Bishop of Rochester Gregorie the great and venerable Bede let the Iesuit therefore looke to the Consequent The Church of Rome commandeth every one upon paine of hell-fire to beleeve a temporarie purging fire after this life First upon what ground Scripture or unanimous consent of Fathers or Tradition of the Catholike Church no such thing But upon apparitions of dead men and testimonie of Spirits whether good Spirits or evill they cannot tell Next wee demand what soules and how long doe they contine there To this they must answer likewise Ignoramus Soto thinketh that none continueth in this purgation ten yeares If this be true saith Bellarmine No soule needs to stay in purging one houre Thirdly the soules that are supposed to be there till their sinnes are purged where with are they purged With fire onely so saith Sir Thomas Moore and proves it out of Zacharie 9.11 Thou hast delivered the prisoners out of the place where there is no water or with water and fire so saith Gregorie in his Dialogues lib. 4. Some are purged by fire and some by bathes and Fisher Bishop of Rochester proves it out of those words of the Psalmist Wee have passed thorow fire and water Fourthly admit they are purged by fire whether is this fire materiall or metaphoricall Ignoramus Wee know not saith Bellarmine lib. 2. de Purg. cap. 6. Lastly is there any mittigation of this paine in Purgatorie or no They cannot tell this neither For venerable Bede hist Ang. lib. 5. tels us of the apparition of a Ghost reporting that There was an infernall place where soules suffered no paine where they had a brooke running through it Neither is it improbable saith Bellarmine l. 2. de Purg. cap. 7. that there should be such an honorable prison which is a most milde and temperate Purgatorie Yea but saith the Iesuit Saint Austin is a firme man for Purgatorie and hee will prove it out of that booke of Enchiridion and place quoted by the Knight Resolutely spoken but so falsly Encharid ad Laurent c 69. Tale aliquid etiam post hanc vitam fieri incredibile non est et utrum ita sit quaeri potest et ut inveniri aut latere possit nonnullos fideles per ignem quendam purgaiorium salvari non tamen tales de quibus dictū est regnum Dei non posside bant that in this very booke chapter 69 Saint Austine speaking of a purging fire and commenting upon the words of Saint Paul Hee shall be saved as it were by fire addeth immediately It is not unlikely that some such thing may be after this life but whether it be so or no it may be argued and whether it can be found or not found that some Beleevers are saved by a purging fire yet it is certaine that none of them shall be saved of whom the Apostle saith they shall not inherit the Kingdome of God And in the same booke chapter 109. he resolves that All soules from the day of their death to their resurrection abide in expectation what shall become of them and are reserved in secret receptacles accordingly as they deserve either torment or ease These hidden Cells or Receptacles wheresoever they are scituated in St. Austins judgment C. 109. Tempus quod inter hominis mortem ultimam resurrectionem interpositum est animus abditis receptaculis continet sicut unaqueque digna est vel requiae vel arumnâ certaine it is they are not in the Popish Purgatory for St. Austine placeth in these secret Mansions all soules indifferently good or bad whereas the Popish Purgatory is restrained only to those of a middle condition being neither exceeding good nor exceeding bad Againe in St. Austines hidden repositories some soules have ease and some paine as each deserveth but in the Romish Purgatory all soules are in little-ease being tormented in a flame little differing from Hell fire or rather nothing at all save onely in time the paines are as grievous but not so durable Else where St. Austine is most direct against Purgatory and wholly for us as namely de peceat meritis de remissione l. 1. c. 28. There is no middle or third place saith he but he must needs be with the Devill who is not with Christ And Hypog l. 5. The first place the faith of Catholikes by divine authority beleeveth to be the Kingdome of Heaven the second to be Hell tertium locum penitùs ignoramus the third place we are alltogether ignorant of and in his booke de vanit seculi cap. 1. Know that when the soule is seperated from the body statim presently it is either placed in Paradise for his good worke or cast headlong into the bottome of hell for his sinnes Neither can the Iesuit evade by saying that there are two onely places where the soules remaine finally and eternally to wit Heaven and Hell but yet that there is a third place where the bodies fry in purging for a time for St. Austine speakes of all soules in generall both good and bad and saith that statim that is presently upon death they are receaved into Heaven or throwne into Hell and therefore stay no time in a Third place What then say we to the passage in which the Iesuit so triumpheth Enchirid. ad Laurenc c. 110. Neither is it to be denied that the soules of the dead are relieved by the piety of their friends living when the Sacrifice of our Mediatour is offered for them and Almes given in the Church We answer that where St. Austine is not constant to himselfe we are not bound to stand to his authority and therefore we appeale from Saint Austine missing his way in this place to the same Austine Nullum auxilium misericordiae potest preberi a justis defunctorum animabus etiamsi justi praebere velint quia est immutabilis divina sententia Qualis quisque moritur talis a Deo judicatur nec potest mutari corrigi vel minus dimia sententia hitting his way elsewhere namely l. 2. Quest Evan. c. 38. There can be no helpe of mercy afforded by just men to the soules of the deceased although the righteous would never so faine have it so because the sentence of God is immutable and Ep. 80. ad Hesich such as a man is when he dieth for such he is judged of God neither can the sentence of God be changed corrected or diminished As for Mr. Anthony Alcots confession that Saint Austines opinion was for purgatorie it maketh not for the Iesuit but against him for he saith it was his opinion not his resolved judgment and his opinion at one place and at one time which after he retracted and resolved the cleane contrary as Mr. Alcots there in part sheweth and Danaeus most fully in his Comment upon St. Austine his Enchiridian ad Laurentium To the tenth If all Papists did agree in this that all Images were to be worshipped but not as Gods yet are they at odds in other
us of supernaturall truth but Scripture as is abundantly proved by Saint Austine If any thing be confirmed by perspicuous authority of Canonicall Scriptures we must without any doubt or haesitation beleeve it but to other witnesses or testimonies we may give credit as we see cause and in his 97. Epistle to St. Ierome I have learned to yeeld that honour and reverence onely to the Canonicall Scriptures that I most firmely beleeve that no Author of them could erre in any thing he wrot and in his booke de natura gratia I professe my selfe free in all such writings of men because I owe absolute consent without any demurre or staggering onely to the Canonicall bookes of Scripture To the same purpose he writeth against Faustus the Manichee l. 11. c. 5. and ep 48. But what neede I presse St. Austine when the evident letter of Scripture is for this truth Titus 1.2 Rom. 3.4 God cannot lie and let God be true and every man a lier that is subject to error and falsehood Againe the Scriptures are sufficient to instruct us in all points necessary to salvation therefore every article of divine faith is evidently grounded upon Scripture The Antecedent I thus prove 2 Tim. 3.15.16 whatsoever is profitable for doctrine for reproofe for correction for instruction in righteousnesse in such sort that it is able to make a man wise unto salvation and perfect to every good worke is sufficient to instruct in all points of salvation but the Scripture is so profitable that it is able to make wise unto salvation and perfect to every good worke Ergo It is sufficient to instruct in all points necessary to salvation The major is evident ex terminis the minor is the letter of the text and that the adversary may not except that this is my collection onely L. 3. Advers haer c. 1. Non per alios dispo sitionem salutis nostrae cognovimus quam per cos per quos evangelium ad nos pervenit quod quidem tunc preconiaverunt postea per Dei volun tatem nobis in Scripturis tradiderunt fundamentum columnam fidei nostrae futuram Aug. l. 3. cont Lit. Petil. c. 6. Sive de Chrlsto sive de ejus ecclesia sive de quacunque re quae pertinet ad fidem vitamque nostram non dicom si nos nequaquam comparandi ei quid dixit si nos sed omnino quod seturus adjecit si Angelus de Coelo vobis annunciaverit praeterquam quod in Scripturis Legalibus Evangelicis accepistis anathema sit I will produce to him impregnable testimonies of the ancient Fathers Irenaeus We have not knowne by others the meanes which God hath appointed for our salvation then by those by whom the Gospell came unto us which at the first the Apostles preached by word of mouth but afterwards by the will of God delivered in writing to be the foundation and pillar of our faith The second is Saint Austine Whether concerning Christ or concerning his Church or concerning any thing that pertaineth to our faith and life I will not say if we but even as he going forward addeth if an Angell from Heaven shall preach unto you any thing but what you have received in the Scriptures of the law and the Gospell accursed be hee Yea but the Iesuit objecteth against us and these Holy Fathers that by the Scriptures we cannot prove which bookes of Scripture are Canonicall and which are not I answere first our question here is not of the principles of Divinity but of Theologicall conclusions Now that Scripture is the word of God and that these bookes are Canonicall Scriptures are principles in Divinity and therefore not to be proved according to the rule of the great Philosopher in the same science It is sufficient to make good our Tenet that the Canonicall Scriptures being presupposed as principles every conclusion de fide may be deduced out of them Secondly that such bookes of Holy Scriptures are Canonicall and the rest which are knowne by the name of Apochrypha are not Canonicall is proved by arguments and testimonies drawne out of Scripture it selfe by Whitaker Disputatione de sacrâ Scripturâ controversiâ primâ by Reynolds most copiously in his Censura librorum Apochryphorum Thirdly I retorte the Iesuits argument against himselfe when they teach tradition is part of Gods word how prove they it to be so by Scripture or Tradition by Scripture they cannot prove that unwritten traditions are Gods word if they prove it by Tradition then they begge the point in question and prove idem per idem To the second The Romanists ground some doctrines of their faith upon the letter of Scripture but it is that letter which killeth as for example they ground their carnall presence of Christ in the Sacrament upon those words in the sixt of St. Iohn unlesse yee eate the flesh of the Sonne of God and drinke his blood you have no life in you which words if you take according to the letter this letter killeth saith Origen but it is the spirit saith our Saviour that quickeneth the flesh profiteth nothing the words which I speake unto you they are spirit and they are life Iohn 6.63 He that pierceth the barke and commeth to the sap runneth not from the tree of life but rather runneth to it so doe we when we leave the barke of the letter upon necessary occasions and pierce into the heart and draw out the sap of the spirituall meaning To presse the letter of Scripture against the spirituall meaning and analogie of faith is not onely Iewish but Haereticall For example The Anthropomorphites ground their haeresie upon plaine and expresse words of Scripture from which to use the Iesuits owne words All Orthodox Divines are faine to flie to figurative and tropicall interpretations To the third First Saint Peter saith not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not in which Epistles of St. Paul but in which points and heads of doctrine many things are hard to be understood Secondly though some points be hard to be understood in themselves or are obscurely set downe in Scripture it followeth not from thence that all things necessary to salvation are not plainely delivered therein For as before I proved out of Saint Austine and Saint Chrysostome Among thuse things which are plainly delivered in Scriptures all such points are found as containe faith and manners all things that are necessarie are manifest Thirdly those things which are obscurely set downe in Saint Pauls Epistles may be and are elsewhere in holy Scriptures more perspicuously delivered Lastly Saint Peter saith not that those things are hard to be understood simply and to all men but to the ignorant and unstable who wrest all Scripture to their owne destruction Among which number the Iesuit must reckon himselfe and his associates before they can fit this text to their purpose To the fourth First this passage out of Saint Iohn hath beene discussed
Papacie formerly prevailed yet it is more than evident by the Testimonies and Records of your owne men that we had not two Churches before Luther but that we had alwayes Testes Veritatis witnesses of Gods truth and our owne Religion in all Ages in the bosome of the Roman Church I proceed to particulars in this last age Anno 1500. Cardinall Cajetan is purged in severall and maine points of doctrine being different from your owne Church Touching the ground of Transubstantiation he denies that the words of Scripture This is my body are availeable to prove it of themselves and thereupon your Jesuit Suarez complaineth Ex Catholicis c. a Ex Catholicis solus Cajetanus in Commentario hujus Articuli qui jussu Pii 5. in Romana editione expunctus est docuit seclusâ Ecclesiae authoritateverba illa Hoc est corpus meum ad veritatem hanc confirmādam nonsufficere Suarez Tom 3. Disp 46. Sect. 3. quaest 75. Art 1. p. 515. Impress Mog An. 1509. Amongst the Catholikes Cajetan onely teacheth that the words This is my Body bee not sufficient without the authoritie of the Church to confirme the truth of it And therefore by the command of Pope Pius the 5. this passage is blotted out in the Roman Edition Touching justification by faith onely whereas hee saith b Absque exceptione aliqua cōditionis sexus qualiatis c. dicitur omni credenti sola fides exigitur ad salutem Cajet Ep. Paulï c. Parisus 1571. fol. 4. Ind. lib. prohibit p. 876. without any exception of person of any Sexe or quality or condition It is said of every Beleever faith alone is required to salvation your Index commands those latter words to bee blotted out Lastly in speaking of the Crosse and the like he saith These are altogether unlawfull and not to be embraced because they are part of an ill worship you cause these words to be strucken out and in lieu of them you subjoyne these words following which are flat contrary c Idem p. 805. These are altogether lawfull and are to be embraced because they are part of the divine worship and the better to colour these miserable shifts and falsifications you give this Caveat to the Reader Idem ibid. p. 805. Be warie if you finde any such Doctrine for it is to bee feared the Heretikes have suggested it Alphonsus à Castro wrote a large Booke against Heresies Anno 1500. and in particular he charged Luther with many Yet in his first Booke and fourth Chapter hee attributeth the same title of Heretike to the Pope and shewes the Pope as Pope is subject to Heresie but behold the record stands published against Luther but is wholly razed touching the Pope Quod autem alii dicunt eum quierraverit in fide obstinatè jam non esse Papam ac per hoc affirmant Papam non posse esse haereticum in reseria verbis velle jocari Ad hunc enim modum quis posset citra impudentiam asserere nullum fidelem posse in fide errare nam cum haereticus fuerit jam desinit esse fidelis Non enim dubitamus an haereticum esse Papam esse coire in unum possint sed id quaerimus an hominem qui aliàs in fide errare potuisset dignitas Pontificalis efficiat à fide indeviabilem Non enim credo aliquem esse adeo impudentem Papae assentatorem ut ei tribuere hoc velit ut nec errare aut in interpretatione sacrarum literarum hallucinari possit Nam cùm constet plures eorum adeo illiteratos esse ut Grammaticam penitus ignorent quî fit ut sacras literas interpretari possent Alph. à Cast advers haer l. 1. c. 4. p. mihi 6. b. Coloniae excudebat Melchior Nouesianus Anno 1543. The words in my Edition are these Whereas some say that he which erreth wilfully in the faith is now no longer Pope and thereupon concludes the Pope cannot be an Heretike they seeme in a sad matter to dally with words For saith he wee make no doubt whether the Pope and an Heretike may agree in one person but this is our question whether a man that otherwise might have erred in the Faith by vertue of the Papall dignity be made such as he cannot erre For I doe not beleeve that there is any so impudent a flatterer of the Pope that will give him this preheminence to say that he can neither be deceived nor misse in the expounding of the Scriptures for seeing it is well knowne that many Popes be so utterly void of learning that they know not the Principles of their Grammer how may it be that they should be able to expound the Scriptures These words I have cited at large out of my Edition 1543. for if you looke into Alphonsus printed within these last threescore yeares I beleeve you will finde them razed in this particular without an Index Expurgatorius which plainly shewes that as the Pope was and may be an Heretike so likewise falsifying of Records is a proper marke of Heretikes Johannes Ferus a Frier Minorite An. 1500. Usher p. 162. and prime Preacher at Mentz in Germany is purged and falsified in many points of controversie which he held with us Touching the power of Priesthood in remitting of sinnes it was the doctrine of Ferus a Non quòd homo propriè remittat peccatum sed quòd ostendat ac certificet à Deo remissum Neque enim aliud est absolutio quam ab homine accipit quà m si dicat En fili certifico te tibiremissa esse peccata annuncio tibi te habere propitium Deum quaecunque Christus in Baptismo Evangelio nobis promisir tibi nunc per me annunciat promittir Fer. Comment in Matth. l. 2. c. 9. Mogunt An 1559. Lugdun apud Johannem à S. Paulo An. 1609. Contr. Man did not properly remit sinne but did declare and certifie that it was remitted by God so that the absolution received from man is nothing else than if hee should say Behold my sonne I certifie thee that thy sinnes are forgiven thee I pronounce unto thee that thou hast God favourable unto thee and whatsoever Christ in Baptisme and in his Gospell hath promised unto us hee doth now declare and promise unto thee by me Of this thou shalt have me to be a witnesse goe in peace and in quiet of conscience This declarative power of remitting sinnes was Ferus doctrine this is ours But behold the case is altered for in Ferus printed at Lyons 1609. all those words are razed out and on the contrary saith that b Sacerdos enim Dei minister verè remittit peccata ac certificat à Deo remissa fol. mihi 160. b. In Matth. l. 2. c. 9. the Priest doth truely remit sinnes and as the Minister of God doth also certifie that they are remitted of God Touching our justification by faith onely the true Ferus
Oblationibus which you interpret Offrings Saint Ambrose cannot meane the peoples gifts or offrings for there was no need of any speech much lesse a long speech at these offrings It must therefore follow that either he meanes the celebration of the Sacrament or some spirituall sacrifices of Praise and Thanksgiving You proceed from one heresie to another viz from your unknown Service to your Transubstantiation This Doctrine I shewed had his descent from the Heretikes Helcesaitae from Marcus from the Capernaites Touching the Helcesaitae you say It is an hereticall fable for those Heretikes make two Christs pag. 92. wee acknowledge but one and the same both in heaven and in the consecrated Host It is true this particular Instance is cited amongst the Tables of Theodoret but yet you have affinitie with their Tenets as neere as cosen Germans once removed For as you acknowledge but one Christ in the heavens and in the Host no more did those Heretikes in words for they rehearsed the Apostles Creed Et in Iesum Christum and not in Christos and as they made a two-fold Christ one in heaven another in earth so likewise you teach that Christ in the Sacrament here on earth is invisible and indivisible but in heaven at the same time visible and with dimensions of quantitie and distinctions of Organs And what is this but consequently to make two Christs or at least to make contradictories true at the same time of one and the same Christ in respect of his humane nature to be visible and invisible Touching Marcus the Heretike you say Hee changed the colour but you teach that the colour and accidents remaine and the substance is changed It is true and your opinion in this is more absurd than that of Marcus for hee changed the Colour to make the people beleeve it was true blood and you make them beleeve it is blood when there is neither tast nor colour of blood Lastly touching the Capernaites you deny there is any likenesse of Doctrine For say you the Capernaites thought they should eate Christs body piece-meale but wee receive Christ whole and entire not in the forme and shape of flesh but of bread c. But I pray which of the Evangelists ever charged them with any such conceit The truth is they understood the words of Christ as you doe in a grosse and carnall manner and therfore Christ in reproving them saith not Flesh eaten piece-meale profiteth nothing but absolutely The flesh profiteth nothing As touching your eating of Christ whole and intire it is all one with their eating of him by piece-meale for there may be many differences in eating but all eating the flesh of Christ with teeth and jawes is Caperniticall But you neither see nor taste the flesh of Christ which they dream'd they should for you receive it Not say you in the forme of flesh but of bread I will returne you an Answer from a learned Divine on our side B. Bilson in the difference between Christ subject and unchristian Rebellion pag. 748. You chaw the flesh of Christ actually with your teeth and swallow the same downe your throats and these be proper actions and right instruments of externall and Caperniticall eating your eyes and your taste be not else blind men and such as by reason of Sicknesse can taste nothing by your Divinitie can eate nothing Since then you concurre with the Capernaites in eating and swallowing notwithstanding you vary from them in sight and taste yet your opinion establisheth a corporall eating of Christs flesh and a perverting of the meaning of Christs words no lesse than theirs did Let mee paralell them together with the most favorable construction I can yet your Church must have her Antiquitie and descent from those Capernaites For suppose the Capernaites did beleeve that Christ would kill himselfe and give his body to be eaten yet the Church of Rome teacheth that Christ did eate his owne flesh a thing no lesse barbarous being meant litterally than to kill himselfe Admit the Capernaites did beleeve that Christ would give his flesh to be mangled by pieces or by halves yet your Churches opinion is no lesse cruell to beleeve that in the Sacrament Christs flesh is swallowed up whole at one morsell Lastly let it be granted that the Capernaites did believe that Christs flesh should be eaten when hee was dead yet the opinion of the Romanists is more brutish to imagine his flesh to be eaten when he was alive being a higher degree of crueltie to devoure men alive Apertissimi loqâ—imur corpus Christi veri à nobis attrectari manducan circumgestari dentibus atteri sensibiliter sacrificari non minâ—â—â— quà m ante consecrationem panis Alanus lib. 3. de Euchar. cap. 37. than when they are dead Sure I am they both agree in this that according to the letter they should eate the flesh of Christ Orally Corporally and Substantially they both agree in the sensible handling of his body in devouring him with the mouth and in grinding him with the teeth Alanus the Romanist professeth openly in the name of the Church Apertissimi loquimur Wee affirme plainly the body of Christ is truly handled of us carried about ground with the teeth and sensibly sacrificed Long before him Pope Nicholas confirmed this doctrine in a Councell at Rome and taught it for a lesson to Berengarius Verum Corpus Domini nostii Iesu Christi sensuclitèr non solum in Sacramento sed in veritate manibus Sacerdotum tractari frangi ac fideliùm dentibus atteri Grat. de con secr d. 2. c. 4.2 Ego Berengarius to let him know the great difference betwixt Papist and Protestant in the same Church I beleeve that the body of our Lord Iosus is sensibly and in very deede touched with the hands of the Priest and broken and rent and ground with the teeth of the faithfull This confession stands a Record in the Roman Decrees and unlesse you mince the words strangely you must needs acknowledge that you eate the flesh of Christ peice-meale and then you sympathize in all things with your first Parents the Capernaites From Transubstantiation you proceede to the Popes Supiemacy wherein you say pag. 93. I am mistaken in saying that Phocas gave that authority to the Bishop of Constantinople It is true this is a mistake of the Printer but no corruption Rogatu Bonifacij phocas constituit sedem Romanae Apostolicae Ecclesie caput esse omnium Ecclesiarum nam anteà Constantinopolitana Ecclesia se scribebat primam omnium Vsperg in Phoc. fol. mihi and in the last Impression which you should have taken you shall finde Rome for Constantinople and this you might well understand to be an error in the print because my purpose was to shew a descent of the Bishop of Romes Supremacy not of the Bishop of Constantinople And this authority stands good against you notwithstanding all your exceptions viz. that the Pope of Rome and that
Baptisme and the holy Eucharist of the body and bloud of Christ the double gift of the holy Ghost Paschasius the Catholique Sacraments of the Christian Church are Baptisme and the body and bloud of Christ Fulbertus the way of Christian religion is to beleeve the Trinitie and veritie of the Deitie and to know the cause of his Baptisme and in whom the two Sacraments of our life are contained Of all these arguments brought by Protestants the Iesuit could not be ignorant Yet hee glaunceth only at one of them to wit the second which he would make us beleeve to bee an absurd begging the point in question How can saith he Sacraments bee Seales to give us assurance of his Word when all the assurance we have of a Sacrament is his Word This is idem per idem or a fallacie called petitio Principij As S. Austine spake of the Pharisees Quid aliud eructarent quà m quo pleni erant What other things should these Pharisees belch out then that wherewith they were full wee may in like manner aske what could wee expect for the Iesuit to belch out against the Knight then that which he is full of himselfe sophismes and fallacies That which hee pretends to find in the Knights argument every man may see in his to wit a beggarly fallacie called homonymia For the Word may be taken either largely for the whole Scripture and in that sense wee grant the Sacraments are confirmed by the Word or particularly for the word of promise and the Word in this sense is sealed to us by the Sacrament and this wee prove out of the Apostle against whom I trust the Iesuit dare not argue what Circumcision was to Abraham and the Iewes that Baptisme succeeding in the place thereof is to vs but Circuncision was a Seale to them of the righteousnesse of faith promised to Abraham and his posteritie Rom. 4.11 therefore in like manner Baptisme is a seale unto us of the like promise What Bellarmine urgeth against our definition of a Sacrament to whom the Iesuit sendeth us is refuted at large by Molineus Daneus Rivetus Willet and Chamier to whom in like manner I remand the Iesuit who here desiring as it seemed to bee catechised asketh what promises are sealed by the Sacraments I answer of regeneration and communion with Christ His second quaere is what need more seales then one or if more why not seven as well as two I answer Christ might adde as many Seales as hee pleased but in the new Testament hee hath put but two neither need wee any more the first sealeth unto us our new birth the second our growth in Christ If I should put the like question to the Iesuit concerning the King what need he more Seales then one or if he would have more why not seven as well as two I know how hee would answer that the King might affix as many seales to his patents and other grants as hee pleaseth but quia frustra fit per plur a quod fieri potest per pauciora because two seales are sufficient the Privie seale and the broad seale therefore his Majestie useth no other Which answer of his cuts the wind-pipe of his owne objection His last question is a blind one how may wee see saith he the promises of God in the Sacraments S. Ambrose and S. Austine will tell him by the eye of faith Magis videtur saith S. Ambrose quod non videtur that is more or better seene which is not seene with bodily eyes Sacraments saith S. Austine are visible words because what words represent to the eares that Sacraments represent to their eyes which are anointed with the eye-salve of the spirit In the Word we heare the bloud of Christ clenseth us from our sinnes in the Sacrament of Baptisme we see it after a sort in the washing of our body with water in the Word wee heare Christs bloud was shed for us in the Sacrament of the Eucharist after a sort we see it by the effusion of the Wine out of the flagon into the Chalice and drinking it In the Word wee heare that Christ is the bread of life which nourisheth our soules to eternall life In the Sacrament after a sort wee see it by feeding on the Consecrated elements of Bread and Wine whereby our body is nourished and our temporall life maintained and preserved To the fift In the former Paragraph we handled those Arguments which the Logicians tearme Dicticall 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in this we are to make good our Elencticall in the former we proved positively two Sacraments in this privatively we are to exclude and casheere all that the Church of Rome hath added to these two which deviseth Sacraments upon so weake grounds and detorteth Scripture in such sort for the maintenance of them that a learned Divine wisheth that as for the remedie of other sinnes so there were a Sacrament instituted as a speciall remedie against audacious inventions in this kind and depravations of holy Scripture to convince them For of an Epiphonema this is a great mysterie Ephes 5.32 they have made a Sacrament the sacrament of Matrimonie of a promise whose sinnes yee remit Iohn 20.23 they are remitted they have made a second Sacrament the sacrament of Penance of an enumeration of the Governours and Ministers of the Church Ephes 4.11 And hee gave some Apostles some Prophets some Pastours some Evangelists some teachers a third Sacrament the sacrament of Order of a relation what the Apostles did Acts 8.17 In laying hands on them who received the gift of tongues a fourth Sacrament the sacrament of Confirmation Of a Miracle in restoring the sick to their former health by anoynting them with oyle in the name of the Lord a fift Sacrament the sacrament of Extreame Vnction A child cannot be bishopped a single partie contracted a Priest or Deacon ordained a penitent reconciled a dying man dismissed in peace without a sacrament the sacrament of Extreame Vnction If they take Sacrament in a large sense for every divine Mysterie holy Ordinance or sacred Rite they may find as well seventeene as seven Sacraments in the Scriptures if they they take the Word in the strict sense for such a sacred Rite as is instituted in the New Testament by Christ with a visible signe or element representing and applying unto us some invisible sanctifying and saving grace I wish the Iesuit might but practise one of their Sacraments that is doe penance so long till hee found in Scripture that and the other foure Sacraments which they have added to the two Instituted by Christ To begin with them in order and give Order the first place wee acknowledge the ordination of Priests and Deacons by Bishops to be de jure divino and we beleeve where they are done according to Christs Institution that grace is ordinarily given to the party ordained but not sacramentall grace not gratia gratum faciens but gratia gratis data a ghostly power
image-worship which is so directly and expresly forbidden by God in the law That the Iewes are thus scandalized at the idolatrous practice of the Roman Church the Knight proveth by an eye-witnesse Sir Edwine Sands who in his description of the religion in the West parts observeth that the worship of images as it is at this day practised by the Roman Church is such a stumbling block to the Iewes and hinderance to their conversion that when they come to Christian Sermons as in Rome they are enjoyned at least once a yeare so long as they see the Preacher direct his speech to a little woodden crucifix that standeth on the Pulpit by him to call it his Lord and Saviour kneele to it embrace it and kisse it to weepe upon it as it is their fashion in Italie it is preaching sufficient for them and perswadeth them more with the very sight of it to hate Christian religion then any reason the world can alledge to love it To the seventh The argument drawne from the Cherubins is refelled professedly by Tertullian De idol c. 5. Apostolus affirmat omnia tunc figuratè populo accidisse addit benè quòd idem Deus quilege vetuit similitudinem fimilitudinem fieri extraordinario praecepto serpent is similitudinem fieri mandavit si eundem Deum observas habes logem ejus nefeceris similitudinem si praeceptum factae posteà similitudinis respicis tu imit are Mosen ne facias adversus legem simulacrum aliquod nisi tibi Deus jusserit the Apostle saith he affirmeth that all things happened to the Iewes in figures and hee addeth well the same God who in his generall law forbad any similitude to be made by an extraordinary precept commanded some similitude to bee made if thou dost serve the same God thou hast his law Make to thy selfe no graven image or similitude if thou regardest the Precept of making a similitude as of the Cherubins or brazen serpent e. imitate thou Moses make thou no image against the law unlesse God command thee by a Precept Whereunto wee may farther adde that the Cherubins were not made publikely to bee seene and gazed upon by the people but were kept in the holy place whither the Priests only resorted neither were they worshipped by the Priests as Lyra cited by the Iesuit who was himselfe a Iew at the first and well knew their practice professeth the Iewes saith he worshipped not the Arke nor the Cherubins nor the mercy seate but the true God which promised to helpe them neither were they set up in the Temple for adoration but for ornament L. 9. c. 6. q. 7. non ut adorarentur sed ob ornatum pulchritudinem Tabernaculi vel Templi ad majestatem Dei plenius ostendendam Lorin in Act Apost c. 17. de Cherubinis jussu Dei factis de alijs imaginibus â— Solomone dicendum fuisse duntaxat ut appendices additamenta ornatus alterius rei non verò per se propositas modo accommodato ad adorationem quam conslat quoque ab Haebreis ipsis non fuisse exhibitam quod utrumque docet Tertullianus eritque id magis verum si verumâ—est Cherubin ore manibus cruribus erectione corporis bumanam jubis à pectore cervice pendentibus Leoninam alis aquilinam ungulis pedum vitulinam figuram retulisse Vasq I de adorat 2. disp 4. c. 6. nunquam cherubinis honor aut adoratio adhibita fuit aut osculo aut genuflexione aut oblatione â—huris aut alio signo peculiari ad ipsos directo nec quisquam nisi ex suo cerebro absque ullo fundamento contrarium poterit affirmare as Azorius convinced by evidence of truth acknowledgeth saying the Cherubins were not painted or engraven on the Arke to the end they might bee adored but only to adorne and beautifie the Tabernacle and more fully to expresse the majestie of God with whom Lorinus and Vasquez accord concerning the Cherubins made by the command of God and other images in Solomons Temple wee must say that they were there as appendices and additions for the adorning of something else not set forth by themselves in a manner fit for adoration which it is manifest that the Iewes never exhibited to them both which Tertullian teacheth Vasquez commeth not behind Lorinus teaching a contrarie lesson to Flood here his words are That the Cherubins were never adored nor worshipped neither by kissing them nor with bowing of the knee or by offering Frankinsence or by any other meanes neither can any man affirm the contrarie except it be out of his owne braine without any foundation or ground at all To the eighth In this allegation the Iesuit sheweth from whence he and his fellowes are descended L. 3. cont haeres c. 2. cum ex scripturis arguuntur in accusationem convertuntur ipsarum scripturarum quasi non rectè haheant neque sint ex auiboritate quia variè sint dictae juia non possit ex his inveniri veritas ab his qui nesciunt traditionem non enim perliter as traditam illam sed pervivam vocem Aug. in 10. tract 49. Sanctus Evangelifia testatur multa Dominum Christum dixisse fecisse quae scripta non sunt electa sunt autem quae scriberentur quae saluti credentium sufficere videbantur Cyr. in 10.12 c. 68. non omnia quae Dominus fecit conscripta sunt sed quae scribentes sufficere put ârunt tam admores quà m ad dogmata ut rect â fide operibus virtute rutilantes ad regnum caelorum perveniamus viz. from the ancient Gnosticks and Valentinians who as Irenaeus testifieth against them When they are convinced of their heresies out of Scripture they fall on accusing the Scriptures themselves impeaching their authoritie and charging them with ambiguity and saying that the truth cannot be found out of them by those who know not tradition for that it was not delivered by letters but by word of mouth But because I have beate the Iesuit heretofore out of this dodge and have proved abundantly the sufficiencie and perfection of Scriptures I will spare farther labour herein and only shew how shamefully he depraveth one text to the derogation of the whole Scripture S. Iohn in the place alledged by him speaketh not of points of faith or manners precepts or examples for our imitation but of miracles 10.20 30. Many things truly did Iesus in the presence of his Disciples which are not written in this booke Upon which words S. Austine and S. Cyrill thus glosse full in the Protestant language the holy Evangelist testifieth that Christ did and said many things that are not written but those things were chosen to bee written which seemed sufficient for the salvation of them that beleeve and S. Cyrill all things which Christ did are not written but what the writers thought to bee sufficient as well for our conversation as doctrine
the bad Popes To the thirteenth The Knight after Alfonsus quoted Antoninus Cajetan and Bellarmine to prove the noveltie of Indulgences and that there is no ground for them in Scriptures or the writings of the ancient Fathers to whom the Iesuit answereth not a word and here the second time hee is Gravelled in this Section To Alfonsus hee seemeth to say something but upon due examination as good as nothing first hee falsifieth his words saying page 334. that Alfonsus confesseth the use of Indulgences to be most ancient and of many hundred yeares standing whereas his words are not that the use of Indulgences was most ancient but that it was said by some to be most ancient among the Romanes Apud Romanos vetustissimus praedicatur illarum usus this praedicatur is of no more credit than Plinie his fertur or Solinus his aiunt For notwithstanding this report Alfonsus resolves in that very place It seemes that the use of Indulgences came but lately into the Church Secondly the Iesuit forceth a wrong Inference from Alfonsus his words For albeit hee affirmeth that Indulgences are not to be contemned because they have beene in use in the Church for some hundreds of yeares yet hee condemneth not a man for an Haeretique that shall deny them but any one that shall contemne the Church or despise her autority his words are Quoniam ecclesiâ Catholicâ tantae est authoritatis ut qui illam contemnat Haereticus meritò censeatur we say the same also Matth. 18.17 and the Scripture beareth us out in it tell the Church and if he refuse to heare the Church let him be unto thee as a Heathen or a Publican but what if Alphonsus out of feare blowes hot and cold with one breath what 's that to us He lived and died a professed Papist and therefore what he writeth against Protestants is little to be set by but what he writeth against the Church of Rome whom he had a minde to defend in all things and whose feed advocate he was must be thougt to be drawne from him by evidence of truth howsoever let it be noted that Alphonsus calleth not him an Haereticke who denieth Indulgences as the Knight doth Vid. Rain Thes Romana ecclefia nec est Catholica nec sanum membrum Catholicae ecclesie but who contemneth the Catholike Church which neither the Knight nor any Protestant doth we deny not much lesse doe we contemne the authority of the Catholike Church But we deny that the Roman Church is the Catholike or a sound member thereof To the fourteenth Our Ministers doe not like Flood and other Iesuits bring muddy stuffe in their sermons out of Petrus de Voragine and the like fabulous Authors but what they produce in this kinde against the Pope for his base sale of Indulgences and making merchandize of his ghostly power they proove out of good Authors grave Historians Canonists and Schoolemen such as are the author of the lives of Popes and the booke called Taxa camerae Apostolicae Centum granamina together with Wescelius Croningensis Guicciardine Henricus de Gandavo Altisiodorensis If Altisiodorensis words are not plaine enough Summ l. 4. d. relap Dicunt quidam quod relaxatio non valeat quantum ecclesia permittit sed facit ut excitentur fideles ad dandum et decipit eos ecclesia some say that the Popes Indulgence prevailes not so much as the Church promiseth but that thereby men are stirred up to give more freely and that therein the Church deceaveth them what say they to that note in Taxa camerae Apostolicae Nota diligenter quod hujusmodi gratiae non consceduÌ„tur pauperibus quia non sunt nec possunt consolari Matth. par in Hen. 3. Romanorum loculos impregnare note diligently that such favours to wit Indulgences are not graunted to poorâ— folke because they have not wherewithall they cannot be comforted or that pregnant phrase of Matthew Paris that Christs blood alone though it be all sufficient to save soules yet the same without saintly satisfaction applied by the Pope is not sufficient to impregnate his holinesse Coffers If the Iesuit smell not in thâ—se sentences the fat steame of the Popes Kitchin he hath no nose To the fifteenth It is well the Iesuit termeth the drinking of a health to Almighty God a tale and by his quoting no authouâ— or it sheweth that it was a signal lye of his owne inventing when he was betweene hawke and buzzard Never any but himselfe who can blush at nothing affirmed any such thing of any Protestant that ever came to that height of impiety and prophannes as to drinke a health to his Maker Historia Ital. l. 13. Leo nullo temporum et locorum habito delectu per universam orbem amplissima privilegia quibus non modo vinis delictorum veniam consequendi sed defunctorum animus ejus ignis in quo delicta expiari dicuntur paenis eximendi facultatem pollicebatur promulgavit quae quia pecuniae tantum a mortalibus extorquendae gratia concedi notum erat a questoribus huiâ— negotio praefectis impudenter administrabantur magnam plerisque locis indignationem offensionemque concitarant presertim in Germania ubi a multis ex ejus ministris hujusmodi mortuos penis liberandi facultas parvo pretio vendi vel in canponum tabernis aleae subiici cernebantur but Luitprandus and Polonus telleth us of one Iohn the twelfth a Pope of Rome and consequently no Protestant who made so bold with Almighty God as to give Orders in a Stable and so familiar with the Divell as to drinke a health to him As for the Knights prophane jeast as he calleth it it is no jeast but a serious testimony out of a grave historian convincing the Popes agents of Atheisme and prophannes and the Popes themselves of sordid covetousnesse his words are Leo published large privileges through the whole world without any distinction of times and places by which he promised not onely pardon to the living but also power to deliver soules of the dead out of Purgatory paines which because it was knowne that they were granted onely to fill the Popes coffers and because his farmers carried themselves lewdly in the sale of them great offence was taken at them especeally in Germanie where such Indulgences were set at a low price and seene to be staked in Tavernes and Ale-houses at games of Tables To the sixteenth The Trent Synod was not a Councell but a Conventicle wholly swayed by the Italian faction wherein not the flower of the Catholique Church for learning but the bran of the Romish boulted by the Pope was gathered together Let Andreas Dudithius the Bishop of Quinque eccles Ep. ad Maximil who was present at this Councell speake his minde of it the matter came to that passe through the wickednesse of those hungry Bishops that hung upon the Popes sleeve and were created on the suddaine by the Pope for
of either to the notable preiudice of faith and the salvation of soules I reply first that for five of the seven as was discussed at large Section the fourth the Iesuit is so farre from any certainty that indeede he can bring no probability that there be any such Sacraments in the Catholike Church and for the other two which we acknowledge to be Sacraments properly so called he cannot be certaine that they are ever effectually administred in his Church according to their owne Tenents who suspend the efficacy of them upon the Priests intention Nay farther he cannot be certaine that they have any Church at all amongst them for there can be no Church as they teach without a visible succession of lawfull Pastours whereof hee cannot be certaine sith no man knoweth whether the Bishops who ordained their Priests or the Archbishop who ordained their Bishops or the Pope who consecrated their Archbishops intended that which your Church intendeth and if there failed an intention in any of all these or in him who baptized or ordained their first Pope since the Bishops of Rome began to be Popes hee hath no certainty according to his owne grounds of any Priesthood or Christianitie in his Church To the seventh I never heard before that it could be good or any way profitable surdo fabulum narrare to tell a Tale in the care of a deafe man Where doe the Scriptures or ancient Fathers give any approbation to such senslesse devotion can a man call upon him with faith or any hope of obtaining his suit whom hee conceiveth to be out of his hearing Yea but Gabriel Biel speaketh not doubtfully but certainly of Invocation though hee seeme to doubt of the manner how Saints in heaven know our necessities on earth Biel indeed lispeth somewhat that way but hee speaketh not plaine hee saith Invocantur sancti not sancti sant invocandi hee speaketh confidently and certainly of the practise of the Romane Church out not of the truth of this point of the Romish Faith that Saints ought to be called upon for that hee taught In Can. Missae Dist 31. videri probabile that It may seeme probable that God revealeth to Saints all those suits which men present unto them consequently holdeth that it may seeme also probable that the living may pray unto them But what is this his probabile or Peter Lumbards not incredibile to build an Article of Faith upon Yea but Peter Lumbard though hee make some doubt whether the Saints heare our Prayers as they proceed from us they being in Heaven and wee in Earth they being but in one place Sicut enim Angelis ita etiam sanctis qui Deo assistant petitiones nostrae innotescunt in verbo Dei quod contemplantur and those that call upon them in a million of places distant farre one from the other yet Hee maketh no doubt of their knowing and seeing our Prayers in the Word of God as the Angels doe I answer that this imaginarie Glasse of the Schoolemen wherein they conceive that the Saints and Angels see all things by the contemplation of God in whom are all things hath beene long agoe battered in pieces For if because they see God they must needs see all things that are in him and know all that hee knoweth it would hereupon insue that the Saints knowledge should be infinite as Gods is that they should know the day and houre when Christ shall come to judgement contrary to the expresse words of our Saviour Marke 13.32 that they should know the secrets of all hearts which the Scripture ascribeth as a singular prerogative to God To avoid these Rockes if our Adversaries will confine the knowledge of the Saints or Angels to such things onely as God shall be pleased to reveale unto them they beg then the point in question which they ought to prove viz. That God will reveale to every Saint what every man on earth prayeth to him for To the eighth First the Iesuit in this answer flatly contradicteth Cajetan whom hee undertaketh to defend for if the Church groundeth not the canonization of Saints upon the report of miracles voyced on them Cajetans Argument in that place is weak and of no force Secondly for the authoritie of the See Apostolike and the infallibility of the Popes judgement they are as uncertaine or more then that such persons canonized by the Pope are Saints L. 3. ep 3. nec quisquam sibi quod soli filio tribuit pater vindicare se putet ut ad areum pargandam c. 1 Kings 8.39 Saint Cyprian in his time severely censured those who arrogated to themselves that which the Father hath given to the Sonne onely to wit in the floore of the Church to take the fanne in his hand and sever the Wheat from the Chaffe If God onely knoweth the hearts of all the children of men either the Pope must be God as the Canonists blasphemously called him or hee cannot infallibly know who are true Saints and sincerely beleeve and love God As for Saint Austines complaint that many were worshipped by men on earth that are tormented by the devill in hell they are indefinitely spoken and not restrained to Donatists or any other Heretikes yet were it so wee may see in those Donatists a perfect picture of Papists For what Donatus did in Affrica that doth the Pope in Europe hee canonizeth those of his faction for Saints And as the Donatists gave the honour of Martyrs to those who justly suffered death for Robberies and Murders so doe the Papists crowne the heads of Murderers and Traitours with the garland of Martyrdome witnesse Becket Campian Oldcorne and Garnet whereof the first standeth in the Kalender of Romish Saints the later in the Register of Jesuiticall Martyrs Neither can the Iesuit so easily fillip off the testimonie of Cassander as if hee taxed the ignorant for making a Saint of a Thiefe Cassan consult art 2. and no way touched upon the Pope or your Church for hee layeth not the blame upon the people as the Iesuit here doth but saith simply that Saint Martin found a place honoured in the name of a holy Martyr to be the sepulcher of a wicked Robber Secondly 't is well knowne that the people cry not up at first a Saint or Martyr after his death but the Priests who voyce miracles upon them and keepe their Shrines and Reliques and by shewing them to the people make no lesse gaine than Demetrius and his fellow Crafts-men did of their silver Shrines of Diana To the ninth As hee that plucks the stickes out of the Chimney one by one at last puts out the fire so the Knight by loosening or quite removing the fuell of Purgatorie fire consequently extinguisheth it If all the parts and circumstances of the Doctrine of Popish Purgatory are doubtfull and uncertaine the whole certainly can be no Article of Faith but the Antecedent the Knight proves out of Bellarmine Dominicus a Soto Fisher
Quillets concerning Images namely whether they are to be worshipped in themselves and for themselves or onely ratione prototypi in regard of that they represent whether properly or improperly whether with kissing and imbracing and other civill complements as Tharasius the Patriarke of Constantinople teacheth or with prostration or corporall submission before Images as the Iesuit indeavoureth to prove out of the Acts of the second Councell of Nice Neither is it certaine and resolved among all Papists that Images are to be worshipped but not as Gods For some of them deny that they are at all to be worshipped others over-lavish on the contrary and teach that they are to be worshipped as God De Imag. sanct l. 2. c. 22. For though Bellarmine himselfe approve not the opinion of those Roman Catholikes who teach that Latria or divine honour is due to Images unlesse it be improperly and by accident yet hee confesseth that Alexander de Hales Aquinas Cajetanus Bonaventure Marsilius Almaine Carthusian Capreolus and Henricus teach that The Images of God are to be worshipped with the same worship wherewith God himselfe is worshipped and what is this lesse than to worship Images as God As for the Canons and curses of the Councell of Nice they are but Bruta fulmina and if the Iesuit be not as senselesse as the Images which hee worshippeth hee must needs confesse as much For to speake nothing of the ridiculous arguments used in that Councell such as these are God made Man after his owne Image therefore we may make or worship Images and the Angels are to be painted quia corporei sunt because they are bodily substances What is there spoken in the 115 Psalme the 4 5 6 7 and 8 verses against Idols which may not be applied to your Popish Images It is said of them They are the workes of mens hands are yours the worke of Angels or Devils It is said of them They have mouthes and speake not eyes and see not eares and heare not noses and smell not hands and handle not feet and walke not doe any of your venerable Images made of silver and gold or rather of which you make so much silver and gold of speake see heare smell handle or walke I conclude therefore in the words of the Psalmist They that make these Images are like unto them and so are all they that defend the worship of them For Gregorie de Valentia the Iesuit telleth but a sorry tale for first hee disparageth his learning in the Greeke saying that alleaging a Text out of Saint Peter who wrote in Greeke hee followed the Latine translation never looking to the originall which argueth in him either grosse ignorance in the Greeke or grosse negligence After hee hath thus disgraced their noble Champion hee leaveth him in the open field saying pag. 377. Neither doe I allow Valentia his use of the word Simulacrum nor his explication of Saint Peters text neither this his argument drawne from thence The truth is Gregorie de Valentia is unexcusable De Idolatr l. 2. Quid attinebat ita determinatè cultus simulacrorum illicitos notare si omnino nullos simulacrorum cultus licitos esse censuisset for howsoever hee distinguisheth of Image and Idoll-worship and intendeth to prove no more out of Saint Peter then that some Image-worship is lawfull yet if his collection were good out of Saint Peter it would prove some Idoll-worship to be lawfull For Saint Peters word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 unlawfull Idolatries and if because Saint Peter brandeth Idolatrie with the epithet of Vnlawfull he will infer that therefore some Idolatrie is lawfull by the same reason he might conclude that some Adulterie or Theft were good and profitable because the Apostle Ephes 5.21 biddeth us to have no fellowship with the unfruitfull workes of darknesse For the distinction of an Image and an Idoll I have spoken at large heretofore here onely I observe that the Iesuit in saying that Idolum according to the prime signification of the word might be taken more indifferently because it signifieth the seeming shape or beauty of a thing or person contradicteth himselfe and the whole current of his owne Doctours and strengthneth our Arguments against them drawne from the prohibition of making or worshiping Idols that is the shape or beauty of any thing or person Flood pag. 337. The shape or beauty of any thing or person according to the prime signification and etymologie of the word is an Idoll but all Popish Images are the shapes of some thing or person they are all therefore Idolls and the worshipers of them Idolaters according to the primitive signification of the word The truth is every Idoll is an Image and every Image an Idoll according to the first signification of the word but according to the present use an Idoll for the most part is taken in the worst sense and signifieth such an Image onely as is idolized that is made for religious worship or rather irreligious as all Popish Images are and because they are so the places of Scripture which we bring against the worship of Idolls as this of Saint Peter are strong and in force against them and their Worshippers And this may serve for answer of the fourteenth Paragraph of this tenth Chapter In the 15. and 16. following he doth but champe somewhat of that which before he chewed and therefore I conclude this Chapter with his owne words a little altered we finde nothing in matter of faith uncertaine in the Protestant Church nothing certaine on the Iesuits side but onely this that he is alwayes and every where himselfe that is a Proteus whose motto may be that of the Heathens Goddesse Fortune constans in levitate suâ constant to his inconstancy and true to his false dealing Concerning the greater safety and comfort in the Protestant faith then in the Romish Spectacles Chap. 11. a page 381. usque ad 404. THE Knight though he talke so much of proving the safety and comfort of the Protestant faith out of Catholike Roman Authors yet he cannot name that man that saith any such thing for suppose he finde one or two Authors that say some thing different from the common opinion doth he presently say the Protestant faith is safe Even those points of Protestant religion which of themselves perhaps might seeme indifferent their disobedience and spirit of contradiction makes damnable The Protestant religion is not safer then the Roman in regard of the all-sufficiency of Scripture on which the Protestants relie for the Catholikes relie upon the same ground of safety acknowledging and reverencing the authority of Scripture as much nay much more then Protestants It is not safer to adore Christ as Protestants doe sitting at the right hand of his Father in Heaven then to adore the Sacrament for Christ is as surely in the Sacrament as in heaven the same Catholique faith teaching both verities and to make you study a little saith hee I may say
Spiridion that famous Bishop of Cyprus Eccles Hist l. 1. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 they lived in wedlocke and had many children without any disparagement at all to their Sacred function As the Rod of Aaron in these brought forth fruit in Holy Matrimony so it budded also in others in our Church who followed virginall chastity and lead a single life as Iewell Reinolds Andrewes Lakes and many other reverend Prelates and Doctors who for eminent learning and examplary life may compare with any of the Romish Mitred Prelates or late Canonized Saints Neither can they pretend that any Eve gave these an Apple whereby their eyes were opened but on the contrary we can produce many a Lucretia who have given Apples to their Popes Lucretia nomine sed re Thais Alexandri filia sponsa nurus whereby their eyes have beene blinded and their reputation for ever blasted See Picus Mirandula his oration extant in Fasciculus rerum expetendum fugiendum and Mantuan his Poem Sanctus ager scurris venerabilis ara cinaedis Servit honorandae Divûm Ganymedibus aedes As for Olivereus Manareus his Legend of Buxhorne if the Reader will be pleased to peruse an apologie for this Buxhorne written to the Chancellor of Lovan wherein the true cause is related for which this licentiate Divine abandoned the Papacy he shall finde in that treatise printed in the yeare of our Lord 1625 a Rowland for his Oliver or Oliverius Manareus the Iesuit to whose relation as much credit is to be given as to Cocleus his History of Luther and Bolsecs of Calvin The Devill the grand Calumniator hath suborned in all ages men of prostituted consciences and corrupt mindes and mouthes to staine with their impure breath the golden and the silver vessells of the Sanctuarie but Illi linguarum nos aurium dominsumus their tongues are their owne they may speake what malice dictateth our eares are our owne and we will hearken unto and assent onely to what truth confirmeth As for their Lutheran baits he mentioneth aurum gloria dilitiae veneres gold glory delights and Venus if these things abound any where it is in the Roman Church where the Pope who pretends himselfe to be the successor of Peter the fisher fisheth with a golden hooke and baits it with fleshly lusts what so pompeous and glorious as his Holinesse triple Crowne and his Cardinals Hats and his Bishops Miters and Croziours for what sence hath not the Romish Religion baits for the eyes they have gawdie shewes for the eares most melodious musicke for the smell sweetest incense and perfumes for the taste feasts without number for the touch whole streets of Curtezans not onely in Rome it selfe but in all the Popes Townes which are commonly knowne by this fowle Cognizance Concerning our adversaries their blasphemous exceptions against the Scripture Spectacles Chap. 14. à page 447. usque ad 463. THough Catholikes hold for most certaine that the Scripture is not the sole rule of faith nor that out of it alone all controversies can be decided as for example in particular which bookes be Canonicall Scripture which not yet for most things now a dayes in controversie many Catholikes have offered to trie the matter onely by Scripture Though Catholikes ground many points upon tradition and practice of the Church yet they ground others upon plaine and expresse authority of Scripture from which Protestants are faine to flie running to this or that corner of I know not what figurative or tropicall interpretation Though the Pope question not much lesse condemne Scriptures of obscurity and insufficiency yet his Apostles and Evangelists have left some things in writing of which some are hard even by the judgment of Scripture it selfe for so saith Saint Peter of the Epistle of Saint Paul which saith he the unlearned and unconstant doe abuse as they doe other Scriptures to their owne perdition If any condemne the Scripture of insufficiency it is St. John in saying that all things are not written and St. Paul in willing the Thessalonians to hold the traditions which they had learned whether by speech or letter Whereas the Knight chargeth us with ranking the Bible in the first place of prohibited bookes wee say it is false for it is not in the Catalogue of such bookes onely in the rules which concernes the Index there is mentioned how the free use of vulgar translations is not to be permitted but for the Latine vulgar translation there is no manner of restraint though if there had beene we might very well have warranted it by the authority of St. Jerome who did no way admit such free use even of the Latine Bibles It is no such crime to forbid the reading of Scripture to some sort of people as may appeare by the testimony of this holy Father who in the same place saith moreover that the beginning of Genesis and the beginning and end of Ezekiel were not to be read by the Iewes till they came to thirties yeare of age A kinde of forbidding of reading the Scripture is no derogation but a great commendation of it for they are forbidden to be read out of reverence and honour due unto them and in regard of the danger which may come by them not of themselves but in regard of the weakenesse of the Reader for want of necessary learning and humility For Cornelius Agrippa it maketh no more matter what he saith then what the Knight saith for it is but aske my brother if I be a theefe Not to answer the places objected by the Knight out of Lindan Lessius Turrian and Pighius I say in generall that those things are spoken not of the Scripture as it is in it selfe that is consisting of both words and meaning but of bare words and letters only which Haeretikes still do and ever have abused as the Devill himselfe did to our Saviour and in this sense it is a wood of theeves Our Authors say no more then St. Jerome doth in effect Marcion Basilides and other plagues of Haeretikes have not the Gospell of God Comment in 1. ad Gal. because they have not the Holy Ghost without whom it becommeth the Gospell of man which is taught nor let us thinke that the Gospell consisteth in the words of Scripture but in the sense not in the superficies or barke but in the pith not in the leaves of speech but in the roote of reason so that if the Knight will say any more of this matter he must undertake the quarrell against St. Ierome Lessius in particular whom the Knight most up braideth to us is farre from saying that the Scripture is uncertaine in it selfe that is that the doctrine thereof is doubtfull but onely that our rule will be uncertaine or rather wee uncertaine of the rule because wee cannot know the Scripture by it selfe It is not all one to say that Scripture alone is no sufficient Rule and to say it is imperfect For although the Knight imagineth that the
All-sufficiencie or containing of all things expressely is a necessarie point of perfection hee is deceived for then would it follow that the Gospell of Saint Matthew Saint Marke and other particular Bookes should be imperfect and especially that of Saint John wherein hee saith expressely that all things are not written Were the Scripture perfect in the Knights sense yet would it not then be a sufficient rule of Faith of it selfe alone for it would still be a booke or writing the very nature whereof doth not suffer it to be the sole rule of Faith or judge of Controversies for a Iudge must be able to speake to heare and to answer whereas the nature of a Booke is as it were to leave it selfe to be read and expounded by men No Catholike declineth the triall of Scripture in regard of imperfection but onely in regard that it being a written Word no Heretike can be convinced by it as I shewed you even now out of Tertullian who saith It is lost labour to dispute with an Heretike out of Scripture Let any man by the effects judge who reverence the Scripture most Catholikes or Protestants let him compare the labours of the one in translating and expounding Scriptures with the labour of the other and hee shall find the truth of this matter In admitting any triall with Protestants by Scriptures De praescript c. 15. Non esse admittendos haereticos ad ineundam de scripturis provocationem quos sine scripturis probamus ad scripturas non pertinere Vos qui estis quando unde venistis quid in meo agitis non mei Quo denique Marcion jure sylvaâ—â— meas caedis wee condescend more to their infirmitie than wee need or they can of right challenge For wee acknowledge that saying of Tertullian most true that Heretikes are not to be admitted to the Scriptures to whom the Scripture in no wise belongeth who are you when and whence are you come What do you in my ground you that are not mine By what right ô Marcion dost thou fell my wood By what leave ô Valentine dost thou turne my fountaines By what authoritie ô Apelles dost thou remove my bounds c. This is Tertullians discourse and words where it is but changing the names of Marcion Valentine and Apelles into Luther Calvin and Beza and it will fit as well as if it were made for them You must first shew your selves owners of the Land before you can claime the writings and evidences belonging to it and which make good the Title The Hammer VVHereas many other things argue that our Adversaries maintaine a desperate cause so especially their excepting against the holy Scriptures of God and refusing to be tried by them in the points of difference betweene us and them For what was the reason why the Manichees called in question the authoritie of the Gospell of Saint Matthew Aug. l. 28. cont Faust cap. 2. and the Acts of the Apostles Desperation because by those writings they were convinced of blasphemous Errour What was the reason why the Ebionites rejected all Saint Pauls Epistles Desperation Irenaeus l. 8. cap. 26. because by them their heresie was most apparantly confuted Iren. l. 3. c. 2. Cum ex scriptur is arguuntur in accusationem convertuntur ipsarum scripturarum quasi non recte habeant nec sint ex authoritate nec possit ex iis inveniri veritas ab his qui ignorunt traditionem Tertul. praesc advers haeret What was the reason why the Gnosticks and Valentinians disparage the Scriptures saying that They were not of authoritie and the truth could not be found out of them by those who were ignorant of Tradition Desperation What was the cause why Papias and the Millenaries preferred word of mouth before Scriptures and pretended 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 unwritten tradition for many of their fables Desperation What was the reason why the Heretikes in Tertullians daies refused to examine their Doctrines by the touchstone of the Scriptures saying More things were required than the Apostles had left in writing for that either the Apostles knew not all or delivered not all to all In like manner wee can impute it to nothing else but diffidence and distrust of their cause that Lyndan Turrian Lessius and Pighius speake so disgracefully of holy Scriptures as they doe terming them dead Characters a dead and killing Letter a shell without a kirnell a leaden rule a boot for any foot a nose of wax Sybils Prophesies Sphinx his riddles a wood of Thieves a shop of Heretikes imperfect doubtfull obscure full of perplexities If they should bestow the like scandalous Epithets upon the Kings Letters patents or the Popes Buls or Briefes they would bee soone put into the Inquisition or brought into some Court of Judicature and there have either their tongues or their eares cut or their fore-heads branded yet the Iesuit is so farre from condemning these blasphemous speeches in his fellow-Jesuits and Romanists that hee deviseth excuses for them and sowes fig-leaves together to cover these their Pudenda which I will plucke off one after another in my answer to his particular exceptions against the Knight To the first It is true that some Roman writers of late have made an assay to prove some of their Popish doctrines out of Scripture but with no better successe than Horantius had in undertaking to refute Calvin his Institutions as appeareth by Pilkington his Parallels If the Scriptures were so firme for our Adversaries why are not they as firm for them why doth the Iessuit in the fore-front of this Section bid as it were defiance to them professing in plaine termes that The Scripture is not the sole rule of Faith nor that out of it alone all Controversies can be decided Doubtlesse any indifferent Reader will conceive that the Scriptures make most for them who stand most for their authoritie and perfection as all the reformed Divines doe not onely affirming but also confirming that the Scripture is not only a most perfect but the only infallible rule of faith Ep. 112. Si divinarum Scripturarum earum scilicet quae in Ecclesiâ Cano. nicae nominantur perspicuâ firmatur authoritate siâ—e ullâ dubitatione credendum est aliis verò testibus vel testimoniis quibus aliquid credendum esse suadetur tibi credere vel non credere liceat quantum ei momenti ad faciendam fidem vel habere vel non habere perpenderis Ep. 97 Solis iis Scripturarum libris qui jam Canoniti appellantur didici hunc timorem honoremque deferre ut nullum earum authorem scribendo aliquid errasse firmissimè credam lib. de Nat. Grat c. 61. Me in hujusmodi quorumlibet Scriptis hominum liberum quia solis Canonicis debeo sine recusatione consensum l. 11. c. 5. Ep. 48. every article of divine faith must be grounded upon a certaine and infallible ground to us but there is no certaine and infallible ground to