dealings of others yet It cannot be denied saith he but that Bellarmine by following Sanders and others rashly hath not a little erred in three points of his defence of the Popes temporall authority and thereupon could not But maruell as he himselfe saith that men who are for their Learning so famous doe so negligently set downe their iudgements in writing as though they had not read the Authours which they commend or had not understood them at all or else had 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 their meaning which fault is frequent in this age And among other errours of Bellarmine he obserueth him to follow Gratian in a singular corruption to wit whereas an auncient Councell decreed Can. 32. Ne Clericus quemquam praesumat apud secularem Iudicem Episcopo non permittente pulsare Gratian contrariwise deliuereth it thus Clericum msllus praesumat pulsare c. 17. These few faults are more then enough to haue beene discouered by their owne Authours out of one Controuersie of their Cardinall Bellarmine As for other notes of his contradictions whereof he is conuinceable I remit them vnto their proper place In the interim seeing that Card. Bellarm. who in Mr. Parsons his estimate is the most Syncere Author of all other Romanists hath beene thus deepely charged by their owne Doctors of so much insincerity our Reader may conceiue thereby how little confidence any may yeeld vnto their other lesse confiderate or conscionable Doctors I proceede and because the fellowshippe which Card. Bellarmine had with Card. Baronius will not permit them to be diuided I adde An Accusation made by the foresaid Marsilius against their Cardinall BARONIVS 18. Cardinall Bellarmine aduanceth Cardinal Baronius in this manner That most worthy and learned Baronius saith he doth demonstrate by most cleare euidences that there was neuer such 〈◊〉 graunted vnto Emperours for the electing of the Pope But I haue answered saith Marsilius that Baronius hath no authority in the Question of Immunities I haue heard that as he hath taken a liberty to mend the Fathers Canons and Historians so he will correct the Councels after his 〈◊〉 and for his owne purpose and to assume vnto himselfe a license hereunto which God forbid Certain it is he shall not be able to mend the text of S. Paul of Chrysostome of Thomas of S. Augustine and others so that we neede not to regard the nouelties of his illustrious Lordship Againe he saith that The answeres of Card. Baronius are not unlike meaning vnto the answeres of Card. Bellarmine who whilst he cannot finde an obiected argument able to be assoyled by History he saith that these wordes haue beene inserted into the bookes In breefe I will say no more saith he of Card. Baronius but that he is an Historian yet Liuing whose workes are suspected where he intreateth of the Immunity namely of the Clergie who when he wanteth other support doth dislike all Historiographers and when he admitteth any he singleth out the wordes which make for him but those which make against him he saith were inserted by others as it here happened in the story of Luitprandus whose booke hath beene the space of 700. yeares approued in the Church but hee reiecteth the authority both of this and of other Writers of his time Seeing therefore that his Annals or Chronicles haue not that estimation in the world as he supposed and that there is a booke which will come forth shortly intituled The Errors of Baronius wherein there are discouered more then twenty seuerall errours which he hath committed in denying this one most auncient Historie concerning Pope Iohn to wit Iohn 12. whom the godly Emperour Otho deposed I shall not neede to say more of his authority 19. Neyther shall I neede to adde any more to this which hath beene said because our Reckoner Mast. Parsons knoweth although we should not reckon by the strict rules of proportion but by the remisse principles of probability onely that if twenty errours may bee found in the compasse of three sheetes of paper set forth by Baronius then may we presume that many hundreth vntruths do lie lurking within his whole Annals which containe twelue huge volumes which in all probability may bewray some apparances of vniust dealings SECT IIII. The loose dealing of their Iesuit Boucher by the accusation of Barclaius their owne Romish Doctor 20. WHereas M. Boucher obiecteth the testimony of Bodine to proue that It is lawful for a priuate man to kill a lawfull King if he shall tyramize ouer his subiects M. Barclay aunswereth saying The Authour in the same Chapter doth plainely contradict you and the wordes themselues doe openly pronounce that you haue belyed his iudgement And after that he made the matter manifest by alleaging the Author at large he shutteth vp the point saying What a mischiefe meaneth this manner of handling Authours and so proceedeth on to vrge him to confesse eyther his wilfull falshood or else his rashnesse in giuing credite to other mens Notes In the next place he chargeth Boucher for alleaging the Supposititious and bastardly Tracts which are falsly fathered vpon Tho. Aquinas to wit the bookes de Regimine Principis which although they be vulgarly receiued as his yet are they fraught with such dotages and fooleries as if they were written to mooue laughter as Cuiacius hath said Finally not to diue any deeper into this puddle-water of falsities Barclay is offended with Boucher for bringing in the sentence of Sarisburiensis laymed and corrupted which saith Barclay you must say you haue deliuered from the relation of others or else you must needs loose your credite by the crime of forgery 21. And now may our Reader iudge whether M. Parsons haue not as I once said lauishly hazarded the credite of the chiefe Pillars of the Romish Church vpon a Triple falsitie as it were vpon a Trey-trippe euen by the confessions of their owne Doctors Something will be expected to be said concerning Gratian. SECT V. The Falshoods which are confessed to swarme in Gratian the auncient compiler of the Decrees of Popes Fathers and Councels 22. AFterwards the zeale which Mr. Parsons hath for the defence of the Romish Authors transported him to iustifie their Gratian also especially in one point wherin notwithstanding his guilt will appeare to bee most transparant But now in generall their owne Antonius Augustinus an Arch-bishop in Spaine hath lately written a booke professedly for the purging of Gratian whose faults he saith are Ità multa c. So many that they cannot be declared in one day many false inscriptions of Authors ascribing many words vnto Gregorie Ambrose and Augustine which are no where to be found or not in them producing also true Authors but yet so as oftentimes bringing in contrary sentences 23. Afterwards he proceedeth to vnfold many particular grosse and dangerous vntruths of Gratian the Compiler of the Decrees of Councels and Popes and of the Testimonies of Fathers
viz. IF you haue seene how little able Mr. Morton hath beene to performe his promise before for wilfull falsities committed by any of our Writers hitherto much more shall you see now when leauing the multitude of other Authors he singleth out Cardinall Bellarmine alone to deale withall who as he hath written much so were it not maruell if in so many Bookes he should haue left some things whereupon his Aduersaries might probably wrangle But as for wilfull vntruthes it is so farre from his knowen and confessed integritie as Mr. Morton could neuer haue made choice of an vnfitter match for this point Nor can it be thought that he chose him vpon hope to find any such aduantage in him indeed but onely to honour himselfe by contending with such an Aduersarie and to cast some clouds at least in the minds of the simple sort vpon the shining beames of Cardinall Bellarmines estimation by obiecting the name of wilfull falsities vnto him But as when the said clouds are driuen away from the ayre the force of the Sunne is more sensibly felt So Cardi Bellarmines workes being cleared here from Mr. Mortons calumniations will be more highly esteemed by euery iudicious Reader as not lending any least true aduantage vnto any impugnation of the Aduersary And this is all the hurt that he is like to receiue by this Assault SECT III. The Reuiewe 12. I Shall desire Mr. Parsons to forbeare a while the examination of the exceptions which I haue taken against Cardinall Bellarmine vntill we come to discusse that point when it wil appeare how feeble a Boreas Mr. Parsons is in dispelling of clouds and for the present to haue so much patience as to vnderstand what how foggie a mist of insinceritie some Authors of their owne profession haue spied in the writings of this their Bellarmine whom Mr. Parsons preferreth for sinceritie before all others of his side His three Accusers 13. The first Accuser is Ioh. Marsilius who beginneth his defence against Bellarmine with prayer vnto God and to the blessed Virgine who mentioneth Bellarmine with all reuerend respect by the appellation of Most illustrious Lord who is authorized in this his aunswere vnder the publike approbation of the State of Venice The second is P. Paulus as select a Writer as Marsilius and equally approoued The third is Guil. Barclaius who yeeldeth vnto Bellarmine this dignifying Title of Most famous Cardinall and most learned Diuine in that booke which he Dedicated to Pope Clement 8. The exceptions that they take against Bellarmine are concerning one onely Controuetsie of his which is the defence of the Papall power in censuring of Temporail States Their Accusations 14. For his abuse of the testmonies of Schoolemen hee is thus noted He erreth saith Marsilius speaking of Bellarmine in expounding Thomas contrary to his meaning whose Catholick Doctrine in all matters of Diuinitie I doe professe He erreth in saying that the Author whom Bellarmine impugneth held that Christ was constrained by necessitie to pay tribute but the Author affirmeth the contrary to wit that Christ as the Sonne of God was not bound to pay tribute yet did it for auoyding of scandall He erreth in denying that Sotus did maruell at the Canonist viz. For saying that the Pope is the Lord of the whole world directly in temporall things For Sotus doth expresly name certaine Lawyers or Canonists and calleth their opinion in this point commentitious or fabulous complaining and maruelling that Syluester departed from the iudgement of Thomas yea and the same wordes of Sotus were read in the first Bookes of the Lo. Cardinall himselfe viz. Bellarmine which if he will not acknowledge it skilleth not for we finde in his viz. Bellarmines bookes sixe hundred alterations He erreth in saying that Nauarre writ that The Popes authoritie was not meerely temporall as though he had confessed the Popes authoritie to be temporall and accessorily spirituall but Nauar neuer writ this but held plainely the contrary Hee saith indeed that the Papall power may use naturall thinges which are instituted by Christ for supernatur all ends such as are water in Baptisme and money for Almes but doth he euer speake of I emporall power he neuer so much as dreamed hereof But it is no rare thing as we haue seene for his illustrious Lordship meaning Bellarmine to cite Authors for an opinion whereas they affirme the plaine contrary He erreth in saying absolutely that Sotus and Couarruvias affirmed that which they spake with condition viz. Ordinariè He abuseth the testimonie of Gerson saith the second Accuser noting that to haue bene spoken against the due reuerence vnto the Pope whereas contrarily he spake in fauour of the Pope 15. Let vs passe ouer their Schoole and come vnto the testimonies of Fathers and Councels wherunto the first Accuser Marsilius proceedeth saying of Bellarmine that He erreth in affirming that Chrysostome expounding that place of Paul Rom. 13. Let euery soule be subiect vnto the higher powers speaketh of power in generall as though hee did as well imply spirituall power as temporall according as Bellarmine himselfe doth interpret the text whereas S. Chrysostome speaketh plainely of Princes and Magistrates And because he namely Bellarmine bringeth no reason for his Answere it will not be amisse to demonstrate his errour by reasons for that which the Apostle calleth higher power Chrysostome interpreteth to be Princes and Magistrates who make politique lawes and who sustaine the burthen of the Common-wealth vnto whom the Apostle commaundeth men to pay tribute and which doth preoccupate all meanes of euasion Chrysostome sheweth that obedience vnto these powers is commaunded vnto Monkes or Priests yea although he were eyther Apostle Prophet or Euangelist Hee erreth in cyting falsly the place of S. Hierome who saith the plain contrary It grieueth me to see things imputed vnto holy Fathers the contrary whereof they affirme And hee offendeth also in cyting the place of S. Augustine Hee erreth in alleaging the Councell of Colen for that Councell determined nothing thereof but according to the Glosse c. Finally See good Reader saith their P. Paulus the cunning of this Author namely Bellarmine saying that the fift Romane Councell vnder Pope Symmachus did allow as her owne Decree that sentence of Eunodius Aliorum hominum causas c. whereas that sentence shall not be any where found to haue beene specially approued or so much as named in that Councell And Hee hath added of himselfe speaking of a Decree of a Councell of Laterane vnder Pope Alexander the third these wordes Quòd nullus sit in terris Papâ Superior That is Because there is none in earth Superiour vnto the Pope 16. Because a third witness is requisite for the better establishment of any Accusation we may admit the testimony of Barclaius in this cause who albeit he commends Bellarmine for his saithfulnesse in respect of the
a worke which for diuers hundred yeeres was admitted for the publike directorie of the Doctors of the Romish Church 24. Heere heere had beene a large field of falsities for Mr. Parsons his pen to galloppe in and to play his Rhetoricall curuets if that his Holy itch as hee calleth such his desire to be meddling with Protestants had not mooued him rather to calumniate the manisest truthes of his Aduersaries then to acknowledge the Falsifications committed by the Principall Authors of his owne side If peraduenture these confessed corruptions in these their particular but yet publike and famous Bookes seeme not to our Reader sufficient to prooue Mr. Parsons his Distinctiue Note to be notoriously calumnious wee haue further to acquaint him with that which followeth SECT VI. A generall practise of fraud in the Romish Church according as it is confessed by their owne Doctors 25. THe generall practise of deceit which now commeth into our viewe is of two kinds the first is their professed abuse of Authors as is manifest both by corrupting of their Books also by peruerting their meanings For euidence whereof we haue concerning the former the confession of their forenamed Marsilius It is a matter known vnto all saith he that those things which were written in the behalfe of Lay Magistrates haue beene and still are razed out of the Councels Canons and Bookes of other Doctors yea out of the very Breuiaries and Missals insomuch as it may bee feared lest that in processe of time that vnlimited power of the Pope in temporall affaires will be established So that hee that will compare the Bookes that were written in the yeere 1530. or 1550. with the writings at this day whether they write of Councels or of other things be shall easily finde where the Vintage is So that it is a maruell that after this haruest we found any clusters of grapes for the defence of our prince Wherby in tract of time it will come to passe that none will giue credit vnto any writings and that the Church of God will be ouerthrowen Which I speake saith he vpon this occasion which is offered by the Lord Cardinall as also wishing very earnestly that bookes bee not depraued which I say with all humilitie and reuerence Marsilius pursueth him further saying It need not be maruelled why we cannot alledge many for this opinion he sheweth two reasons the first is Because this question is but new the second because if any write freely he is forthwith compelled to retract himself as it hapned to the Lord Cardinall Bellarmine himself or else such things are blotted out of their bookes or else threats are cast out insomuch that Sotus could say vpon the conclusion of this matter It becommeth a seruant to thinke much and say litle 26. Can there be any greater fraudulencie then this or in this fraude a more pernicious tyranny against either the liuing or the dead then thus to tye as it were cords vnto their tongues and compelling them to speake contrary to their meaning so farre sometimes as to chaunge visible into Inuisible Besides they doe further so professe to deale with Auncient Authors as either to suffer many errors so they call the opinions when they are obiected against them in dispute or to extenuate them or to excuse them or else by some newe deuised comment to denie them 27. The second kind of deceitfulnesse hath beene belike sensible ynough at Rome seeing that their owne learned Doctor Espensaeus was forced to complaine thereof When Pope Paulus 4. saith he did seriously affirme that hee intended to choose me into the order of Cardinals I doe religiously sweare that as often as I thought vpon the report of obteining the red Hat freely which others hunted after for money who were repulsed I giue immortall thanks vnto God that he suffered not I will not say so much good but so much euill to happen vnto me Quid facerem Romae mentirinescio What should I doe at Rome I cannot lie Now if Rome which will seeme to bee the Metropolis of all sanctitie become the Exchange of lying we may suspect that Mr. Parsons after his so long residence in that place may happily haue receiued some taint This wee may trie by the confession of his owne Romish Authors after that we haue first heard what he will say for himselfe SECT VII Mr. PARSONS his protestation of his own Integritie Master PARSONS Reckoning As for falsities they may proceede of diuers causes and in diuers degrees and with sundry circumstances of more or lesse fault so that there may be a falsitie without a falshood where of my meaning is not in this place but whosoeuer shall be found in a wilfull and witting falsitie or rather falshood that is knowen to be such by the vtterer I doe thinke it to abhorre so much from the nature it selfe of an honest and ciuill man as of what Religion so euer he be he will not commit it once much lesse thrice As for my selfe I stand confident that he will neuer be able to bring any such fraud against me much lesse thrice three The Reueiwe 28. Mr. Parsons hath truely expressed the Character of an honest man to wit that he doth alwayes abhorre all wilfull falshood and he will needs Canonize himselfe and be registred in the Calender of honest men But words are but as letters and deedes as seales so that if Mr. Parsons protestation bee contradicted by his conuersation then his writings whereof we are to speake in the Chapters following may be presumed to bee no truer then his other actions And if in his morall behauiour he be a true man then their twentie and eight Seminarie Priests were blacke Saints who in their Appeale made vnto Pope Clement the eight against the factions of the Iesuits speaking of Master Parsons note Patrem Robertum praecipuum c. that is Father Robert Parsons the chiefe Author of these factions And for a man Dissembling to forewarne our Messengers say they whom we sent vnto your Holinesse that they might escape the hands of them that layde watch to catch them when notwithstanding he was the principall plotter to haue them intrapped and who in taking their Examination appointed a Iesuite to write downe their Aunsweres but so as altering their words at his pleasure 29. This and much more to this effect was deliuered to the Pope against Mr. Parsons by a grand Inquest of their owne Priests in their ioynt Appeale vnto him with whom they account it a damnable sinne to lie or equiuocate The summe wherof one of their Priests in his Quodlibets hath expressed saying of Mr. Parsons that He is the abstract and quintessence of all coggeries and forgeries c. This is that worthy excellent that lies dissembles and equiuocates at euery word Notwithstanding I desire the good Reader that these imputations which are cast vpon him by his owne brotherhood may not any whit
he saith he hath cited out of Polydor. de Jnuent lib. 4. cap. 10. be not in any of our bookes now commonly extant yet he saith that they are in the Edition of Basil An. 1570. and that two yeares after by Pope pius Quintus the Index Expurgatorius did put out these wordes but he telleth not what Index it was for I haue one containing both the Flemmish and Spanish Index Printed at Basil An. 1544. wherein this obseruation is not found which M. Morton saith was Printed Anno 1570. which was 26. yeares after Whereof must needes be inferred that either M. Morton dealeth not sincerely with vs in this matter which yet I will not be so vnfreindly as to suspect or that his Edition of 1570. which hitherto I cannot see hath receiued this addition about the Popes changing of their names after the foresaid Edition of 1544. The Reueiwe 4. Can M. Parsons possibly not suppose me to be insincere in this point who hath challēged me for so egregious a falsificator in so many passages either is he more credulous then he ought to be or else am I more credible then he hath decyphered me to be Howsoeuer I haue little reason to credit any of his Reckonings and euen in this very place he is intollerable for the bookes of Polydore which haue not that sentence in them haue as he knoweth beene much purged as their owne booke which is intituled Index librorum prohibitorum that is The Catalogue of bookes which haue beene prohibited doth expresly shew telling vs that The booke of Polydore De Inuentoribus Rerum is permitted which was purged by the commaund of Pope Greg. 13. in the yeare 1576. How could he then but suspect that such a sentence as this was blotted out 5. Againe I cited in the margent the Index Belgicus which was printed Lugduni An. 1586. pag. 195. wherein these wordes Extraà iocum c. and nine lines following are commaunded to be blotted out Which euery one that will may finde in the auncient bookes of Polydore and yet as M. Parsons confesseth is not in your new Editions which sheweth that their new deuise of purging of bookes hath licensed them to belye the old M. PARSONS charging his Aduersary BVt let vs heare the wordes themselues which M. Morton setteth downe as found in his Tolydore Primus honos c. This is the first honour giuen to the Bishop of Rome after his creation saith he that if his name be not faire he may change the same as for example which yet be not spoken but in iest if before perhaps he had beene an euill doer he may be called Bonifacius that is a good doer if he had beene fearefull then may he be called Leo a Lyon if rusticall then Vrbanus or ciuill c. and the first Authour or beginner of this custome is said to haue beene Pope Sergius 2. whose name hauing beene before Os porci which signifieth the mouth of an hogge it was permitted vnto him saith the supposed Polydore for the auoiding the obseenitie of his former name to change the same These two thinges that the first occasion of changing names should haue beene from Pope Sergius 2. hath no substance at all Platina deliuereth it vpon report 〈◊〉 confuteth it Besides it is to be noted that Os porci is a sirname of a family which no Pope is wont to change but only his Christian or proper name as of late when Hypolitus Aldobrandinus was called Clemens 8. hee changed not the name of Aldobrandinus but of Hypolitus The Reuiewe 6. Well I am content to leaue your Authors in their conflict Can you shew vs a reason why he that will change his Christian name will not also change his naturall name or sirname Saul Iewish was changed into Paul Christian Peter neuer left his name which Christ gaue him Now for the Pope to reiect his name which he receiued in Baptisme as a token of his Christendome this seemeth to be a prophane mistery Mr. PARSONS his Reckoning POlydore saith only and in a iest that some might be named by changing their names Non extrà iocum dictum sit that is let it not be spoken without a iest And Polydore saith only Liceat mutare they may change their names but saith not that it was practized by any The Reuiew 7. For Hystorians to report thinges in such manner doth not imply that the matter was fabulous Ridendo dicere verum quis vetat a man may laugh and tell a truth as I might doe in telling M. Parsons that I cannot without a iest obserue the differences of translations which he hath inuented in Let not and May not as though there had beene craft herein For I beseech you Sir when the Apostle speaking against vnlawfull separation of the wife from her husband saith Let not the wife depart from her husband if he had deliuered it thus A wife may not depart from her husband had these two differed any thing in sense But why doe I hinder M. Parsons his sport whose disposition is euen to play with a feather SECT II. His second charge against his Aduersary about the pope that was choaked with a flye THe mistaking of the name of the Emperour Henry 2. in stead of Fredericke 1. who was excommunicated by Pope Adrian which M. Parsons will haue to proceede from maliciousnesse My discharge 9. The only question was whether Pope Adrian who excommunicated the Emperour was choaked with a flye or no this was the maine but whether he excommunicated H. or F. is but on the by in respect of the scope of our dispute Cardinall Bellarmine erred often in citing of Authours and hath lately corrected those escapes as alleaging Ambrose in stead of Augustine Cyprian in stead of Cyril Innocentius in stead of Clemens and in such like errors their Gratian doth superabound And yet may we not iudge so vncharitably as to impute these faults vnto perfidiousnesse Mr. PARSONS his Reckoning IF Mr. Morton had not seene nor read Nauclerus as he saith how did he presume to set downe his Latin wordes so precisely as his Reader could haue no probable cause to doubt but that they were his owne proper wordes Was not this crasty perfidiousd aling This answere of Mr. Morton doth more intangle him in falshood The Reuiew 10. Did euer sober man make such a question how can one set downe precisely the wordes of an Authour which he himselfe hath not read Any child can answere that this may easily be done by reciting the sentence out of a writer who hath collected it out of the Authour himselfe which is vsuall in all that write If I should aske M. Parsons this did you neuer deliuer any testimony from an other mans writing which was true he would say that this is but a fond question and yet it is Cosen germane to his owne nor is it much vnlike vnto his next taxation for setting downe out of
a signe of our Baptisme And Saint Paul 1. Cor. 9. applieth that of Deut. 25. Thou shalt not muzzell the mouth of the Oxe that laboureth vnto Preachers maintenance of the new Testament and 1. Cor. 10. All these things happened vnto them in figures The Review 1 I answere that some of these Instances were ceremonial and some examples of Gods extraordinarie punishments For the first I denie not but that Circumcision Manna and the Rock were types and had analogie with the Sacraments which are antitypa and both conspire together in one Christ as the archetypon of all and therefore both are spirituall for the which cause the Apostle sheweth of the Israelites that they in their Elements Eate the same spirituall meat and dranke the same spirituall drinke meaning Christ which was as S. Augustine expoundeth it The same which we do namely Christ. 2 The second concerning the Oxe had the same morall equitie in the old law for the maintenance of the Priests Leuites as it hath now in the Ghospel for the Preachers And as touching the third we may say that the diuerse miraculous iudgements of God in former time vpon Fornicators Murmurers and Idolaters in Israel are figures vnto the after-Christian world that if wee finde not the like visible vengeances yet are we taught to make true consequences from them to wit that if we dwell securely in like sinnes although we feele not the like outward plagues yet wee shall be sure to bee tormented in the end because the God who hath beene iust visibly will bee euerlastingly iust to punish transgressions and sinnes 3 In the next place hee exaggerateth this difference of translation to wit The old Testament is a figure of the new in Christ in stead of this as M. Parsons will haue it The earthly kingdome of the Iewes was a shadow of the spirituall gouernment that was in the Church of Christ. Both which are no more disferent in effect than figure and shadow for M. Parsons confesseth that the proposition is true that The old Testament was a figure of the new in Christ. The next exception is of some importance M. PARSONS his Reckoning There followeth in the Consequent or second proposition that therefore in the new the popedome is the substantiue which is no lesse corruptly inferred in our name than was the Antecedent affirmed for that we do not inferre nor yet the Author Carerius in the said second Prop. or Consequence by him alleaged that forsomuch as the old Testment is a figure of the new therefore in the new the Popes spirituall authority is the substantiue c. For that this were a weake inference as euery man seeth Nay Carerius maketh no inference at all in this place by him alleaged but only vseth that similitude which before you haue heard of the Sunstantiue and Adiectiue The Reuiew 4 What is this doth not Carerius make that Inference M. Parsons yea and doth he not make any inference thereof at all Thus you haue written but with what conscience For Carerius propounding this position by way of obiection viz. The Pope hath not by the law of God any temporall power nor can he command secular Princes a ground of which position was this That one and the same person cannot be both a Politicke and Ecclesiasticall this foundation hee labe laboureth to confute by many examples of the old Testament from the which he concludeth thus Hinc inlege c. Hence we see that in the old law the Kingdome was the Substantiue and the Priesthood the Adiectiue but in the new law of the Ghospell Priesthood is the Substantiue and the kingdome is the Adiectiue Which is brought in to prooue that the power Politike as the Adiectiue the Power Ecclesiasticall as the Substantiue may be both in one man And is not this an Inference And thereby further intimating that as in the old the Temporall was the Substantiue that is the superior so vnder the Gospell the Ecclesiasticall is the Substantiue and superiour And is not this That inference which I speake of And finally the speciall drift of that booke of Carerius is nothing else but to establish a Monarchicall power of the Pope both spirituall and temporall throughout the world SECT II. The ninth charge of M. PARSONS his Reckoning THere followeth against Dolman a like sleight The Reuiew 5 Dare Dolman yet againe shew his face Which booke M. Parsons made saith their Priest and is a seditious booke most trecherously intitling the Infanta of Spaine to the English crowne Could M. Parsons so often countenance this Troiane horse except he had meant to play the part of a Sinonicall dissembling Mitigator But to the point The summe of M. PARSONS charge He alleaged Dolman to say that the Commonwealth hath authority to chuse a King and to limit him lawes at their pleasure Which if it were truely alleaged yet is there not heere any mention of people or Democratical state but only of the Common-wealth which includeth both the Nobility and people Secondly Dolman speaketh not of chusing a forme of gouernment be it Democraticall or other but speaketh as by his words we see of a power of a Common-wealth that is deuoide of any certaine gouernment to chuse them what forme of gouernment they like with limitations they thinke most expedient The Reuiew 6 Vpon this his conceit he complaineth of Falshoods both in alleaging the words of the Author which are not in him and also in inferring from them which the words themselues will not beare First of the words Dolman said The Common-wealth hath power to chuse her gouernment I said To change her King If she can change her Gouernment may not she alter her Gouernour And Dolman saith in the margent of the same place that The Common-wealth limiteth the Gouernours authority And is not a King a Gouernour 7 Concerning the sense M. Parsons seemeth to perswade vs that Dolman that is M. Parsons himselfe did allow vnto a Common-wealth onely a power to chuse a gouernment and not to depose a Gouernour Is he not like to bewray his ignorance in reading other mens bookes who is thus vnskilfull in his owne For in his Dolman we read that The Common-wealth hath authority not onely to put backe a new Inheritor vpon lawfull considerations but also to dispossesse them that haue beene lawfully put into possession And againe The Common-wealth saith he may cut off their heads if they infect the rest Heere M. Parsons plaieth the nimble Barber and can teach people to polle the heads of Kings It is no maruell why his owne fellow exclaimed against this booke calling it Trecherous as though he had sentenced the Authour to be woorthy to haue his head shauen for his doctrine As for the word Democraticall which M. Parsons misliketh I would but aske whether euery Common-wealth were not included where Common-wealth in general was expressed After this he returneth vnto
the same Full Satisfaction but much more his L. Cardinall Bellarmine who in his Answer vnto his Maiesties Apologie did not cite as I am perswaded 2000 lines yea and his owne distressed and distorted answer vnto the little Discouerie of Romish positions Who would trouble himselfe with such babisme as this Pamphleter vseth Passe we from generals and let vs trie him in some particulars The first The Pamphleter The Doctor answered that enquiring into the Acts which are extant concerning the proceedings of King Henrie 8. against Q. Mary and Q. Elizabeth he found not any act wherby after that they had been disabled they were restored vnto the right of succession wherein he is confuted by Bish. Barlow who excuseth the first disinheriting of them and sheweth the legitimation of them againe The Censure SECT IV. 8 In the end of the same booke of Full Satisfaction I expressed as much my selfe in a particular Aduertisement vnto the Reader in this behalfe which hath been published now these three yeeres wherein I satisfied for the integritie both of my cause and conscience yet not withstanding this their choise Disputer and Moderate Answerer or rather their immoderate Pamphleter durst obiect this corrected errour vnto me which he hath also singled out and set in the first place for the most notoriously blacke note of falshood This kinde of dealing I finde dayly among the Romanists I might finde more ingenuitie among the Pagans As for B. Barlow he doth not so much as point at me The Pamphleter Enter againe M. Doctor and excuse your selfe if you can why the very first chapter being intituled A generall censure of his slanderous Pamphlet prouing that no argument therein can conclude the Authors intent is omitted without any memorie at all Tell me was this integritie The Censure 9 I now enter Sir Phamphleter to your blush if you be not past shame giuing you to vnderstand that both your fourth and last Arguments are mentioned and satisfied expresly in the same Full Satisf part 2. pag. 97. 99. As for the rest they were more generall insinuations and were afterwards confuted in the answers vnto other particulars The Pamphleter At the first beginning he misquoteth the place of my Answer citing the second section where there is no such thing as he citeth of the consequence Full Satisfact pag. 1. The Censure 10 The quotation is in the margin of the Full Satisfact pag. 1. and is taken out of the booke of the Moderate Answerer cap. 2. § Wherefore And if I haue mis-cited him let my Reader suspect me in his other taxations but if I haue dealt expresly and directly therein then may we quote this fellow for a loose and leaud calumniator The Pamphleter He citeth me disputing against the naked proposition All Protestants are in the censure of Catholikes heretikes and excommunicate absolutely concealing of what heretikes we intreated whether they were denounced or not denounced The Censure 11 This likewise is a godlesse vntrueth for to shew what kinde of Heretike was vnderstood I spent professedly a whole chapter vz. Full Satisfact lib. 1. cap. 4. pag. 5. The Pamphleter He chargeth me to say that Not any Protestant is iudged by vs an Heretike where the restriction any is his owne corruption and maketh the same particular which was generall The Censure 12 The Pamphleters words were these Not one Protestant c. marke Not one and Not any Can this choise Disputer finde any ods betweene these two I wonder what he meant by this Must I be at paines to teach a puppie to speake English The Pamphleter He intituled his 2. Chap. of Full Satisfact thus Conteining fiue arguments of the Moderate Answerer but why in true dealing conteined it not eight The Censure 13 As though I had answered but fiue of those Arguments If the Libeller had but turned ouer the leafe following he might haue seene Full Satisfact cap. 4. pag. 5. this Sixt and Seuenth Arguments both directly expressed and also largely answered the whole Chapter being spent only in the Confutation of these two Arguments Could either I haue dealt more iustly with him or he more falsly with me Oh but where is the Eight Yea marrie this would be knowen for in his booke there the Seuenth is the last therfore hee complaineth of his Printer that set doune the sixt twice I say that if his Printer did it wittingly he was wiser than the Pamphleter because both they do consonantly implie one argument The Pamphleter And in these citations you further behaue your selfe with this sincerity M. D. first you cite my Answer to be in these words No man doubting in faith but onely such as be obstinate No ignorant beleeuer or deceiued of Heretikes but he to whom the truth hath beene made knowen nor onely internally affected but he that is a manifest Professor is subiect to the censure of excommunication for Heresie Now sir I must tell you that there is not any such proposition in the places you cite from my Answer as is manifest in my Answer c. The Censure 14 What you haue pointed at in the Margent suffer me to draw into a more particular view The Propositions of the Pamphleter are contained in the Mèder Answer cap. 2. my Citations in the Full Satisfact cap. 2. His propositions stand thus Ignorance euen vincible excuseth from heresie And The ignorantly-seduced Protestant is not an Heretike except when the truth of the Catholike doctrine is made manifest he resist And againe He is not properly an Heretike who is deceiued of Heretikes and beleeueth Heretikes The second Both sufficient knowledge of truth proposed and an obstinate pertinacy in not imbracing it with such defence of the contrary is required in Heresie The third He that desireth to be ignorant of the truth and so professeth Heresie inignorance though therin he sinne grieuously yet is he not an Heretike The fourth A man doubting in his faith is not properly an Heretike The fift All Heretikes as internall be not subiect to the sensure of excommunication 15 And what haue I now abstracted from these to shew what kind of men are not subiect to the censure of excommunication in the opinion of the Pamphleter First that No man doubting in faith c. in his fourth Secondly Only such as be obstinate c. which is his second Thirdly No ignorant beleeuer c. which is his first and third Fourthly None deceiued of Heretikes but he to whom the truth is made knowen which is also in his first Fiftly None onely internally infected but he that is a manifest Professor is subiect vnto the censure of excommunication which agreeth with his fift And now I leaue the scanning of these to the sight not as he saith of All for who almost will vouchsafe the sight of such triflings but of any who shall cast his eie heereupon to iudge whether there hath beene in my Citation
Chapters together in my former Treatiss of Mitigation Let vs put his former Reason and this Conclusion together and hence I infer a notable absurditie viz. that Master Parsons his Friend must bethought to haue sent many hundred miles vnto M. Parsons to answer a doubt by his letters which he had largely and sufficiently vnfoulded and assoiled publikely by his booke a yeere before 7 These fower particular circumstances viz. 1 Who 2 What 3 Whither 4 and Whom implying these sower Improbabilities the 1. to seeke to be informed in conscience concerning a sinne that did not concerne him the 2. about a Case wherein there could be no doubt the 3. by delaying time and consulting farre off whereas he might haue beene presently resolued at home and 4. in vrging M. Parsons to satisfie that which he had satisfied do all in my apprehension more then coniecturally tell vs that this Case was deuised either by M. Parsons his friend or else by himselfe tather than deriued from the practise of any Protestant And this will be found to be not onely as in this Exordium probable but euen demonstrable by examination of the Narration it selfe The Narration of the pretended Equiuocating Case of York-shire The Case then in offect was this A certaine Minister in Yorkshire named Wh. for I thinke not good to set dewne all the letters thereof dwelling at a towne called Thornley if I misse not the name The Reuiew shewing the manifold falshoods of this declaration 8 Vpon the discouery of the falshoods of this Narration it will easily appeare that M. Parsons had rather cause to blush at the noting of the two first letters of the Ministers name then the Minister himselfe need to be ashamed to be named to the full who is willing to reueale himselfe to bee that Ed. Whitakers Rector of the Parsonage of Thornhil for that is the right name of the place who had a sute with M. C. about the Tithe of a Closse but how M. Parsons hath related the Case in the behalse of the Defendant shall not wee be heard speak for the Plaintiffe Qui partem alteram audit parte inaudit â alterâ saith Seneca iniquus erit aequum licet iudicauerit that is Hee that in iudgement heareth one partie speake and neglecteth the other albeit he happen to iudge iustly yet is he an vniust Iudge Now then behold we the first vntrueth of this fabulous deuise M. PARSONS his Appendix He being married and loaden with many children and thereupon not content with the ordinary Tithes that were woont to be giuen and paid in that Parish The Reuiew 9 This is spoken to make the Minister seeme to haue been a man contentious who notwithstanding dare professe of himselfe that for Thirtie yeeres space for so long hath he beene Rector of that Parsonage hee troubled not any of his Parishoners for Tithe except the now questioned Mr C. and that especially for the Tithe of one Closse From this he passeth to another vntruth M. PARSONS his Appendix He began to vrge one of his Parishioners to pay him other Tithes also out of a certaine Closse or Field that was pretended not to haue paied Tithes before to other precedent Incumbents Whereupon this Minister deuising with himselfe how he might further his owne cause resolued vpon this meane among others to deale with another Minister which immediately before had possessed that Benefice intreating him aswell by request as by offering him a piece of money as hither is written to assist him in this behalfe by lending him the aid of an oath that he had receiued Tithes before that time out of that Closse or Field The Reuiew 10 The Playntiffe answereth that The Minister which immediately before had possessed that Benefice was dead before I was instituted vnto it being about twenty yeeres before this action began Therefore M. Parsons without a miracle of raising the dead man vnto life could not make good this part of his accusation But he goeth onaudaciously without feare of other pits of errours and falshoods which are in his way The third followeth M. PARSONS his Appendix Whereat though for a time the second Minister did seeme to sticke much saying that he could not doe it with the peace of his conscience yet afterward it seemeth by the earnest perswasion inductions of the other Minister his repugnance of conscience was so mortified as hee yeelded to the others intreaty especially for that he tould him him he had so great friendship and acquaintance with those that must be Iudges and examiners of the cause at Yorke as he doubted not but their two oathes would caris it away The Reuiew 11 M. Parsons had a great minde to bring some Minister vpon the stage for all spectators to point at him insomuch that he hath fancied such a man to be that Minister as was dead and buried twenty yeeres before the beginning of this Sute as was said And now the Plaintiffe furthermore answereth that No Minister was euer vsed in this cause either as witnesse or as aider or any way else But it is knowne what a Priestly Itch M. Parsons had to traduce Ministers which kinde of dealing might proceed from a Conscience that was mortua but not mortificata Although these former falshoods may much preiudice M. Parsons his Report yet shall I desire my Reader to forget these circumstances and to iudge according to the issue of the Case it selfe for now we lanch into the maine M. PARSONS his Appendix To Yorke Assises then they went where hauing taken their Oathes and pleaded the case The Reuiew 12 Then belike both the Ministers did Take their Oathes in this Case but the one did not sweare neither indeed could he sweare by the law of nature because he was dead and the other could not sweare by the order of the Common-law of the land which admitteth none in those Courts to sweare in his owne Cause Which Circumstance maketh the forgery of this Case to be such a Pellucidum mendacium that is so transparent an vntruth that a man may see thorow it But we haue longed all this while to heare the issue of this cause and what successe it had M. PARSONS his Appendix At length they found not that successe which they expected for that the whole Towne and Parish of Thornley offering themselues confidently to sweare and depose the contrary in behalfe of the Defendant to wit that Tithes were not accustomed to be paied out of that place the Ministers had sentence giuen against them with no small note of publike periury The Reuiew 13 The fower former falshoods were notable but this as the Master-lie exceedeth them all for at the Assises at Yorke when the Nisi-prius betweene M. Whit. and M. Co was to be tried and verduit ready to be giuen M. Co was Non-sute and afterwards sought for an other Prohibition still to hinder the Rectors proceedings The trueth heereof I haue confirmed not only by
M. Whit. his protestation but also by the most credible testimony as wel of the then Iudge in the Court of Yorke who kept a note of the passages in this cause as of a Counsailor at Law of M. Co his part who aduised his Clyent to forbeare that course of prosecution The wisdome of which his Counsaile was largely verified by the euent I forbeare to mention a publike Instrument vnder seale which noteth that M. C. sought for a Prohibition against M. Whit. after the Assises at Yorke We may guesse what complection M. Parsons his friend was of who blushed not to say that M. Whit. had sentence giuen against him at Yorke Furtheimore because M. Parsons hath aduentured to talke of Successe I hould it not inconuenient to adde as followeth The memorablenesse of the Suite betweene M. Whit. and M. Co about the Tithe of that Closse and the Successe of the whole businesse 14 It was to be sentenced before the Ordinary at Yorke but before the sentence was pronounced M. C. got a Prohibition at London wherein M. Whit. obtained a Consultation because M. C. had been Non-suit in a former Prohibition at Yorke Neuerthelesse he procured a third Prohibition was againe by another Consullation remitted to his Ordinary at Yorke He stirreth vp to London for a fourth Prohibition and after that a fift and a sixt which were all frustrated by so many Consultations because he failed to make dew proofe of his Suggestions within the times limited by the Statute After the three last Prohibitions he procured an Iniunction out of the Chauncery against M. Whi but vpon Information giucn to the Court it was speedily dissolued Is not this a strange case which continuing the space of nine yeeres was so often tossed like a Tennis-bal between London and Yorke But in the end the matter was so vexatiously caried on M. C. his part as that he was taxed to pay 300. pounds costs whereof M. Whit. receiued two hundred pounds and after that his foresaid Tithes and hath enioied them euer since Heere we see not onely one Successe but euen as many successes as there were Consultations which were six and as there were pounds which he got for charges amounting to aboue two hundred pounds and as the valew of the Tithe is which he recouered And now let them laugh that winne for heerein we see this Prouerbe falsified Notwithstanding M. Parsons still boasteth and maketh sport in behalfe of his Defendant and plaieth merily vpon a slanderous figment as followeth M. PARSONS his Appendix One that was a particular friend of M. Wh. demanding the reason how they could sweare or rather forsweare in such maner the thing being knowne to be so notoriously false He answered that they in their owne sence did sweare truely behold then the Case of Equiuocation and that so they were ready to prooue it if they had beene vrged by the Iudges therein to wit that their meaning in swearing was that the former Incumbent had receiued Tithes out of that Closse or Field or without that Closse or Field namely in other Closses adioyning though not in the Field And with this Equiuocation of Out and In they thought themselues cleared both for deceiuing the Iudges and their Parishioners The Reuiew 15 This in his marginall note he calleth a fraudulent and lying Equiuocation who if he be aliue might be put in minde by a most graue godly famous Treasurer of learning Sir Tho. B. that there was such a iest as this set abroach in M. Parsons his time in Oxford by one who merily maintained that the testimonie which he alleaged was out of Aristotle that is not credible said his fellow the other brought for his defence a booke which was not Aristotle where the alleaged testimonie was extant and therefore said the Sophister is it found out of Aristotle May we not thinke that M. Parsons hath turned a iest into an earnest and translated the booke-case into the Close case 16 When we remember the diuerse improbabilites in the Exordium of a friend busily inquiring about a sinne which did not concerne him and questioning about such a Case which no Christian could doubt of and sending for resolution to Rome which might haue beene had at home and consulting thereabout with M. Parsons by priuate letters which had been before largely satisfied in his publike books but especially when we recognize the falsities of the Narration and Declaration it selfe wherein a Minister is made a witnesse who was dead twenty yeeres before and some Minister is obiected whereas no Minister was any way vsed in that cause and they are said to haue beene forsworne who were not nor could not be sworne and the sentence is affirmed to passe with him at the Assises who was so 〈◊〉 as to become Non-sute and so to forsake his cause and in the vp-shot was constrained both to pay the Tithes that were sued for and to repay the charges of the sute How can we but thinke that this Equiuocating by out and in came out of M. Parsons his Equiuocating braine wherein the Mitigation for defence of a woorse kinde of Equiuocation by Mentall Reseruation was formerly ingendred What remaineth now but that we vnderstand what Determination M. Parsons hath passed vpon this forged Case The Conclusion and determination of the former Case M. PARSONS his Appendix Their Conspiracie together by way of money corruption and bribes was detestable Their guilesull deceiuing their lawfull Iudges that were competent in the cause and proceeded iuridically was abhominable The scandall giuen to them that knew they sware falsly was impious The obligation they had to answer directly vnto the sense and meaning of the said Iudges was indispensable all which points are different in a lawfull Equiuocation Whereof I doe inferre for resolution of the case that this was no true or proper Equiuocation at all but rather a flat lie and open periury The Reuiew 17 Although such a speech in iudgement being but a Verball Equiuocation in the inward court of a mans conscience might goe for an indirect truth as hath been prooued yet in foro fori and outward court of mans Iudicature wherin the secret thoughts of men cannot be discerned it may be censured for a lie And whether it be a lie or not a lie yet being a deceit and delusion against a Magistrate in an Oath none can deny but euery such practise is Detestable abhominable indispensable and impious both before God and man And thus far supposing that the case had beene such I yeeld vnto M. Parsons his Censure and Conclusion 18 But now after the examination of the Third part of his Accusation I cannot see how M. Parsons could haue chosen a more extraordinary and famous case wherein to betray their owne malice against Ministers and to make themselues most notoriously infamous by deuising this Equiuocation of out and in which may perswade any indifferent Reader to
offered for those who offended God in many things vsing the same straine of speech as Chrysostome had done by extending Prayer vnto the soules of grieuous and mortall offenders Which doctrine the stomacke of the Purgatorians will in no wise disgest 46. What will become of the testimonie of their sixt witnesse whom Coccius nameth Diadochus de perfectione Spirit cap. 100 All that he will say is that Men fearing death a little enter as it were into iudgement to be Examined by the fire of iudgement c. But their Cardinall Bellarmine hath told vs already that this fire doeth differ from the fire of Purgatorie For the fier of Iudgement is but a Trying and examining fire and that fire of Purgatorie is a purging and tormenting fire 47. But now let euery man giue roome for two Emperors doe approach and seeme to offer their testimonies for Purgatorie The first is Iustinus Imp. Epist. ad Hormisdam who saith That we may not contemne all the memories of the dead That is The Commemorations of their names as their Cardinall Baronius teacheth shewing that heereby was meant the tollerating of the mention of the names of some in the Catalogue of orthodoxall Bishops who died in the schisme of Acatius Now if Commemorations of Bishops and Saints departed doe necessarily conclude them to be in Purgatorie fire then how shall wee celebrate the names of Patriarkes Prophets Apostles Martyrs yea and of the glorious vessell of Grace the Virgine Marie to praise God that they are in rest and blessednesse What iniurie will not these Purgatorians doe vnto other Authors who dare offer such violence vnto the sentence of so great an Emperour 48. The nex Emperour is Iustinianus Nouella de Monachis Hee is also without due reuerence thrust in and vrged to speake nothing to the purpose saying onely that There are Funerals performed for the dead which are called their Memorials To what end is this Let M. Parsons stretch this out with his teeth as farre as he can yet shall hee not possibly make Memorials of the dead reach so farre as the Purgatorie fire for the afflicting of their soules as hath beene shewen and will be hereafter more apparant 49. Procopius Gazeus Ad cap. 6. Esaiae is the ninth Author vpon whom M. Parsons must serue a Latitat before he will appeare For their Sixtus Senensis speaking of these Commentaries saith that They haue not as yet beene turned into Latine but are kept in the Venetian Librarie And when he is suffered to speake the best that he can it is no more but this that There is a celestiall place of Purgation of mens soules euen by the Seraphins This celestiall and heauenly Purgatorie must needes be spirituall by the force of the Holy Ghost and not by any hellish torment but differeth as much from the reall fire which is our Aduersaries fornace as doth Heauen from Hell 50. The tenth and last man of their Greeke witnesses is Iohannes Climachus who liued about the yeere 580. Gradu 4. de Insomnijs All that the testimonie hath is but the Celebration of seruice for the sleeping of ones soule which doth make no more for Purgatorie then to pray that the soule of him that sleepeth may in the end be ioyned with the body and made partaker of the consummation of blisse 51. Because M. Parsons in his Challenge hath allotted vnto me but the compasse of sixe hundred yeares I will not transgresse to proccede in discouering many base counterfeits and corrupt Authours whom Coccius hath brought to serue his stage I now desire the Christian Reader to ponder and apply the Obseruations and Grants of our Romish Aduersaries noted aboue in the first Section to apply the allegations of Coccius vnto them and seeing that M. Parsons did earnestly desire that I should demonstrate the abuse of one and thirtie Fathers whether Greeke or Latine within the compasse of sixe hundred yeeres after Christ to trie whether I haue not satisfied him already euen in the Greeke Authors for besides the ten Greeke Liturgies we haue found Greeke Authors if we shall admit Damascen for one who fell in obiter into Coccius his Catalogue thrice Ten which by being examined according to the confessed principles conclusions animaduersions and obseruations of our Aduersaries themselues appeare to be either foysted or corrupted or discredited or wrested to prooue that which cannot bee euinced from them which wee may so much the rather suspect because that their owne Bishop Roffensis went so farre in his time as to confesse that There was none or very rare mention of Purgatory in the Greeke Fathers and that the doctrine therof was hardly knowne in those times and more absolutely their Polydore Virgil graunting that It was not acknowledged by the Grecians vnto this day Which sheweth that their Salmeron and Coccius in alleaging more then all the Greeke Fathers for proofe of that doctrine haue done this with a Greekish according to the Prouerb with a deceiueable faith Thus much of the Greeke Fathers SECT IIII. The testimonies deliuered in the name of the Latine Fathers abused by Coccius for proofe of Purgatory 52. THis booke groweth bigge and corpulent if I should deale as particularly in the Latine as I haue done in the Greeke Testimonies I might complaine of an Amphora exit therefore will I insist onely vpon those allegations which may be best satisfied from the principles of our Aduersaries and leaue the rest remitting my Reader to the Confutations which other Protestants haue yeelded vnto them 53. Tertullian is made the Captaine of this band whom some of our Aduersaries haue noted to haue held that the soules are in sequestred receptacles wherein they neyther receiue paine nor their reward of blessednesse which doctrine in the iudgement of their Iesuite Suarez doth consequently gainesay the doctrine of Purgatory fire And this answere in generall might satisfie their particular obiections out of Tertullian notwithstanding we shall examine these 54. The first is De testimonie animae aduersus Gentes cap. 4. Thou prayest for the bones and ashes of the dead that they may haue refreshing and wishest that he the departed may rest well with them who are apud inferos The party whom Tertullian bringeth in praying thus is not a Christian but a Pagan and the purpose which Tert. hath to alleadge that and other opinions of the Heathen was not to approue them but to proue out of them that there is an Immortality of the soule euen as he doth from another absurd opinion of theirs in calling wicked men diuels and thereby confessing that there is a Diuell and consequently a Tormenter and therefore also a Day of iudgement Concerning the truth of this answere my Reader may consult with their owne Renatus Laurentius in his Argument and Annotations vpon this booke 55. The second Tert. de corona militis ca. 3. We make Oblations for the dead and this parte Coccius hath cut off for their
birth-dayes Must Oblations for the dead once a yeare necessarily imply a Purgatory torment or wil our aduersaries allow the whole testimony of Tertullian Neither of both for their Renatus answering vnto places of S. Cyprian l. 3. cap. 6. l. 4. cap. 5. That saying of Cyprian saith he that Oblations are offered for Martyrs if I be not deceiued signifieth the commemorations and remembrance of them according to the custome of those times which was after the repeating of the Creede to giue vp the names of godly men departed in a scrowle to lay it on the Altar there to be recyted not without some praise and commendations of their vertues which shined in them whilst they were aliue What can be more plaine to infringe the necessity of this consequence which is from Oblations for them to infer a Purgatory punishment and torment of them That which Tertullian addeth concerning the yearely celebrations of their Birth-dates Was as both Rhenanus and Rhenatus acknowledged an Heathenish custome and for a time onely by indulgence tollerated in the Church but afterwards condemned by the Councell of Nice 56. The third De anima cap. vlt. speaking of a little offence which as the vttermost farthing must be paid in that morà resurrectionis That is in the time of the delay of the Resurrection Coccius should haue considered that Tertullian is reckoned by their owne Doctors among the erroneous Chiliasts who held that the Saints should liue a Thousand yeares in this world in all spirituall delights at what time men should rise as Ribera expoundeth them according to their merits some sooner then others Therefore if we take Mora resurrectionis in the last day for lingring and delay in the time of their resurrection this we see is twelue score wide of Romish Purgatorie 57. The fourth De Monogamia cap. 11. De caestitate cap. 11. are bookes which both Pammelius and Posseuine confesse to haue beene written when he was a Montanist euen against the Church And the testimonies themselues talking but of Prayers and Oblations and refreshing will not carry leuell to the scope that Coccius aymeth at as by many examples we haue proued 58. The next Authour concerning whom I may haue some direction from our Aduersaties is Zeno Veronensis in whose testimony In Serm. de Resurrect there is no mention eyther of Fire or of Purgatory And the booke it selfe is of so small credite that their Notaries of auncient writings viz. Trithemius Senensis Posseuine Baronius and others doe not so much as vouchsafe this Author the naming 59. The third is Lactantius lib. 7. Instit. cap. 21. Perstringentur c. That is God wil examine the iust wtth fire and the sinnes of men shal be burned Which testimony also Bellarmine vrgeth to prooue their Purgatory fire after death not considering that Lactantius speaketh as their Iesuite Suarez confesseth of the fire in the day of the resurrection Which is saith their Senensis the fire of conflagration in the last day Which is not saith Bellarmine that Purgatory now controuerted And Suarez doth furthermore call this a false erroneous opinion to thinke that there shall be some iust men in the day of the resurrection who being not perfectly purged of their sinnes must bee ioyned to their bodies and so purged with fire in their bodies and soules before that they can be blessed 60. Hilarius Pictauiensis in Psal. 59. where he speaketh of purging of sinnes with fire alluding vnto that of 1. Cor. 3. of many That shall be saued as it were by fire according as elsewhere In Psal. 118. vpon those wordes My soule hath desired thy iudgements We saith he must passe thorow that indefatigable fire wherin we must vndergoe those grieuous punishments for the expiation of the sinnes of our soules and is obiected by Bellarmine for confirmation of Romish Purgatorie notwithstanding the same Bellarmine repeating the same place of Hilary in Psal. 118. vpon the same text My soule hath desired thy iudgements c. where Hilary saith that All except Christ yea the Virgine Mary must passe thorow the fire sheweth that Hilary seemeth not to meane the Purgatory fire but the fire of Gods iudgement thorow which indeede all Saints must passe And their Senensis will haue vs vnderstand that herein Hilarius followed the opinion of Origen who taught that all except Christ must passe thorow the fire of conflagration at the last day which opinion Bellarmine condemneth for a manifest errour 61. S. Ambrose his worthinesse mooued Coccius to be plentifull in alleadging diuers testimonies out of him but if I be not much deceiued very vnfortunately The first place is his Orat. de exitu vitae Theodosy praying thus Thou Lorde giue perfect rest vnto thy seruant Theodosius let his soule come where it may not feele the sense of death What then did Ambrose thinke that the soule of this godly Emperour was now in a Purgatory fire This is indeede Coccius his ayme and M. Parsons his consequence but behold good Reader the vertigo of these men for in the beginning of that Oration Ambrose professeth publiquely of Theodosius that He hath not lost his Kingdome but changed it being assumed into the Tabernacles of Christ which testimony destroyeth Purgatorie What then meant Ambrose will some say by this Prayer for Theodosius after his death surely nothing but as he meant in praying for other Emperors Gratian and Valentinian which was as their Iesuite Salmeron confesseth To pray for their speedie resurection 62. A second place is Epist. 8. ad Faustinum wherin there is onely Prayer for the soule departed which breth as wee haue heard is not stronge enough to kindle a Purgatorie fire 63. We descend vnto a third testimonie which is Orat. 1. praeparans ad Missam which I iudge saith Erasmus to be none of the Writings of Ambrose and therefore we may dismisse it for a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Neuerthelesse the testimony it selfe cannot euince the Romish Purgatory as may appeare by comparing it with the third obseruation 64. The last place is the Authour of the Comments vpon S. Pauls Epistles which passe vnder the name of Ambrose teaching that A man must suffer a purging fire lest that hee be tormented in the fire eternall but hee telleth not what purging fire he meaneth whether the fire of the spirite or the fire of tribulation in this life or the fire of examination or the fire of conflagration as he meaneth in Psal. 118. by the confession of Senensis by all which the Romish Purgatorie is excluded And although Coccius could fashion his owne meaning out of that place yet may it be as lawfull for vs to answere in this case according vnto the iudgement of their Iesuite Salmeron who proueth those Comments by many Arguments to bee none of S. Ambroses Which as he censureth are infected with the errours of the Pelagians 65.