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
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
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
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
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
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
praecedenteÌ„ SynoduÌ„ Episcopos earuÌ„ haeresum conuocauit sequitur cum autem conuenissent accersito ad se Nectario Imperator cuÌ„ eo de futura Synodo coÌ„municat iubetque vt quaestiones ex quibus natae fuerant haereses in disputationeÌ„ proponat quo vna fieret in ChristuÌ„ credentiuÌ„ Ecclesia et constitueretur dogma consonuÌ„ ad quaÌ„ religio conformaretur The Emperour not long after the precedent Synode calleth the Byshops of those Heresies togeather When they were assembled the Emperour calleth Nectarius the Byshop of Constantinople to him and consulteth with him concerning the future Synode and coÌ„maundeth him to propound in disputation those questions from whence the Heresies did spring to the ende that there might be one Church of the faythfull a consonant rule of fayth which might be as a paterne of religion Sigâ—bertus a famous Popish Monke writeth in this manner Secunda Synodus vniuersalis 150. PatruÌ„ congregatur Constantinopoli iubente Theodosio et annuente Damaso Papa quae MacedoniuÌ„ neganteÌ„ spirituÌ„ sanctuÌ„ DeuÌ„ esse coÌ„demnans consubstantialeÌ„ patri et filio spirituÌ„ sanctuÌ„ esse docuit The second generall Councell of an hundred fiftie Byshops is assembled at Constantinople by the commaundement of Theodosius Damasus the Pope agreeing thereunto in which Synodâ— Macedonius who denied the Holy Ghost to be God was condemned and the consubstantiabilitie of the Holy Ghost with the Father and the Sonne was confirmed in the same Theodoretus is consonant and vttereth many worthy periods The fourth Section of the Councell of Ephesus The third generall Councell being the first Ephesiue of two hundred Byshoppes was proclaymed by the commaundement of the Emperour Theodosius the younger against Nestorius denying the virgin Mary to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and affirming Christ to haue persons twaine proouing that two natures did subsist in one onely person of Christ Jâ—sus in the yeare of our Lord God 433. Euagrius hath these wordes Cum ista Cyrillus venerandae memoriae Alexandrinorum Episcopus literis suis reprehendisset Nestorius vero reprehensioni illius restitisset et neque illius neque Celestini veteris Romae Episcopi monitis acquiauisset sed temulentiam suam aduersus vniuersam Ecclesiam nihil veritus effudisset haud praeter rationem a Theodosio iuniore Orientis Imperatore petijt vt ipsius nutu Synodus colligeretur Imperialibus itaque literis cum ad ipsum Cyrillum tum ad omnium vbique Ecclesiarum Episcopos missis ad sacrum Penticostes diem in quo venit ad nos spiritus S. Conuentus indicitur When Cyrillus the venerable Byshoppe of Alexandria had by his Letters reproued the wicked blasphemie of Nestorius and Nestorius had withstood the same neither yeelding to his admonition nor to Celestines the Byshop of old Rome but still malepertly powred out his drunken conceites against the whole Church then Cyrill not without cause requested the Emperour Theodosius the younger that by his authoritie a Synode might be called by the Letters therefore of the Emperour directed to Cyrill and to all other Byshops euery where the Synode is appoynted vpon the sacred day of Penticost at what time the Holy Ghost came downe vpon vs. Thus writeth this famous Historiographer Out of whose wordes I gather many worthy instructions First that neither Cyâ—illus the Byshoppe of Alexandria nor Celestinus the Byshoppe of Rome could by any meanes reclaime or diswade Nâ—storius from his cursed and blasphemous opinions Secondly that Cyrillus lamenting the harme that thereby did redound to the Church sought to the Emperour for redresse thereof humbly requesting him that a generall Councell might be gathered for the peace of the Church and for the condemnation of the Heresie of Nestorius Thirdly that Cyrillus that holy and learned Byshoppe who was reputed a Saint in his life-time did not make suite to the Byshoppe of Rome for calling of the Councell which doubtlesse he would haue done if the gathering of Councels had belonged vnto him Fourthly that S. Cyrill sought immediatly to the Emperour not once acquainting the Byshop of Rome therewith Fiftly that the Byshoppe of Rome himselfe was commaunded to come to the Synode euen in such sort as other Byshoppes were Which I prooue by a double meane First because the Storie sayth That the Emperour called omnium vbique Ecclesiarum Episcopos the Byshoppes of all Churches euery where Secondly because Nicephorus sayth that Celestinus the Byshoppe of Rome was absent but appoynted Cyrillus in his stead These are the words Celestinus autem Roma Episcopus propter nauigationis pericula Synodo adesse detrectauit ad Cyrillum tamen vt locum suum ibj obtineret scripsit But Celestine the Byshoppe of Rome was absent from the Synode by reason of the danger of Nauigation yet he wrote to Cyrillus that he might supply his place Touching the Popes absence from Councelles the Iesuiticall Cardinall Bellarmine giueth better and sounder reasons though vnawares both against the Pope himselfe which I willingly admit wishing the Reader to obserue and marke them seriously with mee as which are both memorable and of great consequence This Cardinall yeeldeth two reasons why the Pope was neuer present at Councels in the East-churches by himselfe and in his owne person the one forsooth because it was not conuenient that the Head should follow the members the other because the Emperour would euer sit in the highest place Out of whose wordes I must needes note two important poyntes by the way The one that in the auncient Church the highest place in Councels was euer reserued to the Emperour The other that the East-churches did neuer acknowledge the Popes Primacie which he this day arrogantly challengeth ouer all Kingdomes and Regalities To which twaine this pleasant adiunct must of necessitie be annexed viz. that our humble Father the Pope who hypocritically calleth himselfe seruus seruorum Dej would neuer come to Councels in the East partes because forsooth his charitie was so great that he could not endure to see the Emperour sitting in the highest place And it is not amisse for the benefite of the Reader if I heere adioyne the maner how the Emperour Constantine sate in the Councell of Nice Sozomenus that graue Historiographer who liued more then a thousand one hundred seuentie yeares agoe hath these wordes Congregatis itaque in vnum locum per medium sacerdotuÌ„ ad caput conuentus transeundo in throno quodam qui ipsi paratus erat confedit ac Synodus sedere iussa est Erant N. vtrinque ad parietes Palatij multa posita subsellia hic vero thronus maximus erat et reliquas sedes excellebat Therefore when the Byshoppes were come togeather the Emperour passing through the midst of them to the head of the assembly sate downe in a Throne prepared for him and willed the Byshops to sit downe There were many Seates on both sides to the walles of the Pallace but the Emperours
that he would haue yeelded to a lawfull generall Councell As if he had sayd S. Cyprian was no more bound to follow the Opinion and Decree of the Byshoppe of Rome then the Byshoppe of Rome to follow his Thirdly that our Iesuite saith truly though vnawares against himselfe that it was free for S. Cyprian without the danger of Heresie to persist in his owne opinion For it was not in the power of the Byshoppe of Rome to make that Heresie which was not Heresie afore B. C. That it was lawfull and vsuall before the time of this Councell to appeale to Rome is euident out of S. Cyprian who reporteth how Fortunatus and Felix deposed by himselfe appealed to Cornelius Byshoppe of Rome And one Basilides deposed in Spaine appealed to Pope Stephen as the same Cyprian recounteth Not to speake of Marcion that auncient Hereticke who excommunicated of his Byshoppe in Pontus came to Rome for absolution as Epiphanius relateth And therefore Pope Leo calleth it an auncient custome to appeale to Rome T. B. I answere First that many distressed persons in their distressed and desperate causes haue many times indeede sought to Rome for helpe and succour But wee must not so much regard and consider what hath beene done especially by naughty and disobedient persons as what ought of right to be done and according to the Law of God Persons driuen to the brincke of desperation by reason of their bad and wicked dealing will soone attempt any thing which may any way seeme to better their dolefull and miserable estate Euen so men desirous of Honour will easily hearken vnto that which seemeth any way to further their intended purpose But that such Appeales were neuer approued by the holy Fathers and auncient Councels I haue copiously prooued in the Aphorismes of this Chapter and S. Ciprians opposition against the Byshoppe of Rome doth euidently confirme the same What Pope Leo sayth is of no force B. C. That many Canons are wanting in the Nicene Councell is most certaine For one Canon of that Councell was about the obseruation of Easter day as testifieth Constantine in his Epistle and also Epiphanius and Athanasius but this Canon is in none of those twentie which be now extant and of which onely so many yeares since Ruffinus maketh mention in his Historie T. B. I answere first that I will not deny but some thinges might be decreed in the Nicene Councell which are not this day to be found in the Canons now extant But withall I constantly auouch that there is a great disparitie betweene Canons and Decrees as the late popysh Synode of Trent playnely telleth vs. And consequently that there were but twentie Canons howsoeuer some other things besides were decreed at that time To which I adde that all Decrees are not alwayes thought necessarie to be put in print Whereof we haue an euident example in our English Parliament-statutes for it is often thought conuenient not to put them all in print Secondly that Epiphanius distinguisheth Canons from Decrees these are his expresse wordes In eadem Synodo Canones quosaaÌ„ posuerunt Ecclesiasticos simulque de paschate decreuerunt vnam vnitatem ac consensum In the same Synode they put downe certaine Canons Ecclesiasticall and withall they decreed one vnitie and consent touching the Keeping of Easter Loe this auncient and holy Father maketh a cleere difference betweene the Canons of the Nicene Synode and the Decrees thereof Thirdly that though wee should graunt some of the Nicene Canons to haue perished which we constantly deny yet would it not follow thereupon that such Canons conteyned the Popes falsely pretended Primacie especially seeing both the holy Fathers and most renowned Councels doe stoutly impugne the same This is prooued at large throughout the Aphorismes aforegoing Fourthly that 217. holy Fathers assembled in the Aphrican Councell told the Pope roundly that they had vsed all exquisite diligence to find out the true Copies and to that end had sent Messengers into sundry partes of the East howbeit such Canons as the Pope pretended for his falsely challenged Soueraigntie none could any where be found And therefore they aduised him to surcease and to giue ouer his claime for they could no longer endure such Fumosum typhum seculi such smoakie statelinesse of the world I vse the very wordes of the holy Synode as I haue already prooued Fiftly that Pope Julius swore solemnely that he had locked them vp in a Coffer of his Church These are his expresse words Si quis auteÌ„ de his ampliora atque abundantiora scâ—re voluerit in sacro nostrae Ecclesiae sedis 〈◊〉 et ea quae praeâ—â—ximus inuenire poterit If any shall desire a larger Discourse hereof he may find these Canons much more like stuffe in the Holy Arke or Coffer of the seate of our Church Thus writeth Pope Julius nay rather thus sweareth that holy Pope For these wordes follow immediatly Verum me dixisse testis est Diuinitas The Diuinitie is a witnesse that I haue spoken the truth Heere I wish the gentle and honest Reader to ponder duely these poyntes with mee First that this Epistle of Julius is a counterfeite as I haue already prooued for if the Pope had so layde them vp as heere hee sweareth solemnely Sozimus and the other Popes who made such adoe with the Byshoppes of Africke about those Canons would roundly haue shewed the same Yea doubtlesse if they had once had them in their Coffer vnder a Locke they would rather haue lost all the rest then them Secondly that the world hath been too long abused with this kind of coozenage trickes of legierdemaine Thirdly that if the Byshoppes of Rome can not keepe those Canons which make so much for the aduauncement of their stately Soueraigntie how can we safely credite them in keeping pure and free from errours such Bookes Councels and Canons as make greatly for vs and wholly against them selues Wee can not doe it Fourthly that if counterfeite Bookes Histories and Canons were wholly layde away Poperie beleeue mee would soone fall of it selfe For in this supposed rescript of Pope Iulius directed to the Byshoppes of the East there is such aboundance of matter for the Popes Super-lordly Soueraigntie as would certainly serue his turne if it could so be admitted But Gods holy name be blessed the forgerie is so palpable as euery one may with all facilitie discouer the same Fiftly that S. Augustine Alipius Possidius Marinus and all the other Byshoppes 217. in number assembled in the famous Aphricane Synode doe plainely auouch and constantly affirme that the true Copies of the Canons of the Nicene Councell were at Antioch Alexandria and Constantinople and that they were content for charitie-sake to obserue such proceedinges touching Appeales as the Popes Messengers did alleadge out of their commonitorie from Rome vntill true triall should be made thereof out of the true Copies from the East which were to
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
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„
punire et damnare popoteram non simpliciter assumpsi sed elegi vos multis alijs neglectis ex massa corruptionis Sequitur docet igitur Christus hoc verbo quod ipse sit author nostrae salutis Deinde quod gratia est quicquid habemus siue sint dona illa iustificantia Fides Spes Charitas Spiritus sanctus c. Siue externa illa dona quae alio nomine dicuntur gratiae gratis datae I saith hee haue chosen you This Text may bee vnderstood either of Election to the Apostleship or of eternall Election to Saluation For in both there is grace but no merit and both are wrought by Christ for in him and through him did God chose vs euen before the world was made I saith he who am God and therefore stand in need of nothing I who can punish and condemne haue not simply taken you but reiecting many others haue chosen you out of the masse of corruption Christ therefore doth by these words teach vs that hee is the authour of our saluation Then that whatsoeuer we haue the same is grace whether they be those iustifying gifts faith hope charity the holy Spirit the like or other externall gifts which by another name are called graces freely giuen That which our Sauiour sayth of Marie Magdalene that many sinnes were forgiuen her because shee loued much doth serue well to illustrate that which is here obiected of the kingdome of heauen For Christes Argument is not drawne from the cause but from the effect as if Christ had sayd we may know by her great loue that great gifts are bestowed on her that many sinnes are forgiuen her for that not remission of her sinnes proceeded from her loue but her loue from the forgiuenesse of her sinnes the similitude of the debtors doth plainly insinuate the same vnto vs. Christ told Peter of two debters whereof the one owed fiue hundred pence the other fiftie and that when they had not wherewith to pay the creditour forgaue them both he therefore demaunded of Peter whether of the debtours loued the creditour more Peter answered that he to whom more was forgiuen Christ approoued Peters answere and concluded thereupon that seeing Marie Magdalene loued more he might know that shee had more forgiuen her Because saith Christ to whom little is forgiuen the same loueth little neither is it possible to draw any other meaning out of Christs wordes The reason is euident because Christ saith plainely that the debts were freely forgiuen the debters who were not able to pay the debts For otherwise Maries forgiuenesse could haue no coherence with the similitude of the debters Out of this discourse these points are euidently deduced First that wee are the sonnes of God not by nature for so wee are his enemies and the children of wrath but by grace and adoption in Iesus Christ. Secondly that God chose vs to be his children before wee were borne Thirdly that he chose vs not because wee were holy but that we might bee holy and immaculate in his sight Fourthly that he predestinated vs to be his children by adoption not for any good workes which we either had done or could doe but for his owne good pleasure to the glorie of his grace for as to doe any workes at all before we be borne is altogether impossible so to doe good workes when we are borne seeing we are conceiued in sinne borne in sinne and by nature the children of warth is impossible in like manner Fiftly that all our good Workes are the effects and fruites of our predestination For if it be true as it is most true els the Apostle were a lyer that we were elected to be holy and to doe good Workes it is also true it can neuer be denyed that holy life and good Workes are the effects of our Election and Predestination in Christ Iesus For this cause saith the Apostle that Predestination proceedes freely of Gods eternall purpose Iustification of Predestination and Glorification of Iustification For first he choseth vs in Christ then he iustifieth vs in Christ thirdly and lastly he glorifieth vs for his owne Names sake B. C. And beside in the same place Damnation is giuen to had Workes Get ye away from me ye cursed saith Christ into euerlasting fire which was prepared for the deuill and his angels For I was an hungry and you gaue mee not to eate Seeing then the Scripture declareth plainely that bad workes deserue damnation and hee the cause thereof as plainly doth it also signifie that good Workes merit heauen and be the cause thereof T. B. I answer that there is great disparitie between saluation damnation therefore that good works can not merit saluation though euil works be enough for damnation The reason hereof is euident both in Phylosophy and Diuinitie because as S. Dionysius Areopagita sayth and the popish angelicall doctour Aquinas approueth the same Bonum ex integra causa existet malum ex quolibet defectu Good is of an intire and whole cause but euill comes of euery defect Yea that more is required to good then to euill dayly experience teacheth vs for one may soone doe that hurt to his neighbour which can not without great cost and long time bee cured againe For euery childe can tell our Iesuite that one stroake is able to kill a man but twentie potions and twentie chirurgicall actions can not restore him to life againe So one leape is enough to cast one into the bottome of a pitte or deepe gulfe but twentie hops skippes or leapes will not bring him vp againe This Saint Austen well obserued when hee left in Writing to all posteritie That it is a greater thing to iustifie the Wicked man then to make Heauen and Earth Free-will of it selfe is able to doe euill in the highest degree but of it selfe it hath no power at all either to doe well or to will well For it is God that worketh in you saith the Apostle both the will the deed euen of his good pleasure Againe in an other place thus To will is present with me but I find no meanes to performe that which is good Againe in an other place thus No man can say that Iesus is the Lord but by the holy Ghost Againe in an other place thus we are not sufficient of our selues to thinke any thing as of our selues but our sufficiencie is of God All which and much more our sweete Sauiour compriseth in these few pethy and most golden wordes For without me yee can doe nothing Much more I could say to the same effect but I refraine for two respectes First because I haue regard to breuitie Secondly for that this matter is disputed at large and soundly prooued in the Conclusions afore-going especially in the first sixt and seuenth B. C. Wee find also in Scripture that men are sayd worthy of Reward That you may be counted worthy of