are very idle and all his instances in Turkes Iewes and Haeretikes nothing to the purpose for the unbeleeving Iewes and Turkes never were nor yet are members of the Catholike Christian Church the Arians Nestorians Eutychians and Marcionites have beene long agoe excluded out of the true Church of Christ and their Haeresies are by name condemned in ancient generall Councells approved by the whole Christian world These therefore come not within the verge of the Knights proposition which is restrained to Christian Churches and such whose Tenets have not in particular as yet beene cryed downe and censured as erroneous in any oecumenicall Councell among such doubtlesse those are in the safer way who hold nothing for an Article of faith necessary to salvation which is not clearely deduced out of Holy Scripture and assented unto even by the opposite part whose testimony saith the Iesuit Page 498. must needs proceede from evidence of truth To the second The Iesuit hath received answer already to the former of these demands where I shewed by twenty instances that we stand not single as they doe by affirming what they deny and denying what they affirme for the most if not all the affirmative Articles of our Creed are firmed and subscribed by Papists themselves whereas their additionalls to them are firmed by none but themselves and therefore herein our cause hath a great advantage on theirs For if their beliefe be true our beliefe in all the affirmative Articles thereof must needs be so but not on the contrary because they have many affirmative Articles which we give no credit unto To his second demand I answer that though a multitude of Professors is no perpetuall and infallible marke of the true Church Luke 12.32 Matth. 7.13 Apoc. 13.17 Apoc. 20.2 Apoc 1◠4 The woman arrayed in purple and scarlet called The Whore of Babylon had a cup of gold in her hand c. Apoc. 13.3 All the world wondered and followed the Beast ver 8. All that dwell upon the earth shall worship him whose names are not written in the Booke of Life for Christs flocke is but a little flocke in comparison and broade is the way that leadeth to death and destruction and though it is true that in the latter and worser ages of the Church especially after the yeare 666. which is the number of the name of the Beast and much more after the thousandth yeare wherein Satan was let loose the Romish Church was much more visible to the eye of the world then the Protestant as it is prophecied in the Apocalypse the 16. 6. that the false and malignant Church should be farre more glorious and pompous then the true Spouse of Christ yet in the first and best ages of the Church our adversaries have not so much as one single witnesse who can be proved to have given testimony to their Trent faith and since the happy reformation began by Martin Luther in King Henry the eights dayes the better part of Europe is fallen from the Pope adde we to them all those who in Asia and Africa professe the Christian faith and yet acknowledge not the Pope nor subscribe to the Trent faith and it will appeare we have neere a thousand for one in the Catholike visible Church scattered far and wide over the face of the earth as may be seene in the Mapps set forth in a booke printed the last yeare and intituled Christianographie or the Description of the multitude and sundry sorts of Christians in the World not subject to the Pope with their unity and how they agree with the Protestants in the principall points of difference betweene them and the Church of Rome To the third If the argument bee so weake let the Iesuit remember that it is his owne and that he confesseth as much in the first words of this Chapter which are these The substance of this Section is contained in the title and it is nothing but to turne the Catholike argument mentioned in the former Section the other way for the Protestant side The argument then is a Catholike argument of their owne and if it make for Haeretikes Iewes and Turkes as he saith it doth the blame and shame thereof must light upon the Iesuits that first framed it and not upon the Knight who retorteth it onely upon them for thus it mooveth upon their Axletree that wherein Professors of different religions both agree is safer to beleeve then that wherein they stand single but Iewes and Christians agree in the beliefe of the old Testament Christians and Turkes agree in the truth of Christs humane nature in other points the Christians are single therfore the beliefe of a Iew or a Turke is safer then the beliefe of a Christian The conclusion is here false and blasphemous the minor or assumption is evidently true and confessed on all sides the fault therfore must needs be in the major or ground of this argument but the major or ground is your owne as will appeare by reducing the Iesuits Argument propounded in the former Section into forme That Church wherein parties of a different Religion as Papists and Protestants agree is a safer way than that wherein one party stand single But Papists and Protestants both agree that salvation may be had in the Romish Church but the Protestants stand single in that they say salvation may be had in the Protestant Church therefore it is safer living and dying in the Papists Church than in the Protetestant In this Syllogisme the Knight and all Protestants though they answer to the Assumption by distinguishing as is expressed in the former chapter yet they simply absolutely deny the Major which is not universally true nor at all necessarie Secondly Dato non concesso that the Major is true the Knight nimbly turnes the mouth of the Papists owne Canon to batter their owne walls thus That position say you in which both Papists and Protestants agree is safer than that wherein one partie standeth single but in the eleven Points mentioned by the Knight Papists and Protestants agree in the twelve Articles coyned by Pope Pius the fourth the Papists stand single therefore the Protestant Faith is the safer To the fourth A strange Argument for the Iesuit to conclude other mens sight from his owne blindnesse because hee seeth not how the Knight can avoid the instances in Jewes Heretikes and Turkes whereby hee goeth about to disable the Knight his retorted Argument therfore will hee inferre that any man may see that the Knight is no good guide For pitty let some fit the Iesuit with a paire of Spectacles that he may better see the Knight his way and his own wandrings * How far the Romish Religiō is distant from Heresie Iudaisme and Turcisme or rather trencheth upon all three See P Croy his booke of Conformities and Sutcliffe his Turco papismus Iews and Turks are out of the Christian Church hold not all Positive Articles necessary to salvation and therefore they come not in the Knights way at all nor hath hee to doe with them in this Argument which proceedeth from professed Christians and not open enemies to the Faith For the Knight from his heart detesteth all pathes leading to any of those dangerous precipices and chaulketh to all men Viam vere tutam certam rectam regiam a faire and Safe Way and the very Kings High-way to his Pallace wherein wee have Christ and his Apostles for our Leaders the holy Spirit for our Guide the blessed Angels for our Convoy the ancient Fathers and Doctors of the Church for our fellow Travellers through the whole and the best learned of the Romane Popes Cardinals Bishops and Schoolemen to beare us companie the greater part of our way Wherefore I doubt not but that the indifferent peruser of the Knights Book and the Iesuits Answer and my Reply unto it will breake out into the Apostles exclamation and say to this Romish Sorcerer Acts 3.13 or rather if hee will so false Spectacle-maker Flood O full of all subtiltie and mischiefe thou child of the devill wilt thou not cease to pervert the right way of the LORD FINIS Laus DEO sine fine
36. Beares whelpe Jnformis caro sine oculis sine pilis ungues tantum prominent In which consideration n Ben. Syr. Apoph 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Saâ—tâ—ns nutu stultus fuste Drus in Alph. vâ—t sap 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I thought it most needfull to make choise of a Patron of eminent qualitie who with his Authoritie might stoppe the mouth of such railing Rabshakah's and if need be lend them a smart blow with his Crozure as (o) Hom. Is s 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Vlisses did Thersites with his golden Scepter Now although the Knight vvanted not many Noble and vvorthie friends and some of your Lordships Sacred order who honoured him living and would willingly have afforded him their protection being dead Yet two reasons were prevalent with me to dedicate this Apologie to your Lordship First because none of your Lordships ranke now living to my knowledge hath so often entered into Lists with the Romish Adversaries nor served so long in this sacred Leguer as your Lordship in so much that at my aboade in France now 25. yeares agoe where I saw the (p) Fitzg Hector Romulidum cecidit sub Achille Iuello Rhemensi Hannibali Scipio Fulcuâ— erat Tum cor papicolis Rainoldus fregit in Hatto Alba Stapletonum jugera deinde premunt Ac â—edes nostris prerium Deringe paâ—yris Net gemmae Renues Annulus ire comes Abfuit Elysiis tantum sua Laurea lucis Te Deus in luâ—os tranflulit ergo suos Armes of other Champions of the truth blazoned in a Latin Epigram I descried your Lordships among them in an apposite Anagram made by a renowned Pastor of the French Church THOMAS MORTONIVS homo Martis notus With this or the like Euloge Quassanda est istâ Pelias hasta manu The other reason was your Lordship in your last no lesse unimitable then unanswerable (q) Mort. institut sacram l. 3. c. 3. p. 158. Of Rom. Transub This sentence I have seene lately canvased by a Iesuit against a judicious and religious Knight falsly imputing unto him diverse falsities c. And l. 7. c. 7. pag. 545. Your Iesuit in his booke of Spectacles made in confutation of a judicious and religious Knight among many other of his Paradoxes and Absurdities c. masterpiece held up your buckler over the Knight then living more then once and ward off the Iesuits blowes and therefore I doubt not but that your Lordship will now bestride him being dead and save him from all further injury For my selfe as nothing induced me to make this supplement to his Apologie but the love of Gods truth and the truth of my friends love so I hope that all who love the truth in sincerity upon the impartiall perusall hereof will doe the Knight honour and me right For envie it selfe cannot denie that he hath much advantaged the common cause both by convincing the Adversaries in all the maine points of difference betweene us out of their owne mouthes and discovering more at large then any the mystery of their Indices expurgatorijâ— wherein though they professe to correct onely their owne writers and that but from the yeare 1518. yet the Knight hath traced them upwards and detected their corruption of all sorts of Writers in all former ages whereby the judicious Reader may observe such indirect dealing in our Adversaries towards us as (r) Melancth orat Tom. 1. de Od Sophist Cum triginta Tyranni legem tulissent ne quis è suo Catalogo in dict â causà necaretur Critias tamen Therammenem collegam suum cujus nomen in Catalogo scriptum erat in dict â causâ interfici jussit cumque Therammenes legis occiliuÌ„ peteret respondet legem scriptam esse de iis quorum nomina sunt in Catalogo se vero jam Therammenes nomen in Catalogo delevisse Critias in the Athenian State practised against Therammenes there being a law enacted in the time of the 30. Tyrants at Athens that none of them should be put to death without a legall tryall whose names were written in a certaine Catalogue Critias bearing a spleene to Therammenes first blots his name out of the Catalogue and then proceeds to sentence him to death and when Therammenes pleaded the priviledge of the law as being one of the thirty Governours whose name was set downe in the Catalogue Critias answered that the benefit of the law was restrained to those whose names were in the Catalogue but that he had newly strucke out the name of Therammenes Let any that hath a single eye judge whether the proceedings of our Romish Adversaries against us are not altogether as injurious as this of Critias towards his Collegue Therammenes First they raze out our Records and burne our writings and then nonsuit us for want of Evidence Secondly they blot and cut out by their Indices Expurgatorij the most pregnant testimonies of Antiquity for us and then charge us with false Allegations because forsooth they agree not with their castrated Copies I freely confesse that if any man shall search all the Knights quotations especially out of the Romish Writers in the latter corrected or rather corrupted Editions of them or looke upon him through the Iesuits Spectacles unrubbed he will thinke him very foule in some Allegations at least but let him inquire into the more Auncient and uncorrupted Copies or looke upon the Knights writings without the Iesuits false glasses and glosses or even through those Spectacles he hath fitted for him in this last Pamphlet as they are now wiped and clensed by me he will finde him a most faire and ingenuous Writer There is no text of Scripture among many scores no Allegation of Antiquity among many hundreths vellicated by the Iesuit which is not here vindicated no argument seeming to be blunted which is not sharpened and a new edge set on it no paint colour or varnish layed by the Iesuit on the rotten Pillars of Popery which is not here scraped out or washed away And thus at the length the Case for the Spectacles begunne by the Knight is finished on which I crave leave to imprint your Lordships Name and Armes entreating your Lordship to accept this Dedication as an indication of my sincere love to my deceased friend and withall an acknowledgment of that great debt of thankes I owe your Lordship for your Lordships many undeserved favours which I am able no other wayes to discharge then by underwriting my selfe Your Lordships most humbly and affectionatly Devoted DA. FEATLEY The CONTENTS of the first Part. In the Epistle to I. R. FAlsifications objected by the Iesuit answerd and retorted pag. 2. Personall succession of visible Professors is no certaine note of a true Church pag. 3. The second Commandement is morall and the Iesuits leaving it out of the Decalogue is unexcusable pag. 8. In the Answer to the Preface The Iesuits answer is full of railing slanders sophismes and tergiversations pag. 16. CHAP. I. The Articles of the Roman Creed
the See of Rome should be the head of all Churches for before that time saith Vspergensis the Church of Constantinople did write her selfe chiefe of all Churches so that anteà before that time the Bishop of Rome had no Supremacy and this agrees to Pope Gregories owne confession None of my Praedecessors did ever use that prophane Title Nullus unquam praedecessorum meorum hoc tam prophano vocabulo uti consuevit Greg. ep 36. l. 4. Nay more you had two Bishops of Constantinople viz. Iohn and Cyriacus who both successively assumed the title of Vniversall Bishops before ever the Bishop of Rome had any and those Bishops were suborned by Mauritius a bloody Emperour like unto Phocas who at that time made Constantinople the chiefe place of his aboade and by meanes of advancing the Bishops dignity sought to winne the greater credit to the City Gregory the Great writes unto them both severally as they lived in their Sees and doth accuse them of Pride of Singularity of error of vanity and blasphemy in that new title neither doth he make claime to it himselfe being then Bishop of Rome For mine owne part saith he I seeke to encrease in vertues and not in vanitie of titles Greg. lib. 1. ep 30. for if you call me universall Bishop you deny your selves to be that which indeede you are And when Mauritius the Emperour did countenance the Supremacy in the Bishop of Constantinople Gregory greets him in this manner Idem l. 4. Indict 13. ep 32. p. mihi I have received letters from my vertuous Lord that I should bee at peace with my brother and fellow Bishop Iohn indeede it well beseemeth a Religious Prince to command Bishops in such things but this was heavy to mee that my Soveraigne Lord did not rebuke him for his Pride After the death of Iohn the first Oecumenicall cumenicall Bishop Cyriacus succeeded in the See of Constantinople and continued that title of Oecumenicall Bishop by the power of the Emperour and accordingly Pope Gregory writes againe to Mauritius not to take part with Cyriacus and withall writes to Cyriacus at his first entrance into his Bishopricke Idem l. 6. ep 28. that he would abolish the word of Pride by which there was so great scandall given to the Church After the death of Mauritius Phocas who was a souldier and fought under the banner of Mauritius was proclaimed Emperour by the mutineirs who having committed many murthers and cruelties which Cyriacus could not approve for otherwise it is probable he might have continued the title of Oecumenicall he called a Synod at Rome consisting of 62. Bishops and by vertue of his power granted his Letters Patents to Boniface then Bishop of Rome whereby your Popes had the first authority of Volumus jubemus wee will and command And thus Phocas procured his Imperiall authority by treachery and blood Boniface obteined his power and Supremacy by pollicy and flattery of a bloody Emperour and this saith Platina was magnâ cum contentione with great contention Neither did Boniface enjoy this Title many monthes nor Phoeaeescape the heavy hand of God for he was afterwards slaine by Heraclius Quo quis peccat eo punitur as Mauritius was by him From Phocas you ascend to your first Progenitors the Kings of the Gentiles wherein I shewed the originall of your Papall Supremacy not that your Popes did lineally succeede them but that they did exceede them farre in Tyranny But the Pope useth to stile himselfe servum servorum Dei the servant of the servants of God pag. 95. and will you have it say you that by reason of his humility there must not be any Superiority Surely no for he that said learne of me for I am lowly and meeke made likewise this promise to him that would follow his lesson Matth. 20.25 He that humbleth himselfe shall be exalted Howsoever it is not the title of servus servorum that makes him Christs disciple or a universall Bishop for in that he succeedeth rather Canaan then Boniface but he must follow Christs precept and his example his precept was Luke 22.27 That none of his Apostles should reigne as Lord over his Brethren his example was I am among you as hee that serveth Neither is it the title which he assumes unto himselfe that makes him humble neither doe his Proselites followers so much undervalue him as a servant For saith Gerson Gers de potest Eccles consider 12. Fawning deceitfull flattery whispereth into the eares of ecclesiasticall persons especially of the Pope in a shamelesse manner saying as there is no power but of God so there is none either Temporall or Ecclesiasticall Imperiall or Regall but from the Pope in whose thigh Christ hath written King of Kings and Lord of Lords of whose power to dispute is sacrilegious boldnesse to whom no man may say sir why doe you so though he alter overturne waste and confound all States rules and possessions of men let me be judged a lyar saith he if these things be not found written by them that seeme wise in their owno eyes and if some Topes have not given credit to such lying and flattering words You see then the Popes owne creatures and servants would make all other to be servants unto him But it is strange to see how many of your men would palliate and extenuate the Popes power and Tyrannicall usurpation sometimes under the vaile and title of a servant and sometimes by a ceremony used at the time of his creation your Mr. Harding witnesseth both and seconds his humility in the title of a servant with his privie reason that is saith he lest the Soveraignty of honour exhibited unto him Iuel and Harding should in his owne conceit lift him higher then the degree of humane condition to that purpose saith he seemeth the stoole of easement at his creation to be set before him to temper the highnesse of that vocation with the base consideration of humane infirmities and necessities That is to say that he may remember himselfe in the midst of all his glory to be but a man when as in truth it is recorded that the Porphirie stoole serveth to put the Pope in remembrance of his virility Vt sedentis genitalia abuitimo diacono attrectentur â—sa bellicas that the world may know he is no woman Howsoever it seemes the title of servant is not sufficient to teach him humility without the stoole of easement and a stoole of easement is no sweete badge of his humility But this is as common to others as to himselfe and therefore by that way of Hamilitie he will not merit a Superioritie But say you because hee must carry himselfe like a Servant must he not therefore feed the lambs and sheepe of Christ God forbid But Saint Bernard who otherwise maintained the Popes Supremacie told us about 500 yeares since that the Bishops of Rome as well as other Bishops who had the
the forme of Consecration may be called a Benediction for the reasons alledged by the Spectacle-maker Odo Camerac in can mis dist 4. benedixit suum corpus fecit qui priùs erat panis benedictione factus est caro non enim post benedictionem dixisset hoc est corpus meum nisi in benedictione sieret corpus suam yet it is certaine that Odo Cameracensis distinguisheth the one from the other and ascribeth the conversion of bread into Christs body to the vertue of the precedent benediction and not of the subsequent Consecration Christ blessed the bread hee made it his Body that which before was Bread by his blessing is made flesh for hee would not have said after hee had blessed it This is my Body unlesse by blessing it hee had made it his Body Yea but Flood threatneth to bring a place out of Odo expresly to the contrary which is this Take away the words of Christ Odo Camera expos in Can. miss dist 5. tolle verba Christi non fiunt sacramenta Christi vis sieri corpus fanguinem appone Christi sermonem and take away the Sacraments of Christ wilt thou have the Body and Bloud of Christ made put thereto the word of Christ but which word of Christ for therein is the cardo questionis whether the word of Benediction going before or the word of Consecration following after In Odo his judgement by the word of benediction for hee saith Benedictione factus est caro by blessing it became flesh and that before hee uttered the words This is my Body which in Odo his apprehension as wee heard before could not bee true unlelesse bread had beene turned into Christs body before he pronounced them To the tenth I.R. Here Iohannes de Rivis or Iohn of the Flood speaketh very disgracefully of his Father Christopher us de capite fontium Christopher of the head of the Fountaines Nay to a most reverend Father the Archbishop of Caesarea for the Archbishop of Caesaerea his booke saith hee De correctione Theologiae scholasticae I doe not so much as looke into him but remit it to the Roman Index where you shall find this booke by you here cited forbidden and even the arrogancie of the title sheweth it to deserve no better a place Solinus c. 43. Bonasus Tauri similis si insequantur Agasones vebementiùs fimum emittit per tria jugera quicquid tangit Vrit The Bonasus when hee is hard followed casts dung in abundance on the pursuer and brayeth hideously so doth I.R. cast filth and raile downe right when he is so hard pressed with a testimonie that he hath nothing to reply The Roman Index Prohibitorum librorum is to Flood like the Philosophers pons asinorum in all extremities hee flieth to it But what is this Index to us hee might as well alledge the Turkes Alcharon against the Knight This Index of prohibited bookes deserveth not only a prohibition but a purging by fire For in the first ranke we find the holy Bibles translated into vulgar languages to bee set and after them most of the prime and Classick Writers almost in all professions There is nothing so easie as to prohibit this or any other booke but unlesse our Adversariee back this Papall prohibition with detection of errours and heresies contained in such bookes and a solid confutation thereof this tyrannicall Prohibition of the workes of Authours wil prove an evident conviction that they forcibly smother that truth the light whereof dazleth their eyes Yea but saith Flood there is a grosse historicall errour in that he saith that in that opinion of his both the Councell of Trent and all the Writers did agree till the late time of Cajetan as if Cajetan were since the Councell of Trent No historicall errour at all in the Archbishop but a frivolous cavill in Flood For hee saith not that the Councell of Trent was before Cajetan but that the Councell of Trent and all Writers before it also did agree till the late time of Cajetan Yea but the Knight maketh Cardinall Cajetan and the Archbishop of Caesarea his two champions against the words of Confecration as if they did both agree in the same whereas here the Archbishop saith quite contrarie that all are for him but only Cajetan A ridiculous sophisme ex ignoratione Elenthi the Knight alledgeth both Cardinall Cajetan and the Archbishop of Caesarea against the words of Consecration but not ad idem not to prove the same conclusion hee alledgeth Cajetan to prove that there is nothing in the words hoc est corpus meum to enforce Transubstantiation but the Archbishop of Caesarea to prove that the supposed conversion is made not by the words of Consecration This is my body but by the precedent words of Benediction Christoph de correct theoscholast fol. 11.41 usque ad 63. nisi prius quà m ista verba diceret Christus corpus suum ex pane factum erat ista proposito non fuisset vera hoe est corpus meum c. Fol. 23. and this hee proveth against all Papists strongly after this manner Vnlesse before Christ uttered those words this is my body his body had beene made of bread this Proposition had not beene true This is my body for when Christ said take ye eate yee if at that time the Bread by benediction were not changed it will follow that Christ did command his Disciples to take and eate the substance of bread and so wee must denie the article of Transubstantiation therefore saith he certo certius constat Christum non solùm per ista sola verba non consecrâsse sed ne quidem illa partem aliquam fuisse consecrationis quam fecit it is most certaine that these words were no part of the Consecration And this hee proveth to bee the opinion of all the ancient Fathers by name of Iustine Martyr Dionysius S. Austine Hesichius S. Ierome Gregorie Ambrose Rupert Alquine Bernard Seotus Landulph Peter de Aquila Pelbert and others To the eleventh The Knight alledgeth not Salmerons opinion but his relation of the opinion of other men and although his credit bee cracked with Protestants yet it is whole with Flood and his fellow Iesuits as Chamierus on the contrarie his credit is good with Protestants though none with Pontificians P. 162. Yea but saith Flood Chamier discovereth the Knights bad dealing I would faine know how or wherein first how by the spirit of prophesie or by some letter sent to the Knight after Chamier his death for Chamier was dead many yeares before the Knight wrote Were he alive what bad dealing could he discover in the Knight Cham. de Euchar l. 6. c. 7. who out of him truly and sincerely relateth the words of Salmeron the Iesuite concerning the Graecians in these words seeing the benediction of the Lord is not superfluous or vaine nor gave hee simply bread it followeth that when hee gave it the transmutation was made and those
receive but the Knight must prove that S. Paul would not say Masse unlesse others would communicate with him or that he teacheth that other Priests must not Where S. Paul 1 Cor. 11. commandeth the people to tarrie one for another when they came together to cate hee speaketh to the people who made the suppers called Agape as is plaine by the text wherein bee reprehendeth the Abuses that were committed as that some did exceed others did want some were drunke some went away hungry which could not pertaine to the blessed Sacrament besides the distribution of that belonged to the Priests not to the people who are here instructed and reprehended for their manner of making their suppers The cup of blessing is called a Communion because it uniteth us to Christ our head and also among our selves as members of the same body and though it doe this most perfectly when it is also received sacramentally yet not only so but it doth the same also in some measure being spiritually received and as this union may remaine among us members though every one among us doe not receive every day so it may also remaine betweene us and the Priest though hee say Masse and wee not receive If this argument of the Knight were good it would follow that not only some but that all the people must receive together with the Priest The Catholique Doctours cited by the Knight say indeed that it was the practise of the primitive Church to communicate every day with the Priest but they say not that it was of necessitie so to doe nay some of them as Bellarmine and Durand prove manifestly that there was no such necessitie or dependence of the Priests celebrating upon the peoples communicating that they might not celebrate unlesse the people did communicate For S. Chrysostome saith of himselfe that hee celebrated every day though there were no body to participate with him The Councell of Nants forbidding Priests to celebrate alone speaketh only of not saying Masse all alone without one or two to answer to whom the Priest may seeme to speake when hee saith Dominus vobiscum and the like but what 's this to saying Masse without some body to communicate with him The Councell of Trent doth not blesse and curse out of the same mouth or approve or condemne the same thing when it commendeth sacramentall communion of the people together with the Priest and yet condemneth those who say private Masses are unlawfull For it is one thing for the Councell to wish that the people would communicate because to heare Masse and receive withall will be more profitable an other to say that if there bee no body to communicate such a Masse is unlawfull or that the Priest must not say Masse The Hammer THe Iesuits answer to this Section of the Knight wherein hee impugneth private Masse by foure texts of Scripture two Canons of Councells and twelve pregnant Confessions of Romish Doctours consisteth partly of sophismes and partly of sarcasmes to both which I purpose to returne a short and smart answer first by refuting his sophismes and after by retorting his sarcasmes To the first sophisticall answer I replie That the words of our Saviour Take eat Mat. 26.26 this is my body were spoken to all future communicants as well as to the Apostles then present for they containe in them an institution of a Sacrament to bee celebrated in all Christian Churches till the end of the world as the Apostle teacheth us from the 23. to the 28. especially at the 26 verse 1 Cor. 11. as often as yee eate this bread and drinke this cup ye shew the Lords death till he come This the Apostles in their persons alone could not fulfill for they lived not till Christs second comming they must of necessitie therefore bee extended to all that in succeeding ages should bee present at the Lords Supper who are as much bound by this precept of Christ to communicate with the Priest or dispencer of the Sacrament as the Apostles were to communicate with Christ himselfe when hee first in his owne person administred it otherwise if the precepts Take eate doe this in remembrance of mee appertained to the Apostles only what warrant hath any Priest now to consecrate the elements or administer the Sacrament nay what command have any faithfull at all to receive the Communion Yea but saith the Iesuit if not only the Apostles and their successors but all the faithfull are here enjoyned to eate it would follow that whensoever the Sacrament is administred all must communicate that are in the Church at the same time It will follow that all who are bid to the Lords table and come prepared to whom the Priest in the person of Christ saith Take eate this is my body ought to communicate De eccles observ sciendum juxta antiquos patres quod soli cōmunicantes divinis mysterijs inter esse consueverint Orat. de consecrat dist 2. peractâ consecratione omnes communicent nisi malint ecclesiasticis carere liminibus and this was the custome of the ancient Church as Micrologus teacheth Wee must know saith he according to the ancient Fathers that none but Communicants were wont to be present at the mysteries and therefore before the Communion the Catechumenie and penitents which were not prepared to communicate were commanded to depart ite Missa est and wee find an ancient Canon of the Roman Church attributed to Gelasius enjoyning all under paine of excommunication that are present after the Consecrationis finished to participate of the blessed Sacrament To the second The precept of the Apostle bee ye followers of mee as I am of Christ 1 Co. 11.1 is generall and reacheth as well to acts of pietie as charitie As non est distinguendum ubi lex non distinguit so non est restringendum ubi lex non restringit as wee may not distinguish where the law doth not distinguish so we must not restraine where the law hath no restriction The Iesuite himselfe saith that S. Pauls imitation is directed to all if to all then to Priests and againe hee saith these words come in very fitly to prove that in all things that appertaine unto salvation wee should seeke to imitate S. Paul as hee doth Christ And I hope the Iesuit holdeth the worthy receiving of the Sacrament a matter of salvation I am sure the Apostle saith 1 Cor. 11. Hee that eateth and drinketh unwerthily eateth and drinketh damnation to himselfe But what need wee dispute this point any further sith the Apostle after hee had delivered this precept in the beginning of the chapter in pursuit thereof at the 23 verse instanceth in the Sacrament it selfe saying What I received of the Lord that I delivered unto you that the Lord Iesus the same night hee was betrayed tooke bread c. Surely if wee are to follow the Apostle in the performance of morall duties much more of religious and this the Iesuit in the end is compelled
Service they thought to be fittest and most agreeable to Gods commandement If wee had nothing but their practise for us it alone would prove the visibilitie of our Church in this maine point wherein wee stand at a bay with the Roman Church but the truth is though the Iesuit would bee loath to heare it his owne witnesses Cassander Belithus Waldensis and Aquinas speake home to the point even of a Precept the words of Cassander are the Canonicall prayers and especially the words of Consecration of the body and blood of our Lord the Ancients did so read that all the people might understand it and say Amen according to the precept intimated by the Apostle 1 Cor. 14. 16. The words of Belithus are that in the Primitive Church it was forbidden that any should speake with tongues unlesse there were some to interpret for what saith hee should speaking availe without understanding Waldensis saith more then that in the Apostles time the giving of thankes was in a knowne tongue he confirmeth the practise with a reason saying There was reason it should bee so because in those times not only the Priests but the people also were wont to answer Amen Aquinas goeth a step farther that it was madnesse in the Primitive Church for a man to have prayed in an unknowne tongue because then the people were rude and ignorant in Ecclesiasticall rites Now if the Iesuit thinke that it was not prohibited in the Apostles time to doe any madde act in time of divine Service he himselfe is bound for the Anticyrae Now for that the Iesuit addeth for the imbellishing of his former answer that none of the vulgar languages but the three learned to wit the Hebrew Greeke and Latine were Dedicated on the crosse of Christ and consequently that they being the best and perfectest of all languages were fittest for divine Service to be said in them it is more plausible then substantiall For though I grant that every devout soule so affecteth the person of our Lord and Saviour that shee loveth the very ground hee trod upon and honoureth those languages above all other in which his titles were proclaimed for the greater advancement of his kingdome yet the reason holdeth not in our present case For though a golden key bee simply better then a key of iron yet a key of iron which will open to us a casket of most pretious Iewells is better for that use then a key of gold which will not open the lock Admit the originall languages of Greeke and Hebrew are simply perfecter and better then any other which are derivatives from them yet the Mother-tongue or vulgar language is better and fitter for the congregation in time of divine Service because it answereth the wards of their understanding and openeth to their capacity the Divine mysteries then celebrated which the learned languages cannot doe As for Pilats writing over the Crosse it is certaine he had no end therein to honour the three Languages with this title but to dishonour our Saviour thereby and put a scorne upon him and therefore that inscription in the three languages was rather a pollution then a Dedication of those tongues If Pilats action herein bee of any force it maketh rather against then for our Adversaries For Pilat therefore commanded the title to be written in those three languages that it might be understood of all or the greater part of those that then were at Ierusalem By which reason people of divers languages ought to have their mysteries for so the Iesuit calleth this title celebrated in their owne severall langurges Praef. in psal his maximè tribus linguis sacramentum voluntatis Dei beati regni expectatio praedicatur ex eoque illud Pilati fuit ut in his tribus linguis regem Iudaeorum Dominum nostrum Iesum Christum esse praescriberet S. Hilarie who is alledged by Baylie the Iesuit for the consecration of these tongues neither saith that these tongues were consecrated by that inscription not that Christs kingdome is to be proclaimed in them only His words are in these three languages especially the mysterie of Gods will and the expectation of his blessed kingdome is preached and hence it was that Pilat wrote our Lord Iesus Christ King of the Iewes in those three tongues This testimonie cutteth the throate of our Adversaries for the adverbe maximè or chiefly implieth that the mysteries of Christs kingdome were to be preached in other tongues though in these especially because these were then and are some of them at this day most generally knowne and understood Inc. 15 Marc. Deus voluit ut causa mortis Christi varijs linguis scriberetur quo ab omnibus intelligeretur Et Hieron ib. hae tres linguae in crucis titulo conjunctae ut omnis lingua commemoraret perfidiam Iudaeorum Baron tom 10 Anno Chris 880. ep 147. liter as Slavonicas à Constantino philosopho repertas quibus Deo laudes debitas resonent jure laudamus ut in cadem lingua Christi Dei nostri praeconia opera enarrentur jubemus neque enim trilus tantùm linguis sed omnibus Dominum laudare authoritate sacrâ monemur quae praecepit dicens laudate Dominum omnes gentes nec sanè fidei vel doctrinae allquid obstat five missas in eadem Slavonica lingua canere sive sacrum evangelium vel lectiones divinas N. V. Testamenti benè translatas interpretatas legere out alia horarum officia psallere quoniam qui fecit tres linguas principales Hebraeam scilicet Graecaem Latinam ipse creavit alias omnes ad laudem gloriam suam Lyra and S. Ierome harpe upon this string God would have saith Lyra that the cause of Christs death should bee written in divers tongues that every tongue might declare the trecherie of the Iewes and which marreth all the Iesuits musick the Popes Diapason soundeth out the same note for so wee reade in Bope Iohns Epistle to the King of Moravia we commend the Slavonian letters found out by Constantine the Philosopher whereby those of that countrey set forth the due prayses of God and we command that the preaching and workes of Christ our God bee declared in them for we are admonished by the Divine authoritie which commandeth saying Prayse the Lord all yee Gentiles to prayse the Lord not in three tongues only but in all for hee who made the three principall languages Hebrew Greeke and Latine hee created also all other for his glorie To the twelfth To this insolent interrogation of the Iesuit wee answer that in generall prayer in an unknowne tongue is commanded in all those texts of Scripture which require us to come neere unto God and pray unto him with our heart For by the heart the understanding as well as the will and affections are meants as appeareth by that prayer of Solomon Da mihi cor intelligens in particular and expresse words it is commanded in the 1
Popes superioritie to Councels before the Councell at Laterane under Leo the tenth nor most of Pope Pius the fourth his Articles before the late Councell of Trent wherein those points were first defined Then which what Argument can be more forcible to convince the novelty of the Romish Faith But whether an article of Faith is to be accounted such because it is defined to be such by the Church or whether it be defined to be such by the Church because it is such in its owne nature it will little serve the Iesuits turne to make up the breaches of the Roman Church For certaine it is that their Doctors differ amongst themselves even in points defined by the Church For after the bookes of the Old Testament with all the parts knowne by the name of Apocrypha by the Councell of Trent were defined to be of Canonicall authoritie Sixtus Senensis makes scruple of some of them Sixtus Senens bib Sanct. l. 1. After the immaculate conception of our Lady was defined by Sixtus the fourth and the feast in testimonie thereof authorised by him yet the Dominicans generally hold that shee was conceived in sinne After Justification by inherent righteousnesse De Caus instit l. 7. c. 21. was defined in the Councell of Trent Albertus Pighius and others cited by Vegas held the contrary And though the Councell of Trent stigmatize the doctrine touching assurance of salvation yet Ambrosius Catharinus a learned Papist set forth a learned treatise de certitudine salutis Lastly though Pope Leo the tenth in the Councell of Lateran defineth the Pope to be above a generall Councell yet the Sorbonists at this day maintaine that a generall Councell is above the Pope Therefore as St Thomas Moore said pleasantly of a poore Physitian that he was more then medicus to wit by one letter Mor. in Epigr. meaning that he was mendicus Vna tibi plus est litera quam medico so it may truely be said of the unity Papists brag so much of that it is more then Vnity by a letter to wit Vanity To the fourth If the Knight or any Protestant suspended the efficacy of their Baptisme upon the faith of their Parents or as all Papists doe upon the intention of the Priest the Iesuit might with some colour object to us the uncertainty of our Christendome but let him know if he doth not that we maintaine generally that the effect of Baptisme dependeth not upon the faith of the Parents and God-fathers nor yet upon the intention of the Priest knowne to God onely and himselfe but upon his outward action and his words knowne to all the Congregation We say that the observation of Christs institution in baptizing the partie in the name of the Father of the Sonne and of the Holy-ghost and not the Priests hidden intention makes Baptisme effectuall to all that belong to the covenant To the fift The Iesuit most absurdly inferreth absurdities upon his owne Tenet supposing it to be ours whereas we disclaime it affirming that although the Church useth in marriage all meanes possible by questions and answers by joyning hands by plighting their troth in most significant tearmes and confirming their mutuall promises by giving and receiving a ring and denouncing Gods judgments against them in most fearfull manner if they know any thing one by the other why they should not be ioyned in marriage yet because the heart is knowne to God alone the validity of marriage with us dependeth upon the outward profession and sacred action done before sufficient and undoubted witnesse and not the secret intentions of the partie What the Iesuit addeth by way of jeare that a small deale of orders serves our turnes for he seeth not any thing done by vertue of our ordination which any man or woman may not doe without it I hold it not worthy any other answer then that sith he professeth his eye sight to be so dimme he would make use of the Spectacles he made for the Knight by helpe of them if he be not starke blinde he may see that by vertue of our ordination men in holy orders preach the Gospell administer the Sacraments remit and retaine sinnes which if he thinke any man or woman may doe without ordination like the foole in the Poet Dum vitant stulti vitia in contrario currunt he is gone from one extreame to the other and of a Papist become an Anabaptist With us none may execute the Priests office but he that is called thereunto as was Aaron If the Iesuit meane that any man or woman may doe the outward acts of Priesthood de facto though not de Iure may they not doe the like also sometimes among them doth not their Legend tell us that some Boyes getting by heart and pronouncing the words of Consecration hoc est Corpus meum turned all the Bakers bread in the street into flesh Do not Lady Abbesses and Nuns chaunt Mattins together in Romish Chappels Do not Midwives christen children in their Church With what face then can he charge us with those disorders whereof all the world seeth we are free but he and his Church most guilty To the sixt If we can have but a conjecturall and wavering knowledge of our salvation what comfort can a true Christian have in life or death If his hope be onely in this life the Apostle affirmeth expressely 1 Cor. 15.19 that he is of all men most miserable and certainely he is but little better if all his hope in the life to come be no better then a guesse or slender conjecture Iustly therefore did Martin Luther tearme the Romish doctrine concerning uncertainty of salvation non doctrinam fidei sed diffidentiae no doctrine of faith but of diffidence and distrust which if this Iesuit stiffely maintaines I would faine know of him how he interpreteth that Article of the Creed I beleeve the remission of sinnes Is the meaning onely this that there is a remission of some sins in the Church if so then the Devill beleeves as much concerning this Article as he but if as he beleeveth in the Article of the Resurrection the Resurrection of his owne flesh so in the Article of remission of sinnes the remission of his owne sinnes then his owne justification and particular beliefe of his owne saltion is a part of his Catholike faith and if that be but conjecturall then there is no certainty in the Catholike Faith It is true that it is a different thing to dispute of the certainety of the Catholike faith in generall and of every mans private and particular beliefe of his owne justification and salvation yet there is such a dependance betweene them that if the former be uncertaine the latter cannot be certaine Yea but saith the Iesuit we are certaine by the certainty of divine faith not onely that there be seven Sacraments but that they are also truely administred in the Church so as there can be no danger of the failing