men why not as Popes surely if the Pope doe any thing as Pope it is sending forth his Buls and Rescripts whereby he governeth and instructeth the Pseudo-Catholike Church and decides cases of conscience and if in such he be subject to errour and mistaking even in a matter of as great weight as any was agitated in the Councell of Trent as this Priest affirmeth pag. 7. upon what a sandie foundation is the Romish Babell built and how loose and weake is the maine ground of a Papists faith l It cannot be the common opinion of Divines that it is lawfull for a man to goe to Church and communicate with those who are of a different Religion For seven Popes alleadged by him two Cardinals Bellarmine and Baronius twelve Fathers of the Councell of Trent R. P. and other Iesuits for the Roman partie and of the Protestant beliefe George Abbot Archbishop of Canterburie in his Lectures at Oxford Calvine in his tract adversus Pseudo-Nicodemitas and the Doctors of the reformed Churches generally in their expositions upon the second Commandement and in their commentaries upon the second of the Corinthians 6. Chapter 15 16 17. ver determine the contrary m No infallibilitie in any generall Councel since the dayes of the Apostles much lesse in the Councel of Trent which was neither a generall Councel nor lawfully called nor free nor at all an assembly of Catholike Bishops but of Images moved like the statues of Dedalus by the sinewes of others See the historie of the Councel of Trent written in Italian by Petro Soave Polano and the Epistle Dudith quinque Eccles. ad Maximilianum 2. Caes. But were the Councel of Trent a generall Councel lawfully called consisting of eminent Doctors and Pastours as it were starres of the first magnitude yet they could not without horrible presumption arrogate to that their Synod infallibilitie for that not onely Provinciall but even oecumenicall Councels may erre and be fouly mistaken and that in matter of faith may thus be demonstrated First every assemby which consisteth of members subject to errour may be seduced and deceived but generall Councels are assemblies consisting of members subject to errour for all men are so Rom. 3.4 Therefore generall Councels may be seduced and deceived This reason is strongly backed by the authoritie of the most judicious of all the Fathers Saint Augustine and that in many places namely Ep. 112. c. 1. Si Divinarum scripturarum earum scilicet quae canonicae in Ecclesia nominantur perspicua firmatur autoritate sine ulla Dub. tationâ— credendum est aliâ—s vero testibus vel testimonies quibus aliquid credendum esse suadetur tibi credere vel non credere liceat quantum ea momenti ad faciendam fidem vel habere vel non habere perpenderis If any thing be confirmed by cleare and evident authoritie of Canonicall Scripture that must be beleeeved without all doubting but for other witnesses and testimonies whereby ye are perswaded to beleeve any thing you may give credit unto them or not as you see cause de natura et grat cont Pelag. c. 61. solis canonicis debeo sine ulla recusatione consensum In the writing of any such men I hold my selfe at libertie namely to give my assent unto them or not for I owe consent without any stay or staggering to the Canonicall Scriptures alone therefore not to the Popes Rescripts or Decrees of generall Councels And in his second booke De bapt cont Donat. c. 3. Quis nesciat scripturam canonicam omnibus posterioribus Episcoporum literis ita praeponi ut de illa omnino dubitari et disceptari non possit utrum vel verum rectum sit quicquid in eâ scriptum esse constiterit Episcoporum autem literas quae post confirmatum canonem vel scriptae sunt vel scribuntur et per sermonem fortè sapientiorem cuiuslibet in ea re peritioris et per aliorum Episcoporum graviorem authoritatem doctioremque prudentiam et per concilia licere reprehendi si quid in eis fortè a veritate deviatum est Et ipsa concilia quae per singulas regiones vel provincias fiunt plenariorum conciliorum authoritati quae fiunt ex universo orbe christiano sine ullis ambagibus cedere ipsaque plenaria saepe priora posterioribus emendari cum aliquo experimento rerum aperitur quod clausum erat et cognoscitur quod latebat Who knowes not that the canonicall Scriptures are so farre to be preferred above the latterr letters of Bishops that whatsoever is found written in it may neither be doubted nor disputed of whether it be true or right but the letters of Bishops may not only be disputed of but censured by Bishops that are more wise and learned then they if any thing in their writings swerve from the truth or by Provinciall Synods and these also must give place to plenarie and generall Councels and even plenarie and generall Councels may be amended the former by the latter and it is to be noted that he speaketh of errour in matter of faith For these words are part of his answer to an Objection of the Donatists out of the letters of Saint Cyprian concerning the point of rebaptizing Secondly If the determinations of generall Councels were infallible all Christians were necessarily bound to stand unto them and to submit to their authoritie but this Saint Augustine peremptorily denies l. 3. Cont. Maxim c. 14. Nec ego Nicenum nec tu debes Ariminense tanquam preiudicaturus proferre concilium nec ego huius authoritate nec tu illius detineris Neither ought I to alleadge the Councel of Nice nor thou the Councel of Ariminum in prejudice to either part For neither am I bound to the authoritie of the one nor thou to the authoritie of the other and it is worth the observation that Saint Augustine speaketh of the first most famous Councel of Nice whose authoritie was greater and held more sacred and venerable then any Councel since and if that Councel concluded not Saint Augustine shall the authoritie of a late Conveticle at Trent conclude all Christians Thirdly If generall Councels may contradict one the other they may certainly erre For it is impossible that both parts of a contradiction should be true But generall Councels contradict one the other Ergo. For the Councel held at Ariminum contradicteth the first generall Councel held at Nice in the point of consubstantialitie of the Sonne with the Father The generall Councel held at Chalcedon contradicteth the generall Councel held at Ephesus in the point of Eutychianisme The generall Councel at Frankeford contradicteth your second generall Councel held at Nice in the point of Image worship Your generall Councel held at Lateran under Leo the tenth contradicteth your Councel of Constance in the point of the Councels superioritie above the Pope Fourthly Cuivis contingere potest quod cuiquam potest that which hath befallen some generall Councels may befall any other unlesse
and Supremacie Matth. 10.16 Be ye wise as Serpents and Simple as Doves LONDON Printed by I. L. for Nicholas Bourne at the South entrance to the Royall Exchange 1642. A Preface to the Reader Gentle Reader I Am to write of a point of Controversie wherein I know that I shall undergoe the censure of divers sorts of people yea amaze some at the strangenesse of the thing Yet my intention being good as tending to the safeguard as well of souls as bodies of all and I my selfe being constrained by a kinde of naturall necessitie thereto as suffering much not only by the severitie of the Laws for my Religion which is the least but likewise both spiritually and temporally by the malice and treachery of some evill spirits instigating others to take advantage by Religion doe hope to finde approbation therein at least of the wiser sort Although I cannot see but why in reason not pretending the least prejudice to Religion but rather the good of Gods Church as I shall make appeare the weakest sort of Catholiques should not be likewise pleased therewith For although Religion as it is taken for Christian beliefe ought of every man to be professed according to St. Thomas Aquinas and other Doctors 2a. 2ae q. 3. at two particular times viz. when and as often as the glory of God shall conduce therunto or the spirituall good of our neighbour shall be either conserved or augmented thereby grounding themselves upon the words of our Saviour Matth. 10.32 Qui me confessus fuerit coram hominibus confitebor ego eum coram patre meo qui in caelis est Every one that shall confesse me before men I also will confesse him before my Father which is in heaven Yet it is not necessary to salvation that any man at all times and in all places doe confesse his Religion without necessitie Whence if a man should goe out into the Market place and cry himselfe to be of such and such a Religion or should write upon the frontispice of his house in a countrey contrary to his Religion here liveth a Christian a Protestant or Catholike his act would be thought so farre from vertue or religion as that it would be rather deemed presumption or the height of indiscretion Hence it is that although a Catholike be bound under paine of damnation to professe his religion in the twice before assigned yet he is not bound to professe a Recusancy of a thing of its own nature indifferent thereby at all times and in all places to discover his Religion for this were as much in effect as to cry himselfe over the whole kingdome or to write over his doore that he were A Catholike or at least some Sectary For as I shall hereafter say Recusancy is common both to Catholikes Brownists and other Sectaries different in opinion from Protestants which would be an occasion to call himselfe in question for the Religion he professeth whence I may rightly describe the Recusancy of Catholikes no otherwise then to be an indiscreet discovery of a mans Religion without necessitie or obligation whereby he makes himselfe lyable to the penall laws of England for not going to Church Which was brought first amongst them into England by a certaine company of men for temporall ends procured covertly and by indirect means from twelve Fathers of the Councell of Trent and certaine Popes upon false suggestions to the ruine of many men That I proove what I have said it is necessary that I relate the manner how it was brought in In the beginning of Queen Elizabeths reign and the alteration of Religion in England Catholikes went to Church to conforme themselves to the State as they did in K. Edward the sixths time yet privately kept to themselves the exercise of their owne Religion Which some Priests perceiving not convenient for the propagation of their owne family then newly hatched wrought in the Councel of Trent that twelve Fathers of the said Councel not all Bishops yet favourers of the said family might be selected to declare to English Catholikes upon these suggestions following viz. that the Protestants of England were idolatrous and blasphemous hereticks hating God and his Church that their commerce especially at Church would be an occasion of the subversion and ruine of their soules denying and betraying of the true faith giving of scandall to men of tender conscience as breaking that signe which was distinctive betweene the people of God and not his people that it was altogether unlawfull for them to goe any longer to the Protestant Church as appeareth by the words of the said declaration which if I had by me I would willingly have here inserted This declaration being thus obtained they possessed certain Popes to wit Paul the fourth Pius the the fifth the two last Gregories Sixtus Clement and Paul the fifth so strongly with the same and the aforesaid suggestions that the said Popes likewise declared as it is said by certaine rescripts which I never yet could see their going to Church to be likewise unlawfull Which said suggestions had they beene or were they true I should likewise say and grant it unlawfull but not being true as I shall hereafter shew the common opinion of Divines in this point is to be followed to wit that it is a thing indifferent and therefore may be lawfull to frequent the Churches of Schismaticks Now to prove what I have said that it was first brought in by a certaine company of men It is evident in it selfe by the carriage of the businesse for it is altogether improbable that one mans authoritie to wit Doctor Sanders who is named to be the onely Agent herein a man alwaies ill relished in our state and therefore in this point to be esteemed partiall could select so many Fathers out of the said Councel in a matter of such importance upon his owne bare suggestion or that the said Fathers would or ought to have declared the same unlesse they had been made beleeve that the aforesaid suggestions were true in the common opinion of most of the Priests then in our kingdome That it was wrought for temporall ends by the said company the event shewes the same for there is none that have got or do get thereby but onely the said company as appeares by their abundant treasure and rich Colledges for Recusancie begets persecution and persecution almes deeds that God may assist the afflicted in their distresses And by this Recusancie great mens children can get no learning or science within this kingdome but must be sent beyond the Seas each at twentie five or thirtie pound per annum by which their said family was and is propagated and their heape increased Further the politicall invention of recusancie was so sweet and pleasing by reason of the great gaine which it brought that one of the said company Authour of the answer to the libell of Justice all besmeared with wonted pietie so
much delighteth in tribulation which ariseth by this recusancie that he would not a toleration of Catholike religion in England if he might Although in his answer to the Authour of the said libell he saith as knowing him not able to procure of Queene Elizabeth and the State a toleration for Catholikes that upon certaine conditions of his he would accept of the same but when he speakes from his heart of the thing it selfe he saith in his said Book cap. 9. pag. 216. That it is such as to aske it of God were to aske we know not what for that persecution is better That the said declaration and Popes rescripts were got by the aforesaid suggestions appears by the writings themselves as they are cited and further by one R. P. of the same family who wrote a booke printed Anno 1607. Contra Anonymum against a man without name Doctor Wright that it was not lawfull to frequent Churches of heretikes where promiscuously he relates all the aforesaid suggestions as the ground of his opinion and bringeth Cardinall Bellarmine and Baronius with eight others most of them of the same Schoole for the approbation of his case Which case as he puts it I thinke any man living would likewise have approved That these men above others were so laborious and serious for this recusancie appeares in that whosoever would oppose them were presently blasted for heretikes or at least fallen men insomuch that Azorius who wrote that it was lawfull for a Catholike to goe to the Church of Schismaticks was so troubled by the importunitie of these suggestions that he was constrained through feare that that part of his family should have suffered some great temporall detriment by his judicious writing as they say to recant his opinion and hold it not lawfull in our case of England See the said booke pag. 106. by all which any man may easily perceive that the aforesaid company were the busie-bodies and that for their owne ends as I have said upon the aforesaid grounds otherwise why should they more then others have beene so importune as to perswade yea compel Azorius who not perceiving under the species of piety their rare politicall drift wrote a common opinion to the whole world to denie that common opinion to have place in England That the foresaid Suggestions were and are false it is certaine by experience to any that know the state of the Protestant Church of England and that to the ruine of soules as shall be proved in the question following That it was procured covertly and by indirect meanes appeares in that onely twelve Fathers were chosen and the whole Corps of the Councell left out and amongst the rest the Bishop of Worcester there then present who knowing better the State and affaires of our Countrey then all the rest it seemes to me that he might have beene one of the twelve whose authoritie would have given more satisfaction to this point to our countrey then all the other selected But it should seeme that it was declared without any debate as a matter of no great importance although it seemeth to my weakenesse a matter of as great weight as any that was then agitated in the said Councel and therefore to leave a whole Councel in so weighty a matter that concerned the affaires of a whole Kingdome in point of Religion and where we might have had an infallibilitie and to adhere to twelve men fallible by suggestion without any debate or dispute in my judgement cannot be without great suspition of sinister proceedings Partly therefore supposing and partly intending further to prove the foresaid suggestions to be false and consequently the said Councel and Popes to hâ—ve beene abused he will indevour to examine the truth of the matter it selfe according to the principles of Divinitie within the bounds of the Catholike Church who wisheth all happinesse and prosperitie aswell to the said Church as to all the distressed members of the same with as much brevitie as may be in the insuing question A SAFEGARD FROM Shipwracke to a Prudent Catholique Question Whether it be lawfull for a Catholique to go to the Protestant Church I Answer it to be lawfull for him who doth it without a doubtfull conscience or thought of sin which I say because if a man should do that which in it selfe is lawfull doubting or not being satisfied whether it be lawfull or no he would sin in doing the same because he would put himselfe in hazzard or danger of sin and as the Wise man saith Eccles. 3. Qui amat periculum peribit in eo He that loves danger shall perish in the same So he that thinks a thing which in it selfe is indifferent to be sinne and doth the same sinneth because such a man hath a will to doe the thing although it were sin and by reason of his sinfull will commits sin Otherwise as I have said before it is lawfull Which I prove first The thing in it selfe is not forbidden by any Law either by the Law of God or the Church Not by the Law of God for no place of holy Scripture can be shewed by which it is forbidden Nor by the Law of the Church for no Councell or Canon of the Church can be produced for the prohibition of the same Ergo it is lawfull It is secondly prooved by an example of holy Scripture Lib. 4. Reg. cap. 5. where Naaman the Syrian Prince is permitted to goe to the Idolatrous Temple Rimmon to waite upon the Syrian King there offering sacrifice Ergo a man may be permitted to go to the Protestant Churches where neither Idolatry is committed or any hurt done Againe by the examples of Ioseph of Arimathea and Nicodemus Joh. 19.38 39. who although they went to the Synagogue of Jews and so not apparent disciples of our Saviour yet they were his disciples in secret For it is there said that after the death of our Saviour Ioseph of Arimathea because he was a disciple of Jesus but secret for feare of the Jews desired Pilate c. Nicodemus also came he that at the first came to Iesus by night c. by which appeares that the Jews knew not of their Religion It is manifest likewise that all the Apostles as freely conversed in the Synagogues of Jews as out of the same when thereby they could best exercise their function and mission For the Rhemists in their annotations upon the 20 Chapter of the Acts vers 16. Confesse that notwithstanding the festivitie of Pentecost was established among Christians yet Saint Paul might hasten to the festivitie of the Jews Therefore as these holy men might goe to the Synagoue and reserve their Religion to themselves so may a Catholique to the Protestant Churches And indeed it is an essentiall ingredient to the Mission of all Apostolicall men to treate and converse with all men concerning salvation in all places best for their purpose It is prooved thirdly by Azorius tom 1. lib. 8. institut
moral cap. 11. 27 punctâ— 2.4 5. who saith It is lawfull for Catholiques to prâ—y together with Protestants to heare their Service and goe to their Sermons And for this opinion he citeth Navarr lib. 5. Con. 10. 12. de haeret who as all men know was a pious Divine and a man of a tender conscience Againe the said Azorius saith in the said cap. 27. puncto 5. That if an hereticall Prince commands his Subjects that are Catholiques to goe to Church upon paine of death or losse of goods if he doe this only because he will have his lawes obeyed and not to make it Symbolum hereticae pravitatis nor have a purpose to discern thereby Catholiques from Hereticks they may obey it Gregory Martin one of the translators of the Bible into English cited by the said R. P. in his book aforesaid pag. 101. 109. Diana 5. part tract de scandal pag. 191. resol 33. where he saith a man may use the habit and ceremonies of a false law being in danger of death See Hurtado de Mendoza and others by him cited And Paulus Comitolius Resp. moral lib. 1. q. 47. when he comes to handle the question whether a Professour of the Romane faith being sent into those parts where the Greeke Church observes other rites may goe to their service he allows it and builds upon this reason That by the Law of God and nature it is lawfull and the precepts of the Church if any there were that forbid this doe not binde Christians in cases of great detriment to the life or soule or honour or fame or outward things See Azor. above cited for going to the Schismaticall Church of the Greeks where he saith that a Catholique hearing Masse in a Schismaticall Church there on a Sunday fulfilleth the precept of the Church commanding the same See further the Decree of the Councell of Constans and Martin the 5. which beginneth In super ad evitanda scandala c. for the communicating with hereticks as well in service as otherwaies Which Decree extends it selfe further then to our purpose For by the same we may communicate with Hereticks fallen in a Catholike countrey if it be not in point of heresie Yea receive the Sacraments of Priests excommunicated either by law or any sentence of man so they be tolerated and not by name excommunicated See Diana pag. 175. col 1. and the said Hurtado whom he citâ—th If then we may communicate with such men where there may be some danger of sin why should we not communicate with Protestants where there can be no danger of sinne as shall be hereafter prooved It is fourthly proved by the practice of all Catholikes in forreigne Countries for Germany See for Germany and France Navarr lib. 5. Consil. 12. de Heret and see the foresaid Author of the answer his words are these cap. 9. pag. 216. And indeed if the German Catholiques had beene so restrained persecuted and put to death as the English have beene these yeers and had not gone by halfes with the Protestants as in some places the have done they had had perhaps farre more Catholiques at this day and them more zealous and their whole Nation perchance reduced ere this Thus he Where is to be noted that his perhaps and perchance are nothing worth For by their going to Church as he termeth it by halfes with the Protestants their countrey became Catholike long since whereas his zeale of persecution hath not converted ours yet neither is yet like to doe For Scotland it is confessed by the said R. P. pag. 69. with his judgement of their miserie insâ—ing thereby but the truth of the miserie I shall shew hereafter who yet in plaine termes doth not deny my assertion but here and there granteth that some learned discreete man where there is no scandall and in whom there is no danger of subversion may goe to the Church of heretiques and heare their Sermons Much more say I then to the Church of Protestants most of whom are not to be called properly formall hereticks for to heresie as it is a sinne against faith and maketh a formall hereticke is required obstinacie or pertinacie against the doctrine declaration and sence of the Church See Saint Thomas of Aquin. 2â— â—ae q. 11. ar 2o. Cajetan Bannes idem Aragona art 1o. Suares disput 19. de fide sect 3. Now what obstinacie can Protestants be said to have in their opinions with relation to a Church they know not for they know none other but their owne so that although they beleeve amisse whereby they may suffer in the next world and speake hereticall propositions yet because they proceed not from an hereticall mind or consent they are not perfectly heretiques Adde that I my selfe in Germany with other Catholiques of the same countrey have gone to a Synagogue of Iewes without any scandall or having beene judged to have done amisse Ergo I and others may go to a Church of Protestants without any scandall or being judged in reason to have done amisse And I can assure my selfe whatsoever others may thinke of my assurance that the lawfulnesse of going to Church is the common opinion of all forreign Divines that ever I conversed with in any Vniversitie Which in part may be proved by the fact of a certaine Catholique Lady who going to Church in England sent her Priest to Paris to have this case resolved by the Sorbon Doctors who all Subscribed That a Catholique in England might lawfully goe to the Protestant Church That this is true it may be justified by some persons of great qualitie yet alive If any English Scholler shall answer that we went to the Synagogue of Iewes out of curiositie and when they did not exercise their rites and ceremonies I reply that to choose we would have gone if we might have had private conveniencie unknowne to them to have seene their rites and ceremonies neither doe we set downe our intention of going for if it may be done with any intention lawfully especially where the whole matter of all their rites and ceremonies is alwaies conserved to wit a burning lampe with oyle for the soules departed now as they conceive in Limbo patrum a place where the oblation of oyle to that purpose is alwaies kept the tenne Commandements placed in veneration a number of linnen rolles or bands wrote with Hebrew letters wherwith they binde the tenne Commandements according to their distinction of feasts the knife of Circumcision and the like Which may be stumbling blocks to some weake Christians although the men to performe these rites should not be present why should wee not goe to the Protestant Church with some intention lawfully where there are onely men within bare wals saying some Catholique service by them pieced up together without any Catholique forme not to the possible hurt of any but themselves and whether I went to the said Synagogue out of curiositie or out of the love of science to reason
with them about their tenets as then and there I did the more to abhorre them yet I will assure you that with neither of these intentions doe I goe to the Church of Protestants and yet lawfully It is lastly proved by reason to goe to Protestant Churches is not of its owne nature evill according to the opinion of the above cited Authors or so much as per accidens evill as our case now standeth which will be hereafter proved but a thing indifferent so that by a good intention it may be made good as by an evill intention made evill For the intention and object makes the act good or bad But a man may with a good intention doe a thing indifferent Ergo a man may with a good intention goe to Church Againe if it be unlawfull to go to the aforesaid Church it is either because of Scandall or because it is a distinctive signe betweene Catholiques and hereticks or because there is danger of subversion or blasphemie committed But neither of these things there occurre Ergo it is not unlawfull to goe The Minor I will prove in the three following paragraphs § 1o. That Scandall makes it not unlawfull to goe to the Protestant Church SCandall is defined by St. Thomas 2a. 2ae q. 43. ar 48. and other Divines out of St. Hierom. in cap. 15. and 18. Matth. To be a word or deed lesse right or lesse good giving occasion to another of Spirituall ruine or falling into sinne Neither doe they take the adverb lesse comparatively but negatively for that which is not good that is with hic nunc in regard of some particular circumstance of time place or persons wanteth some morall rectitude or goodnesse This Scandall may be divided into Active Passive Active is in him that gives it Passive in him that takes it both expressed in the holy Scritures by the verbes Active and Passive to scandalize and to be scandalized Matth. 15.17.18 Active may be subdivided into per se per accideus Active per se is when a man with an expresse and certaine intention gives his neighbour occasion of sinning by some word or deed either intrinsecally or extrinsecally evil Active per accidens is when besides the intention of the doer and nature of the act done being extrinsecally evill or at leastwise having some species or shew of evill by which occasion is taken to the spirituall ruine of another Passive scandall is also subdivided into passive scandall given and Passive scandall taken The first proceeds from Active scandall either per se or per accidens given and received by an other Such was the scandall forbidden by our Saviour Mat. 18. ver 6. He that shall scandalize one of these little ones that beleve in me it is expedient for him that a millstone bee hanged about his necke and that he be drowned in the depth of the sea And this is called Scandall of the weake or little ones to whom it belongeth as Saint Bernard saith to be ignorant and moved through weaknesse and so be scandalized For the perfect as Saint Hierome saith in the place before cited are not scandalized Passive scandall taken is when a man out of envie and malice taketh occasion of sinne by anothers words or deeds ill interpreted and misunderstood without any lawfull or probable cause And this is called the scandall of Pharisees which is a sinne onely to themselves and not to be regarded of the speaker or doer as appeares by the answer of our Saviour Matt. 15. ver 14. Sinite illos caeci sunt et duces caecorum Let them alone blinde they are and guides of the blinde Hence Divines with St. Thomas doe inferre first that sometime Passive scandall may be without active as it was in the scandall of the Pharisees Sometimes active scandall may be without Passive as when one by his bad word or deed or ill example doth scandalize and giveth occasion to others of falling into sinne and yet none are scandalized or take the occasion given to sinne thereby And sometimes they may be both together as when one by his bad example giveth and another taketh thereby occasion to sinne Secondly they inferre that no good works which are necessary as is the observing of precepts can give occasion of sinning to any man and therefore not to be omitted to avoyd the the Passive scandall even of the weake ones as well observeth Alfonsus Tostatus Because that were to sinne mortally See Bellar. de script Ecclesiast Possevin in verbo Alfonsus Tostatus Which for no cause any man ought to doe but if they be counsels which are not of necessitie to be done or things indifferent of themselves yet necessary to be done for the safeguard of a mans life or goods Then the scandall that ariseth to some by this that others doe them either proceedeth from malice and then that is a scandall of Pharisees and to be contemned and no spiritual or temporal good is to be omitted for the same Or it proceedeth from infirmitie or ignorance and it is the aforesaid scandall of weaknesse And for this scandall we must refraine for a time according to the example of our Saviour Matth. 17. Who to avoyd the scandall of the Iewes concerning his poverty bid Saint Peter goe to the Sea c. even from the workes of Evangelicall counsels and things otherwise indifferent although necessary to be done Or we must doe them secretly lest the ignorant whose minde is weake be troubled This must be done untill having yeilded a reason of our actions and shewed them to be good or of themselves indifferent and necessary to be done for safeguard of life or fortunes and so the scandall cease which proceeded from ignorance But if after a reason be yeilded the scandall shall not cease it is not to be esteemed a scandall proceeding from ignorance but from malice and to be contemned Neither ought we then to refraine from any the aforesaid actions to avoyd this scandall Thus Abulensis in cap. 18. Matth. q. 51. Salmeron tom 7. tract 29. Estius in cap. 8. ad Cor. 1. v. 13. Diana 5. parte tract 7o. de scand p. 186. who expresly teacheth that a man is not bound to loose his goods and temporall fortunes to avoyd the scandall of weake ones after an admonition and reason for the lawfull doing of the act be yeilded Lorca in 22. q. 43. ar 8. n. 11. and divers others cited by the said Diana But if the great ones such as are Priests and Teachers take this scandall and the doctrine or action be profitable they are not to be regarded for they are incurable because they are blinde that is they will not see and understand what both God and reason dictates to them And he that is weake saith Estius may be sufficiently instructed and taught that his brother doth well and that he ought not to be offended by his fact After which sufficient and full instructions if he persevere in scandall
Raigne when all Catholiques did or might goe to Church going to Church by Catholiques then being in fashion none took scandall thereby because there was then no shew of evill And why should there be now more shew of evill in the act then at that time If ye answer by reason of the aforesaid Declaration I reply that then the species of evill ought to be in the said Declaration as gotten upon false grounds and not in the act of going to Church which any man might easily perceive considering the nature of the act it selfe And the experience of our distressed countrey teacheth us that those indirect proceedings are more apt to generate scandal then the act of going to Church which of its own nature is lawfull and hath been lawfully practised and approved by the common opinion of all Divines of any indifferency in other countreyes and so might have been in ours had it not been for turbulent people who for their owne ends have more troubled the Church in procuring of breves and rescripts then all other nations besides of our condition To Schismaticks I say they sin not in simply going to Church but in going to Church with an ill conscience as thinking that to be sin and doing the same which indeed is not so and the ground of their errour they have had from the misunderstanding of Catholiques To weake ones I answer desiring them to be satisfied because I have and shall prove the thing in it selfe to be lawfull and that I am as I have said in danger and hazard of my life in not doing the same So that by a naturall necessitie I am bound to it Which necessitie if it were not I might peradventure rest in the common Maxime of Philosophers Frustra fit per plura quod potest fieri per pauciora It is in vain done by more that may be done by lesse It may be objected secondly that it is as much scandall to goe to Church as it was to eate of those meats offered to Idols Of which Saint Paul speaks 1 Cor. 8. the eating of which in it selfe considered although the Apostle thought no sin in Wise men or great ones because they did eate the same without any relation at all to the Idoll as he seemeth to intimate verse 4. yet because some ignorant Christians seeing the said Wise men eate did likewise eate the same meats with conscience and devotion as if the said meats had received some vertue or sanctification from the Idol Saint Paul exhorted the Wise men to abstaine from eating the said flesh for that out of mistake and misunderstanding of their eating the aforesaid Christians then newly converted did take offence and sin Whereupon in great zeale he said vers 13. If meate scandalize my brother I will never eate flesh lest I scandalize my brother So that one would thinke that the blessed Apostle would rather have chosen to die as the aforesaid words may import then by eating the said meats or any flesh to have scandalized his brother And St. Augustine in expresse termes lib. de bon conjugali cap. 16. saith It was farre better to have dyed then to have eaten of those meats so offered to Idols conformable to himselfe elsewhere who likewise saith That a man may not commit or occasion so much as a veniall sinne to gaine the whole world Which he that giveth scandall must needs at the least commit Therefore what the said Apostle and St. Augustine said and thought of the eating of the said meats the same ought every Catholique to take as said of the act of going to Church I answer denying the consequence and say that there is a great disparitie betweene the said meats offered to Idols and eaten in the temple with Infidels and the act of going to Church First because in the meats so offered there was not only a shew and appearance of evill but a morall malignitie therein as well to great as to little ones Which although the wise did take away that the said malignitie touched not them yet the weake neither did or had understanding so to doe Whence the Apostle said vers the 7. that there was not knowledge in all For the morall malignitie that was in those meats to all was a prophanation and impuritie in them as being things dedicated to the Idol or the Devill So that as a man receiveth good by holy bread or things sanctified so he receiveth evill by a thing prophaned or maligned Which morall malignitie the Wise taking away as I have said by blessing the said meats to the use of their bodies and conceiving both them and the Idoll as they were in themselves meere creatures both created for the use of man did eate what was usefull to eate without sinne Whereas the weake not so much as considering the prophanenesse of the meats but seeing the Wiser eate with error of judgement conceived vertue and sanctification in the same as being eaten in the temple and offered to the Idol by Infidels and so with conscience and devotion they received the same and were as the Apostle saith in the said seventh vers polluted thereby Now in going to Church their is no morall malignitie at all in so much that scarce the weakest man can invent how to sin by any thing that is there done It being of its owne nature so indifferent and to a good intention good that a parte rei their is no appearance of evill therein If any one say that there is appearance of evill and scandall by reason of disobedience in that the act is done contrary to the declaration of the said twelve Fathers and certain Popes I answer that the declaration is as if it were not because gotten upon most false suggestions as I have and shall say and consequently the minds of the said Fathers and wils of the said Popes is to us in this matter as yet unknowne and the species or shew of evill from thence proceeding rather to be lamented then regarded If the reply be made as before that the suggestions are not examined but the will of the aforesaid Superiors hath alwaies beene held as declaring that which hath been best for the soule and dehorting from going to Church and that so by reason and vertue hereof there results a certaine shew of evill in doing the same which maketh it appeare to most men unlawfull and consequently scandalous I rejoyce as before that the instruction and admonition of the indifferencie and necessitie of the act ought to take away all scandall howsoever apprehended and that such as apprehend it unlawfull and will not be satisfied cannot doe it And lastly such as will not be satisfied but scandalized are not to be regarded as I have said before Adde out of Navar Man c. 23. n. 38. That it is not a sinne in a man not to obey his superiour when he hath probable reasons to thinke that his superiour was deceived in so commanding or that he would not have given
such a command if he had knowne the truth And if any shew of evill result or scandall arise in that he is not obeyed the necessitie of doing the contrarie act being in danger of death must excuse and take away all scandall for in such a case no humane lawes binde as I shall hereafter say I answer to this Objection secondly that there is a disparitie betweene the said meates and going to Church in that the said meates were not to be eaten of necessitie that is there was neither hazard of life or goods in abstaining or more gaine then prejudice of soules in eating And therefore it was more requisite that the wise should abstaine in a matter of so little moment or necessitie where there was scandall then that the weake should have been instructed and admonished that it might have beene done without sinne which is not so in going to Church For in abstaining from thence there is both hazard of life and fortunes and as I shall hereafter say losse of soules and therefore of necessitie the weake are to be admonished and instructed that there is no sinne in the act neither is going to Church prejudiciall but advantageous to soules as experience teacheth Adde that if there were any humane law or Ecclesiasticall law forbidding going to Church it were not to be fulfilled with hazard of life or goods as all Casuists hold See Azorius Navarr consil de haeret above cited if otherwise it doth not appeare forbidden by the law of God For all humane lawes tend to the preservation and conservation of the whole man even in the greatest state of perfection and where by reason of keeping a law disjuncture either of soule or body may probably follow there that law is for the time to be suspended as appeares in the law forbidding to eate flesh in the Lent saying the divine office with danger of being apprehended and the like where the weake ones are rather to be instructed of the necessitie of suspending the law then the body to perish by keeping the same the same say in our case And I doe with reason perswade my selfe considering the Apostles whole discourse in the aforesaid 8. Chapter to the Corinthians that notwithstanding his words verse the 13. if there had beene no other food to have beene gotten for him to have preserved him from famine then the said flesh so offered to Idols that he would rather have perswaded the weake ones that there had beene no sinne in it if with due circumstances they had eaten and how and in what manner they might safely have eaten and so have prevented his sinning against the brethren verse 12. and striking their weake consciences then by abstaining from that and as is supposed wanting all other food have perished through hunger It may be objected thirdly that those famous Doctors of Rhemes William Allen afterwards Cardinall Richard Bristoe William Reynolds and the aforesaid Gregory Martin who translated the whole Bible into English with annotations upon the same in many places as well of the Old Testament as of the new held it unlawfull for any Catholike to goe to the Protestant Church Ergo It is unlawfull and scandalous to goe to the same To the antecedent I answer that the said Doctors were reverend and learned men and their worke renowned but because they would have the same goe forth with more lâ—stre as pleasing the Pope and to avoid all opposition of the aforesaid suggestors they forsooke the common opinion of Divines in two points then agitated the one that the Pope could not depose Kings of their temporall dominions And the other that Catholiques might frequent the Churches of Schismaticks Which they might well doe for their ends being Doctâ—rs and giving some seeming probable reasâ—ns for the same the contrary opinions not being condemned by the Church but left under dispute Yet hence the consequence doth not appeare true For if the aforesaid Doctors had spoken from their hearts grounding themselves upon the Church or reason their interpretation of Scriptures with notes would with me in these poynts have had great authoritie and the conclusion have stood good Whereas now one of the said foure to wit Gregory Martin having delivered his opinion that it was lawfull for a Catholike to goe to Church as appeares by the said booke of R. P. pag. 109. and 110. it seemeth they did not speake in that point their mindes freely peradventure because it was not expedient for all sorts of people which I confesse to be the best reason Yet for Gods sake let us speake the truth in these troublesome times to men at leastwise of reason and understanding Againe the very reasons they give in their annotations upon the fifth Chapter and 19. verse of the 4. booke of Kings doe shew that they did intend but seeming reason and not wholly convincing for whereas for our opinion is and alwaies hath beene usually brought the example of Naaman the Syrian permitted as I have said before by the Prophet Elizeus to goe to the Idolatrous temple Rimmon which is most proper to our case the aforesaid good Doctors reject the said example as nothing like to the same 1. The first reason is because of the time for since the preaching of Christs Gospel say they we are more strictly commanded to professe our faith then in Naamans time Which reason I conceive under favour to be impertinent as well to Naamans case as to ours for the doing of an act indifferent may neither be a profession or a deniall of faith but a meane betweene both viz. a not discovery of the same Neither was it more lawfull in Naamans time to deny God then now 2. The second Reason is because of the place For that the Noblemans religion was not practised in the Countrey where he went to the temple and so there could no scandall arise thereby This reason is in my judgement besides the purpose for no more is Catholike religion practised in this Countrey where we goe to Church Again it proves not Naamans case hereby more lawfull then the going to Church for there may be scandall where a thing of its owne nature may be lawfully done as there might have beene scandall in our Saviours povertie Matth. 17. if he had not prevented it And there may be no scandall and yet the act unlawfull Therefore if it were lawfull abstracting from scandall that being in our case easily avoyded or taken away the thing may still remaine lawfull For if he that goeth to Church be a knowne Catholike the weake are to be admonished of the indifferencie of the thing and the urgent necessitie he hath to doe it and so scandall is avoyded If he be not knowne how can he give more scandall then Naaman did or to whom 3. The third reason is because of the difference of persons in that Naaman had an Office to serve the King in the temple and therefore he might goe lest otherwise the King should have thought
being sufficiently proposed at leastwise to most of them I much doubt For as Diana saith 5a. parte pag. 240. col 1a. A man speaking heresie that is a proposition condemned by the Church without an hereticall consent is no heretique neither in curreth excommunication denounced against heretiques so that although they be incredulous and beleeve not the truth yet they are not properly and in rigor formall heritiques Adde that there is no more sin to goe to the Protestant Church then to goe to them to dinner or to goe with them to a play or other sports And I for my part had rather give twelue pence to heare a Sermon then take five shillings to see a play For there is no such sport as to heare a weake fellow speake fustian with gravitie or tell a fable of the whore of Babylon or Babylonians for so now they terme Catholiques with erected eyes in earnest Or why should it be more lawfull to see a play where most commonly intercedes scurrilitie and obscene gestures and the end of which is nothing but vanitie then to heare a Sermon where perhaps in some places or by some simple men their may be some untruth told of the Pope to please their Auditory although most commonly nothing but moralitie which is the end and intention of the same I pray resolve me § 2. It is not unlawfull to goe to Church because Recusancie is a distinctive signe Which is the second branch of the Minor THat Recusancy is a distinctive sign of a Catholique from a Protestant is most false Which is thus proved If Recusancie be a distinctive signe it is a signe naturall or by institution but neither can be said Ergo it is no signe The Minor is proved Not naturall for as Hurtado above cited well observeth Actions and things are not of their own nature significant but have naturall and politicall uses independent of any signification For a bush hung out at a Taverne doore doth naturally signifie no more wine to be sold then any other creature whatsoever Nor doth the habit of a Bishop naturally signifie a Bishop more then a Judge and so of other things No more doe naturally the actions of men But admit that Recusancy were improperly said a naturall signe yet it would naturally signifie no more a Catholique then a Brownist for he refuseth likewise to goe to Church or any other Sectary Although a posteriori it might be thought by discourse to signifie some one displeased with the Protestant Church but why or wherefore it would never signifie Not by institution for if so who instituted the same God or man Not man for it is out of his power to signe the people of God from not his people It is only the owner of the flocke that must signe the sheepe and none other unlesse it be by speciall order from him Hence when God would signe his people in the old Testament from the people of other Nations he himselfe instituted Circumcision Gen 17. as a distinctive signe betweene them and others that whosoever had that signe should be of his people and who so had it not was to be rejected Neither was it sufficient that any man had accidentally and by the institution of Abraham any other signe by which he might be knowne from others because he was not thought sufficiently marked nor accounted any one of Gods people by any other sign then Circumcision Which was the sole marke of God saying All the male kinde of you shall be Circumcised And this is consonant to reason For one man may get a distinctive signe of another mans institution shall God therefore own him Brownists as I have said have Recusancie doth it therefore follow that they are likewise Catholiques If a sheepe in my neighbours flocke should teare an eare in a bramble or bush or accidentally breake an horne this sheepe is hereby distinct from the rest yet the owner doth not own it by that marke but by a marke of his own institution and ruddle So it is in the present That God did not institute the same it is so evident that it needs no proofe For where may we finde his institution Vnlesse we should run to the all-knowing spirit of hereticks Hence it follows that Recusancie is no distinctive signe If you aske me what is then the signe to know a Catholique from any other Sectary I answer His beleefe of the Creed of the Catholique Church and his lâ—fe at all times in communion with the See Apostolique So Stratford lib. 2. de Eccles. cap. 6. pag. 188. It may be here objected first the common opinion of Divines as the said R. P. saith 2a. 2ae q. 3. To use a distinctive signe of a false religion that properly is such is a deniall of faith and evill in it selfe But the Service said in a Protestant Church is such Ergo. I grant the Major For if the signe be proper of a people rejected of God as since the promulgation of the Gospel Circumcision is to a Jew the Major must needs be true But if the signe be garments or the like used to the worship and ceremonies of a false law which some fondly call a proper signe then the Major meaning the use of such a signe to be a denyall of faith is false according to Diana resol 34. pag. 191. above cited Azorius Sanches and many others there Because such signes being naturall things may be lawfully used as I have said before independent of any such signification and so not properly signes whatsoever R. P. saith to the contrary upon his own bare word The Minor proposition I deny For who instituted that service to be such a signe not God as all Catholiques will confesse but rather the contrary it being Catholique Not themselves for it would savor too much weakenesse to thinke that they would institute to themselves a signe of a false religion And if it be taken for a signe naturally although improperly signifying then I say of its own nature it signifies no more a false Religion in a Protestant then a pious ceremony in a Catholique For Catholiques say the same service Catholiques preach moralitie and each may if hee please receive bread and wine once in a day in a weeke or a moneth in remembrance that Christ dyed for him and this shall be better done then to eate bread and wine without such remembrance For receiving bread and wine See that deduced out of Azorius tom 1. lib. 8. instit moral c. 11. Navar. consil 15. de haeret num 2. Which were but to renew in an urgent point of necessitie the old custome in the Apostles time as appears by the Corinthian Christians in Saint Paul 1 Cor. 11. who did eate and drinke in the Church besides what they received of Christs institution as his true and reall body and blood For after the Sacrifice and Eucharist was ended there were kept Church feasts for the reliefe of the poore upon
her Majesties Servants means if a Sancta Clara himselfe may be beleeved unblemished told divers persons seriously speaking that there was never an able man in Rome To which some replying yes The Pope and Court of Cardinals in faith quoth he no making a signe of contempt with his hand they are slight and weake fellows Here is a fellow to get Buls here is one that got himselfe made the Popes Protonotary and bound himselfe by oath to reveale whatsoever he heard or saw done evilly against the Pope yet he is as ready as any to abuse him I wonder what account he can give to the Pope of this his office but it should seeme that he did except himselfe in his oath that he might evilly intreat him at his pleasure That this is true it will be deposed upon oath by divers witnesses whensoever his Holinesse will be pleased to exact the same And further the said a Sancta Clara added that he was writing a booke conceiving as it should seeme the whole Church to be weake and to want his helpe wherein he would shew what Rules generall Councels ought to observe in declaring matters of faith which rules as he said not observed the Councell should not be held lawfull Oh abominable presumption and ambition let any man judge whether this man be not descending to Lucifer who will presume to be copartner with the holy Ghost in directing and â—eaching his Church If this man live we may perchance in time have broached a quaternitie in divinis but I hope that God will prevent his hereticall humour And thus leaving the said a Sancta Clara to him that will have him my intent here is only to shew upon what unjust grounds by suggestion a Bull may be gotten from Rome And whether the aforesaid suggestors for Recusancy who lived at the Popes doores and continually at his or their favorites sides might not also get their rescripts Buls and Declarations by the like fraud for their own ends although questionlesse with the like pretended zeale and pietie I leave to every mans conscience to judge For as in Catholique Countreys where Buls and Breves are directed to Bishops of Diocesses there can be no thought of any sinister proceedings so out of such countreys where particular men or Corporations busie themselves in procuring such Buls c. there is never want of suspition and most commonly of abusive dealing And it stands with reason because particular men would never sue for generall Briefs concerning a whole State or trouble themselves more then others if it were not for their own ends and did not concerne themselves above the rest And therefore the ancient Pietie and Apostolicall Clemencie of Popes in such Cases hath been patiently to heare wherein they have been misinformed and abused for it is not their intention at any time to grant any thing either upon a veyled truth or unjust though speciously suggested grounds Hence Alexander the third writing to an Archbishop of Canterbury gives a Rule of large extent Extra de rescript ex parte That in these kinde of letters that is such as proceed upon information as our Case is this Condition If the request bee upon true grounds is ever understood though it be not expressed And writing to the Archbishop of Ravenna Ibidem he saith Siquando If at any time we write such things to you as exasperate your minde you must not be troubled but diligently considering the qualitie of the businesse whereof we write either reverently fulfill our command or pretend by your letters a reasonable cause why you cannot for we will endure patiently if you forbeare to performe that which was suggested to us by evill information by which appeares the worthy integritie of the See Apostolique howsoever it be by the unworthinesse of flattering hypocrites oftentimes abused §. 3. That it is not unlawfull to goe to Church for feare of danger of subversion or Blasphemy which is the third and last branch of the Minor to be proved WHich I prove thus Not danger of subversion for to what purpose should they preach subversive doctrine when that supposeth a knowledge in the Minister of some people there present to be subverted Which supposition is false and must needs savour of a broken fancie For the Minister intends no more then to exhort his Auditors to a good life and to instruct them in moralitie For as I have said if he should preach controversies he must know some Catholiques to be there or otherwise he would but ingender doubts among Protestants and doubts science and by that meanes would more trouble and disturbe the mindes of the people then profit them which out of prudencie he forbeares and so contents himselfe now and then with an untruth and away And in Catholique countries I my selfe have heard Priests rebuked for preaching of controversies to a Catholique auditorie as being a meanes rather to disturbe them then profit them as troubling themselves with doubts of things either above their reach and capacitie or whereof otherwise they are infallibly certaine so that generally controversies are never preached unlesse it be to bring people from their doubts to a better and greater certaintie then they were in before which hath onely place among people newly converted or staggering in their religion Secondly A man is said to be in danger when that which is feared commonly oftner hapneth then the contrary so a man is in danger of subversion by going to a place where few come but are subverted but so it hapneth not in the Protestant Church as is apparent by Schismaticks of all sorts who many yeeres frequent the Protestant Church and yet retaine their opinion of the Catholique religion without subversion and become Catholiques at last Adde that going to Church will rather confirme Catholiques in their religion then subvert them from the same for then they will have upon their owne knowledge what now they take upon trust for if what is done in Protestants Churches be opposite to what is done in Catholique Churches as the contrarie opinion useth to say comparing them to light and darkenesse which are privative opposites according to Dialecticks although the comparison be false I say opposita per se posita magis elucescunt opposites being set together doe more clearely shew each other then that which is best sends the best species to the power from the object and consequently to be embraced Now if a man hath the best already it will then more clearely appeare and he is not so mad as to leave the best and take the worâ—â— but will be more sure and certain that he hath the best as seeing the opposite and confirme himselfe theâ—ein This appeares true to every meane capacitie What danger then can there be in going to Church shall we be afraid to let a Greyhound goe into the field for feare he should be taken by an Hare Thirdly those that goe to Church either they were borne Catholiques or converted Protestants
if the latter then that which moved them to become Catholiques cannot move them to be Protestants againe If the first it were a wonderfull thing that hearing a little moralitie should make them fall from the doctrine they were brought up in all their life or hearing a small piece of controversie mentioned if it should so happen by a Minister they should be presently carried away from the doctrine they have so long knowne and never once tell it to the priests they daily converse with especially when they goe not out of any dislike of their religion but with a cleare conscience for some other ends I conceive it would rather confirme them in hearing that spoken which in their owne conscience they know to be untrue that it will be so farre from troubling or striking their consciences that they will come home rejoycing at the truth which they heard that day impugned as that they heard the Minister speake of such or such a point as that Catholiques adored pâ—ctures or the like which they knew in their owne conâ—sciences to be false and thereby stirre up an earnestnesse in them in religion as zealing their owne being opposed by falshood and this may ingender such passion or distraction in the hearer that it may be thought zeale of religion or heate of devotion Which heate if after this fight of contrarieties or opposition should not be allayed the parties being as it were swallowed up with zeale of the house of our Lord and the dislike of the Sermon as fraught with untruths seeme too troublesome they may depart the Church for there be many cases of necessitie to make a man go out of the Church and as many likewise to make him come short of the same as to Service if it stand if not there is the lesse to be done and it shall never trouble me Sermon or both for as there are many waies to the wood so there are many waies to the Protestant Church And I have alwaies observed that most commonly Catholiques converted from Protestancie have been more firme and solid in religion as knowing both then those that never knew but one And if Schismaticks of whom I have before spoken from the wisest to the meanest of capacity that notwithstanding they goe to Church and are voyd of grace are never so much as shaken from their intention of being Catholiques or their opinion of Catholique religion why should those that abound so much with Gods grace and professed Catholiques be said to be in danger or feared to swerve from a religion they so well know As for blasphemie there is likewise none If you reply as the contrary opinion useth to doe out of Saint Thomas 2a. 2ae q. 13. art 1. and 2. that Protestants out of a set intent and purpose ascribe their heresies to Gods revelation and denie his revelations to Orthodox articles of faith in which consists blasphemy and without this blasphemy they cannot preach and therefore no Catholique can goe to Church I answer the antecedent to be false and this blasphemie to be much like the Rhemists Idolatry as preferring and embracing their owne opinions before God and so honouring a creature and rejecting their Creator but in truth and charitie we ought not to make them worse then they are for blasphemie and Idolatrie being sinnes there must be some formall intention in the sinner to deny God his due in what he doth And so likewise there must be an intention of committing Idolatry that is of preferring and embracing that which is a morally knowne creature before the Creator and so to give the creature what is due to the Creator or otherwise there can be neither blasphemie nor Idolatry As no man will say that I eating flesh on a fasting day unknowne or forgotten commit Idolatry in preferring my belly before the law of Gods Church and consequently God because I had no intention thereto so no man can say that in the Protestant Church there is formall Idolatry or blasphemy because they mistake For Diana saith 5a. parte tract de par mamae resol pag. 138. that blasphemy is a sinne in that contumelious words are spoken against God with a minde or intention to dishonour God either directly or indirectly virtually or interpretative Now in the Protestant Churches what contumelious words are spoken against God with a minde c If you say as before that they ascribe their heresies to Gods revelation and deny his revelation to Orthodoxe Articles I answer thâ—t their minds and intentions are not so much as interpretativè to dishonour God thereby or indeed so to ascribe their heresies For if they knew their opinions to be heresies and the tenents they reject to be Orthodoxe Articles as we do by the light of faith it would evidently follow that they spake sometimes contumeliously against God which they doe not know but simply interpret Scripture according to their owne fancies and therein they erre and mistake And because they doe not endeavour the meanes to search and know the truth by the definitions of Councels and Doctrine of Catholique Fathers they sinne yet doe not commit Idolatrie for it is not their intention to make an Idol of their opinion unlesse you take Idolatry so largely as every sinner may be said to be an Idolater because in every sinne there is an aversion from God and a conversion to the creature and consequently in this sense all sinners are Idolaters And if it be unlawfull to converse with these Idolaters or the like blasphemers that is such as sinne by word or deed we must converse onely in spatio imaginario or as Saint Paul saith 1 Cor. 5. vers 10. We must goe out of this world There were divers very learned and holy Fathers as Saint Cyprian in the question of Baptisme administred by hereticks St. Anselme and others who did mistake and erre before they knew the sense and definition of the Church whom therefore to call blasphemers or Idolaters were blasphemie indeed So likewise there are divers points this day controverted among Catholique Divines as the immaculate conception of our blessed Lady and the like the Authours of which to count blasphemers before they knew the sense of the Church were more then peevish Neither are they to be so accounted after the sense of the Church is knowne for the time they held their opinions before So it is with Protestants for although the Orthodoxe Articles are knowne to us by the Church yet to them they are unknowne and to most of them so unknowne as if they had not been revealed at all because they know none other Church but their owne And therefore what they beleeve they have by errour and mistake and not as blasphemy Whence in my opinion it were more proper and Apostolicall for such men as call them blasphemers and Idolaters to use some prudent and faire way to propose to the aforesaid Protestants the true Church and the authoritie of the same without all suspition of
Canons soever forbid Communication with hereticks they are to be understood of notorious hereticks in point of their heresie or particularly denounced excommunicated for heresie and fallen in Catholique countreyes or from amongst Catholiques And not of such as are not formall and subversive hereticks but borne incredulous in a countrey to be converted and not knowing the Catholique Church After all this some may yet say that it hath been a long custome with them to abstain from the Protestant Church above these threescore yeers and they have suffered and lost much by refusing the same and can I have so little judgement as to thinke upon mine own bare word or opinion to make them leave this their custome I answer how small soever my judgement be that it is not only my opinion but the common opinion of Divines in the Catholique Church and I never spake with any Priest in England about this point in my life that was able to give me satisfaction to the contrary Some indeed have answered me that it were lawfull if it were not for scandall Others if it were not a distinctive signe and when I have urged that scandall may be avoyded as I have before said and for a distinctive signe I knew none for who should institute that signe then they have answered that a long custome had brought it in I have blessed my self to thinke that men should so unjustly deale with poore Catholiques as to bring upon them a yoake or fetters which they can keepe upon them by no other law then that they themselves cunningly got them on or chained them about threescore yeeres since and now to kicke of these chaines or their devises would prove forsooth scandall because they would seeme refractary and disobedient to their suggestive humours but to give me a reason why going to Church was unlawfull before the refusall thereof became this supposed distinctive signe or before the same could be cause of scandall I could never yet heare any man give but only the aforesaid R. P. hath given in writing the aforesaid suggested untruths with a great deale of passion that this my opinion was thought rationall â—or almost fortie yeers agoe and since recusancy was brought in as appears by his said booke of many most prudent men in this kingdome which is to me no reason at all For let us propose to any Divine in Christendome these three following questions relating the true state of the Protestant Church in exterior actions for we meddle not as I have said with their opinions in matters of faith and withall adding that we are constrained to them under paine of death and losse of all temporall fortunes 1. Whether it be lawfull for a Catholique to heare the Prayers Epistles Gospels and Psalmes of the Catholique Church among Protestants in their Church 2. Whether it be lawfull to heare a Protestant preach in the same place some moralitie although it should by chance happen that some ignorant Minister should speake of some point of mistaken doctrine as that Catholiques trust in their own merits or the like falshood 3. Whether it be lawfull for a Catholique to receive bare bread and wine in remembrance that Christ dyed for him as a pious ceremony and whether not better so taken then without such remembrance I dare say that there is no impartiall Divine but will answer Yes And for these opinions I make no question but if I had been as well backed in Rome as the said R. P. was I would have got as great approbation to the same as he had to the same questions after his subdolâ—us manner proposed as followeth 1. Whether it be lawfull to frequent the Churches of hereticks where there is both imminent danger of subversion and scandall 2. Whether it be lawfull to heare the blasphemous and idâ—latrous Sermons of hereticks in which both God and his Church is notoriously and highly abused 3. Whether it be lawfull to receive Calvines Communion of bread and wine which they hold a Sacrament and is a signe of hereticall perfidiousnesse whereby a man betrayeth and denyeth his faith To which every Cathoâ—ique whatsoever would and must answer No but this in truth is not our case For the beliefe of Catholiques is not questioned nor subversion or blasphemie or denyall of faith either apprehended or feared Neither can they scarce possibly happen in the Protestant Church as I have before said but the question only is what Catholiques may exteriorly doe for the safeguard of life with a good intention and how and in what manner they may best converse and preserve themselves from ruine with most securitie Therefore I pray forgive the said R. P. who proposed the said questions in Rome out of his aboundant zeale of money and youth to propagate his family not once considering that it is an impossible thing for them to be hereticks who never were Catholiques As for their custome of Recusancie I say first that it is no custome for a custome is a continuance of a thing time out of minde without any interruption Now recusancy hath been interrupted oftentimes first by Doctor Wright who wrote against the same Ann. 1607. and since him Master Broughton and now my selfe Neither hath it been time out of minde for there are some yet alive borne in Queene Maries dayes who have knowne when our recusancie was not in England and thereupon in these troublesome times doe now goe to Church I say secondly that an inconvenient custome with imprudencie is better broken then kept and the prescripâ—ion of threescore yeeres not good Yet if they will needs claime a right in and to their actions by the same I doe hereby promise not to take it from them by any suit in law For I doe write more to avoyd the scandall of the weake then that I do thinke thereby to satisfie the weake or rob them of their said custome As for their sufferings and losses I am sorry for them and doe assure my selfe that they will receive a great reward for the same because they suffered not so much for the love of recusancie as for the love of God for whosoever doth the meanest worke no indiscretion therein being apprehended by the doer either for Gods sake or for vertue sake although of some considering the act it selfe and not knowing the doers intention it may be judged indiscreet yet the worke may have a reward from God and yet another that doth not the same no punishment Thus the three branches of the said Minor proposition being proved the Conclusion standeth good for the lawfulnesse of going to the Protestant Church Me thinks here I heare some storme that if this my opinion should be admitted as lawfull it would follow that they must likewise take all the oathes that are made against Catholiques which will tend to perjurie To which I answer that I would have them to do things consequenter and any thing for safeguard of life wherein their is no sinne And to
the intolerable abuse which some suggestors did put upon the Popes Holinesse concerning this Oath of Allegiance who procured him to send forth a declarative Briefe forbidding English Catholiques to take the same as conteining many things plainly repugnant to faith and salvation and by this meanes compelled him against his will to make the Doctrine adverse to the Oath his owne opinion When as the procurers themselves and their abettors did as I have said counsell in private some men of qualitie who were friends to them to take the same as lawfull as may be easily proved And which is more strange that they should procure it to be declared so repugnant when as the doctrine to be abjured in the said oath wrote by Santarellus was declared by all the Sorbon Doctors and sixteene of the chiefest Jesuits in France to be wicked so that what is held lawfull by most Divines in the Church it being the most common opinion except some few that would seeme to flatter the Pope should be held wicked only for us to take but I conceive as I have said before that the intent and end of the procuration of such Briefs is that nothing should be thought good or lawfull in England to be done without the speciall approbation of the suggestors tribe so that if any man should doe what they have not approved by vertue of the Popes Briefe he shall be presently blasted for an heretick and if he doe what they approve he shall be saved harmelesse by them both at home and abroad let him be never so bad Sed meliora Spero Let any judicious man consider all the Buls Breves and Censures that have beene procured touching the affaires of English Catholiques from the first Bull of excommunication against Queen Elizabeth by Pius Quintus to the last before spoken of in Anno 1639. against one who knowes nothing of the same and he shall finde by farre more hurt done to Catholiques then ever good It were a blessed turne if some order might be taken by our most gracious Queene for the prevention of such mischiefes which serve for nothing more then to make Schismes and Rents in the Church of God and the Pope and his authoritie to be lesse regarded It were more fitting in my poore judgement that Catholiques were succoured in tribulation then by barring them of their Christian liberty in what they may lawfully doe to adde affliction to affliction I must say no more for I perceive that some beginne to swell but the matter is not great for I will write nothing by Gods grace contrary to the Catholique Church Yet I feare they will breake before I have done with The Oath of Supremacy which is as followeth divided into foure branches 1. I A. B. Doe utterly testifie and declare in my conscience that the Kings highnesse is the only Supreme Governor of this Realme and of all other his Highnesse dominions and countries as well in all Spirituall or Ecclesiasticall things or causes as Temporall 2. And that no forreigne Prince Person Prelate State or Potentate hath or ought to have any Jurisdiction power superioritie preheminence or authoritie Ecclesiasticall or Spirituall within this Realme 3. And therefore I doe utterly renounce and forsake all forren Jurisdictions powers superiorities and authorities 4. And doe promise that from henceforth I shall bear faith and true Allegiance to the Kings Highnesse his heires and lawfull successors and to my power shall assist and defend all Jurisdictions priviledges preheminences and authorities granted or belonging to the Kings Highnesse his heires and successours or united and annexed to the Imperiall Crowne of this Realme So helpe me God and by the contents of this Booke Where is to be noted first that in the first yeere and Parliament of Queene Elizabeths reigne when they abolished the Popes authoritie and would have yeelded the same authoritie with the Title of Supreme head to the Queen as it was given before to her father and brother divers especially moved by Minister Calvines writing who hâ—d condemned in the same Princes that calling liked not the terme and therefore procured that some other equivalent terme but lesse offensive although in truth it is all one with the other might be used Vpon which formalitie it was enacted that she was the Chiefe Governour aswell in causes Ecclesiasticall or Spirituall as Civil Temporal because otherwise there could have beene no colour to make new lawes for the change of Religion So the abovesaid Author to the Answer c. cap. 1. pag. 7. and 8. And this was the onely and sole intention of making the aforesaid Oath which was divâ—rs from the â—ntention of King Henrie the eighth and consequently the Oath not the same For his intention in assuming to himselfe the Supremacie was not as I shall say beneath in the third note to alter any principle of Religion the Supremacie onely excepted or so much as any ceremonie of the Catholique Church but to give himselfe a more licentious libertie in point of marriage and divorce and to make the same libertie justifiable to his subjects and because he could not have the same granted to him by the Pope was angry and displeased with him and tooke it of his owne accord and for his sake disturbed the Church and Clergy of England and took away their lands and gave them to his Nobilitie It is to be noted secondly that we are to sweare that the King is chiefe Governour as well in all spirituall things c. Where by All is to be understood in all things ordered or to be ordered by him unlesse some exception bee made in reason touching the establishment or regiment of the Protestant Church of England that the spirituall things were meant touching the Church appears by the very words themselves Spirituall or Ecclesiasticall and that they were meant touching a Church to be established distinct from the then Catholique Church in England appeares by the intention of the oath which was as I have said to inable the Queene to change and alter Religion and to forme an other Church diverse from that which then was which is the Protestant Church and that there are some spirituall things justly excepted from the King appeares by the Declaration of Queene Elizabeth in her next visitation of the Clergie after the said Oath was made wherein she her selfe made an exception and declared in print the same being published by her commandement that in truth She had not power we will not examine then from whence her Ministers power came she having none her selfe by the words of the Oath and Act to minister the Sacraments Neither had she any such intent and that no such thing was implyed in her Title or claime of Spirituall regiment nor no other thing nor more then was before granted to her father by the terme of Supreame Head requiring all her loving subjects to receive the Oath at least in that sence which was
6â— de leg cap. 1. upon the will and intention of the lawmaker which is the soule of the law the substance and force of the law doth chiâ—fly depend therefore it by any meanes the will of the lawmaker may be knowne according to it especially we must understand the words of the law But the will of the lawmaker is sufficiently knowne concerning this oath to make it apparently unlawfull for any Catholique to take as appeareth by the words of King Iames of blessed memory saying in his Premonition pag. 9. and in his Apology for the oath pag. 2. and 9. that by the oath of Allegiance he intended to demand of his subjects nothing else but a profession of that temporall Allegiance and civill obedience which all subjects by the law of God and nature doe owe to their lawfull Prince c. For as the Oath of Supremacie saith he was devised for putting a difference betweene Papists and them of our profession So was the oath of Allegiance ordained for making a difference between the civilly obedient Papists and the perverse disciples of the Powder treason by which words it appeareth that King Iames held both the law and the law maker intended by the oath of Supremacie to put a difference betweene Papists and Protestants and that no Papist would take that oath wherein the Jurisdiction of the Pope was intended to be abjured Ergo the said oath of Supremacie is to be interpreted accordingly all doubtfulnesse of words set aside and consequenter unlawfull for any Catholique to take To the Major of which Objection I answer first granting the same Secondly with a distinction that the intentions of the law and law maker are to bee sought when they interpret the law in a truer sense then the plaine words doe as they lie otherwise not lest it want veritie To Suarez I answer that himselfe saith in the place before cited that if at any time the propertie of the words of an oath should induce any injustice or like absurditie concerning the minde or meaning of the lawmaker they must be drawne to a sense although improper wherein the law may be just and reasonable for this is presumed to be the minde of the law maker as it hath beene declared by many lawes in F. tit de lege thus Suarez So that although there were in the words of this oath divers significations impropper and unusuall yet in the opinion of Suarez it might be taken and the words interpreted in the truest sense abstracting from the reall intention of the law maker how much more then say I the words being not improper or unusuall but according to the intention of the law and law maker may they be taken in the more favourable sence which may make the law to be just and reasonable See for this doctrine Can. Cum tu de testibus cap. 16. Can. ad nostram de Iurejurando cap. 21. et de regulis â—â—ris in 6. reg 49. in paenis leg Benignius F. de leg Leg. In ambigua ibidem Hence it followeth first out of the doctrine of the said Suarez that although the words and sentences contained in this oath being considered barely by themselves and without due circumstances to wit the intention of the law and lawmaker and to what end and purpose the sâ—id oath was framed may seeme to some doubtfull and ambiguous although to me they seeme not so that is not cleare and morally certaine and so for one to sweare them in that doubtfull sence were to expose himselfe to danger of perjurie yet considering as I have said that such doubtfull words are to be taken in the more favourable sense and which maketh the law to be just and reasonable and to contain no falshood or injustice If any one sweare those words which of themselves are doubtfull in no doubtfull sense but in a true and determinate sense and wherein they are not doubtfull but cleere and morally certaine there is no danger of perjurie at all It may seeme to follow secondly out of the aforesaid doctrine that such as tooke the oath of Supremacie in King Henry the eighth dayes which rather then those famous and glorious men Sir Thomas Moore and Bishop Fisher would take they worthily chose to die were not to be condemned of perjurie because it might be supposed that they being learned Bishops and Noblemen knowing what belonged to an oath did draw the same to some improper sense which ought to have beene the intention of the aforesaid King to make the law just as if they should have sworne the then King Head or chiefe of the Church of his countrey for that he was Sovereigne Lord and ruler of both persons Spirituall and Temporall all sorts being bound to obey his lawfull civill lawes and commandements And so in this sense although it be a kinde of improper speech every King is Head of the Clergy and all others of his owne Countrey Or peradventure they might sweare him Supreame Head of the Church of England that is Chiefe of the congregation of beleevers within his dominions for so in our language we commonly say him to be the head of a Colledge Court or Citie that is the chiefe and him to be chiefe who is supreame therein The Church being then taken by all Divines for a congregation of men Why might not King Henrie be improperly sworne in the opinion of Suarez Head of the then congregation in England So that what Sir Thomas Moore lawfully and piously refused with relation to the intention of the aforesaid King others might without perjurie take with relation to the law of God abstracting from all unlawfull intentions to wit that every oath be just and reasonable as being to be taken in Veritie Iustice and Iudgement and so what was unlawfull in a proper sence might at lest be free from Perjurie in an improper Thus understanding the first branch and the second and third in the same sence before delivered they might peradventure be excused as I have said from perjurie But never from sinne For considering the state of England in those dayes and the absolute intention of the King which well knowne to the whole world was to be sworne Supreame Head of the Catholique Church Catholique religion still here remaining as I have said his oath was as much different from this now oath of Supremacie as darknesse from light For by this the Queene claimed not the Supremacie granted by Christ to Saint Peter as did her father but onely to be Supreame governour of a Church out of which she would not onely discard the Pope but likewise roote out all Catholique religion contrary to her fathers minde as I have shewed so that the question in the said Kings dayes was about an Article of faith viz. Whether the Supremacie were granted by God to the King or to the Pope Which Article they were bound with losse of their lives to have professed being called thereunto for then did occurre the