as cheife in the calling of all Nations g Reply pag â—5 c. And we tell him that Pope Leo did speake more for Peter to advance himselfe then it is probable he would otherwise have done if his Chayre had not met with some opposition in those times for Leo maketh Christ Marke the tenth to reprehend the desire of that power which in the Iesuites quotation he seemeth to give to S. Peter h Leo Epist 55. ad Pulcher. Augustam de ambitu Anatolij Et ille vere crit magnus qui fucrit totius ambitionis alicâ—â—â— dicente Domino Quicunque voluerit inter vos major sicri sit vester minister Et quicunque voluerit inter vos primus esse erit vester servus Sicut filius hominis non venit ministrari sed ministrare although Maldonate the Iesuite would not have the words of the Evangelist so to be understood i Maldonat com in Marc. 9. 35. Non hic agi de prjma in gubernanda Ecclesia dignitate etsi co etiam sensuhunc locum alicubi apud Leonem magnum legi memini We have seene then saith the Iesuite how undoubtedly the auncient Fathers maintained S. Peters primacie as well ever all the Church of Christ as over the rest of the Apostles also k Reply pag. 55 But any may perceive with how false eyes his owne witnesses but little favouring his cause as we shall further shew hereafter So that any may conceive how poorely he hath layed the foundation of the Roman Catholicke Church vizt Peter his Monarchichall power over the Apostles Neither saith he will it be hard to shew the like uniforme consent of antiquitie in attestation of that other point denyed also by our Answerer in the Star-chamber concerning the same headship and Primacie which the Bishops of Rome doe inherite by lawfull succession l Reply pag. 55 And to manifest this he beginnes his entrance with a repetition of what hath beene said and answered before and then fixeth first of all upon the strong pillar of Popish height the Arabicke Canons of the Nicene Councell from whom hee doubteth not to bring us most plaine testimony in this point m Reply pag. 56 and who beleiveth him not for if these Canons speake not plainely for the purpose whereunto they were framed what device can helpe them But the Iesuite knowing his coyne counterfeit tels us that the Answerer doth soone rid himselfe of this and the like decrees of that holy Synode by averring them to be forged by certaine well-willers of the Roman Church in the name of the good Fathers that never dreamed saith he of such a busines n Reply ibid. And is not this a truth that the Iesuite cannot resist though he playes the Baby in telling us that if you desire to heare him prove this his saying you must have 〈◊〉 â—â— other proofe you are like to get none of him besides his owne rash affirmation o Reply ibid. For the matter is so cleare from all antiquity that there were but twenty Canons in the Nicent Councell all which we have that it were but the mis-spending of time to prove that which all acknowledge q See them repeated in the sixt Councell of Carthage apud 〈◊〉 um Besides could the famous lights of the world at that time be ignorant of these Canons as S. Augustine r Concil Carthag 6. c. 7. Augustinus Ecclesiae Hiâ—ponis Regiensis Legatus Provinciae Numidiae with 〈◊〉 and more 〈◊〉 Bishops Å¿ Epistola Aphricani Concil ad Bonifacium Papam 1. Aurelius caeteri qui praesentes affuimus numero ducenti decem septem ex omni Concilio Aphricae Were they so little esteemed that they were clofetted at Rome or so unknowne in the East that the Patriarches of Constantinople and Alexandria could make no returne of them t Epistola Concil Aphric ad Coelestinum Quia illud quod pridem per cundem co episcopum nostrum Faustinum tanquam ex parte Nicaeni Concilij exinde transmiâ—â—â—â—is in Concilijs verioribus quae accipiuntur Ni aena à sancto Cyrillo coepiscopo nostro â—◠〈◊〉 Ecclesiae à venerabili Artico Constantino 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ac auther 〈◊〉 missis tale aliquid non poâ—uimus repeâ—â—e though the one sent them intirely as they were decreâ—d by the Fathers at Nice u Epistola Attici Episcopi Constantinopolitani ad Concilium Africanum Sicut staâ—â—ta suntin Nicaea civitam à Pauibus canoâ—â—â— in integro ut jussisus direx and the other â—â—nsm faithfull exemplars from the authenticke Coppie x escripta ad Conc. Aphrican Cyrilli Alexandrini Episcopi Necesse habus 〈◊〉 exemplaria ex authentica Synodo in Nâ—â—â—â— Bythiniae habito vestrae charitati dirigere quae in Ecclesiastica historia requirentes 〈◊〉 But if there were nothing else to disgrace them the Iesuite his endeavours to justifie them from farre-fetched and counterfeit grounds were alone sufficient to render them suspected of themselves For doe you thinke that a â—â—e from the 〈◊〉 of S. Thomas sent from some sleight Mercenarie of the Pope to his mancipated servants the Iesuites in a matter that concernes the Popes greatnes so neerely is to be received as an infallible Argument Neither if this Papall altitude could stand upon true grounds would it need â—uch counterfeit supporters as these two Epistles cited by the Iesuit in regard they declare theÌ„selves counterfeite and are acknowledged for no better by their owne For if this Epistle were written to Pope Marke after the Arians burnt their bookes at Alexandria surely it must be many yeares after Pope Marke was dead their burning being in the raigne of Constantius y Athanasius Epistol ad orthodoxos in persecut when â—â— Pope Marke died in the time of Constantines government z Hieron in Chron. Further how could this Epistle lye hid when the controversie was betwixt the African Church and the Roman Bishops Besides could Marke send to Athanasius in Egypt when it is apparant by Baronius that he was â—â— Exul in France a Baron â—om 3 ad anâ—um 336 â— 39 Exul ho 〈◊〉 agebat â—â— Galliâ—â— Could the Roman Coppie and that of Alexandria so farre differ as wee see they did if the Pope had sent a true Exemplar ex Romano scrinie And not to presse the Reader any further What trifling follies doe they impute to the Niceâ—â— Fathers as to publish these Canons halfe Latinâ— halfe Greeke perswading that fourtie were made by the Greeke Fathers fourtie by the Latine and to insert tenne Cannons amongst the rest in relation to the seaventie languages which they conceived to bee in the whole world or the seventie disciples and all this by the assistance of the Spirit of God b Epistola Athanasij Aegiptiorum Episcoporum ad Marcum Papam Saâ—e praesentibus nobis octoginta capitula in memorata tractaâ—â— sunt Synodo scilicet quadraginta à Latinis similiter Latinis
either 〈◊〉 a Neasâ—uig or mac a 〈◊〉 in regard their fathers villany adhâ—â—eth to that name and addeth afflictioâ— to their mindes but for the sonnes of Preists and Bishops amongst us what repining humour can possesse them seeing they were borne in honourabâ— Dist 56. cap. Osius Osius Papa suit silius Stephani subdiaconi Bonifacius Papa â—uit silius â—ucundi presbyteri Faelix Papa filius Felicis presbyteri de titulo Fasciolae Agapitus Papa â—ilius â—ordiâ—ni presbyteri Theodorus Papa 〈◊〉 Theodoâ—â— Episcopi de 〈◊〉 Hierosotyma Sylverium Papa filius Sylverij Episcopi Romae Deusdedit Papa 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 subdiaâ—â—◠〈…〉 natione 〈◊〉 〈…〉 matrimâ—ny their patents living in the rule appointed by the Apostle But the Iesuite as 〈◊〉 of his sports commeth in good sober sadnesse to wonder that in such an audience the Answerer blushed not to affirme that Rome had little to alleadge for this perfâ—rment but onely that S. Peter was crucified in it But what can the Iesuite say it hath more Why he tells us That 〈◊〉 can â—ll 〈◊〉 that the Apostle did relinquish Antiâ—â—h to 〈◊〉 his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 her u Reply pag. â—â— As if the Bishop and Monarch of the whole Church 〈◊〉 not 〈◊〉 a double mansion several places of 〈◊〉 Did their Popes relinquish Rome by fitting in the chaire â—â— Aâ—ignion Or was it possible that hee that kept the Bishoprick of the whole Church could relinquish the Seâ— of Antioch by his so journing at Rome The â—â—suite would perswade it and that it was done by commaund For saith he as 〈◊〉 Writers ◠〈◊〉 Papa 〈…〉 doe relate Peter was commanded so to doe by CHRIST himselfe Reply pag. â— Here is nothing to make the inheritance to descend upon the Church of Rome from divine testimony And Bellarmine indeede conceived the matter onely probable â—â—remptorily hee concludeth not that the Bishop of Rome by divine right is Peters Successour y Bellarm. de Rom. Pont. l. â— c. 1â— Et quo â—â—am â— Mar 〈◊〉 Papa i â—â— ad 〈◊〉 sâ—â—â—bit 〈…〉 S. 〈◊〉 in 〈◊〉 contra 〈◊〉 Athanasius in Apâ—logia 〈…〉 Marry 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 nor â—â—â— improbabile Dominum 〈…〉 ut â—edem 〈…〉 â—â—geret 〈◊〉 uâ— Romaâ—â—s Episcopus 〈◊〉 â—â— succedâ—ret sed 〈◊〉 â—â— hoc â—â—t 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ratio 〈◊〉 non est 〈◊〉 institutione 〈◊〉 quâ— in â—â—â—gelio legitur neither will he 〈◊〉 it of faith that Peters seate was there onely hâ—◠〈◊〉 that it is most probable pâ—â— credendum and he will â—â—count you a Catholicke if you beleive it z Bellarm de Rom Pont. l 4. c 4. Accedit quod 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Christâ—m imperasse 〈◊〉 ut Romae â—edem â—ollocaret non â—â—men 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ut 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ibi collâ—caret Quoâ—iam ergo â—on constat 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Peâ—â—o ut Romae 〈◊〉 colâ—ocaret ideo non est de 〈◊〉 divine 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Romae â—â—dem esse constitutam sed â—amen ut 〈◊〉 est 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Is this the Cardo upon which all the Catholicke Romane â—aith turâ—eth Is there no more certainery in this ground-worke Must Peters inheritance descend certainely upon him who by divine right cannot proove himselfe to bee his Heire Must one Witnesse and that a knowne Counterfeit and â—â— Marcâ—lluâ— a Haec est una illarum epistolarum quas 〈…〉 esse 〈◊〉 tell us a story and obtâ—ine an Empire This is too great a reward Now whereas hee tells us that Peter was Bishop of Rome the space of â—â—ve and twentie yeares Antioch having had him but for 〈◊〉 and consequently that he laboured more fruitfully and performed all more gloriously in her then in Antioch and finally that in her even by Christs appointment also he glorified God by the triumph of his blessed death and martyrdome b Reply pag. â—â— We tell him that when he attempts to prove it hee shall not want his answere That Peter was at Rome preached there was crucified it is not much to grant him but that hee was there such a Bishop as Linus c. hee cannot prove some making him such a Bishop as Paul was others making him nonâ— at all But the Iesuite chargeth the most learned Answerer with judging according to the flesh when hee made the Apostles death and martyrdome a slender cause why Peter should respect her so much And further telleth us that surely it is no slender cause for the Catholicke Church to sing therefore of her with solemne joy in this sort Thrice happy Rome that with the purple blood Of such great Princes stand'st adorn'd and blesâ— Not thine owne worth but their deserving good Crownes theâ— on earth the fairest and the best c Reply pag. 61 62. This most grave and reverend Lord I confesse hath nor as some of you could have wish'd put off the 〈◊〉 the 〈◊〉 man in the Iesuiticall forme d Hassen Mullerus de Votis Iesuitarum c. 6 Si Nobiles illoâ—â—m societatem ingrediantur habitu veniant splendido ac precioâ—o permittunt â—t triduum eâ—m reservent quo lapso cum â—â—ponere alteri dare Societatis habitum â—â—duere jubenâ—â—â— Et hoc est secundùm illos veterem exuere 〈◊〉 seipâ—â—m mottiâ—â—cais alteri suâ—◠〈◊〉 â—â—â— neither as your Popes have â—nterpreted 〈◊〉 I. Epist 3. ad 〈◊〉 the Apostle Rom 8. â— â— â— but as God himselfe hath commaunded wherein the World is his Witnesse and I thinke it but time spent to justifie him But let the Iesuite prove this Argument to bee convincing if hee bee able his singing and other passages will not worke the feate The Saints in Rome wee know as the Church otherwhere were much confirmed by the patient sufferings of the Martyrs but this doth not excuse much lesse lift up Rome Did Abels blood that â—â—yed for vengeance plead then for glory Did innocent blood theâ— advance your Monarchy that now you make your selves drunke with the blood of the Saints Hierusalem lost heâ— Crowne by the Prophets blood must the Apostles triple Rome Yet if Rome get such an height in martyring the servant what might Hierusalem pleade that crucified the Lord These you see are silly inventions but the strongest pillars of the Romane faith The Iesuite hath done his doe yet he telleth us Much more might be said and now intreates the Gentle Reader to trophey him for his victory But hee hath not yet cured the wound that hath beene given him though hee conceiteth all faire smoothe and without scarre He hath laboured to make Fathers and Saints the Popes serving-men the World his Citie Heaven the Church and Purgaâ—ory his Provinces but as you see all in vaine The downe-right blowes he perswades himselfe to be given we feele not our sheildâ— are not peirced neither are the least of our bul warkes overthrowne SECT IX THis Section shewes that the Iesuite having overshot himselfe in a tearme would now make it good by an interpretation and thereupon hee enquires Whether the Church of Rome may
Church which by the testimonie of venerable Antiquitie wee finde approved to remaine ever free from all errour to that rocke against which the power of hell shall never prevaile to that foundation which Christ hath setled by his promise and made for ever immoveable by his obtained Prayer Reply pag. 6â— How non-erring a Church your Roman hath beene in her head is already declared How infallible a rule of faith your Cheife Pastor hath proved in the primitive times venerable Antiquitie by severall examples hath detected What a rocke Peters pretended Successours have beene when the divell was let loose to split so farre as possible the ship of the Church hath not been left you untold And who can beleive that CHRIST his prayer for Peters faith was effectuall for the POPES when against faith they day he desire to usurpe his kingdome This we Catholickes saith the Iesuite are exhorted to doe by S. Cyrill sayinâ— Let us remaine as members in our head the Apostolicke Throne of the Roman Bishops from whence it is our part to seeke what wee ought to believe This also all Protestants are advised to doe by a Doctour of their owne who as we heard before telleth them that they ought diligently to search out the spouse of Christ and Church of the living God which is the pillar and ground of truth having found her then setting aside all other questions they ought to embrace her communion follow her direction and rest in her judgment y Reply pag. 6â— What Doctor Feild advised Protestants to doe hath beene formerly declared And for what Catholickes are exhorted to doe he urgeth S. Cyrill but from whence From Aquinâ—s z Cyril Alleâ— in Thesauro alleadged by S. Thomas in opusc cont Graecoâ— Reply pag. 6â— who forged it For Cyrill hath no such words His Thesaurus hath no such filth He neither consented unto nor approved this tyranny Hee was one of them that sent the Copy of the Councell of Nice to curbe these pretences before they got head I wonder why the Iesuite added not the like forgery of the Councel of Chalcedon to the same end from the same Author Here wee may see that the best grounds he hath to prove their holy Father to be infallible and the Romane Mother without spots are but authorities taken from deceit But leaving Doctor Feild formerly urged and answered he presents us with these sentences of the Auncient in which saith he as in a pure mirrour they may if they list espy their enorâ—ions disagreement from the truth Reply pag 63 And the first Ancient Father that he produceth is Ireneus All they that are in the Church of God ought to obey saith he unto those Preists who have their succession from the Apostles who together with the succession of their Bishoprick have received the assured grace of truth according to the good will of the heavenly Father And we ought to have for suspected such as withdraw themselves from the like principall succession and joyne themselves together in any other place I say wee ought to hold them as hereticks of a perverse judgment or as schismatickes selfe-liking presumptuous fellowes And elsewhere saith the Iesuite he declareth how such like hereticks are to be conâ—â—â—ed confounded according to the practice of his times to wit in the second age after Christ We confound saith he al those who gather otherwise then they ought how by that Church which is the cheifest the most auncient best knowne unto all men which was established grounded in Rome by the two most glorious Apostles Peter and Paul pointing forth that Tradition and faith which this Roman Church holdeth from the Apostles by the succession of Bishops even unto our dayes After this manner also saith the Iesuite did Tertullian troâ—â—ce wrest those Heretickes whom hee had to deale withal Let them shew unto us if they can the original of their Churches let them rip up the order of their Bishops in â—ueâ—â—ort that by a succession derived from the beginning they prove their cheife Bishop to have some one of the Apostles or Apostolicall men for his author and Predecessour for by this meanes the Apostolicall Churches doe make up their accounts And because the Heretickes then were destitute of all such proofe as Tertullian exacted of them for the maintenance of their cause even as our Adversaries saith the Iesuite are as this day He therefore bringeth in the Catholicke Church upbrayding them with them all Protestants in this manner Who â— God 's name are yeâ— When from whence came yoâ— hither What doe you amongst mine being none of mine By what right O Marcion doest thou cut my â—ood what leave hast â—hâ—â— O Valentine to turne my streames fountaines another way By what authority doest thou remove my bounds O Apelles O Luther O Calvin O Zuiâ—glius The possession is mine I have it of old I enjoyed it before you c Reply pag 69 and 70. All that the Iesuite hath produced from Irenâ—us Tertullian will make little for justifying his pretences if the point be truly considered For there is a bare personall succession which may accompany a false Church as it did the Iewish when the Pharisees saâ—e in Moses Chaire and the Churches of the East when Heretickes invaded the chaires of Catholicke Bishops Secondly there is a Successâ—â—â— not only personall of Bishops Preists but where the Catholick Apostoliâ—all doctrine is continued also The people wee say where this is plaine are bound to receive the Doctrin from Timothie every succeeding Bishop as Timothie â— Tim 1. 14. from the Apostle that established and first published the same Now whatsoever the Iesuite hath brought from these Fathers is no way advantageous for the Church of Rome For first we can shew and have done as good personall succession as the Roman Bishops can claime any Secondly to this our orderly Succession we can and have proved by comparison and consanguinity of Apostolicall doctrin that we are true and Apostolicall Churches Thirdly the Roman certaintie upon which their Profelyres must depend is no firmer by these Fathers testimonies then Ephesus Smyrna Corinth Philippi Germany Spaine France Egypt Lybia Thessalonica c Irenaeus pag. 140 142. Disci te ab Apostoli cis Ecclesijs Habetis Romae Linum Polycarpum Smyrnae ab Apostolis edoctum Tertull. Praeser p. c. 37. Proximè est tibi Achaâ— habes Corinthum Si non longè es â— Macedonia habes Philippos habes Thessalonicenses Si potes in Asiam tendere habes Ephesum si autem Italiae adjaces haqes Romam unde nobis quoque authoritas praest ò est Rhenanus Argum in Tert. de praescript alibi Impress Basil 1521. Tertullianus Ecclesiam unam Apostolicam nulla loco affigit Romanum Ec lesiam ornat magnificae laudis elogio non tamen tantam illam facit quantum hodiè fieri videmus nam Apostolicis Ecclesijs numerat non
mil lib 3. cap. 5. Neminem posse etiamsi velit subesse Christo communicare cum Ecclesia coelesti qui nen subest Pontifici non communicat cum Ecclesia militante viz Romana So that we can justly say that wee have beene forced to depart from your particular Communion you declaring your selves schismaticks and enemies to the Catholicke Church and that wee doe adhere to the vniversall body it selfe in which Salvation will be found notwithstanding all your desperate Decrees cast out against the members thereof But our Iesuite sayth that we are so far from discovering any such thing that a prime Doctour †Doctour Feild in his Treatise of the Church lib. 3. cap. 13. cited Reply pag. 7. of ours confesseth that the Roman Church held still Communion with those other Churches that never fell into error We find not this in the place alledged but allowing it to be so why might not a perverse company hold Communion outward Conformitie with the true Church You make Iudas an Hereticke wee thinke hee was scarce so good and yet how long in this Hypocrisie did hee keepe Communion with the Apostles Arius was worse if it were possible for as the first would have dissolved his humanity this attempted with grosse conceits against his Divinity and yet his Communion was Catholicke and in outward appearance he a Socrat. eccl hist lib. 1. and his consorts b Carron in sum Concil pag. 39 Vndeâ—â—â— consilio inter se habito acquiescunt ad subscribendum manu solâ non mente subscribed to the Nicene Creed If this be all that you can say for your faith that you have held outward Communion with the faithfull it doth little avayle For a theife may be with true men and Heretickes with them that professe the faith and the Divell himselfe among the sonnes of God nay present himselfe before the Lord * Iob 2. 1 But an other †Master Bunny in his treatise tending to pacification sect 14. pag. 89. of the same ranke telleth vs that the Church of Rome hath ever continued after a sort in profession of the faith since the time that by the Apostles it was delivered to them c. And hath also in some manner preserved c. the word and Sacraments that Christ himselfe did leave vnto vs All this will not make Rome Catholicke or free her from Apostasie backsliding which surely is a very speciciall blessing of God and an evident worke of the holy Ghost from which confession our Iesuite inferrs that the Church of Rome her enemies being Iudges is cleerely freed from all suspition of Apostasie and is confessed to have held faithfull Communion with the true Church of God c Reply pag. 7 But all this foolishly and without ground even by the judgment of as cunning an Arguer as himselfe Parsons the Iesuite for hee doth not thinke Mr Bunny so kinde d Parsons Resolution in the second part of his Preface to the Reader It is such a PacificatioÌ„ as the high Preists of the Iewes wold have made with the Apostles after they had whipt and beaten them vpon condition they should neither teach nor preach any more the Doctrine of Christ as the Iesuite would have him neither doth he pick out of those words any such conclusion as heere is pointed out vnto vs which I have no cause to thinke hee would have omitted if the words would have afforded any such thing Yet we must consider that Mr Bunny was a Pacificator and would speake as much as possibly he could if not more then was fit for perswading vnion betwixt Rome and other Churches Moreover all the good he speaketh of the Romish church is that after a sort they continued in the profession of the faith which might have beene spoken of the Arians Nestorians Pelagians the most heretickes that did not vtterly cast of the name profession of Christianity for which of them after a sort did not professe CHRIST to be the Messias the Saviour of the world Further in some manner it preserued the word and sacraments but in such a maner that may stand with Apostasie The word they acknowledge but with Additions traditionall written the Câ—â—on so corrupted must not speak but with a tongue of the Pope's making The Sacraments they reject not but deny the People in the Eucharist the cup the other they have corrupted with many mixtures whereby it appeareth plainely that they have fallen from the auncient puritie embraced by the Roman church and that after a sort and in some manner onely they have had Communion with other Churches the word and sacraments being preserved not from their desire so much as from the blessing of God For if they might have done all at pleasure the word of God had beene changed for Evangelium aternum e Vide hist explica reverendis simi dom Primar de success stat Eccl cap â— and what doe you thinke would have become of the Sacraments So that the Answerer his worke neither totters nor wants a supporter as yet His third observation is that the most learned Primate will not have those opinions wherein we differ from him to be Heresies but onely a kind of still creeping in Apostasie hooded with the name of Religion and semblance of Devotion and therefore pretendeth himselfe to be excused from discovering vnto vs the author time of their beginnings f Reply pag. 7. Againe he chargeth the learned Answerer page 12. to denounce their opinions Heresies far spread and of long continuance which he imputeth to forgetfulnes till hee remembreth himselfe that they are not exempted from being Heresies by the Answerer but from being such as doe openly oppose the foundation of our faith g Ibid. So that these sayings may stand well together notwithstanding any thing he hath as yet vttered But he telleth vs if the differing points be heresies that never any did more openly oppose the foundation of faith then they And to prove this hee produceth the point of adoration of the hoste in the Sacrament of which he maketh no question but every man will easily vnderstand that if Hell were raked vp a more notorious Heresie could not be found c. and therefore it seemeth impossible in this Iesuites iudgment that any Bishop of Rome could be able to perswade such an impietie c. without being manifestly discerned h ibid. That this grosse and idolatrous Practise of Adoration of the Host is founded vpon a grosse and hereticall foundation is not denyed by the most learned Answerer Neither doe I thinke any man will otherwise conceipt thereof and yet by this concession the Iesuite getteth no ground for his inference therein For suppose this doth fight against Gods divine truth and in as violent a manner as the gates of Hell or power of darknes it followeth not that every man will easily espy i Rhem annota upon the 2. Thess cap 2.
crutches For what are the Arguments hee contendeth with 1. That there was never any commandement given that the Cup should be given to the Laytie 2. That the use of celebration of the Cuppe was not sâ— generall in the Apostles time c. And for this hee cites a Iesuite and tells us that Cardinall Perâ—n in his Reply to the King of Great Brittaine hath undeâ—yabliâ— proved that uppon just cause the Church might change the Communion of both kindes into one that Cardinall Bellarmine hath most largely disputed heâ—reof and clearely prooveth That Christ in the Sacrament is wholly contained in one kinde and that under one kinde there is found the full substance and vertue of the Sacrament t Reply pag. 20. 21. c. Loe heere is the brave confirmation of his indifferent Chalice * If Christs Bloud how â—lightly is it valued when they fight to avoyde it which if allowable I wonder hee should take so much paines in his Reply but have referred all the Controversies to his Predecessors paines because nihil dictum est quod non â—â—it dictum priâ—â— But as hee prooves so shall his answere bee sutable His referments shall bee answered with referments For their Peron I referre him for answere to Mâ—â—lin And for Bellarmine I could name him an hoast But this sacriledge of theirs I will truely lay downe and breifly in a few wordes that the Reader may see the ground of our Churches practise and the base and simple shiftes that they are forced unto for their defending of the surreption of the Cuppe And although our Iesuite declareth himselfe to have beene borne in a full Moone or the Dogge-dayes by his folly and reviling calling our Cleargie the Cupping Ministery u Reply pag â—â— yet GOD bee thanked wee defire not the cuppe for our owne selves in that their appetite is seene but for the people also that all things may bee ordered in the Church according to Christs institution And heerein all may see that hee might as justly revile CHRIST and his Apostles as hee doth those whom hee styles the Câ—pping Ministery And I thinke a Papist and a Preist might best of all men let that scorne have passed seeing the Cuppe not of the New Testament might â—it them for their armes with a Poâ—uâ— non 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for their Motto For a man may be in the act of â—eriting with them that is none of the soberest x Less de Iustie â—uâ—e l. 4. cap. 2. dubitat â— nu 10 p. 718. 719. Si tantus â—it excessus ut peccet mortiserè amittit meritum â—â—junij sicut aliorum bonorum operum Si aâ—tem non peccet mortiferè non amittit absolutè sed solum ex parte Quia quâ parte voluntariè abstinet à cibâ—â— vetitis et à secundâ refectione propter Ecclesiae prâ—â—ceptum meretur quod meritum non eliditur etiamsi in usu cibi vel potus non seâ—â—â—â— dâ—â—iâ—am modeâ—â—tionem quâ â—amen parte excedit non â—eâ—eâ—â— nay a man may be drunke and yet fast truly y â—â—llarm lib. 2. de bonis operibus in partic cap. 1. Iejunium EcclesiasticuÌ„m est abâ—â—inâ—ntia cibi secundum Ecclesiae regulam assumpta paâ—le post Iejunium igitur Ecclesiasticum dicitur abstinentia cibi quoâ—iam hoc â—â—junium neque POTVS neque medicamentorum sed solius cibi absâ—â—â—â—nâ—iaâ— perâ—se râ—quiâ—iâ— if Bellarâ—ine his definition of a Fast be adequate to the thing that is defined But letting all this passe I will shew plainely that the Cuppe cannot be taken from the Sacrament but the perâ—eâ—tion and integritiâ— if not the substance thereof is utterly overthrowne And to deale with a Iesuite from Iesuiticall grounds we may observe that if it crosse the substance either of Christs institution or of his Sacrament â—r his precept or of the practise of the primitive Church a Reply to Iesuite Fisher by Dr Fran White pag. 466. 467 it can no lesse then vitiate the whole action That it crosseth these what tongue can deny which impudencie hath not appropriated to its selfe For did CHRIST exhibite a double thing to the Apostles faythes and memories and did hee not likewise for the effecting thereof consecrate two materiall elements bread and wine was it not the practise of the primitive Church b Lyranâ—â— in 1. cor 11 Fit hic 1. Cor. 11. mentio de duplici specie nam in primitiva Ecclesia sic da â—atur â—idelibuâ— Cassander consult ar 22. pag. 168. Satis conâ—â—at occidentalem seâ— Romanaâ— mille à Christo â—nnis in â—olenni et ordinaria hâ—â—jus Sacramenti dispensatione â—tramque paâ—â—â— et â—iâ—â— specâ—em omnibus Ecclesiâ— Christi members eâ—hibuiâ—â—e iâ— quod ex in nuâ—â—â—iâ— veâ—â—rum scriptorum taâ— Grâ—coâ—um quam Latinorum testimoâ—â—â—s manifesâ—â—â— est atq ut ita facerent inductoâ— fuisse 〈◊〉 instituâ—â— exemploque Christi and of the Latine for a thousand or more yeares to administer it in the same manner not onely to the Cleargy but to the people also by the institution example of Christ â—ellarâ— De Euchar. l. 4. c. 24. Ecclesia autem vetus ministrabaâ—â—â—b duplici specie quando Christiani â—rant pâ—â—â—â—i 〈◊〉 Crescente aâ—tâ—m multiâ—â—â—â—ne magis â—â— magis 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 â—t sic paâ—latiâ— defâ—â—â—â—sâ—◠〈◊〉 〈◊〉 was the contrary ever received by the Church deliberatly upon concluding grounds or did it stealedas the rest of the tares into the Romish Church by Custome If the Iesuite can shew us better grounds to acquite it from intrusion let him declare it this was the cheife reason the Councell of Constance e Concil Constantien Seâ—â— 13. Licet Christus post â—â—â—nam instiâ—â—erit suis discipulis administraverit sâ—b 〈◊〉 que specie panis vini hoc venerabile â—â—cramentum tamen hoc non obstante sacrorum Caâ—oâ—â—â—â—â—thoriâ—aâ— laâ—dabilis approbata coÌ„â—etudo ecclesiae servavit servat c. Et sicut haec consâ—â—â—â—do ad evitâ—â—dum aliqua pericula et scandala est rationabiliter introducta quod licet in primitiva ecclesia hujuâ—â—odi sacramentum reciperetur à fidelibus sub utraque specie posâ—â—à à confiâ—â—entâ—bus sub utraque et à laicis tantuâ—â—odo sub specie panis sâ—cipiâ—â—ur c. Vnde cum hujusmodi consuetudo ab Ecclesia sanctis patribus rationabiliter introducta diâ—â—issimè observata sit habenda est pro lege had for its defence and what strength it hath against Christs institution and the Primitive practise any may conceive What hath mooved the Roman Church to this surreption of the Cuppe from the people no man can without doubting imagine for if those wife motives repeated by Gerson should bee the cause wee may see how weake arguments will moove the Apostolicall power against CHRISTS institutions For first he telâ—ethus of the danger in the effusion 2. The inconvenience of the portation of it from place to place 3. The vessell might bee as filthâ—â— as Iudas his trunke 4. There
Sea that have any busines l Antiochenum Concil â— sub â—ulio can 9. Ad Metropolin omnes undique qui negotia videntur habere concurrant And who can perceive any other thing in Irenaeus for he doth not as the Iesuite interprets him make all Churches to agree with the Roman for her more powerfull principalitie but sheweth that all faithfull men from all parts of the world comming to Rome in regard it was the imperiall Seate might learne what Scriptures were delivered by the Apostles Peter and Paul in regard at that time in this Fathers judgment they were there conserved by the Church And so Chrysostome in like manner doth attribute to the Citty of Antioch the titles of the great Cittie the Metropolis of the whole world to which multitudes of Bishops and Doctors came for instructions and being taught by the people departed m Chryâ—ostom de Verbis E 〈◊〉 Vidi Dominum hom 4. Magna civitas ac totius orbis Metropolis Quot Episcopi quot doctores huc venerunt a populo docti discedunt In the next course appeareth Athanasius who if wee may beleive this Iesuite together with all the Bishops of Egypt did acknowledge themselves subject unto the same viz the Roman Church though farre distant The ground that moves the Iesuite to be so well perswaded is their Epistle written to Pope Marke with this Inscription To the holy Lord Venerable Marke sitting in the Apostolicall height Pope of the Roman Apostolicke Sea and of the Church Vniversall Athanasius and all the Bishops of Egypt send greeting Besides he tels us that in this Epistle this holy Father with his fellow Bishops ingenuously acknowledgeth the Roman Church to be the mother and head of all other Churches and therefore they professe themselves to belong thereunto and that both they and all theirs will alwayes live obedient unto the same n Reply pag. 51 Here is a heape of Fathers like Abdisu and his company in the Trent councelli a fayned Athanasius a troupe of Gipsies These know better how to cant M. Malone then to speake Athanasius or like Bishops of the Catholicke Church Such bastard birthes as these may advance your now scarlet Mistresse to be the Lais orflourishing Flora of the world but never prove that auncient holy Church of Rome to have taken upon her as her right to bee the Head and mother of the Catholicke Church as you desire to manifest thereby Bellarmine tels us that both these Epistles of Athanasius to Pope Marke and Marke to Athanasius are supposititious o Bellar. Script Eccles De Athanasio De Epistolis Athanasij ad Marcum Papam Marci Papae ad Athanasium constat ex ratione temporis eas epistolas esse supposititias and Baronius gives them the like honor p Baronius an Christi 336. sect 58. 5â— At Mercaâ—â—is merces nonnihil suspectae redduntur But M. Malone may be excused for why may not he aswell cite a bastard father for the Catholicke Roman mother as their Pope did a fictitious Canon for the Catholicke Roman Father q Concil Carthag 6 Yet I wonder all these paines should be taken when the headship of the Church might by a generall Councell be taken from the Roman and given to any other as Cameracensis r Camerace nsis in Vesp aâ— 3 pag. 380. affirmes His next evidence is the generall Councell of Chalcedon where Paschasinus and other Fathers assembled there doe manifestly declare the Pope to be caput universalis Ecclesiae Heal of the Church universall Å¿ Reply pag. 5â— The Iesuite should have forsaken this for feare of losse For surely it is no otherwise then they gave it to the Church of Constantinople which at that time when this Councell was held had the same cause for her headship to wit the Empire and Senate as old Rome had Whereupon thâ—se Bishops thought it very reasonable that she should enjoye the same Priviledges as old Rome had and in ecclesiasticall matters sicut illa majestatem habere be an head of the Universall Church t Concil Chalced Act 16. Eadem intentione permeti centuÌ„ quinquaginta Deo amantissimi Episcopiae qua sedi novae Roma privilegia tribuerunt rationabiliter judicantes imperio Senatu urbem oâ—naâ—aÌ„ aequis senioris Romae privilegijs frui in ecclesiasticis sicut illa majestatem habere And what doth the Councell give to Rome if she had this title more then hath beene given to other Bishops and Churches Did not Basill tearme Athanasius caput universorum the head of all u Basil epist 52 Nazianzen also saith of him that he gave lawes to the whole world x Nazianzen Orat in laudeÌ„ Athanasij Leges orbi terrarum praescribit And Chrysostome calleth Antioch the Metropolis of the whole world y Chrysost de verbis Esaiae Vidi Dominum c. hom 4. Magna civitas ac totius orbis metropolis and in another place the head of all the world z Chrysost hom 3. ad Populum Caput totius orbis Iustinian likewise calleth Constantinople caput omnium civitatum the Head of all citties a Institut l. â— de satisdat § vlt. Whereby it appeares that the title of head was given to many persons and places for their excellency in some kinde or other and not for their supremacy Besides this to any that will veiw the Councell it will evidently appeare that the Roman Bishop was considered as then he appeared in the Councel by his Legates and not as hee was in his private chaire and was reputed Head of the Church not in regard of his Sea or succession but because hee did presede by his Legate that Church representative which was there gathered together as Cyrill was Head of the Ephesine b Concil Ephesiâ— apud Binn in Epistola ad Imperator tom in act Concil 〈◊〉 cap. 8. Quia inquam triginta illi contra sacram Synodum â—anctissimorumque Episcoporum hic coactorum CAPVT Cyrillum sanctissimum Alexandriae Archiepiscopum blasphemam depositionis noram ut 〈◊〉 in se continentem protulerunt and Hosius of the Nicene Councell c Bellarm. l. 1â— de Concil c. 19. Athanasius in Epist ad solitariam vitam agentes dicit Hosium Principem fuisse in eoâ— Concilio ipsum esse qui composuit Symbolum quod dicitur Nicaenum so that the Iesuite prooveth nothing here but onely amazeth his Reader with this pretence of a Councell having not one word in this Councell that will give him the priviledge of a Semper-President because he is head but accompting him Head because by the generall Councell he was accepted President and did discharge that office by his Legate there present The Iesuite hath ommitted nothing Steven Arch-Bishop of Carthage in that Epistle to Damasus which he wrote in the name of three African Councels hath this title To our most blessed Lord sitting in the Apostolicall eminencie Pope Damasus the cheife Bishop of
of Bishops in the Roman See that invincible rock upon which Christ built his Church For who will dreame that Father to esteeme that present seate or succession to be the rocke for any other reason then because they held the rocke confessed by Peter And in this sence not only Peters successors at Rome but all other successors of Peter the rest of the Apostles might bestiled rocks p Origen in Math hom 1. Petra est 〈◊〉 omnis qui imitator est Christi ex quo bibebant qui bibebant de spiritali consequenti petra Et super omni hujusmodi petra aedificatur ecclesia Dei In singulis enim quibuscunque perfectis qui habent in se congregationem verborum oâ—erum sensuum omnium qui hujusmodi beatitudinem operantur 〈◊〉 Eccelesia Dei cui portae non praevalent inserorum Si autem â—per unum illum Petrum arbitraris Vniversam Ecclesiam aedificari à Deo quid dicis de Iacobo Iohanne filijs tonitrui vel de singulis Apostolis Vere ergo ad Petrum quidem dictum est â—u es Petrus c. tamen omnibus Apostolis omnibus quibuscunque perfectis fidelibus dictum viâ—â— retor For why may not those churches that cleave fast to the rock of faith be called rocks to stay and adheare unto q Iranaeus l. 4. c. 43. Ijs qui in Ecclesijs sure presbyteris oporter obaudire qui successionem habent ab Apostolis quicunque cum Episcopatus successione charisma veritatis certum secundùm beneplacitum patris acceperunt Idem c. 44. Adherere his qui Apostoloâ—um doctrinam oustodiunt cum presbyterij ordine sermonem sanum conversatio nem sine offen sa praestant as well as the Roman her Bishops in regard Augustine saith in that very Psalme that if any man come full of the Catholicke faith wee are wont to give eare unto him as unto these men r August in Psalm contra partem Donati Talis si quis ad te veniat plenus Catholica side Quales illoâ— sanctos viros omâ—es solemus audire But what makes the former words to the Iesuites conclusion Doth S. Augustine here declare Roman Preists Successors to Peter in a Monarchicall estate or such unmoveable grounded rocks that all the Churches in time to come must be grounded upon them Surely the sesuite will never finde this to bee S. Augustines meaning but from what the Roman Preists had beene and from what for the present they were alluding to our Saviors words he doth stile them a rock that the gates of Hell did not at that time prevaile against making them a good directory to truth whilst they adheared to the Apostles doctrine For by the course of that Psalme we cannot conceive S. Augustine to have thought otherwise in regard he doth not give the Bishop of Rome power to end and determine that controversie but maketh Donatus his request to have his cause heard at Rome to be unjust telling us what the Emperour had ordained that divers Bishops Preists should heare the matter not the Roman Bishop alone Å¿ August ibid Nam Donatus cùm volebat Africam totam obtiâ—ere Tunc Iudices transmarinos petijt ab Imperatore Sed haectam unjust petitio non erat de charitate Hoe ipsa veritas clamaâ— quam vclo modo refeâ—e Nam consensit Impeâ—â—â—or â—â—â—â—t quae soderenâ— Romae Sacerdotes qui tunc possent Caeciliano cuâ— illâ— audite which he would not have done I suppose if the Bishop of Rome had had that Monarchy by Apostolicall succession which now they pretend by that title to enjoy But there is not a word of Augustine that proveth the Roman Bishops Successors of Peter in any office power or Bishoprick or so much as maketh him Bishop of Rome That he had his seate there where the Roman Preists had their Succession he insinuateth but in this place he telleth us no more nor so much as Eusebius who beginneth the Roman Bishop with Linus t Eusebius hist Eccles l. 3. c. â— Linus verò primum post Petri Pauli Martyrium Romanae Ecclesiae Episco patum sorâ—iâ—ut est for the words of Eusebius after the martyrdome of Peter and Paul can no more make Peter Bishop of Rome then Paul and I thinke they will not admit two Bishops at once in one Citie Much more might be urged to shew that the Iesuite hath produced S. Augustine to testifie that which hee never thought of But I will come to Chrysostome whom the Iesuite produceth expecting much from him because hee nameth Peters Successours Why saith he did Christ shed his bloud but to regaine those sheepe the care of whom he committed both to Peter and to Peters Successours u Reply pag. 59 I aske the Iesuite whether he thought the Apostles had no commission from Christ to have a care of his sheepe whether Goe ye into all the world and preach the Gospell to every creature * Marke 16. 15 did commaund no care of CHRISTS flocke or whether there be no successors of Peter but the Bishops of Rome Cardinall Cusanus cannot deny that all Bishops are the successours of Peter x Nich. de Cusa Card. l. 2. De concord cath c. 13. Non possumus negare omnes Episeopos esse ejusdem successores Scilicet Petri And S. Chrysostome in the very place cited by the Iesuite expresseth himselfe to be free from the conceit that the Bishops of Rome are S. Peters onely Successours For why should he perswade Basil to be minde full of his dutie hee being a Bishop from this reason because CHRIST said to Peter Lovest thou me Feede my sheepe and because the care of his sheepe are committed to Peter and his successours y See Chrysostomes testimony produced before in the beginning of the Section if hee had not beene one of them This title I have shewed before doth belong to other Bishops as well as Romane neither is it denyed by Bellarmine himselfe z Bellarm de Rom. Pont. l. â— c. 23. Respondeo in Apostlatu continâ—â— Episcopatum Episcopes succedere Apostolis and therefore I may forbeare here further to presse it The next is Leo but I shall not neede to speake to that which is urged from hâ—m here in regard I shall have more occasion in the next Section He loved to be great and to make Peter greater then he should be for his owne sake as I have in some things before declared shall hereafter more fully shew Yet all that hee desired I suppose was not so great licentiousnesse as the Bishop of Rome desireth and would have all to attribute unto himselfe Now commeth the Bishop of Ravenna Peter Chrysologus in his Epistle to Eutyches You are not much beholding to that See that you should bring a Bishop from thence to give testimony for you but what saith hee Wee desire thee honorable brother that thou wilt listen dutifully unto those things which
5. Indeed your Religion consisteth of one point absolutely and simply Papall supremacy and we doubt not but if that were overthrowne all the Fabrick of your late Roman erection would quickly fall to the ground yet the Catholick faith is not such it consisteth not of one only article neither is it everthrowne by the intrusion of every errour for this being granted if we can shew you the time when Indulgences g Roâ—â—ens Art 18. In principio nascentis Ecclesiae nullus fuit Indulgentiarum vsus or any other errour crept into the Church of Rome you must then conclude catholick religion throughout the world was overthrowne a conclusion forced from shame And let all men judge whether this be not a desperate advantage given to free himselfe from the present danger Neither can the Iesuite from his confidence of Roman puritie glory as he heere hath done in regard he seemeth to have changed his opinion before hee printed halfe his booke curbing his lavishnes and making the Church of Rome free not from all errours as heere he doth but from spots of misbeliefe only h Sect 9. which I feare he will be forced to flye vnto hereafter when hee shall examine his owne iollity in this particular For who brought in that doctrine that the Pope is Lorâ— over all or did extend Indulgences to your Purgatory flames but Boniface the 8 if wee beleive your owne Agrippa i De vanitat scient cap 61. Hic est ille magnus Bonifacius quia tria magna grandia fecit primum falso oraculo deluso Clemente persua sit sibi cedere Apostolatum secundum condidit sextum Decretalium Papam asseruit omnium Dominum tertium instituit Iubilaeum indulgentiarum nundinas illasque primus in Purgatorium extendit Besides this in Leo k Ser. 4 de quadragesima Cùm ad tâ—gendum infidelita tem suam nostris audeant interesse mysteriis ita in Sacramentorum communione se temperant interdum ut tutius lateant ore indigno Christi corpus accipiunt sanguinem autem redemptionis nostrae haurire omnino declinant the great his time it was a note of a Maniche to communicate in one kinde yet now wee fee it is practifed by them which would perswade the world that they are Catholickes and although they may quarrell that the cause is different yet they may see the act of omission onely condemned by Leo the Pope Also in the Primitive times the Sacrament was received by the faithfull in both kindes in the Greeke Church till Cassanders l Consult Art 22. initio Satis compertum est vniversalem Christi Ecclesiam in hunc vsque diem Occidentalem vero seu Romanam mille amplius à Christo annis in solenni praesertim ordinaâ—ia huius Sacramenti dispensatione vtramque panis vini speciem omnibus Ecclesiae Christi membris exhibuisse time in the Westerne or Roman Church for above a 1000 yeares and yet in the Councell of Constance Henricus de Piro Iohannes de Scribanis m Concil Constantien Sess 13. apud Binium stiled it Mos perversus and the whole Councell decreed against it Concupiscence the Apostle calleth sinne but yet it is now no doctrine of the Roman Church for the contrary is decreed in the Trend Councell n Concil Trident. Sess 5. Hanc concupiseentiam quam aliquando Apostolus peâ—â—atum appeilat fancta synodus declarat Ecclesiam Catholicam nunquam intellexisse peccatum appellaâ—i quod verè propriè in renatis peccatum sit sed quâ—â— ex peccato est ad peccatum inclinat Si quis autem contrarium senserit anathema sit And many more may bee found out if I did desire to muster vp your iniquities in this kinde But it shall suffice for the present to referre the Iesuite and the Reader to the Catalogue of the right reverend the Lord Bishop of Derry o Lib. 3. de Antich cap 6. Catalogus veterum haeresum quas Ecclesia Romana renovâ—â—it c. which when Mr Malone or his whole Tribe hath fully answered I may conceive he had something besides his wilfulnes to breed his confidence in this opinion In his examination of the second exception against the Demaund hee hopeth to enervate it by his observations therevpon the first whereof is that therein the Answerer supposeth our catholicke Doctrine to bee that Apostasie which the Apostle speaketh of 1. Tim. 4. 1. 2. p Reply pag. 5. And here our Iesuite wisely collecteth for the learned Primate doth neither acknowledge your Roman Church either in Diocesse or ad extra for Catholick neither your additions mixtures for Catholick Doctrine any more then Saul * 1. Sam. 10. 11 for a Prophet because he got amongst the Prophets as your deceipts have crept into the Creed But yet that by your corrupt mixtures and declinings is truly accomplished that Prophecy 1 Tim 4. hee makes little doubt And what abuse is done heerein to your glorious Synagogue why should not false doctrines and novelties fall before the auncient and radicall truth as Dagon †and false gods before the Arke Nay what doth the learned * 1. Sam. 5. 3. 4. Primate suppose that was not deprecatively expressed in your Trent-Councell by a Bishop q Cornelius Bishop of â—iton â—0 of your owne for if to fall from Religion to Superstition from Faith to infidelitie from Christ to Antichrist bee not an Apostasie let the Iesuite declare what it is But the Iesuite would faine know in what sence wee take Apostasie whether as it designeth an vtter Revolt from the faith of Christ which the Iesuite is confident they cannot bee charged withall Because elsewhere the learned Primate confesseth that men dying as hee saith in our Religion doe dye vnder the mercy of God r Reply pag. 5. What doth the Iesuite meane by this Doth he thinke the most learned Answerer by their Religion did poynt out Ignatius his plat-forme or the Religion of their Holies Francis and Dominick Were any of their other Religions conjectured at which are imployed to frame Christ a Religion by policie that their Master might obtaine a Monarchie by fraude Surely whatsoever the Iesuite may conjecture these will finde but little shelter for their securitie in that sermon But if this Interpretation square not who doth hee then meane by men dying in our Religion if those that lived in the Roman Communion then his collection is vayne also For who can doubt that some may bee saved there without casheering of the Apostasie tâ—eâ—ce Many followed Absalom * 2 Sam. 15. 11. that were true of heart and yet the Iesuite will not deny a Rebellion against David and falling away of the People from him The high places were not taken away and yet Asa's †◠Chron 25. 17. heart and many others no doubt were vpright all their dayes Iudas * Acts 1. 18. may betray Christ and hang Demas †2
muffling in part that can give it libertie to keep station in the Church of God without controule but when Piety is pretended and Heresie getteth in by protection thereof closed vp and vnespied this is Iniquitie in a Mysterie * 2. Thess â— 7. Whereby we see that the Iesuite hath not touched the most learned Primate his answer who for open heresies which like Edom cry out against the Church of God at their birth downe with it downe with it even to the ground †Psal 137. 7. confesseth that the impietie thereof is so notorious that at the very first appearance it is manifestly discerned c The most reverend the Lord Primate his Answere pag. 2. And whereas he dare challenge his Adversaries to give true instance so much as but of any one knowne and confessed Heresie which was not at it first divulging contradicted by some one or other Pastor of Gods Church how cunningly soever it came muffled in the mantle of Pietie d Page 6. making it as a thing impossible to be performed Heereby every man may perceive that the Iesuite is willing to close his owne eyes vpon condition he may pull out other mens For otherwise daâ—â— he be so bold as that hee should deny this Apostasie to have come into the Church without resistance when the spirit of God doth declare that the bringers in of it must have a time for detection not being opposed in the beginning but revealed and consumed * Thess 2. 6. 2. afterwards But leaving this what the Iesuite desires here was performed to him by the Testimony of Bernard and Reinerâ—us in the Answer to the first Section concerning the 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 whom they have accounted condemâ—â—â—â— for Heretickes Yet because this point may bee morefully answered I will out of their owne authors gratifie him further in this particular And first from Prâ—teolus c Prateolus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Aquarij are knowne and confessed Her 〈◊〉 and yet quiâ— hujus 〈…〉 fuit ex quo tempore caeperit nemo est qui indicat Here the Iesuite must send for Saint Bridget for he will neede a Revelation in regard that as Prateolus acknowledgeth their first beginning is vnknowne So Alphonsus de Castro f Alphon de Castro adv haere lib 6. DeEuchaâ—istia Adversus hunc errorem tres Evangelistae pugnant Mathaeus scilicet Marcus Lucas cannot finde any throughout all the Ecclesiasticall History which opposed their Heresie at its first divulging and therefore runneth vp to the institution of the Sacrament and makes Mathew Marke and Luke the opposers A strange thing that this heresie concerning the Sacrament should have birth before the Sacrament was instituted or the institution thereof published by the Evangelists The Praedestinati are reputed by your owne for Heretickes yet Alphonsus de Castro g Idem lib. 12. de Praedestinatio Quis autem suerit hujus haeresis princeps Sigibertus subticuit nec egoapud aliquem alium reperi notwithstanding his search cannot finde their Author and Prateolus h Prateolus Elench Haeret. Quis eorum Dux institutor fuerit nescitur telleth vs their Captaine is not knowne So also the Abstinentes were taken for no better then Hereticks and yet you are so far from discovering the time of their birth that their spreading is not remembred as your Prateolus i Ibid Abstinentes quo tempore viguere non meminit Philastrius observeth Multitudes of this kinde might be produced but these shall for the present suffice in answer to the Iesuites challenge Hee secondlie observes that the most reverend Primate his distinction of such like Heresies and that Apostasie serve his turne nothing at all forasmuch as it hath no ground nor foundation which doth not proove more stronglie against his part then against vs. This distinction will presage as ill to Rome as a Comet if you faile to proove what you so confident he affirme But to make it good First he demaunds what can he infeâ—ta out of these sayings of the Apostle which we may not with farre more probabilitie apply to himselfe and to his Revolting Religion c rather then those auncient Fathers and holy Doctours of the Primitive Church whom he himselfe though else where hee confesseth them to â—â—ve beene godly 〈◊〉 yet in this place would have vs to thinke that they were of those who spake lyâ—â— in Hypocrisie and had a hand in bringing in of damnable Apostasie Secondly he saith That our Answerer and his mates did in their foreleaders Luther and Galvin revolt and depart from the Roman Church yea from all the world is voluntarily acknowledged by Calvin himselfe For which cause wee thinke that wee may with reason hold them guiltie of Apostasie indeed k Reply pag. 6. In all which observation wee finde him to charge vs first to further that mysticall iniquitie rather then those auncient Fathers of the Primitive Church Secondly that wee did revolt and depart from the Roman Church and are guiltie of this Apostasie But if all this were as true faith as the Iesuite professeth how maketh it to the overthrow of the exception A deepe charge but nothing to the purpose For the question in controversie is not who brought in the Apostasie but whether there bee such an Apostasie that concludeth within it many Heresies like terra filij begotten wee know not by whom borne wee know not where nor when The learned Answerer saith there are such and the Iesuite saith nothing materiall to the contrary and therefore the demaund to finde out all heresies onely by person time and place must remaine vaine and ill-grounded still But whereas the Iesuite by wrastling and strugling thinketh his demaund is made good if he can cast this Apostasie from themselves and Rome it maketh nothing for him but altereth the question as if his demaund excepting these mysticall iniquities had desired by circumstance of person time and place to have pointed out all other heresies onelie And who doth not see this defence erected by the most learned Answerer for the Catholicke faith impregnable and so far without his shot that he would fasten falshoods which are ridiculous vpon his learned pen that hee might with some shew and advantage fight against the same For who chargeth the Fathers that they speake lyes in hypocrisie let him point out the place if hee can in which the most reverend Primate would have them thinke that they were of those or such kinde of men Hee telleth vs indeed that when the seeds of mysticall iniquitie were a sowing they the Fathers that kept watch and ward against the one open heresies that oppose the foundation might sleepe yea peradventure might at vnawares themselves have some hand in bringing in this Trojan horse commended vnder the name of Religion l Page â— c. But is heere any thing that attempts to perswade you that the fathers speake lyes in Hypocrisie or doth crosse that testimony which elsewhere hee hath
of Infants dying before Baptisme because they are sprung from faithfull parents and froÌ„ the virtue of the Eucharist received by the mother after conceptioÌ„ to sanctify the child in the womb shâ—lbe 〈◊〉 k Zag Zab. ibid. Thom à Iesu lib. 7. pa. 1. cap 8. cit per cundem 5. They baptize themselves every yeare vpon the Epiphany as the Muscovites in memorial of Christs Baptisme whom they thought to be baptized as that day l Zag Zab. ibid eit per cundem 6. The Egyptians have a custome to conferre holy Orders to Infants m Thomâ— a Iesu lib. 7. pa. 1. cap. 5. cit per cundem 7. They deny all efficacy to Baptisme vnlesse celebrated in the Church by the Preist notwithstanding any necessity whatsoever neither doe they baptizâ— till the fourtieth day though the child dye without Baptisme n Tho. à Iesu ibid. cit per cundem I could name the Iesuit many moâ—â— but if he can shew the person time place by whom when where these points received birth with their opposers by demonstrable authority not by naked grounds we will spare him the rest confesse he may with good reason aske the question he doth and require our answere to it But till then let him not expect that from an other which the whole Roman Inquisition cannot discover vnto vs in the like kinde Yet for the present the Iesuite hath performed his promise as he supposeth in some particulars pointed out by himself First concerning the defection of the Greeke Church which indeed comprehendeth all the rest by you named o Reply pag. 9. c. Here we have the Iesuite myred in his first entrance For what hath he tu doe with generals Saphista versatur in generalibuâ— he followeth not his answerer but forsakes him here Particulars are demaunded like a false Steward the Iesuite delivereth all in grosse fearing his prejudice if hee submit to a strict particular accompt All that he laboureth to prove here are two things First the beginning of the Greek Churches defection from the Roman which was not desired at his hands Secondly the beginning of severall errours which shal be observed in their place For the first the defection of Paulus Samosatanus Macedonius Nestoriuâ— c. was not from the Roman but the Greeke a principall member of the Catholick Church Secondly the Greek Church did not fall with theÌ„ but condemâ—ed theÌ„ neither doe they adhere to them or their doctrine at this day That there are in the East which are named from some of those condemned Hereticks yet follow not their doctrine p Onuphr in Iul 3. Uerum hie Nestoriani nomen potius Nestorij haeretici quam errores retinuisse mihi videntur c. there is no question But that the doctrine of those Hereticks is taught by the Greek Church is vtterly vntrue neither dare the Iesuite say it is althogh by his obscure generalities he wold insinuat that in what those differed froÌ„ the Roman church these close with theÌ„ And for the other several defectioÌ„s as he calleth theÌ„ thogh it were but ajust flight froÌ„ their tyranny he cannot tel how many they were but stiles them twelve or there abouts But to what purpose 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 these 〈◊〉 vnlesse he shew vs the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the 〈◊〉 by 〈◊〉 they were made And this will not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 â—â— shew vnto vs what errour every 〈…〉 in with â—â— for otherwise his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 have 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 then imployed to none â—ffect Whereas he maketh them oppressed by the Turke in regard of their 〈◊〉 from 〈◊〉 it 〈◊〉 Iesuites fancie I pray GOD 〈◊〉 theâ—â— other 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 separation they cast off 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 though noâ— all their slavery â—ut if it be 〈◊〉 â—◠〈◊〉 at the cause of their oppression which is not 〈◊〉 â—aith where 〈◊〉 notwithstanding their persequâ—â—ion they still 〈◊〉 but their persons many more probable grounds may be given of Gods putting them to this 〈◊〉 then this assigned by Iesuite vnlesse you have relation to politicke and worldly prudencyes of that Church and not to crymes that bring downe Gods judgments vpon them For we know some things 〈◊〉 not altogetheâ— to be approved of but idolatrous as Image-worship are practised amongst them They deny indeed that which is practised by you in regard of the manner even Statues of stone or Marble and yet imbrace with an idolatrous love paper and pâ—inted representations This their sinne is not the least causer of Gods iudgment vpon them as we may coniecture from the IX of the Râ—velation if Gods visiting them may bee imputed to their sinne and not to his secret will who tryeth his owne by affliction as the Church of the Iewes in Egypt and the Primitive in her sincereâ—â— perfections Thirdly â—s concerning the severall 〈◊〉 few in comparison wherein the Greek Church aâ— this day dissenteth from the Roman their beginning and contradiction iâ— noterious q Reply pag. â—â— Here the Iesuite by way of preface makes the Greeke Church at this day to vary from the 〈◊〉 in regard of vs for so I conceive he desires to be vnderstood â—ut in a few points which is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for they differ at thisday from them in most points that we 〈◊〉 them for So that I doubt not but they received scardall from your corruption which because yoâ—â— pride would not â—ure they left you 〈◊〉 â—â— your 〈◊〉 and adhered to th◠〈◊〉 doctrine which 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 every wheâ— received at all times 〈◊〉 in the Catholicke Church And although they 〈◊〉 the 〈◊〉 of 〈◊〉 yet some of your owne r See before thinke their errour therein to be onely in the 〈◊〉 of expressing 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and not in the substance of doctrine it selfe And 〈◊〉 whereas he saith that their begiâ—ning 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i◠〈◊〉 I will beleive him when he hath answered those points which I have lay 〈◊〉 before for what he hath done by his owne election and choyce will declare vnto vs what great performance we may expect â—â— his hands when an other may have the liberty to point out his taske And first he beginneth with their denyall of subjectionâ—â— the Roman Sea c. This is the first 〈◊〉 and agreat one and as he tells vs was begâ—â— by Iohn of Constantinople and he there â—pon severally contradected by Gregory the great and by Pelagius in his epistle c. Å¿ Reply pag. â—â— Here are two 〈◊〉 fashoodâ— by this Iesuite in this particular supposed and 〈◊〉 First that 〈◊〉 ages before 〈◊〉 of Constantinople his 〈◊〉 the Bishop of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in their sence was vniversally acknowledged Secondly that this controversie betwiâ—◠〈◊〉 Gregory was about the denyall of Papall 〈◊〉 â—oth which shal be 〈◊〉 to be notoriously vntrue For the first 〈◊〉 the Iesuite orderly proceeded he should have proved the Roman Bishop the Monarch of the Church by vniversall confent before hee should have questioned the Greeke Church for the
unto us without some uncertainty h Reply pag. 13 Thirdly he flyeth to the institution of Christ as a sufficient rule to declare the originall of their faith which we like in them accepting the tryall thereby what he pretendeth for himselfe wee will on our part undertake to prove viz â— that all the points of our Religion by the confession of the very authors alledged by the Iesuite have their originals from the institution of our Lord. But if the Iesuite deny us the like liberty which he taketh unto himselfe he befooles his owne argument if he grant the same unto us then hee demonstrateth his owne demaund to bee vaine which requireth person time place as a necessary ground whereby to detect Heresie and errour by Finally it will most plainly appeare how vainly our Answerer proveth my demaund to be vaine if we gather his reason to a head thus we our selves cannot tell when some of those points which we maintaine against them began or by whom they were first brought in Ergo we have little reason to demaund the same of him seeing as he saith it is more then we our selves are able to tell The Antecedent hath beene already disproved i Reply pag. 13 How the Antecedent hath been disproved the Reader may judge by what hath been already said but I am sure it hath driven this Iesuite the Defenders of Purgatory c. to the Scriptures which the Iesuite â—â—r any Saylor in the Roman Gulfe would never anchor 〈◊〉 unlesse forced by a storme in case of necessity And further I wonder that the Iesuite should confesse that iâ— all their profession wee cannot shâ—we them any point or article whose Originall they cannot derive most plainely from Christ and his Apostles c. whenas they charge the Scripture with obscurity k Bellarm De verbo Dei lib. 3 cap. 1. Si res consideres necessarió fatendum est Scripturas esse obscurissimas Siquidem tradunt summa mysteria de divina Trinitate de incarnations verbi c Et 〈◊〉 post Si veromodum dicendi consideremus inveniâ—mus innumerabiles rationes 〈◊〉 darknes And thirdly you may perceive this Antecedent hath beene so well proved that omissâ successione intermediâ the Iesuite is willing to breake downe their bulwarke of succession and to originalize every point in his profession from Christ and his Apostles thinking that to be a sufficient meanes to declare the truth of Doctrine when their Champions Fisher and Sweet denyed the said liberty for the same end to their acute and learned opponent Doctor Featly l Answer to the Fisher catched in his own nâ—t Sect. 2. And although we should not stand with him upon his said Antecedent truely hee deduceth not a right conclusion out of the same For say that we our selves could not tell the precise time of their beginnings yet have we good cause to demaund the same of him m Reply pag. 14. c This is but a fancy and hath no ground in reason as if your Catholick Roman Church ought not to have as much care to prevent heresies as we to detect them or that you who make succession your note of truthes should not bee bound to shew their perpetuity by a preciâ—e continuance from the Apostles downewards as well as we to declare their falshood and to shew their upstartednes in following times Our Answerer surmising as it seemeth that the vanity of these foresaid proofes would quickly be descryed by his judicious Reader endeavoureth with other vaine instances and examples to cast a mist before his eyes n Reply pag. 14 c. Silly Dreamer how did his selfe-conceit flatter him when he compiled his Reply Doth he thinke a judicious Reader can espy that in transitu on a sudden and by view barely which a Iesuite and his fellow-labourers cannot manifest with all their paines Yet let the judicious Reader judge of things past he promiseth much in time to come But wee by Gods grace setting forth the light of veritie will easily disperse the foggie vapors of his vanitie that so wee may reduce the Reader to the path of truth o Reply ibid Gods grace assisteth truth not herefie the breath of his mouth must consume Antichrist not fortifie his kingdome the light of verity is so far from being set forth by this Iesuite that it is his master-peice to rayle against it to eclypse it if such a moone-calfe could performe the worke Yet let us see what these foggie vapors are which the glorious light of the Iesuites veritie will disperse He saith then concerning our Private Masse that he will tell us in what Popes dayes it first beganne if wee tell him in what Popes dayes the People first began to fall from their devotion r Reply ibid. But he hath left the most learned Primate's answere not because a fogge but because the light thereof ofâ—ends his sight For first the most learned Answerer setteth forth the vanity of his Demand in asking What Bishop of Rome did first alter that Religion which you commend in them of the first 400 yeares In what Pope his dayes was the true Religion over-throwne in Rome by severall arguments 1. from their owne disability 2. from their comming in pedetentim their lingring birth which cannot bee in one Popes dayes 3. from the tacite confent of many which cannot be wrought by one And heere hee bringeth two more instances the first taken from want of Devotion in the people the second from time it selfe And therefore to require a Pope for the altering of that which was done by another or to restraine us so to time as to urge us for to shew that to have beene brought into the Roman Church in one Popes dayes which perhaps was not effected in the lives of 100. of them this must needes be a vaine and ridiculous Demand But let us see whether the Iesuite be not lost in this mist Wee urge him with hiâ— promise saith he as he is a man of his word and wee give him to understand that in Pope Peter the Apostles time the people fell from their devotion of whom therefore the same Apostle saith That it had beene better for them not to have knowne the way of Iustice then after having knowne it to turne froÌ„ the holy comandement given them * 1. Peâ—â—â—â— 21. c. Behold now when people fill from their devotion and consequently when our private Masse began even by our Answerers owne rule unlesse he put chance betweene q Reply pag. 14 Did people in generall want devotion in S. Peters time was the best age of the Church the worst by your censure Is it the decay of love in some one or few hypocrites mindes that can answere the most learned Primates demaund You must shew us a time when the people did as universally lack Devotion as they doe among you the Sacrament or else you have accepted the Answerers promise to your
Lord rebuke every proud tongue that dare attempt so high despight against God and his truth The Iesuite proceedes Lâ—c heere the Divells disputation against the Private Masse which I thought good to lay downe thus at large i Reply pag. 17â— Here the Iesuite beginneth to triumph but upon what reason the precedent discourse will declare yet his intent is pious that my poore deluded Countriman may understand whither his new Masters doe leade him k Ibid. The Owle might leave preaching unlesse it be to night birds for the Iesuite may assure himselfe that this most reverend Lord will never bee so deceived †Ruffin Hist Eccles lib. 1. cap. 11. Dolis apud ignorantes locus est scientibus vero dolum intendere non aliud est quam risum movere as to be taken with his delusions which are grounded vpon so filly a perswasion as Dabunt signa monstrous miracles and tale-Divinity His masters are CHRIST and his Apostles neyther doth hee refuse the sacred Chorus of the auncient Church these have not beene seducers they neither delude nor drawe into errors they will consume your man of sinne and because you feare the consumption you disgrace their effects and operations making the reading of the sacred scriptures l Reply pag. 17 the cause of most horrible impieties reviling with your tongue-prodigies GODS heavenly lampes least they should declare your filth by their celestiall light The holy Sacrifice of the Masse hath triumphed in the Church of God even from the beginning and shall continue mangre all Opposers unto the end m Reply pag. 17 c. If the Iesuite meane by the sacrifice of the Masse the administration of the body and blood of Christ whereby the sacrifice of Christs death is commemorated unto us he hath no Adversary For we know it was instituted by Christ and hath beene continued perpetually by the Catholicke Church even to these very times But if hee meane by the sacrifice of the Masse that outward visible sacrifice made by the Preist alone n Concil Trid. Sess 22. cap. 6. Sacrosancta Synodus Missas illas in quibus solus sacerdos sacramentaliter communicat non modo non damnaâ— ut illicitas sed etiam probat atque commendat wherein CHRIST is pretended really to be sacrificed this was never in the auncient Church much lesse triumphed therein and although the Iesuite would have it auncient yet it was not borne in the fathers time o Erasmus de concord Eccles versus sinem Sunt qui in Missa commâ—nionem requirant sic fateor a Christo suit institutum ita olim consuevit observari Casâ—ander Consult art 24. §. De iteratione pag. 223. Certe ex tota Canonis compositione manifestè apparet totam illâ—â—â—ysticam in qua Canon adhibebatur actionem vel publicam vel certe inter plures semper celebratam suisse Quod si â—odie 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 queat facile verus â—ius intellectus restitui possit but brought into the Church by the decay of Devotion on the peoples part p Erasmus de amab concord Ecclesiae Verum id quo minus fiat haud stat per sacerdotes sed per laices in quibus hâ—u nimium refrixit charitas which defection it hath still nourished The word sacrifice indeed was in use amongst the fathers though Calvin thought it was abused neither did they or the Church of Rome thereby hold it a reall sacrificing of Christ but a commemoration of his death q Lombard Sent. lib. 4. Dist 12. par 2. Quaeritur Si quod gerit sacerdos proprie dicatur sacrificium vel immolatio si Christus quotidie immoletur vel semel tantum immolatus sit Ad hoc breviter dici potest illud quod offertur consecratur à sacerdote vocari sacrificium oblationem quia memoria est repraesentatio veâ—i sacrificii sanctae immolationis factae in ara crucis Et semel Christus mortuus in crâ—ce est ibique immelatus est in semetipso quotidie autem immolatur in sacramento quia in sacramento recordatio fit illius quod factum est semel and therefore Calvin himselfe saith that your impiety in that particular being considered with the abuse of the auncients there would appeare betweene them and you an unmeasurable distance r Calvin lib. devera Eccles reform extat in Tractat. Theolog Calvini c. pag. 389. Vtrumque illis concedo veteres non mâ—do sacriâ—iciâ—â—oce abusoâ— esse sed etiam caeremoniâ Verum sireputemus quantum a veterum corruptelâ distet quae nunc abipsis fucatur â—â—pietas immensum est ferè intervallum and therefore the Iesuite abuseth their adversaries in making them to impute that to the fathers which they knew these never held Whereby the Iesuit might see how vaine he is in making us to be enemies of this mystery when we onely oppose their popish innovations and defiling of so sacred an institution And whereas the Iesuite would make Luther the first oppugner of private Masse it is a good argument that many were a sleepe when it first came into the Church seeing many of themselves forced by the testimony of the auncient Fathers confesse that it was not according to the auncient use of the Church of God Ignatius maketh all to communicate and all in both kindes Å¿ Ignatius ad Philadelphenses Vnuspanis omnibus confractus vnus calix qui omnibus distributus est in receiving of this blessed Sacrament Chrysostome t Chrysostomus in Cor Homil. â—8 Est autem ubi nihil differt sacerdos à subdito ut quando fruendum est hoâ—â—endis mysterijs similiter enim omnesut illa percipiamus digni habemur Non ficut in veteri lege partem quidem sacerdos comedebat partem autem populus non licebat populo participerâ— esse corum quorum particept erat sacerdos sed nunc non sic verum omnibus unum corpus proponâ—â—â— poculum â—um maketh Preist and People all alike This is acknowledged to be the practise of the primitive times by Innocent the third Innocent 3. lib. 6. Myster Missae cap. 5. In primitiva quidem Ecclesia singulis diebus qui celebrationi Missarum intererant communicare solebant sed excrescente multitudiâ—e c and by Durand Dur. raâ— l. 4. c. 53. In pâ—â—mitiva Ecclesiâ omnes qui celebrationi â—â—issarum interâ—rant singulis diebus communicarâ— â—lebant co quòd Apostoli omnes de â—alice biberâ—â— Domiâ—â— dicence Bibite exâ—â—oc â—mnes And to preserve pious mindes from embracing this fond perswasion of the Iesuites that Luther first impugned Private Masse I desire that they would consider with what impatience Chrysostome would have prosecuted the same when he expresseth bitternes even against the peoples neglect of communicating Indeed he could not actually dispute against that which was not yet we may coÌ„ceive by his words how he would have approved of Private Masse if it had
accompted a good meanes to further the edifying of your Babell and to hold her followers together is not this then a good ground to resolve a mans judgment that things are not now kept in that order wherein they were set at first by the Apostle c See the most reverend the Lord Primate in his Answere to the Iesuites challenge pag. â— And hereunto the Iesuite replyes I have alwayes esteemed our Answerer so both for learning and sincerity that I preferre none of his ranke before him yet doe I not see how in this obiection he can escape a blemish in one of them at the least d Reply pag. 21 We have had good experience that the Iesuites jealousies are not crimes nor his words slaunder and therefore if he proves nothing he sayes nothing But he is ready in his armes For where he sayth that by S. Paules Order Christians should pray with understanding and not in an unknowne language alleadging for the same the 14 chap. of his 1. epistle to the Corinthian it is most certaine that neither in that fourteenth chapter nor yet in all S Paules Epistles there is any such order as he meaneth to be found which if he knew not his ignorance is to be wondred as if he knew it his integrity must be stayned for wronging the Apostle and deluding his Reader Reply pag. 22. It were vaine to bestowe time to defend this most learned Primate from this unjustly charging Iesuite especially in either of these dreames of want of learning or sincerity when his owne tongue and pen have manifested such deepe knowledge his life so sacred sincerity that a legion of Iesuites extracted cannot expresse the like And who is there that hath stood at the feete of this learned Gamaliel that hath not heard him to declare more learning then this Iesuite can boast of and seene in him more truth and candidenes of divine conversation then Iesuites and Fryars by their demure and painted out-side can challenge to themselves Nay whose conscience that knowes him doth not testifie of him that what is or may be required in a good man learned Doctor and faithfull Bishop may bee found in him f Epistol Bap. Mant. ad Ioan. Picum Mirandulam In uno codemque homine viderer videre Hicronymum Augustinum revixisse Neither doth this Iesuite deserve so learned an Adversary who slighteth those things which befoole his indeavours to answere and falleth into violent straynes against the Proposer But let us see what groâ—â—d our travailer now treades uppon No he will demaund first When he sayth that by S. Paules order Christians should pray with understanding what kinde of prayer doth hee meane g Reply pag. 22. To this we answere him All prayers which as well require the understanding as the will knowledge as Devotion But the Iesuite sayth if private prayer such as Christians by themselves doe exercise cleare it is that the Apostle in that fourteenth Chap. speaketh of none such and say he did it is well knowne that amongst us the use of praying in a vulgar tongue is left as free to each one as amongst the Protestants themselves Reply pag. 22 The most learned Primate interpreteth not those words of prayer as publick or private but in regard of the act of praying with what circumstances soever it be used and that by St. Paules order no prayers ought to be made of what kind soever which the parties invocating understaÌ„d not be they publicke or private for the whole Church or for particular necessity But for that freedome of praying in a vulgar tongue which you say is left to each one amongst you we know it false by experience unlesse your directions for saying of Ave's and Pater-nosters bee arbitrary and left to the discretion of your Catholicke children which I thinke no Popish father will admit For your Rhemists conclude that praying either publickely or privately in Latine is thought by the wisest and godliest to be most expedient i Vpon the 18 verse of the 14 chap. of the first Epistle of Paul to the Corinthians and though they confesse that their church hath commanded in some Councells that such as cannot learne distinctly in Latine specially the Pater noster and the Creed should be taught them in the vulgar tongue Yet the wisdome of the Church hath better liked and allowed of Latine Primars Beads and Prayers k Vpon the 1â— verse from whence the Iesuite may collect that the Rhemists stick closer to the Latine then himselfe insomuch that they would have the people to use not onely Latine Primars and Prayers but Latine Beades also All which without doubt are alike availeable Againe the Iesuite saith if he meane the Publicke Prayer and service of the Church certaine also it is that the Corinthians had theirs in the Greeke and not in any unknowne language and therefore the Apostle speaking of prayer in an unknowne tongue cannot be said to meane the publicke Service of the Church l Reply pag. 22 And wherefore in Greeke was it not because that language was more generally understood and did not the Apostles for the same cause make use of that tongue in revealing the mysteries of God But at length our Iesuit confesseth all which hee so violently fighteth against by distinguishing betwixt prayer which is directed to the edifying and instruction of the hearers upon which Prayer the Apostles Doctrine in that Chapter runneth altogether and their publicke Church service which cannot any way be said to be such m Reply pag. 23 For hereby we get this that our prayers both publick and private are agreeable to the Apostles grounds which are generall and that their prayers both publicke and private doe oppose the same And yet they thinke all wil be made up by a more grosse uncovering their shame and nakednes and therefore he telleth us that their publicke Church service is directed principally to the worship of Almighty God and not to instruct and edifie the hearers n Reply ibid. What God 's service and no way for instruction what Darke Church Darke soules all in obscurity Gods worship also Hath the Church beene without Vrim and Thummim since her captivitie in Babylon The Iesuite will have it so But wee know that as GODS worship is an act which GOD accepteth for his honour so thereby man doth increase in saving graces not of those onely which are appropriated to the will zeale and devotion but to the understanding also being made conformable to GODS Image in wisedome and knowledge o Thomas 22â— quaest 92. ar 2. Ordinatur primò divinus cultus ad reverentiam Deo exhibendam Secundò ordinatur ad hoc quod homo instruatur à Deâ— quem coliâ— Tertiò ordinatur dirinus cultus ad quandam directionem humanorum actuâ—m secundùm instatuta Dei qui colitur and surely if every action especially that which is christian and divine ought to be done to edification wee
that first spoyled Gods people of this heavenly treasure yet it is most certaine that they are defrauded of their right which undenyablie demonstrates the Iesuites demaund to be frivolous and vaine that concludeth the Church of Rome doth remaine pure and undefiled still unlesse we can point out a Pope that brought in every corruption wherewith she is tainted Neither will it serve the Iesuites turne to exclaime against our translations for although wee should confesse that some of ours have as many faults as we know to be in the vulgar Latine or they charge the Originalls withall that some expresse it with more impatiencie then Clemens did the omissions of Sixtus t Praefatio ad Lectorem ult citat Non pauca in sacra Biblia praeli vitio irrepsisse quae iteratâ diligentiâ indigere viderentur yet this is not sufficient to to make our translations no Scriptures to excommunicate them out of the Church or to deprive the people of the true use thereof For is any ignorant that vulgar translations in primitive times were in many particulars faultie and more grosse then any translation which is allowed to bee read in the Church of Ireland u Ibid. S Hieronymus tempore suo accidisse testatus est tot scilicet fuisse exemplaria quotcodices cùm unusquisque pro arbitrio suo addeâ—et vel detraheret Did not Lucian and Hesychius at severall tymes correct the Septuagint x Hieron in libr. Paralip praefat Alexandria Aegyptus in Septuaginta suis Hesyâ—â—ium laudat autorem Constantinopolis usque Antiochiam Luciani martyris exemplaria probat mediae inter has Provinciae Palaestinos codiceâ— legunt quoâ— ab Origine elaboratos Eusâ—bius Pamphilus vulgaverunt totusque Orbis hâc inter se triphariâ varietate compugnat Were all the translations out of Greeke into Latine without faults as they were without number y Augustin de Doctr. chr lib. 2. cap. 11. Qui enim Scripturas ex Hebraea lingua in Graecam verterunt linguam numerari possunt Latini autem interpretes nullo modo The vulgar Latine now in force by decree in the Church of Rome abounded with errors or els your Popes were full of impiety that kept all the learned traine of the Roman Church 22. yeares in worke to correct is before it could bee fitted for an impression then let it passe not without downright errors as by Clements altering adding detracting contradicting of it in thousands of places in his after-edition is most apparant and hath beene formerly declared z Vid. lit â— â— Further whereas the Iesuite urgeth St Hierome that the Gospell of Christ by pâ—rverse interpretation is made the Gospell of man or which is worse the Gospell of the Divell a Reply pag. 26. Our Iesuite hath forgot himselfe for what hath interpretation to doe with our translation we confesse Arius and Pelagius used the Scripture in this manner that your great Roman Interpreter hath so behaved himselfe that he needeth not to give place to any precedent Hereticks b See the right reverend and most learned the Lord Bishop of Kilmore his Epistle to M â— Wadsworth chap. 3. pag. 62. 63. ad pag. 69 But for which of our good workes would hee stone us Now you may see how great cause our Iesuite hath to complement it Hath not then our holy mother the Catholick Church good reason to barre her children from reading of such dangerous bookes as lead their Readers head long into perdition and doth shee not hâ—reby regard that Christian reverence and respect which is due unto the Majesty of Gods sacred Word more by keeping it from defiled hands then our Adversaries doe by casting that pricclesse pearle before such wyne c c Reply pag. 27. Here our Iesuite is out of his coule like a Fencer in his flourish For they are not corrupt translations which his faction detesteth for none are more corrupt â—â—e hath â—â— authentick but vulgar and even now our vulâ—mple h 〈…〉 were but poisoned grounds new faâ—gled d deservâ—â—d train 〈…〉 Reply pag. 26 name of holy Scripture yet here they shall haveger 〈◊〉 of pricelesse pearles which as the Iesuite saith â—n his â—â— before sâ—ynâ— Surely if our translation be no Scripâ—â—es where is the breach of reverence of Christian respect where is the Majestie of the sacred word prophaned if ours be the true word of God Let the Iesuite returne to his vomite which he hath disgorged against God and his Oracles I would know whether it is more honour to Gods Booke to bee reserved in close Libraries or in the hearts or hands of his Saints Whom he meaneth by Swyne every one may perceive even those that Christ prized at the high rate of his precious bloud the laytie and all others to whom this libertie by the Adversaries is denyed But our Iesuite must learne that the word of God is of that efficacie that it can make cleane wallowing swyne and those which are now dogges and without it will force to cast up their vomite and in time it will purge and consume Antichrist and that foule fabrick of iniquity your Aâ—gean Roman stable And further our Iesuite deales like the Iewes with the Inhabitants of the towre of Syloam * Luke 13. 4. pâ—â—ving quidlibet de quolibet particular doctrines by desperate events First he telleth us that since the most learned Answerer printed his booke there fell out an example among our selves which might sufficiently condemne this their perniâ—ious licensing of every giddie braine to reade their Bibles But I pray you what example is this why of one Gray who not long agâ—â— â—â—ving inhumanely murthered his owne sonne excused his bloody fact by the example of Abram whom God commanded to sacrifice his sonne Isaac c Reply pag. 27 Who will excuse the bloody fact of that distracted wretch But yet who can collect any such thing from the Iesuites fond premisses as he laboureth to conclude Nabal was his name and folly was with him ever◠〈◊〉 knoweth that it was coÌ„ceived discontent which 〈…〉 his soule in that speculative desperatnes that 〈…〉 Divels suggestion not the scriptures which 〈…〉 to that evill And I pray the Iesuite to tell me the 〈…〉 why amongst them images the Laye-mens bookes 〈…〉 not wrought the same effect seeing by them â—he historieâ— of the Bible are likewise represented Further will the Iesuite argue the Divell hath abused scriptures by suggestion therefore the scriptures should bee taken from the tempted for their ordinary use If this were good Logick the Iesuite might debarre Christ of his scriptum est * Mat. 4. 4. 7. because the Divell cited text Neither can the Iesuite shew such grosse abuses in the interpretation of scriptures by those which have beene indifferently learned as have beene committed by the learned themselves some of them prooving to be the greatest Architects of Villanie It may be the Anthropomorphites did embrace their opinion
〈◊〉 Romana Athanasius 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 hist cap. 〈…〉 S. 〈◊〉 Basil Augustine stile thâ—se writings â—â—ving his counterfeit Calixius at Rome make these bookes Canonicall it being plaine that they were so tearmed in respect of other corrupt writings which were read in the Church at that time which practice was excepted against by the Third Councell of Carthage 〈◊〉 as it is urged by the Iesuite wherein it was decreed that nothing should be read in the Church under the name of divine Scriptures and I thinke you will not conceive this inhibition had any relation to any of those bookes we call Apocryphall they being never condemned to be read by the Church Besides Bellarmine telleth us the title of divine â—â— given by most 〈◊〉 and most 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to the Prayer of 〈◊〉 the 3 and 4. of 〈◊〉 the 3. and 4. of 〈◊〉 and the booke of Pastor â— c. And the calling of 〈◊〉 Propheticall Scripture by S. Ambrose is to like effect it being given to the fourth booke of Eâ—â—ras which the Iesuite will not have Canonical Scripture though it be lifted up with as great a testimony from that Faâ—her q Sixtus seneâ— Bibl. sancta lib. 1. de Esdâ—â— lib. 3. 4. Divus Ambrosius etiam quartum librum putat editum ab ipso Esdra non sine divinâ revelatione as the booke of Tobie which hee is willing to justifie But leaving Tobie with his dog the Iesuite hath some further proofe for the Macehabees They are alledged saith he as other Canonicall bookes of Scriptures are without any difference And who are the alledgers Cyprian 〈◊〉 â—en and Ambrose r Reply pag. â—â— Two things are here to be examined First whether every booke cited by a Father be Canonicall Secondly how and in what manner they be urged and cited by the Fathers First it is evident that there is no ground that the citing of a booke by a Father should turne his nature when an Apostles pen hath not that virtue in it selfe unlesse he will conclude all those Poets cited in the Scriptures and the booke of Eâ—â—ch by Iude to be reckoned within the Canon Besides if this Argument have any life in it against us why 〈◊〉 it not have the same strength against Papists to prove the booke called Pastor to be Canonicall which as Bellarmine observeth 〈◊〉 by the Fathers Irenaeus who giveth it the name of Scriptures Clemens Alexandrinus and Origen For the Bellarm de scriptor ecclesâ— Hermen five Hermes librum scripsit apud veteres valde celebrem 〈◊〉 inscripsit Pastorem Is libâ—â— quamvis à sancto 〈◊〉 reâ—â—o lib. 4 caprino Origeâ—â— et divinorum title Divine given by Cyprian and his testimony out of Augustine there needeth no further illustration 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 answered in substance before Our Iesuite from these grounds the principall whereof iâ— S. Hieromes ignorance beginnes his 〈◊〉 What wonder then if the Church at Rome 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 them also for Canonicall 〈…〉 The slightest cause hath two or three witnesses those without exception that directly agree one with an other in giving testimony to the proposed articles The Iesuiâ—e that pretended the auncient Church hath not given us â—â—â— compleat proofe from the same and those which he â—â—th produced are but particular men with one Provinâ—â—â—ll Councell which they themselves generally approve â—oâ— and some of his private testimonies say little to the pâ—rpose So all that our Iesuite can expect is this that in some private judgements these bookes might be judged Canonicall but never so delivered by the auncient Church which defence the booke Pastâ—r hath from 〈◊〉 confession and the fourth of Esdras by the confession of your owne Sixtuâ— Senensis 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 lib. 1. de 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ◠〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And therefoâ—e there is reason sufficient that our Iesuite should 〈◊〉 doâ—â—â— his 〈◊〉 whichupon so vaine a confidence heâ— hath â—rected and acknowledge their change although they have doâ—â— it upon so good a ground as the imbracing of some private judgments three or foure hâ—â—dreth yâ—â—es after Christ leaving the streame of the ancient Church â—he 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the same Thus the charge appâ—â—â—â—th to be 〈◊〉 not 〈◊〉 as the Iesuit hoped to have proved it that the Church of Rome hath leâ—â— the gâ—â—â—rall practise of the â—â—â—cient Church and hath imbracâ—◠〈◊〉 private 〈◊〉 not for love of their persons but 〈◊〉 in the 〈◊〉 themselves they finde some shelter 〈◊〉 their 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sâ—â—ing he cannot declare them scriptures by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 neither by the testimony of the ancient 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 all is sure if we cannot manifest that 〈◊〉 bookes held now 〈◊〉 by the Church of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a contrary sentence by the â—â—cient church 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 all his skill 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 â—◠〈◊〉 saith the 〈◊〉 â—◠〈◊〉 thâ—â— evâ—â— the Church of God did 〈…〉 〈…〉 before the Church declared them for Canonicall by 〈◊〉 authoritie * Reply pag 2â— The Iesuit must tell us what he meâ—â—â—th by the Churches declaring them by publicke authority For if he understand a generall Councell it is idle for they never came to be so yâ— Canus loc Theol. l. â— c. â—â— Cyprianus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in expositione symboli â—osdem sex libros patrum anctoritate a quibus se 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Quod idâ—◠〈◊〉 ci◠〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 â—â—ordium Cuâ—â—que diligeâ—ter de omnibus exploraverat omni investigatione comperit hos libâ—â—â— esse a veteris instrumenti am in Psalmum â—â—â— Sed i 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Cyril 〈◊〉 â—◠〈◊〉 Caâ— â—â— audacious in the primitive times as to claime the priviledge to â—â—eepe into the Canon Besides he is as foâ—d in the consequent that they have made no change herein froÌ„ the practise of the 〈◊〉 Church unlesse we can shewe that the ancient Church of God did give judgment or sentenâ—â— contrary to their Trent declaration in a generall councell For if this were good reason the councell of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 have 〈◊〉 the 3. 4. booke of Esdras Pastor their decretall epistles Gregory Siâ—tus yea what not plead in the same manner that they had made no change they never being in your judgment I think condemned by the publicke authoritie of any generall councell in the ancient catholicke Church that did give judgment or sentence conâ—â—ry thereunto But if the Church might be said to give â—â—â— judgment against the bookes of Iudith Toby and the 〈◊〉 by keeping them out of the canoâ— as no doubt â—â— may practise being the best declareâ— of mens judgements it shal be manifested sufficieÌ„tly that they have long 〈◊〉 received their doome For first they were alwaies difâ—â—â—â—med in regard of the canon rule of faith 〈◊〉 that the Iesuit hath not produced one privat 〈◊〉 that is plaine and convincing for almost â—â—â— yeares 〈◊〉 Christ Secondly In the 〈◊〉 Catalogue
〈◊〉 by 〈◊〉 â—all of the aâ—â—cient Fathers and the Councell of 〈◊〉 Canone 〈…〉 these bookes are omitted â—â—â—â— part of the 〈◊〉 Scripture Thirdly the reputed 47. Canon of the third Councell of Carthage which is their cheifest testimony by the indgemeÌ„t of their own was never determinâ—â—â—â— that Synode â—arclaij Paraenesis l. 1. c. â—1 Refertur â—ic canoâ— concil 3. Carthaginensi cui Augustinus interâ—â—it sed ex 〈◊〉 constat posterioris Concilij esse quod paulo post sub Boni â—â—cio convocaâ—â—m Fourthly in after ages they were by many rejected a never getting authority till the Trent decree Besides these bookes will by their owne light declare of what authority they are The 〈◊〉 I hope will grant that God is as true in his word as the Pope infallible in his decrees if upon this ground these bookes deserve credit let the Reader conclude first for Iudeth whether it were â—squam or ullâ—bi we cannot tell neither I thinke the Iesuite himselfe Again she honoureth that fact of Siâ—â—on * Caâ—â—s loco â—â—pra citat Constat auâ—em 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doctisâ—imoâ— in contrariam sententiam 〈◊〉 qui tamen semper in Ecclesia Catholica sunt habiti Nich. Lyâ—an super 〈◊〉 â— 1. super Tobiâ—â— Abuleâ—â—â—s super Math. c. 1. D. Aâ—â—on 3. p. â— 1◠〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 loâ—â— tum maâ—ime in fine 〈◊〉 super 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 etiam sex â—â—cros esse 〈◊〉 Gelaâ—â—â—â— Pâ—pa rejecit 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Macha Diâ—â—â— autem Gregorius l. moral â—â— rejjoâ—◠〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 de Tâ—â—â—poribus Rich l. 2. Exceptioâ—â—â— c. 9. Ocham â—â— Diâ—◠〈◊〉 1. l. 3. 〈◊〉 Ac D. Aug docet aâ— Ecclesia esse quid em receptos seâ—â—â—â— certa side 〈◊〉 9. 2 and Levy which the Spirit of God abhorreth as appeares by Moses †Gen. 49. 5. And we may see that Iudeth fitting her selfe for lyes and deceit * 〈◊〉 9. 10 desireth God to give a blessing thereunto †Ver. 13. which action as it condemneth the person that doth the same so doth it disgrace this booke which speaketh â—â— directly opposite to the Apostolicall rule * Eph. 4. 25. And as Iudeth doth detect her selfe so doth Tâ—bit also by his vaine story of the Rivall Devill †Tob 6. 14. the driving away of a devill or an evill spirit which should trouble any with the smoke of the heart and the liver of a fish * Tâ—â— 6. 7 contrary to Christs doctrine that there are some devills which will not be cast out but by fasting and prayer †Mat. 17. 21. And wherefore should the Apostle Eph 6. 13. have left this out of his aâ—moury if it had bene of such forâ—â— eâ—â—icacy as is here expressed Further we have an Angell lyeing chap. 5. verse â—â— and a fish travailing on Land chap. 6. verse 2. The Maâ—chabees containe many things which declaâ—â— the author of them not to write with confidence of Godâ— Spirit asisting him as first that he was an Epitoâ—â—ist of â—â—son * 2. Maccà b 2. 23. Secondly he excuseth himselfe †2 Maccab. â—5 39. as if the holy Ghost might deserve a censure Thirdly it appeareth that his end is to delight his Reader * 2. Maccab. 2 25. 15. 40. and to get honour to himselfe †2. Maccab. 2 â—6 â—7 Lastly he justifieth Razis in killing himself * 2. Macâ—ab 14 41. 42. 43. a commendation fitter for the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 then the patient Marâ—â—rs of Christ as S. Augustine Aug. câ—n Gâ—ud l. c 31. Dictum est quod 〈◊〉 nobiliter merit meâ—us veller hâ—militer â—â—â— enim 〈◊〉 Illiâ—autem verbis historia gentium â—â—â—dare 〈◊〉 sed viros 〈◊〉 huius â—â—culi non martyrâ—â— Christi observeth To these many more may be added but this which hath bene spokeÌ„ will suffice to shew that they have dealt without all conscience in obtruding those bookes upon the church which were never as canonicall received from the Iewes unto whom were committed the oracles of God * Rom. 3. 2. never delivered to the primitive Church from the Apostles never aproved by any father of the church for almost 400 yeares never thought of when the Canon was repeated such which by their Physiognomy detect themselves Whence we may gather that the Church of Rome now hath varied in her judgment from the church of God then althogh we be not able to lay down the precise time when she thought her selfe wiser then her forefathers heerein Neither will his turning to the Epistles of Iames Iude the second of Peter c Reply pag. 2â— c any thing availe his cause in regard there is a great difference betwixt those Epistles these bookes of Iudeth Tâ—bit and the Macchabees for although some private men did doubt of the former yet the church in generall did receive and approve the fame * See before pag. â—5 whereas on the contrary the Iesuite after all his search cannot finde â—â—â— testimony either of Father or Councell that accounâ—â—â— the latter Canonicall for well-nigh 400 yeares after Christ And therefore most indiscreetly did the Iesuit vrge 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 to prove the like doubt to have bene held of these Epistles with those bookes which they absolutely call Apocrypha Secondly he abuseth his Reader when he would perswade that they were ouely particular Fathers that doubted of these bookes when the Iesuite cannot finde that they were received either of the Iewes or the Apostles or Primitive Fathers for certaine ages after Christ Thirdly to what thoughts of desperation is he and his fellowes driven to defend this adding to the Canon as first that doubtfull writings which have beene accompted Apocryphall for certaine hundred of yeares which our Iesuite calleth somtime may by the publick authority of the Church be declared Canonicall and secondly that particular Fathers which indeed are all the Fathers that lived in the first 300. almost 400. yeares the Iesuite citing none within that compasse but Cyprian and their bastard Calixtuâ— as hath beene formerly declared might doubt of the authority of those bookes without prejudice till the Church had declared them for Canonicall by publicke authority But if the Canon was not compleate in the first times I would know when it was made perfect and whether in those times tradition was enabled to declare the same or whether the Fathers were negligent to testifie this truth and also whether Canonicall and Apocryphall is a distinction lately invented All this the Iesuite must resolve or else acknowledge the Canon of the Church in the Primitive times to be certainely knowne and setled which will declare their vanity and change in these last times to adde unto the sacred Canon and rule of Faith upon pretence that the Church hath power to declare canonicall Scripture A Doctrine invented in after-ages by the Roman faction who as they looked for unlimited power so to defend their practises they desire an unrestrayned rule making Scriptures what
Iesuite make this good in his owne particular calling Bibling Babling Å¿ Reply pag. â—â— We know in this sence every meane may be despised not onely Stephen * Acts 7. â—4 and Paul †Acts 28. 24. Socrates histe Eccles l. 1. c 6. Sabinus qui haerefis Macedonianâ—â— princeps est dediâ—â— operâ his refragatur immo vero cos qui Nicaeae coacti crant impetitos 〈◊〉 vocat 〈◊〉 de vita Constantini l. 2. c. 71. Magis magisque lis accrevit 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 provincias mali illius imperus invaserâ—t but Christ himselfe What Councels ever choaked Hereticks but they croaked afterwards â— It is sufficient if the Scriptum est may stupifie a Devill * Math. 4. 4. 7. amaze a Pharisee †〈◊〉 17. ◠◠〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Eccles l. 1. c. â— Cum amplius â—recenti Episcopi â—unam candemque 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 exquisitis legis devinâ—â— testimoniis vera fides esse confirmatur 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 â—â—◠〈◊〉 â—◠〈◊〉 〈◊〉 victus ab â—â— peâ—ituâ— deâ—eiverit convict an Arian â— consume Antichrist * 2. Thess 2. 8. in the effect or judgement of others What they themselves conceive hereof is nothing to the purpose the Rule is the Rule though a perverse Hereticke cannot be made to acknowledge it Thus saith the Iesuite we may easily espy the reason why our Answerer refuseth to stand to the verdict of either Church Councell or Fatherâ— admitting onely Scriptures for the judge of his cause x Reply pag. 33 Indeed by this place of Tertullian we may easily espie it is the same reason that mooved the auncient Fathers to urge the generall tradition of the auncient Church against certaine Heretickes of their time which perswaded the most learned Answerer to make use of the like weapons against the Iesuite in regard Papists as ancient Heretickes shift off the Scriptures many times by additions substractions depravations adulterous sences corrupted stiles c But to charge this most reverend Lord with refusing to stand to the verdict of either Church Councells or Fathers c. is one of the Iesuites truths He refuseth them indeed as judges of our faith as the absolute rule seclusis sacris litaris so do your owne y Marsilius def Pa. pa. 2. c. 28. Quas vero ipsorum auctoritate propria prae ter Scripturam protulerunt sententias scripturae sive canoni consonas recipiam quas vero dissonas reverenter abjiciam Non tamen aliter quam auctoritate Scripturae cui semper innitar Aquinas 1. part sum q. 1. ar 8. Auctoritatibus autem canonicae scripturae utitur propriè ex necessitate argumentando Auctoritatibus autem aliorum doctorum Ecclesiae quasi arguendo ex proprijs sed probabi liter Innititur enim fides nostra revelationi Apostolis Prophetis factae qui canonicos libroâ— scripserunt non autem revelationi si qua fuit alijs Doctoribus facta that have any conscience but not as good testimonies to assent to the truth And so farre are they from patronizing the Popish cause that you dare not accept them nisi ex cogitato commento but with mentall reservation of a false comment or a worse interpretation z Index Expurg Belgic pag. 5. Quum igitur in Catholicis veteribus alijs plurimos feramus errores exâ—enuemus excusemus excogitato commenso persaepè negemus commodum â—â—â— sensum assingamus dum 〈◊〉 in disputationibus aut in confliction but cum adversarijs Reply pag. 33. What followes to wit that by the confession of his own forefathers masters fellow Protestants they the fathers were no better then meere Papists a is both falshood and froath for which of our accompt the fathers Papists if the Iesuite knowes them let him produce them but we beleive his weaknes wil be seene before his detection And surely he dreameth to thinke we esteeme the Fathers Papists and slaves to that Tyrant whose usurpations their writings alwayes resisted And how can this hang together Wee acknowledge that for the first 400. or 500. yeares the Church of Rome remained a true Church free from Papall impostures and yet as the Iesuit spareth not to accuse us charge the fathers of the primitive Church c. as Papists to favour of that leaven which they ever cast out and expelled But this the Iesuit hath referred to another place till which time we will leave it Yet whereas the Iesuite still insisteth upon the most learned Answerers words no other Father but God do we know upon whose bare credit we may ground our consciences in things that are to be beleived that rocke upon which alone we build our faith is the foundation of the Apostles and Prophets from which no sleight that they can devise shall ever draw us and thinketh the same are uttered for no other end but to cast by the fathers as little respecting their authority b Reply pag. 33 We take this but for a wizards surmise and a vain repetition we having shewen before that the most learned Answerer hath given the Fathers their due respect and if he should do more hee would deny to God his due reverence You that give too much to Saints and Angels dare not justifie but distinguish your worship How much better is it then to deale plainely and to give unto Fathers that which is theirs and to God and his word what belongeth to them Yea whether is it greater disparagement to the Fathers to make them stoop to God or man We doe the first you doe the last where you dare you purge them they shall not speake one word against Babylon but by inventing some device you will deny them c Vide lit â— and if such dealing will not serve then downe with their buildings giving them no honour at all d Index expurg Hispanâ—ard Quiâ—ogae edit Madilti ann 1584. in fine literae â— Deleatur tota Epistola Vdalrici Episcopi Augustini de â—â—libatu cleri Item totus liber Bertrami presbyteri de corpore sanguine Domini penitusauferatur Lastly the Iesuite saith we will now discover for conclusion of the whole how farre herein the Answerer differeth from those Fathers of the auncient Church of God with whom he pretendeth to have so great affinity And this we will declare by the expresse words of an auncient learned Father Vineâ—â—tius Lyrinensis e Reply pag. 34 c. How willingly the Iesuite would have the auncient Church to be as corrupt as themselves may appeare by this his strugling with one onely Lyrinensis whose words largely translated speake not any thing in effect to prove his intention for who is ignorant that heresies are novelties and that Hereticks would justifie their new follies by the auncient testimonies of the sacred Scriptures neither by them alone but the auncient Fathers also Yet must this prove the Answerer to differ from the Fathers of the auncient Church because with them he useth the rule that was
sedem omni lande dignam plus quam Ecclesiae sanctae expedit decet exaltare se peâ—â—tus â—â—t quasi fundant Si quis illas omnes Scripturas 〈◊〉 Sanctis attributas diligenter perlegeret et eorum tempora ad illa scripta applicaret ac deinde in opusculis omnium sanctorum Patrum qui usque ad Augustinum Hieronymum et Ambrosium fuere ac etiam de gestis Conciliorum ubi authentica scripta allegantur usum et memoriam hâ—beret hoc inveniret verum quia nec in illis omnibus Scripturis de illis praefatis Epistolis mentio habetur et etiam ipâ—â— Epistolâ— applicatae ad tempus eorum sanctorum scipsas produâ—t Cusanus doth downe-rightly stile some of them Counterfeits and doubteth not that they all would betray themselves if diligently read applyed to the timesh Contius wrote a Preface which is suppressed with his reasons that he was confident would have declared these Epistles Counterfeit i Contius Annot. in dist 16. c. Septuaginta dicit 〈◊〉 aâ— supra in 〈◊〉 ratioâ—â—â— adduâ—â—i quibus omnes Pontificum qui Sylâ—â—strum 〈◊〉 〈…〉 esse manifeste octendi Vide colloq Rainoldi cum Harto c 8. divis 3. Besides they shame themselves For would these Fathers speake like Barbarians when the Heathen Rhetoricians were ready to oppose them Could they speake in one stile forme of wordes when they had so many different pennes and diverse tongues Were Popes so obscure or their Epistles so contemptible that they were not knowne in the first 500. yeares Were they of so sleight perswasion that they could not moove the Bishops of Africk to give their Successors what those blessed Martyrs possessed Did they cite Hieromes Translation by Prophesie which was not extant while any of them were â—iving Did any Author in those times speak such tearmes as are mentioned in those Epistles Finde me Primatus and Apocrisiarius in Anacletus his time Pagaâ—â—â— in Caius his dayeâ— Finde me a Preist with a shaven Crowne in Anicetus his Government Much more may be gathered from our learned obsenvers but these things may suiâ—â—se to declare of what breed these Epistles are Secondly If the Nicenâ— Fathers have not ampliâ—â—ed the â—ounds of the jurisdiction of the Church of Rome in so â—â—rge a manner as shee desired the most learned Primate observeth she hath had her well-willers that have supplied the Councels negligence in that behalfe and made Canons for the purpose in the name of the good Fathers that never dreamed of such abusines k In the Answer to the Iesuites challenge pag. 13. But in regard the Iesuite hath undertaken to justifie them in the Eight Section I will there God willing discouer their corruption Thirdly If the power of judging all others will not content the Pope unlesse he himselfe may bee exempted from being judged by any other another Councell saith the most reverend the Lord Primate as auncient at least as that of Niâ—â— shal be suborned wherein it shal be concluded by the consent of 284. imaginarie Bishops that No man may judge the first seate and for failing in an elder Councell then that consisting of three hundred Buâ—kram Bishops of the selâ—â— same â—â—king the like note shal be sung quoniam prima sedes non judiâ—abitur à quoquam The first seate must not be judged by any man l Ibid. Now that these trâ—ly be as they are reported no man â—â—n doubt that will seriously enter into consideration of them unlesse he leave his wits and wisdome also For the first to wit the Councell of Sinnessa it was never heard of till the time of Pope Nicholas the first about the yeare 860. unlesse the Iesuite hath better evidence then Bellarmine could finde m Bellarm. de Rom. Pont. â— 2. c. 26. In Concilio 〈…〉 dicunt Patres 〈◊〉 seâ—â—â—◠〈◊〉 judicatur Resett haec verba ex isto Concilio Nicolaâ—â—â— in 〈◊〉 ad 〈◊〉 and yet the supposed Session of this pretended Councell was many hundred yeares before even in the time of the Emperour Dioclesian And the number of Bishops that are urged for the glory of this Councell deâ—ect the forging of it for could it be that the Church in her cruellest persequution should cause 300. Bishops to assemble together when afterwards in her full prosperitie at Nice in the most urgent cause that ever the Church had there were assembled but 318. Neither are we without other just exceptions againstit Did this Councell tell truth that Dioclesian being in the Persian warre heard of the condemning of Marcellinus when that warre was ended 2. yeares before No Binnius condemneth this as no part of the Acts of the Councell unlesse he may helpe the lyar by making him speake as he pleaseth n Binius Not. ad Concilium Sinuessanum Cum esset in bello Persaâ—â—m Haec nisi â—mendentur falsa sunt Etenim cum sententia Eusebiâ— quorundam aliorum hoc anno 20 imperij sui imperio se abdicaverit quod magis est ante biennium de Persis superatis vi 〈◊〉 Romae una tum Maximia no collega suo triumphum egerit quomodo quaeso hoc anno cum exercitu adversus Persas in procinctu expeditione â—ssâ— pâ—tuit Dicimus igitur â—â—c omnia quae sequuntur non esse exactis Concilij sed ut apparet ad ipâ—â— aâ—â—a appendicem superadditam â—el sâ—â—ectio ista restiâ—atur 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 erat â— beâ—â—â— Persâ—rum germana esse videbitur 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 consentaâ—â—ea Vâ—de Baâ—on â—n Christi â—â—◠〈◊〉 â—â—â— And lastly it is apparant that as wise as our Iesuite hath accompted these â—â—ckram Bishops even Donatists the Acts spurious and of â—â— weight Ibid. 〈◊〉 Virorum 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 â—â—c acta 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 esse validis saâ—e argumentis prâ—bare conati funt adcoque 〈◊〉 nihil 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a 〈◊〉 câ—lâ—â—dè excogitaâ—â—m For your second Councell held as you pretend at Roâ—â— under Sylvester it had neither other Bishops nor more authenticke acts For first it is infected with Constantines 〈◊〉 Act. 1. c 1 Cum 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 quod Constantinus 〈◊〉 a Sylvestro Episcopo urbis Romae 〈◊〉 suit a lepra a tale and indeed beyond all folly ridiculous 〈◊〉 knowne to the Church many ages after Constantines death q Platina in vita Maâ—ci 1. Qâ—od verâ— in lepram 〈◊〉 â—◠〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 siâ— confictâ prius de 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 nescio quâ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 â—â—â—do 〈◊〉 â—â—ee in re secuâ—â—â— qui 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 â—bi â—â—◠〈◊〉 quintum aetatis 〈◊〉 attigisset 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ex urbe Constantiâ—oâ—oli ad a â—â—as â—alid as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 causa â—â—llâ— de lepâ—à mentione habitâ Praeterea 〈◊〉 â—ac de re à â—ullo scriptorum â—â—t mentio non dico ab his qui ethniâ—i 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 â—â— a 〈◊〉 quideâ— Secondly this Councell sub Sylvestrâ— must be the yeare before Sylvester was Pope an idle conceite for that is the third Consulship of Constantine Augustus 〈◊〉 hist Ecel l. 4.
in the Acts viz. a Bisâ—opricke n Rhem 〈◊〉 upon Luk â— â—â— And although the Iesuite now seeth that Peter can be no Monarch by his Apostleship such extraordinary power being given to others yet it hath beene that which they ever pretended to exalt him whom they would have to be Peters Successour and the Monarch of the Church and therefore they have had their mouthes and rescripts full of Apostle and Apostleship calling his office Apostleship saying that he heareth causes with his Apostleship why should he not determine with it All his instruments of government are Apostolical as Letters Decrees Mandates Buls Pardons Dispensations nay what hath he that is not Apostolicke Whether messenger or Legate Whether Palace Chamber Chancery Seale o Sacraâ— ceâ—am Rom. eccles l 1. Reg. Canc. Apostol Extra do jurejur c. Ego c. Besides how many of the Iesuites counterfeits urged for the Primacy are thought to speake effectually when they attribute to the Pope to sit in the Apostolicall height to have his See Apostolicke his office an Apostleship his priviledges his eminencies Apostolicall Fourthly he would have told them that the auncient Fathers declare in plaine tearmes how Christ grounding his Church upon Peter Mat. 16. committing his flocke to Peter Ioh. 21. wishing Peter to confirme his Brethren and praying for Peters faith that it should not faile Luc. 22. constituted Peter head of his Church upon earth and consequently thereby made him Prince Cheife Captaine Head Leader and Prelate over the rest of the Apostles p Reply pag. 60 But whosoever will weigh his quotations shall perceive that the Fathers have beene onely pretended by him they disdaining any such Monarchie as from those texts the Iesuite laboureth to collect And first for the 16. of Mat. Although the Fathers doe sometimes give Peter the name of the rocke or foundation upon which the Church is builded or grounded yet their meaning is not that the Church is builded upon Peter absolutely and personally but relativelie and from his faith or Christ that hee confessed And therefore Hillary that calleth Peter the foundation of the Church q Hilar. in Mat. 16 Faelix Ecclesiae fundamentum telleth us that not onely to say but also to beleive that CHRIST is the Sonne of GOD this faith is the foundation of the Church r Hillar l. 6. De Trinitat Christum Dei silium non solum nuncupare sed etiam credere Haec fides Ecclesiae fundamentum and in another place hee saith This is the alone happie rocke of faith confessed with the mouth of Peter Thou art the Sonne of the everliving GOD Å¿ Idem l. 2. De Trinitat Vna â—â—aec est faelix fidei Petra Petri ore confessa Tu es filius Dei vivi S. Basill also saith that CHRIST is truely a Rocke unmoveable but Peter is so from the Rockâ— Christ t Basil serm de Pâ—niten Christus verè Petra est inconcussa Petrus vero propter Petram And S. Ambrose concludeth u Ambros ser â— Recte igitur qui Petra Christus Simon nuncupaâ—â—s est Petrus â—â— qui cum Domino fidei societatem habebat cum Domino haberet nominis Dominici unitatem ut siqut à Christo Christianus dicitur ita à Petra Christo Petrus Apostolus vocaretur that rightly therefore because CHRIST is the rocke was Simon called Peter that so he that had a society of faith with his Lord might also have the unitie of his name that as a Christian taketh his denomination from CHRIST so Peter the Apostle might â—â—ke his name from the rocke CHRIST So also saith Gregory Nissen The LORD is the rock of faith even the foundation as the LORD himselfe saith to the Prince of the Apostles Then art Peter and upon this rocke I will build my Church x Gregor Nissenus cap. postremo testimoniorum con Iudaeos Dominus est Peâ—â—â— fidei â—â—â—quam fundamentum ut ipse Dominus ait ad principe◠〈◊〉 Tu es Petrus super â—anc Petram aedificabo Ecclesiam 〈◊〉 And S. Augustine teacheth us that The Church is founded upon a rocke from whence even PETER took his name For the rocke tooke not its denomination from PETER but PETER from the rocke even as CHRIST taketh not his name from Christians but a Christian from CHRIST y August truâ—â— 124. in Iohan. Ecclesia fundata est super petram â—â— de Petrus nomen accepit Non enim à Petro petra siâ—â— Petrus à petra siâ—â— non Christus à Christianis sed Christianus à Christâ— vocatur Theodoret shall conclude for this particular who telleth us that Blessed PETER or rather the LORD himselfe layed the foundation for when PETER said thou art CHRIST the Sonne of the living GOD the LORD said upon this rocke I will build my Church Bee not you therefore denominated from man for CHRIST is the foundation z Theodoret. in 1. Cor. 3. Fundamenâ—â—â— jecit beatus Petrus vel pâ—tius ipse Dominus Cum enim dixisset Petrus Tu es Christuâ— filius Der viâ—â— dixir Domiâ—â— super hanc 〈◊〉 â—rarâ— aedificabo EcclesiammeaÌ„ Ne voâ—â—â— go denominaâ—â— ab hominibus Christus 〈◊〉 â—â—◠〈◊〉 So that the Iesuite may see how Peter was the rocke and foundation by confessing and preaching CHRIST the true rocke The latter of which duties to wit preaching CHRIST is so bitter â—nto their Popes that I thinke they had rather forsake their Rock-ship then be tyed thereunto And as the Church was no otherwise grounded upon Peter then you have heard from the Fathers so neither was the flocke of CHRIST Io. 21. committed to Peter in the Roman sence For feeding is not domineering that which before did point out a sheepheard must not now constitute a Prince or Monarch But not to descant upon this place in every particular the Iesuite may take notice that there want not Fathers that thinke the other Apostles had as much interest in feeding as Peter himselfe and that hee received no new power by his pasce oves this is cleare from the reasons that the Fathers give wherefore CHRIST spake onely to Peter As first not to give him a new power and Commission but to stirre him up to conâ—â—sse his LORD thrice as before hee denyed him So Augustine tract in Iohan 123. Cyrillus in Iohan. lib. 12. cap. 64. Secondly that hee might renewe the Apostle shippe for so saith Cyrill But CHRIST said fiede my Lambes renewing unto him the dignitie of his APOSTLESHIP least it might seeme to be lâ—st for his denyall which happened by humane informitie a Cyrillâ—â— in Io. l. 12. c 64. Dixit autem pasce agâ—â—◠〈◊〉 Apostolâ—â—â—s ei renovâ—â—â—â— dignitatem ne propter â—egatioâ—em quae human◠〈◊〉 accidit lâ—befactaâ—i videreâ—â—â— What new power is here given What ordinarie jurisdiction that ordinarily did not belong to the rest Here is the old Apostleship renewed to Peter which by denyall of his Master he
non habentem maculam aut rugam non sie accipiendum est quasi jam sit sed quae prâ—paratur ut sit quando apparebit etiam gloriosa Nunc enim propter quasdam ignoranties in firmitates membrorum fuorum habet unde quotidie tota dicat Dimitte nobis debita nostra Neither was it the question in those times whether the Catholicke Church could bee spotted with Heresie but with sinne which was affirmed by the Catholicke Church against the Pelagians and this the Iesuite seemeth now to conceive and therefore telleth us that by reason of ignorant and infirmities of her members in other matters the Church hath dayly occasion to pray for the forgivenesse of sinnes n Reply pag. 43. Now the Iesuite giving the title â—â—spotted unto the Primitive Church of Rome which he accounteth the Catholicke how could the most learned Answerer understand the Iesuites tearme but according to the sence of the word as it was vulgarly taken in the primitive times Secondly it were not amisse to conceive that the Iesuite in his Challenge calleth the Primitive Church of Rome 〈◊〉 o In his Challenge in his enquirie in this section hee layeth downe the Roman Church without reâ—â—raynt of Primitive and lastly in his proofe hee thinketh hee hath got the day if from antiquitie he can prove that the Catholicke Church cannot faile So that you may easily â—spy who is guiltie of mingling one question with another But let us examine this new question as the Iesuite hath proposed it Whether the Church of Rome may rightly be tearmed Vnspotted or no p Reply pag â—â— That the auncient Roman Church was invincible never fundamentally erring in the foundation of faith in all her members for the first 400. or 500. yeares after Christ The Iesuite telleth us our Doctors and Masters grannt q In his Challenge So that the Controversie is not what the Primitive Church of Rome was in regard of Heresie but what the Roman Church is lyable unto in her succession which the Iesuite resolves and as he would make us beleive from Augustine and other anncient Fathers saying that in the truth and soundnes of her faith and doctrine shee is evermore invincible and not lyable to any spot or stayne r Reply pag. 43 But neither doth Augustine Origen Eusebius Alexander B. of Alexandria Athanasius Cyrill B. of Hierusalem or Philo Carpathius c. whom he urgeth Å¿ Reply pag 64 pag 650 say any thing for the Roman but for the Catholicke Church to which they beare testimony that it cannot faile So that our Iesuite falleth under Bellarmines Censure who affirmeth that they doe but trifle away the time who contend to prove that the Church cannot absolutely faile because it is graunted by the Protestants themselves t Bellarm. de Ecclesia mil l. 3. c. 13. Notandum autem est muluâ— ex nostris tempus 〈◊〉 dum probant absolute Ecclesiam non posse dâ—ficere 〈◊〉 Calâ—â—â—â— eâ—teri 〈◊〉 â—i id concedunt which the Iesuite knowing though dissembling after he hath produced S. Chrysostome for the perpetuitie of the Catholicke Church argueth fâ—r her But what Church doth this holy Father meane thinke you Surely none other then Peters Church u Reply pag. â—â— c. Peters Churchâ— proâ— nefâ—â— was the Church espoused to Peter purchased by Peter redeemed by Peter At Antioth the Church was first called Christian * Acts 1. v. 26. which name it hath retained and shall it loose its title and 〈◊〉 now and bee denominated from Peter The Spouse of Christ the mysticall body of Christ the house of God the Lords granary and 〈◊〉 Stapleâ— Relect cont 1. q. â— art 1. not 5 Vt est corpus Christi in uno sensu propter internam gratiam ita est domus magna Cheisti â—st area ager dominicus in alio sensu propter externam collectionem c. but Peters Church is somewhat harsh Chrysostome neere giveth the Church no such title onely their poore forged Cyrill hath Ecclesia Apostolica Petri an evidence answerable to the cause yet not convincing for the same title might be given to the Church of Antioch But can the wordes of Chrysostome stretch to the Roman Church â—et the Iesuite shew it if he be able That Church whereof Chrysostome speaketh is the Church of Christ not of Peter that Church whereof he is a Pastor y Chrys in Mat homâ—â—â— Ecclesiae futurae pastorem constituit not a Monarch the rock upon which it is builded is not Peter but Christ beleived confessed by Peter Ibid. Et super hanc Petram aedificabo Ecclesiam meam id est fidem atque confessionem Peter had no gift given him to preserve this Church from amidst â—â—erce assaults and raging flouds in this Fathers opinion though the Iesuite would perswade it but Peter was confirmed in his faith confessed by this promise made that the gates of hel should not prevaile against the Churchâ— Neither had Peter power given him to make the Church invincible but to declare it Ibid Petrus Ecclesiam per universum orbem amplificatam 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 validiâ—â—â—â— monstravit And as the Fathers ground this priviledge of the unspotted â— Non enim turbari te con venâ—â— cùm audicris quia traâ—ar crucifiâ—â—â— integritie of the Roman Church upon the promise of Christ to Peter Matt 16. so also they oftentimes deduce the same from the vertue of that prayer which Christ made to his Father for Peters faith that it should never faile Luc 22. wherin doubtlesse he was heard for his reverence Heb. 5. 7. Reply pag. â—â— There is no ground why the Roman should enjoy this priviledge either from Christs promise or his prayer as the Iesuite hath failed in deducing any thing from the former so doth he shew his abilities in this latter at his first entrance For first he brings in forged Epistles under the name of Lucius d Bellarm. l. 2 de Rom. Pont. c. â— dare not affirme this Epistle to be undoubted it is dared Gallo Volusâ— ano Cosâ— when as they were not Consule at that time as appeareth by Baron Annal. to â— an â— and Felix e The Epistle is dated Claudio Paterno Coss when as there were none such in his time Baron ad aâ— 273. good Bishops who would have 〈◊〉 the pride that they are urged heere to 〈…〉 the rest he cites 〈◊〉 good Bishop we will not deny yet his goodnes did not declare itselfe at all times when he spake of S. Peter or the Roman Church but his infirmity For as the Bishops of Rome both before and after him desired more then was fit so it will be no difficulty to shew that they contended to justifie their desires by unfit meanes and especially by swelling wordâ—â— in the honour of S. Peter and their owne Seâ— and practises sutable thereunto Insomuch that they were esteemed smoâ—â—â— by some
Marcellini At 〈◊〉 Pontifex ad sacrificia gentium ductâ—â— cum 〈◊〉 instarent carnificeâ— ut thura dijs exhiberet 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Deos alienos adoravit others But it may be they will say a Pope may have spots of Paganisme yet not of Heresie but I thinke any man will conceive that if the Pope may practise against all the points of Christian Faith and turne Pagan he may well turne Hereticke and pleade against one and then farewell the blessed Prerogative of an invincible perpetuity of unspotted faith Not many yeares after Liberius was Pope and although some desire to mince it yet is it plaine that he was an Arian Hereticke subscribed to that heresie as Athanasius i Athanasius in Epistola ad solimariam vitam agentes Liberius deinde post exactum in exilio biennium inflexus est minisque mortis ad subscriptionem inductus est and S. Hierome k Hieronymus Catal Script Eccles â—ortunatianus Episcopus Liberium Romae urbis Episcopum ad subscriptionem Haereseos compulit Idem in Chronico Liberius taedio victus exilij in haeteticam pratitatem subscribenâ— testifie Yea so publicke was the report hereof even in our late ages that many eminent Papists as Cusâ—â—â—â— l Nich. de Cusa Candiâ—â—al l. 2 de Concord Cathol c 5. Et licet Liberius Papa tunc suit qui ut scribit Augustinus contra Crescentium Arianae sectae se subscripsit licet resisteret in principio propter hoc in exilium missus esset habetur elegans disputatio Constan â—ij Imperatoris Liberij rediit autem de exilio Victus consensit errori ut scribit S. Hieronymus in Chronicis Platina m Platina de vita Liberij I Constantius Liberium ab exilio terocat qui Imperatoris beneficio motus â—â—m haereticis in rebus omnibus ut quidam voâ—â—nt senticas Sabellicus n Anton. Sabellicus Ennead 7. l. 8. c. 36. Hiprecibus suis apud Constantinum in Felicis iâ— vidiam Liberio reditum ad urbem confecere quo ille beneficio 〈◊〉 ex consesso Arianus ut quidam scribunt est factus and others made no doubt from the testimony of antiquity to charge him with it Surely if an Arian Head be no spot to Roman infallibilitie what will besmeare it These may fuisse to shew their Popes in the â—est times not to have beene without spots And now if in the best times of rhe Roman Church when it was most pure this pretended head was bespotted with heresie how can we expect that he should be blessed with such a prerogative to be infallible to others And indeede Experience hath confirmed our judgments herein For in the seaventh age Honorius was a Monothelite condemned by the judgment of three Councels o Concil VI. Occumeâ—icum Act. 13. Concil VII Occumenicum Act. 7. Concil VIII Occumenicum Act. 7. his own Epistles witnessing against him p 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Epistolae Honoris ad Sergium una in VI. Synodo act 12. altera ibidem Act. 13. â—â—â—â—raque autem Honorius approbat doctrinam Sergij principis Monothelitarum jubet non debere dici Christum duas habere voluntates aut operationes Pope Leo the second execrating him q Leo II. ad 〈◊〉 Imperatorem Epist 2 Anathemaâ—izamus novi erroris Inventorâ—s id est Theodoâ—â—â— c necnon HONORIVM qui hanc Apostolicam Ecclesiam non Apostolicae traditionis doctrina lustravit sed prophanâ proditione immaculatam fidem 〈◊〉 conatus est In the XIIth age Alphonsus de Castro affirmes Celestine the III. no way to be excused of teaching Heresie to wit that Heresie so dissolves matrimonie that a partie may marrie againe r Alphons de Castro adv haer l. 1 c. 4. Coelestinum Papam etiam errâsse circa matrimonium fidelium quorum alter labitur in haeresim res est omnibus manifesta In the XIIIIth Age Iohn the XXIIth taught that the Saints departed saw not God before the Resurrection Å¿ Bellarm. de Rom. Pont. l. 4. c 14. Ioannes XXII Papa à multis reprehenditur ac praessertim à Galielmo Ocam in opere â—â— dierum ab Adriano in quaestione de confirmatione circa â—nem quid docucrit animas beato â—um non visuâ—as Deum ante resurrectionem Erasmus praefat one ad ad librum 5. Ireâ—aei idipsum cum additamento affirmat In the XVth Centurie Iohn the XXIIIth denyed the Resurrection and life eternall and was accused of pertinaciâ— therein t Concil Constâ—ntiâ— self â—â— See this at large before pag. 53 Bellarmine telleth us at that time there were three pretenders for the Papacie so that it could not easily bee discerned quis eorum verus ac legitimus esset Pontifex which of them was the true and lawfull Pope u Bellatâ—n de Rom Poâ—â— l 4. c 14. Erant enim co temporâ—tres qui Pontifices haberi volebant Gregorius XII Benedictus XIII et Ioannes XXIII nec poterat facilè indicaaâ—i quis eorum verâ—s ac legitimus esset Pontifeâ— cùm non decssent singulis doctissimi patroni So that it seemed the Councell of Constance did not adhere to the Pope nor the Pope to the faith Now let the Reader judge what great reason we have to be waile our selves that we want this pretended infallible rule of faith which cannot rule it selfe and free the adherents thereto from errour how farre these Puritans are from the Catholicke humilitie that defend their staines when the auncienâ— Fathers best men in their journeying towards heaven did bewaile their imperfect estate hungred for that righteousnes and perfection that was to come And what cause have we to blush that the particular Church of Ireland is lyable to errour when the best particular Churches in the world never assumed a better Condition But is the Iesuits inference concludent here because our Church is lyable to error therfore it cannot with reason challenge to it selfe the title of unspotted Here is not so much as silly Sophistry the Churches of Ephesus Thessalonica Philippi in the Apostles dayes were lyable to error therfore bespotted posse et esse are two distinct things A Iesuite may be a true subject but it doth not follow therefore in an instant he forsakes his order And a Pope may be a Saint but who will thinke it necessary that hee will without delay forsake his tyrannicall condition The Church of Ireland may erre in faith yet it doth not follow that it is now bespotted with heresie or hereafter will bee So that it may have alliance and affinitie with all true auncient Churches true members of the Catholicke for any thing the Iesuite hath yet produced Yet as if the Iesuite had dreamed all this while and did now awake he bolts out with a phantasticke flourish Let them take then saith the Iesuite if they will their erring Church unto themselves but let them not withall deny us leave to sticke unto that
amended which were scarse espyed in their times How doth every Councell disgrace the knowledge grace and courage of former Fathers and Bishops if the amending of things amisse might conclude the same m Augustin â— â—apt con Donat c. 3. Ipsaque plenaria saepè priora à posterioribâ—â— emeâ—dari sine 〈◊〉 typho sacrilegae superbiâ— sine â—lla inâ—â—â—tâ—cervice arrogantiae fine ulla coâ—â—entione lividae invidiâ— cum â—â—â—e catholick cum charitate 〈◊〉 Have not some of your bretâ—ren found out new thoughts concerning the blessed Virgins conception which will take away the harsh doctrine of the Fathers and Catholicks of former times Shall wee thinke that these tumultuoâ—â— upstarts have therefore more knowledge grace or courage then those ancient Fathers the whole Catholicke Church Litle honour was given to the Roman See before the Councell of Nice Aeneas Sylv. epist 301. must we conclude that your after Doctours had more knowledge grace or courage then the Apostles and Fathers before that Councell because they have washed and cured GODS Church of so notorious an errour I see the Iesuite is of the Cardinalis Matthee Langi Archbishop of Salzburg Hist con Triâ—en l. 1. minde that did thinke the Church should bee reformed but not by a Monke But they are Popish thoughts to have the reformation or government of the Church to depend upon men Wee have a Rule left by CHRIST which as it is the rule to governe so to reforme what by fraud or neglect hath crept into the Church amisse We acknowledge GOD hath many instruments in the Church but that which worketh reformation is the word of God and although the Instrument may have honour for the works sake yet it is the word not the instrument that effects the reformation Why the Iesuite should tearme those learned men tumultuous upstarts I cannot guesse for I am sure they were as auncient as there Order and for tumultuous practices who dare compare with Iesuites for grand supplanters Whereas the Iesuite thinkes to vilifie them by his heape of invectives they will appeare true friends to the Catholicke Church by grave and solide discourses pleading her cause and contesting for her right And I would know whether they have sinned in being impatient of the Churches sufferings any more then the Councels of Basill and ConÌ„stance who greived to see a Saracens head upon the Churches shoulders and therefore declared the Churches rights and the Popes usurpations condemning him with his foolish pretences p Concil Constane Sess 4. 10. Concil Basil sess 12. 33. Veritas de potestate concilij generalis universalem Ecclesiam repraesentantis supra Papam queâ—libet alterum declarata per constantiense hoc Basileense generalia Concilia est veritas fidei Catholicae veritatibus praedictis pertinaciter repugnans est confendus Haereticus Wherefore the Iesuite might have left this passion as being grounded upon distemper and fury and have taken his rabblement to himselfe and his to whom truely it belongs But this Iesuite will speake nothing without demonstration and therefore will shew ours to be a deforming rather then a reforming humour q Reply pag 73 and this he would prove because First of all the prime stirrer of this stone Martin Luther had the gift to see in his omne dayes such comfortable successe herein as was answerable to his labours r Reply 〈◊〉 What was that The shaking off the Roman Triple The emptying of the Fryars bellies The restrayning of the Cleargies luxurie No but from the time the pure Gospell was first restored and brought to light the world hath every day become worse and worse Å¿ Reply pag 73. Wee acknowledge that Luther and others complained of the disorders of men that communicated with them but will the Iesuite conclude that these were occasioned by bringing in the doctrine of CHRIST Were the Preachers of the Gospell filled with a deforming rather then a reforming humour because they could not tollerate stewes and prophanenesse where they preached but did inveigh with bitternesse against them If there were a Iesuite that had so much devotion as to reproach the sinnes of the Roman Court or Italie with Luthers courage and should upbrayde them with neglect of the Cleargies example the Popes holinesse and the lampe of divine light that proceedes from him and should crye out that Sodome and Gomorrha never abounded with sinne and Sodomie as Italy notwithstanding their helpes of devotion doth at this present or since Peter placed his seate there Should he therefore confesse that Peter planting his seat there should be the cause of those filthie sinnes and Sodomies or that the Cleargies lives Papall holinesse and determinations did bring prophanenesse into those states and countries Absit The Apostle saith of the Corinthians after they had received the Gospell that there was such fornication amongst them as was not once named amongst the Gentiles * 1. Cor. 〈◊〉 Must it follow that this is to be imputed to the Christian religion No this makes the offence the greater it doth no way cause it and this is the meaning of Luther and most of the others cited The word of God is compared to light in Scripture * II. Peter 1. 19 the light whereof might declare more to Luther a Preacher abroad then when hee remained darke and lazie in his Cloyster at home And we thinke that Luther might deceive himselfe in this particular for not distinguishing betwixt an evill and the detection thereof The Pharisees hypocrisies were not thought such before CHRISTS time His revealing of them brought them not in Luther espyed more mischeife abroad when he veiwed mens actions by the light of the word then he could before by a Roman Gloworme and this might make him thinke the world worse when his eyes had more light and his medium was more cleare When Grace entereth into a mans heart hee trembles at every thought of uncleanenesse that before the receipt thereof in regard of blindnesse could not see the odiousnesse of the filthiest crimes And man as he cannot esteeme vertue but by this light of grace so hee cannot apprehend the foulenesse of sinne So that Luther might get fruite by his preaching though he was bold to say of some that pretended to follow him They are and remaine swyne they beleive like swyne and like swyne they dye Reply pag. 73 But doth M. Malone urge this for the credite of the Swyneheard or the Swyne For the harlet or her lovers Poore Luther because the Swyne that Rome had bred in filthinesse would not leave their swynish condition for his preaching against their swynishnesse this is the thing hee bewayles And what great hurt comes thereby to Luthers cause or the cause of Religion whose complaints may be paralelled by the Prophets * 〈◊〉 49 4. and Apostles themselves And heere to satisfie the Reader I would have him to observe some things fit to bee taken notice of and it will over-throw all
that building which the Iesuite hopes to erect by his collected Invectives First that the learned Divines in generall in reformed Churches by the auncient Fathers exampleâ— doe from their heart detest the pollutions and corruptions of the world insomuch that they cannot treate of them but with detestation denying all honour to them though their owne by communion that live not after the puritie of the doctrine of their profession which wee cannot finde among the Papisâ—es they commending sinne Baron aâ— 1100. n. 14. De 〈◊〉 â—â—liâ— Imperatoris Quis negare poterit summum fuisse hoc pietatis genus in hoc se exhibuisse crudelem Immo ex â—â— quod non firmioribus vinculis strinxerit c. nihil habes in quo damnes filiâ—â— magis quam si vehementi febre phrenetico delirenti infanienti furentique pius fiâ—â—â—s inâ—iciat vincula patri â—verè intuitu pietatis ut facere prae se tulit ea omnia praestitit collerating uncleanenesse x Espencâ—â—us in Epast ad Titum c. 1. p. 67. Prostat in quaestu pro meretrice sedet liber palam ac publicê hic impressus hodicque ut olim venalis Taxa Camorae seu Canceilariae Apostolicae inscriptus in quo plus scelerum diseas licet quam in omnibus omnium vitiorum summistis et summarijs et plurimis quidem licentiâ— omnibus autem absolutio â—â—pturientibus proposita protecting abominable wretches as lately in the Venetian State y Historia Interdicti Vencti lib 1. p. 7 8. â— Reply p. 74 and if any hath either declaimed against or abhorred the base lives of their Clergie which is but seldome they have beene suspected as no good Catholickes for the same Againe wee by his testimonies may see that Reformed Churches by doctrine or connivencie doe not tollerate those evills which they declaime against as the Papistes doe whereby it can cast no impeachment upon their doctrine Thirdly the cause of these evills is declared by Iacobus Andrâ—â— to bee because the severe discipline of the Church hath beene formerly disgraced by Conscience-tyrannie and oppression in the Romane Churchâ— so that there is no correction of sinne but the People feare a Papall tyrannie Fourthly the Iesuite hath taken advantage of some points in controversie betwixt those that they stile Lutherans and Calvinists making use of eithers passions to disgrace the good life and sincerity of both Now for his charge of Atheisme I feare we have cause to suspect there are some amongst us I meane in our Kingdomes All doe not beleive the Gospell and the Ministers of Sathan have their worke heerein But that which the Iesuite would lay to our charge may bee seene in every corner of Italy We have not nourished one Machiavel that the Iesuite can produce nor one Iohn that denyed the immortalitie of the soule He hath not espyed one amongst us that hath called the Gospell Fabulam de Christâ— Yet if there be any such as from the loose conversation of some may bee suspected I am sure they play their part in secret as the foole in the Psalmist that said in his heart There is no God * Psal 24. 1. These things duely considered and weighed may shew that the Reformation doth more detest and abhorre sinne then give any encouragement unto it Besides wee see that the exclamation against sinne is no argument that sinne is in the budde and flourish but in her ruine and decay So that all the Iesuite can saye from these testimonyes is this that as those pious men assaulted the Kingdome of Anti-Christ by the opposall of such corruptions of Doctrine as did get footing in their schisme of Rome so did they labour afterwardes to extirpate and roote out those fruites of Idolatrie and Superstition wicked life open prophanesse and all kinde of filthy and notorious demeanour But if wee should graunt all to bee true which the Iesuite urgeth hee argueth vainelie in labouring to disgrace the profession of the Gospell because some of their Communion are of dissolute lives For if this Argument were good wee should quickly make Rome the Synagogue of Sathan far from the Church of God For how many have shewed the cheife Pilots in your Church to have beene in many successions the most notorious wicked wretches that ever the earth did beare some of them for saking S. Peters wayes a Pâ—aâ—â—â—a in vit Iohan X Pontifices ipsi à Petri veâ—tigijs discessâ—runt others being monsters and unnaturall b Idem in vita Benedicti 4. Vbi cum ipsis opibus lasciâ—ire coepit Ecclesia Dei versis ejus cuâ—toribus à severitate ad lasâ—iviam peperit nobis tanta licentia peccandi haec portenta à quibus ambitione largitione sanctisâ—ma Petri sedes occupata est potius quam possessâ— Idem in vit Christopher 1. Ponâ—â—fices tanquam monstra quaedam è medio Deus sustulit Idem in vit Sergij III. Vide quaeso quantum isti degeneraverint à majoribus sâ—â—s yea prodigionsly wicked c Geneb Chron l. 4 Nihil mirum si isti Pontifices prodigiosi essent Sylvester the second giving himselfe to the Divell d Platina in vita Sylvestri II. Diabolum secutus curse totum tradiderat and doing him homage Martinus Polon ann 1007. Sylvester II. diabolo homagium fecit ut sibi omnia ad votum succederent Iohn the XIIIth abounded in all wickednes f See before pag. 107. no Catiline Nero or Heliogabalus like unto him so that if he was not a baptised Turk yet he was worse in the judgment of your owne for he died of a wound given him by the Divell in the act of adulterie as your owne report it g Luitprand Tiein l. 6. c. 11. Dum se cum câ—jusdam viri uxâ—â—â— obleâ—â—â—ret in temporibus adeò â— Diabolo est percussus ut intra dierum octâ— spatium â—odem sit vulnere mortuus What was Boniface the seaventh but a Villaine a Church-Robber a Theife a murderer of two Popes as good as Sylla and Cataline I rayle not it is Baronius his Rhetoricke h Baron ann 985. n. 1. Auâ—umerandum potius interfamâ— sos latrones et potentissimos grassâ—tores atque patriae perditores Syllas et Catâ—linas â—oâ—umque similes quos omnes superavit sacrilegus iste turpissima â—ecâ— duorum Pontificum Besides Alexander the VI. what vertues what holinesse did hee shine with I will speake no more of them as having shewed what they were before But for your Cardinals what holinesse was enclosed in their purple habites They were Pride it selfe and acted it yea the most excellent exemplars to paint it by By their Wickednesse horrible schisme was brought into the Church And for the unmeasurable and bottomlesse gulfe of their covetous desire who can by words sufficiently expresse it besides their Simoniacall intercessions to the Pope their selling of their favours for money their most shamefull and damnable â—orruptions the adulteries
the Councell of Basill but also whole fraternities of Orders accused and charged with Schisme or Heresie Whatsoever in this Section followeth is but the tâ—arâ— of a Crocodile or the preaching of a Foxe an Homily made of what hath beene answered before That which we are now to examine is the Iesuites ensuing Discourse wherein he promiseth to shew that SECT XI OVr Answerer by Vanitie offereth wroâ—g tâ— Truth and Charity a Reply pag 87 This our Iesuite makes the Scope of his XI Section which he doubts not to make as manifest as he hath done his former undertakings with a nil ultrà I hope wee have given sufficient satisfaction saith he unto our Answerers deâ—aâ—â—nd when he enquired whether I was able to shew one point wherein he and his have broken that Harmony which Iraeneus commendeth in the Catholicke Church of his time b Reply pag 87 Mr Malone is not so good in his payments as banqueâ—oâ—ts for they will pay debts with good words but the Iesuite thinkes he can satisfie all with invectives and with the same Method wanting matter as they money to pay quarrels with the forme or by out-facing pretends the debt satisfied when poore man he hath onely snarled a little against the specialtie for that which he tearmes to be the holy Catholicke Church hath bene declared a Schisme and that the Catholicke Church is not inclosed within the mountaines but dispersed â—ver the face of the earth with which we communicate and are members hath beene sufficiently declared to which wee referre the Reader And now saith he aâ— we have â—ully â—â—swâ—red â—ntâ— his demaund so have we just cause to complaiâ—â— that he hath not given us any reâ—â—â—â—tion of that which I propoundâ—d when I dâ—sired him to tell whether of us both have the true Religion we who doe not disagree with the auncient Church in any one point or they who agree with it in very few and disagree in almost all Observe I pray you how vainely he shapeth his answere 〈◊〉 unto c Râ—â—lâ— pag 88 c. Indeed if that which the Iesuite affirmeth for graunted could as easily be proved as it is bouldly avouched saith the most reverend Primate the question would quickely be resolved whether of us both have the true religion But he is to understand that strong conceipts are but weake proofes and that the Iesuites have not beene the first from whom such brags as these have beene heard Dioscâ—rus the hereticke was as pâ—arte when hee uttered these speeches in the Councell of Chalcedon I am cast out with the Fathers I defend the doctrine of the Fathers I transgresse them not in any point and I have their testimonies not barely but in their verie bookes d Answ pag. â—â— Lâ—e here what a flourish of words he hath unfâ—ulded and not one to the purpose c e Reply pag â—8 You see that the most reverend Primate his Answere justly conceiveth that such a Proposition as the Iesuite desires to be resolved in supposeth that by the confession of our Church either antiquitie speakes onely for them and against our selves or else that the supposition is so cleare in it selfe that it cannot be denyed Then which nothing is more ridiculous and therefore you were a little too hastie M. Malone as the most learned Answerer tels you to â—ry out Whether of us both have the true Religion and might have done well indeed to have bethought your selfe more advisedly of that which you had undertaken to performe as also to have remembred the saying of the King of Israell unto Bâ—nhâ—dâ—d Let not him that girdeth on his harnesse boast himselfe as he that putteth it off For if you can convince us that we agree not with the auncient Church in any one point we will plead guiltie and confesse our errour if you can justifie your selves by the auncient doctrine of the Catholicke Church we will recanâ— the charge of Apostasie which now we deservedly cast upon you In the meane time we know that such as you can pretend with Dioscâ—rus the doctrine of the Fathers when indeed you exclude them and foyst upon the Christian world old Gibeonitish mustinesse of Decretall Epistles and false birthes to prove you to be ex genere antique when for all this your cheifest Heraulds stagger at your Pedigree so that his learned Answere is not a flourish of words but a detection of your follie who supposing in your Challenge that to be confessed by us which is the point in controversie would vainely flatter your selfe as if you had borne us downe with the weight of the authoritie of the Fathers and so astonished us therewith that we could not tell what to say for our selves whenas you had not layde downe so much as the name of any one Father at that time But you aske the question Why may not Dioscorus his peartenes in bragging so of the holy Fathers when they least of all made for him be applied unto our Answerer vainely boasting of them in the same nature rather then to us who have alledged their assured authorities for our cause so abundantly f Reply pag. 88 This is nothing to the purpose let him be like whom he will it is apparant by Dioscorus that men may pretend a propertie in that which is none of their owne as the Divell and the Pope in the kingdomes of the world which being granted it cannot be denyed but you may also pretend that Scriptures antiquity make for you when truely and re ver â they batter you and beate you downe And although it be nothing to the point controverted that the Iesuite speakes of Dioscorus yet we may consider it without offence He tels us Dioscorus was condemned and cast out for maintaining his owne opinion against that of the whole Councell g Reply pag. 88 Not so but an hereticall opinion hee might have varied from a whole Councell in a truth as your Panormitane insinuateth h Panorm super p. Decret Deelect etelec potestate c. signif Quod si Papa movere tur melioribus rationibus et auctoritatibus quam Concilium quod standum esset sententiae suae nam et Concilium potest errare c. In concernentibus fidem etiam dictum unius privati esset praeferendum dicto PAPAE si ille moveratur melioribus rationibus eâ— auctoritatibus novi veteris testamenti quam Papâ— And had our Answerer lived in those dayes would he not thinke you have received the like censure of the said Councell for denying unto the Pope that Supremacie i Reply pag â—â— c. A fancie the Councell you dare not stand to you in part except against it and in a point that comes neere the Supremacy k Binâ—not in Conc. Chaleed verb. Concilium Decretum illud act 16. quo Patres Concil absentibus legatis postea reclamantibus Constantinopolitanae sedi primatum attribuerunt ideo quod instar Romae caputiâ—â—perij effects primatum meruerit
strength of his confutation Now as this of Dioscorus hath not beene received by him with any good relish so what the most reverend Primate saith further in this particular is displeasant also I will put them downe at large that the Reader may observe this Astmaticall Iesuite in this particular to pant for breath Neither neede we wonder saith the most learned Answerer that he should beare us downe that the Church of Rome at this day doth not disagree from the Primitive Church in any point of Religion who sticketh not so confidently to affirme that we agree with it but in very few and disagree in almost all Å¿ See the most reverend the L. Primate his answere to the Iesuites challenge pag. 24. To the first the Iesuite saith it is his constant assertion that the Church of Rome at this day doth not disagree from the primitive Church in any point of Religion t Reply pag. 89. Secondly that neither the learned Answerer nor any of ours have ever yet beene able to disproove the same to this day how eagerlie soever they have set themselves against it u Reply pag. 89 Thirdly having no more to say then what his foremen have said before him he referres the Reader to his sound and pregnant evidences throughout the whole volume in the particular points propounded x Reply ibid. To the Iesuites first Assertion I answere that the Iesuite is neither Pope nor inspired and therefore may erre To the second the Iesuite must deny what Protestants have learnedly performed or else betray his God on earth and so breake his mancipiall obligation but as they use to deny any unjust thing whereof they are convicted so of necessitie must they not confesse that evidence whereby they are overthrowne It is as bad as heresie for them to give our writers their merit y Possevin Bibliothee select p. â—30 Vniversa igitur hac â—tactatione haeresim sapit quod Lutherum Calvinum Melancthonem caeterosque nominet honorifice they deny them the honour of their morall partes and therefore have their quidam doctus and tearmes of that cut z Index Hispaâ— fol 148. Bucerus Theologus Deleatur verbum Theologus Ibid Hulderico Zuinglio Theologo Delcatur Theologo Ibid. p. 204 Supprimatâ—â— nomen Calvini ponatut studiosâ—s quidam Now for your last your reforment to your evidences we accept your motion and if in them be found any thing else but corruption and confidence we will confesse you hold with antiquity But the question is so farre from being resolved that your indeavours have made your cause more full of jealousie in regard you have stuffed your volume not as you pretend with multitudes of convincing evidences but with counterfeit authors impertinent allegations as hath bene already discovered and will be further made apparant in the examination of your reply Yea you have cast behinde you all modestie in handling the testimonies brought against you by the most learned Answerer some passing by altogether as unanswerable as in the point of Free-will and others slightly passing over as in many points of your Reply Another of his Assertions is that we agree with the Primitive Church but in verie fewe points of Religion and disagree in almost all z Reply pag. â—9 The most reverend Primate in his answere would know where he should find those few points in which we agree with the ancient Church whether in the points controverted betwixt them and us or else in the whole body of that religion which we professe dare the Iesuite acknowledge our agreement with the Primitive Church in the first Then he must confesse themselves to varie from us where wee agree with Antiquitie and so leaveth small credite unto himselfe who with the same breath hath given out that the present Church of Rome doth not disagree with that holy Church in any point Doth he by those few points wherein he confesseth we do agree with the ancient Church meane the whole body of Religion professed by us Who sees not then the height of impudency Can those points be esteemed few which in truth containe the Apostles Nicene and Athanasian Creeds Do we not adhere to this Religion see our Liturgy doe we not judge heresies by this rule viz. Scripture Creeds and foure first generall Councells See the Statute * Anno 2. â—â—â—zab inter statut Hiberâ— pag 267. if we approved equivocating as they learned of Arius they might suspect us that we speake not as we beleive as they usually practise but our words being plaine our profession loathing your practises especially in points of faith and religion what ground had the Iesuite for these outdaring and outfacing calumnies See the Iesuites defence at large I doubt not but if your cause were good you are of abilitie and learning enough to frame an Argument more soundly and to divide more judiciously then heere you have done For every schooleboy may discerne that by those few points wherein I confesse you agree with the ancient Church I could not 〈◊〉 either of these your two sorts of articles at all b Reply pag. 89 The Iesuite hath bestirred himselfe heere to goe from this Dilemma for first he rayles and revyles the whip the division that afflicts him as if it might more judiciously have bin done and indeed with a schoole-boyes reason because it smarts For how proves he it not judicious but because it cannot cohere with his former words A wise reason The division detects the incongruity of the Iesuits assertions therefore it might more judiciously have bin done proh sapientiâ— But the Iesuite by his confession acknowledgeth that he could not meane these words of our agreeing with the Primitive Church in very few points of Religion to have relation either to the points in controversie betwixt them and us or to the whole body of our Religion and that this is so plaine that a schoole-boy may discerne it And now I would gladly know of the Iesuite a third member that doth not lye under the whole body of our Religion or our negative refutes as they tearme them of their Positions additionall viz t the points controverted betwixt us The Iesuite promiseth something If you urge me saith he to declare what points of Religion thâ—se are wherein I confesse you do agree with the ancient Church c Reply pag. 90 Indeed this is the thing we would know but instead of their enumeration he giveth us a repetition I say again they are but very fâ—w e Reply ibid. an addition yea sâ— few that we may boldly say they are just none at all f Reply ibid. If this be not a meere Bull carry me to your Cloister make a Iesuite of me we agree in few and yet in none at all Christs little flocke might be no flocke if this were sence If here the Iesuite be not amazed let the Reader applaud him For if we agree in none with the ancient Church why doe you
he say of the ignorance or the folly of the Answerer when he upbraides him with a Creed of the new fashion compised by Pope 〈◊〉 the fourth o Reply pag. 91 Nullus sapienâ— admiratur M â— Malone and therfore take the foole with you And howsoever you thinke to defend Pins the fourth by the Practice of the Nicene Councell it will give you no shelter they did you say expresse and declare the ancient faith in a new fashion and forme of words p Reply ibid. So did Athanasius so others but this is not the thingâ— for which you are accused but it is for an Appendix of twelve new points many of which were never accounted of faith till Pius the fourth his time and therefore your ground from which you perswade us to embrace it is unsound viz â— that it was compiled after the like manner without any alteration or innovation of the auncient faith aâ— all q Reply pag. 92 The ancient faith was so necessary to be believed that Athanafius tells us Whosoever wil bee saved it is necessary that he hold the Catholicke faith but your Creed is propounded onely to schollars and cheifely to such as are to receive promotions unto Scholasticall or Ecclesiasticall dignities r Reply pag. 91. Secondly the Apostle S. Iude tells us that the Faith Catholicke was once delivered but all your Trent articles are not so but brought in in after-times by the authority and definition of your Church as Transubstantiation Å¿ 〈◊〉 4. disâ— 11. q. 3. 〈◊〉 in Can. 〈◊〉 â—ect 41. Thirdly in the unitie of the Catholicke faith layde downe t Irenaeus â— 1. â— 3. 3â— by Irenaeus all the founded Churches in Germany Spaine France the East Egypt Lybia and all the world did sweetly agree but upon many of the new articles in your Creed there have been continuall warres controversies betwixt those that you will acknowledge Catholickes as communicating in one kinde Purgatory Indulgences the Mother and Mistresse of all Churches So that these points must be additions or else the Church lost the unity of Faith for a long time together Fourthly 〈◊〉 Lirinensis u Vincen. Lirinen advers prophan novat Cùm sit perfectus Scripturarum canon sibique ad omnia satis superque sufficiat and other Fathers x S. Basil l. de vera pia fid Manifesta defectio fidei est importare quicquam â—orum quae scripta non sunt S. Hilar l. 2. ad Const Aug. fidem tandem secundum ea quae scripta sunt defiderantem hoc qui repudiat Antichristuâ— est qui simulaâ— Anathem a eâ—â— S. August l. 2. de doct Christ c. 9. In ijs quae apertè in scriptura posita sunt inveniuntur illa omnia quae continent fidem moresque vivendi and some Schoolemen y Scotuâ— Prolog in Sent. q. 2 Scriptura sufficienter continet doctrinaÌ„ necessariaÌ„ viatori Thom. 2. 2. q. 1. a 10. ad 1. In Doctrina Christi Apostolorum veritas fidei est sufficienter explicita make the Scripture sufficient to â—each all points of faith but many articles of this Creed are confessed by you to be delivered by tradition onely not by Scripture z Coster in compend orthodoxae fidei demonstr 〈◊〉 5. c. 2p 162. so that you see you have vainely sought your defence from the practise of the Nicene Fathers It had been better I thinke Mr Malone that you had taken another kind of defence that you had justified the Pope your Church that they make new Creedes defining verities by the infolded still revelation of GOD which determinations have the force of a certaine divine revelation in respect of us as one of the learnedst of your Fraternity hath said a Suaâ—es â—om 2. p. 93. or with Stapleton that the church may define a point of faith Etiamsi nullo scripturarum aut evidenti aut probabili testimonis confirmaretur although it bee not confirmed with any evident or probable testimony of the Scriptures b Stapleton Râ—lect Cont. 4. q. 1 ar â— or with Lâ—â— the X. in his Bull against Luther that it is heresie to say immanu Ecclesia aut prorsus non esse statuere articles fidei that it is not in the hand of the Church or Pope to make articles of faith c Art 27. not to have run to expressing declaring which the Councell Pope never intended but be it as it will the Iesuite tells us that the Laytie may bee well counted Catholickes though they never so much as heard of it therefore we need not to trouble our selves about so triviall a matter especially they accounting us of the Lay number But after charges of ignorance folly and wrangling the Iesuite accuseth the most milde modest nature of the most â—overend Primate that he sticketh not maliciously to slander Maldonate and others with the crime of Perjurie d Reply pag. 92. c. He that would answere this snarling Iesuite with equall currishnes must speake with his teeth and not with his tongue But passingby his language I will consider how impudently he chargeth that with slander the truth wherof he cannot cast off with all his shifts Their Trent Creede is Neither will I ever receive or expound it vizâ— the Scripture but according to the uniforme consent of Fathers e Bulla Pij IV. p. 478. Nec eam unquam nisi juxta unanimem consensum Patrum accipiam interpretabor Now to defend Maldonate and Pererius two of his brotherhood for not practising according to faith he first reviles after his accustomed manner the most reverend Primate Secondly he denyes that Maldonatâ— ever tooke his â—ath Thirdly he expounds the article of faith for the saving of the Iesuites credite f See the Iesuites Reply pag. 9â— First for his reviling let Rabshekah rayle for Maldonats oath he tels us that the most reverend Primate cannot tell whether Maldonate tooke the oath or not gives two reasons one in the Text because he supposeth he never did the other in the margent For he lived wrote in Paris where the Tridentine Councell is not received g Reply pag. 92 A Iesuite must beleive for the Popes advantage why should wee thinke his suppositions should prejudge his cause he that must beleive white blacke if the Church injoyne it h 〈◊〉 p. 247. can suppose any thing The other reason is as vaine might as well have been spared in the margent as in the text for though the Church of France receive not the Councell of Trent yet is there any Iesuite in France that doth not subscribe unto it to submit in any other maner then the Pope prescribes is not obedience but rebellion Besides this being made a part of the Papall Creed he cannot deny his Baptisme in that faith if their faith be as auncient as the Iesuite which is not done without a vow or oath But if
falso 415. Ecclesia Propheâ—â— est more then a Prophet r Idem falso 224. Plâ—â—quaâ— Propheta yea greater then all the Prophets Å¿ Idem circ fals 286. Major omnibus Prophetis having the Spirit of GOD for 〈◊〉 â—iâ—ar t Idem falso 416. Spiritum Sanctum Ecclesiae Vicarium dicit Thus wee see what judge the Iesuite doth contest for and how farre they labour to extend his power to wit that the Pope who is not onely a Prophet but more then a Prophet yeaâ— greater then all the Prophets who hath the Spirit of God for his Vicâ—â— either with or without a Councell hath onely power to determine matters of Faith whereby we may know what to beleive and what not with authority not onely equall but superiour to the scriptures Now what strength doth the Iesuite bring to confirme this Rule His first place is Esay LIIII and the 17. Thou shalt judge every tongue that shall resist theâ— in thy judgment u Reply pag. 99. Surely the Iesuite is like to their Divines in the Councell of Trent who being restrayned to the Scriptures and forbidden schoole-disputes brought all the places out of the Prophets and Psalmes where they stand the words Confitâ—â—r and its verball Confissiâ— to proove Auricular Confession and they were accounted best learned who brought most of them * Hist Concil Tridâ—â— l. 4. p. 345. For here is nothing whereby to make the Pope the infallible Iudge of Controversies unlesse he will conclude that wheresoever Iudge or Iudgment is expressed it is meant of him The second is out of Mat. XI and the 18. Hâ—ll gates shall not prevaile against her x Reply ibid We confesse that all the powers of Hell shall never prevaile against the Church but we say this Church is neither the Pope naked nor Roman as hath in many places beene shewed Yet I would gladly know to what purpose this text is here produced The third place is Mat. XVIII and the â—7 Hâ—e that will not heare the Church let him be to thee aâ— a Heathen and a Publican y Reply ibid. If an infallible judge bee heere pointed out then all these abâ—â—â—dities will follow First that every particular Church should bee infallible and the Iudge of Controversies for Dâ—c Ecclesia hath relation to particular Churches not to the Catholicke Secondly a particular Church should not be subject to errour in criminall causes if this place pointed out an infallible judgment when as this infallibility is denyed not only your own Councels but your Popes also 3ly If the Churches judgment must be infallible because CHRIST requireth us to heare the Church How can the Pastors of the Church bee excluded from this priviledge when the people are enjoyned by the Apostle to obey and follow them Heb. XIII 17. His fourth place is Ephes IIII. II. and 14. God hath placed in the Church Apostles Prophets Pastors and Doctors c. To the end that we be â—â— more little children â—aâ—oring with every winde of doctrine z Reply ibâ—â— I shall shew hereafter that this text maketh against his Iudge his Monarch for the present he may take this with him First that we acknowledge as long as the Church had Apostles Prophets their testimonies were divine and could infallibly direct Secondly although the â—aâ—tors now are meanes ordained by God to the end that wee bee no more little children wavering with every winde of doctrine yet it doth not follow that they are infallible Iudges seeing the argument may as well hold of each as of all who are ordained to the same end which I thinke the Iesuite will not acknowledge His last is 1. Tim. 2. The Church is the Pillar and foundation of truth a Reply ibid. What therefore the Pope the infallible Iudge This followes not For he is the rock if we beleive Popish interpreters upon which the Church is built How then can he be the Church infallibly to direct The foundation surely differs from the roofe the Church that is builded from the rocke that she is builded upon Secondly the Iesuite may know that we envy not the priviledges which GOD hath given his Church nay he were no member of her that should not reverence her with obedience and therefore we acknowledge her the pillar and ground of Truth if containing the Apostles absolutely perfectly if without the Apostles we deny not her Counsels but with all obedience embrace them if she commaund as she is limited in matters of faith by the Scriptures But we see this place is more for the Church of Ephesus concerning which the Apostle speakes literally then Rome and yet experience hath perswaded us that there is no infallibility there Further then this some of your own dare not goe but make a difference betwixt the judgment of GOD and the judgment of the Church the one they say is infallible but the other may sometime deceive b Panorm in Decret De senten Excom cap. 28. Iudicium Dei veritati quae nec fallit nec fallitur semper innititur judicium autem Ecclesiae aliquando sequitur opinionem quae sâ—pè fallit fallitur Dried de dog Ecclesl 2. p. 58. Generale Concilium Papae Cardinalium Episcoporum Doctorum â—â— Scripturis propheticis intelligendis non est tantae authoritatis quantae fuerit olim Apostolorum collegum For Ruffinus his testimony that S. Basil and S. Gregory Nazianzen did take the interpretation of the Scripture not according to their owne proper understanding but according to the tradition of the Fathers c Reply p. 99. The Iesuite pointeth not out the place if he did I thinke little would appeare for his purpose in regard he is to prove the authority of a Iudge not the discretion of a Doctour And who doubts but any wise interpreter will use all meanes that may informe him to performe his worke But let Ruffine passe Augustine maketh an out-cry And doth not S. Augustine cry out saith the Iesuite that Truth reposeth in the belly of the Church c. d Reply ibid. And who saith otherwise He that should thinke that Truth is removed out of the Church thinkes amisse But to conclude from hence the Church the Roman Church the Roman Pope to be the Iudge or Rule of faith is inconsequent Neither doth that place of Augustine cited by the Iesuite in the Xth Section Evangeliâ— non credereâ—â— nisi me Catholica Ecclesiae commoveret authoritus containe any thing to enforce this for many things may move us to beleive that are not the Rule of Faith Miracles did this worke in many but this I hope is far from your Rule What is urged from Vincentius Lirinensis hath been fully answered His note from the Geneva Bible proves nothing If he finde this Iudge at Geneva he speedes well In these words I feare he cannot be espied And now having little or nothing he beginnes his Perâ—ration Behold here gentle Reader how although the articles
ibid. I have made it good before that Heresie is more ancient then the Papacy and that duration doth not exclude their opinions from being prophane and hereticall novelties c Before p. 193. 194. in which place as also hereafter the Inquisitor may receive satisfaction But hee telleth us that the most learned Answerer consequently will have us to beleive that his Religion is of more antiquity d Reply p. 106. Now as the Iesuite distasted the terme of Noveltie deservedly cast at himselfe and his so he is impatient that antiquity might any way belong to us and therefore in a disgracefull manner saith that the most learned Answerer endeavoureth to make good the antiquity of his profession first by jumping at once over a Thousand sixe hundred yeares and squaring his faith by that of the Apostles e Reply ibid. But this is not vanity if it were done unlesse the Iesuite will condemne himselfe as vaine also For in severall particulars he is forced to jumpe to the Apostolical times himselfe as hath beene before observed f Pag 86. 87 Neither dare he adhere to his touchstone the fathers but where his holy Father hath approved him g Reply p. 98. And for GODS Pen although he doth distast it yet he is willing to pretend from thence some safety though imaginarily when otherwise hee can finde no protection at all h See the direction at the letter But let the Iesuite know that he leapes short that reacheth not the Scriptures And to bee taught by any other without CHRIST and his Apostles in divine mysteries is to be deceived Give GOD and his Word the first place the Fathers will never bee denyed to be great helpes to truth and devotion and this is all that the most learned Answerer doth desire Secondly saith the Iesuite by adventuring though faintly to justifie it by that which the holy Fathers in middle ages did professe i Reply p. 106. Here the Iesuite detects himselfe that what he hath uttered before is untrue for there he chargeth the Answerer with jumping at once over a Thousand sixe hundred yeares and yet in this place he acknowledgeth him to justifie our profession by that which the holy Fathers in middle ages did professe Here we may see the reason why Mr Malone pleads the Fathers for his touchstone and accuseth us for rejecting them not because he accompts them the Rule or is confident in their tryall but because the people whom they dayly deceive are not so well able to make use of them whereby to convict their errours These are they that cry the Fathers the Fathers and yet despise them Wee keepe them under the commaund of their MASTER yet deny them not their just reverence their deserved honour We haue seene saith the Iesuite how he hath failed in the first producing no more for himselfe then all Heretickes have ever done k Reply p. 106. If the most learned Answerer had onely pretended Scripture without the truth or true sense of it he had done no more then the Devill Papists and other Heretickes have done but how will the Iesuite prove this to have beene practised by his learned Answerer The Scriptures he desires not as Papists and heretickes have abused them but in their true sence This light because you cannot endure must you therefore be a conquerour Poore fugitive How doth he dreame when he flyes from that power that prosequutes and would condemne him For the sword of the Spirit would not onely as the sword of the Angell make the Asse bruise the legge * â—â—â— â—â— â—â— but even breake the heart of the false Prophet if his eyes did behold the brightnesse of it And as vainely doth he charge the most learned Answerer with feare and shamefull tergiversation from the Fathers testimonies l Reply p. 106. when as whatsoever he hath said concerning them is the same that some Papists nay the Iesuite himselfe notwithstanding hee calls them the touchstone hath affirmed Was it not Mr Malone that rejected the Fathers generally consenting and defended them that did likewise m Reply p. 92. Who declared it lawful for every one in points that the Pope hath not made faith to presse urge the Fathers or reject them as they please n Reply p. 93. Doth not a troop of their owne exclude them from that authority in the Church which the Iesuite would seeme to give them neither affording theÌ„ the honor of a rule or touchstone either o Bellarm. â— de Concil author l. 2. c. 12. Scripta Patrum non sunt Regulae neque habent auctoritatem obligandi Wadding legat de concep Virg. Mariae sect 2. Orat. ◠§. 6. Nec enim parvum Doctorum aggerem sed Dei sapientiam spiritum pro regula rectore veritatis habet sancta haec nostra quae fallâ— non potest mater Ecclesia The Iesuite further telleth us that the Answerer in demonstration of his forwardnes taketh upon him to give the first onset himselfe But it is easie to espy saith he how this pretended hardines is nothing else but a meere cover and cloake to hyde the weaknes of his cause and to boulster out his booke with a shew of antiquitie more then with a substance of verity being flush alwayes in words and refined periods yet still failing in sound reason and judgment p Reply p. 106. What the Iesuite hath espied I presume he hath not kept secret therefore whether this conceit be not one of his selfe flatteries will be espied in the proper place where he hath declared what hee hath beene able to performe But though we should grant him saith the Iesuite whatsoever be alleadgeth out of the Fathers and that wee should confesse their sayings to make altogether for him hath not his owne mouth pronounced that all this will not be any way sufficient forasmuch as no authority but that of the Scripture can suffice And if he had reason to cry out with S. Augustine and say let humane writings bee remooved let Gods voyce sound with what sense now may he be thought to have stuffed such a deale of Paper with humane authorities It wil be answered that it is done onely to shew the confidence hee hath in his cause and that the Fathers howsoever hee esteemeth them little make wholly for him and against us q Reply p. 107. To this wee answere that iâ— his cause did not gaine by it yet the Catholicke Church is no looser when the grand deceivers of the Romane Faction are detected and their pretences of antiquity made knowne for delusions Secondly is the cause of Religion no way assisted by the writings of the auncient Fathers unlesse wee acknowledge them with the Iesuite the assured touchstone Navigators as are all that saile in the Sâ—ippe of the Church have much comfort and direction by the other Starres although the North alone infallibly direct their course and assists them to the
haven Thirdly if the most learned Answerer said no more then S. Augustine Let humane writings bâ— removed let Gods voyce sound I would know of the Iesuite why hee might not urge antiquity as well as that Father did and to as good effect But how vaine he is hâ—reâ—in his owne Masters and Grandsirs doe sufficiently declare saith the Iesuite whilst they themselves confesse that the holy Fathers doe altogether stand for us and therefore with one consent they doe utterly disclaime from their opinions and doctrine as heere in part shall breifely be made knowne to the end that our dogg Bagg even by the Câ—rrs of his owne towâ—e may be made cry and runne away after being shaken in the myre before his owne doore Reply p. 107. Vocis horrendae fragâ—r per ora missus terno Will no tone affect the Iesuite but that of open-mouthed Cerberus Will no march please him that is not under Rabsâ—ekaâ—'s colours Doth he thinke the day is wonne if hee can revile the hoast of the living GOD Beleive it this was Goliaâ—s heresie though it were never condemned by Papists who most constantly practise in this kinde But pardon me M. Malone that I barke not for company but passe by your furies with contempt and silence Yet it may be observed how the Printer amending the coppie and for Bragg impressing Bagg is so distasted by the Iesuite that though hee let passe many of his owne oâ— the Printers errours yet this is put amongst his Erraâ—â— as indignely taking it that the Dogg-letter should forsake his discourse or the Dâ—gg-starre bee left out of his Kalender But leaving this two things we finde here insisted upon by the Iesuit first that the most learned Answerer his owne Masters and Grandsyrs as he styles them doe confesse that the holy Fathers altogether stand for them Secondly that we utterly disclaime from their opinions and doctrine Both which are so notorious untruthes that no modest man would ever affirme it For the place in Cartwright is his only evidence to prove the first and I suppose he never saw iâ— for he hath cited him falsly the booke being The defence of the Answere to the Admonition against the Reply of T. C. where we find that M. Cartwright favoured not S. Augustines rule but this was so far from being approved by the confession of the Church of England and other learned Protestants that the rule by the Iesuites own confession is avâ—â—ched by the most reverend Father Archbishop Whiâ—gâ—ift to have beene of credit with the writers of his time namely with M. Zuingliâ—â— M. Calvin and M. Gâ—alter yea as the Iesuite Å¿ Reply pag â— liâ— â— iâ— mâ—rgiâ— tels us he was perswaded that no learned man dissented from them And that the Rule was true good and so farre from establishing any pâ—ice of Popery that it quite overthroweth the same it was then published by that most reverend Father In that defence of the Answere pag. 10â— and so received of all other for any thing the Iesuite hath said Now the rest of his particular witnesses tend nothing at all to his advantage for either they point out only particular Fathers which will not conclude with the Iesuite that the holy FATHERS doe ALTOGETHER stand for them or els particular points as Freewill Mâ—rite Invocation of Saints Limbus Patrum concerning which the Papists are no more beholding to them then we our selves For in the points of Merite and Fâ—â—ewill Maldonate telleth us that the Prodigall by loosing his substance is interpreted to loose his freewill by Many Fathers u Maldonat les com in â—â—nâ— 15. ver 13. Solent plâ—â—ique substantiam quam prâ—â—igâ—s dâ—citur pâ—râ—â—disse Luc. 15 Liberum arbitriâ—m â— interpretaâ—i Sic August â—â—da Euthym. Bernard And Augustine gave lesse to the will then the Schoolemen did in the judgment of Erasâ—us x Erasmus epist dedicat ante libros Hilarij Divus Augustinu adversuâ— Pelagium diâ—iâ—ans minus tribâ—it libeâ—o hominis arbitrio quam nunâ—â—â—ibueâ—â—dum putant qui nuâ—c in scholâ—s regnant scâ—olastiâ—is possem â—ujus generis exemplâ— multa commâ—â—oâ—are As for Merite the Fathers are also charged with errour by our Adversaries y Peâ—eâ— Ies comm in Rom. â— disâ— â—â— num 106. disp 23. num 111. Grâ—ci Patres neâ— panci Laâ—inorum Doctorum arbitraâ—â— sunt Praedestinatioâ—â— causam fuisse praevisa hominum opera â—uâ— fidem non meâ—â—â— Dei gratiam Sed hoc Scripturae adversatur Further whosoever will reade the Answer to the Iesuites Challenge shall see how little advantage they get by the Fathers words concerning some of those points although in some sense they are not received by us Yet I could wish the Iesuite to consider how grosly he hath abused the most learned and reverend Bishop Bilson by urging his objection for his solution when as if he will but see the Author himselfe he shall find that he concludeth no such thing For the second that we utterly disclaime from the Fathers opinions and doctrine I have shewed before with what truth this is affirmed yet I will lay downe his argument whereby he seemeth to inforce this that by the repetition of it all may take notice of the Iesuites vanity For is there any consequence in this that because Cartwright Luther c. have excepted against the Fathers and it may be with tearmes not altogether so decent therefore all the reformed Churches doe utterly disclaime froâ— their opinions and doctrine This is so weake that it falls of it selfe But if better Arguments then this will serve wee have manifested that the Fathers have forsaken their corruptions though they seeme to follow after with a corrupt pursuit by clipping and cankering forging and fretting when they could not perswade them otherwise to pleade their cause z See before sec â— And if to argue after the Iesuites manner wil be received by himself we can tell him that Ludovicus Vives being wel acquainted how the Fathers were accounted of in the Roman Church spared not to say that those which served not to their purpose were of no better esteeme then a company of lewd women in a weavers shop or the baths y Lud. Vives coâ— in Aug. de civit Dâ—â— l. 20. c. 26. Itaque illa demùm â—is videntur â—dicta coÌ„cilia quae in rem sâ—aâ— faciunt reliqua non pluris a stiâ—anda quaÌ„ conventum muliâ—rcularum in textrina vel thermis And let the Iesuit resolve whether we may coÌ„clude that they have utterly disclaimed from the doctrin of the Fathers because Sixtus Senensis hath mentioned eleven of those Auncients that held prescience of Merites were therefore censured by him for condemned Pelagians a Sixtus Senâ—â—s Bibliotâ— sanâ—â— l. 6. Annot. 251. Haec igitur sunt Patrum dictâ— scil Chrysostom Origeâ— Am â— brâ—s Hiâ—roniâ— Augustin Theâ—dâ—â—â—t Sâ—dâ—l Thâ—â—phylact Oâ—â—â—mâ—n Thâ—â—dul c. ex quibus colligâ— videtur Praescientiam meâ—itorum esse causam divinae
that the most reverend Primate in that Historicall explanation did not discend to the ages of Wickliâ—â— or Husse and therefore could not bring them in for Pâ—lâ—ars of his successive Church The Iesuite further telleth us that they are confessed to be damned herâ—ticks h Reply â— 11â— but bringeth not any testimony for the same He that speaketh most bittâ—rly is O sâ—aâ—der against the Waldenses who taxeth their opinions as absurd c. But I hope wee are not tyed to belâ—ive him where it is apparant hee was altogether deceived That the most learned and holy Bishop Iâ—well did cast off the Waldenses as none of ours may bee imputed to this that hee bâ—held them as their persecutors painted them out with spots of Maâ—ichâ—isme and other hereticall errours But if the Iesuite will read that discourse which hee cavils at hee shall see that the heresies imputed to thâ—m were bred in the malicious minds of Papists who did therefore fâ—igâ—â— these opinions to be theirs because they reproached their dissolute lives and no otherwise i Girard Histor Franc. lib. 10. Quam vis pravis iâ—buti â—â—erint opinionibus non hoc taâ—en tantum Papae magnorum Principum odium in â—os concitabat quantum libertas orationis quâ dicâ—oâ—um Principum atque Ecclesiasticorum vitia morâ—s dissolâ—tos culpare ipsiusque Papae vitam actionâ—â— reprehendere consâ—everunt Haec praecipua res fuit quae universorum â—is conâ—â—avit odium quaeque â—ffecit ut plures â—efariâ— affingerentur â—is opiniones à quibâ—◠〈◊〉 â—â—â—â—ant alâ—â—â—â— Thirdly saith the Iesuite both Luther himselfâ— and all his followers doe make him the first Author of Protestanâ—y k Reply pag 110. What Luther the first that ever taught the doctrine professed by Protestants Those that are better read in story then our Iesuite confesse otherwise for Poplinerius acknowledgeth the Waldenses and Protestants to differ little and that this doctrine was preached and defâ—nded throughout Europe in France Spaine England Italy Germany and other Nations also l Popliâ—er hist Franc. lib. 1. â—dit aâ— 1581. fol 7. b Hi Albigenses invitis Principibus Christianis omnibus circa annum 1100 temporibus subsequentibus doctrinam suam ab eâ quam hodie PROTESTANTES amplectuntur parùm differentem non per Galliam solum totam sedâ—â—iam per omnes pâ—nâ— Europae oraâ— disseminârunt Nam Galli Hispani Angli Scoti Itali Germani Boâ—â—mi Sâ—xonâ—â— Poloni Lithuani gentes aliae â—am ad hunc diem pertinaciter defenderunt But I need not to stand in defence of that booke which doth defend it selfe and ever will against either the Iesuite or his fellow-labourers neither hath he urged any thing worthy observation against the same For there is no question but Luther did powerfully preach against Popish corruption and by his ministery together with others whom GOD raised up with him did publish the Gospell the light whereof for a long time they did disgrace and revile It is not enough to make Luther the Author of our Religion because after your Apostasie heâ— was one that at first did publickely and zealously preach the same When the Arians persecuted the Catholicke Faith eclipsed obscured it made it reputed Hâ—resie insomuch that the whole world m See before pag â—5 lit â— in marg was an Arian and Catholicke also in her owne judgment was the Catholicke faith afterwards published with zeale and victory the birth of Christian Religion the beginning of our Creed Nothing more triviall That which the Iesuite speakes afterwards of Luthers remorse of Conscience is ridiculous and might have beene spared for who can doubt but that in his â—calous performing of his duty in publishing the Truth of the Gospell of CHRIST the Divell did as violently assault him within as the Pope without thereby he was afflicted with as many superstitious feares within as outward terrors for the same reasons I suppose in regard the preservations of their kingdomes did depend upon it Now at last that he may conclude he casts up his Audit Sâ—â—ing that our Answerer cannot tell us that which we demaâ—nded to wit when or by whom our Catholicke Religion was first brought in n Reply p. 11â— Although there is no Injunction for it as hath beene shewed that he should answere your Demaund yet hee hath in all your particulars discovered your innovations which how it hath beene avoyded wil bee examined in their due place Yet the Iesuite telleth us that he will doe the Answerer the favour to tell him briefly where when and by whom his Protestant Religion was first begun o Reply p. 113. But I aske the Iesuite whether in his Conscience he is not checked for urging Calvin c with a corrupt minde when from their words he would have it concluded that the Catholicke Faith did first bâ—gin at Wittâ—nbergâ— I hope the Iesuite can consider that the repairing of the Temple was not the laying thâ— foundation of it neither David Hâ—â—â—â—hiah or Iosiah their regulating of things amisse a bringing in of a new law Teaching for doctrine the Traditions of men this makes a beginning but let the auncient of dayes be preached in the last times this is no Novâ—ltie no new thing But saith the Iesuite Loâ— here then the place where Wittenberge the yeare 1517 the day of the moneth the xxxi of Octâ—ber the day of the weekâ— Saturday yea the very houre of the day twelve of the clocke when first Protestancie was brâ—â—â—hed by Luther p Reply p. 1â—3 Nothing more fond Luther resisted Popish abuses such a day therefore the Faith preached by Luther did then first begin What did de make a new Gospell as some of you have attempted q See before pag. 330. 331 or frame a new Creed as you have lately done r See before 359. I desire the Iesuites evidence or his modesty his evidence to convict Luther or his modesty to condemne himselfe For if the opposing of Iâ—dulgences be the beginning of our Faith as the Iesuite doth insinuate Bellarmine will shew that he hath fayled both iâ— person time and place Å¿ Bellarm. de Indulgen l. â— c. 1. Primi qâ—â— indulgentias contempserunt oppugnârunt fuâ—ruâ—â— Waldenâ—â—â— Seqâ—â—tus est Valdenses Ioannes Wicleâ—â—â— Wicleâ—um seqâ—â—ti sâ—â—â— Hussitâ— Hos MAIORES PARENTES habâ—it Maâ—tinâ—s Lutherus And although he give Luther the name yet Bzovius will not have Luther but Staâ—pitius to have first begun the worke Bzovius Annal Eccles in ann 1517. num â— Staâ—pitius quoque quamvâ—â— PRIMVâ—â—apâ—dâ—m validâ—ori postea brachio vibrandum contra Ecclesiam conjâ—â—issâ—t sectâ— tamen cujus si non â—â—ctor certè promoâ—o◠〈◊〉 â—â—â—en darâ— non potuit sed â—â—rpiâ—â—dinem hanc Luthero reliquit And notwithstanding the Iesuite telleth us so confidently that Protestancie was first brâ—ached by Luther the yeare 1517. yet the same Author affirmeth that he disputed against them in the points oâ— free-will mâ—rits and traditions the yeare before Ibid. nuâ— 1â— Superiore poâ—â—o anâ—o 1516 Idem Lutherus disputavit conâ—ra Scholasticoâ— Theologoâ— de libero aâ—â—â—trio meritâ—s bonoâ—um opâ—â—â—â— traditionibuâ— Ecclesiasticiâ— â—asque propositioâ—eâ— Toâ—o 1. opâ—â—u◠〈◊〉 â—â—serâ—it â—◠〈◊〉 â—â—ique appaâ—eâ—◠〈◊〉 jam 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 So punctuall the Iesuite is that in the judgment of his owne he hath in every circumstance troad awry His repetition of Aâ—gâ—stines rule That Custome which â—en looking up into former tiâ—â—s doe not finde to have beene brought in by any that lived after the Apostles is rightly beleived to havâ— beene delivered by the Apostles themselves helpes neither them nor their cause for they never have nor ever wil be able to manifest either by our confession or otherwise that Roâ—ish customes have beene universally received neither can they defend them from Noveltie in their â—â—â—rance wherefore they may well bee cast forth into thâ— Dâ—nghill as wanting the Salt of Apostolicall institution for their seasoning So that S. Augustines Rule condemneth their Novelties and the GENENERALL CONTROVERSIE is cleared but indeed no otherwise then to the detection of their Egyptian Darkenes