strength of his confutation Now as this of Dioscorus hath not beene received by him with any good relish so what the most reverend Primate saith further in this particular is displeasant also I will put them downe at large that the Reader may observe this Astmaticall Iesuite in this particular to pant for breath Neither neede we wonder saith the most learned Answerer that he should beare us downe that the Church of Rome at this day doth not disagree from the Primitive Church in any point of Religion who sticketh not so confidently to affirme that we agree with it but in very few and disagree in almost all Å¿ See the most reverend the L. Primate his answere to the Iesuites challenge pag. 24. To the first the Iesuite saith it is his constant assertion that the Church of Rome at this day doth not disagree from the primitive Church in any point of Religion t Reply pag. 89. Secondly that neither the learned Answerer nor any of ours have ever yet beene able to disproove the same to this day how eagerlie soever they have set themselves against it u Reply pag. 89 Thirdly having no more to say then what his foremen have said before him he referres the Reader to his sound and pregnant evidences throughout the whole volume in the particular points propounded x Reply ibid. To the Iesuites first Assertion I answere that the Iesuite is neither Pope nor inspired and therefore may erre To the second the Iesuite must deny what Protestants have learnedly performed or else betray his God on earth and so breake his mancipiall obligation but as they use to deny any unjust thing whereof they are convicted so of necessitie must they not confesse that evidence whereby they are overthrowne It is as bad as heresie for them to give our writers their merit y Possevin Bibliothee select p. â—30 Vniversa igitur hac â—tactatione haeresim sapit quod Lutherum Calvinum Melancthonem caeterosque nominet honorifice they deny them the honour of their morall partes and therefore have their quidam doctus and tearmes of that cut z Index Hispaâ— fol 148. Bucerus Theologus Deleatur verbum Theologus Ibid Hulderico Zuinglio Theologo Delcatur Theologo Ibid. p. 204 Supprimatâ—â— nomen Calvini ponatut studiosâ—s quidam Now for your last your reforment to your evidences we accept your motion and if in them be found any thing else but corruption and confidence we will confesse you hold with antiquity But the question is so farre from being resolved that your indeavours have made your cause more full of jealousie in regard you have stuffed your volume not as you pretend with multitudes of convincing evidences but with counterfeit authors impertinent allegations as hath bene already discovered and will be further made apparant in the examination of your reply Yea you have cast behinde you all modestie in handling the testimonies brought against you by the most learned Answerer some passing by altogether as unanswerable as in the point of Free-will and others slightly passing over as in many points of your Reply Another of his Assertions is that we agree with the Primitive Church but in verie fewe points of Religion and disagree in almost all z Reply pag. â—9 The most reverend Primate in his answere would know where he should find those few points in which we agree with the ancient Church whether in the points controverted betwixt them and us or else in the whole body of that religion which we professe dare the Iesuite acknowledge our agreement with the Primitive Church in the first Then he must confesse themselves to varie from us where wee agree with Antiquitie and so leaveth small credite unto himselfe who with the same breath hath given out that the present Church of Rome doth not disagree with that holy Church in any point Doth he by those few points wherein he confesseth we do agree with the ancient Church meane the whole body of Religion professed by us Who sees not then the height of impudency Can those points be esteemed few which in truth containe the Apostles Nicene and Athanasian Creeds Do we not adhere to this Religion see our Liturgy doe we not judge heresies by this rule viz. Scripture Creeds and foure first generall Councells See the Statute * Anno 2. â—â—â—zab inter statut Hiberâ— pag 267. if we approved equivocating as they learned of Arius they might suspect us that we speake not as we beleive as they usually practise but our words being plaine our profession loathing your practises especially in points of faith and religion what ground had the Iesuite for these outdaring and outfacing calumnies See the Iesuites defence at large I doubt not but if your cause were good you are of abilitie and learning enough to frame an Argument more soundly and to divide more judiciously then heere you have done For every schooleboy may discerne that by those few points wherein I confesse you agree with the ancient Church I could not 〈◊〉 either of these your two sorts of articles at all b Reply pag. 89 The Iesuite hath bestirred himselfe heere to goe from this Dilemma for first he rayles and revyles the whip the division that afflicts him as if it might more judiciously have bin done and indeed with a schoole-boyes reason because it smarts For how proves he it not judicious but because it cannot cohere with his former words A wise reason The division detects the incongruity of the Iesuits assertions therefore it might more judiciously have bin done proh sapientiâ— But the Iesuite by his confession acknowledgeth that he could not meane these words of our agreeing with the Primitive Church in very few points of Religion to have relation either to the points in controversie betwixt them and us or to the whole body of our Religion and that this is so plaine that a schoole-boy may discerne it And now I would gladly know of the Iesuite a third member that doth not lye under the whole body of our Religion or our negative refutes as they tearme them of their Positions additionall viz t the points controverted betwixt us The Iesuite promiseth something If you urge me saith he to declare what points of Religion thâ—se are wherein I confesse you do agree with the ancient Church c Reply pag. 90 Indeed this is the thing we would know but instead of their enumeration he giveth us a repetition I say again they are but very fâ—w e Reply ibid. an addition yea sâ— few that we may boldly say they are just none at all f Reply ibid. If this be not a meere Bull carry me to your Cloister make a Iesuite of me we agree in few and yet in none at all Christs little flocke might be no flocke if this were sence If here the Iesuite be not amazed let the Reader applaud him For if we agree in none with the ancient Church why doe you
who being not justified doe dye are appointed for euerlasting punishments By which it is evident that the fiction of Purgatory is not to be admitted but in the truth it is determined that every one ought to repent in this life to obtaine remission of his sinnes by our Lord Iesus Christ if he will be saved And let this be the end This compendious and briefe Confession of vs we conjecture wil be a contradiction to them who are pleased to slander maliciously accuse vs and vnjustly persecute vs But we trust in our Lord Iesus Christ and hope that he will not relinquish the cause of his faithfull ones nor let the rod of wickednes lye vpon the lot of the righteous Dated in Constantinople in the Moneth of March 1629. CYRILL Patriarch of Constantinople OVr Iesuite is charged by the most reverend Primate Some things are maintained by you which have not beene delivered for Catholicke Doctrine in the primitive times but brought in afterwards your selves know not when The Iesuite pumping for an answere herevnto talketh of ambiguity doubtfull phrases fighting in a cloud As if a man could deale more plainely with the Roman faction then to tell them that there are many points held now of faith by them which the first times never received for Catholicke doctrine and that they themselves know not when many of them were first broached in the Roman Church But the Iesuite fearing least he should be espied in opposing so manifest a truth would here raife a myst or fogge that he might the better steale out of danger for he indeavoureth to perswade That by those words the Answerer goeth about to make his simple Reader beleive that we maintaine doctrine contrary to that of primitive times because forsooth we maintaine now somethings which were not expresly declared nor delivered as necessary articles of Christian faith c Reply pag. 11 He were a simple reader indeed that would beleive this Iesuite either in his faith or doctrine if it have no better support then the declaration of some of their late Councels to confirme it But he were more then simple that can pick the Iesuite his collection from the learned Answerer his words Simple men interprete the Bels as they imagine and imagination hath directed the Iesuite heere and not the truth For what hath the words of the most reverend Primate to doe with the species of opposition where chargeth he you with maintaining doctrine contrarie to that of primitive times where doth he insinuate so much He that discovered your intrufions to have been brought in vnder the name of Piety was not so forgetfull to judge those points contrary to the received doctrine of faith You teach new faith this is the charge You deny not the old professedly in any point this were too grosse and fit for the fooles your brethren open Heretickes and not for the wisest sonne that can promote his fathers kingdome by a more secret and mysticall fraud So that let his words be softer then oyle or sharper then darts I am sure heerein the Iesuite fayles when hee thinketh them to be shot at the innocent The Iesuite would speake more to purpose to free himselfe and his faction and to this end he delivereth to us two propositions 1. We maintaine some things as Articles of faith which were not in primitive times expressely determined declared delivered for such And 2. Wee maintaine some things as articles of our faith which are contrary to that which hath beene declared for Catholick doctrine in primitive times would have vs know that there is a great difference betwixt these two sayings d Ibid. But as the Iesuite granteth the former to be true of themselves so the most learned Answerer in this place doth not charge them with this latter at all For I doubt not but that the most reverend Primate will yeeld so farre vnto you that in shew at least you holde the Apostles Creed and with the Pharisees give it the first place of honour as they Moses law yet notwithstanding your additions have cast contumely many times vpon the ancient faith as Pharisaicall traditions vpon Moses law * Mat. 25. â— 9. That which Roffensis sayth may be acknowledged in a right sence that there were many points universally held by the Primitive Church in beleife and practise the which with explanation were defended against contradicting Hereticks that arose in after-times But what is this to new doctrine never universally received nor anciently knowne or what argument is heere perswading you to declare that for ancient faith which was never delivered from the Apostâ—â—s c. or received by the Primitive Church But the Iesuite that he might gaine credit to his first proposition tels vs. Before the Nicen Councell some books of Canonicall Scripture were doubted of yea and rejected from the Canon by some of the Ancient without any blame at all which after the said Councel could not lawfully be called in quèstioÌ„ e Reply pag. 11 And all to very little purpose For first the Nicene Councell did not declare doubtfull books for Canonical Scripture nor point out the Canon which the Catholick Church did universally receive neither doth it make at all against their universall receipt of those bookes that some privat men or Church doubted of or rejected them For the Iesuite will have his doctrine generally received if affirmed by ten or eleven Fathers †Valentia if by the choysest Why shall f Reply pag. 94 not Gods booke have equall priviledge with a Papall Indulgence when the first is acknowledged in a manner by most this never taken notice of nor acknowledged at all Besides suppose that some private men or some few Churches did not receive some booke of the Canon yet this can no way hinder the universal receipt of the whole more then a mountaine or a wave the Globes roâ—undity Secondly although they were not blame worthy as the Iesuite would have it which should not receive some bookes of the New Testament which is false yet they were not without blemish for if it were an honour to the Iewes especially to the tribes of Iudah Benjamin that to them wholly intirely were commended the Oracles of God * Rom. 3 2. it must needes bee a dishonour to the ten tribes to have rejected all but the five bookes of Moses Thirdly although those bookes were doubted of yet they were doubtingly received for you cannot finde them by any Church canonically rejected Fourthly it had bin as foule an errour to have decreed any thing against the authority of those books before the Nicen Councel as afterwards For if the Iesuit will take it to bee such a tye that all are bound to stand vnto the declaration of a Councel why did not the Councel of Laodicea f Carran in sum Concilâ— can 59. performe their obligatioÌ„ but in the repetition of the Canon leave the book of Iudith to be placed amoÌ„gst the Apocrypha not
were first brought in whether by Balaam or an Apostle though the Iesuite his fellowes could proâ—e it by Apocrypha to be as auncient as the towre of Babeâ—â— it wil be prophane and new in the opinion of any Christian iudgment and vnderstanding still And here it is not to be omitted how the Iesuite flyes to that which they coÌ„temne in us the sacred scriptures deserting the successioÌ„ of this article of glorious RomaÌ„ faith suspecting the fathers so much boasted of by him to prove it of universall beleife must we be urged then in reason to tell you at what time Purgatory and Indulgences were first brought into the Church wheÌ„as the Greeke Fathers seldome mentioned Purgatory never received it x Roâ—â—ens ar 18. Graecis ad hunc vsque diem non est creditum Purgatorium esse when some of the Latine apprehended it not y Ibid. Sed neque Latini simul omnes ac sensim huâ—us rei veritatem conceperunt when sometime it was vnknowne z Ibid. Aliquandiu Purgatorium in cognitum and but lately knowne to the Church a Ibid Sero cognitum ac receptum Ecclesiae fuerit vniversae when it got strength pedetentim by little little not from scriptures or fathers interpreting them onely but partly ex revelationibus b Ibid. by some whisperer in a trunke or a worse Gipsy But if these notable points in the opinioÌ„ of Valentia Caiâ—tan Fisher had their original froÌ„ Christ his Apostles the word of God why should the Iesuit desire any other medium to examine the truth of their report but their own levell The word of God is sufficient to canonize these of faith could you but finde them delivered there But we are sure of your disability herein vnlesse you fly vnto the ayde of your pro ratione voluntas your will-guiding Interpreter And the Iesuit might have forborn to charge the Answerer with untruth in regard he but only repeats Fisher Caietans opinions and the Iesuite himselfe thus farre jumpeth with them that there is some uncertainty when first their vse began Besides I would gladly know whether the word of God without succession be able to point us out the certaine original of the Doctrine of faith if it be what will become of his demaund if it be not where findeth he the vntruth that he doth falsly charge the Answerer withall Finally Because Fisher affirmeth that the knowledge of Purgatory came in pedetentim by little little therefore it ought not to be admitted nor esteemed For by the same Logick he may prove that S. Iames his epistle ought not to be admitted for Canonicall Scripture because as S. Hierome c Paulatim tempore procedente meruit authoritatem Hieron de vitis illust verbo Iecobus doth witnesse by little and little in processe of time it obtained authority credit d Reply pag. 13 This is another brat of the Iesuites begetting let him foster it the most learned Answerer concludeth no such thing but shewes that this profane Novelty crept pedetentim like a snaile to the height of Papall faith and therefore is not easy to be discerned But the Iesuite had a great mind to make vse of Ierome's words and without a forged preparation hee was not able to bring them in Yet as he vrgeth them there is great difference betweene these two instances For the Epistle of S. Iames was first received by the Catholike Church e Eusebius apud Sixt. Sâ—nens Bibl. Sanct lib. 7. haer 9. Noâ— tamen scimusistam epistolâ—m Iacobi cum caeteris ab omnibus Ecclesijs recipi though doubted of by some particular members thereof f Sixtuâ— Senens ibid. Nec ita perperà m sequentia verba Hieronymi interpretanda sunt ut ex his dedueamus Epistolam hanc vel temporum successu vel Ecclesiae diâ—â—imulatione divinam factam Iaâ—obo ascriptam cum tadis ipsa non esset hoc enim impossibile prorsus est sed sic potius juxta veram Hieron mi mentem exponenda sunt quod Epistolam hanc de qua primum inter ALIQVOS ambigebatur an divino spiritu aâ— ab Apostolo Iacobo scripta esset Ecclesia Christi paulatim tempore procedente â—â—mperit esse veram et canonicam etipsiâ—s Iacobi germanam But Purgatory was not received so far as they can manifest but by degrees in particular Churches only never at the best esteemed as of faith but among Romanists Secondly Purgatory partim ex revelationibus came to be beleived of some particular Churches when the Epistle of S. Iames from the worth divine light that was in it selfe meruit authoritatem got authority not in the Catholicke but amongst those doubting Churches which had not received it So that heere is the difference of paulatim and pedetentim S. Iames his Epistle was knowne and received by the Catholicke Church and did by degrees remove the jealousie of those particular Churches that suspected it Purgatory being vnknowne at sometime to the Catholick Church which must either be in the Apostles dayes or never vnlesse this point were more vnhappy then any other point of Doctrine got to be knowne afterwards in the Roman Church not from Scriptures which knew it not but by revelations and tales of a Ghost When our Answerer then c. doth demand of us whence tho foresaid points of Purgatorie Indulgences Communion in one kind have their Originals we can shew even out of the very authors alledged by himselfe that they have their Originals from the institution of our Lord howsoever it be granted that there is some uncertainty when first began their publique and frequent use g Reply pag. 13 What doth the Iesuite get by this he affordeth us matter sufficient to prove his Demaund idle For first what little reason hath he to aske What Bishop of Rome did first alter that Religion which wee commend in them of the first 400. yeares and In what Pope his dayes was the true Religion overthrowne in Rome when they themselves are forced to distinguish in regard of time the practise of their faith from the person that instituted the Doctrine thereof confining this vnto the age of Christ acknowledging the other to have beene brought into the Roman Church they know not when †〈◊〉 constat Secondly what ground hath the Iesuite the rest of his profession to require the circumstances of person time and place to find out heresies by but because the true auncient faith hath beene ever continued in the Church by perpetuall succession being beleived practised therein without interruption And yet here our Adversaries confesse that a doctrine may be taught by Christ yet never practised in the immediate following times but as a thing forgotten begin in particular Churches after the Apostolick times and from thence slyde into the Roman never into the Catholick at such a time which they are not able to designe
Lord rebuke every proud tongue that dare attempt so high despight against God and his truth The Iesuite proceedes Lâ—c heere the Divells disputation against the Private Masse which I thought good to lay downe thus at large i Reply pag. 17â— Here the Iesuite beginneth to triumph but upon what reason the precedent discourse will declare yet his intent is pious that my poore deluded Countriman may understand whither his new Masters doe leade him k Ibid. The Owle might leave preaching unlesse it be to night birds for the Iesuite may assure himselfe that this most reverend Lord will never bee so deceived †Ruffin Hist Eccles lib. 1. cap. 11. Dolis apud ignorantes locus est scientibus vero dolum intendere non aliud est quam risum movere as to be taken with his delusions which are grounded vpon so filly a perswasion as Dabunt signa monstrous miracles and tale-Divinity His masters are CHRIST and his Apostles neyther doth hee refuse the sacred Chorus of the auncient Church these have not beene seducers they neither delude nor drawe into errors they will consume your man of sinne and because you feare the consumption you disgrace their effects and operations making the reading of the sacred scriptures l Reply pag. 17 the cause of most horrible impieties reviling with your tongue-prodigies GODS heavenly lampes least they should declare your filth by their celestiall light The holy Sacrifice of the Masse hath triumphed in the Church of God even from the beginning and shall continue mangre all Opposers unto the end m Reply pag. 17 c. If the Iesuite meane by the sacrifice of the Masse the administration of the body and blood of Christ whereby the sacrifice of Christs death is commemorated unto us he hath no Adversary For we know it was instituted by Christ and hath beene continued perpetually by the Catholicke Church even to these very times But if hee meane by the sacrifice of the Masse that outward visible sacrifice made by the Preist alone n Concil Trid. Sess 22. cap. 6. Sacrosancta Synodus Missas illas in quibus solus sacerdos sacramentaliter communicat non modo non damnaâ— ut illicitas sed etiam probat atque commendat wherein CHRIST is pretended really to be sacrificed this was never in the auncient Church much lesse triumphed therein and although the Iesuite would have it auncient yet it was not borne in the fathers time o Erasmus de concord Eccles versus sinem Sunt qui in Missa commâ—nionem requirant sic fateor a Christo suit institutum ita olim consuevit observari Casâ—ander Consult art 24. §. De iteratione pag. 223. Certe ex tota Canonis compositione manifestè apparet totam illâ—â—â—ysticam in qua Canon adhibebatur actionem vel publicam vel certe inter plures semper celebratam suisse Quod si â—odie 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 queat facile verus â—ius intellectus restitui possit but brought into the Church by the decay of Devotion on the peoples part p Erasmus de amab concord Ecclesiae Verum id quo minus fiat haud stat per sacerdotes sed per laices in quibus hâ—u nimium refrixit charitas which defection it hath still nourished The word sacrifice indeed was in use amongst the fathers though Calvin thought it was abused neither did they or the Church of Rome thereby hold it a reall sacrificing of Christ but a commemoration of his death q Lombard Sent. lib. 4. Dist 12. par 2. Quaeritur Si quod gerit sacerdos proprie dicatur sacrificium vel immolatio si Christus quotidie immoletur vel semel tantum immolatus sit Ad hoc breviter dici potest illud quod offertur consecratur à sacerdote vocari sacrificium oblationem quia memoria est repraesentatio veâ—i sacrificii sanctae immolationis factae in ara crucis Et semel Christus mortuus in crâ—ce est ibique immelatus est in semetipso quotidie autem immolatur in sacramento quia in sacramento recordatio fit illius quod factum est semel and therefore Calvin himselfe saith that your impiety in that particular being considered with the abuse of the auncients there would appeare betweene them and you an unmeasurable distance r Calvin lib. devera Eccles reform extat in Tractat. Theolog Calvini c. pag. 389. Vtrumque illis concedo veteres non mâ—do sacriâ—iciâ—â—oce abusoâ— esse sed etiam caeremoniâ Verum sireputemus quantum a veterum corruptelâ distet quae nunc abipsis fucatur â—â—pietas immensum est ferè intervallum and therefore the Iesuite abuseth their adversaries in making them to impute that to the fathers which they knew these never held Whereby the Iesuit might see how vaine he is in making us to be enemies of this mystery when we onely oppose their popish innovations and defiling of so sacred an institution And whereas the Iesuite would make Luther the first oppugner of private Masse it is a good argument that many were a sleepe when it first came into the Church seeing many of themselves forced by the testimony of the auncient Fathers confesse that it was not according to the auncient use of the Church of God Ignatius maketh all to communicate and all in both kindes Å¿ Ignatius ad Philadelphenses Vnuspanis omnibus confractus vnus calix qui omnibus distributus est in receiving of this blessed Sacrament Chrysostome t Chrysostomus in Cor Homil. â—8 Est autem ubi nihil differt sacerdos à subdito ut quando fruendum est hoâ—â—endis mysterijs similiter enim omnesut illa percipiamus digni habemur Non ficut in veteri lege partem quidem sacerdos comedebat partem autem populus non licebat populo participerâ— esse corum quorum particept erat sacerdos sed nunc non sic verum omnibus unum corpus proponâ—â—â— poculum â—um maketh Preist and People all alike This is acknowledged to be the practise of the primitive times by Innocent the third Innocent 3. lib. 6. Myster Missae cap. 5. In primitiva quidem Ecclesia singulis diebus qui celebrationi Missarum intererant communicare solebant sed excrescente multitudiâ—e c and by Durand Dur. raâ— l. 4. c. 53. In pâ—â—mitiva Ecclesiâ omnes qui celebrationi â—â—issarum interâ—rant singulis diebus communicarâ— â—lebant co quòd Apostoli omnes de â—alice biberâ—â— Domiâ—â— dicence Bibite exâ—â—oc â—mnes And to preserve pious mindes from embracing this fond perswasion of the Iesuites that Luther first impugned Private Masse I desire that they would consider with what impatience Chrysostome would have prosecuted the same when he expresseth bitternes even against the peoples neglect of communicating Indeed he could not actually dispute against that which was not yet we may coÌ„ceive by his words how he would have approved of Private Masse if it had
ut puâ—o ex piâ—tate devotione exscribentium qui devotissimas historias horrebant annumerare inter apocrypha and Iohannes Driedo f Dried l. 1. c. 4. Alterum difficultatis nodum qui est super libris Iudith Tobiae conatur dissolvere magister in historijs cuius sententiam seâ—uitur alius quidam expositor in prooemio Bibliae dicens in prologis illis duobus Hieronymi super Iudith Tobiam mendosum esse codicem in â—oloco ubi legimus hagiographa legendâ—m esse apâ—crypha Here is a solide truth for Iudith's virginitie no witnesse but an heare-say and we know not from whom So that our Iesuite ought to seeke an other answere for this is lame halting and of little strength But suppose the Nicene Councell in S. Hieromes opinion did receive Iudith into the Canon yet he will not say the same of Toby and the Maccabees how can our Adversaries then deny the change Why Gods owne are not so much bound to our compassionate Iesuite as these suspicious birthes but how will he array them with a canonicall coate The auncient Church saith he received them for canonicall g Reply pag. 28 S. Hierome his ignorance were then much to be wondred at but this testimony will not be rejected if the Iesuite can make good what so generally he affirmes By the auncient Church hee must exclude neither age nor iudgment unlesse some straglers wherefore then doth hee leave out the first 300. and almost 400. yeares affording us not one testimony but a pretence or two out of Cyprian to no purpose and in his proofes why doth hee afford us onely particular testimonyes private men when the Churches declaration is to be expected at his hands But let us examine his testimonies First he produceth the third councell of Carthage Can. 47. We say this is but a private testimony and at best but a declaration of a particular Church and a Councell that they allowe not themselves h Bellarm. de Rom. Pont. l. 2. cap. 21. At objicit Calvinus Concilium Carthaginense tertium can 26. ubi vetatur ne quis princeps sacerdotum aut summus sacerdos dicatur sed solùm primae sedis Episcopus Respondeo Concilium statuisse solum de Episcopis Africae inter quos multi erant Primates a quales ne vllus corum summus Sacerdos aut Princeps aliorum diceretur Nec enim Concilium hoc provinciale Romanum Ponuficem aut aliarum provinciarum Episcopos obligare poterat Secondly Innocent ad Exuperium But if this be his Epistle what doth he declare therein but his private judgment what finde we there but an answer that he gave not ex cathedrâ but as he expresseth himselfe pro captu intelligentiae meae at the intreatie of a Brother Gelasius his decree hath not one word of Canonicall in it onely they are stiled of the old testament which is a phrase used many times by our selves because they are comprehended in one volume together and yet we esteeme them not within the Canon S. Augustine doth not take canonicall for those scriptures which were inspired by the Spirit of God and delivered by the Catholick Church for such as 〈◊〉 appeare by his words before the 〈◊〉 of those bookes i Aug. de 〈◊〉 Christi l. 2. c. â—â— In canonicis 〈◊〉 scripturis 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 quas 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Apostolicas 〈◊〉 For first he perswades those to be cheifly respected quae Apostolicas sides habere epistolas 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that were received of those Churches in which the Apostles themselves did â—â—â— and 〈◊〉 they directed their Epistles Secondly amongst thâ—se which he 〈◊〉 Canonicall bookes he could have this 〈◊〉 Ibid 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 In scripturis 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be observed ut â—as quae ab omnibus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 quas 〈◊〉 non 〈◊〉 that those which are received of all Churches should be 〈◊〉 before those which 〈◊〉 Churches did not receive Certainely by this we may see what St Augustine 〈◊〉 by his Canon not those which were generally received onely but those also which were 〈◊〉 of a few Churches and those 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of lesse 〈◊〉 Ibid. which were the same that wee accompt 〈◊〉 So that Canonicall in Augustines sence is 〈◊〉 those which abound with lyes and 〈◊〉 Ibid. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 occupen◠〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 denâ—â—s 〈◊〉 dicent 〈◊〉 contra 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 â—â— is 〈◊〉 by his words not to those which is godly bookes were premitted to be read by the people though because not divinely inspired they were not to confirme any point of Doctrine whereby the same Father interpreteth the meaning of that Councel of Carthage urged by the Iesuit in case he had subscribed therunto as our adversaries perswade And that this agreeth with S. Augustine mind it shineth forth in many places For although S. Augustin saith that the Church had them the Maccabees for canonical yet he tels you how not because they were divinely revealed but for the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which must needes interpret that the church 〈◊〉 them for canonical that is of that canon which was fit to be read only for the moving of the peoples affection by declaring the passions of the 〈◊〉 for he maketh them not of that 〈◊〉 which were 〈◊〉 inspired â— Aug. de 〈◊〉 Dei 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 opposeth theÌ„ to it â— non 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 â—â— quibus 〈◊〉 Machobâ—â—rum â— Aug. con Epist Gâ—udâ—â— l. â—â— 31. â—â—â—â—pe quidem scripturam quae appellatut Mac 〈◊〉 non habent 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 psalmes quibus Dom. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 testibus tuis Sed recepta est 〈◊〉 Ecclesia non 〈◊〉 si sobriè legatur vel audiatur libri 〈◊〉 non Iudas sed 〈◊〉 canonicis 〈◊〉 propter 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 passiones 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 â—â—rabiles This is found saith that Father not in the holy Scriptures which are called Canonicall but in others amongst which are also the bookes of the Macchabeas which not the Iâ—wes but the Church hath for Canonicall for the vehement and wonderfull sufferings of 〈◊〉 Martyrs And so in an other place â—â—â—aith that the Scriptures of the 〈◊〉 were not received of the Iewes as the Law the Prophets and Psalmes to which God gave testimony â—â— to his owne witnesses Yet he denyeth not but the Church received them not unprofitably But wherein lay their profit S. Augustine declareth s◠〈◊〉 in the sober reading and hearing of them read For Isiodorus Cassâ—dorus their testimonies make noâ— the received Doctrine of the auncient Church Neither can those tearmes of holy and divine wherewith â— Bellarm. de Verbo Dei lib. l. 〈◊〉 4 Po 〈◊〉 de ijs 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ◠〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 vino 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 illo 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 quae 〈◊〉 ab 〈◊〉 epist 3. ad â—â—per 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 15. â—â—â—
ever beene pretended by such as not onely interpret the same to their owne lust but also reject what parcels or bookes they please and for this he cites the Marcionists rejecting the Old Testament the Manichees the New 〈◊〉 and Cerinthus the Acts of the Apostles the Ebionites the Epistles of S. Paul Luther that of S. Iames c. Yet would these men saith he be tryed by none but by the Scriptures when as they had discarded all such Sâ—riptures as were found any way to make against their Errors In like sort deale our Adversaries at this day l Reply pag. 32 But if we doe neither interpret the Scriptures after our own lusts neither deny any part of the sacred faith that was once delivered to the Saints if we adhere to that perfect rule which of it selfe is sufficient and more then sufficient ad omnia for all things m Vincen. Lyrin Cùm sit perfect â—â— Scripturarum canoâ— fibique ad omnia satiâ— superque suffielat Surely the Iesuite is a Calumniator and we are no Hereticks not so much as in similitude onely We know Hereticks both adde to the Scriptures and detract also This we see at Rome let the Iesuite espy it amongst us if he can in Ireland Further iâ—â—â—â— ignorant that Heretickes in discarding all that makes against them have rather forsaken Scriptures then pleaded tryall by them for what is this but the Preparer of an Index Expurgatorius so that we may see from whence Papists had their so profitable inventions And where can you finde a greater agreement in this kind then betwixt your selves and Heretickes for you admit no Scriptures but with your owne glosses which is as much in effect as to deny all And if the râ—â—e concerning God be as true concerning Scriptures Non est minus Deum fingere quam negare It is no losse error to feigne a God then to deny the Deitie what will your additions to the Scriptures merite You embrace not onely Apocryphall bookes but whatsoever superstitions your corrupt practice hath produced and these because God will not justifie them you will have to be Apostolicall Traditions His accusation that we admit what Scripture wee like of and cast out what displeaseth n Reply pag. 3â— us is the report of a Iesuite Italian newes a thing which he will never manifest as you may perceive by his proofe Ecclesiasticus with them is no true Scripture saith the Iesuite and why it approveth Free will too much o Reply ibid. The Iesuite argues but with his owne impudencie and no reason of ours Ecclesiasticus hath no authority to confirme points of Doctrine and therefore was justly cast off by Whitaker That it is so reputed by the Church of God is because it was never written by any of the Prophets 2. Peter 1. 19. never received by the Church of the â—ewes to whom were commended the Oracles of God Rom. 3. 2. Further it had never approbation by the Apostles in the Church of God and besides these generals there are many other particulars for which wee reject this booke as from his owne mouth who in the beginning thereof doth not assume to himselfe that honour which the Iesuite would conferre upon him for he acknowledgeth his owne weaknes and disability in translating it out of the Hebrew * In the Prologue which I thinke is not comely for that mind to doe which was assisted by the Spirit of God for when Moses said I am not eloquent God questions who made the tongue * Exod. 4. 10. 11 Besides this chap. 46. ver 23. it is not agreeable to the truth of sacred Scriptures which is there spoken of Samuels prophecying after his death and other things But I would know if your additions and traditions were not where would you finde that new Fabrick of the Roman Creed published by your infallible guide But saith our Iesuite Cyprian Ambrose August Clemens Alex. and other holy Fathers account Ecclesiasticus to be holy Scripture p Reply pag. 33 If this were proofe sufficient a small authority would suffice to prove the Canon for we may as well confirme the booke Pastor and divers others from Bellarmines q Bellarm. de script Ecclesâ— pag. 34. See this testimony cited before pag. 163. testimony as the booke of Ecclesiasticus c. for any thing he urgeth from these Fathers to determine it within the Canon in regard he acknowledgeth that it hath the same Epithites from many Fathers as he professeth this to have So that if this be the Iesuites best Apologie for Ecclesiasticus it is much beholding to his free will but nothing to his industry This manner of proceeding saith the Iesuite Tertullian doth discover in those Heretickes of his time and withall will teach us how we are to proceed with those of our dayes who tread so right the steppes of their forefathers The conflict saith he with the Scriptures is good for nothing but to turne either the stomacke or the brayne This heresie receiveth not certaine Scriptures and that which it receiveth it draweth to her owne purpose by additions and substractions and if it receive the whole Scriptures it depraveth them by divers expositions Where as the adulterous sence doth no lesse destroy the truth then doth the corrupted letter What wilt thou gaine that â—â—â— cunning in Scriptures when that which thou defendest is denyed and that which thou denyest is defended thou shalt indeed loose nothing but thy voyce with contending nor shalt thou gaine any thing but choler hearing blasphemies The Heretickes will say that â—◠〈◊〉 the Scripture and bring lyeing interpretations and that they defend the truth Therefore must not appeale be made to Scriptures nor must the conflict be in them by which the victory is either uncertaine or little certaine or none at all r Reply pag 3â— What Tertullian and other auncient Fathers thought of this rule hath beene formerly declared and this quotation doth not make Tertullian a despiser of the rule of Scriptures but proveth Hereticks to be shifters and forsakers of the same Whereby the Iesuite may espy the hereticke All that beareth any shew for the Iesuite is in the taile of his allegation Ergo non ad Scripturas as provocandum est therefore must not appeale be made to Scriptures but the Iesuite dare not put in the whole nec in ijs constituendum certamen in quibus nulla aut parum certu victoria which is as much as if I were to deale with a Papist in points of religion should urge the scripture to him it were in vain why because although they receive the Scriptures they accept them not as the rule of faith besides they adde detract and what they receive they must onely interpret They not onely corrupt the stile by a vulgar authenticke but the sence by a Papall violence and in this case what shall a man get from a Papist but cholerike blasphemie and licentious rayling Doth not the
the Fathers fayle But for the Scriptures their confidence hath not beene so great therein as to make them alone a rule for the least article of their new faith And this Iesuite that even now would perswade others to beleive that we adhere to the Scriptures onely because we would not be subject to the sentence of any judge doth here detect himselfe what judge he will allow The Scriptures must be locked up Bibling is Babling and generall Councells must do the worke well why then doe they not confirme Constance and Basill If they dare not submit to them why do they vainly pretend their authority But it may be they are not confirmed by the Pope So that you may see by the Iesuit's wavering his aime is onely to have that Exlex who ought at this time principallie to be corrected for his heresies to be both the rule and the Iudge But we are as free saith the Iesuite from the imputation of Heresie as our Adversaries are farre from finding out any such generall Councell in which wee have beene condemned z Reply pag. 17 Have you no better Apologies then this to exempt you out of the Catalogue of Hereticks The Pelagians had as good and pleaded the same against S. Augustine who answered them with scorne Aut vero congregatione Synodi opus erat ut apertu pernicies damnaretur quasi nulla haeresis aliquando nisi Synodi congregatione damnata sit a Aug. con â— Epist Pelag 4 4 c. 12. What is it needfull to assemble a Synode that a manifest corruption should be condemned as if no Heresie hath at any time beene condemned without the calling of a Synode And they are as surely branded for Novelists and Sectaries saith this Loyolist as their opinions have beene certainely condemned by many the like generall Councells b Reply pag. 37 I wonder where the Iesuite will find them nay what have they besides the names of generall Councells that may honour the assembly of their so many Bishops Some of these you dare not confirme why then should they have generall faith and esteeme amongst us If you dare not subscribe to your Councels for what reason should they have power to condemne us Some against Faith given have martyred those which you acknowledge ours Your Trent Synode hath anathematized the Catholick Church Doctrine And I am perswaded if that faction had as much power as they give to their Head the Church Catholicke should not bee long from martyrdome also Besides whose opinions have Generall Councels condemned ours Surely then our pretended Heresies are ancienter then Luther he is not the first that taught our doctrine But where are your Councels Mr Malone that condemne the holy Scriptures the foure first Generall Councels the three Creeds These are ours to them wee subscribe If these are Noveltiâ—s we are Novelists if this be doctrine of Sectâ—ries the Hereticke hath justly stiled us But if the Iesuite cannot bring Councels that have condemned God in his Word the Primitive Church in her Decrees and the generall Confessions of Faith I hope hee will upon better thoughts except Noveltie from our Faith Schisme from our Persons Neither let the Iesuite runne about as in other-places he hath done to coyne us an other Faith when as he himselfe revileth us for adhering to the Scriptures c Reply Sect. â— when as our Lawes justifie our embracing the foure first Generall Councels and our Liturgie doth enclose the Creedes The Iesuite continueth his vaine discourse And as saith he they never yet assembled any Generall Councell of Catholick Preists and Prelates of that Church which is dispersed through many Nations neither by reason of their fatall discord amongst themselves will ever beâ— able to assemble the same so wee may for ever live secure d Reply pag. â—7 Every Iesuite is not a Prophet We may have a Coâ—â—â—â—ll such a one where your Papa shall not be Presidâ—nt â—or your Cloâ—ke-bagge carry the Spirit that shall direct iâ— when the Church of Rome it selfe shall be frâ—â—â— from that Factioâ— which now doth tyrannize over it and the true Bishops thereof shall enjoy that authoritie which most truely is their owne by divine institution and Fryars and Iesuites may turâ—e Turkes for any station that they shall have in the Hierarchiâ— of the Church of God e Censura â—â—â—positionum ad sacram Facultatem Theoâ—â—giae Parisiâ—â— sem allat c. Priâ—â—a Propositio Hierarchia Ecclesiastica constat ex Pontifice Cardinalibus Archiepiscopis Episcopis Regularibus Câ—â—sura In istâ primâ— proposâ—tiâ—â—◠〈◊〉 ratio memâ—â—â—rum Hierarchiae Ecclesiasticae seu sacri Principatâ—â— divinâ ordinatione instituti est manca redundaâ—â— atque inducens in errorem Finally saith the Iesuite the reason of this his â—ergivâ—rsaâ—ion from the Fathers authority is vaine and idle when hee saith that we have coyned clipped and washed their monuments And why I pray you For though saith he he endeavour to proove this by severall instances yet not one doth he produce that will serve his turne and therefore tells the most learned Answerer that he is bound to bring forth â—â—und prooâ—â— of this his accusation under paine of incuâ—ring the brand of forgerie and spitefull calumnie himselfe f Reply pag. 38 We may perceive the Iesuite is unwilling to enter into dispute concerning these particulars and therefore â—â—sts them off as wanting proofe Yet indeed the matter is so notorious in many of the instances that your owne have espied the counterfeits and branded them with their Censures But the Iesuite might have forsaken his selfe flatterie and have taken notice that there is more proofe against the particulars then hee had answered unto For is it possible that there should bee little respect given to the Church of Rome before the Councell of Nice as their Cardinall and after-Pope urged by the most reverend the Lord Primate affirmeth when wee finde the first Bishops of that Church writing such controuling Epistles Councels before that of Nice giving such unlimited power and the Romane Emperour qualifying with such unmeasurable Principalitie their Romane Bishop But because the Iesuite desires a further manifestation of these Counterfeitâ— I will take them as they are layde downe in order by the most reverend the Lord Primate beginning with your Craftie Merchant Isidorus Mereator that is justly charged with counterfeiting Decretall Epistles c. Our Iesuite hath a minde to justifie these brattâ— and to make Isidorus his merchandize to passe for good wares yet Bellarmine confesseth that they are infected with Errour script into them g Bellarm. de Rom. Pont. l. 2. c. 14. Aliquos errores in eas irrepsisse non negaverim nec indubitatas esse affirmaâ—e audeam â— Cusanus de Concord cath l. 3. c. 2. Sunt meo judicio illa de Constantino apocrypha sicut fortassis etiam quaedam alia longa magna scripta Sanctiâ— Clementi Anacleto Papâ— attributa In quibus volentes Romanam
what fetches they use to drag the people to their opinion so they may sway in the Church of God and tyrannize with their Antichristian Scepter over the Kingdome of Saynts The Iesuite before hee leaves off would faine say something for himselfe and cause as first that wheresoever the Fathers doe professe them in their workes they never tell him that they hold them for opinions rather then for points of faith o Reply pag. 95 which wee acknowledge for indeede there is no such profession in the Fathers yet I thinke and upon good grounds if they had knowne of any such fundamentall points some would have declared them to the Church Secondly he confesseth that some of the said points were not declared by the Church in former ages to be necessary and cheife Articles of faith and Religion yet they were ever belonging to the substance of faith from the beginning and without doubt were held for such at least implicitly and virtually by the holy Fathers howsoever our Answerer upon no better ground then his divining humour doth give out the coÌ„trary p Reply pag. 9â— Surely it could not be faith at any time if not then for to the Church long before was declared the whole counsell of God so that indeed it may bee of the Popish faith which may be declared 1500. yeares after Christ but not that of the ancient Church which was once delivered to the Saints And if the Iesuite will have that of the Foundation which was never so declared or reputed till our last times let him proove ex re â—atâ— that it is so and not thinke himselfe able by his without doubt to perswade us that the Fathers held those points virtually and iâ—plicitely â—â— belonging to the substance of faith and then hee doth something for if the bare act of declaration may make an article of faith the Bishop of Rome with his â—â—â—ncell may make us an other beleife and turne Christianity into a new mould a thing much desired if more then probable grounds doe not deceive us But if these points were decreed in after-times from some inward and virtuall substance of faith which was inherent in them let him declare it and by some meanes or other helpe our eye-fight that can perceive no such thing in the points here mentioned And whereas the wisard thinkes every man of his own profession hee is deceived his conjectures are farre from the grounds that are followed by the most learned Answerer and how farre it is from divining to expresse a truth any wil apprehend that knowes that divining hath relation to things to come and not to things past But what he promiseth in the next Chapter we will examine whereby I thinke wee may come to more perfect knowledge of their Catholicke frâ—â—des though not of their 〈◊〉 as he would perswade SECT XII THe Iesuite having travailed in the defence of certaine points from the Fathers testimony that are not of the foundation of Faith and fearing to be censured by Lyrinensis who saith that the aunciâ—â—t consent of the holy Fathers is with great care to bee sâ—ught and followed by us not in every pettie question belonging to the Law of GOD but ONE 〈◊〉 at least principally in the Rule of Faith a See the testimony urged by the most reverend the Lord Primate in his Answer to the Iesuites Challenge pag. 26. doth in this Section enquire Hâ—â—â— a point of Faith may be discerned from an indifferent opinion in Religion b Reply p. 96. and declares the reason of his so doing Forasmuch saith he â—â— our Answerer affirmeth that all the points by me laid downe in my demaund be not cheife articles I thought it meet by this disputation to disproove him herein and to shâ—w that they be all such cheife articles of faith at the obstinate denyall of any of them depriveth a man of all true beleife and maketh him a faithlesse Hereticke For performance whereof we are first to enquire which is the way or certaine Rule to know an article of Faith from an indifferent opinion and that being found out by squaring the said points thereby we shall easily understand whether they be theife articles yea or â—â— c Reply pag. 96 Now in this passage the Iesuite meeteth not at all with the most learned Answerers observation For he denyes all the points propounded by the Iesuite to be cheife articles in regard of those which are more necessary fundamentall which onely are to be enquired of by consent of Fathers in Lirinensis his judgment d See above lit â— and not because in their owne nature they are indifferent for if he should conceite them such why should he style you Heretickes for your false declarations concerning them nay why should there be controversies at all betwixt us Secondly all that the Iesuite urgeth here satisfieth not the most learned Answerer in shew onely For unlesse he can prove that these points were according to his Rule declared by the Catholicke Romane Church for cheife Articles of Faith before those Fathers times which he urgeth in Lirinensis his judgment all his quotations of antiquitie in defence of them are to no purpose And I would willingly see where the Romane Catholicke Church by her declaration hath defined these points de fide before the Ages of those Fathers which the Iesuite produceth for confirmation of the same But notwithstanding hee goeth a by way and followeth not his Answerer yet I will not leave him but take some breife veiwe of this discourse also And first he excepts against the Scriptures These must bee no Rule whereby to discerne cheife Articles of Faith from indifferent opinions in Religion nay to make Scriptures the Rule is but to shake hands with all condemned Heretickes Reply pag. 96 And this hee telleth us he hath already discovered but fearing least it be in conceit and opinion onely hee is heere resolved further to prosequute the same and layeth this for his ground There be many confessed points of Faith which are not in any sort expressed or as much as once touched by the Scripture f Ibid. Sure they are of the Popish Creed or not at all for the Catholicke Church taught none as necessary to salvation but what were contained in the Scriptures g Bellarm. de verbo Dei non scripto l. 4. c. 11 Dico illa omnia scripta esse ab Apostolis quae sunt omnibus necessaria quae ipsi palam omnibus vulgo praedicaverant Yet hee will proove his proposition from Augustine The Apostles truly saith S. Augustine as he is urged by the Iesuite have not delivered any thing concerning this point but that custome which was alledged against Cyprian ought to be held to have beene derived from their tradition b Reply pag. 96 But what point is this Rebaptization a point as farre from the foundation as Rome from Heaven that only concernes the manner forâ—â— of 〈◊〉 Baptisme What points else
hath he thaâ—â—â— not concludent from the Scripture Not one unlesse you suppose that he keeps them as concealements yet he thinkes he doth something when he tels us from Hierome that the scriptures consist not in reading but in the true understanding of their sence meaning that by an evill interpretatioÌ„ the Gospell is no more the word of God but the word of man yea which is worse the word of the Divell i Reply ibid. As if this were not the matter that we complaine of that Popes will interpret as they please presume to say this shal be the sence of the Holy Ghost But to fit himselfe for performance of what he hath undertakes he saith that there be â—â—â— three meanes or wayes by which a Conclusion deduced from the scripture may be pretended to be infallible k Reply pag. 97 But what is this to the foundation of Faith I hope every infallible proposition is not of such necessary beleife that a maâ— must beleive it on paine of damnation You told us but 〈◊〉 that your new Creed was propounded onely to Scholleâ—s and cheifely unto such as are to receive promotions unto Scholasticall or Ecclosiasticall dignity l Reply pag. 98 what are all lay-men Clerks or is the nature of your faith changed Now the Iesuite nameth his three onely meanes the first humane discourse the second Private inspiration the third the authority of some externe meane ordained by GOD betwixt the Scripture and us c m Reply pag. 97 To avoyde the two first he makes a long discourse but he fights with his owne shadow for wee make not the Scripture of private interpretation as being against the Apostles rule * 2 Pet. 1. 20. neither doe we make our reason the onely Inquisitor to finde out the sence of Scripture knowing that the carnall man perceiveth noâ— the the things that are of GOD Yet this we say that reason being assisted by grace becomes a divine instrument whereby the scriptures may be used to saving knowledge and to finde out the mysteries of our Faith Now seeing that neither humane discourse saith the Iesuite 〈…〉 by God betwixt the Scripture and â—â— such as is the authority of the Magistrate 〈…〉 the Princes law and the people that it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and propound unto us all decisions and 〈◊〉 whatsoever Reply pag. 97 The Iesuite shall never finde that there is any such exterâ—â— infallible means 〈◊〉 by GOD betwixt the Scripture and â—â— to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and propound unto us all decisions and conclusions whatsoever that we are bound to beleive 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of 〈◊〉 Neither when they come to point it out are they agreed who it is For sometime it is the generall and uniforme consent of auncient Fathers that is the assured Touch-stone to try all controversies betwixt us o See the Iesuites Epistle to the King and this generall consent may consist of 〈…〉 fathers p Reply pag. 94 â—â—â— sometimes of fewer as in 〈◊〉 of the Commandements and leaving out the Second they cannot find the one halfe to reckon them after that sortâ— sometime the practise of the Church sometime the rule of Faith sometime the Councels interpretations and sometime all must vanish and that which the Head determineth is a knowne truth that which the Head condemneth is a knowne error q Hart colloque cum Rainolds pag. 44. Now which of all these are infallible For Consent of fathers Cajetan will tell us that God hath not tyed the exposition of the Scriptures to the sence of the Fathers and therefore he resolves to follow a new sence agreeable to the Text. 〈◊〉 à 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 alienus though it be repugnant to the streame of the sacred Doctors t Cajetan in Prooem comment in Genes In like manner Andradius Andradius Defens Triden Fid. l. 2. pag. â—â—â— Non 〈◊〉 debentur eorum explicationibus addicti alligarâ— quin sit 〈◊〉 omnibus illis 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 quid Dei praesidijs adjuti explicando valeamus sensum alium 〈◊〉 etiam dissimilem afferre atque noris explicationibus 〈◊〉 Ecclesiae sanctorum 〈◊〉 fidem atque pietatem illustraâ—â— For the practise of the Church if they meane the Roman it is no good direction in regard as we have shewed before it is very subject to varietie as in the point of Childrens receiving of the Eucharist t See before pag. 25. â— See before pag. 10â— and in the point of Iudges and the like all which are full of uncertainty For their rule of faith we see that this may be in the Roman Church enlarged extended yea we have wits in the Church of Rome that can censure it making it in some considerations standalous hereticall x Censura Symboli Apostolorum censur ar 3. Tota Haec propositio equivocatione laâ—orat quae inducere potest in haeresim propter ambiguas particulas de ex quia ordinaria de habitudinem importat principij componentis c. Ideo propositio in hoc sensu falsa est scandalosa haeretica 〈◊〉 y Censur ar 4. Haec propositio ambigua est aliquo sensu haeretica Periculosa est propositio 〈◊〉 obrium illum sensum intellectâ— quasâ— diviniâ—as aliquid passa aut â—â—â—tua fuctit non solum haeretica est sed etiam impis â— blasphema deceitfull z Censur ar 2. Tota haec propositio captiosa est â—â—llax blasphemous z See before lit erroneous See hereafter lit â— false c See before lit â— dangerous d See before lit 7. absurd Censura ar 9. Absurda ambiguous See before lit â— contrary to the word of GOD the common sence of the Fathers and of the universall Church g Censura ar 7. Propositio 〈◊〉 est 〈◊〉 falsa erronea nec non verbo Dei communi Patrum totiusque Ecclesia sensui contraria â— Wadding Legat. Phil. 3. Sect. 2. orat 9. § 9. Pro Petro in fide Petrâ— succedentibus non pjo Concilio oravit exoravit Adversus hoâ— adversus Ecclesiam in Petro in illisque fundatam non adversus Concilium dixit infernum non praevalituram 〈◊〉 â—oncilia errâsse viderimus quando à suo capitâ— Ã quo 〈◊〉 sanctius veritatis influentia recesserant vel dissenâ—â—râ—nt Non â—â—â—buit 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 â—em Pontifici sed à Pontifice habet Concilitum ut sit ratum ac 〈◊〉 For Councels interpretations we shall have as much to doe for to finde out the sence of a Councell as of the Scripture it selfe Besides how many weake particulars may suspend a Councell from her pretended infallible authoritie as if not rightly called rightly headed c So that there remaines none but the Pope for whom Christ prayed It is he that gives authoritie to a Councell not the Councell to him But if this Lord that would be of our conferences prove a Lord of Mis-rule where then shall we
unto us without some uncertainty h Reply pag. 13 Thirdly he flyeth to the institution of Christ as a sufficient rule to declare the originall of their faith which we like in them accepting the tryall thereby what he pretendeth for himselfe wee will on our part undertake to prove viz â— that all the points of our Religion by the confession of the very authors alledged by the Iesuite have their originals from the institution of our Lord. But if the Iesuite deny us the like liberty which he taketh unto himselfe he befooles his owne argument if he grant the same unto us then hee demonstrateth his owne demaund to bee vaine which requireth person time place as a necessary ground whereby to detect Heresie and errour by Finally it will most plainly appeare how vainly our Answerer proveth my demaund to be vaine if we gather his reason to a head thus we our selves cannot tell when some of those points which we maintaine against them began or by whom they were first brought in Ergo we have little reason to demaund the same of him seeing as he saith it is more then we our selves are able to tell The Antecedent hath beene already disproved i Reply pag. 13 How the Antecedent hath been disproved the Reader may judge by what hath been already said but I am sure it hath driven this Iesuite the Defenders of Purgatory c. to the Scriptures which the Iesuite â—â—r any Saylor in the Roman Gulfe would never anchor 〈◊〉 unlesse forced by a storme in case of necessity And further I wonder that the Iesuite should confesse that iâ— all their profession wee cannot shâ—we them any point or article whose Originall they cannot derive most plainely from Christ and his Apostles c. whenas they charge the Scripture with obscurity k Bellarm De verbo Dei lib. 3 cap. 1. Si res consideres necessarió fatendum est Scripturas esse obscurissimas Siquidem tradunt summa mysteria de divina Trinitate de incarnations verbi c Et 〈◊〉 post Si veromodum dicendi consideremus inveniâ—mus innumerabiles rationes 〈◊〉 darknes And thirdly you may perceive this Antecedent hath beene so well proved that omissâ successione intermediâ the Iesuite is willing to breake downe their bulwarke of succession and to originalize every point in his profession from Christ and his Apostles thinking that to be a sufficient meanes to declare the truth of Doctrine when their Champions Fisher and Sweet denyed the said liberty for the same end to their acute and learned opponent Doctor Featly l Answer to the Fisher catched in his own nâ—t Sect. 2. And although we should not stand with him upon his said Antecedent truely hee deduceth not a right conclusion out of the same For say that we our selves could not tell the precise time of their beginnings yet have we good cause to demaund the same of him m Reply pag. 14. c This is but a fancy and hath no ground in reason as if your Catholick Roman Church ought not to have as much care to prevent heresies as we to detect them or that you who make succession your note of truthes should not bee bound to shew their perpetuity by a preciâ—e continuance from the Apostles downewards as well as we to declare their falshood and to shew their upstartednes in following times Our Answerer surmising as it seemeth that the vanity of these foresaid proofes would quickly be descryed by his judicious Reader endeavoureth with other vaine instances and examples to cast a mist before his eyes n Reply pag. 14 c. Silly Dreamer how did his selfe-conceit flatter him when he compiled his Reply Doth he thinke a judicious Reader can espy that in transitu on a sudden and by view barely which a Iesuite and his fellow-labourers cannot manifest with all their paines Yet let the judicious Reader judge of things past he promiseth much in time to come But wee by Gods grace setting forth the light of veritie will easily disperse the foggie vapors of his vanitie that so wee may reduce the Reader to the path of truth o Reply ibid Gods grace assisteth truth not herefie the breath of his mouth must consume Antichrist not fortifie his kingdome the light of verity is so far from being set forth by this Iesuite that it is his master-peice to rayle against it to eclypse it if such a moone-calfe could performe the worke Yet let us see what these foggie vapors are which the glorious light of the Iesuites veritie will disperse He saith then concerning our Private Masse that he will tell us in what Popes dayes it first beganne if wee tell him in what Popes dayes the People first began to fall from their devotion r Reply ibid. But he hath left the most learned Primate's answere not because a fogge but because the light thereof ofâ—ends his sight For first the most learned Answerer setteth forth the vanity of his Demand in asking What Bishop of Rome did first alter that Religion which you commend in them of the first 400 yeares In what Pope his dayes was the true Religion over-throwne in Rome by severall arguments 1. from their owne disability 2. from their comming in pedetentim their lingring birth which cannot bee in one Popes dayes 3. from the tacite confent of many which cannot be wrought by one And heere hee bringeth two more instances the first taken from want of Devotion in the people the second from time it selfe And therefore to require a Pope for the altering of that which was done by another or to restraine us so to time as to urge us for to shew that to have beene brought into the Roman Church in one Popes dayes which perhaps was not effected in the lives of 100. of them this must needes be a vaine and ridiculous Demand But let us see whether the Iesuite be not lost in this mist Wee urge him with hiâ— promise saith he as he is a man of his word and wee give him to understand that in Pope Peter the Apostles time the people fell from their devotion of whom therefore the same Apostle saith That it had beene better for them not to have knowne the way of Iustice then after having knowne it to turne froÌ„ the holy comandement given them * 1. Peâ—â—â—â— 21. c. Behold now when people fill from their devotion and consequently when our private Masse began even by our Answerers owne rule unlesse he put chance betweene q Reply pag. 14 Did people in generall want devotion in S. Peters time was the best age of the Church the worst by your censure Is it the decay of love in some one or few hypocrites mindes that can answere the most learned Primates demaund You must shew us a time when the people did as universally lack Devotion as they doe among you the Sacrament or else you have accepted the Answerers promise to your
delivered to the Saints * Iude v. 3. 4. neither the instrument Gods Booke †Luke 1. 4. written for this purpose and continued for this end that it might be a memoriall of Gods truth for the time to come for ever and ever * Esai 3â— â— Doe you thinke that if all or any of this had made for him or given advantage to his cause the Iesuite would have closed his eyes I cannot beleive that it was courtesie which made him for beare but the brightnesse of the testimony which this 〈◊〉 his tender eyes durst not behold whereby you may take notice of the Iesuits practise in leaving convincing grounds untouched that he might the better and with the lesse reproofe stile that a vaine betaking to the Scriptures which truely is done in imitation of Christ and by Apostolicall direction And furthermore who amongst his owne will not be ashamed of his wry mouth and cloven tongue that dare stile that a conveighance which this most reverend Father urgeth from antiquity citing Tertullians wordes Is this the honourer of the auncient Church that accounteth the iudgement of the fathers as the assured touchstone to try all controversies betwixt us i In his Epistle to the King Here wee see what esteeme they may expect at his handes if they crosse his way for though he forbeare to question Tertullian whom he cannot answere yet you may perceive his direction followed by the most learned Answerer is persecuted by this Mountebanke with a base invective But although the Iesuite dare not absolutely submit his cause unto this tryall yet for the present he will accept his motion upon condition that if the Answerer come short of proving this way that a change hath beene made that saying of Tertullian shall point at him and his doctrine and all the rest which he casteth at us shall fall upon his owne head k Reply pag 20 I understand not this condition nor I thinke he himselfe but if the Iesuite convict us by Tertullian his rule we are content that he shall triumph and be acknowledged a Victor The first instance then produced by the most reverend Primate is this In the Apostles dayes when a man had examined himselfe he was admitted unto the Lords table there to eate of that bread and drinke of that cuppe as appeareth plainely 1. Cor. 11. 28. In the Church of Rome at this day the people are indeed permitted to eate of the bread if bread they may call it but not allowed to drinke of the cuppe Must all of us now sâ—â—t our eyes and siâ—â— * As it was in the beginning so now Sicâ—â— erat in principio nunc unlesse we be able to tell by whom and when this first institution was altered l See the most reuerend the Lord Primate his answere to the Iesuites challenge And the Iesuite would perswade that this is a weake argument by his crosse pleading of foure things practised by us 1. In the Apostles dayes the faithfull received the sacrament after meate in the euening * 1. Cor. 11. â—1 in the Protestants Church at this day it is commonly received fasting and in the morning therefore it is not with them sicut erat in principiâ— nunc 2. In the Apostles dayes the sick were annointed * Marke 6. 3. Ia. 5. 14. with oyle and a commandement given so to doe the Protestants practise no such thing therefore c. 3. In the Apostles dayes the faithfull were commanded to obstaine from eating of bloud * Act. 15. and strangled meates Among the Protestants there is no such abstinâ—nce observed Therefore c. 4. Christ when hee ministred the sacrament said * Mat. 26 6. Take eate this is my Body the Protestants now adayes say not so but take â—ate this in remembrance c. And from this he concludes that it is not with the Protestants sicut erat in principio m Reply pag. 20 c. Heere any man may see that this Iesuite dare not stand to his accepted motion to bee tryed by Moses and the Prophets Christ and his Apostles the sacred Scriptures and therefore hee laboureth to weaken the strength thereof but let him mantle himselfe in his pretences never so much this is sufficient to declare that a change hath beene made which is all that the most learned Answerer desireth to conclude So that if wee can declare that Papists not Protestants in their changes made have fallen from the puritie of Doctrine and practise of primitive times the Iesuite will rest like a Franciscan Novice demure and tongue-tyed for ever For the three first instances wee confesse that a change hath beene made and that heerein wee have followed the practise of those that brought them in But for the fourth hee deales like a shuffler and would seeme to insinuate that we have dealt with those words * This is my Body Hoc est corpus 〈◊〉 as they haue done with some of the Commandements either cast them out or put something in the place thereof as their owne 〈◊〉 and Ribadâ—nâ—yra n The second they have left out and â—ut in stead of the fourth Commandement Remember to sanctifie the holy Dayes have done Wheâ—â—â— our Church teacheth Children before Confirmation that the Body and Bloud of Christ which is the inward part or thing signified of the sacrament are verily and indeed taken and received of the faithfull in the Lords Supper o See the Catâ—chisme in our Common Prayer Booke and in the celebration of the Communion the whole institution is repeated in these words expressely Take â—ate this is my Body which is given for you p See there the Order for the Administration of the Communion So that this is but an imaginary change pretended having no truth in it at all For the Changes confessed they are not but in things indifferent and ceremonies which no Papist dare deny but the Church of God had and hath power to alter CHRIST as in the Sacrament prescribing the substance leaving the Ceremonie to the ordering of the Church r Augustin epistol 118. Salvator non praecepit quo deinceps ordine sumeretuâ— ut Apostolis per quos dispositurus erat Ecclesiam servaret hunc loâ—â—m Nam si hoc ille monuisset ut post cibos alios semper acciperetur credo quòd cum morem nemo variâsset as is apparant in those wordes This doe not thus in 〈◊〉 of â—ee Luke 22. 19. This Answere the Iesuite knew would put a period to his vaine flourish and therefore by repeating it hee thinkes to avoyde the same as if the rule by Scriptures were of no force if this answere were permitted for saith hee What force leaveth he to his owne argument made against us in a matter of the like indifferency Å¿ Reply pag. 20. If the Iesuite could prove it so it were something to the purpose but lame Ignatius heere leaves his armes and fals to
〈◊〉 Romana Athanasius 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 hist cap. 〈…〉 S. 〈◊〉 Basil Augustine stile thâ—se writings â—â—ving his counterfeit Calixius at Rome make these bookes Canonicall it being plaine that they were so tearmed in respect of other corrupt writings which were read in the Church at that time which practice was excepted against by the Third Councell of Carthage 〈◊〉 as it is urged by the Iesuite wherein it was decreed that nothing should be read in the Church under the name of divine Scriptures and I thinke you will not conceive this inhibition had any relation to any of those bookes we call Apocryphall they being never condemned to be read by the Church Besides Bellarmine telleth us the title of divine â—â— given by most 〈◊〉 and most 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to the Prayer of 〈◊〉 the 3 and 4. of 〈◊〉 the 3. and 4. of 〈◊〉 and the booke of Pastor â— c. And the calling of 〈◊〉 Propheticall Scripture by S. Ambrose is to like effect it being given to the fourth booke of Eâ—â—ras which the Iesuite will not have Canonical Scripture though it be lifted up with as great a testimony from that Faâ—her q Sixtus seneâ— Bibl. sancta lib. 1. de Esdâ—â— lib. 3. 4. Divus Ambrosius etiam quartum librum putat editum ab ipso Esdra non sine divinâ revelatione as the booke of Tobie which hee is willing to justifie But leaving Tobie with his dog the Iesuite hath some further proofe for the Macehabees They are alledged saith he as other Canonicall bookes of Scriptures are without any difference And who are the alledgers Cyprian 〈◊〉 â—en and Ambrose r Reply pag. â—â— Two things are here to be examined First whether every booke cited by a Father be Canonicall Secondly how and in what manner they be urged and cited by the Fathers First it is evident that there is no ground that the citing of a booke by a Father should turne his nature when an Apostles pen hath not that virtue in it selfe unlesse he will conclude all those Poets cited in the Scriptures and the booke of Eâ—â—ch by Iude to be reckoned within the Canon Besides if this Argument have any life in it against us why 〈◊〉 it not have the same strength against Papists to prove the booke called Pastor to be Canonicall which as Bellarmine observeth 〈◊〉 by the Fathers Irenaeus who giveth it the name of Scriptures Clemens Alexandrinus and Origen For the Bellarm de scriptor ecclesâ— Hermen five Hermes librum scripsit apud veteres valde celebrem 〈◊〉 inscripsit Pastorem Is libâ—â— quamvis à sancto 〈◊〉 reâ—â—o lib. 4 caprino Origeâ—â— et divinorum title Divine given by Cyprian and his testimony out of Augustine there needeth no further illustration 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 answered in substance before Our Iesuite from these grounds the principall whereof iâ— S. Hieromes ignorance beginnes his 〈◊〉 What wonder then if the Church at Rome 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 them also for Canonicall 〈…〉 The slightest cause hath two or three witnesses those without exception that directly agree one with an other in giving testimony to the proposed articles The Iesuiâ—e that pretended the auncient Church hath not given us â—â—â— compleat proofe from the same and those which he â—â—th produced are but particular men with one Provinâ—â—â—ll Councell which they themselves generally approve â—oâ— and some of his private testimonies say little to the pâ—rpose So all that our Iesuite can expect is this that in some private judgements these bookes might be judged Canonicall but never so delivered by the auncient Church which defence the booke Pastâ—r hath from 〈◊〉 confession and the fourth of Esdras by the confession of your owne Sixtuâ— Senensis 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 lib. 1. de 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ◠〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And therefoâ—e there is reason sufficient that our Iesuite should 〈◊〉 doâ—â—â— his 〈◊〉 whichupon so vaine a confidence heâ— hath â—rected and acknowledge their change although they have doâ—â— it upon so good a ground as the imbracing of some private judgments three or foure hâ—â—dreth yâ—â—es after Christ leaving the streame of the ancient Church â—he 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the same Thus the charge appâ—â—â—â—th to be 〈◊〉 not 〈◊〉 as the Iesuit hoped to have proved it that the Church of Rome hath leâ—â— the gâ—â—â—rall practise of the â—â—â—cient Church and hath imbracâ—◠〈◊〉 private 〈◊〉 not for love of their persons but 〈◊〉 in the 〈◊〉 themselves they finde some shelter 〈◊〉 their 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sâ—â—ing he cannot declare them scriptures by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 neither by the testimony of the ancient 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 all is sure if we cannot manifest that 〈◊〉 bookes held now 〈◊〉 by the Church of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a contrary sentence by the â—â—cient church 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 all his skill 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 â—◠〈◊〉 saith the 〈◊〉 â—◠〈◊〉 thâ—â— evâ—â— the Church of God did 〈…〉 〈…〉 before the Church declared them for Canonicall by 〈◊〉 authoritie * Reply pag 2â— The Iesuit must tell us what he meâ—â—â—th by the Churches declaring them by publicke authority For if he understand a generall Councell it is idle for they never came to be so yâ— Canus loc Theol. l. â— c. â—â— Cyprianus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in expositione symboli â—osdem sex libros patrum anctoritate a quibus se 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Quod idâ—◠〈◊〉 ci◠〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 â—â—ordium Cuâ—â—que diligeâ—ter de omnibus exploraverat omni investigatione comperit hos libâ—â—â— esse a veteris instrumenti am in Psalmum â—â—â— Sed i 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Cyril 〈◊〉 â—◠〈◊〉 Caâ— â—â— audacious in the primitive times as to claime the priviledge to â—â—eepe into the Canon Besides he is as foâ—d in the consequent that they have made no change herein froÌ„ the practise of the 〈◊〉 Church unlesse we can shewe that the ancient Church of God did give judgment or sentenâ—â— contrary to their Trent declaration in a generall councell For if this were good reason the councell of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 have 〈◊〉 the 3. 4. booke of Esdras Pastor their decretall epistles Gregory Siâ—tus yea what not plead in the same manner that they had made no change they never being in your judgment I think condemned by the publicke authoritie of any generall councell in the ancient catholicke Church that did give judgment or sentence conâ—â—ry thereunto But if the Church might be said to give â—â—â— judgment against the bookes of Iudith Toby and the 〈◊〉 by keeping them out of the canoâ— as no doubt â—â— may practise being the best declareâ— of mens judgements it shal be manifested sufficieÌ„tly that they have long 〈◊〉 received their doome For first they were alwaies difâ—â—â—â—med in regard of the canon rule of faith 〈◊〉 that the Iesuit hath not produced one privat 〈◊〉 that is plaine and convincing for almost â—â—â— yeares 〈◊〉 Christ Secondly In the 〈◊〉 Catalogue
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 unto her so that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 safely follow her 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 rest in her judgement in thâ—â— I say generall Counceâ—â— may 〈◊〉 in 〈◊〉 of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Church her selfe from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of Christian Religion and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in all This is a â—ad beginning being a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 him I lay down 〈…〉 first that the Church including in iâ— all 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Christ appeared in the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Secondly 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 all those 〈◊〉 that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Apostles times i◠〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 all 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 happily not from all ignorance Thirdly that the Church including 〈◊〉 the â—eleivers living 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 free not onely from 〈◊〉 in such things 〈…〉 to 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈…〉 thing that any 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to Christian 〈◊〉 and religion 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 without all doubt 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the judgement of the Church in 〈…〉 so â—â— to the thing◠〈◊〉 in Scripture or 〈◊〉 by the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that â—ath beene 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Because as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Church 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Church 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of 〈◊〉 or Rome but the Vniversâ—ll Church neither that Vniversall Church which 〈◊〉 be gathered together in a generall Councell which is 〈◊〉 sometimes to have erred but that which dispersed through the world from the Baptisme of Iohn continueth to 〈◊〉 times Sixtly that in the judgment of Waldensis the Fathers successively are more certaine judges in matters of faith then a Generall Councell of Bishops though it be in a sort the highest Court of the Church as the Treatisâ—r saith But saith the Iesuite if yet for all this our Answerer will not be brought to build his conscience upon any other authority d Reply pag. 32 I perceive a little thing will beget conâ—idence 〈◊〉 Iesuite that is so lifted up with producing two old objections to little purpose but what then why majora his agreat one of our owne shall schoole him a little better Pooâ—e â—edant in what manner By telling him out of Lyriâ—ensis that the auncient consent of godly Fathers is with great carâ— not onely to be searched but also to be followed of us cheifly in the rule of Faith Reply ibid. As if the consent of Fathers were the absolute rule of Faith without Scriptures when you yourselves dare not attribute to any Fathers authority power to expresse the rule of Faith by their bare consent For Durand saith that although the Church hath power of Gâ—â— on 〈◊〉 yet that doth not exceede thâ— limitation of the Scripturâ— f Durand â—â— Dist. 44. q. 3. â— 9. Ecclesia licet habet in terris dominationem Dei. illa tamen â—on excedit limitationem Scripturae Universall extent of Doctrine is a good directory to truth but the absolute foundation of Faith are the sacred Scriptures Neither are we at all to give credit saith the Author of the imperfect worke upon Matthew amongst the workes of Chrysostome unto the Churches themselves unlesse they teach or doe those things which are agreeable to the Scriptures g 〈◊〉 Commentar in Mat. homil 49. intes operâ— S. Chrys incerto auctore Nec ipsis ecclesijs omnino â—redendum est niâ—â—â—a dicant vel faciant quae convenientia sunt Scripturis No testimonies have any strength that walk without God his word The Fathers adhere to the Scriptures therfore we ought to adhere to them so are we to embrace the authority of the ancient Doctors Councels as those that embraced the holy Scriptures in their faith doctrin and for that cause this learned Bishop coupleth them together Wee rest saith he upon the scriptures of God upon the authority of the ancient Doctors and Councels Reply pag. 31 inferring thereby that those which fixe their faith have not onely divine testimonies but also the judgement and beliefe of the best men to declare the same as good subsidiarie helps to their convincing grounds which doth not conclude that any authority besides the Scripture is necessary but that it is a faire convenient rule to bridle mens fancies least the Scriptures should be wrested by them which are too much wedded to their owne conceits to patronage their errours And what Augustine gave to Bishops and Councels this learned Bishop assenteth unto but I am assured that the Iesuite will not bee able to prove that S. Augustine ever embraced such a thought as to believe that the receiving of humane testimonies should disable the Scriptures from being the onely concluding and sufficient rule for he is of a quite contrary opinion as is apparant in many places of his writings Aâ—g â— Donat. post collat c. 1â— Quâ—si Episcoporum Concilia Scripturis Canonicis fue â—int aliquandâ— comparata Neither will our Iesuite have us in our appâ—â—le to Scripture to betray our cause by our disagreement with our selves alone but also by our agreement with ancienâ— Heretickes and who are those Hereticks The Valentinians Ennomians Marcionists Arians and others whâ— as it is well knowne saith this Iesuite were wâ—nt to reject all other authorities and to â—â—nce with Scripture onely Reply pag. â—â— If this Iesuite be not a fencer judge by his weapons both edge and point being rebated for his most powerfull performance ends not so much as in a scratch or scarre And whereas he saith we fence with Scripture onely it seemeth he knoweth not the nature thereof otherwise he would repute it with the Apostle a sword for a â—ouldiâ—r yea sharper then a two-edged sword We acknowledge many subsidiarie helpes but indeed none sufficient to controule the conscience but Scriptures onely And herein we follow these ancient Hereticks 1. Augustâ—â—â— cited by the most learned Answerer and unanswered by the Iesuite Let humane writings be removed let Gods voice sound Aug. de Pastor c. 14. Aâ—ferantur chartae humanae sonâ—â—t voâ—â—s divinae ede mihi unam Scripturae â—ocem pro parte Donati and further in his booke of the Vnity of the Church hee saith Let them declare their Church if they be able not in the speech and rumours of the Africans not in Councels of their Bishops not in the passages of their disputes not in their â—ignes deceitfull wonders because even against these things the word of God hath perswaded us to be â—aâ—y but in the Law Prophets Psalmes the Pastors voyce the Evangelists preaching and labours that is in all the canonicall authority of holy Scriptures m Aug. de Vnit. Eccle. c. 88. Ecclesiam suam demonstrant si possunt non iâ— sermonibus rumoribus Afrorum non in concilijs Episcoporum suorum non in literis 〈◊〉 libet disputatorum non in signis prodigijs â—allaâ—ibus qui etiam contra ista verbo Domini prâ—parati cautiâ—â—ddiâ—i sumus
author neither any Apostle nor any man Apostolicall c See the Answere to the Iesuites Challenge pag. 7. The Iesuite boasteth if the Fathers authoritie will not suffice hee will produce good and certaine grounds out of the sacred Scriptures d See the Iesuites Challenge in fine The most learned Answerer tels him if he would change his order and give the sacred Scriptures the precedency he should therein doe more right to God the author of them who well deserveth to have audience in the first place and withall ease both himselfe and us of a needelesse labour in seeking any further authoritie to compose our differences And thereupon as St Augustine the Donatists so this most reverend Lord provoketh Papists Let humane writings be removed let Gods voyce sound Produce but one cleare testimonie of the sacred Scripture for the Popes part and it shall suffice alledge what authoritie you list without Scripture and it cannot suffice e Answere to the Iesuites Challenge pag. 10. And in the same page he further expresseth himselfe And this we say not as if we feared that these men were able to produce better proofes out of the writings of the Fathers for the part of the Pope then we can doe for the Catholicke cause when we come to joyne in the particulars they shall finde it farre otherwise but partly to bring the matter unto a shorter tryal partly to give the word of God his due to declare what that rocke is upon which alone we build our faith even the foundation of the Apostles and Prophets * Ephes â— â—0 from which no sleight that they can devise shall ever drawe us Here also in the place alledged he shewes that although by reason of their corrupt dealing with antiquitie it is high time for us to listen unto the advice of Vincentius Lirinenfis and not be so forward to commit the tryall of our controversies to the writings of the Fathers who have had the ill hap to fall unto such hucksters handling Yet that you may see saith the most reverend Primate f In his Answere to the Iesuitea Challenge pag 20. how confident we are in the goodnes of our cause we will not now stand upon our right nor refuse to enter with you into this field but give you leave for this time both to be the Challenger and the appointer of your owne weapons Now let all men judge whether there can bee a more plaine expression without fast and loose without tergiversation without inconstancie when as the most learned Answerer adhereth with the auncient Fathers to the true and absolute rule the sacred Scriptures and yet to satisfie the Iesuite is willing to try our faith according to the rule proposed by the Iesuit himselfe not that our doctrine had no other foundation or testimony besides the Fathers but that the Iesuites vaine pretences of Antiquitie might be detected and made knowne and that the world might see that their Doctrine and Church is not to bee justified by the testimonies of either God or man unlesse it bee that Man of sinne who in this cause would bee both party and Iudge and in matters which hee calleth faith would have his determinations to be received without dispute The Iesuite proceeds Although we have already shewen how little right you have to stand uppon in this case yet such thankes as this your courtesie doth deserve wee willingly returne g Reply pag. 48 Palmarium Facinus What have you shewen but your shame You have declared your distast of Scriptures and if the Fathers would performe the worke you expect from them why doe you muster in their ranke such hired Souldiers Epistles Canons Bookes swolne with forged titles corrupted depraved that they might deceive but that gladiatorio animo although neither God nor good men will plead for you yet you will not leave to plead for your selves Wee have heard you say ere while saith the Iesuite that we have had opportunitie enough of time and place to falsifie the Fathers writings and to teach them the learning and tongue of the Chaldeans and that we have performed it so well by clipping washing cankering c. that thereby their complexions being altered they appeare not to be the same men they were h Reply pag. 48 And where I pray you doth the most learned Answerer unsay it O but if this be true saith the Iesuite how can the goodnes of your cause be proved by them if not true what satisfaction can you make us for your uncharitable slaunders If the Fathers bee corrupted how dare you enter into this Field if not corrupted why did you charge us wrongfullie i Reply ibid. If the most learned Answerer had not detected your frauds you had never beene charged by him with those crimes If your clipping washing cankering had not beene espied or if he had bene so credulous as to have beleived all your impostors that you can stile Fathers of Councells then might you justly have demaunded How could the goodnes of his cause bee proved by them But whenas you dare not trust God in his owne meaning nor the true ancient Fathers or lawfull decrees of Councels without the assistance of your bastard authors to helpe in time of necessity this gives him ground sufficient to justifie our cause that hath no need of such treacheries and to detect yours even they being Iudges whom you appeale unto For in the point to bee handled afterwards whether Peters Primacie did descend to all succeeding Bishops of Rome what testimony bringeth the Iesuit but Arabick canons of the Nicene Councell proved to be according to the title by an experiment from the mountaines of S. Thomas 1605 k Reply pag. â—6 and confirmed by an epistle of Athanasius to Pope Marke l Reply pag. â—7 Here is one Counterfeit brought to justifie another and all for the counterfeite authoritie of the Roman Bishop This your corrupting of antiquitie would have hindred us if the same had not beene detected but this most reverend Lord can discerne betwixt the right hand and the left and point you out those witnesses that you onely dare commit your selves unto The Councell of Nice was corrupted by the Pope for to magnifie his Chaire and sea and to make the African Fathers beleive that he had that by positive law which now they challenge by divine right but did these Fathers trust the corrupters No they sent for the true coppie and then left the pretenders May not this be done in the like manner by the most learned Answerer True it is that Gibeonites with their pretences of antiquitie and outward mustines may sometime deceive a Ioshua yet we doubt not but time and experience may reveale the fraud Iacob was deceived by Laban but it was in the night Day declared who deceived him Whilst the world was no further learned then the Pope infallible what excellent testimonies were there for the Papall triple but when the Sunne the
f Epistol Concil Aphricam ad Papam Caelestinum Executores etiam clericos vestros quibusque petentibus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 concedere ne fumosum typhum seculi in Ecclesiam Christi videamur inducere ambition by others g Hieron Epist 57. A Pastore praesidium ovis flagito facessaâ— invidia Romani culminis recedat ambitio their pride being hated their motions contemned And Leâ— was no more to be excused then some of his Predecessors in these particulars seeing he rejected the Catholick Church a Councell of 〈◊〉 and â—â—â— Bishops because they would make another Patrâ—arcke equall with him h 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Concil Chalcedonenâ—â— Occumenicum sive Vniversale IV. approbat 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 â—â—â—centi Triginta Episcopâ— Id vero quod instigante Anatolio Constantinopolitaâ—â— Antistite ambiciose absentibus possea contradicentibus segatis de primatur 〈◊〉 Constantinopolitanae contra decreta 〈…〉 dem secundum 〈…〉 quam S. Leo Rom. â—ex plane in probavit cassa vit atque irritum reddidiâ—â—â— â—eply pag. 66. Bellarm. de sacram conâ—â—â— l. 2. c. x. Epistolae 〈…〉 apud nonnullos 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ve 〈◊〉 supposititiâ—◠〈◊〉 Non sit certain 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 quorum nomina praeserunti So that if you have no better argument then Leo his appetite to magnify Rome and to free it from spots it is but a poore and tender 〈◊〉 For we deny not Christs care of Peter neither his prayer for Peter but that all were fortified in Peter any otherwise then by example the Iesuite must proove by better grounds then hee 〈◊〉 produceth or else hee is not halfe way at his journeyes end The next witnesse is the good counterfeit Eusebius from whose plaine dealing he beginnes his triumph Could any 〈◊〉 speake more plainely for us concerning the ever during 〈◊〉 of the Catholicke Roman Church â— There is no reasoÌ„ any should for if your forgtâ— y ◠〈◊〉 you who will expect truth to pleade your causeâ— But the Iesuite tells us that S. Cyprian affordeth 〈◊〉 like testimony for that speaking of certaine Hereticks of 〈◊〉 They are bold saith he to 〈◊〉 even to the chaire of Peter and to the principall Church from whence Preistly Vnitie draweth its originall neither doe they consider how they are those Romans whose faith is commended by the Apostle and to whom persidiousnes cannot 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 k Reply pag â—â— But he fayles for first hee speaketh not of the same thing 〈◊〉 in Cyprian having relation to matter of fact in discipline not doctrine Secondly if Cyprian should speake in the Iesuites sense here surely he speaketh non-sense in his bitter charges against Stephen Cornelius his Successor who received these schismaticks whose 〈◊〉 in former Popes times could not have accesse thither l Cyprian epist ad 〈◊〉 Thirdly Cyprian speakes elegantly in this place as a Rhetoritian not positively but perswasively at the Roman Souldiers and the Spanish Navye were stiled invincible not because they were truly as they were stiled but that by a superlative and excessive praise their carriage valour might be lifted up and encreased and you call your Popes generally blessed not because they are but because they should be so For his other Citation out of Cyprian The spouse of Christ cannot be defiled she is unspotted and chast m Reply pag. 67 We acknowledge as that Father saith that the spouse of Christ is uncorrupt and chast but this prooves not the Romane Church free from Heresies neither that the same which you call Peters Church shall in her succession enjoy that priviledge And what the Ancient meant when they tearmed the Church uncorrupt I told you before and the same Father shall tell you againe that it is so stiled in relation to what it shal be not what actually it is August cont Pelag. de nâ—â— gra cap. 63. Hoc agitur â—tique nunc in haec seculo ut ad â—stam quam omnes sancti 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 puritatem Ecclesia sancta pervenina quae in 〈◊〉 seculo neque aliquo malorum hominum sibi permixto neque aliqua in se lâ—go 〈◊〉 resistente legi mentis dicut 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 vitam in 〈◊〉 divinâ— The next testimony is the learned Priest S. Hierome but what saith this their supposed Cardinall surely he is not so full mouthed as the counterfeit Popes In his Epistle to Damasus thus he writeth Apud vos solos incorruptâ— Patrum servatur haereditus With you onely is the inheritance of the Fathers kept without corruption Reply pag. 6â— Which we beleive for which of ours taints the Roman Church as an hereticall Assembly in Damasus his dayes yet when hee was dead your owne witnesse stiles Rome BABYLON the PURPLE HARLOT the Bishop and Cleargie the Pharisâ—icall Senate p Hieron ad Paulinum in lib. Didymi de Spiritu Sancto Praefat. Cùm iâ— BABYLONE versarer PVRPVRATAE MERETRICIS essem colonus volui aliquid garrire de Spiritu sancto coeptum opusculum ejusdâ—urbis Pontifici dedicate Et ecce Pharisaeorum conclamavit Senatus nullus scriba vel doctus sed omnis quasi sibi indicto praelio DoctrinaruÌ„ adversus me imperitiae factio conjuravit Damasus qui me ad hoc opuspiluâ— impulerat jam dormit 〈◊〉 Christo But to what purpose doth the Iesuite urge the latter sentence Know that the Romane faith commended by the mouth of the Apostle cannot be deceived yea though an Angel should teach otherwise then hath already beene preached yet caâ— it not be changed being defended by the authority of the Apostle S. Paul q Reply pag. 67. Here we see it is Paul that defends the Romane saith not Peter And how doth Paul performe this but by his Epistle his doctrine Now if Pauls Doctrine can defend the faith that it cannot be changed what wil the Prophets and Apostles doe altogether This is a testimony for the Scriptures not for the Pope Paul anathematizeth * â—al 1. 8. 9. all whose doctrine sounds against that delivered by himself though Peter or his Vicar should define it Vincent Lirinen div prof Novatiâ—â—◠〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ioannes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 omnis Apostolorum 〈…〉 but you will â—â—ve no heretickes or heresie before the definition of your Pope no not Arianisme it selfe Reply pag. 10â— 103. 104. Yet if Paul befriend you you are very ungratefull that in your solemne sermons in â—â—ly have censured S. Paul for a â—ote headed person who was so transported with his pangs of zeale and eagernesse beyond all compasse in most of his disputes That there was no great reckoning to bee made of his assertions yea he was dangerous to read â—◠〈◊〉 of â—â—resie in some places and bettâ—â— perhaps he had never written t S. Edwind Sâ—â—ds his relation of the state of Religion in the Westeâ—â— parts of the woâ—â—â— Pacianus bringeth up the reare who in his first Epistle to the Hereticke Symproâ—â—â—â— saith the Iesuite speaking of the Catholicke Church hath these words When as after the Apostles divers
he say of the ignorance or the folly of the Answerer when he upbraides him with a Creed of the new fashion compised by Pope 〈◊〉 the fourth o Reply pag. 91 Nullus sapienâ— admiratur M â— Malone and therfore take the foole with you And howsoever you thinke to defend Pins the fourth by the Practice of the Nicene Councell it will give you no shelter they did you say expresse and declare the ancient faith in a new fashion and forme of words p Reply ibid. So did Athanasius so others but this is not the thingâ— for which you are accused but it is for an Appendix of twelve new points many of which were never accounted of faith till Pius the fourth his time and therefore your ground from which you perswade us to embrace it is unsound viz â— that it was compiled after the like manner without any alteration or innovation of the auncient faith aâ— all q Reply pag. 92 The ancient faith was so necessary to be believed that Athanafius tells us Whosoever wil bee saved it is necessary that he hold the Catholicke faith but your Creed is propounded onely to schollars and cheifely to such as are to receive promotions unto Scholasticall or Ecclesiasticall dignities r Reply pag. 91. Secondly the Apostle S. Iude tells us that the Faith Catholicke was once delivered but all your Trent articles are not so but brought in in after-times by the authority and definition of your Church as Transubstantiation Å¿ 〈◊〉 4. disâ— 11. q. 3. 〈◊〉 in Can. 〈◊〉 â—ect 41. Thirdly in the unitie of the Catholicke faith layde downe t Irenaeus â— 1. â— 3. 3â— by Irenaeus all the founded Churches in Germany Spaine France the East Egypt Lybia and all the world did sweetly agree but upon many of the new articles in your Creed there have been continuall warres controversies betwixt those that you will acknowledge Catholickes as communicating in one kinde Purgatory Indulgences the Mother and Mistresse of all Churches So that these points must be additions or else the Church lost the unity of Faith for a long time together Fourthly 〈◊〉 Lirinensis u Vincen. Lirinen advers prophan novat Cùm sit perfectus Scripturarum canon sibique ad omnia satis superque sufficiat and other Fathers x S. Basil l. de vera pia fid Manifesta defectio fidei est importare quicquam â—orum quae scripta non sunt S. Hilar l. 2. ad Const Aug. fidem tandem secundum ea quae scripta sunt defiderantem hoc qui repudiat Antichristuâ— est qui simulaâ— Anathem a eâ—â— S. August l. 2. de doct Christ c. 9. In ijs quae apertè in scriptura posita sunt inveniuntur illa omnia quae continent fidem moresque vivendi and some Schoolemen y Scotuâ— Prolog in Sent. q. 2 Scriptura sufficienter continet doctrinaÌ„ necessariaÌ„ viatori Thom. 2. 2. q. 1. a 10. ad 1. In Doctrina Christi Apostolorum veritas fidei est sufficienter explicita make the Scripture sufficient to â—each all points of faith but many articles of this Creed are confessed by you to be delivered by tradition onely not by Scripture z Coster in compend orthodoxae fidei demonstr 〈◊〉 5. c. 2p 162. so that you see you have vainely sought your defence from the practise of the Nicene Fathers It had been better I thinke Mr Malone that you had taken another kind of defence that you had justified the Pope your Church that they make new Creedes defining verities by the infolded still revelation of GOD which determinations have the force of a certaine divine revelation in respect of us as one of the learnedst of your Fraternity hath said a Suaâ—es â—om 2. p. 93. or with Stapleton that the church may define a point of faith Etiamsi nullo scripturarum aut evidenti aut probabili testimonis confirmaretur although it bee not confirmed with any evident or probable testimony of the Scriptures b Stapleton Râ—lect Cont. 4. q. 1 ar â— or with Lâ—â— the X. in his Bull against Luther that it is heresie to say immanu Ecclesia aut prorsus non esse statuere articles fidei that it is not in the hand of the Church or Pope to make articles of faith c Art 27. not to have run to expressing declaring which the Councell Pope never intended but be it as it will the Iesuite tells us that the Laytie may bee well counted Catholickes though they never so much as heard of it therefore we need not to trouble our selves about so triviall a matter especially they accounting us of the Lay number But after charges of ignorance folly and wrangling the Iesuite accuseth the most milde modest nature of the most â—overend Primate that he sticketh not maliciously to slander Maldonate and others with the crime of Perjurie d Reply pag. 92. c. He that would answere this snarling Iesuite with equall currishnes must speake with his teeth and not with his tongue But passingby his language I will consider how impudently he chargeth that with slander the truth wherof he cannot cast off with all his shifts Their Trent Creede is Neither will I ever receive or expound it vizâ— the Scripture but according to the uniforme consent of Fathers e Bulla Pij IV. p. 478. Nec eam unquam nisi juxta unanimem consensum Patrum accipiam interpretabor Now to defend Maldonate and Pererius two of his brotherhood for not practising according to faith he first reviles after his accustomed manner the most reverend Primate Secondly he denyes that Maldonatâ— ever tooke his â—ath Thirdly he expounds the article of faith for the saving of the Iesuites credite f See the Iesuites Reply pag. 9â— First for his reviling let Rabshekah rayle for Maldonats oath he tels us that the most reverend Primate cannot tell whether Maldonate tooke the oath or not gives two reasons one in the Text because he supposeth he never did the other in the margent For he lived wrote in Paris where the Tridentine Councell is not received g Reply pag. 92 A Iesuite must beleive for the Popes advantage why should wee thinke his suppositions should prejudge his cause he that must beleive white blacke if the Church injoyne it h 〈◊〉 p. 247. can suppose any thing The other reason is as vaine might as well have been spared in the margent as in the text for though the Church of France receive not the Councell of Trent yet is there any Iesuite in France that doth not subscribe unto it to submit in any other maner then the Pope prescribes is not obedience but rebellion Besides this being made a part of the Papall Creed he cannot deny his Baptisme in that faith if their faith be as auncient as the Iesuite which is not done without a vow or oath But if
falso 415. Ecclesia Propheâ—â— est more then a Prophet r Idem falso 224. Plâ—â—quaâ— Propheta yea greater then all the Prophets Å¿ Idem circ fals 286. Major omnibus Prophetis having the Spirit of GOD for 〈◊〉 â—iâ—ar t Idem falso 416. Spiritum Sanctum Ecclesiae Vicarium dicit Thus wee see what judge the Iesuite doth contest for and how farre they labour to extend his power to wit that the Pope who is not onely a Prophet but more then a Prophet yeaâ— greater then all the Prophets who hath the Spirit of God for his Vicâ—â— either with or without a Councell hath onely power to determine matters of Faith whereby we may know what to beleive and what not with authority not onely equall but superiour to the scriptures Now what strength doth the Iesuite bring to confirme this Rule His first place is Esay LIIII and the 17. Thou shalt judge every tongue that shall resist theâ— in thy judgment u Reply pag. 99. Surely the Iesuite is like to their Divines in the Councell of Trent who being restrayned to the Scriptures and forbidden schoole-disputes brought all the places out of the Prophets and Psalmes where they stand the words Confitâ—â—r and its verball Confissiâ— to proove Auricular Confession and they were accounted best learned who brought most of them * Hist Concil Tridâ—â— l. 4. p. 345. For here is nothing whereby to make the Pope the infallible Iudge of Controversies unlesse he will conclude that wheresoever Iudge or Iudgment is expressed it is meant of him The second is out of Mat. XI and the 18. Hâ—ll gates shall not prevaile against her x Reply ibid We confesse that all the powers of Hell shall never prevaile against the Church but we say this Church is neither the Pope naked nor Roman as hath in many places beene shewed Yet I would gladly know to what purpose this text is here produced The third place is Mat. XVIII and the â—7 Hâ—e that will not heare the Church let him be to thee aâ— a Heathen and a Publican y Reply ibid. If an infallible judge bee heere pointed out then all these abâ—â—â—dities will follow First that every particular Church should bee infallible and the Iudge of Controversies for Dâ—c Ecclesia hath relation to particular Churches not to the Catholicke Secondly a particular Church should not be subject to errour in criminall causes if this place pointed out an infallible judgment when as this infallibility is denyed not only your own Councels but your Popes also 3ly If the Churches judgment must be infallible because CHRIST requireth us to heare the Church How can the Pastors of the Church bee excluded from this priviledge when the people are enjoyned by the Apostle to obey and follow them Heb. XIII 17. His fourth place is Ephes IIII. II. and 14. God hath placed in the Church Apostles Prophets Pastors and Doctors c. To the end that we be â—â— more little children â—aâ—oring with every winde of doctrine z Reply ibâ—â— I shall shew hereafter that this text maketh against his Iudge his Monarch for the present he may take this with him First that we acknowledge as long as the Church had Apostles Prophets their testimonies were divine and could infallibly direct Secondly although the â—aâ—tors now are meanes ordained by God to the end that wee bee no more little children wavering with every winde of doctrine yet it doth not follow that they are infallible Iudges seeing the argument may as well hold of each as of all who are ordained to the same end which I thinke the Iesuite will not acknowledge His last is 1. Tim. 2. The Church is the Pillar and foundation of truth a Reply ibid. What therefore the Pope the infallible Iudge This followes not For he is the rock if we beleive Popish interpreters upon which the Church is built How then can he be the Church infallibly to direct The foundation surely differs from the roofe the Church that is builded from the rocke that she is builded upon Secondly the Iesuite may know that we envy not the priviledges which GOD hath given his Church nay he were no member of her that should not reverence her with obedience and therefore we acknowledge her the pillar and ground of Truth if containing the Apostles absolutely perfectly if without the Apostles we deny not her Counsels but with all obedience embrace them if she commaund as she is limited in matters of faith by the Scriptures But we see this place is more for the Church of Ephesus concerning which the Apostle speakes literally then Rome and yet experience hath perswaded us that there is no infallibility there Further then this some of your own dare not goe but make a difference betwixt the judgment of GOD and the judgment of the Church the one they say is infallible but the other may sometime deceive b Panorm in Decret De senten Excom cap. 28. Iudicium Dei veritati quae nec fallit nec fallitur semper innititur judicium autem Ecclesiae aliquando sequitur opinionem quae sâ—pè fallit fallitur Dried de dog Ecclesl 2. p. 58. Generale Concilium Papae Cardinalium Episcoporum Doctorum â—â— Scripturis propheticis intelligendis non est tantae authoritatis quantae fuerit olim Apostolorum collegum For Ruffinus his testimony that S. Basil and S. Gregory Nazianzen did take the interpretation of the Scripture not according to their owne proper understanding but according to the tradition of the Fathers c Reply p. 99. The Iesuite pointeth not out the place if he did I thinke little would appeare for his purpose in regard he is to prove the authority of a Iudge not the discretion of a Doctour And who doubts but any wise interpreter will use all meanes that may informe him to performe his worke But let Ruffine passe Augustine maketh an out-cry And doth not S. Augustine cry out saith the Iesuite that Truth reposeth in the belly of the Church c. d Reply ibid. And who saith otherwise He that should thinke that Truth is removed out of the Church thinkes amisse But to conclude from hence the Church the Roman Church the Roman Pope to be the Iudge or Rule of faith is inconsequent Neither doth that place of Augustine cited by the Iesuite in the Xth Section Evangeliâ— non credereâ—â— nisi me Catholica Ecclesiae commoveret authoritus containe any thing to enforce this for many things may move us to beleive that are not the Rule of Faith Miracles did this worke in many but this I hope is far from your Rule What is urged from Vincentius Lirinensis hath been fully answered His note from the Geneva Bible proves nothing If he finde this Iudge at Geneva he speedes well In these words I feare he cannot be espied And now having little or nothing he beginnes his Perâ—ration Behold here gentle Reader how although the articles