Pont. l 4. c. 7 Cyprianus pertinaciter restitit Stephano Pontifici doâââienti haereticos non rebaprixandââ ut patet ex Epistola ejusdem Cypriani ad Pompeiââ tamen non solum non fuit haereticus sed neque mortaliter peccavit et tamen Ecââesia Cypriaâum 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 câllegis suiâ instigante Diabolo superbire temporibus praedecessorum noâââorum Bonifacii atque Coelestiâi contra Romanam Ecclesiam coepit Sed videâs 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 âhaire which was not of such an unmooveable stability âs that rocke ought to bee upon which the Church is builded Further I thinke Mr Malone will not deây 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. Augustiââ 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 ãâã l. 7. â 6. into which seates ascended none of these Monarcâs 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 exâorfit auâ ambitus occupavit etiam si âoribus atque actibus non âssendât ip ãâã tamen iniââââui est ãâã ãâã 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 defânding 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. ââ into subjection under their feete But the Iesuite confident of Prosper telleth us Therefore the holy Bishop ãâã doth testifie how in his dayes The whole world agreed with Pope Siricius in one and the same fellowship of communion d Reply pag. ââ 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 Optaâââ that lived many Decades of years before him doth testifie how in his dayes the whole world agreed with Pope Siriââus 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 âdefend 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 subscriptioâââ Haereseââ 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 Romaâââ Ecclesiaâ sed tamen nos omnes sensum habeâââ 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 observâd but so farre as they might convince them of the truth of their doctrine and profession
of Bishops in the Roman See that invincible rock upon which Christ built his Church For who will dreame that Father to esteeme that present seate or succession to be the rocke for any other reason then because they held the rocke confessed by Peter And in this sence not only Peters successors at Rome but all other successors of Peter the rest of the Apostles might bestiled rocks p Origen in Math hom 1. Petra est ãâã 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 oâerum sensuum omnium qui hujusmodi beatitudinem operantur ãâã Eccelesia Dei cui portae non praevalent inserorum Si autem âper 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 âu es Petrus c. tamen omnibus Apostolis omnibus quibuscunque perfectis fidelibus dictum viââ 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 Apostoloâum 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 omâes 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 obtiâere Tunc Iudices transmarinos petijt ab Imperatore Sed haectam unjust petitio non erat de charitate Hoe ipsa veritas clamaâ quam vclo modo refeâe Nam consensit Impeâââor âââât 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 sorâiâut 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 continââ 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 hâm 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
in the Acts viz. a Bisâopricke n Rhem ãâã upon Luk â ââ And although the Iesuite now seeth that Peter can be no Monarch by his Apostleship such extraordinary power being given to others yet it hath beene that which they ever pretended to exalt him whom they would have to be Peters Successour and the Monarch of the Church and therefore they have had their mouthes and rescripts full of Apostle and Apostleship calling his office Apostleship saying that he heareth causes with his Apostleship why should he not determine with it All his instruments of government are Apostolical as Letters Decrees Mandates Buls Pardons Dispensations nay what hath he that is not Apostolicke Whether messenger or Legate Whether Palace Chamber Chancery Seale o Sacraâ ceâam Rom. eccles l 1. Reg. Canc. Apostol Extra do jurejur c. Ego c. Besides how many of the Iesuites counterfeits urged for the Primacy are thought to speake effectually when they attribute to the Pope to sit in the Apostolicall height to have his See Apostolicke his office an Apostleship his priviledges his eminencies Apostolicall Fourthly he would have told them that the auncient Fathers declare in plaine tearmes how Christ grounding his Church upon Peter Mat. 16. committing his flocke to Peter Ioh. 21. wishing Peter to confirme his Brethren and praying for Peters faith that it should not faile Luc. 22. constituted Peter head of his Church upon earth and consequently thereby made him Prince Cheife Captaine Head Leader and Prelate over the rest of the Apostles p Reply pag. 60 But whosoever will weigh his quotations shall perceive that the Fathers have beene onely pretended by him they disdaining any such Monarchie as from those texts the Iesuite laboureth to collect And first for the 16. of Mat. Although the Fathers doe sometimes give Peter the name of the rocke or foundation upon which the Church is builded or grounded yet their meaning is not that the Church is builded upon Peter absolutely and personally but relativelie and from his faith or Christ that hee confessed And therefore Hillary that calleth Peter the foundation of the Church q Hilar. in Mat. 16 Faelix Ecclesiae fundamentum telleth us that not onely to say but also to beleive that CHRIST is the Sonne of GOD this faith is the foundation of the Church r Hillar l. 6. De Trinitat Christum Dei silium non solum nuncupare sed etiam credere Haec fides Ecclesiae fundamentum and in another place hee saith This is the alone happie rocke of faith confessed with the mouth of Peter Thou art the Sonne of the everliving GOD Å¿ Idem l. 2. De Trinitat Vna ââaec est faelix fidei Petra Petri ore confessa Tu es filius Dei vivi S. Basill also saith that CHRIST is truely a Rocke unmoveable but Peter is so from the Rockâ Christ t Basil serm de Pâniten Christus verè Petra est inconcussa Petrus vero propter Petram And S. Ambrose concludeth u Ambros ser â Recte igitur qui Petra Christus Simon nuncupaââs est Petrus ââ qui cum Domino fidei societatem habebat cum Domino haberet nominis Dominici unitatem ut siqut à Christo Christianus dicitur ita à Petra Christo Petrus Apostolus vocaretur that rightly therefore because CHRIST is the rocke was Simon called Peter that so he that had a society of faith with his Lord might also have the unitie of his name that as a Christian taketh his denomination from CHRIST so Peter the Apostle might ââke his name from the rocke CHRIST So also saith Gregory Nissen The LORD is the rock of faith even the foundation as the LORD himselfe saith to the Prince of the Apostles Then art Peter and upon this rocke I will build my Church x Gregor Nissenus cap. postremo testimoniorum con Iudaeos Dominus est Peâââ fidei âââquam fundamentum ut ipse Dominus ait ad principeâ ãâã Tu es Petrus super âanc Petram aedificabo Ecclesiam ãâã And S. Augustine teacheth us that The Church is founded upon a rocke from whence even PETER took his name For the rocke tooke not its denomination from PETER but PETER from the rocke even as CHRIST taketh not his name from Christians but a Christian from CHRIST y August truââ 124. in Iohan. Ecclesia fundata est super petram ââ de Petrus nomen accepit Non enim à Petro petra siââ Petrus à petra siââ non Christus à Christianis sed Christianus à Christâ vocatur Theodoret shall conclude for this particular who telleth us that Blessed PETER or rather the LORD himselfe layed the foundation for when PETER said thou art CHRIST the Sonne of the living GOD the LORD said upon this rocke I will build my Church Bee not you therefore denominated from man for CHRIST is the foundation z Theodoret. in 1. Cor. 3. Fundamenâââ jecit beatus Petrus vel pâtius ipse Dominus Cum enim dixisset Petrus Tu es Christuâ filius Der viââ dixir Domiââ super hanc ãâã ârarâ aedificabo EcclesiammeaÌ Ne voâââ go denominaââ ab hominibus Christus ãâã âââ ãâã So that the Iesuite may see how Peter was the rocke and foundation by confessing and preaching CHRIST the true rocke The latter of which duties to wit preaching CHRIST is so bitter ânto their Popes that I thinke they had rather forsake their Rock-ship then be tyed thereunto And as the Church was no otherwise grounded upon Peter then you have heard from the Fathers so neither was the flocke of CHRIST Io. 21. committed to Peter in the Roman sence For feeding is not domineering that which before did point out a sheepheard must not now constitute a Prince or Monarch But not to descant upon this place in every particular the Iesuite may take notice that there want not Fathers that thinke the other Apostles had as much interest in feeding as Peter himselfe and that hee received no new power by his pasce oves this is cleare from the reasons that the Fathers give wherefore CHRIST spake onely to Peter As first not to give him a new power and Commission but to stirre him up to conââsse his LORD thrice as before hee denyed him So Augustine tract in Iohan 123. Cyrillus in Iohan. lib. 12. cap. 64. Secondly that hee might renewe the Apostle shippe for so saith Cyrill But CHRIST said fiede my Lambes renewing unto him the dignitie of his APOSTLESHIP least it might seeme to be lâst for his denyall which happened by humane informitie a Cyrillââ in Io. l. 12. c 64. Dixit autem pasce agâââ ãâã Apostolâââs ei renovââââ dignitatem ne propter âegatioâem quae humanâ ãâã accidit lâbefactaâi videreâââ What new power is here given What ordinarie jurisdiction that ordinarily did not belong to the rest Here is the old Apostleship renewed to Peter which by denyall of his Master he
non habentem maculam aut rugam non sie accipiendum est quasi jam sit sed quae prâparatur 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 ââspotted 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 ãâã o In his Challenge in his enquirie in this section hee layeth downe the Roman Church without reââraynt 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 âspy 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 ââ 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 ãâã dum probant absolute Ecclesiam non posse dâficere ãâã Calââââ eâteri ãâã âi id concedunt which the Iesuite knowing though dissembling after he hath produced S. Chrysostome for the perpetuitie of the Catholicke Church argueth fâr her But what Church doth this holy Father meane thinke you Surely none other then Peters Church u Reply pag. ââ c. Peters Churchâ proâ nefââ 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 ãâã now and bee denominated from Peter The Spouse of Christ the mysticall body of Christ the house of God the Lords granary and ãâã 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 âst 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 âet 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 homâââ 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 ââerce 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 ãâã ãâã validiââââ monstravit And as the Fathers ground this priviledge of the unspotted â Non enim turbari te con venââ cùm audicris quia traâar crucifiâââ 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. ââ 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 ãâã the pride that they are urged heere to ãâ¦ã the rest he cites ãâã 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 wordââ in the honour of S. Peter and their owne Seâ and practises sutable thereunto Insomuch that they were esteemed smoâââ by some
Heresies did arise and with different names did end avour to teare in peices and devide Christ his dove and his queene or spouse was it not reason that the true Apostolicall Church should be called by her syrname of Catholicke thereby to discerne and distinguish her incorrupted unitie least that Vnspotted Virgin by other mens errors and mistaking might be devided u Reply pag. 6â c. What have we here for the unspotted Roman Church Here is nothing to exempt her from present staines or after pollutions That there was a Catholicke Church and not âespotted with the impurities of the auncient Herâticks who doth deny yet this doth not prove Augustine over-shot in his retractation or the Iesuite justified in âââ tearme Now as if hee had performed what he made us expect âe swels Might not a man now bee bold to bee tryed by the judgment of our Answerers owne conscience whether hee had any reason to except against me for tearming the ãâã Catholicke Roman Church unspotted x Reply pag. ââ And indiscreet man may be bould in an arme of flesh a âeed of Egypt a broken tooth but vainely and to his losse The most learned Answerers Conscience may for any thing you have said commiserate your confidence not justifie it unlesse you would have him to be convicted with forged words and bare names When as I have saith the Iesuite this generall warrant from the holy Fathers and Doctours of this Primitive times for the same y Reply pag. 67 The most learned Answerer by excepting at your unspotted Church did not charge the âniversall built upon the rocke confessed by Peter with desperate Heresie Particular members and Churches which have outwardly professed Christ have fallen into Heresie so may Rome z Frauciscus Picus Theo. 13 Iuxta Theoso gorumquotuâdam Iuris Interpretum aliquorum dogmata fieri possetut Romana Ecclesia quae particularis Ecclesia est contra universalem distincta infide aberraret but that the Catholick Church should forsake the foundation of faith this he well knew would crosse Christs promise and make the gates of Hell prevaile against his Church It would then be no rock upon which the Church was builded but the sand subject to wind weather The Iesuite in his Challenge did not stile the auncient Catholick Church which he here tearmeth Roman but the primitive Church of Rome unspotted in this sense it is there acknowledged by himselfe that the ancient Roman is by us confessed to be unspotted so that what he hath produced for their Catholick exemption from Heresie is nothing to his purpose But he proceedes in his Oratory The which being maturely pondered of thee Christian Reader thou mayest easily perceive how farre unlike our Answeters Church is unto that of the primitive confessed best times notwithstanding that he seemeth to claime so great affinitie therewith But wherein is this dissimilitude unliâenes In regard the Roman Church being head of all other Churches in earth c. thereupon rightly called the Vniversall or Catholick Church c is blessed with the prerogative of an inâincible perpetuity of an unspotted faith c. But our Adversaries Church saith the Iesuit forasmuch as by them it is confessed to want this infallible rule of faith to be lyable to error cannot with reason challenge unto it self the name of an unspotted Church therefore is rightly concluded to have no affiâity or aliance with the true ancient catholick Church at al a Reply pag. 67 and 68. In answer to this we have told the Iesuit truly that the Roman Church is so far from being the head over all other churches that for all the Iesuits proofs if it were utterly destroyed the Catholick Church would not faile 2ly that in no sense the Roman Church can be truly called Catholick or Vniversall And here Godwilling I will shew that no Church in the world hath beene more besmeared with spots staines even of misbeliefe then the Roman in her successioÌ And if an heretical Pope can bespot the primitive church of Rome with heresy which indeed we beleive not though Papists must not deny the same it will appeare that the Primitive Church of Rome was not blessed with the Prerogative of an invincible perpetuity of unspotted faith And first if we believe their owne Rhenanus Pope Zephsrinus was defiled with spots of misbeleife Montanizing which is warranted by Tertullians testimony that was well acquainted with the Favourers of Montanus b Bellarm. de Rom Pont. l. 4. c. 8. Zepherinus Victoris successor videtur haeresim Montani approbasse Scribit enim Tertullianus in libro contra Praxeam Romanum Pontificem agnoscentem prophetias Montani ex eâ agnitione pacem Ecclesijs Asiae Phrygiae inferentem à Praxea fuisse persuasum literas pacis revocare quas jam emiserat Constat autem ex historijâ to tempore Zepherinum fuisse Romae Pontificem Quare Rhenanus in annotationibus ad Tertâllianum ponit hoc loco in margine Episcopus Romanus Montanizat Neque dici potest eo tempore nondum fuisse damnatam ab Ecclesia haeresim Montani Nam ut ibidem Tertullianus dicit Praâeas persuasit Pontifici revocare literas pacis eâ praecipârè ratione quia praedecessores ejus haeresim illam antea damnavissent neither hath Bellarmine any better shift to excuse this Pope then by telling us as if a Montanist knew not a Montanist that faith is not to be given to Tertullian c Bellarm. de Rom. Pont. l. 4. c. 8. Respondeo non esse omnino fidem habendam Tertulliano in hac parte quandoquidem ipse Montanista erat Some hundred yeares after we finde an other bespotted Pope Marcellinus acknowledged for an Idolater by Câsterus d Costerus Enchirid. c. 3. p. 137. Fatemur siquidem ãâã posse ut Petri successor Idola eolat quod beatum Marcellinum fecisse aiunt Bellarmine e Bellarm recognit l. de ãâã Pont. p. 20. Concessimus S. Marcellinum Idolââ sacriââcasse and reported by a Councell of their friends making Sinâessa f Concil Sinuessanum Ecce introierunt testes 14. qui dicebant se Marcellinum vidisse in temple Veâta ãâã thuâificantem Ibid. In sinu autem trecenrorum Episcoporum caputeinere convolutum Marcellinus Episcopus urbis Romae voce clarâ ãâã dicebat Peccavi coram vobis non possum in ordine sacerdotum esse quoniam ãâã me corrupit auro Subscripserunt autem in ejus damnationem damnaverunt âââ exâââ civitatem by Pope Nicholas the first g Nicholaus â ad Michael Imperator Epist â Tempore Dioclesiam Maximiani Augustorum Marcellinus Episcopus urbiâ Romae adeo ãâã est à Paganis ut in tempâââ eorum ingressus grana thuris super ãâã ãâã Cujus nei gratia collecto numerosorum Concilio Episcoporum inquisitione facta hoc se idem Pontifex egisse confessus est Platina h Platina de vita
edita ââgua Sed visum est 318. patribus Sancto spiritu repletis in praeââââo Concilio congregatis maximè jam dicto Alexandro Apostolicae sedis Apoâââsarijs ut decem capitula a dunarentur alijs atque congruis locis inscrerentur ad forâââ septuaginta discipulorum vel potius totius orbis terrae linguarum sepungiâââ 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 âââ script supposititious c Bellarm. de scriptor Eccles ut ãâã ãâã De Epistolis Athanasi ad Marcum Papam Marci Papâ ad Athanasium ãâã extratione temporis âââ epistolas esse supposititiâs Baronius takes them as Coââentitious and forged by certaine well-willers of the Roman Church d Baron tom 3. ad an 336 ãâã ââ 59. ââ ãâã ille ãâã Architectur bene esse consultum assertion ãâã ãâã ãâã de Nicââo Canone extra numerum vicentarium allegatum Hoââââââââ ãâã ãâã qui ignoravit ex apertissimâ veritate solutionem ãâã 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 Biââium 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 ãâã in Epist Athanasij c. ad Felicem Felicis ad Atha Haec Epistola sub nomine Athanasij ad Felicem ex synodo Alexandââna scripta ab Episcopis ââgypti Thebââdis Lybiae de fide suspecta est tum quod hoc tempore quâ Athanasius ââga clapsus in cremo latitabat ãâã âââ Liberio ãâã Episcopi orthodoxi decrââ Imperatoris ãâã ãâ¦ã quod hunc epistola ad ãâã scripta ipsum ãâã de sua ipsi âââ ãâã ãâã 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. âââ 66. Quae fertur Athanasij nomine ad Felicem Romanum ãâã ex Synido Alexandrina scripta haâd aeque probatur c. At ipse ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã 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 counterââits 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 throughââ 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 âât 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 Pontââ l. 2. c 25. Quod illi âanânes non sunt omnes probant nonâââlti ex Epistoââ Athanasij ad Marcum Papam in quaâe tit exemplum Nicaeni concilij ex Romani Pontificis scrinio ãâã ââempla quae erant Alexandriae fuisse creâââ ab Ariaâââ Sed hoc ãâã ãâã â ãâã ãâã ââ verè NON ââ SOLIDV ââ 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 âââswade us that he will proceede in laying downe the judgââââ 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 Augâin 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. ââ 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
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 Aquinâs 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 enorâions 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 conâââed 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 troââce 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 âueââort 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 âood what leave hast âhââ O Valentine to turne my streames fountaines another way By what authority doest thou remove my bounds O Apelles O Luther O Calvin O Zuiâglius 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 Irenâus 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 saâe in Moses Chaire and the Churches of the East when Heretickes invaded the chaires of Catholicke Bishops Secondly there is a Successâââ not only personall of Bishops Preists but where the Catholick Apostoliâall 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
falso 415. Ecclesia Propheââ est more then a Prophet r Idem falso 224. Plââquaâ Propheta yea greater then all the Prophets Å¿ Idem circ fals 286. Major omnibus Prophetis having the Spirit of GOD for ãâã âiâar t Idem falso 416. Spiritum Sanctum Ecclesiae Vicarium dicit Thus wee see what judge the Iesuite doth contest for and how farre they labour to extend his power to wit that the Pope who is not onely a Prophet but more then a Prophet yeaâ greater then all the Prophets who hath the Spirit of God for his Vicââ either with or without a Councell hath onely power to determine matters of Faith whereby we may know what to beleive and what not with authority not onely equall but superiour to the scriptures Now what strength doth the Iesuite bring to confirme this Rule His first place is Esay LIIII and the 17. Thou shalt judge every tongue that shall resist theâ in thy judgment u Reply pag. 99. Surely the Iesuite is like to their Divines in the Councell of Trent who being restrayned to the Scriptures and forbidden schoole-disputes brought all the places out of the Prophets and Psalmes where they stand the words Confitââr and its verball Confissiâ to proove Auricular Confession and they were accounted best learned who brought most of them * Hist Concil Tridââ l. 4. p. 345. For here is nothing whereby to make the Pope the infallible Iudge of Controversies unlesse he will conclude that wheresoever Iudge or Iudgment is expressed it is meant of him The second is out of Mat. XI and the 18. Hâll gates shall not prevaile against her x Reply ibid We confesse that all the powers of Hell shall never prevaile against the Church but we say this Church is neither the Pope naked nor Roman as hath in many places beene shewed Yet I would gladly know to what purpose this text is here produced The third place is Mat. XVIII and the â7 Hâe that will not heare the Church let him be to thee aâ a Heathen and a Publican y Reply ibid. If an infallible judge bee heere pointed out then all these abâââdities will follow First that every particular Church should bee infallible and the Iudge of Controversies for Dâc Ecclesia hath relation to particular Churches not to the Catholicke Secondly a particular Church should not be subject to errour in criminall causes if this place pointed out an infallible judgment when as this infallibility is denyed not only your own Councels but your Popes also 3ly If the Churches judgment must be infallible because CHRIST requireth us to heare the Church How can the Pastors of the Church bee excluded from this priviledge when the people are enjoyned by the Apostle to obey and follow them Heb. XIII 17. His fourth place is Ephes IIII. II. and 14. God hath placed in the Church Apostles Prophets Pastors and Doctors c. To the end that we be ââ more little children âaâoring with every winde of doctrine z Reply ibââ I shall shew hereafter that this text maketh against his Iudge his Monarch for the present he may take this with him First that we acknowledge as long as the Church had Apostles Prophets their testimonies were divine and could infallibly direct Secondly although the âaâtors now are meanes ordained by God to the end that wee bee no more little children wavering with every winde of doctrine yet it doth not follow that they are infallible Iudges seeing the argument may as well hold of each as of all who are ordained to the same end which I thinke the Iesuite will not acknowledge His last is 1. Tim. 2. The Church is the Pillar and foundation of truth a Reply ibid. What therefore the Pope the infallible Iudge This followes not For he is the rock if we beleive Popish interpreters upon which the Church is built How then can he be the Church infallibly to direct The foundation surely differs from the roofe the Church that is builded from the rocke that she is builded upon Secondly the Iesuite may know that we envy not the priviledges which GOD hath given his Church nay he were no member of her that should not reverence her with obedience and therefore we acknowledge her the pillar and ground of Truth if containing the Apostles absolutely perfectly if without the Apostles we deny not her Counsels but with all obedience embrace them if she commaund as she is limited in matters of faith by the Scriptures But we see this place is more for the Church of Ephesus concerning which the Apostle speakes literally then Rome and yet experience hath perswaded us that there is no infallibility there Further then this some of your own dare not goe but make a difference betwixt the judgment of GOD and the judgment of the Church the one they say is infallible but the other may sometime deceive b Panorm in Decret De senten Excom cap. 28. Iudicium Dei veritati quae nec fallit nec fallitur semper innititur judicium autem Ecclesiae aliquando sequitur opinionem quae sâpè fallit fallitur Dried de dog Ecclesl 2. p. 58. Generale Concilium Papae Cardinalium Episcoporum Doctorum ââ Scripturis propheticis intelligendis non est tantae authoritatis quantae fuerit olim Apostolorum collegum For Ruffinus his testimony that S. Basil and S. Gregory Nazianzen did take the interpretation of the Scripture not according to their owne proper understanding but according to the tradition of the Fathers c Reply p. 99. The Iesuite pointeth not out the place if he did I thinke little would appeare for his purpose in regard he is to prove the authority of a Iudge not the discretion of a Doctour And who doubts but any wise interpreter will use all meanes that may informe him to performe his worke But let Ruffine passe Augustine maketh an out-cry And doth not S. Augustine cry out saith the Iesuite that Truth reposeth in the belly of the Church c. d Reply ibid. And who saith otherwise He that should thinke that Truth is removed out of the Church thinkes amisse But to conclude from hence the Church the Roman Church the Roman Pope to be the Iudge or Rule of faith is inconsequent Neither doth that place of Augustine cited by the Iesuite in the Xth Section Evangeliâ non credereââ nisi me Catholica Ecclesiae commoveret authoritus containe any thing to enforce this for many things may move us to beleive that are not the Rule of Faith Miracles did this worke in many but this I hope is far from your Rule What is urged from Vincentius Lirinensis hath been fully answered His note from the Geneva Bible proves nothing If he finde this Iudge at Geneva he speedes well In these words I feare he cannot be espied And now having little or nothing he beginnes his Perâration Behold here gentle Reader how although the articles
A REIOYNDER TO THE REPLY PVBLISHED BY THE IESVITES VNDER THE NAME OF WILLIAM MALONE The First Part. Wherein the Generall Answer to the Challenge is cleared from all the IESUITES Cavills MATTH XXIII 9. 10. Call no man your FATHER upon the earth for one is your FATHER which is in Heaven Neither be yee called Masters for one is your Master even CHRIST II. TIMOTH III. 8. 9. As Iannes and Iambres withstood Moses so doe these also resist the Truth men of corrupt mindes reprobate concerning the Faith But they shall proceede no further for their folly shal be manifest unto all DUBLIN Printed by the Societie of Stationers Printers to the Kings most excellent Majestie 1632. TO THE RIGHT HONOVRABLE HENRY LO VISCOVNT FALKLAND ONE OF THE LORDS OF HIS MAIESTIES MOST HONOURABLE PRIVIE COUNCELL Right Honourable my singular good Lord IT was Tertullian's observation of Heretickes Nostra suffodiunt ut sua aedificent a Tertull de praescript aâ vers haeret cap. 42. Your Lordship is well informed by experience that the Romish Clergie who disdain the stile of Hereticks are like Vnderminers like Builders For what kinde of Vndermining is left unpractised to make way ut sua aedificent that they may build up their Babell and advance their ROMAN See The Scripture the Rule of Faith they undermine by their Vnde scis allowing it neither authority nor Command but because their Cheife Pastour declares it expounds it The Church they undermine by assuming her Name defiling her Doctrine Councels by denying their lawfulnesse unlesse called and approved by Rome Bishops Preists by making them Delegates to his supposed Holyness rejecting their Commission received from CHRIST Neither cease they here but Princes and States they undermine also sometime by raising open VVarre sometime by Bosome-conspiracies Powder-plots other secret attempts Nor doe these Vnderminers looke alway like Faux in the Vault but they will appeare somtimes as it were Angels of Light Princes shall have Thousands of their Pennes b Iesuite Fisher in his Epistle to the King but I thinke rather Pen-knives They wil be strongly tyed and united to his Majesties Crowne the more familiaritie they have with him by whom Kings do raigne the more awfull will they be found unto his Holy annointed c The Iesuite in his Epistle Dedicatory and all this as the Divell to our Saviour ut sua aedificent that Princes may fall downe and worship their Beast We may goe further None escape them They undermine Populum Primates Populi by subverting their Estates Proselyting their Children and yet the keeping backe of these Vnderminers from his Majesties presence is censured by Mr Malone our Iesuite to be the fruite of waspish emulation d In his Epistle Dedicatory as if these things might be done and yet they remaine faithfull to their Prince his State and Dignitie But their Allegiance may well be discerned by their Obedience For besides their immediate addresse to Rome their acknowledging a PROTECTOVR e In a letter of LVD CAR. LVDVISIVS S. R. E. VICECANCELLARIVS superscribed thus Rev. P Pâi .. Praefectâ p. P. Carâ Excalceaterum in Regâ Hibernia Dated Rome 10. Kal. Iââii 1631. which is in my hands and concerneth the quarrels of the Regulars and Seculars in the points censured by the Doctors of Sââbon â5 âan 1631. Vt rei veritas innotesâat scriptum est ad quosdam illius Regni Praelatos â qu. bus expectatur informatio Interim vâsum est sacrae Congreg ni ut nos ex munere PROTECTORIS quo fungimur admoneamus rogemus V. ãâã ne ex dolore aut vindicta illatae ut praetenditur calumniae quid quam agat erga tumultus authores ne majâres âxcitentur turbae sed offensiones injurias suas âuorumque reâittat sâcrâ Congreg ãâã quae plenè satisfaciet justâ censurâ corripiet ac poenâ afficiet ââââmniae dum constire it Architectos there and abusing his Majesties Subjects by pressing their Consciences to yeeld subjection against his sacred Commaunds to none but from thence There is dayly resisting of his ROYAL Commaunds in matters that are not absolutely Spirituall For there being Publication of His Maiesties ROYALL pleasure for the changing of the Popish Calendar which ever since the times of Rebellion was observed in the Province of Vlster Did they obey This it may be they will glory in But for what other then Politick respects How was the Titular Primate advised by his Councell learned Was he not pressed to disobey Was it not reputed inconvenient to alter the same Did he not censure the receiving of the Kings command against this their disobedient practise to be no otherwise then to obey men more then GOD That if obedience should be yeelded herein their Adversaries so he stiles his sacred Majestie Councell wil be encouraged to publish more severe edicts against them sic paulatim serpet Cancer f In a letter written partly in Irish partly in Latine to the Titular Primate superscribed To his much esteemed assured loving frâind Mr William Bitagh these in haste wheresoever These are the points for which it were inconvenient to alter the time heere praesârtim hoc anno ãâã quod videamur obsdire hominibuâ magis quam Deo recipiendo TEMPORALIVM Potestatum mandata contra râceptam Ecclesiasticam lgem idque ãâã âdium religionis nostrae undâ ADVERSARII animentur ad alia magis nociva praecepta canâra nos âdenda dum âiderent nos minoribus praeceptis âââemperare sic paulatim serpet Cancer c. Doe they apprehend his Majestie Councell for Adversaries Who can then esteeme theÌ for Friends Shall a rebellious intrusion bee esteemed the Oracle of GOD and checke the Regall Power as proceeding from Men and yet Subjection not violated but their Obedience must remaine firme Much more in this kinde may be presented to your Lordship if it were not superfluous but by this it may appeare how that notwithstanding their pretences Princes are relished or distasted by them in ordine ad spiritualia as they countenance or exalt their Popish Faction For to omit other things the Iesuit his contemptuous reproaching of the learned defence of his Majesties supreame power made in the Castle-Chamber in the time of your Lordships Government here doth declare how inviously they heare of his Maiesties eminent and glorious Prerogatives But the more they declare themselves enemies to our Faith her Defender the more I doubt not but all sacredly affected will arme themselves to resist them in these their contrivings secret imaginations I doe not come with this Dedication to move your Lordship hereunto for it hath beene your VVorke who is or hath beene more Faithfull amongst all the Servants of my Lord the KING * 1. Sam. 2â And for your pious affection to the true Religion I could speake more then I suppose your modesty would be willing to heare so that I doubt not but
questions then fight combates to begge the points controverted then to purchase the glory and honour of a Triumph He declares the preparation to the warre Mr Vsher vpon his receipt proclaimes this a Iesuites Challenge prepares himselfe to the fight buckâls on his harnesse What to doe to warre with a Pigmie you are deceived A sling and a few stones * will best answere currish 1. Sam. 17. 40. Rhetoricke alicentious Rayler He desires to informe his Reader that for as much as the maine controversy concerneth the fathers iudgments for the first 500 yeares in his proofes hee hath kept compasse howsoever he hath descended to disproove his Adversary Here let him know that we will follow him in the path that he should tread in his extravagant collections and descent from the rule prescribed wee desert him and herein we take no other libertie then what he assumeth to himselfe as is apparant in his second information He hath enlarged himselfe in that article of the Reall presence and why I pray you In regard of the eagernesse wherewith the adverse part doth impugne the same Who seeth not that the blind beggar strikes but hee knoweth not whom for if he vnderstand by the adverse part that part of the Catholicke Church which liveth vnder his Majesties government as his words import he is blindlie mistaken for who knowes not that many in the Church of England confesse Christs presence in the sacrament though they assigne not the manner how but to entertaine the Catholicke meane as he tearmes it â pag. 44. to acknowledge Christs presence in the Eucharist in a sacrament all manner I thinke he can neither find pen nor tongue that contradicteth the same Yet what he saith he will proove by miraculous demonstration and surely I thinke he is better able to iustifie their doctrine about the Sacrament by their legends then the Scriptures and by new invented wonders c Alexand de Hales in 4. sent q. ãâã In sacramento apparet caro interdum humanâ procuratione interdum operatione diabolicâ then the venerable testimonie of the auncient Church And it is not to be neglected what an open way to Atheisme is prepared by their published legends and approoved miracles whilst they dare averre that none can beleive the scriptures wherein are contained Christs miracles but by their Churches proposall and that the same hand though not in the same manner doth deliver their legends for the comfort of her pretended catholicke children although the consequence be not necessary may it not fall out that one finding fraud and falshood in these wonders d Lyranus in Daniel 14. Aliquando fit in Ecclesia maxima deceptio populi in miraculis fictis à Sacerdotibus vel eis adhaerentibus propter luciuÌ temporale Ga Biel in Can Miss lect 49 Miracula dicit fieri hominibus ad imagines confluentibus nonnunquam operatione Daemonum ad fallendum inoidinatâs cultores Deo permittente exigente talium infidelitate may entertaine a jealousie of the truth of those miracles that confirme our faith e De tribus mundi impostoribus Italy I thinke knowes the effect of this snare not infecting inferiors alone but your infallible Chaire f Io. 23. Concil Const Sess 2. And doe not your imaginarie fables herein next to your images and idolls confirme the Iewes in their hardnesse of heart to thinke Atheisticallie of our faith and Messias For working feeling in the well disposed Protestant Reader by those your pretended supernaturall events I thinke vnlesse it be such as Augustine found in himselfe in reading Dido and Aenâas an imaginarie discourse a phantasticke compassion you may despaire of For we are not now to receive new doctrines or new miraculous confirmations g Stella in Luc. 11. 19. We have Moses and the Prophets let vs heare them * Luke 16. 29. if any man preach any other Gospell then that we have received let him be accursed â Gal. â 9. Wadding Legat Phiâ terâii c. sect 3. And we need not to be ignorant Mr Malone how the Dominicans answered the Patrons of the immaculat conception of the blessed Virgin when they brought to confirme their cause miraculous proofes that they were of the same stampe that Iannes and Iambres wrought in Aegypt but let this expect its proper place I will not yet forsake the Preface The Iesuite confesseth that he hath roughly and freelie dealt with the Answerer and this he desires might not be imputed to any disregard that hee hath to his person or learning which hee honours and highly esteemes The Iesuites Common-wealth is not Athens all ingenuous men are not cloystered in their Colledges The Iesuite confesseth that we have one But to deale with one whose person he professeth to honour and learning highly to esteeme in more disgracefull and virulent straines then Michael did with the Divell * Iude. 9. how can the Iesuite apologise for this But here I hope his Maiestie and all others of eminent place will consider to what a height this spaune of Ignatius hath ascended in this kingdome that they did not onely builde the Babylonian turrets scorne and outface our true Religion practised by his sacred Maiestie established by the lawes of Church and State but also revile the most eminent for Pietie Learning and Prelacy in our Ecclesiasticall Government Yet let him triumph in his snarling language all good men doe see such eminencies of learning and sincerity in the most reverend Primate that a Iesuites tongue though more besmeared cannot defile his honour or his name Neither doth this coelestiall luminary greeve any more then the Moone at his Dogge-Rhetoricke That which vexeth Lots * â Pet 2. 7. righteous soule is to see his Country made Sodome and Aegipt by blindnes and Idolatry An heard of swine he knowes may make a greater noise then an army of men and who wypeth her mâuth or vseth her tongue more then the harlot If such things as these will justifie Papall intrusions Mr Malone will not faile who hath given vs loud cryes and a large volume but praetereà nihil Some things else we finde in this preface as their pretence of Vnitie and our Division which because hee pipeth it so often in the body of his Reply we will there take some opportunitie for the consideration of the same The Iesuite a vayne Demaundant THe Iesuite after his Preparatives addresseth himselfe to the Reply and first layeth downe his demaund What Bishop of Rome did first alter that Religion which the Protestants commend in those of the first 400. or 500. yeares confessing it to have beene the true religion of Christ and his Apostles a Reply pag. â And here we may see the Iesuites additions In his first demaund he expressed onely the true religion here he addeth of Christ and his Apostles which I do not except against as if I did conceive a religion might bee true that is not from Christ and
quo non semel Scripââra ãâ¦ã est ac si denotare ãâã ãâã ãâã in sâ ipsis ãâ¦ã for who is so wilfull to affirme this confution to consist in the gift of new tongues but in making the former unântelligible as your Latine is now to the people ãâã formerly they vulgarly understood And yet uppon this confused foundation hee seeketh not onely to justifie their owne blindnes but hee would make us scattered wights and Babelists also May not Protestants saith hee bee rather tearmed Babelists whose diversity of languages and daylie jaââes amongst themselves give good testimony that their ãâã ãâã of ãâã built against the true Church the Saints and Sacraments the tâppe thereof ayming at heaven it selfe will ãâã bee dissipated and left ââââlated t Reply pag. 24. May not Mr Malone bee rather tearmed a Babelist that so confusedly falleth upon us without any ground whence to force this conclusion For first our divers languages make no more confusion amongst us then the extraordinary gift of tongues did in the Apostles dayes in regard wee retaine your Latine unconfused and have many other languages which are ãâã acquainted with the faith of CHRIST Secondly our jarres are not equall to yours although they many times are passionately exprest neither are they of any other nature then those which have beene among the members of the Church of CHRIST neither destroying faith nor the foundation thereof Thirdly the Iesuite is vaine in his fâaunting tearmes ãâã towre of Protestancie the toppe whereof ayming against heaven it selfe when all the world is but gleabe-land sufficient for their towre of S. Angelo built against the true Church the Saints and Sacraments u Reply pag. 24 As if there were a true Church where CHRIST is not Monarch or that their Universal Master could make Saints as he hath done Sacraments But if wee consider all aright the ambitious towre of Protestancie will not be a mole-hill iâ compared to your mountaines for the whole world cannot containe Popish ambition although the greatest honour uppon earth must stoope before it x Extra de Major Obed. cap. Vnam Sanctam Porrâ subesse Romano Pontifici omni humaââ creaturae declaramus dicimus diâââimimus et ãâã omniâââsse de necessitate ãâã No tearmes will suââice the Papacie but those which wee expresse God withall as wee may see variously out of ãâã y De Patriarch Primat orig lâb 1. Exercitâ 1. Vâ quemaâmodum Diââcesani iâ Episcopâ Episcopi in Metropolita Metropolitâ in Patriarcha unum ãâã itâ Triââtaa Patriarcharum in Vnitate Pontificis coalesceret sicq sedis Principis Apostolonum esset in Trinitate VNITAS in Vnitate TRINITAS But this is little to that which followeth for you have made your Monarch after the manner of serpents to cast off his slough yea his nature it selfe z Alvae ãâã de ãâã Eccles lib. â cap. 37. Papa igitur participatutraââque naturam cum Christo hee must not be barely man either you must take him for God and man or compounded of ââth a Clemens ãâã in gloss Papa ãâã mundi Qui maxima ãâã nec Deus ââ nec homo quasi Neuter es inter Vtrumque Where will you finde his Preisthood when his Majestie is stiled divine b Ludou Luisius ab Alcaâar in Apoc. in carmine ad ãâã Apost Dâ ãâã 5. Quem numinis instar vera colit pietas which cannot stand with a miââsteriall dutie Did he affect divinitie as the Emperour thought c Aventin lib. 7. The Pope will tell you that Peter and you may conceive for whose sake is assumed into the society of the individuall Vnitie d Nicol. 3. de Election cap. Fundamenta in ãâã Hunc enim in ãâã individuâ unitatis ãâã c. and the Glâsse will give his succeââor the tittle of our Lord God the Pope e Extravag Ioan. 1â de verb rum sign cap. ãâã ãâã in gloss Credere auââm ãâã DEVM ãâã Papam c. and as if this were too little a Cardinall of their owne hath told us that Popes have been perswaded that they might doe unlawfull tâââgs and so plus quam Deus more then God himselfe f Francisc Zabarel deschism Innoc. 7. Benedicti p. â0 Now let the Iesuite consider what reason hee had to stile true Religion an ambitionâtowre when as if he cast an eye upon themselves the towre of Papacie hath a foundation as low as Hell and an height more loftie then the towre of Babell it selfe For the Iesuites invectives of spirit of giddines severall sects varying opinions g Reply pag. â4 c. His testimonies are not his freinds First he urgeth Lavatherus but as it seemeth from Genebrard and Staphylus h See the Margine ibid. men of excellent credite and repute no doubt suâficient by their bare testimonie to divide all Protestancie but the Iesuites text is moderate if his margine truth it for the one divides Protestancie but into above 100. sects and varying opinions when the other maketh the sects 180. and both differ from Genebrard the author that he citeth who saith there are more then 200 but we see the Iesuite lest hee should be taken lisping placeth sects and varying opinions together Now in this sence who is there that is acquainted any thing in Popish writings but can point out many thousand varying opinions amongst the Papistes themselves which they condemne not as wee doe those follies mentioned by Genebrard and not goe out of the compasse of the Papall Creed And to give them a taste in their Hierarchie there hath beene eleven points of Popish Irish divinitie i Censura propositionum ad sacrae Theologiae facultatem allatae per Patricium Cahil Rectorem S. Michaelis Dublinensis c. condemned by above 60. Doctors of Sorbon lately k Actum apud Sorbonam in congregationibus publicis sacrae facultatis Theologiae Parisiensis habitis diebus secunda septima âaâarij 1632. Et confirmatum in Coâitiis extraordinariis deciâââ quinti ejusdem mensis anni praesentibus sexaginta Doctoribus amplâââ with such tearmes as these lame l Censura In ista â propositioneânumeratio membrorum Hierarchiae Ecclesiasticae est manca false m â Falsa contrary to common right n 4. Iuri communi contraria ambiguous o 2. Ambigua injurious p 7. Injuâiosa inept ridiculous against the sence and use of the Church q 6 Inepta ridicula contra communem Ecclesiâ sensum âsum contrary to divine naturall and positive law r 10. Iuri divino naturali positivo contraria seditious Å¿ 1â Sediosa scandalous t 9. Scandalâsa schismaticall u â Scâisâatica Hereticall c. x â Haereticâ But suppose there were as many sects as the Iesuite pretends to disturbe the peace of the Protestant Churches what concludeth he in reproach of us when he acknowledgeth that before
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 âffugium 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 ââgisse mâmini authores putant Bellarmine upon the vi of Marke and the v. of Iames Å¿ Bellarm. de Extrem Vnct. c. z. Duae Scripturae proseââtur 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 Theophilaââus 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 graâââor quod videam Lutherum Calvinum Chemnitium locis citatis esse in priore opinione existimant enim illi eandem esse unctionem Marci 6. luâââi 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 ãâã Anal. Fidel l. 8. c 8. Quod si per sententiam Doctorum aliqua fidei controversia non ãâã commodè componi posset eo quod de illorum confensu non ãâã constareâ ââ 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 âââique ad omnia satis superâââ sufficiat but this directive helpe of Fathers he applieth to sometimes onely y Idem Sed noque semper neque omnes hae reses hoc mo ââ impugnanââ ãâã 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
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 ãâã 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 âtque sigillo tuo corrobores And Euagrius reports your Pope Felix to doe the like sending his Nunâies 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 Chalcedoâââse 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 fraudulcÌtia 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
Marcellini At ãâã Pontifex ad sacrificia gentium ductââ cum ãâã instarent carnificeâ ut thura dijs exhiberet ãâã ãâã Deos alienos adoravit others But it may be they will say a Pope may have spots of Paganisme yet not of Heresie but I thinke any man will conceive that if the Pope may practise against all the points of Christian Faith and turne Pagan he may well turne Hereticke and pleade against one and then farewell the blessed Prerogative of an invincible perpetuity of unspotted faith Not many yeares after Liberius was Pope and although some desire to mince it yet is it plaine that he was an Arian Hereticke subscribed to that heresie as Athanasius i Athanasius in Epistola ad solimariam vitam agentes Liberius deinde post exactum in exilio biennium inflexus est minisque mortis ad subscriptionem inductus est and S. Hierome k Hieronymus Catal Script Eccles âortunatianus Episcopus Liberium Romae urbis Episcopum ad subscriptionem Haereseos compulit Idem in Chronico Liberius taedio victus exilij in haeteticam pratitatem subscribenâ testifie Yea so publicke was the report hereof even in our late ages that many eminent Papists as Cusââââ l Nich. de Cusa Candiââal l. 2 de Concord Cathol c 5. Et licet Liberius Papa tunc suit qui ut scribit Augustinus contra Crescentium Arianae sectae se subscripsit licet resisteret in principio propter hoc in exilium missus esset habetur elegans disputatio Constan âij Imperatoris Liberij rediit autem de exilio Victus consensit errori ut scribit S. Hieronymus in Chronicis Platina m Platina de vita Liberij I Constantius Liberium ab exilio terocat qui Imperatoris beneficio motus ââm haereticis in rebus omnibus ut quidam voâânt senticas Sabellicus n Anton. Sabellicus Ennead 7. l. 8. c. 36. Hiprecibus suis apud Constantinum in Felicis iâ vidiam Liberio reditum ad urbem confecere quo ille beneficio ãâã ex consesso Arianus ut quidam scribunt est factus and others made no doubt from the testimony of antiquity to charge him with it Surely if an Arian Head be no spot to Roman infallibilitie what will besmeare it These may fuisse to shew their Popes in the âest times not to have beene without spots And now if in the best times of rhe Roman Church when it was most pure this pretended head was bespotted with heresie how can we expect that he should be blessed with such a prerogative to be infallible to others And indeede Experience hath confirmed our judgments herein For in the seaventh age Honorius was a Monothelite condemned by the judgment of three Councels o Concil VI. Occumeâicum Act. 13. Concil VII Occumenicum Act. 7. Concil VIII Occumenicum Act. 7. his own Epistles witnessing against him p ãâã ãâã Epistolae Honoris ad Sergium una in VI. Synodo act 12. altera ibidem Act. 13. ââââraque autem Honorius approbat doctrinam Sergij principis Monothelitarum jubet non debere dici Christum duas habere voluntates aut operationes Pope Leo the second execrating him q Leo II. ad ãâã Imperatorem Epist 2 Anathemaâizamus novi erroris Inventorâs id est Theodoâââ c necnon HONORIVM qui hanc Apostolicam Ecclesiam non Apostolicae traditionis doctrina lustravit sed prophanâ proditione immaculatam fidem ãâã conatus est In the XIIth age Alphonsus de Castro affirmes Celestine the III. no way to be excused of teaching Heresie to wit that Heresie so dissolves matrimonie that a partie may marrie againe r Alphons de Castro adv haer l. 1 c. 4. Coelestinum Papam etiam errâsse circa matrimonium fidelium quorum alter labitur in haeresim res est omnibus manifesta In the XIIIIth Age Iohn the XXIIth taught that the Saints departed saw not God before the Resurrection Å¿ Bellarm. de Rom. Pont. l. 4. c 14. Ioannes XXII Papa à multis reprehenditur ac praessertim à Galielmo Ocam in opere ââ dierum ab Adriano in quaestione de confirmatione circa ânem quid docucrit animas beato âum non visuâas Deum ante resurrectionem Erasmus praefat one ad ad librum 5. Ireâaei idipsum cum additamento affirmat In the XVth Centurie Iohn the XXIIIth denyed the Resurrection and life eternall and was accused of pertinaciâ therein t Concil Constântiâ self ââ See this at large before pag. 53 Bellarmine telleth us at that time there were three pretenders for the Papacie so that it could not easily bee discerned quis eorum verus ac legitimus esset Pontifex which of them was the true and lawfull Pope u Bellatân de Rom Poââ l 4. c 14. Erant enim co temporâtres qui Pontifices haberi volebant Gregorius XII Benedictus XIII et Ioannes XXIII nec poterat facilè indicaaâi quis eorum verâs ac legitimus esset Pontifeâ cùm non decssent singulis doctissimi patroni So that it seemed the Councell of Constance did not adhere to the Pope nor the Pope to the faith Now let the Reader judge what great reason we have to be waile our selves that we want this pretended infallible rule of faith which cannot rule it selfe and free the adherents thereto from errour how farre these Puritans are from the Catholicke humilitie that defend their staines when the auncienâ Fathers best men in their journeying towards heaven did bewaile their imperfect estate hungred for that righteousnes and perfection that was to come And what cause have we to blush that the particular Church of Ireland is lyable to errour when the best particular Churches in the world never assumed a better Condition But is the Iesuits inference concludent here because our Church is lyable to error therfore it cannot with reason challenge to it selfe the title of unspotted Here is not so much as silly Sophistry the Churches of Ephesus Thessalonica Philippi in the Apostles dayes were lyable to error therfore bespotted posse et esse are two distinct things A Iesuite may be a true subject but it doth not follow therefore in an instant he forsakes his order And a Pope may be a Saint but who will thinke it necessary that hee will without delay forsake his tyrannicall condition The Church of Ireland may erre in faith yet it doth not follow that it is now bespotted with heresie or hereafter will bee So that it may have alliance and affinitie with all true auncient Churches true members of the Catholicke for any thing the Iesuite hath yet produced Yet as if the Iesuite had dreamed all this while and did now awake he bolts out with a phantasticke flourish Let them take then saith the Iesuite if they will their erring Church unto themselves but let them not withall deny us leave to sticke unto that