deliros senes sed qui magis quà m Phormio deliraret vidisse neminem I will leave the application to your selfe and the interpretation to the Reader because you say I cannot translate Latin Some truth or modesty I should gladly heare from you but this is such an impudent Calumny as Bellarmine himselfe would have beene ashamed to have heard it fall from the Pen of any learned Papalin heare therefore what your owne men confesse of Calvin and others and what we professe in the name of our Church Your F. Kellison saith of Calvin Kellis Surney lib. 4. cap. 5. p. mihi 229. That if hee did meane as hee speaketh hee would not dispute with him but would shake hands with him as with a Catholike And then hee repeats Calvins words I say that in the Mysterie of the Supper by the signe of Bread and Wine is Christ truly delivered yea and his Body and his Blood And a little before those words hee giveth the reason Because saith he Christs words This is my Body are so plaine that unlesse a man will call God a deceiver hee can never be so bold as to say that hee setteth before us an emptie Signe This is likewise Bellarmines confession of him Bell de Euch. lib. 1. cap. 1. Non ergo vacuum inane signum It is no vaine and empty signe Thus you see your fellowes and you agree like Harpe and Harrow you say it is an empty peece of Bread they answer in Calvins behalfe and ours that it is not an empty signe Idem ibid. c. 8. Nay saith Bellarmine both Calvin and Oecolampadius and Peter Martyr doe teach the Bread is called Christs Body figuratively as being a signe or figure of his body but they adde withall it is no bare and empty figure but such as doth truely convey unto them the things signified thereby Bilson in the difference betwixt Subjection and Christistian Rebellion Part. 4. p. mihi 779. for which truthes sake Christ said not this Bread is a figure of my body but it is my body To give you an instance in some of our Church God forbid saith our learned Bilson wee should deny that the flesh and blood of Christ are truly present and truly received of the Faithfull at the Lords Table It is the Doctrine that wee teach others and wherewith wee comfort our selves Wee never doubted but the Truth was present with the Signe and the Spirit with the Sacrament as Cyprian saith Wee knew there could not follow an operation if there were not a presence before Neither doe I thinke you are ignorant of this but that you have inured your selfe to falsities and reproaches For it is apparently true that the question in these dayes is not of the truth of the presence but of the manner that is whether it be to the Teeth and the Belly or Soule and Faith of the Receiver And therupon our learned and Reverend B. Andrews returned his Answer to Bellarmine Wee beleeve the presence Wee beleeve B. Andrew ad Bell. Apol. Resp c. 1. p. mihi 11. I say the presence as well as you concerning the manner of the presence we doe not unadvisedly define nay more wee doe not scrupulously inquire no more than wee doe in Baptisme how the blood of Christ cleanseth us From the Sacraments you procceed to our two and twentie Bookes of Canonicall Scripture and indeed wee allow but two and twentie But will any Catholike say you allow this to have been Catholike Doctrine Yes without doubt Scil. Orig. in Exposit Psal 1. many good Catholikes did follow the Hebrew Canon of the Iewes which saith Origen compriseth but two and twentie bookes of the old Testament according to the number of the letters among them Melito Bellar. de verbo Dei l. 1. c. 20. Bishop of Sardis was a Catholike and saith Bellarmine hee did follow the Hebrew Canon of the Iewes Hilary Hilar. in Prolog in Psal explanat Bishop of Poictiers was a Catholike and he told us The old Testament was contained in two and twentie bookes according to the number of the Hebrew letters St. Cyril Cyril Catechis 4. Bishop of Hierusalem was a Catholike and hee gave us the like Lesson Peruse the two and twentie books of the old Testament but meddle not with the Apochrypha Athanasius Anthanas in Synops Bishop of Alexandria was a Catholike and affirmes that the Christians had a definite number of books comprehended in the Canon which were two and twentie equall to the number of the Hebrew letters Ruffinus was a Catholike Bellar. de verbo Dei l. 1. c. 20. and Bellarmine confesseth hee did follow the Hebrew Canon which conteined our two and twentie books Gregory Nazianzen was a Catholike Naz. Carm. Iamb ad Seleucum Iamb 3. and hee shewed to Seleucus a Catalogue of the Canonicall bookes and hee cites the bookes in order from Genesis to Malachie the last of the Prophets and leaveth out all the Apochrypha The Fathers of the Councell of Laodicea were Catholikes Concil Laod. cap. 59. and in the 59th Canon they allow onely those two and twenty bookes for Canonicall which wee receive There are others whom you terme Catholikes as namely Damascene Hugo de Sancto Victore Lyranus Hugo Cardinalis Tostatus Waldensis Driedo and Cajetan all which differ from your Tenet of the Apochryphall bookes which are canonized by your Trent Councell such agreement is there amongst your best learned touching the greatest point of your Beleefe and yet forsooth your Church cannot be depraved But here is one thing say you which giveth mee much cause of wonder which is that you talke of Traditions as distinct from Scripture I ever tooke you to be so fallen out with them that you made the deniall of them a fundament all point of your Religion that you would not indure the word Tradition but alwaies translated or rather falsified it into Ordinances Thus you It is a true saying of the Heathen Orator Cicero Hee who once goeth beyond the bounds of Modestie had need to be lustily impudent I protest I onely termed your Additions Traditions and you question our Church for false translating of the word And cannot wee indure the word Traditions Doe not we allow of all the Apostolicall Traditions which agree unto the Scriptures Nay more doe wee not translate the word Traditions in the Scripture when the Text will beare it according to the Greeke originall Looke upon the fifteenth of Matthew Matth. 15. v. 2 3 6. and in three severall verses 2 3 6. wee use the word Tradition Looke upon the seventh of Marke Marke 7. v. 3 8 9 13. and in foure severall places of that chapter you shall find likewise wee translate Traditions Looke upon Saint Paul to the Colossians Galatians and upon Saint Peter Colos 2.8 Galat. 1.14 1. pet 1.18 and in all these in the Translation joyned with your Rhemish Testament you shall find the word Traditions How
contrarie hee recants it saying a Bel. Recognit de summo Pont. p. 16. I allow not that which I said with Albertus Pighius that Paul appealed to Caesar to be his lawfull Judge Againe whereas it was said the Popes used to be chosen by Emperours the word Emperor potest fortè debet deleri b Idem de Cler. p. mihi 52. it must and peradventure ought to be blotted out And when I sayd that Paul was subject to Caesar as to his temporall Lord I meant it was so c De facto non de jure Ib. p. 17. Sapendo M. Paolo chasotto Sisto Quinto usci un Indice de libri prohibiti il quale se ben subito si occulto non fu pero cio cosi presto fatto che non ne restassero gli essemplari Et in questo erano compresse le opere del Bellarmino In lib. Confirmatione del considerationi del M. Paulo di Venetia di M. Fulgentio Brestiano servita In Venetia appresso Ruber to Mejetti 1606. Con licentia de superiori in 4 to in fact but not of right And in truth it seemes that neither the Pope nor his Inquisitors were well pleased with this Catholike doctrine For Frier Paul of Venice acknowledged Cardinall Ballarmine and Baronius for learned men and further saith that he hath knowne the one and the other in Rome but he could wish withall that they had written that which they sincerely thought without being forced to recant any thing that they had spoken For Frier Paul knew well that under Sixtus Quintus there came out an Index of prohibited Bookes which though it were suddainly stayed and called in yet it was not so closely acted but that there remained Copies of it and in that Index the workes of Bellarmine were comprehended If this learned Cardinals Booke had beene forbidden you and your fellowes would have beene to seeke of an answere for many objections made against you for it is usuall with you to referre me for an answer to Bellarmine But as it is observed they recanted many things in their writings Dum plurima Annalibus digerendis pervolutanda fuere agnovit ingenuè quae primis editionibus autmāca aut non omnino ad plenam veritatem abs se fuerāt scripta id quod in Annalibus non semel testatus est For Baronius confesseth that in his first Editions many things were imperfect and not altogether true which were corrected in the other impressions And I am perswaded ere long wee shall have an Index a Defēsio Johānis Marsilii in favorem respōsi 8. propositiones continentis adversus quod scripsit illustrissimus Cardinalis Bellarminus Venetiis 1606. Expurgatorius lay hold on him For saith Johannes Marsilius I have heard that as he hath taken a liberty to mend the Fathers Canons and Historians so he will correct the Councels after his manner and for his owne purpose and so assume unto himselfe a licence hereunto which God forbid Againe saith he b Marsil p. 357. See B. Mortons encounter against M. Parsons reckoning l. 1. c. 1. p. 10 11 the Answers of Cardinall Baronius are not unlike the answers of Cardinall Bellarmine who whilst he cannot finde an objected argument to be assoiled by Historie he saith that those words have beene inserted into the Bookes much like to Mr. Floyd when there is no answere to be made to some particular objections out of the Authors you reject them all as condemned by your Inquisitors And this answere I am sure may serve for all objections that can bee made from most Classicall Authors The last thing which I here meane to speake of is a certaine distinction of explicite and implicite faith which the Knight and his Ministers cry out against and are pleased sometimes to make themselves merry withall as if they would laugh out but it is too well and solidly grounded to bee blowne away with the breath of any such ministeriall Knight as he is Thus you You professed formerly to teach mee for my learning now it seemes you would instruct me for my manners you tell me I make my selfe merrie with your doctrine as if I would laugh out truly I am sorry to thinke you teach such ridiculous doctrine as should deservedly cause laughter Shall I make you my Confessor I cannot chuse but smile when I consider what great paines you have taken in this whole Chapter to uphold the Articles of your Faith with sixe pretended rules and all infallible as namely Scripture in the plaine and literall sense Tradition or common beliefe and practice of the whole Church Councels either generall or particular confirmed by the See Apostolike the authoritie of that whole See it selfe defining Ex Cathedra though without either generall or particular Councell the common and uniforme consent of ancient Fathers or moderne Doctours and Schoole-men delivering any thing unto us as matter of Faith All these sixe rules say you we acknowledge and are ready to make good whatsoever is taught any of these wayes When I say you assume confidently that all these are infallible rules to leade men to the knowledge of your Faith and at last you conclude and as it were shut up all those rules of knowledge with the doctrine of an implicite faith This I confesse is such a mystery of foolishnesse as deserveth rather laughter than an answer For as Cato said He marvelled that a Soothsayer did not laugh when he saw a Soothsayer So I am verily perswaded that your selves doe smile when you meet each other to thinke how you cousen the poore ignorant people with a blind obedience and an implicite Faith To let passe your Golden Legends and leaden miracles which occasion sufficient mirth in long winter nights for all sorts of people what I pray is that implicite Faith that you condemne me and our Ministers for laughing at Mistake us not I know no Protestant doth laugh at an implicite Faith which is directed to the proper object the holy Scripture we laugh not at an implicite Faith which cannot be well unfolded or comprehended by reason as namely the unsearchable mysterie of the Trinitie of Christs conception by the holy Ghost and the like but we disclaime and condemne your Catholike Colliers Faith which is canonized for your Popish Creed that is to pin our Faith upon the Churches sleeve and to assent to every thing the Church propoundeth to be beleeved without examination whether it be agreeable to the Scripture or besides it We laugh or rather wee pitie that Merchant of Placentia who chose rather to bee a Papist than a Protestant Laurent Discept Theolog. p. 5. because saith he I can briefly learne the Roman faith For if I say what the Pope saith and deny what the Pope denyes and if he speake and I hearken unto him this is alone sufficient for me And wee cannot choose but smile at the judgement pronounced by your Gregorie de Valentia upon this poore ignorant
I cite but three Authors and yet none prove the Antiquitie or Vniversalitie of our Faith Then you goe backe againe and you tell the Reader I say nothing here of the mans notable cunning and falshood in making him beleeve as if we did excuse our selves in those things whereof they accuse us If such extravagant excursions and reproches you call a Reply or a Catholike Answer I will lay my finger on my mouth and say with your Cardinall Qui decipi vult decipiatur Briefely the substance of my Assertion was this The three Creeds the Canonicall Scriptures the Apostolike Traditions the foure first generall Councels and the rest were so generally received in the bosome of the Roman Church that for that reason it might seeme a senselesse question to demand where our Church was before Luther Next I shewed that the positive Doctrines of our Church mentioned in our 39. Articles were contained in a very few points and those also had Antiquity and Vniversality then I shewed that those doctrines which they obtruded upon us were but Additions and Negative Tenets in our Articles and that many of those additions were condemned or at least excused by their owne men And I instanced in three Authors before mentioned for three severall points of their Doctrine and this is the substance and true meaning of that Section and thus much by way of advertisement to the moderate Reader Now to answer you distinctly to that you have produced confusedly Your first exception is touching Pope Adrian the sixth you say It is not as Sr. Humphry putteth it to wit if the consecrated Bread be Christ but if it be rightly consecrated And doe not you still by Adrians confession excuse your adoration by implying a condition and is it not all one according to your doctrine For if it be rightly consecrated it is Christ if not it is a Crust and no man amongst your Communicants knoweth what it is because he knoweth not the Priests intention Take it therefore which way you will yet my assertion stands true we condemne you for adoring the Elements for ought you know of bread and wine because it doth depend upon the intention of the Priest whether Christ be there or no but yet you cannot condemne us for adoring Christs rent body in the Heavens and however the Priests doe consecrate yet saith Gerson when the host is adored that condition is ever at lest to be supposed if it be rightly consecrated that is Gers compend Theol. Tit. de tribus virtut p. 111. if it be truely the body of Christ And this is that Pope Adrian hath delivered by your owne confession and therefore they are not to be cleered from Idolatry because they intended to worship one God as indeede there was but one God but because they adored him there where he was not and in that manner as they supposed him to be The case saith Catharinus is like in the host not consecrated Cathar Annot. in Caiet p. mihi 134. For God and Christ is not adored simply but as he is existing under the formes of bread and wine If therefore he be not there but it be found that Divine worship is given to a creature insteede of Christ there is Idolatry also For even in this regard they were Idolaters who adored Heaven or any other thing supposing with themselves that they adored in it the Divinity whom they called the soule of the world Compare then the certainty of your faith with ours which is the point in question and tell me if in this we are not more certaine and safe then you can be First your owne Bellarmine tels us Bell. de Iustific l. 3. c. 8. that none can be certaine by the certainity of faith that he doth receive a true Sacrament No man saith Andreas Vega can beleeve assuredly that he receiveth the least part of the Sacrament Vega l. 9. de Iustific c. 17. and this is so surely to be credited as it is apparant that we live And both give one and the same reason for it For there is no way except it be by Revelation that we can know the intention of the Minister either by outward appearance or by certainty of faith From this dangerous consequence we condemne your adoration and resolve to let you know from your owne men Th. Salistar de arte Praedicandi c. 25. that No man be he never so simple or never so wise ought precisely to believe that this is the body of our Lord that the Priest hath consecrated but onely under this condition if all things concerning the consecration be done as appertaineth for otherwise he shall avouch a creature to be the Creator which were Idolatry Now as this way in the generall is uncertaine and dangerous so likewise there are many other wayes which may easily occasion this Idolatry and therefore you cannot deny us to be in the more certaine and safe way As for instance Iohannes de Burgo who was Chancellor of Cambridge about 200. yeares since gives us to understand that a Priest may faile in his intention many wayes As for example Pupilla Oculi c. 3. 5. c. If the Bread be made of any other then wheaten flower which may possibly happen or if there be too much water in quantity that it overcomes and alters the nature of wine if the wine be changed into vinegar and therefore cannot serve for consecration If there be thirteene cakes upon the Table and the Priest for his consecration determine onely upon twelve in that case not one of them all is Consecrated Lastly if the Priest dissemble or leave out the words of Consecration or if he forget it or minde it not in all and every of these wayes there is nothing Consecrated and consequently the people giving divine honour to the Sacrament all Bread or Cup commit flat Idolatry When I heare the Apostle proclaime to all Christians that he which doubteth is condemned already I cannot chuse but pitty the state and condition of that miserable man who hath a doubtfull perplexed and uncertaine faith who taketh all upon trust and upon the report sometimes of an Hypocrite sometimes of a malitious Priest who hath no intention at all to administer the true Sacrament History of Trent For saith your Trent history if a Priest having charge of foure or five hundred soules were an Infidell but a formall Hyppocrite and in absolving the Penitent baptizing of children and Consecrating the Eucharist had an intention not to doe that which the Church doth it must be said that the children are damned the penitent not absolved and that all remaine without the fruite of the Communion Now let the Reader judge which doctrine is most certaine and safe either that of your Church which may occasion flat Idolatry in the worshiper or our sursum corda with hearts and eyes lifted up to Heaven where we adore our Saviour Christ in his bodily presence according to the
to the Iewes and Greekes repentance towards God and faith towards our Lord Iesus Christ hee could not but have seene the absurditie of his answer wherein he denieth that S. Paul speaketh of the written word For who knoweth not that repentance towards God and faith towards Iesus Christ are written almost in every Sermon of the Prophets and chapter of the Evangelists What hee addeth for confirmation of his answer from the example of our Saviour who made knowne to his Disciples whatsoever hee heard from his Father and yet delivered not one word in writing no whit at all helpeth his cause For albeit we grant that our Saviour wrote nothing except wee give credit to a relation in Eusebius of a letter written by him to King Abgarus yet hee commanded his Apostles to write those things which they had heard and seene what thou seest write it in a booke Euseb eccles hist. l. 1. Apoc. 1.11 and send it to the seven Churches and S. Peter saith 2 Ep. 8.20 that no Scripture is privatae 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is as Cal vin well rendereth the words privatae impulsionis of private impulsion or motion for the prophecie came not in old time by the will of man but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the holy Ghost and therefore Irenaeus saith expresly Advers haeres .3 c. 1. non per alios dispositionem salut is accepimus quans per quos E vangelium ad nos pervenit quod primum praeconiaverunt posted secundùm Dei voluntatem in script is reliquerunt columnam firmamentum fidei futurum Euseb hist eccl l. 2. c. 14. fideles iterat is precibus impetrârunt à Marcout monumentum illud doctrinae quod sermone verbis ill is tradidisset etiam script is mandatum apud eos relinqueret Esay 8.20 that what the Apostles preached first by word of mouth by the will of GOD they afterwards delivered in writing to bee a pillar and foundation of our faith and S. Austine affirmeth that what Christ would have knowne of his words and deeds as needfull to our salvation that hee gave in charge to his Apostles to set downe in writing If this suffice not I will stop the mouth of this Iesuit with the free confession of a greater Iesuit then hee Gregorie of Valence in his eight booke of the Analysis of faith the fift chapter minimè in ipsorum arbitrio positum fuit scribere aut alio tempore aut alijs verbis scribere the penmen of the holy Ghost were so guided by the spirit that it was not in their power or at their choyce to write or not to write or to write at another time or to write in other words then they did To the testimonie of Bellarmine the Iesuit gives as sleight an answer as to the former out of S. Luke whereunto I need to reply nothing because in a case so cleere wee need not the Cardinals confession having such expresse testimonie of Scripture and Fathers as namely of Esay to the law and to the testimonie if they speake not according to this word Deut. 4.2 Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things which are written in the booke of the law to doe them And Moses wrote this law and delivered it to the Priests which bare the Arke Gal. 1.8 2 Tim. 3.15 it is because there is no light in them of Moyses yee shall not adde unto the words which I command you which to bee spoken of the written law is apparant by comparing this text with Galathians 3.10 and Deuteronomie 31.9 And the words of Christ Iohn 5.39 search the Scriptures for in them you thinke you have eternall life And of S. Iohn his beloved Disciple Iohn 20.31 these things are written that yee might beleeve that Iesus Christ is the Sonne of God and that beleeving ye might have life through his Name And of S. Paul if we or an Angel from heaven preach unto you any other Gospel then that yee have received Advers hermog c. 22. adoro scripturae plenitudinem scriptum doceat Hermogenes Epist ad Pomp nihil innovetur in quit Stephanus quod traditum est unde est ista traditio Vtrum de Dominicâ Evangelicâ authoritate descendens an de Apostolorum mandatis epistolis veniens ea enim facienda quae scripta sunt Deus restatur siergo aut in evangelio praecipitur aut in Apostolorum epistolis aut Actibus continetur observetur haecsanctatraditio that is as S. Austine expoundeth it praeterquam quod in Scripturis legalibus Evangelicis accepist is if any preach unto you any Gospell beside that which is contained in the writings of the Law and the Gospell let him bee accursed And thou hast knowne the Scriptures from a child which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Iesus for all Scripture is given by Divine inspiration and is profitable for doctrine for reproofe for correction for instruction and righteosnesse that the man of God may bee perfect throughly furnished to all good workes And of Tertullian I adore the fulnesse of Scriptures let Hermogenes prove what hee saith out of Scriptures or otherwise let him feare the woe denounced against all such as adde any thing thereunto or take there-from And of S. Cyprian our brother Steven will have nothing to bee altered in the Church tradition Whence is this tradition is it from the Gospel or the Acts of the Apostles or their Epistles if it be so then let this holy tradition bee kept for God himselfe witnesseth that wee ought to observe those things that are written And of Athanasius Athanas. orat 1. cont Arr. Sufficiunt per se inspiratae scripturae ad veritatis instructionem Basil Serm. de side 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Hom. 3. in 2. ad Tbess 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Et in 2. ad Cor. Hom. 3 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ierom. advers Helvid c. 3. credimus quia legimus non credimus quia non legimus Augustin de doc Chris l. 2. c. 9. in ijs quae apertè posita sunt in scriptura inveniuntur illa amnia quae continent fidem mores Cyril in Evang. Iohan. l. 1.2 c. 68 ea conscripta sunt quae scribentes Sufficere put drunt ad mores dogmataque Vincen. Lyrin advers Haeres hic requirat aliquis cum sit perfectus scripturae canon sibique ad omnia sat is superque sufficiat Biel in can mis lec 71. quae agenda quae fugienda quae amanda quae contemnenda quae timenda quae audenda quae credenda speranda caetera nostrae saluti necessaria quae omnia sola docet Sacra scriptura the holy Scripturesare sufficient to instruct us in the truth And of S Basil it is a manifest falling away from faith either to refuse any thing of those that are written or to bring in any of those things which
for his impudencie and ignorance two Sorbon Doctours Aurelius and Lallier have disciplined him to the purpose and I will bee 10th saevire in plagas vulnera Yea but some of these mens Workes are marked in the Roman Index saith the Iesuit they are so indeed to the eternall prayse of their ingenuity and to the everlasting infamie of the Romish Inquisitors crueltie who so deale with the witnesses of truth as Pope Sergius did with Formosus his predecessor after his death they mangle and deface them cutting off their thumbes and fingers wherewith they testified and signed the truth in their writings To the sixteenth In this Paragraph the Iesuit is totus in fermento it wonderfully transporteth him and putteth him in a cold sweat that the Knight should say out of Chemnitius that the second Synod of Nice in which Image-worship was established was condemned in the Councell of Frankford held in the yeare of our Lord 794. P. 308. The Magdeburgians saith hee and other your owne Authours affirme that that very Councell of Frankford did say an Anathema to all such as deface images is not this then abominable falshood in your friend Chemnitius to cite nay forge it against images and in you to follow him in it ne Saevi magne Sacerdos let not the Iesuit lay about him so furiously lest peradventure hee lend a blow to his best friends for besides other Historians of good note Hincmarus Archbishop of Rhemes P. 306. Hincma Rhem. advers Hincma Laudunens c. 20. Graecorum pseudo-Synodus destructa est penitùs abdicata Ado. Vien in cron aetat 6. pseudo-synodus quam septimam Graeci appellant pro imaginibus adorandis abdicata penitùs Idem habet Regino ad ann 794. Bellarmine lib. de Concil c. 7. Concilium Francofordiense reprobatur quantum ad alteram partem in qua exerrore damnatur septima Synodus whom himselfe calleth a Catholique indeed nay and Cardinall Bellarmine himselfe also 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saith as much as Chemnitius or the Knight to wit that the Councell of Nice was condemned in the Councell of Frankford neither doth the Anathema pronounced in that councell against such as deface images fall upon us who fight not against images as the Iconomachi did but against image-worship as that Councell of Frankford doth To the seventeenth The words of Poly dore Virgill are these Deinvent l. 6 c. 13. de simulacrorum cultu jam agamus quem non modò nostrae rellgionis expertes sed teste Hieronymo omnes ferèveteres sancti patres damnabant oh metum idololatriae Let us now speake of the Worship of images which not only those which were ignorant of our religion but as Saint Ierome testifieth almost all the ancient holy Fathers condemned for feare of idolatrie To this allegation the Iesuit saith that Polydore is to be understood of the Fathers of the Old Testament only Although Polydore hath not the word Old Testament but ancient Fathers and Saints which style the Church of Rome never attributed to any before Christ But bee it so let us take what hee granteth wee have then the testimonie of the true Church before Christs Incarnation against image-worship and this is advantage enough unlesse the Iesuit could confront their judgement by Christ and his Apostles or some of the Fathers of the New Testament Yet what if Polydore Virgill in that place nameth some of the Fathers in the New Testament Divus quoque Gregorius Serenum episcopum Marsiliensem reprehendu quòd imagines fregisset laudat quòd coli inhibuisset will not that stoppe the Iesuits mouth reade then a little further in Polydore in the same chapter courteous Reader and thou shalt meete with these words Saint Gregorie also reproveth Serenus the Bishop of Marsellis for breaking downe images and yet commendeth him in that hee forbad the worship of them To the eighteenth Peresius saith that there can bee no sound proofe brought either out of Scripture or tradition of the Church or common consent of Fathers or determination of a generall Councell or any other effectuall reason to perswade a man that the image of Christ L. de tradit nullum quod ego viderim afferunt validum fundamentum neque scripturas neque traditionent ecclesiae neque communem consensum sanctorum neque concilij generalis determinationem aliquam nec etiam rationem quâ hoc efficaciter suaderi posset scilicet imagines Christi sanctorum adorari debere eadem adoratione quâ res quae repraesent antur P. 242. and the Saints are to bee worshipped with the same adoration that the samplers are Is this nothing against you then Aquinas and in a manner all the Schoole-men Ludovicus Paramo Bernardus Pind Franciscus Petigianis Petrus de Cabrera Azotius Lamas Rubio Bustus quoted by the Bishop of Ely in his reply to Fisher with divers others reckoned up by Bellarmine l. 2. de imag c. 20. were no Papists For all the above-mentioned hold that opinion for Catholique which Peresius condemneth To the Nineteenth The more wee looke into Agobardus the greater reason wee have to make account of him for the first hee alledgeth the Councell of Eliberis against setting up of images in Churches next hee affirmeth that the ancients had pictures of Saints painted or carved ad recordandum non ad colendum to remember the Saints by them not to worship them Lastly hee averreth that there is no example in all the Scriptures or Fathers for adoration of images and what doth or can any Protestant say more against the doctrine of the Roman Church in this point then this Agobardus doth whom this Iesuit canonizeth for a saint neither can he put him off by saying Hic author cautè legendus est quoniam laborat eodem errore quo Agobardus reliqui ejus aetatis Galli qui negabant sacris imaginibus ullum deberi cultum religiosum that hee speaketh against Idoll-worship or some abuse of Images which crept in in his time for Bellarmine who better studied Agobardus then this Iesuit in his booke of Ecclesiasticall Writers ad annum 820. in his censure of Ionas Bishop of Orleans saith this Authour is to bee read with caution because hee was infected with the same opinion that Agobardus and other French Bishops of that age were who denie any religious worship to bee due to images To the twentieth Sententias loquitur Carnifex this is the first essay wee heard from this Iesuit but nothing to the purpose for wee grant that things that are good in themselves and of a necessarie and profitable use are not to bee taken away for the abuse but wee denie that Images in Churches are of that nature neither is his law-Axiome universally true Vtile per inutile non vitiatur that which is profitable is not corrupted or made bad by that which is unprofitable For the brazen Serpent in the Wildernesse was for a time utilis profitable curing them that had beene stung by the
Bishop of Rochester Gregorie the great and venerable Bede let the Iesuit therefore looke to the Consequent The Church of Rome commandeth every one upon paine of hell-fire to beleeve a temporarie purging fire after this life First upon what ground Scripture or unanimous consent of Fathers or Tradition of the Catholike Church no such thing But upon apparitions of dead men and testimonie of Spirits whether good Spirits or evill they cannot tell Next wee demand what soules and how long doe they contine there To this they must answer likewise Ignoramus Soto thinketh that none continueth in this purgation ten yeares If this be true saith Bellarmine No soule needs to stay in purging one houre Thirdly the soules that are supposed to be there till their sinnes are purged where with are they purged With fire onely so saith Sir Thomas Moore and proves it out of Zacharie 9.11 Thou hast delivered the prisoners out of the place where there is no water or with water and fire so saith Gregorie in his Dialogues lib. 4. Some are purged by fire and some by bathes and Fisher Bishop of Rochester proves it out of those words of the Psalmist Wee have passed thorow fire and water Fourthly admit they are purged by fire whether is this fire materiall or metaphoricall Ignoramus Wee know not saith Bellarmine lib. 2. de Purg. cap. 6. Lastly is there any mittigation of this paine in Purgatorie or no They cannot tell this neither For venerable Bede hist Ang. lib. 5. tels us of the apparition of a Ghost reporting that There was an infernall place where soules suffered no paine where they had a brooke running through it Neither is it improbable saith Bellarmine l. 2. de Purg. cap. 7. that there should be such an honorable prison which is a most milde and temperate Purgatorie Yea but saith the Iesuit Saint Austin is a firme man for Purgatorie and hee will prove it out of that booke of Enchiridion and place quoted by the Knight Resolutely spoken but so falsly Encharid ad Laurent c 69. Tale aliquid etiam post hanc vitam fieri incredibile non est et utrum ita sit quaeri potest et ut inveniri aut latere possit nonnullos fideles per ignem quendam purgaiorium salvari non tamen tales de quibus dictū est regnum Dei non posside bant that in this very booke chapter 69 Saint Austine speaking of a purging fire and commenting upon the words of Saint Paul Hee shall be saved as it were by fire addeth immediately It is not unlikely that some such thing may be after this life but whether it be so or no it may be argued and whether it can be found or not found that some Beleevers are saved by a purging fire yet it is certaine that none of them shall be saved of whom the Apostle saith they shall not inherit the Kingdome of God And in the same booke chapter 109. he resolves that All soules from the day of their death to their resurrection abide in expectation what shall become of them and are reserved in secret receptacles accordingly as they deserve either torment or ease These hidden Cells or Receptacles wheresoever they are scituated in St. Austins judgment C. 109. Tempus quod inter hominis mortem ultimam resurrectionem interpositum est animus abditis receptaculis continet sicut unaqueque digna est vel requiae vel arumnâ certaine it is they are not in the Popish Purgatory for St. Austine placeth in these secret Mansions all soules indifferently good or bad whereas the Popish Purgatory is restrained only to those of a middle condition being neither exceeding good nor exceeding bad Againe in St. Austines hidden repositories some soules have ease and some paine as each deserveth but in the Romish Purgatory all soules are in little-ease being tormented in a flame little differing from Hell fire or rather nothing at all save onely in time the paines are as grievous but not so durable Else where St. Austine is most direct against Purgatory and wholly for us as namely de peceat meritis de remissione l. 1. c. 28. There is no middle or third place saith he but he must needs be with the Devill who is not with Christ And Hypog l. 5. The first place the faith of Catholikes by divine authority beleeveth to be the Kingdome of Heaven the second to be Hell tertium locum penitùs ignoramus the third place we are alltogether ignorant of and in his booke de vanit seculi cap. 1. Know that when the soule is seperated from the body statim presently it is either placed in Paradise for his good worke or cast headlong into the bottome of hell for his sinnes Neither can the Iesuit evade by saying that there are two onely places where the soules remaine finally and eternally to wit Heaven and Hell but yet that there is a third place where the bodies fry in purging for a time for St. Austine speakes of all soules in generall both good and bad and saith that statim that is presently upon death they are receaved into Heaven or throwne into Hell and therefore stay no time in a Third place What then say we to the passage in which the Iesuit so triumpheth Enchirid. ad Laurenc c. 110. Neither is it to be denied that the soules of the dead are relieved by the piety of their friends living when the Sacrifice of our Mediatour is offered for them and Almes given in the Church We answer that where St. Austine is not constant to himselfe we are not bound to stand to his authority and therefore we appeale from Saint Austine missing his way in this place to the same Austine Nullum auxilium misericordiae potest preberi a justis defunctorum animabus etiamsi justi praebere velint quia est immutabilis divina sententia Qualis quisque moritur talis a Deo judicatur nec potest mutari corrigi vel minus dimia sententia hitting his way elsewhere namely l. 2. Quest Evan. c. 38. There can be no helpe of mercy afforded by just men to the soules of the deceased although the righteous would never so faine have it so because the sentence of God is immutable and Ep. 80. ad Hesich such as a man is when he dieth for such he is judged of God neither can the sentence of God be changed corrected or diminished As for Mr. Anthony Alcots confession that Saint Austines opinion was for purgatorie it maketh not for the Iesuit but against him for he saith it was his opinion not his resolved judgment and his opinion at one place and at one time which after he retracted and resolved the cleane contrary as Mr. Alcots there in part sheweth and Danaeus most fully in his Comment upon St. Austine his Enchiridian ad Laurentium To the tenth If all Papists did agree in this that all Images were to be worshipped but not as Gods yet are they at odds in other
Spiridion that famous Bishop of Cyprus Eccles Hist l. 1. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 they lived in wedlocke and had many children without any disparagement at all to their Sacred function As the Rod of Aaron in these brought forth fruit in Holy Matrimony so it budded also in others in our Church who followed virginall chastity and lead a single life as Iewell Reinolds Andrewes Lakes and many other reverend Prelates and Doctors who for eminent learning and examplary life may compare with any of the Romish Mitred Prelates or late Canonized Saints Neither can they pretend that any Eve gave these an Apple whereby their eyes were opened but on the contrary we can produce many a Lucretia who have given Apples to their Popes Lucretia nomine sed re Thais Alexandri filia sponsa nurus whereby their eyes have beene blinded and their reputation for ever blasted See Picus Mirandula his oration extant in Fasciculus rerum expetendum fugiendum and Mantuan his Poem Sanctus ager scurris venerabilis ara cinaedis Servit honorandae Divûm Ganymedibus aedes As for Olivereus Manareus his Legend of Buxhorne if the Reader will be pleased to peruse an apologie for this Buxhorne written to the Chancellor of Lovan wherein the true cause is related for which this licentiate Divine abandoned the Papacy he shall finde in that treatise printed in the yeare of our Lord 1625 a Rowland for his Oliver or Oliverius Manareus the Iesuit to whose relation as much credit is to be given as to Cocleus his History of Luther and Bolsecs of Calvin The Devill the grand Calumniator hath suborned in all ages men of prostituted consciences and corrupt mindes and mouthes to staine with their impure breath the golden and the silver vessells of the Sanctuarie but Illi linguarum nos aurium dominsumus their tongues are their owne they may speake what malice dictateth our eares are our owne and we will hearken unto and assent onely to what truth confirmeth As for their Lutheran baits he mentioneth aurum gloria dilitiae veneres gold glory delights and Venus if these things abound any where it is in the Roman Church where the Pope who pretends himselfe to be the successor of Peter the fisher fisheth with a golden hooke and baits it with fleshly lusts what so pompeous and glorious as his Holinesse triple Crowne and his Cardinals Hats and his Bishops Miters and Croziours for what sence hath not the Romish Religion baits for the eyes they have gawdie shewes for the eares most melodious musicke for the smell sweetest incense and perfumes for the taste feasts without number for the touch whole streets of Curtezans not onely in Rome it selfe but in all the Popes Townes which are commonly knowne by this fowle Cognizance Concerning our adversaries their blasphemous exceptions against the Scripture Spectacles Chap. 14. à page 447. usque ad 463. THough Catholikes hold for most certaine that the Scripture is not the sole rule of faith nor that out of it alone all controversies can be decided as for example in particular which bookes be Canonicall Scripture which not yet for most things now a dayes in controversie many Catholikes have offered to trie the matter onely by Scripture Though Catholikes ground many points upon tradition and practice of the Church yet they ground others upon plaine and expresse authority of Scripture from which Protestants are faine to flie running to this or that corner of I know not what figurative or tropicall interpretation Though the Pope question not much lesse condemne Scriptures of obscurity and insufficiency yet his Apostles and Evangelists have left some things in writing of which some are hard even by the judgment of Scripture it selfe for so saith Saint Peter of the Epistle of Saint Paul which saith he the unlearned and unconstant doe abuse as they doe other Scriptures to their owne perdition If any condemne the Scripture of insufficiency it is St. John in saying that all things are not written and St. Paul in willing the Thessalonians to hold the traditions which they had learned whether by speech or letter Whereas the Knight chargeth us with ranking the Bible in the first place of prohibited bookes wee say it is false for it is not in the Catalogue of such bookes onely in the rules which concernes the Index there is mentioned how the free use of vulgar translations is not to be permitted but for the Latine vulgar translation there is no manner of restraint though if there had beene we might very well have warranted it by the authority of St. Jerome who did no way admit such free use even of the Latine Bibles It is no such crime to forbid the reading of Scripture to some sort of people as may appeare by the testimony of this holy Father who in the same place saith moreover that the beginning of Genesis and the beginning and end of Ezekiel were not to be read by the Iewes till they came to thirties yeare of age A kinde of forbidding of reading the Scripture is no derogation but a great commendation of it for they are forbidden to be read out of reverence and honour due unto them and in regard of the danger which may come by them not of themselves but in regard of the weakenesse of the Reader for want of necessary learning and humility For Cornelius Agrippa it maketh no more matter what he saith then what the Knight saith for it is but aske my brother if I be a theefe Not to answer the places objected by the Knight out of Lindan Lessius Turrian and Pighius I say in generall that those things are spoken not of the Scripture as it is in it selfe that is consisting of both words and meaning but of bare words and letters only which Haeretikes still do and ever have abused as the Devill himselfe did to our Saviour and in this sense it is a wood of theeves Our Authors say no more then St. Jerome doth in effect Marcion Basilides and other plagues of Haeretikes have not the Gospell of God Comment in 1. ad Gal. because they have not the Holy Ghost without whom it becommeth the Gospell of man which is taught nor let us thinke that the Gospell consisteth in the words of Scripture but in the sense not in the superficies or barke but in the pith not in the leaves of speech but in the roote of reason so that if the Knight will say any more of this matter he must undertake the quarrell against St. Ierome Lessius in particular whom the Knight most up braideth to us is farre from saying that the Scripture is uncertaine in it selfe that is that the doctrine thereof is doubtfull but onely that our rule will be uncertaine or rather wee uncertaine of the rule because wee cannot know the Scripture by it selfe It is not all one to say that Scripture alone is no sufficient Rule and to say it is imperfect For although the Knight imagineth that the
subject unto in it selfe Lastly the Iesuit taketh himselfe by the nose in saying Heretikes in all Controversies run to the letter of the Scriptures leaving the true sense and spirituall meaning for so doe the Romanists apparantly namely in the Controversie of Supremacie Ecce duo gladii Loe here two swords therefore the Pope hath the temporall and spirituall Sword at command Peter rise up kill and eate therefore the Pope hath power to put Princes to death In the question about the number of Sacraments they alleage the letter of that text in the vulgar translation Hoc est magnum Sacramentum to prove marriage a Sacrament whereas the Apostle in the same place saith that hee speaketh not of corporall marriage of a man and his wife but of the spirituall marriage of Christ and his Church Likewise in the Controversie about the reall presence they run to the letter Except yee eate the flesh of the Sonne of man and drinke his blood though Christ in the same place expounding himselfe saith The words which I have spoken unto you are spirit and life the like may be observed in other Controversies For answer to all which texts wee tell him out of Saint Ierome whom himselfe quoteth in the next Paragraph That the Gospell consisteth not in the words of Scripture but in the sense not in the supersicies or barke but in the pith not in the leaves of speech but in the root of reason To the tenth How neere neighbours the Romanists are to Marcion who denied or by consequence overthrew the truth of Christs humaine nature as the Papists doe in the Sacrament vailing him under the outside or accidents of a round water and what affinitie the Iesuit hath with the rest of the ancient Heretikes the Knight shewed him before in his seventh Section and if hee desire to know more of his pedegree from them I referre him to an Appendix to Whitakers answer to Sanders his Demonstration page 801. As for the aspersion of old Heresies which hee casts upon us they are washed away by Bishop Morton and Doctor Field in their Treatises of the Church Ad notam sextam But why hee denies that wee have the Spirit arrogating it onely to himselfe I see no reason but the pride of his owne spirit together with the malice of the evill spirit who suggested unto him this uncharitable censure of us To the eleventh The Scripture is a Light Psal 119. and the nature of a light is first to discover it selfe and then all things else therefore Calvin to his fond question how know you Scripture to be Scripture answereth acutely by retortion how know you the Sun to be the Sun If hee say by his bright lustre and beames wee say the same of holy Scripture that it is discerned by its owne light Which if the Papists see hot the fault ought not to be laid upon the Sun-beames but upon their Owles eyes To the twelfth That rule which needeth any thing to be added to it is imperfect but all Papists teach that to the written Word unwritten Traditions must bee added to make a compleat and perfect rule of Faith all Papists therefore teach the Scripture alone to be an imperfect Rule We on the contrary stand for the perfection of Scripture and constantly and unanimously defend that not onely the whole Scripture is perfect but that every part also hath its owne perfection but not the perfection of the whole Because the eyes have not the perfection of the whole head or the head the perfection of the whole body a man cannot conclude that the eye or the head is imperfect no more can the Iesuit conclude that the Gospell of Saint Matthew Saint Marke or Saint Iohn are therefore imperfect because they containe not in them all doctrines in particular necessary to salvation It is sufficient that they together with the rest perfectly instruct us in all points of faith by themselves they perfectly informe us so farre as the Holy Ghost intendeth that we should be informed by each of them in particular and this is their perfection that they have no defect in matter or forme and that they concurre with the rest of the bookes of Scripture to the maine end of the Holy Ghost in committing the word of God in writing for the infallible and perfect instruction of the Church and every faithfull soule in all Doctrines needfull to salvation To the thirteenth Although many Protestants have written de Scripturâ judice and they have warrant our of Scripture so to stile it the words which I have spoken they shall judge you yet in propriety of speech which especially ought to be used in stating questions the Scripture is rather to be termed a rule and law or sentence of the judge then the judge himselfe the supreame and infallible judge of all controversies we teach to be the Holy Ghost speaking to us out of Scriptures and the subordinate or inferior Judge the consencient authority of the Catholique Church To the fourteenth The Iesuit shewed no such thing nor can shew out of Tertullian De praescrip advers haeret c. 17. who convinced the greater part of Haeretikes in his time by Scripture as appeareth in his writings In the place which the Iesuit quoteth he hath no such words as he alleageth out of him viz. that there is no good to be done with Haeretikes by Scriptures He saith indeede in that place that it was but in vaine to conferre with a certaine kinde of Haeretikes by Scriptures alone quia ista haeresis non recipit quasdam Scripturas et si recipit non recipit integras et si aliquatenus integras praestat c. That is This haeresie admits not of certaine Scriptures or not intire or if in some sort in ire it perverts them by divising divers interpretations In which words he no way disparageth the holy Scriptures or derogateth from their perfection but discovereth the wicked practise of Haeretikes and their evasions and tergiversations when they are most evidently convinced by Scriptures Will you say that if a Bedlam or willfull malefactor either by puffing out the Candle or shutting his eyes or looking another way will not reade or see the evidence that is brought against him that therfore the evidence is not able to convince him To the fifteenth Though it were granted the Iesuit that the Papists have written more upon the Scriptures then Protestants it will not from thence follow that they more reverence or honour the Scripture sithence in their very Commentaries upon Scripture they derrogate from the authority sufficiency and perfection of them by refusing to referre all points of faith in controversie to their decision by resolving their faith last of all not into them but into the Church by teaching that they are obscure even in points necessary to salvation and that unwritten Traditions are equally to be reverenced with them Secondly compare men with men and oportunities with oportunities it may easily be proved that
published by Pope Pius the fourth were anciently received though newly defined by the Councell of Trent for proofe he instanceth in the first Councell of Nice and compareth that Councell and their Creed with this of Trent hee proceeds by way of recrimination to question the 39. Articles of our Church he accuseth us for corrupting and misinterpreting the Scriptures for declining Traditions Fathers and Councels hee excuseth their Index Expurgatorius and accuseth us for falsifying the Fathers and lastly he concludeth with the doctrine of implicite faith and this is the substance and contents of his answer to my first Chapter All which and whatsoever else is materially contained therein and the rest of his sections following I will take into severall parts distinctly and returne him a moderate answer The Reply to Mr. Lloyd FIrst touching your Trent Creed you complaine that according to the common fashion of our Ministers by way of derision I divide it into twelve points as it were into twelve Articles which say you he and they might with as much reason divide it into foure and twentie Here you begin to quarrell at your first entrance but I hope you will gladly forgive us this wrong for if wee accuse your Trent Fathers for coyning twelve Articles in stead of foure and twentie they and you are more beholding to us for laying the lesser number to your charge and yet if you please to review them you shall finde they fall most naturally within the number of twelve But you would know what difference there is betwixt the Councell of Nice and the Councell of Trent and their two Creeds Let mee tell you if ever the proverb held true Comparisons are odious it holds betwixt the two Councels and their two Creeds the Councell of Trent is not worthy to be named the day wherein the Councell of Nice is mentioned That famous Councell of Nice was the first and best generall Assembly after the Apostles time that was summoned in the Christian world it had in it 318. Bishops Totius orbis terrarum lumina saith Victorinus amongst whom were the foure Patriarchs of the Easterne and Westerne Churches It was called by the first and best Christian Emperour Quasi servator medicus animarum Euseb in vita Conslant orat 3. c. 10. Constantine the Great who was Vocalissimus Dei praeco and as it were the Preserver and Physitian of our soules saith Eusebius This Emperour exhorted the Fathers and Bishops of that Councell Omni igitur seditios â contentione depulsâ literarum divinitùs inspiratarum testimoniis res in quaestionem adduct as dissolvamus Theod. Hist Eccl. l. 1. c. 7. p. 208. to lay aside seditious contention and resolve all doubts and questions by the testimonies of divine Scriptures and accordingly they framed their Creed out of the doctrine of the Apostles and all who were not of the Arrian faction did assent and agree to it saith Theodoret. Now take a view of your Trent Councell and compare them together Your Councell of Trent like Demetrius Assembly was summoned by Pope Paul the third without a lawfull calling the three Patriarchs of Constantinople of Antioch of Alexandria refused to be present the Legates of the Kingdome of Denmark of Suetia and the Dukedome of Prusia were all absent and returned their answer that the a Gravamina opposita Concil Trid. Causa 1. pag. 21. Pope had no right to call a Councell Our Queene b Epit. rerum in orbe gest sub Ferd. 1. ann 1561. apud Scard tom 3. p. 2171. E Belgio in Insulam trajicere prohibuit ibid. Elizabeth of blessed memory disavowed the Councell in so much that when the Pope sent Hieronymus Martinengus as Legate into England to summon our Bishops shee would not suffer him to land or set his foot on her Dominions The French King signifieth by his Legate James Amiot that hee for his part neither held it for a generall not yet for a lawfull Councell but for a private Conventicle and accordingly hee wrote Conventui Tridentino The Emperour Innoc Gentil sess 12. and Hist of Trent l. 4. p. 319. Illyric in Protest contr Concil Trid. Charles the fifth declared by his Embassadour Hurtado Mendoza in the name of the whole Empire that the Bishops wholly hanging at the Popes becke had no authoritie to make lawes in causes of reformation of religion and manners Andreas Dudithius Dudith in Ep. ad Maximil 2. de Calice Sacerdotum conjugio the Bishop of five Churches told the Emperours Maximilian and Ferdinand that the Trent Fathers were like a paire of countrey Bag-pipes which unlesse they were still blowne into could make no musick The Holy Ghost had nothing to doe with that Councell and therefore they could create no new Articles of faith Your historie of Trent tels us The historie of Trent the Spirit was sent in a Carriers cloak-bag from Rome to Trent but when there fell store of raine the Holy Ghost could not come before the flouds were abated and so it fell out that the Spirit was not carried upon the waters as wee read in Genesis but besides them Looke upon your Bishops they were but fortie and two at the first meeting and two of them titular the rest for the most part saith Dudithius were but hirelings Andr. Dudith ut suprà young men and beardlesse hired and procured by the Pope to speake as hee would have them To say nothing of those Emperours who called the first and best Councels and were present in person when as the Popes send but their Legates Euseb in vitâ Constant orat 3. c. 16. Ego intereram Concilio saith Constantine I was present at the Councell amongst you as one of you Touching his Imperiall seat in the Councell Ibid. c. 10. his throne was very great and passed all the rest saith Eusebius whereas there is no greater distance in the time Advertendum quod locus ubi sedet Imperator 〈…〉 tenet 〈◊〉 Pontifex Liber Ceremon l. 2. c. 2. than there is now difference in the places for the Emperour is allowed but to sit at the Popes foot-stoole and it is specially to bee noted saith your booke of ceremonies that the place whereupon the Emperour sitteth may bee no higher than the place where the Pope setteth his feet Your Councell of Trent hath made many decrees for reformation of manners but did they ever reforme this abuse and restore the ancient custome You then that are so confident in equalling those two Councels doe you thinke there is no difference betwixt a conventicle and a generall Councell betwixt a Councell lawfully called and one summoned by usurpation betwixt a late Councell held in a corner of the world in the worst age and an ancient Councell in a most famous citie held in the most flourishing age betwixt a Councell that layes her sole foundation in the Scriptures and one that builds her first Article of faith upon Traditions Bulla Pii
saith Nempe quòd solâ fide in Christum nullis meritis nostris justificamur In Ep. Pauli ad Rom. c. 16. In verba illa deleatur Ind. lib. prohibit p. mihi 629. Ind. Madrid fol. 133 Ind. Belg. p. mihi 393. That we are justified by faith alone in Christ and by none of our merits That our owne workes whatsoever they be are not of that value that they should merit a reward of condignitie or congruitie but so farre forth as God in his mercie doth accept them These and the like passages are commanded to be blotted out And whereas hee sayth a Sic verè nullum hominum genus est quod minimè movetur verbo Dei quà m hi qui in sua justitia confidunt Idem in Joh. c. 1. There is no kinde of men that are lesse moved with the word of God than those which trust in their owne righteousnesse your men as being guilty of their trust in their merits of workes command this and the like passages to bee stricken out Your Index of prohibited Bookes published by the b Opera tamdiu prohibentur quaÌ„diù expurgatio noÌ„ prodierit Ind. l. prohibit p. 56. Cardinall of Sandonall and Roxas tells us that the workes of Ferus are forbidden to be read till such time as they shall be purged and sure I am when they are purged they are none of his For I appeale to you and your fellow Jesuites Mr. Floyd whether these passages following be his or yours I meane either the Protestant doctrine which he published before Luthers dayes or the Popish tenets which are since altered by the Inquisitors and taught by the Trent Fathers In the third of St. Matthew the true Ferus sayth c Quòd si aliquando mercedem audis pollioeri scias non ob aliud esse debitam quà m ex promissione divina Ferus in Math. 3. If at any time thou heare of a reward promised know that it is not due for any thing else but for the divine promise sake Your Inquisitors command it to be altered thus Quòd si aliquando mercedem audis polliceri scias non sine promissione esse debitam Ind. Madrid fol. mihi 125. If thou heare of a reward promised know that it is not due without the promise The one saith it is not due for any respect but for the divine promise ex promissione divina the other saith it is not due without the promise when the true Ferus addes Gratis promisit gratis reddidit He promised freely and he hath given freely you command these words to be stricken out And whereas Ferus commenting upon the words of Christ Ind. Belg. p. mihi 372. Ind. lib. prohib p. 627. Qui hanc fidem nescit ad EcclesiaÌ„ non pertinet etiamsi videtur primus esse in Ecclesia Idem in Mat. l. 3. c. 16. p. mihi 25. Ind. Madrid p. 125. Ind. Belg. p. 370. Tues Petrus c. Thou art Peter and upon this Rocke I will build my Church she wing that this Rocke was meant of Christ by the confession of Peters faith And saith hee whosoever is ignorant of this Faith belongs not to the Church although hee seeme to be the chiefe in the Church These words are otherwise read in your generall Indices and are commanded to bee stricken out And upon the words Si quis natus fuerit c. he saith a In Joh. c. 3. p. mihi 69. Ind. lib. proh p. 625. The Preachers of Gods Word ought first to teach faith by which a man is justified and afterwards good workes there the words by which a man is justified are commanded to be stricken out Now as you have purged many places so likewise you have forged and falsified others by addition or retraction Looke upon his Commentary on the first Epistle of Saint John and you shall behold strange additions and the true Protestant Doctrine wrested to flat Poperty as for instance b Scriptura sacra data est nobis seu certa quaedam regula Christianae doctrinae Idem in 1 Ep. Joh. c. 2. edit Antwerp An. 1556. The holy Scriptures saith the true Ferus are given us as a certaine sure rule of Christian Doctrine In Ferus printed at Rome he is taught to say The holy Scriptures and a Romana edit An. 1577. traditions are given us as a certaine sure rule of Christian Doctrine The true Ferus saith b Justus lic èt in Christo manet tamen sine peccato nec esse potest septies enim in die etiam justus cadit Idem in cap. 3. Though the just man remaineth in Christ yet he is not neither can be without sinne for even the just doe fall seven times a day your Roman Ferus addeth c Sine peccato originali not without veniall sinnes The true Ferus saith d Fiâ—eÌ„ charitateÌ„ conjungit Apostolus ita tamen ut fidem praeponat Ibid. The Apostle conjoyneth faith and charity yet so as hee preferreth faith your Roman Ferus addeth he preferreth faith e Additur ordine non perfectione in order not in perfection The true Ferus saith f Charitas timoremexpellit quia fidem quâ Christum vitaÌ„ propitiationem salvatorem nostrum apprehendimus probat confirmat certámque reddit Ib. c. 4. Aliter Charity driveth out feare because it trieth confirmes and makes assured our faith whereby we apprehend Christ our life propitiation and salvation your Romane Ferus saith g Charitas timorem expellit quia peccata remittit Spirit us saÌ„ctus eam consolatur testimonium perhibens quòd filii Dei sumus Ibid. Charity drives out feare because it forgiveth our sinnes and the Holy Ghost doth comfort it giving testimony that we are Gods children The true Ferus saith h Ibid. cap. 5. There be some who after faith doe earnestly urge good workes but because they teach not withall to what end they are to be directed and how much is to be ascribed unto them they give cause that almost all the common people doe trust in their owne workes and so they build upon the sand the Roman Ferus saith There were some who after faith and with faith did earnestly urge good workes but because they cast away their necessity and others ascribed too much to them they all did build upon the sand Lastly in the true Ferus sometimes by changing of a word or by taking away of a word you pervert the sense and meaning of the Author As for instance whereas the true Ferus saith Saint John condemned all glorying in our workes omnem gloriam your Roman Edition hath turned omnem into inanem and saith Saint John condemned inanem gloriam vaine glory Ridiculum est quod quidam bîc volunt Cephas idem esse quod caput Idem in Joh. c 1. p. mihi 43 c. And whereas the true Ferus saith It is ridiculous that some will have Cephas for the head your
so false and so apparently false as that it is not to be doubted but hee that shall averre it will make no soruple of any lie how lewd soever Thus you Good words and found proofes would better become men of your profession If you affirme that you have a Lineall Succession the proofe lyes on your side and when I shall see it as plainly proved as spoken I shall readily confesse my error till then let me tell you it is not your Catalogue of Popes which you say are sold and printed at London that can make a firme agreement of succession in Faith For by that reason our Queene Elizabeth of blessed memorie succeeded Queene Mary in Faith and consequently our Faith must be good by your owne confession By that reason Ahaz and Manasses that shut up the doore of the Temple succeeded David in the Faith By that reason Pope Liberius the Arrian succeeded Iulius a Catholike Bishop in the Faith By that reason your Cardinall Poole succeeded Bishop Cranmer our Protestant Martyr in the Faith This most firme Argument therefore as you call it is but weake and infirme and accordingly it was resolved by Saint Ambrose and the ancient Fathers Ambr. de Poenit. cap. They have not the succession of Peter that want the faith of Peter In fine if for no other cause yet for this alone your succession in Faith is interrupted because you your selfe confesse that some Articles which are received as points of Faith in your Church are different from those which were received in the Primitive Churches and therefore want succession in the true doctrine And that you may yet farther know there was an interruption of the true Faith in succeeding Ages Genebr Chrone lib. 4. your owne Genebrard confesseth that there were fifty Popes succeeding one another rather Apostaticall than Apostolicall Cardinall Bellarmine in his Chronologie tels us of six and twentie Schismes in the Papacie wherein it was questionable betwixt the Popes and Antipopes who were the true successors of Peter Your Cardinall Baronius tels us that base Harlots beare all the sway at Rome Baron An. 912. and gave Bishopricks at their pleasures and intruded their Paramours into Peters chaire false Popes whose names are written in the Catalogue of Popes onely to note and designe the times It is not then your Catalogue of Popes which you so much brag of that can free you from Heresie or make good your succession in the Faith and therefore I will conclude as I first began The pedigree of the Romish Faith is drawne downe from the ancient Heretikes and the Protestant Faith from Christ and his Apostles CHAP. VIII The summe of his Answer to Sect. 8. 1. That I allege but three Authors Adrian Coster and Harding and them falsly or impertinently for three severall points of the Protestant Faith none for the universality of it in generall as the title promiseth 2. That it is not sufficient to name some in the Roman Church who held some of our opinions but that I must shew a distinct companie from the Roman making a Church 3. That it is not to purpose to shew the Antiquitie and Vniversality of those points wherin we agree with you but in those other points wherein wee disagree 4. That if it were granted the Protestant Church in former ages lay hid in the bosome of the Roman Church that proveth it to have been invisible rather than visible The Reply IN the eighth Section I assumed to prove the Antiquitie and Vniversalitie of our Religion by and with the consenting testimonies of the Romane Church you tell mee It is a bold and unlikely adventure and it is shamelesse and impudent These words be like a house full of smoake without fire but what is the occasion of all this heinous complaint Forsooth the Knight bringeth not one Author I say not one for the Vniversalitie and Antiquitie of his Church And is this so grievous an accusation Surely I thought there was none so ignorant or impudent as to denie both the Vniversalitie and Antiquitie of three Creeds two Sacraments instituted by Christ the two and twentie books of Canonicall Scriptures of the first foure Generall Councels of the Apostolike Traditions of the Ancient Liturgies of the Ordination of Priests and Deacons These are our Tenets and these were the particular Instances which I made and to bring Authors for the proofe of these as if we made a doubt of that which all true Christians did generally receive and beleeve I say with St. Austin Insolentissimae dementiae Aug. It were a signe of most insolent madnesse But admit I should produce some Authors for proofe of this generall beleefe would their Authoritie free me from your termes of Shamelesse and impudent adventure Certainly no for say you If hee should have one two or three or ten men it would not be sufficient for him unlesse hee have the Authoritie of the Catholike Church or Church of Rome To cite many Authors or to bring none then is all alike to you for in your doome nothing will free mee from the name and punishment due to Heresie but the authoritie of the Church and yet in this you have granted mee more than I could expect for you have given mee liberty to take my authoritie from the Church so it be from the Catholike or the Roman And hereby you have made your Roman Church distinct from the Catholike which is most true which both you your selfe and most of your fellow Jesuits have made all one and confirmed by the title of Roman Catholike in all your writings This being granted I proceed to the rest of your exceptions In this Section say you he bringeth onely three Catholike Authors Adrian Costerus and Harding but no word for Antiquitie or universalitie Thus you Hee that shall reade my Section in Via tuta with this your Answer must needs confesse that you deale not fairly nor ingeniously with mee for sometimes you leape from the beginning of a Chapter to the end then you returne againe to the beginning being willing to conceale or confound the truth of my Assertions You so mingle my words with your own in the same Character that a prudent Reader can hardly discerne mine from yours but most usuall it is with you to cry down my words with bitter passages and decline the question in all As for Instance in this Section whereas I said the Church of Rome doth confesse the Antiquitie and Vniversalitie of our Religion long before Luther I instanced in our three Creeds and the rest before named One while you cry out of my impudencie that I cite no Authors another while that if I did cite them they would not serve my turne but you never mention either the Creeds or Scriptures or Councels or any of the points which you well knew had Antiquitie and Vniversalitie in the name and opinion of all Christians After that you flie to the later end of my Section and there you tell mee
Iesuit who holdeth both may by his beliefe merit their holy sacrament of Penance for egregiously abusing Hugo de Sancto Victore and S. Ierome and his reader by making a Sacrament of a metaphor and out of them arguing thus wooddenly against the Knight Hugo hath a particular chapter wherein hee calleth Penance as wee doe with S. Ierome the second boord after shipwracke Ergo Penance is a Sacrament of the new Law doth he not deserve for concluding so absurdly to have the character of his owne sacrament indelebly imprinted upon his flesh To the thirteenth The Knight alledgeth not Bellarmine nor Hugo nor Peter Lombard nor Bonaventure nor Hallensis nor Altisiodorensis nor Suarez himselfe as if they expresly and in direct tearmes denied Extreame Unction to bee a sacrament this they doe not neither as things stood with some of them might doe safely the Roman Church having defined the contrarie Yet so great is the force of truth that what in words they affirme they consequently deny and thus much Suarez ingenuously confesseth some Suar. tom disp 39 sect 2. nonnulli negârunt hoci sacramentum fuisse à Christo institutum ex quo planè sequebatur non esse verum sacramentum saith hee have denied that this Sacrament was instituted by Christ whence it followeth by plaine consequence that it is no true Sacrament Yea but saith Flood if those Schoole-men had lived in this age they would have said that Christ did institute it Whereunto I answer that all Iudgements proceed ex allegatis probatis not allegandis probandis upon things alledged and proved not upon things to be alledged and proved in future times neither is it likely that they would have altered their opinion upon notice of the Trent decision for if the Church of France and divers other Romish Catholiques as they tearme them submit not at this day to all the Decrees of that Councell much lesse may it bee thought that those ancient and acute schoole Divines who bare the greatest sway in their times would have suffered themselves to baffled by the pretence of a pettie Councell charging her canons with nothing but paper-shot every Sacrament of the New Testament is supported with two pillars institution by Christ and a promise of justifying grace annexed to the due receivers thereof set downe in Scripture the former pillar the ancient Schoolemen take from Extreame Unction the later Bellarmine and Cajetan how then can it stand The Iesuit answereth upon a third pillar unwritten tradition But this I have proved before to be a weak and rotten one and to speake the truth it serveth Papists as pons Asinorum did the ancient Logicians to which they fly for shelter when all other helpe faileth them Albeit they bragge much of Scripture yet upon examination of particulars it will appeare that their new Trent Creed consisting of twelve supernumerarie Articles hath no foundation at all in Scripture and therefore they are forced for their support to fly to verbum Dei non scriptum an unwritten word of God which I would faine know of them how they prove to be Gods word Whether by Scripture or by unwritten tradition by Scripture they cannot say for it implies a flat contradiction that verbum non scriptum should be scriptum that unwritten traditions should be found in or founded on Scripture if they say they prove it to bee Gods word by tradition then they prove idem per idem the same thing by it selfe and build their faith upon a sillie sophisme called petitio prÃncipij the begging the maine point in question To the fourteenth In the allegation of Cardinal Bessario the Iesuit chargeth the Knight with ambiguous translation P. 225. and so placing the words that they may have a double sence the one to deceive the simple and the other to excuse himselfe against the objections of the learned and for this he pronounceth a woe against him vae peccatori terraâ— ingredienti duabus vijs Woe to the sinner going on the earth two wayes But the truth is as Pentheus after he was distracted imagined duplices se ostendere Phoebos Oresles apud Euripidem Electram sororem appellat Furiam quòd eam ne fureret in lectlo constringeret that hee saw two Sunnes when yet there was but one in the skie so the Iesuit in a fit of frantick malice imagined the Knight to goe two wayes whereas hee goeth but one and that a faire and streight way for he setteth the Latine words of the Cardinall without any adition or detraction in the margent haec duo sola sacramenta in Evangelijs manifestè tradita legimus and hee translateth them faithfully wee reade that these two Sacraments only were delivered us plainly in Scriptures hee rendereth not the words we reade plainly in Scriptures that there were two only Sacraments delivered unto us which had beene a misplacing of Bessarions words and mis-interpretation of his meaning bu wee reade that these two only were plainly delivered in the Gospell there is no more ambiguitie in the translation then in the originall which though it denieth not that other Sacraments may bee delivered in the Gospell yet it affirmeth that these two only are plainly delivered there and consequently that these two only are de fide matter of faith and upon paine of damnation to be beleeved for as I proved before out of S. Austine and S. Chrysostome all things that concerne faith and manners and are necessarie to salvation are plainly delivered in holy Scriptures To the fifteenth Some Papistsas Flood confesseth denie the foure inferiour Orders to be Sacraments P. 234. and Soto denieth the superiour what a confusion is here in your sacrament of order If the ordination of Bishops be not truly and properly a Sacrament as Dominicus Soto acknowledgeth neither is the ordination of Priests a Sacrament for what can be alledged more for the one then the other and if the ordination of Priests be no sacrament much lesse Deacons or subdeacons or Acolytes or Exorcists Whether there be the same character imprinted in the ordination of Bishops and Priests it is not materiall to our present question for if it be the same then it followeth according to the doctrine of the Schooles that they are one and the selfe-same Sacrament if a diverse character bee imptinted by the one and by the other then are they two distinct Sacraments If they are the same Sacraments then Soto denying the one consequently denieth the other to bee a Sacrament if they are distinct Sacraments then there are eight Sacraments Yea but saith the Iesuit Whither there bee a new character in a Bishop or the same extended is no matter of faith and therefore wee are not to dispute with you of it but keepe you off at the staffes end or rather out of doores when you are once admitted into the Catholique Church wee may admit you to speake of a Schoole-point or else not Wee know well that yee are loath that
we should heare of your differences among your selves but the fire of contention cannot bee kept within the walls of your Schooles quis enim celaverit ignem Lumine qui semper proditur ipse suo it breaketh out and if ye looke not to it it will set on fire the whole fabrick of your Romish Babel Meane while the Iesuit giveth us great incouragement to desire to bee admitted into the Roman Church because then forsooth wee shall have leave to tread the endlesse mazes of scholasticall disputes To the sixteenth If Soto come short Durand commeth home to the point in question for hee affirmeth that which is alledged by the Knight and confessed by the Iesuit that Matrimonie is not a Sacrament univocally if not univocally not truly and properly but equivocally or analogically Yea but saith the Iesuit all acknowledge it for anerror in Durand hee saith all but hee names none Surely the Divines of the reformed Church acknowledge it for no error in Durand but defend it for a truth and for such Romish Divines that adhere to the Councell of Trent they are but a faction in the Church nor is their authoritie more to be urged against the Doctours of the reformed Churches then the authoritie of the Doctours of the reformed Churches against them which yet if any should produce against any of the Articles of their new Creed they would not vouchsafe them so much as a looke For the definition of the Church in the Councel of Florence which the Iesuit toucheth upon it is of little or no authoritie because that Councell was not general nor called by lawfull authoritie but by the schismaticall Pope Eugenius the fourth who was deposed by a generall Councell held at Basil To the seventeenth Because the Iesuit is forbidden by the Popes law to tast of the fruits of Matrimonie at which it seemes his mouth waters hee is content to let the tree fall to the ground for want of support To Cardinal Cajetan who gave a strong push at it by denying that it can be proved to bee a Sacrament Out of the words of S. Paul Ephesians the fift hee answereth nothing but with ifs if it be not proved out of that place it may be out of others if out of no other yet out of tradition to his ifs I returne fies fie for shame that they should bind all their followers under paine of a heavie curse to beleeve this Sacrament of Matrimonie and yet know not where to ground this their beliefe upon Scripture or tradition If it may be proved to bee a sacrament out of S. Paul Ephes 5. their most learned Cardinal Cajetan is out if it may not be proved out of those words Cardinal Bellarmine and almost all Papists that wrote since Cajetan are in an errour The Iesuit holdeth a Wolfe by the eare hee dares neither hold with Cajetan nor against him but puts the matter off with an iff If it cannot be proved to bee a Sacrament out of that passage as Cajetan affirmeth yet it may bee out of other texts What texts why doth he not name them it is a signe hee feareth his coyne is counterfeit that hee dare not bring it to the test If that place which seemeth to make most for his Romish tenet make nothing at all as the acute Schooleman and most learned Cardinal Cajetan confesseth there is no likelihood that other texts which have lesse appearance will stand them in any stead and therefore for his last refuge he flyeth to unwritten traditions as the old Dunces as I noted before ad pontem asinorum To the eighteenth Canus puts a strong sharpe weapon in our hands to wound your Trent doctrine concerning Matrimonie Canus loc Theol l. 8. c. 5. in materiâ formâ hujus Sacramenti viz. Matrimonij statuendâ adeò sunt inconstantes varij aà eò incerti ambigui ut ineptus juturus sit quis in tantâ illorum varietate discrepantiâ rem aliquam certam constantem exploratam conetur afferre but withall forbiddeth us to strike with it as the Iesuit Flood telleth us as if we were at his beck and might not use our weapons as wee list But let him know though he be so foolish as to give advantage wee will not bee so childish as to leave it If that bee true which he writeth that the Divines of Rome write so uncertainly of the matter and forme of Matrimonie that it were folly in any to goe about to reconcile these differences and determine any thing certaine in the point we will inferre upon him that it is likewise folly to define Matrimonie to be a Sacrament for if the matter and forme of Matrimonie bee so unknowne as hee saith the genus of it must needs be unknowne For the genus as Porphyrie teacheth is taken from the matter L. de praedicab c. de genere and answereth thereunto as the difference is taken from the forme If the genus be uncertaine how can it bee an article of faith that matrimonium is species sacramenti The whole nature of a thing consisteth of matter and forme which if it bee unknowne the specificall essence is unknowne and if the specificall essence be unknowne how can it be ranked in his predicament under its proper genus What Papist soever therefore defineth Matrimonie and putteth it under a Sacrament as the proper genus Canus putteth the foole upon him take it off when you can To the nineteenth Vasquez giveth the Iesuits cause not so light a blow as hee imagineth in saying that where S. Austine calleth Matrimonie a sacrament hee taketh the word Sacrament in a large sense and not in the strict and proper for if S. Austine bee so to be understood he held not Matrimonie a sacrament properly so called but in a large sence onely and if that were his judgement we have a great advantage of our Adversaries in the cause for S. Austine carrieth a great stroake not only because hee is held the acutest of all the ancient Fathers and father of all the Schoolemen but especially because the Pope in the Canon law professeth Augustinum sequimur in disputationibus Wee follow for the most part saith Pope Gelasius S. Ierome in the interpretation of Scripture S. Gregorie in matter of moralitie but S. Austine in point of controversie Yea but saith Flood this is but Vasquez his private and singular opinion concerning S. Austine Neither doth the Knight otherwayes urge it then as the singular opinion of a singularly learned Iesuit enforced by evidence of truth to give over their chiefest hold of antiquitie in this point the authoritie of S. Austine Well be it so saith Flood Vasquez is so farre for you yet we have an Oliver for a Rowland Bellarmine for Vasquez for this opinion of Vasquez is contradicted by other Catholique Divines and by Bellarmine in particular Where is then the unitie our Adversaries so much bragge of two of the greatest Champions of the Pope Vasquez and
image-worship which is so directly and expresly forbidden by God in the law That the Iewes are thus scandalized at the idolatrous practice of the Roman Church the Knight proveth by an eye-witnesse Sir Edwine Sands who in his description of the religion in the West parts observeth that the worship of images as it is at this day practised by the Roman Church is such a stumbling block to the Iewes and hinderance to their conversion that when they come to Christian Sermons as in Rome they are enjoyned at least once a yeare so long as they see the Preacher direct his speech to a little woodden crucifix that standeth on the Pulpit by him to call it his Lord and Saviour kneele to it embrace it and kisse it to weepe upon it as it is their fashion in Italie it is preaching sufficient for them and perswadeth them more with the very sight of it to hate Christian religion then any reason the world can alledge to love it To the seventh The argument drawne from the Cherubins is refelled professedly by Tertullian De idol c. 5. Apostolus affirmat omnia tunc figuratè populo accidisse addit benè quòd idem Deus quilege vetuit similitudinem fimilitudinem fieri extraordinario praecepto serpent is similitudinem fieri mandavit si eundem Deum observas habes logem ejus nefeceris similitudinem si praeceptum factae posteà similitudinis respicis tu imit are Mosen ne facias adversus legem simulacrum aliquod nisi tibi Deus jusserit the Apostle saith he affirmeth that all things happened to the Iewes in figures and hee addeth well the same God who in his generall law forbad any similitude to be made by an extraordinary precept commanded some similitude to bee made if thou dost serve the same God thou hast his law Make to thy selfe no graven image or similitude if thou regardest the Precept of making a similitude as of the Cherubins or brazen serpent e. imitate thou Moses make thou no image against the law unlesse God command thee by a Precept Whereunto wee may farther adde that the Cherubins were not made publikely to bee seene and gazed upon by the people but were kept in the holy place whither the Priests only resorted neither were they worshipped by the Priests as Lyra cited by the Iesuit who was himselfe a Iew at the first and well knew their practice professeth the Iewes saith he worshipped not the Arke nor the Cherubins nor the mercy seate but the true God which promised to helpe them neither were they set up in the Temple for adoration but for ornament L. 9. c. 6. q. 7. non ut adorarentur sed ob ornatum pulchritudinem Tabernaculi vel Templi ad majestatem Dei plenius ostendendam Lorin in Act Apost c. 17. de Cherubinis jussu Dei factis de alijs imaginibus â— Solomone dicendum fuisse duntaxat ut appendices additamenta ornatus alterius rei non verò per se propositas modo accommodato ad adorationem quam conslat quoque ab Haebreis ipsis non fuisse exhibitam quod utrumque docet Tertullianus eritque id magis verum si verumâ—est Cherubin ore manibus cruribus erectione corporis bumanam jubis à pectore cervice pendentibus Leoninam alis aquilinam ungulis pedum vitulinam figuram retulisse Vasq I de adorat 2. disp 4. c. 6. nunquam cherubinis honor aut adoratio adhibita fuit aut osculo aut genuflexione aut oblatione â—huris aut alio signo peculiari ad ipsos directo nec quisquam nisi ex suo cerebro absque ullo fundamento contrarium poterit affirmare as Azorius convinced by evidence of truth acknowledgeth saying the Cherubins were not painted or engraven on the Arke to the end they might bee adored but only to adorne and beautifie the Tabernacle and more fully to expresse the majestie of God with whom Lorinus and Vasquez accord concerning the Cherubins made by the command of God and other images in Solomons Temple wee must say that they were there as appendices and additions for the adorning of something else not set forth by themselves in a manner fit for adoration which it is manifest that the Iewes never exhibited to them both which Tertullian teacheth Vasquez commeth not behind Lorinus teaching a contrarie lesson to Flood here his words are That the Cherubins were never adored nor worshipped neither by kissing them nor with bowing of the knee or by offering Frankinsence or by any other meanes neither can any man affirm the contrarie except it be out of his owne braine without any foundation or ground at all To the eighth In this allegation the Iesuit sheweth from whence he and his fellowes are descended L. 3. cont haeres c. 2. cum ex scripturis arguuntur in accusationem convertuntur ipsarum scripturarum quasi non rectè haheant neque sint ex auiboritate quia variè sint dictae juia non possit ex his inveniri veritas ab his qui nesciunt traditionem non enim perliter as traditam illam sed pervivam vocem Aug. in 10. tract 49. Sanctus Evangelifia testatur multa Dominum Christum dixisse fecisse quae scripta non sunt electa sunt autem quae scriberentur quae saluti credentium sufficere videbantur Cyr. in 10.12 c. 68. non omnia quae Dominus fecit conscripta sunt sed quae scribentes sufficere put ârunt tam admores quà m ad dogmata ut rect â fide operibus virtute rutilantes ad regnum caelorum perveniamus viz. from the ancient Gnosticks and Valentinians who as Irenaeus testifieth against them When they are convinced of their heresies out of Scripture they fall on accusing the Scriptures themselves impeaching their authoritie and charging them with ambiguity and saying that the truth cannot be found out of them by those who know not tradition for that it was not delivered by letters but by word of mouth But because I have beate the Iesuit heretofore out of this dodge and have proved abundantly the sufficiencie and perfection of Scriptures I will spare farther labour herein and only shew how shamefully he depraveth one text to the derogation of the whole Scripture S. Iohn in the place alledged by him speaketh not of points of faith or manners precepts or examples for our imitation but of miracles 10.20 30. Many things truly did Iesus in the presence of his Disciples which are not written in this booke Upon which words S. Austine and S. Cyrill thus glosse full in the Protestant language the holy Evangelist testifieth that Christ did and said many things that are not written but those things were chosen to bee written which seemed sufficient for the salvation of them that beleeve and S. Cyrill all things which Christ did are not written but what the writers thought to bee sufficient as well for our conversation as doctrine
were true might not a man thinke you tell as good a tale of some Protestants who in their pots have made so bold with Almighty God himselfe as to drinke a health to him and were not this a fine argument to prove that there is no God It is intollerable presiemption in the Knight to take upon him to censure so great a Councell as that of Trent Wherein the whole flower of the Catholique Church for learning and sanctity was gathered together the splendour of which Councell was so great that your night owle Heretiques durst not once appeare though they were invited to goe and come freely with all the security they could wish Whoreas the Knight saith that it is a senselesse and weake faith that giveth assent to doctrine as necessary to be believed which wanteth authority out of Scriptures and consent of Fathers I answer he knoweth not what he saith for all the Fathers agree that there are many things which men are bound to believe upon unwritten traditions whose authority you may see in great number in Bellarmine De verbo Dei l. 4. c 7. The consent of Doctours of the Catholique Church cannot more erre in one time then another the authority of the Church and assistance of the Holy Ghost being alwayes the same no lesse in one time then another Tertull. de prescript cap. 28. quod apud multos unum invenitur non est erratū sed traditum and Tertullians rule having still place as well in one age as another that which is the same amongst many is not errour but a tradition St. Paul thought he answered sufficiently for the defence of himselfe and offence of his contentious enemy when he said 1 Cor. 11. If any man seeme to be contentious we have no such custome nor the Churches of God It is false which the Knight againe repeateth that an article of faith cannot be warantable without authority of Scriptures for faith is more ancient then Scripture to say nothing of the times before Christ faith was taught by Christ himselfe without writing as also by the Apostles after him for many yeares without any word written As no lesse credite is to be given to the Apostolicall preaching then writing so no lesse credit is still to be given to their words delivered us by tradition then by their writings the credite and sense of the writings depending upon the same tradition St. Austine defendeth many points of faith De baptisme l. 2 c. 7. l. 5 c. 25. cont Maximin l. 3. c. 3. et Epist 174. de Genesi ad litteram l. 10. c. 23. l. de cura pro mortuis et Epist 118. de unit eccles c. 22. et tract 98. in Iohan. either onely or chiefely by tradition and the practise of the Catholique Church as single Baptisme against the Donatists consubstantiality of the Sonne the divinity of the Holy Ghost and even unbegottennesse of the Father against the Arrians and the Baptisme of children against the Pelagians to say nothing of prayer for the dead observation of the feasts of Easter Ascention Whitsontide and the like Nay this truth was so grounded with him that he accounted it most insolent madnesse to dispute against the common opinion and practise of the Catholique Church In his booke of the unity of the Church he saith that Christ beareth witnesse of his Church and in his Tractates upon John having occasion to handle those words of St. Paul If we or an Angell from Heaven c. wherewith the Knight almost concludeth every Section he thus commenteth upon them the Apostles did not say if any man preach more then yee have received but besides that which you have received for if he should say that he should prejudicate that is goe against himselfe who coveted to come to the Thessalonians that he might supply that which was wanting to their faith but he that supplieth addeth that which was lacking taketh not away that which was before these are the Saints very words in that place by which it is plaine that he taketh the word praeter besides not in that sense as to signifie more then is written as you would understand it but to signifie the same that contra St. Paul himselfe useth the same word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 para besides Rom. 16.17 for contra and you in your owne Bibles translate it so I beseech you brethren marke them which cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which you have learned and avoid them The Hammer AS Erucius the accuser of Roscius Amerinus having little to say against him Cic. pro Rosc Amer. to fill up the time rehearsed a great part of an invective which he had penned in former time against another defendant so the Iesuit here failing in his proofes for indulgences for which little or nothing can be said to fill up the Section transcribeth a discourse of his which he had formerly penned concerning the necessity of unwritten traditions which hath no affinity at all with the title of this Chapter de Indulgentiis In other paragraphs we finde him distracted and raving but in this he turneth Vagrant and therefore I am to follow him with a whip as the law in this case provideth Touching the point it selfe of Indulgences which Rivet fitly termeth Emulgences but the Iesuit the Churches Treasury whosoever relieth upon the superabundant merits and satisfaction of Saints for his absolution for his temporall punishment of sinne after this life shall finde according to the Greeke proverbe 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 instead of treasure Eras Adag Thesauri Carbones glowing coales heaped upon his head in hell For neither are there any merits or superabundant satisfactions of Saints Luk. 17.10 Christ saying when you have done all you are unprofitable servants nor were there any could they be applied or imputed to any other men 2 Cor. 5.10 the Apostle teaching that every man shall receive according to that which himselfe hath done in his body whether it be good or evill 2 Cor. 11.15 nor hath the Pope any more power to dispose of this treasury for the remission of sinnes our Saviour Matth. 18. v. 18. and Iohn 20.23 conferring the same power of remitting sinnes upon all the Apostles which he promised to S. Peter Matth. 16. Neither if the Pope had any speciall power of granting Indulgences could it extend to the soules in Purgatory quia non sunt de foro Papae because they are not subject to the Popes court Serm 2. de defunct 9 9. as Gerson rightly concludeth Neither lastly can it be proved that there is any Purgatory fire for soules after this life St. Iohn expresly affirming that the blood of Christ purgeth us from all our sinnes 1 Iohn 1.7 the fire therefore of Purgatory is rightly termed chymerica and chymica chymericall and chymicall chymericall because a meere fiction and chymicall because by meanes of this fire they extract much gold The Apostle saith there is
P. 328. Absolution is a iuridicall act to be performed by a superiour and judge towards an inferiour and a subject being under his power which the soules in Purgatory are not in respect of the Pope Here by the way let the Reader observe how the Iesuit unwittingly striketh a blow at the Popes triple crowne For if the soules in Purgatory are none of his subiects where is his third Kingdome Why should he weare a triple crowne if he may not beare his sword in Purgatory the word Mysterium anciently engraven upon the Popes Miter was wont to be thus declared that the three Crownes compassing it signifie the rule he beares in Heaven Earth and Purgatory but if he hath of late lost that kingdom and is not now as the Iesuit saith Superior to the soules that frie in Purgatory What power hath he to mittigat their fine or release their mulct or abate their fire much lesse wholly absolve them from the guilt of temporall punishment there in toto As for that he addeth concerning communion of Saints it yeelds no support at all to his cause for the communion of Saints which all Christians beleeve is partly in the blessings of this life partly in the use of spirituall graces whereby they pray one for another admonish instruct and comfort one the other this communion no way extendeth to inward habits as faith hope charity nor to outward penall sufferings which can be imparted to no other as may be most evidently deduced out of Scriptures and the joynt testimonies of the ancient Fathers First therefore wee say that the Saints have no superabundance of merits or satisfactions as I have proved before next that admitting they had any they cannot dispose of them to others for every one shal beare his own burdens every one shall receive the things done in his body according to that he hath don whether it be good or bad not according to that which he hath don or suffred in the body of another Gal. 6.5 de pudicit c. 22. Quis alienam mortem sua solvet nisi solus fiâ—ius Dei proinde qui illum emular is donando delicta si nihil ipse deliquisti plane patere pro me si vero peocator es quomodo oleum facuiae tuae sufficere tibi mihi porerit In Iohan. tract 24. Et si fratres pro fratribus moriantur tamen in fraternorum peccatorum remissâ—one nullius sanguis martyris funditur Leo ep ad Palest Accepere justi non dedere coronas et de fortitudine fidelium nata sunt exempla patientiae non dona justitiae singulares quippe eorum mertes fuerunt nec alterius quisquam de bitum suo fine persolvit Bernard ep 198 cont Abelard Satisfactio unius omnibus imputatur sicut omnium pecca-ta ille unus portavit nec alter invenietur qui fore fecit alter qui satisfecit satisfecit ergo caput pro membris the wise virgins said to the foolish that begged of them oyle to fil their lamps Not so lest there be not enough for us for you the righteousnes of the righteous shal be upon him the wickednes of the wicked shal be upon him Ez. 18.20 Who ever saith Tertullian satisfied by another mans death his owne death but only the Son of God therfore thou who imitatest him in forgiving sins if thou hast sinned in nothing thy selfe I pray thee suffer for me but if thou artâ—a sinner as I am how will the oyle of thy little lampe suffice for thee and for me If Tertullians coyne be not currant I am sure St Austine St Leos is Although saith St Austine brethren dye for their brethren yet the blood of no Martyr was ever shed for the remission of their brothers sinnes For as St. Leo testifieth the righteous have received they have not given crowns from the fortitude of true beleevers we receive examples of patience not gifts of righteousnes For their death was singular neither did any of theÌ„ by it discharg the death of another the head hath satisfied for the members the satisfactioÌ„ of one is imputed to all Marke he saith of one not of more the head satisfied for the meÌ„bers not the meÌ„bers one for another To the seventh I freely subscribe to the conclusion and beleeve without any scruple that the 56000. yeares of pardon granted by the Pope to every one that shall say seven prayers before the Crucifix and seven Paternosters and seven Ave-maries is no more for the dead then for the living For done to such an intent neither are the better for it neither the living nor the dead are gainers but onely the Pope himselfe and his Agents who sell paper and lead at a deerer rate than any Merchant or Stationer in Christendome Yet by the Iesuits leave Pope Gregory granting 14000 yeares of Pardon and Nicolas the first as many and Sixtus the fourth twice as many which make up the full number of 56000 must needs be thought to intend benefit to the soules in Purgatorie or in hell unlesse you will make the Pope to be so absurd as to suppose that any were to live upon earth so many thousand yeares which had beene an errour 55000 times worse than the errour of the Millenaries For they taught that the Saints should live a thousand yeares with Christ on earth but these that sinners should live in durance here or in Purgatorie 56000 yeares which is 50000 yeares longer than by all computations the World hath or as most thinke shall last To the eighth What Scripture or Tradition hath the Iesuit for this his incredible paradox If wee should grant him such a Purgatorie as hee desires which no man yet could find either in the Map of this world or in the Table of holy Scriptures yet is it impossible to defend with any probability this position of his that in few weekes space a soule might suffer punishment answerable to the Penance of many thousand yeares For the learned Romanists generally accord that Purgatorie fire differeth little from hell but in time that the one is eternall the other temporall they beleeve it to equalize or rather exceed any fiery torment on earth How then can they imagine so much fuell to be laid on that fire and the torments in it so improved that a man may suffer so much punishment in a few weekes which may weigh downe or beare scale with the penance of 56000 yeares or if the torments could be so increased what soule would be able to beare them for those few weekes nay rather a few houres To the ninth The Authours alleaged by the Knight namely Durand Sylvester Prierias Major Fisher Bishop of Rochester Alfonsus a Castro Antoninus Cajetan and Bellarmine speake not as the Iesuit would have it comparatively but positively Durand saith Durand 4. sent dist 20. q. 3. de indulgeÌ„tiis pauca dici possum per certitudinem quia nec scriptura expressè de iis loquitur sancti
the purpose that that Councell seemed to be an assembly not of Bishops but of Hobgoblins not of men but of Images moved like the statues of Daedalus by the sinewes of others What the Iesuit addeth of night owles not daring to appeare in the splendour of that Councell hath no colour of truth For it is no newes for owles to appeare at popish Councells At a Councell held at Rome by Pope Heldebrand Fascic rerum expetend sugiend Ortwhinus Gratius writeth there appeared an huge great Owle which could not be frayed away but scared all the Bishops As for Protestants whom this Blacke-bird of Antichrist termeth night Owles if they had flocked to that Councell they had shewed themselves not Owles by appearing in that twi-light at Trent but very Wood-cocks to trust any security offerd them by those who after publike faith given to Iohn Huz and Ierome of Prage notwithstanding the safe conduct of Sigismond the Emperour for their going to and comming from the Councell at Constance most cruelly burned them at a stake to ashes To the seventeenth Divine faith must be grounded upon divine authority and that cannot be the Catholike faith which wanteth consent of Fathers As for those Fathers whose authority Bellarmine draweth ob torto collo to testifie for unwritten traditions de verbo Dei lib. 4. cap. 7. the Iesuit may see them fully answered in Iunius Whitaker Daniel Chamierus and Dr. Davenant Bishop of Sarum and a farre greater number of Fathers alleaged to the contrary by Robert Abbot in his answer to William Bishop cap. 7. Phillip Morney in his preface to his booke de sacrâ Eucharistiâ and Iacobus Laurentius in his singular tractate de Disputationibus and others To the eighteenth The assistance of the Holy ghost was more speciall in the times of the Apostles then in latter ages they could not erre in their writings others might yet we charge not the Catholike Church of Christ in any age with any fundamentall errour though we may the Roman Tertullian his rule may have still place and as well in one age as another if it be rightly taken and not misconstrued and misapplied for if it be taken generally that whatsoever is the same amongst many is no errour but tradition it is it selfe a great errour For the same opinion concerning the inequality of the Father and the Sonne is found amongst many to wit the Arrian Churches the same doctrine concerning the procession of the Sonne from the Father onely is found amongst many namely all the Greeke Churches at this day the same practise of administring the Eucharist to children was found amongst many namely all the Churches of Affrica in St. Austines time yea and in all Churches subject to the Bishop of Rome for many ages as Maldonat the Iesuit confesseth yet the above named Positions and this latter practise are confessed on all sides to be erroneous But Tertullian by many understandeth not the practise of some particular Churches Tertul. de prescrip Age nunc omnes ecclesiae erraverint verisimile est ut tot et tante in unam fidem erraverint much lesse of factious persons of one Sect but the generall and uniforme doctrine and practise of the whole Church as his words in the same Chapter quoted by the Iesuit declare Goe too now admit that all Churches have erred is it likely so many so great Churches should erringly conspire in one faith To the nineteenth We derogate nothing from any generall custome of the Catholike Church let the Iesuit produce out of good Authors any such custome for Indulgences to redeeme soules out of Purgatory flames by Papall Indulgences and this controversie will soone be at an end howsoever let me tell the Iesuit the way that this text of St. Paul is impertinently alleaged to prove this or any other article of the Trent faith For St. Paul in this place speaketh not of any Article of faith nor matter of manners necessary to salvation but of habits gestures fashions and indifferent rites in matter of which nature there is no question at all but that the custome of the Churches of God ought to sway as is abundantly proved by Dr. Andrewes late Bishop of Winchester in his printed Sermon upon that text To the twentieth Disputabamus de alliis respondet Iesuita de cepis we dispute of Indulgences the Iesuit answereth of Traditions in matter of Faith These are very distinct questions and so handled by all that deale Work-man-like in points of difference betweene the Reformed and the Romane Churches but the Jesuits common place of Indulgences was drawne drie and therefore hee setteth his cocke of Traditions on running which yeeldeth nothing but muddy water What though Faith be ancienter than Scriptures the Argument is inconsequent Ergo Scripture is not now the perfect rule of Faith Faith neither is nor can be more ancient than the Word of God upon which it is built this Word of God is now written and since the consigning and confirming the whole Canon of the written Word by Saint Iohn in the Apocalypse is become the perfect and as the Schooles speaketh the adequate rule of Faith It is true Christ and his Apostles first taught the Church by word of mouth Lib. 3. advers heres cap. 1. Non enim per alios dispositionem salutis nostrae cognovimus quam per eos per quos Evangelium pervenit ad nos quod quidem tunc praeconiaverunt postea per dei voluntatem in scripturis nobis tradiderunt fundamentum columnam fidei nostrae futuram but afterwards that which they preached was by the commandment of God committed to writing to be the foundation and pillar of Faith as Irenaus testifieth in expresse words To the twentie one If the Iesuit could prove as undoubtedly any words of the Apostles that are not set downe in Scriptures to be their owne words as wee can prove the writings we have to be theirs wee would yeeld no lesse credit to them then to these but that neither can hee nor so much as undertaketh to doe And whereas he further faith that the credit of the Scripture depends upon Tradition unlesse hee qualifie the speech some way it is not onely erroneous but also blasphemous for it is all one as if hee should say that man gives credit and authority to God as Tertullian jeareth the Heathen In Apolloget not receiving Christ for God because the Romane Senate would not give their consent and approbation to make him one Iam homo deo propitius esse debet or that the credit and authority of Gods Word dependeth upon mans receiving it Whereas in truth Gods Word is not therefore of divine and infallible authoritie because the Church delivereth it to be so but on the contrary the Church delivereth it to be so because in it selfe it is so and the Church should erre damnably if shee should otherwise conceive of these inspired Writings then as of the undoubted Oracles of God
to which we owe absolute consent and beliefe Vid. August supr cit without any question or contradiction To the two and twentieth Saint Austine defends no point of Faith against Heretikes either onely or chiefly by the Tradition and practise of the Catholike Church but either onely or chiefly by the Scriptures For example in his booke of Baptisme against the Donatists after hee had debated the point by Scriptures hee mentioneth the custome of the Church and relateth Stephanus his proceeding against such as went about to overthrow the ancient custome of the Catholike Church in that point But hee no where grounds his Doctrine upon that custome though hee doth well approve of it as wee doe Againe in his booke against Maximinus and his 174 Epist to Pascentius hee confirmeth the faith of the Trinity by the written Word against those Heretikes his words Ep. 175 Haec siplacet audire quemadmodum è Scripturis sacris asserantur to the same Pascentius are Here thou maist heare if thou wilt how these points of our Faith are maintained by Scripture So farre is hee from founding those or any other points of faith only or chiefly upon unwritten Traditions What the Iesuit alleageth out of his tenth booke De Genes ad literam cap. 23. Consuetudo matris Ecclesiae in baptizandis parvulis nequaquam spernendus est neque ullo modo superflua deputanda no whit advantageth his cause for there Saint Austine saith no more but The custome of the Church in baptizing Infants is no way to be despised or to be accounted superfluous Wee all say the same and condemne the Pelagians of old and Anabaptists of late who deny Baptisme to be administred to children or any way derogate from the necessitie of that Sacrament The Iesuit saith hee will say nothing of Prayer for the dead yet hee quoteth Saint Austine de curâ pro mortuis as if in that booke hee taught Prayer for the dead and grounded it upon unwritten Tradition Whereas in that booke hee neither maintaineth Prayer for the dead nor maketh mention of any unwritten Tradition for it but on the contrarie solidly out of Scriptures proveth Esaias Propheta dicit Abraham nos nescivit et Israel non cognovit nos si tanti patriarchae quid erga populum ex his procreatur ageretur ignoraverunt quomodo mortui vivorum rebus atque actibus cog noscendis adjuvandisque miscentur et paulo post ibi ergo sunt spiritus defunctorum ubi non vident quecunque aguntur aut eveniunt in istâ vitâ hominibus Ep. 118. Si quid hocum sic faciendum divinae Scripturae praescribat authoritas non est dubitandum quin ita facere debeamus similiter si quid per orbem tota frequentat Ecclesia that the Saints departed have no knowledge of our affaires upon earth the Prophet Esay saith Abraham knoweth us not and Israel is ignorant of us If so great Patriarchs knew not what befell their posteritie after their death how can it be defended that the dead intermeddle with the actions or affaires of the living to helpe them onward or so much as to take notice of them A little after he concludes flat upon the Negative The Spirits therefore of the dead there remaine where they knowe not what befalleth to men in this life To what end therefore should wee call upon them in our troubles and distresse here Neither hath this Father any thing in his 118 Epistle for the Iesuit or against us for there hee speaketh of Ecclesiasticall Rites and Customes as appeares in the very title of that Epistle not of Doctrines of Faith and yet even in these hee giveth a preheminence to the Scriptures If saith hee the authoritie of divine Scripture prescribe any Rite or Custome to be kept there is no question to be made of such a Rite or Custome and in like manner if the whole Church throughout the world constantly useth such a Rite or Custome The Iesuites next allegation out of this Fathers booke De unitate Eccles cap. 22. falleth short of his marke hee saith there that Christ beareth witnesse to his Church that it should be Catholike that is spread over the face of the Earth and not to be confined to any certaine place as the Province of Affrica Wee say the same and adde that the bounds of it are no more the territories of the Bishop of Rome than the Provinces of Affrica Wee grant that Whosoever refuseth to follow the practise of the Church to wit the Catholike or universall Church resisteth or goeth against our Saviour who promised by his spirit to leade her into all truth and to be with her to the end of the World Which promise may yet stand good and firme though any particular Church erre in Faith or manners as did the Churches of Asia planted by the Apostles themselves and the Church of Rome doth at this day Cont. lit Petil. l. 3. c. 6. Now because that testimonie of Saint Austine wherewith the Knight concludes almost every Section If wee or an Angell from heaven preach unto you any thing whether it be of Christ or of his Church or any thing which concerneth Faith or manners besides that which you have received in the Legall and Evangelicall Scriptures let him be accursed is as a beame in all Papists eyes therefore they use all possible meanes to take it out but all in vaine for the words of the Apostle on which Saint Paul commenteth are not as the Iesuit would have them If any man preach unto you Contra against but if any preach unto you Praeter besides Ep. ad Galat. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Neque enim inquit si contraria solum predicaverint intulit anathema esto sed si evangelizaverint preter id quod ipsi evangelisavimus hoc est si plusculum quidpiam adjecerent as Saint Chrysostome and Theophylact accutely observe The Apostle saith not if Chrysostome rightly understand him if they should preach any thing contrary but if they shall in their preaching adde any thing be it never so little besides that which wee have preached unto you let him be accursed And Theophylact is altogether as plaine as Chrysostome in his Glosse upon the words The Apostle inferreth not if any man preach contrarie to that yee have received but if any preach besides that which wee have preached unto you that is if they shall presume to adde any thing though never so little let them be accursed Neither doth Saint Austine in his tractate upon Saint Iohn upon which Bellarmine and after him Flood so much beare themselves any whit contradict the former interpretations of Saint Chrysostome and Theophylact. For his words in that place carry this sense The Apostle saith not if any man preach more unto you than you have already received that is perfectly conceived and apprehended for then hee should goe against himselfe who saith that hee desired to come to the Thessalonians to supply
All-sufficiencie or containing of all things expressely is a necessarie point of perfection hee is deceived for then would it follow that the Gospell of Saint Matthew Saint Marke and other particular Bookes should be imperfect and especially that of Saint John wherein hee saith expressely that all things are not written Were the Scripture perfect in the Knights sense yet would it not then be a sufficient rule of Faith of it selfe alone for it would still be a booke or writing the very nature whereof doth not suffer it to be the sole rule of Faith or judge of Controversies for a Iudge must be able to speake to heare and to answer whereas the nature of a Booke is as it were to leave it selfe to be read and expounded by men No Catholike declineth the triall of Scripture in regard of imperfection but onely in regard that it being a written Word no Heretike can be convinced by it as I shewed you even now out of Tertullian who saith It is lost labour to dispute with an Heretike out of Scripture Let any man by the effects judge who reverence the Scripture most Catholikes or Protestants let him compare the labours of the one in translating and expounding Scriptures with the labour of the other and hee shall find the truth of this matter In admitting any triall with Protestants by Scriptures De praescript c. 15. Non esse admittendos haereticos ad ineundam de scripturis provocationem quos sine scripturis probamus ad scripturas non pertinere Vos qui estis quando unde venistis quid in meo agitis non mei Quo denique Marcion jure sylvaâ—â— meas caedis wee condescend more to their infirmitie than wee need or they can of right challenge For wee acknowledge that saying of Tertullian most true that Heretikes are not to be admitted to the Scriptures to whom the Scripture in no wise belongeth who are you when and whence are you come What do you in my ground you that are not mine By what right ô Marcion dost thou fell my wood By what leave ô Valentine dost thou turne my fountaines By what authoritie ô Apelles dost thou remove my bounds c. This is Tertullians discourse and words where it is but changing the names of Marcion Valentine and Apelles into Luther Calvin and Beza and it will fit as well as if it were made for them You must first shew your selves owners of the Land before you can claime the writings and evidences belonging to it and which make good the Title The Hammer VVHereas many other things argue that our Adversaries maintaine a desperate cause so especially their excepting against the holy Scriptures of God and refusing to be tried by them in the points of difference betweene us and them For what was the reason why the Manichees called in question the authoritie of the Gospell of Saint Matthew Aug. l. 28. cont Faust cap. 2. and the Acts of the Apostles Desperation because by those writings they were convinced of blasphemous Errour What was the reason why the Ebionites rejected all Saint Pauls Epistles Desperation Irenaeus l. 8. cap. 26. because by them their heresie was most apparantly confuted Iren. l. 3. c. 2. Cum ex scriptur is arguuntur in accusationem convertuntur ipsarum scripturarum quasi non recte habeant nec sint ex authoritate nec possit ex iis inveniri veritas ab his qui ignorunt traditionem Tertul. praesc advers haeret What was the reason why the Gnosticks and Valentinians disparage the Scriptures saying that They were not of authoritie and the truth could not be found out of them by those who were ignorant of Tradition Desperation What was the cause why Papias and the Millenaries preferred word of mouth before Scriptures and pretended 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 unwritten tradition for many of their fables Desperation What was the reason why the Heretikes in Tertullians daies refused to examine their Doctrines by the touchstone of the Scriptures saying More things were required than the Apostles had left in writing for that either the Apostles knew not all or delivered not all to all In like manner wee can impute it to nothing else but diffidence and distrust of their cause that Lyndan Turrian Lessius and Pighius speake so disgracefully of holy Scriptures as they doe terming them dead Characters a dead and killing Letter a shell without a kirnell a leaden rule a boot for any foot a nose of wax Sybils Prophesies Sphinx his riddles a wood of Thieves a shop of Heretikes imperfect doubtfull obscure full of perplexities If they should bestow the like scandalous Epithets upon the Kings Letters patents or the Popes Buls or Briefes they would bee soone put into the Inquisition or brought into some Court of Judicature and there have either their tongues or their eares cut or their fore-heads branded yet the Iesuit is so farre from condemning these blasphemous speeches in his fellow-Jesuits and Romanists that hee deviseth excuses for them and sowes fig-leaves together to cover these their Pudenda which I will plucke off one after another in my answer to his particular exceptions against the Knight To the first It is true that some Roman writers of late have made an assay to prove some of their Popish doctrines out of Scripture but with no better successe than Horantius had in undertaking to refute Calvin his Institutions as appeareth by Pilkington his Parallels If the Scriptures were so firme for our Adversaries why are not they as firm for them why doth the Iessuit in the fore-front of this Section bid as it were defiance to them professing in plaine termes that The Scripture is not the sole rule of Faith nor that out of it alone all Controversies can be decided Doubtlesse any indifferent Reader will conceive that the Scriptures make most for them who stand most for their authoritie and perfection as all the reformed Divines doe not onely affirming but also confirming that the Scripture is not only a most perfect but the only infallible rule of faith Ep. 112. Si divinarum Scripturarum earum scilicet quae in Ecclesiâ Cano. nicae nominantur perspicuâ firmatur authoritate siâ—e ullâ dubitatione credendum est aliis verò testibus vel testimoniis quibus aliquid credendum esse suadetur tibi credere vel non credere liceat quantum ei momenti ad faciendam fidem vel habere vel non habere perpenderis Ep. 97 Solis iis Scripturarum libris qui jam Canoniti appellantur didici hunc timorem honoremque deferre ut nullum earum authorem scribendo aliquid errasse firmissimè credam lib. de Nat. Grat c. 61. Me in hujusmodi quorumlibet Scriptis hominum liberum quia solis Canonicis debeo sine recusatione consensum l. 11. c. 5. Ep. 48. every article of divine faith must be grounded upon a certaine and infallible ground to us but there is no certaine and infallible ground to
us of supernaturall truth but Scripture as is abundantly proved by Saint Austine If any thing be confirmed by perspicuous authority of Canonicall Scriptures we must without any doubt or haesitation beleeve it but to other witnesses or testimonies we may give credit as we see cause and in his 97. Epistle to St. Ierome I have learned to yeeld that honour and reverence onely to the Canonicall Scriptures that I most firmely beleeve that no Author of them could erre in any thing he wrot and in his booke de natura gratia I professe my selfe free in all such writings of men because I owe absolute consent without any demurre or staggering onely to the Canonicall bookes of Scripture To the same purpose he writeth against Faustus the Manichee l. 11. c. 5. and ep 48. But what neede I presse St. Austine when the evident letter of Scripture is for this truth Titus 1.2 Rom. 3.4 God cannot lie and let God be true and every man a lier that is subject to error and falsehood Againe the Scriptures are sufficient to instruct us in all points necessary to salvation therefore every article of divine faith is evidently grounded upon Scripture The Antecedent I thus prove 2 Tim. 3.15.16 whatsoever is profitable for doctrine for reproofe for correction for instruction in righteousnesse in such sort that it is able to make a man wise unto salvation and perfect to every good worke is sufficient to instruct in all points of salvation but the Scripture is so profitable that it is able to make wise unto salvation and perfect to every good worke Ergo It is sufficient to instruct in all points necessary to salvation The major is evident ex terminis the minor is the letter of the text and that the adversary may not except that this is my collection onely L. 3. Advers haer c. 1. Non per alios dispo sitionem salutis nostrae cognovimus quam per cos per quos evangelium ad nos pervenit quod quidem tunc preconiaverunt postea per Dei volun tatem nobis in Scripturis tradiderunt fundamentum columnam fidei nostrae futuram Aug. l. 3. cont Lit. Petil. c. 6. Sive de Chrlsto sive de ejus ecclesia sive de quacunque re quae pertinet ad fidem vitamque nostram non dicom si nos nequaquam comparandi ei quid dixit si nos sed omnino quod seturus adjecit si Angelus de Coelo vobis annunciaverit praeterquam quod in Scripturis Legalibus Evangelicis accepistis anathema sit I will produce to him impregnable testimonies of the ancient Fathers Irenaeus We have not knowne by others the meanes which God hath appointed for our salvation then by those by whom the Gospell came unto us which at the first the Apostles preached by word of mouth but afterwards by the will of God delivered in writing to be the foundation and pillar of our faith The second is Saint Austine Whether concerning Christ or concerning his Church or concerning any thing that pertaineth to our faith and life I will not say if we but even as he going forward addeth if an Angell from Heaven shall preach unto you any thing but what you have received in the Scriptures of the law and the Gospell accursed be hee Yea but the Iesuit objecteth against us and these Holy Fathers that by the Scriptures we cannot prove which bookes of Scripture are Canonicall and which are not I answere first our question here is not of the principles of Divinity but of Theologicall conclusions Now that Scripture is the word of God and that these bookes are Canonicall Scriptures are principles in Divinity and therefore not to be proved according to the rule of the great Philosopher in the same science It is sufficient to make good our Tenet that the Canonicall Scriptures being presupposed as principles every conclusion de fide may be deduced out of them Secondly that such bookes of Holy Scriptures are Canonicall and the rest which are knowne by the name of Apochrypha are not Canonicall is proved by arguments and testimonies drawne out of Scripture it selfe by Whitaker Disputatione de sacrâ Scripturâ controversiâ primâ by Reynolds most copiously in his Censura librorum Apochryphorum Thirdly I retorte the Iesuits argument against himselfe when they teach tradition is part of Gods word how prove they it to be so by Scripture or Tradition by Scripture they cannot prove that unwritten traditions are Gods word if they prove it by Tradition then they begge the point in question and prove idem per idem To the second The Romanists ground some doctrines of their faith upon the letter of Scripture but it is that letter which killeth as for example they ground their carnall presence of Christ in the Sacrament upon those words in the sixt of St. Iohn unlesse yee eate the flesh of the Sonne of God and drinke his blood you have no life in you which words if you take according to the letter this letter killeth saith Origen but it is the spirit saith our Saviour that quickeneth the flesh profiteth nothing the words which I speake unto you they are spirit and they are life Iohn 6.63 He that pierceth the barke and commeth to the sap runneth not from the tree of life but rather runneth to it so doe we when we leave the barke of the letter upon necessary occasions and pierce into the heart and draw out the sap of the spirituall meaning To presse the letter of Scripture against the spirituall meaning and analogie of faith is not onely Iewish but Haereticall For example The Anthropomorphites ground their haeresie upon plaine and expresse words of Scripture from which to use the Iesuits owne words All Orthodox Divines are faine to flie to figurative and tropicall interpretations To the third First Saint Peter saith not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not in which Epistles of St. Paul but in which points and heads of doctrine many things are hard to be understood Secondly though some points be hard to be understood in themselves or are obscurely set downe in Scripture it followeth not from thence that all things necessary to salvation are not plainely delivered therein For as before I proved out of Saint Austine and Saint Chrysostome Among thuse things which are plainly delivered in Scriptures all such points are found as containe faith and manners all things that are necessarie are manifest Thirdly those things which are obscurely set downe in Saint Pauls Epistles may be and are elsewhere in holy Scriptures more perspicuously delivered Lastly Saint Peter saith not that those things are hard to be understood simply and to all men but to the ignorant and unstable who wrest all Scripture to their owne destruction Among which number the Iesuit must reckon himselfe and his associates before they can fit this text to their purpose To the fourth First this passage out of Saint Iohn hath beene discussed
before and cleered where I shewed that it maketh nothing against but strongly for the sufficiencie of Scripture to instruct in all points necessarie to salvation For though all Christs speeches and actions are not registred by the Evangelist yet as Saint Austine rightly inferreth out of the words following haec scripta sunt ut credatis credentes vitam aeternam habeatis 2 Thess 2.15 electa sunt quae saluti credentium sufficerent Such things were made choice of to be written Ver. 2. And Paul as his manner was went unto them of Thessalonica and three Sabbath dayes reasoned with them out of the Scriptures as might suffice for the salvation of all Beleevers Neither is that text of Saint Paul any whit derogatorie to the perfection of Scriptures for whatsoever hee meanes by Tradition per Sermonem taught by word of mouth it is certaine out of the seventeenth of the Acts that all Saint Pauls speech and discourse to the Thessaloinans whereunto the words have reference were out of Scripture Secondly the words themselves Tenete traditiones quas dedicistis sive per sermonem sive per Epistolam import not that the Apostle delivered divers things to them in writing by an Epistle and without writing by word of mouth but that he preached to them and taught them the Christian doctrine both wayes by Letters and by speech and that they should have as much care of his writings as of those things hee spake to them in presence Thirdly admit they were different things which hee spake to them and which hee wrote all that can be from thence inferred is but this that all points of saving Doctrine are not written in this Epistle of Saint Paul to the Thessalonians which may be granted without any prejudice to our Tenet For those things that are not written in that Epistle might be and undoubtedly are written in other of his Epistles or other bookes of holy Scripture To the fift Saint Ierome is not against the free use of Scripture in the vulgar tongue for hee himselfe translated the Scriptures into the vulgar tongue of the Dalmatians hee dedicates his Commentarie upon Scripture to Lay-persons yea many of them to women whom he exhorteth Haec monilia in pectore haec in auribus hereant to account them as their chiefe casket of Iewels let these Iewels hang upon your neckes and in your eares Epist ad Demetriad wherein hee much commendeth the Husbandmen about Bethlem for being so perfect in Scriptures that They had the Psalmes of David by heart and sang them as they followed the Plow Arator stivam tenens cantat Davidicum melos he instructeth Laeta a religious Matron how to bring up her daughter in the knowledge of the Scriptures and what method to observe in the reading thereof Progemmis serico divinos codices amet In steed of silks and precious stones let her handle the books of holy Scripture let her first learne the Psalter c. discat primo Psalterium his se Canticis avocet in Proverbiis Salomonis erudiatur ad vitam In Ecclesiaste consuescat quae mundi sunt calcare In Iob virtutis patientiae exempla sectetur Ad evangelia transeat nunquam eapositura de manibus c. Neither are the words you quote out of him against the free use of the Scripture but against the practise of some forward persons who Lapwing-like offer to flye with a piece of the shell on their head taking upon them to expound holy Scriptures to others which they understand not themselves and to teach that which they never learned docent quod nunquam didicorunt To the sixt This practise of the Iewes concludeth nothing at all but that those passages of Scripture above mentioned are very difficult and subject to misconstruction and therefore require a discreet Reader of ripe yeares and judgement Whether this their practise be commendable or no in restraining all before they arrive to thirty from reading those passages of Scripture I dispute not but this is certaine that even this custome of theirs which the Iesuit brings against us makes for us for they permitted all men before thirty to reade all other chapters of holy Scriptures and after thirty these also To the seventh The honour the Papists doe the Scriptures in prohibiting them to be read is like the favour she did her Paramour in the Poet Quae prae amore exclusit foras which out of pure love thrust him out of doores The greatest honour wee can doe Gods holy Oracles is diligently to reade them attentively to heare them humbly to obey them and daily to search them as the deeds and evidences of our salvation Ioh. 5.39 according to the Precept of our blessed Saviour Search the Scriptures for in them yee thinke yee have eternall life and they are they which testifie of mee As for the Iesuits reason drawne from the weaknesse of the Readers it is very weake and of no force at all Psal 19 7. Prov. 1.4 First because the Scriptures were written to give knowledge to the simple and wisedome to the unlearned Secondly because if this his reason were good their Church should prohibit all other bookes as well as Scriptures or rather much more than Scriptures in regard there are errours in them but none in Scriptures and God hath promised a speciall blessing to those who in obedience to his ordinance diligently reade and study the holy Scriptures which hee hath not to those that reade other books To the eight This Proverb might most rightly have beene applied to the Iesuit in the former Section when he a Iesuit produced Oliverius Manerius a Jesuit against Henry Buxhorne Deane of Tyelmond then hee said in effect Aske my brother Jesuit if I be a thiefe or rather a slanderer But it no way fitteth Cornelius Agrippa and the Knight the one being a zealous Protestant the other a professed Papist though discovering and ingeniously confessing divers abuses in the Papacie If hee were as the Iesuit sayes a Magician because hee wrote of Art-magicke what were Pope Hildebrand and Sylvester who not onely studied but also practised the black-Art as Benocardinalis Platina and others write To the ninth The Iesuit will not stand answering every one severally because hee dare not keepe that station for feare of Gun-shot For the answer hee giveth in generall it is false and absurd if not impious false because it is certaine that those similitudes cannot be applied to the letter onely without the meaning nor doe the Heretikes now a dayes nor did the Devill himselfe alleage onely the letter and syllables of Scripture but the meaning also 2 Pet. 4.16 though perverting and wresting it to an evill end and drawing false conclusions from it Hee that calleth the Scriptures Sybils Prophecies blasphemously carpeth at the obscuritie of the meaning and Pighius who compared it to a nose of wax impiously taxeth the diversitie of senses and interpretations which the Scripture is
soever to exception saith nothing for him Pelagius was not so absurd as to hold this position that Peters Chaire and Faith goe alwaies together but only spake in a glozing manner thus to Pope Sozimus Thou holdest Peters Chaire and Faith and will the Iesuit inferre an universall from a particular Pope Sozimus held Peters Chaire and Faith therfore all that hold Peters Chaire hold his Faith What holdeth these two together Luke 22.32 Quest vet N. Test q. 75. Quid ambigitur pro Petro rogabat pro Iacobo et Iohāne non rogabat ut caeteros taceam manifestum est in Petro omnes contineri a most strong and effectuall Bond saith the Iesuit namely Christs promise to Peter I have prayed for thee that thy Faith faile not The time will faile me to declare particularly how many waies this Argument of the Iesuit failes first Christ prayed not here for Peter onely as Saint Austine affirmeth What doth any man make question hereof did Christ pray for Peter and not for James and John To say nothing of the rest it is manifest that in Peter all the rest are contained This prayer then no more privilegeth the See of Rome from error than of Ierusalem or of Ephesus or any other See of the Apostles Secondly Christ prayed not that Peter might not erre who afterwards erred Gal. 2.14 and was reproved by Saint Paul Galathians the second but that his Faith might not faile that is be overcome in that fearfull temptation in such sort that hee might not rise againe after his fall Thirdly Christs prayer is for Peter himselfe in his person and the Apostles whom Satan winnowed not for his See Fourthly if this promise any way belonged to his Successors certainly no more to those of Rome than Antiochia so infirme is this the Iesuits proofe which yet hee saith Must stand firme till Sir Humphrey can tell what Pope began to varie from his Predecessours Agreed Sir Humphrey shall presently tell him by name Liberius the Arrian Vigilius the Eutychian Honorius the Monothelite condemned in three generall Councels sixth seventh and eighth Iohn the three and twenty deposed in the Councell at Constance as for other enormous crimes so for this his damnable heresie that Hee denied the immortalitie of the soule and the life to come To which after the Iesuit hath replied instance shall be given in many other Popes which have beene branded with the note of heresie in like manner To the third A strange and loose inference three and thirty Popes adored Images because their Predecessor had the pictures of Saint Peter and Saint Paul Pope Gregorie allowed of the standing of pictures in the Church Vid. supr yet would have them by no meanes adored Helena the mother of Constantine had the wood of Christs crosse yet adored it not saith Saint Ambrose If to have the picture of Saint Peter or Saint Paul nay or of Christ himselfe maketh a man an Idolater or a Papist then not onely all the Lutherans generally but very many of the most orthodoxe Divines in our and other reformed Churches will be proved as good Papists as Pope Sylvester To the fourth Not only Protestants whom the Iesuit nick-nameth Heretikes but also Contius and other Romanists have disparaged these Epistles and if the Iesuits nose be not very flat and stuffed also hee may smell the forgerie of these Decretals by the barbarisme of the stile disagreeing to those times and many absurdities and contradictions noted in them by Coqueus and others To the fift If it be no matter of Faith that this particular Priest Transubstantiateth the Bread because no man knowes his intention nor that particular Priest Et sic de caeteris It followeth that it is no matter of Faith to beleeve that any Priest in the Roman Church by the words of Consecration turneth the Bread into Christs Body As for that hee addeth that it is no matter whether any ever died for this point in particular I answer it is a matter of great moment for if Garnet would not take it upon his salvation that this Bread hee consecrated immediately before the death was turned into Christs Body nor any ever would or did pawne his life for Transubstantiation it is evident that Papists themselves doubt of the certainty of that Article On the contrarie wee can produce hundreds nay thousands who for denying Transubstantiation have beene put to death and have signed the truth of the Doctrine of the Reformed Churches concerning the Sacrament with their blood and therefore the Doctrine of the Protestants in this point is of more credit than the contrarie because it is strengthened and fortified by a Noble armie of Martyrs Concerning the Protestants charitable opinion of the salvation of Papists Spectacles Chap. 17. à page 491. usque ad 508. THE Knights discourse in this Chapter is wholly from his purpose which he pretendeth in the title of his Chapter which is to answer our objections The Knights eight instances in the Doctrine of Merits Communion in both kinds publike use of Scripture Priests marriage Service in a knowne tongue Worship of Images Adoration of the Sacrament and Traditions are all answered before and proved some false for the things wherewith he chargeth us are all absurd if we consider the proofes of Scripture which he bringeth All testimonies from an enemy proceede not from charity but from truth and such are those which Catholikes bring out of learned Protestants to prove that a man dying in the Romish Religion may be saved Free-will Prayer for the Dead Honouring of Relikes Reall Presence Transubstantiation Communion in one kinde Worshiping of Images the Popes Primacy Auricular Confession and the like are all acknowledged some by one Protestant some by another not to be materiall points so as a man may without perill beleeve either way the severall authors are Perkins Cartwright Whitgift Fulke Penrie Somes Sparks Reynolds Bunnie and Whitaker John Frith a Foxean Martyr acknowledgeth that the matter touching the substance of the Sacrament bindeth no man of necessity to salvation or damnation whether he beleeve it or not John Huz held the Masse Transubstantiation Vowes Freewill Merit of workes and of the haeresies now in controversie held onely one to wit communion in both kindes Dr. Barrow acknowlegeth the Church of Rome to be the Church of God Hooker a part of the house of God and limbe of the visible Church of Christ Dr. Somes that all learned and reformed Churches confesse that in Popery there is a Church a Ministry and true Christ Field and Morton that we are to be accounted the Church of God whose words may be seene in the Protestants Apologie Tract 1. Sect. 6. Whereas the Knight saith that men otherwayes morally good relying wholly on the merits of Christ that is living Papists and dying Protestants in the principall foundation of our faith may finde mercy because they did it ignorantly where hath the Knight learned this Theologie that a man