author neither any Apostle nor any man Apostolicall c See the Answere to the Iesuites Challenge pag. 7. The Iesuite boasteth if the Fathers authoritie will not suffice hee will produce good and certaine grounds out of the sacred Scriptures d See the Iesuites Challenge in fine The most learned Answerer tels him if he would change his order and give the sacred Scriptures the precedency he should therein doe more right to God the author of them who well deserveth to have audience in the first place and withall ease both himselfe and us of a needelesse labour in seeking any further authoritie to compose our differences And thereupon as St Augustine the Donatists so this most reverend Lord provoketh Papists Let humane writings be removed let Gods voyce sound Produce but one cleare testimonie of the sacred Scripture for the Popes part and it shall suffice alledge what authoritie you list without Scripture and it cannot suffice e Answere to the Iesuites Challenge pag. 10. And in the same page he further expresseth himselfe And this we say not as if we feared that these men were able to produce better proofes out of the writings of the Fathers for the part of the Pope then we can doe for the Catholicke cause when we come to joyne in the particulars they shall finde it farre otherwise but partly to bring the matter unto a shorter tryal partly to give the word of God his due to declare what that rocke is upon which alone we build our faith even the foundation of the Apostles and Prophets * Ephes â— â—0 from which no sleight that they can devise shall ever drawe us Here also in the place alledged he shewes that although by reason of their corrupt dealing with antiquitie it is high time for us to listen unto the advice of Vincentius Lirinenfis and not be so forward to commit the tryall of our controversies to the writings of the Fathers who have had the ill hap to fall unto such hucksters handling Yet that you may see saith the most reverend Primate f In his Answere to the Iesuitea Challenge pag 20. how confident we are in the goodnes of our cause we will not now stand upon our right nor refuse to enter with you into this field but give you leave for this time both to be the Challenger and the appointer of your owne weapons Now let all men judge whether there can bee a more plaine expression without fast and loose without tergiversation without inconstancie when as the most learned Answerer adhereth with the auncient Fathers to the true and absolute rule the sacred Scriptures and yet to satisfie the Iesuite is willing to try our faith according to the rule proposed by the Iesuit himselfe not that our doctrine had no other foundation or testimony besides the Fathers but that the Iesuites vaine pretences of Antiquitie might be detected and made knowne and that the world might see that their Doctrine and Church is not to bee justified by the testimonies of either God or man unlesse it bee that Man of sinne who in this cause would bee both party and Iudge and in matters which hee calleth faith would have his determinations to be received without dispute The Iesuite proceeds Although we have already shewen how little right you have to stand uppon in this case yet such thankes as this your courtesie doth deserve wee willingly returne g Reply pag. 48 Palmarium Facinus What have you shewen but your shame You have declared your distast of Scriptures and if the Fathers would performe the worke you expect from them why doe you muster in their ranke such hired Souldiers Epistles Canons Bookes swolne with forged titles corrupted depraved that they might deceive but that gladiatorio animo although neither God nor good men will plead for you yet you will not leave to plead for your selves Wee have heard you say ere while saith the Iesuite that we have had opportunitie enough of time and place to falsifie the Fathers writings and to teach them the learning and tongue of the Chaldeans and that we have performed it so well by clipping washing cankering c. that thereby their complexions being altered they appeare not to be the same men they were h Reply pag. 48 And where I pray you doth the most learned Answerer unsay it O but if this be true saith the Iesuite how can the goodnes of your cause be proved by them if not true what satisfaction can you make us for your uncharitable slaunders If the Fathers bee corrupted how dare you enter into this Field if not corrupted why did you charge us wrongfullie i Reply ibid. If the most learned Answerer had not detected your frauds you had never beene charged by him with those crimes If your clipping washing cankering had not beene espied or if he had bene so credulous as to have beleived all your impostors that you can stile Fathers of Councells then might you justly have demaunded How could the goodnes of his cause bee proved by them But whenas you dare not trust God in his owne meaning nor the true ancient Fathers or lawfull decrees of Councels without the assistance of your bastard authors to helpe in time of necessity this gives him ground sufficient to justifie our cause that hath no need of such treacheries and to detect yours even they being Iudges whom you appeale unto For in the point to bee handled afterwards whether Peters Primacie did descend to all succeeding Bishops of Rome what testimony bringeth the Iesuit but Arabick canons of the Nicene Councell proved to be according to the title by an experiment from the mountaines of S. Thomas 1605 k Reply pag. â—6 and confirmed by an epistle of Athanasius to Pope Marke l Reply pag. â—7 Here is one Counterfeit brought to justifie another and all for the counterfeite authoritie of the Roman Bishop This your corrupting of antiquitie would have hindred us if the same had not beene detected but this most reverend Lord can discerne betwixt the right hand and the left and point you out those witnesses that you onely dare commit your selves unto The Councell of Nice was corrupted by the Pope for to magnifie his Chaire and sea and to make the African Fathers beleive that he had that by positive law which now they challenge by divine right but did these Fathers trust the corrupters No they sent for the true coppie and then left the pretenders May not this be done in the like manner by the most learned Answerer True it is that Gibeonites with their pretences of antiquitie and outward mustines may sometime deceive a Ioshua yet we doubt not but time and experience may reveale the fraud Iacob was deceived by Laban but it was in the night Day declared who deceived him Whilst the world was no further learned then the Pope infallible what excellent testimonies were there for the Papall triple but when the Sunne the
strength of his confutation Now as this of Dioscorus hath not beene received by him with any good relish so what the most reverend Primate saith further in this particular is displeasant also I will put them downe at large that the Reader may observe this Astmaticall Iesuite in this particular to pant for breath Neither neede we wonder saith the most learned Answerer that he should beare us downe that the Church of Rome at this day doth not disagree from the Primitive Church in any point of Religion who sticketh not so confidently to affirme that we agree with it but in very few and disagree in almost all Å¿ See the most reverend the L. Primate his answere to the Iesuites challenge pag. 24. To the first the Iesuite saith it is his constant assertion that the Church of Rome at this day doth not disagree from the primitive Church in any point of Religion t Reply pag. 89. Secondly that neither the learned Answerer nor any of ours have ever yet beene able to disproove the same to this day how eagerlie soever they have set themselves against it u Reply pag. 89 Thirdly having no more to say then what his foremen have said before him he referres the Reader to his sound and pregnant evidences throughout the whole volume in the particular points propounded x Reply ibid. To the Iesuites first Assertion I answere that the Iesuite is neither Pope nor inspired and therefore may erre To the second the Iesuite must deny what Protestants have learnedly performed or else betray his God on earth and so breake his mancipiall obligation but as they use to deny any unjust thing whereof they are convicted so of necessitie must they not confesse that evidence whereby they are overthrowne It is as bad as heresie for them to give our writers their merit y Possevin Bibliothee select p. â—30 Vniversa igitur hac â—tactatione haeresim sapit quod Lutherum Calvinum Melancthonem caeterosque nominet honorifice they deny them the honour of their morall partes and therefore have their quidam doctus and tearmes of that cut z Index Hispaâ— fol 148. Bucerus Theologus Deleatur verbum Theologus Ibid Hulderico Zuinglio Theologo Delcatur Theologo Ibid. p. 204 Supprimatâ—â— nomen Calvini ponatut studiosâ—s quidam Now for your last your reforment to your evidences we accept your motion and if in them be found any thing else but corruption and confidence we will confesse you hold with antiquity But the question is so farre from being resolved that your indeavours have made your cause more full of jealousie in regard you have stuffed your volume not as you pretend with multitudes of convincing evidences but with counterfeit authors impertinent allegations as hath bene already discovered and will be further made apparant in the examination of your reply Yea you have cast behinde you all modestie in handling the testimonies brought against you by the most learned Answerer some passing by altogether as unanswerable as in the point of Free-will and others slightly passing over as in many points of your Reply Another of his Assertions is that we agree with the Primitive Church but in verie fewe points of Religion and disagree in almost all z Reply pag. â—9 The most reverend Primate in his answere would know where he should find those few points in which we agree with the ancient Church whether in the points controverted betwixt them and us or else in the whole body of that religion which we professe dare the Iesuite acknowledge our agreement with the Primitive Church in the first Then he must confesse themselves to varie from us where wee agree with Antiquitie and so leaveth small credite unto himselfe who with the same breath hath given out that the present Church of Rome doth not disagree with that holy Church in any point Doth he by those few points wherein he confesseth we do agree with the ancient Church meane the whole body of Religion professed by us Who sees not then the height of impudency Can those points be esteemed few which in truth containe the Apostles Nicene and Athanasian Creeds Do we not adhere to this Religion see our Liturgy doe we not judge heresies by this rule viz. Scripture Creeds and foure first generall Councells See the Statute * Anno 2. â—â—â—zab inter statut Hiberâ— pag 267. if we approved equivocating as they learned of Arius they might suspect us that we speake not as we beleive as they usually practise but our words being plaine our profession loathing your practises especially in points of faith and religion what ground had the Iesuite for these outdaring and outfacing calumnies See the Iesuites defence at large I doubt not but if your cause were good you are of abilitie and learning enough to frame an Argument more soundly and to divide more judiciously then heere you have done For every schooleboy may discerne that by those few points wherein I confesse you agree with the ancient Church I could not 〈◊〉 either of these your two sorts of articles at all b Reply pag. 89 The Iesuite hath bestirred himselfe heere to goe from this Dilemma for first he rayles and revyles the whip the division that afflicts him as if it might more judiciously have bin done and indeed with a schoole-boyes reason because it smarts For how proves he it not judicious but because it cannot cohere with his former words A wise reason The division detects the incongruity of the Iesuits assertions therefore it might more judiciously have bin done proh sapientiâ— But the Iesuite by his confession acknowledgeth that he could not meane these words of our agreeing with the Primitive Church in very few points of Religion to have relation either to the points in controversie betwixt them and us or to the whole body of our Religion and that this is so plaine that a schoole-boy may discerne it And now I would gladly know of the Iesuite a third member that doth not lye under the whole body of our Religion or our negative refutes as they tearme them of their Positions additionall viz t the points controverted betwixt us The Iesuite promiseth something If you urge me saith he to declare what points of Religion thâ—se are wherein I confesse you do agree with the ancient Church c Reply pag. 90 Indeed this is the thing we would know but instead of their enumeration he giveth us a repetition I say again they are but very fâ—w e Reply ibid. an addition yea sâ— few that we may boldly say they are just none at all f Reply ibid. If this be not a meere Bull carry me to your Cloister make a Iesuite of me we agree in few and yet in none at all Christs little flocke might be no flocke if this were sence If here the Iesuite be not amazed let the Reader applaud him For if we agree in none with the ancient Church why doe you
bee Vnitie among Roman Proselytes as hee but pretends and cannot prove whether they can discerne it from the Chaine of their Captivitie by which they are bound Are there not many that h Scot. 4. d. 11. q 3. captivate their Iudgements that cannot perswade their Vnderstandings And who knowes not that their i Aene Sylv. in epist ad Mogunt capitulo â— cit per Fl. Illyricum Etiam verum dicere contra Papam est contra juramentum Episcoporum Maldon in Math. 16. 6. Haereticos non magis audiendos esse etiamsi vera sacris literis consentanea dicant aut doceant quam Diabolum Oathes with other obligations and not the Truth tye them like Sampsons foxes by the tayle to the Vnitie of their blinde Subiection Is it not k Concil Tridentin Heresie deserving a curse to question Papall decrees and in Roman determinations to doubt where they cannot believe Is not this to be an l Gloss Extravag Iohan 22 tit 14 cap. â— Cum inter Credere dominuÌ„ deum nostrum Papam conditorem dictae Decretalis istius sic non potuisse statuere prout statuit haereticuÌ„ censeretuâ— Hereticke But I will forbeare any further pursuite of these things vntill a fitter opportunity and consider how he expresseth this our Dissention and their Concord in his vain-glorious Hieroglyphick The Roman Divines he makes Harpers and turnes our Heavenly Musitians to play on all kindes of Instruments and this hee thinkes a â—est worth his whole discourse But Instruments of a kinde doe not presuppose an harmonious consent Neither doe Organs of different formes necessarily exclude a concord as this Harper would have it * Psalme 150. God was praysed in the sound of the Trumpet vpon the Violl and Harpe with Timbrell and Flute Virginalls and Organs and yet no horrid dissonancie or vnreconcileable discord to be heard So that although hee make Knox Master of our Quire I cannot thinke him fit to bee a Chorister in their owne for his skill in Musicke He further proceedes and gives Knox the Horne when all Scotland knowes that he brought the †To bee brought to the Horne is as much as to be outlawed m Sleid com lib 22 Hist Conc Triden Pope and his Cleargie to it He puts our Private Spirit as he tearmes it in a Bagpipe and forgets the Spirit that travayled in a m Cloake-Bag betwixt Trent and Rome I will not trouble you with such other thoughts as his piping hath occasioned but will turne the leafe and see whether his Pen be better then his Pensill and first wee finde A Replye to Mr Iames Vsher his Answere Your Father Parsons thought it an error in a Prince to call your great Cardinall Mr Bellarmine Shall it bee justified in a Iesuite to deale so vnmannerlie with a Primate and one of His Majesties most honourable Privy Councell A practise vsuall to our hot oppugners yet so little approved by their wisest brethren vppon their second thoughts that Mr Fitzherbert Rector of the English Colledge of his owne Society in Rome retracted his vnmannerly vsage in the same kinde towardes the Lord Bishop of Winchester Neither let this Iesuite thinke that his pretence of Religion is Apologie sufficient to plead for his incivility heerein when as n Replique a laresponse du seâ—enissime roy de la grand Bretagne Card. du Perâ—on pag. 1010. c. wise as himselfe or any of his order gave that most reverend Bishop the honour of his Dignity and Sea He telleth vs further that his Reply discovereth how answerlesse Mr Vsher returneth Balaam nor his Creature never spake truer for though the Iesuite hath presented to the world a Bulke pretending vniforme consent of antiquitie for the Romish Religion and the vanitie of the Answerer it will appeare onely that he hath expressed good will though little strength whereby Master Vsher †Responsa eius sine responsionibus returneth and remaineth answerlesse still Heere is folly enough for a Page and a Painting but resteth hee heere no hee vrgeth 1. Cor. 4. 15 and maketh it speake in this manner If yee haue tenne thousand Vshers in Christ yet not many fathers Heere is a Courtesie perforce for though this Loyolist neglects the most reverend Primate his honour in State his dignity in Schooles and makes him but a Master though his exquisite knowledge eminencie in Church and styles him but an Vsher yet his Sanctitie bursts forth and will not be hid for hee is acknowledged in Christ But let him glory in his conceipt as hee pleaseth I am sure though his faction have many * Fryars and Iesuites vulgarly stiled fathers fathers in Antichrist yet they have neither many nor any such Vshers in Christ After his Painting and Title wee finde an Epistle Dedicatory to His Maiestie which any man reading and beleiving may thinke a Iesuite a true Subiect for hee comes not with o Antiq. Britan in vita Thom Becket salvo ordine as their Canterburie Saint but will vnder-goe the tryall of his cause before His Maiestie and submit the right thereof to the censure of his excellent wisedome So that Ireland may rejoyce shee hath found a Iesuite that giveth Princes Iudgement in spirituall matters when the whole world besides cannot produce I thinke an other that will allowe them an p Some give the Pope a direct power to despose kinges Others an indirect power Bellar de Rom Pont lib 5 cap. 6. Quanâ—uÌ„ ad personas non potest Papa ut Papa ordinariâ— temporales Principes deponere c. tamen potest mutare regna et vni auferre atque alteri conferre tanquam summus Princeps spiritualis si id necessarium sit ad animarum salutem et cap 7 Quod si christiani olim non deposuerunt Neronem c id fuit quia deerantvires temporales Christianis vndependant temporall Iurisdiction He acknowledgeth his Maiesties vertues which wee commend in a Iesuite though it be but a Subiects dutie and could wish his Pen were as strong as his Subiect But forgetting pistoll poyson and Gun-powder hee imputeth their scaring from his Maiestiâ—s presence to washpish emulation of Adversaries which truelie proceeded from wel-grounded Iealousie and loyall feare Did you never heare of Benedict Palmio and Hanniball Codrett two famous Iesuites that not onely taught Parry that it was lawfull to kill the Queene of England but also that it was an act meritorious Williams Yorke O Cullen Savage divers others that were executed for the like attempts Did not they charge Holt and other Iesuites to bee their instructors in that practicall devotion where did Squire learne the lesson to empoyson the Queene but from your brother Wadpole q Oâ— Eâ—in his breife reply to certaine odious and slanderous libells etc. 411. These things are not inventions springing from washpish emulation of adversaryes but they are the confessions of such as were made Martyrs by Popish Doctrine I will close all
mil lib 3. cap. 5. Neminem posse etiamsi velit subesse Christo communicare cum Ecclesia coelesti qui nen subest Pontifici non communicat cum Ecclesia militante viz Romana So that we can justly say that wee have beene forced to depart from your particular Communion you declaring your selves schismaticks and enemies to the Catholicke Church and that wee doe adhere to the vniversall body it selfe in which Salvation will be found notwithstanding all your desperate Decrees cast out against the members thereof But our Iesuite sayth that we are so far from discovering any such thing that a prime Doctour †Doctour Feild in his Treatise of the Church lib. 3. cap. 13. cited Reply pag. 7. of ours confesseth that the Roman Church held still Communion with those other Churches that never fell into error We find not this in the place alledged but allowing it to be so why might not a perverse company hold Communion outward Conformitie with the true Church You make Iudas an Hereticke wee thinke hee was scarce so good and yet how long in this Hypocrisie did hee keepe Communion with the Apostles Arius was worse if it were possible for as the first would have dissolved his humanity this attempted with grosse conceits against his Divinity and yet his Communion was Catholicke and in outward appearance he a Socrat. eccl hist lib. 1. and his consorts b Carron in sum Concil pag. 39 Vndeâ—â—â— consilio inter se habito acquiescunt ad subscribendum manu solâ non mente subscribed to the Nicene Creed If this be all that you can say for your faith that you have held outward Communion with the faithfull it doth little avayle For a theife may be with true men and Heretickes with them that professe the faith and the Divell himselfe among the sonnes of God nay present himselfe before the Lord * Iob 2. 1 But an other †Master Bunny in his treatise tending to pacification sect 14. pag. 89. of the same ranke telleth vs that the Church of Rome hath ever continued after a sort in profession of the faith since the time that by the Apostles it was delivered to them c. And hath also in some manner preserved c. the word and Sacraments that Christ himselfe did leave vnto vs All this will not make Rome Catholicke or free her from Apostasie backsliding which surely is a very speciciall blessing of God and an evident worke of the holy Ghost from which confession our Iesuite inferrs that the Church of Rome her enemies being Iudges is cleerely freed from all suspition of Apostasie and is confessed to have held faithfull Communion with the true Church of God c Reply pag. 7 But all this foolishly and without ground even by the judgment of as cunning an Arguer as himselfe Parsons the Iesuite for hee doth not thinke Mr Bunny so kinde d Parsons Resolution in the second part of his Preface to the Reader It is such a PacificatioÌ„ as the high Preists of the Iewes wold have made with the Apostles after they had whipt and beaten them vpon condition they should neither teach nor preach any more the Doctrine of Christ as the Iesuite would have him neither doth he pick out of those words any such conclusion as heere is pointed out vnto vs which I have no cause to thinke hee would have omitted if the words would have afforded any such thing Yet we must consider that Mr Bunny was a Pacificator and would speake as much as possibly he could if not more then was fit for perswading vnion betwixt Rome and other Churches Moreover all the good he speaketh of the Romish church is that after a sort they continued in the profession of the faith which might have beene spoken of the Arians Nestorians Pelagians the most heretickes that did not vtterly cast of the name profession of Christianity for which of them after a sort did not professe CHRIST to be the Messias the Saviour of the world Further in some manner it preserued the word and sacraments but in such a maner that may stand with Apostasie The word they acknowledge but with Additions traditionall written the Câ—â—on so corrupted must not speak but with a tongue of the Pope's making The Sacraments they reject not but deny the People in the Eucharist the cup the other they have corrupted with many mixtures whereby it appeareth plainely that they have fallen from the auncient puritie embraced by the Roman church and that after a sort and in some manner onely they have had Communion with other Churches the word and sacraments being preserved not from their desire so much as from the blessing of God For if they might have done all at pleasure the word of God had beene changed for Evangelium aternum e Vide hist explica reverendis simi dom Primar de success stat Eccl cap â— and what doe you thinke would have become of the Sacraments So that the Answerer his worke neither totters nor wants a supporter as yet His third observation is that the most learned Primate will not have those opinions wherein we differ from him to be Heresies but onely a kind of still creeping in Apostasie hooded with the name of Religion and semblance of Devotion and therefore pretendeth himselfe to be excused from discovering vnto vs the author time of their beginnings f Reply pag. 7. Againe he chargeth the learned Answerer page 12. to denounce their opinions Heresies far spread and of long continuance which he imputeth to forgetfulnes till hee remembreth himselfe that they are not exempted from being Heresies by the Answerer but from being such as doe openly oppose the foundation of our faith g Ibid. So that these sayings may stand well together notwithstanding any thing he hath as yet vttered But he telleth vs if the differing points be heresies that never any did more openly oppose the foundation of faith then they And to prove this hee produceth the point of adoration of the hoste in the Sacrament of which he maketh no question but every man will easily vnderstand that if Hell were raked vp a more notorious Heresie could not be found c. and therefore it seemeth impossible in this Iesuites iudgment that any Bishop of Rome could be able to perswade such an impietie c. without being manifestly discerned h ibid. That this grosse and idolatrous Practise of Adoration of the Host is founded vpon a grosse and hereticall foundation is not denyed by the most learned Answerer Neither doe I thinke any man will otherwise conceipt thereof and yet by this concession the Iesuite getteth no ground for his inference therein For suppose this doth fight against Gods divine truth and in as violent a manner as the gates of Hell or power of darknes it followeth not that every man will easily espy i Rhem annota upon the 2. Thess cap 2.
of the Greekes hee mixeth Papists and Protestants and yet both put together they are not able to shew the distinct time without a circum circa and turne about for so hee expresseth it The denyall of vnleavened bread in celebration of the Sacrament was begunne about anno Domini 1053. as appeareth by Leo the 9. in his Epistle to Michael Bishop of Constantinople y Reply pag. 10 The Iesuite hath produced nothing but vanity for the finding the beginning of this notorious heresie For Leo the 9. saith no such thing viz that Michael was the first that broached this errour neither doth he cite the first author of it For it cannot follow because Michael did oppose the Azymes used in the Latin Church about the yeare 1053. therefore about that age it did beginne For that Patriarch charged the Church of Rome with other practises quod Sabbat a quadrageâ—â—mâ— observâ—â—â—◠〈◊〉 quod suffocata comederunt gentiliter quod 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 tantùm in Paschate nunquam vero in quadragesimali tempore decantarent Brovius in anno 1653. All which I thinke you will not say were first distasted by Michael at that time The Iesuitè runneth from his path and vainely without any relation to the thing in controversie telleth vs that the Greeke Church doth vehemently professe to detest the Protestants Religion a Reply pag 10 c. Wherein we have no reason to beleive him in regard he bringeth not any particular out of the Authors cited by himselfe to convince the same which I make no question but hee would have done if they had fairely offered it vnto his hands Secondly there would not be that freindly entercourse betwixt some of the Patriarchs of the Greeke Church and our Bishops as there is neither would they have sent their Preists to our Vniversities for instruction omitting yours which are nearer to them neither would the Grecians that are amongst vs frequent our Chappels Churches when they avoyd yours if they conceived them equally polluted or held vs in equall detestation b Concil Lateran 4. sub Inno 3. apud Bin. c. 4. In tantum Graeci coeperunt abominari Latinos quod inter alia quae in derogationem 〈◊〉 in 〈◊〉 committeâ—â—â—â— si quando sacerdotes Latini super corum celebrâssent altarianon prius ipsi sacrificare vo lebant in illis quam ea tanquam per hoc inquinata lavissent Baptiâ—atos etiam à Latinis ipsi Graeci rebaptizare ausu remerario praesumebant adhuc sicut accepimus quidam agere hoc non verentum with â—â—â—â—selves Neither doe they differ from vs in the fundamentall points of Doctrine we giving them as we ought a charitable interpretation although in some of the points in the Iesuites Catalogue taken from the Divines of Wittemberge they may be censured somewhat to savour of superstition and errour And that it may appeare whether the Greeke Church doth most favour Papists or Protestants I will insert here a Confession of faith of Cyrill Patriarch of Constantinople translated into English and published at London 1629. An other translation whereof I have seene vnder which is written This Copy hath beene translated out of the originall made * * done by the hands of the most reverend Patriarch Cyrill which I know well The writing it selfe being in my hands and having examined it my owne selfe I doe testifie that it doth agree with it word for word Corneille Hague Embassadour of the vnited Provinces of the Low-Countreyes at the gate of the Grand Seignour IN THE NAME OF THE FATHER AND OF THE SONNE AND OF THE HOLY GHOST VEE beleive one God Almightie and infinite three in Persons the Father Sonne and Holy Ghost the Father vnbegotten the Sonne begotten of the Father before the World consubstantial with the Father the Holy Ghost proceeding from the Father by the Sonne having the same ofsence with the Father and the Sonne wee call these three Persons in one essence the Holy Trinity ever to bee blessed glorified and to bee worshipped of every creature Wee beleive the Holy Scripture to bee given by God to have no other Authour but the Holy Ghost which wee ought vndoubtedly to beleive for it is written Wee have a mere sure word of Prophecy to the which â—ee doe well to take â—eede as to a light shining in a darke place Besides we beleive the authority thereof to be aboue the authority of the Church It is a farre different thing for the Holy Ghost to speake and the tongue of man for the tongue of man may through ignorance erre deceiue and bee deceiued but the Word of GOD neither deceiueth nor is deceiued nor can erre but is alwayes infallible and sure Wee beleiue that the best and greatest GOD hath predestinated his Elect vnto glorie before the beginning of the World without any respect vnto their workes and that there was no other impulsiue cause to this election but onely the good will and mercy of God In like manner before the world was made hee hath rejected whom hee would of which act of reprobation if you consider the absolute dealing of God his will is the cause but if you looke vpon Gods orderly proceeding his justice is the cause for God is mercifull and Iust Wee beleive that one GOD in Trinity the Father Sonne and Holy Ghost to bee the Creator of all things visible and invisible Inuisible things wee call the Angels visible things the Heauens and all things vnder them And because the Creator is good by nature hee hath created all things good and cannot doe any evill and if there bee any euill it proceedes from the Diuell and man for it ought to bee a certaine rule to vs that GOD is not the Author of evill neither can sinne by any just reason bee imputed to him Wee beleiue that all things are governed by GODS Prouidence which wee ought rather to adore then search into sith it is beyond our capacity neither can wee truely vnderstand the reason of it from the things themselves in which matter wee suppose it better to embrace silence in humilitie then to speake many things which doe not edifie Wee beleive that the first man created by God fell in Paradise because neglecting the Commaundement of God hee yeelded to the deceitfull counsell of the Serpent from thence sprung vp originall sinne to his posterity so that no man is borne according to the flesh who doeth not beare this burthen and feele the fruits of it in his life Wee beleive that IESVS CHRIST our Lord hath made himselfe of no accompt that is hath assumed mans nature into his owne Subsistence that he was conceived by the Holy Ghost that hee was made Man in the Wombe of Mary alwayes a Virgin was borne and suffered death was buryed and glorified by his resurrection that hee brought salvation and glory to all beleivers whom wee looke for to come to judge both quicke and dead Wee beleive that our Lord IESVS CHRIST sitteth
S. Augustine's time there were many more heresies that oppugned the Primitive Roman Faith y Reply pag. 8. then hee nameth sects to discredite ours For Perkâ— as the Iesuite hath mistaken his name so his Author if he speake as he is alledged for I have him not hath forsaken the truth there being no ground in the Church of England to produce so vaine a charge But for that noble * Sir Edwine Sands Knight the true inheritour of his Fathers vertues he doth shew in the place cited z In his Relation of Religion that whatsoever unity is amongst us proceedeth from the meere force and vertue of veritie which he accompteth the best and blessedest and which onely doth unite the soule with God And that the Unity of the Church of Rome is but for order in the world c. antecedent before us for which worldly peace they are beholding to their Father and adviser yet he further acknowledgeth our differences are not essentiall or in any part capitall Whereby the Reader may see with what truth he hath cited this Author For the most learned Bilson hee doth onely bewayle the mindes of many men that are not so prone to peace as they ought A complaint that the best age of the Church might have taken up And therefore if the Iesuite will proove our jarres let him forsake such poore advantages that for the most part are raised from Passion and manifest that in fundamentall points we vary one from another or all from the Catholick Church for otherwise it is more then probable that Babell will remaine where the most learned Answerer left it even in the midst of the Roman blindnes SECT IIII. THe most learned Primate as he hath sufficiently shewed the meanes whereby tares that have crept into the Church might bee detected viz â— by having recourse unto the first and best times doth further shew that the like may be done by comparing the state of things present with the middle times of the Church To which the Iesuite replying sheweth himselfe offended not so much to be foyled by his Adversary as to have it knowne This word thus doth doth more perplexe the Iesuite then the blowes which make him smart and therefore his passion expresseth it selfe Why saith hee unlesse you performe it better then thus I see not but your selfe may be crowned an Innovator of idle arguments a Reply pag. 25 No neither of idle demaunds for that is so proper to the popish schooles that no man can deprive them of this catholicke title and least want of succession should make them loose their priviledge the Iesuite hath sufficiently continued it in this his vaine Reply The first of these Arguments which the Iesuite would have accompted idle is comprehended in these words I finde by the constant and approved practise of the auncient Church that all sortes of people men Weomen and children had free liberty to reade the holy scriptures I finde now the contrary among the Papists and shall I say for all this that they have not remooved the bounds which were set by the Fathers because perhaps I cannot name the Pope that ventured to make the first inclosure these commons of Gods people b See the most reverend the Lord Primate his Answere to the Iesuites Challenge pag 9. And hereunto the Iesuite giueth a downe-right answere that hee findes no truth in this his saying first because he layeth not downe where amongst the auncient any such practise is testified to have beene 2ly neither doth he shewe where amongst us he findes the contrary c Reply pag. 25 The most learned Answerer thought it not necessary to produce witnesses to manifest so open truthes whereof the Iesuite could not be ignorant besides he is vaine and wilfull to conclude a thing untrue because the proofe is not particularly urged for who will seeke to prove those things which are most manifest which the Iesuite without declaring his ignorance cannot deny But because he chargeth this most reverend Lord with untruth I will take away that scruple from whence he seemeth to deduce this conclusion and breifly manifest first that it was the constant and approved practise of the auncient Church that all sorts of people had free liberty to reade the holy scriptures secondly that we finde the contrary amongst the Papists that then we may see whether his impudency will deny that which his deceite in this place is willing to cover For the first it is a proposition so cleare that I am perswaded the Iesuite would not have denyed it if he could with safety to himself his cause acknowledge the same Yet although he doth not confesse it I neede not much to trouble my selfe in the manifesting thereof there being such cloudes of witnesses And to goe further then the Priâ—itive times after Christ It is apparant that Gods word was not given to be kept under a bushell but as the sunne in the Orbe of the Church to lighten and irradiate the hearts of his Children as may be gathered from the scriptures penning in their vulgar tongue when they spaâ—e Hebrew To this purpose it was that Moses commaunded the Israelites to * Deut. 6. â— write the law upon the posts of their houses and on their gates And that it was a custome amongst the Church of the Iewes to try doubtfull things by the scriptures may be collected by the words of our Saviour * 10. 5. 39. Search the Scriptures for in them yee thinke yee have eternall life and they are they which testifie of mee And why should the Iewes have sent their Hebrew text to be interpreted if they had conceived that the vulgar use had not beene permitted Also it appeareth 2. Tim. 3. 15. that it was the familiar practise of good people to breed up children in the knowledge of the sacred scriptures And that it was the practise of the primitive times is plaine by the * Act. 17. 11. Bereans who searched the scriptures dayly to try the truth of the Apostles Doctrine and were therefore accounted more noble then those in Thessalonica Neither was it practise onely but the Apostle in those times perswadeth thereunto by shewing the blessing which followed the same Apoc. 1. 3. Blessed is he that readeth and they that heare the words of this Prophesie c. And for the Ages following who can be ignorant that knowes any thing of that which the Iesuite desireth proofe of For Polycarpus to the Phillippians saith I trust that you are well exercised in sacred scriptures d Polyâ—arp ad Philippâ—n Confido benè exercitatos esse in sacris literis nihil vos latet And in Origen his time the reading of these divine mysteries dayly prayers the word of instruction were the nutriments whereby the Spirit e Origen in Levit hom 9. Nutrimenta igitur spiritus sunt divina lectio orationes assiduae sermo doctrinae His alitur cibis his coÌ„valescit his victor
Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleannes through the lusts of their owne hearts to dishonour their owne bodies betweene themselves Who changed the truth of God into a lye and worshipped the creature more then the Creatour who is blessed for ever Amen Whereby wee may see from whence such fearefull practises and opinions proceede not from Gods truth but from the contempt of it when men had rather adhere to their vaine imaginations then that heavenly light Which is further declared Rom. 1. 28. Even as they did not like to retaine God in their knowledge God gave them over to a reprobate minde to doe those things which are not convenient And what ground this Iesuite hath to charge the scriptures with these fearefull effects he saith not But let him tell us whether doth Gods booke afford one syllable to justifie any of these practises layed downe by him nay doth it not deterre them from such wickednes That corrupt men in the maliciousnes of imagination may pervert the Scriptures to their own destruction as we deny it not so it maketh nothing at all against the vulgar use thereof And heerein our Iesuite is worse then Adam Eve the Serpent or hee that possessed them in their corruptest nature none making God the cause of their fearefull wickednes as the Iesuite in these particulars doth his Word And I thinke the pollution of Popish Preists might with as much truth bee objected unto them as to Anabaptists nay I dare say though I hate to give them a word for defence that there is as much sufferance for notorious pollution within the Papal command as under any government and confusion in the world as will be cleared by their stewes incestuous dispensations filthy Sodomies and mincing those sinnes which a chaste minde is distempered to thinke on q Sanches lib. 4 de debito con jugali disp 46 and modestie forbiddeth me to name But our Iesuite will conclude the matter and tells us if our Answerer cannot prove as sure he cannot that ever any such liberty was granted to the people to read such like Scripture as is allowed amongst them at this day let him tell us himselfe how farre he is from agreeing with the practise of either first or middle ages of the Church wherein no such Bibling nor Babling amongst the common people was ever beard or dreamed of r Reply pag. 27 If this Iesuite by such like scriptures would have the same translations prooved to have beene in practise in the first or subsequent ages or if he would have us to proove that there were others which were as corrupt as he presupposeth ours to be in common practise then he requireth us to proove what we affirme not Yet this wee may justly say that there was never translation in the Latine Church before Hierome's time but was more corrupt then any he can finde allowed in the Church of Ireland since the Reformation which may bee demonstrated by their owne measure or rule for if our translations be nearer the Hebrew out of which they were translated then those afore-mentioned Versions out of the Septuagint it cannot bee denyed that they are more agreeable to the truth And that they come nearer the Hebrew we need not to goe farre for manifestation thereof in regard they are more agreeable to the Vulgar Latine which in the judgement of Papists is nearer to the Hebrew then the Septuagint and by consequent then any translation from thence whatsoever But it hath this notwithstanding beene formerly shewed in this Section that the Fathers not onely permitted the same scripture for the people to read as we doe now but exhorted them also to that dutie And this did continue in the Church of God untill God and his truth being neglected and contemned humane inventions and superstitious customes which did better consent to Papall tyrannie then the Scriptures could any way doe invaded the Church And notwithstanding our Iesuites pretences wee know it is not because the Scriptures are so dangerous in their use that they are not permitted by the Romish Faction but because by their light every weake judgement may discerne Papall Hypocrisy f Verger secretar Pont. act 1. pag. â—1 Et scio quidem te non ignorare prudentissimos homines qui diu in hâc causâ versati sunt ita sentire ut si ea judicanda sit ex verbo Dei in veteri novo testamento scripto juxta eum sensum quem ex Epistolis atque actis Apostolorum agnoscimus ipsos Apostolos tâ—nuisse docuisse fore ut vincamur à Lutheranis and thereupon bee inclined to cast off that Usurper which raigneth in their conscience t Consilium quorund Episcop Bonon congregat de stabiliend Rom Eccles Denique quod inter omnia consilla quae nos dare hoc tempore beatitudini tuae possumus omnium gravissimum ad extremum reserâ—aviâ—us oculi hic aperiendi sunt omnibus nervis admittendum erit ut quam minimum Eâ—angeliâ— poterit praesertim vulgari linguâ in â—â—s legatur civitatibus quae sub tuâ ditione potestate sunt Sufficiatque tantillum illud quod in Missa legi solet nec co amplius cuiquam mortaliâ—m legere permittatur Quamdiu enim pauculo illo homines contenti fuerunt tamdiu res tuae ex sententiâ successere eaedemque in contrarium labi coeperunt exquo ulterius legi-rulgò usur patum â—st Hic ille in summa est libes qui praeter caeteros hasâ—e nobis tempestates ac turbines concitavit quibus propè abrepti sumus Et sane si quis illum â—iligenter expendat deinde quae in nostris fieri ecclesijs consueveâ—unt singula ordine contempletur videbit plurimum inter se dissidere hanc doctrinam nostram ab illâ prorsus diversam esse ac saepè contrariam etiam So that whether you have made a change or our selves let the Reader determine and whether Bibling in a language that may be understood doth not better agree with the auncient practise then Babling in an unknown tongue where the people and the stones are equally edified I also desire the Reader further to conceive how the Iesuit hath behaved himselfe in this controversie that when hee should have freed his Church from the change mentioned and so have avoided the most learned Primates argument he doth nothing labour to prove their agreement with the Fathers as he should haue done but onely goeth about to perswade that the Fathers never permitted such translations or as he tearmeth it such like Scriptures to be read of the people as are allowed amongst us at this day Al which is nothing to the purpose in regard the change consisteth in their different practise from the auncients and not in our agreement with them For if all sorts of people did reade the Scriptures in the primitive times being invited thereunto by the Christian practise of the faithfull and the exhortations of the Bishops then living and that the
p Glossa apud Gratian. de consecr Dist 2 Panis est Ambrosius de sacramentis â— Quâ—â—tomagis operatorius est fermo Christi ut sint quae erant in aliud commuâ—entur sic quod erat paâ—is ante consâ—crationem jam corpus Christi est c. Hoc 〈◊〉 est impossiblle â—â— panis sit corpus Christi sed haec verba ad 〈◊〉 intellectum 〈…〉 ita solvit 〈◊〉 as the Iesuite would perswade us hee is here willing to doe though in other mens judgements they would have a more wholesome understanding if the words ut sint quae erant were utterly cast out of the text Neither doe the subsequent words of Ambrose helpe his translation or assure him that he hath hit the marke to wit Before consecration there was not the body of Christ after consecration I tell thee plainely that it is now the body of Christ q Reply pag. 40 For the change which Ambrose speaketh of is no other then of a childe of Adam to be made a new creature r Ambros de sacram l. 4. c. 4 Tu ipse eras veâ—us creatura postquam consecratus es nova creatura esse coepisti accipe igitur quemadmodum serâ—o Christi omnem creaturam mutare consueverit which the Iesuite I hope will not say is done by Transubstantiation His further defence resteth in this that they have other editions which have those words Å¿ Reply pag. 40 This indeed concludes that all your impressions of Ambrose are not guilty of this clipping but this excuseth not all Now saith the Iesuite if he who either at Rome or at Paris set forth that worke found not in the exemplar or manuscript which he tooke in hand to print those words ut siat quae erant is that a sufficient argument to charge us with cankering c. when as we otherwise doe generally hold to this day the auncient reading t Reply ibid. To which I answere that if any such corrupted exemplar were no man that was fit for such a worke could bee ignorant that the exemplar was depraved in regard Gratian u Gratian. de cons dist 2. c. Panis est and other your bookes of more ordinarie vse x Breviare Rom. lect 58 infra octav corp Christi repeate this sentence of Ambrose with those words ut sint quae erant Besides this it was Berengarius his usuall argument against the carnall eating of Christ y Modius Noâ— dist 2. c. Paniâ— est and therefore the true reading to such no question learned men as were imployed about that worke could not be unknowne So that if he who either at Rome or at Paris set forth the same found no such exemplar where those words are omitted as it is more then probable or finding any such corrupt one should publish it contrarie to Gratian and all other Coppies for the sole behoofe of the Popish cause what can this bee but a cankering and fretting away of a sound part of anâ—iquitie To conclude the most reverend the Lord Primate hath not in this particular exceeded in a circumstance for all probability will perswade that these words ut sint quae erant have troubled your braines for being urged by Berengarius and accurately explained by Guitmundus and Algerus z yet an accurate explanation could not serve the turne but sometime an exemplar is pretended where sint is left out a Ibid. Vt sint quae erant Haec B Ambrosij verba quae Berengarius Catholicis objiciebat accuraâ—è explanantur à Guitmundo l. 3. ab Algero l. 1. c. 7. Lanfranous autem non modo ea optiâ—è interpretatur sed etiam ad dit in quibusdam codicibus sic legi Si igitur tanta vis est in sermone Domini Iesu ut inciperent esse quae non erant quaâ—â—â— magis operatorius est ut quae erant in aliud commuâ—entor â— So Lanfranc vide lit â— prucedenâ— sometime where the whole sentence is omitted b So the Roman Edition sometimes the words are inserted but ad sanum intellectum they are to be translated not as they beare but as in the Roman Church they ought to be understood c So Hugo Card. The second instance is out of the imperfect worke uppon Matthew â—omil 11. where the Author writeth thus Si ergo haee vasa sanctificata ad privatos usus transferre sic periculo sum est in quibus non est verum corpus Christi sed mysterium corporis ejus continetur â—uanto magis vasa corporis nostri quae sibi Deus ad habitaculum praeparavit non debemus locum dare Diabolo agendi in cis quod vult If therefore it bee so dangerous a matter to transferre unto private uses those holy vessels in which the true Body of Christ is not but the mystery of his Body is contained how much more for the vessels of our bodie which God hath prepared for himselfe to dwell in ought not we to give way unto the Divell to doe in them what he pleaseth Those wordes in quibus non est verum corpus Christi sed mysterium corporis ejus continetur in which the true Body of Christ is not but the mystery of his Body is contained did threaten to cut the very throate of the Papists seall presence saith the most learned Answerer therefore in good policie they thought it fit to cut their throat first for doing any further hurt Whereupon in the Editions of this worke printed at Antwerpe apud Ioannem Steelsium anno 1537. at Paris apud Ioannem Roigny anno 1543 and at Paris againe apud Audonum Parvum anno 1557. not one syllable of them is to bee seene though extant in the auncienter edition â—â— one whereof is as old as the yeare 1487 d See the most reverend the Lord Primate his Answere to the Iesuite's challenge pag. 14 The substance of the Iesuites answere to excuse this clipping is twofold First from Sixtus Senensis who doth testifie as our Iesuite saith that some auncienter â—â—ppies have not those words at all e Reply pag 41 But I would aske the Iesuite what coppies those are whether manuscripts or printed if Manuscripts where are they why doth he not point them out why doth he not direct us to them if more auncient Popish printed Coppies this doth but point them out for more ancient clippers But the truth is Sixtus Senensis saith no such thing in the booke alledged f Sixtus Senens l. 4. bibl Sancta And therefore letting him passe the Iesuite hopes to make sure worke by telling us that this appeareth by the marginal note of that very coppie which our Answerer citeth g Reply pag 43 But the truth is there is no such marginall in the edition set out at Antwerpe anno 1537. by the first corrupter of the place Iohannes Mahusius as being conscious hee had never seene any such Coppie yet in the fourth Tome of Chrysostome set out
at Paris anno 1546. which the Iesuite alledgeth not there is this marginall annotation Haec in quibusdam exemplaribus desunt but what were those quadam exemplaria Manuscripts surely not but the former printed one of Mahusius his editions set out at Antwerpe anno 1537. and at Paris anno 1543. And is not this a prettio tricke of legerdemaine first to corrupt the Author in print and then in after editions to cite those so corrupt impressions under the equivocall title of quaedam exemplaria Is not this a brave restoring of an Author to the auncient puritie of it's true and first reading So that indeed any may see that hee which followeth such guides must have the throate of his understanding cut with the knife of will full blindnes but the most reverend Primate is too well experienced in these their practises to be intrapped by such cheates or blinded with such wiles But if it be read with those words saith the Iesuite our Answerer himselfe cannot free it from manifest error mention being made of the Vessels onely of Salomons Temple which King Balthazar transferred to prophane uses and therefore was punished with losse of life and Kingdome and seeing that in those vessells neither the Body of Christ nor yet the mysterie of his Body is contained those words are not onely superfluous but also erroneous and false h Reply pag. 41 Indeede this Argument of the Iesuites is most erroneous and false for this learned Author shewiug us how to keepe our Vessels in Holynesse presseth it first from the Vessels used in the Temple Si enim vasa sanctificata ad privatos usus transferre peccatum est periculum sicut doceâ— nos Balthasar qui bibens in calicibus sacratis de regno depositus est de vita i Opus imperfâ—â— Matth hom 41 For if it is a sinne and dangerous to transferre unto private uses the sanctified vessels to wit those of the Iewes as Balthasar doth teach us who drinking in the holy vessels lost both his Kingdome and his life Then from the vessels used in the Church Si ergo haee vasa sanctificata ad privatos usus transferre sic periculosum est in quibus non est verum corpus Christi sed mysterium corporis Christi continetur quantò magis vasâ— corporis nostri c. If therefore it be so dangerous a matter to transferre unto private uses these holy vessels signanter demonstrativè that were used in the Church Christian and in all probability were before his face wherein the true Body of Christ is not but the mystery of his Body is conteined How much more for the vessels of our body which God hath prepared for himselfe to dwell in ought wee not to give way unto the Divell to doe in them what hee pleaseth But let the Vessels be what they will in the judgment of his owne Sixtus Senensis this Author doth here allude unto the Sacrament k Sixtus Senens Bibl. Sancta l. 6. Annot 21. Author operis imperf hom 11. alludere videtur ad haereâ—im corum qui â—egant verum corpus Christi esse in Sacramento altaris dum ait Vasa sanctificata c. which is all that wee neede to require And therefore the Iesuite hath little cause to sport unlesse it be in his shame it being evident that hee that thrust out those words did canker fret and corrupt this place and not restore it to the auncient puritie as the Iesuite vainely laboureth to perswade After all these paines the Iesuite conceiving hee hath not satisfied the Reader closeth up all with an other answer no doubt without exception The truth is saith the Iesuite as Bellarmine rightly observeth that imperfect worke upon Matthew though it goe commonly amongst the workes of Chrysostome yet is it none of his l Reply pag. 41 Who saith it is Was it urged by the most reverend the Lord Primate for Chrysostomes Here he contendeth to little purpose his fight is but folly For saith the Iesuite it aboundeth with errors c. the which errors have beene foisted in by divers Hereticks m Reply ibid c. But who were those Heretickes what were their errors were they not Arians Montanists Manichees Donatists Pelagians n Sixtus Seneni Bibl. sanctae â— 4. In Matthae um extat incerti autoris imperfectum opus varijs Montani Maâ—ichaei Arij Donati ac Pelagij haeresibus implicitum Had their Heresies any thing to doe with the question of the Reall Presence or the controversies betwixt us Wherefore the Iesuite concludeth I doe not see that any accompt ought to be made thereof at all o Reply pag. 41 A poore fetch because in some particulars it hath beene p Sixtus Senen ibid. Ego quod ad dam nihil habeo nisi hoc ipsum opus disertum doctum esse ac dignum quod assiduè legatur si tamen prius diligentissime expurgatum fuerit ab ijs erroribus quos in sexto libro in censuris super Matthaei expositoribus annotavimus abused by Heretickes therefore it must be rejected in the whole Sixtus Senensis approveth not this for he acknowledgeth the worke wittie and learned and wortâ—y of a daylie Reader if it were first diligently purged froÌ„ those errors which he hath noted in his sixt booke And Bellarmine although he thought it was either composed or corrupted by some Hereticke doth neverthelesse confesse it is a learned booke and contrary to the Iesuite minime sperâ—enous no way to â—e despised q Bellarm. de Scriptor Eccles Cujuscunque sit opus aut ab Haeretico aliquo Compositum suit aut ab Haeretico aliquo corruptum quamvis alioqui liber sit doctus minime spernendus Whereby wee may see how great esteeme the Iesuite hath of ancient Writers and with what clippings his well-willers would put forth these learned monuments if they might have their desire For although Bellarmine thinketh it credible that this Author was a Catholicke and his booke not to be despised though it were corrupted by auncient Hereticks r Ibid. Proâ—â—de eredibile est auctorem suisse Catholicum sed opus illius ab Arianis depravatum yet Sixtus Senensis before he will give him this liberty will have him purged not onely of the auncient heresies that were as the Iesuite speaketh foysted into him but of all those errours also which he hath noted in his Censures upon the Expositors of Matthew as in his fift homilie where he favours the Lutherans in the point of originall sinne Å¿ Sixtus Seuen lib. annot 16. in the IX where hee overthrowes the freedome of humane will t Ibid. annot 10. in the XIth XVIIth and XIXth where he denyes the reall presence in the Sacrament of the Altar u Ibid. annot 11. But the Iesuite will have it altogether rejected and no accompt to be made thereof at all and yet it hath beene used as a Champion to fight the Christian cause
when with frivolous surmises he seekes to make his Reader beleive that the Monks of Wengart should have thrust somewhat out of Rabanus his penitentiall but such dribling objections are worthy to bee answered with laughter f Reply pag. 4â— What doe we finde heere but a rabble of words that carry no weight at all for they are not frivolous surmises that are used against the Monks of Weingart nor dribling objections that are urged against you Mr Malone First if there be a blanke in Rabanus his penitentiall set forth by Petrus Stuartius as is not denyed if Stuartius received a blanke Manuscript from the Monks of Weingart as is likewise acknowledged If Romanists may purge or blanke manuscripts as Possevine affirmeth g See the most reverend the Lord Primate his Answer to the Iesuites challenge pag. 15. 16. 17. If the words blanked or purged out make against the Popish carnall presence in the Sacrament and for the cause of the Protestants as the Iesuite that can now with the Answerers helpe make up the blanke out of Paschasius well knoweth though hee will not acknowledge so much How can hee with any modestie call it a fâ—â—volous surmise that the Monkes of Weingart did thrust those words out of Rabanus his Penitentiall and that a dribling objection a pettie instance which convinceth the altering of the complexions of the aunciâ—ut by fretting unlesse such rasures are not fretts and washing away the soundest part of their writings For it is well knowne how that blanke which hee observeth in the Penitentiall published by Steuartius is to bee supplyed out of Paschasius Radbertus whose Doctrine as it seemeth was there alledged b Reply pag. 42 I doubt not that it is well knowne how that blanke should be filled up now it is cleared to you by the most learned Answerer yet I suppose you never learned it by your owne paines out of Rabanus his penitentiall The Iesuite tels us if Paschafius were the first bringer in of the Carnal presence as our Answerer doth blindly avouch without doubt his saying could prejudice nothing our cause and consequently it is a foud imagination to thinke that the Monkes of Weingert should have clipped his words for any advantage in thiâ— matter i Reply pag. 43 Who doth thinke Paschasius his assertion could prejudice your cause It is the fretting of Rabanus not Paschasius that the Answerer complaineth of The words that declare Paschasius his Doctrine in his or your owne bookes we give you leave to raze at pleasure but to raze it in Rabanus where it is brought forth to receive a judgment to undergoe a censure this maketh I hope for the advantage of your cause For doth not your blanke and rasure hinder the Reader to see Rabanus in his words following cui errori quantum potuimus c. to condemne the Paschasian and Popish doctrine and there I hope you gained by it unlesse it were no losse for the most famous Doctor of his time the most glorious starre of Germanie k Barâ—n tom 10 a◠§. de Raban Fulgentissimum Germaniae sidus directly to pronounce your Doctrine erroneous But if our Answerer will allow others to build upon surmises but halfe as boldly as he presumeth to doe himselfe and upon grounds farre more likely also then he hath any it may very well be thought that Rabanus Maurus that famous Arch-bishop of Ments whose commentaries for the most part are in the ordinarie glosse upon the Scripture of so great request in the Church of God who also as it is well knowne was never yet â—oted by any writer before Waldensis to have maintained any point contrarie to the Catholicke faith of the then Roman Church l Reply pag. 4â— c. I feare the Iesuites surmises wil be according to the imagination that he hath had of his learned Answerers demonstratives frivolous and vaine But before we examine them observe in these words a false supposition that the Doctrine of the carnall presence was in Rabanus his time the generall received doctrine of the Roman Churcâ— Secondly a most untrue assertion for before the Waldenses William of Malmesbury reproached Rabanus as disputing against the doctrine of the carnall presence m Guil. Malmes in praef Epit Amalarij de divinis officijs ad fraâ— rem Robertum Mâ— in Bâ—bliothe Colleg. Omnium Animarum Oxon. Admonitum te volo ut unum exhis qui de talibus disputaverun fugiendum scias Rabanum nomine qui in libro de officijs Ecclesiasticis dicit Sacramenta Altaris proficere ad saginam corporis ac pro hoc corruptioni vel morbo vel aetati vel secessui vel postremo morti obnoâ—ia quae de Domini corpore dicere credere scribere quanâ—â— sit pâ—riculi vides which in all probabilitie the Iesuite having the learned Answerers booke De christianarum Ecclesiarum successione statu in his hand could not be ignorant of though here he wilfully dissemble the same Now let us see what his câ—ca insomnia his sleeping surmises will prove that are brought in with such untruths First because it is well knowne that Rabanus Maurus wrote one peuitentiall worke before this voide free from all such error therefore it is not likely that he should write another n Reply pag. 43 Here is a wise surmise a convincing reason as if it wereso unusall that men should write twice of the same generall subject especially occasion being offered by the propounding of a new question as it here fell out For this penitentiall was written in answere to certaine particular questions propounded by Bishop Heribaldus as the booke it selfe sheweth whereunto you may adde the expresse testimony of Sigebertus Genblacenâ—s de illustr Eccles scriptor cap. 90. that saith Rabanus did write de quâ—stionibus Canonum ad Heribaldum Episcopum librum unum ad Reginbaldum Coëpiscopum de eadem re librum unum one booke concerning the questions of the Canons to Bishop Heribladus and an other booke concerning the same matter to Regiâ—â—ld his Collegue Secondly many Authors saith the Iesuite as well Catholicks as others doe alledge that booke which Paschasius wrote de Corpore Domini as if it had beene composed by Rabanus whereby they declare that he was held to bee of the same minde with Paschasius in this point of the Eucharist o Reply pag. 43 Heere is a surmise indeed if this may moove a Iesuite surely he will make Hierome a Pelagian in regard many authors alledge the confession of faith and Epistle ad Deâ—etriadem framed by Pelagius as if they had beene composed by Hierome This then is no ground to prove Rabanus to be of the same minde with Paschasius and if without ground any held as the Iesuite perswadeth he may know they held an error induced therunto by the no clean dealing of those that coyned false titles to those bookes Now as if surmises had beene demonstratives our Iesuite telleth us
non habentem maculam aut rugam non sie accipiendum est quasi jam sit sed quae prâ—paratur ut sit quando apparebit etiam gloriosa Nunc enim propter quasdam ignoranties in firmitates membrorum fuorum habet unde quotidie tota dicat Dimitte nobis debita nostra Neither was it the question in those times whether the Catholicke Church could bee spotted with Heresie but with sinne which was affirmed by the Catholicke Church against the Pelagians and this the Iesuite seemeth now to conceive and therefore telleth us that by reason of ignorant and infirmities of her members in other matters the Church hath dayly occasion to pray for the forgivenesse of sinnes n Reply pag. 43. Now the Iesuite giving the title â—â—spotted unto the Primitive Church of Rome which he accounteth the Catholicke how could the most learned Answerer understand the Iesuites tearme but according to the sence of the word as it was vulgarly taken in the primitive times Secondly it were not amisse to conceive that the Iesuite in his Challenge calleth the Primitive Church of Rome 〈◊〉 o In his Challenge in his enquirie in this section hee layeth downe the Roman Church without reâ—â—raynt of Primitive and lastly in his proofe hee thinketh hee hath got the day if from antiquitie he can prove that the Catholicke Church cannot faile So that you may easily â—spy who is guiltie of mingling one question with another But let us examine this new question as the Iesuite hath proposed it Whether the Church of Rome may rightly be tearmed Vnspotted or no p Reply pag â—â— That the auncient Roman Church was invincible never fundamentally erring in the foundation of faith in all her members for the first 400. or 500. yeares after Christ The Iesuite telleth us our Doctors and Masters grannt q In his Challenge So that the Controversie is not what the Primitive Church of Rome was in regard of Heresie but what the Roman Church is lyable unto in her succession which the Iesuite resolves and as he would make us beleive from Augustine and other anncient Fathers saying that in the truth and soundnes of her faith and doctrine shee is evermore invincible and not lyable to any spot or stayne r Reply pag. 43 But neither doth Augustine Origen Eusebius Alexander B. of Alexandria Athanasius Cyrill B. of Hierusalem or Philo Carpathius c. whom he urgeth Å¿ Reply pag 64 pag 650 say any thing for the Roman but for the Catholicke Church to which they beare testimony that it cannot faile So that our Iesuite falleth under Bellarmines Censure who affirmeth that they doe but trifle away the time who contend to prove that the Church cannot absolutely faile because it is graunted by the Protestants themselves t Bellarm. de Ecclesia mil l. 3. c. 13. Notandum autem est muluâ— ex nostris tempus 〈◊〉 dum probant absolute Ecclesiam non posse dâ—ficere 〈◊〉 Calâ—â—â—â— eâ—teri 〈◊〉 â—i id concedunt which the Iesuite knowing though dissembling after he hath produced S. Chrysostome for the perpetuitie of the Catholicke Church argueth fâ—r her But what Church doth this holy Father meane thinke you Surely none other then Peters Church u Reply pag. â—â— c. Peters Churchâ— proâ— nefâ—â— was the Church espoused to Peter purchased by Peter redeemed by Peter At Antioth the Church was first called Christian * Acts 1. v. 26. which name it hath retained and shall it loose its title and 〈◊〉 now and bee denominated from Peter The Spouse of Christ the mysticall body of Christ the house of God the Lords granary and 〈◊〉 Stapleâ— Relect cont 1. q. â— art 1. not 5 Vt est corpus Christi in uno sensu propter internam gratiam ita est domus magna Cheisti â—st area ager dominicus in alio sensu propter externam collectionem c. but Peters Church is somewhat harsh Chrysostome neere giveth the Church no such title onely their poore forged Cyrill hath Ecclesia Apostolica Petri an evidence answerable to the cause yet not convincing for the same title might be given to the Church of Antioch But can the wordes of Chrysostome stretch to the Roman Church â—et the Iesuite shew it if he be able That Church whereof Chrysostome speaketh is the Church of Christ not of Peter that Church whereof he is a Pastor y Chrys in Mat homâ—â—â— Ecclesiae futurae pastorem constituit not a Monarch the rock upon which it is builded is not Peter but Christ beleived confessed by Peter Ibid. Et super hanc Petram aedificabo Ecclesiam meam id est fidem atque confessionem Peter had no gift given him to preserve this Church from amidst â—â—erce assaults and raging flouds in this Fathers opinion though the Iesuite would perswade it but Peter was confirmed in his faith confessed by this promise made that the gates of hel should not prevaile against the Churchâ— Neither had Peter power given him to make the Church invincible but to declare it Ibid Petrus Ecclesiam per universum orbem amplificatam 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 validiâ—â—â—â— monstravit And as the Fathers ground this priviledge of the unspotted â— Non enim turbari te con venâ—â— cùm audicris quia traâ—ar crucifiâ—â—â— integritie of the Roman Church upon the promise of Christ to Peter Matt 16. so also they oftentimes deduce the same from the vertue of that prayer which Christ made to his Father for Peters faith that it should never faile Luc 22. wherin doubtlesse he was heard for his reverence Heb. 5. 7. Reply pag. â—â— There is no ground why the Roman should enjoy this priviledge either from Christs promise or his prayer as the Iesuite hath failed in deducing any thing from the former so doth he shew his abilities in this latter at his first entrance For first he brings in forged Epistles under the name of Lucius d Bellarm. l. 2 de Rom. Pont. c. â— dare not affirme this Epistle to be undoubted it is dared Gallo Volusâ— ano Cosâ— when as they were not Consule at that time as appeareth by Baron Annal. to â— an â— and Felix e The Epistle is dated Claudio Paterno Coss when as there were none such in his time Baron ad aâ— 273. good Bishops who would have 〈◊〉 the pride that they are urged heere to 〈…〉 the rest he cites 〈◊〉 good Bishop we will not deny yet his goodnes did not declare itselfe at all times when he spake of S. Peter or the Roman Church but his infirmity For as the Bishops of Rome both before and after him desired more then was fit so it will be no difficulty to shew that they contended to justifie their desires by unfit meanes and especially by swelling wordâ—â— in the honour of S. Peter and their owne Seâ— and practises sutable thereunto Insomuch that they were esteemed smoâ—â—â— by some
coâ— qui 〈◊〉 animarum zelantes ardenter sacris studijs procurantes multos in Ecclesia Dei operantur spirituales profectus magnum faciant ibi fructum their bookes burnt r Ibid Diâ—â—icte praecipientes ut quicunque libellum ipsum habuerit cum prorsus in toto in qualibeâ— sui parte comburere abolere procuret the Fryars preserved from the flame the Fryars made inquisitors of heresies Å¿ Bulla Alexandri IV. inter liter Ponâ—iâ—â—c pro officio Inquisit à â—â— Pegâ—à edit Rom. an 1585. pag. 5051. Alexander Episcopus servus servorum Dei Dilectis filijs universis fratribus Praedicatorum Minorum ordinum Inquisitoribus â—aereticae pravitatis c. Praesentium vobis auctoritate mandamus 〈◊〉 in â—odem negotiâ— de divino eâ— Apostolico favore confisi omnj humanâ— tractare deposito constanter ac â—ntrepide procedentes cirea extirpandam haereticam pravitatem câ—m omni vigilantiâ— omnique â—â—â—dio laboretis Prateol de haer in Guileâ— de S. Aâ—â—â—e Gault sec 13. these censured as forsaking the faith I will not for all this say that there were no members of CHRIST in the Church of Rome yet I dare say that all these Factionists against the Person Ghospell Preisthood of CHRIST were members of the Divell Neither is Dissention at this day such a fugitive from the Roman Church as the Iesuite would have us to beleive The Regulars of Ireland yesterday would excommunicate the Seculars out of the Hierarchie and preferre their Prelates before their Bishops for this reason because their Bishops are Subulci Swyneheards their flockes swyne Censura Paris Propos 2. Sacerdotes sunt meri saeculares Ibid. Propos â— Superiores Regularium digniores sunt Episcopis siquidem dignitas Pastoris peten da est ex conditione sui gregis quemadmodum opilio dignior est subulco The Sorbonists that cry loudest in this Heard make the Regulars as hath beene before related in their positions to be schismaticall inept hereticall * See before pag. 136. c. Now we may see what reason the Iesuite hath to use his interlineall glosses or to demaund with what reason the Answerer pretends harmony in Religion u Reply pag. 79 seeing it is apparant that the quarrels of Protestants are but in ceremonies or at worst in points of no absolute consequence that their differences are in matters that concerne the life of Religion unlesse they thinke the Church may subsist without CHRIST his Gospell or his Preisthood We may complaine with Ioseph that our brethren or those which should be so are too hard hearted that will offer to cast us into the pit of Death and Heresie for such pettie and small differences that being scanned with charitie would not appeare to be materiall when as your Variances Mr Malone would burst into scisme nisi ignis securis in officio contineret x Spal contra Suar. c. x. nu 30 Schisma proculdubiò facerent etiam nostrae Romanenâ—â—umsectae modo à me nominatae nisi illos ignis securis in officio contineret unlesse your Peacemonger tyed you to Unity by the faggot and the hangman So that his declamation out of Chrysostome doth torture himselfe not punish us for who barely seemes to have CHRIST but the Principall of Papists And what Alcoran denyes him more then their eternall Gospell Who mixeth the Gospell with decrees of men Have they forgot them who will have traditions to be received with the Scriptures pari pietatis affectu y Conc. Triden sess 4. Omnes libros tam veteris quam novi Testamenti neenon Tradiones ipsas pari pietatis affectu ac reverentiá suscipit â—c veneratur Are they not at Trent and Rome And therefore wee condemne you not because you are at oddes with Heretickes but because you are at peace with Hell and contention against the Faith But although the Iesuite hath fayled in his first attempt to make our dissentions such as either drive us from the Church or the Church from us yet hee ceaseth not but proceedes to manifest that the most learned Answerer in his Sermon at Wansted did seeke to shake off the palpable badge and cause of discord from himselfe by laying all upon the Pope and his universall superioritie as may appeare saith the Iesuite by his words Neither indeede is there any hope that wee shall see a generall peace for matters of Religion settled to the Christian World as long as this supercilious Master the Pope shall bee suffered to keepe this rule in Gods house But is not this saith the Iesuite just as if malefactors should give out that they can never live in quiet peace whilst Iustice beareth sway Or yet as if the damned spirits should complaine that they can never finde rest in Hell while God in Heaven beareth rule z Reply pag â—0 It is just as like as the Pope is either like to God or Iustice It is true as I have shewed before that the Divell is somthing lesse ambitious then the Pope For if the Scripture do point out that wicked one he would be but similis altissimo like unto the most High yet the Pope doth so farre disdaine to bee like GOD that he must be GOD himselfe No sooner Pope but he must bee placed upon the Altur and be worshipped lib. 1. ceremon sect 1. pag. 16 a Bis super altare collocatur cum mitra ibi que adoratur If in the Chaire who governes but a Celestiall Prince b Carer de potest Rom. Pon. 2. c. 24. n. 19. Hâc itaque in re Itali maximè se divino mâ—nere extollant super omnes nationes quod habuerintprin cipem coelestem Pontificem scil Romanum Talke of his power it is Omnipotent c Theses Pauli 3. Dicatâ— Vicedeum Christianâ— reipublicae Monarcham invictissimum et pontificiae omnipotentiae conservatorem acerrimum His Act the act of GOD d Panor in cap inter corpcralia de trans Episc His Tribunall one with God e Hostiens de trans Episc c. quanto n. 11. from whom there is no Appeale to GOD f Aug Triumph quaeâ—â— 6. 1. Nulla appellatio tenet facta aÌ„ Papà ad Deum quia unum Consistorium est ipsius Papâ— ipsius Dej because this presupposeth a superiour The Vnity and Trinitie of his Deitie I have shewed before out of Morinus g See before pag. 135. lit â— Besides he is as like to Iustice as he is truely GOD and no further I will not say that like Ziâ—â—ri hee â— surped his Monarchie by killing of his Master but by actions in our Saviours testimony equally unjust as by butchering his servants slaughtering his Saints Iustice gives Hee takes from every man his due His actions are the measure of Iustice not measured by it Princes and Preists the most glorious witnesses of the world whose prerogatives he covets and usurpes can witnesse this Shall wee thinke that all
he say of the ignorance or the folly of the Answerer when he upbraides him with a Creed of the new fashion compised by Pope 〈◊〉 the fourth o Reply pag. 91 Nullus sapienâ— admiratur M â— Malone and therfore take the foole with you And howsoever you thinke to defend Pins the fourth by the Practice of the Nicene Councell it will give you no shelter they did you say expresse and declare the ancient faith in a new fashion and forme of words p Reply ibid. So did Athanasius so others but this is not the thingâ— for which you are accused but it is for an Appendix of twelve new points many of which were never accounted of faith till Pius the fourth his time and therefore your ground from which you perswade us to embrace it is unsound viz â— that it was compiled after the like manner without any alteration or innovation of the auncient faith aâ— all q Reply pag. 92 The ancient faith was so necessary to be believed that Athanafius tells us Whosoever wil bee saved it is necessary that he hold the Catholicke faith but your Creed is propounded onely to schollars and cheifely to such as are to receive promotions unto Scholasticall or Ecclesiasticall dignities r Reply pag. 91. Secondly the Apostle S. Iude tells us that the Faith Catholicke was once delivered but all your Trent articles are not so but brought in in after-times by the authority and definition of your Church as Transubstantiation Å¿ 〈◊〉 4. disâ— 11. q. 3. 〈◊〉 in Can. 〈◊〉 â—ect 41. Thirdly in the unitie of the Catholicke faith layde downe t Irenaeus â— 1. â— 3. 3â— by Irenaeus all the founded Churches in Germany Spaine France the East Egypt Lybia and all the world did sweetly agree but upon many of the new articles in your Creed there have been continuall warres controversies betwixt those that you will acknowledge Catholickes as communicating in one kinde Purgatory Indulgences the Mother and Mistresse of all Churches So that these points must be additions or else the Church lost the unity of Faith for a long time together Fourthly 〈◊〉 Lirinensis u Vincen. Lirinen advers prophan novat Cùm sit perfectus Scripturarum canon sibique ad omnia satis superque sufficiat and other Fathers x S. Basil l. de vera pia fid Manifesta defectio fidei est importare quicquam â—orum quae scripta non sunt S. Hilar l. 2. ad Const Aug. fidem tandem secundum ea quae scripta sunt defiderantem hoc qui repudiat Antichristuâ— est qui simulaâ— Anathem a eâ—â— S. August l. 2. de doct Christ c. 9. In ijs quae apertè in scriptura posita sunt inveniuntur illa omnia quae continent fidem moresque vivendi and some Schoolemen y Scotuâ— Prolog in Sent. q. 2 Scriptura sufficienter continet doctrinaÌ„ necessariaÌ„ viatori Thom. 2. 2. q. 1. a 10. ad 1. In Doctrina Christi Apostolorum veritas fidei est sufficienter explicita make the Scripture sufficient to â—each all points of faith but many articles of this Creed are confessed by you to be delivered by tradition onely not by Scripture z Coster in compend orthodoxae fidei demonstr 〈◊〉 5. c. 2p 162. so that you see you have vainely sought your defence from the practise of the Nicene Fathers It had been better I thinke Mr Malone that you had taken another kind of defence that you had justified the Pope your Church that they make new Creedes defining verities by the infolded still revelation of GOD which determinations have the force of a certaine divine revelation in respect of us as one of the learnedst of your Fraternity hath said a Suaâ—es â—om 2. p. 93. or with Stapleton that the church may define a point of faith Etiamsi nullo scripturarum aut evidenti aut probabili testimonis confirmaretur although it bee not confirmed with any evident or probable testimony of the Scriptures b Stapleton Râ—lect Cont. 4. q. 1 ar â— or with Lâ—â— the X. in his Bull against Luther that it is heresie to say immanu Ecclesia aut prorsus non esse statuere articles fidei that it is not in the hand of the Church or Pope to make articles of faith c Art 27. not to have run to expressing declaring which the Councell Pope never intended but be it as it will the Iesuite tells us that the Laytie may bee well counted Catholickes though they never so much as heard of it therefore we need not to trouble our selves about so triviall a matter especially they accounting us of the Lay number But after charges of ignorance folly and wrangling the Iesuite accuseth the most milde modest nature of the most â—overend Primate that he sticketh not maliciously to slander Maldonate and others with the crime of Perjurie d Reply pag. 92. c. He that would answere this snarling Iesuite with equall currishnes must speake with his teeth and not with his tongue But passingby his language I will consider how impudently he chargeth that with slander the truth wherof he cannot cast off with all his shifts Their Trent Creede is Neither will I ever receive or expound it vizâ— the Scripture but according to the uniforme consent of Fathers e Bulla Pij IV. p. 478. Nec eam unquam nisi juxta unanimem consensum Patrum accipiam interpretabor Now to defend Maldonate and Pererius two of his brotherhood for not practising according to faith he first reviles after his accustomed manner the most reverend Primate Secondly he denyes that Maldonatâ— ever tooke his â—ath Thirdly he expounds the article of faith for the saving of the Iesuites credite f See the Iesuites Reply pag. 9â— First for his reviling let Rabshekah rayle for Maldonats oath he tels us that the most reverend Primate cannot tell whether Maldonate tooke the oath or not gives two reasons one in the Text because he supposeth he never did the other in the margent For he lived wrote in Paris where the Tridentine Councell is not received g Reply pag. 92 A Iesuite must beleive for the Popes advantage why should wee thinke his suppositions should prejudge his cause he that must beleive white blacke if the Church injoyne it h 〈◊〉 p. 247. can suppose any thing The other reason is as vaine might as well have been spared in the margent as in the text for though the Church of France receive not the Councell of Trent yet is there any Iesuite in France that doth not subscribe unto it to submit in any other maner then the Pope prescribes is not obedience but rebellion Besides this being made a part of the Papall Creed he cannot deny his Baptisme in that faith if their faith be as auncient as the Iesuite which is not done without a vow or oath But if
ibid. I have made it good before that Heresie is more ancient then the Papacy and that duration doth not exclude their opinions from being prophane and hereticall novelties c Before p. 193. 194. in which place as also hereafter the Inquisitor may receive satisfaction But hee telleth us that the most learned Answerer consequently will have us to beleive that his Religion is of more antiquity d Reply p. 106. Now as the Iesuite distasted the terme of Noveltie deservedly cast at himselfe and his so he is impatient that antiquity might any way belong to us and therefore in a disgracefull manner saith that the most learned Answerer endeavoureth to make good the antiquity of his profession first by jumping at once over a Thousand sixe hundred yeares and squaring his faith by that of the Apostles e Reply ibid. But this is not vanity if it were done unlesse the Iesuite will condemne himselfe as vaine also For in severall particulars he is forced to jumpe to the Apostolical times himselfe as hath beene before observed f Pag 86. 87 Neither dare he adhere to his touchstone the fathers but where his holy Father hath approved him g Reply p. 98. And for GODS Pen although he doth distast it yet he is willing to pretend from thence some safety though imaginarily when otherwise hee can finde no protection at all h See the direction at the letter But let the Iesuite know that he leapes short that reacheth not the Scriptures And to bee taught by any other without CHRIST and his Apostles in divine mysteries is to be deceived Give GOD and his Word the first place the Fathers will never bee denyed to be great helpes to truth and devotion and this is all that the most learned Answerer doth desire Secondly saith the Iesuite by adventuring though faintly to justifie it by that which the holy Fathers in middle ages did professe i Reply p. 106. Here the Iesuite detects himselfe that what he hath uttered before is untrue for there he chargeth the Answerer with jumping at once over a Thousand sixe hundred yeares and yet in this place he acknowledgeth him to justifie our profession by that which the holy Fathers in middle ages did professe Here we may see the reason why Mr Malone pleads the Fathers for his touchstone and accuseth us for rejecting them not because he accompts them the Rule or is confident in their tryall but because the people whom they dayly deceive are not so well able to make use of them whereby to convict their errours These are they that cry the Fathers the Fathers and yet despise them Wee keepe them under the commaund of their MASTER yet deny them not their just reverence their deserved honour We haue seene saith the Iesuite how he hath failed in the first producing no more for himselfe then all Heretickes have ever done k Reply p. 106. If the most learned Answerer had onely pretended Scripture without the truth or true sense of it he had done no more then the Devill Papists and other Heretickes have done but how will the Iesuite prove this to have beene practised by his learned Answerer The Scriptures he desires not as Papists and heretickes have abused them but in their true sence This light because you cannot endure must you therefore be a conquerour Poore fugitive How doth he dreame when he flyes from that power that prosequutes and would condemne him For the sword of the Spirit would not onely as the sword of the Angell make the Asse bruise the legge * â—â—â— â—â— â—â— but even breake the heart of the false Prophet if his eyes did behold the brightnesse of it And as vainely doth he charge the most learned Answerer with feare and shamefull tergiversation from the Fathers testimonies l Reply p. 106. when as whatsoever he hath said concerning them is the same that some Papists nay the Iesuite himselfe notwithstanding hee calls them the touchstone hath affirmed Was it not Mr Malone that rejected the Fathers generally consenting and defended them that did likewise m Reply p. 92. Who declared it lawful for every one in points that the Pope hath not made faith to presse urge the Fathers or reject them as they please n Reply p. 93. Doth not a troop of their owne exclude them from that authority in the Church which the Iesuite would seeme to give them neither affording theÌ„ the honor of a rule or touchstone either o Bellarm. â— de Concil author l. 2. c. 12. Scripta Patrum non sunt Regulae neque habent auctoritatem obligandi Wadding legat de concep Virg. Mariae sect 2. Orat. ◠§. 6. Nec enim parvum Doctorum aggerem sed Dei sapientiam spiritum pro regula rectore veritatis habet sancta haec nostra quae fallâ— non potest mater Ecclesia The Iesuite further telleth us that the Answerer in demonstration of his forwardnes taketh upon him to give the first onset himselfe But it is easie to espy saith he how this pretended hardines is nothing else but a meere cover and cloake to hyde the weaknes of his cause and to boulster out his booke with a shew of antiquitie more then with a substance of verity being flush alwayes in words and refined periods yet still failing in sound reason and judgment p Reply p. 106. What the Iesuite hath espied I presume he hath not kept secret therefore whether this conceit be not one of his selfe flatteries will be espied in the proper place where he hath declared what hee hath beene able to performe But though we should grant him saith the Iesuite whatsoever be alleadgeth out of the Fathers and that wee should confesse their sayings to make altogether for him hath not his owne mouth pronounced that all this will not be any way sufficient forasmuch as no authority but that of the Scripture can suffice And if he had reason to cry out with S. Augustine and say let humane writings bee remooved let Gods voyce sound with what sense now may he be thought to have stuffed such a deale of Paper with humane authorities It wil be answered that it is done onely to shew the confidence hee hath in his cause and that the Fathers howsoever hee esteemeth them little make wholly for him and against us q Reply p. 107. To this wee answere that iâ— his cause did not gaine by it yet the Catholicke Church is no looser when the grand deceivers of the Romane Faction are detected and their pretences of antiquity made knowne for delusions Secondly is the cause of Religion no way assisted by the writings of the auncient Fathers unlesse wee acknowledge them with the Iesuite the assured touchstone Navigators as are all that saile in the Sâ—ippe of the Church have much comfort and direction by the other Starres although the North alone infallibly direct their course and assists them to the
that the most reverend Primate in that Historicall explanation did not discend to the ages of Wickliâ—â— or Husse and therefore could not bring them in for Pâ—lâ—ars of his successive Church The Iesuite further telleth us that they are confessed to be damned herâ—ticks h Reply â— 11â— but bringeth not any testimony for the same He that speaketh most bittâ—rly is O sâ—aâ—der against the Waldenses who taxeth their opinions as absurd c. But I hope wee are not tyed to belâ—ive him where it is apparant hee was altogether deceived That the most learned and holy Bishop Iâ—well did cast off the Waldenses as none of ours may bee imputed to this that hee bâ—held them as their persecutors painted them out with spots of Maâ—ichâ—isme and other hereticall errours But if the Iesuite will read that discourse which hee cavils at hee shall see that the heresies imputed to thâ—m were bred in the malicious minds of Papists who did therefore fâ—igâ—â— these opinions to be theirs because they reproached their dissolute lives and no otherwise i Girard Histor Franc. lib. 10. Quam vis pravis iâ—buti â—â—erint opinionibus non hoc taâ—en tantum Papae magnorum Principum odium in â—os concitabat quantum libertas orationis quâ dicâ—oâ—um Principum atque Ecclesiasticorum vitia morâ—s dissolâ—tos culpare ipsiusque Papae vitam actionâ—â— reprehendere consâ—everunt Haec praecipua res fuit quae universorum â—is conâ—â—avit odium quaeque â—ffecit ut plures â—efariâ— affingerentur â—is opiniones à quibâ—◠〈◊〉 â—â—â—â—ant alâ—â—â—â— Thirdly saith the Iesuite both Luther himselfâ— and all his followers doe make him the first Author of Protestanâ—y k Reply pag 110. What Luther the first that ever taught the doctrine professed by Protestants Those that are better read in story then our Iesuite confesse otherwise for Poplinerius acknowledgeth the Waldenses and Protestants to differ little and that this doctrine was preached and defâ—nded throughout Europe in France Spaine England Italy Germany and other Nations also l Popliâ—er hist Franc. lib. 1. â—dit aâ— 1581. fol 7. b Hi Albigenses invitis Principibus Christianis omnibus circa annum 1100 temporibus subsequentibus doctrinam suam ab eâ quam hodie PROTESTANTES amplectuntur parùm differentem non per Galliam solum totam sedâ—â—iam per omnes pâ—nâ— Europae oraâ— disseminârunt Nam Galli Hispani Angli Scoti Itali Germani Boâ—â—mi Sâ—xonâ—â— Poloni Lithuani gentes aliae â—am ad hunc diem pertinaciter defenderunt But I need not to stand in defence of that booke which doth defend it selfe and ever will against either the Iesuite or his fellow-labourers neither hath he urged any thing worthy observation against the same For there is no question but Luther did powerfully preach against Popish corruption and by his ministery together with others whom GOD raised up with him did publish the Gospell the light whereof for a long time they did disgrace and revile It is not enough to make Luther the Author of our Religion because after your Apostasie heâ— was one that at first did publickely and zealously preach the same When the Arians persecuted the Catholicke Faith eclipsed obscured it made it reputed Hâ—resie insomuch that the whole world m See before pag â—5 lit â— in marg was an Arian and Catholicke also in her owne judgment was the Catholicke faith afterwards published with zeale and victory the birth of Christian Religion the beginning of our Creed Nothing more triviall That which the Iesuite speakes afterwards of Luthers remorse of Conscience is ridiculous and might have beene spared for who can doubt but that in his â—calous performing of his duty in publishing the Truth of the Gospell of CHRIST the Divell did as violently assault him within as the Pope without thereby he was afflicted with as many superstitious feares within as outward terrors for the same reasons I suppose in regard the preservations of their kingdomes did depend upon it Now at last that he may conclude he casts up his Audit Sâ—â—ing that our Answerer cannot tell us that which we demaâ—nded to wit when or by whom our Catholicke Religion was first brought in n Reply p. 11â— Although there is no Injunction for it as hath beene shewed that he should answere your Demaund yet hee hath in all your particulars discovered your innovations which how it hath beene avoyded wil bee examined in their due place Yet the Iesuite telleth us that he will doe the Answerer the favour to tell him briefly where when and by whom his Protestant Religion was first begun o Reply p. 113. But I aske the Iesuite whether in his Conscience he is not checked for urging Calvin c with a corrupt minde when from their words he would have it concluded that the Catholicke Faith did first bâ—gin at Wittâ—nbergâ— I hope the Iesuite can consider that the repairing of the Temple was not the laying thâ— foundation of it neither David Hâ—â—â—â—hiah or Iosiah their regulating of things amisse a bringing in of a new law Teaching for doctrine the Traditions of men this makes a beginning but let the auncient of dayes be preached in the last times this is no Novâ—ltie no new thing But saith the Iesuite Loâ— here then the place where Wittenberge the yeare 1517 the day of the moneth the xxxi of Octâ—ber the day of the weekâ— Saturday yea the very houre of the day twelve of the clocke when first Protestancie was brâ—â—â—hed by Luther p Reply p. 1â—3 Nothing more fond Luther resisted Popish abuses such a day therefore the Faith preached by Luther did then first begin What did de make a new Gospell as some of you have attempted q See before pag. 330. 331 or frame a new Creed as you have lately done r See before 359. I desire the Iesuites evidence or his modesty his evidence to convict Luther or his modesty to condemne himselfe For if the opposing of Iâ—dulgences be the beginning of our Faith as the Iesuite doth insinuate Bellarmine will shew that he hath fayled both iâ— person time and place Å¿ Bellarm. de Indulgen l. â— c. 1. Primi qâ—â— indulgentias contempserunt oppugnârunt fuâ—ruâ—â— Waldenâ—â—â— Seqâ—â—tus est Valdenses Ioannes Wicleâ—â—â— Wicleâ—um seqâ—â—ti sâ—â—â— Hussitâ— Hos MAIORES PARENTES habâ—it Maâ—tinâ—s Lutherus And although he give Luther the name yet Bzovius will not have Luther but Staâ—pitius to have first begun the worke Bzovius Annal Eccles in ann 1517. num â— Staâ—pitius quoque quamvâ—â— PRIMVâ—â—apâ—dâ—m validâ—ori postea brachio vibrandum contra Ecclesiam conjâ—â—issâ—t sectâ— tamen cujus si non â—â—ctor certè promoâ—o◠〈◊〉 â—â—â—en darâ— non potuit sed â—â—rpiâ—â—dinem hanc Luthero reliquit And notwithstanding the Iesuite telleth us so confidently that Protestancie was first brâ—ached by Luther the yeare 1517. yet the same Author affirmeth that he disputed against them in the points oâ— free-will mâ—rits and traditions the yeare before Ibid. nuâ— 1â— Superiore poâ—â—o anâ—o 1516 Idem Lutherus disputavit conâ—ra Scholasticoâ— Theologoâ— de libero aâ—â—â—trio meritâ—s bonoâ—um opâ—â—â—â— traditionibuâ— Ecclesiasticiâ— â—asque propositioâ—eâ— Toâ—o 1. opâ—â—u◠〈◊〉 â—â—serâ—it â—◠〈◊〉 â—â—ique appaâ—eâ—◠〈◊〉 jam 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 So punctuall the Iesuite is that in the judgment of his owne he hath in every circumstance troad awry His repetition of Aâ—gâ—stines rule That Custome which â—en looking up into former tiâ—â—s doe not finde to have beene brought in by any that lived after the Apostles is rightly beleived to havâ— beene delivered by the Apostles themselves helpes neither them nor their cause for they never have nor ever wil be able to manifest either by our confession or otherwise that Roâ—ish customes have beene universally received neither can they defend them from Noveltie in their â—â—â—rance wherefore they may well bee cast forth into thâ— Dâ—nghill as wanting the Salt of Apostolicall institution for their seasoning So that S. Augustines Rule condemneth their Novelties and the GENENERALL CONTROVERSIE is cleared but indeed no otherwise then to the detection of their Egyptian Darkenes