ancient Doctrine Doe you thinke the Divell playeth â—ex onely in his owne Kingdome No assure your selves no more then the Pope Pontifex only at Rome for though hee swayes not universally yet many States â—eele his secret practices to worke division amongst those that are united to the truth Is not this the greatest part of your worke to make sedition to breake peace Divide impera is not a lesson that the Iesuites are now to learne seeing it hath beene their dayly practice l Dist Compeâ— Dâ— Iesuit 〈◊〉 â— 27. â— Watson Quodâ— 3. art 4. p. â—â— And although the Iesuite would now excuse it I cannot see but the Christian CoÌ„mon-wealth at this time is pestred by their Vrbanus or Turbanus as Cardinall Benno stiled an other of the like Condition of the same name m Benno in vita Hildebrand So that the Iesuites pretences to free his Supercilious Master from being that which he was justly stiled are too vaine and light there being no hope that we shall fee a generall peace for matters of Religion settled to the Christian world as long as he is suffered to keepe this rule in Gods house n The Iesuite might have taken notice of what was urged by the most reverend Primate immediately before those words whereas he carpeth in the Sermon preached before his Majesty pag. 13. 14. viz. That Nilus Arch bishop of Thessalonica entring into the consideration of the originall ground of that long continued schisme whereby the West standeth as yet divided from the East and the Latine Churches from the 〈◊〉 wrote a whole booke purposely of this Argument wherein he sheweth that there is no other cause to be assigned of this distraction but that the Pope will not permit the cognisance of the controversie unto a generall Councell but will needs sit himselfe as the alone Teacher of the point in question and have others hearken unto him as if they were his Schollars and that this is contrary both to the ordinances and the practise of the Apostles the Fathers thereunto we may adde the testimony of their owne Cassander consult Art 7. de Ecclesia vera Neque unquam credo controversia apud nos de externa Ecclesiae unitata extitisseâ— nisi Pontifices Romani hâc authoritate ad dominationis quandam speciem abusi fuissent eamque extra fines à Christo Ecelesia peaescriptos ambitionis et cupiditatis causâ â—utulissent But returning againe to the Answere he telleth us that Our Answerer alledgeth for himselfe the example of S. Cyprian who with the rest of the African Bishops dissented from the Pope and Church of Rome without being cut off from the Catholicke Communion To which the Iesuite replyes that this is easily answered forasmuch as the point wherein S. Cyprian did vary from the Pope was not declared by the Church untill after S. Cyprians death and therefore it might have beene maintained without any breach of Catholick Vnitie * Reply pag. 80 What he speakes concerning the Churches declaration will have a more fit place hereafter But to shew how little the Iesuite hath spoken for his cause wee may first consider That Cyprians opinion was condemned by your Pope his Councell the contrary defined o Bellar. l. 2. de Concil c. 5. Constat Cornelium Papam cum nationali Concilio omnium Episcoporum Italiae statuisse non debere haereticos rebaptiâ—â—ri et eundem sententiam postea approbasse Stephanum Papam et jussisse ut haeretici non rebaptizarentur yea S. Cyprian himselfe excommunicated and so severely dealt withall by Pope Stephen that he would not admit the African Legats to speake with him but styling Cyprian a Counterfeit said that CHRIST did deny any Communion to be held with him p Cassander Consult ar 7. Cùm Stephanus Episcopus Romae utbis Cyprianum quod in ipso erat repelleret Episcoposaâ— ipsum ex Africâ legatos nec ad sermonem communis colloquij admitteret praecip eret universae fraternitati ut venientibus non solum pax communio sed tectum hospitium negaretur insuper Cyprianum Pseudo Christum dolo sum operarium diceret Haec scribit Firmilianus Episcopus è Cappadociâ ad Cyprianum cujus Firmiliani meminit Eusebius Histor 6 l. c. 25. l 7. c. 13. Ad quem Stephanus scripsit non esse communicandum ijs qui ad Haereticos transcuntes rebaptizant All which did not make the declaration of the Church in Augustines opinion so that we may easily perceive that Augustine did not thinke the Pope to bee the Church or his declaration to be the Churches definition And indeed what toyle did Vincentius Lyrinensis q Advers prophan Novat take in vaine if the Pope could define alone if there were no true knowledge of Scriptures but where he gapes if for him CHRIST onely prayed Besides see what Church did define this Not the Roman out of which Cyprian was excommunicated and never reconciled but that for which Cyprian shed his blood r Augustin l. 2. cont Crescon c. 32. Non accipio quod de baptizandis haereticis et schismatics B. Cyprianus sensit quia hoc Ecclesia non accipit pro qua B. Cyprianus sanguinem fudit to wit the true Catholick which with Cyprian is every Maundy Thursday by their Bulla Coenae excommunicated at Rome And therefore the Iesuite hath unwisely urged S. Augustines wordes against the Donatists Put your selves into that Church which as it is manifest S. Cyprian defended and then may you alledge S. Cyprians authoritie for your Doctrine Å¿ Reply pag. 81. It being plaine that the Roman Schismatickes accuse and accurse that Church in which Cyprian dyed a blessed Martyr accompting it no further Catholicke then it is Roman All that followeth is chaffe Finally saith the Iesuite I would our Answerer did observe in this example how notwithstanding so many Bishops as in Africke joyned with S. Cyprian who in number were more then are in all his Majesties dominions yet was there found a superiour Church that did controule them all herein prescribing both to them others what they ought to follow and beleive by whose authority S. Augustine as we have heard and all the rest of the African Bishops did reject that opinioÌ„ of S. Cyprian embraced the contrary t Reply pag. 81. First wee may see that the Bishop of Rome had not so peaceable a dominion as the Iesuite pretends if so many Bishops did resist his controuling as the Iesuite acknowledgeth Secondly you may see his falshood in his cautelous conveighance labouring to perswade that the Roman Church was the superiour Church having authority to controule them all to prescribe to them and others what they ought to follow and believe whenas Augustine never dreamed of it when he and the African Bishops alwayes resisted and disdained it u See before pag. 301. That they did not adhere to Cyprians opinion the
sedem omni lande dignam plus quam Ecclesiae sanctae expedit decet exaltare se peâ—â—tus â—â—t quasi fundant Si quis illas omnes Scripturas 〈◊〉 Sanctis attributas diligenter perlegeret et eorum tempora ad illa scripta applicaret ac deinde in opusculis omnium sanctorum Patrum qui usque ad Augustinum Hieronymum et Ambrosium fuere ac etiam de gestis Conciliorum ubi authentica scripta allegantur usum et memoriam hâ—beret hoc inveniret verum quia nec in illis omnibus Scripturis de illis praefatis Epistolis mentio habetur et etiam ipâ—â— Epistolâ— applicatae ad tempus eorum sanctorum scipsas produâ—t Cusanus doth downe-rightly stile some of them Counterfeits and doubteth not that they all would betray themselves if diligently read applyed to the timesh Contius wrote a Preface which is suppressed with his reasons that he was confident would have declared these Epistles Counterfeit i Contius Annot. in dist 16. c. Septuaginta dicit 〈◊〉 aâ— supra in 〈◊〉 ratioâ—â—â— adduâ—â—i quibus omnes Pontificum qui Sylâ—â—strum 〈◊〉 〈…〉 esse manifeste octendi Vide colloq Rainoldi cum Harto c 8. divis 3. Besides they shame themselves For would these Fathers speake like Barbarians when the Heathen Rhetoricians were ready to oppose them Could they speake in one stile forme of wordes when they had so many different pennes and diverse tongues Were Popes so obscure or their Epistles so contemptible that they were not knowne in the first 500. yeares Were they of so sleight perswasion that they could not moove the Bishops of Africk to give their Successors what those blessed Martyrs possessed Did they cite Hieromes Translation by Prophesie which was not extant while any of them were â—iving Did any Author in those times speak such tearmes as are mentioned in those Epistles Finde me Primatus and Apocrisiarius in Anacletus his time Pagaâ—â—â— in Caius his dayeâ— Finde me a Preist with a shaven Crowne in Anicetus his Government Much more may be gathered from our learned obsenvers but these things may suiâ—â—se to declare of what breed these Epistles are Secondly If the Nicenâ— Fathers have not ampliâ—â—ed the â—ounds of the jurisdiction of the Church of Rome in so â—â—rge a manner as shee desired the most learned Primate observeth she hath had her well-willers that have supplied the Councels negligence in that behalfe and made Canons for the purpose in the name of the good Fathers that never dreamed of such abusines k In the Answer to the Iesuites challenge pag. 13. But in regard the Iesuite hath undertaken to justifie them in the Eight Section I will there God willing discouer their corruption Thirdly If the power of judging all others will not content the Pope unlesse he himselfe may bee exempted from being judged by any other another Councell saith the most reverend the Lord Primate as auncient at least as that of Niâ—â— shal be suborned wherein it shal be concluded by the consent of 284. imaginarie Bishops that No man may judge the first seate and for failing in an elder Councell then that consisting of three hundred Buâ—kram Bishops of the selâ—â— same â—â—king the like note shal be sung quoniam prima sedes non judiâ—abitur à quoquam The first seate must not be judged by any man l Ibid. Now that these trâ—ly be as they are reported no man â—â—n doubt that will seriously enter into consideration of them unlesse he leave his wits and wisdome also For the first to wit the Councell of Sinnessa it was never heard of till the time of Pope Nicholas the first about the yeare 860. unlesse the Iesuite hath better evidence then Bellarmine could finde m Bellarm. de Rom. Pont. â— 2. c. 26. In Concilio 〈…〉 dicunt Patres 〈◊〉 seâ—â—â—◠〈◊〉 judicatur Resett haec verba ex isto Concilio Nicolaâ—â—â— in 〈◊〉 ad 〈◊〉 and yet the supposed Session of this pretended Councell was many hundred yeares before even in the time of the Emperour Dioclesian And the number of Bishops that are urged for the glory of this Councell deâ—ect the forging of it for could it be that the Church in her cruellest persequution should cause 300. Bishops to assemble together when afterwards in her full prosperitie at Nice in the most urgent cause that ever the Church had there were assembled but 318. Neither are we without other just exceptions againstit Did this Councell tell truth that Dioclesian being in the Persian warre heard of the condemning of Marcellinus when that warre was ended 2. yeares before No Binnius condemneth this as no part of the Acts of the Councell unlesse he may helpe the lyar by making him speake as he pleaseth n Binius Not. ad Concilium Sinuessanum Cum esset in bello Persaâ—â—m Haec nisi â—mendentur falsa sunt Etenim cum sententia Eusebiâ— quorundam aliorum hoc anno 20 imperij sui imperio se abdicaverit quod magis est ante biennium de Persis superatis vi 〈◊〉 Romae una tum Maximia no collega suo triumphum egerit quomodo quaeso hoc anno cum exercitu adversus Persas in procinctu expeditione â—ssâ— pâ—tuit Dicimus igitur â—â—c omnia quae sequuntur non esse exactis Concilij sed ut apparet ad ipâ—â— aâ—â—a appendicem superadditam â—el sâ—â—ectio ista restiâ—atur 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 erat â— beâ—â—â— Persâ—rum germana esse videbitur 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 consentaâ—â—ea Vâ—de Baâ—on â—n Christi â—â—◠〈◊〉 â—â—â— And lastly it is apparant that as wise as our Iesuite hath accompted these â—â—ckram Bishops even Donatists the Acts spurious and of â—â— weight Ibid. 〈◊〉 Virorum 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 â—â—c acta 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 esse validis saâ—e argumentis prâ—bare conati funt adcoque 〈◊〉 nihil 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a 〈◊〉 câ—lâ—â—dè excogitaâ—â—m For your second Councell held as you pretend at Roâ—â— under Sylvester it had neither other Bishops nor more authenticke acts For first it is infected with Constantines 〈◊〉 Act. 1. c 1 Cum 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 quod Constantinus 〈◊〉 a Sylvestro Episcopo urbis Romae 〈◊〉 suit a lepra a tale and indeed beyond all folly ridiculous 〈◊〉 knowne to the Church many ages after Constantines death q Platina in vita Maâ—ci 1. Qâ—od verâ— in lepram 〈◊〉 â—◠〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 siâ— confictâ prius de 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 nescio quâ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 â—â—â—do 〈◊〉 â—â—ee in re secuâ—â—â— qui 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 â—bi â—â—◠〈◊〉 quintum aetatis 〈◊〉 attigisset 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ex urbe Constantiâ—oâ—oli ad a â—â—as â—alid as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 causa â—â—llâ— de lepâ—à mentione habitâ Praeterea 〈◊〉 â—ac de re à â—ullo scriptorum â—â—t mentio non dico ab his qui ethniâ—i 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 â—â— a 〈◊〉 quideâ— Secondly this Councell sub Sylvestrâ— must be the yeare before Sylvester was Pope an idle conceite for that is the third Consulship of Constantine Augustus 〈◊〉 hist Ecel l. 4.
observed if the Truth were not before knowne The declaration doth not make it Faith but sheweth that the faithfull doe adhere unto it as revealed by God for if the truth were not there the declaration of it were an Hersie or error at least Neither doth hee produce any thing afterwards to make the Church the rule of faith Whereas he tels us that S. Augustine writing to S. Hierome requesteth him that setting downe the Catalogue of Heretickes he would joyntly expresse in what points they had beene condemned by Catholicke authoritie and againe in his Preface to the above mentioned Catalogue of Heresies hee mentioneth himselfe what the Church holdeth against such Heresies without making any mention of the authority of Scripture z Reply p. 10. I thinke the Iesuite would have a Church embracing heresie What doth the Churches adherence to truth make her the Iudge or rule of it and because Catholicke authority condemneth Herefie must therefore the contrary truth have its life from the declaration thereof Faith must then follow the Church not leade it The Iesuit may conceive that this Father meanes not by the Churches authority a power inherent in their Roman Apollo excluding all other assistance but a lawfull determination according to the Scriptures by the Bishops Preists of the Catholick Church For otherwise he must acknowledge in the Church such a domination as was amongst the Gentiles Luke 22. But sure it is that S. Augustine dreamed no more of your Iudge then the blessed Apostle S. Paul who in the enumeration of the divers degrees of the ministery Ephes 1111. v. 11. left him out Besides the Iesuite by Apostolicall directions in matters that concerne faith may see a Rule not a Iudge pointed out as having authority to guide us Phil. 3. 16. Gal. 6. 16. by which rule as the Church receiveth strength so limitation Finally saith the Iesuite observe how all the points layde down by me in my demand being declared by the Catholicke Church for articles of faith are of necessity to be beleived and held for such the contrary for dâ—â—â—able Heresie Reply p. 104 What the Iesuite doth say for the expresse declaration of all his points of Faith wil be examined in their severall places here an induction he brings us a conclusion whereby he would prove that the onely Rule to know a point of faith from an indifferent opinion in Religion is the declared determined judgment of the Church by which all the points laid down in his demand being propounded unto them for such must of necessity be accounted cheife articles of Catholick beleife b Reply p. 105. 106. But from whence the Iesuite draweth this conclusion I cannot see for if the Church command by the expresse Scripture and sense agreed on in all ages the Church then doth judge at least with undependant authority but direct calling for obedience to a former judgment if it decree in points doubtfull the Churches declaration can bind us to peace and externall obedience but here no infallible judge is allowed to make matters that were doubtfull to be of faith or to create from uncertainties a new Creed That the Church by her particular ministers and body representative hath applied the Scriptures to severall heresies thereby detected condemned them we deny not but will this make every point decreed by a Councell wilfully from their owne ends without direction or limitation to be a cheife article of Faith Your Quartadecimani were convinced of heresie by the Scripture as Alphonsus de Castro telleth us c Alphons de Castro advers Haeâ— l. 12. de Pascha Istorum ergo sententia inde convincitur haerescos quòd supra in titulo de lege oâ—tendimus esse hâ—resim asserere caeremonias judicia legis veteris obligare tempore legis evangelicae Nam Paulus reprehendens Galats co quod caeremonias legis observandas putaâ—ent inter alia dicit Dies observatis menses tempora annos but where by the naked declaratioÌ„ of Pope Victor without this rule Neither did he excommunicate all the Bishops of Asia in this cause if Alphonsus speake truth but they escaped it by Irenâ—us his chyding of your Pope d Idem ibid. Fâ—cisset nisi illum Iraeneus ob hoc redarguisset Here you see that these hereticks of the East after the Pope had condemned them had one Catholick Bishop pleading for them In like manner the Novatians e Alphons de Castro adver haer l. 12. de â—â—â—n haeâ— 3 Cum non sit alia res pluries apertius in sacris condicibus pâ—odita quà m misâ—ricordia quam Deus erga peccatorâ—s maxime poenitentes exercet illis peccatorum suorum indulgentiam tribuens might be condeÌ„ned as the Arians f Socrates Hist Eccles l. 1. c. 7. Evangelici enim Apostolici libri nâ—â—non antiquorum Prophetarum ora cula planè instruunt nos inquit Constantinus Imperator in Nicaea Synodo sensu numinis Proinde hostili politâ discordiâ sumaâ—â—us ex dictis divini Spiritus explicationes quaestionum Haec his similia memorabat ille velut amans paterni nominis filius sacerdoâ—ibus tanquam patribuâ— cupions confiteri Apostolicorum dogmatum unitatem Quibus assensus maximae conventus partis acceâ—â—it Macedonians g Theodoret. Hist Eccles l. 5. c. 9. Iam enim semel formam protulimus ut qui se Christianum profiteatur server â—a quae ab Apostolis tradita sunt quum dicat Sanctus Paâ—lus Si quis vobis annunciat aliud quam accepistis anathema esto Nestorians h Epistola Cyrilli Synodi ad Nestorium tom 1. Act. Concil Ephes Occum c. 14 Haec tenere haec sapere cum à sanctis Apostolis Evangelistis tum ab universa quoque sacra divina Scriptura tum ex veraci denique sanctorum patrum confessione edocti sumus Eâ—tich i Euagrius Histor Eccles l. 2. c. 4. Dominum nostrum Iesum Christum confitemur c. siâ—ut antiquitùs Prophetae de â—o postille ipse Christus nos docâ—â—t idem ipsum nobis Patrum Symbolum tradidit Pelagians k Concil Milevit c. 2. the Monothelites l Concil Constant Vniversale VI. Act. 1. 2. Propositis in medio Sanctis intemeratis Evangelijs but was this done by the judgement of the Church onely and absolutely surely no but by the Scriptures And it is more then cleare that the reason why you distast the Scriptures is as Clemens Alexandrinus observeth because you hold not the rule of faith Clemens Alexandr Stromat l. 7. Necesse est enim labi in maximis cos qui res maximas aggrediuâ—tur nisâ— regâ—lam veritatis ab ipsa veritate acceptam tenuâ—rint Qui autem sâ—nt ejâ—smoâ—i ut qui à recta via excideâ—int meritò etiam falluntur in pluâ—imis singularibus propterea quòd non habeant verorum â—alsoâ—um judicium planâ— exercitatum
5. Indeed your Religion consisteth of one point absolutely and simply Papall supremacy and we doubt not but if that were overthrowne all the Fabrick of your late Roman erection would quickly fall to the ground yet the Catholick faith is not such it consisteth not of one only article neither is it everthrowne by the intrusion of every errour for this being granted if we can shew you the time when Indulgences g Roâ—â—ens Art 18. In principio nascentis Ecclesiae nullus fuit Indulgentiarum vsus or any other errour crept into the Church of Rome you must then conclude catholick religion throughout the world was overthrowne a conclusion forced from shame And let all men judge whether this be not a desperate advantage given to free himselfe from the present danger Neither can the Iesuite from his confidence of Roman puritie glory as he heere hath done in regard he seemeth to have changed his opinion before hee printed halfe his booke curbing his lavishnes and making the Church of Rome free not from all errours as heere he doth but from spots of misbeliefe only h Sect 9. which I feare he will be forced to flye vnto hereafter when hee shall examine his owne iollity in this particular For who brought in that doctrine that the Pope is Lorâ— over all or did extend Indulgences to your Purgatory flames but Boniface the 8 if wee beleive your owne Agrippa i De vanitat scient cap 61. Hic est ille magnus Bonifacius quia tria magna grandia fecit primum falso oraculo deluso Clemente persua sit sibi cedere Apostolatum secundum condidit sextum Decretalium Papam asseruit omnium Dominum tertium instituit Iubilaeum indulgentiarum nundinas illasque primus in Purgatorium extendit Besides this in Leo k Ser. 4 de quadragesima Cùm ad tâ—gendum infidelita tem suam nostris audeant interesse mysteriis ita in Sacramentorum communione se temperant interdum ut tutius lateant ore indigno Christi corpus accipiunt sanguinem autem redemptionis nostrae haurire omnino declinant the great his time it was a note of a Maniche to communicate in one kinde yet now wee fee it is practifed by them which would perswade the world that they are Catholickes and although they may quarrell that the cause is different yet they may see the act of omission onely condemned by Leo the Pope Also in the Primitive times the Sacrament was received by the faithfull in both kindes in the Greeke Church till Cassanders l Consult Art 22. initio Satis compertum est vniversalem Christi Ecclesiam in hunc vsque diem Occidentalem vero seu Romanam mille amplius à Christo annis in solenni praesertim ordinaâ—ia huius Sacramenti dispensatione vtramque panis vini speciem omnibus Ecclesiae Christi membris exhibuisse time in the Westerne or Roman Church for above a 1000 yeares and yet in the Councell of Constance Henricus de Piro Iohannes de Scribanis m Concil Constantien Sess 13. apud Binium stiled it Mos perversus and the whole Councell decreed against it Concupiscence the Apostle calleth sinne but yet it is now no doctrine of the Roman Church for the contrary is decreed in the Trend Councell n Concil Trident. Sess 5. Hanc concupiseentiam quam aliquando Apostolus peâ—â—atum appeilat fancta synodus declarat Ecclesiam Catholicam nunquam intellexisse peccatum appellaâ—i quod verè propriè in renatis peccatum sit sed quâ—â— ex peccato est ad peccatum inclinat Si quis autem contrarium senserit anathema sit And many more may bee found out if I did desire to muster vp your iniquities in this kinde But it shall suffice for the present to referre the Iesuite and the Reader to the Catalogue of the right reverend the Lord Bishop of Derry o Lib. 3. de Antich cap 6. Catalogus veterum haeresum quas Ecclesia Romana renovâ—â—it c. which when Mr Malone or his whole Tribe hath fully answered I may conceive he had something besides his wilfulnes to breed his confidence in this opinion In his examination of the second exception against the Demaund hee hopeth to enervate it by his observations therevpon the first whereof is that therein the Answerer supposeth our catholicke Doctrine to bee that Apostasie which the Apostle speaketh of 1. Tim. 4. 1. 2. p Reply pag. 5. And here our Iesuite wisely collecteth for the learned Primate doth neither acknowledge your Roman Church either in Diocesse or ad extra for Catholick neither your additions mixtures for Catholick Doctrine any more then Saul * 1. Sam. 10. 11 for a Prophet because he got amongst the Prophets as your deceipts have crept into the Creed But yet that by your corrupt mixtures and declinings is truly accomplished that Prophecy 1 Tim 4. hee makes little doubt And what abuse is done heerein to your glorious Synagogue why should not false doctrines and novelties fall before the auncient and radicall truth as Dagon †and false gods before the Arke Nay what doth the learned * 1. Sam. 5. 3. 4. Primate suppose that was not deprecatively expressed in your Trent-Councell by a Bishop q Cornelius Bishop of â—iton â—0 of your owne for if to fall from Religion to Superstition from Faith to infidelitie from Christ to Antichrist bee not an Apostasie let the Iesuite declare what it is But the Iesuite would faine know in what sence wee take Apostasie whether as it designeth an vtter Revolt from the faith of Christ which the Iesuite is confident they cannot bee charged withall Because elsewhere the learned Primate confesseth that men dying as hee saith in our Religion doe dye vnder the mercy of God r Reply pag. 5. What doth the Iesuite meane by this Doth he thinke the most learned Answerer by their Religion did poynt out Ignatius his plat-forme or the Religion of their Holies Francis and Dominick Were any of their other Religions conjectured at which are imployed to frame Christ a Religion by policie that their Master might obtaine a Monarchie by fraude Surely whatsoever the Iesuite may conjecture these will finde but little shelter for their securitie in that sermon But if this Interpretation square not who doth hee then meane by men dying in our Religion if those that lived in the Roman Communion then his collection is vayne also For who can doubt that some may bee saved there without casheering of the Apostasie tâ—eâ—ce Many followed Absalom * 2 Sam. 15. 11. that were true of heart and yet the Iesuite will not deny a Rebellion against David and falling away of the People from him The high places were not taken away and yet Asa's †◠Chron 25. 17. heart and many others no doubt were vpright all their dayes Iudas * Acts 1. 18. may betray Christ and hang Demas †2
that first spoyled Gods people of this heavenly treasure yet it is most certaine that they are defrauded of their right which undenyablie demonstrates the Iesuites demaund to be frivolous and vaine that concludeth the Church of Rome doth remaine pure and undefiled still unlesse we can point out a Pope that brought in every corruption wherewith she is tainted Neither will it serve the Iesuites turne to exclaime against our translations for although wee should confesse that some of ours have as many faults as we know to be in the vulgar Latine or they charge the Originalls withall that some expresse it with more impatiencie then Clemens did the omissions of Sixtus t Praefatio ad Lectorem ult citat Non pauca in sacra Biblia praeli vitio irrepsisse quae iteratâ diligentiâ indigere viderentur yet this is not sufficient to to make our translations no Scriptures to excommunicate them out of the Church or to deprive the people of the true use thereof For is any ignorant that vulgar translations in primitive times were in many particulars faultie and more grosse then any translation which is allowed to bee read in the Church of Ireland u Ibid. S Hieronymus tempore suo accidisse testatus est tot scilicet fuisse exemplaria quotcodices cùm unusquisque pro arbitrio suo addeâ—et vel detraheret Did not Lucian and Hesychius at severall tymes correct the Septuagint x Hieron in libr. Paralip praefat Alexandria Aegyptus in Septuaginta suis Hesyâ—â—ium laudat autorem Constantinopolis usque Antiochiam Luciani martyris exemplaria probat mediae inter has Provinciae Palaestinos codiceâ— legunt quoâ— ab Origine elaboratos Eusâ—bius Pamphilus vulgaverunt totusque Orbis hâc inter se triphariâ varietate compugnat Were all the translations out of Greeke into Latine without faults as they were without number y Augustin de Doctr. chr lib. 2. cap. 11. Qui enim Scripturas ex Hebraea lingua in Graecam verterunt linguam numerari possunt Latini autem interpretes nullo modo The vulgar Latine now in force by decree in the Church of Rome abounded with errors or els your Popes were full of impiety that kept all the learned traine of the Roman Church 22. yeares in worke to correct is before it could bee fitted for an impression then let it passe not without downright errors as by Clements altering adding detracting contradicting of it in thousands of places in his after-edition is most apparant and hath beene formerly declared z Vid. lit â— â— Further whereas the Iesuite urgeth St Hierome that the Gospell of Christ by pâ—rverse interpretation is made the Gospell of man or which is worse the Gospell of the Divell a Reply pag. 26. Our Iesuite hath forgot himselfe for what hath interpretation to doe with our translation we confesse Arius and Pelagius used the Scripture in this manner that your great Roman Interpreter hath so behaved himselfe that he needeth not to give place to any precedent Hereticks b See the right reverend and most learned the Lord Bishop of Kilmore his Epistle to M â— Wadsworth chap. 3. pag. 62. 63. ad pag. 69 But for which of our good workes would hee stone us Now you may see how great cause our Iesuite hath to complement it Hath not then our holy mother the Catholick Church good reason to barre her children from reading of such dangerous bookes as lead their Readers head long into perdition and doth shee not hâ—reby regard that Christian reverence and respect which is due unto the Majesty of Gods sacred Word more by keeping it from defiled hands then our Adversaries doe by casting that pricclesse pearle before such wyne c c Reply pag. 27. Here our Iesuite is out of his coule like a Fencer in his flourish For they are not corrupt translations which his faction detesteth for none are more corrupt â—â—e hath â—â— authentick but vulgar and even now our vulâ—mple h 〈…〉 were but poisoned grounds new faâ—gled d deservâ—â—d train 〈…〉 Reply pag. 26 name of holy Scripture yet here they shall haveger 〈◊〉 of pricelesse pearles which as the Iesuite saith â—n his â—â— before sâ—ynâ— Surely if our translation be no Scripâ—â—es where is the breach of reverence of Christian respect where is the Majestie of the sacred word prophaned if ours be the true word of God Let the Iesuite returne to his vomite which he hath disgorged against God and his Oracles I would know whether it is more honour to Gods Booke to bee reserved in close Libraries or in the hearts or hands of his Saints Whom he meaneth by Swyne every one may perceive even those that Christ prized at the high rate of his precious bloud the laytie and all others to whom this libertie by the Adversaries is denyed But our Iesuite must learne that the word of God is of that efficacie that it can make cleane wallowing swyne and those which are now dogges and without it will force to cast up their vomite and in time it will purge and consume Antichrist and that foule fabrick of iniquity your Aâ—gean Roman stable And further our Iesuite deales like the Iewes with the Inhabitants of the towre of Syloam * Luke 13. 4. pâ—â—ving quidlibet de quolibet particular doctrines by desperate events First he telleth us that since the most learned Answerer printed his booke there fell out an example among our selves which might sufficiently condemne this their perniâ—ious licensing of every giddie braine to reade their Bibles But I pray you what example is this why of one Gray who not long agâ—â— â—â—ving inhumanely murthered his owne sonne excused his bloody fact by the example of Abram whom God commanded to sacrifice his sonne Isaac c Reply pag. 27 Who will excuse the bloody fact of that distracted wretch But yet who can collect any such thing from the Iesuites fond premisses as he laboureth to conclude Nabal was his name and folly was with him ever◠〈◊〉 knoweth that it was coÌ„ceived discontent which 〈…〉 his soule in that speculative desperatnes that 〈…〉 Divels suggestion not the scriptures which 〈…〉 to that evill And I pray the Iesuite to tell me the 〈…〉 why amongst them images the Laye-mens bookes 〈…〉 not wrought the same effect seeing by them â—he historieâ— of the Bible are likewise represented Further will the Iesuite argue the Divell hath abused scriptures by suggestion therefore the scriptures should bee taken from the tempted for their ordinary use If this were good Logick the Iesuite might debarre Christ of his scriptum est * Mat. 4. 4. 7. because the Divell cited text Neither can the Iesuite shew such grosse abuses in the interpretation of scriptures by those which have beene indifferently learned as have beene committed by the learned themselves some of them prooving to be the greatest Architects of Villanie It may be the Anthropomorphites did embrace their opinion
they list interpreting it according to the times how they pleasâ— d Epistola 2. Nich. de Cusa Card. de usu commu ad Boâ—emoâ— Ecclesia hodierna non ita ambulat in ritu communionis sicut ante ista tempora quando sanctissimi viri utriusque speciâ—i Sacramentum necessarium esse vi praecepti Christi et verbo opere aâ—â—â—uebant Poâ—â—â—â— ne tunc Ecclesia â—rrare Certè non Quod si non quomodo id â—â—diè verum non est quod tunc omnium opinione affirâ—abatur cùm non sit alia Ecclesia ista quam 〈◊〉 Ceâ—â—â— hoc te non movent quod diversis temporibus alius alius ritus sacrisiciorum at etiam 〈◊〉 stante veritate invenitur scripturasque esse ad tempus 〈◊〉 et vaâ—â—â— intellectas ita â—â—uno tempore secundùm currentem universalem 〈◊〉 â—â—poâ—â—rentur mutato 〈◊〉 iterum sententia mutaretur SECT V. How vainely our Answerer betaketh himselfe to the Scriptures againe IN all this Section we finde nothing but what the most learned Answerer before stiled a sleight a In his Answer to the Iesuites Challenge pag 11. for where will he manifest the most reverend Lord scared with the auncient Church whose testimonies he is assured afflict these worst and last times but that he might first give the sacred Scriptures the precedencie which is due to the word of God and that he might not erect a new faith which was never builded upon the foundatton of the Apostles and Prophest b Ibid. Now let us see to what purpose the Iesuite hath heere spent his paines He it should seem was willing to finde out a way whereby the true Religion might be knowne and first hee taketh it for graunted that the Primitive Church of Rome held the true Religion for the first 500. yeares Secondly that this true Church of Rome did generally hold the chiefe Articles of Religion pointed out by himselfe in his demaund and then would have men to judge of true points of Religion by the testimony of that Church c See the â—â—â—â—ites Reply pag. 29. The most learned Answerer in this place saith nothing to these things in particular but to the Iesuites whole frame which he maketh a rule to finde out true Religion by arguing it first as a needlesse labour secondly as a tedious rule in regard matters in controversie might be brought to a shorter tryall thirdly as derogating from the Word of God that Rocke upon which alone wee build our faith from which no sleight that they can devise saith he shall ever draw us d See the 〈◊〉 reverend Lord Primaâ—â— his Answer pag. 11 Vpon this the Iesuite hath almost spent a whole page to prove that the sayings and authorities of those auncient Fathers are sufficient to prove what their opinion was e Reply pag. 29. in the points controverted as if the most learned Answerer had denyed that which in the very place alledged by the Iesuite he undertaketh to make good viz r that the Fathers writings fortifie the Catholicke cause against the Pope his party And this we say saith the most learned Answerer 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 find it far otherwise f In his Answer to the Iesuites Challenge â— Gregor de Valen. Analys Fidei l. 8. c. 8. Fatendum est raro accidere posse ut quae sit Doctorum omnium uno tempore viventium de religione sententia satis cognoscâ—tur Sunt enim Catholici Doctores in Ecclesia ubique diffusa plurimi qui proinde omnes nec facile congregari nec interrogari possunt quid senâ—iâ—nt Whereby it is cleare that the Iesuite hath altogether fought with his owne shadow or the Iesuite Valentiag having not assaulted either word or passage of the most learned Answerers For if this most reverend Lord had accepted the rule I doubt not but he would have acknowledged the Fathers able to relate their owne beliefe and would further have accepted them as sole Umpier but accompting this but a Iesuiticall shift to avoide the true touchstone or ground of faith the holy Scripture he tells him that alledge what authority you list without Scripture and it cannot suffice which the Iesuite did observe although he is unwilling to take notice of it in regard hee supposeth that the Answerer will not be satisfied herewith h Reply pag. 29 This dispute sheweth that the Iesuite hath not beene so well imployed as the Emperour for in all this his fishing ne musca quidem he hath not caught a Fly and therefore the good man is sleepie that thinketh the Answerer hath for got himselfe for although he should graunt the first that the primitive Church of Rome held the true Religion of Christ for the first 500. yeares it will not needes follow that whatsoever points the Fathers of that Church generally held without the Scriptures should be points of true Religion For then every point of Morality Philosophy Rhetorick 〈◊〉 should be points of true Religion and this is crossed in the Greeke Church which is a true one but yet notwithstanding may not bee justified in every particular that they generally handle Neither dare the Iesuite admit the consequent for then the points of the blessed Virgins conception in originall some k Canus â—oâ— Theol. l. 7. c. 1 n. 1. n. 3. receiving of the Sacrament by children l Rejoynder pag. 25. and the opinion of the Millenaries m Sixtus Senens Bibl. sancta l. 5. c. 233. of the vulgar reading of the Scriptures n Rejoynder p. 139. 14â— 145. communion in both kindes o Rejoynder pag. 116. that the bookes of Toâ—y Iudith and the Macchabees are Apocryphall p Rejoynder pag. 166. must be points of true Religion Nay further the Iesuite urgeth that the most learned Answerer elsewhere confesseth that those which dye in the communion of the Church of Rome at this day dye under the mercy of God q Reply pag. 5 which surely this most reverend Lord would not have granted to them if he had not beene perswaded that they beleived aright in the foundation of faith and yet he doth not take any Church since the Apostles times to have beene more corrupt or full of errour then your owne So that a particular Church as the Roman may in some of her members be true in the foundation of faith and yet tainted with many corruptions both of manners and doctrine Is not this plaine by many of S. Paul his Epistles by the Church of Pergaâ—â—s * Revel â— â—4 And therefore the Iesuite may consider how weake a rule hee would perswade us to follow as if this argument were concludent because we hold a particular Church a true Church therefore that Church
Epistle to the Reader bâ—fore 〈◊〉 â—â—swere to the Iesuites Challenge â—o he is not unmindefull of his promise but God giving life and strength will send it unto them Wherein he will manifest I make no doubt that the Bishops of Rome have clymed to their great height not without the furtherance of counterfeit and buckram Bishops indeed and that it is a shame for Iesuites who so much desire to be accounted holy and learned to produce this Buckram and blacke guard as 〈◊〉 from hâ—ll to howle for the unspotted purity and 〈◊〉 of their Catholicke cause Bâ—â— whilst he 〈◊〉 so 〈◊〉 and proveth so â—eebly he maketh me remember saith the Iesuite what S. Augustine saith of his like They seeme saith he to thinke that they have not to doe with men but as if they were 〈◊〉 beasts who heare them or reade their writings they abuse the ignorance or dulnes of them or rather their blindnes of minde And so I need not to stand longer with our Answerer in this point for as the same holy Father said to such another why should I labour to make good my excuse when he endeavoureth not any way to prove his accusation f Reply pag. 38 More Serpentum lubricus undique g Iraeneus adv hoer l. 3. c. 2. The Iesuite being deepely charged thought it most expedient not to answere and he that passed by one argument grounded upon the words of Aeneas Sylvius what would he have done thinke you had he bene pressed with a multitude What we conceive of them it is not materiall to be exprest whether beasts or men The Apostle fought with beasts as Ephesus after the manner of men And for his excuses we are more acquainted with them then his answeres and therefore care not here to spare them if he afford us nothing else Yet putting on a brazen face and carried away with the Spirit of Calumnie saith this Iesuite he saith further thus neither hath this corrupting humour stayed it selfe in forging of whole Councels and entire treatises of the auncient writers but hath like a Canker fretted away divers of their sound parts and so altered their complexions that they appeare not to be the same men they were As he forced me to storme a little at his vanitie when without proofe he chargeth us with forging of whole Councells and entire treatises so now I cannot choose but smile to see what simple proofes hee bringeth for this his charge of cankering and fretting the monuments of the auncient h Reply pag. 49 Is it possible that a rayling tongue and a smiling countenance at one time can accompanie a Iesuite When hee stormes the Answerer must be a 〈◊〉 Bishop when he smiles he must put on a brazan face and bee carried away with the Spirit of Calumnie Surely Salomon could see farre from him that telleth us When a wiseman contendeth with a foolish man whether he rage or laugh there is no rest * 〈◊〉 29. â— But let us see what simple proofes those are which make this wise man merry To instance saith the most learned Primate in the great question of Transubstantiation wee were wont to reade in the bookes attributed to S. Ambrose de Sacramentis lib. 4. cap. 4. Si ergo 〈◊〉 vis est in sermone Domini IESV ut inciperent esse quae non erant quanto magis operatorius est ut sint quae â—rant in aliud commutentur If therefore there be so great force in the speech of the Lord IESVS that the things which were not began to be namely at the first Creation how much more is the same powerfull to make that things may still be that which they were yet be changed into an other thing It is not unknowne saith our most reverend Lord how much those words ut sint quae erant have troubled their braynes who maintaine that after the wordes of Consecration the Elements of Bread and Wine bee not that thing which they were and what devices they have found to make the Bread wine in the Sacrament to be like unto the Beast in the Revelation that was and is not and yet is But that Gordian knot which they with their skill could not so readily untye their Masters at Rome Alexander-like have now cut asunder paring cleane away in their Romane Edition which is also followed in that set out at Paris Anno 160 3. those wordes that so much trouble them i See the most reverend the Lord Primate his Answere to the Iesuites challenge pag. 13. In this instance of our Answerer saith the Iesuite it is easie to espy how wilfull spleene and affected ignorance doe tyrannize his minde and penne k Reply pag. 39 The Iesuite here playes the Orator l 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 institut l. 5. c. 13. Haec simulatio hucusquè procedit ut quae dicendo refutarâ— non possumus quasi 〈…〉 fleights what hee cannot answere reviles where he wants patience like a frantick without sence for if his spleene be wilfull his ignorance affected how will he make them tyrants how can they tyrannize his minde and pen Hee is a King no Tyrant whom wee willingly obey and when wee aâ—â—ect sinne it raigneth not tyrannizeth over us But let us consider his pretences First he telleth us that Ambrose giveth the Answerer a sâ—ronde bobbe in those words in aliud commutentur c. as hereafter shal be more at large declared m Reply pag. 39 To which place we will referre him for his Answere Secondly he laboureth to free these two editions from clipping First in regard those words being rightly understood establish our doctrine of transubstantiation saith the Iesuite to the utter confusion of all that gaine say the same n Reply pag. 40 and that this might appeare he findeth fault with the translation of the most learned Answerer when he Englisheth those words ut sint quae erant thus that things may still bee that which they were o Reply pag. 39 But I aske the Iesuite to what â—ix hath relatioÌ„ if to the elements of bread wine as of necessity it must how can the translation be otherwise then it is expressed by the most learned Answerer For whose minde is so tyrannized with ignorance as to beleive that bread and wine can be what they were when as their substance is departed quae erant declare a substantiall not an accidentall manner of being but the truth is the Iesuite knowing not how to relish the words would force an interpretation contrary to the sence they offer the Reader for whatsoever his hopes are from them Hugo their Cardinall could not see how those words of Ambrose and Popish transubstantiation could agree together Hee could conceive no otherwise but that Ambrose made the bread the body of Christ and therefore directs the Reader with an hoc tamen impossible that it is impossible and from thence concludeth that the words are to be understood ad sanum intellectum
Pont. l 4. c. 7 Cyprianus pertinaciter restitit Stephano Pontifici doâ—â—â—ienti haereticos non rebaprixandâ—â— ut patet ex Epistola ejusdem Cypriani ad Pompeiâ—â— tamen non solum non fuit haereticus sed neque mortaliter peccavit et tamen Ecâ—â—esia Cypriaâ—um ut sanctam colit qui non videtur unquam resipuisse ab illo suo error To the African Bishops in the cause of Appeales Å¿ Epist Bonifacii â— ad Alex. Episc Aurelius enim praefatae Carthaginensis Ecclesiae olim Episcopus cum câ—llegis suiâ— instigante Diabolo superbire temporibus praedecessorum noâ—â—â—orum Bonifacii atque Coelestiâ—i contra Romanam Ecclesiam coepit Sed videâ—s se modo peccatis Aurelij Eulalius à Romanae Ecclesiae communione segregatum humiliam recognovit se pacem communionem Romanae Ecclesiae petens subscribendo non cum collegis suiâ— damnavit Apostolica auctoritate omnes Scripturas quae adversus Romanae Ecclesiae privilegia factae quoquo ingenio fuerunt Must all Africa not afford one Bishop that is catholick or Lay-man that is a right Christian and true Catholicke How are they acknowledged Martyrs How Saints Besides I wonder that this truth never appeared in Canon of Councell nor was ever registred by the Fathers in the ages mentioned with generall consent For that phrase upon this rocke I know the Church is built meaning S. Peters chaire I dare say with reverence to S. Hierome that it was either upon Christ or Peters confession of Christ to bee the Sonne of God as the Fathers in multitudes doe interprete it or upon Peter himselfe whom your owne would have thâ— rocke and not upon Peters â—haire which was not of such an unmooveable stability â—s that rocke ought to bee upon which the Church is builded Further I thinke Mr Malone will not deâ—y that the foundation of the Church was layde before Peter had any chaire either at Antioch or at Rome and if hee say S. Hierome meant not his chaire but in relation to Peter then who can deny but all the Apostles are rockes as Peter was Petrae omnes Apostoli All the Apostles are rockes upon which the Church is built saith Origen t Origen in Mat. hom 1. The Iesuite proceedes and brings two places from St Augustine if we will believe him to bee the Author of the questions of the old and new testament For to make this other then a counterfeit he shall never bee able but what saith he that may procure such an universal preheminence to this onely Father Why hee is called caput fidelium Head of the faithfull u Reply pag. 51. So may every Preist in his Parish unlesse his flocke be Infidels And for the other title Pastor gregis Dominici Pastor of our Lords flock Reply ibid. What Bishop is not Pastor of the flocke of Christ but Papall Bishops who poore Delegates have not their institution from CHRIST but as poore hirelings from the Papacie In the second place the Iesuite tels us thot S. Augustiâ—â— giveth this testimonie of the Church of Rome that the Principalitie or supremacie of the See Apostolicke hath alwayes borne sway therein y Reply pag. 52 This Father will not serve the Iesuites turne without a glosse Principalitie Supremacie must be the same so the Iesuite would have it for if this be not true Augustine forsakes his engager But the Iesuite may know that principalitie is not Papall Dominion there was a primatuâ— or principalitie of the Church of Constantinople z Theodoret. l. 2 c 27. and a primatus or primacie of the Church of Hierusalem 〈◊〉 l. 7. â— 6. into which seates ascended none of these Monarcâ—s He commeth to the principalitie of a See or Bishoprick that entereth by orderly election as Augustine acknowledgeth the Bishop of Rome to have done And a man may get a principalitie in the Church by sedition and ambition as Leo expresseth himselfe to the Bishops of Africke Leo Epist 87. ad Episc Africanos Principatus autem quem seditio exâ—orfit auâ— ambitus occupavit etiam si â—oribus atque actibus non â—ssendâ—t ip 〈◊〉 tamen iniâ—â—â—â—ui est 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 What hee can picke out of the word Apostolicall hath beene answered before Next to the Master he produceth the Scholler Prosper in two places but to no more purpose or advantage then the former For who will deny the Church of Rome in Prospers time in regard of her outward eminencie to bee made the head of pastorall honour unto the world c Reply pag. 52 and that she was more conspicuous by being a towre to Religion in defending the faith against hereticks then by exercising any power not temporall * No such word in the originall quotation out of Prosper as the Iesuite addeth but Ecclesiasticall that was given him by Councels Whereby we may see the difference betwixt Rome now and then their eminencie their honour then was extended arce religionis by defâ—nding the true faith Your holy Fathers now seeke advancement solio potestatis by obtaining a Monarchie and bringing all powers but hell that must triumph over you * Revel 19. â—â— into subjection under their feete But the Iesuite confident of Prosper telleth us Therefore the holy Bishop 〈◊〉 doth testifie how in his dayes The whole world agreed with Pope Siricius in one and the same fellowship of communion d Reply pag. â—â— Here is a Logicall therefore Prosper telleth us that Rome the See of Peter is made the head of pastorall honour unto the world c. therefore Optaâ—â—â— that lived many Decades of years before him doth testifie how in his dayes the whole world agreed with Pope Siriâ—â—us in one and the same fellowship of communion We will leave the inference the evidence is nothing For was there not reason that they should doe as they did to wit agree in truth with the eminentest opposing Bishop for otherwise they should have beene Donatists Make your Popes as Siricius was and we will agree with them in communion not because Popes but because they â—defend the true Doctrine against Donatisticall and hereticall rashnes Doe you thinke Hierome thought himselfe bound to Liberius his Communion when he styled him an Arian e Hieroâ— Catalog Scrip. Eccles Fortunatianus Episcopus Liberium Romanae Vrbis Episcopum ad subscriptioâ—â—â— Haereseâ—â— compuiit Ambrose would not endure to give a stupide consent to the Church of Rome itselfe unlesse he saw reason for it lib. 3. de sacram cap. 1. In omnibus cupio sequi Romaâ—â—â— Ecclesiaâ— sed tamen nos omnes sensum habeâ—â—â— Id quod alibi rectius servatur nos custodimus Heere you may see how the Auncients did adhere to the Roman Bishop not in every thing from opinion of his authoritie infallibilitie mother-hood or mistresseship for they thought in other places something might be more rightly observâ—d but so farre as they might convince them of the truth of their doctrine and profession
of Bishops in the Roman See that invincible rock upon which Christ built his Church For who will dreame that Father to esteeme that present seate or succession to be the rocke for any other reason then because they held the rocke confessed by Peter And in this sence not only Peters successors at Rome but all other successors of Peter the rest of the Apostles might bestiled rocks p Origen in Math hom 1. Petra est 〈◊〉 omnis qui imitator est Christi ex quo bibebant qui bibebant de spiritali consequenti petra Et super omni hujusmodi petra aedificatur ecclesia Dei In singulis enim quibuscunque perfectis qui habent in se congregationem verborum oâ—erum sensuum omnium qui hujusmodi beatitudinem operantur 〈◊〉 Eccelesia Dei cui portae non praevalent inserorum Si autem â—per unum illum Petrum arbitraris Vniversam Ecclesiam aedificari à Deo quid dicis de Iacobo Iohanne filijs tonitrui vel de singulis Apostolis Vere ergo ad Petrum quidem dictum est â—u es Petrus c. tamen omnibus Apostolis omnibus quibuscunque perfectis fidelibus dictum viâ—â— retor For why may not those churches that cleave fast to the rock of faith be called rocks to stay and adheare unto q Iranaeus l. 4. c. 43. Ijs qui in Ecclesijs sure presbyteris oporter obaudire qui successionem habent ab Apostolis quicunque cum Episcopatus successione charisma veritatis certum secundùm beneplacitum patris acceperunt Idem c. 44. Adherere his qui Apostoloâ—um doctrinam oustodiunt cum presbyterij ordine sermonem sanum conversatio nem sine offen sa praestant as well as the Roman her Bishops in regard Augustine saith in that very Psalme that if any man come full of the Catholicke faith wee are wont to give eare unto him as unto these men r August in Psalm contra partem Donati Talis si quis ad te veniat plenus Catholica side Quales illoâ— sanctos viros omâ—es solemus audire But what makes the former words to the Iesuites conclusion Doth S. Augustine here declare Roman Preists Successors to Peter in a Monarchicall estate or such unmoveable grounded rocks that all the Churches in time to come must be grounded upon them Surely the sesuite will never finde this to bee S. Augustines meaning but from what the Roman Preists had beene and from what for the present they were alluding to our Saviors words he doth stile them a rock that the gates of Hell did not at that time prevaile against making them a good directory to truth whilst they adheared to the Apostles doctrine For by the course of that Psalme we cannot conceive S. Augustine to have thought otherwise in regard he doth not give the Bishop of Rome power to end and determine that controversie but maketh Donatus his request to have his cause heard at Rome to be unjust telling us what the Emperour had ordained that divers Bishops Preists should heare the matter not the Roman Bishop alone Å¿ August ibid Nam Donatus cùm volebat Africam totam obtiâ—ere Tunc Iudices transmarinos petijt ab Imperatore Sed haectam unjust petitio non erat de charitate Hoe ipsa veritas clamaâ— quam vclo modo refeâ—e Nam consensit Impeâ—â—â—or â—â—â—â—t quae soderenâ— Romae Sacerdotes qui tunc possent Caeciliano cuâ— illâ— audite which he would not have done I suppose if the Bishop of Rome had had that Monarchy by Apostolicall succession which now they pretend by that title to enjoy But there is not a word of Augustine that proveth the Roman Bishops Successors of Peter in any office power or Bishoprick or so much as maketh him Bishop of Rome That he had his seate there where the Roman Preists had their Succession he insinuateth but in this place he telleth us no more nor so much as Eusebius who beginneth the Roman Bishop with Linus t Eusebius hist Eccles l. 3. c. â— Linus verò primum post Petri Pauli Martyrium Romanae Ecclesiae Episco patum sorâ—iâ—ut est for the words of Eusebius after the martyrdome of Peter and Paul can no more make Peter Bishop of Rome then Paul and I thinke they will not admit two Bishops at once in one Citie Much more might be urged to shew that the Iesuite hath produced S. Augustine to testifie that which hee never thought of But I will come to Chrysostome whom the Iesuite produceth expecting much from him because hee nameth Peters Successours Why saith he did Christ shed his bloud but to regaine those sheepe the care of whom he committed both to Peter and to Peters Successours u Reply pag. 59 I aske the Iesuite whether he thought the Apostles had no commission from Christ to have a care of his sheepe whether Goe ye into all the world and preach the Gospell to every creature * Marke 16. 15 did commaund no care of CHRISTS flocke or whether there be no successors of Peter but the Bishops of Rome Cardinall Cusanus cannot deny that all Bishops are the successours of Peter x Nich. de Cusa Card. l. 2. De concord cath c. 13. Non possumus negare omnes Episeopos esse ejusdem successores Scilicet Petri And S. Chrysostome in the very place cited by the Iesuite expresseth himselfe to be free from the conceit that the Bishops of Rome are S. Peters onely Successours For why should he perswade Basil to be minde full of his dutie hee being a Bishop from this reason because CHRIST said to Peter Lovest thou me Feede my sheepe and because the care of his sheepe are committed to Peter and his successours y See Chrysostomes testimony produced before in the beginning of the Section if hee had not beene one of them This title I have shewed before doth belong to other Bishops as well as Romane neither is it denyed by Bellarmine himselfe z Bellarm de Rom. Pont. l. â— c. 23. Respondeo in Apostlatu continâ—â— Episcopatum Episcopes succedere Apostolis and therefore I may forbeare here further to presse it The next is Leo but I shall not neede to speake to that which is urged from hâ—m here in regard I shall have more occasion in the next Section He loved to be great and to make Peter greater then he should be for his owne sake as I have in some things before declared shall hereafter more fully shew Yet all that hee desired I suppose was not so great licentiousnesse as the Bishop of Rome desireth and would have all to attribute unto himselfe Now commeth the Bishop of Ravenna Peter Chrysologus in his Epistle to Eutyches You are not much beholding to that See that you should bring a Bishop from thence to give testimony for you but what saith hee Wee desire thee honorable brother that thou wilt listen dutifully unto those things which
either 〈◊〉 a Neasâ—uig or mac a 〈◊〉 in regard their fathers villany adhâ—â—eth to that name and addeth afflictioâ— to their mindes but for the sonnes of Preists and Bishops amongst us what repining humour can possesse them seeing they were borne in honourabâ— Dist 56. cap. Osius Osius Papa suit silius Stephani subdiaconi Bonifacius Papa â—uit silius â—ucundi presbyteri Faelix Papa filius Felicis presbyteri de titulo Fasciolae Agapitus Papa â—ilius â—ordiâ—ni presbyteri Theodorus Papa 〈◊〉 Theodoâ—â— Episcopi de 〈◊〉 Hierosotyma Sylverium Papa filius Sylverij Episcopi Romae Deusdedit Papa 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 subdiaâ—â—◠〈…〉 natione 〈◊〉 〈…〉 matrimâ—ny their patents living in the rule appointed by the Apostle But the Iesuite as 〈◊〉 of his sports commeth in good sober sadnesse to wonder that in such an audience the Answerer blushed not to affirme that Rome had little to alleadge for this perfâ—rment but onely that S. Peter was crucified in it But what can the Iesuite say it hath more Why he tells us That 〈◊〉 can â—ll 〈◊〉 that the Apostle did relinquish Antiâ—â—h to 〈◊〉 his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 her u Reply pag. â—â— As if the Bishop and Monarch of the whole Church 〈◊〉 not 〈◊〉 a double mansion several places of 〈◊〉 Did their Popes relinquish Rome by fitting in the chaire â—â— Aâ—ignion Or was it possible that hee that kept the Bishoprick of the whole Church could relinquish the Seâ— of Antioch by his so journing at Rome The â—â—suite would perswade it and that it was done by commaund For saith he as 〈◊〉 Writers ◠〈◊〉 Papa 〈…〉 doe relate Peter was commanded so to doe by CHRIST himselfe Reply pag. â— Here is nothing to make the inheritance to descend upon the Church of Rome from divine testimony And Bellarmine indeede conceived the matter onely probable â—â—remptorily hee concludeth not that the Bishop of Rome by divine right is Peters Successour y Bellarm. de Rom. Pont. l. â— c. 1â— Et quo â—â—am â— Mar 〈◊〉 Papa i â—â— ad 〈◊〉 sâ—â—â—bit 〈…〉 S. 〈◊〉 in 〈◊〉 contra 〈◊〉 Athanasius in Apâ—logia 〈…〉 Marry 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 nor â—â—â— improbabile Dominum 〈…〉 ut â—edem 〈…〉 â—â—geret 〈◊〉 uâ— Romaâ—â—s Episcopus 〈◊〉 â—â— succedâ—ret sed 〈◊〉 â—â— hoc â—â—t 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ratio 〈◊〉 non est 〈◊〉 institutione 〈◊〉 quâ— in â—â—â—gelio legitur neither will he 〈◊〉 it of faith that Peters seate was there onely hâ—◠〈◊〉 that it is most probable pâ—â— credendum and he will â—â—count you a Catholicke if you beleive it z Bellarm de Rom Pont. l 4. c 4. Accedit quod 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Christâ—m imperasse 〈◊〉 ut Romae â—edem â—ollocaret non â—â—men 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ut 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ibi collâ—caret Quoâ—iam ergo â—on constat 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Peâ—â—o ut Romae 〈◊〉 colâ—ocaret ideo non est de 〈◊〉 divine 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Romae â—â—dem esse constitutam sed â—amen ut 〈◊〉 est 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Is this the Cardo upon which all the Catholicke Romane â—aith turâ—eth Is there no more certainery in this ground-worke Must Peters inheritance descend certainely upon him who by divine right cannot proove himselfe to bee his Heire Must one Witnesse and that a knowne Counterfeit and â—â— Marcâ—lluâ— a Haec est una illarum epistolarum quas 〈…〉 esse 〈◊〉 tell us a story and obtâ—ine an Empire This is too great a reward Now whereas hee tells us that Peter was Bishop of Rome the space of â—â—ve and twentie yeares Antioch having had him but for 〈◊〉 and consequently that he laboured more fruitfully and performed all more gloriously in her then in Antioch and finally that in her even by Christs appointment also he glorified God by the triumph of his blessed death and martyrdome b Reply pag. â—â— We tell him that when he attempts to prove it hee shall not want his answere That Peter was at Rome preached there was crucified it is not much to grant him but that hee was there such a Bishop as Linus c. hee cannot prove some making him such a Bishop as Paul was others making him nonâ— at all But the Iesuite chargeth the most learned Answerer with judging according to the flesh when hee made the Apostles death and martyrdome a slender cause why Peter should respect her so much And further telleth us that surely it is no slender cause for the Catholicke Church to sing therefore of her with solemne joy in this sort Thrice happy Rome that with the purple blood Of such great Princes stand'st adorn'd and blesâ— Not thine owne worth but their deserving good Crownes theâ— on earth the fairest and the best c Reply pag. 61 62. This most grave and reverend Lord I confesse hath nor as some of you could have wish'd put off the 〈◊〉 the 〈◊〉 man in the Iesuiticall forme d Hassen Mullerus de Votis Iesuitarum c. 6 Si Nobiles illoâ—â—m societatem ingrediantur habitu veniant splendido ac precioâ—o permittunt â—t triduum eâ—m reservent quo lapso cum â—â—ponere alteri dare Societatis habitum â—â—duere jubenâ—â—â— Et hoc est secundùm illos veterem exuere 〈◊〉 seipâ—â—m mottiâ—â—cais alteri suâ—◠〈◊〉 â—â—â— neither as your Popes have â—nterpreted 〈◊〉 I. Epist 3. ad 〈◊〉 the Apostle Rom 8. â— â— â— but as God himselfe hath commaunded wherein the World is his Witnesse and I thinke it but time spent to justifie him But let the Iesuite prove this Argument to bee convincing if hee bee able his singing and other passages will not worke the feate The Saints in Rome wee know as the Church otherwhere were much confirmed by the patient sufferings of the Martyrs but this doth not excuse much lesse lift up Rome Did Abels blood that â—â—yed for vengeance plead then for glory Did innocent blood theâ— advance your Monarchy that now you make your selves drunke with the blood of the Saints Hierusalem lost heâ— Crowne by the Prophets blood must the Apostles triple Rome Yet if Rome get such an height in martyring the servant what might Hierusalem pleade that crucified the Lord These you see are silly inventions but the strongest pillars of the Romane faith The Iesuite hath done his doe yet he telleth us Much more might be said and now intreates the Gentle Reader to trophey him for his victory But hee hath not yet cured the wound that hath beene given him though hee conceiteth all faire smoothe and without scarre He hath laboured to make Fathers and Saints the Popes serving-men the World his Citie Heaven the Church and Purgaâ—ory his Provinces but as you see all in vaine The downe-right blowes he perswades himselfe to be given we feele not our sheildâ— are not peirced neither are the least of our bul warkes overthrowne SECT IX THis Section shewes that the Iesuite having overshot himselfe in a tearme would now make it good by an interpretation and thereupon hee enquires Whether the Church of Rome may
Church which by the testimonie of venerable Antiquitie wee finde approved to remaine ever free from all errour to that rocke against which the power of hell shall never prevaile to that foundation which Christ hath setled by his promise and made for ever immoveable by his obtained Prayer Reply pag. 6â— How non-erring a Church your Roman hath beene in her head is already declared How infallible a rule of faith your Cheife Pastor hath proved in the primitive times venerable Antiquitie by severall examples hath detected What a rocke Peters pretended Successours have beene when the divell was let loose to split so farre as possible the ship of the Church hath not been left you untold And who can beleive that CHRIST his prayer for Peters faith was effectuall for the POPES when against faith they day he desire to usurpe his kingdome This we Catholickes saith the Iesuite are exhorted to doe by S. Cyrill sayinâ— Let us remaine as members in our head the Apostolicke Throne of the Roman Bishops from whence it is our part to seeke what wee ought to believe This also all Protestants are advised to doe by a Doctour of their owne who as we heard before telleth them that they ought diligently to search out the spouse of Christ and Church of the living God which is the pillar and ground of truth having found her then setting aside all other questions they ought to embrace her communion follow her direction and rest in her judgment y Reply pag. 6â— What Doctor Feild advised Protestants to doe hath beene formerly declared And for what Catholickes are exhorted to doe he urgeth S. Cyrill but from whence From Aquinâ—s z Cyril Alleâ— in Thesauro alleadged by S. Thomas in opusc cont Graecoâ— Reply pag. 6â— who forged it For Cyrill hath no such words His Thesaurus hath no such filth He neither consented unto nor approved this tyranny Hee was one of them that sent the Copy of the Councell of Nice to curbe these pretences before they got head I wonder why the Iesuite added not the like forgery of the Councel of Chalcedon to the same end from the same Author Here wee may see that the best grounds he hath to prove their holy Father to be infallible and the Romane Mother without spots are but authorities taken from deceit But leaving Doctor Feild formerly urged and answered he presents us with these sentences of the Auncient in which saith he as in a pure mirrour they may if they list espy their enorâ—ions disagreement from the truth Reply pag 63 And the first Ancient Father that he produceth is Ireneus All they that are in the Church of God ought to obey saith he unto those Preists who have their succession from the Apostles who together with the succession of their Bishoprick have received the assured grace of truth according to the good will of the heavenly Father And we ought to have for suspected such as withdraw themselves from the like principall succession and joyne themselves together in any other place I say wee ought to hold them as hereticks of a perverse judgment or as schismatickes selfe-liking presumptuous fellowes And elsewhere saith the Iesuite he declareth how such like hereticks are to be conâ—â—â—ed confounded according to the practice of his times to wit in the second age after Christ We confound saith he al those who gather otherwise then they ought how by that Church which is the cheifest the most auncient best knowne unto all men which was established grounded in Rome by the two most glorious Apostles Peter and Paul pointing forth that Tradition and faith which this Roman Church holdeth from the Apostles by the succession of Bishops even unto our dayes After this manner also saith the Iesuite did Tertullian troâ—â—ce wrest those Heretickes whom hee had to deale withal Let them shew unto us if they can the original of their Churches let them rip up the order of their Bishops in â—ueâ—â—ort that by a succession derived from the beginning they prove their cheife Bishop to have some one of the Apostles or Apostolicall men for his author and Predecessour for by this meanes the Apostolicall Churches doe make up their accounts And because the Heretickes then were destitute of all such proofe as Tertullian exacted of them for the maintenance of their cause even as our Adversaries saith the Iesuite are as this day He therefore bringeth in the Catholicke Church upbrayding them with them all Protestants in this manner Who â— God 's name are yeâ— When from whence came yoâ— hither What doe you amongst mine being none of mine By what right O Marcion doest thou cut my â—ood what leave hast â—hâ—â— O Valentine to turne my streames fountaines another way By what authority doest thou remove my bounds O Apelles O Luther O Calvin O Zuiâ—glius The possession is mine I have it of old I enjoyed it before you c Reply pag 69 and 70. All that the Iesuite hath produced from Irenâ—us Tertullian will make little for justifying his pretences if the point be truly considered For there is a bare personall succession which may accompany a false Church as it did the Iewish when the Pharisees saâ—e in Moses Chaire and the Churches of the East when Heretickes invaded the chaires of Catholicke Bishops Secondly there is a Successâ—â—â— not only personall of Bishops Preists but where the Catholick Apostoliâ—all doctrine is continued also The people wee say where this is plaine are bound to receive the Doctrin from Timothie every succeeding Bishop as Timothie â— Tim 1. 14. from the Apostle that established and first published the same Now whatsoever the Iesuite hath brought from these Fathers is no way advantageous for the Church of Rome For first we can shew and have done as good personall succession as the Roman Bishops can claime any Secondly to this our orderly Succession we can and have proved by comparison and consanguinity of Apostolicall doctrin that we are true and Apostolicall Churches Thirdly the Roman certaintie upon which their Profelyres must depend is no firmer by these Fathers testimonies then Ephesus Smyrna Corinth Philippi Germany Spaine France Egypt Lybia Thessalonica c Irenaeus pag. 140 142. Disci te ab Apostoli cis Ecclesijs Habetis Romae Linum Polycarpum Smyrnae ab Apostolis edoctum Tertull. Praeser p. c. 37. Proximè est tibi Achaâ— habes Corinthum Si non longè es â— Macedonia habes Philippos habes Thessalonicenses Si potes in Asiam tendere habes Ephesum si autem Italiae adjaces haqes Romam unde nobis quoque authoritas praest ò est Rhenanus Argum in Tert. de praescript alibi Impress Basil 1521. Tertullianus Ecclesiam unam Apostolicam nulla loco affigit Romanum Ec lesiam ornat magnificae laudis elogio non tamen tantam illam facit quantum hodiè fieri videmus nam Apostolicis Ecclesijs numerat non
amended which were scarse espyed in their times How doth every Councell disgrace the knowledge grace and courage of former Fathers and Bishops if the amending of things amisse might conclude the same m Augustin â— â—apt con Donat c. 3. Ipsaque plenaria saepè priora à posterioribâ—â— emeâ—dari sine 〈◊〉 typho sacrilegae superbiâ— sine â—lla inâ—â—â—tâ—cervice arrogantiae fine ulla coâ—â—entione lividae invidiâ— cum â—â—â—e catholick cum charitate 〈◊〉 Have not some of your bretâ—ren found out new thoughts concerning the blessed Virgins conception which will take away the harsh doctrine of the Fathers and Catholicks of former times Shall wee thinke that these tumultuoâ—â— upstarts have therefore more knowledge grace or courage then those ancient Fathers the whole Catholicke Church Litle honour was given to the Roman See before the Councell of Nice Aeneas Sylv. epist 301. must we conclude that your after Doctours had more knowledge grace or courage then the Apostles and Fathers before that Councell because they have washed and cured GODS Church of so notorious an errour I see the Iesuite is of the Cardinalis Matthee Langi Archbishop of Salzburg Hist con Triâ—en l. 1. minde that did thinke the Church should bee reformed but not by a Monke But they are Popish thoughts to have the reformation or government of the Church to depend upon men Wee have a Rule left by CHRIST which as it is the rule to governe so to reforme what by fraud or neglect hath crept into the Church amisse We acknowledge GOD hath many instruments in the Church but that which worketh reformation is the word of God and although the Instrument may have honour for the works sake yet it is the word not the instrument that effects the reformation Why the Iesuite should tearme those learned men tumultuous upstarts I cannot guesse for I am sure they were as auncient as there Order and for tumultuous practices who dare compare with Iesuites for grand supplanters Whereas the Iesuite thinkes to vilifie them by his heape of invectives they will appeare true friends to the Catholicke Church by grave and solide discourses pleading her cause and contesting for her right And I would know whether they have sinned in being impatient of the Churches sufferings any more then the Councels of Basill and ConÌ„stance who greived to see a Saracens head upon the Churches shoulders and therefore declared the Churches rights and the Popes usurpations condemning him with his foolish pretences p Concil Constane Sess 4. 10. Concil Basil sess 12. 33. Veritas de potestate concilij generalis universalem Ecclesiam repraesentantis supra Papam queâ—libet alterum declarata per constantiense hoc Basileense generalia Concilia est veritas fidei Catholicae veritatibus praedictis pertinaciter repugnans est confendus Haereticus Wherefore the Iesuite might have left this passion as being grounded upon distemper and fury and have taken his rabblement to himselfe and his to whom truely it belongs But this Iesuite will speake nothing without demonstration and therefore will shew ours to be a deforming rather then a reforming humour q Reply pag 73 and this he would prove because First of all the prime stirrer of this stone Martin Luther had the gift to see in his omne dayes such comfortable successe herein as was answerable to his labours r Reply 〈◊〉 What was that The shaking off the Roman Triple The emptying of the Fryars bellies The restrayning of the Cleargies luxurie No but from the time the pure Gospell was first restored and brought to light the world hath every day become worse and worse Å¿ Reply pag 73. Wee acknowledge that Luther and others complained of the disorders of men that communicated with them but will the Iesuite conclude that these were occasioned by bringing in the doctrine of CHRIST Were the Preachers of the Gospell filled with a deforming rather then a reforming humour because they could not tollerate stewes and prophanenesse where they preached but did inveigh with bitternesse against them If there were a Iesuite that had so much devotion as to reproach the sinnes of the Roman Court or Italie with Luthers courage and should upbrayde them with neglect of the Cleargies example the Popes holinesse and the lampe of divine light that proceedes from him and should crye out that Sodome and Gomorrha never abounded with sinne and Sodomie as Italy notwithstanding their helpes of devotion doth at this present or since Peter placed his seate there Should he therefore confesse that Peter planting his seat there should be the cause of those filthie sinnes and Sodomies or that the Cleargies lives Papall holinesse and determinations did bring prophanenesse into those states and countries Absit The Apostle saith of the Corinthians after they had received the Gospell that there was such fornication amongst them as was not once named amongst the Gentiles * 1. Cor. 〈◊〉 Must it follow that this is to be imputed to the Christian religion No this makes the offence the greater it doth no way cause it and this is the meaning of Luther and most of the others cited The word of God is compared to light in Scripture * II. Peter 1. 19 the light whereof might declare more to Luther a Preacher abroad then when hee remained darke and lazie in his Cloyster at home And we thinke that Luther might deceive himselfe in this particular for not distinguishing betwixt an evill and the detection thereof The Pharisees hypocrisies were not thought such before CHRISTS time His revealing of them brought them not in Luther espyed more mischeife abroad when he veiwed mens actions by the light of the word then he could before by a Roman Gloworme and this might make him thinke the world worse when his eyes had more light and his medium was more cleare When Grace entereth into a mans heart hee trembles at every thought of uncleanenesse that before the receipt thereof in regard of blindnesse could not see the odiousnesse of the filthiest crimes And man as he cannot esteeme vertue but by this light of grace so hee cannot apprehend the foulenesse of sinne So that Luther might get fruite by his preaching though he was bold to say of some that pretended to follow him They are and remaine swyne they beleive like swyne and like swyne they dye Reply pag. 73 But doth M. Malone urge this for the credite of the Swyneheard or the Swyne For the harlet or her lovers Poore Luther because the Swyne that Rome had bred in filthinesse would not leave their swynish condition for his preaching against their swynishnesse this is the thing hee bewayles And what great hurt comes thereby to Luthers cause or the cause of Religion whose complaints may be paralelled by the Prophets * 〈◊〉 49 4. and Apostles themselves And heere to satisfie the Reader I would have him to observe some things fit to bee taken notice of and it will over-throw all
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
the Councell of Basill but also whole fraternities of Orders accused and charged with Schisme or Heresie Whatsoever in this Section followeth is but the tâ—arâ— of a Crocodile or the preaching of a Foxe an Homily made of what hath beene answered before That which we are now to examine is the Iesuites ensuing Discourse wherein he promiseth to shew that SECT XI OVr Answerer by Vanitie offereth wroâ—g tâ— Truth and Charity a Reply pag 87 This our Iesuite makes the Scope of his XI Section which he doubts not to make as manifest as he hath done his former undertakings with a nil ultrà I hope wee have given sufficient satisfaction saith he unto our Answerers deâ—aâ—â—nd when he enquired whether I was able to shew one point wherein he and his have broken that Harmony which Iraeneus commendeth in the Catholicke Church of his time b Reply pag 87 Mr Malone is not so good in his payments as banqueâ—oâ—ts for they will pay debts with good words but the Iesuite thinkes he can satisfie all with invectives and with the same Method wanting matter as they money to pay quarrels with the forme or by out-facing pretends the debt satisfied when poore man he hath onely snarled a little against the specialtie for that which he tearmes to be the holy Catholicke Church hath bene declared a Schisme and that the Catholicke Church is not inclosed within the mountaines but dispersed â—ver the face of the earth with which we communicate and are members hath beene sufficiently declared to which wee referre the Reader And now saith he aâ— we have â—ully â—â—swâ—red â—ntâ— his demaund so have we just cause to complaiâ—â— that he hath not given us any reâ—â—â—â—tion of that which I propoundâ—d when I dâ—sired him to tell whether of us both have the true Religion we who doe not disagree with the auncient Church in any one point or they who agree with it in very few and disagree in almost all Observe I pray you how vainely he shapeth his answere 〈◊〉 unto c Râ—â—lâ— pag 88 c. Indeed if that which the Iesuite affirmeth for graunted could as easily be proved as it is bouldly avouched saith the most reverend Primate the question would quickely be resolved whether of us both have the true religion But he is to understand that strong conceipts are but weake proofes and that the Iesuites have not beene the first from whom such brags as these have beene heard Dioscâ—rus the hereticke was as pâ—arte when hee uttered these speeches in the Councell of Chalcedon I am cast out with the Fathers I defend the doctrine of the Fathers I transgresse them not in any point and I have their testimonies not barely but in their verie bookes d Answ pag. â—â— Lâ—e here what a flourish of words he hath unfâ—ulded and not one to the purpose c e Reply pag â—8 You see that the most reverend Primate his Answere justly conceiveth that such a Proposition as the Iesuite desires to be resolved in supposeth that by the confession of our Church either antiquitie speakes onely for them and against our selves or else that the supposition is so cleare in it selfe that it cannot be denyed Then which nothing is more ridiculous and therefore you were a little too hastie M. Malone as the most learned Answerer tels you to â—ry out Whether of us both have the true Religion and might have done well indeed to have bethought your selfe more advisedly of that which you had undertaken to performe as also to have remembred the saying of the King of Israell unto Bâ—nhâ—dâ—d Let not him that girdeth on his harnesse boast himselfe as he that putteth it off For if you can convince us that we agree not with the auncient Church in any one point we will plead guiltie and confesse our errour if you can justifie your selves by the auncient doctrine of the Catholicke Church we will recanâ— the charge of Apostasie which now we deservedly cast upon you In the meane time we know that such as you can pretend with Dioscâ—rus the doctrine of the Fathers when indeed you exclude them and foyst upon the Christian world old Gibeonitish mustinesse of Decretall Epistles and false birthes to prove you to be ex genere antique when for all this your cheifest Heraulds stagger at your Pedigree so that his learned Answere is not a flourish of words but a detection of your follie who supposing in your Challenge that to be confessed by us which is the point in controversie would vainely flatter your selfe as if you had borne us downe with the weight of the authoritie of the Fathers and so astonished us therewith that we could not tell what to say for our selves whenas you had not layde downe so much as the name of any one Father at that time But you aske the question Why may not Dioscorus his peartenes in bragging so of the holy Fathers when they least of all made for him be applied unto our Answerer vainely boasting of them in the same nature rather then to us who have alledged their assured authorities for our cause so abundantly f Reply pag. 88 This is nothing to the purpose let him be like whom he will it is apparant by Dioscorus that men may pretend a propertie in that which is none of their owne as the Divell and the Pope in the kingdomes of the world which being granted it cannot be denyed but you may also pretend that Scriptures antiquity make for you when truely and re ver â they batter you and beate you downe And although it be nothing to the point controverted that the Iesuite speakes of Dioscorus yet we may consider it without offence He tels us Dioscorus was condemned and cast out for maintaining his owne opinion against that of the whole Councell g Reply pag. 88 Not so but an hereticall opinion hee might have varied from a whole Councell in a truth as your Panormitane insinuateth h Panorm super p. Decret Deelect etelec potestate c. signif Quod si Papa movere tur melioribus rationibus et auctoritatibus quam Concilium quod standum esset sententiae suae nam et Concilium potest errare c. In concernentibus fidem etiam dictum unius privati esset praeferendum dicto PAPAE si ille moveratur melioribus rationibus eâ— auctoritatibus novi veteris testamenti quam Papâ— And had our Answerer lived in those dayes would he not thinke you have received the like censure of the said Councell for denying unto the Pope that Supremacie i Reply pag â—â— c. A fancie the Councell you dare not stand to you in part except against it and in a point that comes neere the Supremacy k Binâ—not in Conc. Chaleed verb. Concilium Decretum illud act 16. quo Patres Concil absentibus legatis postea reclamantibus Constantinopolitanae sedi primatum attribuerunt ideo quod instar Romae caputiâ—â—perij effects primatum meruerit
falso 415. Ecclesia Propheâ—â— est more then a Prophet r Idem falso 224. Plâ—â—quaâ— Propheta yea greater then all the Prophets Å¿ Idem circ fals 286. Major omnibus Prophetis having the Spirit of GOD for 〈◊〉 â—iâ—ar t Idem falso 416. Spiritum Sanctum Ecclesiae Vicarium dicit Thus wee see what judge the Iesuite doth contest for and how farre they labour to extend his power to wit that the Pope who is not onely a Prophet but more then a Prophet yeaâ— greater then all the Prophets who hath the Spirit of God for his Vicâ—â— either with or without a Councell hath onely power to determine matters of Faith whereby we may know what to beleive and what not with authority not onely equall but superiour to the scriptures Now what strength doth the Iesuite bring to confirme this Rule His first place is Esay LIIII and the 17. Thou shalt judge every tongue that shall resist theâ— in thy judgment u Reply pag. 99. Surely the Iesuite is like to their Divines in the Councell of Trent who being restrayned to the Scriptures and forbidden schoole-disputes brought all the places out of the Prophets and Psalmes where they stand the words Confitâ—â—r and its verball Confissiâ— to proove Auricular Confession and they were accounted best learned who brought most of them * Hist Concil Tridâ—â— l. 4. p. 345. For here is nothing whereby to make the Pope the infallible Iudge of Controversies unlesse he will conclude that wheresoever Iudge or Iudgment is expressed it is meant of him The second is out of Mat. XI and the 18. Hâ—ll gates shall not prevaile against her x Reply ibid We confesse that all the powers of Hell shall never prevaile against the Church but we say this Church is neither the Pope naked nor Roman as hath in many places beene shewed Yet I would gladly know to what purpose this text is here produced The third place is Mat. XVIII and the â—7 Hâ—e that will not heare the Church let him be to thee aâ— a Heathen and a Publican y Reply ibid. If an infallible judge bee heere pointed out then all these abâ—â—â—dities will follow First that every particular Church should bee infallible and the Iudge of Controversies for Dâ—c Ecclesia hath relation to particular Churches not to the Catholicke Secondly a particular Church should not be subject to errour in criminall causes if this place pointed out an infallible judgment when as this infallibility is denyed not only your own Councels but your Popes also 3ly If the Churches judgment must be infallible because CHRIST requireth us to heare the Church How can the Pastors of the Church bee excluded from this priviledge when the people are enjoyned by the Apostle to obey and follow them Heb. XIII 17. His fourth place is Ephes IIII. II. and 14. God hath placed in the Church Apostles Prophets Pastors and Doctors c. To the end that we be â—â— more little children â—aâ—oring with every winde of doctrine z Reply ibâ—â— I shall shew hereafter that this text maketh against his Iudge his Monarch for the present he may take this with him First that we acknowledge as long as the Church had Apostles Prophets their testimonies were divine and could infallibly direct Secondly although the â—aâ—tors now are meanes ordained by God to the end that wee bee no more little children wavering with every winde of doctrine yet it doth not follow that they are infallible Iudges seeing the argument may as well hold of each as of all who are ordained to the same end which I thinke the Iesuite will not acknowledge His last is 1. Tim. 2. The Church is the Pillar and foundation of truth a Reply ibid. What therefore the Pope the infallible Iudge This followes not For he is the rock if we beleive Popish interpreters upon which the Church is built How then can he be the Church infallibly to direct The foundation surely differs from the roofe the Church that is builded from the rocke that she is builded upon Secondly the Iesuite may know that we envy not the priviledges which GOD hath given his Church nay he were no member of her that should not reverence her with obedience and therefore we acknowledge her the pillar and ground of Truth if containing the Apostles absolutely perfectly if without the Apostles we deny not her Counsels but with all obedience embrace them if she commaund as she is limited in matters of faith by the Scriptures But we see this place is more for the Church of Ephesus concerning which the Apostle speakes literally then Rome and yet experience hath perswaded us that there is no infallibility there Further then this some of your own dare not goe but make a difference betwixt the judgment of GOD and the judgment of the Church the one they say is infallible but the other may sometime deceive b Panorm in Decret De senten Excom cap. 28. Iudicium Dei veritati quae nec fallit nec fallitur semper innititur judicium autem Ecclesiae aliquando sequitur opinionem quae sâ—pè fallit fallitur Dried de dog Ecclesl 2. p. 58. Generale Concilium Papae Cardinalium Episcoporum Doctorum â—â— Scripturis propheticis intelligendis non est tantae authoritatis quantae fuerit olim Apostolorum collegum For Ruffinus his testimony that S. Basil and S. Gregory Nazianzen did take the interpretation of the Scripture not according to their owne proper understanding but according to the tradition of the Fathers c Reply p. 99. The Iesuite pointeth not out the place if he did I thinke little would appeare for his purpose in regard he is to prove the authority of a Iudge not the discretion of a Doctour And who doubts but any wise interpreter will use all meanes that may informe him to performe his worke But let Ruffine passe Augustine maketh an out-cry And doth not S. Augustine cry out saith the Iesuite that Truth reposeth in the belly of the Church c. d Reply ibid. And who saith otherwise He that should thinke that Truth is removed out of the Church thinkes amisse But to conclude from hence the Church the Roman Church the Roman Pope to be the Iudge or Rule of faith is inconsequent Neither doth that place of Augustine cited by the Iesuite in the Xth Section Evangeliâ— non credereâ—â— nisi me Catholica Ecclesiae commoveret authoritus containe any thing to enforce this for many things may move us to beleive that are not the Rule of Faith Miracles did this worke in many but this I hope is far from your Rule What is urged from Vincentius Lirinensis hath been fully answered His note from the Geneva Bible proves nothing If he finde this Iudge at Geneva he speedes well In these words I feare he cannot be espied And now having little or nothing he beginnes his Perâ—ration Behold here gentle Reader how although the articles
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
by their greatest Divines in their glosses chaines decrees of Popes summes of Divinity from the weight and worth of the worke as cannot be denyed by their owne x Sixtus Seuen Bibl. sanct l. 4. â—unt ex opposito qui hoc ipsum opus conâ—endunt esse Chrysostomi adducti non solùm auctoriâ—â—te Apostoliâ—ae Eclesiae quae publicè inter divinas â—â—udes legit homilias ex his commentarijs sub nomine Ioannâ—â— Chrysostomi sed etiam permoti pondere gravitate sententiarum propositionum â—ujus operis quae ad confirmationem Christianorum dogmatum sub titulo testimonio auctoritate Chrysostomi inducuntur in glossis authenticis quas vocant ordinaâ—iaâ— in Caâ—enis Evangelicarum explanationum in Decretis summorum Pontificum 〈◊〉 Theologiciâ— magni nominis Theologorum So that you may see the most learned Answerer hath brought this instance not as you vainely affirme in derision of the blessed Sacrament but to manifest your corrupting of the workes of antiquity for your own advantage without the authority of any auncient manuscript Copy whatsoever Neither is the authority of this worke so contemptible although the Iesuite may take libertie to â—â—eight antiquity but that seeing it hath served the Popes turne it may well serve ours also to cut the very 〈◊〉 of the Papists reall presence And therefore yâ—◠〈◊〉 Commilitones Mr Malone that carry the mariâ—â—â—â—r the beast in your fore-heads may continue your blaâ—â—â—â—â—es and abuse the Scriptures as you have done his â—aâ—â—ed ordinance of the blessed Sacrament deriding the fâ—llowers of his sacred institution but howsoever you flatter your selves The right hand of the Lord will finde out those that hate him and shall make them as a fierie even in the time of his anger * Psalme â—â— And howsoever your scarlet Mistresse saith in her heart I fit a Queene and am no Widdow and shall see no sorrow Yet her plagues shall come in one day death and mourning and famine and she shal be utterly burnt with fire for strong is the Lord God who judgeth her * Reâ— 18. â— 7. 8. His third instance saith the Iesuite out of the same booke concerning the sacrifice of the Body and Bleod of IESVS CHRIST put in for the sacrifice of Bread and Wine is too too childish for we indifferently allow of both those manner of speeches as signifying one and the same thing therefore the changing of those words could advantage us no more then it doth helpe our Answerer to prove what he intended y Reply pag. 40 c. Mr Malone hath an ill name for every thing that displeaseth him This instance is too too childish but as wise as himselfe thinke not so For Sixtus Senensis by those words which they have changed judgeth this Author to deny the Body and Bloud of Christ to be in the Sacrament of the Altar z Siâ—tus Seuen Bibl. sancta l. 6. Annot. 21. Author operis imperf homilia 1â— alludere videtur ad haeresim eorum qui negant verum Christi corpus esse in Sacramento Altaris dum ait Vasa c. Neque ab hac sententia abludit cum hom 17. non multo ante finem Eucharistiam appellat panem benedictum hom â—9 ferè in principio vocat sacrificium paniâ— viâ—â— and would therefore have this place to bee purged a Idem libro 4o. And will any deny the corrupter that used this sleight of hand to bee of the same opinion The Text then is corrupted this is not denyed and therefore notwithstanding the Iesuite falsely pretendeth the changing of those wordes doe not advantage them the most reverend Primate hath prooved what hee intended to wit that the Papistes have heereby so altered the complexions of the auncient writers that they appeare not the same men they were The Iesuite runs on in his examination Two instances more saith he in this matter doth our Answerer produce still striving to surpasse himselfe more and more in vanitie For besides that our question is concerning the writers of the first five ages he commeth out with Fulbertus and Rabanus whereof the later lived in the ninth age the former in the eleventh so farre is he ever from speaking to the purpose b Reply pag. 42 I see the Iesuite is wearie of his worke he is not willing to have his owne arraigned of Forgery and therefore excepts against these instances as not being to the purpose in regard the question is concerning the writers of the first 500. yeares c Reply pag. 42 In answere whereunto we say It is equall perfidiousnes to corrupt the authors of the middle age as those of the first 500. Secondly if they confesse guiltie in these they deserve to be suspected in their impressions of the most auncient Thirdly Augustine is here corrupted though it be in the writings of Fulbertus and so both the auncient and middle aged Doctors suffer violence Fourthly let this be to the purpose or not the Iesuite cannot excuse their corrupt handling of authors and for corrupt ends when as Fulbertus was published corruptly ad refutandas haereses hujus temporis But taking them in order the Iesuite telleth us that In the former for want of sounder matter when as the Answerers subject here is Popish corruptions he fiddles about a mistake of two words which though he confesseth himselfe to have beene amended in the end yet must it needs such is his distresse serve him for an instance to proove that wee have corrupted the writings of the auncient d Reply pag. 42 I am sure the Iesuite doth not like the Musicke hee tearmeth it so wisely but I may excuse him heerein for the Papists were unwise that would otherwise commend it But whose mistake was this Dicet Haereticus in all probabilitie could not be the Printers here then was the error he that set forth this booke did not foresee the words were S. Augustines and so easie to be detected And whereas the publisher did afterwards put this among his Errata he was much behoulding to his Adviser that assured him if those words remained his fraud would be discovered Now any may see who is in distresse he that forgeth for necessitie and correcteth for shame or the most learned Answerer that hath found out and scorned the Cosener The Iesuite comes to the second and exclaimes that the Answerer makes much a doe about nothing e Reply ibid. as if it were a matter of nothing to corrupt the auncient writers If the Reader will but observe the Iesuite he shall finde him where he is most plunged and stifled to be most abundant in his rayling language scorning and contemptible behaviour towards the Answerer For what reason hath he to tearme this learned observation a dribling objection worthy to be answered with laughter builded only upon surmises when he groanes under it and all his strugling is not able to deliver him thence See what he saith I say about a blanke