the Pope had beene the Head and that all other Churches had held the Catholicke Faith of him in capite but I perceive the Romane Church is now presumed from the Ancients to have had this title Yet I thinke it will scarce be found what the Iesuite doth understand by the Roman Church For if by the Roman Church be comprehended all other Churches that are onely to be accounted Catholicke for the subordinate obeysance to Peter and other succeeding Bishops b See the Iesuits Reply pag. 49 then it is meere vanity to make an Head the Head of it selfe to make the Church all Head and no body If their particular Citie or Diocesse and Church therein then he cannot by the Roman Church understand the Roman Catholicke as hee confesseth in the last Section for saith he if the Roman Church be taken as it comprehendeth onely that Cleargie which maketh but one particular Bishopricke and Diocesse in tho Citie of Rome abstracting or as hee would say abstracted from that relation which it hath unto all other Christian Churches as the head unto the members then I say thâ—â— no man ever by the Church of Rome did understand the Vniversall Church c Reply 〈◊〉 Secondly if it be not the Roman Catholicke then all the testimonies produced make nothing for the Romane Catholicke Church but for the Roman Church that is not Catholicke But though hee doth not fully expresse himselfe herein yet he doth that which may give us a guesse of his meaning seeing the streame of his proofes is to set forth the eminencie of their Romane Pastor And to make this good hee cites some Fathers to prove the Pope to be the head of the faithfull d See S. Augustine cited by the Iesuite pag. â—1 head of Pastorall Honour e See Prosper ibid. pag. 52. so that notwithstanding he pleades for the Church Roman yet that which he laboureth to advance is the See and Pope Roman that is that they fight for this they desire Rome they would have the head of all Churches and the Pope the Head of her and their sleighting of Councels many times declare in their opinion the Pope to bee the onely Beasts head that must bee adored for the Councell maketh not the Pope infallible but the Pope the Councell f Wadding Legat. Phil. 3. c. Sect. 2 Non tribuit Concilium infallibilitatem Pontifici sed à Pontifice habeâ— Concilium ut fit ratum ac firmum For Peter and those that follow him in the faith of Peter not for a Councell did Christ pray g Ibid. Pro Pâ—tro in fide Petri succedentibus NON PRO CONCILIO oravit et exâ—ravit Well then let us see how wee shall answere what hee brings for the Roman Churches exaltation And first of all it seemeth a needlesse thing for this Iesuite to bring proofes to manifest the same It being so undoubted a truth if we may beleive this Iesuite that the very first Broachers of Protestancie when they speake without Passion doe not deny the same h Reply pag. 30 The Broachers of Protestancie were CHRIST his Apostles who gave us wine and oyle out of the Vessels of his Truth when such botchers as you have laboured to erect a phantastick frame of your owne His first instance is Martin Bucer whom he produceth confissing ingenuously that with the Fathers of the auncient Church the Romane Church obtained the Primacie before the rest for as much as shee hath S. Peters chaire and her Bishops almost ever still have beene held for Peters successors i Reply pag â—â— And what I pray you getteth your Church or Pope by this ingenuè confitemur Little I suppose to make Româ— caput infallibilitatis or the Pope the Pylot to guide thither For he saith that the Roman Church hath obtained the Primacie prae caeteris before other Churches not super not over all the rest and that the Bishops of Rome have beene held for Peters successors but not absolutely as an infallible truth but semper ferè almost ever not without doubts and jealousies as hee seemeth to expresse But if absolutely other Bishops nay all other Bishops have beene likewise so esteemed as is plaine by Chrysostomes exhortation to Basill Bishop of Caesarea who from the ground of Pasce oves exhorteth him to that duetie of Peters because it belongeth to his Successours as well as to himselfe k Chrâ—sost de Sacerdotio l. 2. â—â—tre amas me â—â—quit atque illo id conâ—iâ—ence adjungit Si amas me Pasâ—e ores meas Interrogat discipulum Praeceptor â—um ab eo non quo id ipse doâ—eatur â—erùm in NOS DOCEAâ— quanâ—ae sibi curae â—â— gregis hujus praefectura â—â— â—aulo cost Veâ—â—m hoc ille tum agebat ut Petrum caeterâ—s noâ— edoceret quantà beneâ—â—â—enâ—iâ— ac charitate erga suam ipse Ecclesiam afficeretur ut hac ratione NOS quoque ejusdem Ecclesiâ— studium curamque toto animo susciperemus 〈◊〉 item de causa Christus sanguinem effudit suum certe ut pecudes eâ—â— acquitereâ— quaâ—â—â—â— Petro â—um Petri successoribus gubernandas in manum 〈◊〉 whereunto agreeth Peter Lumbard lib. 4. Dist 18. We envie not the Bishop of the imperiall Cittie this Honour that in Procession hee shall goe last and in a Councell sit first If this will serve his turne let him put off his Crowne and assume his Myter and with an ingenuè confitemur wee will all acknowledge him the greatest Bishop first in place of all Peters Successours But for his Monarchie to make the whole Catholicke Church the Senate of Bishops and Preists a bare shadow this is too much to be allowed him Further whilst hee embraceth Peters faith wee will not deny him to have a part as the rest of the Catholicke bodie in Christs prayer Yet to thinke that Christ so prayed for Peter and his Successours Bishops of Rome that Hell might prevayle against all other his Successours the Bishops of the Catholicke Church this without extreame flatterie wee cannot graunt unto him So that Bucer hath not said much for this Head of Churches Yet he goeth not alone Luther himselfe saith the Iesuite doth confesse that the Bishop of Rome hath superiority over all other Bishops l Reply pag. â—â— This is no great matter for it was as the Iesuite confesseth when he made use of his bests wits m Ib â— that is when he did and said or at least submitted all to the determination of this Apollyon but afterwards in his raving pange of madnes hee spared not like madde-men and fooles to speake the truth and to call a spade a spade the Pope Antichrist and the Roman state the Whore of Babylon So that any may see this maketh little to the Producers purpose for if this were a good Testimonie why doth he not produce our Acts of Parliament in Queene Maries dayes and all those Testes which in the time of blindnes from men not well
Head for that Church obtained this title by reason of the Cittie wherein the principall members of the Church remained and because it was an Apostolicall Church not for that all the other Apostolicall Churches were subordinate unto it in power The second hee urgeth is out of the Eight Epistle of his fourth booke where hee would have Cyprian to stile the Roman Church the roote and the mother of the Cathelicke Church x Reply pag 50 If this be true surely Cyprian had a conceipt that the branch might grow before the roote for who will say that Rome first received the Faith or the name of Christians or that there was no Catholicke Church before Peter preached there But Cyprian meant no such thing as this Iesuite would perswade him to affirme Hee findes a Schisme in Rome betwixt Novatianus and Cornelius Nevatianus being made Bishop the other living suspends his judgment in this matter untill hee had enquired the truth from the Romane Preists and Deacons y Cyprian Epistol 45. Omnia interim integra suspenderentur done end nos iidem collegae nostri rebus illic aut ad pacem aut pro veritate compertis redirent onely hee adviseth them that like good Navigators they should not separate themselves from the unity of the Catholicke Church z Ibid. Nos enim singulis navigantibus ne cum scandalo ullo navigarent rationem red sentes scimus nos hortatos cos esse ut Ecclesiae Catholiâ—â— radicem matricem pag 〈◊〉 at 〈◊〉 which he understandeth by this phrase taking the roote and mother of the Catholicke Church to bee the â—â—nitie of Faith and not as our Iesuâ—â— would collect that thereby is meant the Roman Congregation for wherefore then should he suspend his judgment till he heard the matter if his thoughts had concluded as this Iesuite would have it that Cornelius and his Adherents were the roote and mother of the Catholicke Church And that this is the meaning of S. Cyprian we may easily perceive in regard he taketh these wordes ad Catholicâ— Ecclesiae unitatem to the unity of the Catholicke Church and ad radicis matris sinum to the bosome of their roote and mother in his 42 Epistle to expresse the same thing Besides wee may further observe that the roote and mother of the Catholicke Church is not Cornelius and his Diocess in regard the Iesuite will not have the Pope and his Diocese to be the Catholicke Church a Reply pag. 49. which S. Cyprian Epist 43. makes to bee the Mother ad matrem suam id est Ecclesiam catholicam His third witnesse from Antiquity is Tertullian who even when hee was fallen otherwise â—nto heresi yet did he though he was an Hereticke acknowledge the Bishop of Rome to be Episcopus Episcoperum the Bishop of Bishops b Reply pag. 51. As if this were sufficient to make the Romane Church the head of all other Churches or the Pope the Father of all Bishops Well if it be not Rome hath lost one of her best Arguments for her triumphant Station over the Church of GOD. And who knoweth not that this title was given to all those that had Bishops under them as all Patriarches and Metropolitans had And what is more common then to give other Bishops the stile of Summus vel princeps Episcoporum Cheife or Prince of Bishops as Rabanus speakes of the Bishops of Antioch and Alexandria c Rabanus l. 1. de instit Cleric c. 5. Sicut Archiepiscopus Antiochenus Episcopus atque Alexandrinus Antistes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Graeco â—ocabulo dicitur quod sit summus vel Princeps Episcoporum tenet enim vicem Apostolicam praesidet Episcopis caeteris Yea so common was this appellation that in the third Carthaginian Councell this title was inhibited to all the Metropolitans d Concilium Carthag 3. can 26. Vt primâ— sedis Episcopus non appeiletur princeps Sacerdotum aut summus sacerdos aut aliquid hujusmodi sed tantum primae sedis Episcopus But least the Iesuite should say that the stile of Prince of Bishops is not so concludent for an universall government as to be called Bishop of Bishops we shall finde Sidonius calling Lupus Pater Patrum Episcopus Episcoporum Father of Fathers and Bishop of Bishops Sidonius l. 6. Epist 1. Benedictus Spiritus sanctus Pater Dei omnipotentis quod tu Pater Patrum Episcopus Episcoporum and Athanasius was called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Arch-Preist of Preists f 〈◊〉 in orat â—â— de laudibus He ronis which is the same in effect whereby we may see upon how slender a foundation the Castle of S. Angelo is raised Yet if Tertullian be but observed by an eye that will not be blinde it will appeare that he speaketh onely in scorne and ironically when he cals your Roman Bishop cheife preist and Bishop of bishops Onely this Roman Fisher will forsake nothing that commeth to his hooke though it be but the scorne of an Hereticke He ceaseth not but brings in old Irenaeus lib. 3. cap. 3. saying that with this Roman Church by reason of her more powerfull Principality or Supremacy it is necessary that all other Churches doe agree g Reply pag. 51. All this maketh little to give the Church of Rome the headship pretended For the question here is particular concerning the Canon of the Scriptures and the Church of Rome is commended for her truth as she then stood h Irenaeus l. â— c. 3. In qua semper ab his qui sunt undique consecratâ— est quae ab Apostolis traditio not for her infaâ—libilitie in ages after that she should remaine the same For were see Augustine forsakes the Roman Church in which some doubted of the Epistles to the Hebrewes and adhered unto the Greekes who received it into the Canoni Irenaeus also in another matter forall the powerfull principalitie that he gave unto the Roman Church reproved sharpely her Monarch and forsooke not in all probabilitie their Commuâ—ion whom hee had excommunicated k Eusebius hist Eccles l. 5. c. 23. Extant autem verba illorâ—â— qui Victorem acriter reprehenderunt equibus Irenae us Besides if all other Churches did agree with the Roman i Augustin l. â— de Peceat merit remissse 27. Ad Haebraeâ—â— quoque Epistola quan quam nonnullis incerta fit tamen magis me movet authoritas Ecclesiarum Orientalium quae hanc etiam in Canonicis habent propter potentiorem principalitatem by reason her more powerfull principalitie it were good our Iesuite would have interpreted what he had meant thereby for these are words that better fit an imperiall government then the rule of the Church And that people should come thither for this respect I thinke the Church of Rome hath little cause to triumph therein any more then other Patriarchall Seas because all men come up from all parts to the Metropoliticall
otherwise Nâ—◠〈◊〉 sensum habemus they could espye errour there as well as in any other lesse eminent Church But he tells us This agreement in Communion with the Roman Church was in those primitive times held for an infallible marke of true faith aâ— appedreth most plainely by that which S. Ambrose relateth of his brother Satyrus f Reply pag. 52 It appeareth plainely that the Iesuite shootes at rovers not at the marke otherwise he would not produce a matter of fact knit to time and occasion to prove a thing absolutely and without dependance Satyrus would not communicate in the dread mysteries of the Eucharist but by the hand of a Catholicke Bishop opposite to the Luciferians who were Schismatickes at that time and to that purpose calling a certaine Bishop so him 〈◊〉 supposing that no true freindship could bee without true faith hee therefrre first of all enquired of him whethâ—â— hee did accord with the Catholicke Bishops that iâ— with the Romane Church g Reply ibid. Now the Iesuite would hereupon conclude that agreement in communion with the Romane Church was in those times held for an infallible marke of true faith h Reply ibid. In Satyrus his time the Romam Church was a good marke because by true doctrine it gave good aime but was it the same when Liberius Honorius were Romane Bishops Satyrus made not Bishops Catholicke because Romane but in regard they were opposite to Schismatickes Neither did Ambrose interprete Catholicke Bishops by the Romaâ—â— Church but because they were truely Catholick at that 〈◊〉 which were of the Roman cleargy About those times then they did choose Bishops by their agreement with the present Orthodoxall Bishops as Nectarius of Constantinople Timothieof Alexandria c. not because those Sees made their Bishops infallible and exempt from errour but because these men at that time by generall testimonie suis Ecclesijs religiose praessent did religiously governe their Churches i 〈◊〉 hist l. 7. c. 9. Hos enim imperator quo que visos cotam alloâ—â—â—tus approbavit de quibus et integra constabat fama quod suis Ecclesâ—â— religiosè praeessent The same reason made Satyrus call some Bishops Catholick and from the same ground Ambrose expoundeth Satyrus his Catholicke Bishops by the Romane Church The Iesuite commeth now to his last proofe from restaring of Bishops put out of their Bishopricks to conclude his Papall Monarchie and bringeth us onely one example and that but an attempt onely viz â— of Athanasius Patriarch of Alexandria Paulus Arch-bishop of Constantinople Marcellus Bishop of Ancyra Asclepas Bishop of Gaza and Lucianus Bishop of Hadrianople who being all Patriarches and Prelates of the East Church and expelled from their places even by Councels of other Bishops came unto Rome complained unto Pope Iulius of their wrongs and were by him righted and restored As witnesse Sozomenus c k Reply pag â—â— The Bishop of Rome was a man of gâ—eat authority in regard of the Imperiall Citie whereof he was Bishop and much he might doe by perswasion advice and by the assistance of the Imperiall power yet all this will not conclude him the Monarch of the Catholicke Church And what did Iulius more then the Arch-Bishop of Canterbuâ—y ought to doe upon the like occasion Hee discussed the crimes of every one l Reply pag. â—â— And good reason for a good man ought to know the cause he would patronize much more a good Bishop Hee did receive them into his Communion finding that they all did agree to the Nicene Councell m Reply ibid. Could he have done otherwise without blame As one that had care of all by reason of the dignity of his See he did restore to every of them their owne Churches writing also to the Bishops of the East c. * Reply ibid. And what made him so confident of his power his Monarchie Surely no but because he was the Emperouâ—s Chaplaine and therefore might expect to bee graciously assisted by his Lord. And that this is not a conjecture you may conceive in regard the Bishops of the East made â— Reply pag. 53 light of his restitution returning him an answere full of scornes and threats o Sozomen Hist Eccles l 3. 2 7. Athanasi â—s autem Paulus ad suas sedes revertuntur literasque Iulit Episcopis Orientis mittunt Quibus illi graviter commoti conveniunt Antiochiae in unum epistolam verbis elegantibus ornatam disertè ut â—heto rum mos sert compositam ad Iulium scribunt eamque plenam ironiae minarum non expertem gravissimarum Neither was he ever able to bring to passe what he determined whilâ—st he used his owne power for they disdained that the greatnes of his Bishopprickâ— should make them his inferiors p Ibid-Indignati sunt se posteriores ideo ferre quòd magnitudine Ecclesiae superarentur Sozomen hist eccles l. 3. c. 9. At cum literis apud â—piscopos Orientis de rebus propter quas scripsisset nihil proficeret causam Aâ—hanasij Pauli ad Constantem retulit and therefore he sollicited his Lord by whose authoritie they were restored q Sozomen hist Eccles l. 3. c. 1â— Conâ—tans autem rebuâ— gestis in concilio Sardicensi cognitis scripsit ad fratrem Constantium literas uti Athanasio Paulo ecclesias suas redderet Vbi vâ—â—o intellexit fratrem diem de die ducere scripâ—iâ— denuo ut vel viros istos reciperet vel se ad bellum gerendum pararet Constantius igiâ—ur cùm de linere cum Episcopis Orientis communâ—casset stultum putavit obâ—eam causam bellum civile intestmum suscipere Quo quidem concilio inductus Athanasiuâ— ex Itaâ—â— acceâ—sit cap. 20. Imperator autem dimittit Athanasium in Aegyptum 〈◊〉 â—â—â—â—â— literas cùm ad Episcopos et Presbytetos cujusque civitatis tùm ad populum Ecclesiae Alexandrinae quibus et vitam ejus piè actam et probitaâ—em morum commendavi◠〈◊〉 cohortatus est uti ei utpote suo antistiti pâ—rentâ— precibuses oraâ—ionibus 〈◊〉 reilgioâ—◠〈◊〉 And now the Iesuite having finished his testimonies concludes for the Papall Crowne How farre now may wee thinke doth our Answerer swarve from the auncient Fathere Pastors and Saints of the Primitive Church whilest hee by a separation from that Church which they acknowledged to bee their head and themselves to be members thereof faileth to be a member of the true body of Christ or one of his true flock forasmuch as he with-draweth himselfe from the true confessed Pastor And what wonder then that hee should dissipate and destroy all true faith and doctrine c r Reply pag. 53. It is cleare that the most learned Answerer hath with the Church that he by Gods providence governeth not swarved from the auncient Fathers Pastors and Saints of the primitive Church much lesse made a separation from the auncient Church How the Church of Rome was
n Cap 21. hath published a Booke in French translated into English whereby hee hath prooved it to bee an vnjust proceeding to deny the change happened to the Church vnder pâ—â—tence that the authors time and place of it cannot be specified And also Doctor Fulke o In his answer to a counterfite Catholick ar 11. â— 24 hereto agreeth that when the Scripture telleth vs that the Mysterie of iniquitie preparing for the generall defection and revelation of Antichrist wrought even in Saint Paules time 2. Thess 2. it is folly to aske whether suddenly and in one yeare all Religion was corrupted and if Mr Malone will have more hee shall not want numbers of our owne to witnes our consent heerein May not this shamelesse Iesuite blush then to produce Fulke and Whitaker and the rest to have answered this question when they conclude it vaine and of no necessity and never dreamed of answering the same For all the Quotations of the Iesuite out of our Authors doe not expresse one word of answere to his question Fulke speaketh of the time that the Pope began to blind the world Napier of the beginning of the Popes Papisticall and Antichristian raigne Brokard of the Popes falling from Christ Leigh sheweth his opinion how long the Popes have beene Divells Winckelman relates the different opinions touching the beginning of the 42. monethâ— in the 11. of the Revelation Whitaker coniectures at the last true and godlie Bishop of the Roman Church and so in like manner the rest of the learned men mentioned by him but there is not one of them whose words he expressely layeth downe that answeres the question What Bishop of Rome did first alter that Religion which you commend in them of the first 400 yeares or In what Popes dayes was the true religion over-throwne in Rome To this question from his owne words wee may proove a consent that this observation of times seasons doth often fayle and that they are not so easie to be discerned as fooleâ— are borne in hand they are For heerein with the learned Answerer doth Powell and the learned Whitaker agree yea so consonant are they in their resolutions that the learned Answererin this Iesuites observation seemeth to be spit out of Whitaker his mouth and Mr Powell hee confesseth agreeth with them The difference is not in answering this question In what Popes dayes was the true religion over throwne but In what Popes dayes did the revelation of the Antichristian tyrannie beginne The Iesuite may know there is a distance betwixt the blading of Antichrist his tyrannie whereby it became visible and the power of it the blading was but a preparation for evill the power and authoritie it got afterwards was that which brought these frauds and corruptions in whereby it appeareth that there is great difference in these questions and that worthy Whitaker was no weather-cock as this Buzard tearmeth him Yet notwithstanding we doe not deny that as Hectick agues whose beginnings are obscure declare themselves to Physitians by divers symptomes of the bodies decay waste whereby one Physitian at one time by one signe another by an other in a different houre may judge of the disease though from divers symptomes yet all aright So have our Divines done some perceiving the symptomes of Apostacie in the Church at one time some at another have declared the appearing of this defection fore-told some from one Popes tyrannie some from another Some saw this Apostacie by symptomes of notorious pride as in Boniface the third Others by out-daring impieties when Dagon images and idols were put vp in the Church of God Others by open vilenes and prophâ—nesse visible to Parasites p Plat. in Iohan 13. Onuph annot in Plat Iohan. â— themselves when your monstra and pertenta opened heaven gates But what is this to the Iesuites demaund the question that he is to exempt from vanity concerneth the time of the alteration or overthrowe of the true or the so much commended Religion of the first 400. or 500. yeares The Apostacie or defection began indeed in the Apostles time and the seedes of Antichristianisme were layde for the sixe following ages q See the most reverend Lord Primate in his book de Christ Eccl. success statu pag. 16. 17 18. and yet no Papist to bee found no such visible alteration that thereby religion should bee overthrowne About the sixt Centurie some of these tares began to blade and yet all the good grayne not vtterly choaked whereby the Iesuites question appeareth more vaine For consider this Apostacie in its beginning or inchoation then it not apparantly altered much lesse overthrew the Catholick faith consider it in the encrease although it assaulted Religion yet neither wholly or in any fundamentall part did it alter the same consider it when it came to more perfect ripenes if there be any perfection in Apostacie as in the latter Centuries doe not thinke that we conclude the Church of God overthrowne because that Antichrist playeth the Tyrant therein So that Mr Covell sayth nothing of the alteration or overthrow of catholick faith when he speaketh of the beginning of Apostacie His last objection is taken from S. Augustine his rule that whatsoever the vniversall Church vseth if no time can be found when that vse began it must necessarily be derived from the very Apostles themselves r Reply pag 4. We need not to question this ground although S. Augustine gave this rule not to discerne points of faith by for he knew they were in the divine word plenarily contained but ceremonies and matters belonging to Ecclesiasticall practise For can we thinke the Fathers in S. Augustine his dayes were so ignorant of the catholicke rule of faith that they must leane vpon such a conjecture as this for points fundamentall of necessary beleife Shew me one Councell that decreed any point of faith by the bare strength of this rule if you can I can shew you a point of practise that had all that this rule could give it as Childrens necessary eating the Eucharist Å¿ Maldon in 6. Iohan. Aug. de peccator merit remiss lib. 1. c. 24. and yet is rejected both by the doctrine practise of your Traditiondefenders Yet may we iustly reproove this Iesuites assertion that dare affirme those points vniversally held and practised by the Church at the time as he cals it of Luthers revolt then which nothing is more grosse for if he meane the very waiters of the Roman Mistresse Sylvester Prierias his representative Church the Pope and his Cardinalls they will not be found to agree in the points mentioned but did differ amongst themselves And for the Catholicke Church let him proove it if hee bee able for bare words will not sway it Yet if this will serve their turne we shal be able to proove that in the Catholicke Church these points were never generally received take the Church for the vniversall body of the
5. Indeed your Religion consisteth of one point absolutely and simply Papall supremacy and we doubt not but if that were overthrowne all the Fabrick of your late Roman erection would quickly fall to the ground yet the Catholick faith is not such it consisteth not of one only article neither is it everthrowne by the intrusion of every errour for this being granted if we can shew you the time when Indulgences g Roâ—â—ens Art 18. In principio nascentis Ecclesiae nullus fuit Indulgentiarum vsus or any other errour crept into the Church of Rome you must then conclude catholick religion throughout the world was overthrowne a conclusion forced from shame And let all men judge whether this be not a desperate advantage given to free himselfe from the present danger Neither can the Iesuite from his confidence of Roman puritie glory as he heere hath done in regard he seemeth to have changed his opinion before hee printed halfe his booke curbing his lavishnes and making the Church of Rome free not from all errours as heere he doth but from spots of misbeliefe only h Sect 9. which I feare he will be forced to flye vnto hereafter when hee shall examine his owne iollity in this particular For who brought in that doctrine that the Pope is Lorâ— over all or did extend Indulgences to your Purgatory flames but Boniface the 8 if wee beleive your owne Agrippa i De vanitat scient cap 61. Hic est ille magnus Bonifacius quia tria magna grandia fecit primum falso oraculo deluso Clemente persua sit sibi cedere Apostolatum secundum condidit sextum Decretalium Papam asseruit omnium Dominum tertium instituit Iubilaeum indulgentiarum nundinas illasque primus in Purgatorium extendit Besides this in Leo k Ser. 4 de quadragesima Cùm ad tâ—gendum infidelita tem suam nostris audeant interesse mysteriis ita in Sacramentorum communione se temperant interdum ut tutius lateant ore indigno Christi corpus accipiunt sanguinem autem redemptionis nostrae haurire omnino declinant the great his time it was a note of a Maniche to communicate in one kinde yet now wee fee it is practifed by them which would perswade the world that they are Catholickes and although they may quarrell that the cause is different yet they may see the act of omission onely condemned by Leo the Pope Also in the Primitive times the Sacrament was received by the faithfull in both kindes in the Greeke Church till Cassanders l Consult Art 22. initio Satis compertum est vniversalem Christi Ecclesiam in hunc vsque diem Occidentalem vero seu Romanam mille amplius à Christo annis in solenni praesertim ordinaâ—ia huius Sacramenti dispensatione vtramque panis vini speciem omnibus Ecclesiae Christi membris exhibuisse time in the Westerne or Roman Church for above a 1000 yeares and yet in the Councell of Constance Henricus de Piro Iohannes de Scribanis m Concil Constantien Sess 13. apud Binium stiled it Mos perversus and the whole Councell decreed against it Concupiscence the Apostle calleth sinne but yet it is now no doctrine of the Roman Church for the contrary is decreed in the Trend Councell n Concil Trident. Sess 5. Hanc concupiseentiam quam aliquando Apostolus peâ—â—atum appeilat fancta synodus declarat Ecclesiam Catholicam nunquam intellexisse peccatum appellaâ—i quod verè propriè in renatis peccatum sit sed quâ—â— ex peccato est ad peccatum inclinat Si quis autem contrarium senserit anathema sit And many more may bee found out if I did desire to muster vp your iniquities in this kinde But it shall suffice for the present to referre the Iesuite and the Reader to the Catalogue of the right reverend the Lord Bishop of Derry o Lib. 3. de Antich cap 6. Catalogus veterum haeresum quas Ecclesia Romana renovâ—â—it c. which when Mr Malone or his whole Tribe hath fully answered I may conceive he had something besides his wilfulnes to breed his confidence in this opinion In his examination of the second exception against the Demaund hee hopeth to enervate it by his observations therevpon the first whereof is that therein the Answerer supposeth our catholicke Doctrine to bee that Apostasie which the Apostle speaketh of 1. Tim. 4. 1. 2. p Reply pag. 5. And here our Iesuite wisely collecteth for the learned Primate doth neither acknowledge your Roman Church either in Diocesse or ad extra for Catholick neither your additions mixtures for Catholick Doctrine any more then Saul * 1. Sam. 10. 11 for a Prophet because he got amongst the Prophets as your deceipts have crept into the Creed But yet that by your corrupt mixtures and declinings is truly accomplished that Prophecy 1 Tim 4. hee makes little doubt And what abuse is done heerein to your glorious Synagogue why should not false doctrines and novelties fall before the auncient and radicall truth as Dagon †and false gods before the Arke Nay what doth the learned * 1. Sam. 5. 3. 4. Primate suppose that was not deprecatively expressed in your Trent-Councell by a Bishop q Cornelius Bishop of â—iton â—0 of your owne for if to fall from Religion to Superstition from Faith to infidelitie from Christ to Antichrist bee not an Apostasie let the Iesuite declare what it is But the Iesuite would faine know in what sence wee take Apostasie whether as it designeth an vtter Revolt from the faith of Christ which the Iesuite is confident they cannot bee charged withall Because elsewhere the learned Primate confesseth that men dying as hee saith in our Religion doe dye vnder the mercy of God r Reply pag. 5. What doth the Iesuite meane by this Doth he thinke the most learned Answerer by their Religion did poynt out Ignatius his plat-forme or the Religion of their Holies Francis and Dominick Were any of their other Religions conjectured at which are imployed to frame Christ a Religion by policie that their Master might obtaine a Monarchie by fraude Surely whatsoever the Iesuite may conjecture these will finde but little shelter for their securitie in that sermon But if this Interpretation square not who doth hee then meane by men dying in our Religion if those that lived in the Roman Communion then his collection is vayne also For who can doubt that some may bee saved there without casheering of the Apostasie tâ—eâ—ce Many followed Absalom * 2 Sam. 15. 11. that were true of heart and yet the Iesuite will not deny a Rebellion against David and falling away of the People from him The high places were not taken away and yet Asa's †◠Chron 25. 17. heart and many others no doubt were vpright all their dayes Iudas * Acts 1. 18. may betray Christ and hang Demas †2
of Infants dying before Baptisme because they are sprung from faithfull parents and froÌ„ the virtue of the Eucharist received by the mother after conceptioÌ„ to sanctify the child in the womb shâ—lbe 〈◊〉 k Zag Zab. ibid. Thom à Iesu lib. 7. pa. 1. cap 8. cit per cundem 5. They baptize themselves every yeare vpon the Epiphany as the Muscovites in memorial of Christs Baptisme whom they thought to be baptized as that day l Zag Zab. ibid eit per cundem 6. The Egyptians have a custome to conferre holy Orders to Infants m Thomâ— a Iesu lib. 7. pa. 1. cap. 5. cit per cundem 7. They deny all efficacy to Baptisme vnlesse celebrated in the Church by the Preist notwithstanding any necessity whatsoever neither doe they baptizâ— till the fourtieth day though the child dye without Baptisme n Tho. à Iesu ibid. cit per cundem I could name the Iesuit many moâ—â— but if he can shew the person time place by whom when where these points received birth with their opposers by demonstrable authority not by naked grounds we will spare him the rest confesse he may with good reason aske the question he doth and require our answere to it But till then let him not expect that from an other which the whole Roman Inquisition cannot discover vnto vs in the like kinde Yet for the present the Iesuite hath performed his promise as he supposeth in some particulars pointed out by himself First concerning the defection of the Greeke Church which indeed comprehendeth all the rest by you named o Reply pag. 9. c. Here we have the Iesuite myred in his first entrance For what hath he tu doe with generals Saphista versatur in generalibuâ— he followeth not his answerer but forsakes him here Particulars are demaunded like a false Steward the Iesuite delivereth all in grosse fearing his prejudice if hee submit to a strict particular accompt All that he laboureth to prove here are two things First the beginning of the Greek Churches defection from the Roman which was not desired at his hands Secondly the beginning of severall errours which shal be observed in their place For the first the defection of Paulus Samosatanus Macedonius Nestoriuâ— c. was not from the Roman but the Greeke a principall member of the Catholick Church Secondly the Greek Church did not fall with theÌ„ but condemâ—ed theÌ„ neither doe they adhere to them or their doctrine at this day That there are in the East which are named from some of those condemned Hereticks yet follow not their doctrine p Onuphr in Iul 3. Uerum hie Nestoriani nomen potius Nestorij haeretici quam errores retinuisse mihi videntur c. there is no question But that the doctrine of those Hereticks is taught by the Greek Church is vtterly vntrue neither dare the Iesuite say it is althogh by his obscure generalities he wold insinuat that in what those differed froÌ„ the Roman church these close with theÌ„ And for the other several defectioÌ„s as he calleth theÌ„ thogh it were but ajust flight froÌ„ their tyranny he cannot tel how many they were but stiles them twelve or there abouts But to what purpose 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 these 〈◊〉 vnlesse he shew vs the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the 〈◊〉 by 〈◊〉 they were made And this will not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 â—â— shew vnto vs what errour every 〈…〉 in with â—â— for otherwise his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 have 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 then imployed to none â—ffect Whereas he maketh them oppressed by the Turke in regard of their 〈◊〉 from 〈◊〉 it 〈◊〉 Iesuites fancie I pray GOD 〈◊〉 theâ—â— other 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 separation they cast off 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 though noâ— all their slavery â—ut if it be 〈◊〉 â—◠〈◊〉 at the cause of their oppression which is not 〈◊〉 â—aith where 〈◊〉 notwithstanding their persequâ—â—ion they still 〈◊〉 but their persons many more probable grounds may be given of Gods putting them to this 〈◊〉 then this assigned by Iesuite vnlesse you have relation to politicke and worldly prudencyes of that Church and not to crymes that bring downe Gods judgments vpon them For we know some things 〈◊〉 not altogetheâ— to be approved of but idolatrous as Image-worship are practised amongst them They deny indeed that which is practised by you in regard of the manner even Statues of stone or Marble and yet imbrace with an idolatrous love paper and pâ—inted representations This their sinne is not the least causer of Gods iudgment vpon them as we may coniecture from the IX of the Râ—velation if Gods visiting them may bee imputed to their sinne and not to his secret will who tryeth his owne by affliction as the Church of the Iewes in Egypt and the Primitive in her sincereâ—â— perfections Thirdly â—s concerning the severall 〈◊〉 few in comparison wherein the Greek Church aâ— this day dissenteth from the Roman their beginning and contradiction iâ— noterious q Reply pag. â—â— Here the Iesuite by way of preface makes the Greeke Church at this day to vary from the 〈◊〉 in regard of vs for so I conceive he desires to be vnderstood â—ut in a few points which is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for they differ at thisday from them in most points that we 〈◊〉 them for So that I doubt not but they received scardall from your corruption which because yoâ—â— pride would not â—ure they left you 〈◊〉 â—â— your 〈◊〉 and adhered to th◠〈◊〉 doctrine which 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 every wheâ— received at all times 〈◊〉 in the Catholicke Church And although they 〈◊〉 the 〈◊〉 of 〈◊〉 yet some of your owne r See before thinke their errour therein to be onely in the 〈◊〉 of expressing 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and not in the substance of doctrine it selfe And 〈◊〉 whereas he saith that their begiâ—ning 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i◠〈◊〉 I will beleive him when he hath answered those points which I have lay 〈◊〉 before for what he hath done by his owne election and choyce will declare vnto vs what great performance we may expect â—â— his hands when an other may have the liberty to point out his taske And first he beginneth with their denyall of subjectionâ—â— the Roman Sea c. This is the first 〈◊〉 and agreat one and as he tells vs was begâ—â— by Iohn of Constantinople and he there â—pon severally contradected by Gregory the great and by Pelagius in his epistle c. Å¿ Reply pag. â—â— Here are two 〈◊〉 fashoodâ— by this Iesuite in this particular supposed and 〈◊〉 First that 〈◊〉 ages before 〈◊〉 of Constantinople his 〈◊〉 the Bishop of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in their sence was vniversally acknowledged Secondly that this controversie betwiâ—◠〈◊〉 Gregory was about the denyall of Papall 〈◊〉 â—oth which shal be 〈◊〉 to be notoriously vntrue For the first 〈◊〉 the Iesuite orderly proceeded he should have proved the Roman Bishop the Monarch of the Church by vniversall confent before hee should have questioned the Greeke Church for the
denyall thereof and that his Monarchy 〈◊〉 consist not in matter of outward glory and precedency but of spirituall regency and power for els how could they deny what was never established or consented vnto by the Catholicke Church or any famous or glorious member of the same And further in manifesting the falshood of his supposition you may conceive it is impossible to 〈◊〉 the ancient testimonies i◠〈◊〉 that the fathers denyed this spirituall and divine regency of the Roman Bishops because they never assumed or exercised it yet all those steps whereby they laboured to ascend vnto this spirituall height were ever resisted in all times and ages For in the first place their attempt of divine derivation of this power is cast off by their owne Cusaâ—us t Cusanus de Concord cath lib 2. cap. 13. is so far from giving the Bishop of Rome this spirituall eminency by divine Canon that he denieth it to have beene granted vnto him by any Canon of the Church and proveth it to have beene onely brought in by coÌ„mon vse custome And surely what priviledges the Bishops of Rome enioyed above their brethren which were far from that oecumenicall spirituall regency u Turrecrem d. 2â— Constantino Consistebat hic honor in hoc videlicet quod ad locum in fedendo primo post Rom â—oat in responsionibus haberet secundam vocem in subscriptionibus or papall omnipotency the Councell of Chalcedon x Chalced concil act 16. Etâ—â—im 〈◊〉 â—â—nioris Romae propter imperium civitatis illius patres consequenter privilegia teddiderum atributed to the guift of their fathers which fathers we may coniecture Pius y Aeneas Sylv. epist 301. the second thought to be the fathers assembled in the Nicene Councell as Marsilius z Defens pa. 2. cap. 1â— Patavinus hath plainely declared Now all practises of insurrection to gaine this vniversall regency either before or after they received this limited honour of sitting and subscribing first were ever resisted by the Catholicke Bishops as by this one instance wil be sufficiently cleared The Bishops of Rome did many timesstrive that the finale judicium next to the determination of a â—â—â—â—cell for a Papa a Concil Constan sess 4. â— Consil Basil sess 2. Idem assent Cardinal Cameracensis Ioannes Gerson Iacobus Almainus Nicolaus Cusanus â—anoriâ—itan Cardinal 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 alii teste Bellarmin d concil 〈◊〉 lib. cap. 14. supra was never dreamed of in primitive times should depend vpon theÌ„ in matters not of faith which they never pretended authority to declare but of fact this Cyprian b Lib. 1. epist 3. Nam cùm statutuÌ„ sit omnibus nobis aequum sit pariter justum vt vniuscujusque causa illic audiatur vbi est crimen admissum singuliâ— pastoribus â—â—â—tio gregis sit adscripta quam regat vnusquisque guberâ—eâ— rationem sui actus Domino redditurus oporter vtique cos quibus prae suâ—â—s nâ—â— circumcurfare nec Episcoporum concordiam cohaereâ—â—â—â— suâ subdolâ fallaci temeritate collidere sed agere illic causam suam vbi accusatores habere testes sui criminis possuÌ„â— nisi si paucis desperatis perditis minor videtur esse auctoritas Episcoporum in Africa constiâ—utorum qui iam de illis judicaverunt et eorum câ—â—scientiam multiâ— delictorum laqueis vinctam judicij sui nuper gravitate damnârunt I am causâ— coâ—â—â—â— cognita est iam de eis dicta sententia est nec censurâ— congruit sacerdoâ—um mobilis atque in constantis animi levitate reprehendi cum Dominus doceat et dicat sit sermo vester est est non non resisteth as savouring of usurpation shewing vpon what poore grounds this practise dependeth even vpon the judgment of a few desperat graceless people who were of opinion that Bishops were vnequall in their authority wherevpon the Bishops laboured to restraine these busie-bodies by lawfull remedy in Councels afterwards as may be collected from the sixt Councell of Carthage c Epistol concil Aphricani ad Caelest vrbis Romae Episcopum the 8th generall Councell held at Constantinople d can 26. Secondly the Iesuite doth falsly point out the Patriarch to deny Papall height or their spirituall monarchy for the Popes at that time pretended nothing of that nature and therfore he could not dâ—ny that which was never affirmed It is true that Iohn could not be content to enjoy the priviledges of his predecessors given him by the Councels of Constantinople and Chalcedon but that he would be more the onely Bishop and vniversall Patriarch yet that he denyed the honour of the Bishop of Rome no more then the other Patâ—iarchs Gregory e Epistol 36. will cleare in regard he lamenteth their losse as much as his owne Neither is there any thing urged by this Iesuite that proveth the point of denyall of this Top-gallant of Papall vsurpation and therefore we may well reject it as to no purpose For why should Gregory by this thinke the Patriarchall Sees in their Priviledges violated if that Papal pride had only bin contradicted by Iohn of Constantinople Secondly he assumeth that their denâ—al of prayer for the dead was begun by Acrius contradicted by Augustine Epiphan 1. This is boldnes and impudency in the Iesuite to charge the Greek Church to follow that Hereticke whom they have do in their practise vtterly abdicate condemne 2. He speaketh not any thing to the purpose for Acrius did never crosse prayer for the dead in the sence that the Greeke Church doth at this time for they deny prayers for soules in Purgatory f Cocciâ—◠〈◊〉 2. lib. 7 art 5. pag. 846. Grâ—ci ac Musâ—â—vitae etsi funeâ—re sacrum 〈…〉 tamen Purgatorium Purgâ—â—oâ—ium 〈◊〉 art 1â— coâ— Lutheâ— Gâ—â—â—is ad â—unc usque diem non est creditum Purgatorium esse which the ancient Churchâ— never dreamed of nor Aerius ever opposed but that Hereticke denyed the Commemoration and prayer for the Saints departed vsed by the ancient Church which had no relation to Purgatory flames or soules pretended to be punished there as will be seen in handling of the point and for this and not the other was he condemned of hereticall rashnes So that the Iesuite is mistaken framing an answere to that which was not required at his hands and therefore we desire him to recâ—llect his thoughts tell vs what person among the Greekes did first deny prayer for soules out of Purgatory or els he saith nothing to the demaund In the third place he tells vs their defence of marriage of Preists was contradicted against Theodorus by Chrysostome g Roâ—â—enâ— ibid Legat qui velit Graecorum veterum commentarios nullum quantum opinâ—â— aut quam â—arissi mum de Purgatoriâ— seâ—â—oâ—em inveniet sed neque Laâ—iâ—i simâ—l omnes ac sensim hujus â—â—i veritatem conceperunt and against certaine other by Epiphanius hâ—r
of the Greekes hee mixeth Papists and Protestants and yet both put together they are not able to shew the distinct time without a circum circa and turne about for so hee expresseth it The denyall of vnleavened bread in celebration of the Sacrament was begunne about anno Domini 1053. as appeareth by Leo the 9. in his Epistle to Michael Bishop of Constantinople y Reply pag. 10 The Iesuite hath produced nothing but vanity for the finding the beginning of this notorious heresie For Leo the 9. saith no such thing viz that Michael was the first that broached this errour neither doth he cite the first author of it For it cannot follow because Michael did oppose the Azymes used in the Latin Church about the yeare 1053. therefore about that age it did beginne For that Patriarch charged the Church of Rome with other practises quod Sabbat a quadrageâ—â—mâ— observâ—â—â—◠〈◊〉 quod suffocata comederunt gentiliter quod 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 tantùm in Paschate nunquam vero in quadragesimali tempore decantarent Brovius in anno 1653. All which I thinke you will not say were first distasted by Michael at that time The Iesuitè runneth from his path and vainely without any relation to the thing in controversie telleth vs that the Greeke Church doth vehemently professe to detest the Protestants Religion a Reply pag 10 c. Wherein we have no reason to beleive him in regard he bringeth not any particular out of the Authors cited by himselfe to convince the same which I make no question but hee would have done if they had fairely offered it vnto his hands Secondly there would not be that freindly entercourse betwixt some of the Patriarchs of the Greeke Church and our Bishops as there is neither would they have sent their Preists to our Vniversities for instruction omitting yours which are nearer to them neither would the Grecians that are amongst vs frequent our Chappels Churches when they avoyd yours if they conceived them equally polluted or held vs in equall detestation b Concil Lateran 4. sub Inno 3. apud Bin. c. 4. In tantum Graeci coeperunt abominari Latinos quod inter alia quae in derogationem 〈◊〉 in 〈◊〉 committeâ—â—â—â— si quando sacerdotes Latini super corum celebrâssent altarianon prius ipsi sacrificare vo lebant in illis quam ea tanquam per hoc inquinata lavissent Baptiâ—atos etiam à Latinis ipsi Graeci rebaptizare ausu remerario praesumebant adhuc sicut accepimus quidam agere hoc non verentum with â—â—â—â—selves Neither doe they differ from vs in the fundamentall points of Doctrine we giving them as we ought a charitable interpretation although in some of the points in the Iesuites Catalogue taken from the Divines of Wittemberge they may be censured somewhat to savour of superstition and errour And that it may appeare whether the Greeke Church doth most favour Papists or Protestants I will insert here a Confession of faith of Cyrill Patriarch of Constantinople translated into English and published at London 1629. An other translation whereof I have seene vnder which is written This Copy hath beene translated out of the originall made * * done by the hands of the most reverend Patriarch Cyrill which I know well The writing it selfe being in my hands and having examined it my owne selfe I doe testifie that it doth agree with it word for word Corneille Hague Embassadour of the vnited Provinces of the Low-Countreyes at the gate of the Grand Seignour IN THE NAME OF THE FATHER AND OF THE SONNE AND OF THE HOLY GHOST VEE beleive one God Almightie and infinite three in Persons the Father Sonne and Holy Ghost the Father vnbegotten the Sonne begotten of the Father before the World consubstantial with the Father the Holy Ghost proceeding from the Father by the Sonne having the same ofsence with the Father and the Sonne wee call these three Persons in one essence the Holy Trinity ever to bee blessed glorified and to bee worshipped of every creature Wee beleive the Holy Scripture to bee given by God to have no other Authour but the Holy Ghost which wee ought vndoubtedly to beleive for it is written Wee have a mere sure word of Prophecy to the which â—ee doe well to take â—eede as to a light shining in a darke place Besides we beleive the authority thereof to be aboue the authority of the Church It is a farre different thing for the Holy Ghost to speake and the tongue of man for the tongue of man may through ignorance erre deceiue and bee deceiued but the Word of GOD neither deceiueth nor is deceiued nor can erre but is alwayes infallible and sure Wee beleiue that the best and greatest GOD hath predestinated his Elect vnto glorie before the beginning of the World without any respect vnto their workes and that there was no other impulsiue cause to this election but onely the good will and mercy of God In like manner before the world was made hee hath rejected whom hee would of which act of reprobation if you consider the absolute dealing of God his will is the cause but if you looke vpon Gods orderly proceeding his justice is the cause for God is mercifull and Iust Wee beleive that one GOD in Trinity the Father Sonne and Holy Ghost to bee the Creator of all things visible and invisible Inuisible things wee call the Angels visible things the Heauens and all things vnder them And because the Creator is good by nature hee hath created all things good and cannot doe any evill and if there bee any euill it proceedes from the Diuell and man for it ought to bee a certaine rule to vs that GOD is not the Author of evill neither can sinne by any just reason bee imputed to him Wee beleiue that all things are governed by GODS Prouidence which wee ought rather to adore then search into sith it is beyond our capacity neither can wee truely vnderstand the reason of it from the things themselves in which matter wee suppose it better to embrace silence in humilitie then to speake many things which doe not edifie Wee beleive that the first man created by God fell in Paradise because neglecting the Commaundement of God hee yeelded to the deceitfull counsell of the Serpent from thence sprung vp originall sinne to his posterity so that no man is borne according to the flesh who doeth not beare this burthen and feele the fruits of it in his life Wee beleive that IESVS CHRIST our Lord hath made himselfe of no accompt that is hath assumed mans nature into his owne Subsistence that he was conceived by the Holy Ghost that hee was made Man in the Wombe of Mary alwayes a Virgin was borne and suffered death was buryed and glorified by his resurrection that hee brought salvation and glory to all beleivers whom wee looke for to come to judge both quicke and dead Wee beleive that our Lord IESVS CHRIST sitteth
acknowledging it the more authenticke for that imaginary decree mentioned by the Iesuit Besides there is no questioÌ„ but the denyal of those books of the new testameÌ„t were blameworthy else Epiphanius g Har. 51. 75. would not have charged the Alogi with Heresie for denying the Revelation of St Iohn The most learned Answerer goeth further to expresse the blindnes of this Rule to finde out Heresie by Gregorius de Valentia one of your principall Champions doth confesse that the vse of receiving the Sacrament in one kind began not by the Decree of any Bishop but the very vse of the Churches and the consent of the faithfull To which the Iesuite maketh Reply And is not that vse of the Churches and Consent of the faithfull a sufficient warrant I pray you to cleere it from the odious tearme of Sacriledge wherewith you vnadvisedly doe stile it h Reply pag. 12 And here if that which the Iesuite doth insinuate were granted for truth it were no sufficient warrant against CHRISTS institution but that justly it might bee styled Sacriledge even as the Answerer hath done What brought in the high places in Israel doe you suppose they were erected by any decree of Councell or otherwise if not so then by the Consent and practise of the Israelites and yet I doubt not but you will style that sinne Sacriledge or as bad vnlesse you thinke it piety to keepe backe from the temple what GOD had appointed for his service there Compare the omission of a typicall sacrifice with the removing of one of the Sacramentall expressions of Christ his death and passion instituted by himselfe and then judge which deserveth the baser Epithite But if you further question with Valentia when first did that Custome get footing in some Churches he returneth you for Answere saith the most reverend Primate Minimè constat it is more then he can tell 1. And yet saith our Iesuite hee largely and learnedly there proveth even by the expresse word of God that it was vsed in the Apostles times c. i Reply pag. 12 Did he attempt it his learning was exercised without his conscience Did he prove it the Iesuite saith so but I will thinke him worthy to be Generall of his Order if hee can doe either the Pope or the Diuell so much service as to perswade the world to beleive the same 2. Vpon which vse the ensuing Customer which got footing in some particular Churches were grounded k Reply pag. 12 This is as true as their new Creed for who will say that Valentia knew the ground vpon which this Custome was received in some particular Churches that hath his Minimè constat his know not whâ—â— for the Person that brought it in 3. The Councell of Constâ—â—ce from this chaine viz. Customes so grounded and other good reasons made it a laâ— c. l ibid True it is that your 〈◊〉 Orbis or Catholicke world never received it before and he that readeth their law must see that wilfulnes and not reason perswaded it For first they have a non obstâ—â—â—e for Christs institution Secondly they reject the Primitive practise m Concil Constan sess 13. apud Bin Licet Christus post coenam instituerit suis discipulis administraverit sub vtrâque specie panis vini hoc venerabile sacramentum tamen hoc non obstante c. licet in primitiva Ecclesia hujusmodi sacramentum reciperetur a fidelibus sub vtrâque specie c. Thirdly they are forced to invent or confirme the poore deceitfull Cousenage of Concomitancy And all to make good this faith never heard of before Further what needed that to be made a law at Constance which Gods expresse word hath declared to be the vse and practise of the Apostles times how could that come into the Church by degrees which was brought in first by them that converted the whole Catholicke Church How ordained in the first Councell of Ephesus about a thousand yeares before the said Synode of Basil c. if but made â— law from Customes so grounded onely at Constance And now let Mr Malone consider how far he slideth â—rom that he ought to aime at the wisdome of his interâ—gation and let him also apprehend how he is forced by â—ecessity to seeke protection from the Apostles omitting â—mpora intermedia which they scorne in vs. And I could â—kewise wish him not to be vnmindefull how this Councell doth 〈◊〉 Antiqâ—â—ty which he so much desires to magnify and defend But if none of these considerations may worke any mutation in him let him vse his Vrbanus Regius †Cited by the Iesuite ibid. who for my part I know not neither will believe if hee were ever so prime a Doctour that should fasten so false a calumny on the Ephesiâ—â— Councell But grant the Iesuit all that he desires which is to make his Doctrine of receiving in one kinde as auncient as the Councell of Constance for opposition of their Decree wee are able to produce the Bohemianâ— not long after Gregorius de Valentia saith the most reverend Primate n In the answere to the Iesuites challenge pag. 3. 4. confesseth that it is more thâ—n he can tell when the Custome of receiving the Sacrament in one kinde began in some Churches The like doth Fisher and Caiâ—tan giue vs to vnderstand of Indulgences that no certainty â—â—â— be had what their originall was or by whom they were first brought in Fisher also further addeth concerning Purgatory that in the auncient Fathers there is either â—none at all or very rare mention of it that by the Grecians it is not beleived even to this day that the Latines also not all at once but by little and little received it and that Purgatory being so lately knowne it is not to be marvailed that in the first times of the Church there was no vse of Indulgences seeing these had their beginning after that men for a while had beene affrighted with the torments of Purgatory Out of which confession of the adverse part you may observe 1 What little reason these men have to require vs to set downe the precise time wherein all their prophane novelties were first brought in seeing that this is more then they themselves are able to doe 2. That some of them may come in podetentim as Fisher acknowledgeth Purgatory did by little and little and by very slowe steppes which are not so easie to be discerned as fooles bee borne in hand they are 3. That it is a fond imagination to suppose that all such changes must be made by some Bâ—â—â—â—or any one certaine author whereas it is confessed thâ— some may come in by the tacite coÌ„sent of many grow after into a generall custome the beginning whereof is past mans memory Here the Iesuite observes first want of Truth when he saith that we required him to set downe the precise time wherein all our profâ—â—â— novelties were brought in c o Reply
pag. 1â— This Iesuite wanteth honesty otherwise he would not observe with falshood and jealousie that for which there is no ground in the most reverend Primates words For first he speaketh not of the Iesuit alone but of all his Tribe and do you thinke it is so hard a thing to find some of you asking What yeare the Religion of the Papists came in prevailed Whether all nations suddenly and in one yeare were moved to the doctrine of the Papistes Whether in a moment the masse was said in stead of other Apostolicke communion p See Doctor Fulks answere of a true Christian to a Counterfeite catholicke Is it not your owne Demaund In what Popes dayes was true Religion overthrowne in Rome and when you come to explaine your selfe in your Reply is it not the certaine time which you demaund of us page 1. and the precise time page 14. Secondly saith the Iesuite I observe false logick to wit Because Fisher Caietan or Valentia cannot tell therefore none else can tell q Reply pag. 13 This is none of the most learned Primates inference but the Iesuites Yet I dare say that it is better logicke then the Iesuite hath usually replyed withall For may not one argue from a probable ground but it must destroy the whole Systeme of Logick drive Aristotles Topicks out of his Organon Fisher Caietan Valentia not Punies though Mr. Malone seeme to sleight them but great Rabbins of Popish Divinity nay I thinke I may say the greatest without deserving censure cannot tell therefore none can tell is a probable argument and not false Logicke as this sixt Predicable would have it For if the best learned caÌ„not find out the time when these Customes c. were first brought in it is a vehemeÌ„t if not a violent presuÌ„ption that poore Punies cannot finde that out If a Sheriffe that hath posse CoÌ„mitatus returne non est inventus vpoÌ„ a persoÌ„ a Catchpole will scarse find out the fugitive And I thinke it is good logick for I am sure it is good reasoÌ„ that if Fisher Caietan Valentia cannot tell this Iesuite as he hath done may well hold his peace Yet here is more logick theÌ„ the Iesuite 〈◊〉 see or at least theÌ„ he hath observed for Valentia saith minimè coÌ„stat it doth not appeare wheÌ„ that Custome of receiving the sacrameÌ„t in one kind did first get footing in some Churche Fisher Câ—ietan say that no certainty can be had by whoÌ„ Indulgences were first brought in or what was their original r See them veged by the most reverend the Lord Primate in his answer to the Iesuit's challenge pag. 3 therefore it will follow necessarily that all the wise men in the Roman Church are not able to set downe the precise or certaine time wherein these Novelties did first arise vnlesse the Iesuite will despise the iudgments of their learned Cardinall their highly esteemed Bishop and his owne Valentia Againe Because Valentia cannot tell when the Custome of receiving the Sacrament in one kind began in some particular Churches therefore we know not when it was first vsed in the Church at all whereas it is shewen to have beene first brought in by Christ his Apostles Å¿ Reply pag. 13 Here is impudeÌ„cy would make an Ethiop blush for what can be more fowle theÌ„ to fasteÌ„ those things vpoÌ„ this most reverend Lord which he never intended neither can bee collected froÌ„ his wordes But the Iesuite frames argumeÌ„ts that he may with more facility answer theÌ„ the most reverend Primates are not so easily digested That which hee collecteth froÌ„ Valentia is that the vse of receiving the sacrament in one kinde began first in some Churches grew to be a generall custome in the latine Church not much before the Councell of Constance in which at last to wit 200 yeares ago this custome was made a law SecoÌ„dly that it doth not appeare when first that Custome did get footing c And out of this confession c. he observeth What little reason these men have to require us to set downe the precise time wherein all their prophane novelties were first brought in seeing this is more then they themselues are able to doe * See the most reverend the Lord Primate in his answere to the Iesuites challenge pag â— Which observatioÌ„ or inference the Iesuit durst not touch as being too well guarded by the premisses if Valentia may be beleived for him to avoyd For suppose one should say speake as true as Valentia that the plague or a leprosie as heresy is did begin first in some Provinces was afterwards scattered throughout the Roman Empire and should further adde that it doth not appeare wheÌ„ first that infectioÌ„ did get footing in some Provinces Doth it not necessarily follow that all men must be ignorant when the ContagioÌ„ or Leprosie first infected the Empyre So that if this Iesuite had framed his argumeÌ„t truly according to this most reverend Lords collection it would have made him gape for an answere Valentia that speaketh truth for wee must not thinke that a Iesuit can lye telleth vs that the receiving of the SacrameÌ„t in one kind did first begin in some churches at a time that doth not appeare afterwards got by custome into the Latine being made a law by a decree at Constance therfore it is more theÌ„ your selves can do to tell wheÌ„ this custome got footing in the Church at all And further if Valentia did coÌ„tradict himselfe saying at one time that this custome was brought in by Christ and his Apostles at another that it began first in particular churches so spread at a time that doth not appeare let the Iesuite bedaube him with an excuse or condemne the waverer And againe Because Fisher Caietan grant that no certainty can be had by whom Indulgences were first brought in therefore they must be profane novelties wheÌ„ as both Fisher Caietan ground theÌ„ vpon the word of God condemning him of another untruth when he affirmeth that they give us to understand how no certainty can be had what their originall was u Reply pag. 13 Here the Iesuite is driveÌ„ to the like inventioÌ„ for the learned Answerer maketh no such infereÌ„ce His intentioÌ„ there being onely by Popish witnesses to prove that you know not the originall of some points of your faith to discover thereby your vanity in requiring of vs the precise time of their birthes Profane novelties he stileth not these alone but all your other after-byrthes also yet proveth theÌ„ prophane and new in his most learned answere following And although the most reverend Primate intended in this place no such thing yet if a Popish Martyr and Cardinall beare not false witnesse they wil be little better then prophane and novelties also by their testimonies For if Indulgences be such a point of faith that no certainty can be had what their originall was or by whom they
primitive times unlesse hee can make it as generally to be vnderstood in France and Spaine at this day as it was sometime in Spaine before the Latine ceased to bee the vulgar language in that Countrie m Bellarm. de vâ—â—bo Dei lib 2. cap. 15. A multis jam seculis desâ—â—t in Hispaniâlingua latina esse vâ—â—garis But our Iesuite confident in his variety resolveth not to trouble the most learned Answerer with any more demands untill such time as he shall have thought upon some better Answerer to my challenge for as we have seene saith he hitherto he hath well plaied the answerlesse Answerer indeed concluding at last out of Arnobius thus If I be not able to declare unto you by what Bishop of Rome and in what Popes dayes the simplicity of the auncient faith was first Corrupted it will not presently follow that what was done must needs be undone n Reply pag. 18 and 19. Can there be a better Answere then what hath been given him For the Demaund is not onely prooved vaine by the most learned Answerer but he hath moreover answered the foole in his folly and satisfied the vaine Demaundant not confessing his disability therein as the Iesuite would perswade but pointing out the originall of those bastard birthes which he doth struggle to legittimize Yet the Iesuite being hard pressed with Arnobius who directly affirmeth that the truth of a matter of fact doth not depend vpon any mans knowledge or detection replyeth Indeed I grant that if wee had agreed that it was done wee ought not to pose you about the time when it was done but wee denying that it is done and having already proved that vnlesse it be shewen when it was done it must needs follow that it was never done without doubt when you confesse that you are not able to shewe when it was done you declare plainly that it is not â—â— yet done Reply pag. 19 But is here any syllable that answereth Arnobius is not the answere answerlesse indeed For first Arnobius is produced to prove that a thing may be don though it cannot be shewen how it was done and the Iesuite for answere thereof telleth us that he hath proved the contrary but we are not tyed to beleive him vntill he pointeth out the time when and the place where it was done this being necessary by his own rule Besides the Iesuite doth not consider how hee shakes the foundation of their Roman faith Peters seat and Peters successor by this his assertion For the first Have the Protestants agreed that Peter placed his seat at Rome The Iesuit knoweth they altogether oppose the same yet if we argue froÌ„ the vncertainty of time when Peter did that greaâ— worke that it was never done Bellarmine answeres us that though their Divines disagree when it was done yet it doth not at all weaken the matter of fact but that it was done p De Rom. Pont. lib. 2. cap. â— Respondeo discordiam de tempore si qua esset quo Petrus Romam venit non infirmare sententiam nostram quòd Petrus Romam venerit Nam saepissimè accidit ut constet de re non constet de modo vel alia circumstantia Further it is the great foundation of your Roman faith that S. Peter left the Bishops of Rome his successors which we beleive was not done shall this article together with the RomaÌ„ church fall to the ground unlesse you can certainely lay us downe his immediate successor to whom he delivered this Commission Bellarmin is a greater friend to the Papacy then so Etiamsi plane ignoraremus quis Petro proximè successerit non tamen proptereà in dubium revocari debere an aliquiâ— successerit q Bellarm. de Râ—m Pont. lib. 2. cap. 5. Although we be ignorant saith hee of the person that immediatly succeded Peter yet doth it not breed any scruple that he had no successor at all Now compare these harpers together and you shall perceive that either our Iesuite wanteth skill or else his instrument is out of tune for otherwise he would not jangle thus against their Master-Musitian that unlesse we can shew him the time when a thing is done it must needs follow that it was never done Whereby also it appeareth how farre that parable of the good and bad seede saith the Iesuite by you alledged is from furthering of your cause r Reply pag. 19. Here is a discourse laced with wise observations First because the demaunders acknowledged the bad seede Å¿ Ibid. But how knew they that seede to be bad which they never saw was it not by the blade as evill trees by their fruite or was it by comparing it with the blade of the good seed as we examine heresies by Apostolicke doctrine Secondly saith the Iesuite the Master â—old them the party by whom it was sâ—wen t 〈◊〉 Yet the Servants told the Master that they were tares before the Master told them who was the seedesman and why in like manner may not we discover heresies before the hereticks that brought them in Thirdly by the text saith he wee 〈◊〉 when it was sowen to wit when men were asleepe u 〈◊〉 But will such a time satisfie the Iesuite if it be layed downe by us will this answere the Iesuites demands What Bishop of Rome did first alter that Religion which you commend in them of the first 400. yeares In what Pope his dayes was the true Religion overthrowne in Rome x See the Iesuites preface to the Reader if it do not he abuseth the parable if it doe let him receive his answere in the second page of the Answere to his Challenge where this most reverend Lord telleth him that they who kept continuall watch and ward against heresies which openly oppose the foundations of our faith might sleepe while the seeds of the Roman Apostasie were a sowing And now let the Reader consider how slightly and shiftingly the Iesuite hath cast off this parable of the seed Well then our Answerer telleth us saith the Iesuite that in the tenth age men not onely slumbred but snorted also by the testimonies of our owne Authors Genebrard Baronius and Bellarmine and what then must this sayth hee inforce mee to yeeld that the Divell brought in no tares all that while but let slip the oportunity of so darke a night and slept himselfe for company No Sr the case is cleare hee did not sleepe but bestirred himselfe most busily in soweing then his tares abundantly Then brought hee in all those vices which at that time raigned both in Princes and Prelates and made that age so unhappy yet Gods divine providence saith Bellarmine in the very place alledged by you did so worke that no new heresies did then arise y Reply pag. 19. Here we have many things seemingly confessed by this Iesuite First that the visibility of the Roman Church hath passed through an obscure age Secondly that the light of
the Roman Church could not free that age from darkenes Thirdly that the Spirit which assisted Popes Princes in those times was the Spirit that worketh in the Children of disobedience * Eph. â— â— Fourthly that Heresies might have come into the Church of Rome for any care the Pope had to keepe them out if GODS divine providence had not prevented them Fiftly that the Divell aboundantly sowed his tares of vices in Princes Prelates yet Gods divine providence did so worke that no new Heresies did then arise Is not heere a brave defence to make the Answerer his argument to languish and sleepe for ever Surely the Iesuite was betwixt sleeping and waking that he said he knew not what But did the Divell thinke no ground fit for his tares but Princes and Prelates Surely we are able to demonstrate that this bad blinde sleepie age did give seed-time for innumerable corruptions in others also yea so flourishing were the blossomes and prodigious the fruite which sprung from that seed husbanded by the Divell that it infected the whole Roman Church in such a manner that Gerebertus in his Apologie for the Councell of Rhemes put his petition up to Christ in Heaven as having no hope for good in the Roman Church upon earth it being so far infected that loosing the nature of a mother shee cursed the good blessed the evill communicated with those whom shee ought not to salute bound them with excommunication whom Christ had freed being accepted of him and zealous of his lawe z Gereber Apolog pro Rhemens Concil post acta Concil Rhem. Sed una salus hominis ô Christe â—â—â—eâ— Ipsa Roma omnium Ecclesiarum hactenus habita mater bonis maledicere malis benedicere fer tur quibus nec Ave dicendum est comâ—â—â—icare tuamque legem zelantes damnare abutens ligandi solvendi potestate à te acceptâ And so corrupt was that age that all vertue was consumed both in head and members a Io. Stella in vitâ Benedicti â— Papae 122. Acciderat illi aetati quòd omnis virtus tam in capite quam in membris ex hominum ignaviâ consumpta suerit nay so farre was Religion out of date that Preists and Bishops durst not speake of Iustice or righteousnes in regard they neither loved nor practised it b Aâ—lfric serm ad Sacerdotes MS. in Biblioth Colleg. Benedict Cantabrig His diebus tanta negligentia est in Sacerdotibus Episcopis qui deberent esse â—oâ—umnae Ecclesiae ut 〈◊〉 non audent de justitia loqui qui justitiam nec faciunt nec diligunt But the Iesuite thinketh all is well if Princes and Prelates were defiled together Yet Wernerus their owne Carthusian may assure us that our Iesuite putteth Princes causelesly into a lewd company when as hee coupleth them with Popes for hee telleth us it was most apparant that Holines had left the Pope and fled to the Emperours c Werner Fascic tempâ—tat 6. circ an 944. Sanctitatem Papam dimisisse ad Imperatoreâ— accessisse hoc tempore clarâ— apparet which is cleare on the one side also by the testimony of their owne Baronius who saith that most sordide whooâ—es governed at Rome their lustfull mates ascending the Chayre d Baron tom 10. Annal. an 912. §. 8. Quae tunc facies sanctae Ecclesiae Romanae quà m foedissisima cùm Romae dominarentur potentiffimae ae què ac fordidissimae meretrices quarum arbitrio mutarenâ—â—r sedes darenâ—ur Episâ—opi quod auditu horrendum infandum est intruderentur in Sedem Petri earum amaâ—â—pâ—eudâ— pontifices Here first this Iesuite hath abused Princes as their usuall practise is in joyning them with such filthy and foul-lived wretches as their Popes are confessed and acknowledged to be when Princes have reprehended and loathed them labouring to bring them to reformation as Otto and the Roman Synode did Iohn the 12. or 13. for you agree not whether he is calling him to purge himselfe of most fearfull offences as Homicide Perjury Sacriledge Incest drinking the Divels health Dicing invocating Iupiter Venus and other Divels e â—uitprand Tiâ—inens Hister l. 6. c. 9. â— 10. Summo Pontifici et universali Papae Domino Iohanni Otto divinae respectu clementiae Imperator Augustus cum Archiepiscopis Liguriae Tusciae Saxoniae Franciae in Domino salutem Romam ob servitium Dei venientes dum filios vestros Romanos scilicet Episcopos Cardinales Presbyteros Diaconos et universam plebem de vestra absentia percontaremur et quid caussae esset quòd nos Ecclesiae vestrae vestrique defensores videre noluissetis talia de vobis tamque obâ—â—oena protulerunt ut si de hiâ—â— oâ—ibus dicerentur vobis verecundiam ingererent Quae ne magnitudinem vestram omnia lateant quaedam vobis sub brevitate dâ—scribimus quum si cuncta nominatim exprimere cuperemus dies nobis non sufficeret unus Noveritis itaque non à paucis sed ab omnibus tam vestri quam alterius ordinis vos homicidij perjurij sacrilegij et expropria cognatione atque ex duabus sororibus incesti crimine esse accusatoâ— Dicunt et aliud audâ—â—â— ipso horrendum Diaboli vos in amoreâ— viâ—um bibisse c. Neither let the Iesuite thinke that the Divell made them so evill men and yet left them good Bishops to preserve the purity of Catholicke doctrine this surely would bee a Paradoxe in all places but at Rome where they acknowledge doctrines were not as the auncient Prophesies delivered to the Church by holy men as the Spirit gave them utterance but brought in by such that were not able to rule their owne houses well and therefore farre unfit to be governours of the Church of God And as the Iesuite was deceived in the Divels arable land so with Bellarmine is he mistaken in the seede also For iâ— iâ— probable that he who did sowe seedes of Heresie in the slumbering age before this snorting nap would bee idle when hee was altogether without resistance If Image-worship got footing when their eyes were open may wee not expect that other heresies came in when they were fast asleepe In what primitive times durst an Image by rowling eyes and sweating knavery require adoration from the people Durst any godly Bishops decree for this idolatry in the first sixe ages No this Heresie was resisted by three hundred thirtie eight Bishops at Constantinople Anno 754. And though afterwards it got strength at Nice was defended by Rome and at last got to be Roman faith yet was the same disliked denyed opposed resisted by all the good men that lived in that after-times as Charles the great the Councell of Franckford Lewes his son the Synode of Paris Alcuinus the Church of England and the Waldenses c. Neither did the English distaste it as an ordinary folly and superstition onely but as contrary to true faith such an opinion which the Church
acknowledgeth it no better to afford the people free libertie to reade the scriptures then to cast Pearles before swyne Å¿ Reply pag. 27. which he hath received from Hosius t De expresso Dei verbo Sed sic visum est haeresiarchae nostri temporis qui primus dare sanctum canibus ante porcos ausus est projicere margaritas And it is no marvaile that they so much desire to inclose these commons of Gods people in regard they find not any to bee made Papists by the Catholicke Doctrine contained in them For experience it selfe hath taught them what fruite the reading of these divine mysteries in a vulgar tongue hath brought forth u Hosius de sa vern leg Experientiâ magistrâ didicimus quid fructus ea res attulerit Tantum abest ut accesserit ad pietatem aliquid plus ut etiam diminutum esse videatur The People saith Bellarmine take no profit out of the Scriptures but hurt x Bellarm. De verbo Dei lib. 2 cap. 15. Populus non solum non caperet fructum ex scripturis sed â—tiam caperet detrimentum Experimento idem comprobatur And the Iesuite telleth us a whole legend of tales to confirme this Doctrine y Reply pag. 27. So that it is most apparant by what hath beene already said that the auncient Church not onely permitted all Christians without exception or dispensation to heare and read the sacred Scriptures but also earnestly exhorted them to the practise of those holy duties and that the present Roman exhorteth none permitteth very few to be acquainted with those heavenly Oracles And shall weâ— then deny that Papists have remooved the bounds set by the auncient Fathers and fedde the people with huskes of superstition whom they ought to have nourished with the sincere milke of the word of life unlesse we can point them out the Pope that first attempted to bereave Gods people of so great a blessing But the Iesuite hath an other frame for his defence That scripture which those of the auncient Church had free libertie as he saith to reade was onely such as was approved to bee true and lawfull by the same Church the reading whereof amongst us at this day is as free as ever it was amongst our forefathers z Reply pag. 25. How tenderly doth the Iesuite tread here if this Ice breake sure he will be swallowed up He dare not graunt that the auncient Church gave free libertie to reade the scriptures and therefore pointeth it out as the most learned Answerers assertion as hee saith neither dare he confesse the truth concerning themselves that they deny them to the people as hath beene fully proved yet declaimeth of the desperate effects that are produced by the reading of them neverthelesse would perswade us to beleive 1. that they vary not from their forefathers 2ly that their adversaries have removed those bounds which were set by the Fathers in this point leading yea and driving Christ his flocke out of the wholesome pastures wherein formerly they were fed unto Salvation into the marish weedy and poysoned grounds of their new fangled vulgar Bibles a Reply ibid. For the first of which I willingly assent thereunto if by forefathers he understand those wise grave learned fathers which in watching the Church lost Religion learning languages and suffered Barbarisme and superstition to invade the same But if he meane those auncient lights the vigilant Bishops and Preists of the first and best times as wee take them to be none of your fathers so is it made good that you altogether in this practise vary from them it being most evident that the prime fathers for the edifying of Christs Church exhorted the people to the reading of the scriptures when your forefathers Mr Malone for the advancement of their Templum Domini in which is adored your Lord God the Pope were forced blasphemoâ—sly to inhibite the same b See this proved before in this Section For the second he will never prove it although hee attempt to performe the same by a two fold argument 1. Because our vulgar Bibles are not approved for holy Scriptures by the Church of God c Reply pag. 26 Whereunto I answere first that any mâ—y perceive the Iesuite cannot deny those bookes which we offer to the Church to be divine and revealed from God although â—e dreamâ—th that they have lost their nature by their translation Secondâ—y hee doth calumâ—iate us for the oâ—iginalâ— Canon oâ—t of which wee translate is allowed by the catholicke Church which they cannot say for theirs and the translation by a renowned member thereof which is sufficient for the approbation of the same Yet it may be he would have ours to bee allowed as their vulgar Latine hath lately been by canon in the Roman Church as if the Spirit of God remained at Eckron no word of God were to be found in Israel * 1. Kings 1. 2 3 But we know if it were in their power to approve or disprove it Gregory Sixtus d Consilium Episcopi Bononiae congregat de sâ—abiliend Rom. eccl Consilium nostrum esset ut tua Sanetitas Cardinalibus illis at que Episcopis quos in suis residere eclesijâ— contigerit praeciperet ut Decretales Sextum Clementinas Extravagantes regulas Cancellariae in 〈◊〉 quisque civitate legi ac doceri publicè curet Vtinam legendis hujusmodi libris homines ubique diligentisù incubuissent Neque enim res nostrae in hujusmodi deploratissimum statum ad ductae essent should bee the Canon which should governe the Church the Scriptures should not onely bee cast out but Gratian e Ibid. Ac non item Decreâ—i quod minimè mirum videri debet Est enim perniciosus liber author tatem tuam valde vehementer imminuit licet alicui extollere videatur Nam inter alia negat multis in loâ—â—s posse Papam vel tantillum ad eam Doctrinam adjungere quam nobis Christus ipse tradidit Apostoli docuêre also as too opposite to their intents The titles which they have given to Gods divine Oracles will declare how great affection they beare to the approvlng of them Besides if no translation be the word of God before the Roman synagogue hath approoved it I would know whether Sixtus or Clemens his edition be the word of God As for their vulgar edition by this rule it was no Scripture before the Trent assembly and the Rhemish Translation no Scripture to this houre His second Argument is that as it is not confirmed by Rome so it is disproved by Protestant Doctours themselves f Reply pag. 26. But herein two things are fit to be observed First that the Churches under the government of our sacred Prince did never propose any translation absolutely as without all kind of errour they being the workes of industrious and painfull and yet but men but as a faire helpe and means to
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 unto her so that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 safely follow her 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 rest in her judgement in thâ—â— I say generall Counceâ—â— may 〈◊〉 in 〈◊〉 of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Church her selfe from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of Christian Religion and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in all This is a â—ad beginning being a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 him I lay down 〈…〉 first that the Church including in iâ— all 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Christ appeared in the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Secondly 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 all those 〈◊〉 that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Apostles times i◠〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 all 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 happily not from all ignorance Thirdly that the Church including 〈◊〉 the â—eleivers living 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 free not onely from 〈◊〉 in such things 〈…〉 to 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈…〉 thing that any 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to Christian 〈◊〉 and religion 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 without all doubt 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the judgement of the Church in 〈…〉 so â—â— to the thing◠〈◊〉 in Scripture or 〈◊〉 by the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that â—ath beene 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Because as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Church 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Church 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of 〈◊〉 or Rome but the Vniversâ—ll Church neither that Vniversall Church which 〈◊〉 be gathered together in a generall Councell which is 〈◊〉 sometimes to have erred but that which dispersed through the world from the Baptisme of Iohn continueth to 〈◊〉 times Sixtly that in the judgment of Waldensis the Fathers successively are more certaine judges in matters of faith then a Generall Councell of Bishops though it be in a sort the highest Court of the Church as the Treatisâ—r saith But saith the Iesuite if yet for all this our Answerer will not be brought to build his conscience upon any other authority d Reply pag. 32 I perceive a little thing will beget conâ—idence 〈◊〉 Iesuite that is so lifted up with producing two old objections to little purpose but what then why majora his agreat one of our owne shall schoole him a little better Pooâ—e â—edant in what manner By telling him out of Lyriâ—ensis that the auncient consent of godly Fathers is with great carâ— not onely to be searched but also to be followed of us cheifly in the rule of Faith Reply ibid. As if the consent of Fathers were the absolute rule of Faith without Scriptures when you yourselves dare not attribute to any Fathers authority power to expresse the rule of Faith by their bare consent For Durand saith that although the Church hath power of Gâ—â— on 〈◊〉 yet that doth not exceede thâ— limitation of the Scripturâ— f Durand â—â— Dist. 44. q. 3. â— 9. Ecclesia licet habet in terris dominationem Dei. illa tamen â—on excedit limitationem Scripturae Universall extent of Doctrine is a good directory to truth but the absolute foundation of Faith are the sacred Scriptures Neither are we at all to give credit saith the Author of the imperfect worke upon Matthew amongst the workes of Chrysostome unto the Churches themselves unlesse they teach or doe those things which are agreeable to the Scriptures g 〈◊〉 Commentar in Mat. homil 49. intes operâ— S. Chrys incerto auctore Nec ipsis ecclesijs omnino â—redendum est niâ—â—â—a dicant vel faciant quae convenientia sunt Scripturis No testimonies have any strength that walk without God his word The Fathers adhere to the Scriptures therfore we ought to adhere to them so are we to embrace the authority of the ancient Doctors Councels as those that embraced the holy Scriptures in their faith doctrin and for that cause this learned Bishop coupleth them together Wee rest saith he upon the scriptures of God upon the authority of the ancient Doctors and Councels Reply pag. 31 inferring thereby that those which fixe their faith have not onely divine testimonies but also the judgement and beliefe of the best men to declare the same as good subsidiarie helps to their convincing grounds which doth not conclude that any authority besides the Scripture is necessary but that it is a faire convenient rule to bridle mens fancies least the Scriptures should be wrested by them which are too much wedded to their owne conceits to patronage their errours And what Augustine gave to Bishops and Councels this learned Bishop assenteth unto but I am assured that the Iesuite will not bee able to prove that S. Augustine ever embraced such a thought as to believe that the receiving of humane testimonies should disable the Scriptures from being the onely concluding and sufficient rule for he is of a quite contrary opinion as is apparant in many places of his writings Aâ—g â— Donat. post collat c. 1â— Quâ—si Episcoporum Concilia Scripturis Canonicis fue â—int aliquandâ— comparata Neither will our Iesuite have us in our appâ—â—le to Scripture to betray our cause by our disagreement with our selves alone but also by our agreement with ancienâ— Heretickes and who are those Hereticks The Valentinians Ennomians Marcionists Arians and others whâ— as it is well knowne saith this Iesuite were wâ—nt to reject all other authorities and to â—â—nce with Scripture onely Reply pag. â—â— If this Iesuite be not a fencer judge by his weapons both edge and point being rebated for his most powerfull performance ends not so much as in a scratch or scarre And whereas he saith we fence with Scripture onely it seemeth he knoweth not the nature thereof otherwise he would repute it with the Apostle a sword for a â—ouldiâ—r yea sharper then a two-edged sword We acknowledge many subsidiarie helpes but indeed none sufficient to controule the conscience but Scriptures onely And herein we follow these ancient Hereticks 1. Augustâ—â—â— cited by the most learned Answerer and unanswered by the Iesuite Let humane writings be removed let Gods voice sound Aug. de Pastor c. 14. Aâ—ferantur chartae humanae sonâ—â—t voâ—â—s divinae ede mihi unam Scripturae â—ocem pro parte Donati and further in his booke of the Vnity of the Church hee saith Let them declare their Church if they be able not in the speech and rumours of the Africans not in Councels of their Bishops not in the passages of their disputes not in their â—ignes deceitfull wonders because even against these things the word of God hath perswaded us to be â—aâ—y but in the Law Prophets Psalmes the Pastors voyce the Evangelists preaching and labours that is in all the canonicall authority of holy Scriptures m Aug. de Vnit. Eccle. c. 88. Ecclesiam suam demonstrant si possunt non iâ— sermonibus rumoribus Afrorum non in concilijs Episcoporum suorum non in literis 〈◊〉 libet disputatorum non in signis prodigijs â—allaâ—ibus qui etiam contra ista verbo Domini prâ—parati cautiâ—â—ddiâ—i sumus
ever received in the Church with more truth and faithfulnes then Hereticks have done Surely the Iesuite hath payed it here for he that every where dreameth of false logicke in others doth not here speake true sence himselfe Lyrinensis maketh 1. one generall sufficient rule for all things the sacred Scriptures f Lyrinens Duplici modo munire fidem suam Domino adjuvante deberet Primo scilicet divinae legis autoritaâ—e Cum sit perfectus Scripturarum canon sibique AD OMNIA satis superque sufficiat 2ly another usefull in some cases onely g Ibid. Tum deinde ecclesiae catholicae traditione Sed neque semper neque omnes haereâ—â—s hoc modo impugnandae sunt yet never to be used in those cases without Scriptures which is the tradition of the Universall Church h Ibid. Multum necesse est propter tantos tam varij erroris anfractus ut Propheticae Apostolicae interpretationis linea secundum Ecclesiastici Catholici sensus normam dirigaâ—ur In ipsa autem catholica Ecclesia magnopere curandum est ut id teneamus quod ubique quod semper quod ab omnibus creditum est hoc est etenim verè proprièque catholicum The first was used by the auncient Church from the worth that is in it selfe i Ibid. Sibique ad omnia superque sufficiat the other from the perversnes of Hereticks that many times abuse the sacred rule k Ibid. Quia videlicet scripturam sacram pro ipsa sui altitudine non uno codâ—mque sensus universi accipiunt sed ejusdem eloquia aliter atque aliter alius atque alius interpretatur Aliter namque illam Novatianus aliter Sabeilius Bring us now one Scripture expounded according to Lyrinensiâ— his rule l Ibid. Quod ubique quod semper quod ab omnibus creditum est by the universall consent of the primitive Church to prove traditions confession Purgatory prayer to Saints image-worship Free-will c. in your sence and wee will receive it if you cannot confesse the truth that you deale like hereticks and acknowledge that we follow the practise of the auncient times And here I would have the Iesuite consider how many of their owne doe cry the Scripture m Sanders Rocke of the Church chap. 8. pag. 193. They have most plaine Scriptures in all points for the Catholicke faith and none at all against the same Bristo Mot. 48 Most certain it is that from the beginning of Genesis to the end of Apocalypse there is no text that maketh for you against us but all for us though it be more Iudeorum as they templum Domini and further with greater pretended reverence kisse antiquity not that they love either but because the one is not so light as the other to lay open their errours and detect their deformities Moreover whereas Christ made it a note of his sheepe to heare his voyce this good man would have it to bee the signe and token of an Hereticke but if Hereticks make use of Scriptures this confirmes the rule to be what God made it though it cannot justifie their practise that abuse the same And for brutish and wilde interpretations of Hereticks which this Father makes woolvish let the Iesuite cast an eye to their owne and who hath dealt so grossly as they have done †See before pag. 149 â—it b. And although they bragge of Unity and interpretations of good consent yet for any thing we see it is to be suspected when their Popes could not agree about the Text that he as his schollers may faile to accord in interpretation thereof Further I could wish it were examined whether we or they faile in the Rule of interpreting the Scriptures according to the universall tradition of the Church and analogie of faith and then it would easily appeare if this be a note of Heresie who the Hereticks are For the Fathers beleived but halfe the faith according to that you interpret and to make those points traditions of the universall Church which needed decrees to authorize them 1500 yeares after Christ must needes conclude egregious vanity But who knoweth not that you had rather be tried by the Moone and seven Starres which cannot so easily detect the workes of darknes then the Scriptures the fountain of light that will declare the least errour in your doctrine or practise n Clem. Alex Serom. l. 7. Sicut improbi oueri excludunt Paedagogum ita etiam hi arcent Prophetias a suâ Ecclesâ—â suspectas â—as habentes propter repâ—eh ensionem admonitionem Quamplerima certe consarciunt mendacia figmenta ut jure videantur non admittere Scripturas So that we disclaime not the Fathers but in your Phantasies for we allowe them at all times what they ought to have and when by an universall consent they declare what the Apostles delivered to the Church wee grant them a more centrouling authoritie Yet we are not ashamed to distinguish betwixt God and man though you blush not to equall them and to make Gods ipse diceit a convincing rule which we cannot grant to man or the best of men the Fathers and Bishops of the auncient Church where they come alone without the Scriptures Our Iesuite hath done much in this Chapter to wit proved that we preferre God before men and I have shewed that we deny not to men what God hath allowed to them SECT VI. AND least Vanitie should be absent for a little here the Iesuite proceedes to take a veiw How vainely our Answerer excuseth his disclaime from the Fathers a Reply pag. 36 But how vainely he chargeth the Answerers most learned observation will presently appeare Here saith the Iesuite our Answerer meeteth us with the same auncient Father Vincentius Lirinensis who though a great Commender of the methode of confuting Heresies by the consent of holy Fathers yet is carefull herein to give us this caveat that neither alwayes nor all kinde of Heresies are to be impugned after this manner but such onely as are now and lately sprung namely when they doe first arise while by straitnes of the time it selfe they be hindred from falsifying the rules of the auncient Faith and before the time that their poyson spreading farther they attempt to corrupt the writings of the auncient But far-spred and inveterate heresies are not to bee dealt withall this way for as much as by long continuance of time a long occasion hath lyon open unto them to steale away the truth Out of which saying our Answerer inferres that our Heresies being farre-spred and of long continuance have had time enough and place to coyne and clipp and wash the 〈◊〉 of Antiquitie wherein saith hee they have not bene wanting and therefore must not be impugned by consent of holy Fathers b Reply pag. 36 Here is little Vanitie to be seene as yet how the Iesuite will make it appeare remaineth to be done and this hee will accomplish by espying
not the Fathers that assist and direct in understanding of the Scriptures be Rules as Vincentius Lirinensis onely stileth them in their kind yet give place unto the word of God as the absolute and sufficient rule of faith Moreover Rules Measures are either originall which we call the Standard or those which are proportioned and fitted thereby and might not this Father make the Scriptures as the Standard the onely absolute rule sufficicient of it selfe as he tearmeth it to try points of Catholick Faith and yet graunt the generall consent of all Bishops and Preists of the Catholicke Church in a generall Councell to be a Rule proportioned fitted and squared thereby Who knoweth not also that the Standard is a most absolute and controuling Rule without doubt and exception when there are many things that may call in question the truth of the other so that it may need to bee corrected thereby Now what doth the most learned Primate say that crosseth Liriuensis This auncient Father acknowledgeth the authority of the divine Canon sufficient of it selfe to trye the Catholicke Faith His learned Penne confesseth Gods Word to be that rocke alone upon which wee build our Faith Lirinensis to avoyde jarring interpretations would likewise from the Custome of Catholicks have the Traditions of the Catholick Church to wit the generall consent of Fathers to be requisite at some times to the understanding of heavenly Scriptures And for any thing I can find the most reverend Primate doth not urge a syllable against it So that untill the Iesuite can shew further then he hath done Vanitie I thinke will turne Fryar and remaine with him And although this Iesuite doth make the Fathers upon Lirinensis his experiment the absolute rule yet a further experience perswadeth them to leave Lirinensis at sometimes which although they will not doe with open face yet by covered shifts they labour to avoyde what they pretend to be his direction For they make the Fathers doctors not judges to be followed for their reason not for their authority p Bellarm. de verbo Dei l. 3. c. 10. Aliud est interpretari legem more Doctoris aliud more judicis ad explanationem more Doctoris requiritur cruditio ad explicationem more judicis requiritur auctoritas Doctor enim non proponit sententiam suam ut necessario sequendam fed SOLVM quatenus ratio suadet which destroyes their judgship to be rejected where excogitato commento they cannot helpe q Vasquez Iesâ— l. 2. de Adora disp 3. c. 2. initio Recentiores aliqui pondere hujus Concilij Elibertini quasi oppressi tanquam optimum â—ffugium elegerunt authoritatem Concilij negare quod Provinciale fuerit nec a Pontifice confirmatum c. Et sane si aliâ viâ Concilio satisfieri commodè non possit hoc nobis effugium sufficeret So Maldonate upon the xvi of Matthew r Maldonat in 16 Mat. Portae inferni non praevalebunt Quorum verborum sensus non videtur mihi esse quem omnes praeter Hilarium quos â—â—gisse mâ—mini authores putant Bellarmine upon the vi of Marke and the v. of Iames Å¿ Bellarm. de Extrem Vnct. c. z. Duae Scripturae proseâ—â—tur ab omnibus una ex cap. 6. Marci altera ex cap. 5. Iacobi De prioâ— non omnes conveniunt an cum Apostoli ungebant oleo infirmes curabant illa fuerit unctio Sacramentalis de quâ nunc disputamus an solum fuerit figura quaedam adumbratio hujus Sacramenti Qui tuentur Priorem sententiam ut Tho Waldens loco citate Alphons de castro l. de Haer verbo Extrema Vnctio ca ratione ducuntur quod Beda Theophilaâ—â—us OE cumenius in commentarijs Marci Iacobi videantur dicere eandem esse unctionem cujus fit mentio in utroque loco Sed profectò probabilior est sententia posterior que est Ruardi lansenij Dominici a Soto aliorum Et mihi certe eo etiam nomine graâ—â—â—or quod videam Lutherum Calvinum Chemnitium locis citatis esse in priore opinione existimant enim illi eandem esse unctionem Marci 6. luâ—â—â—i 5. reject the authorities of Fathers and any may tell me wherefore Besides the suspition of this rule is detected that when a wrangling Papist will question the true sence of the Fathers as it is easie to be done even where the minde is convinced how can the fathers be the assured touchstone to try all controversies when the Pope may order all matters as he pleaseth t Gregor 〈◊〉 Anal. Fidel l. 8. c 8. Quod si per sententiam Doctorum aliqua fidei controversia non 〈◊〉 commodè componi posset eo quod de illorum confensu non 〈◊〉 constareâ— â—â— tunc constat authoritas Pontifici But hereby we may see who feare the judgement of Antiquity you or our selves Wee receive them without appeale if true and not forged if cleare and not ambiguous in points that they were bound to beleive and teach from the sacred Scriptures upon paine of damnation You not at all unlesse when you please they will stoop unto and undergoe a Papall explanation Yet thirdly the Iesuite tels us Lirinensis as we see doth not so withdraw the tryall of inveterated Heresies from the consent of holy Fathers that he will have it brought to Scripture onely as our Answerer pretendeth but giveth us to understand that when they cannot sufficiently bee convinced by holy writ then the authoritie of generall Councells wherein by the consent of catholick Priests and Prelates of the Church they have beene condemned should suffice us to avoyde and detect them Reply pag. 37 Lirinensis maketh the sacred Scriptures the onelie absolute rule fit for all times and occasions x Vincen. Lirin adv profanas Novat Cum sit perfectus Scripturarum canon â—â—â—ique ad omnia satis superâ—â—â— sufficiat but this directive helpe of Fathers he applieth to sometimes onely y Idem Sed noque semper neque omnes hae reses hoc mo â—â— impugnanâ—◠〈◊〉 But will the Iesuite perswade us that when Lirinensis doth withdraw the tryall of inveterated Heresies from the consent of holy Fathers it is left to other judgement on earth besides the Scriptures Surely the Iesuite did better adhere to the Fathers in his Epistle Dedicatory then in this place for there they were the assured touch stone to try all controversies betwixt us whether wee varie about the true sence of holy writ or about any Article of Christian beleife whatsoever but heere they may be suspended as hee acknowledgeth in Lirinensis his opinion and in some reserved cases neither Scriptures nor Fathers must be the rule but the authoritie of generall Councells c. So that you see their rule is that which best befreinds them The Fathers at one time shall helpe and bee the assured touchstone A generall Councell not auncient I hope but of the Popes calling when
the Fathers fayle But for the Scriptures their confidence hath not beene so great therein as to make them alone a rule for the least article of their new faith And this Iesuite that even now would perswade others to beleive that we adhere to the Scriptures onely because we would not be subject to the sentence of any judge doth here detect himselfe what judge he will allow The Scriptures must be locked up Bibling is Babling and generall Councells must do the worke well why then doe they not confirme Constance and Basill If they dare not submit to them why do they vainly pretend their authority But it may be they are not confirmed by the Pope So that you may see by the Iesuit's wavering his aime is onely to have that Exlex who ought at this time principallie to be corrected for his heresies to be both the rule and the Iudge But we are as free saith the Iesuite from the imputation of Heresie as our Adversaries are farre from finding out any such generall Councell in which wee have beene condemned z Reply pag. 17 Have you no better Apologies then this to exempt you out of the Catalogue of Hereticks The Pelagians had as good and pleaded the same against S. Augustine who answered them with scorne Aut vero congregatione Synodi opus erat ut apertu pernicies damnaretur quasi nulla haeresis aliquando nisi Synodi congregatione damnata sit a Aug. con â— Epist Pelag 4 4 c. 12. What is it needfull to assemble a Synode that a manifest corruption should be condemned as if no Heresie hath at any time beene condemned without the calling of a Synode And they are as surely branded for Novelists and Sectaries saith this Loyolist as their opinions have beene certainely condemned by many the like generall Councells b Reply pag. 37 I wonder where the Iesuite will find them nay what have they besides the names of generall Councells that may honour the assembly of their so many Bishops Some of these you dare not confirme why then should they have generall faith and esteeme amongst us If you dare not subscribe to your Councels for what reason should they have power to condemne us Some against Faith given have martyred those which you acknowledge ours Your Trent Synode hath anathematized the Catholick Church Doctrine And I am perswaded if that faction had as much power as they give to their Head the Church Catholicke should not bee long from martyrdome also Besides whose opinions have Generall Councels condemned ours Surely then our pretended Heresies are ancienter then Luther he is not the first that taught our doctrine But where are your Councels Mr Malone that condemne the holy Scriptures the foure first Generall Councels the three Creeds These are ours to them wee subscribe If these are Noveltiâ—s we are Novelists if this be doctrine of Sectâ—ries the Hereticke hath justly stiled us But if the Iesuite cannot bring Councels that have condemned God in his Word the Primitive Church in her Decrees and the generall Confessions of Faith I hope hee will upon better thoughts except Noveltie from our Faith Schisme from our Persons Neither let the Iesuite runne about as in other-places he hath done to coyne us an other Faith when as he himselfe revileth us for adhering to the Scriptures c Reply Sect. â— when as our Lawes justifie our embracing the foure first Generall Councels and our Liturgie doth enclose the Creedes The Iesuite continueth his vaine discourse And as saith he they never yet assembled any Generall Councell of Catholick Preists and Prelates of that Church which is dispersed through many Nations neither by reason of their fatall discord amongst themselves will ever beâ— able to assemble the same so wee may for ever live secure d Reply pag. â—7 Every Iesuite is not a Prophet We may have a Coâ—â—â—â—ll such a one where your Papa shall not be Presidâ—nt â—or your Cloâ—ke-bagge carry the Spirit that shall direct iâ— when the Church of Rome it selfe shall be frâ—â—â— from that Factioâ— which now doth tyrannize over it and the true Bishops thereof shall enjoy that authoritie which most truely is their owne by divine institution and Fryars and Iesuites may turâ—e Turkes for any station that they shall have in the Hierarchiâ— of the Church of God e Censura â—â—â—positionum ad sacram Facultatem Theoâ—â—giae Parisiâ—â— sem allat c. Priâ—â—a Propositio Hierarchia Ecclesiastica constat ex Pontifice Cardinalibus Archiepiscopis Episcopis Regularibus Câ—â—sura In istâ primâ— proposâ—tiâ—â—◠〈◊〉 ratio memâ—â—â—rum Hierarchiae Ecclesiasticae seu sacri Principatâ—â— divinâ ordinatione instituti est manca redundaâ—â— atque inducens in errorem Finally saith the Iesuite the reason of this his â—ergivâ—rsaâ—ion from the Fathers authority is vaine and idle when hee saith that we have coyned clipped and washed their monuments And why I pray you For though saith he he endeavour to proove this by severall instances yet not one doth he produce that will serve his turne and therefore tells the most learned Answerer that he is bound to bring forth â—â—und prooâ—â— of this his accusation under paine of incuâ—ring the brand of forgerie and spitefull calumnie himselfe f Reply pag. 38 We may perceive the Iesuite is unwilling to enter into dispute concerning these particulars and therefore â—â—sts them off as wanting proofe Yet indeed the matter is so notorious in many of the instances that your owne have espied the counterfeits and branded them with their Censures But the Iesuite might have forsaken his selfe flatterie and have taken notice that there is more proofe against the particulars then hee had answered unto For is it possible that there should bee little respect given to the Church of Rome before the Councell of Nice as their Cardinall and after-Pope urged by the most reverend the Lord Primate affirmeth when wee finde the first Bishops of that Church writing such controuling Epistles Councels before that of Nice giving such unlimited power and the Romane Emperour qualifying with such unmeasurable Principalitie their Romane Bishop But because the Iesuite desires a further manifestation of these Counterfeitâ— I will take them as they are layde downe in order by the most reverend the Lord Primate beginning with your Craftie Merchant Isidorus Mereator that is justly charged with counterfeiting Decretall Epistles c. Our Iesuite hath a minde to justifie these brattâ— and to make Isidorus his merchandize to passe for good wares yet Bellarmine confesseth that they are infected with Errour script into them g Bellarm. de Rom. Pont. l. 2. c. 14. Aliquos errores in eas irrepsisse non negaverim nec indubitatas esse affirmaâ—e audeam â— Cusanus de Concord cath l. 3. c. 2. Sunt meo judicio illa de Constantino apocrypha sicut fortassis etiam quaedam alia longa magna scripta Sanctiâ— Clementi Anacleto Papâ— attributa In quibus volentes Romanam
sedem omni lande dignam plus quam Ecclesiae sanctae expedit decet exaltare se peâ—â—tus â—â—t quasi fundant Si quis illas omnes Scripturas 〈◊〉 Sanctis attributas diligenter perlegeret et eorum tempora ad illa scripta applicaret ac deinde in opusculis omnium sanctorum Patrum qui usque ad Augustinum Hieronymum et Ambrosium fuere ac etiam de gestis Conciliorum ubi authentica scripta allegantur usum et memoriam hâ—beret hoc inveniret verum quia nec in illis omnibus Scripturis de illis praefatis Epistolis mentio habetur et etiam ipâ—â— Epistolâ— applicatae ad tempus eorum sanctorum scipsas produâ—t Cusanus doth downe-rightly stile some of them Counterfeits and doubteth not that they all would betray themselves if diligently read applyed to the timesh Contius wrote a Preface which is suppressed with his reasons that he was confident would have declared these Epistles Counterfeit i Contius Annot. in dist 16. c. Septuaginta dicit 〈◊〉 aâ— supra in 〈◊〉 ratioâ—â—â— adduâ—â—i quibus omnes Pontificum qui Sylâ—â—strum 〈◊〉 〈…〉 esse manifeste octendi Vide colloq Rainoldi cum Harto c 8. divis 3. Besides they shame themselves For would these Fathers speake like Barbarians when the Heathen Rhetoricians were ready to oppose them Could they speake in one stile forme of wordes when they had so many different pennes and diverse tongues Were Popes so obscure or their Epistles so contemptible that they were not knowne in the first 500. yeares Were they of so sleight perswasion that they could not moove the Bishops of Africk to give their Successors what those blessed Martyrs possessed Did they cite Hieromes Translation by Prophesie which was not extant while any of them were â—iving Did any Author in those times speak such tearmes as are mentioned in those Epistles Finde me Primatus and Apocrisiarius in Anacletus his time Pagaâ—â—â— in Caius his dayeâ— Finde me a Preist with a shaven Crowne in Anicetus his Government Much more may be gathered from our learned obsenvers but these things may suiâ—â—se to declare of what breed these Epistles are Secondly If the Nicenâ— Fathers have not ampliâ—â—ed the â—ounds of the jurisdiction of the Church of Rome in so â—â—rge a manner as shee desired the most learned Primate observeth she hath had her well-willers that have supplied the Councels negligence in that behalfe and made Canons for the purpose in the name of the good Fathers that never dreamed of such abusines k In the Answer to the Iesuites challenge pag. 13. But in regard the Iesuite hath undertaken to justifie them in the Eight Section I will there God willing discouer their corruption Thirdly If the power of judging all others will not content the Pope unlesse he himselfe may bee exempted from being judged by any other another Councell saith the most reverend the Lord Primate as auncient at least as that of Niâ—â— shal be suborned wherein it shal be concluded by the consent of 284. imaginarie Bishops that No man may judge the first seate and for failing in an elder Councell then that consisting of three hundred Buâ—kram Bishops of the selâ—â— same â—â—king the like note shal be sung quoniam prima sedes non judiâ—abitur à quoquam The first seate must not be judged by any man l Ibid. Now that these trâ—ly be as they are reported no man â—â—n doubt that will seriously enter into consideration of them unlesse he leave his wits and wisdome also For the first to wit the Councell of Sinnessa it was never heard of till the time of Pope Nicholas the first about the yeare 860. unlesse the Iesuite hath better evidence then Bellarmine could finde m Bellarm. de Rom. Pont. â— 2. c. 26. In Concilio 〈…〉 dicunt Patres 〈◊〉 seâ—â—â—◠〈◊〉 judicatur Resett haec verba ex isto Concilio Nicolaâ—â—â— in 〈◊〉 ad 〈◊〉 and yet the supposed Session of this pretended Councell was many hundred yeares before even in the time of the Emperour Dioclesian And the number of Bishops that are urged for the glory of this Councell deâ—ect the forging of it for could it be that the Church in her cruellest persequution should cause 300. Bishops to assemble together when afterwards in her full prosperitie at Nice in the most urgent cause that ever the Church had there were assembled but 318. Neither are we without other just exceptions againstit Did this Councell tell truth that Dioclesian being in the Persian warre heard of the condemning of Marcellinus when that warre was ended 2. yeares before No Binnius condemneth this as no part of the Acts of the Councell unlesse he may helpe the lyar by making him speake as he pleaseth n Binius Not. ad Concilium Sinuessanum Cum esset in bello Persaâ—â—m Haec nisi â—mendentur falsa sunt Etenim cum sententia Eusebiâ— quorundam aliorum hoc anno 20 imperij sui imperio se abdicaverit quod magis est ante biennium de Persis superatis vi 〈◊〉 Romae una tum Maximia no collega suo triumphum egerit quomodo quaeso hoc anno cum exercitu adversus Persas in procinctu expeditione â—ssâ— pâ—tuit Dicimus igitur â—â—c omnia quae sequuntur non esse exactis Concilij sed ut apparet ad ipâ—â— aâ—â—a appendicem superadditam â—el sâ—â—ectio ista restiâ—atur 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 erat â— beâ—â—â— Persâ—rum germana esse videbitur 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 consentaâ—â—ea Vâ—de Baâ—on â—n Christi â—â—◠〈◊〉 â—â—â— And lastly it is apparant that as wise as our Iesuite hath accompted these â—â—ckram Bishops even Donatists the Acts spurious and of â—â— weight Ibid. 〈◊〉 Virorum 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 â—â—c acta 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 esse validis saâ—e argumentis prâ—bare conati funt adcoque 〈◊〉 nihil 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a 〈◊〉 câ—lâ—â—dè excogitaâ—â—m For your second Councell held as you pretend at Roâ—â— under Sylvester it had neither other Bishops nor more authenticke acts For first it is infected with Constantines 〈◊〉 Act. 1. c 1 Cum 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 quod Constantinus 〈◊〉 a Sylvestro Episcopo urbis Romae 〈◊〉 suit a lepra a tale and indeed beyond all folly ridiculous 〈◊〉 knowne to the Church many ages after Constantines death q Platina in vita Maâ—ci 1. Qâ—od verâ— in lepram 〈◊〉 â—◠〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 siâ— confictâ prius de 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 nescio quâ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 â—â—â—do 〈◊〉 â—â—ee in re secuâ—â—â— qui 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 â—bi â—â—◠〈◊〉 quintum aetatis 〈◊〉 attigisset 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ex urbe Constantiâ—oâ—oli ad a â—â—as â—alid as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 causa â—â—llâ— de lepâ—à mentione habitâ Praeterea 〈◊〉 â—ac de re à â—ullo scriptorum â—â—t mentio non dico ab his qui ethniâ—i 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 â—â— a 〈◊〉 quideâ— Secondly this Councell sub Sylvestrâ— must be the yeare before Sylvester was Pope an idle conceite for that is the third Consulship of Constantine Augustus 〈◊〉 hist Ecel l. 4.
sacred Scripture did burst forth of those libraries wherein it was ecclipsed and the most lucide starres the auncient Fathers waited upon that originall light then many of these poore meteors and fained appearances were quickely obscured and despised of some of your owne So that your Dilemma proves but a childish florish For although it is most true that you have done as much as you durst to pretend Fathers make Fathers detract from Fathers adde to Fathers forging clipping washing cankering them yet these things being detected and casheered the Fathers are restored to their authoritie they formerly had although they are not thought fit to bee used as a rule against those Hereticks that have not spared in this manner to abuse their writings Againe saith the Iesuite you have given us flatlie once to understand that the Scripture was the rocke upon which alone you build your faith and from which no sleight that wee could devise should ever drawe you and therefore you bade us to our face alledge what authoritie we list without Scripture and it could not suffice How is the winde now changed how come you now to falsifie this your former resolution m Reply pag. 49 Did ever any Iesuite trifle in this manner and speake more inconsequent The Scripture is the rocke upon which alone he will build his faith no authoritie can suffice without Scripture therefore the winde is changed hee falsifies his former resolution Doth not this rationall deserve to censure others for false Logicke that pleads with such a shape of reason himselfe The Iesuite promised in his Challenge to produce good and certaine grounds out of the sacred Scriptures if the Fathers authoritie will not suffice Did he cast off their rock of Fathers because he promised Scriptures I thinke hee will not acknowledge it and why should he vainely heere dreame that the Scriptures are rejected by the most reverend the Lord Primate when to stoppe the Iesuites boasting out of a well grounded confidence in the goodnes of his cause he will not in this place stand upon his right Besides let the Iesuite shew me the generall consent of Fathers in a matter of faith without the Scriptures if hee be able If he cannot his thoughts are confused when hee dreamed of their authoritie without Scripture if hee say he will let him produce them for surely it is hard to bee beleived Furthermore when the Lawyers urge Constantines denation for Papall possession I aske the Iesuite upon what authoritie he would build his title whether upon the donation it selfe or the Lawyers interpreting it If the Donation be sufficient why not the Scriptures If the interpreters must be added yet this is not to take away the power of the Charter Nay if they be added 〈◊〉 necessary testimonie the Charter were nothing without the Lawyers What followeth in the Iesuite hath received Answere in the fift Section only here he will not be perswaded that he chooseth his owne weapons n Reply pag. 49 but let the Reader judge for bibling in his judgment is but babling it is no other then fencing to fight with Scriptures and to appeale to sole Scripture is but to agree with auncient Heretickes So that Scriptures are none of his armorie and if the Fathers bee rejected also what remaineth further but ipse dixit assisted with pretended miracles lying wonders But let them be whose weapons they will Hee telleth us that hee will use them and the first encounter shal be concerning the dignity and preheminencie of the Church of Rome o Reply ibid. Indeed this is that fruitfull article of Faith that hath got all the new articles of the new Romane Creed This is the breast that nourisheth them that gives them strength The occasion wherefore he beginnes here is for as much as our Answerer taketh his first exception against him for styling all the auncient Doctors and martyrs of the Church universall with the name of the Saints and Fathers of the Primitive Church of Rome though he alledgeth heerein no more against me saith the Iesuite but this one bare Interrogaterie out of Albertus Pighius Who did ever yet by the Roman Church understand the universall Church p Reply pag. 49 What needes further proofe If neither the whole Roman Church neither your whole Roman world in the judgment of Albertus Pighius did ever take the Romane Church for the Church Vniversall is not this enough to lash the Iesuite for confounding Vrbem Orbem and mingling Heaven and earth together But he will take of Pighius by a Distinction If saith he the Roman Church be taken as it comprehendeth onely that Cleargie which maketh but one particular Bishoprick Diaces in the citie of Rome abstracting from that relation which it hath unto all other Christian Churches as the head unto the members then I say with Pighius who speaketh of it onely in this sense that no man ever by the Church of Rome did understand the Vniversall Church But if it bee taken as it is the Mother Church begunne in S. Peter under Christ and miraculously continued those of each one of the rest of the Apostles fayling by due succession of lawfull Bishops having a relation to all other Christian Churches as the head to the members then doe I say that it may rightly bee stiled with the name of the Vniversall Church And that all other Churches are to be accounted Catholick no further then they be linked in a subordinate obeysance thereunto q Reâ—â—â— pâ—g â—â— Here are many prettie things By this meanes the Church of Rome the Mother must bee borne after the daughter for many particular Churches had birth before Rome was a Church or the Roman Inhabitants received the Faith of Christ Secondly that the Catholicke Church must be in a subordinate obeysance to the Church of Rome before there was any Church there Besides the Catholick Church was never enclosed in any other place but the world never restrained to any other habitation To chaine it â—o any head out of Heaven or to confine it to any particular place on Earth were to make it schismaticall This Church concludes all Saints Noah's Arke was heere a Temple Christ delighted with this Church as in the Canticles before Rome was Rome or a Pontifex governed therein Some are in Heaven that never yeelded obedience to this Church or heard of Rome And it is more then probable some are in hell that were tearmed Holinesse it selfe whilst they remained in this Catholick here But what the Iesuite hath to make this Roman Church the Catholicke and mother of all other Churches in the next Section we shall examine SECT VIII THis Iesuite after hee hath obtained from the most learned Primate ex gratiâ libertie in his owne challenge to chuse his owne weapon would first use it to prove that The Auncient Fathers of the first Ages acknowledged the Roman Church to bee the head of all other Churches a Reply pag 40 I had thought
informed hee might have alledged But Luther tels us that Gods will which way soeuer it is made knowne unto us ought to be reverently embraced and therefore it is not lawfull to gainsay rashly the Bishop of Romes Supremacie And this reason is of such force that although there were no other it alone ought to bee sufficient to â—urbe the temeritie of all opposers n Reply pag â— The Argument is thus Whatsoever is permitted by God is reverently to bee embraced But the Papall altitude is permitted by God Therefore with all reverence to be embraced May not this argument serve for Pope Ioan the stewes the holy Ladie Maâ—ylda Iudas Iulian yea for all villany without exception or interruption For we must not thinke that any thing can come to passe without Gods voluntary permission God made the world shall we say that like Gallio he câ—reth for none of these things * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 God hath permitted many evils many tyrannies among the Babyâ—nians Persians Grecians Romans yet this doth not justifie them in their impieties or make us reverently to embrace them therein Wee know God placed Peter in the sheepe-fould to â—eedâ— his Lambes as hee sent the the rest to the same worke but shew us that hee tooke him from the Ewes great with young to make him the King of Israell the Monarch of the Church and this is something to the purpose Yet this Argument is not the Charter by which Peter got his Primacie but those Popes that came in the last dayes For when Luther was in his best witts hee could not finde the Popes Primacie in Pasce â—ves or Oravi pro te Petre or in any other place of Scripture or from any other reason but from experience So that we perceive the Bishop of Rome hath as much right to his pretended greatnes as Nimrod to Babylon and all former Tyrants to their Usurpations Now the Iesuite addresseth himselfe to Antiquity and wherefore Because our Answerer will needes be a scholler of their maddest humours in this point wee present him heere saith he with the Doctrine of Antiquity utterly condemning the same o Reply pag. â—0 The most learned Answerer is no Scholler of Luther or of Bucer neither are their humours directories of his Faith or opinions One is his Doctor and that is Christ and as farre as Luther and Bucer follow him so farre they may have his company but no further It is your holy Brother-hood that are tyed to madde humours nay to such as a madde man would not embrace Who can presume that a Iesuite hath his wits that casting aside Gods Law in the place thereof embraceth the rule of Ignatius as if it were their Decalogue or Square for direction And for any thing we can see the Prescripts of their Generall are little lesse esteemed by them in their practise then what God himselfe appoints them p Hassenmuller Hist Ies c. 6 de voâ— Obedieniiae Impudentissimos istos homines non pudet haec sigmenta capiâ—is sui haâ— Loiolae nugaâ— ipsi Dei Deca â—â—go praeponeâ—â— quod Iacobus Crusius Novitiorum Landspergensium Rector facit Noster inquiens Decalogus eâ—â— Râ—gula voâ—orum ab Ignatio Lâ—â—â—â—â— traditâ— This goeth farre but yet all this is nothing to the requisites that they prescribe to themselves vizâ— that if the Church you know who they meane should determine white to be blacke it must not be opposed q Regulae Iesu it ad finem Histor interdict tenet regula 132. si quod oâ—ulis nostris apparet album nigrum illa esse definierit debemus itidem quod nigrâ—â— sit pronunciare Now seeing hee hath urged Bucer Luther disputing â—â— concessis he will make it cleare by Antiquity it selfe So that he will not accept that the Roman Church is the Head of all other Churches by a bare Concession or graunt of her enemies but will further make it apparant by her owne evidences and auncient Prerogatives And his first testimony is the Inscription of an Epistle of Ignatius the disciple of S. Iohn the Evangelist to the Romans where amongst other prerogatives he confesseth that it beareth sway ever all other Churches r Reply pag 10 The person cannot want authority and esteeme being an holy Bishop and Martyr Yet I am sure the Iesuite hath besmeared the face of this Epistle with falshood fraud for where will he finde this sway-bearing to be Oecumenicall and over all other Churches Bellarmine dare not be so bold but contractedly speakes in the Region of the Romans Å¿ Bellarm de Rom. Pont l. 2. c. 15. Primus igitur sit Beatus Ignatius qui Epistolam ad Romaâ—â—â— inscribiâ— Ignatius Ecclesiâ— sanctifiâ—aâ—ae quae praesideâ— in regione Romanorum and yet more largely then the truth of the Epistle will beare 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in loco Regionis Romanorum and what Patriarch had not the like to beare sway in divine matters over all the Churches of the Province or Provinces that were subordinate unto him Nay further the Arch-Bishoppes of Yorke and Dublin are styled Primates the one of England the other of Ireland and yet this doth not make them Universall Swayers of the Church in those Kingdomes much lesse to obtaine headship for their Churches above all others therein So that I am perswaded if ever God had given the Roman Church such a capitall priviledge the Catholicke Church would have had plainer wordes to have declared CHRISTS favour and particular bountie unto it But you may remember who it was that tooke our Saviour to the pinacle of the Temple that offered him all the Kingdomes of the world that hee might neare sway over them and you cannot forget mitte te dâ—â—rsum If in these things you will not reject Saâ—â— with your Master take heed you fall not from the pinacle of the Temple with him that you embrace as your Lord. It is more glorious for a Bishop to bee a fatherly guide and governour then a sway-bearing President and it would more commend the Roman Bishop to attend those suburbane Churches and Provinces committed to his care by the Nicene Councell as Ruffinus â— expounds it and not to distend his holines with the vaste thoughts of universall Regiment The second Witnesse of Antiquity hee maketh Cypriâ—â— and two places he citeth out of him The first out of his third Epistle in his first booke where this Father calleth the Romane Church Cathedram Petri â—â—clesium principalem the Chaire of Peter and the cheâ—â—â— Church Ruffinus histâ—ccles l. 1. c. 6. â—t ut apud Alexandriam in urbe Roma vetusia conâ—uâ—â—â—do serâ—â—ur ut vel ille 〈◊〉 vel hic â—â—â—aroicariatum ecclesiarum solicitudinem gerat And might not the Church of Antioch have the first title or stile And yet this would not bee sufficient to give that Church such an universall headship and preheminence Reply pag. 50 For the other phrase of Ecclesiam principalem it makes it not the
Sea that have any busines l Antiochenum Concil â— sub â—ulio can 9. Ad Metropolin omnes undique qui negotia videntur habere concurrant And who can perceive any other thing in Irenaeus for he doth not as the Iesuite interprets him make all Churches to agree with the Roman for her more powerfull principalitie but sheweth that all faithfull men from all parts of the world comming to Rome in regard it was the imperiall Seate might learne what Scriptures were delivered by the Apostles Peter and Paul in regard at that time in this Fathers judgment they were there conserved by the Church And so Chrysostome in like manner doth attribute to the Citty of Antioch the titles of the great Cittie the Metropolis of the whole world to which multitudes of Bishops and Doctors came for instructions and being taught by the people departed m Chryâ—ostom de Verbis E 〈◊〉 Vidi Dominum hom 4. Magna civitas ac totius orbis Metropolis Quot Episcopi quot doctores huc venerunt a populo docti discedunt In the next course appeareth Athanasius who if wee may beleive this Iesuite together with all the Bishops of Egypt did acknowledge themselves subject unto the same viz the Roman Church though farre distant The ground that moves the Iesuite to be so well perswaded is their Epistle written to Pope Marke with this Inscription To the holy Lord Venerable Marke sitting in the Apostolicall height Pope of the Roman Apostolicke Sea and of the Church Vniversall Athanasius and all the Bishops of Egypt send greeting Besides he tels us that in this Epistle this holy Father with his fellow Bishops ingenuously acknowledgeth the Roman Church to be the mother and head of all other Churches and therefore they professe themselves to belong thereunto and that both they and all theirs will alwayes live obedient unto the same n Reply pag. 51 Here is a heape of Fathers like Abdisu and his company in the Trent councelli a fayned Athanasius a troupe of Gipsies These know better how to cant M. Malone then to speake Athanasius or like Bishops of the Catholicke Church Such bastard birthes as these may advance your now scarlet Mistresse to be the Lais orflourishing Flora of the world but never prove that auncient holy Church of Rome to have taken upon her as her right to bee the Head and mother of the Catholicke Church as you desire to manifest thereby Bellarmine tels us that both these Epistles of Athanasius to Pope Marke and Marke to Athanasius are supposititious o Bellar. Script Eccles De Athanasio De Epistolis Athanasij ad Marcum Papam Marci Papae ad Athanasium constat ex ratione temporis eas epistolas esse supposititias and Baronius gives them the like honor p Baronius an Christi 336. sect 58. 5â— At Mercaâ—â—is merces nonnihil suspectae redduntur But M. Malone may be excused for why may not he aswell cite a bastard father for the Catholicke Roman mother as their Pope did a fictitious Canon for the Catholicke Roman Father q Concil Carthag 6 Yet I wonder all these paines should be taken when the headship of the Church might by a generall Councell be taken from the Roman and given to any other as Cameracensis r Camerace nsis in Vesp aâ— 3 pag. 380. affirmes His next evidence is the generall Councell of Chalcedon where Paschasinus and other Fathers assembled there doe manifestly declare the Pope to be caput universalis Ecclesiae Heal of the Church universall Å¿ Reply pag. 5â— The Iesuite should have forsaken this for feare of losse For surely it is no otherwise then they gave it to the Church of Constantinople which at that time when this Councell was held had the same cause for her headship to wit the Empire and Senate as old Rome had Whereupon thâ—se Bishops thought it very reasonable that she should enjoye the same Priviledges as old Rome had and in ecclesiasticall matters sicut illa majestatem habere be an head of the Universall Church t Concil Chalced Act 16. Eadem intentione permeti centuÌ„ quinquaginta Deo amantissimi Episcopiae qua sedi novae Roma privilegia tribuerunt rationabiliter judicantes imperio Senatu urbem oâ—naâ—aÌ„ aequis senioris Romae privilegijs frui in ecclesiasticis sicut illa majestatem habere And what doth the Councell give to Rome if she had this title more then hath beene given to other Bishops and Churches Did not Basill tearme Athanasius caput universorum the head of all u Basil epist 52 Nazianzen also saith of him that he gave lawes to the whole world x Nazianzen Orat in laudeÌ„ Athanasij Leges orbi terrarum praescribit And Chrysostome calleth Antioch the Metropolis of the whole world y Chrysost de verbis Esaiae Vidi Dominum c. hom 4. Magna civitas ac totius orbis metropolis and in another place the head of all the world z Chrysost hom 3. ad Populum Caput totius orbis Iustinian likewise calleth Constantinople caput omnium civitatum the Head of all citties a Institut l. â— de satisdat § vlt. Whereby it appeares that the title of head was given to many persons and places for their excellency in some kinde or other and not for their supremacy Besides this to any that will veiw the Councell it will evidently appeare that the Roman Bishop was considered as then he appeared in the Councel by his Legates and not as hee was in his private chaire and was reputed Head of the Church not in regard of his Sea or succession but because hee did presede by his Legate that Church representative which was there gathered together as Cyrill was Head of the Ephesine b Concil Ephesiâ— apud Binn in Epistola ad Imperator tom in act Concil 〈◊〉 cap. 8. Quia inquam triginta illi contra sacram Synodum â—anctissimorumque Episcoporum hic coactorum CAPVT Cyrillum sanctissimum Alexandriae Archiepiscopum blasphemam depositionis noram ut 〈◊〉 in se continentem protulerunt and Hosius of the Nicene Councell c Bellarm. l. 1â— de Concil c. 19. Athanasius in Epist ad solitariam vitam agentes dicit Hosium Principem fuisse in eoâ— Concilio ipsum esse qui composuit Symbolum quod dicitur Nicaenum so that the Iesuite prooveth nothing here but onely amazeth his Reader with this pretence of a Councell having not one word in this Councell that will give him the priviledge of a Semper-President because he is head but accompting him Head because by the generall Councell he was accepted President and did discharge that office by his Legate there present The Iesuite hath ommitted nothing Steven Arch-Bishop of Carthage in that Epistle to Damasus which he wrote in the name of three African Councels hath this title To our most blessed Lord sitting in the Apostolicall eminencie Pope Damasus the cheife Bishop of
all Prelates d Reply pag. 51 Which of these words M. Malone prooves Rome to be above Hierusalem the Hils of Babylon to bee higher then the mountaines of the Lord Not the title of Cheife Bishop for this gives the Bishop no power but place no authoritie but precedency Is it the other that he sits in the Apostolicall eminencie Who doubts that the Apostleship is attributed to other Bishops aswell as Rome that dare not adventure to imagine the effect of this appellation to be a spirituall Monarchie As Sidonius to Lupus praeter officium quod incomparabiliter eminenti Apostolatui tuo sine fine debetur e 〈◊〉 l. 4. Epist 4. So likewise in the renunciation of the Metropoliticall Sea of Heraclea thus speakes Theodoret Chritâ—pulus Deprecor thronum principatum sacerdotium adhortorque eum qui vocatur quem Paracletus ad Apostolatum suum separabit And if we will give credit to Pacianus Episcopi Apostoli nominantur Bishops are called Apostles f 〈◊〉 Epist 1. so that it was no unusuall thing to give good Bishops titles that were indeed proper and peculiar to the Apostles of Christ as Prophets Apostles Evangelists and the like And therefore this can bee no rest for him to depend upon For the two places to prove Rome the head of all Churches cited out of Victor Vticensis Ennodius g Reply pag. 51 we have answered thereunto that this title is but an appellation that betokens honour and precedencie not power and superioritie Surely the Church of Rome got not this height by such arguments neither doe I thinke that it could bee maintained if it wanted other strength and defence So that any may see his capitall argument getteth no more then what we yeeld unto him in What his other endeavours will effect we may easily conjecture He bringeth in S. Ambrose next h Reply ibid. but with as little helpe for the Roman headship as the former from whom he expected assistance But here is no truth in this quotation all neither true Author true word true consequence For first how many can we finde that reject those commentaries upon Paules Epistles as being none of Ambroses some charging them as upon the Epistle to the Romans with Pelagianisme from which I thinke the Iesuite will defend this Father Secondly let the Author be who he will these words seeme to be inserted Cujus hodie rector est Damasuâ— for if it be he as by some of the learned of your side is supposed that wrot the booke of questions of the old and new testament i Bellarm de Script Eccles De Ambrosio M. credibile igitur est auctorem horum commentariorum esse Hilarium Diaconum Romanum qui Luciferi schisma propagavit he lived * Quaeâ—â— 43. 300 yeares after Christ and so could not speake these words of Damasus who was Bishop 367. Or if he were Remigias Lugdnnensis as Maldonat thinkes k Maldonat in Ioh. c. 12. v. 32. who lived about the yeare 870. I thinke you will say he spared the truth if he had said Hodie rector est Damasus And who doth not see the poore consequence that followeth hereupon Damasus is Rector of Gods house therefore the Roman Church is the head of all other Churches By this I dare say a man may prove any Church the Head of another for to what Bishop is not this style given Paul calleth himselfe and Timothie and others that were called to the regiment of the Church ministers of Christ stewards of the mysteries of God * 1 Cor. 4. v. 1 and himselfe a minister of the Church * Coloss 1â— 25. But let Gods word prevayle as the Iesuite is affected what hath heerein beene said of Damasus that hath not beene said and by Rome it selfe of Andrew the Apostle who I feare will not be admitted to enjoy the conclusion though the Roman Breviarie give him the premisses Majestatem tuam Domine suppliciter exoramus ut sicut Ecclesiae tuae beatus Andraeas Apostolus existit Praedicator Rector O Lord we humbly beseech thy Majestie that as blessed Andrew the Apostle is Preacher and Rector of thy Church l Cassander Prec Eccles De sancto Andreâ— I feare he would smell like Spalato that from hence should conclude that the Church which Andrew governed as a Bishop was the mother church of all others or that he were the universall Bishop from whom every man should receive his faith Nay Bellarmine will not exclude others from this title m Bellarm. de Rom. Pont l. c. 11. Omnes enim Apostoli fuerunt capita Rectores Pastores Ecclesiae universae and yet none shall have what the Iesuite infers thereupon but his owne Roman mistresse After Ambrose comes S. Hierome whom he bringeth in saying I following none as fiâ—st but Christ am united in one Communion to thy blessedneâ— that is to say to Petâ—rs Chaire Vpon this rocke I know the Church is builâ— Whosoever eateth the Lambe out of this house he is prophane He that gathereth not with thee doth scatter that is to say He that belongeth not to Christ standeth upon the side of Antichrist n Reply pag. 5â— What our Iesuite would have here is plaine that consent with the Roman Church makes a Catholicke and therefore it must be the Mother Church Is there no difference betwixt Rome now and then Who could then argue her of falshood or false beleife It were a poore reaâ—on to aâ—gue from her being pure to her corrupt defylings But wherein lyeth the strength of this Testimony Surely in side-â—â—king communion as if it were certaine that to commucate with Rome and her Bishop is suâ—ficient to declare a man catholicke and that non-union to that head were as much as not to be of the body of Christ Now what force hath this testimonie for confirmation hereof For we see Popish confession will not acknowledge Sergius a catholicke though he communicated with Honorius o Concil â— VI Oecum 〈◊〉 Act. 12. 1â— Neither doe the present Romanists embrace those Arrianâ— as Catholicke for Liberiâ—â— his familiarity nor condemne Athanasius though condemned by their Pope p Bellarm. de Rom. Pont. l. 4 c. 9. Nam ut colligitur ex Athanasij verbis ex Epistolis ipsius Liberij duo mala Liberius commisit Vnum quod subscripsit in damnationem Athanasij Altemâ—â— quod cum Haereticis communicavit Binnius Not. it Epist Liberij ad Episcopoâ— Orien extat tomo 1. Concil Quisquis innocentem Athanasium à Cathoâ—icorum communioâ—e arcet impioâ— verò Arianoâ— ad communionis vinculum admitti audeat 〈◊〉 non Catholicum sed Arianum esse oportet Will you accompt all for Hereticks that have not obeyed your Romane Bishop What say you to Irenaeus q Eusebius hist Eccles l. 5. c. 23. Extant autem verba illorum qâ—i Victorem acriter reprehenderunt Equibus Irenaeus To Cyprian r Bellarm. de Rom
Pont. l 4. c. 7 Cyprianus pertinaciter restitit Stephano Pontifici doâ—â—â—ienti haereticos non rebaprixandâ—â— ut patet ex Epistola ejusdem Cypriani ad Pompeiâ—â— tamen non solum non fuit haereticus sed neque mortaliter peccavit et tamen Ecâ—â—esia Cypriaâ—um ut sanctam colit qui non videtur unquam resipuisse ab illo suo error To the African Bishops in the cause of Appeales Å¿ Epist Bonifacii â— ad Alex. Episc Aurelius enim praefatae Carthaginensis Ecclesiae olim Episcopus cum câ—llegis suiâ— instigante Diabolo superbire temporibus praedecessorum noâ—â—â—orum Bonifacii atque Coelestiâ—i contra Romanam Ecclesiam coepit Sed videâ—s se modo peccatis Aurelij Eulalius à Romanae Ecclesiae communione segregatum humiliam recognovit se pacem communionem Romanae Ecclesiae petens subscribendo non cum collegis suiâ— damnavit Apostolica auctoritate omnes Scripturas quae adversus Romanae Ecclesiae privilegia factae quoquo ingenio fuerunt Must all Africa not afford one Bishop that is catholick or Lay-man that is a right Christian and true Catholicke How are they acknowledged Martyrs How Saints Besides I wonder that this truth never appeared in Canon of Councell nor was ever registred by the Fathers in the ages mentioned with generall consent For that phrase upon this rocke I know the Church is built meaning S. Peters chaire I dare say with reverence to S. Hierome that it was either upon Christ or Peters confession of Christ to bee the Sonne of God as the Fathers in multitudes doe interprete it or upon Peter himselfe whom your owne would have thâ— rocke and not upon Peters â—haire which was not of such an unmooveable stability â—s that rocke ought to bee upon which the Church is builded Further I thinke Mr Malone will not deâ—y that the foundation of the Church was layde before Peter had any chaire either at Antioch or at Rome and if hee say S. Hierome meant not his chaire but in relation to Peter then who can deny but all the Apostles are rockes as Peter was Petrae omnes Apostoli All the Apostles are rockes upon which the Church is built saith Origen t Origen in Mat. hom 1. The Iesuite proceedes and brings two places from St Augustine if we will believe him to bee the Author of the questions of the old and new testament For to make this other then a counterfeit he shall never bee able but what saith he that may procure such an universal preheminence to this onely Father Why hee is called caput fidelium Head of the faithfull u Reply pag. 51. So may every Preist in his Parish unlesse his flocke be Infidels And for the other title Pastor gregis Dominici Pastor of our Lords flock Reply ibid. What Bishop is not Pastor of the flocke of Christ but Papall Bishops who poore Delegates have not their institution from CHRIST but as poore hirelings from the Papacie In the second place the Iesuite tels us thot S. Augustiâ—â— giveth this testimonie of the Church of Rome that the Principalitie or supremacie of the See Apostolicke hath alwayes borne sway therein y Reply pag. 52 This Father will not serve the Iesuites turne without a glosse Principalitie Supremacie must be the same so the Iesuite would have it for if this be not true Augustine forsakes his engager But the Iesuite may know that principalitie is not Papall Dominion there was a primatuâ— or principalitie of the Church of Constantinople z Theodoret. l. 2 c 27. and a primatus or primacie of the Church of Hierusalem 〈◊〉 l. 7. â— 6. into which seates ascended none of these Monarcâ—s He commeth to the principalitie of a See or Bishoprick that entereth by orderly election as Augustine acknowledgeth the Bishop of Rome to have done And a man may get a principalitie in the Church by sedition and ambition as Leo expresseth himselfe to the Bishops of Africke Leo Epist 87. ad Episc Africanos Principatus autem quem seditio exâ—orfit auâ— ambitus occupavit etiam si â—oribus atque actibus non â—ssendâ—t ip 〈◊〉 tamen iniâ—â—â—â—ui est 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 What hee can picke out of the word Apostolicall hath beene answered before Next to the Master he produceth the Scholler Prosper in two places but to no more purpose or advantage then the former For who will deny the Church of Rome in Prospers time in regard of her outward eminencie to bee made the head of pastorall honour unto the world c Reply pag. 52 and that she was more conspicuous by being a towre to Religion in defending the faith against hereticks then by exercising any power not temporall * No such word in the originall quotation out of Prosper as the Iesuite addeth but Ecclesiasticall that was given him by Councels Whereby we may see the difference betwixt Rome now and then their eminencie their honour then was extended arce religionis by defâ—nding the true faith Your holy Fathers now seeke advancement solio potestatis by obtaining a Monarchie and bringing all powers but hell that must triumph over you * Revel 19. â—â— into subjection under their feete But the Iesuite confident of Prosper telleth us Therefore the holy Bishop 〈◊〉 doth testifie how in his dayes The whole world agreed with Pope Siricius in one and the same fellowship of communion d Reply pag. â—â— Here is a Logicall therefore Prosper telleth us that Rome the See of Peter is made the head of pastorall honour unto the world c. therefore Optaâ—â—â— that lived many Decades of years before him doth testifie how in his dayes the whole world agreed with Pope Siriâ—â—us in one and the same fellowship of communion We will leave the inference the evidence is nothing For was there not reason that they should doe as they did to wit agree in truth with the eminentest opposing Bishop for otherwise they should have beene Donatists Make your Popes as Siricius was and we will agree with them in communion not because Popes but because they â—defend the true Doctrine against Donatisticall and hereticall rashnes Doe you thinke Hierome thought himselfe bound to Liberius his Communion when he styled him an Arian e Hieroâ— Catalog Scrip. Eccles Fortunatianus Episcopus Liberium Romanae Vrbis Episcopum ad subscriptioâ—â—â— Haereseâ—â— compuiit Ambrose would not endure to give a stupide consent to the Church of Rome itselfe unlesse he saw reason for it lib. 3. de sacram cap. 1. In omnibus cupio sequi Romaâ—â—â— Ecclesiaâ— sed tamen nos omnes sensum habeâ—â—â— Id quod alibi rectius servatur nos custodimus Heere you may see how the Auncients did adhere to the Roman Bishop not in every thing from opinion of his authoritie infallibilitie mother-hood or mistresseship for they thought in other places something might be more rightly observâ—d but so farre as they might convince them of the truth of their doctrine and profession
not of an excellencie of Power Neither did Peter take away schisme by absolute definition as your Pope assumeth authoritie to doe but by orderly disposition with Apostolicall consent His third instance is Nazianzen b Reply ibid. But doth he give Peter what will satisfie the Iesuite a monarchy The Church cannot endure two universall Bishops two Monarchs Had Peter it by Nazianzens testimony Surely how could Iames Iohn inherite that blessing yet Nazianzen puts them together Petrus Ioannes Iacobus qui prae alijs erant numerabantur Peter and Iohn and Iames who both were and are reckoned before others c Nazianzen de moderat in disput servanda Here Nazianzen his prae alijs is not Papall not Pontificall neither then could Peters advancement be a Monarchy In like manner all that the Iesuite urgeth is nothing to the point that he ought to prove That Peter was Captaine or cheife of the Disciples as Epiphanius styles him the most excellent Prince of the Apostles in Cyrils judgement d these Reply pag 54 are but titles of excellency which were given him for his personall gifts and endowments Paul in this manner compares himselfe to the very cheife Apostles * 1. Cor. 11. v. 5. and Eusebius Emissenus or whosoever was the Author of the Homilie De Natal utriusque speaking of Peter and Paul tearmeth them Princes of Christians from their order and gifts and further saith si ille primus iste precipuus if the one was the first the other was the cheife It was familiar to give termes of excelleÌ„cy of power to those that exceeded in gifts Nicodemus is stiled Prince of the Iewes e Cyrillus l 2. In Iohannem cap. 41. Nicodemus Iudaeorum Princeps and who knowes not that Aristotle is ever mentioned as Prince of Philosophers So likewise his supposititious Ambrose speakes not of any other Primacie but of personall eminencie For he maketh Paul from his owne words to be no lesse then the first Apostles in dignitie and other excellent performances though he were after them in time which that Author presumes cannot weaken the Apostles testimonie of himselfe in regard Iohn preached before Christ and baptized CHRIST Andrew followed CHRIST before Peter who notwithstanding received the Primacie f Ambros in 12 cap. post ad Corinthios Hocerant quod Apostolus Paulus Hoc ergo dicit quia minor non est neque in praedicatione neque in signis faciendis Apostolis praecessoribus suis non dignitate sed tempore Nam si de tempore praescriben dum putatur ante coepit Ieannes praedicare quam Christus non Christus Ioannem sed Ioannes Christum baptizavit Num ergo sie judicat Deus Denique prior sequutus est Andreas Salvatorem quam Petrus tamen Primatum â—on accepit Andreas sed Petrus Heere the drift is that if Paul were as excellently qualified as the Apostles his afterbirth could not prejudge his equalitie and if Peter were more eminent in gifts then his brother Andrew Andrew his precedencie in time could not deprive Peter of his eminencie of gifts The Iesuite concludes not but bringeth Eusebius telling us Peter the Apostle by Nation a Galilean was the first Bishop of the Christians g Reply pag. 54. This the Iesuite perceived would conclude nothing and therefore added his ridiculous glosse Iames was Bishop of Hierusalem others of other places but Peter was Bishop of all the Christians h Reply ibid. Poore folly who deprived them of their Apostleships that their Bishoprickes were so contracted that they ceased to bee Bishops and Super-intendents of the Christian Church Paul professeth that the care of all Churches were upon him * 2. Cor. 11. 28. Pope Innocent called Chrysostome the great Doctour of the whole world i Canisius Fâ—com Patrum mitio Catechismi Innocentius primus pontifex in Epistola ad Arcadium Impera torem Ejecistie throno suo re non judicatâ magnum totius Orbis Doctorem and other Fathers have had these titles given them ordinarily whereby their esteeme in the Universall Church hath beene declared as Origen the next Master after the Apostles of the Church k Sixâ—us Senens l. 4 tit Origenes Didymus in primis appellat cum secundum post Apostolos Ecclesiarum magistrum so that he is preferred before your Popes Athanasius an agregious pillar of the Church whose Tenets were esteemed for the lawe of right faith l Nazianzea Orat. in laudem ejus Athanasius egregium Ecclesiae columen cujus dogmata pro orthodoxae fidei lege habebantur Basil the mouth of the Church m Greg. Nissen in vita S. Ephr. Syri Cesaream Cappadociae divino Spiritu ductus ipse Os Ecclesiae auream illam doctrinae lusciniam Basilium vidit and Hilary the Pillar of the Church of Christ n Bellarm. de Script Eccles De S. Hilario S. Hilarius Doctor maximus Ecclesiae Catholicae columna meritò habitus sit But to remove this title see whether Paul be inferior in Chrysostome judgment I lle alter Michael Christianorum Dux Alter Aaron totius mundi populis inunctus sacerdos He another Michael the Archangell or Captaine of Christians An other Aaron an annointed Preist to the people of the whole world o Chrys hom 8 de laudibus Pauli And Cyprian when he was sought for to be martyred was tearmed the Bishop of Christians p Cyprian Ep. 69. Siquis tenet vel possidet de bonis Caecilij Cypriani Episcopi Christianorum which is the same with Pontifex Christianorum so that this title gives not Peter this Universall Monarchie any more then others But the Iesuite may know those words cited by him are not truely the words of Eusebius for Scaliger delivering him truly to the world findes not there the Iesuites quotation there being neither in it natione Galilaeus nor Christianorum Pontifex wherby we see the Monarchy wil stoop to any corruptioÌ„s Neither are the Iesuites next following quotations any better For the two places cited from S. Augustine the first cited out of his 124 serm de tempore where S. Peter is termed the Head the very Crowne of the Church the second urged from the same Father or whosoever els was the Author of the questions upon the old new Testament For even as in Christ were found al the causes of mastership so after our Savior all are contained in Peter for Christ ordained him their head that he might be the Pastor of our Lords flock q Reply pag. 54 they are none of his the first being suspected by many the second rejected by all yea so despised by Bellarmine that he makes the Author no Catholick r Bellarm l. de gra primi hominis c. 3. Ex his intelligi potest auctorem quaestionum novi ac veteris testamenti non solum non esse S. Augustinum sed neque esse hominem Catholicum but an Heretick Å¿ Idem
de effectu Sacraâ—u l. 2. c. 10 Respondeo primo librum citatum non esse Augustini sed alicujus haeretici qui multa docet contra fidem contra Augustinum that taught many things both against faith against S. Augustine I doe not urge this as if his testimonies from hence were of any strength they being answered in substance before but because you may see that they will avoyde no witnesses though in other causes they reject them that will advantage their cause For the titles given to S. Peter by Chrysostome as Cheife Captaine Head of the Apostles t Reply pag. 54. they all have received answere before For we acknowledge Peter Head which is the same with cheife of the Apostles otherwise how could Paul compare himselfe to the very cheife if there had beene no cheife And if the Apostle had bene by divine institution Paules Soveraigne how could Paul compare himselfe with him he himselfe being divinely assisted But the Iesuite making a pause is willing for brevities sake to let passe manie other holy Fathers and Doctors of the auncient Church who are most copious in the confirmation of Peters primacy over the rest of the Apostles u Reply pag. 54. And you have seene for what kinde of Primacie it is that the Fathers speake not a Primacie of power to which all the members of the Church must stoop but of Order excellency gifts graces for the Fathers will expell from their mindes that will sincerely read them all conceite that Peter had a soveraigne Monarchy over the Apostles See Peters Primacie the same with that of Iames and Iohn for so saith Clemens Peter and Iames and Iohn after the assumption of our Saviour although they were preferred before others of our Lord himselfe yet did not challenge this glory to themselves x 〈◊〉 hist Eccles l. 2. c. 1. Clemens hoc asserit Petrus enim inquiâ— Iacobus Ioannes post 〈◊〉 Servatoris quamvis ab ipso quoque Domino alijs essent praelati gloriam tamen hanc sibiipsis non vendicaâ—â—â—â— â—â—â— Neither is Paul by Chrysostome made lesse then Peter himselfe and from S. Paul his owne testimony Gal. 2. 8. And now saith that ancient Father doth Paul shew himselfe to be equall to the rest of the Apostles in honour neither doth he compare himselfe to those others but unto the very Cheife declaring that every one of them had obtained alike dignity y Chrysost in Epist ad Gal. c. 2. Iamque se caeteris honore parem ostendit nec se reliquis illis sed ipsi summo comparat declarans quod horum unusquisqueâ— parem sortitus sit dignitatem Ambrose knowes not whether should bee preferred z Ambros serm 66. B. Petrus Paulus eminent inter universos Apostolos peculiari quâdam prerogativa praecellunt utrum inter ipsos quis cui praeponatur incertum est but Cyprian and Hierome make them all equall Christ after his resurrection saith Cyprian gave equall power to all the Apostles a Cyprian de Vnitate Ecclesiae Apostolis omnibus post resurrectionem suam parem potestatem tribuat And the rest of the Apostles were even the same that Peter was being endued with the like fellowship both of honour and power b Ibid Hoc erant utique caeteri Apostoli quod fuit Petrus pari consortio praediti honoris potestatis Hierome also speaketh as much The Church is founded equally upon all the Apostles all received the kingdome of Heaven ex equo super eos Ecclesia fortitudo solidatur c Hierom. l. 1 cont Iâ—rin At dicis super Petrum fundatur Ecclesia licet id ipsum in alio loco super omnes Apostolos fiat cuncti claves regni 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ex â—â—â—â— c. So that the Iesuite had done well if he had taken up before if he had not troubled his Reader with proving that kinde of Primacy which is not denyed him and had forborne the attempting a proofe of that which the Fathers will never graunt But howsoever he resolves that Optatus Bishop of Milevetum must not be let passe in regard he will seeme to catechize our Answerer himselfe very handsomely in these words Thou canst not deny but that thou knowest full well that the Episcopall Chaire hath beene first given unto Peter in the cittie of Rome wherein Peter the head of the Apostles hath sitten whence also hee was called Cephas In the which one Chaire Vnitie might be kept of all men least the rest of the Apostles should maintaine every one their singular Chaires to themselves so that now he should be a schismaticke and an offender who would seeme to raise up another against this onely Chayre d Reply pag. 54. This place of Optatus if the Papists doe rightly interpret it must enclose a notorious falshood for can it be affirmed with truth by Optatus that in his time the Apostolicall Chayre was onely placed in the Citty of Rome when other Apostles had their severall seates and Chaires in other Citties also as Iames at Hierusalem aswell as Peter at Rome all which were visible and conspicuous to the Church before Optatus his time as we may see out of Tertullian Percurâ—e Ecclesias Apostolicas apud quas ipse â—â—huc cathedra Apostolorum suis locis praesidentur c Tertul. praescrip con haereâ—â—â—â— And therefore Optutus his Chayre cannot be interpreted for the onely chayre of the Catholicke Church placed by Peter at Rome from which whosoever did separate himselfe upon what cause soever should be a Schismaticke But Optatus being rightly understood declareth thus much and no more That Peter having his seate placed at Rome and yet Eusebius maketh him not the first Bishop therâ— f Euseb hist Eccl. l. 3. c. â—â— 19. the Apostles did forbeare to place their seates in that Cittie and therefore judgeth the Donatists schismaticall that placed another Bishop of their Schisme in Rome contra singularem cathedram which this father sheweth was ever one in Rome in ea sedit primus Petrus succedit Linus Lino Clemens So that the Donatist Permenian with his fellowes were esteemed Schismaticks by Optatus not because they separated themselves from the Vnitie of the Roman Church as now they understand it but in regard by placing a Bishop of their faction in Rome they contemned the established policie of the Church that required in one Citty but one Episcopall Chayre Whereby we see that Optatus is so farre from catechizing the Answerer that hee doth checke the Iesuite and his faction that in like manner as the Donatists have done doe now intrude upon our Episcopall Chaires in Ireland titular Bishops of their faction of Schisme not forbearing the chayre of S. Patricke it selfe But drawing to conclusion of this point the Iesuite could wish that both the Answerer and all his Adherents would listen well unto S. Leo who saith that Peter onely in all the world is chosen
edita â—â—gua Sed visum est 318. patribus Sancto spiritu repletis in praeâ—â—â—â—o Concilio congregatis maximè jam dicto Alexandro Apostolicae sedis Apoâ—â—â—sarijs ut decem capitula a dunarentur alijs atque congruis locis inscrerentur ad forâ—â—â— septuaginta discipulorum vel potius totius orbis terrae linguarum sepungiâ—â—â— discipulorum tam excellentis concilij fierent capitula And if these bee not sufficient to marke out an Impostor let us heare what their owne speake and you shall find Bellarmine accompting them both viz. Athanasius his epistle and Markes â—â—â— script supposititious c Bellarm. de scriptor Eccles ut 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 De Epistolis Athanasi ad Marcum Papam Marci Papâ— ad Athanasium 〈◊〉 extratione temporis â—â—â— epistolas esse supposititiâ—s Baronius takes them as Coâ—â—entitious and forged by certaine well-willers of the Roman Church d Baron tom 3. ad an 336 〈◊〉 â—â— 59. â—◠〈◊〉 ille 〈◊〉 Architectur bene esse consultum assertion 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 de Nicâ—â—o Canone extra numerum vicentarium allegatum Hoâ—â—â—â—â—â—â—◠〈◊〉 〈◊〉 qui ignoravit ex apertissimâ— veritate solutionem 〈◊〉 For the second Epistle to Felix c Reply pag. â— if we observe what the Iesuite urgeth out of him unlesse we be wilfully perverse wee cannot thinke Athanasius and the Bishops of Egypt to bee so farre from sence as this Epistle makes him that they dare not presume to yeeld to the Errors of their enimies the Arrians without acquainting the Pope therewithall as if with his dispensation they might adhere to any corruption whatsoever Besides the Rescript to this Epistle was dated Agario Iuliano Cass f Vide rescriptum hujusmodi apud Biâ—â—ium tom 1. conciliorum when as never any that did number the Roman Consuls did make mention of Agarius And also the Rescript declares what wee may conceive both of it and the Epistle of Athanasius to wit that they are of no better stampe then the Decretall Epistles the latter part of the Rescript being taken out of the latter part of the Epistle of Felix the first to the Bishops of Frannce And to close up this Binnius will tell this Iesuite that the Epistle it selfe is of suspected birth both from the time when it was written and other circumstances g Bin. tom 1. Concil in 〈◊〉 in Epist Athanasij c. ad Felicem Felicis ad Atha Haec Epistola sub nomine Athanasij ad Felicem ex synodo Alexandâ—â—na scripta ab Episcopis â—â—gypti Thebâ—â—dis Lybiae de fide suspecta est tum quod hoc tempore quâ— Athanasius â—â—ga clapsus in cremo latitabat 〈◊〉 â—â—â— Liberio 〈◊〉 Episcopi orthodoxi decrâ—â— Imperatoris 〈◊〉 〈…〉 quod hunc epistola ad 〈◊〉 scripta ipsum 〈◊〉 de sua ipsi â—â—◠〈◊〉 〈◊〉 reddat and Baronius doth also disparage this Epistle and derides the Merchant that maketh vse of such baggage Commodities h Baron Annal. tom â— ad Annum 217. â—â—â— 66. Quae fertur Athanasij nomine ad Felicem Romanum 〈◊〉 ex Synido Alexandrina scripta haâ—d aeque probatur c. At ipse 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 From whence wee may see how this Iesuite is voyde of all shame who as if he had hit the Eagle on the eye doth not onely produce these counterâ—â—its but swolne with impudencie in his wonted manner of rayling bitterly reviles the Answerer for justly telling him that the good Fathers assembled in that Synode neuer dreamed of such a busines nor established any such Decrees or Canons at all Beholde heere saith he how precisely this holy Father doth alledge the Canons and decrees of the Nicene Councill for the authority of the Roman Church and for her absolute Supremacie over all other Christian Churches throughâ—â— the world And what will not our Adversaries venture to say and doe against the Catholicke Truth when as they stick not with brasen faces to avouch that the good Fathers assembled in that Synode never dreamed oâ— such a businesse c. But I leave it to the judgment of the unpartiall Reader to determine whether the abovesaid Testimony of S. Athanasini given but twenty yeares or thereabouts after the said Nicene Councell doth not sufficiently bruise and hurst their face of brasse and force them to swallow downe againe their enormious untruthes and calumniations i Reply pag. 59 Heere wee may see a discourse fit for a Iesuite all confidence â—â—t builded upon no truth Cardinall Bellarmine confesseth the Iesuites proofe from the Epistle of Athanasius to Pope Marke and the Rescript to Athanasius to be unsound k Bellarm. de Rom Pontâ—â— l. 2. c 25. Quod illi â—anâ—nes non sunt omnes probant nonâ—â—â—lti ex Epistoâ—â— Athanasij ad Marcum Papam in quaâ—e tit exemplum Nicaeni concilij ex Romani Pontificis scrinio 〈◊〉 â—â—empla quae erant Alexandriae fuisse creâ—â—â— ab Ariaâ—â—â— Sed hoc 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ◠〈◊〉 〈◊〉 â—â— verè NON â—â— SOLIDV â—â— and what sound evidence he hath brought from his INDIAN Tale and the other Epistle to Felix hath beene declared So that the Iesuite may consider that Fures clamorem theeves may slye from his voyce but true men tremble not at the noyse He may strain himselfe against brazen faces enormious untruths calumniations but whom doth he wound but himselfe that among all the ancient Fathers cannot bring one Argument for these Arabicke Canons but these false birthes lying counter feit and yet doth swagger triumph rage and swell against him that justly putts desiance to his folly But leaving these counterfeits the Iesuite would â—â—â—swade us that he will proceede in laying downe the judgâ—â—â—â— of the anncient Fathers concerning the derivation of S. Peterâ— supreme jurisdiction unto all his lawfull Successours in the Romane See Reply pag. â— The Iesuite doth well to distinguish those that follow from those that in this point hee hath alreadie alleadged but with whom doth he beginne With him I suppose that will faile him when it commeth to tryall and that is S. Augustine m Augâ—in Psal mum contra partem Donati who expresseth what the Iesuite is to prove most plainely Reckon saith he the Preists even from Peters seat and observe who to whom hath ever succeeded in that ranke of Fathers that same is the rocke which the proud gates of hell doe not overcome n Reply pag. â—â— Loe here saith the Iesuite S. Augustine maketh the very succession of Bishops in the Roman See that invincible rocke upon which Christ built his Church forasmuch as it is grounded in Peter and thereby is partaker of the promise of Christ that the gates of hell shall not prevayle against it o Reply pag. 59 S. Augustine speaketh nothing here to the Iesuites purpose for he neither maketh Peter the Monarch of the Church nor the Pope his sole Successor in that Monarchie Neither doth S. Augustine as the Iesuit affirmeth make the very successioÌ„
of Bishops in the Roman See that invincible rock upon which Christ built his Church For who will dreame that Father to esteeme that present seate or succession to be the rocke for any other reason then because they held the rocke confessed by Peter And in this sence not only Peters successors at Rome but all other successors of Peter the rest of the Apostles might bestiled rocks p Origen in Math hom 1. Petra est 〈◊〉 omnis qui imitator est Christi ex quo bibebant qui bibebant de spiritali consequenti petra Et super omni hujusmodi petra aedificatur ecclesia Dei In singulis enim quibuscunque perfectis qui habent in se congregationem verborum oâ—erum sensuum omnium qui hujusmodi beatitudinem operantur 〈◊〉 Eccelesia Dei cui portae non praevalent inserorum Si autem â—per unum illum Petrum arbitraris Vniversam Ecclesiam aedificari à Deo quid dicis de Iacobo Iohanne filijs tonitrui vel de singulis Apostolis Vere ergo ad Petrum quidem dictum est â—u es Petrus c. tamen omnibus Apostolis omnibus quibuscunque perfectis fidelibus dictum viâ—â— retor For why may not those churches that cleave fast to the rock of faith be called rocks to stay and adheare unto q Iranaeus l. 4. c. 43. Ijs qui in Ecclesijs sure presbyteris oporter obaudire qui successionem habent ab Apostolis quicunque cum Episcopatus successione charisma veritatis certum secundùm beneplacitum patris acceperunt Idem c. 44. Adherere his qui Apostoloâ—um doctrinam oustodiunt cum presbyterij ordine sermonem sanum conversatio nem sine offen sa praestant as well as the Roman her Bishops in regard Augustine saith in that very Psalme that if any man come full of the Catholicke faith wee are wont to give eare unto him as unto these men r August in Psalm contra partem Donati Talis si quis ad te veniat plenus Catholica side Quales illoâ— sanctos viros omâ—es solemus audire But what makes the former words to the Iesuites conclusion Doth S. Augustine here declare Roman Preists Successors to Peter in a Monarchicall estate or such unmoveable grounded rocks that all the Churches in time to come must be grounded upon them Surely the sesuite will never finde this to bee S. Augustines meaning but from what the Roman Preists had beene and from what for the present they were alluding to our Saviors words he doth stile them a rock that the gates of Hell did not at that time prevaile against making them a good directory to truth whilst they adheared to the Apostles doctrine For by the course of that Psalme we cannot conceive S. Augustine to have thought otherwise in regard he doth not give the Bishop of Rome power to end and determine that controversie but maketh Donatus his request to have his cause heard at Rome to be unjust telling us what the Emperour had ordained that divers Bishops Preists should heare the matter not the Roman Bishop alone Å¿ August ibid Nam Donatus cùm volebat Africam totam obtiâ—ere Tunc Iudices transmarinos petijt ab Imperatore Sed haectam unjust petitio non erat de charitate Hoe ipsa veritas clamaâ— quam vclo modo refeâ—e Nam consensit Impeâ—â—â—or â—â—â—â—t quae soderenâ— Romae Sacerdotes qui tunc possent Caeciliano cuâ— illâ— audite which he would not have done I suppose if the Bishop of Rome had had that Monarchy by Apostolicall succession which now they pretend by that title to enjoy But there is not a word of Augustine that proveth the Roman Bishops Successors of Peter in any office power or Bishoprick or so much as maketh him Bishop of Rome That he had his seate there where the Roman Preists had their Succession he insinuateth but in this place he telleth us no more nor so much as Eusebius who beginneth the Roman Bishop with Linus t Eusebius hist Eccles l. 3. c. â— Linus verò primum post Petri Pauli Martyrium Romanae Ecclesiae Episco patum sorâ—iâ—ut est for the words of Eusebius after the martyrdome of Peter and Paul can no more make Peter Bishop of Rome then Paul and I thinke they will not admit two Bishops at once in one Citie Much more might be urged to shew that the Iesuite hath produced S. Augustine to testifie that which hee never thought of But I will come to Chrysostome whom the Iesuite produceth expecting much from him because hee nameth Peters Successours Why saith he did Christ shed his bloud but to regaine those sheepe the care of whom he committed both to Peter and to Peters Successours u Reply pag. 59 I aske the Iesuite whether he thought the Apostles had no commission from Christ to have a care of his sheepe whether Goe ye into all the world and preach the Gospell to every creature * Marke 16. 15 did commaund no care of CHRISTS flocke or whether there be no successors of Peter but the Bishops of Rome Cardinall Cusanus cannot deny that all Bishops are the successours of Peter x Nich. de Cusa Card. l. 2. De concord cath c. 13. Non possumus negare omnes Episeopos esse ejusdem successores Scilicet Petri And S. Chrysostome in the very place cited by the Iesuite expresseth himselfe to be free from the conceit that the Bishops of Rome are S. Peters onely Successours For why should he perswade Basil to be minde full of his dutie hee being a Bishop from this reason because CHRIST said to Peter Lovest thou me Feede my sheepe and because the care of his sheepe are committed to Peter and his successours y See Chrysostomes testimony produced before in the beginning of the Section if hee had not beene one of them This title I have shewed before doth belong to other Bishops as well as Romane neither is it denyed by Bellarmine himselfe z Bellarm de Rom. Pont. l. â— c. 23. Respondeo in Apostlatu continâ—â— Episcopatum Episcopes succedere Apostolis and therefore I may forbeare here further to presse it The next is Leo but I shall not neede to speake to that which is urged from hâ—m here in regard I shall have more occasion in the next Section He loved to be great and to make Peter greater then he should be for his owne sake as I have in some things before declared shall hereafter more fully shew Yet all that hee desired I suppose was not so great licentiousnesse as the Bishop of Rome desireth and would have all to attribute unto himselfe Now commeth the Bishop of Ravenna Peter Chrysologus in his Epistle to Eutyches You are not much beholding to that See that you should bring a Bishop from thence to give testimony for you but what saith hee Wee desire thee honorable brother that thou wilt listen dutifully unto those things which
either 〈◊〉 a Neasâ—uig or mac a 〈◊〉 in regard their fathers villany adhâ—â—eth to that name and addeth afflictioâ— to their mindes but for the sonnes of Preists and Bishops amongst us what repining humour can possesse them seeing they were borne in honourabâ— Dist 56. cap. Osius Osius Papa suit silius Stephani subdiaconi Bonifacius Papa â—uit silius â—ucundi presbyteri Faelix Papa filius Felicis presbyteri de titulo Fasciolae Agapitus Papa â—ilius â—ordiâ—ni presbyteri Theodorus Papa 〈◊〉 Theodoâ—â— Episcopi de 〈◊〉 Hierosotyma Sylverium Papa filius Sylverij Episcopi Romae Deusdedit Papa 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 subdiaâ—â—◠〈…〉 natione 〈◊〉 〈…〉 matrimâ—ny their patents living in the rule appointed by the Apostle But the Iesuite as 〈◊〉 of his sports commeth in good sober sadnesse to wonder that in such an audience the Answerer blushed not to affirme that Rome had little to alleadge for this perfâ—rment but onely that S. Peter was crucified in it But what can the Iesuite say it hath more Why he tells us That 〈◊〉 can â—ll 〈◊〉 that the Apostle did relinquish Antiâ—â—h to 〈◊〉 his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 her u Reply pag. â—â— As if the Bishop and Monarch of the whole Church 〈◊〉 not 〈◊〉 a double mansion several places of 〈◊〉 Did their Popes relinquish Rome by fitting in the chaire â—â— Aâ—ignion Or was it possible that hee that kept the Bishoprick of the whole Church could relinquish the Seâ— of Antioch by his so journing at Rome The â—â—suite would perswade it and that it was done by commaund For saith he as 〈◊〉 Writers ◠〈◊〉 Papa 〈…〉 doe relate Peter was commanded so to doe by CHRIST himselfe Reply pag. â— Here is nothing to make the inheritance to descend upon the Church of Rome from divine testimony And Bellarmine indeede conceived the matter onely probable â—â—remptorily hee concludeth not that the Bishop of Rome by divine right is Peters Successour y Bellarm. de Rom. Pont. l. â— c. 1â— Et quo â—â—am â— Mar 〈◊〉 Papa i â—â— ad 〈◊〉 sâ—â—â—bit 〈…〉 S. 〈◊〉 in 〈◊〉 contra 〈◊〉 Athanasius in Apâ—logia 〈…〉 Marry 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 nor â—â—â— improbabile Dominum 〈…〉 ut â—edem 〈…〉 â—â—geret 〈◊〉 uâ— Romaâ—â—s Episcopus 〈◊〉 â—â— succedâ—ret sed 〈◊〉 â—â— hoc â—â—t 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ratio 〈◊〉 non est 〈◊〉 institutione 〈◊〉 quâ— in â—â—â—gelio legitur neither will he 〈◊〉 it of faith that Peters seate was there onely hâ—◠〈◊〉 that it is most probable pâ—â— credendum and he will â—â—count you a Catholicke if you beleive it z Bellarm de Rom Pont. l 4. c 4. Accedit quod 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Christâ—m imperasse 〈◊〉 ut Romae â—edem â—ollocaret non â—â—men 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ut 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ibi collâ—caret Quoâ—iam ergo â—on constat 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Peâ—â—o ut Romae 〈◊〉 colâ—ocaret ideo non est de 〈◊〉 divine 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Romae â—â—dem esse constitutam sed â—amen ut 〈◊〉 est 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Is this the Cardo upon which all the Catholicke Romane â—aith turâ—eth Is there no more certainery in this ground-worke Must Peters inheritance descend certainely upon him who by divine right cannot proove himselfe to bee his Heire Must one Witnesse and that a knowne Counterfeit and â—â— Marcâ—lluâ— a Haec est una illarum epistolarum quas 〈…〉 esse 〈◊〉 tell us a story and obtâ—ine an Empire This is too great a reward Now whereas hee tells us that Peter was Bishop of Rome the space of â—â—ve and twentie yeares Antioch having had him but for 〈◊〉 and consequently that he laboured more fruitfully and performed all more gloriously in her then in Antioch and finally that in her even by Christs appointment also he glorified God by the triumph of his blessed death and martyrdome b Reply pag. â—â— We tell him that when he attempts to prove it hee shall not want his answere That Peter was at Rome preached there was crucified it is not much to grant him but that hee was there such a Bishop as Linus c. hee cannot prove some making him such a Bishop as Paul was others making him nonâ— at all But the Iesuite chargeth the most learned Answerer with judging according to the flesh when hee made the Apostles death and martyrdome a slender cause why Peter should respect her so much And further telleth us that surely it is no slender cause for the Catholicke Church to sing therefore of her with solemne joy in this sort Thrice happy Rome that with the purple blood Of such great Princes stand'st adorn'd and blesâ— Not thine owne worth but their deserving good Crownes theâ— on earth the fairest and the best c Reply pag. 61 62. This most grave and reverend Lord I confesse hath nor as some of you could have wish'd put off the 〈◊〉 the 〈◊〉 man in the Iesuiticall forme d Hassen Mullerus de Votis Iesuitarum c. 6 Si Nobiles illoâ—â—m societatem ingrediantur habitu veniant splendido ac precioâ—o permittunt â—t triduum eâ—m reservent quo lapso cum â—â—ponere alteri dare Societatis habitum â—â—duere jubenâ—â—â— Et hoc est secundùm illos veterem exuere 〈◊〉 seipâ—â—m mottiâ—â—cais alteri suâ—◠〈◊〉 â—â—â— neither as your Popes have â—nterpreted 〈◊〉 I. Epist 3. ad 〈◊〉 the Apostle Rom 8. â— â— â— but as God himselfe hath commaunded wherein the World is his Witnesse and I thinke it but time spent to justifie him But let the Iesuite prove this Argument to bee convincing if hee bee able his singing and other passages will not worke the feate The Saints in Rome wee know as the Church otherwhere were much confirmed by the patient sufferings of the Martyrs but this doth not excuse much lesse lift up Rome Did Abels blood that â—â—yed for vengeance plead then for glory Did innocent blood theâ— advance your Monarchy that now you make your selves drunke with the blood of the Saints Hierusalem lost heâ— Crowne by the Prophets blood must the Apostles triple Rome Yet if Rome get such an height in martyring the servant what might Hierusalem pleade that crucified the Lord These you see are silly inventions but the strongest pillars of the Romane faith The Iesuite hath done his doe yet he telleth us Much more might be said and now intreates the Gentle Reader to trophey him for his victory But hee hath not yet cured the wound that hath beene given him though hee conceiteth all faire smoothe and without scarre He hath laboured to make Fathers and Saints the Popes serving-men the World his Citie Heaven the Church and Purgaâ—ory his Provinces but as you see all in vaine The downe-right blowes he perswades himselfe to be given we feele not our sheildâ— are not peirced neither are the least of our bul warkes overthrowne SECT IX THis Section shewes that the Iesuite having overshot himselfe in a tearme would now make it good by an interpretation and thereupon hee enquires Whether the Church of Rome may
rightly be tearmed unspotted or no a Reply pag. 6â— In discussing whereof hee durst not free this Church of his so much adored from all spots but onely those which are of misbeleife b Reply pag. 6â— and spots of misbeleife whose spots can they be Not the true Churches foâ— that company which beleiveth not aright cannot be esteemed the Church Vniversall or Particular so that every pure Church in this sense hath equall priviledge though he pretends it for the onely triumph of the Roman 〈◊〉 every man for â—e that is an Heretick truly 〈◊〉 by 〈◊〉 appelâ—ation 〈◊〉 be 〈◊〉 of CHRIST neither of the Church But the Iesuites preface is full of confidence As the Answerer provoked me to the former disputation though I weene to his smart so doth he give me the like occasion to buckle with him in this e Reply pag. 6â— Whom have we here Hercules with his distasse smart your Fathers and fellowes use not to make such worthies smart you had rather destroy then wound men of his quality But where or when was this smart given I am sure wound or scarre we see none Surely the Iesuite hath bene Chaplaine to the knight Errant that fights sleeping that conquers in his dreames otherwise he could not stand so fortified with imagination as he here appeares Nemo alieno sensu est miser he feeles nothing he complaines not it is not sufficient to prove that he smarts because you conceite that you have given him a wound this hath declared your desire but not manifested the event you presume of But the Iesuite seemeth to promise as much in this Section because in a twitting fashion the Answerer saith that he not onely confounded Urbem Orbem but also mingled heaven and earth together by giving the title of unspotted unto the Catholicke Church of Rome â— Reply pag 62 Hath not this just charge a just ground If unspotted be a property belonging to the triumphant Church can it without confusion be attributed to any Church upoÌ„ earth How this word unspotted is taken in antiquity S. Augustine hath determined and the Iesuite saith nothing materially in opposition why should it not then continue in it's strength still I would know whether the Church in generall or in her members can be without spots that is not defiled in manners though free from false beleife The Church that was free as much as humane imperfection would permit confesseth herselfe blacke though comely * Cant. 1. 5. And the Iesuites citation out of Paâ—â—anus acknowledgeth a freedome onely from heresies Paciâ—â— epist 3. Ecclesia est non habens â—aculam neque rugam hoc est haereses non 〈◊〉 which every true Church and true member hath But how will the Iesuite prove the Roman Church unspotted First hee must have two things graunted him according to his present understanding or â—lse a â—ople First by the Roman Church we must understand the Church universall as hath beene declared saith he in the former Section f Reply pag. â—â— Secondly Vnspotted must have relation to spots of misbeleife only And then I say saith the Iesuit that the Roman Church hath ever bene found and will alwayes remaine in that kind unspotted even unto the end of the world g Reply ibid. This is after-wit but if the Iesuit hath not proved the Roman Church to be the universall in the former Section if the universall hath beene without spots of misbeleife when the Roman in her prime-member hath bene infected with Leprosy this will declare that the Roman Church if their positions be true was not without spots or Catholick either For the first the Iesuite would get by Petition that by the Roman Church is understood the Church universall But let him know it is too great an almes to grant an Adversary Ioh. Sansour in Polycratic l. 6. c. 24. Romana Ecclesia quae materomnium ecclesiarum est se non tam matrem exhibet alijs quam novercam Sedentin eâ Scribas Phâ—risae ponentes onâ—â—a importabiliâ— in humeris hominum quae digito non coâ—â—ngunt and too great an imposture to be approved in them For I am sure no modest man will dreame that the Church of CHRIST could be so forsaken by CHRIST that it were not worthy to be governed but by reprobates as Aliace testifies of the Roman Church h Card de Aliaco lib. de Reform Eccl. cap. de Reform religionum In proverbium abierit Ad hunc statum venisse Romanâ—â— Ecclesium ut non fit digna regi nisi per reproboâ— The Catholicke Church were a poore mother to instruct Gods Saints if she did not shew her self so much a mother as a stepmother if in it fit the Scribes and Pharisees Hereticks long since condemned by Christ and yet Iohannes Sarisburiensis affirmes this of your Roman Church Besides those which have bewayled her corruptions have told us that prophesie is now quite extinct in the Church and it is accomplished that is written 3. Kings 22. I will goe forth and be a lyeing Spirit in the mouth of all the Prophets k Aâ—aâ— Pelagde planctu Ecclesiae l. x. act 5 Ad literam hoâ—â—â— in Ecclesia deficit 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 quod scribitur 3. Regum 22. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but this were harsh for any to affirme of the Catholicke Church of God Moreover it is crosse to reason it selfe to make the Roman the Catholicke Who will thinke that the whole is not greater then the part that Catholicke and Roman are ejusdem ambitus that the Churches Subsistency must depend upon that which will faile that must be utterly overthrowne l Ribeâ—â— Iescom in Apocal. 14. num 44. 48. Babylon significat Romam in fine mundi futuram Besides were there no Saints nor Martyrs before Rome was converted Nay were all the Roman Converts malefidians before Peter confirmed them in the Faith Poore Stephen thou art little behoulding to this Iesuite that Heaven must now be shut to thee which Christ opened * Acts 7. 36. at thy Matyredome But this Grand-imposture hath beene lately layed open by the reverend and learned the Lord Bishop of Leichfield and therefore I may heere forbeare it For the Second I will breifly declare the Iesuites Vanitie herein and first to take away all ambiguitie S. Augustine that useth this tearme of unspotted not of the Primitive Roman but of the auncient Catholicke Church expoundeth what he meant by the same Wheresoeuer in these bookes I have made mention of the Church not having spot or wrinckle it is not so to be taken as if she were so now but that she is prepared to be so when she shall appeare to be glorious For now by reason of certaine ignorances and infirmities of her members the whole Church hath cause to say every day Forgive us our Trespasses m August Retract l. 2. c. â—8 Vbi cunque iâ— his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 memorari Ecclesiam
non habentem maculam aut rugam non sie accipiendum est quasi jam sit sed quae prâ—paratur ut sit quando apparebit etiam gloriosa Nunc enim propter quasdam ignoranties in firmitates membrorum fuorum habet unde quotidie tota dicat Dimitte nobis debita nostra Neither was it the question in those times whether the Catholicke Church could bee spotted with Heresie but with sinne which was affirmed by the Catholicke Church against the Pelagians and this the Iesuite seemeth now to conceive and therefore telleth us that by reason of ignorant and infirmities of her members in other matters the Church hath dayly occasion to pray for the forgivenesse of sinnes n Reply pag. 43. Now the Iesuite giving the title â—â—spotted unto the Primitive Church of Rome which he accounteth the Catholicke how could the most learned Answerer understand the Iesuites tearme but according to the sence of the word as it was vulgarly taken in the primitive times Secondly it were not amisse to conceive that the Iesuite in his Challenge calleth the Primitive Church of Rome 〈◊〉 o In his Challenge in his enquirie in this section hee layeth downe the Roman Church without reâ—â—raynt of Primitive and lastly in his proofe hee thinketh hee hath got the day if from antiquitie he can prove that the Catholicke Church cannot faile So that you may easily â—spy who is guiltie of mingling one question with another But let us examine this new question as the Iesuite hath proposed it Whether the Church of Rome may rightly be tearmed Vnspotted or no p Reply pag â—â— That the auncient Roman Church was invincible never fundamentally erring in the foundation of faith in all her members for the first 400. or 500. yeares after Christ The Iesuite telleth us our Doctors and Masters grannt q In his Challenge So that the Controversie is not what the Primitive Church of Rome was in regard of Heresie but what the Roman Church is lyable unto in her succession which the Iesuite resolves and as he would make us beleive from Augustine and other anncient Fathers saying that in the truth and soundnes of her faith and doctrine shee is evermore invincible and not lyable to any spot or stayne r Reply pag. 43 But neither doth Augustine Origen Eusebius Alexander B. of Alexandria Athanasius Cyrill B. of Hierusalem or Philo Carpathius c. whom he urgeth Å¿ Reply pag 64 pag 650 say any thing for the Roman but for the Catholicke Church to which they beare testimony that it cannot faile So that our Iesuite falleth under Bellarmines Censure who affirmeth that they doe but trifle away the time who contend to prove that the Church cannot absolutely faile because it is graunted by the Protestants themselves t Bellarm. de Ecclesia mil l. 3. c. 13. Notandum autem est muluâ— ex nostris tempus 〈◊〉 dum probant absolute Ecclesiam non posse dâ—ficere 〈◊〉 Calâ—â—â—â— eâ—teri 〈◊〉 â—i id concedunt which the Iesuite knowing though dissembling after he hath produced S. Chrysostome for the perpetuitie of the Catholicke Church argueth fâ—r her But what Church doth this holy Father meane thinke you Surely none other then Peters Church u Reply pag. â—â— c. Peters Churchâ— proâ— nefâ—â— was the Church espoused to Peter purchased by Peter redeemed by Peter At Antioth the Church was first called Christian * Acts 1. v. 26. which name it hath retained and shall it loose its title and 〈◊〉 now and bee denominated from Peter The Spouse of Christ the mysticall body of Christ the house of God the Lords granary and 〈◊〉 Stapleâ— Relect cont 1. q. â— art 1. not 5 Vt est corpus Christi in uno sensu propter internam gratiam ita est domus magna Cheisti â—st area ager dominicus in alio sensu propter externam collectionem c. but Peters Church is somewhat harsh Chrysostome neere giveth the Church no such title onely their poore forged Cyrill hath Ecclesia Apostolica Petri an evidence answerable to the cause yet not convincing for the same title might be given to the Church of Antioch But can the wordes of Chrysostome stretch to the Roman Church â—et the Iesuite shew it if he be able That Church whereof Chrysostome speaketh is the Church of Christ not of Peter that Church whereof he is a Pastor y Chrys in Mat homâ—â—â— Ecclesiae futurae pastorem constituit not a Monarch the rock upon which it is builded is not Peter but Christ beleived confessed by Peter Ibid. Et super hanc Petram aedificabo Ecclesiam meam id est fidem atque confessionem Peter had no gift given him to preserve this Church from amidst â—â—erce assaults and raging flouds in this Fathers opinion though the Iesuite would perswade it but Peter was confirmed in his faith confessed by this promise made that the gates of hel should not prevaile against the Churchâ— Neither had Peter power given him to make the Church invincible but to declare it Ibid Petrus Ecclesiam per universum orbem amplificatam 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 validiâ—â—â—â— monstravit And as the Fathers ground this priviledge of the unspotted â— Non enim turbari te con venâ—â— cùm audicris quia traâ—ar crucifiâ—â—â— integritie of the Roman Church upon the promise of Christ to Peter Matt 16. so also they oftentimes deduce the same from the vertue of that prayer which Christ made to his Father for Peters faith that it should never faile Luc 22. wherin doubtlesse he was heard for his reverence Heb. 5. 7. Reply pag. â—â— There is no ground why the Roman should enjoy this priviledge either from Christs promise or his prayer as the Iesuite hath failed in deducing any thing from the former so doth he shew his abilities in this latter at his first entrance For first he brings in forged Epistles under the name of Lucius d Bellarm. l. 2 de Rom. Pont. c. â— dare not affirme this Epistle to be undoubted it is dared Gallo Volusâ— ano Cosâ— when as they were not Consule at that time as appeareth by Baron Annal. to â— an â— and Felix e The Epistle is dated Claudio Paterno Coss when as there were none such in his time Baron ad aâ— 273. good Bishops who would have 〈◊〉 the pride that they are urged heere to 〈…〉 the rest he cites 〈◊〉 good Bishop we will not deny yet his goodnes did not declare itselfe at all times when he spake of S. Peter or the Roman Church but his infirmity For as the Bishops of Rome both before and after him desired more then was fit so it will be no difficulty to shew that they contended to justifie their desires by unfit meanes and especially by swelling wordâ—â— in the honour of S. Peter and their owne Seâ— and practises sutable thereunto Insomuch that they were esteemed smoâ—â—â— by some
Church which by the testimonie of venerable Antiquitie wee finde approved to remaine ever free from all errour to that rocke against which the power of hell shall never prevaile to that foundation which Christ hath setled by his promise and made for ever immoveable by his obtained Prayer Reply pag. 6â— How non-erring a Church your Roman hath beene in her head is already declared How infallible a rule of faith your Cheife Pastor hath proved in the primitive times venerable Antiquitie by severall examples hath detected What a rocke Peters pretended Successours have beene when the divell was let loose to split so farre as possible the ship of the Church hath not been left you untold And who can beleive that CHRIST his prayer for Peters faith was effectuall for the POPES when against faith they day he desire to usurpe his kingdome This we Catholickes saith the Iesuite are exhorted to doe by S. Cyrill sayinâ— Let us remaine as members in our head the Apostolicke Throne of the Roman Bishops from whence it is our part to seeke what wee ought to believe This also all Protestants are advised to doe by a Doctour of their owne who as we heard before telleth them that they ought diligently to search out the spouse of Christ and Church of the living God which is the pillar and ground of truth having found her then setting aside all other questions they ought to embrace her communion follow her direction and rest in her judgment y Reply pag. 6â— What Doctor Feild advised Protestants to doe hath beene formerly declared And for what Catholickes are exhorted to doe he urgeth S. Cyrill but from whence From Aquinâ—s z Cyril Alleâ— in Thesauro alleadged by S. Thomas in opusc cont Graecoâ— Reply pag. 6â— who forged it For Cyrill hath no such words His Thesaurus hath no such filth He neither consented unto nor approved this tyranny Hee was one of them that sent the Copy of the Councell of Nice to curbe these pretences before they got head I wonder why the Iesuite added not the like forgery of the Councel of Chalcedon to the same end from the same Author Here wee may see that the best grounds he hath to prove their holy Father to be infallible and the Romane Mother without spots are but authorities taken from deceit But leaving Doctor Feild formerly urged and answered he presents us with these sentences of the Auncient in which saith he as in a pure mirrour they may if they list espy their enorâ—ions disagreement from the truth Reply pag 63 And the first Ancient Father that he produceth is Ireneus All they that are in the Church of God ought to obey saith he unto those Preists who have their succession from the Apostles who together with the succession of their Bishoprick have received the assured grace of truth according to the good will of the heavenly Father And we ought to have for suspected such as withdraw themselves from the like principall succession and joyne themselves together in any other place I say wee ought to hold them as hereticks of a perverse judgment or as schismatickes selfe-liking presumptuous fellowes And elsewhere saith the Iesuite he declareth how such like hereticks are to be conâ—â—â—ed confounded according to the practice of his times to wit in the second age after Christ We confound saith he al those who gather otherwise then they ought how by that Church which is the cheifest the most auncient best knowne unto all men which was established grounded in Rome by the two most glorious Apostles Peter and Paul pointing forth that Tradition and faith which this Roman Church holdeth from the Apostles by the succession of Bishops even unto our dayes After this manner also saith the Iesuite did Tertullian troâ—â—ce wrest those Heretickes whom hee had to deale withal Let them shew unto us if they can the original of their Churches let them rip up the order of their Bishops in â—ueâ—â—ort that by a succession derived from the beginning they prove their cheife Bishop to have some one of the Apostles or Apostolicall men for his author and Predecessour for by this meanes the Apostolicall Churches doe make up their accounts And because the Heretickes then were destitute of all such proofe as Tertullian exacted of them for the maintenance of their cause even as our Adversaries saith the Iesuite are as this day He therefore bringeth in the Catholicke Church upbrayding them with them all Protestants in this manner Who â— God 's name are yeâ— When from whence came yoâ— hither What doe you amongst mine being none of mine By what right O Marcion doest thou cut my â—ood what leave hast â—hâ—â— O Valentine to turne my streames fountaines another way By what authority doest thou remove my bounds O Apelles O Luther O Calvin O Zuiâ—glius The possession is mine I have it of old I enjoyed it before you c Reply pag 69 and 70. All that the Iesuite hath produced from Irenâ—us Tertullian will make little for justifying his pretences if the point be truly considered For there is a bare personall succession which may accompany a false Church as it did the Iewish when the Pharisees saâ—e in Moses Chaire and the Churches of the East when Heretickes invaded the chaires of Catholicke Bishops Secondly there is a Successâ—â—â— not only personall of Bishops Preists but where the Catholick Apostoliâ—all doctrine is continued also The people wee say where this is plaine are bound to receive the Doctrin from Timothie every succeeding Bishop as Timothie â— Tim 1. 14. from the Apostle that established and first published the same Now whatsoever the Iesuite hath brought from these Fathers is no way advantageous for the Church of Rome For first we can shew and have done as good personall succession as the Roman Bishops can claime any Secondly to this our orderly Succession we can and have proved by comparison and consanguinity of Apostolicall doctrin that we are true and Apostolicall Churches Thirdly the Roman certaintie upon which their Profelyres must depend is no firmer by these Fathers testimonies then Ephesus Smyrna Corinth Philippi Germany Spaine France Egypt Lybia Thessalonica c Irenaeus pag. 140 142. Disci te ab Apostoli cis Ecclesijs Habetis Romae Linum Polycarpum Smyrnae ab Apostolis edoctum Tertull. Praeser p. c. 37. Proximè est tibi Achaâ— habes Corinthum Si non longè es â— Macedonia habes Philippos habes Thessalonicenses Si potes in Asiam tendere habes Ephesum si autem Italiae adjaces haqes Romam unde nobis quoque authoritas praest ò est Rhenanus Argum in Tert. de praescript alibi Impress Basil 1521. Tertullianus Ecclesiam unam Apostolicam nulla loco affigit Romanum Ec lesiam ornat magnificae laudis elogio non tamen tantam illam facit quantum hodiè fieri videmus nam Apostolicis Ecclesijs numerat non
â—olaâ— facit Apostolicam Videmus quod lac à Paulo Corinthij haufâ—rint Si superesset Tertullianus non â—â—punè illud diceret c which I thinke you will not defend from fayling Fourthly we shall finde that the Doctrine did alwayes honour the See the Sees were no further esteemed then because they gave true testimony to the Doctrine Zozomen l. 7 c. â— Eo autem declarabat Thodosius Imperator se velle ut illorum duntaxaâ— Ecclesia diceretur cathol ca qui Prinitatem divinam aequali honore colerent qui diveriam sentirent cos haeroticoâ— appellari intestabiles esse â—â—supplicio afficiâ— May wee not then from better grounds cry O FRAUNCIS O DOMINICK O IGNATIUS then the Iesuite O Luther O Calvin O Zuinglius and charge them for creepers into the Church without any personall or doctrinall succession either What the Iesuite further urgeth against the Protestants from Augustine to prove the Romanists the onely unspotted Church is meere vanitie As for my selfe saith Augustine there bee many things which make me to remaine within this Catholick Church First the uniforme consent of people and nations which saith the Iesuite is not seene amongst Protestants e Reply pag. 70 I am sure the Papists are not Catholickes from the body of their Church but from the Union with their Head when in fundamentalls the Protestants agree with all people and nations not thereticall and Dâ—â—â—tisticall over the face of the earth Secondly a certaine authority begun by miracles such as the Protestants themselves saith the Iesuite will sweare they have none nourished by hope increased by charitie and strengthened by antiquitie f Reply ibid. It is true we have no new Doctrine and therefore wee need not new miracles but I hope the Iesuite will not be so impudent to deny that the auncient and Apostolicall Doctrine had miracles for confirmation and that wee adhere and depend upon the same Thirdly the succession of Preists even from S. Peter the Apostle unto this present Bishop of Rome which saith the Iesuite I wish the Protestant Reader to observe well g Reply ibid I pray the Iesuite to consult with M. Mason and either to justifie us or condemne themselves Lastly the very name of Catholicke which is so proper to this Church amongest so many Heresies that howâ—â—ever all Heretickes affect the name of Catholicke yet if a stranger chance to enquire in what place doe the Catholickâ— meete together no Hereticke will dare to shew hiâ— own Church or house Reply pag. 70 First I desire the Iesuit to consider what Augustine saith that Hereticks affect the name never any 〈◊〉 more then Papists who are all but Donatists of which none are found in the auncient succession of the Roman Bishops Secondly that although the title Catholick did point at the true Church in the Primitive times yet it was no otherwise then the titles of men did point out Hereticks i Hieron cont Luâ—ferianos prope fineâ—â— Now if at this time many are called by the names of men which the Iesuit takes for Catholicks as Dominicans Franciscans c why may not many bee called Catholicks that truely are Hereticks as Iesuites and all Papalines Besides names make not Hereticks Nestorians in name are not ever Nestorians in Doctrine k Onuphrius de vita Iulij III. Longe maxima pars Christianorum qui per Assiriam Persiam ac reliquâ—â— orientales provincias habitant appellantur Nestoriani Ibid. Vero hi Nestoriani nomen potius Nestorij haeretici quam errores retinuisse nihi videntur Nam nihil plâ—nè quod illam sectam referat in his hominibus qui hic adsunt compeâ—io neither Papists Catholicks for howsoever they usurpe the name yet are they spotted and infected not onely with errors of life but with heresies and Apostafies also as hath beene plainly declared What Theophilus speakes concerning the Church we resist not neither can the Iesuite embrace it as enclosing any Prerogative for them So that all his labouring heere hath beene to cloath Rome with the Catholicke Priviledge of exemption from Heresie but with ill successe seeing it hath beene declared filthy in manners hereticall in Doctrine and Apostaticall from the auncient puritie wherein shee appeared in the primitive times And therefore the Iesuites Conclusion is nothing but the approbation of his Phantasie which out of selfe-love is bestowed uppon his enlarged endeavours SECT X. THe Tenth Section inquires How vninely our Answerer claymeth kindred with the Primitive Church Reply pag. 72 â— the Iesuite beginnes like a Bedlam or Franticke Here our Answerer like Saul in his distresse runnes upon his owne weapon and with Achitophel is strangled in a knot of his owne twisting Reply ibid. Iesuites I confesse doe not fall upon their owne swords but make others to fall by them Yet they cannot deny that some of them have beene choaked with halters which they never twisted themselves and meritoriously But how farre the most learned Primate is from Saul any man may see when his learned answere hath made the Iesuite to travaile Vagabound to compile and build up this frame which he hath sent us And whereas he assimulates him to Achitophell I thinke he ought not from his strangling himselfe but because hee hath both saddled and bridled M. Malone and rid him out of breath also But any may espy to whom these things would best belong whether to the Iesuite or to the Answerer Qui enim appetit quod adipisci non potest cruciatur Augustia â—â—â—or Eccl. c. â— The Iesuite expected glorie by his demaund but seeing his expectation frustrate his reviling expresseth his torture and pointeth out the desperate Saul the amazed Achitophel Now what is the cheife ground that the Iesuite produceth to manifest the vanitie of the Anâ—â—rers claimeâ— Surely a wise one and from confession of the â—â—swerer Forasmuch as clayming kindred with 〈◊〉 annâ—â—us Church of Rome he yet confesseth saith the 〈…〉 Church is indeed unlike unto her having wasted away such spots as impaired both the bountie and health too of that auncient Church Reply pag. 7â— And what hinders this but the Church of Ireland might clayme kindred with the auncient Roman Why hee tels us If the auncient Roman Church was the true Church and spouse of Christ for 500 yeares as he will â—oâ— deny what may we thinke of his I pray you which he himselfe doth grant to be unlike unto the same Reply pag 72 Doth dissimilitude take away kindred Brethren may be unlike as Iacob and Esau Why not Sisters It is sufficient to conclude a Prince of the house of Austria from the lippe although they much varie in their other proportions Hippocrates his twinnes were not I thinke in all parts so alike as the Iesuite would have particular Churches and yet they were not without that Sympathie of Nature to cry together laugh together and die together Omne fimile est dissimile or else they would be
numerically the same and therefore although there be some dissimilitude betwixt the auncient Roman Church and that wherein the learned Answerer communicates yet it is not in those things that will cut off kinred or acquaintance either But here we see the Iesuite wresting and tugging to perfect this Argument hath most falsly charged the Answerer with confession of that which he doth but for Argument sake admit as is plaine by his owne words And therefore saith the most reverend Primate though we should admit that the auncient Church of Rome was somewhat impaired both in beautie and in health too wherein wee have no reason to be sorie that wee are unlike unto her there is no necessitie that hereupon presently she must câ—ase to be our Sister f See the most reverend the Lord Primate his Answere to the Iesuites Challenge p. 22 so that we may easilie perceive whose neckâ— is taken in the halter by his strugling and striving to get out thence And if the Iesuite will endure examination I thinke hee will not so justifie the Roman Church for the first five hundred yeares but that it had something practised in it which other Churches did dislike Neither doth this so farre deface it as the Iesuite would perswade For what will hee say of all those Churches in the Apocalypse None dâ—re denie their spots because God hath registred them And if the Iesuite bee interrogated whether the Roman then as now differs from them in their Spots I thinke hee will affirme it and yet accompt them true Churches also Doth not this Iesuite then abuse his Reader by his vaine flourish when he grounds it for an Argument that wee are no true Church because wee doe in some particulars differ from a true one to wit the auncient Romane Surelie this Argument would better fit the mouthes of Atheists Who doth not see that Rome now in many things differeth from Rome auncient it selfe For if Rome auncient were without spots and you in all things like unto it Why did your Councels pretend reformation Why did all gooâ— men call for Councels Why did your Doctours complaine of the corrupt estate of the Church Nay why did your assemblies amend those things that were never amisse But the Iesuite suspecting the strength of this pretence laboureth further to discredite the most learned Primate his answere He seekes indeede to recover his head out of the halter saith the Iesuite by telling us that those things wherein his Church is unlike unto that of auncient time are not of any such moment but that hee may for all that claime her for his Sister though poore soule a disfigured and diseased one g Reply pag. â—â— Doe you see how skilfull this Iesuite is to take his Metaphors from the Halter and the Hangman In this my Answere shall bee the admiration of his Rhetoricke But what produceth hee to put by this defence Why as if hee were making an Oration to his Novices he cryes out To whom would not such babish conceipts as these moove laughter h Reply pag. 7â— Is it possible that a Iesuite can leave his fixos oculos his complicatas manus to prove ridiculum quid upon so small provocation Surely hee would never have answered so discreete an answere with derision as you perceive hee heere doth if hee had had any thing else to have furnished his Reply withall But let us see the grounds of his laughter That Christ forsooth after all his promises to the contrarie shâ—uld suffâ—r his beloved spouse even in those first ages to bee so impaired as these men dreame that for so manie Centuries of yearâ—s hee should abandon her lying in disgrace and languishing in disease untill such time as a luxurious Apostata arising from his sacrilegious bed should come with his impure hands to wash away â—eâ— spots or untill such time as a branded Sodomite tooke in hand to play the Paracelsian thereby to cure her malady i Reply pag. 7â— Here were matter of weeping rather then of laughter if this charge were just For who makes the Roman Church in the first ages to be abâ—â—doned by CHRIST to be lyeing in disgrace to bee languishing in disease Not the Answerer but this Iesuite out of his honesty hath invented it because against the Answerers words he hath no ground for exception But I would know whether the promises are made to the Church quâ Roman and not otherwise whether hee hath any other Arguments then what are answered to prove it and how it came to pâ—sse that there were invented Epistles and other proofes urged to declare this besides the Scripture when the institution is pretended to come from thence Secondly I desire to know where he can finde us the â—â—urches of England and Ireland acknowledging Lutheâ— â—â— Calvin their dictates any further then they are agreeable to the truth delivered by CHRIST and his Apostles or whether we have depended upon them or either of them for reformation Thirdly I desire the Iesuite to certifie whether Luther were not a luxurious Fryar and how hee can proove the Apostacie which he brandeth him with let him further declare Fourthly whether Bolsecke be not the best testmionie that the Iesuite hath to proove Calvin to have beene a â—anded Sodomite as without shame hee blusheth not to traduce him These things when the Iesuite hath declared we will confesse he hath raved zealously but for the present we can but conceive this to be the effect of his received wounds which forceth his impatiencie that he cannot containe himselfe But that which the Iesuite supposeth will countenance his pâ—ssion is that the Fathers whom he deservedly commendeth in their best times are concluded hereby to have lesse understanding to knowe or lesse grace and courage to performe what was necessarie for the washing and câ—ring of Gods Church then certaine tumultuous Vpstarts k Reply pag. 7â— c. I desire that you would confesse ingenuously whether you or our selves give more honour to the Fathers Wee that acknowledge them to bee Counsellors appointed to the Church to be pastors and doctors raised up by God to feede his people and when they are met together in a Councell or Consent their sentence to be the greatest determination on earth whose credit immediately followes the sacred page Or you that accompt the best of them whilst they lived except the Roman Bishops themselves but a Roman Delegate that all of them when they ruled their Church could not teach the Church any point of doctrine but by the Popes call and appointment whose workes you so esteeme that you have made them companions but of bastard broods base births and have professed in your practise to make them speake as you desire them by falsE interpretation l See before Sect. â— c. Secondly I desire that the Vanitie of this pretence might be seene Is it any thing to the dishonour of the understanding grace or courage of the Fathers that somethings were since
the Schismes in the Romane Church were contentions for Iustice That Symony was her purchaser Shall we deeme that Iustice enthroned Cardinals above Bishops Fryars before Preists Will Iustice judge GOD'S rule to be dangerous and that man 's is able to lead to perfection Will Iustice inhibite marriage and open the Stewes VRBANVS nihil equi cogitat if wee beleive the Proverbe VRBAN was never yet just how comes he now to be so upright And further as your Monarchie is farre from being either like to GOD or Iustice so shall wee appeare to be farre unlike either to your Malefactors on earth or the damned in Hell Wee are Malefactors Heretickes but by whose judgement save the Hereticks himselfe the most absolute Malefactor on earth Were not the Apostles so stiled What better appellation had Memnon or Cyrill from the Nestorians h Acta Concilial Ephes tom â— Acta Concil Ephes c. 1. p. 774. sequâ—â— But for the damned in Hell I am so farre perswaded of Papall charitie from their fierie Chariots that I doubt not but they would adventure an other Powder-plot to blow us up to Heaven upon condition that his Usurpations in darkenes bee not unlightned and so troubled with us on earth But the Iesuite is impatient and would scorne away this presage As though saith he there hath not beene a generall peace for many ages before the stirring of Luther and his rebellious rout notwithstanding that the Pope did alwayes keepe the same rule in GODS house i Reply pag. 80 The Iesuite to exempt the Bishop of 〈◊〉 from being a disturber of the peace of the Church would prove it from the experience of his peaceable government before Luthers time But he might know that there hath beene no peace at all that we might call the peace of GOD where he hath borne any controule For is it probable that Peace should proceede from him that was alwayes or the most part at warre How many Schismes were there in the Romane See k Stapleton Doctr. Princip l. 23. c. 15. Schismata Rom. Pontiâ—icum viginti numerantur If they could not agree upon their Peace-maker must they not be at warre themselves Had it not beene the best course in those times to bring peace to the Church for to have excluded them altogether from governement But if so great peace were in the Roman Church as you pretend why did the Pope condemne your representative Church of Basil l Epistola Synodalis contra invectivaâ— factam nomine Eugenij Papae qui Epistolae illius exordio dicere ausus est Patres in Conciliâ— congregatos jam fere septem annis ab ipse Christi Vicario aÌ„ supremâ— ApostolicaÌ„ Romanâ— sede Christianorum matre tre capite segregates esse when your Roman Church had censured him for a Schismaticke m Concil Basil Sess 34. If wee by a spirit of giddinesse be divided because there are as the Iesuite saith above a hundred severall sects and varying opinions amongst us n Reply pag. 24. what shal be concluded concerning them that in the hight of their tyrannie and leonine peace haue had six hundred and such as were begotten by posthabiting the Gospels Epistles and Christian wisdome o Cornel. Mus com Rom. 6. pag. 279. Vigebat Spinosa molesta nescio quae Theologia de instantibus de Relationibus de Quidditatibus c. Tota penè aetas in hominum decretis quae inter se pugnantia semper nullo tempore reconcilianda alunt perpetuum per secula litem centerebatur c. Is sublimis Theologus habebatur qui majora portenta pro suis Traditiunculis fingere sciat c. Minc SEXCENTAE Sectae Thomistae Scotistae Occhamistae Albertistae Egidiani Alexandrâ—i c. O secâ—â—â— posthabebantur Evangelia Epistolae Christiâ—â— sapientia delitescebat c. Neither can the Iesuite glory in their Romane peace when in Ferus his judgment In omnibus gentibus major est concordia quam inter Christianos at the time the Pope kept the greatest rule in the Church there was more concord in any nation then amongst the Christians p 〈◊〉 3. De 〈◊〉 Domini And from what fountaine came these quarrells He 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 it will decâ—are Because their 〈◊〉 werâ— not as our 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of Peace Esay 9. but of Warre Alvar. de planct Eccles l. â— art 5. Nec sunt â—odie Prâ—lati principes pacis sicut Christus Esay 9. sed Guerrae And what made the Pope and his Prelates so Mâ—â—tiall Was not the quarrell doctrine and in their divinity the foundation of faith the Supremacie What peace had the Roman Church when Princes resisting their Usurpations their Kingdomes were filled with warre with bloud What Unity of faith could make the sonne breake the bond of nature to his Father the servant the bond of faith to his Lord What peace was there when your Pope denyed marriage to the Cleargie when they bearded your Tyrant charging him with heresie and franticke opinions r Lambertus Schafnaburgensis in histor ann 1074. Hildebrandinus Papa cum Epicopis Italiae conveniens jam frequentibus synodis decreverat ut secundùm instituta antiquorum canonum presbyteri uxores non habeant c. Adversus hoc decretum protinus vehementer interfremuit tota â—actio Clericorum hominem planè haerâ—ticum vesani dogmatis esse clamitans qui oblitus sermonis Domini quo ait Non omnes capiunt hoc verbuÌ„ qui potest capere capiat Et Apostolus Qui se non conâ—inet nubat melius est 〈◊〉 nâ—bere quam uâ—i 〈◊〉 exactione homines viâ—ere cogerat titu Angelorum dum consuetum curâ—â—n naturae negaret fornicationi immundiciae fraena laxaret You talke of Peace and will have the Tyrant the Peace-maker when like a cursed Ismael his hand hath beene against every man every mans against him * Gen. 16. 12. What Prince was not an Hereticke or Schismaticke that resisted his will What Preist or People were not condemned persecuted that would not stoope to this golden Calfe Peace you have had but it hath beene amongst your owne such as Grâ—gory speakes of that the ministers of Antichrist shall be knit together like the scales of 〈◊〉 Å¿ Greg. Moral l. 33. c 24. Quia membra Leviathan istius id est iniquos omnes quos Dei sermo squamarum compactionibus comparat ad defensionem suam par culpa coâ—cordat benè dicitur Vna alteri adhaerebunt tenentes se 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 abunâ—ur and this Peace the Turkes have and how have they got it thinke you but as your Popes have obtained theirs by the strangling of their brethren Could not the Arians say that all peace was amongst Arians when they execrated the Catholicke world And who can speake against Roman Peace when by their Bulla coenae they excommunicate all the world but Heretickes This Peace may be found amongst the wicked Nay Hell it selfe cannot stand without it The
ancient Doctrine Doe you thinke the Divell playeth â—ex onely in his owne Kingdome No assure your selves no more then the Pope Pontifex only at Rome for though hee swayes not universally yet many States â—eele his secret practices to worke division amongst those that are united to the truth Is not this the greatest part of your worke to make sedition to breake peace Divide impera is not a lesson that the Iesuites are now to learne seeing it hath beene their dayly practice l Dist Compeâ— Dâ— Iesuit 〈◊〉 â— 27. â— Watson Quodâ— 3. art 4. p. â—â— And although the Iesuite would now excuse it I cannot see but the Christian CoÌ„mon-wealth at this time is pestred by their Vrbanus or Turbanus as Cardinall Benno stiled an other of the like Condition of the same name m Benno in vita Hildebrand So that the Iesuites pretences to free his Supercilious Master from being that which he was justly stiled are too vaine and light there being no hope that we shall fee a generall peace for matters of Religion settled to the Christian world as long as he is suffered to keepe this rule in Gods house n The Iesuite might have taken notice of what was urged by the most reverend Primate immediately before those words whereas he carpeth in the Sermon preached before his Majesty pag. 13. 14. viz. That Nilus Arch bishop of Thessalonica entring into the consideration of the originall ground of that long continued schisme whereby the West standeth as yet divided from the East and the Latine Churches from the 〈◊〉 wrote a whole booke purposely of this Argument wherein he sheweth that there is no other cause to be assigned of this distraction but that the Pope will not permit the cognisance of the controversie unto a generall Councell but will needs sit himselfe as the alone Teacher of the point in question and have others hearken unto him as if they were his Schollars and that this is contrary both to the ordinances and the practise of the Apostles the Fathers thereunto we may adde the testimony of their owne Cassander consult Art 7. de Ecclesia vera Neque unquam credo controversia apud nos de externa Ecclesiae unitata extitisseâ— nisi Pontifices Romani hâc authoritate ad dominationis quandam speciem abusi fuissent eamque extra fines à Christo Ecelesia peaescriptos ambitionis et cupiditatis causâ â—utulissent But returning againe to the Answere he telleth us that Our Answerer alledgeth for himselfe the example of S. Cyprian who with the rest of the African Bishops dissented from the Pope and Church of Rome without being cut off from the Catholicke Communion To which the Iesuite replyes that this is easily answered forasmuch as the point wherein S. Cyprian did vary from the Pope was not declared by the Church untill after S. Cyprians death and therefore it might have beene maintained without any breach of Catholick Vnitie * Reply pag. 80 What he speakes concerning the Churches declaration will have a more fit place hereafter But to shew how little the Iesuite hath spoken for his cause wee may first consider That Cyprians opinion was condemned by your Pope his Councell the contrary defined o Bellar. l. 2. de Concil c. 5. Constat Cornelium Papam cum nationali Concilio omnium Episcoporum Italiae statuisse non debere haereticos rebaptiâ—â—ri et eundem sententiam postea approbasse Stephanum Papam et jussisse ut haeretici non rebaptizarentur yea S. Cyprian himselfe excommunicated and so severely dealt withall by Pope Stephen that he would not admit the African Legats to speake with him but styling Cyprian a Counterfeit said that CHRIST did deny any Communion to be held with him p Cassander Consult ar 7. Cùm Stephanus Episcopus Romae utbis Cyprianum quod in ipso erat repelleret Episcoposaâ— ipsum ex Africâ legatos nec ad sermonem communis colloquij admitteret praecip eret universae fraternitati ut venientibus non solum pax communio sed tectum hospitium negaretur insuper Cyprianum Pseudo Christum dolo sum operarium diceret Haec scribit Firmilianus Episcopus è Cappadociâ ad Cyprianum cujus Firmiliani meminit Eusebius Histor 6 l. c. 25. l 7. c. 13. Ad quem Stephanus scripsit non esse communicandum ijs qui ad Haereticos transcuntes rebaptizant All which did not make the declaration of the Church in Augustines opinion so that we may easily perceive that Augustine did not thinke the Pope to bee the Church or his declaration to be the Churches definition And indeed what toyle did Vincentius Lyrinensis q Advers prophan Novat take in vaine if the Pope could define alone if there were no true knowledge of Scriptures but where he gapes if for him CHRIST onely prayed Besides see what Church did define this Not the Roman out of which Cyprian was excommunicated and never reconciled but that for which Cyprian shed his blood r Augustin l. 2. cont Crescon c. 32. Non accipio quod de baptizandis haereticis et schismatics B. Cyprianus sensit quia hoc Ecclesia non accipit pro qua B. Cyprianus sanguinem fudit to wit the true Catholick which with Cyprian is every Maundy Thursday by their Bulla Coenae excommunicated at Rome And therefore the Iesuite hath unwisely urged S. Augustines wordes against the Donatists Put your selves into that Church which as it is manifest S. Cyprian defended and then may you alledge S. Cyprians authoritie for your Doctrine Å¿ Reply pag. 81. It being plaine that the Roman Schismatickes accuse and accurse that Church in which Cyprian dyed a blessed Martyr accompting it no further Catholicke then it is Roman All that followeth is chaffe Finally saith the Iesuite I would our Answerer did observe in this example how notwithstanding so many Bishops as in Africke joyned with S. Cyprian who in number were more then are in all his Majesties dominions yet was there found a superiour Church that did controule them all herein prescribing both to them others what they ought to follow and beleive by whose authority S. Augustine as we have heard and all the rest of the African Bishops did reject that opinioÌ„ of S. Cyprian embraced the contrary t Reply pag. 81. First wee may see that the Bishop of Rome had not so peaceable a dominion as the Iesuite pretends if so many Bishops did resist his controuling as the Iesuite acknowledgeth Secondly you may see his falshood in his cautelous conveighance labouring to perswade that the Roman Church was the superiour Church having authority to controule them all to prescribe to them and others what they ought to follow and believe whenas Augustine never dreamed of it when he and the African Bishops alwayes resisted and disdained it u See before pag. 301. That they did not adhere to Cyprians opinion the
reason was not because it was condemned by the Roman Bishop or his Roman Church but because out of the sacred Scripture by a lawfull Councell * Concil Nicen of the Catholick Church it was detected as erroneous and false But whilst our Adversaries doe not acknowledge any such superiour Church what wonder saith the Iesuite that they live forlorne consumed and confounded with â—dious discord and debate amongst themselves deprived of all true faith forasmuch as they refuse to listen unto her by whom God hath decreed all faith should be delivered unto his people throughout the world x Reply pag. 81. This is but fuming froth We acknowledge a Catholick Church as superiour to all particular Churches in the world But wee say your Roman is so farre from being it that it gaines well if it appeare a true member thereof when it comes to be examined What is there no God but at Dan and Bethel Must your Calves measure true worship or your Excommunicating the Levites make the Catholick to be no Church It is not your censuring of all others for Heretickes that can exempt you from being Schismatickes any more then the Donatists which did the like Being then aliens from this Church wherein no where else the right Christian faith is certaine to be found they must not wonder saith the Iesuite that we should thus bewayle them as perished and lost y Reply pag. â—â— For your bewayling us as perished and lost it is but a fetch of your Hypocrisie I could wish your teares if you shed any were bestowed upon your selves who need them We 〈◊〉 know the temper of your teares too well How bewayled you the French Massacre the Butchery of Princes but with teares of blood with groanes of applause z See the Oration of Pope Sixtus the fift upon the death of the French King Henry the third The places which you brought out of the Fathers against Schismatickes doe most properly point out your selves and therefore ill chosen to discredit us Take then your owne charge unto your selves who justly deserve it for howsoever you glory as if you onely had the Church of CHRIST which we doe not it will not therefore follow that you belong unto his consecration in regard you are separated from the body of CHRIST keeping neither Communion nor Unity with the whole being sequestred by your selves doe censure all that will not forsake the libertie of CHRIST and hold from you in villany and Vassalage Whereas the Iesuite thinketh to despise the Answerers Church by his frames of folly and falshood tearming it â— Church lurking in a corner of the earth obscure and in glorious that can neither obtaine friendship with any abroad nor yet maintaine agreement in itself at home a Reply pag. 8. Wee know the true Church many times doth lurke when the where sits as Queene and knowes no sorrow * Rev. 18. 2. Yet it is not so obscure but it hath enlightned the world that it can despise your outward glory and deride your lyes in Hypocrisie your tales of Hobgoblins your deceit from Purgatory your holinesse for gaine and new declarative doctrines Secondly we hold peace with the Catholick Church as hath beene manifested when you have and doe really excommunicate it And in fundamentalls both with them and amongst our selves wee are faithfully knit together although there be some differences in matters of nâ— absolute consequence which the purest Churches have been ever subject unto when you are not agreed who is onely able to teach uncontroulâ—ably an infallible point of doctrine whether a Councell or the Pope b Francise â—icus Theorem 16. Fuere qui diâ—erent Concilium in â—ausa fidei praeesse Pontifici fuêre qui Pontificem Concilio praeponerent alia etiam quaestio utrum sine Pontifice utrum â—o â—efragante convocari colligique possit Bellarm l. 2. de Conciliâ— cap. 13. § Sed dum Vsque ad hunc diem quaestio superest When your Church is so farre from holding freindship with other Churchâ—â— that it malitiously sets it selfe against the whole raiâ—ing warres and tumults against the true members thereof as lately against the Greekes and eveâ— against that part of the Latin Church that refused her command as the Monkes of Bangor the Waldenses c. can well witnesse And although you are continually speaking of dissentions yet the best judgments wisest eyes that our ages have afforded have found your peace to be but the outward effect of Policy not naturall from truth but forced from your bloody laweâ— and cruellest Inquisition What is further urged against Schismatickes out of the Fathers we assent unto Which the Iesuite well know and therefore telleth us I know our Answerer here will say that these heavy threats admonitions and exhortations of the ancient Fathers doe make nothing against him at all forasmuch as hee pretendeth himselfe to bee within the true Church alreadie c Reply pag â—5 Here wee may perceive the Iesuite hath taken a great deale of paines to little purpose For whereas hee should have proved us to have beene schismatickes before hee had given sentence against us hee as it seemes according to the practise of their Inquisition with Hallyfax-law condemneth first and enquires for the Schismatick afterward and so poorely that a Iurie of morall honest Papistâ— rightly informed would finde an Ignoramus upon his bill for he bringeth us no proofe but repeates what hee hath formerly done But howsoever saith the Iesuite hee is able with this â—ond conceipt to sâ—oth up and quiet his owne Conscience â— doubt not but otherâ— many wil be found who taking more tâ—â—eart the businesse of their salvation will ponder advisedly what Church the holy Fathers above produced doe point at and whether they declare it not plaine enough to bee the Roman Church embracing in her holy Communion all Christian Churches of the earth out of which our Adversaries are confessedly departed and have erected to themselves a new Congregation so farre unlike unto that Vniversâ—ll and Apostolicall Church designed by the Fathers that neither in other Nationâ— doth she find any other Churches to joyne in one sincere Communion with her nor yet is able to maintaine agreement amongst her owne at home it selfe as above hath beene abundantly declared d Reply pag â—â— Wee have shewed in answere to that which the Iesuite hath formerly produced that the Fathers never thought the Romane Church to be the Catholicke nor dreamed of necessary Communion with her any further then she communicated with the Catholicke Church teaching that Truth which was first delivered by the Apostles And that we have left your Romane schisme it is just as before is declared in regard you have gone out of the Catholicke Church and corrupted and depraved the Catholicke Faith The repetition of Lutheran and Puritan accusations might have beene spared seeing they have beene urged and answered before where the Reader may see not onely the Pope and
in resisting you making those articles of faith which were never of universall beleife in the Christian world But to whom doth hee tell these tales if to those of his owne profession it is idle and needlesse if to us it is most â—â—â—rue for saith hee it is well knowne that with us they bee cerâ—â—inely accounted cheife articles of faith being all of them declared for such by the sacred and infallible â—â—thâ—â—itie of the Church h Reply ibid. It is neither â—eedelesse for his owne nor untrue being delivered to your selves For the most reverend Father knowes it is his dutie dayly to perswade against faith-intrusions for the preservation of his owne neither can your Arguments make it untrue for are all things you accompt or the Trent Câ—â—ncell hath determined of so necessarie light that everie man must beleeve them You may perswade this in Peru or Mexico but your neighbours the Vâ—â—etians will not beleive you that dwell nearer home neither have all your Catholicke Children such opinion of that Councell as to receive it Now our Iesuite would have them of faith from our confession Neither can our Advâ—rsaries themselves saith hee deny that they appertaine to the substance of Faith and Religion sâ—â—ing that they condemne them for heresiâ— in us i Reply pag. 93. Heere the Iesuite will not have an Heresie to bee but in point of faith that the denyall thereof might exclude us from salvation if this be the rule by which the Iesuite will try Heresies I thinke these will not proove of that stampe in our opinions For first we deny not salvation to those which by ignorance communicate with them that imbrace these grosse follies Secondly we say not that they belong to any article of the Apostles faith but are additions that had nothing to glue them to the Creed but Babylonish Clement We take them for grosse corruptions but to make them errours in fundamentall points our Church hath not I thinke declared it Heresies of deeper errour and more elavated pride then are found in this Catalogue proclaime themselves among you those peâ—ces declare noâ— your greatest defection Who abhorres not your tyrannicall Hildebrandine insurrection whereby you trample upon Gods power the authority delegated to Kings and Bishops and the whole Preisthood of the Catholicke Church Secondly your Conscience Monarchy whereby you cast Christ out of his chaire and give the Pope Christs infallible office This Constance could not endure and k Sess 2 4 Basill l Sess â—3 thought Heresie never doubted of Who is ignorant that heresies have had their degrees which they could not have had in respect of faith if all did equally totter the foundation Augustine defines an hereticke otherwayes then from the foundation Hee is an Hereticke that for lâ—cre of any temporall commoditie aâ—d especially for his owne vaine-glory and preferments sake as your Courtiers doe doth beget or follow false or new opinions m August in libro de utilieredend caâ—s 2â— quest 3. c Haereticus 〈◊〉 qui alicujus teÌ„poralis commodi maâ—imae gloriae principatusque fui gratia falsos ac â—oâ—as opiniones vel gigniâ— vel sequitur and this may be done in points which are not fundamentall Besides how many are accounted Heretickes in this common course of appellation and yet free from denying the foundation of Faith For wee finde Leo the Xth. in his Bull against Luther * 4 Iâ—â—â—â— 1â—â—â— to style it Heresie for any man to say that the Church or himselfe hath not power statuere â—rticâ—lâ—s fidei to make new articles of faith as also that Luthers assertion was no lesse optima pâ—â—itâ—â—tia novâ— vita new lifâ— was the best repentance and yet I hope the Iesuite will reâ—oove these farre from the foundation And if the Pope may erre in his Buls to call that Heresie which is not fundamentall errour why may not you give leave to others to use the same Libertie seeing hee is the patterne of imitation unlesse you thinke the Pope above Angels and that hee may deliver what he pleaseth and make Heresie what hee list and the Anathema that thereby hee deserves himselfe by his verie pleasure should fall upon others Nay you have gone further De Consecrat dist 5. Cap. â—t jejun that hee will never bee a Christian qui confirmatione Episcopali non fuit Chrismatus Now if a man may bee counted an infidell and unbeleiver by you for omission of the Ceremonie of Confirmation why should you draw from the liberties of mens tongues an Argument that whosoever by you or our selves are styled Heretickes must needes in regard of those points erre in the foundation Doe you not know it often fals out as when you charge us that after the way which is called Heresie so doe many of the faithfull serve the Lord God of their Fathers Shall we condemne to eternall fire Irenaeus Iustine Martyr all the Millenaries and all those which consented to those points which Epiphanius Augustine or Alphâ—â—sus de Castro have styled Heresies it were too rigide a censure and more fit for the Iudges of Hell then the Preists of God So that this proves but a vaine ground to inferre these points to be of faith because they are accompted heresies and if we will observe it we may from his owne words finde that heresies have declared themselves not so much from the matter whether fundamentall or not as from the perverse manner of holding an opinion against any ones conscience being lawfully convicted of the same And therefore our Iesuite will not have them Hereticks that deny tradition Images c. simplie by a bare and naked negation but wilfully and perversly by obstinate denyall Yet will our Answerer say saith the Iesuite that by the Fathers they were held but onely as opinions and not as belonging to the substance of faith and this is but his owne opinion for wheresoever the Fathers doe professe them in their works they never tell him that they hold them for opinions rather then for points of faith Reply pag. 9â— The Iesuite speakes of the Answerers divining but here divines amisse himselfe indeed proves down-right a Deceiver for if the learned Answerer will say that the fathers held them as opinions why should he require the Iesuites proofe for their consent and therefore let him fasten this opinion upon whom he can the most reverend Primate knowes well enough that they neither held them generally as opinions or of faith neither is he so ignorant in antiquity but that he well understands those ancient Souldiers of the Catholicke Church were alwayes ignorant of the after invented marches under Roman Coloâ—â—s so that the Iesuit would perswade the reader by a trick of deceit that 〈◊〉 knowledge the Fathers generall consent in these points as opinions but not as of faith which was never dreamed of by the Church By this it will appeare that they care not by what meanes they establish their decrees nor
of our Faith be grounded some way or other in the Scripture yet the Rule to finde out which is a point of faith and which not must be taken from the Church Reply p. 100. Observe here what we gaine from the Iesuite and then we will attend his arguments First he that in the page before told us that there be many confessed points of Faith which are not in any sort expressed or as much as once touched by the Scriptures f Reply pag. â—â— in this place would perswade the gentle Reader that the articles of their Faith are some way or other grounded in the Scripture Secondly he makes the ground of Faith to be the Scripture yet the Rule to finde out which is a point of Faith and which not must be taken from the Church so that although hee make their Pope their Cater-Pillar yet Scripture is acknowledged the ground of Faith But to make this discourse an over-sight I would know how the Rule can measure without the ground or how Faith can remaine grounded in Scripture when their rule measures without it Now the Iesuite would make this knowne by the practise of the Primitive Church but before he begins he prepares his Reader Some points there are in which controversie arising 〈◊〉 the affirmative nor yet the negative part is by the Church declared to be true nor commanded to be so beleived professed by her followers in which saith S. Augustine that Faith whereby we are Christians remaining safe either we doe not know which part in true and â—â— suspend our definitive sentence or else by humane and weake suspicion we doe guesse otherwise then the truth is and consequently are deceived Reply p. 100 Wee know that Augustine in this place speaketh not of any matter of Faith that is or can be by declaration of the Church but telleth us that our beleife whereby wee are Christians remaining sure and setled our ignorance errour in other things which are far from being of faith will not be so dangerous And other sort of points there is saith the Iesuite wherein when controversie doth arise one part is already found declared for true and commaunded of necessity to be so beleived by all and in these if a man be advertised of the Churches declaration and notwithstanding will obstinately maintaine the contrary then is he said to hold against a point of Catholick faith and therefore accounted to be an hereticke Let us suppose saith S. Augustin that some man doth hold of CHRIST that errour which Photinus held which he thinketh to be the true Catholicke Faith I doe not yet account him for an Hereticke except when the doctrine of the Church is layde open unto him he yet maketh choise to continue in that errour which before he held Reply ibid. Was ever any man so mad to thinke that the Church could not point out an article of Faith This may be done by private Churches private Doctors but shew us if you can that Augustine made a point of Faith from the naked ground of the Churches declaration with Scriptures or without onely and for no other reason then because it is declared Augustine affordeth nothing here for this purpose he sheweth his charity that if some man by weaknes and infirmitie hold on hereticall opinion if it be not obstinately and pertinaciously he doth not accompt him an Heretick â—ut I aske you although 〈◊〉 with mercie the errant whether you are perswaded that he would doe so of the Heresie The point is whether S. Augustine would have accounted Photius his opinion denying CHRIST to be GOD an indifferent point of Religion as the Iesuite would perswade us before it was defined by the Church No the words of Augustine plainely declare that the doctrine of the Church taught from the Scriptures not defined by a Councel is sufficient to detect Heresie though he would have the obstinacie of the party appeare against the truth before he condemnes him for an Hereticke But this will appeare saith the Iesuite yet more manifest by the manner wherewith S. Augustine excused S. Cyprian c. for that his errour was not against any point as yet declared by the Church i Reply ibid. pag. 101. Surely S. Augustine doth not contest for that the Iesuite dreameth He excuseth Cyprian why Because the Roman Church had not condemned this opinion This is false for this opinion was condemned Cyprian excommunicated by the strength of Rome as is before shewed confessed by your own * See before Sect. 10. yet he adhered therunto But that which Augustine saith here may be interpreted by his words urged immediately before that though Cyprian held this opinion yet was it not with obstinacie as the 〈◊〉 maintained theirs but that he would have forsaken that errour if the falshood thereof had beene demonstrated unto him not by a Generall Councell onely as it was at Nice but as the Iesuite urgeth his words if any man had shewed the contrary unto him Now the Pope with his Councell did decree against it but this Augustine did not conceive as the Iesuite would collect to be a demonstration sufficient to convict S. Cyprian so that the Iesuit doth but trifle in urging this testimony Now saith the Iesuite although this point is made plaine 〈◊〉 by this holy Fathers authority k Reply p. 101. c. What hath the 〈◊〉 no more but one Fathers authoritie and as you perceive a poore one for his infallible Iudge Yes That I may leave it past all doubt saith hee or replication wee will give a glance to see how the practise of this Doctrine was performed and to this purpose hee telleth us that wee shall finde how 68. Bishops writing from Garthage to Pope Innocentius after having related unto his Holines what they had concluded themselves in the matter they say that they thought it convenient to intimate the same unto his Charitie to the end that unto the decrees of our mediacritie say they be annexed the authoritie of the See Apostolicke for the preservation of the health and good estate of many and also for the correction of the perversitie of some others And that the second Councell held at Milevitum sent an epistle to Pope Innocentius about the same matter beginning with these words Seeing our Lord God by the gift of his especiall grace hath placed you in the See Apostolicke c we beseech you to use your pastorall diligence in remedying the great dangers wherewith the weaker members of Christ are invironed l Reply p. 101. 102. Nowhere is nothing that may conclude the Roman Bishop to be this infallible rule it being manifest that other Bishops were sought unto and consulted as well as himselfe nay after hee had declared his judgement For in the point of Easter after the Bishops of Egypt had declared their mindes and the Church of Alexandria with the Bishop of the Roman Church had defined the matter yet They
doe as yet expect my sentence what I thinke fit to write concerning Easter day saith Saint Ambrose m Ambros ep 83. Meam adhuc expectant sententiam quid 〈◊〉 scribere de die Pascha But wee are not ignorant that the consent of the Patriarchall Sees was a great helpe to the advancement of Truth and repelling of errour and therefore those Bishops were sought unto to adde their assistance for suppression of innovations or arising Heresies Yet was not Rome sought unto in point of infallibilitie any otherwise then Alexandria For wee finde lovinian seeking to Athanasius that from his hand-writing hee might receive an exact exemplar or declaration of the Faith n Theodoror histor Eccless l. 4 c. 2. But what Iudgment would the Iesuite have their Innocent to have had A judgment of assent This what Bishops had not Eusebius of Nicomedia and Theoguis of Nice Heretickes exercised it o Sozom. hist Eccles l. 2. c. 15 Illa quae vestro judicio decreta sunt non contradicendo impugnare sed consentientibus animis confirmare decrevimus et hoc libello consensum illum roboramus Yea Liberius a Pope desires the Emperour that the Nicene Councell might in the same manner of all Bishops bee confirmed p Sozom. hist Eccles l. 4. c. 10. Liberius postulavit ab Imperatore ut fides in Concilio Nicaeno tradita subscriptionibus omnium obique Episcoporum confirmaretur which I am perswaded hee would not have done if he had conceived that subscriptive Confirmation had made a Iudge of Faith It may be he will have the Bishop of Romes subscription to make an Edict Why if this were graunted it were too weake to conclude him the rule of Faith for Emperors did the like with a power not usurped but sollicited and that by Councels and Popes too The first Councell of Constantinople petitioned Theodosius to ratifie the Decrees of that Councell that as by his Letters he called the Councel so by Seale he should fortifie their Decrees q Epistola Synodalis ad Theodosium Imperatorem Rogamus igitur tuam clementiam ut per literas tuâ— pietatis ratum esse jubeas confirmesque Concilij decretum et sicuti literis quibus nos convocasti Ecclesiam honore prosecutus es ita etiam summam corum quae decreta sunt conclusionem sententiâ â—tque sigillo tuo corrobores And Euagrius reports your Pope Felix to doe the like sending his Nunâ—ies to the Emperour by his authoritie to confirme the Chalcedon Councell r Enagrius histor Eccles l. 3. c. 18 Mittantur à Felice ad Zenonem Vitalius Misinus Episcopi ut ejus authoritate tum Concilium Chalcedoâ—â—â—se confirmaretur and many places to the like purpose may be urged But if the Church be the rule of Faith how many absurdities will follow thereupon As first that there must bee a Church before and so without Faith because faith in the Iesuits judgment cannot be before it is defined Secondly the Church must be the Rule of it selfe unlesse they will put forth that Article The holy Catholicke Church out of the Creed Thirdly the Church must rule the foundation upon which it is builded Ephes 2. Revel 21. Fourthly it is not denyed by the Iesuite that this rule is ruled someway by Scripture and therefore it hath not its rectitude in it selfe So that we see the Church of God hath her ministery the word of God the controule The Councell of Nice did her duty but Theodores telleth us how l. 1. c. 8 Å¿ Ibi animadversa fraudulcÌ„tia allegârunt Episcopi ex Scriptura resplendentiam soutem flumen charactera ad substantiam hoc In lumine tuo videbimus lumen Et hoc Ego Pater unum sumus luculentius deinceps ac com pendiosius conscripsere EIVS DEM CVM PATRE ESSE FILIVM ESSENTIAE And that all may perceive with how much fraud and falshood these places of Augustine are forced we may consider that the Scriptures are sufficient t August in Ioan tract 49. Cum multa fecisset Dominus Iesus non omnia scripta sunt sicut idem ipse sanctus Evan gelista testatur multa Dominum Christum dixisse fecisse quae Scripta non sunt electa sunt autem quae scriberentur quae saluti credentium sufficere videbantur Serm. 38. ad fratres in Eremo inter opera August Legite sacram Scripturam in qua quid tenendum quid fugiendum sit plene invenietâ— not onely to teach faith but also to condemne heresies * See before pag. 199. in that fathers judgment and that Generall Councels themselves may be amended u See before pag. 319. Further he would never have moved to have past by the Councels of Nice and Ariminum x August con Maximin l. 3. c. 14. Neque ego Nicenum nec tu debes Ariminense tau quam praejudicaturus proferre Concilium Nec ego hujus autoritate nec illius detineris Scripturarum autoritatibus non quorumcunque proprijs sed utriusque communibus testibus res cum re caussa cum caussa ratio cum ratione decertet Reply pag. 100. if the Church had onely ruled the Faith So that the Iesuite hath concluded upon halting principles For never was the Pope acknowledged alwayes or at any time the onely Pastor of the Church neither the Roman Church the rule to find out heresies or to declare truthes neither did the auncient Bishops dreame of submitting to the Roman Church as the onely way to prevent errour neither did they thinke Arius his blasphemy onely cursed after the determination at Nice neither did Augustine ever breath forth as the Iesuit would father upon him y though with caution that an opinion which formerly was not held for a point of Faith may by the declaration of the Church be received and held for such Neither lastly did the Catholick Church expresly declare the Iesuites points for Cheifâ— articles of Faith True it is that a point of the Catholicke Faith may not be so fully preached or so openly professed or so publickely declared at one time as at another but that the same article might be no cheife point of faith at one time in the Christian Church and at another time by the Churches declaration be fundamentall is grosse and ridiculous For either the Churches declaration doth make that which was not to be of the substance of Faith giving it authoritie and credit making it of necessary beleife and so fundamentall which is too grosse to bee defended at Mid-day or else it doth declare to others what was formerly the foundation out of the Scriptures against some new arising Heresie And what doth the point gaine from the Church whether authoritie or light Authoritie they feare to say Light they cannot affirme for by the producing of it the darkenes is detected the Heresie is condemned Truth it receives not for it was there before Nay how could an Heresie against the foundation be
observed if the Truth were not before knowne The declaration doth not make it Faith but sheweth that the faithfull doe adhere unto it as revealed by God for if the truth were not there the declaration of it were an Hersie or error at least Neither doth hee produce any thing afterwards to make the Church the rule of faith Whereas he tels us that S. Augustine writing to S. Hierome requesteth him that setting downe the Catalogue of Heretickes he would joyntly expresse in what points they had beene condemned by Catholicke authoritie and againe in his Preface to the above mentioned Catalogue of Heresies hee mentioneth himselfe what the Church holdeth against such Heresies without making any mention of the authority of Scripture z Reply p. 10. I thinke the Iesuite would have a Church embracing heresie What doth the Churches adherence to truth make her the Iudge or rule of it and because Catholicke authority condemneth Herefie must therefore the contrary truth have its life from the declaration thereof Faith must then follow the Church not leade it The Iesuit may conceive that this Father meanes not by the Churches authority a power inherent in their Roman Apollo excluding all other assistance but a lawfull determination according to the Scriptures by the Bishops Preists of the Catholick Church For otherwise he must acknowledge in the Church such a domination as was amongst the Gentiles Luke 22. But sure it is that S. Augustine dreamed no more of your Iudge then the blessed Apostle S. Paul who in the enumeration of the divers degrees of the ministery Ephes 1111. v. 11. left him out Besides the Iesuite by Apostolicall directions in matters that concerne faith may see a Rule not a Iudge pointed out as having authority to guide us Phil. 3. 16. Gal. 6. 16. by which rule as the Church receiveth strength so limitation Finally saith the Iesuite observe how all the points layde down by me in my demand being declared by the Catholicke Church for articles of faith are of necessity to be beleived and held for such the contrary for dâ—â—â—able Heresie Reply p. 104 What the Iesuite doth say for the expresse declaration of all his points of Faith wil be examined in their severall places here an induction he brings us a conclusion whereby he would prove that the onely Rule to know a point of faith from an indifferent opinion in Religion is the declared determined judgment of the Church by which all the points laid down in his demand being propounded unto them for such must of necessity be accounted cheife articles of Catholick beleife b Reply p. 105. 106. But from whence the Iesuite draweth this conclusion I cannot see for if the Church command by the expresse Scripture and sense agreed on in all ages the Church then doth judge at least with undependant authority but direct calling for obedience to a former judgment if it decree in points doubtfull the Churches declaration can bind us to peace and externall obedience but here no infallible judge is allowed to make matters that were doubtfull to be of faith or to create from uncertainties a new Creed That the Church by her particular ministers and body representative hath applied the Scriptures to severall heresies thereby detected condemned them we deny not but will this make every point decreed by a Councell wilfully from their owne ends without direction or limitation to be a cheife article of Faith Your Quartadecimani were convinced of heresie by the Scripture as Alphonsus de Castro telleth us c Alphons de Castro advers Haeâ— l. 12. de Pascha Istorum ergo sententia inde convincitur haerescos quòd supra in titulo de lege oâ—tendimus esse hâ—resim asserere caeremonias judicia legis veteris obligare tempore legis evangelicae Nam Paulus reprehendens Galats co quod caeremonias legis observandas putaâ—ent inter alia dicit Dies observatis menses tempora annos but where by the naked declaratioÌ„ of Pope Victor without this rule Neither did he excommunicate all the Bishops of Asia in this cause if Alphonsus speake truth but they escaped it by Irenâ—us his chyding of your Pope d Idem ibid. Fâ—cisset nisi illum Iraeneus ob hoc redarguisset Here you see that these hereticks of the East after the Pope had condemned them had one Catholick Bishop pleading for them In like manner the Novatians e Alphons de Castro adver haer l. 12. de â—â—â—n haeâ— 3 Cum non sit alia res pluries apertius in sacris condicibus pâ—odita quà m misâ—ricordia quam Deus erga peccatorâ—s maxime poenitentes exercet illis peccatorum suorum indulgentiam tribuens might be condeÌ„ned as the Arians f Socrates Hist Eccles l. 1. c. 7. Evangelici enim Apostolici libri nâ—â—non antiquorum Prophetarum ora cula planè instruunt nos inquit Constantinus Imperator in Nicaea Synodo sensu numinis Proinde hostili politâ discordiâ sumaâ—â—us ex dictis divini Spiritus explicationes quaestionum Haec his similia memorabat ille velut amans paterni nominis filius sacerdoâ—ibus tanquam patribuâ— cupions confiteri Apostolicorum dogmatum unitatem Quibus assensus maximae conventus partis acceâ—â—it Macedonians g Theodoret. Hist Eccles l. 5. c. 9. Iam enim semel formam protulimus ut qui se Christianum profiteatur server â—a quae ab Apostolis tradita sunt quum dicat Sanctus Paâ—lus Si quis vobis annunciat aliud quam accepistis anathema esto Nestorians h Epistola Cyrilli Synodi ad Nestorium tom 1. Act. Concil Ephes Occum c. 14 Haec tenere haec sapere cum à sanctis Apostolis Evangelistis tum ab universa quoque sacra divina Scriptura tum ex veraci denique sanctorum patrum confessione edocti sumus Eâ—tich i Euagrius Histor Eccles l. 2. c. 4. Dominum nostrum Iesum Christum confitemur c. siâ—ut antiquitùs Prophetae de â—o postille ipse Christus nos docâ—â—t idem ipsum nobis Patrum Symbolum tradidit Pelagians k Concil Milevit c. 2. the Monothelites l Concil Constant Vniversale VI. Act. 1. 2. Propositis in medio Sanctis intemeratis Evangelijs but was this done by the judgement of the Church onely and absolutely surely no but by the Scriptures And it is more then cleare that the reason why you distast the Scriptures is as Clemens Alexandrinus observeth because you hold not the rule of faith Clemens Alexandr Stromat l. 7. Necesse est enim labi in maximis cos qui res maximas aggrediuâ—tur nisâ— regâ—lam veritatis ab ipsa veritate acceptam tenuâ—rint Qui autem sâ—nt ejâ—smoâ—i ut qui à recta via excideâ—int meritò etiam falluntur in pluâ—imis singularibus propterea quòd non habeant verorum â—alsoâ—um judicium planâ— exercitatum
Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleannes through the lusts of their owne hearts to dishonour their owne bodies betweene themselves Who changed the truth of God into a lye and worshipped the creature more then the Creatour who is blessed for ever Amen Whereby wee may see from whence such fearefull practises and opinions proceede not from Gods truth but from the contempt of it when men had rather adhere to their vaine imaginations then that heavenly light Which is further declared Rom. 1. 28. Even as they did not like to retaine God in their knowledge God gave them over to a reprobate minde to doe those things which are not convenient And what ground this Iesuite hath to charge the scriptures with these fearefull effects he saith not But let him tell us whether doth Gods booke afford one syllable to justifie any of these practises layed downe by him nay doth it not deterre them from such wickednes That corrupt men in the maliciousnes of imagination may pervert the Scriptures to their own destruction as we deny it not so it maketh nothing at all against the vulgar use thereof And heerein our Iesuite is worse then Adam Eve the Serpent or hee that possessed them in their corruptest nature none making God the cause of their fearefull wickednes as the Iesuite in these particulars doth his Word And I thinke the pollution of Popish Preists might with as much truth bee objected unto them as to Anabaptists nay I dare say though I hate to give them a word for defence that there is as much sufferance for notorious pollution within the Papal command as under any government and confusion in the world as will be cleared by their stewes incestuous dispensations filthy Sodomies and mincing those sinnes which a chaste minde is distempered to thinke on q Sanches lib. 4 de debito con jugali disp 46 and modestie forbiddeth me to name But our Iesuite will conclude the matter and tells us if our Answerer cannot prove as sure he cannot that ever any such liberty was granted to the people to read such like Scripture as is allowed amongst them at this day let him tell us himselfe how farre he is from agreeing with the practise of either first or middle ages of the Church wherein no such Bibling nor Babling amongst the common people was ever beard or dreamed of r Reply pag. 27 If this Iesuite by such like scriptures would have the same translations prooved to have beene in practise in the first or subsequent ages or if he would have us to proove that there were others which were as corrupt as he presupposeth ours to be in common practise then he requireth us to proove what we affirme not Yet this wee may justly say that there was never translation in the Latine Church before Hierome's time but was more corrupt then any he can finde allowed in the Church of Ireland since the Reformation which may bee demonstrated by their owne measure or rule for if our translations be nearer the Hebrew out of which they were translated then those afore-mentioned Versions out of the Septuagint it cannot bee denyed that they are more agreeable to the truth And that they come nearer the Hebrew we need not to goe farre for manifestation thereof in regard they are more agreeable to the Vulgar Latine which in the judgement of Papists is nearer to the Hebrew then the Septuagint and by consequent then any translation from thence whatsoever But it hath this notwithstanding beene formerly shewed in this Section that the Fathers not onely permitted the same scripture for the people to read as we doe now but exhorted them also to that dutie And this did continue in the Church of God untill God and his truth being neglected and contemned humane inventions and superstitious customes which did better consent to Papall tyrannie then the Scriptures could any way doe invaded the Church And notwithstanding our Iesuites pretences wee know it is not because the Scriptures are so dangerous in their use that they are not permitted by the Romish Faction but because by their light every weake judgement may discerne Papall Hypocrisy f Verger secretar Pont. act 1. pag. â—1 Et scio quidem te non ignorare prudentissimos homines qui diu in hâc causâ versati sunt ita sentire ut si ea judicanda sit ex verbo Dei in veteri novo testamento scripto juxta eum sensum quem ex Epistolis atque actis Apostolorum agnoscimus ipsos Apostolos tâ—nuisse docuisse fore ut vincamur à Lutheranis and thereupon bee inclined to cast off that Usurper which raigneth in their conscience t Consilium quorund Episcop Bonon congregat de stabiliend Rom Eccles Denique quod inter omnia consilla quae nos dare hoc tempore beatitudini tuae possumus omnium gravissimum ad extremum reserâ—aviâ—us oculi hic aperiendi sunt omnibus nervis admittendum erit ut quam minimum Eâ—angeliâ— poterit praesertim vulgari linguâ in â—â—s legatur civitatibus quae sub tuâ ditione potestate sunt Sufficiatque tantillum illud quod in Missa legi solet nec co amplius cuiquam mortaliâ—m legere permittatur Quamdiu enim pauculo illo homines contenti fuerunt tamdiu res tuae ex sententiâ successere eaedemque in contrarium labi coeperunt exquo ulterius legi-rulgò usur patum â—st Hic ille in summa est libes qui praeter caeteros hasâ—e nobis tempestates ac turbines concitavit quibus propè abrepti sumus Et sane si quis illum â—iligenter expendat deinde quae in nostris fieri ecclesijs consueveâ—unt singula ordine contempletur videbit plurimum inter se dissidere hanc doctrinam nostram ab illâ prorsus diversam esse ac saepè contrariam etiam So that whether you have made a change or our selves let the Reader determine and whether Bibling in a language that may be understood doth not better agree with the auncient practise then Babling in an unknown tongue where the people and the stones are equally edified I also desire the Reader further to conceive how the Iesuit hath behaved himselfe in this controversie that when hee should have freed his Church from the change mentioned and so have avoided the most learned Primates argument he doth nothing labour to prove their agreement with the Fathers as he should haue done but onely goeth about to perswade that the Fathers never permitted such translations or as he tearmeth it such like Scriptures to be read of the people as are allowed amongst us at this day Al which is nothing to the purpose in regard the change consisteth in their different practise from the auncients and not in our agreement with them For if all sorts of people did reade the Scriptures in the primitive times being invited thereunto by the Christian practise of the faithfull and the exhortations of the Bishops then living and that the
Churches under Popish government have beene for many hundred of yeares without vulgar Bibles approoved and appointed to be read of the people whereby they might be exercised in the like auncient Christian duty doth it not then follow that let our custome bee what it will they denying free libertie unto the people to reade them without dispensation disagree herein from the practise of the auncient Church although wee doe not point out the Pope that did first seale up this treasure from the people and consequently that the Iesuites demaund is vaine Yet the Iesuite continueth his pursuite and his Vanitie also By an other instance saith hee no lesse vaine then the former he endeavoureth to tell us againe how wee differ from the middle ages of the Church u Reply pag. 27 If no more vaine then the former the learned Answerer needeth not to feare well where is this enclosure of Vanity I heare S. Hierome say The Church doth read indeede the bookes of Iudith and Toby and the Mâ—chabees but doth not receive them for canonicall scripture x Hieronym Praesat in libros Salomon Epist 113. I see that at this day the Church of Rome receiveth them for such May not I then conclude saith the most learned Primate y In his Answer to the Iesuites Challenge pag 9. that betwixt S. Hierome's time and ours there hath beene a change and that the Church of Rome now is not of the same judgement with the Church of God then howsoever I cannot precisely lay downe the time wherein shee first thought her selfe to bee wiser herein then her fore-fathers What Vanity can the Iesuite espye heere why saith hee Our Answerer playeth Bopeepe with his Reader affecting ignorance to wrong the truth for well hee knoweth that the same S. Hierome not long after did testifie unto the world that the first Nicen Councell declared the booke of Iudith for Canonicall which hee had not heard of when hee wrote the former words alledged by our Answerer z Reply pag. 2â— Here the Iesuite had need to be active for his weapons are but reedes The place he urgeth is Hierome in the prologne to the booke of Iudith And surely there will bee small grounds to make Iudith reputed canonicall in Hierome's time Paula and Eustochium desired Hierom to translate this booke of Iudith into Latine where by the way you may see if you make it canonicall Scripture wee may conclude a woman might have and reade the same in the vulgar tongue to whom St Hierome answereth that among the Hebrewes tht booke of Iudith was taken amongst the holy writings but yet of no authoritie to resolve a controversie being written in the Chaldey reckoned among the Histories yet because it is read that the Nicene Councell did take this booke in the number of the sacred Scriptures hee did yeild to translate the same a Hiero in Prolog ad librum Iudith Apud Hebraeos liber Iudith inter Hagiographa legitur cujus autoritas ad roboranda illa quae ad contentionem veniunt minus idonea judicatur Chaldaeo tamen sermone conscriptus inter historias computatur Sed quia hunc librum Synodus Nicena in numero sanctarum Scripturarum legitur compu tâsse acquicri postulationi vestrae imo exactioni But where was it read non ex canone de sacris libris confecto not out of the Canon made up of the holy bookes b Baronius in appendice decimi tomi notatione ad annum 32 Haud affirmandum omnino existimarem Canonem de libris sacris statutum esse à Nicaeno Concilio à quo neminem ausum fuisse recedere jure debet existimari Sed non ex Canone de sacris libris consecto id asseruisse S. Hieronymum verum potius ex actis cjus in quibus obiter citatus idem liber inventus â—uit this Baronius affirmeth where then in some obscure pamphlet for any thing the Iesuit knoweth and so farre was St Hierome from testifying to the world what the Iesuite so confidently affirmeth that it cannot be manifested St Hierome gave any credite to what he saith was onely read Yea their owne Lindanus from St Hieromes uncertaine manner of Speech Legitur computâsse seemeth to conclude that St Hierome beleived it not though he might reade it c Lindan Panopl Evangel l. 3. c. 3. Vehementer ut dubitem facit quod apud Hieronymum Praefat in Iudith reperitut paulâ— cost Sed legitur computasse ait Hiero. quod mihi dubitantis suspicionem subindicate videtur and saith if the Nicene Councell did aunciently reckon the booke of Iudith in the Canon why did not the Councell of Laodicea reckon it why did not Nazianzene make mention of it What meant the same St Hierome to say the Church at that time did reade the bookes of Iudith Tobic and the Maccabees but did not receive them amongst the Canonicall Scriptures d Idem ibid. Si Niâ—aena Synodus olim hunc Iudith librum cum alijs in Canonem redegerat cur annis 80. post â—um non accenset Laodicaena cur Nazianzenus ejus non meminit paulo post Quid sibi vult quod idem Hieron in librorum Salomoniâ— praefatione scribit Ecclesiam libros Iudith Thobiae ac Machabeorum legere quidem sed inter canonicas scripturas non recipere And Erasmus in his Censure upon this Prologue saith that St Hierome doth not affirme the booke of Iudith to have beene approoved in the Nicene Synode †Censura Prologi ad librum Iudith Non affirmat approbatum hunc in Synodo Nicaena sed ait legitur computâsse So that it is most apparant who it is that playeth Bopeepe with his Reader that affecteth ignorance to wrong the truth Further what did St Hierome afterwards that might cause the Iesuite to conceive it in his subsequent esteeme Canonicall He translated it but did he not the like to others which he denyeth to be in the Canon and where then is his retractation which hee ought to have performed for abusing the Canonicall booke of Iulith if he had committed violence against Gods sacred truth Neither ought it to amaze the Reader that this booke should be said to be taken in the number of sacred writings for who knowes not that Bookes were esteemed Hagiographa holy and divine from their matter and in opposition to prophane writings and yet were farre from the authoritie of the Canon And if it be a true rule that one falshood makes the whole testimonie suspected what shall we say to the corruption of this prologue to the booke of Iudith wherein Hagiographa is put for Apocrypha as may bee prooved by Lyranus c Lyrs Prolog in Bibl. Neque al quemm veat quod in Iudith Thobiae prologis dicitur quod apud Hebraeos inter Hâ—giographa leguntur qui manifestus error est apocripha non hagiographa est legendum qui error in omnibus quos viderim codicibus invenitur inolâ—uit