Reges Domino seruiunt in timore nisi ea quae contra iussa Domini fiunt religiosa seueritate prohibendo atque plectendo Aliter N. seruit quia homo est aliter quia etiam et rex est Quia homo est ei seruit viuendo fideliter quia vero etiam Rex est seruit leges iusta praecipientes et contraria prohibentes conuenienti vigore sanctiendo sicut seruiuit Ezechias Lucos et Templa Idolorū et illa excelsa quae contra praecepta Dei fuerant constructa destruendo sicut seruiuit Iosias talia et ipse faciendo sicut seruiuit rex Niniuitarum vniuersam Ciuitatem ad placandum Dominum compellendo sicut seruiuit Darius Idolum frangendum in potestatem Danieli dando et inimicos eius Leonibus ingerendo sicut seruiuit Nabuchodonosor omnes in regno suo positos a blasphemando Deo lege terribili prohibendo In hoc ergo seruiunt Domino Reges in quantum sunt Keges cum ea faciunt ad seruiendum illi quae non possunt facere nisi Reges How doe Kinges serue God in feare but by punishing with religious seueritie such thinges as are against Gods lawes For the King serueth God one way as he is man an other way as he is King As he is man he serues God in lyuing as becommeth an honest Christian as he is King he serues God in making sharpe Lawes to the furtheraunce of Vertue and to the suppressing of Vice As Ezechias serued God while he destroyed the Groues and Temples of Idols and those Hie places which were erected against Gods lawes As Josias serued God while he performed the same or like dueties As the King of the Niniuites serued God in compelling the whole Citie to serue God As Nabuchodonosor serued God while he with very sharpe Lawes terrified all his subiectes from blaspheming the euerliuing God In this therefore Kings serue God as they are Kinges when they doe that for the seruice of God which none but Kinges can doe Thus writeth S. Austin that auncient Father that holy Writer that learned Doctor that strong Piller that worthy Champion of Christes Church Out of whose Discourse I obserue many thinges well worthy to be engrauen in Marble with Golden letters in perpetuam rei memoriam First that Kinges serue God when they religiously punish sinne Secondly that Kinges serue God as they be men when they liue as it becommeth faythfull and honest Christians Thirdly that Kinges serue God as they be Kinges when they make Godly lawes to aduance Vertue and to suppresse Vice Fourthly that it belongeth to the office dutie and charge of Kings to purge the Church and House of God from Heresies Errours Superstition and Idolatrie Fiftly that it appertaineth to the charge and office of Kinges to punish Blasphemie and to cause their Subiectes to liue religiously and in the feare of God Sixtly that this holy Father and great learned Doctor vtterly condemneth the Popes Fayth and Doctrine while he denyeth all authoritie to Kinges in Church causes and Ecclesiasticall affaires and maketh them onely executors of his Lawes Will and good Pleasure For which respect the same holy Father soone after addeth these expresse wordes Quis mente sobrius Regibus dicat Nolite curare in regno vestro a quo teneatur vel oppugnetur Ecclesia Domini vestri non ad vos pertineat in regno vestro quis velit esse siue religiosus siue sacrilegus Who well in his Wittes will say thus to Kinges Haue no regard neither take any care who within your Kingdome either protect or oppugne the Church of God you haue no charge neither doth it pertaine to your office who in your Kingdome be Religious or who be Sacrilegious Seuenthly that Kinges haue charge not onely of the bodyes of their Subiectes but much more of their soules Which not onely S. Austen fayth but the whole course of Scripture teacheth the same For the godly Kinges as well in time of the Law of Moyses as in the time of the New Testament and law of Grace did manage all matters both of Church and Common-weale For which cause the Ciuill Magistrate was commaunded to read the whole Booke of the Law as well of the first as of the second Table and to studie the same night and day For which cause the Ciuill Magistrate was commaunded to goe out and in before the people and to lead them out and in that the congregation of the Lord should not be as Sheepe without a Shepheard For which cause the Booke of the Law was deliuered into the Kings handes at such time as he receiued the Crowne and was annoynted King Lastly and this striketh dead that Kings as Kings serue God when they doe those things which none but Kinges can doe If this golden Periode were soundly vnderstood and perfectly kept in memorie it alone would be enough to trample Pope and Poperie vnder foote For I pray you sir Frier did not Constantinus surnamed the great Theodesius the elder Theodosius the younger and Martianus gather the foure first generall Councels of Nice Constantinople Ephesus and Chalcedon which Pope Gregorie did reuerence as the foure Ghospels did they not call the same Synodes as they were Emperours Kinges and Monarches I wote they did it is already prooued it can not be denyed What Did not Reccaredus as King commaunde all the Byshops of Spaine and Gallicia to assemble themselues before him at Toledo there to decide and determine causes ecclesiasticall did he not tell them the cause why he sent for them did he not sit downe among them did he not define with them did he not subscribe before all the Byshops did he not confirme the Decrees and Canons of the Councell with his royall edict we haue already seene it wee haue viewed the very wordes it is prooued most manifestly Now let vs duely ponder and throughly vnderstand what of necessitie must be inferred heereupon S. Austin affirmeth constantly that when Kinges serue God as Kings then doe they that which none but Kings can doe But so it is that Reccaredus and the other Kings both called confirmed Councels as they were Kings for it is already prooued ergo Kinges and none but Kings can call and confirme holy Councels and sacred Synodes The reason is S. Austens when he resolutely auoucheth that while Kinges serue God as Kinges they doe that which none but Kinges can doe for if Kinges as Kinges call and confirme Councels none doubtlesse which are no Kinges can doe the same And consequently no Byshop no not the Pope of Rome hath authoritie to gather Councels or to confirme the same Two thinges onely the Pope may in shew of wordes seeme to obiect for himselfe obiection 1 Th' one that Kinges doe not call or confirme Councels as they be Kinges but rather as the Seruantes or Deputies of the Pope obiection 2 Th' other that the Pope is not onely a Byshoppe but a King also To
the former Obiection this is my answere response 1 First that Kinges of late yeares are in deed so brought into thraldome by the Pope where Poperie beareth the sway as they may truely be sayd to doe the office not of Kinges as Kinges but rather of Seruantes and Slaues to the disholy Father the Pope of Rome response 2 Secondly that the Pope will not this day permit Kinges to make Lawes in Ecclesiasticall causes but onely to execute those vnchristian execrable tyrannicall Lawes which by Popes of late yeares are with Fire and Faggot framed to their handes To the latter I answere in this maner First that how and in what sort the Pope is King it is plenteously prooued in the tenth Conclusion of this present Chapter To which place I referre the Reader for his full satisfaction in this behalfe Secondly that by the Popes owne Law whosoeuer is Possessor malae fidei in the beginning can haue no iust title by prescription in the ending Thirdly that if we suppose and graunt him to be the true and lawfull King of Jtaly yet can no more be rightly inferred therevpon saue onely that hee can call and confirme Councels within Jtaly and make Lawes to his subiectes of the same Kingdome In which case I for my part will not contend with him as who onely denie his vsurped authoritie in other transmarine and forraigne Kingdomes Now let vs heare the Frier once againe to recreate our spirits with his merrie conceites B. C. Surely it were meâ—re madnesse to thinke that Anatolius would euery way haue had equall authoritie in all Ecclesiasticall causes as the Minister affirmeth seeing then we must graunt that he desired Jurisdiction in Italy and Rome it selfe Nay what were it else but to condemne Anatolius of grosse foolerie in suing for that superextrauagant grace of the Pope to the iniurie of his owne Sea and Dignitie T. B. I answere first that our Jesuite heere vnawares condemneth rather their famous Pope Gregorie of meere foolerie then Anatolius to whom he imputeth it For if Gregories report be true the Councell of Chalcedon offered him the name of Vniuersall Byshoppe and yet did the same Gregorie obiect the desire thereof against the Patriarch of Constantinople as a proud name derogating from the right of all other Byshoppes Yea your owne sweete selfe sir Iesuite doe in this very Chapter ascribe no lesse vnto your Pope and withall admit other Byshoppes beside his Holynesse Secondly that Anatolius might truly haue had equall authoritie with the Byshoppe of Rome in all Ecclesiasticall causes and for all that not haue desired iurisdiction in Jtaly and Rome it selfe For our Iesuite must know that these three are intrinsecally distinguished one from an other viz. Identitie Equalitie and Similitude There is often Similitude where Equalitie wanteth and many times equalitie where no Identitie can be found Thirdly that the Councell of Chalcedon approoueth whatsoeuer the Nicene Synode hath decreed and consequently it taketh not away from any Byshoppe his proper dignitie Lastly that this which our Fryer heere obiecteth and whatsoeuer else where to the like effect is soundly confuted in the Aphorismes aforegoing especially in the third and fift of the same And for further proofe marke well my next Answere folowing B. C. Nothing is determined in the Councell of Nice touching the Church of Rome but that is made the rule of other Churches as Pope Nicholas the first noteth who also affirmeth that the Authoritie of the Romane Church was not from Men but from God T. B. I answere first that neither Pope Nicholas nor any other Pope is a sufficient witnesse in his owne cause as is already prooued Secondly that if God had giuen such authoritie to the Church of Rome sixe hundred and thirtie holy and learned Byshoppes in one Synode 217. in an other 200. in an other 150. in an other 318. in an other all which is already prooued in the Aphorismes aforegoing would neuer haue limitted or once offered to alter the same These expresse words of the Fathers of the Chalcedon Councell may for the present be sufficient Etenim sedi senioris Romae propter Imperium Ciuitatis illius Patres consequenter priuilegia reddiderunt For the Fathers consequently gaue Priuiledges to the Sea of old Rome for the Empire of that Citie Loe Men not God gaue Priuiledges to the Sea of Old Rome And they yeeld this reason for the same because forsooth the Citie of Rome was the Seate of the Empire and reputed Caput Mundi the Head of the World Thirdly that when Pope Nicholas sayth that they tooke example of the forme of the Church of Rome for that which they would giue to the Church of Alexandria he graunteth in very deed that as the Bishope of Alexandria had but the preheminence of all there about no more had the Byshope of Rome And so it followeth that the Councell thereby did decree that the Byshop of Rome should keepe himselfe within those limittes Cardinall Cusanus and Ruffinus doe so vnderstand the Canon of the Nicene Councell Yea other Canons of the same Councell doe plainely insinuate the same sense as at large it is alreadie prooued Fourthly that if the Byshoppe of Rome had vniuersall soueraigntie from God as Pope Nicholas vntruely auouched then could no Byshop of Rome nor yet the holy Councell of Nice haue giuen or permitted such custome to the Byshoppe of Alexandria The reason is euident because whatsoeuer is De Jure Diuino no Mortall Man can dispense with the same This is so cleere and certaine as no learned Papist either doth or can denie the same Fiftly that no Custome may be admitted against the knowne Trueth The Popes owne Decrees out of S. Austen doe so teach vs these are the very wordes Qui contempta veritate praesumit consuetudinem sequi aut circa fratres inuidus est et malignus quibus veritas revelatur aut circa Deum ingratus est inspiratione cuius Ecclesia eius instruitur nam Dominus in Euangelio ego sum inquit Veritas non dixit ego sum Consuetudo itaque Veritate manifestata cedat Consuetudo Veritati Hee that contemneth Veritie and presumeth to follow Custome is either enuious and iniurious toward his Brethren to whom the trueth is reuealed or else vngratefull to God-ward with whose inspiration his Church is instructed for our Lord saith in his Ghospell I am the Trueth he said not I am Custome therefore when Trueth is manifest let Custome giue place to the same Againe in an other place thus Hoc planè verum est quia ratio et veritas consuetudini praeponenda sunt This is true in deed that Reason and Trueth must be preferred before Custome The same Decrees out of S. Cyprian teach vs the same these are the wordes Non debemus attendere quid aliquis ante nos faciendum putauerit sed quid prius qui ante omnes est Christus prior fecerit
appointed King Dauid King Salomon did in like maner shew their supreame authoritie both ouer all their Subiectes and in all maner of causes For larger discourse whereof I referre the Reader to my Golden Ballance of Tryall Now if euery King haue within his Dominions the chiefe Power Soueraigntie ouer all persons causes it must needes follow it can not be denyed that the Confirmation of Councels belongeth not to the Pope Which consequence will appeare most euidently throughout the Sections following To which I adde that seeing there is but one Bishopricke whereof euery Byshop hath a part in solidū as is already prooued the Confirmatiō of Councels can belong no more to the Byshop of Rome then it doth to other Byshops For with that whole to which many haue equall title and right no one of them hath more to doe then an other This in generall may suffice I haste to the particulars The second Section of the Councell of Nice The first generall Councell of Nice of 318. Byshops in which Arius denying the consubstantialitie of the Sonne of God was condemned was celebrated in the yeare 327. after Christ not by the appoyntment of the Pope who in those dayes was but reputed as other Byshops but by the flat and expresse commaundement of the Emperour Constantinus worthily surnamed the great All the Fathers assembled in the sacred Councell of Nice wrote to the Church of Alexandria and to the inhabitants of Egypt Lybia and Pentopolis in these expresse wordes Quoniam per gratiam Dei et pientissimum Imperatorem Constantinum qui nos ex varijs ciuitatibus et Prouincijs congregauit magna ac sancta a Synodus Nicaeae collectae est omnino necessarium visum est vt ad vos quoque a sacro Synodo darentur literae quo cognoscere possitis cum quae mota et examinata tum probata sint et obtenta Because through the grace of God and by the commaundement of the most holy Emperour Constantine who hath called vs out of diuers Cities and Prouinces the great and holy Councell of Nice is assembled it seemeth necessarie that the whole Councell send Letters to you by which yee may vnderstand as well those thinges that were called into question as the things that are decided and decreed in the same Out of these wordes of the famous Historiographer Socrates I obserue these memorable documents for the good of the Reader First that this testimonie is of greatest credite and without all exception as which was not published by one or two but by more then three hundred Byshoppes as writeth Nicephorus who were the most vertuous and learned Priestes in the Christian world Secondly that these Fathers so many so holy so learned so wise doe not once name the Pope in their Letters so farre were they in those dayes from ascribing the chiefe Prerogatiue in Councels to the Byshop of Rome Thirdly that the Byshoppe of Rome himselfe was also commaunded by the Emperours Letters euen as other Byshoppes were Albeit both hee and the Byshop of Constantinople by reason of infirmities were excused and their Messengers allowed in their absence So writeth the famous Historiographer Nicephorus This Obseruation would be marked as which striketh the Pope starke dead For the Pope was so farre from being the Commaunder of all that himselfe was cōmaunded as the rest Fourthly that Pope Syluester could not confirme the Nicene Councell as the Popes flattering Popelinges tell vs because Julius as Sozomenus and others doe constantly affirme was at that time Byshoppe of Rome Fiftly that all the Fathers of this most sacred and famous Synode doe plainely confesse in their ioynt Letters that the Emperour called the Councell assigned the day and the place when and where it should be kept and charged all Byshoppes to be there present at the day by him appoynted Sozomenus hath these wordes Verum cum institutum hoc Imperatoris conceptae spei non respondisset nec conciliari contentiosi potuissent et iam qui ad conciliandam Pacem missus fuerat reuersus esset Synodum Nicaeae Bythiniae celebrandam conuocauit et omnibus vbique Ecclesiarum praesidibus vt ad indictum diem adessent scripsit But after the matter succeeded otherwise then the Emperour expected neither could the contentious persons be reconciled but Hesius that was sent to make peace was now returned he caused a Synode to be kept at Nice in Bythinia and wrote to all Byshops euery where to be present at the day appoynted Nicephorus hath these expresse words Quapropter infectis rebus ad Impetatorem redijt qui ad pacem componendam missus fuerat Hosius itaque Imperator decantatissimam illam in Bithynia Nicaenam Synodum promulgat et literis locorum omnium Episcopos ad constitutam Diem eò euocat Wherefore Hosius who went to make peace returned to the Emperour not hauing accomplished the matter the Emperour therefore doth publish the famous Synode of the world to be celebrated at Nice in Bithynia and with his Letters calleth thither the Bishops of all Countries and Prouinces to be present at the day appoynted Theodoretus in his Historie Ecclesiasticall plainely testifieth the same trueth Thus we see euidently by the vniforme testimonie of foure very graue Historiographers whereof three liued more then a thousand and one hundred yeares agoe that the Byshop of Rome had no more to doe in Generall Councels then other Byshops had They tell vs first that the Emperour sent Hosius the Byshoppe of Corduba in Spaine to make peace to bring the contentious to vnitie if it could be Secondly that when he saw that would take no place then he proclaymed a Councell to be holden at Nice in Bythinia Thirdly that he commaunded all Byshops euen the Byshop of Rome himselfe to come to Nice at the day by him appoynted The third Section of the Councell of Constantinople The second Generall Councell holden at Constantinople against Macedoneus his complices for denying the Diuinitie of the Holy Ghost was called by the commaundement of the Emperour Theodosius the great about 384. yeares after Christ. Socrates hath these wordes Impeperator vero nihil cunctatus Synodum suae fidej Episcoporū ad hoc conuocat vt Nicanam fidem confirmantes Constantinopolitanae Ecclesiae Episcopū ordinent sperans autem futurū vt illis et Macedoniani coadvnarentur etiam illius haeresis Episcopos conuocat The Emperour Theodosius with all expedition calleth a Councell of Byshops imbracing the right Fayth that aswell the Fayth of the Nicene Councell might be confirmed as that a Bishop might be appoynted at Constantinople and because he was in hope to make the Macedonians agree with the Byshops of the right Fayth he calleth also the Byshops that were of the Macedonian-sect Sozomenus is consonant to Socrates in one place and in an other place addeth these words Theodosius vero Imperator Paululū post
excessiue eating Vse dayly abstinence refection without gluttonie or excesse for it profiteth thee nothing to haue an emptie Belly two or three dayes and after to fill the Panch while it may hold Thus the Popes owne Decrees teach vs and it is to be well obserued For doubtlesse Popish Fastes haue this effect most vsually the richer sort stuffe their bellies and fill their panches at Dinner with great varietie of Wines and delicate Meates Yea at all times they drinke Wines and eate Peares Apples Rasinges Figges and Simnels especially in their Collations at night they eate conserues of Quinces Cheries Wardens and like dainties which farre exceed the best Dinners of the poorer sort And this I protest for edification-sake I heere disclose the same that my selfe heard one Recusant once say at dinner that he did eate the more at dinner on the Fasting day that so he might put away Hunger vntill the next day What I haue heard touching this Subiect if I should here relate the same would seeme strange to many a one I speake of thinges heard by report the other I speake of my owne hearing this by the report of others An other Decree of Pope Pius doth yeeld vs this instructioÌ„ These are the words Nihil enim prodest homini ieiunare et orare et alia religionis bona agere nisi mens ab iniquitate et ab obtrectationibus lingua cohibeatur To Fast and Pray doth not profit a man any thing neither yet to do other dueties of Religion vnlesse he keepe his Minde from iniquitie his Tongue froÌ„ euill speaking An other Decree borrowed from S. Austen hath these wordes Ieiunium autem magnum et generale est abstinere ab iniquitatibus et ab illicitis voluptatibus seculi quod est perfectum ieiunium in hoc seculo Quasi QuadragesimaÌ„ S. abstinentiae celebramus cum bene viuimus cum ab iniquitatibus et ab illicitis voluptatibus abstinemus The great and generall Fast is to absteine from iniquitie and vnlawfull pleasures of this world and this is the perfect Fast in this world We keepe as it were a Quadragesima or Lent of abstinence while we liue well and Christianly while we absteine from sinne and from vnlawfull pleasures But an other Decree borrowed of S. Hierome shall be the vpshot of this game These are the very wordes Audiant itaque qui ea quae necessaria sunt corpori subtrahunt illud quod per Prophetam Dominus loquitur Ego Dominus odio habens rapinam holocanstorum De rapina vero holocanstum offert qui temporalium bonorum siue ciborum nimia egestate vel manducandi vel somni penuria corpus suum immoderatè affligit Let them therefore who withhold or take from the body thinges necessarie for it heare what our Lord sayth by his Prophet I the Lord hate the robbery of burnt Offeringes Now he offereth burnt Offeringes of Rapine or Roberie who afflicteth his body immoderately either with too much want of temporall good thinges or of Meates or with the penurie of eating or of sleepe This Discourse if my Tryall be annexed to it is enough concerning this Subiect To S. Hierome this in briefe is my answere viz. That the Epistle fathered on him is a counterfeit as which agreeth not with the true Hieroms Doctrine else where as is alreadie prooued To which I adde which I haue also prooued that if wee suppose and admit it to be a Tradition of the Apostles yet doth mine assertion stand firme and vntouched viz. That notwithstanding that Tradition yet was Lent-fast free voluntarie and not commaunded by any Law To S. Austen I answere first that the Sermon which our Jesuite citeth is not his but a counterfeit My reason is at hand because S. Austen as is already prooued affirmeth constantly that the Apostles made no Law for Fasting This is already prooued Secondly that in things indifferent such as I haue prooued Lent to be euery one is bound to obey the Law of that Church in which he lyueth And so he that keepeth not Lent-fast may truely be said to sinne Thirdly that S. Epiphanius and S. Austen did not reprooue Aerius for denying popish Lent-fast which was at that time vnhatched but for denying the Churches Authoritie in appoynting Fasting-dayes vpon what cause soeuer Which my selfe doe constantly auouch to be an Heresie indeede For when the Church vpon speciall causes appoynteth Fasting dayes then all that for infirmitie may ought to absteine and not to contemne those Fastes as Aerius taught Howbeit I say withall that the auncient Church condemned it for an Heresie in Montanus to appoynt ordinary times of necessarie and Religious Fasting when there was no speciall cause so to doe B. C. That which he bringeth concerning S. Spiridion his eating of Flesh in Lent all circumstaunces considered hurteth not vs but maketh against himselfe For we deny not but that in some cases Flesh may be eaten without violation of that Fast. T. B. I answere First that S. Spiridions eating of Flesh all circumstances duely considered maketh so much against Popish Lent fast as will make both the Jesuites and the Popes heart to pant when they shall seriously ponder my answere in that behalfe Secondly that our Jesuite truly graunteth that Papists may in some cases eate Flesh in theâ—â— holy Lent For first seeing the Pope can bring all Soules out of Popish Purgatory Secondly seeing he can dissolue that Matrimony which Christ himselfe instituted Thirdly seeing he can make a vowed Popish Monke to become a truly marryed man Fourthly seeing he can authorize the Brother to marrie his owne full and naturall Sister Fiftly seeing his owne will is a reason sufficient to doe whatsoeuer pleaseth him Sixly seeing he may iudge all but none iudge him Seuenthly seeing he can doe as much as Christ him selfe could doe Eightly Seeing none may say vnto him Why doest thou so Although he carry many thousandes of Soules to Hell Nynthly seeing he hath the right of both Swords the Spirituall and the Temporall and by vertue thereof deposeth Kings and translateth their Kingdomes Tenthly seeing he can by the fulnes of his power change the nature of things and of nothing make somthing all which is already prooued it followeth by an ineuitable illation that by the Popes Dispensation all Papistes may eate Flesh aswell in the time of Lent as at other times of the yeare This is confirmed by the vsuall practise aswell of Seminarie Priestes as of Iesuites Iesuited Papistes within this Land For a famous Jesuite made offer to a Gentleman that if he would become a Papist he should haue Licence to eate Flesh in Lent among Lollards that by so doing he might liue without suspition and escape daunger of the Lawes Now let vs duely examine the circumstaunces of S. Spiridions eating of Flesh in Lent Cassiodorus in the Tripartite Historie hath these expresse wordes Instante iam Quadragesima quidam
Hood Litle Iohn In his Detection published Anno. 1602. This is a great wonderment of the world let it be remembred Lib. 2. cap. 17. The Franke Discourse pag. 98. A.D. 1602. Marke how the Iesuites confute themselues Forerunner page 15. cap. 3. Iudic. 15. v. 4. A Iesuites Miracle See my Anatomie Loe a great number euen of the best haue consulted to answere my Bookes See my Counterblast for Garnetes Letter Loe the Iesuites write many Bookes against Bell which they dare not publish In Breuiar Rom. hebd 4. quadr in sabb Nadis pedibus adoratur crux Durand in rationale diuiâ— offic libr. 6. cap. 77. In the Preface to the Reader pag. 7. Biel in Can. miss lect 49. in fine Gabriel Biel in can miss â—ect 49. prope finem Suruey part 2. lib. r. 1. cap. 6. concl 2. Gregor Sereno episcopo lib. 7. ep 109. cap. 109. 2. Reg. 18. v. 4. Epiphan ep ad lo. Hierosol in fine In villa Anablatha Epiphan haeres 79. pag. 313. The Iesuite knoweth not in the world how or what to write See the .14 Chapter aforegoing A.D. 414. Theodor. de Graecar affect curat lib. 5. pag. 521. to .2 Amb. lib. 3. hexam cap. 5. tom 4. Iustin. apol 2. prope â—â—nom Apud Euseb. libr. 2. hist. cap. 17. Chrysost. in 2. Cor. hom 18. in morab. What can be more plainely told What more euident to the reader nothing in the whole world Cyprian in orat dom pag. 316. Vide Origen cont Celsu lib. 8.9.13 Sozom. hist. trip lib. 4. cap. 35. A.D. 424. Hier. in prefat lib. 2. in ep ad Galat. Lyer in 1. cor cap. 14. Basil. ep ad cler Neocaesar epist. 6 a. See my answere to this in the last Chapter of this Booke Psal. 115.1 1. Cor. 1.27 Mat. 21.16 Mat. 4.18 Mat. 9.9 Act. 8.3 act 9.1 1. tim 1 v. 13. Rom. 11.33 1. Sam. 17. v. 4.10 Note well the word as Mat. 26. v 27. Marke well the word as Ioh. 21. v. 15. Cap. 13. of priuate Masse Out vpon rotten Popery Ephes. 6. v. 16. Marke well the Tryall of the new Religion for this present case Epist. ad Marcellam Primo principaliter Argmentum ad hominem Supra cap. 12. 1. Cor. 11. v. 23. The Iesuite woundeth himselfe with his owne weapon Antoninus de potest Papae part 4. tit 22. cap. 3. part 1. Victor relect 4. de poâ—est papae propos 1. Pag. 126. Aquin. in lib. 3. sentent dist 37. art 4. The answere to the Iesuites consequent Euseb. hist. lib. 5. cap. 26. Nicephor ecclesi hist. lib. 12. cap. 34. They fast fifteene dayes by interuall Trip. hist. lib. 9. cap. 38. Sozom. lib. 7. cap. 19. Pope Gregory corrected the popish Lent-fast De Consecra dist 5. cap. quadragesima 36. dayes in Lent besides the Sundayes Socrates hist. lib. 5. cap. 22. Epiphan haeres 80. libr. 3. in fine Socrat. hist. lib. 5. cap. 22. A.D. 427. That is vsque ad nonam Hist. trip lib. 9. cap. 38. Niceph. lib. 12. cap. 34. A.D. 373. EpiphaÌ„ haeres 80. lib. 3. in fine This reason can neuer be truely answered Hist. tripart libr. 9. cap. 38. Nicephor lib. 12 cap. 34. The ninth houre with vs is three a clocke in the after noone Socrates hist. libr. 5. cap. 22. S. Austen turneth Popish Lent vpside downe August ad Catulanum epist. 86. The Apostles made no Law for fasting Lent Euseb. hist. lib. 5. cap. 18. ex Apollonio Secundo principaliter Gratian. dist 16. cap. Apostolorum Apostolor Con. 8. const Apostol lib. 5. cap. 16. eâ— cap. 21. lib. 7. cap. 24. Clemens lib. 7. c. 24. const Apost Tertiò principaliter 1. Tim. 4. v. 3. Dur. in rat dium offic lib. 6. cap. 7. prope finem 1. Cor. 15. v. 39. Loe Fish is Flesh. Constit. Apost lib. 5. cap. 13. in fine Durandus lib. 6. cap. 7. in initio et nota cap. 6. Dur. lib. 6. cap. 7.9.10 O wonderfull compassion O wily Popish faction See Anatomy Booke 3. Advise 9. 3500. Pounds 1000. Pounds 1000. Pounds Act. 19. v. 24. Quarto Principaliter Rom. 10.3 Mat. 15.9 Rom. 14. v. 23. Hebr. 11.6 Tit. 1. v. 15. Rom. 14. v. 5.14.17.20 1. Cor. 8. v. 8. Gal. 1. v. 10. Mar. 7. v. 15. Deut. 12.8 1. Cor. 10.31 Rom. 14.23 Hebr. 11.6 Gal. 2. v. 4 5. Cor. 7.23 Act. 16.3 Gal. 2. v. 3.4.5 A generall rule against the Papists Quintò Principaliter Durand lib. 6. cap. 10. §. 3. Durand lib. 6. cap. 30. §. 1. Esa. 58.5 Beleth in ration diu offic cap. 8. Tit. 2.12 Pietas est cultus Deo exhibitus De consecrat dist 5. cap. non dico De consecrat dist 5. cap. nihil De consecrat dist 5. cap. ieiunium De consecrat dist â— cap. non mediocriter Esa. 61.8 Aug. ad Casulan epist. 86. The Church may appoynt Fastes for speciall causes which Aerius denyed The Church may appoynt Fasting dayes Euseb. lib. 5. cap. 8. Plenitidine potestatis Super cap. 2. peâ— omnes conclusiones See my Anatomie in the preamble Hist Tripart libr. 1. cap. 10. Vide Eseb. hist. libr. 5. cap. 24. Marke this Story well neuer forget the same for it proueth Lent fast to haue bin free and voluntary in the auncient Church Nicephor lib. 8. cap. 42. Popish Lent-fast is both superstitious ridiculous Certis quibusdam diebus Note this poynt well for it is emphaticall Cum suis. S. Spiridion destroyeth popish Lent A cibo omni abstinens Vsque ad horam nonaÌ„ that is vntill three a clocke in the after noone S. Spiridion was the Byshoppe of Cyprus Ios. Angl. in 4. S. part 1. pag. 379. The Church of Rome hath indeed deceiued many a man Ios. Angl. vbi supra pag. 382. Marke that popish Lent-fast 〈◊〉 but an Apish imitation of Christes fast One may keepe the Popish Lent and be drunke euery day Forget not this poynt Ios. Angl. vbi supra pag. 394. The Pope is equall to the Apostles The Iesuite fleeth from the matter Couarru to 1. cap. 20. par 11. in med col 1. Marke this poynt well For the marriage of Priestes and Monkes see my Suruey Anton. par 1. tit 10. cap. 3. Sylu. de indulg S. R. pag. 417. See marke the eight Chapter Aquinas in supplem quaest 25. art 1. See the ChristiaÌ„ Dialogue pag. 17.19 Ioh. 14.6 Ioh. 17.17 See and note well the Rhemists vpon the New Testament Mat. 16.17 Luk. 22.31 A.D. 1540. Note well the next Chapter touching the infallibilitie of the Popes fayth A.D. 1415· Rhem. test in Act. 15. v. 28. in marg But if this be done then must Poperie be ouerthrowen See and note well the Rhem. annot vpon Mat. 16.17 and Luke 22. v. 31. Loe not the iudgement of the Pope but of a generall Councell is infallible So say the Rhemistes note the places Math. 16.17 Luk. 22.31 The learned Papistes hold all poyntes of doctrine which I defende which is and wil be my comfort to the worldes end A formall and materiall confutation See the
thus viz. That about the yeare of our Lord God 1529. the Duke of Saxonie with others protested publiquely and constantly against the decree of Ferdinando the Emperour that they could not with safe conscience obey and yeeld vnto the same Whereupon the aduersaries did euer since that time malitiously call all reformed Catholikes and sound Christians by the name of Protestants But as I haue prooued in the Jesuites Antepast wee are the Legitimate and reformed Catholiques and the Papistes are Bastardes and deformed Catholiques and consequently the thing truly implyed in the name Protestant is as old as the Religion deliuered by S. Peter and S. Paul to the Church of Rome Which mine Assertion shall by the power of God be made most euident before the end of this Discourse See and note well the end of the 16. Chapter and the 17. Chapter with it as also the 29.30 and 31. Chapters being the three last of this present Booke The Second Chapter of the Popes Superroyall power B. C. TO season the beginning of his Chapter with a little of his mendatious powder be writeth thus Bonifacious Byshoppe of c. T. B. To this before I answere in particular and plaine tearmes it shal not be amisse to lay open to the indifferent Reader the Popes falsely challenged Superroyall power Which I hope in God to performe most plentiously by these Conclusions following The first Conclusion The Popes owne Decrees teach vs that though he be most wicked and carry with him thousandes vpon thousandes to the chiese Diuell of Hell yet may no mortall man reproue him for his such detestable and cursed dealing These are the expresse wordes of the Popes owne Canon Si Papa c. innumerabiles populos cateruatim secum ducit primo mancipio gehennae cum ipso plagis multis inaeternum vapulaturus huius culpas istic redarguere praesumit mortalium nullus quia cunctos ipse iudicaturus a nemine est indicandus nisi deprehendatur a fide deuius These are the wordes of Pope Bonifacius as Gratianus who compiled the Booke of Decrees hath related them I heartily wish the Reader to ponder seriously what I write protesting vpon my saluation that in all mine Assertions Authorities Allegations I deale faythfully euer citing the expresse wordes as I finde them in mine Authors their authorities and reasons The second Conclusion The Popes Power is so sacred so eminent and so surpassing great as it is become flat Sacriledge to dispute of the same Victoria a most famous and learned popish schoole-Doctor who was the first man that brought Scholasticall doctrine into Spaine deliuereth this poynt of doctrine in these expresse wordes Non spectat ad subditos determinare aut examinare quid possit Papa aut quid non possit et quomodo teneantur parere vel non quia sacrilegium est disputare de potentia principis et praecipuè Papae It pertaineth not to popish vassals to determine or examine what the Pope may doe or what he may not doe and how they are bound to obey or not because it is Sacriledge to dispute of the Power of the Prince especially of the Pope Loe we may not dispute of the Popes Power no not to know and learne how and wherein wee ought to obey him This is it indeed that maketh so many sillie Papistes euery where For Papistes must beleeue all thinges but examine nothing that the Pope doth And why I pray you Forsooth least his coozening trickes and the newnesse of late Poperie should be knowne and so both the Pope and all his Iesuited Popelings be vtterly ouerthrowne The third Conclusion The Pope can deliuer if he list all men in this world from the paine due to their sinnes in this world and not this onely but also bring all soules out of Purgatorie if that be done for them which he requireth Three verie learned and famous Popish Doctors Syluester Pryeras Bartholomaeus Fumus and Vigâ—erius doe constantly resolutely affirme this conclusion Sylmester hath these expresse words Sicut potest Papa liberare a paena peccatorum debita in hoc mundo omnes qui sunt in mundo si faciant quod mandat etiamsi essent millies plures quam sunt itae liberare potest omnes qui sunt in purgatorio si quis pro ets facial quod iubet As the Pope can deliuer all in this world from paine due for sinne in this world if they doe what hee commaundeth though they were thousandes more then they bee euen so can hee deliuer all that are in Purgatorie if any doe that for them which he commaundeth And least any man should thinke that impossible which the Pope requireth to be done the same learned Writer telleth vs in an other place that it is a thing very easily done these be his wordes Indulgentiae simpliciter tantum valent quantum praedicantur modo ex parte dantis sit authoritas ex parte recipientis charitas et ex parte causae piet as Pardones are simply worth so much as they are payed so there be authoritie in the giuer charitie in the receiuer and pietie in the cause or motiue But so it is no Papist dare or can deny the same that the soules in Purgatorie be in charitie by popish fayth doctrine for otherwise they could not be out of Hell And doubtlesse that the Pope hath authoritie to giue Pardons as also that he graunteth them for good godly causes viz. for saying Masses Trentals Diriges for murdering of noble Princes for blowing vp with Gunpowder Townes Cities Common-weales and the like I suppose no Papist will denie If they do my argument is the stronger and my selfe shall very willingly agree thereunto Bartholomaus Fumus hath these expresse wordes Papa posset liberare omnes animas purgatorij etiamsi plures essent si quis faceret pro eis quod iuberet peccaret tamen indiscretè concedendo The Pope could set at libertie all the soules in Purgatorie though neuer so many if any would doe that for them which hee commaundeth mary hee should sinne by his vndiscreet pardoning But Viguerius proceedeth further and is bold to tell vs that it is neither inconuenient nor against the iustice of God these are his expresse wordes Nec est inconueniens quod Papa purgatoriuÌ„ posset euacuare non enim per hoc aliquid detraheretur diuinae iustitiae Neither is it inconuenient that the Pope can harrow Hell for that doth derogate nothing from the iustice of God Antoninus that famous popish Arch-byshop iumpeth with the rest in these expresse wordes Quia Ecclesia hoc facit et seruat credencuÌ„ est it a esse Because the Church this doth and obserueth we must beleeue it to be so Now to say that the Pope can deliuer al soules out of Purgatorie but doth it not to keepe himselfe from sinne is altogeather vaine friuolous For first hee should no more sinne in deliuering
neque N. hominis consuetudinem sequi oportet sed Dei veritatem Wee must not regard what any before vs thought should be done but what Christ first did who is more to be respected then all others Againe in an other place thus Nam Consuetudo sine Veritate vetustas erroris est propter quod relicto errore sequamur Veritatem Custome without Trueth is the antiquitie ef Errour wherefore let vs leaue Errour and follow the Trueth Pope Gregorie is consonant and plainely auoucheth the same Trueth Vsus qui Veritati est contrarius est abolendus Vse contrary to Trueth must be abolished Sixtly that where there is Law Custome can haue no place For Custome I finde thus defined in the Popes owne Decrees Consuetudo est ius quoddam moribus institutuÌ„ Custome is a certaine Law instituted by the frequent actions of men It followeth in the same Decrees Quod pro Lâ—ge suscipitur cum deficit Lex Which is receiued as Law when Law can not be had And in the Glosse I finde this exposition Hic videtur quod tunc demum recurrendum est ad Consuetudinem cum Lex deficit et sic est argumentum quod nunquam secundum Consuetudinem est iudicandum si ius contrarium praecipiat Heere it seemeth that then we must haue recourse vnto Custome when Law is wanting and so we haue an argument that we must neuer iudge according to Custome if Law commaunde the contrary Sequitur in Glossa resp quod non secundum consuetudinâ—m sed secundum iura est iudicandum I answere that Iudgement must not be giuen according to Custome but according to Law And consequently I conclude against Pope Nicholas and against all Jâ—suites and Iesuited Papistes that seeing the sacred Councels of Nice Constantinople Ephesus Chalcedon and Aphrican yeelded no prerogatiue to the Byshoppes of Rome saue onely in respect of Custome and seeing withall that Pope Sozimus Celestinus and Bonifacius did challenge their falsely pretended Primacie and Prerogatiues onely by the Canons of the Nicene Councell as I haue alreadie soundly prooued and for that end Pope Sozimus falsified the same Canons and the other Popes vrged the same for the furtheraunce of their falsely pretended Title Primacie and Prerogatiues but were therefore in the ende roundly controlled and vtterly reiected of the Fathers of the Aphrican Councell the Popes or Byshoppes of Rome must hold them selues contented and satisfied with that iurisdiction which the holy Synodes haue allotted them B. C. The true meaning therefore of the Canon is that the Byshoppe of Rome before the definition of any Councell vsed to commit the gouernment of Egypt Libia and Pentapolis to the Byshoppe of Alexandria as Pope Nicholas the first doth expound T. B. The Iesuite should haue named the Pope that first gaue such gouernment to the Byshoppe of Alexandria and in what yeare it first beganne Which doubtlesse hee would haue done if possibly hee had been able to performe the same The trueth therefore is as I haue prooued euidently and Pope Nicholas is like to Sozimus and others of that vngodly 〈◊〉 They 〈◊〉 neither tell where when or by what Pope such gouernement was first committed to the Byshoppe of Alexandria and yet doe they neuer cease to demaunde the like of vs but I hope this Catholike Triumph will stop all their mouthes Yea two other Canons of the Nicene Councell are flatte contrary to Pope Nicholas his expositioÌ„ for the seuenth Canon giueth honour to the Byshop of Hierusalem yet not by reason of any Commission from the Byshop of Rome but for an old Custome Tradition The same seuenth Canon in like maner ascribeth a proper dignity to euery Metropolitane And the fourth Canon auoucheth constantly that nothing done in any Prouince is of any force or strength vnlesse the same be confirmed by the Metropolitane As for the Popes Vniuersall soueraigntie no Canon yet extant in rerum natura neither of the Councell of Nice Constantinople Ephesus Chalcedon or Aphrican maketh any mention thereof B. C. The word Superroyall I suppose slyly mocketh at that which venerable antiquitie confesseth I will content my selfe with the testimonie of S. Chrysostome who speaking not onely of Byshoppes but inferiour Clergie-men instructeth them how to deale with secular Potentates comming vnworthily to the Sacramentes in this manner If a Duke quoth he if a Consull if hee that weareth a Crowne come vnworthily stoppe and hinder him thou hast greater power then hee And the Minister denieth that the late Queene might preach the Ghospell or administer the Sacramentes Which functions notwithstanding other of their Clergie might execute whereof it ensueth that in these Spirituall poyntes their power was aboue that of the Queenes and so truely in a good sense may be called Superroyall which so much his superscoffing grauitie seemeth to deride and taunt T. B. I answere first that the Superroyall counterfeite Power which I deride in your Pope is the deposing of Kinges the translating of Empires the making of some thing of nothing the applying of the substantiall partes of one thing to an other the aduauncing of himselfe aboue euery thing that hath beeing and such like whereof I haue spoken and intreated very plentifully in the Conclusions of this present Chapter Secondly that albeit in the preaching of the Word and administration of the Sacramentes the chosen Minister hath onely the charge and authoritie to execute them yet hath Gods annoynted Prince the supreame charge and soueraigne authoritie to commaunde the execution thereof as also to correct and to punish the Minister for the neglect of his duetie in that behalfe For though the execution perteyne to the Ministers yet the prouision direction appoyntment care ouersight which is the Supreme gouernement indeed perteyneth onely solely wholly to the Prince For which cause King Ezechias highly renowned in holy Writ though he were but very young in yeares did for all that in regard of his prerogatiue Royall Supreame authoritie in causes Ecclesiasticall call the Priestes Leuites his Sonnes charging them to heare him and to follow his Commaundement for so are the wordes of the Text. Yea Josias that famous King did sundry times commaund the Hie Priest But of this subiect I haue intreated so copiously in other Bookes as it is heere a thing needlesse to stand longer vpon the same Thirdly that I graunt freely willingly that Ministers in the action of their Ecclesiasticall function Church-ministerie are aboue all Christians aboue Queenes Kinges and Monarches representing the person of God teaching admonishing rebuking them as others following the godly example therein of S. Iohn the Baptist. Yea I further graunt that if the vices of Princes Kinges and Monarches be notorious scandalous to the whole Church then the Byshops may denounce such Potentates to be enemies to the trueth aduersaries to God and no true members of the Church but to be holden for forlorne people and as
single Vow is able to contract Matrimonie albeit he sinne in so contracting but the subiect of a solemne Vow is inabled to matrimoniall contract the transgressions of the Vow single and solemne are of the same nature or kind albeit he that maketh the solemne Vow sinneth more grieuously The reason is because the specificall difference of actes resteth in the obiectes and seeing there is one obiect of both the Vowes to weete to keepe chastitie the actes must be of the same nature or kind howbeit the transgression of the solemne Vow shall be greater by reason of the perfecter state Thus disputeth Fryer Josepth after the opinion of other popish Doctors And doubtlesse his Discourse is euident because euery specificall difference morall aryseth of the obiectes and consequently seeing the obiect of Vow single is one and the same with the Vow solemne the difference betweene them can no way be essentiall neither can the Vow solemne dissolue Matrimonie contracted forasmuch as the Vow single beeing intrinsecally the same can not doe it Marke well the next Proposition The 11. Proposition Matrimonie euen after the solemne Vow of Religion is with our Jesuites and Iesuited Papistes very lawfull and of force so it be done by and with the Popes Dispensation This doctrine is taught by many learned Papistes Antoninus Richardus Hugo Innocentius Conarrunias Nauarius and others The same Doctrine is confirmed euen by the reall and vsuall practise of sundry Popes It may suffice in regard of breuitie to alledge one in the name of all The Popish S. Antoninus sometime the Archbyshop of Florence hath these wordes Papa dispensare potest in statuto Concilij vmuersalis de Voto solennj per prâ—fessionem etiam patet quod licet Papa non possist facere quod professus non fuit professus potest tamen facere quod non sit obligatus religâ—oni et ad votum religionis quia in omni voto intelligitur excepta authoritate Papae Infra et communiter Canonistae tenent quod Papa potest dispensare in voto solenni religionis non quidem tantum vt sit religiosus et non seruet vota sed de religioso potest facere laicum ex magna causa vrgente The Pope can dispense in the Decrees of a Generall Councell It is also cleare that he can dispense in a solemne Vow of profession For albeit the Pope can not make a professed person not to haue been professed yet can hee this doe that the professed person shall neither be bound to his Religion nor to his Vow because we must vnderstand that in euery Vow the Popes authoritie is excepted And the Canonistes doe commonly hold that the Pope can dispense in the solemne Vow of Religion not onely that one be still a Religious person and keepe not his Vow but hee can also make of a Religious person a meere Lay-man vpon an vrgent cause To this Popish canonized Saint and famous Arch-byshoppe let it not grieue our M. Fryer if I adde the worthy testimonie of their famous Popish Canonist and great Diuine Martinus Nauarrus his wordes are these Papa dispensare potest cum Monacho iam professo vt contrabat matrimonium imo de facto multj Papae dispensarunt Loe the Pope when it pleaseth his Holynesse can make of Monkes meere Lay-men he can also make Monkes to continue Monkes still and for all that not to keepe their Vowes Yea how soeuer his Iesuites and Iesuited Popelinges cry out against the Marriage of Priestes yet can hee make the Marriage of Monkes and a fortiorj the Marriage of secular Priestes to be lawfull Marriage euen with his bare word I will say nothing of Couarruvias Richardus Paludanus Scotus Caietanus Josephus Angles and others for of their verdictes the Reader may find great plentie in my Suruay of Poperie See and marke well the fourth Proposition aforegoing Onely heere by the way I would tell our holy Father if it would please him to heare me that seeing he can with his word make the Marriage of Priestes lawfull it were good he should doe it for that which hee may read in the next Proposition The 12. Proposition The forced and coacted Chastitie of Priestes hath been such so intollerable euen by the confession of the best learned Papistes as nothing in the whole world hath brought more shame to Priesthood more harme to Religion more griefe to godly men The great famous Popish Cardinall Panormitanus doth prooue this Proposition so learnedly and with such Christian grauitie as it being well marked is able to confound all Papistes in the world these are his expresse wordes Continentia non est in Clericis secularibus de substantia ordinis nec de iure Diuino quia alias Graeci peccarent nec excusaret eos consuetudo Sequitur et non solum credo potestatem messe Ecclesiae hoc condendi sed credo pro bono et salute esset animarum quod esset salubre statutum vt volentes possint contrahere quia experientia docente contrarius prorsus effectus sequitur ex illa Lege continentiae cum hodie non viuant spiritualiter nec sint mundi sed maculantur illicito coitu cum eorum grauissimo peccato vbi cum propria vxore esset castitas Continencie in secular Priestes is neither of the substaunce of their Orders nor of the Law diuine For otherwise the Greekes should sinne and their Custome could not excuse them And I doe not onely beleeue that the Church can make such a Law but also that such a Law were for the good and for the saluation of soules that such as would might marrie for experience teacheth that a contrary effect followeth of that law of continencie seeing this day they liue not spiritually neither are they cleane but polluted in vnlawfull copulation with their most grieuous sinne though they might liue chastly with their owne Wiues Thus writeth learned Panormitanus the Popes famous Canonist his deare Abbot his reuerend Arch-bishop his honourable Cardinall Let vs now heare what Polydorus Virgilius a zealous learned Papist saith for hee seeing he was an Italian knew best the Italian and Romish fashion These are his expresse wordes I will neither adde to them nor take ought from them but will deale synceerely and truly though our Jesuite be farre from it not onely in this Booke but in whatsoeuer else I shall write hereafter euen vpon the perill of my soule Illud tamen dixerim tantum abfuisse vt ista coacta castitas illam coniugalem vicerit vt etiam nullius delicti crimen maius ordini dedecus plus mali religioni plus doloris omnibus bonis impresserit inusserit attulerit quam Sacerdotum libidinis labes proinde forsitan tam e republica Christiana quam ex ordinis vsu esset vt tandem aliquando ius publici matrimonij Sacerdotibus restitueretur quod illi sine infamia sanctè potius colerent quam se spurcissimè eiuscemodi
be so plainely deliuered by our Aduersaries may seeme a woonderment to the Christian world For it clearely turneth vpside-downe the chiefest Bulworke of Popish vnwritten Traditions and in effect all Popish Fayth and Religion The common good which commeth to the Church of God by writing against the Aduersaries of his Trueth is hence apparant to all the World For after the swaggering Iesuite S.R. with the aduise of Bellarmine and others had bickered so long with the Downefall of Poperie that the fall had almost broken their neckes then ouercome with the dint of Argumentes and force of the Trueth he was as it were violently compelled to write as we here see in defence behalfe of the Trueth To which for the better manifestation of this trueth so necessarie to be knowen I will adde yet an other Testimonie of our Jesuite in these wordes Truly sayd S. Epiphanius that we may tell the inuention of euery question out of the consequence of Scripture He sayd not Out of the Scripture For all cannot be taken thence as him selfe writeth but of the consequence of them Because all questions are resolued out of the Scriptures or out of that which followeth of them as the effect of the cause Thus the Iesuite approoueth vnawares the selfe same Doctrine which I in the Downefall doe defend And consequently the very weapons which our Aduersaries put into our handes are sufficient God be blessed for it to defend vs and our cause against them The Fourth Conclusion Popish Auricular Confession is not necessarie for mans saluation For first seeing all thinges necessarie for saluation are conteyned in the holy Scriptures as in the third Conclusion Secondly seeing all Preceptes and Promises of God in the New are contayned in the Old Testament as in the first Conclusion Thirdly seeing Popish Auricular Confession is not contayned in the Old Testament as in the second Conclusion it followeth by a necessarie and ineuitable consequution that Popish Auricular Confession is not necessarie for mans saluation This trueth will yet better appeare in the Conclusions following The Fift Conclusion Popish Auricular Confession is neither commaunded by Christ nor yet by his Apostles I prooue it because it is not contayned in the Old Testament as in the second Conclusion Which Testament for all that contayneth all the Preceptes of the New as may doth appeare to the indifferent reader in the first Conclusion The Sixt Conclusion Popish Auricular Confession was instituted and established by the meere Law of man grounded onely vpon a falsely imagined Apostolicall vnwritten Tradition I prooue it many wayes First because the Popes owne Decrees referre the matter to the iudgement of the Reader viz. Whether one be bound to Confession Auricular by Gods law or by Mans law These are the expresse wordes as Gratianus hath published the same Quibus authoritatibus vel quibus rationum firmamentis vtraque sententia satisfactionis et confessionis nitatur in medium breuiter exposuimus Cuj autem harum potius adhaerendum sit lectoris iudicio reseruatur Viraque N. fautores habet sapientes et religiosos viros Vpon what Authorities or foundations of Reasons either opinion is grounded I haue briefly shewed But to whether of them it is better to adhere that I leaue to the iudgement of the Reader for either opinion hath Wise and Religious men for the Patrons of the same Behold heere gentle Reader that not onely the Popes Doctors but his owne Canon-law and the Commenters vpon the same doe all confesse that Confession after Popish manner is onely solely grounded vpon Mans law Yea the Popish Glosse addeth That both Wise and Religious men doe so thinke though some others hold the contrary Secondly because the great Thomist who for his rare skill in Theologie was surnamed Absolutus Theologus Syluester Prieras doth deliuer his opinion in these wordes Quarto vtrum ad confessionem teneamur diuino iure vel humano Et dicâ— quod Canonistae videntur tenere quod sit de iure positiuo Et ad hoc est Glossa de paenit Dist. 5. In summa quae vult quod instituta sit a quadam vniuersali traditione Ecclesiae Ideo infert quam confiteri non tenentur infideles nec similiter Graeci ex quo non acceptauerunt huiusmodi constitutionem sicut nec votâ—â— castitatis It is demaunded fourthly sayth the great Learned Papist Syluester whether we be bound to Popish Confession by the law of God or by the positiue Law of man And I say the Canonistes hold that we are bound by the Law of man And of this opinion is the Glosse which is of this minde that Confession was instituted by a certaine vniuersall tradition of the Church Wherevpon the sayd Glosse inferreth that Infidels are not bound to Confession neither the Greekes in like maner seeing they did neuer approoue such Constitution as neither the vow of Chastitie Thirdly because the highly renowned Papist Martinus Nauarrus confesseth constantly and plainely that their solemne Glosse commonly receiued and approoued of all Canonistes holdeth Confession to be commaunded by the Church Fourthly because the famous Canonist most reuerend Arch-byshop and honourable Cardinall Panormitanus was of the same opinion with the Glosse For Couarruvâ—as a very learned Popish Arch-byshoppe deliuereth his minde in these wordes Quam ex nostris plerique sequuti sunt maximè Panormitanus ex ea asserentes confessionem sacramentalem quae Sacerdotibus fit iure humano institutam esse Which Glosse many of our Canonistes haue followed especially Panormitanus affirming out of that Glosse that Sacramentall confession made to Priestes was ordayned by the law of Man Fiftly because Scotus the Popish subtile schoole Doctor surnamed for his great skill Doctor subtilis after hee had largely disputed pro et contra of Popish Auricular confession concludeth in these wordes Apparet ergo istud non esse de iure diuino promulgato per scripturam Apostolicam Vel ergo tenendum est primum membrum scilicet quod sit de iure diuino promulgato per EuangeliuÌ„ vel si illud non sufficiat dicendum est tertium scilicet quod est de iure diuino positiuo promulgato a Christo Apostolis sed Ecclesiae promulgato per Apostolos absque omni scriptura It therefore appeareth that it is not of the law of God published by Apostolicall Scripture We must therfore either hold the first member to weeâ—e that it is of the law of God published by the Ghospell or if that will not suffice we must say the third that is to say that it commeth from the positiue law of God published by Christ to his Apostles but published by the Apostles to the Church without all Scripture Thus writeth the Popish Doctor subtilis who with all his subtiltie can not tell in the world what to say in defence of their Popish Auricular confession For after he hath discoursed to the vttermost of his wittes and imployed his
whole care industrie and diligence to see what helpe might be had in that behalfe his best resolution is to say with the old doting man of Carlton That it is either one thing or other For first he freely confesseth that it is not in the Old law Secondly that it is not in the Scripture of th'Apostles Thirdly that we must either hold this or that but he can not tell whether Fourthly that how soeuer we thinke or say of this Popish Auricular confessioÌ„ this perforce we must resolue to be the trueth viz. that it is grounded vpon Vnwritten tradition without all maner of Scripture This is it which our Papistes must euer flie vnto as to their best and last trumpe For which respect their learned and canonized Martyr the late Byshoppe of Rochester confessed plainely that the holy Scriptures will not serue their turne these are his expresse wordes Contendentibus itaque nobiscum Hareticis nos also subsidio nostram oportet tueri causam quam scriptura sacra Therefore when Heretiques contende with vs we must defend our cause by other meanes then by the holy Scripture Thus writeth Byshoppe Fisher the Popes canonized Saint and glorious Martyr a Learned man indeed who as we see for all his Learning was not able to defend Poperie by Gods word and therefore he fled from the holy Scriptures to vnwritten Traditions as Scotus did afore him And for the same respect Couarruuias a famous Popish Bishoppe and a great learned man confessed and published to the whole world that howsoeuer the trueth was that which their Pope did must of necessitie be defended These are his expresse words Nec mâ—latet c. Neither am I ignorant that S. Thomas affirmeth after great deliberation that the Byshoppe of Rome can not with his Dispensation take away from Monkes their solemne Vow of Chastitie This notwithstanding wee must defend the first opinion least those thinges which are practised euery where be vtterly ouerthrowne Behold here gentle Reader that howsoeuer the Popes opinion be whether true or false that skilleth not the same wee must defende of necissitie And why I pray you must this be done Because forsooth sayth Couarruutas otherwise Poperie will be turned vpside downe Sixtly because their famous Cardinall Caietanus affirmeth roundly that Auricular and Secret confession is against Christes institution as also the Precept that vrgeth vs to the same For albeit hee approoue Confession as instituted by Christ yet doth he adde a double restriction First that it was Voluntarie then that it was neither Secret nor of All sinnes Which twaine for all that the late Byshoppes of Rome affirme and vrge as necessarie to Saluation Marke well the next Conclusion out of the Popes owne Decrees The Seuenth Conclusion Popish Auricular Confession was not an Article of Popish Fayth for the space of 1215. yeares I prooue it because their famous Fryer and reuerend Popish Byshop Iosephus Angles affirmeth peremptorily and without all And 's or Ifs that none were Heretikes for the deniall of the necessitie of Popish confession vntill the Decree of their late Councell of Latheran which was holden 1215. yeares after Christ. And the Fryer Byshoppe yeeldeth this reason for the same viz. Quia nondum erat ab Ecclesia declaratum Because the Church of Rome had not before that time declared it to be so To which I adde for the complement of this controuersie that the Holy Auncient Fathers those stout Champions and mighty Pillers of Christes Church were neuer acquainted with Popish Auricular confession I prooue this by a double argument First by the fact of the holy Byshop Nectarius then by the ioynt-testimonies of Nicephorus and Rhenanus Concerning Nectarius that holy and worthy Byshoppe of Constantinople hee abolished the Law made for Confession so to auoyde the great Vices which ensued therevpon Where the Reader must obserue two thinges with mee th' one that in the Auncient church Publike Penaunce was inioyned to those who publikely denyed the Fayth in time of Persecution And that some were so zelous and so highly esteemed the sacred Ministerie that although they did not denie the Fayth publikely yet for that they had some doubtes therein and were troubled in their mindes they voluntarily disclosed their secret griefes to Gods Ministers humbly desired their Godly aduise submitted themselues to doe what was thought expedient by those Ministers whom the Church had placed to inioyne Penance for publike sinnes Th' other that notwithstanding the whoredome of the Deacon and other vices neither would that holy Byshop Nectarius euer haue attempted to abolish Confession if it had been Gods ordinance neither would so many famous Byshops haue imitated his fact And yet is it most certaine as shal be seene by and by that all for the most part Easterne-Byshops did follow his opinion Yea euen S. Chrysostome who succeeded Nectarius at Constantinople that goodly Patriarchall seate of the World Concerning Nicephorus and Rhenanus their owne expresse wordes shall heere be layde open to the Reader Nicephorus after he hath told vs what Nectarius did immediatly addeth these wordes Quem etiam ferè Orientales Episcopi omnes sequuti sunt Whom almost all the Byshoppes of the East did follow and imitate Againe he addeth toward the end of that Chapter these wordes Itaque de quorundam maximè vero Eudaemonis Ecclesiae eius Presbyteri patria Alexandrini Consilio ne postea in Ecclesia Presbyter paenitentiarius esset Nectarius statuit suadentibus illis vt cuique permitteretur pro conscientia et fiducia sua communicare et de immaculatis mysterijs participare Therefore Nectarius being aduised by sundry especially by Eudaemon an Elder of that Church borne in Alexandria made a Decree through their perswasion that from that day no Priest should heare the Confessions of the penitentes but that euery one should be permitted to communicate and to be partaker of the holy Mysteries as his owne Conscience and Fayth did mooue him Beatus Rhenanus after he had discoursed at large how the Auncient Church appoynted Priestes ouer the penitent that they might giue them counsaile how to make satisfaction according to the Canons which themselues did not vnderstande and withall had prooued out of S. Cyprian S. Chrysostome S. Basill S. Ambrose S. Hierome S. Bede Tertullian Hesychius Theodulphus Theodorus Bertramus Rabanus and Nectarius all which he alleadged for his opinion he deliuered his owne iudgement in these wordes Non aliam ob causam complurimi hic testimonijs vsi sâ—mus quam ne quis admiretur TertullianuÌ„ de clancularia illa admissoruÌ„ confessione nihil loquutum quae quantum coijcimus penitus id temporis ignorabatur For no other cause haue I heere vsed the testimonies of so many Writers but least any should maruell that Tertullian spake nothing of that secret Confession which as I thinke was vtterly vnknowen at that time Loe Tertullian spake not one word of Auricular confessioÌ„
Gods meere fauour grace and good pleasure without all desertes of Man Seuenthly that our Vocation our Iustification and our Glorification are the effectes of Predestination I therefore conclude that Good workes are not the cause why Gods children possesse Heauen as their inheritaunce seeing it is the effect of Predestination yet that they are the ordinarie way and meanes by which God decreed in his eternall purpose to bring his Elect to Heauen For as he ordayned the end that is to say the Kingdome of Heauen or Eternall life so also ordayned he the way and meanes to attaine the same that is to say Vocation Iustification Fayth and Good workes Yea euen among Men whosoeuer intendeth the Ende intendeth also the Meanes The 6. Conclusion Good workes in a godly sense very vsuall frequent in the holy Fathers may truly be sayd to be meritorious that is to say they please God and are so acceptable in Gods sight that of mercie he rewardeth them farre aboue their desertes This Conclusion is sufficiently prooued by the reasons alleadged in the first Conclusion I will here onely annexe the testimonie of Bernard that famous and learned Popish Abbot In one place he hath these wordes Sic non est quod iam quaeras quibus meritis speremus bona praesertim cum audias apud Prophetam non propter vos sed propter me ego faciam dicit Dominus sufficit ad meritum scire quod non sufficiant merita So there is no cause that thou shouldest now aske by what merites we hope for Glorie especially since thou hearest the Prophet say I will doe it sayth the Lord not for your sake but for mine owne selfe It is enough to merite to know that our merites are not sufficient Againe in an other place the same Bernard hath these wordes Deest gratiae quicquid meritis deputas Noâ—â— meritum quod gratiam excludat Horreo quicquid de meo est vt sim meus nisi quod illud magis sorsitan meum est quod me meum facit Gratia reddit me mihi iustificatum gratis et sic liberatum a seruitute peccati It degenerateth from Grace whatsoeuer thou ascribest to Merit I will no Merite that excludeth Grace I abhorre whatsoeuer is of mine owne that I may be mine owne vnlesse perhappes that is more mine owne which maketh me mine owne Grace iustifieth me freely to my selfe and so deliuereth me from the bondage of sinne In an other place the same Bernard hath these wordes Iam vero de vita aeterna scimus quia non sunt condignae passiones huius temporis ad futuram gloriam nec si vnus omnes sustineat Neque N. talia sunt hominum merita vt propter ea vita aeterna debeatur ex iure aut Deus iniuriam aliquam faceret nisi cam donaret Nam vt taceam quod merita omnia Dei dona sunt et ita homo magis propter ipsa Deo debitor est quam Deus homini quid sunt merita omnia ad tantam gloriaÌ„ denique quis melior est Propheta cui Dominus ipse tam insigne testimonium perhibet dicens Virum inueni secundum cor meum Veruntamen et ipse necesse habuit dicere Deo non intres in iudicium cum seruo tuo Domine Now touching eternall life we know that the sufferinges of this time are not worthy of the glory to come no not if one endure all For the Merites of men are not such that for them eternall life is due by right or that God should do some iniurie if he gaue it not For to let passe that all Merites are the giftes of God and so man is rather debter to God for them then God to man What are all Merites to so great Glorie In fine who is better then the Prophet to whom our Lord giueth so worthy a testimonie saying J haue found a man according to my heart howbeit hee had need to say to God Enter not into iudgement with thy seruant O Lord. Thus writeth the deuote and religious Abbot Bernard who though he liued in the greatest mist of Poperie and so was carried away with some errours of his time yet did he teach most Christian doctrine almost in all his workes And because he was reputed a great Papist and of high esteeme in the Church of Rome his testimonie is euer most forcible against Papistes the Pope and Church of Rome Out of this his most learned and Christian Discourse I obserue many godly memorable Lessons First that our best workes doe merite nothing Secondly that our greatest and best merit is this viz. to know that our supposed merites are not sufficient Thirdly that how much soeuer be it more be it lesse We ascribe to Merites so much doe we derogate from Gods grace And consequently seeing we may not derogate from the Grace of God in any respect it followeth of necessitie that we cannot challenge any thing of Merite Fourthly that Grace doth iustifie vs freely and consequently that our Workes doe not iustifie at all Fiftly that though one man could suffer as much as all men doe yet could not that man condignely Merite heauen Sixtly that eternall life is not due to mans Merites Ex iure that is to say Condignely and of right Seuently that God should doe no man wrong if he gaue it not But doubtlesse if Good workes did merite Heauen God should doe wrong to many a man in not giuing it For to withhold and keepe a mans right from him is a notorious and knowen wrong Eightly that a Man is more indebted to God then God to Man And this reason my L. Abbot Bernard yeeldeth for the same viz. Because Heauen or Eternall life is the free gift of God The 7. Conclusion Good workes euen by Popish doctrine without the mercie and promise of God in his Sonne and our onely sauiour Christ Iesus doe not condignely merite Heauen This is soundly prooued by all the reasons of the third Conclusion But I will prooue it by other euident meanes S. Augustine hath these expresse wordes Vae eâ—iam laudabili vitae homiâ—â—m si remotu misericordia â—iscautias â—am Woe euen to the best liuers on earth if thou extend not thy Mercie to them For this cause doth the holy Prophet desire God Not to enter into iudgement with him And he addeth this reason Because 〈◊〉 mâ—n liuing can 〈◊〉 iustified in his sight Againe the same Prophet confesseth in an other place That if God deale extreamely in punishing what is done amisse none lyuing no not the best of all iâ— abâ—e to endure his iustice Abbot Bernard hath these expresse wordes Peccatum separans inter nos et Deum penitus auferri non poterit donec liberemur a corpore The sinne that separateth vs from God can not wholly be taken away while we remaine in this world He speaketh of Concupiscence euill desires Loe originall
frâ—tres magis satagite vt per bona opera câ—râ—aÌ„ vestraÌ„ vocationem et electionem facâ—utis Againe thus Whom hee hath Predestinate those hath he Called and whom he hath Called those hath he Iustified and whom he hath iustified those hath he glorified Secondly to auoyde tormentes which are due to all euill workes For as th'Apostle teacheth vs Death is the stipend of sinne And our M. Christ telleth vs That euery euill Tree which bringeth not foorth good fruite shal be cut downe and cast into the Fire Yea that hee which had not on a Wedding garment was bound hand foote and so cast into vtter darkenesse Thirdly to attaine corporall and eternall reward So sayth holy Writ Come yee blessed of my Father possesse the kingdome prepared for you from the beginning of the world for I was hungry and yee gaue mee to eate I was thirsty and yee gaue mee to drinke For which respect Moses is sayd to haue had regard vnto reward And euen so is reward promised to him that giueth but a cuppe of cold Water in Gods name In respect of our Neighbours for diuers considerations First to put away scandall Woe to that man by whom scandall commeth you are the cause that Gods name is blasphemed among the Gentiles Secondly that we may profite our Neighbours by our good examples Let your Light so shine before men that they may see your Good workes and glorifie your Father which is in Heauen Now because our late Popes our newly hatched Jesuites and Jesuiteâ— Papistes are so full of Good workes at least in their owne corrupt perswasions that they are able with the same to merite Heauen and eternall Glorie I am content to imploy my Penne in speaking a litle thereof that the world may vnderstand the same for edification sake I will say nothing of the outragious behauiour of the Romish Papistes in time of Carnâ—uà le at Rome when and where for many dayes or rather weekes togeather men and women gadde vp and downe in the streetes and into houses some on Horse-backe some on foote transformed vnder Vizardes men into womans apparrell and women into mans apparrell and so to the great scandall of all good people that see or heare thereof worke wickednesse as the same goeth intollerable and odible to God and all good men Two kindes of notorious workes I will onely touch for the present the Stewes the Hospitall De sancto spiritu The Romanes forsooth are so mortified and so holy partly by the Pope for the time being who if he be truely named is not onely Holy but Holynesse it selfe in the abstract partly by the preachinges and other instructions of Jesuites and Iesuited Popelinges that the Pope forsooth must perforce permit them to haue common Brothel-houses or Stewes so to satisfie their beastly inordinate carnall lustes I meane not heere to dispute whether sinne in some cases may be tolerated or noe I haue written of that subiect else where at large But this I meane for the good of the Reader and edification-sake to make it euident to the world that the Romish Papistes who glorie in their meritorious workes are the worst liuers vpon earth The Stewes are not sufficient to bridle the outrage of the inordinate carnall lust of the Saints at Rome but they must further haue a second Toleration or Dispensation for an Hospitall of Charitie forsooth called for the surpassing vertue thereof by the name of the holy Ghost The end of this Hospitall is this to keepe Whores and Whore-maisters from villanous and most cruell Murders Euery night one of that holy Hospitall whatcheth diligently and turning about a Wheele made for the purpose receiueth new borne Bastardes into their câ—stodie The Wheele is so artificially contriued that they can not know or see who bringeth the said Infant-bastardes The Children are curteously receiued haue vsage and education as if they were legitimate The Hospitall is very rich and well able to maintaine all that are brought thither It findeth moe and more able friendes then any other Hospitall More Landes and Goods are giuen to it then to any other And no maruell seeing all that the Romish Saintes doe giue to it is giuen for the maintenaunce and education of their beloued Bastardes When these Bastards come to yeares of discretion either sooner or latter as it seemeth good to the Fathers then they come to visite the sayd Hospitall and to see their owne Bastardes and for a worke of Charitie they make choyse of those whom they loue and like the best Will not such Holy workes of mercie merite Heauen condignely by Popish Fayth and Diuinitie it is approoued with great solemnitie But how will some say doe the Fathers know their owne Bastardes I answere that it is a thing very easie to be done For the Fathers and Mothers or some by their procurement doe hang about the neckes of their Bastardes speciall Tokens or Iewels by which they may know them an other day Which Tokens the Gouernours of the Hospitall by the Lawes thereof which they are sworne to obey obserue and performe must carefully from time to time keepe and see that they neuer be taken from their Neckes during their aboade in the sayd Hospitall This Storie I haue for this end heere inserted that the world may know the meritorious workes of the Pope Iesuites and other Romish Papistes The censure whereof I leaue to the iudicious and honest Reader The 11. Conclusion As it is true by the constant Doctrine of best Learned Popish Writers that the best Workers are not condignely meritorious of Eternall life without the Promise of God made to reward them So it is in like maner true also that albeit by reason of Gods Promise the Reward be iustly both giuen and expected yet neither doth nor can the sayd Promise in reâ— veritate and true estimation of the Worke and the Reward make the worke condignely meritorious of the same Reward Eternall glorie I euer vnderstand This Conclusion consisteth of two partes the former whereof is copiously prooued in the seuenth Conclusion afore-going The latter I prooue by many meanes and inuincible reasons First because a Promise although it make the thing promised to be iustly a kind of debt and so of iustice both required and expected neither doth nor can change the nature of the Worke or attribute any condignitie or worthinesse to the same Secondly because the Promise is freely made and farre exceedeth the worthinesse of the Worke. So sayth the popish Fryer John de Combis in these very wordes Deus nes punit citra condignum remunerat vltra condignum God punisheth vs lesse then we be worthy and rewardeth vs farre aboue our desertes So sayth Abbot Bernard in these expresse wordes Aeternam vitam nullis potes operibus promereri nisi gratis detur et illa Thou must beleeue that thou canst not merite eternall life with any
Brytaines did at their conuersion receiue the Latine Seruice first by Eleutherius about the yeare 179. after Christ and againe by Gregorie about the 596. yeare yet can no more be truely inferred therevpon if we graunt the Latine tongue to haue been then decayed in Brytaine same onely that the Romanes deliuered their Church-seruice in the Latine tongue which then was their vulgar Language being altogeather ignoraunt of the Brytaine tongue and that the Brytaine for the loue they bore to the publique Prayers and Church-seruice which they receiued at their conuersion to the Christian faith did euer after vse and retaine the same in the Latine tongue in which they first receiued it Fourthly that seeing by Christes commandement deliuered by his Apostle All thinges in the Church ought to be done to edification it followeth of necessitie that the Latine vsage of the Brytaines in diuine Seruice was a Ragge of a New religion as which was about 179. yeares younger then the old and repugnant to Apostolicall doctrine For S. Paul spendeth no lesse then one whole Chapter that only to prooue that euery Nation ought to haue their Church-seruice in their vulgar knowne tongue If the Trumpet sayth he giue an vncertaine sound who shall prepare him selfe to the Warre So likewise you except ye vtter by the tongue manifest speech how shall it be knowne what is spâ—ken for ye shall speake in the ayre Againe thus If I know not the meaning of the voyce I shall be to him that speaketh an Aliant and he that speaketh shall be an Aliant to mee Againe thus Wherefore let him that speaketh with the tongue pray that he may interpret For if I pray with the tongue my spirit prayeth but my vnderstanding is without fruite Where I wish the Reader to obserue with me that the Spirit in this place is taken for the spirituall gift of Tongues as S. Chrysostome vpon this place doth witnesse S. â—heophilact is consonant to S. Chrysostome He calleth the Gift the Spirit sayth Theodorus My Spirit prayeth that is my spirituall Gift to speake with Tongues sayth Phoâ—us Againe thus If thou blesse with the Spirit how shall he that occupieth the roome of the vnlearned say Amen at the giuing of thankes seeing he vnderstandeth not what thou sayeth Againe thus I had rather speake fiue wordes with my vnderstanding in the Church that J may instruct others then ten thousand wordes in an vnknowen tongue Againe thus Let all things be done to edification Fourthly that our Jesuite gableth as a lying pratler while he impudently auoucheth that by Bels allowance the Latine vse in Church-seruice where the people vnderstand it not is found Catholique and Apostolicall For Bell hath plainely prooued it to be vnsound Prophane and Diabolicall as also that the vse of publique Seruice in the vulgar Tongue came neither from Wittenberge nor Geneua But from the Primitiue Apostolicall and succeding Churches for many hundred yeares togeather Whosoeuer shall with a single eye and sound iudgement peruse the Sixteene chapter afore-going and ioyne my Suruey with it can not but cleerely behold as in a Glasse of Christall the trueth to be as I haue written Lyranus a famous and great learned Papist in his learned Commentaries vpon S. Pauls Epistles doth so plainely so constantly affirme that in the Primatiue Church the publique Prayers and all other thinges were in the vulgar Tongue as none that shall read him seriously can possibly stand in doubt thereof Yea S. Basil auoucheth expressely that the Egyptians the Lybians the Thebanes the Palestines the Arabians the Phaenicians the Syrians and generally all Christian Nations of what Language soeuer they were had their common Prayers and Seruice in their vulgar Tongue But our Rhemishes obiect S. Pauls words against S. Paul in this manner Also when a man prayeth in a strange Tongue which himselfe vnderstandeth not it is not so fruitfull for instruction to him as it be knâ—w particularly what he prayed Neuerthelesse the Apostle forbiddeth not such praying neither confessing that his spirit heart and affection prayeth well towardes God though his minde and vnderstanding be not profited to instruction as otherwise it might haue been if he vnderstood the wordes Neither yet doth he appoynt such a one to get his strange Prayers translated into his vulgar Tongue to obtaine thereby the aforesaid instruction To this I answere first that I haue alreadie prooued out of S. Chrysostome and other Fathers Theodoretus Theophilactus and Photius that S. Paul doth not vnderstand by the word Spirit the Heart and Affection but the Spirituall gift to speake with Tongues Secondly that it is cleare by many textes of the Apostle that the word Spirit doth so signifie as I haue sayd Thirdly that if we should graunt the Spirit to signifie Heart and Affection as the Rhemistes absurdly expound it yet could not that serue their turne because S. Paul willeth to pray not onely with Spirit but also with minde and vnderstanding As also for that S. Paul in an other text commaundeth expressely That all thinges â—e done in the Church to edifying Which is no other Doctrine indeed then Christ himselfe teacheth in his holy Ghospell This people saith he draweth neere vnto me with their mouth and honoureth me with the lippes but their heart is farre from me Fourthly that the Apostle commaundeth him that hath the gift of Tongues to pray that he may interpret his strange tongue himselfe or that some other should interpret it or else to keepe silence in the Church For this cause doth S. Chrysostome constantly affirme that Prayers not vnderstood of him that vttereth them are altogeather vnprofitable Thou seest sayth he how by litle and litle he is come to this poynt that he declareth him to be vnprofitable not onely to others but also to him selfe seeing the minde of such a man is voyde of fruite For if a man speake onely in the Persians Language or in any other strange Tongue and doe not vnderstand those things which he speaketh he shall be to himselfe as he that vnderstandeth not the meaning of the voyce This and much more to the like effect sayth S. Chrysostome of those that had the gifts of Tongues and vnderstood not what they spake What thinke you sir Fryer would he haue sayd if he had heard the vnlearned Papistes babling on their Beades and Primers what they did not vnderstand Nay if he had heard that which now adayes is very frequent among the vnlearned Papistes both men and women how they choppe and change clippe and mangle the wordes so as they either haue a contrarie or ridiculous sense or else plaine none at all but stand as Cyphers and Voces non significatiuae For this is a truth so well knowne as it can not without blushing be denied that many popish Priestes haue been so ignoraunt that they neither vnderstood their Portesses