are baptised and externally professe Christianitie And according to this notion it comprehendeth both the good and the bad the cleane and the vncleane of that profession 2. Tim. 2. 20. Math. 13.25.47 Math. 3.12 c. 22.10 〈◊〉 it is taken for Particular Societies and congregations of Christians Apoc. 1.4 2.1 and sometimes it is taken for the Pastors of particular Churches Math. 18.17 sometimes for the People Acts 20.28 sometimes for the whole Flocke consisting of Pastors and People Apoc. 3.6 But it is neuer taken in holy Scripture for the Pope and Councell If the Iesuit in his Proposition There is a visible Church alwaies in the world c. understand the 〈◊〉 Church in the first Notion then it is denied that we are absolutely to adhere to the Traditions of this Church or that the same is alwaies and intirely One Vniuersal Apostolicall Holy according to the meaning of the Apostles and Nicene Creed Secondly according to the second Notion the Church is not visible for a principall part thereof is in heauen and the other moetie militant vpon earth being considered as elect and holy is knowne intuitiuely to God only 2. Tim. 2.19 and morally coniecturally and according to the iudgement of Charitie to men in this world 2. Thess. 2.13 Thirdly according to the third Notion the Church is visible in all ages and some part thereof teacheth and professeth right Faith in all substantiall and fundamentall articles And we are to cleaue to the Traditions of the same so farre as in the deliuerie thereof it exceedeth and transgresseth not the bounds of lawfull authoritie and teacheth according to the rule of Gods word S. Chrysostome saith Because Seducers are often found even in true Churches we are not to beleeue vnlesse they speake and do that which is consonant to the Scriptures And in another place 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 If the Priest teach any peruerse Doctrine giue no credit yea though he were an Angell Nay I will presume to say more than this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 one ought not beleeue Paul if he should preach any thing humane or of himselfe but as he is an Apostle and hath Christ speaking in him Lastly according to the fourth Acceptation there are euer in the world particular Churches and societies of Christians and euery one of these Churches professe some portion of diuine veritie But we must enquire by the rule of Gods word which of these are pure and orthodoxall and on the contrarie which of them are infected with errors and imbrace the Doctrine of the one and auoid the Corruptions of the other Remarkable Obseruations concerning the Church OBSERVATION I. THe externall visible Church is an intermixed or compounded societie bodie and state of Christian people professing the faith and worship of Christ in which are found sheepe and goats wheat and tares gold and drosse good fishes and bad and vessels of honour and dishonour This common and generall societie and bodie consisteth of diuers particular Churches consenting and agreeing in the professing of some part of diuine veritie and of these Churches some are orthodoxall some are impure in faith and religion and also these being compared are respectiuely purer or impurer And within the compasse of each particular Church the members are better or worse more or lesse holy or corrupt OBSERVAT. II. Whereas the Church hath many Titles and Properties belonging to it and Christ Iesus the Head thereof hath made sundrie Promises and conferred diuerse Graces vpon it wee must consider which part of the Church is the proper subiect of these Qualities Promises and Graces For it is apparant That as Sheepe and Goats Chaffe and Wheat Gold and Drosse are of a contrarie kind although they are intermixed so likewise the Affections and Attributes of the same although they are spoken in generall of the whole Subiect as an Heape which hath Wheat and Chaffe a Field which hath Wheat and Tares are called an Heape of Graine a Field of Wheat yet many of them appertaine formally and indeed onely to the better part of the common Subiect OBSERVAT. III. In the visible societie of Christian people there are found according to S. Augustine Citizens of the heauenly Hierusalem and also Inhabitants of Babylon And as the same Father teacheth Notum est ciues malae Ciuitatis administrare quosdam actus 〈◊〉 Ciuitatis It is manifest that in the visible Church Burgers of the wicked Citie Babylon doe administer some Functions of the holy Citie Hierusalem Ioh. 12.6 2. Timoth 4.10 Apoc. 3.14 15. Phil. 〈◊〉 Ioh. 3.9 The Promises of Christ made to the Church concerning his presence and assistance to his Word and Sacraments preached and administred according to his commandement are fulfilled when wicked persons execute the office and performe the worke of outward 〈◊〉 For although wicked persons like the Carpenters of Noahs Arke reape no benefit to themselues yet God Almightie concurreth with their Ministerie being his owne Ordinance for the saluation of all deuout and worthie Communicants OBSERVAT. IIII. Some things are spoken of the Church in common or generall tearmes to shew what the whole is in respect of Gods outward vocation or what the office and dutie of the whole Church is but the same promises properties and priuiledges are really fulfilled or found in the better and sounder part thereof onely When our Sauiour promiseth that the gates of Hell shall not preuaile against the Church Matth. 16.18 he vnderstandeth such a Church as heareth and obeyeth his word and not a visible companie or Hierarchie of Prelates which forsake his word and doe what they list August d. Vnit. Ecclesiae cap. 18. Ecclesia in his est qui adificant supra Petram id est qui credunt verbum Christi faciunt d. Baptismo Lib. 6. cap. 24. Nonne illi sunt in Ecclefia qui sunt in Petra Qui autem in Petra non sunt nec in Ecclesia sunt iam ergò videamus vtrum super Petram aedificium suum constituant qui audiunt Christi verba non faciant Saint Augustine in these words deliuereth three things first The Church is in them which build vpon the Rocke secondly They are not in the Church which are not in the Rocke thirdly They onely build vpon the Rocke and are in the Rocke which beleeue and obey the word of Christ And this Doctrine of S. Augustine is taken out of the holy Scripture Matth. 7.24 1. Cor. 3.11 10.4 Also when S. Paul saith The Church is the ground and pillar of Truth 1. Tim. 3. 15. by the Church hee vnderstandeth the House of the liuing God as the precedent part of his speech sheweth to wit If I tarrie long that thou mayest know how thou oughtest to behaue thy selfe in the House of God c. But they alone are verily and indeed the House of God which beleeue and loue the Truth
cannot vse it so the Scriptures are a meanes to conuict proteruious 〈◊〉 as they were vsed by Christ and his Apostles and by the 〈◊〉 Councels or Papall Councels and the Bishops and Doctors of the Roman Church c. Answ. First Our Sauiour and his Apostles did both vse the Scriptures themselues and commanded others euen simple men to vse them Iohn 5 39. Ephes. 6 17. and they are commended who examined Doctrine by them Acts 17 11. Secondly they which vnderstand and applie the Scriptures truely vse them as Christ and his Apostles did and so the Scripture in their vse is a word of power and not as a sword in a childs hand Thirdly Scriptures were meanes to conuict Hereticks as they were vsed by the Fathers of the Church and other holie Persons before any generall Councells were gathered to wit the first three hundred yeares and before the Papall Supremacie was aduanced in the Church Fourthly it is ridiculous to imagine that the present Roman Church and the sole Adheres thereof according to the Trident Creed are the only true expositors of holy Scriptures or that 〈◊〉 exposition of Scripture repugnant and diuers from the present Roman Creed is false or Haereticall for neither hath the holie Ghost by expresse testimonie or euident demonstration appropriated the key of knowledge to this Church and few Heretickes haue more fouly corrupted and abused the Scriptures And the pillars of this Church 〈◊〉 sundrie times been vnskilfull Ideots vnlettered Gulls Monsters of mankind with whom the holie Spirit vseth not to haue commerce Wisdom 1. 2. Cor. 6. 15. Fiftly the place of Tertul. d. Praescript c. 19. doth not 〈◊〉 the imperfection of holie Scripture to conuict proteruious error according to the latter part of my former distinction for then he could not haue said Scripturae plenitudinem adoramus We adore the plenitude of the 〈◊〉 and Let Hermogenes teach that it is written and if it be not written let him feare the Wo denounced against them which add or detract any thing from the word of God but be 〈◊〉 of the Scriptures according to the first part of my distinction to wit That Heretickes blinded with malice and either denying or corrupting the text of the Scriptures cannot be so conuicted by them but they will still vse cauils and by Sophisticall slights borrowed from Philosophers elude the euidence of the plaine Texts of Scriptures But if this argue the Scriptures of imperfection it will also prooue the Authoritie of the Church and of Tradition to be insufficient as appeares in the Arrians and Donatists And Heretickes may with no lesse pretext take exception against Tradition and Ecclesiasticall Authoritie than against the Scripture Ireneus li. 3. ca. 2. When they are confuted by Scriptures they accuse them as being not well written and destitute of Authoritie or else so ambiguous that one cannot find the Truth by them c. And in like manner when we prouoke them to stand to triall by Tradition which came from the Apostles c. they oppose the same c. And thus they will consent neither to Scripture nor Tradition And Gregorie Valence himselfe saith The infallible teaching and proposition of the Church is no lesse obscure vnto vs than any other Article which we are to beleeue Sixtly we acknowledge the lawfull Power and Authoritie of the Church about expounding holy Scriptures and for maintaining Vnitie in right Faith and appeasing contention repressing proteruious Errants Heb. 13.17 Math. 18.17.1 Timoth. 3.15 2. Thessal 5.12 And in particular first wee beleeue the authority of Councels General and Nationall lawfully assembled and accordingly proceeding to be sacred And all Councels of this nature we reuerence with the same honour the ancient Church did affirming that priuate Christians and particular Churches are to submit their iudgement to the authority of the same except it bee manifest that they depart from Truth Secondly wee highly and reuerently esteeme exposition of Scripture deliuered by the vnanimous consent of the Primatiue Fathers and although wee yeeld eminent and supreme Authoritie to the holy Scriptures because the same is absolutely diuine yet when any question ariseth concerning Expositions we allow not priuate persons vpon vncertaine or probable reasons to reiect the sence which hath bin antiently and commonly receiued and against which no strong or solid exception can be produced Now this being obserued and other helps of expounding Scripture vsed there followeth nothing from our Tenet whereby Christianitie should be made vncertaine and Disputation from sole Scripture prooue fruitles or which may hinder apparent Victorie by the same against proteruious Error IESVIT The Preface ended our Aduersarie descendeth to his disputation and herein first he setteth downe a maine proposition which hee intendeth to prooue to wit The Roman Church is the onely true Church Secondly He deliuereth fiue Principles manifest in themselues and presupposed and confessed by Papists and Protestants Principle 1. No man can be saued without firme and sure apprehension of supernaturall Truth concerning his last end and the meanes to attaine thereunto Secondly Assurance of this kind is not had by cleere sight Demonstration humane Discourse or humane Authoritie but by Faith grounded vpon Gods Word reuealing things vnknowne by other meanes Thirdly God reuealed all Supernaturall Truth to Christ and Christ reuealed the same to the holy Apostles partly by vocall Preaching but principally by the immediate teaching of his holy Spirit to this end that they should deliuer them to mankind to bee receiued and beleeued euerie where ouer the World euen to the consummation thereof Fourthly the Apostles fulfilled this preaching to all Nations and deliuering partly by writing and partly by word of mouth the whole entire Doctrine of Saluation planted an vniuersall Christian companie and to deliuer vnto 〈◊〉 all they had 〈◊〉 from them Fiftly though the Apostles and their Primatiue Hearers be deceased yet there still remaines in the World a meanes by which men may assuredly know what the Apostles preached andthe Primatiue Church receiued of them because the Church euen to the endof the World must be founded on the Apostles and beleeue nothing as matter of Faith but that which was deliuered by them The former grounds being confessed a question remaineth to be examined What is the principall infallible meanes whereby a Christian may know what was and is the Doctrine of Faith originally preached by the Apostles Whether holy Scripture of the Apostles and Euangelists bee that meanes or perpetuall Tradition vnwritten deriued by Succession from the Apostles ANSVVER The Iesuit affirmeth the latter and produceth foure Arguments to prooue his Tenet and then supposing that he hath prooued the Question inferreth that the Roman Church is the only true Church because it is the only faithfull keeper and teacher of this Tradition IESVITS 1. Argument If the maine and substantiall points of our Faith are
present and the Doctrine was personally pronounced to them alone Also Math. 18.9 15.22 the like is found concerning other doctrines and precepts and yet these doctrines and precepts are common to all Christians The Romists if they were not partiall could distinguish betweene personall precepts deliuered to the Apostles onely as they were by office Pastors of the Church and betweene common precepts deliuered vnto them as Christians and as they represented the whole body of the Church But the Obiectour addeth That we are not able to demonstrate that this Precept Drinke yee all of this was common I answere First if that which Christ said to the Apostles S. Paul spake to the whole multitude of Beleeuers then Christs words vttered to the Apostles were common But the first is true 1. Cor. 11. 28. And S. Hierome inferreth vpon the same Oportet Coenam dominicam esse communem quià ille omnibus Discipulis suis qui aderant equalitèr tradidit Sacramenta The Lords Supper ought to be common because Christ deliuered the Sacraments of his Bodie and Bloud equally to all the Disciples that were present Secondly If Communion in both kinds hath not foundation in Christs words vttered to the Apostles then Communion in one kind wanteth foundation in Christs words and institution and if it haue not foundation in Christs words then it wanteth all foundation for S. Paul grounds his whole Doctrine touching the holy Eucharist vpon our Sauiours words and institution 1. Cor. 11.23 Thirdly If the reason why the Apostles receiued the Cup was because they were Priests then all Priests being present at the communion ought to receiue in both kinds although they administer not but this is repugnant to the practise of the Romane Church Fourthly It is not certaine that the Apostles were Priests when Christ ordained and administred the Eucharist for that they were not Priests Math. 18. is affirmed by our Aduersaries and that they were made Priests Luke 22. by the words Hoc facite as Bellarmine Suares Henriques Hosius Canisius c. say can neuer be prooued for what force is there in Hoc facite to conclude Priestly Ordination and if Hoc facite prooueth Priesthood then Lay men are made Priests when the words Doe this in remembrance of mee are spoken to them in part or respectiuely Hitherto we haue found nothing in our Aduersaries but Sophistrie of words and Theomachie against Diuine Institution and Apostolicall Tradition But to hold correspondence with the rest the Iesuit addeth IESVIT Secondly These words Accipite manducate bibite Take eate drinke were certainely spoken vnto the same persons and they runne so together in rancke that no man can with probabilitie make the one outrunne the other But the command Accipite which signifies Take with your hands for it is a Precept distinct from Manducate which is take with your mouth was giuen to the Apostles onely not vnto all the faithfull else wee must say That all Communicants were bound to take the consecrated Bread and Cup with their hands who euer heard of such a Precept in the Christian Church ANSWER This Argument truely propounded is All persons commanded to eate were commanded to take None but the Apostles were commanded to take for if Lay men were commanded to take they must alwayes receiue the Eucharist in their hands Ergo None but the Apostles were commanded to eate This Obiection fighteth against Lay mens receiuing in one kinde which vntill 〈◊〉 we supposed Papists had permitted but it seemeth that they will haue the whole vse of the Sacrament depend vpon the Popes deuotion and pleasure But touching the Argument I denie the Assumption for Lay men were commanded to take that is to receiue at least into their mouthes and then to manducate that is to chew or swallow and to let the Element receiued passe into their stomack To take with the hand is agreeable to Christs manner of Administration and it was vsed in the Primitiue Church but the same is not of absolute necessitie for some Communicants may want hands or the naturall vse thereof but to receiue into the mouth and then to manducate or drinke is commanded The Iesuit imagineth that all taking is by the hand and thus he prooueth himselfe to be neither good Grammarian nor Diuine Virgill saith Illos porticibus rex accipiebat in amplis where accipio is to entertaine S. Paul saith Per quem accepimus gratiam Rom. 1. 5. By whom we haue receiued grace and Apostleship ca. 8.15 Ye haue receiued 〈◊〉 the spirit of Adoption The Angell said Ioseph thou sonne of Dauid feare not to take Mary thy wife Math. 1. 20. His Bishopricke let another man take Act. 1.20 IESVIT The third reason is because there was a peculiar and personall cause Why Christ should giue that particular Councellor Admonition for the imperatiue word doth not euer signifie a precept but often an aduise or a permission as your Maiestie well knowes to his Apostles at that time to wit because he would haue them all not onely drinke of his bloud but also would haue them drinke of the same Cup without filling and consecrating the same anew this is more manifest in the Protestants opinion who thinke the Chalice whereof Christ said in S. Mathew Bibite ex hoc omnes to be the same whereof he said in S. Luke Accipite diuidite inter vos non enim bibam amplius de hoc genimine vitis For this being supposed the words Drinke ye all of this imports the same as Diuide this Cup amongst you But Diuide this Cup amongst you was a personall precept giuen to all the Apostles importing that euery one should drinke but a part of that Cup and that also in such measure as the Cup without new filling and consecration might suffice for all to drinke therof What All men in the world Or all Christians that should succeede them to the Worlds end Christ neuer intended that one Cup for all nor is it indeed diuided or parted with vs but the Apostles dranke it vp amongst them Wherefore referring my saying to your Maiesties learned censure I conclude that to me it seemes cleere that the precept or rather direction Drinke ye all of this was but personall confined vnto the number of all there then present ANSWER The Precept Drinke ye all of this saith the Iesuit was personall and concerned the Apostles onely because our Sauiour commanded them All to drinke of the same Cup without filling and consecrating it anew But if Drinke ye all of this had imported a generall duty then Christ could not haue stinted them to one single Cup. This obiection is grounded vpon a false Principle which is all Precepts are Personall in regard of their substance wherein any circumstance is Personall Nothing can be more absurd and false than this Position for in the Decalogue it selfe some things were Personall as appeareth by the Preface Exod. 20.2 Likewise in many generall or common
Yet wee say after Tradition hath beene our Introduction the Soule that hath but ordinarie Grace added to Reason may discerne Light sufficient to resolue our Faith that the Sunne is there This Principle then being not absolutely and simply euident in it selfe is presumed to be taught vs otherwise and if otherwise then it must be taught in and by some superior Science to which Theologie is subordinate Now men may be apt to thinke out of reuerence That Diuinitie can haue no Science aboue it but your owne Schoole teacheth me that it hath The sacred Doctrine of Diuinitie in this sort is a Science because it proceeds out of Principles that are knowne by the Light of a superior Knowledge which is the Knowledge of God and the blessed in Heauen In this superior Science this Principle The Scriptures are the Oracles of God is more than euident in full Light This superior Science deliuers this Principle in full reuealed Light to the Prophets and Apostles The infallible Light of this Principle made their Authoritie Diuine by the same Diuine Authoritie they wrote and deliuered the Scripture to the Church Therefore from them immediately the Church receiued the Scripture and that vncorrupt And since no sufficient reason hath or can be giuen that in any substantiall thing it hath beene corrupted it remaines firme to vs at this day prooued in the most supreame Science and therefore now to be supposed at least by all Christians That the Scripture is the Word of God And therefore the B. his answere is good euen in strictnesse That this Principle is to be supposed Besides the Iewes neuer had nor can haue any other proofe that the Old Testament is the Word of God than wee haue of the New For theirs was deliuered by Moses and the Prophets and ours was deliuered by the Apostles which were Prophets too The Iewes did beleeue their Scripture by a Diuine Authoritie for so the Iewes argue themselues We know that God spaeke with Moses And that therefore they could no more erre in following Moses than they could in following God himselfe Now how did the Iewes know that God spake to Moses How Why apparently the same way that is before set downe first by Tradition So S. Chrysostome We know Why by whose witnesse doe you know By the Testimonie of oùr Ancestors But he speakes not of their immediate Ancestors but their Prime which were Prophets and whose Testimonie was Diuine into which namely their Writings the Iewes did resolue their Faith And euen that Scripture of the Old Testament was a Light and a shining Light too and therefore could not but be sufficient when Tradition had gone before And therefore though the Iewes entred this way to their beleefe of the Scripture yet they doe not say Audiuimus Wee haue heard that God spake to Moses but Wee know it So they resolued their Faith higher and into a more inward Principle than an Eare to their immediate Ancestors and their Tradition F. And that no other answere could be made but by admitting some Word of God vnwritten to assure vs of this Point B. I thinke I haue shewed that the B. his answere is good and that so no other answere need be made If there were need I make no question but another answere might be made to assure vs of this Point though wee did not admit of any Word of God vnwritten I say to assure vs and you expresse no more If you had said to assure vs by Diuine Faith your Argument had beene the stronger But if you speake of assurance onely in the generall I must then tell you and it is the great aduantage which the Church of Christ hath against Infidels a man may be assured nay infallibly assured by Ecclesiasticall and humane proofe Men that neuer saw Rome may be sure and infallibly beleeue that such a Citie there is by Historicall and acquired Faith And if consent of humane storie can assure me this Why should not consent of Church-storie assure me the other That Christ and his Apostles deliuered this Bodie of Scripture as the Oracles of God For Iewes enemies to Christ they beare witnesse to the Old Testament and Christians through almost all Nations giue in euidence to both Old and New And no Pagan or other enemies of Christianitie can giue such a worthie and consenting Testimonie for any Authoritie vpon which they relye or almost for any Principle which they haue as the Scripture hath gayned to it selfe And as is the Testimonie which it receiues aboue all Writings of all Nations so here is assurance in a great measure without any Diuine Authoritie in a word written or vnwritten A great assurance and it is infallible too onely then we must distinguish infallibilitie For first a thing may be presented as an infallible Obiect of Beleefe when it is true and remaines so For Truth 〈◊〉 tale as it is Truth cannot deceiue Secondly a thing is said to be infallible when it is not onely true and remainesso actually but when it is of such invariable constancie and vpon such ground as that no degree of falsehood at any time in any respect can fall vpon it Certaine it is that by humane Authoritie Consent and Proofe a man may be assured infallibly that the Scripture is the Word of God by an acquired habite of Faith Cui non 〈◊〉 falsum vnder which nor error nor falsehood is But he cannot be assured infallibly by Diuine Faith Cui subesse non potest falsum into which no falsehood can come but by a Diuine Testimonie This Testimonie is absolute in the Scripture it selfe deliuered by the Apostles for the Word of God That which makes way for this as an Introduction and outward motiue is the Tradition of the present Church but that neither simply Diuine nor sufficient alone into which we may resolue our Faith And now to come close to the particular The time was before this miserable rent in the Church of Christ which I thinke no true Christian can looke vpon but with a bleeding heart that you and we were all of one beleefe That beleefe was tainted in tract and corruption of time very deepely A diuision was made yet so that both parts held the Creed and other common Principles of Beleefe of these this was one of the greatest That the Scripture is the Word of God for our beleefe of all things contained in it depends vpon it Since this diuision there hath beene nothing done by vs to discredit this Principle nay we haue giuen it all honor and ascribed vnto it more sufficiencie euen to the containing of all things necessarie to saluation with satis superque enough and more than enough which your selues haue not done doe not And for begetting and settling a beleefe of this Principle wee goe the same way with you and a better besides The same way with you because wee allow the Tradition of the
certainetie of Christianitie cannot but with it fall to the ground ANSVVER The totall certainetie of Christianitie dependeth not vpon a Church illustrious and conspicuous to the eie of the whole world and hauing such externall pompe and Visibilitie as Papals imagine Therefore if such a Church be ouerthrowne that is be proued in sundrie Articles to be corrupt and vnfound which is our Tenet concerning the present Roman Church the certaintie of Christianitie may still subsist The Tenet which wee maintaine touching the qualitie of the present Roman Church 〈◊〉 to the reformation of errours and abuses in the same and not to the ouerthrowing of the lawfull authoritie of the Visible Church The certainetie of Religion in the time of the Iewes did depend as much vpon the authoritie of the Visible Church of Iuda as it can in our daies depend vpon the authoritie of the Roman Church or of any other for that Church was by office the keeper of the Canonicall Scripture Rom. 3 2. the teacher of heauenly trueth Ezek. 44 23 Mal. 2 7. a ministeriall Iudge of controuersies Deut. 17 9. Ezek. 44 24. and yet notwithstanding the said Church was reprooued by the holie Prophets Mal. 2 8. 2. Chron. 29.6 7. Esay 56 10. Ezek. 34. and the religious kings of Iuda reformed the same 2. Chron. 14.3 4. and cap. 17.7 8 9. and cap. 29.3 c. and cap. 34.3 4. and cap. 33.15 Now like as when a Physition discouereth the diseases of the bodie and prescribeth remedies and medecines he doth thereby heale and not destroy the state of the bodie so likewise they which out of the Oracles of God haue reuealed the errours and corruptions of the Roman Church and sought reformation thereof doe not ouerthrow the certainetie of Christianitie nor impaire the lawfull authoritie of the Church but repaire and establish the same IESVIT If it be hidden and made inuisible men must needs wander in the search of the first deliuered Christian Doctrine without end or hope of euer ariuing at any certaine Issue And if this Controuersie be not examined and determined in the first place disputation by Scripture will proue fruitlesse by the sole euidence whereof no victorie can be gotten against proteruious error or at least not victorie that is verie apparant neither will answers about particular Doctrines satisfie a mind preoccupated with a long continued dislike of them ANSVVER In this Section two things are deliuered First If the Church be hidden c. Secondly Controuersies cannot be decided by sole Scripture c. To the first I answer The Church that is the societie of Christian people professing sauing Faith is at no time totally bidden and inuisible but in Persecution the same may be hidden and vnknowne to them which 〈◊〉 no will to know it 2. Cor. 4 3. or which defire to know it that they may persecute and oppresse it Reuelat. 12 14. And the same may sometimes cease to be largely and in a 〈◊〉 and pompous manner visible Math. 10 23. and 23 34. Heb. 11 38. And in the state of Persecution when the same is hidden and vnknowne to enemies the friends of this Church to whom it is knowne may by the Ministerie thereof exercised in priuate receiue the certaintie of beleefe and if it be vnknowne or hidden to any of them these may by priuat reading or meditation of that which they haue formerly learned supplie the defect of publique Ministerie euen as some Christians at this day being slaues in Turkie or Barbarie may be saued without externall Ministerie And it is also possible for such to be Instruments of conuerting and sauing others Ruffin Hist. Eccles. li. 1. c. 9 10. Besides we do also acknowledge that the Popish Church although it were corrupt and vnsound in many things yet it preserued the Bookes of holie Scripture and taught the Apostles Creed and sundrie parts of Diuine veritie collected from the same and by these Principles of Christianitie preserued in that Church iuditious and pious men might with studie and diligence find out what was the first deliuered Christian Doctrine in such things as are necessarie to Saluation as in the Iewish Church when the same was corrupt in manners and doctrine Mal. 2 8. Esay 56 10. 2. Kings 16 11 16. Marc. 6 34. the Bookes of holie Scripture and many remnants of Diuine truth which were able to saue Gods elect remained and were sufficient Principles from whence all sauing truth might be deriued and pernitious errours and abuses discouered and reformed And thus although the true Church be granted at sometimes to be hidden and inuisible in manner before expressed well affected people shall not want all meanes to vnderstand what was the first deliuered Christian faith The Iesuit in the next passage laboureth to make it appeare impossible to end and determine Controuersies of Religion without the authoritie of a perpetuall visible Church whose iudgement is alwaies infallible and free from all error But if his speech be resolued from a Rhethoricall flourish into forme of Argument the loosenesse of it will appeare For he proceedeth in this or the like manner IESVIT By all such meanes as is of it selfe sufficient to declare what was the first deliuered Christian Doctrine apparant victorie may be gotten against proteruious errour and minds preoccupated with long dislike of particular Doctrines may be satisfied By sole Scripture no apparant victorie can be gotten against proteruious errour neither can long dislike of particular Doctrines be satisfied Ergo sole Scripture is not a sufficient meanes to declare what was the first deliuered Christian Doctrine ANSVVER First If by apparant Victorie be meant such Victorie as proteruious errants will confesse or persuade themselues to bee a Victorie against them then the Maior Proposition is false For when our Sauiour himselfe confuted the Pharisees by such demonstration as none could be greater yet they resisted the Truth and in like sort they resisted St. Stephen Acts 7 53. and S. Paul Acts 28 23. and in the best Councels of Nice Ephesus c. no such apparant Victorie was gotten of proteruious Heretiques Secondly If by apparant Victorie be meant a true and sufficient confutation and conuiction of Errants then the Minor is false for that is a sufficient means to obtaine Victorie by which our Sauiour himselfe subdued Sathan Math. 4.4 7. and the Heretiques of his time Math. 12 3. 22 29 43. and by which St. Paul confuted the Pharisees and other Aduersaries Acts 17 2. and 28 23. And whereby the Fathers of the Nicene Councell conuicted the Arrians Socrat. Hist. l. 1. c. 6. and which are giuen by inspiration to be an effectuall meanes to reprooue and confute error 2. Tim. 3 16. Chrys. d. fid leg nat But the Iesuit may cauil saying that euen as a sword in the hand of a Giant is sufficient to 〈◊〉 an enemie but not in the hand of a child who
erred in exposition nor differed one for the other Thirdly the Fathers affirme that the Scripture expounds it selfe Aug. d. verb. 〈◊〉 Serm. 2. d. vnit Eccles. c. 5. p. 427. Chrys. sup Gen. Hom. 13. And they doe not alwayes referre men to Tradition concerning exposition of Scripture but prescribe other rules and meanes also Aug. d Doctr. Christ. l. 4. c. 30. c. Chrys. sup Gen. Hom. 21. sup Rom. Hom. 13. sup Iohn Hom. 39. Tertul. c. prax Hilar d. Trinit l. 5. Ambros. 〈◊〉 Psal. 118. Serm. 8. Origen Mat. Hom. 25. Fourthly that which the Aduersarie affirmeth touching the Fathers to wit that they held the Scriptures to be cleare in all substantiall points onely to men beforehand instructed by the light of Tradition is vntrue neither doe the Fathers speake of Tradition according to the Romish acceptation First sometimes the Fathers exhort heathen men which were not instructed by Tradition to reade the Scriptures Theophilus Antiochenus saith to Autolicus being as then a Pagan Verum tu ipse si placet consule liter as sacras But doe thou thy selfe if it seeme good vnto thee consult with the holy Scriptures Also they prouoke Heretikes which denied the Tradition of the Church to examine truth by Scriptures August d. vnit Eccles c. 2.3.16 contra Maxim Arrian l. 3. c. 14. Socrates Hist. lib. 1. cap. 6. Secondly by Tradition they vnderstand not the fabulous dreames and inuentions of Papals who like the Pharisees corrupt the right sence of Scripture by their vnwritten Traditions and affirme those things to bee Apostolicall which agree with the confessed Doctrine of the Apostles like darkenesse with light But the Fathers by Tradition vnderstand such exposition of Scripture as was vniformely receiued and commended for Apostolicall by the Primatiue Church and which besides antiquitie or the report of men appeared to bee Apostolicall by an exact harmonie and consent with the Text of the holy Scripture to which it was applied St. August d. Bapt. c. Donatist l. 5 c. 26 St. Cyprian Epist. 74. Tertul. d. praescript c. 21 Ruffin Hist. Ecclesiast l. 2 c. 9 IESVIT I hope I haue in the opinion of your most learned Maiestie sufficiently demonstrated the first ground of Catholicke faith to wit that a Christian is originally and fundamentally built vpon the word of God not as written 〈◊〉 Scriptures but as deliuered by the Tradition of the Church successiuely from the Primatiue vpon the authority whereof we beleeue that both Scriptures and all other substantiall Articles of Faith were deliuered by the Apostles thence further ascending and inferring they came from Christ and so from God the prime veritie and Authour of truth ANSVVER You haue played the Paralogist and weaued a spiders web which is fitter to catch flyes than to persuade so religious learned iudicious and resolute a king who is like an Angell of God knowing good and euill Your obiections being weighed in the ballance of the Sanctuarie are found light they are Funiculus vanitatis a coard and bundle of vanitie a potsheard couered ouer with the drosse of siluer His most learned Maiestie as you truly stile him honoureth genuine and Orthodox all Tradition as no religious king or good Christian can doe more and hereupon to wit vpon the testimony of Tradition besides other Arguments he beleeueth that you and your consorts are deceiued when you hold that a Christian is originally and fundamentally built vpon the word of God not as written in Scripture but as deliuered by Tradition c. For if the Scripture according to the doctrine and Tradition of the Primatiue Church is eminentissimae authoritatis of most eminent authoritie If it be the seed of which faith is first of all conceiued if it is the Rocke whereupon the Church is built if the authoritie of vnwritten Tradition dependeth vpon it and must bee examined by it If the Churches authoritie is 〈◊〉 from it then a Christian is originally and fundamentally built vpon it First That which is most excellent in euery kind is the modell and paterne of all the rest but I trow you will grant the Scripture to be the most excellent part of Gods word 2. Pet. 1. 〈◊〉 S. 〈◊〉 c. 〈◊〉 Manich. li. 11 cap. 5. d. Ciuit. Dei lib. 11. cap. 3. Ibid. 〈◊〉 14. cap. 7. d. Vnit. Eccles. 16. Chris. d. 〈◊〉 Hom. 4. Oecumen sup 2. Tim. 3. Ansel. sup 2. Tim. 3. Secondly A Christian is fundamentally built vpon the rock but the Scripture is a rocke Cardinalis Camaracensis 〈◊〉 vespert 〈◊〉 sacrae Scripturae In euery building orderly framed the foundation hath precedence then followeth superedification and lastly consummation According to this order Christ the most exact Architect did build his Church vpon the rocke of holy Scripture Thirdly The seed of Faith is the root and foundation of 〈◊〉 Christian the Scripture is the seed of Faith Iohn 20. 41. for it is the word of God Luc. 8.11 Iam. 1.18 1. Cor. 4 15. And were the Popish Tenet true that the Scripture is not the whole word of God but only a part thereof yet a Christian must be originally and fundamentally built vpon it together with Tradition And Tradition according to the Tenet of our Aduersarie in this place cannot be the sole foundation of Christianitie but only a part of the foundation Fourthly All Scripture giuen by diuine Inspiration is simply and without exception to be receiued and all Tradition repugnant to Scripture is to be refused From hence it followeth that Scripture is a rule of Tradition and not Tradition of Scripture and Scripture is the highest rule as both the Fathers and many Papists themselues affirme and thus it is certaine that a Christian is orignally and fundamentally built vpon the holy Scripture IESVITS 2d Ground That there is a visible Church alwaies in the world to whose Traditions men are to cleaue and the Church is one Vniuersall Apostolicall Holy ANSWER The subiect of this Proposition to wit Ecclesia the Church is a word or terme of diuers significations and therefore the Iesuit should haue declared in what notion he taketh the same when he saieth There is a visible Church c. First Cardinall Bellarmine with other Pontificians saith that the Church whereof he disputes is a companie of people linked together by the same profession of Faith and Communion of Sacraments vnder lawfull pastros 〈◊〉 vnder the Roman Bishop who is Christs Vicar Secondly The terme Church is taken in the holy Scripture for the vniuersall number of holy beleeuers in all ages and more strictly for the whole number of holy beleeuers vnder the New Testament Heb. 12.23 Apoc. 5.9 Ephes. 5.25.27 and thus it comprehendeth both the Church Militant and Triumphant Thirdly the Church is taken for the common and vniuersall multitude of Christian people of any one or more ages which
16. 12. Iohn 10. 8. Ezek. 22. 26. Secondly the same apeareth to be true both by the example of the greater Prelates of the Asian Churches which corrupted true Doctrine and worship and prouoked the Almightie so much that he remooued their Candlesticke out of his place and also by the example of the West Church it selfe wherein Popes and greater Prelates haue been illiterate Monsters Diuels incarnate Apostataes men defiled with all wickednesse and abominable sinnes as Papists themselues report And concerning Doctrine it is euident by comparing their decrees with the Scriptures and the ancient Fathers and Councels that they are in many things departed from the truth And Occham saith Omnis congregatio quae potest errare contra bonos more 's potest errare contra fidem quia mali mores excacant intellectum Because euill manners blinde the iudgement therefore euery assembly which may erre notoriously in manners may erre against the Faith But if by true Church we vnderstand a number of Beleeuers smaller or greater teaching and professing right Faith in all substantiall and capitall points and willing to imbrace and teach all other diuine veritie when the same is made knowne vnto them then it is granted that there is a true Church of Christ alwayes in the world And this kind of Beleeuers doe either teach and professe their Faith and Religion in congregations apart or in the externall fellowship and common societie of corrupt Beleeuers as appeareth by the example of the Iewes in the dayes of their wicked Kings and Priests and in the time of the Pharisees The open and publicke ministerie of Priests was corrupt in those dayes yet God had a remnant of people and small Church in the middest of this blindnesse Esay 1.9 In the other part of this Section the Iesuite produceth an Argument to prooue That there is alwayes a true Church of Christ in the world The summe of his Argument is Christ neuer leaueth the world destitute of the ordinarie meanes of saluation and people cannot haue the meanes of saluation but from the true Church and by the Tradition thereof by which they receiue the Scriptures and the rule of Faith to guide them in the exposition of the Scriptures ANSVVER It is lost labour to spend time in proouing against vs that there is alwayes in the world a true Church for wee haue euer acknowledged this The thing that we denie is that although there bee alwaies in the world a Church the 〈◊〉 members whereof are free from damnable and 〈◊〉 errour yet there is not alwaies a true Church in the world whose commanding Prelates are free from all error or 〈◊〉 part of it from malicious error Secondly It is granted that Christ doth not according to his antecedent will leaue the world destitute of the meanes of Saluation Math. 23.37 1. Timoth. 2.4 2. Pet. 3.9 But notwithstanding this will of Christ many people may be actually destitute of the meanes of Saluation by the negligence of Preachers and through their owne negligence or malice contemning or repelling the said meanes when they are offered vnto them Acts 13.46 Thirdly A corrupt visible Church may truely deliuer some parts of sacred Truth and among other verities it may deliuer the Apostles Tradition touching the Canon of the Scripture and also the rule of Faith contained in the Apostles Creed This appeareth by the Churches of the Nestorians at this day and also of old by the Iewish Church which at such times as it was Idolatrous and vnsound preserued the Canon of the Scriptures of the Old Testament and by transcribing and reading deliuered the whole Text thereof truely Rom. 3.2 and Acts 15.21 Fourthly If we should grant which is false as appeareth by the Greeke Church that there was in some ages past no other Church but the Roman and the adheres thereof and affirme withall that the chiefe Prelats thereof and their faction maintained sundrie erronious and superstitious doctrines yet because all Doctors and people liuing within the externall communion of that Church were not equally poysoned and surprised with error but many among them firmely beleeuing all fundamentall 〈◊〉 were 〈◊〉 by adeu out and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in some other points It followeth not that the world should be destitutes of all meanes of saluation for these founder members lining in the visible Roman Church might deliuer the maine and capitall Articles of Christianitie and their ignorance and error in other matters was in those daies pardonable because they offended in simplicitie and were 〈◊〉 unawares IESVIT Secondly this Church must be alwaies visible and conspicious for the Traditions of the Church must euer bee famous glorious and notoriously knowne in the world that a Christian may say with S. Augustine I beleeue nothing but the consent of Nations and Countries and most celebrious fame Now if the Church were hidden in secret invisible in any age then her Traditions could not bee Doctrines euer illustriously known but rather obscure hidden Apochriphall Ergo the Church the mistris pillar and foundation of Truth must bee alwaies visible and conspicuous which if need bee may be further prooued most euidently ANSVVER The Church according to the Popish Tenet is said to be Visible because it alwaies hath such an outward forme and appearance in the eyes of the world as that people are able by sence or common reason to know the same materially and to distinguish it from other societies of infidels and Hereticks And by the Church in this question they vnderstand a companie of beleeuers professing Christian Faith without error submitting themselues to the Bishop of Rome as to their vniuersall Visible head And they affirme concerning the said Church that it may at all times be sensibly knowne and discerned and that the place of aboad and the principall members thereof are openly knowne and the externall actions of the same to wit Preaching Praying administration of 〈◊〉 may bee alwaies heard and seene and that the same is perpetually sensible and 〈◊〉 like vnto earthly kingdomes and common weales Some few of them acknowledge that it is possible for the same for some short season to loose part of the externall amplitude and glorie and to be ouershadowed with clouds and stormes of Heresies Scismes and Persecutions but yet they all 〈◊〉 that euen in those tempestuous seasons it is conspicuous to the world in regard of the principall members and that the common and ordinarie condition of the true Church is to be amply famously and in a glorious manner visible But our Tenet is First That the true Church abideth oftentimes in persecution either of 〈◊〉 and externall enemies or of domesticall foes And in time of persecution by either of 〈◊〉 enemies it may be reputed a false Church or impious Sect by the multitude and consequently be vnknown to the wicked world vnder the Notion of holy and true and in such
not impossible for a true Church to succeed or come out of a false or for a corrupt Church to reforme it selfe And if this happen there is required no new Ordination of Pastors 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 any Miracles to confirme their Vocation but they which 〈◊〉 ordained in a corrupt Church returning to the right Faith and worship of God make their former Ordination more legitimate holy and effectuall The Iesuit in the words ensuing collecteth from our Sauiours promise I will be with you c. that there must euer bee a companie of Bishops and Pastours succeeding the Apostles because Christ said to them and their successours I will bee with you c. But if this collection be good then euerie one of the Apostles must haue Bishops Pastours and Doctours succeeding them in right faith to the end of the world for Christ spake to them all in generall and also distributiuely to euerie of them c. But the Papals themselues at this day exclude all the successours of other Apostles excepting Saint Peter Neither yet doth our Sauiour limit his presence and assistance to generall Councels or definitiue sentences of Popes but hee speaketh of Preaching and Baptising and therefore if his presence with Pastours and Bishops doe free them from all errour it must free them in Preaching and writing Bookes as well as sitting in Councell Also they to whom Christ is alwayes present are not of infallible iudgement or free from errour in all matters but onely from damnable and malicious errour as appeareth by Saint Cyprian Saint Augustine and all the elect of God Wherefore this promise in regard of the perfection thereof did appertaine to the Apostles themselues and in regard of the veritie of it and for such a measure of assistance as is necessarie to constitute a number of faithfull people more or lesse in euery age to serue Christ truely in the substance of faith and pietie it is fulfilled alwayes euen to the end of the world But because our Aduersaries insist so much vpon this Text to raise their visible and personall succession I will reduce the Argument which they draw out of it into forme and then accommodate mine Answere If Christ will be with his Apostles all dayes to the end of the world then the Apostles not continuing aliue themselues they must remaine in Bishops Pastours and Doctours locally and personally succeeding them to the end of the world But the first is true Ergo c. First if the consequence of this Argument were good then all and euerie one of the Apostles must continue allwayes to the consummation of the world in Bishops Pastours and Doctours lineally succeeding them which Papals themselues denie Secondly lineall and personall succession is not the sole meanes by which the Apostles after their decease remaine in the world but they remaine also in the world by their Scriptures and also by the faith of Beleeuers receiuing and obeying their doctrine Thirdly that which is promised vpon condition is not absolute vntill the condition be fulfilled The presence of Christ is promised to the Apostles successours conditionally and as they were one with the Apostles by imitation and subordination that is so farre as they walked in their steps and conformed their Doctrine and Ministerie to the patterne receiued from them But successours did not alwayes performe this condition neither did the promise inable them to doe it without their owne care and indeuour which was contingent and separable and therefore many times deficient Fourthly Christs presence alwayes to the consummation of the world with some Bishops Pastours and Doctours lineally succeeding the Apostles prooueth not that these Bishops and Pastours cannot erre in any part of their Doctrine for then no particular Bishops hauing Apostolicall ordination could fall into any errour but it sheweth onely that Christ co-operates with them in such Ministeriall duties and actions as they performe according to his Ordinance And when they preach his Doctrine and administer his Sacraments hee himselfe will adde vertue and grace to their actions being duly performed IESVIT Fourthly this Church is vniuersall 〈◊〉 in mundum vniuersum Marc. 16. 15. where I will be alwayes with you ANSWER The true Church is vniuersall according to the manner formerly declared But the Argument taken out of Saint Marke 16.15 prooueth not that it is euer actually vniuersall in respect of place and multitude of professours For as it followeth not that because Christ said he would be with Saint Paul when he preached at Corinth Act. 18.10 therefore he will be euer at Corinth So likewise it is inconsequent to inferre Christ said he would be present in all places of the world with the Apostles when they baptised and preached as he commanded them Ergo he will alwayes be present in those places although their successours neglect his commandement Is God euer in the dungeon in Egypt because he was euer there whilst Ioseph a iust person continued in prison The promise of spirituall presence is annexed to the worke of Preaching and Baptising wheresoeuer it is performed according to the Diuine Ordinance but that which in some ages hath beene done in many places may at other times be performed in few IESVIT Fiftly the Church is one not diuided into parts because it teacheth and beleeueth vniformely all that Christ deliuered and commanded without factions Sects or parts about matters of faith ANSWER It is not affirmed neither can it be concluded out of Mat. 28. that the visible Church in all ages of the world teacheth and beleeueth either vniformely or expresly and distinctly all that Christ deliuered or commanded and in the same Churches which were planted by the Apostles there was discord among infirme Christians 1. Cor. 1.11 IESVIT Sixtly this Church is alwayes holy for doctrine neuer deliuering or teaching any falshood I who am the truth am alwayes with you teaching all nations Holy also for life Christ the Holy of Holies assisting and making her able to conuert Infidels which it could not well doe without signes and tokens of wonderfull sanctitie at the least in her more eminent Preachers ANSVVER Although the true Church is alwaies holy for Doctrine yet it is not perfectly and in the highest degree euer so And it is most inconsequent to argue Christ which is the Truth is euer with the Church Ergo the Church cannot erre or teach any falshood for Christ is alwaies with the faithfull Ephes. 3. 17. yet iust and faithfull people may erre Because Christ was with the Apostles by miraculous inspiration therefore they could not erre or deliuer any falshood great or small but he is present with the sounder part of the Church militant since the Apostles by ordinarie grace and assistance which freeth the same from damnable and malicious errour but not from all errour And this assistance of Grace is greater or lesse according to the good pleasure of Christ and the disposition of his people which are
compassed about with ignorance and infirmitie and at some times better or worse qualified than at other Also the true Church in firmissimis suis in her firmest members is 〈◊〉 holy for life because the Holy of Holiest sanctifieth and purgeth the same by his Word Sacraments and Grace Eph. 5.26 Tit. 3.5 6. But it is not absolute in holinesse Iam. 3.2 1. Ioh. 1.8 nor yet in euery age so remarkeably holy that it is thereby able to conuert Infidels And the true Church hath not in all ages the gift of Miracles and the pretext of Miracles is common to deceiuers Math. 24.24 25. 2. Thessal 2.9 Apoc. 13.13 And Suares the Iesuit saith Haec adulterari possunt ita exterius fingi vt non sint necessaria signa verae Fidei Miracles may so be adulterated and externally feigned that they may not be necessarie signes of Faith And Canus speaking of Popish miracles and legends saith Nostri pleriquè de industria ita multa 〈◊〉 vt eorum me pudeat taedeat sundrie of our men do so wilfully coine many things in their report of Miracles that I am ashamed and irked of them IESVIT That the Roman is the One Holy Catholicke Apostolicall Church from and by which we are to receiue the Tradition of Christian Doctrine These grounds being laid it is apparant that the Roman Church that is the multitude of Christians spread ouer the world cleauing to the Doctrine and Tradition of the Church of Rome is the One Holy Catholicke and Apostolicall Church ANSVVER The former grounds according to your deliuerie and exposition of them are partly false and partly ambiguous and captious and therefore it cannot be made apparant from them That the moderne Roman Church is the One Holy Catholicke and Apostolicall Church from which we are absolutely to receiue the whole Tradition of Christian Doctrine IESVITS 1. Argument There mnst be alwaies in the world One Holy Catholicke and Apostolicall Church that is a Church deliuering Doctrine vniformely therby making them credible Vniuersally thereby making them famously knowne to mankind Holily so making them certain and such as on them we may securely rely Apostolically so making them perpetually flow without change vnto the present Christianitie in the Channell of neuer interrupted succession of Bishops from the Apostles And this Church must either be the Roman or the Protestants or some other opposit to both Protestants cannot say a Church opposite to both for then they should be condemned in their owne judgement and bound to conforme themselues to that Church which can be no other but the Graecian a Church holding as many or more Doctrines which Protestants dislike than doth the Church of Rome as J can demonstrate if need be ANSVVER There must be alwaies in the world a Church One Holy Catholicke and Apostolicall that is A number of Christians beleeuing and 〈◊〉 professing Christianitie to the sounder part wherof the properties of One Holy Catholicke Apostolicall belong But there is not alwaies in the world an Hierarchiall visible Church consisting of Prelates and people vnited in one externall forme of Policie and profession of Religion vnder an vniuersall Pope to which alone these foure titles are proper or principally belonging And there may bee an Orthodoxall Apostolicall Church consisting of a small number of inferiour Pastors and right beleeuing Christians opposed and persecuted by the Hierarchiall part of the visible Church euen as in the raigne of king Manasses and other idolatrous kings of Iuda when Idolatrie preuailed among the Priests and generall multitude there was a remnant of holy people worshipping God according to his word and not defiled with the impietie of those times Now concerning the disiunctiue part of the Iesuits Argument which is This Church must either be the Roman or the Protestants or some other opposite to both It is answered The Protestant Church is that true and Orthodoxall Church which is One Holy Apostolicke and a sound part of the Catholicke For although the same may be supposed to haue had beginning in Luthers age yet this is vntrue concerning the essence and kind and is true onely touching the name and some things accidentall For in all ages and before Luther some persons held the substantiall articles of our Religion both in the Roman and Graecian Church And by name the Graecians maintained these articles in common with vs That the Roman Church hath not primacie of Iurisdiction Authoritie and Grace aboue or ouer all other Churches neither is the same infallible in her definitions of Faith They denie Purgatorie priuate Masses Sacrifice for the dead and they propugne the mariage of Priests In this Westerne part of the world the Waldenses Taborites of Bohemia the Scholers of Wiclife called in England Lollards maintained the same doctrine in substance with the moderne Protestants as appeareth by the confession of their Faith and by the testimonie of some learned Pontificians And concerning certaine differences obiected to haue beene betweene them and vs we shall afterward shew that the same are no greater than such as haue beene antiently among the Fathers and there are as great differences betweene the Elder and moderne Romists in many passages of their doctrine But now on the contrarie if it were so that we could not for certaine ages past nominate or assigne out of historie any other visible Church besides the Roman or Grecian yet because right Faith may be preserued in persons liuing in a corrupt visible Church as Wheat among Tares 1. King 19. 11. and because God hath promised there shall be alwaies in the world a true Church hauing either a larger or smaller number of professors if Protestants be able to demonstrate that they maintaine the same Faith and Religion which the holy Apostles taught this alone is sufficient to prooue they are the true Church IESVIT It is also most manifest and vndeniable that Protestants are not such a Church nor part of such a Church since their reuoult and separation from the Roman seeing confessedly they changed their Doctrines they once held forsooke the bodie whereof they were members broke off from the stocke of that tree whereof they were branches Neither did they departing from the Roman ioine themselues with any other Church professing their particular doctrines dissonant from it Ergo The Romane is the one holy Catholicke and Apostolicall Church c. ANSVVER Bold words It is most manifest and vndenyable miserable proofes they changed their Doctrine they once held c. If the Pharisees had argued in this manner against Saint Paul or the Manichees and Pelagians against Saint Augustine the one would haue told them That it was no fault to forsake the leauen of Traditions to imbrace the Doctrine of the Gospell confirmed by the Prophets and the other would haue pleaded most iustly That it is a vertue and honour to forsake errour and to imbrace veritie Gods people are commanded vpon a
will not demonstrate that it is the Church vniuersall For both the Iewes and also sundrie Christians which are no Romists are largely diffused ouer the World and exercise their Religion in places where they make their abode and there is nothing more presumptuous than to make externall Fame and Amplitude which are things common and separable proper notes of a true Church and vpon this ground to reiect and censure smaller Churches which haue lesse fame in the World but more Veritie IESVIT Most manifestly Holy in all kind of high extraordinarie Sanctitie giuing notorious signes and tokens thereof striking admiration into carnall men that are not altogether prophane and diffusing abroad among Infidels the sweete Odour of Christ and the Christian Name ANSWER Passing by your boasting of Manifestly Holy in all kind of high and extraordinarie Holinesse notorious striking admiration c. And putting you in mind of Solomons Prouerbe There is a man that boasteth himselfe to be rich and yet hath nothing Prou. 13. 7. I answere the matter first You must be aduertised that Gregory Moral l. 33. c. 26. saith Praedicatores Antichristi sanctitatis sibi speciem arrogant sed tamen opera iniquitatis exercent Antichrists Preachers arrogate vnto themselues a shew of holinesse and practise the workes of iniquitie This will be verified in such as you are if your forme of externall holinesse bee not conioyned with holy and Orthodoxall Doctrine You must therefore first of all prooue your doctrine to be Orthodoxall in the Articles in question betweene the reformed Churches and you before your miracles and specious holinesse can stand you in any stead And there is no kind of externall holinesse which heretickes haue not pretended and practised in shew before men Secondly your owne friends and followers testifie That your Church hath beene for many ages notoriously defiled with the enormitie of vices Some of them say in generall tearmes that from the crowne of the head to the sole of the foot the vlcerous matter of enormous sinne hath defiled and deformed the whole body and state of Christianitie liuing vnder your profession Others affirme that all Ecclesiasticall and Christian discipline was in a manner extinguished in euery place Others say that oppression rapine adulterie incest and all pestilent vice did confound all sacred and prophane things and that the same beat S. Peters ship so impetuously that it began to hull or wallow vpon the to-side Others that vices were so exalted and multiplied that they hardly left any space to Gods mercie Others say there is no place wherein is found so little pietie and Religion as in those people which dwell neerest to Rome Others say that you haue not onely imitated and matched but surpassed all the auarice ambition lubricitie and tyrannie that was euer heard of amongst the heathen Sundrie of your owne part haue written volumes containing Narrations of the outragious wickednesse which raigned among 〈◊〉 They haue stiled your grand fathers Monsters of mankind The dregs of vice Incarnate deuils c One saith Nothing was more luxurious couetous and proud than Priests they spent the Churches patrimonie in gluttonie ryot vpon dogs and queanes and all their preaching was to Matthew Paris saith The 〈◊〉 of Rome seeke not to make people deuout but to fill their coffers with treasure they studie not to win soules but to 〈◊〉 vpon other mens reuenues they oppresse the godly and impudently vsurpe other mens right they haue no care of honestie or right King Iohn of England from whom Pope Innocent extorted fortie thousand markes at once and twelue thousand annually to absolue his kingdome being interdicted said That he had learned by wofull experience that the Pope was ambitious beyond all men liuing an insatiable gulfe and thirster after monie and readie for hope of gaine like waxe to be 〈◊〉 to any kind or degree of 〈◊〉 Aluares hath these words The mysticall Sion the Church which in her primitiue state was adorned of her spouse with such and so many royall graces is now clouded and eclipsed with the blacke mist of ignorance iniquitie and errour and we behold her cast downe from heauen and as a desart vnhabited of vertue and if any godly people remaine they are esteemed as Arabians and Saracens And in the same place The Prelates of the Church are an armie of deuils Potius depraedandis spoliandis scandalizandis hominibus quam lucris animarum operam dantes They rather labour to rob spoile and scandalise men than to win soules Honorius Angustodonensis who liued in the yeere 1120. hath these words Turne thee to the citisens of Babylon and obserue what manner of people they be and by what streetes they walke come hither to the top of the mountaine that thou mayest behold all the habitations of the damned citie Looke vpon her Princes and Iudges Popes Cardinals Prelates the verie seate of the beast is placed in them All dayes they are intent to euill 〈◊〉 occupied without satietie in the works of iniquitie they not onely themselues act but instruct others to flagitious wickednesse they make port-sale of things sacred they purchase that which is wicked and labour with all their might that they may not descend alone to hell Turne thy selfe to the Clergie and thou shalt see in them the tent of the beast they neglect Gods seruice they are slaues to worldly lucre they defile their Priesthood through vncleannesse they seduce the people by hypocrisie they deny God by euill workes they abandon all the Scriptures appointed for mans saluation they lay snares all manner of wayes to ruine the people and are blind guides going before the blinde to perdition Contemplate also the societies of Monkes and thou shalt discerne in them the tabernacles of the Beast by faigned profession they mocke God and prouoke his wrath they betrample their rule with vile manners they deceiue the world by their habit c. Many of them are deuoted to gluttonie and sensuall appetite they putrifie in the filth of vncleannesse Behold the habitation of Nunnes and thou shalt obserue in them a Bride-chamber prepared for the Beast These from their tender yeeres learne leaudnesse they associate many to them to accumulate their damnation They make haste to bee vailed that they may more freely let loose the reines of luxurie they are prostituted worse than any Harlots like an insatiable gulfe they are neuer satisfied with the dung of vncleannesse These insnare the soules of yong men and shee among them which transcendeth her fellowes in leaudnesse beares away the bell Thirdly the Roman Church hath many passages in the verie course of Doctrine to destroy or corrupt holinesse for to omit their grosse superstitions Pharisaicall Traditions and other impieties against God First They depriue people of the reading and hearing of the holy Scripture which is a principall meanes to destroy Vice and kindle
Vertue Deut. 31. 21. Secondly Their doctrine of Pardons ministred daily occasion of intollerable wickednesse For although their Scholemen plastered the same with subtle distinctions yet the people entertained them according to the outward letter and practised accordingly Thirdly By some part of their doctrine they 〈◊〉 people to commit sinne Equiuocation is a doctrine of Periurie To affirme that it is lawfull to depose Princes and take away their 〈◊〉 in case of Heresie is a plaine doctrine of 〈◊〉 worse than murder and if the Pope may command murder why may he not also command adulterie theft and blasphemie The doctrine of the Popes authoritie to dispence with oathes is perilous and pernitio us to the safetie of mankind making way to all kind of fraud and iniustice If the Roman Church be so apparantly and infinitly holy why doth it openly maintaine Stewes and receiue yearely tribute and part stake with Harlots and wherefore are Sanctuaries the harbours and dennes of Assisines and other enormous delinquents tollerated and supported by this Church It is a monstrous doctrine which was hatched by Pope Vrban and approoued by Baronius That they are not to be iudged murtherers which slay excommunicate persons The exemption of 〈◊〉 from being tried in Causes Criminall before Christian Magistrates is a doctrine which maketh way to most outragious offences Gulielmus Nubrigensis lib. 2. cap. 16. The Iudges complained that there were many robberies and rapes and murthers to the number of an hundred then presently committed within the realme by Ecclesiasticall persons vpon presumption of exemption from the censure of the lawes We cannot be persuaded that the Roman Church is holy in such high and extrordinarie manner as our Aduersarie boasteth because the greatest Clerkes of that societie vndertake the defence of such impieties as are detestable in Nature and condemned by the light of common Reason Garnets Powder-plot hath many Patrons Cardinall Baronius commendeth to the skies yong Henrie the Emperors sonne for rebelling against his naturall father for deposing imprisoning and bringing him with sorrow to the graue what Turke or Sauage would be the encomiast of such vnnaturall and enormous villanie IESVIT Most 〈◊〉 Apostolicall 〈◊〉 a most glorious succession of Bishops and Pastors from the Apostles famous in all monuments of Historie and Antiquitie who were neuer noted as deliuering 〈◊〉 doctrines the one to the other In which proofe that these properties agree to the Roman and be wanting in the Protestant Church J will not inlarge my selfe as I otherwise might as well not to wearie your Maiestie as also not to seeme to diffide the matter being most cleere of your Maiesties judgement wherefore it is more than cleere That the Roman Church is the One Holy Catholicke Apostolicke Church by whose Tradition Christian Religion hath beene is and shall be euer continued from the Apostles to the worlds end ANSVVER First If the present Roman Church do want the life and soule of Apostolicall Succession to wit Apostolicall Doctrine locall and titular Succession is only a Pharisaicall cloake or a painted wall Acts 23.3 and common to Caiaphas Paul Samosaten Nestorius and to many other notorious Heretickes Secondly The visible Succession of the Bishops and Pastors of the said Church from the Apostles is not most glorious and famous by the report of all monuments of Historie and Antiquitie but the same hath beene notoriously distained in latter times by Simoniacall entrance of Popes and Prelats by Schysmaticall intrusions and by commutation of the forme of election of Pastors appointed by the Apostles and exercised in the Primatiue Church And whereas the Aduersarie contendeth that Roman Bishops and Pastours hane Succession of doctrine because Ecclesiasticall Historie is silent in noting latter Popes for deliuering contrarie doctrines the one to the other both the Illation it selfe and the antecedent or ground of the Illation are false First it is inconsequent to inserre negatiuely from humane Historie and to say Histories are silent and therefore no such matter was Our Sauiour prooueth the Pharisees and Sadduces to be errants because their present doctrine was repugnant to the Scripture and had the Pharisees or Sadduces replied That their doctrine was the same which Moses the Prophets taught because they had Snccession and Histories were silent when they changed the antient Faith they had iustified themselues vpon as good grounds as Papals do Secondly it is false which this disputer venteth so confidently That Histories and antient Monuments are altogether silent of the Innouations which were made by latter Popes and we are able as in due place it shall appeare to produce testimonies of Historie to the contrarie IESVITS 2. Argument Protestants haue the holy Scriptures deliuered vnto them by and from the One Holy Catholicke and Apostolical Church but they receiued them from no other Church than the Roman Ergo the Roman is the One Holy Catholicke and Apostolicke Church ANSVVER This Sillogisme is peccant in forme and both the propositions are affirmatiue in the second figure which I note the rather because the Aduersarie at the end of his Argument cryeth Victoria saying An Argument conuicting and vnanswerable I must therefore reduce the same to a lawfull forme and then answer That Church by and from which the Protestants receiue the Scriptures is the Only Holy Catholicke and Apostolicke Church The Protestants receiue the Scriptures from the Roman Church Ergo The Roman Church to the Only Holy Catholicke and Apostolicke Church First If this Argument be conuicting and vnanswerable as the Iesuit boasteth then these which follow are such That from which the Russians receiued the Scriptures is the Only Holy Catholicke and Apostolicke Church The Russians receiued the Scriptures from the Greeke Church Ergo The Greeke Church is the Only Holy Catholicke and Apostolicke Church Also that Church from which the Apostles receiued the Scriptures was the true Church The Apostles receiued the Scriptures from the Sinagogue of the Iewes gouerned by the Pharisees Ergo The Synagogue of the Iewes gouerned by the Pharisees was the true Church The deliuerie of the Text of the holy Scriptures is common to the true and corrupt Church and not proper to the Only Holy Catholicke and Apostolicke Church as appeareth by the Synagogue which being a corrupt Church at the time of our Sauiours Aduent yet by the speciall prouidence of God preserued and deliuered the Text of the old Testament Rom. 3.2 And S. Agustine testifieth of the Iewes That they were Librarie keepers to Christians of the Bookes of the Law and Prophets And S. Hierom saith That the Hebrews did not corrupt the Text of the old Testament Also the Donatists and Nouatians deliuered the incorrupt Text of holy Scripture to their followers Secondly the proposition of the former Argument hath another defect The Text of holy Scriptures may be deliuered by a particular Church which is but a member of the vniuersall and therefore it is
an vniforme Tradition of all ages that the place of Saint Paul 1. Cor. 3. 12. is vnderstood of Popish Purgatorie or Math. 16. 19. Iohn 20.23 of Iubilees and Indulgences or the place of Acts 10. 13. Rise Peter and kill of murthering Princes or of the temporall dominion of the Pope If the Papists would impose no other sence vpon the Scripture than such as is confirmed by vniforme Tradition the difference betweene them and vs would easily bee composed but these men euerie day hatch nouell expositions and when they are hunted out of one they flie to another They glorie of antiquitie succession vniforme Tradition and cry Victoria Inuincible Vnanswerable before the combate is finished but they are compelled to forge Authours to impose false expositions vpon the Texts of Fathers sometimes to abridge sometimes to inlarge the Tomes of Councells and to purge and corrade Ecclesiasticall writers old and new and yet being vnable to preuaile by all the former they are forced in many cases to presse the bare authoritie of the Pope and his adheres to warrant their Tradition IESVITS 3d. Argument My third proofe I ground vpon a principle most certaine and set downe by your most gratious Maiestie That the Roman Church was once the Mother Church and consequently the One Holy Catholicke and Apostolicke Church all other Churches being her daughters and that she is not to be forsaken further than it can be prooued that she departed from her selfe that is from the Mother and originall Doctrine deliuered by the Apostles ANSWER This principle whereupon you ground your third Argument is neither true in it selfe nor yet confessed by his excellent Maiestie in the place whereunto you referre vs His Maiestie affirmeth That wee ought not to depart from the Church of Rome in Doctrine or Ceremonie further than she had departed from her selfe in her best estate and from Christ her head This sentence of our most religious King is consequent vpon S. Pauls doctrine Rom. 12. 18. Rom. 14. 13. and the same is consonant to Charitie and Reason and argueth a mind desirous of Concord and Peace and averse from vnnecessarie Innouations And as this moderation is commendable in all men so it is most agreeable to him that is a Father of peace whose word is Beati Pacifici But whereas you incroach vpon his Maiesties speech adding a glosse which is not warranted by the Text and infer a conclusion which the premises affoord not you are herein iniurious both to the Author you alleage and to the Truth The Roman was neuer by diuine institution the Mother Church in regard of all Christians neither Vniuersall in respect of an absolute command and iurisdiction ouer all particular Churches as is challenged by the Canon Dist. 12. c. 1. Non decet c. But it was once a Mother Church as the Seas of Patriarches are stiled Mother-Churches or a Mother-Church respectiuely to such people and nations as were conuerted by her preaching and other Churches were stiled with that title as well as the Roman Theoderet speaking of the Church of Hierusalem saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 We make knowne vnto you that the most reuerend and godly Cyrill is made Bishop of Hierusalem which is the Mother of all Churches The Roman Church once a Metropolitan or patriarchall Mother Church since the daies of Hildebrand is suspected to be the Mother spoken of Apoc. 17. 5. and some of your owne part haue said that in these latter times Nontam se matrem exhibet quam Noueream she behaueth her selfe more like a stepdame than a naturall mother her brests haue beene verie drie for sundrie ages past and she depriued her children of a principall portion of the food of life and in steed of milke deliuered them water mixt with chaulke Her publicke readings and seruice were in an vnknowne tongue the holy Scriptures were closed vp that people might not cast their eies vpon them fabulous legends were read and preached in steed of Gods word and hereby it came to passe as some of their owne Authors say That the greater number of people vnderstood no more concerning God and things diuine than Infidels or Heathen people IESVIT But she cannot be prooued to haue changed her Doctrine since the Apostles by any monuments of Historie or Antiquitie yea the contrarie in my iudgement may be most euidently prooued in this sort ANSVVER If by monuments of Historie and Antiquitie be vnderstood Human or Ecclesiasticall Monuments it is inconsequent to inferre that the present Roman Church hath not changed her doctrine since the Apostles although this could not be demonstrated by monuments of Historie c. for there remaineth a more firme and demonstratiue Argument to prooue this to wit the holy Scripture and if the present doctrine of the Roman Church disagree with the Scripture then it is changed from that which it was antiently The rule by which we must trie doctrines is the word of God and not humane Historie and the word of God is true and abideth for euer whereas humane Historie is fallible contingent and corruptible 1. It is not absolutely necessarie that humane Histories of all matters should be composed and the world continued many ages without any written Historie Secondly When the same are written they cause onely humane Faith Thirdly they may totally perish and be suppressed or corrupted by the enemies of Truth Fourthly Historie may be repugnant to Historie and that which is affirmed by some may be contradicted or contrauerted by others and the largenesse and difficultie of the Monuments of Antiquitie may be such as that few people can be able to read and examine them and if they which read and compare them be opposite in iudgement each to other the greater part of people shall be perplexed and cannot know how to resolue themselues Our Aduersaries teach vs That the principall Monuments of Antiquitie to wit the ancient Councels haue not beene faithfully preserued Many things supposititious haue beene added to the workes of the Antient and bastardly Bookes and Sentences passe vnder the titles of Fathers Our Aduersaries being a party whose doctrine is to be examined according to their owne challenge by Monuments of Antiquitie haue presumed to correct purge and alter such Records Lastly when the testimonie of Historians repugnant to their present Tenet is produced against Papals they despise and reiect them to wit Eusebius Socrates Sozomene c. Baronius a new vpstart censureth all Historians Pighius after one thousand yeares controls the testimonie of generall Councels and it is a rule among them that the antient Fathers then much lesse Histories are not to be 〈◊〉 any 〈◊〉 than they 〈◊〉 the keyes and 〈◊〉 of the 〈◊〉 Church IESVIT The Doctrines that were for diuers ages vniuersally receiued in the Christian Church and no time of their beginning is assigneable
no Lye nor his Power any Inconstancie Because therefore Christ hath a true and perfect Bodie both in regard of substance and matter and also in respect of quantitie stature measure posture proportion c. and because euerie true humane bodie by the Ordinance of the Creator who hath formed and constituted the seuerall kinds and natures of things after a speciall manner is determined to one indiuiduall place at one instant and must also haue distinction and diuision of parts with a length latitude and thicknesse proportionall to the quantitie thereof Therefore except God himselfe had expressely reuealed and testified by his Word that the contrarie should be found in the humane bodie of Christ and that the same should haue one manner of corporall being in Heauen and another in the holy Eucharist at one and the same time a Christian cannot be compelled to beleeue this Doctrine as an Article of his Creed vpon the sole Voyce and Authoritie of the Laterane or Trident Councell Some learned Papists confesse ingeniously That secluding the Authoritie of the Church there is no written Word of God sufficient to enforce a Christian to receiue this Doctrine And moderne Pontificians are not able to confirme their present Tenet to wit That Christs humane bodie may be in many vbities or places at one time and that the whole bodie of Christ is circumscriptiuely in Heauen and according to the manner of a Spirit and of the Diuine nature it selfe without extension of parts in euerie crumme of the Sacramentall formes This Doctrine I say Papals are not able to confirme by the vnanimous Testimonie and Tradition of the antient Church Therefore because the same is grounded neither vpon Scripture nor Tradition they begge the question when they alleadge Gods omnipotent power for it must first of all and that vpon infallible Principles appeare That God will haue it thus before his omnipotencie be pleaded that he is able to make it thus But the Iesuites Sophisme whereby hee would intangle vs within the snares of fundamentall Errour when wee denie Christs bodily presence in many places at once proceedeth in this manner No bodie can be truely receiued in many places at once vnlesse the same be corporally present in many places at once The Bodie of Christ is truely receiued in many places at once to wit in euery place where the holy Eucharist is administred Ergo The Bodie of Christ is present in many places at once I answere The Maior Proposition is denyed for there is a twofold manner of true Presence and consequently of Receiuing one Naturall by the hand and mouth of the bodie Another Mysticall and Spirituall by the deliuerie of the holy Ghost and by the apprehension and action of the soule First The holy Ghost truely and verily reacheth and presenteth the Obiect which is Christs Bodie and Blood crucified and offered in Sacrifice for mans Redemption Secondly The reasonable soule being eleuated by a liuely and operatiue Faith apprehendeth and receiueth the former obiect as really verily and truely after a spirituall and supernaturall manner as the bodie receiueth any corporeall or sensible obiect after a naturall manner Iohn 1. 12. Ephes. 3. 17. Fulgentius saith Filium Dei vnicum per fidem recipiunt They receiue the onely Sonne of God by Faith Our Sauiour saith That holy Beleeuers receiue the Flesh and drinke the Blood of Christ Iohn 6. 50 53 54. Credendo by 〈◊〉 v. 35.47 Paschasius hath these words The flesh and blood of Christ c. are truely 〈◊〉 by Faith and vnderstanding It is not lawfull to eate Christ with teeth This Sacrament is truely his flesh and his blood which man eateth and drinketh spiritually 〈◊〉 saith Hold readie the mouth of thy Faith open the iawes of Hope stretchout the bowels of Loue and take the Bread of life which is the nourishment of the inward man Eusebius Emisenus When thou goest vp to the reuerend Altar to bee filled with spirituall meates by Faith behold honour and wonder at the sacred Bodie and Blood of thy God touch it with thy minde take it with the hand of thy heart and chiefly prouide that the inward man swallow the whole Saint Ambrose Comedat te cor meum panis Sancte panis viue panis munde veni in cor meum intra in animam meam Let mine heart eate thee oh holy Bread oh liuing Bread oh pure Bread come into my heart enter into my soule Saint Augustine There is another Bread which confirmeth the heart because it is the Bread of the heart And in another place Then is the Body and Blood of the Lord life to each man when that which is visibly taken in the Sacrament is in very truth spiritually eaten spiritually drunken Now from the former Testimonies it is manifest that the Bodie and Blood of Christ may truely and really bee eaten and receiued by operatiue Faith in the Sacrament And if it bee further obiected That spirituall eating and drinking of the Bodie and Blood of Christ may bee without the Sacrament I answere That the same is more effectually and perfectly accomplished in the Sacrament than out of the Sacrament because the holy Ghost directly and in speciall when the Sacrament is deliuered exhibiteth the Body and Blood of Christ as a pledge and testimonie of his particular loue towards euery worthie Receiuer and the liuely representation and commemoration of Christs death and Sacrifice by the mysticall signes and actions is an instrument of the Diuine Spirit to apply and communicate Christ crucified and to increase and confirme the Faith Charitie and pietie of Receiuers Lastly It is remarkeable that vntill the thousand yeeres and more after Christs Ascension Orthodoxall Christians beleeued that the Bodie and Blood of Christ were truely and really present and deliuered to worthie Receiuers in and by the holy Eucharist according to St. Pauls Doctrine 1. Cor. 10.16 And that the same must be spiritually receiued by Faith or else they profited nothing But the manner of Presence which some Modernes now obtrude by Consubstantiation or by Transubstantiation was not determined as an Article of Faith And to say nothing of Consubstantiation the defence whereof inuolueth them in many absurdities which vndertake for it it is apparant that Transubstantiation is a bastard plant and vpstart weed neuer planted by the heauenly Father but the same sprang vp in the declining state of the Church and it is perplexed and inuolued with so many absurdities and contradictions to Veritie formerly receiued that our Aduersarie was transported with partiall folly when he presumed to ranke the refusall of this new and prodigious Article among fundamentall Errours IESVIT EIghtly Their denying the Sacrament of Penance and Priestly Absolution the necessarie meanes for remission of finnes committed after Baptisme ANSVVER THe Obiector by Penance vnderstandeth not Repentance as it is a vertue for Protestants beleeue true
prime foundation of Christianitie is Christ himselfe 1. Cor. 3. 11. 1. Pet. 2.6 The Church is the seruant and Spouse of Christ the House of God whereof Christ himselfe is the grand Lord and Builder But wee haue learned in the Gospell That the seruant is not greater than his Lord Ioh. 13. 16. Hereupon S. Augustine Enchyrid cap. 56. Good order requireth that the Church be placed after the Trinitie as an House after the Inhabiter his Temple after God and the Citie after the Founder And if the Aduersarie replie That although it be a lesse Article in regard of the Obiect yet the denyall thereof is of greater consequence because it maketh men guiltie of Heresie c. I answere Granting that the denyall of the whole Article being rightly expounded maketh men Heretickes but I denie that a Christian which beleeueth this Article is no Hereticke if hee beleeue and maintaine any Errour against the plaine Doctrine of the holy Scripture which hee knoweth or which hee is bound Necessitate 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 to know beleeue and maintaine Saint Hierom vpon the Galathians saith Whosocuer to wit in waightie points vnderstandeth the Scriptures otherwise than the sence of the holy Ghost whereby they were written requireth may bee called an Hereticke although hee depart not out of the Church Tertullian saith Whatsoeuer in points Diuine and Sacred is repugnant to Veritie is Heresie Albertus saith Hee is an Hereticke which followeth his owne opinion and not the iudgement of the Scripture Occham Hee is an Hereticke which with a pertinacious minde imbraceth any Errour the contradictorie doctrine whereof is contained in holy Scripture Two things constitute an Hereticke First Errour and false Doctrine as the materiall Secondly Malicious and pertinacious adhearing to the same or defending the same as the formall A man may haue both these without any explicite denying the Article of the Catholicke Church For the Trueth which hee gainesayeth may be plainely deliuered in the holy Scripture and hee may reade the same and haue sufficient meanes to know it in the Scripture and maliciously or inordinately resist the holy Ghost speaking by the Scriptures Act. 7.51 Our Sauiour condemneth some for Heretickes calling them false Prophets Murtherers and Theeues Mat. 7.15 Ioh. 10.5 Not because they opposed the present Church for some of these were principall Rulers of the Iewish Church Mat. 23.1 but because they taught and beleeued contrarie to the Scriptures Mat. 22.29 Saint Augustine d. Bapt. c. Don. li. 4. c. 16. speaketh not altogether as the Iesuit 〈◊〉 him but saith onely That hee would not affirme of such a person who being baptised in the 〈◊〉 Church beleeued as Photinus the hereticke did supposing the same to be Catholicke Faith that he was an hereticke he absolutely affirmeth not that such a person was no Hereticke but that hee would not pronounce him an Hereticke before hee was conuicted And hee speaketh of Heretickes not as they were in foro coeli according to the iudgement of God but in foro Ecclesiae according to Ecclesiasticall Censure Neither doth hee speake of persons sufficiently conuicted by plaine euidence of holy Scripture and maliciously and inordinately resisting the Truth but of simple Errants misled and seduced through ignorance or infirmitie Doctor Field whose learned Treatise of the Church is nibbled at by Papists but yet remaines vnanswered by them is censured by this Obiectour for saying without any Proofe that an Errant against a fundamentall point is an Hereticke though he erre without pertinacie But the Iesuit reporteth amisse when hee saith Doctor Field deliuered this Assertion without Proofe for in the Margine of his Booke he confirmeth the same by the testimonies of Gerson and Occham two famous Doctors of the Roman Church And it is remarkeable that the Iesuit censuring the Doctour himselfe produceth no Argument out of diuine Authoritie to confirme his owne Position but resteth onely vpon the single testimonie of one Father which as I haue alreadie shewed speaketh not to his purpose IESVIT Hence Jinferre that Protestants erre fundamentally according to the second kind of erring to wit in the manner in all points they hold against the Romane Church which I haue prooued to be the true Catholicke Church For he that holds any priuate opinion so stiffely as rather than forsake them he denyes and abandons the Catholike Church a mayne Article of his Creed erreth fundamentally as is cleare But Protestants hold their priuate opinions so stifly as thereupon they haue denied and abandoned the Catholicke Church to wit the Romane ANSWER The mayne Proposition of this Section to wit Protestants 〈◊〉 fundamentally according to the second kinde of erring c. is denied and the Assumption of the Syllogisme whereby the Obiectour laboureth to prooue the same is palpably vntrue For Protestants maintaine no priuate opinion either stiffely or remissely whereby they haue denied and abandoned the true Catholicke Church First They maintaine no doctrine as matter of Faith but that which is deliuered in holy Scripture and which consenteth with the Primitiue Church either expresly or virtually But such doctrine is not priuate opinion because the holy Ghost which is the supreame gouernour and directour of the Church and the Prophets and Apostles which were inspired from heauen are the Authours thereof Secondly The Romane Church is not the Catholicke Church but an vnsound part of the generall visible Church as it is prooued by the Learned of our part whereunto the Aduersaries haue as yet made no replie IESVIT Neither doth it import that they retaine the word hauing reiected the sence seeing not the letter of the Creed pronounced but the matter beleeued makes men Christians Neither is it enough to say that they beleeue the Church of the Elect seeing the Church of the Creed is not the Church of the onely Elect a meere fancie but the visible and conspicuous Church continuing from the Apostles by sucsion of Bishops which thus I prooue ANSWER We retaine both the words and the sence of the Article and the Catholicke Church in the Apostles Creed in respect of the militant part thereof is a Church of right beleeuers and especially of iust and holie persons and principally and intentionally and as it comprehendeth both the militant and triumphant the congregation of all the elect for this Church is the mysticall and liuing bodie which Christ saueth Ephes. 5. 23. It is the Church of the first borne which are written in Heauen Heb. 12.23 It is the Church builded vpon the Rocke against which the gates of Hell shall not preuaile either by Haeresie Temptation or mortall Sinne Math. 16. 18. Math. 7.24 And if it be a meere fancie to hold this then Gregorie the Great with many other of the antiēt Fathers were fantasticks for teaching in this manner But the Church of the Creed is not alwaies the Church Hierarchicall for the Church in the
vse no Image made of sensible matter but such onely as is perceiued by vnderstanding But if we consider the Pictures and Puppets which now a daies in most places our Romists make of the blessed Virgin we may wish that they had made only dead or confused pourtraitures And what Christian eyes if not bleared with the fogge of Superstition can with patience behold the dresses attires and various fashions wherin they 〈◊〉 present the B. Virgin yea many times like a Curtesane or after the lightestand most immodest fashions of the world What proportion or correspondence is there with the sampler in these prodigious formes IESVIT The office of an Jmage is to carrie the imagination of the beholders thereof directly and immediatly to the person imagined therein Jmagination of parts in the person represented answering vnto the parts seene in the Image which kind and vse of Images nature allowes vnto men to the end they may remember and more fully imagine persons absent and remooued from their corporall fight vpon whom they ought and haue great desire liuely and staidly to fix their imaginations and thoughts ANSWER Images of visible persons and creatures may leade the imagination of Beholders to the Person and Creature represented by them But Images of Christ and of the Trinitie and of the glorified Saints are deficient in their expression and representation and they may misleade the imagination and ingender a carnall conceit of those Persons and also hinder the spirituall knowledge and Faith which people ought to haue of them The Spirit of God which knoweth best what helpes are vsefull and necessarie to eleuate our mindes to spirituall Contemplation hath left vs his Gospell wherein Christ Iesus is depainted before the eyes of our soule Galathians 3. 1. And also the holy Sacraments which are visible signes and Seales of Grace but if painted and carued Images had beene such motiues and effectuall meanes to infuse godly memorie and heauenly desires into our hearts as 〈◊〉 pretend wee may be assured that our great Paraclete would haue expresly appointed and recommended the same in his Word so farre would hee haue beene from perpetuall defacing of Images and condemning the ordinarie vse of them in his Worship I answere therefore It may bee the Office or vse of some Images to wit of such as agree with the Prototype and which are permitted by the Word of God and are lawfully made and vsed to leade the imagination of the beholders to the remembrance of the person and thing imagined But if people presume beyond their modell and aduenture to delineate that in Pictures and Images which they know not and inuent a kinde of Teaching which was not learned in the Schoole of Christ their owne inuentions prooue snares and their Images beget vaine imaginations to say no worse of them IESVIT Hence ariseth the allowed Principle of Nature receiued by all Nations ciuill and barbarous Ita vt in eo to speake with Saint Augustine Nulla Doctorum paucitas nulla indoctorum turba dissentiat That the Image may and ought to stand for the Prototype and is by imagination to be taken as if it were the verie person and what wee outwardly doe to the Image is done by imagination vnto the person As when wee kisse the hands and feete of the Jmage in our imagination wee kisse the hands and feet of the Person inwardly imagined by his Image ANSWER It is no Axiome of Nature that euerie Artificiall Image deuised by man may and ought to stand for the Prototype and is by imagination to bee taken as if it were the very Person and what wee outwardly doe to the Image is done by imagination to the Person but onely of such Images as are lawfully appointed either by Ciuile or Diuine Ordinance to these ends The brasen Serpent was a Figure and Image of Christ and yet it did not in such sort stand for the Prototype as that outward Adoration and burning of Incense might lawfully be done vnto it In like sort the Paschall Lambe was a figure of Christ Ioh. 1. 29. cap. 19. 36. and yet no holy 〈◊〉 kissed or saluted or censed or bowed downe to the Paschall Lambe The Cherubins according to our Aduersaries Tenet were Images and yet they were neuer honoured or adored with kissing kneeling Incense or any other signe in speciall directed to them And if any man saith Vasques hold otherwise it is a conceit of his owne braine hauing no foundation It is not necessarie therefore according to the Law of Nature but at the furthest contingent to exhibite the same outward Actions of Honour Loue Reuerence and Obeysance to Figures and Images which belong to the Principall In ciuile Comportment it is lawfull and in some cases it is a matter of dutie to be vncouered and to vse reuerence in the Kings Chamber of Presence and before his Chaire of Estate when his Person is absent but these and the like Actions exceed not the bounds of ciuile Obseruance In the Church which is Gods house wee vncouer our heads and wee kneele and make Obeysance before the Altar or Communion Table not to the figure of the Temple or to the Table materially or formally considered but to Christ himselfe And when wee worship towards the East as the antient Christians did if there be a Crucifix painted in the Window for Ornament or Memorie wee direct no part of our Obeysance to that painted Image but to our blessed Sauiour who hath visited vs 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as the Day or Easterne Light from on high Luc. 1. 78. And it is so farre from beeing vniuersally true that the Image is to be taken for the Prototype that in some cases wee may adore the one and deface and abolish the other as appeareth in the Brasen Serpent If saith Alphonsus Castro Christian people were in our dayes as prone to Idolatrie as the people of Israel then were and that they could not otherwise be reclaimed I should thinke that Images were to be broken in peeces The same is affirmed by Corduba and Tapia IESVIT This is the Axiome of Philosophie gathered out of Aristotle Idem est motus in imaginem exemplar For Motion proceeding from the bodie and from the mind what the bodie doth really and externally to the Image the mind doth imaginarily that is by conceit and affection to the person ANSVVER Principles of Nature containing themselues within their owne bounds are to be embraced but sacred and religious Actions are regulated by a Diuine and supernaturall Modell 1. Cor. 2. 5 6 9. c. The Word of God hath set a blacke marke vpon Images deuised by man when they are applyed to worship And therefore although in humane and ciuill vse the Image might in some sort stand for the Prototype and by imagination be taken and vsed as the person resembled by it yet in things religious and sacred it is otherwise When the
sufficiently 〈◊〉 ANSVVER Polydores words are Touching the beginning of Images wee haue treated before now here we will speake of their worship which not onely men of contrarie Religion but as Saint Hierom witnesseth almost all the antient holy Fathers condemned for feare of Idolatrie c. The Obiectour saith That this place is falsified and his reason is Polydore speaketh of the Fathers of the Old Testament to wit of Moses Daniel Ieremie and the Prophets and he saith That they condemned worship of Images because Christ was not as then incarnate c. But this is not all that Polydore speaketh for among those Fathers hee placeth Gregorie the Great writing to Serenus And although Christ was not made man in the dayes of the Prophets yet he had appeared in the similitude of man and Abraham Moses Elias and the Prophets being men their Pictures might haue beene worshipped if Adoration of Images had beene lawfull And besides Polydore Cassander and many other Pontificians affirme that the antient Fathers in the Primatiue Church abhorred or at least abstained from the hauing and worshipping of Images which is also confirmed by their Testimonies IESVIT Neither can our Aduersarie bring any cleare Testimonie of Antiquitie against this custome For the Decree of the councell of Eliberis that no Picture should be made in the Church least that which is worshipped or adored bee painted in walles which the Minister much vrgeth clearely signifieth the contrarie For may not Images painted on Tables be in Churches and yet neither made in the Church nor painted on walls which kinde of Images this Councell doth not forbid And why doth the Councell forbid Images to be made in the Church as pertinent to the fabrike thereof or to be painted on walls but out of reuerence vnto Images for they being holy things and so to be honoured for their Prototypes sake the Councell thought it vnworthy of their dignitie they should bee made on walls where they may easily be defaced and deformed and by persecutors for that Councell was held in time of persecution abused ANSWER No testimonies can be so cleere which Sophisters will not labour to peruert and elude Otherwise what is clearer against Image worship than the words of the Councell of Elliberis and Epiphanius It is lost labour to contest with men Qui sola pertinacia pugnaces neruos contra perspicuam veritatem intendunt as Saint Augustine speaketh which vpon sole pertinacie bend their vttermost force to gainesay perspicous veritie First the Councell of Elliberis is so cleere against Image worship that many Pontificians of great note acknowledge the same and therupon condemne or eleuate the authoritie of that Councell Secondly If that Councell forbad the being of Images in Churches then it did much more hold the worship of them to be vnlawfull but the beginning of the Canon apparently shewes that Placuit in Ecclesijs picturas esse non debere It 〈◊〉 vs of the Councell that Pictures may not be in Churches IESVIT He doth also much insist vpon Epiphanius but relates according to his fashion both his fact and words vnsincerely Epiphanius saith he finding an Image painted on a cloath hanging in a Church rent it do wne and said it was against the authority of the Scriptures that any image should be in the Church Thus he vnsincerely as I said not expressing what kind of Image that was that Epiphanius in peeces for Epiphanius saith Cum iuuenissem Imaginem hominis pendentem in Ecclesia tanquam Christi aut alicuius Sancti nescio enim cuius erat When I bad found an Image of a man hanging in the Church as of Christ or of some Saint for I know not of whom the image was Epiphanius doth by this relation more than insinuate that this was the Image of some prophane man hanging in the Church as if it had beene a sacred image of Christ or some Saint which is gathered by this reason When I saw saith he against the authoritie of Scriptures the image of a man hanging in the Church not absolutely any image as Mr. White citeth him for euen by Gods expresse command Images were placed in the Temple but the image of a man Why doth Epiphanius so much vrge the impietie of the fact in regard that it was the image of a man but that he vnderstood by the word Man a meere ordinarie prophane man not a blessed Saint For certainely it might seeme more against the authoritie of Scriptures to make and set vp in Churches the image of God than the image of holy men and the image of Christ according to his Godhead than as he is man so that there was no cause why Epiph. should put so much Emphasis in the word Man had he not vnderstood a prophane man For some Christians in those dayes being newly conuerted from Paganisme and so reteyning some relikes thereof did out of affection vnto their deceased friends and parents vse to paint their images and offer vnto them oblations of Frankincense and other the like heathenish honours specially on their Anniuersary dayes vpon their Sepulchre These men S. Augustine reprehends and not the worshippers of Saints Images vnder the title of Sepulchrorum picturarum Adoratores who to the Ghosts of their parents defunct did though Christians offer that heathenish worship which the Poet exhorteth vnto Non pigeat tumulis animas excire paternis Paucaque in extructos mittere thura rogos Parua petunt manes ANSVVER This place of Epiphanius is a thorne in the Papists sides and they are so distracted about the clearing of it that Vasques saith It is an irkesome thing to report what each of them hath spoken Some of them reiect the Epistle saying that it was a counterfeit worke But this opinion is reprooued and confuted by the learned of their owne part and what can be more improbable than that Saint Hierome would translate a counterfeit worke Others say that Epiphanius did this in a preposterous zeale Ferdinandus Velosillus or Velosius as Posseuine calleth him saith as followeth Epiphanius against the Colliridian haeresie inueigheth bitterly against Statues and Images of men and against their worship And againe in his Epistle to Iohn Bishop of Hierusalem he taunteth them currishly or despitefully dente canino mordet perhaps this man is excuseable by reason of ignorance and because he wrot against Idolaters wherefore he is not ranked among Haeretikes Others affirme that Epiphanius did this because of the abuse of superstitious people committed about that Picture Others say he did thus because the contrarie was not as then defined by the Church But Vasques himselfe and before him Marianus Victorius insist vpon this poore shift which our Aduersarie followeth in this place to wit that this vale or curtaine which Epiphanius defaced and rent asunder contayned an Image or Picture of some prophane man hanging in the Church as if
it had beene a sacred image of Christ or of some Saint and which was worshipped by some Christians newly conuerted from Paganisme with heathenish honours But if this glosse had beene likely it is very improbable that Cardinall Bellarmine and some other also who haue written since Vasques would haue esteemed it so lightly And Epiphanius his text will not beare this exposition For he saith that at the time when he wrote that Epistle he did not remember to wit perfectly whose image this was but if Epiphanius himselfe did not remember whose image it was whether of Christ or of a Saint or of some other man how knowes this Iesuit that it was the image of a prophane person Besides if it had beene the picture of some prophane person or Pagan superstitiously worshipped wherefore was Epiphanius silent in relating hereof considering that the bare narration of so grosse a fact would most apparently haue iustified the whole proceeding but he affirmeth only in defence of his action That entring into an Oratorie and there espying a vaile or hanging whereon was figured the image of a man which he did not when he wrote the Epistle remember whether it were Christ his picture or any other of the Saints he cut the same in peeces and withall commanded that no such painted vayles should hereafter be suffered to hang in the Church IESVIT Wherefore seeing this Minister so much esteemed in the Church of England saying what he can deuise in proofe of the Romane Churches change about Images brings nothing but manifest falshoods so many in so few lines any indifferent man may conclude that worship of Images hath continued without change euer since the Apostles For if any change in such matter as this had beene made it would haue beene most euident when and by whom so great a Noueltie was introduced ANSVVER The Minister whom you depraue was no otherwise esteemed in the Church of England than 〈◊〉 an ordinarie Student and professour of Theologie neither was his authoritie in handling of controuersies greater than the waight of his argument and disputation should deserue And your Hyperbole saying That he bringeth nothing but manifest falshoods is rather an vndigested cruditie of rayling words than a true censure of him against whom you are better able to declame then dispute But your threadbare argument whereby you labour to prooue That worship of Images hath continued without change euer since the Apostles because it would haue beene most euident when and by whom so great a noueltie was introduced hath at the least three lame feet First The Antecedent is false for it is euident to iudicious men when and by whom this noueltie was brought in as for those which are blinded with superstition and haue a feared conscience nothing is euident to such Secondly This Argument presupposeth that Worship of Images was generally practised among Christians in the dayes of the Apostles and in the Primatiue Church for otherwise why shall Protestants be bound explicitely to assigne the time of Alteration If this practise was not Apostolicall and Primatiue the succeeding practise whensoeuer it began and whether we can assigne or not assigne when and by whom maketh not the same lawfull Thirdly Ab ignoratione rei ad negationem non sequitur It is inconsequent to argue Protestants cannot out of humane Historie assigne the moment of time when worship of Images first began to be practised in the Church Ergo This practise is not an Innouation For Papists cannot assigne the moment of time when Heathens first began to worship Baal and Ashtaroth or when the Progenitors of Abraham began to serue other Gods Iosh. 24. 2. And yet they will iudge the consequence to be absurd which should inferre because Papists cannot assigne when and by whom such Innouations began therefore they were perpetuall Wee expect diuine Reuelation to warrant Adoration of Images for vnlesse that appeare the same cannot bee a necessarie dutie in Religion But the Iesuit would ambush himselfe in the Laborinth of Historicall Discourse which can produce onely humane beleefe when it is plaine and certaine but being also vncertaine and not faithfully kept it may perplex and deceiue and beget contention whereas on the contrarie Diuine Reuelation settles the conscience and makes the Truth manifest IESVIT §. 3. The places of Exodus and Deuteronomie with no probabilitie vrged against the worship of Images by Protestants that make them Against Image worship Protestants bring in the place of Exodus Chap. 20. ver 4. 5. and of Deuteron cap. 5. ver 6. 7. Thou shalt not haue false gods before me Thou shalt not make to thy selfe a grauen Jmage nor any likenesse either in the heauen aboue or on the earth below or of things that are vnder waters or vnder ground Thou shalt not adore nor worship them Which place I wonder they can thinke strong enough to ouerthrow a Custome in which the rules of Nature the principles of Christianitie the perpetuall Tradition of Gods Church doth settle Christians for this place makes against them or not against vs which I prooue thus The Images we are forbidden to worship we are forbidden to make Thou shalt not make to thy selfe any grauen Jmage thou shalt not adore them nor worship them Contrariwise The Jmages we may lawfully make we may also lawfully adore or worship if they be Images of venerable and adorable persons But the Images which we worship of Christ Protestants make yea some to wit Lutherans set them vp in their Churches and they are Images of an adoreable person Ergo They cannot condemne our Adoration of Jmages except likewise they condemne their making them as against Gods Law ANSVVER The places of Scripture alleaged by Protestants against Adoration of Images Exod. 20. 5. Deut. 5.8 are a part of the Morall Law therefore if the worshipping of Images was prohibited vnto the Israelites in the same it is also forbidden Christians and to worship Images is vnlawfull in the state of the New Testament The Aduersarie wondreth why Protestants should thinke that the 〈◊〉 places of Exodus and 〈◊〉 are strong enough to ouerthrow Image Worship being 〈◊〉 vpon 〈◊〉 of Nature Christianitie and Tradition First This latter Clause is onely a vaine ostentation and repetition of that which is formerly confuted Secondly The reason whereupon he groundeth his confident speech saying Which place I wonder they can thinke strong enough is wonderous weake as it will appeare by the Resolution and Answer of his Obiection This Argument in forme is If all worship of Images is prohibited Exod. 20. c. then all making them is also prohibited for the same Precept which saith Thou shalt not bow downe to them nor worship them saith in the former part Thou shalt not make to thy selfe any grauen Image c. But all making of Images is not prohibited Exod. 20. Because Protestants themselues allow some kinde of Image making Ergo All worship of
still sollicitous though secure of their owne as S. Cyprian writes ANSVVER The blessed Saints in Heauen can desire that only which is according to the will of God Math. 6. 10. But that it pleaseth God they shall desire to know and vnderstand all the particular actions and occurrents of people on earth or that they shall desire to know the honour which is done to them in the inferiour world must be beleeued as a matter of Faith when the Papals prooue it by diuine Reuelation And although according to S. Cyprian blessed Saints are sollicitous of the Saluation of the Chucrh militant yet it followeth not Ergo they heare the petitions of the liuing for a father dwelling in London which hath his sonne at Constantinople is sollicitous of his sonnes safetie and yet he vnderstandeth not all the particulars about him IESVIT Wherefore our Doctrine that Saints see our prayers being deliuered so constantly by the antient Fathers so conformable to the principles of Christian beleefe about the blessednesse of Saints so consonant vnto expresse passages of Scripture we may easily expect that vnto Protestants it would not be displeasing did they looke on it with vnpartiall eyes specially they hauing no Text of Scripture that may make so much shew of direct opposition against it ANSWER Your insinuations are coniecturall and at the best seemingly plausible but your disputation is weake wherefore we admire your confidence in a case so groundlesse and intreat you either to argue more soundly or else to be lesse vaineglorious in your conclusions IESVIT The place continually obiected out of the Prophet Esay Abraham knew vs not Israell was ignorant of vs thou O Lord art our Father thou our Redeemer hath this sence that Abraham and Iacob when they did liue vpon earth and carnally beget children did not know particularly their posterities and so could not beare them such particular affection whereas God can and doth distinctly see and know their necessities and prouides against them deliuering his children out of them And therefore he is the onely Father the onely Redeemer Abraham and Iacob not deseruing the name of Father in comparison with God What makes this against the Saints hearing our prayers ANSVVER We receiued our exposition of this place of Esay cap. 63.16 out of S. Augustine and I marueile why the Iesuit reiecteth the same and chuseth a worse because his owne party confesseth that Abraham and the Patriarkes liuing in the darke lake of Limbus did not heare the prayers of their posteritie nor behold and vnderstand the affaires of their children liuing vpon earth IESVIT §. 3. The worship of Spirit and Truth with outward prostration of the bodie due vnto Saints THe third cause of their dislike is That we giue the honor of the Creator vnto the creature honoring Saints with religious worship with worship of Spirit and Truth euen to the prostrating of our bodies before them whereby we giue them honor due to God only and bring in many Gods as the Heathens do To this Obiection made long ago by Faustus the Manichee S. Austine answereth in these words The Christian people doth celebrate with religious solemnitie the memories of Martyrs to the end to stirre vp themselues to their imitation and that they may be assisted with their prayers and associated vnto their merits c. but with the worship tearmed in Greeke Latria and which the Latine language cannot expresse in one word being a certaine subiection and seruitude due properly to the Deitie only wee do not honour any but onely God nor thinke that this honour ought to be giuen but only to him These words of S. Augustine shew the worship of Saints to be on the one side more than ciuile and on the other side lesse than diuine more than ciuile as proceeding out of acknowledgement of the excellencie Saints haue superior vnto all naturall by which they be partakers of diuine perfection in that high degree as no substance can by natureparticipate therof and therfore S. Austine with good reason tearmes it religious Lesse than diuine as proceeding from persuasion of excellency though superhumane yet infinitely inferiour vnto the increate and immence excellencie of God yea depending essentially thereof So that honor is giuen them dependently of God as being superexcellent participants of his perfection and his singular friends ANSVVER Our Argument is All religious worship is due to God onely Papists yeeld to Saints some religious worship Ergo Papists yeeld to Saints some worship due to God onely The Iesuit pretendeth to answere by distinction out of St. Augustine saying That religious worship is either simply Diuine and founded vpon infinite and increate excellencie called Latria or else superhumane founded vpon Grace and Glorie which is an excellencie finite and created Papists yeeld the latter kinde of religious worship to blessed Saints and Angels but not the former To this Answere Protestants replie saying That there are no other kindes of worship than there be Tables of the Morall Law But there are onely two Tables of the Morall Law the former whereof teacheth Diuine Worship and the second humane ciuile or of speciall obseruance And if there be a mixt worship partly Diuine and partly humane so much thereof as is Diuine is proper to God and may not be imparted to any Creature Esay 42.8 But against this they obiect That to euery kinde and degree of excellencie there is a worship due proportionall to that excellencie But blessed Saints and Angels haue a speciall kinde and degree of excellencie superiour to theirs which liue vpon earth Therefore a speciall honour proportioned to their excellencie and superiour to humane is due vnto them It is answered That granting in blessed Saints and Angels an excellencie of Grace and Glorie and Honour due in respect of the same this prooueth not that they are to bee adored with religious worship for then holy persons vpon earth may bee worshipped with religious worship But the vertue of Religion according to the Tenet of the Schoole respecteth immedately increated excellencie and Latria and Religion are all one and if Saints and Angels may be worshipped with religious worship they may bee serued with the worship of Latria And if they answer that worship of Saints is a materiall action of religion this answer is confuted by the schoolemen themselues who also affirme that the worship of Saints c. is an act of Dulia and not of Religion or Latria The place obiected out of S. Augustin c. Faust. Manich. li. 20. c. 2 1 is made to speake that by the Aduersarie which the holy father intendeth not for he tearmeth not the honour exhibited by the true Church to the persons of Martyrs religious but he saith onely Populus Christianus memorias martyrum religiosa solemnitate concelebrat Christian people celebrate the memorials of Martyrs with religious solemnitie And then expounding himselfe in the progresse of the chapter
meanes by Catechising c. is a going about the bush the effect is vncertaine and vnsufficient to affoord distinct vnderstanding of an vnknowne language IESVIT Now that S. Paul did command that Seruice should be in such a language as euery woman in the Church might bee able to vnderstand it word by word is incredible nor are our Aduersaries able to prooue it ANSWER A most ridiculous Paralogisme for admitting that S. Paul descended not precisely to euery single word explained in such manner that euery particular woman might at the first hearing vnderstand the same yet the conclusion followeth not That he commanded not the common Seruice should be in a knowne language First your selues acknowledge that Preaching and Prophecying should be in a knowne tongue and yet euery word or perhaps euery sentence cannot speaking morally bee vttered so plainely that euery person shall at the first sight distinctly conceiue the meaning Secondly the ignorance of the distinct notion of euery word hindereth not sufficient edification when the ordinarie necessarie and common passages of the publike Seruice are intelligible IESVIT Neither can they shew by any records of Antiquitie that such a Custome was in the Primatiue Church yea the contrarie may more than probably bee shewed because the drift of the Church in appointing Liturgies or set formes of publicke Prayer at the Oblation of the Eucharisticall Sacrifice was not the peoples instruction but for other reasons First That by this publike Seruice a continuall daily tribute of homage of Prayer of Thankesgiuing might be publikely offered and paid vnto God Secondly That Christians by their personall assistance at this publicke Seruice might protest and exercise exteriourly Acts of Religion common with the whole Church represented by the Synaxis or Ecclesiasticall meeting of euerie Christian Parish Finally To the end that euerie Christian by his presence yeelding consent vnto the publicke Prayers Praises and Thankesgiuings of the Church and as it were subscribing and setting his Seale vnto them by this assisting at them might ordinarily participate of the graces benefits and fruits which the Church doeth obtaine by her Liturgies and publicke Oblations Now for this end there is no need that euery one should vnderstand word by word the Prayers that are said in the publicke but it suffiseth that the Church in generall and in particular Pastours and Ecclesiasticall persons dedicated vnto the Ministeries of the Church and who watch being bound to giue an account of soules committed vnto their charge haue particular notice of all the Prayers that are said and that all that will may be taught and instructed in particular if they will vse diligence and desire it ANSWER We can prooue by Records of Antiquitie that the publike Seruice was ioyntly performed by the Ministers and people in a language common to both And the drift of the antient Church in their Seruice was that God might bee honoured by voyce heart and minde of all which were present Iohn 4. 24. But God in the state of the Gospel is not honoured with dumbe shewes and with lip labour nor with Prayers and Praises which the Offerers vnderstand not The reasons which you produce to prooue That it is not necessarie for vnlearned people to vnderstand the Common Seruice or Liturgie are lame and disjointed First Although the sole or principall end of appointing set formes of publicke Prayer was not to teach or instruct people in knowledge but to worship God c. yet because the latter cannot intirely be performed without the former because they which come to God with sound of words without sence and vnderstanding of matter offer the sacrifice of fooles therefore the placing of the one excludeth not the other for although the end of priuate Prayer is to worship God Psal. 50. 15. yet our Aduersaries themselues holde it requisite that such Prayer be made in a knowne Language Also one end of celebrating and receiuing the holy Eucharist is to commemorate and shew foorth the Lords death vntill his comming againe 1. Cor. 11. 25 26 but without vnderstanding the Language wherein the Lords Supper is administred people cannot call to remembrance or shew foorth the Lords death at least wisè so clearly and distinctly as is fit for them to doe Secondly A distinct and explicite inward deuotion ioyned with externall saying Amen is more effectuall and pleasing to God than a confused and generall But when people vnderstand the publike Prayers and Seruice of the Church in a familiar Language they are inabled to conioyne distinctly and explicitly inward and outward deuotion mentall and vocall saying Amen Therefore it is most expedient and necessarie for the Church to celebrate Diuine Mysteries and offer publicke Prayers in a Language which the people vnderstand IESVIT Moreouer the Churches antiently euen in the purest times of Christianitie had Chancells into which Lay-men might not enter and so could not particularly and distinctly vnderstand the Prayers said by the publicke Minister of the Church within the said Chancels they did also vse to say a good part of the Liturgie secretly so that their voyce was not audible vnto any yea the Greeke Church did antiently vse a vaile wherewith the Priest was for the time of the sacred Oblation compassed about which are manifest signes that the Church did neuer thinke it necessarie that all the publicke Liturgie should be heard much lesse word by word vnderstood by the whole vulgar multitude present thereat ANSWER It is not certaine at what time Chancells began neither were all Lay Persons prohibited to enter for the Emperour had his seate within the Chancell vntill the dayes of Theodosius the Elder as Theoderit and Sozomene report And although Lay persons were not seated in the Quire or Chancell yet the Seruice was pronounced by the Ministers in that place with an audible voyce so as the people in the bodie of the Church heard the same Iustinian the Emperour made this Decree following Wee command that all Bishops and Priests within the Romane Monarchie shall celebrate the sacred Oblation of the Lords Supper c. not in secret but with a lowd and cleare voyce that the mindes of the hearers may bee stirred vp with more deuotion to expresse the praises of the Lord God for so teacheth the Apostle 1. Cor. 14. Honorius in gemma Animae lib. 1. cap. 103. It is reported that in antient time when the Canon of the Masse was openly recited c. Iohn Billet cited by Cassander saith In times past the Masse was pronounced with a lowd voyce whereupon Lay people knew the same c. And mumbling and whispering in the Masse is not much more antient than Pope Innocent the third The Liturgies also fathered vpon S. Basil and S. Chrysostome haue a knowne Mother to wit the late Roman Church but there is besides many other iust exceptions so great dissimilitude betweene the supposed Fathers and the Children that they rather argue the dishonest
dealing of their Mother than serue as lawfull witnesses of that which the Aduersarie intendeth to prooue by them The Vaile in the Greeke Church of which S. Chrysostome speakes Hom. 61. ad Pop. Antioch was not vsed to depriue the people of hearing but it was a ceremonie admonishing and signifying that prophane and vncleane persons were vnworthie to behold or pertake the sacred mysteries And as this Father sheweth Hom. 3. in Ephes. the drawing open of the curtaines signified the opening of Heauen and the descending of Angels at the celebration of the holy Eucharist Metrophanes a Monke of Greece in a certaine tractate testifyeth the forme or vse of the Vaile or Curtaine in the East Church to be That the Priest may within or vnder the same prepare aforehand the things requisit for the administration of the Sacrament and when this is done then the Canopie is drawne at the pronouncing of the holy Creed which is vttered with a loud voice euen as all other parts of the Liturgie are that all people may heare Now this action signifieth according to Dionisius that God reuealeth these mysteries to those only which are Orthodoxall in Faith and hee communicates his diuine grace to none but those which are sound in the diuine worship and to such all things are manifested whether men or women poore or rich c. The Iesuit therfore is ignorant of the reason wherefore the Greeke Church vseth a Canopie and shutteth and openeth the same at the holy Communion for the same was not done to take away audience of any part of the Seruice from lay people for the whole Liturgie from the beginning to the ending was pronounced with a loud voice but to admonish and signifie the due preparation which all persons were to vse when they pertake the sacred mysteries IESVIT Besides it is certaine that the Scripture was not read in any language but Greeke ouer all the Church of the East as S. Hierom witnesseth Also the Greeke Liturgie of S. Basil was vsed in all the Church of the East and yet the Grecian was not the vulgar language of all the Countries of the East as is apparant by manifest testimonies of the Cappadocians Mesopotamians Galatians Lycaonions Egyptians Syrians yea that all these countries and most of the Orient had their proper language distinct from the Greeke is manifest out of the Acts of the Apostles No lesse manifest is it that the Latine Liturgie was common antiently for all the Churches of the Westerne parts euen in Africke as appeareth by testimonies of Augustine but it is manifest that the Latine was not the vulgar language for all nations of the West And though the better sort vnderstood it yet some of the vulgar multitude onely knew their owne mother tongue as may be gathered out of the same S. Augustine who writes that he pleading in Latine against Cryspinus a Bishop of the Donats for possession of a village in Africke whereunto the consent of the villagers was required they did not vnderstand his speech till the same was interpreted to them in the vulgar African language So that the Christian Church did neuer iudge it requisit that the publique Liturgie should be commonly turned into the Mother language of euery nation nor necessarie that the same should be presently vnderstood word by word by euerie one of the vulgar Assistants neither doth the end of the publique diuine Seruice require it ANSWER Omitting things doubtfull this is apparant that common people both of the East and West had the vse of the Scriptures in such a language as they vnderstood for otherwise the Fathers would not haue exhorted them to read the holy Scripture but such exhortations are most frequent in S. Chrysostome S. Hierome and in other Fathers Read before pag. 279. And that the people of Asia vnderstood Greeke and the Africans Latine is prooued by the learned of our part out of many Authors and where this was wanting people had Translations and Seruice in their natiue tongue Also such people as were conuerted to Christianitie if they wanted Translations in their Mother tongue were careful to learne the ordinarie language in which diuine Seruice was vsed and wherein the holy Scriptures were commonly read But what proofe can the Aduersarie make that Christian people altogether ignorant of the language vsed in the publique Seruice came into those congregations and were pertakers of the holy Sacraments IESVIT As for the comfort that some few want in that they do not so perfectly vnderstand the particulars of diuine Seruice it may by other meanes bee aboundantly supplied without turning the publique Liturgies into innumerable vulgar languages which would bring a mightie confusion into the Christian Church First the whole Church should not be able to iudge of the Liturgie of euerie countrie when differences arise about the Translation thereof so diuers errours and heresies may creepe into particular countries and the whole Church neuer able to take notice of them Secondly particular countries could not be certaine that they haue the Scripture truely translated for thereof they can haue no other assured proofe but onely the Churches approbation nor can she approoue what she doth not vnderstand Thirdly were vulgar Translations so many as there be languages in the world it could not be otherwise but that some would be in many places ridiculous incongruous and full of mistakings to the great preiudice of soules specially in languages that haue no great extents nor many learned men that naturally speakethem Fourthly the Liturgies would be often changed together with the language which doth much alter in euerie age as experience sheweth Fiftly in the same countrie by reason of different dialects some prouinces vnderstand not one another And in the island of Iaponia as some write there is one language for noble men another for rustickes another for men another for women Into what language then should the Iaponian Liturgie be turned Finally by this vulgar vse of Liturgie the studie of the two learned languages would bee giuen ouer and in short time come to be extinct as we see that no antient language now remaines in humane knowledges but such as haue beene as it were incorporated in the publique Liturgies of the Church and the common vse of learned tongues being extinct there would follow want of meanes for Christians to meet in generall Councells to communicate one with another in matters of Faith Jn a word extreame Barbarisme would be brought vpon the world ANSVVER They cannot be some few onely in this case but the maior part yea an hundred to one which want the benefit and comfort of the holy Scriptures and publique Seruice of the Church And to supplie this want by preaching or priuate instruction it is morally speaking impossible it may be performed more compendiously and easily if Papists would chuse rather to follow S. Pauls doctrine 1. Cor. 14. than stifly to adhere to the late custome of
Augustine and Tertullian and concerning the first he saith that S. Augustine spake not of a bare and emptie figure but of the figure of a thing really present but this answere is deceitfull for the Sacramentall elements are a true and liuely figure and not a bare and emptie signe of the Bodie and Bloud of Christ. And although the Bodie and Bloud of Christ are not essentially contained and inclosed in the shapes or materiall substance of the elements yet they are really communicated by the holy Ghost at and by the faithfull and worthie receiuing of these diuine mysteries The second place of S. Augustine admitteth not the Iesuits solution for one difference betweene the Manichee and this Father was concerning Moses his words Deut. 12.23 Thou shalt not eat the Bloud for the Bloud is the Soule S. Augustine saith Possum interpretari praeceptum illud in signo esse positum I may expound that commandement by saying it was set downe in a signe for Christ doubted not to affirme This is my bodie when he gaue a signe of his Bodie In these words S. Augustine teacheth that as the Bloud is called the Soule after the manner of a signe so likewise the Bread in the holy Eucharist is called the bodie of Christ because it is a signe of his bodie This similitude prooueth that S. Augustine held our Sauiours words This is my Bodie to be a siguratiue enunciation which is the thing affirmed by vs. Tertullian affirmeth expressely of Bread which he receiued into his hand and distributed to his disciples that it is a figure of Christs Bodie And the Aduersaries 〈◊〉 expounding his words in this manner The figure of my bodie is my bodie is voluntarie or rather sophisticall for the words immediately following are he called bread his Bodie and in other places he maketh bread the subiect of the proposition This is my Bodie But the accidents and shape of bread are not bread neither did our Sauiour when he said This is my Bodie demonstrate the forme only of Bread or command the formes only of Bread and Wine to be corporally receiued for he did demonstrate that which was sacramentally changed but the accidents of Bread and Wine are not changed into Christs Bodie and Bloud by the confession of Papists themselues IESVIT This supposed I inferre that the bodie of Christ is present in the mysticall Supper not onely to the faithfull that receiue the Sacrament nor onely to the place or Church where the holy Synaxis is celebrated but vnder the formes of Bread in the verie same place therewith This manner of presence is cleerely consequent vpon the precedent and that granted this cannot be denyed For the reason for which Christians hold the bodie of Christ to be really truly present in the Sacrament is because they cannot otherwise in proper and plaine sence verifie the word of Christ to say of Bread this is my bodie Wherefore we must either put no real presence at all or els put such a real presence as is able to verifie the foresaid speech in proper and rigorous sence But if the bodie of Christ be not in the same place with the consecrated Bread contained vnder the formes thereof it cannot be said to be verily and really the body of Christ. For though we should suppose the Body of Christ to leaue heauen and be substantially present in the Church where the Sacrament is giuen yet this supposed presence would no waies further the verifying of the words of Christ This is my Bodie except his bodie be vailed and couered with the sensible accidents of Bread so that it be demonstrated by them and pointing vnto them one may truely say This is the Body of Christ. For why should consecrated Bread be tearmed truely and substantially the Bodie of Christ if his body be not so much as in the same place with it Wherefore the Fathers affirme that Christ is so in this Sacrament as he is vailed with the semblances of Bread as S. Cyrill of Hierusalem in his Booke highly commended by Dr. Whitaker saith Let vs therefore with all certitude receiue the Bodie and Bloud of Christ For vnder the forme of Bread is giuen Thee his Bodie Yea Caluin saith In the supper Christ Jesus to wit his Bodie and Bloud is truely giuen vnder the signes of Bread and Wine ANSVVER Although the mysticall words be not vnderstood properly and rigorously yet we may truely and really though spiritually eat the Flesh and drinke the Bloud of the sonne of man by a liuing Faith Ioh. 6.54 1. Cor. 10.16 The food which entreth into the bodie must be locally present but this food entreth not into the bodie but it is the bread of life which nourisheth the substance of the soule saith S. Ambrose But the Obiector demandeth Why consecrated bread should be tearmed truely substantially the body of Christ if his bodie be not so much as in the same place with it Our answer is because of the Sacramentall vnion betweene the signes and the bodie of Christ represented and spiritually communicated to the worthie receiuor by that signe As a Kings crowne may be called a kingdome because it is a signe thereof and the placing thereof vpon the head may be a meanes of conferring a kingdome So likewise in Sacramentall speeches the outward signe is called by the name of the thing signified because it representeth it and is by diuine institution an effectual instrument to applie and communicate the same 1. Cor. 10.16 And by the same reason Christs Bodie may be said to be in the bread and his Bloud in the Cup not by locall presence or as wine is contained in a vessell which S. Cyrill affirmeth not but vertually and by relation and spirituall donation because when the Minister deliuereth the outward signe and the Communicant receiueth the same The holy Ghost deliuereth and communicates the thing signified to the beleeuing soule IESVIT Whence it is also consequent that the whole bodie of Christ is contained vnder a consecrated Host be the same neuer so little for by this mysterie the bodie of Christ is demonstrable by the sensible accidents so that consecrated bread may be termed truly really substantially the bodie of Christ not a parcell or part thereof only But were not the bodie of Christ wholly and entirely vnder the formes of bread consecrated bread could not truely and properly be tearmed the bodie of Christ but a sole part and 〈◊〉 thereof Againe we haue no reason to beleeue the bodie of Christ is truely and really present in the Sacrament but only to the end that it may in the Supper be truely and really eaten to nourish and feed mens soules And if he be eaten onely mentally by Faith we haue no ground to thinke that he is present more than mentally by Faith the presence of his bodie being ordained vnto the manducation thereof for else why did he institute this Sacrament
to be that the change is spirituall and mysticall And speaking of the elements of Bread and Wine he affirmeth expresly that our Sauiour deliuered consecrated Bread and Wine to his Disciples If then according to Gaudentius the consecrated signes which Christ deliuered his Disciples were Bread and Wine they were not abstracted shapes and figures of Bread and Wine for where the matter and essence is abolished and the accidents onely remaine there is not the verie thing but a shadow and image thereof onely IESVIT Thirdly the Instrument by which God workes this Transubstantiation is by them acknowledged the most efficacious that may be to wit the word not of man but of God S. Ambrose Moses his word changed the water of Egypt into blood and againe turned them from bloud into water If so great was the benediction of man what may we thinke of diuine Consecration where the verie words of our Sauiour worke The words of Elias had power to bring downe fire from Heauen and shall not the words of Christ haue force to change the kinds of the Elements Againe thou seest how working and efficatious is the word of Christ. If therefore such vertue is in his Word that thereby things that are not receiue being how much more hath it power that the things that are still remaine in the geneall latitude of being and according to the sensible accidents and be conuerted into another substance ANSWER Among the six or seuen examples brought by S. Ambrose of changes only two are substantiall and the rest accidentall and the elements are changed when of common and naturall creatures they are made sacred and become chanels and instruments of sauing grace So the Fathers affirme That the word of Christ in Baptisme is most efficacious to alter the property of naturall water and to giue regeneratiue force and vertue to it Also the holie Scripture affirmeth concerning Euangelicall Doctrine That it is the immortall Seed of God the Word of eternall life the Power of God to saluation c. 1. Pet. 1.29 Act. 5.20 14.3 Rom. 1.16 the same conuerteth people to God Act 2.37 and maketh them new creatures 2. Cor. 5.17 1. Cor. 4.15 But yet from hence we cannot inferre that either the water of Baptisme or regenerate persons are changed by Transubstantiation IESVIT Fourthly The effect of this Transmutation taught by the Fathers is the presence of the substance of Christs bodie and the absence of the substance of Bread binding vs to abnegate our senses and not to beleeue what we seeme to see with our eyes Theophylact Bread is transelemented or transformed by an ineffable creation although to vs it seeme Bread because we are weake and haue horror to eate raw flesh specially the flesh of man for this reason Bread appeareth but in essence and substance it is not Bread S. Cyril Come not therefore as vnto simple Bread and Wine for it is the Bodie and Bloud of Christ according to the affirmation of our Lord for although sense suggest the contrarie yet let Faith confirme thee iudging not of the thing by tast but indubitably and with full Faith beleeue that thou art made partaker of the Bodie and Bloud of Christ. And againe know this and with full certitude beleeue That the Bread seene is not Bread though it so seeme to the tast but the Bodie of Christ and that Wine seene is not Wine though tast iudge it to be so but the Bloud of Christ. ANSWER First the Fathers teach and we with them acknowledge that Christs bodie is mystically present to faithfull communicants 1. Cor. 10.16 But corporall presence by indistance of place and absence of the materiall substance of the elements was not taught by the antiēt Church for they teach That the creatures of Bread and Wine are present in the Eucharist and that after they be changed they nourish the bodie but the abstracted shapes of Bread and Wine are not Gods creatures but Popish fancies Againe they teach that such signes and elements are present as haue power to feed and nourish the bodie and to resemble the mysticall vnion betweene Christ and Christian people to wit Bread confected of many cornes of graine Wine of many grapes but mathematicall Bread and wine haue neither power to nourish neither doe they resemble the mysticall Vnion aforesaid for there is in them onely the shadow of graine and Grapes but no substance and Papists may as well say That painted bread and wine haue power of feeding and mysticall representation as these fictions and Mathematicall shadowes Secondly Cyrill sheweth in other passages of that worke what hee intendeth and meaneth namely That the consecrate bread is not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 common prophane and meere naturall bread which the sight and taste iudge so to be but sanctified eleuated and changed to supernaturall vse and operation Thirdly If Theophylact a late Writer and some one or two besides speake obscurely and improperly in this Argument what is this to the grounding and raysing of an Article of Faith or to the proouing a matter in question by a common and euident consent of Fathers Fourthly The Fathers exhort people to abnegate their sences in Baptisme wherein they maintaine no Transubstantiation and there is good reason why wee should doe this in the holy Eucharist because wee therein eate the flesh and drinke the blood of the Sonne of man Credendo by beleeuing Iohn 6. 35. and not by sensible or corporall eating IESVIT Finally That the Fathers held Transubstantiation is prooued by the continuancie which they taught of Christs bodie in the Sacrament so long as the accidents of bread last as appeareth by their reseruing of the same For Reseruation to haue beene the custome of the Primatiue Church Protestants grant That the Sacrament was of some reserued in the elder dayes of the Church is not saith Master Fulke so great a question as whether it ought to be reserued And Chemnicius granteth that in this point on our side stands 〈◊〉 consuetudinis late patentis diu propagatae And whereas 〈◊〉 addeth Haec tamen veritati praescribere non debet hee accuseth the Primitiue Church and opposeth no lesse against them than vs and I am sure your Maiestie knowes that the Primitiue Fathers did vse to send the Sacrament vnto them that were lawfully absent from Church as doth witnes S. Iustin and vnto the sicke as Dyonisius Alex. writes of Serapion That Christians carryed the same to their priuate houses to take in the morning before other meate as testifieth Tertullian That many times they did weare the same about them for protection as Satyrus brother to S. Ambr. going to sea carryed it in a stole by vertue whereof he was saued in shipwracke That Martyrs had the same frequently with them to receiue it for their Viaticum as Tharsilius a most glorious Martyr who being taken with the
Luc. 22.18.1 Cor. 10.16 11.26.27.28 Secondly the same affirmeth not that the substance of Bread and Wine is abolished Thirdly naturall reason sheweth that accidents must haue a subiect of inhaerencie and that bare formes and shadowes of things cannot nourish without corporall substance Fourthly the sences of Tast and Feeling discerne apparantly a corporietie in the elements receiued In this case there is no reason to imagine that our sences are deluded or that God almightie by miracle worketh in a contrarie manner to the course of nature and to that which he hath otherwise reuealed in his word It is not sufficient for Romists to affirme That God vseth a miraculous course in these things and to palliate absurdities repugnant to sence reason and scripture vnder pretext of Gods omnipotencie but they must prooue by diuine Reuelation that he will doe this for God effecteth not all things by his omnipotencie which men may imagine to be possible In the wordes of our Sauiour This is my Bodie This cuppe is the new Testament in my Bloud c. there is not a sillable concerning accidents without a subiect or concerning any miracle wrought in the Sacrament by omnipotencie neither is there any such doctrine elsewhere reuealed And if Christs words be expounded figuratiuely according to S. Augustine Tertullian Theoderit Origen Bertram c. they make nothing for corporall presence by indistance of place and if they be vnderstood literally they prooue not Transubstantiation for Bread may be called the bodie of Christ by an inusitate forme of speaking which according to the Tenet of some learned Diuines is no trope or figure And if neither of these expositions content our Aduersaries they might haue beleeued the words of the holy Text as they sound literally and a reall presence of Christs Bodie and Bloud wrought by the power of the holy Ghost without defining and determining the expresse manner how For if they beleeue that accidents subsist without a substance and nourish and are tasted and felt and passe into the stomach and yet are not able to expresse the distinct manner how and if they beleeue a substantiall presence of Christs indiuiduall humane bodie in many hosts and yet are vnable to declare the maner how Why might they not haue suspended other questions concerning the distinct manner of presence and maintained onely a true and mysticall presence the distinct manner whereof is incomprehensible in this life and not haue disturbed the peace of the Church by defining as an article of Faith such a doctrine as hath no foundation in diuine Reuelation to make it appeare certaine and infallible IESVITS 1. Consideration The first is grounded vpon the supposall of two things most certaine First that the Primitiue Church preaching vnto Pagans Iewes and other Infidels the rest of Christian mysteries as the Trinitie the Incarnation the Resurrection of the bodie did most carefully keepe as much as might be from their knowledge the mysteries of the Eucharist yea Catechumens and Nouices were not before Baptisme fully taught or instructed therein Secondly the reason moouing the Primitiue Church to be carefull in this point was least Catechumens and Infidels being fully acquainted with the whole mysterie the one should be scandalized and the other mocke thereat Hence it was accounted such a haynous offence that Christians should discouer this secret vnto Infidels or dispute about the difficulties thereof in their presence The Councell of Alexandria relating the crimes of Arians number this as one of the greatest They were not ashamed in publique and as it were vpon a scaffold to treat of the mysteries before Catechumens and which is worse before Pagans And a little after Jt is not lawfull to publish the Mysteries before them that are not initiated for feare least Pagans out of ignorance mocke and Catechumens entring into curiosities be scandalized And againe Before Catechumens and which is more before Iewes and Pagans blaspheming Christianitie they handled a question about the Bodie and Bloud of our Sauiour S. Ambrose saith To declare the mysteries vnto them that be Catechumens is not Tradition but Prodition seeing by such declarations danger is incurred least they be diuulged vnto Jnfidels that will scoffe at them This supposed I infer that the seeming absur dities of the Catholique reall presence should incourage a true Christian mind to beleeue it for a true Christian desires to beleeue and firmely cleaue vnto the reall presence that was beleeued by the Primitiue Church But this was a reall presence accompanied with many so seemingly grosse absurdities that the Church had no hope to satisfie Infidels therein or to keepe them from blaspheming but by concealing the mysterie from them and consequently they held the Catholique not the Protestant Doctrine in this point The Protestant Doctrine that makes Christs bodie present spiritually by Faith vnto the deuout Receiuer that communicating thinks sweetly of Christs passion and death containes no mysterie to be concealed in respect of the seeming absurdities ANSWER In the daies of the Fathers Heathens Iewes and Heretickes might enter into the Church and heare the publicke Sermons and preaching as appeareth by the fourth councell of Carthage and Infidels might read the bookes and tractates of the Fathers But the Fathers in their sermons to the people and also in their written bookes deliuered the Doctrine of the holy mysteries as appeareth by Ireneus Iustin Martyr S. Cyprian Gregorie Nissen Cyrill of Hierusalem S. Chrysostome S. Augustine S. Ambrose c. Neither is it apparant that the said Fathers taught any other secret Doctrine touching the holy mysteries than such as they preached in their Homilies and penned in their Bookes and therefore these Homilies and Bookes being publique it appeareth not that the Primitiue Church was more carefull to conceale the Doctrine of the Eucharist than of Baptisme or of the Trinitie The Obiections out of Athanasius and S. Ambrose shew that it was held vnlawfull in those ages to treat or dispute of the holy Eucharist intempestiuè that is before Heathens which were not at all instructed in the first Principles of Religion or to treat of this Doctrine in prophane places or auditories But what is this to Transubstantiation For it was held vnlawfull in the Primitiue Church in maner aforesaid that is in an vndue time order place to treat or dispute of the mysteries of Baptisme or of other profound mysteries belonging to Christian faith Also if it were granted that some antient Fathers beleeuing a reall Presence did therefore conceale the doctrine of the holy Eucharist Ratione scandali because of offence of Infidels arising vpon many difficulties and seeming contradictions to sence and common reason it followeth not from hence that those Fathers beleeued Popish Transubstantiation for many difficulties and repugnances to sence and common reason are found in Consubstantiation as well as in Transubstantiation and sundrie places of the Fathers may with more
probabilitie be alleadged in fauour of reall Presence by Consubstantiation than for Transubstantiation Lastly The mysticall vnion betweene Christ and his members is ineffable and the manner incomprehensible and the Protestant Doctrine teaching a reall donation of the bodie and blood of Christ and a mysticall coniunction by the operation of the holy Ghost with the soules of faithfull Receiuers and that dead and corruptible creatures can be a meanes and instrument heereof is a great mysterie of godlinesse incredible to prophane persons and therefore the Primitiue Church which beleeued this Doctrine might iustly require that this Mysterie should not be manifested before Infidels and other infirme Christians vntill they were first instructed in the rudiments of Christianitie IESVIT Yea the Fathers did not feare to declare vnto Catechumens this Sacrament so farre as it was commemoratiue of Christ and his Passion as appeareth by the Treatises of Saint Augustine vpon Saint Iohn made before Catechumens out of which Treatises Protestants for their meere commemoratiue presence alleadge many Sentences to little purpose For he there explicates spirituall manducation by Faith and he excludes the grosse imagination of eating Christs bodie in his proper shape tearing it in pieces with the tooth but denies not yea rather insinuates another kind of spirituall manducation not onely by Faith but by reall sumption though to conceale the Mysterie from Catechumens he speakes not so clearely thereof Wherefore as the Palme tree the heauier the waight is that is laid vpon it the more it riseth vpwards as it were ioying in difficulties so a true Catholicke Christian feeling in the doctrine of Transubstantiation many seeming absurdities that presse carnall imagination to the ground groweth thereby more strong to beleeue it imbracing these difficulties as manifest signes that this doctrine was beleeued by the Primitiue Apostolicall Church On the other side Protestants finding the Presence of Christs body by Faith to be deuoyd of such difficulties may by the very lightnesse thereof suspect it is not the doctrine which the Fathers concealed from Jnfidells as more absurd to humane Imagination than any other mystery of Christian Religion ANSWER You obiect that the Fathers declared to Catechumens that is to Nouices in Christianitie a commemoratiue presence in the holy Eucharist but not a corporall presence by Transubstantiation and from hence you would inferre that the Fathers held two kinds of Presences of Christs body and bloud in the Eucharist the one soly spirituall by intellectuall apprehension the other corporall by reall sumption of Christs body into the mouth and stomacke of the receiuer and you pretend that S. Augustine was of this iudgement But you must remember that you are not now to deale with Aduersaries which will credite your bare words and proofes you haue none Therefore I answer First that the Fathers taught no other kind of Presence to them which were baptised and receiued the holy Eucharist than to Catechumens or vnbaptised Christians although they instructed the one sort more fully than the other Secondly S. Augustine teacheth not that Christs body is receiued inuisibly insensibly and according to the nature of a spirit by the mouth and stomacke of each Communicant but he teacheth onely two kinds of manducation in the Sacrament one both corporall and spirituall wherein the body of man receiueth the externall elements of Bread and Wine and the soule receiueth the true body and bloud of Christ by faith the other corporeall onely wherein the receiuer partaketh the outward signe and not the thing signified Panem Domini non panem Dominum the visible Sacrament of Christs body but not his very body and he affirmeth not vpon the sixt chapter of S. Iohn That a malicious sinner continuing such receiueth the very body and blood of Christ. Thirdly Protestants beleeue not onely a commemoratiue but also an exhibitiue presence of the thing signified together with the outward signe according to the manner formerly declared pag. 405. and this Presence is mysticall and such as may seeme incredible to vnbelceuers because of sundry difficulties repugnant to common sence to wit That Christs flesh by the vnspeakeable power of the holy Ghost should be after a sort incorporated into the soule and that corruptible and dead creatures should be eleuated and made effectuall instruments to apply and communicate Iesus Christ and the vertue of his death to faithfull Communicants IESVITS 2. Consideration This consideration is drawne from the qualitie of the difficulties obiected against this Mysterie which be such as a Christian in honour should neglect them For if it be the part of a prudent and intelligent man not to permit Imagination to preuaile against his Reason What a disgrace is it for a Christian that his faith should be conquered by these kind of difficulties For that the seeming absurdities of this misterie be not in respect of naturall Reason but meerely of Jmagination may hence appeare that some naturall truths be in a manner as difficile and incredible which will be seene if we compare the foure aboue mentioned difficulties with the difficulties some truths euident in nature haue ANSWER When difficulties obiected arise from experience of sence and principles of nature and there is no expresse or manifest word of God sufficient to mooue vs to beleeue the contrarie it is the part of each intelligent and prudent man rather to credite that which is apparent to sence and common reason than to beleeue Paradoxes vpon no true ground and reason IESVIT First we cannot imagine that the whole body of Christ can be contained in the compasse of a small Hoast But it is not more incredible that in a thing of small quantititie for example the wing of a Flye there should be so many parts as vnfolded and laid together would couer the whole face of the world both of heauen and earth And yet it is demonstrable in Philosophy That euen in the wing of a Flye there are so many parts as broad and long as the wing though still thinner and thinner that Almightie God separating and vnfolding them may therewith couer the whole world For certaine it is that some finite number of such parts so separated each of them as long and as broad as a Flyes wing would couer the face of the whole world certaine also it is That the wing of the Flye is still diuisible into more and more such parts so that no finite number is assignable but God may still separate from that wing a greater number without any end therefore it is certaine that in the wing of a Flye there is so much quantity as is sufficient to couer the face of the whole world both of heauen and earth if God would but separate and vnfold the same Is not this Secret of Philosophy as incredible to carnall Imagination as the being of Christs body within a small Hoast Wee that cannot comprehend things we see with eyes and feele with hands certainely we shall haue much adoe
Preepts of the old and new Testament some personall circumstances may be noted and yet the substance of the Commandement is generall 1. Cro. 28.9 Pro. 30.1.3 Math. 18.2.3 Ioh. 13.13 14. Also we may consider a twofold vnitie of the Cup Specifical and Indiuiduall to drinke of the same indiuiduall Cup euen as to eate of the same indiuiduall loase is an accidentall circumstance But to drinke and receiue the common kind to wit the fruit of the Wine this is the substance of the Commandement If we parallell the Obiection the defect is manifestly ridiculous It is not of the substance of Christs Commandement That lay People shall receiue consecrated Bread at the Communion because the Bread which Christ gaue his Disciples was of one Indiuiduall loafe but the bread of one indiuiduall loafe will not suffice all men in the world therefore the Precept of receiuing consecrated Bread was Personall and concerned the Apostles only Now if a man should vse this Argument which in substance is the same with the Iesuits he had in my opinion more cause to blush for shame than to glory before the Presence of a most iudicious and learned King as this vaine Boaster doth IESVIT Another text of Scripture some vrge to prooue That Communion vnder one kind is commanded to wit the famous place out of the sixt chapter of S. Iohn Except ye eate the flesh and drinke the bloud of the Sonne of man you shall not haue life in you Where our Sauiour vnder the penaltie of loosing eternall life commands not onely eating but also drinking Perchance your Maiestie doth not stand much vpon this as not beleeuing that chapter of S. Iohn to concerne the Sacramentall sumption of our Sauiours Flesh as also some learned Catholikes hold Not withstanding though we grant that Chapter to concerne the eating and drinking in the Sacrament as most of the Fathers teach yet this obiection may be easily satisfied by the former Principles for as we distinguish in the Sacrament the substance and the manner The substance being to receiue the body of Christ the manner in both kinds by formall eating and drinking so the same distinction is to be made in our Sauiours Precept about this Sacrament For howsoeuer his words may sound of the manner of receiuing in both kinds yet his intention is to command no more than the substance to wit that we really receiue his body and bloud which may be done vnder one kind This is made cleere by the Precept by our Sauiour giuen about another Sacrament to wit Baptisme where though his words seeme to define the manner yet his mind was but to determine the substance He saith to his Apostles Baptise all nations in the name of the Father and of the Sonne and of the holy Ghost To baptise signifies the same that the Greeke word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is not to wet or sprinkle with water but to put and plunge into the Water by immersion bathing them in water in which respect Baptisme is tearmed by the Apostle the Lauer or Bath of the renouation of the holy Ghost And yet because the Church teacheth Baptisme by 〈◊〉 or sprinkling to be sufficient and substantiall Baptisme no lesse than Baptisme by immersion Christians must and doe so interpret the words of Christ Baptize that is plunge into the water all Nations to command onely cleansing and washing in substance not the manner thereof by immersion as his words may seeme to import and the Primitiue Church did the first sixe hundred yeares practise Jn this like sort the words Vnlesse you eate the flesh of the Sonne of man and drinke of his bloud you shall not haue life in you be preceptiue no further than they signifie reall receiuing of his body and bloud not the manner of both kinds as may appeare by the intention of the Commaundement For as Christ gaue this Precept of Eating and Drinking onely to the end that wee might haue life in vs so likewise he meant to command the same no further than it was necessary to this end But eating formally the body of Christ vnder the forme of Bread and vertually and implicitly his bloud as contayned within his Sacred body suffiseth that we may haue life in vs as he promiseth in the same place He that eateth this Bread shall liue for euer What necessitie then is there to vnderstand this Precept of formall receiuing in both kinds But further I adde the coniunctiue particle and signifies disjunctiuely the same that vel or as Argentum aurum non est mihi and particularly of this Sacrament He that eateth and drinketh vnworthily eateth and drinketh damnation the sence is disjunctiue eateth or drinketh vnworthily In this sort the words of Christ Except you eate and drinke is to be vnderstood disjunctiuely Except you eate the flesh or drinke the bloud of the Sonne of man you shall not haue life in you Which disjunctiue sence to be the sence intended in this place may be prooued because else Christ should be contrary to himselfe for seeing in the ver 59. of this Chapter He promiseth life eternall to eating onely Qui manducat panem viuit in aeternum If in the foure and fiftie verse of the same Chapter he require vnto himselfe life euerlasting eating and drinking both he should in the space of a few lines speake contraries And because this is impossible wee interprete the place disiunctiuely vnlesse you eate or drinke c. ANSWER Cardinall Bellarmine affirmeth that the Text of Saint Iohn cap. 6. is to be expounded of the holy Eucharist and not onely of spirituall receiuing but also of Sacramentall eating and drinking the Bodie and Blood of Christ And hee saith that although some Catholickes to wit Gabriel Biel Cusanus Caietan Ruard Tapper Hesselius and 〈◊〉 expound this Chapter of spirituall Receiuing yet other Pontificians hold as himselfe doth with Bellarmine also agree Suares Vasques Gregorie Valence Salmeron Barradius c. From this Exposition it followeth That Communicants when they partake the holy Eucharist ought to receiue in both kindes for our Sauiour saith Iohn 6.54 He that eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood c. 55. My flesh is meate indeed and my blood is drinke indeed 56. Hee that eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood dwelleth in me and I in him 53. Except ye eate the flesh and drinke the blood of the Sonne of man c. Our Aduersarie after some staggering about the place Ioh. 6. condescendeth at last to Bellarmines Tenet and admitting that Saint Iohn treateth of Sacramentall Receiuing answeres the former places by a distinction of substance and manner saying That howsoeuer Christs words may sound of the manner of Receiuing in both kinds yet his intention is to command no more than the substance and he prooueth this by the example of Baptisme wherein although according to the letter dipping and plunging
giue the sicke only the Bread Secondly if Paulinus of whom Erasmus saith it is the same Craftsman which hath corrupted so many things in the writings of S. Hierome and S. Augustine report truely touching S. Ambrose this prooueth not That Communion in one kind was in ordinary vfe but that S. Ambrose being speechlesse and without vnderstanding and deceasing instantly after the Bread was put into his mouth and consequently being preuented by death receiued by reason of this accident one materiall part of the Sacrament onely IESVIT Secondly it was an antient custome in the Church to giue the Sacrament vnto Lay men especially vnto Eremites to be carryed in most pure linnen corporalls home to their houses to be taken in the morning before all other meates but there is no signe or token in Antiquity That the Faithfull together with the consecrated Bread did carry away with them consecrated Wine yea diuers Histories shew the onely forme of Bread was carryed away and consequently that the Church did not then esteeme of Communion 〈◊〉 one kind as of a Sacrilegious mayming of the Sacrament as Protestants now doe ANSVVER It was an antient custome to send the Communion to Persons absent in both kinds as appeareth by the Historie of Exuperius in S. Hierome And Gregorie Nazianzen saith of his sister Gorgonia if her hand had laid vp any Portion of the types or tokens of the pretious body and of the bloud c. And as touching sicke persons Why should we not iudge that the same order and proportion was kept in sending the Sacrament to them at their houses as was obserued when sicke persons came to the Communion Table or Altar in the Church IESVIT Thirdly it was an antient custome in the Graecian Church to consecrate the holy Eucharist on Saturdayes and Sundayes and on the other dayes of the weeke to communicate Ex praesanctificatis of the praesanctified forme st hat is consecrated on the Saturday or Sunday before Now it is not probable that they did consecrate Wine to indure fiue or sixe dayes long for feare specially in such hot Countreyes the same should grow sower Wherefore for the most part they did communicate vnder one kind ANSWER The Office of the Greeke Church making mention of the Sacramentall signes consecrated or sanctified before they were vsed nameth Bread and Wine For thus wee reade in the same That after the Priest hath sanctified the Bread hee powreth Wine and Water into the sacred Cup and rehearseth the accustomed words c. And the Liturgie Praesanctificatorum of the Presanctified signes according to Genebrards 〈◊〉 speaketh both of the body and of the bloud presented in the mysticall signes It appeareth also by Balsamon vpon the 52 Canon of the Synod in Trullo that both the Elements were consecrated at least vpon two seuerall dayes in the weeke and Baronius acknowledgeth That in antient times the Eucharist was reserued in both the kinds now if it was consecrated and reserued in both kinds Why should we imagine that it was not deliuered and receiued in both kinds IESVIT Fourthly the Manichees liued in Rome and other places shrouding themselues among Catholikes went to their Churches receiued the Sacrament publikely with them vnder the sole forme of Bread and yet they were not noted nor there discerned from Catholikes A manifest signe that Communion vnder one kind was publikely in the Church permitted at the least vpon some iust causes that might be pretended For how could the Manichees still refusing the Cup haue beene hidden among these antient Christians if they had beene persuaded as now Protestants that receiuing vnder one kind only is a Sacriledge If one in the Church of England should refuse the Cup but once in a publike Communion in the Church would he not be incontinently noted ANSWER The holy Eucharist in the dayes of Pope Leo the first was administred in both kinds and Romists could neuer as yet produce any one sufficient testimonie or example that so much as any one congregation of Christians in antient times receiued in the open Church vnder one kind And although the place obiected out of Leo doth in speciall concerne the Manichees yet it sheweth plainely that the present doctrine and practise of the Roman Church is not consonant to the antient practise of the same Church Neuerthelesse our peruerse Aduersary argueth against vs out of this place of Leo saying That if the Communion had not sometimes beene administred vnder one kind the Manichees practise in refusing the Cup could not haue passed vnmarked but must necessarily haue beene obserued I answer First The Manichees were espied and discouered otherwise how could the Pope reprooue their practise Secondly Vasques the Iesuit saith That these Heretikes receiued the Cup into their hand but dranke no Wine and among a multitude of Communicants some few might hold the Cup to their mouth and make shew of drinking and yet receiue no Wine IESVIT The last Argument is practise of the Apostles that is of the first Christians vnder them of whom wee reade in the Acts of the Apostles Erant perseuerantes in Doctrina Apostolorum communicatione fractionis Panis Orationibus speaking of sucred Eucharisticall Bread the taking whereof was ioyned with Prayer which vnto the newly baptised was straight giuen after Baptisme and yet there is no mention of Wine So that Protestants if they will haue these Christians to haue Wine they must out of their owne liberalitie by way of interpretation bestow it vpon them seeing the words of the Text doe not affoord it them To this Apostolicall practise wee may adde the example of Christ who gaue to his two Disciples in Emaus the Sacrament vnder the sole forme of Bread That the Bread Christ gaue was Eucharisticall and consecrated the words of the Text insinuate some learned Fathers affirme and the miraculous effect of opening their eyes to know Christ and their returne to Hierusalem and the Church of the Apostles in all hast confirmes it That they receiued at the hands of Christ the Sacrament vnder one onely kind of Bread is euident by the context of the Holy Narration which saith That vpon our Sauiours breaking and giuing them Bread they knew him and bee straight vanished out of their sight So that here also if Protestants will haue Wine giuen to these Disciples they must by the superabundance thereof in their Expositions supply 〈◊〉 want thereof in Scripture yea the Scripture in this place 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 capable of that Exposition the Apostles acknowledging of Christ in the verie fraction and giuing of Bread and our 〈◊〉 departing in the same moment leaues not-time for him to giue them Wine after the Bread ANSWER Your last Argument is poore and drowsie and perhaps you imagine that at this your Feast if yet we may be said to drinke 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sine Calice we haue drunke well before and therefore in the
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 those things which are behind or wanting 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the afflictions 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of Christ in my flesh 〈◊〉 his body which is the Church The first part of these words prooueth that S. Paul suffered for the Collossians But because he might suffer for the confirmation of their faith or as an example of patience or by way of persecution because he preached the Gospell to them and other Churches it cannot be concluded that hee suffered to make satisfaction for their sinnes Secondly The next words conclude not Satisfaction for Christs Afflictions and Passions are of two kinds Some Personall and in his owne flesh Some By Sympathie and compassion in his members The first are satisfactorie the second are exemplarie purgatiue probatiue or for the edifying of the Church S. Paul supplyed not or perfected not the first Esa. 63.3 for then Christs sufferings vpon the Crosse were imperfect but both S. Paul and all other iust persons which patiently beare affliction and indure the Crosse supply and accomplish that which is yet wanting in Christ as he is considered in a mysticall vnion to his Church Christ saith to Saul Act. 9.4 Saul Saul Why persecutest thou me and v. 5. I am Iesus whom thou persecutest S. Augustine and S. Gregorie say That Christ and the Church are one mysticall Body Therefore when the members suffer the head suffers and the afflictions of the members are the afflictions of Christ 2. Cor. 1. 5. 1. Cor. 12. 12. It is also remarkeable that not onely the Fathers but the maior part of Popish Doctors expound this Scripture in such sort that it serueth not at all to maintaine Papall Indulgences And Estius a moderne Pontifician saith That whereas 〈◊〉 of his part straine the Text of S. Paul to prooue Satisfactions and Indulgences himselfe is of mind that the said Doctrine cannot effectually be prooued by this place The other place 2. Cor. 12. 15. I wil verie gladly spend and be spent for you or as the Rhemists translate I most gladly will bestow and will my selfe moreouer be bestowed for your soules affoordeth no argument for Satisfactions and Pardons Caietan Estius Iustinian and other Popish expositors themselues deliuer the sence of this Text in manner following S. Paul manifesteth his paternall affection to the Corinthians saying I am readie not only as a Father to bestow all that I haue vpon you so farre am I from seeking any thing of yours but also to spend my life for you Now by what Art or Engine can Papists extort Pardons or Satisfactions out of this Text doth it follow that if Saint Paul be readie to spend himselfe life and state for the good of his flocke therefore there is a rich stocke and treasure of superabundant Passions and Satisfactions laid vp by S. Paul to bee spent by the Corinthians at their need Surely our Aduersarie intended rather to deride the world than to giue men satisfaction when he presented vs with such inconsequent stuffe But the Iesuit secondeth his former inference by a testimonie of Origen I answer Origen in the place obiected speaketh of purging sinne it selfe by the passions of Martyres and not of the temporall mulct or paine of sinne onely But the bloud of Martyres purgeth not sinne it selfe by way of condigne Satisfaction our Aduersaries being witnesses but at the vttermost by way of Deprecation now Deprecation and Satisfaction properly taken are of diuers natures The place of S. Augustine is strained against his meaning for this Father speaketh of all the members of Christ which suffer for their Masters cause But in our Aduersaries Tenet all that suffer for Christ haue not superabundant Satisfactions but onely some And this Father is so farre from maintaining workes of Supererogation as that he saith Pro modulo nostro exoluimus quod debemus pro posse virium nostrarum quasi canonem passionum inferimus c. According to our small measure we pay that which we are obliged vnto and according to our power we cast in as it were the stint of our passions but they which pay a stint and render that whereunto of right they are obliged haue not superaboundant Passions or workes of Supererogation IESVIT This was the practise of the Primitiue Church which at the petition of constant confessours in prison did release the penalties that sinners were inioined to performe to satisfie non onely the discipline of the Church but also the wrath of God after the remission of sinne still continuing vnto the infliction of temporall paine as appeareth by the testimonie of S. Cyprian And that this relaxation of temporall paine was done by applying the abundant satisfaction of holy Confessours and designed Martyres vnto the poenitents that receiued indulgence at their intercessions appeares by Tertullian For hee falling from the Church into the errours of Montanus whereof one was That for Christians sinning after Baptisme there was no remission of sinne refutes the Catholique custome of remitting penalties vnto sinners for the merits of Martyres speaking thus Let it suffice the Martirs that they haue cancelled and satisfied their owne sinnes Jt is ingratitude or pride for one prodigally to cast abroad vpon others that which as a great benefit was bestowed vpon him And speaking vnto the Martir saith Jf thou bee a sinner how can the oyle of thy lampe suffice both for thee and mee By which haereticall impugnation appeares that the Catholicke Doctrine then was that men might satisfie one for another and that the abundant satisfactions of some that suffered exceedingly as Martirs were applied for the Redemption of some others more remisse and negligent not from eternall but onely temporall punishment ANSWER You are an vnfaithfull Relatour of the practise of the Primitiue Church which was as followeth After foule and enormous knowne offences committed by Christians and especially after denying the Faith or Sacrificing to Idols offendours were put to a grieuous and long Penance It fell out sometimes that there was iust reason why the rigour of Penance should be mittigated either in respect of the kinde of duresse imposed or in regard of the length and continuance Which fauour the Bishops and Pastours of each Church not the Romane onely had authoritie by the Canons to grant as they saw iust cause This mitigation and relaxation of Penance was called by the name of Pardon and Indulgence and in the same there was no buying or selling no reference to Purgatorie Secondly Whereas you pretend that Popes Pardons were in vse in the Primitiue Church many of your owne part controll your impudencie to wit Durand Antonine Maior Roffensis Angelus de Clauasio Cassander And 〈◊〉 denyes That the Church hath any Treasurie 〈◊〉 of the merits of Christ and of the Saints The 〈◊〉 is maintained by Angelus de Clauasio
enough not spared to say That what the B. would not acknowledge in this cause you would wring and extort from him then indeed you said as before that it had erred And this no man denyed But euerie Error denyes not Christ the Foundation or makes Christ denie it or thrust it from the Foundation F. The B. said That the Error was not in Point fundamentall B. The B. was not so peremptorie His speech was That diuers learned men and some of your owne were of opinion That as the Greekes expressed themselues it was a Question not simply Fundamentall The B. knowes and acknowledges that Error of denying the Procession of the Holy Ghost from the Sonne to be a grieuous Error in Diuinitie And sure it would haue grated the Foundation if they had so denyed the Procession of the Holy Ghost from the Sonne as that they had made an inequalitie betweene the Persons But since their forme of speech is That the Holy Ghost proceeds from the Father by the Sonne and is the Spirit of the Sonne without making any difference in the consubstantialitie of the Persons the B. dares not denie them to be a true Church for this though he confesses them an erroneous Church in this particular Now that diuers learned men were of opinion That à Filio per Filium in the sense of the Greeke Church was but a Question in modo loquendi in manner of speech and therefore not fundamentall is euident The Master and his Schollers agree vpon it The Greekes saith hee confesse the holy Ghost to be the Spirit of the Sonne with the Apostle Galat. 4. and the Spirit of Truth S. Ioh. 16. And since Non est aliud It is not another thing to say The Holy Ghost is the Spirit of the Father and the Sonne then that he is or proceeds from the Father and the Sonne in this they seeme to agree with vs in eandem Fidei Sententiam vpon the same Sentence of Faith though they differ in words Now in this cause where the words differ but the sentence of Faith is the same 〈◊〉 eadem euen altogether the same Can the Point be fundamentall You may make them no Church as Bellarmine doth and so denie them saluation which cannot be had out of the true Church but the B. dares not It ought to be no easie thing to condemne a man of Heresie in foundation of Faith much lesse a Church least of all so ample and large a Church as the Greeke especially so as to make them no Church Heauen Gates were not so easily shut against multitudes when S. Peter wore the Keyes at his owne Girdle And it is good counsaile which Alphonsus à Castro one of your owne giues Let them consider that pronounce easily of Heresie how easie it is for themselues to erre Or if you will pronounce consider what it is that seperates from the Church simply and not in part onely I must needs professe that I wish heartily as well as others that those distressed men whose Crosse is heauie alreadie had beene more plainely and moderately dealt withall though they thinke a diuerse thing from vs than they haue beene by the Church of Rome But hereupon you say you were forced F. Whereupon I was forced to repeat what I had formerly brought against Dr. White concerning Points Fundamentall B. Hereupon it is true that you read a large discourse out of a Booke printed which you said was yours The particulars all of them at the least the B. tells me he doth not now remember and is sure he did not then approoue But if they be such as were formerly brought against 〈◊〉 White they are by him formerly answered The first thing you did was the righting of S. Augustine Which Sentence the B. doth not at all remember was so much as named in the third Conference much lesse was it stood vpon and then righted by you Another place of S. Augustine indeed was which you omit but the place of it comes after about Tradition to which I remit it But you tell vs of a great proofe made out of this place These words containe two Propositions One That all Points defined by the Church are Fundamentall The other That this is prooued out of this place of S. Augustine 1. For the first That all Points defined by the Church are Fundamentall It was not the least meanes by which Rome grew to her Greatnesse to blast euerie Opposer shee had with the name of Heretike or Schismatike for this serued to shriuell the credit of the persons and the persons once brought into contempt and ignominie all the good they desired in the Church fell to dust for want of creditable persons to backe and support it To make this proceeding good in these later yeeres this course it seemes was taken The Schoole that must maintaine and so they doe That all Points defined by the Church are thereby Fundamentall necessarie to be beleeued of the substance of the Faith and that though it be determined quite Extra Scripturam And then leaue the wise and actiue heads to take order that there be strength enough readie to determine what is fittest for them But since these men distinguish not nor you betweene the Church in generall and a Generall Councell which is but her Representation for determinations of the Faith the B. though he be very slow in sifting or opposing what is concluded by lawfull generall and consenting Authoritie though hee giue as much as can be giuen to the definitions of Councels truly generall nay suppose hee should graunt which hee doth not That Generall Councels cannot erre yet this cannot downe with him That all Points euen so defined are Fundamentall For Deductions are not prime and Natiue Principles nor are Superstructures Foundations That which is a Foundation for all cannot be one and another in different Christians for then it could be no constant Rule for any nor could the soules of men rest vpon a shaking Foundation No If it be a true Foundation it must be common to all and firme vnder all in which sense the Articles of Christian Faith are Fundamentall And Irenaeus layes this for a ground That the whole Church howsoeuer dispersed in place speakes this with one mouth Hee which among the Guides of the Church is best able to speake vtters no more than this and lesse than this the most simple doth not vtter Therefore the Creed of which hee speakes is a common is a constant Foundation and an Explicite Faith must be of this in them which haue the vse of Reason for both Guides and simple people all the Church vtter this Now many things are defined by the Church which are but Deductions out of this which suppose them deduced right mooue farre from the Foundation without which Deductions explicitely beleeued many millions of Christians goe to Heauen and cannot therefore be Fundamentall in the Faith True
rewarder of them that seeke him F. I asked How then it happened as Mr Rogers saith that the English Church is not yet resolued what is the right sense of the Article of Christ's descending into Hell B. The English Church neuer made doubt that I know what was the sense of that Article The words are so plaine they beare their meaning before them Shee was content to put that Article among those to which she requires subscription not as doubting of the sense but to preuent the Cauills of some who had beene too busie in crucifying that Article and in making it all one with the Article of the Crosse or but an Exposition of it And sure the B. thinkes and so doe I That the Church of England is better resolued of the right sense of this Article than the Church of Rome especially if she must be tryed by her Writers as you trie the Church of England by Mr Rogers For you cannot agree whether this Article be a meere Tradition or whether it hath any place of Scripture to warrant it Scotus and Stapleton allow it no footing in Scripture but Bellarmine is resolute that this Article is euerie where in Scripture and Thomas grants as much for the whole Creed The Church of England neuer doubted it and S. Augustine prooues it And yet againe you are different for the sense For you agree not whether the Soule of Christ in triduo mortis in the time of his death did goe downe into Hell really and was present there or virtually and by effects onely For Thomas holds the first and Durand holds the latter Then you agree not whether the Soule of Christ did descend really and in essence into the lowest Pit of Hell and place of the Damned as Bellarmine once held probable and prooued it or really only into that place or Region of Hell which you call Limbum Patrum and then but virtually from thence into the Lower Hell to which Bellarmine reduces himselfe and giues his reason because it is the common opinion of the Schoole Now the Church of England takes the words as they are in the Creed and beleeues them without further dispute and in that sense which the antient Primitiue Fathers of the Church agreed in And yet if any in the Church of England should not be throughly resolued in the sense of this Article Is it not as lawfull for them to say I conceiue thus or thus of it yet if any other way of his Descent be found truer than this I denie it not but as yet I know no other as it was for Durand to say it and yet not impeach the Foundation of the Faith F. The B. said That Mr Rogers was but a priuate man But said I if Mr Rogers writing as he did by publike Authoritie be accounted onely a priuate man c. B. The B. said truth when he said Mr Rogers was a priuate man And I take it you will not allow euerie speech of euerie man though allowed by Authoritie to be printed to be the Doctrine of the Church of Rome This hath beene oft complained of on both sides The imposing particular mens Assertions vpon the Church yet I see you meane not to leaue it And surely as Controuersies are now handled by some of your partie at this day I may not say it is the sense of the Article in hand but I haue long thought it a kind of descent into Hell to be conuersant in them I would the Authors would take heed in time and not seeke to blind the people or cast a mist before euident Truth least it cause a finall descent to that place of Torment But since you hold this course Stapleton was of greater note with you than Rogers is with vs and as he so his Relection And is it the Doctrine of the Church of Rome which he affirmes The Scripture is silent that Christ descended into Hell and that there is a Catholike and an Apostolike Church If it be then what will become of the Pope's Supremacie ouer the whole Church Shall hee haue his power ouer the Catholike Church giuen him expressely in Scripture in the Keyes to enter and in Pasce to feed when he is in and when he hath fed to confirme and in all these not to erre and faile in his ministration And is the Catholike Church in and ouer which he is to doe all these great things quite left out Belike the Holy Ghost was carefull to giue him his power Yes in any case but left the assigning of his great Cure the Catholike Church to Tradition And it were well for him if hee could so prescribe for what he now claymes But what if after all this Mr Rogers there sayes no such thing as in truth he doth not His words are All Christians acknowledge he descended but in the interpretation of the Article there is not that consent that were to be wished What is this to the Church of England more than others And againe Till wee know the natiue and vndoubted sense of this Article is Mr Rogers Wee the Church of England or rather his and some others Iudgement of the Church of England F. But if Mr Rogers be onely a priuate man In what Booke may wee find the Protestants publike Doctrine The B. answered That to the Booke of Articles they were all sworne B. What was the B. so ignorant to say The Articles of the Church of England were the publike Doctrine of all the Protestants or That all Protestants were sworne to the Articles of England as this speech seemes to implie Sure he was not Was not the immediate speech before of the Church of England And how comes the subiect of the speech to be varyed in the next Lines Nor yet speake I this as if other Protestants did not agree with the Church of England in the chiefest Doctrines against which they ioyntly take exceptions against the Romane Church as appeares by their seuerall Confessions Nor did the B. say That the Booke of Articles onely was the Continent of the Church of Englands publike Doctrine Shee is not so narrow nor hath shee purpose to exclude any thing which shee acknowledges hers nor doth shee wittingly permit any crossing of her publike declarations Yet shee is not such a Shrew to her Children as to denie her Blessing or denounce an Anathema against them if some peaceably dissent in some particulars remoter from the Foundation as your owne Schoolemen differ And if the Church of Rome since shee grew to her greatnesse had not beene so fierce in this course Christendome I persuade my selfe had beene in happier peace at this day F. And that the Scriptures onely not any vnwritten Tradition was the Foundation of their Faith B. The Church of England grounded her Positiue Articles vpon Scripture and her Negatiue Refute where the thing affirmed by you is not affirmed in Scripture nor directly
present Church to be the first inducing motiue to embrace this Principle onely wee cannot goe so farre in this way as you to make the present Tradition alwayes an infallible Word of God for this is to goe so farre in till you be out of the way For Tradition is but a Lane in the Church it hath an end not onely to receiue vs in but another after to let vs out into more open and richer ground And a better way than you Because after we are mooued and prepared and induced by Tradition wee resolue our Faith into that written Word and God deliuering it in which wee find the Tradition which led vs thither And so wee are sure by Diuine Authoritie that wee are in the way because at the end wee find the way prooued And doe what can be done you can neuer settle the Faith of man about this great Principle till you rise to greater assurance than the present Church alone can giue And therefore once againe to that knowne place of S. Augustine The words of the Father are Nisi commoueret Vnlesse the Authoritie of the Church mooued me but not alone but with other motiues else it were not commouere to mooue together And the other motiues are Resoluers though this be Leader Now since wee goe the same way with you so farre as you goe right and a better way than you where you goe wrong wee need not admit any other Word of God than wee doe And this ought to remaine as a presupposed Principle among all Christians and not so much as come into this Question about the sufficiencie of Scripture betweene you and vs. F. From this the Person doubting called vs and desiring to heare Whether the B. would graunt the Romane Church to be the Right Church The B. graunted that it was B. One occasion which mooued Tertullian to write his Booke de Praescrip aduersus Haereticos was That he saw little or no profit come by Disputations Sure the ground was the same then and now It was not to denie that Disputation is an opening of the Vnderstanding a sifting out of Truth it was not to affirme that any such Disquisition is in and of it selfe vnprofitable If it had S. Stephen would not haue disputed with the Cyrenians nor S. Paul with the Grecians first and then with the Iewes and all Commers No sure it was some abuse in the Disputants that frustrated the good of the Disputation And one abuse in the Disputants is a Resolution to hold their owne though it be by vnworthie meanes and disparagement of Truth The B. finds it here For as it is true that this Question was asked so it is altogether false that it was asked in this forme or so answered There is a great deale of difference especially as Romanists handle the Question of the Church betweene The Church and A Church and there is some betweene a True Church and a Right Church which is the word you vse but no man else that I know I am sure not the B. The Church may import in our Language The onely true Church and perhaps as some of you seeme to make it the Root and the Ground of the Catholike This the B. neuer did neuer meanes to graunt A Church can imply no more than that it is a member of the whole This the B. neuer did nor euer will denie if it fall not absolutely away from Christ. That it is a True Church he graunted also but not a Right as you impose vpon him For Ens and Verum Being and True are conuertible one with another and euerie thing which hath a Being is truly that Being which it is in truth of substance But this word Right is not so vsed but is referred more properly to perfection in Conditions And in this sense euerie thing that hath a true and reall being is not by and by right in the Conditions of it A man that is most dishonest and vnworthie the name a verie Theefe if you will is a True man in the veritie of his essence as he is a Creature endued with Reason for this none can steale from him nor hee from himselfe but Death but hee is not therefore a right or an vpright man And a Church that is exceeding corrupt both in Manners and Doctrine and so a dishonour to the name is yet a True Church in the veritie of essence as a Church is a companie of men which professe the Faith of Christ and are baptised into his Name but yet it is not therefore a Right Church eyther in Doctrine or Manners It may be by this word Right you meant cunningly to slip it in that the B. should graunt it Orthodoxe This hee neuer graunted you For Orthodoxe Christians are keepers of integritie and followers of right things so Saint Augustine of which the Church of Rome is neyther In this sence then no Right that is Orthodoxe Church at Rome And yet no newes that the B. graunted the Romane Church to be a True Church For so much verie learned Protestants haue acknowledged before him and the Truth cannot denie it For that Church which receiues the Scripture as a Rule of Faith though but as a partiall and imperfect Rule and both the Sacraments as instrumentall Causes and Seales of Grace though they adde more and misuse these yet cannot but be a True Church in essence How it is in Manners and Doctrine I would you would looke to it with a single eye For if Pietie and a peaceable minde be not ioyned to a good vnderstanding nothing can be knowne in these great things F. Further he confessed That Protestants had made a Rent and Diuision from it B. The B. I know from himselfe could here be heartily angrie but that he hath resolued in handling matters of Religion to leaue all gall out of his Inke and makes me straine it out of mine There is a miserable Rent in the Church and I make no question but the best men doe most bemoane it Nor is hee a Christian that would not haue vnitie might hee haue it with Truth But the B. neuer said nor thought that the Protestants made this Rent The cause of the Schisme is yours for you thrust vs from you because wee called for Truth and redresse of Abuses For a Schisme must needs be theirs whose the cause of it is The Woe runs full out of the mouth of Christ euer against him that giues the offence not against him that takes it euer But you haue giuen the B. iust cause neuer to treat with you or your like but before a Iudge or a Iurie F. Moreouer hee said hee would ingenuously acknowledge That the Corruption of Manners in the Romish Church was not a sufficient cause to iustifie their departing from it B. I would the B. could say you did as ingenuously repeat as hee did confesse Hee neuer said That Corruption of Manners was not a sufficient cause to
Heauen especially to them that haue had the Truth manifested the heart of this Argument were broken Besides the force of this Argument lyes vpon two things one expressed the other vpon the By. First That which is expressed is Wee and our Aduersaries consent That there is saluation to some in the Romane Church What would you haue vs as malicious at least as rash as your selues are to vs and denie you so much as possibilitie of saluation If wee should wee might make you in some things straine for a Proofe But wee haue not so learned Christ as eyther to returne euill for euill in this headie course or to denie Saluation to some ignorant silly Soules whose humble peaceable obedience makes them safe among any part of men that professe the Foundation Christ. And therefore seeke not to helpe our cause by denying this comfort to silly Christians as you most fiercely doe where you can come to worke vpon them And this was an old Tricke of the Donatists For in the Point of Baptisme Whether that Church or in the part of Donatus they 〈◊〉 all to be baptised among them Why because both parts 〈◊〉 that 〈◊〉 was true 〈◊〉 the 〈◊〉 which that peeuish Sect most vniustly denyed the sound part as S. Augustine deliuers it I would aske now Had not they Orthodoxe Baptisme among them because the Donatists denyed it iniuriously Or should the Orthodoxe against Truth haue denyed Baptisme among the Donatists to crie 〈◊〉 with them Or that their Argument might not be the stronger because both parts graunted But marke this how farre you runne from all common Principles of Christian Peace as well as Christian Truth while you denie Saluation most vniustly to vs from which you are further off your selues Besides if this were or could be made a concluding Argument I pray why doe not you beleeue with vs in the Point of the Eucharist For all sides agree in the Faith of the Church of England That in the most blessed Sacrament the worthie Receiuer is by his Faith made spiritually partaker of the true and Reall Bodie and Bloud of Christ truly and really and of all the benefits of his Passion Your 〈◊〉 adde a manner of this his presence Transubstantiation which manie denie and the Lutherans a manner of this presence Consubstantiation which more denie If this Argument be good then euen for this consent it is safer communicating with the Church of England than with the Romane or Lutheran because all agree in this Truth not in any other Opinion And therefore if you will force the Argument to make that the safest way of Saluation which differing parts agree on Why doe you not yeeld to the force of the same Argument in the 〈◊〉 of the Sacrament one of the most immediate meanes of Saluation where not onely the most but all agree Secondly The other vpon the By which helpesthis Argument is your continuall poore Out-crie against vs That wee cannot be saued because wee are 〈◊〉 of the Church Sure if I thoughtI were out I would get in as fast as I could But what doe you meane by Out of the Church Sure out of the Romane Church Why but the Romane Church and the Church of England are but two distinct members of that Catholike Church which is spread ouer the face of the Earth Therefore Rome is not the House where the Church dwells but Rome it selfe as well as other particular Churches dwells in this great Vniuersall House vnlesse you will shut vp the Church in Rome as the Donatists did in Africke I come a little lower Rome and other 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 are in this 〈◊〉 to whom 〈◊〉 Christ the care of the Household is committed by God the Father and the Catholike Church the Mother of 〈◊〉 Christians Rome as an elder Sister had a great 〈◊〉 committed vnto her in and from the prime times of the Church and to her Bishop in her but at this time to 〈◊〉 passe manie 〈◊〉 that 〈◊〉 formerly beene in the House England and some other Sisters of hers are fallen out in the House What then Will the Father and the Mother God and the Church 〈◊〉 one Child out because another is angrie with it Or when did Christ giue that Power to the Elder Sister 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and her 〈◊〉 the Bishop there should thrust out what Child 〈◊〉 pleased Especially when shee her selfe is 〈◊〉 accused to haue giuen the offence that is taken in the House Or will not both Father and Mother be sharper to her for this vniust and vnnaturall vsage of her younger Sisters but their 〈◊〉 Children Nay is it not the next way to make them 〈◊〉 her out of doores that is so 〈◊〉 to the rest It is well for all Christian men and Churches that the Father and Mother of them are 〈◊〉 so 〈◊〉 as some would haue them And Saluation need not be feared of any 〈◊〉 Child 〈◊〉 outing from the Church because this Elder 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 are discouered in the House and 〈◊〉 growne 〈◊〉 for it to them that complayned But as Children crie when they are awaked so doe you and 〈◊〉 with all that come 〈◊〉 you And 〈◊〉 confesses That yee were in 〈◊〉 dead sleepe 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 much 〈◊〉 when the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 you Now if you can prooue that Rome is 〈◊〉 the Catholike Church it selfe as you commonly call it speake out and 〈◊〉 it In the meane time you may 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 too if you will and it seemes you doe for here you forget 〈◊〉 what the B. said to you 〈◊〉 The doubting Person said the B. to me may be better saued in it than you B. 〈◊〉 that is easier than you than 〈◊〉 man that knowes so much of Truth and opposes against it as you and your 〈◊〉 doe How farre you know Truth other men may iudge by your proofes and causes of Knowledge but how 〈◊〉 you oppose it when it is knowne that is within and no man can know but God and your selues Howsoeuer where the Foundation is but held there for ordinarie men it is not the 〈◊〉 of vnderstanding but the simplicitie of beleeuing that makes them safe For Saint Augustiue speakes there of men in the Church and no man can be simply said to be out of the visible Church that is baptized and holds the Foundation And as it is the simplicitie of beleeuing that makes them safe yea safest so is it sometimes a quicknesse of vnderstanding that louing it selfe and some by respects too well makes men take vp an vnsafe way about the Faith So that there is no question but manie were saued in corrupted times of the Church when their Leaders vnlesse they repented before death were lost And Saint Augustines Rule will be true That in all Corruptions of the Church there will euer be a difference betweene an Heretike and a plaine well-meaning man that is mis-led and beleeues an Heretike I pray you Marke this and so by Gods grace will I. For our Reckoning will bee
part of them obserue Vnitie in the Bond of Peace in things essentiall and in the common Rule of Faith And although the qualitie of Teachers be a motiue of credibilitie yet the power of persuasion dependeth properly vpon the Word of Christ and they which disagree in other matters and with a common consent teach the maine and principall Doctrine of Faith must therein be credited because of the prime Author himselfe If humane frailetie discord and error in some things should totally discredit the Authoritie of Teachers the World must receiue no Diuine Veritie by the Ministerie of men because amongst men Non germinat granum Veritatis sine palea Vanitatis The good Seed of Veritie springeth not without some Chaffe of Vanitie S. Cyprian S. Augustine S. Hierome c. disagree in some things and Tertullian and Origen haue many errors and therein are reprooued by others and yet the rest of their Doctrine wherein they teach truly receiueth no preiudice from their contrarie errors The Iesuits and Dominicans and other Scholasticks desire to be esteemed credible Witnesses and yet there is no small contention betwixt them concerning sundrie Questions Although therefore some dissention bee found among Teachers yet their whole Doctrine is not thereby made incredible neyther is there perpetually in the true Church a visible and perspicuous concord in all things In the words ensuing the Aduersarie questioneth Doctor Field because hee affirmeth That Protestants Dissentions are not reall but apparent and verball Against this hee affirmeth That so long as Contentioners rest vnsatisfied and admit no Reconciliation saying That Reconcilers haue missed of their meaning it is vaine by distinctions to colour their Discord c. 〈◊〉 First To 〈◊〉 Discord by distinctions is no meanes of true 〈◊〉 but by 〈◊〉 to discouer and manifest that Contentioners 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 other and whereas they speake diuersty in 〈◊〉 yet they maintaine the same Veritie in substance this may be to good purpose Secondly Although A 〈◊〉 are many times froward and will not for the present admit the charitable constructions of moderate persons 〈◊〉 to reconcile them Exod. 2. 14. Act. 7.27 yet at the last Vnitie may be effected by this meanes and peaceable and moderate Christians ought in the meane season to gather the faire Lilly of sauing Veritie growing amidst the Thornes of humane Infirmitie IESVIT Fiftly I inferre That this Church is vniuersall spread ouer all Nations that she may be said to be euery where morally speaking that the whole knowne World may take notice of her as of a worthie and credible witnesse of Christian Tradition howsoeuer her outward glory and splendor peace and tranquilitie be sometimes obscured in some places more or lesse and not euer in all places at once ANSVVER The Church is vniuerfall First Because of time for it continueth successiuely in all Ages Matth. 28.20 Luc. 1.33 Secondly In regard of Persons and Places because no Countrey Nation State Age or Sex of People are excluded from being part of it Galat. 3.20 Act. 10.34 Apoc. 5.9 Thirdly In respect of Faith because Diuine Veritie constitutiue and which giueth being to the true Church continueth throughout all Ages 1. Pet. 1.25 Reuel 14.6 and is found in all the parts of the true Church But notwithstanding this the true Church is not perpetually vniuersall in regard of actuall amplitude and diffusion of visible Congregations throughout all Nations and inhabited Countreyes of the World for it may in some Ages in actu exercito and in regard of actuall residence remaine onely in a few Countreyes and Cardinall Bellarmine graunteth That if one sole Prouince of the World should retaine true Faith yet the Church might then be truly and properly called vniuersall if it could manifestly be shewed that the same were one with that Church which was once vniuersally spred ouer the world And although Deiure by right and according to the diuine Precept the true Church should at all times remaine and continue in those regions where it was once planted yet it happeneth by the malice and iniquitie of man that those places which once were a Sanctuarie of holinesse are afterwards changed into the habitation of Satan and into a cage of vncleane Birds The Iesuit perceiuing that it is impossible to defend a perpetuall actuall vniuersalitie of the Church presenteth vnto vs an imaginarie vniuersalitie his words are She may be said to be euerie where morally speaking c. I answere Morally speaking the Church cannot be said to be where it is altogether vnknowne and where no meanes are vsed or actions performed which are sufficient to make it knowne A king may morally be said to be in euery part of his kingdome because his lawes ministers and gouernment are extended throughout all his kingdome and king Richard the first when hee was in Syria might be said to be morally in England But the true Church in many ages hath no commerce with Infidels in things spirituall mediate or immediate the Faith Preaching and authoritie thereof is altogether vnknowne to many people to wit to the inhabitants of America for 1400. yeeres to many other nations of Affrica and Europe for 600. yeeres c. And many people which heare the fame of Christians in generall as they doe of the Iewes haue no meanes to distinguish Orthodoxe Beleeuers from Heretickes and they which vnderstand not the Doctrine of the true Church cannot take notice of her as of a worthie and credible witnesse of diuine Tradition IESVIT A truth so cleare that it may be euidently prooued out of Scripture that euen in Antichrists dayes the Church shall be visibly vniuersall for shee shall then bee euerie where persecuted which could not bee except shee were euerie where visible and conspicuous euen to the wicked ANSVVER Your former Proposition concerning the perpetuall locall vniuersalitie of the Church is as cleare as the Sunne-shine at midnight and the Arguments whereby you labour to prooue it are of no force First if it were granted that the true Church in the raigne of Antichrist should bee visibly vniuersall yet it is inconsequent Ergo The true Chnrch is perpetually and in all ages visibly vniuersall Separable accidents are sometimes present to the subiect and sometimes absent but visible vniuersalitie is a separable accident as appeareth by the state of the true Church in the first hundred yeere Secondly the words of Saint Iohn Apoc. 20. 8. are And when the thousand yeeres shall be consummate Satan shall be loosed out of his prison and shall goe foorth and seduce the nations which are vpon the foure corners of the earth Gog and Magog and shall gather them into battell the number of whom is as the sand of the Sea In this Prophesie nothing is deliuered which doth expresly or by consequence argue the visible vniuersalitie of the true Church in all ages 1. The nations which are vpon the foure corners of the earth seduced by
Satan may be Infidels at least a great part of them as well as Christians and although Satan possessed deceiued them before yet now when he is loosed he doth in a new manner and by a greater efficacie of errour deceiue them 2. The true Church may be persecuted vniuersally by multitudes of enemies dispersed euery where and yet remaine it selfe in one or in few places and it may also be persecuted when it professeth and exerciseth religion in secret Apoc. 12.14 15. 3. Many learned Papists affirme that in the dayes of Antichrist true beleeuers shall cease to bee in many places and the number of orthodoxall people shall be small and the same shall professe their faith in secret August Triumph sum d. Eccles. pot q. 21. ar 4. At that time particular Churches diffused farre and neere ouer the world shall withdraw themselwes from the obedience of the Romane Pope and few shall obey him and the Pope himselfe at that time shall with a few keepe himselfe 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the 〈◊〉 of 〈◊〉 others being 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from his 〈◊〉 The like is affirmed by Occham 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and Barradias Now this former affertion which is the common Tener of Papists agreeth not with the speech of our Aduersarie when he saith That in the dayes of Antichrist the Church shall be euerie where visible and conspicuous euen to the wicked and he must reuoke his bold 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in his first words A truth so cleare that it may euidently be prooued c. IESVIT The reason of this perpetuall visible vniuersalitie is because the Tradition of the Church is as I haue prooued the sole ordinarie meanes to ground faith on for substantiall points Wherefore this Tradition must bee so deliuered as that it may bee knowne to all men seeing God will haue all men without any exception of nation to bee saued and to come to the knowledge of Truth 1. Timothie 2. 4. But if the Church were not still so diffused in the world that all knowne nations may take notice of her all men could not be saued ANSWER Although the teaching and Tradition of the Church is the first Introduction to leade people vnto the knowledge of the grounds of saluation and the ordinarie meanes whereby they receiue the holy Scriptures and rule of Faith contained in the same which is all you haue or can prooue yet hence it followeth not that the true Church is visibly vniuersall in all places of the world First you are reprooued by the example of the Indians and people inhabiting the New found World who are Gods creatures and reasonable men formed 〈◊〉 his image capable of grace and 〈◊〉 as well as other men and included within the latitude of 〈◊〉 promises Math. 28.19 Marc. 16.15 Call 2.28 Call 3.11 and the Apostles speech 1. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 4. God will 〈◊〉 all men to be 〈◊〉 c 〈◊〉 them as well as others And yet notwithstanding the true Church whose Tradition according to your position is the sole ordinarie meanes to ground Faith on was not for many ages either Actually or Moraily visible vniuersall or any waies made knowne to them It seemes by the conclusion of your Argument wherein you insert these words That all knowne nations c. that you obserued this but you are no way able to cleere the difficultie for if because S. Paul saith God wil haue all men to be saued and come to the knowledge of the Truth the true Church must in all age be visibly vniuersall then the same must be so in regard of the nations inhabiting the New found world because S. Pauls words God will haue all men to be saued and come to the knowledge of the Truth are vniuersall according to your exposition and must be vnderstood without limitation or respect of persons Secondly when S. Paul saith God wil haue all men to be saued c. He 〈◊〉 according to the antecedent wil of God as learned Papists commonly maintaine But this antecedent Will according to some learned Papists is no formall Will in God but is only improperly and metaphorically so called and according to others which say it is a formall Will the same produceth not vniuersally either grace of outward calling to Saluation or inward grace in them that are externally called and therefore it is inconsequent to argue from this manner of Gods willing all men to be saued That the true Church is in all ages visibly vniuersall 1. Aquinas and others say that the antecedent will of God is only a velleitie or wishing that the thing might be a complacencie in a thing considered abstractiuely and without other circumstances and that vpon it alone the Saluation of no man followeth 2. The same is generall in respect of all and euery singular and indiuiduall person and God by his antecedent will wisheth the Saluation of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by experience that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Will all 〈◊〉 and singular persons by the ministerie of the true Church and that whole countries and nations for 〈◊〉 ages 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the same and some countries 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the preaching of the Gospell sooner and others latter some haue been 〈◊〉 in one age and some in another 4. Gods antecedent Will is alwaies the same and 〈◊〉 to it he 〈◊〉 the Saluation of all men in the time of the Old Testament Ezek. 33.11 Now from the former positions it followeth that S. Pauls words 1. Tim. 2.4 God will haue all men to be saued c. do not 〈◊〉 that the true Church is visibly vniuersall in all ages since the Ascension of Christ and the preaching of the Apostles For if the antecedent will of God of which S. Paul speaketh 1. Tim. 2.4 be onely a velleitie and complacencie about mans Saluation abstractiuely considered and if it respect singular and indiuiduall persons as well as whole nations and notwithstanding the same many singular persons and whole nations haue beene destitute and that for a long space of time of all meanes of conuersion and outward calling to Christianitie and if the same Will for some large tract of time produceth no external effect sufficient to conuert Infidels then it followeth that the true Church which is the onely ordinarie teacher of sauing veritie is not visibly vniuersall in all places of the world in euery age The minor is prooued from the foure propositions formerly deliuered The sequell is euident by the exposition which our Aduersaries deliuer of S. Pauls text vnderstanding the same of the antecedent will of God and from the position of the 〈◊〉 deliuered in this section which is That the Tradition and Preaching of the true visible Church is the sole ordinarie meanes to leade people to the knowledge of sauing Truth For if the antecedent will of God is not a certaine and infallible cause that all people shal at all times haue the preaching of sauing Veritie by the ministerie of the true visible
grieuous penaltie to depart out of Babylon and spirituall Sodome Apoc. 18.4 and Chap. 11.8 Saint Paul speaking of such as teach diuerse doctrine from the Apostles saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Depart from such from their assembly and Church Reade Acts 19. 8. 1. Corinth 10. 14. 2. Cor. 6. 14 15 17. Hos. 10. 17. The Roman Church in those things wherein wee departed from it was shamefully corrupted it did not onely forsake bur depraue and persecute the truth of God the leprosie thereof was incurable for it would not iudge it selfe nor bee reprooued by others nor reforme the least errour but desperately followed the Canon Si Papa c And none might inioy life and breath within her Precincts which would not obey her Traditions These Romuleans vnlesse they were blinded like Elymas could not be ignorant at least of some of their errours and corruptions but they chose rather in their Tridentine Synode to proclaime and propugne apertly or couertly all their antient forgeries than to compassionate the distressed and 〈◊〉 Christian world by mittigating or condescending according to truth in the smallest matters It had beene most facile for them without any preiudice or dammage to themselues to haue permitted the Communion of the holy Eucharist in both kindes the publicke 〈◊〉 of God in a knowne and vnderstood Language to haue abolished the adoration of Images c. But their Luciferian pride and mallice was so transcendent that they rather presumed to obtrude new Scandalls vpon the Christian World than to vse the least Moderation for the peace of the Church And euer since that Synod they haue proceeded from euill to worse obscuring and out-facing the Truth with Forgerie and Sophistrie They haue conspired against Kingdomes and States they haue surpassed professed Infidels in perfidious Stratagemes and immane Crueltie Lastly whereas they expelled vs by Excommunication and chased vs away from them by Persecution yet this Romane Aduocate taxeth vs of Schisme and Apostasie neuer remembring what S. Augustine long since deliuered The Sacriledge of Schisme is then committed when there is no iust cause of separation Or what some of his owne part haue said The Sheepe are not bound to be subiect to any Shepheard which is become a Wolfe or is aduerse to the saluation of the Flocke IESVIT Which also plainely will appeare to any man of vnderstanding that casts vpon her an impartiall eye For is she not conspicuously one the professors thereof agreeing in all points of Faith howsoeuer they differ about small vndefined Questions ANSVVER Externall Vnitie is found amongst Infidels and the Turkes being more in number than Papists neuer disagree amongst themselues touching matters of their Religion Shall wee then say as the Iesuit doth It will plainely appeare to any man of vnderstanding that casts his eye vpon Turkie that the same hath Veritie because it is conspicuously one Saint Augustine saith That Iewes Heretikes and Infidels obserue Vnitie against Vnitie S. Bernard Alia est vnitas Sanctorum alia facinorosorum The Vnitie of Saints is one thing and the Vnitie of wicked men Deceiuers another S. Hilarie Vnitas fidei vnitas perfidiae There is Vnitie of Faith and there is likewise perfidious and faithlesse Vnitie S. Gregorie saith That the ministers of Antichrist shall cleaue together like the skales of Leuiathan Therefore because externall Vnitie is in it selfe a thing common and Iewes and Mahometists enioy the same more apparently than many Christians our Aduersarie must prooue that his Church hath Veritie before his argument taken from externall Vnitie can be of any force Neither is Papisticall Vnitie so entire and absolute as this man gloryeth for Papalls disagree both in Doctrine and Manners They differ concerning the supreame Authoritie of the Church Whether it be in the Pope or in the Generall Councell They differ in the matter of Free-will and Grace They differ concerning the manner of the Conception of the Virgin Marie There are three Opinions among them concerning the Temporall dominion of Popes Some say he hath direct Temporall power some say indirect some say hee hath none but by the free Donation of Princes and that Princes were euill aduised in yeelding him so much And moderne Popes disagree with the antient concerning the Dignitie of vniuerfall Bishop adoration of Images Transubstantiation Communion in both kinds and the merit of Good workes Also they themselues complaine of grieuous hatred and discord reigning generally among them and some of them say There is greater Concord among Gentiles And when they colour these palpable Dissentions pretending that they are readie to submit themselues to the iudgement of the Pope First this Iudge and Vmpire is many times a Peace-breaker and no Peace-maker an Ismael in the Christian World whose hand is against euerie man and euerie mans hand is against him Secondly Vnitie which is founded on blind Obedience is onely an Vnitie of Pollicie and not of true Faith Thirdly this submission maketh not actuall Concord and miserable Dissention both intestine and forraine at home and abroad rageth betweene Popes and Princes and betweene one Popish Faction and another The Guelphes and Gibellines the Papalls and Imperialls are as famous in Histories for their Discord as the sonnes of Cadmus and when Papistrie was most potent the Christian World was most distracted IESVIT Apparently vniuersall so spread ouer the World with Credit and Authoritie that whole Mankind may take sufficient notice of her and her Doctrine for the embracing thereof ANSWER The Roman is a particular Church and not vniuersall it is onely an vnsound member of the whole and not the whole Rom. 1. 6. S. Paul saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Among whom are yee also But a Church which is but one amongst the rest cannot be the whole and vniuersall Church It is as absurd to say that the Romane Church is the vniuersall Church as to affirme that England is the vniuersall World If the vniuersall Church be taken properly or absolutely it comprehendeth both the Triumphant and Militant Church Augustine Enchir. cap. 56. and 61. Couaruuias Resol Lib. 4. cap. 14. If it be taken restrictiuely it is the whole Church Militant of each Age. If Catholike be taken for that which is Orthodoxall in Faith and which holdeth no diuision with the common Bodie of Christianitie according to which notion the Fathers tearme particular Churches Catholike then neyther is this Title proper to the Romane Church alone neyther can Papists iustly assume the name of Catholike vntill they haue proued their Faith to be Orthodoxall and iustified themselues from being the Authors of Discord in the Christian World And to answere that which followeth although the Romane Church is spread ouer sundrie parts of the World because some people professing the Romane Faith trauaile or reside in many Countreyes and exercise their Religion where they trauaile or liue yet this