good prayers is so vehemâ—â—â—â—â—d vnaffected as that I earnestly beseech you euen 〈◊〉 the most precious Passion of our Lord and â—auiour suffered for the cancelling of our sinnes by â—ur owne charitable Disposition towards others for â—resume those words of the Apostle to be imprinted 〈◊〉 your soules (a) Rom. 5. Charitas Dei diffusa est in â—â—ordibus vestris Finally by what is most sacred and holy that yoâ— would vouchsafe now and then your particular remembrance of me either yet aliue or hereafter dead in that your most retired and Religious Memento vsed in the celebration of the most Blessed and Reuerend Sacrifice of the Masse for the expiating of my manyfold sinnes This I humbly beseech this in all prostration of soule I implore and begge aâ— your hands and in such your performance ech of yoâ— iustly may comfort your selues in those words of ouâ— Sauiour Beati (b) Matt. 5. misericordes quoniam ipsi misericordiam consequentur And thus in thâ— good hope thereof I cease referring you to the perusall of the Treatise it selfe Yours in our Lord Iesus N. N. P. MISCELLANIA Contayning certaine Controuersiall Animaduersions Animaduersion I. I WILL begin with the approuall or reiecting what is or hath beene accounted the Scripture or the written Word of God which point concernes the Bookes of Ecclesiasticus Toby Judith Hester Machabees c. Where we are to vnderstand that the Canonicall Scriptures are to vs at this day discerned and made knowne not by that which either the Iewes for a time or certaine Fathers do omit deny or doubt of in their Canon of Scripture but by that which many Fathers do constantly affirme Since otherwise and vpon the conâ—rary ground we might deny with the Lutherans the Epistle of Iames Iude the second of Peter the 2. and 3. of Iohn the Epistle to the Hebrews and the Apocalyps seeing all these bookes (a) Ofiand in Epic. Cent. 4. p. 299. are denied by the Lutherans Now the reason of this Thesis or Proposition is because in the Primitiue Church the Canonicall Scriptures were not generally all at once receaued but in so great a variety of pretended Scriptures great care and search was requisite wherby to determine which Scriptures were Canonicall which not wherby it came to passe that sundry bookes were for the tyme misdoubted oâ— by some Fathers or Councells omitted oâ— not receaued which yet afterwards were vpon greater search and consideration generally acknowledged And according herto D. Bilson Bishop (b) In his suruey of â—hrists suffering printed 1604. pag. 664. of Winchester thus truly sayth The Scriptures were not receaued in all places at once no not in Eusebius his â—yme Animaduersion II. D. Whitakers (c) In his answ to M. Reynolds â—efut p. 2â— 23. and other of our Aduersaries do reiect the former bookes of the Old TestameÌ„t to wit Ecclesiasticus Toby c. because they were not first written in Hebrew and in that they had not for their knowne Authours those whom God had declared to be his Prophets This Argument is weake For it is a rash assertion so to measure the Scriptures by the tongue wherein they are written as to restrayne the Spirit of God to one only language The â—anity of which said assertion is sufficiently disproued by Example of Daniel a great part whereof to wit from cap. 2. vers 4. vâ—que ad â—â—em cap. 7. though not written in Hebrew is yet by our Aduersaries acknowledged for Canonicall And touching the second point of this Argument it cannot be proued that God would direct by his holy Spirit no Authors in their Writings but such as were knowne and also further declared by certaine testimonies to be Prophets For our Aduersaries cannot yet tell who writ the seuerall bookes of Judges the third and fourth of the Kings the two of Chronicles the booke of Ruth and Iob all which bookes neuerthelesse they admit for true and Canonicall Scripture And hereupon it is that D. Whitakers though crossing his former assertion thus writeth (d) L. de sacra Script â—ag 603. Multorum librorum authores ignorantur c. The authors of many bookes of Scripture are vnknowne as of Iosue Ruth Paralipomenon Hester c. Thus he To whose iudgment D. Willet subscribeth saying We (e) In his Synops p. 4. receaue many bokes in the Old Testament the Authours whereof are not perfectly knowne Animaduersion III. AGainst the writings of the Ancient Fathers the Protestants pretend seuerall difficultyes For example D. (f) Contra Duraeum l. 5. p. 300. Kâ—mpu in his Exam. part 1. p. â—4 Whitakers and others obiect against the Epistles of Ignatius that (g) Dial. â— Theodoreâ— and (h) Dial. 3. contra Pâ—lag Ierome do alledge certaine testimonies from Ignatius his Epistle ad Smirnenses which are not found in that or any other of Ignatius his Epistles Wherto I answere First that the Auncient (i) By Austin in Psalm 95. by Tertull. lib. adu Iudaeos versus finem By Iustin in Triphon circa medium Fathers haue in like maner cited this sentence reguauit a ligno Deus as the saying of Dauid in his Psalms which yet is at this day wanting in them And in like manner some Sentences are alledged from Tully and Plato and the same are not to be found in their wrytings now extant Therfore this former Obiection only argueth that certaine parts of Ignatius his Epistles may be lost but maketh nothing against those now remaining In like sort our Aduersaryes do reiect as counterfeyte the writings of Dionysius Arcopagita as confessed to make for our Catholike Doctrine their chiefe argument is in that these his writings are neuer mentioned by Eusebius and Ierome To this may be answered that (k) Euseb hist l. 5. c. 29. Ierom. in Catal. prope init Eusebius Ierome do confesse that there are many bookes and Authors which neuer came to their knowledge A thing not vnlike if we but remember as incident to those precedent tymes the knowne want of printing and great difficulty of Manuscripts through the violent persecutions which then raigned Finally touching the Lyturgies of Chrysostome they vrge it making altogether for seuerall poynts of our Catholike and Roman fayth that as M. Jewell obiecteth (l) Iewell in his repâ—y pag. 10. Chrysostomes Masse prayeth for Pope Nicolas who was Pope seuerall huÌ„dred yeres after Chrysostome that also it prayeth for the Emperour Alexius who liued in like manner many ages after Chrysostome These are but friuolous Cauils For in all ould Lyturgies or Bookes of CoÌ„mon prayer prayer is specially appointed to be made for Princes and Bishops for the names of whom are certayne places reserued which are subiect to alteration according to the change of succeeding tymes and persons The lyke course wherof for Princes we may discerne in the English Communion Booke composed in K. Edwards tyme where according to the change of succeeding gouerment are inserted the names of Queene Elizabeth
by his owne learned Brethrens Confessions or else he must rest silent And this is the reason why the Protestants are so loath to dispute of the Church Since this Question compreheÌ„deth in it selfe diuers points of fact as of its continuall Visibility Antiquity Succession Ordination and Mission of Pastours c. All which Questions receaue their proofes from particular Instances warranted from History by shewing the particular Tymes Persons and other circumstances concerning matter of Fact Animaduersion XXI WE Catholikes charge the Protestants with a vicious Circle of dispute between the Scripture and the spirit and in requitall hereof the Protestants do reciprocally insimulate vs Catholiks within the said vicious circular argumentation betweene the Scripture and the Church Now let vs see whether of vs stand truly chargeable herewith That the Catholikes are free from this kind of arguing I thus proue The Catholikes touching the Scripture and the Church do euer make their proofes in seuerall kinds of Causes and by a partiall manner of proofe and therby do still proue one thing by another more knowne to those persons to whom it is to be proued The actuall assent and beliefe it selfe is wrought wherby we infallibly belieue the Mysteries reuealed though we belieue the verity of the Scriptures reuelation by the authority of the Church propounding the Churches proposition for the authority of the Scriptures reuealing wherby the Scripture reuealing doth giue vs testimony of the Church propounding againe the Church propounding of the Scriptures reuealing Neuerthelesse this reciprocall testimony and proofe is not any proper vicious circle First because it is in diuerso genere causae in diuers kinds of causes for the testimonies of the Scriptures reuelation to the infallibility of the Churches proposition is causa formalis the formall cause by the which we assent to the Churches proposition But the Churches proposition is only Causa conditionalis or as we vse to speake Conditio fine qua non to know the Scriptures Reuelation and so they are reciprocall in a different manner of proofe the one that is Scripture à Priori as including diuine reuelation the other that is the Church à Posteriori required only as a condition The former as a formall precedent Cause the later as a subsequent annexed condition Secondly this reciprocall proofe is not adomnino idem as Aristotle requires to a Circle that is the one is not the totall and sole cause of knowing the other for the Churches proposition is not knowne only by the Scriptures reuelation and not otherwise but also by other proofes signes and testimoâ—ies to wit Miracles Consent Sanctity c. all which conuince that the Churches authority is necessary and infallible to distinguish the true sense of the Scripture from false and to end Controuersies about Scripture But now to cast our eye vpon the Protestants Circle prouing the Scripture by the priuate Spirit and the priuat Spirit from the Scripture it is euident that they proue the Scripture by the Spirit and Spirit by the Scripture in one the same kind of Cause and by one sole whole manner of proofe For demaund of a Protestant how and by what meanes he vnderstaÌ„deth the Scripture He answeres by the Spirit and so knowes the Scripture by the Spirit And aske him by what meanes he knowes he hath the true spirit he answeres the Scripture assures himselfe therof since he is one of the Elect. And thus this his proofe is truly Circular and vicious as being deliuered in eodem genere Causae and omnino ad idem Animaduersion XXII IT is most certaine that Protestants deny all Authorities of all affirmatiue heads making their last refuge to their owne priuaâ— Spirit and Iudgement For example if we insist in the affirmatiue Notes and Marks of the Church to wit vniuersality visibility vnity c. ouâ— aduersaryes as is aboue said discard the testimonyes of all these heads by erecting for Notes the preaching of the word and administration of the Sacraments so reducing to their owne iudgment only when the word is truly preached and the Sacramâ—nts rightly administred Yf in matters of fact we recurre to History I meane concerning visibility Succession vocation c. they reiect this authority by saying Sufficit (g) Whitak contra Duraeum l. 7 p. 478. nobis c. To vs it is sufficient by comparing the Popish opinions with the Scrâ—pture to discouer the disparity of faith betweene them and vs. And as for Historiographers we giue them liberty to wryte what they will If we produce the testimonyes of particular Fathers of the Primitiue Church marke how Luther depresseth them (h) Luth. de seruo arbis 1551. pag. 434. The Fathers of so many ages haue beene plainly blind most ignorant in the Scriptures they haue erred all their life time vnlesse they were amended before their death they were neither Saincts nor pertayning to the Church If we produce Generall Councels they answere saying (i) Petâ—â— Martyr l. de votis pa. 476. As long as we insist in Generall Councels so long we shall continue in the Popish Errors If we passe to Apostolicall Traditions Cartwright in depressing Traditions maintained by S. Austin thus wryteth To (k) Sâ—â— Cartwright in whitgifts defence p. 103. allow S. Austins saying touching Traditions is to bring in popery If we alledge diuers passages of Scripture as out of Toby Ecclesiasticus the Machabees the Protestants with full voyce deny them to be Canonicall and style them only Apocriphal If we take our authorityes out of such books of Scripture as are acknoledged for Scripture on both sydes the Protestants deny the Translation of the Scripture to be true sincere which point appeareth both from the Protestants mutual condemning one anothers translation of Scripture as also from the most bitter censure giuen by our English Puritans against our English Translaiion whereof seuerall books writteÌ„ by them are yet extaÌ„t If we Catholikes proceed further in insisting in the Originall of both the Testaments the Protestants deny that the Originalis are at this present true Thus for example in Math c. 10. we read 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the first Peter Beza (l) Beza in Annotat noui Testam 1556 denyeth the Originall herein mantayning that the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 was inserted into the text by some one fauoring the Popes Primacy In like sort (m) Beza vâ—i supra Beza denyeth that the Greeke Originall in Math. 22. is at this present the same as it was penned by the Euangelist mantayning that it is corrupted in fauour of the Realâ— presence If we yet ascending further entrench our selfe in such books of Scripture whose Originals Translations are accepted on ech party as true and incorrupted and tel our Aduersaryes that the whole Church of God in her primitiue and purest tymes interpreted the passages of Scripture in that sense in which they are at this present by the Catholikes alledged the Protestants
vincula reis profer lumeÌ„ caecis c which acts say they are peculiar to Christ And againe in the same Hymne they obiect those words Monstra te esse Matrem as implying a mother and awfull authority ouer Christ. In explication of the first we demaÌ„d that our Lady would loose our Sinnes and bring light to the blynd only by her impâ—tration and praying to her blessed Sonne not otherwyse and therfore in most of our set pâ—ayers to her we adioyne these words following Per Dominum nostrum Iesum Christum Touching the second sentence We do not wish her to impose any command or Motherly authority ouer her Some But we only vnderstand hereby shew thy selfe a Mother by appeasing thy sonne in our behalfe this by the remembrance of all thy Motherly tender care and loue towards him in his Infancy through the whole course of his life that by thee he may receaue our prayers and therefore it immediatly followeth in the same Hymne sumat per te preces But now if these words be such an eye-sore to the ProtestaÌ„ts what will they say to those words of S. Paul Omnibus (p) 1. Cor. 9. omnia factus sum vt omnes facerem saluos J am become to all men all things that I may saue all Where the Apostle in words assumeth to himselfe the Saluation of others In like manner in that Antiphone in our Ladies office beginning Salue Regina c. Our Apuersaries insist in those words Et Iesum benedictum fructum ventris tui nobis post hoc exilium ostende And shew to vs after this our exile Jesus c. To which I answere That it is lesse to say To shew the Sauiour vnto men then to say To saue men And yet we read the Apostle thus to say Et teipsum (q) 1. Tim. 4. saluam facies eos quite auâ—iunt Thou shalt â—â—ue thy selfe and them that do heare thee Moreouer it is obiected out of that Antiphone that the B. Virgin is stiled Spes nostra Our Hope To this I say that these words are vsed because next after our Lord Iesus Christ being God and Man we chiefly place our confidence in the mediation of the Blâ—sâ—â—d Virgin Since our Hope is not to be placed only in the Authours of our Good but also in the Intercessours and ministers thereof And according hereto when our Loâ—d said to the Iewes It (r) Iohn 5. is Moyses who accusâ—s you in quo speratis in whom you hopâ— Our Sauiour did not reprehend the Iewes in that they hoped in Moyses but because they did not belieue Moyses Finally our Aduersaries cannot brooke our Lady to be called Mater misericordiae because say they God is the Father of Mercy therefore the B. Virgin cannot nor ought to be called so But this is no good consequence for we read that Christ is called Lux (s) Iohn 9. mundi and yet Christ sayth of his Apostles Vos (t) Math. 5. estis lux mundi Thus such titles may be giuen to God and men in a different relation without any dishonour to God Animaduersion XLVII THe puritans do most maliciously peruert seuerall texts of Scripture in dishonour of our B. Lady For example First they obiect as seeming at least to rest doubtfull of the continuance of our B. Ladyes Virginity that Text Et non (u) Math 1. cognoscebat eam donec peperit filium primogenitum which words say they seeme to afford a double Argument The first is taken from the word Donec inferring from thence that after the byrth of her Sonne she should carnally know Joseph The second from the words following Filium primogenitum seeing Primogenitus properly signifieth that sonne which is first borne in reference to those Sonnes or children which are after borne I answere first touching the word Donec which word as also the word vsque doth not euer signify an affirmation after the time expressed if a Negation did goe before neither alwayes do they signify a Negation when an affirmation did precede For example Sede a (x) Psal 109. dextris mâ—is donec ponam inimicos tuos scabellum pectum tuorum Sit at my right hand vntill J make thy Enemyes thy footestoole Now these words do not import that after he shall not fit at the right hand of his Father The like sentences to these are these following Donec (y) Math 5. transeat Caelum Terra iota vnum aut vnus apex non praeteribit á lege And againe Ego (z) Math. 28. vobiscum sum vsque ad consummationem mundi In all which locutions sentences of Scripture that which is doubtfull is expressed but that which is certaine is not expressed or spoken of Now touching the word Primogenitus Epiphanius (a) Haeres 78. denieth that Christ was called Primogenitus Mariae the first borne of Mary for the Euangelist sayth not Primogenitum suum but he sayth Fitium suum primogenitum signifying therby that he was the Sonne of the B Virgin but withall the first begotten Sonne of God Seing accordingly we thus read Ipse (b) Coloss 1. namque est primogenitus omnis Creaturae He to wit Christ was the first borne of all Creatures S. Ierome sayth that Christ was called (c) Adueâ—s Heluid Primogenitus Mariae not because she brought forth any other Sonne after him but because before him she brought forth no other Sonne For it is the phrase of Scripture that those who are Vnigeniti are called Primogeniti So S Paul calleth Christ Primogenitus (d) Heb. 6. Dei for the only-begotten sonne of God Lastly they vrge that sentence Jnter (e) Math. 11. natos mulicrum non surrexit maior Iohanne Baptista There hath not risen among the borne of women a greater then John the Baptist intimating hereby that the Blessed Virgin is inferiour in dignity to S. Iohn Baptist. This is easely answered First if the words as they lye be literally taken as our Aduersaries pretend then should John Baptist be greater then Christ Secondly because S. Iohn Baptist in those words spoken by Christ is compared only with the Holy men of the old Testament but Christ and his Mother as also the Apostles belong to the new Testament Animaduersion XLVIII DIuers Protestants as aboue is shewed do hould such bookes to be Scripture which other Protestants reiect as Apocryphall therefore it followeth that the Scripture it selfe cannot shew at least to vs which is the point controuerted which is Scripture which doubt is only to be referred to the Authority of the Church And therefore M. Hooker truly sayth Of things (f) Eccles Pol. lâ—â— 1 Sect. 14. p. 8â— necessâ—ry the very chiefest is to know what Bookes we are to esteeme Holy which point is confessed impossible for the Scripture it selfe to teach And againe It is (g) Ibidem l. 2. Sect. 4. p. 102 â—4â— and D. Couell in defence of M. Hooker art 4. pag. 31.