also of the Authors Sinceritie and his Adversaries unconscionable Dealing in their Allegations of Authors Grace Peace and Truth in CHRIST JESVS AMong all the Controversies held against your Romish Religion none were ever more hott to draw Protestants violently into the fire than these two First the denying your Romane Church to bee The Catholike Church without which there is no Salvation Secondly the affirming the Romish Adoration of the Sacrament of the Altar to be Idolatrous Therefore have I especially undertaken the discussion of both these Questions that seeing as Saint Augustine truly said It is not the punishment but the Cause which maketh a Martyr it might fully appeare to the world whether Protestants enduring that fierie tryall for both Causes were indeed Heretikes or true Martyrs and consequently whether their Persecutors were just Executioners of persons then condemned and not rather damnable Murtherers of the faithfull Servants of Christ And I doubt not but as the first hath veverified the Title of that Booke to prove your Doctrine of the Necessitie of Salvation in your Romish Church to be a GRAND IMPOSTVRE So this second which I now according to my promise present unto you will make good by many Demonstrations that your Romish MASSE is a very Masse or rather a Gulfe of many Superstitious Sacrilegious and Idolatrous Positions and Practises And because the very name of ROMANE CHVRCH is commonly used as in it selfe a powerfull enchantment to stupifie everie Romish Disciple and to strike him deafe and dumbe at once that hee may neither heare nor utter any thing in Conference concerning the Masse or any other Controversie in Religion be the Protestants Defence never so Divine for Trueth or Ancient for Time or Vniversall for Consent or Necessarie for Beleefe I therefore held it requisite in the first place to discover the falshood of the former Article of your Church before I would publish the Abominations of the Masse to the end that for Iâ—â—latrie in Scripture is often termed spirituall Adulterie the Romish Church which playeth the Bawd in patronizing Idolatrie being once outted your Romish Masse as the Strumpet might the more easily either bee reformed or wholly abandoned This may satisfie you for the necessitie of this Tractate The next must bee to set before you your owne delusorie trickes in answering or not answering Bookes written against you especially such as have beene observed from mine owne experience One is to strangle a Booke in the very birth So dealt Master Brerely long since by a Letter writ unto mee to prevent the publishing of my Answere against the first Edition of his Apologie when hee sent mee a second Edition thereof to be answered which both might and ought to have beene sent a twelve moneth sooner but was purposely reserved not to bee delivered untill the very day after my * See the Protestants Appeale in the beginning Answere called An Appeale was published Of which his prevention I have therefore complained as of a most unconscionable Circumvention Another device you have to give out that the Booke whatsoever written against your Romish Tenents is in answering and that an Answere will come out shortly So dealt Master Parsons with mee * In his Sober Reckoning Certifying mee and all his credulous Readers of an Epistle which hee had received from a Scottish Doctor censuring my Latine Apologies to be both fond and false and promising that his Answere to them Printed at Gratz in Austria should be published before the Michaelmas next following whereas there have beene above twentie Michaelmasses sithence every one giving Master Parsons his promise the flatt lye A third Art is a voluntarie Concealement And thus Master Brerely who having had knowledge of the fore-mentioned Booke of Appeale manifesting his manifold Aberrations and Absursurdities in doctrine his ignorances and fraudes in the abuse of his Authors as in other passages throughout that Booke so more especially the parts concerning the Romish Masse yet since hath written a large Booke in defence of the Romish Liturgie or Masse urging all the same Proofes and Authorities of Fathers but wisely concealing that they had beene confuted and his Falshoods discovered Onely hee and Master Fisher singling out of my Appeale an Explanation which I gave of the Testimonie of Gelasius in condemning the Manichees concerning their opinion of not administring the Eucharist in both kindes did both of them divulge it in their Bookes and reports also in many parts of this Kingdome as making for the justification of their sacrilegious dismembring the holy Sacrament and for a foule Contradiction unto my selfe notwithstanding that this their scurrilous insultation as is * Boâ—ke 1. cap. 3. Sect. 7. heere proved serveth for nothing rather than to make themselves ridiculous The last but most base and devillish Gullerie is a false imputation of Falshoods in the alleging of Authors which was the fine sleight of Master Parsons a man as subtile for Invention as elegant for Expression for Observation as dextrous and acute and as politike and perswasive for Application as any of his time Hee in an Answere to some Treatises written against your Romish blacke Art of Aequivocation by mentall Reservation and other Positions fomenting Rebellion to wit in his Bookes of Mitigation and Sober Reâ—koning doeth commonly leave the principall Objections and reasons and falleth to his verball skirmishes concerning false Allegations and as turning that Ironicall Counsell into earnest Audacter fortiter calumniare c. hee chargeth mee with no lesse than fiftie Falsifications All which I spunged out in a Booke entituled an Encounter and retorted all the same Imputations of falshood upon himselfe with the interest discovering above forty more of his owne Which may seeme to verifie that Cognizance which your owne Brother-hood of Romish Priests in their Quodlibets have fastened on his sleeve calling him The Quintessence of Coggerie As for mine owne Integritie I have that which may justifie mee for howsoever any one or other Error may happen in mis-alleging any one Authour yet that I have not erred much or if at all yet never against my Conscience Heereof I have many Witnesses One within mee a witnesse most Domesticall yet least partiall and as good as Thousands mine owne Conscience a second is above mee GOD who is Greater than the Conscience A third sort of Witnesses are such as stand by mee even all they who have beene conversant with mee in the Perusall and Examination of Authours Testimonies by mee alleged men of singular Learning and Iudgement who can testifie how much they endeared them-selves unto mee when any of them happened to shew mee the least errour in any thing Hee that shall say Non possum errare must be no man and hee that will not say Nolo errare as hating to erre can be no Christian man The last Witnesse for my integritie may bee the Bookes of my greatest Adversaries Master Parsons and Master Brerely whose many scores of Falshoods have beene layd so
The Article of the Church of Rome Contrarily 13 Concil Trid. Sess 22. Can. 9. Si quis dixerit tantùm linguâ vulgari Missam celebrari debere Anathema sit Hee that shall say that the Masse ought to be Celebrated onely in the vulgar tongue let him be Anathema that is Accursed The English Article hath two points 1. That Prayer in a tongue unknowne to the People that pray is Repugnant to the Word of God 2. That it is also plainely Repugnant to the Custome of Primitive Antiquity First of the Repugnance to the word of God The Romish Expositor Paraphrasing upon these words Repugnant to the word of God supposeth in the first place that thereby is meant the Doctrine of the Apostle 1. Cor. 14. concerning Prayer in a Tongue not understood of him that prayeth and then for answere thereunto repeateth onely their old Crambe to wit that by Prayers there spoken off are not meant the publike prayers in the set and solemne service of the Church of Corinth but other their 14 Paraph Crediderim Sanctum Paulum vel de privatis conventibus vel de privatis colloquiis post omnia officia habitis ibi agree Private Convents and Colloquies And whereas the Apostle requireth of the Idiote that is Private or Lay-man as wee call him that hee understand his Prayer so as to be able to give consent thereunto in publike saying Amen he 15 Paraph. Idiota apud Apostolum i. e. Ille cui incumbit respondere expoundeth this as understood of Him who by office answereth Amen for the rest of the People whom wee name the Parish-Clerke Both which have beene * See the Challenges above thorowout Confuted by your owne Schoolemen and the Latter more especially by Bellarmine himselfe in our former Sections as you have seene A second devise of qualifying these words of our Article Repugnant to the word of God is his owne but thus 16 Paraph. Decrevit igitur Articulus esse Repugnans Scripturis id est non Doctrinae Scripturae sed Scriptioni seu Traditioni Scripturae quae fuit Corinthijs in Lingua communi The Article decreeth it to be repugnant to the Scriptures that is saith hee not to the Doctrine of Scripture but to the Scription or tradition of Scripture which among these Corinthians was in praying in a common tongue Here you have a dainty Distinction betweene the word Scripture and Scription the word Scripture to signifie the Doctrine of Scripture and the word Scription to betoken Tradition of Scripture So hee by an elegant Figure which wee forbeare to name but wish there were some sense in it For was it ever heard off that there was a Scripture without Scription that is to say a Writ without writing or when as all Divines ever distinguished of Traditions into 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Written which are the Scriptures themselves and Vnwritten which are without the same written word of God Was it possible for them to conceive of a Tradition in Scripture which was not Scripture or word of God If so then whereas all Creatures are distinguished into Sensible and Insensible it shall be possible to point out a Sensible Creature void of Sense His third Crotchet 17 Idem Dum. dicit esse Repugnans verbo Dei intelligi deberent Institutioni D. Pauli non Christi cujus scripta sub nomine verbi Dei comprehenduntur omnia tamen ab Apostolis demandata non sunt mandata Christi ut ab omnibus concessum est When the Article saith Repugnant to the word of God It is to be understood as meaning Repugnant to the Institution and Ordinance of Saint Paul not of Christ Saint Pauls writings being comprehended under the name of Gods word although all that are commanded by the Apostles are not therefore the commands of Christ as all do confesse So hee That there are in Scripture Apostolicall Constitutions namely such as are fitted to the Churches according to the Conveniences of the times distinguished from Divine Constitutions which are enjoyned the Church as necessary for all times it is true But that both which this Paraphrase affirmeth either S t. Paul in requiring a Knowno Prayer delivered not therein the Doctrine of Christ necessary for all times or that our English Composers of this their Article in affirming the Institution of Vnknowne Prayers to be Repugnant to the word of God did not thereby understand the word and Commandement of Christ in his Authenticall Scripture are two as strange exorbitancies as your Glosser could make For the Apostle to shew that hee taught a Doctrine which concerned all the Churches of Christ and at all times useth Similitudes to Illustrate his meaning universally fitting all ages and Congregations of Christians in their solemne prayers If a Trumpet saith hee or a Pipe give an uncertaine sound who shall prepare himselfe either to the Battell or to the daunce applying those Similitudes as well to praying as to preaching in an Vnknowne tongue But every one of you will grant that the same Scripture for necessitie of preaching in a knowne tongue is the Divine Institution of Christ and not onely an Apostolique Constitution Therefore except you will separate that which Christ by his Apostle hath joyned together you must confesse the same necessitie of the Command of Christ for knowne Prayer Besides his Conclusion How shall hee that understandeth not say Amen being as true of all Prayers in all subsequent ages of the World as it could be to the Church of Corinth it prooveth the truth of the Divine Ordinance of Christ therein Thus farre of the meaning of S. Paul now to returne to our Article Whereas you and all that ever read Protestant Bookes know that whensoever they affirme any thing to be Repugnant to the word of God they meane to the Scripture as it is the expresse Command and Ordinance of God and of Christ and that notwithstanding your Glosser should dare to tell us that the meaning of our Articling An unknowne Prayer to be Repugnant to the Word of God must signifie not Repugnant to Scripture or to the Institution of Christ but to Scription and Apostolicall Tradition must needs argue in your Professor some ecclipse of judgement by the which also hee venteth out his Inference following A fourth straine he hath in his Inference from our English Article as followeth 18 Idem Vi hujus verbi probabiliter inferri potest debere Ecclesiae officia apud nos hodiè celebrari in lingua Latina quià per se loquendo est lingua communis communites intellecta solùm autem asseritur in Articulo Preces publicae fiant linguâ à populo intellectâ quod sine dubio debet intelligi de lingua per se communi non per Accidens loquendo The Article affirmeth saith hee that Prayers ought to be used in a tongue knowne to the people therefore wee properly inferre that Prayers in our Church may be in
Christ that is with the same Intention as Christ when hee said This of the Bread then in his hands the Priest saying This should intead and meane that This Bread whereof Christ spake and not that which is in his owne hands which now he intendeth to Consecrate and Consequently should he make no Consecration at all And what hereupon must become of your Romish Masse in your Transubstantiation Sacrifice and Adoration you may understand in the next Section The full Overthrow of the whole Doctrine of Transubstantiation Corporall Presence Personall Sacrifice and Adoration Consequently upon the former Confutation of your Romish Significative Pronunciation of Christ's words by the Priest SECT V. TRuly hath your Iesuite * See above in the Second Section Suarez expressed the Doctrine of your Church as followeth Except these words This is my Body be taken Significatively and formally they worke no Consecration nor can it be collected that that which is now in the hands of the Priest is the true Body of Christ So he alleging the Couâ—acel of Trent for his warrant But the words as they are pronounced by the Priest cannot possibly be taken Significatively but onely in the way of Rehearsing and Repeating them No one Iota in the Text or Context No one Testimonie of Antiquitie No one Reason or yet competent Example hath beene alleged by any of your Doctors for proofe of the Contrary This point needeth no more discussion onely for further Illustration-sake wee shall commend unto you a more proportionable Example than was any that hitherto your Sophisters have invented which because your Iesuites have affected the * See above in the first and second Sections Similitudes of Historicall and Comicall Representations wee shall likewise borrow from that Stage If therefore any Romish Priest should Act the part of Aäron in imitating an operative Speech of turning and Transubstantiating a Rod into a Serpent in saying to suppose Aäron to have said so This is my Serpent yet could not your Priest possibly deliver the same words Significatively as in the person of Aäron either in saying This because This Rod spoken of by the Priest is not the same Rod whereof Aäron said This nor yet in the word My because that wherof Aäron said My Serpent cannot possibly bee said accordingly My Serpent by the Priest as your selves well know And therefore doth this discover your Romish Intoxication in your Significative Exposition of these words This and My in the Speech of Christ THE THIRD BOOKE Treating of the First Romish Doctrinall Consequence pretended to arise from your former depraved Exposition of Christ's wordes This is my Body called TRANSVBSTANTIATION Your Doctrinall Romish Consequences are Five viz. the Corporall 1. Conversion of the Bread into the Body of Christ called Transubstantiation in this Third Booke 2. Existence of the same Body of Christ in the Sacrament called Corporall Presence in the Fourth Booke 3. Receiving of the Body of Christ into the Bodies of the Communicants called Reall or Materiall Conjunction in the Fifth Booke 4. Sacrificing of Christ's Body by the hands of the Priest called a Propitiatory Sacrifice in the Sixth Booke 5. Worshipping with Divine Worship called Latria or Divine Adoration of the same Sacrament in the Seventh Booke After follow the Additionals in a Summary Discoverie of the Abominations of the Romish Masse and the Iniquities of the Defenders thereof in the Eighth Booke THese are the five Doctrinall Consequences which you teach and professe and which wee shall by God's assistance pursue according to our former Method of Brevity and Perspicuity and that by as good and undenyable Evidences and Confessions of your owne Authours in most points as either you can expect or the Cause it selfe require And because a Thing must have a Begetting before it have a manner of Being therefore before wee treate of the Corporall Presence wee must in the first place handle your Transubstantiation which is the manner as wee may so say of the Procreation thereof CHAP. I. The State of the Controversie concerning the Change and Conversion professed by Protestants which is Sacramentall And by the Papists defined to be Trans-substantiall First of the Sacramentall SECT I. THere lyeth a charge upon every Soule that shall communicate and participate of this Sacrament that herein hee Discerne the Lords Body which Office of Discerning according to the judgement of Protestants is not onely in the use but also in the Nature to distinguish the Object of Faith from the Object of Sense The First Object of Christian Faith is the Divine Alteration and Change of naturall Bread into a Sacrament of Christs Bodie This wee call a Divine Change because none but the same * See hereafter Chap. 4. §. 1. 2. Omnipotent power that made the Creature and Element of Bread can Change it into a Sacrament The Second Object of Faith is the Body of Christ it selfe Sacramentally represented and verily exhibited to the Faithfull Communicants There are then three Objects in all to be distinguished The First is before Consecration the Bread meerely Naturall Secondly After Consecration Bread Sacramentall Thirdly Christs owne Body which is the Spirituall and Supersubstantiall Bread truly exhibited by this Sacramentall to the nourishment of the soules of the Faithfull Secondly of the Romish Change which you call Transubstantiation SECT II. BVt your Change in the Councell of a Est conversio totius substantiae Panis in Corpus Christi totius substantiae Vini in sanguinem manentibus duntaxat speciebus Panis Vini quam quidem Conversionem Catholica Ecclesia aptissimè Transubstantiationem appellat Conc. Trid. Sess 13. Can. 2. Trent is thus defined Transubstantiation is a Change of the whole Substance of Bread into the Body of Christ and of Wine into his Blood Which by the Bull of b Ego N. N jurò hinc Conversionem fieri quam Catholica Ecclesia appellat Transubstantiationem Extrà quam fidem nemo salvus esse potest Bulla Pij 4. super formâ luram nit professionu Fidei Pius the Fourth then Pope is made an Article of Faith without which a man cannot bee saved Which Article of your Faith Protestants beleeve to bee a new and impious Figment and c Transubstantiationem Protestantes esse sceleratam Haeresin dicunt Bell. l. 3. de Euch. cap. 11. Heresie The Case thus standing it will concerne every Christian to build his Resolution upon a sound Foundation As for the Church of England shee professeth in her 28. Article saying of this Transubstantiation that It cannot bee proved by holy Writ but is repugnant to the plaine words of Scripture overthroweth the nature of a Sacrament and hath given occasion unto MANY SVPERSTITIONS CHAP. II. The Question is to be examined by these grounds viz. I Scripture II. Antiquity III. Divine Reason IN all which wee shall make bold to borrow your owne Assertions and Confessions for the Confirmation of Truth The Romish Depravation of the Sense of Christ
vâ—us sed aduâ—bratus sanguis duntaxat putaâ— dâ—s est Whose Eares can abide to heare the Blood of Christ now after his glorious Resurrection to have been separated out of the naturall receptacles of his veines Yea who can without horror thinke therof especially seeing Experience telleth us that the same Blood which appeared did vanish away putrifie and corrupt Wherfore It will be our safest Resolution according to the Consent of Divines to affirme that no mortall eye of man did ever behold the TRVâ— BLOOD of Christ since his Triumphant piercing of the Heavens Hitherto your publike Professor according herein with Thomas Aquinas whom hee calleth the Angelicall Doctor and with other famous Divines But presently whereas his cited Doctors furthermore Conclude None of those Apparitions to have beene of any True flesh at all but onely Shaddowes and Representations thereof hee craveth leave to depart from them affirming it to be although not the True flesh of Christ yet True flesh and leaveth them questioning against this his Assertion concerning these Miraculous Apparitions What True flesh then it might be Whether the flesh of Beâ—sts or of a Man Whether newly Created or Commentitiously obtruded Hee answereth yet so that whereas your Stories and all their Reporters and Worshippers of such Apparitions do equally esteeme of All as being a like Truely flesh hee teacheth them to distinguish of the Apparitions which are said to have vanished shortly after their first shew the other that were of a longer continuanceâ— and to acknowledge the Existence of the True flesh onely in the Second kinde In the last place opposing against the Generall Opinion of Thomas and other of your choicest Divines above-mentioned who held these to be meerly Apparitions without any Substance of flesh Hee albeit granting that a Fictitious Apparition may be truly Miraculous yet to make the same Opinion Ridiculous breaketh out and inveigheth in this maner 6 Quoâ—sunt C. 6. contra eos qui dicunt tantùm fictitum esse sanguinem illum qui per long a intervaâ—â—a corspicitur IdeÌ„ Author Collius Quis sibi persuadere poterit largissimos rubri coloris liquores qui ex sacra mensa non semel eruperunt nulla procreata substantia effâ—uere vasa atque calices implerè posse certe capiant si liber istud credant alij mihi enim uti captu ita creditu semper difficillimum visum est Qui tâ—mâ—n paulò post An credant illa Accidentia esse quâ—sia fides Catholica consecrati calicis in Eucharistia scimus esse Cap. 7. Ego opinor Basim ac firmamentum Accidentium sanguinis ijs ipsis accidentibus quae in calice supersunt ascribendum esse Who Can perswade himselfe that such abundance of lâ—quor of red colour which is said to have issued out of the Eucharist filling the Chalices and other vessels should be wholly Fictitious and Accidents without Substances Let others understand and believe this if they please for my part I must confesse it was alwayes beyond my Capacity and Credulity So your Doctor of his supposed Miraculous Apparitions Notwithstanding he hath no more Foundation either out of Scripture or from any Tradition out of the Primitive Church of Christ for Meere Accidents without Substance in that which he saith he believeth than he hath in the other which he believeth not but declameth against as you have heard II. The same Authors Discourse upon the Romish Stories concerning the mentioned Reliques of Christs Blood issued out Miraculously from Images SECT VII VVHereas Aquinas with Others out of many Histories have approved of many Apparitions of Blood in great abundance at Mantua Venice Rome and els-where flowing out of Images This your Doctor concludeth with himselfe that 7 Idem Collius lib. 5. Disp 8. cap. 2. Verum Christi Sanguinem in terus esse memoriae atque literis proditum est Cap. 3. Quid de allâ—tis historiis censenâ—â—um sit Sicut certam mihi elicere posse videar assertionem non nihil istius sanguinis Christi apud nos remansisse ita adduci non possum ut assentiar tantam effusi sanguinis copiam qualis ea esse convincituâ— ex iis â—bsque certo naturae Christi rèviviscentis detrimento absolutae corporis Christi Perfectioni repugnante Difficile est satisfacere ijs omnibus qui de vero Christi sanguinâ— gloriantuâ— cùm â—â—n cuiâ— pulchrum sit ut fâ—rt Proverbâ—um ut quispiam pâ—udens inducet animum suum credere tot vascula sacro Domini cruore referta nunc etiam in terris reperiri Si quis credit audiat illam infignem sententiam Qui citò credit levis est corde Cap. 4. Objectis rationibus respondetur Cap. 5. An cum fide Catholica repugnet nihil sanguinis Christi tem ansisse in terris Cardinalis Sancti Petri ad Vin. putat non sine haeresi negari posse Ex testimonio Bullae Pij Secundi Pontificis ex Revelatione Brigittae alij alij ut Thomas affirmat de sanguine Christi nutrimentali non de vitali sed Distinctio haec inanis Ob. Athanasius de passione imaginis Domini Cap. 7. Sanguis Dominicus c. cujus Authoritas approbata est in septimo Synodo Nvcena Act. 4. quibus rationibus Angelicus Doctor Quodilibet 5. a 3. â—â—dem cap. refert ad sanguinem Christi sed ego minime subscribendum esse arbitor Ob. Leo tertius Respondeo Non verum Christi sanguinem Manituae existentem fuisse à Leone comprobatum sed fuit certa Inventi liquoris Approbatio utpote qui veneratione dignus imò etiam pium videri istum liquorem ut Christi sanguinem pâ—c colendum Ob. Sol. Diploma Pij Secundi tantum dicit non repugnare Fidei doctrinae sanguinem Christi aliquem relictum esse in terris Ob Sol. Non solum probabilis ac vera propemodum opinio est eam historiam de percussu Imaginis Christi non fuisse Athanastâ— magni sed alterius Doctoris ejusdem nominis quae tamen si ejus fuisse dicatur tamen unius Sancti Patris authoritas ad râ—m tanquam de fide stabiliendam non sufficiet Et approbatio Synodi Nycenae secundae non est existimanda cadere in totum ac singulas Istius historiae partes sed solum quadrare in historiam perfossae Imaginis c. Quod ad Brigittae Revelationem spectat etsi sit eâ— maximi ponderis tamen non tanâ— tamque efficacis censenda est ut ab ea discedere impium ac iâ—â—â—ligiosum fuit Albeit Some portion of the Blood of Christ might be sayd to remaine on earth yet can it not be thought that such a copious measure of Blood as is reported should have bin Because although each Country glory and boast of such their Reliques as being Christs Blood for that as the Proverb is EVERY ONE THINKETH HIS OVVNE BEST yet could not so great Quantities of Blood as filled whole vessels be sayd to issue out of Christs Body
potest naturaliter exercere actus sensuum exteriorum Ita tenet Thomas Alij Authores quia sensus ejus non potest recipere has species ab objectis externis quia hic actus est materialis extensus suâ naturâ Quamvis potentia absoluta potest Idem dicendum de sensibus interioribus apetitu sentiente quia non uti phantasmatibus nec actum secundum elicere quia hic actus est materialis nisi à materiali extenso principio non potest intellectus ejus secluso miraculo acquirere novas species nec prius exquisitis uti quia intellectus hoc non potest facere nisi simul phantasia operetur cum intellectu non loquor de speciebus infusis Haec Suarez in 3. Thom. quaest 76. Art 7. Disp 53. §. 4. So also Vincentius Silivitius Senes Ies Moral quaest Tom. 1. Tract 4. 5. num 139. 141. Motus localis non convenit corpori per se non possunt actiones sensum convenire Christo naturaliter quia hae exercentur per species in substantia divisibili At Christi corpus est in Sacramento indivisibiliter c. Suarez and other Romish Doctors First that Christ as hee is in this Sacrament hath no power naturally of himselfe to move himselfe And this your owne dayly experience hath brought you unto whilest beleeving Christs Corporall Presence in the Hoast you shut him up in a Boxe where you still find the same lying as destitute of power of motion as any other unconsecrated Bread which being put together with it lyeth so long untill they both equally waxe mouldy putrifie and ingender wormes Secondly that Christ in himselfe as being in this Sacrament hath no naturall faculty of sense nor abilitie without a miracle to heare or see c. Thirdly That hee is voyd of all sensible appetite Lastly that without some miraculous power hee cannot possibly apprehend in his understanding any thing present nor yet remember any notions past So hee âšœ Iosephus Angles Florent in 4. Sent. Qu. de existentia corporis Christia in Euch. Dissio 1. 2. Aâ—t 9. 12. Corpus Christi ut est in hoc Sacramento nec potest tangi nec per se nec per Accidens quatenùs est in Eucharistia non potest ullam sensationem accipere Ratio quia omnis receptio specierum quae est sensatio fit in organo quantitativo nec agere nec pati potest nec actionem transientem agere Communis opinio est Scoti Christus non potest aliquam operationem potentiae merae naturalis ut est nutriendi sentiendi habere Ratio omne agens positivum agit per contactum quod est modo quantitativo And Art 12. Oculus Christi non videt suum corpus ut est in hoc Sacramento proptereà quod est inextensum oculus est inextensus Scotus in 4. Sent. Dist 10. quaest 5. Nulla sensatio potest esse in Christo ut est in Eucharistia Petrus de Aquilia in doctrina Scoti spectatissimus in 4. Sent. Dist 10. quaest 1. Christi corpus in Eucharistia non potest uti aliquâ potentiâ activâ See Palenterius above Chap. 4. Sect. 9. Similter Aegidius Conicks de Sacramen Quaest 76. Art 6. num 91. Yet so that he is not alone For hee allegeth for this opinion your Aquinas and concludeth it as being without Contradiction Which your Doctor * See the Marginals immediately preceding Angles calleth a Common Opinion noting Scotus your subtilest of Schoolemen to be a Patron thereof Which they founded upon your other generall but yet vast and wilde Paradoxe of an Existence of Christs Body in this Sacrament without a Quantitative maner of Being by way of Extension of Parts It were well that you would take the Testimonies of your other two Jesuites for a supplement as namely of 1 Vasquez Ies in 3. Thom. qu 76. Art 7. Disp 191. c. 5. Opposita sententia vera est eo ipso quòd caret corpus Christi extensione in Sacramento neque agere neque pati posse prout est in hoc Sacramento corporeâ actione neque passione neque tangere aliquid neque ab alio tangi nec posse intelligere quantum per conversionem ad phantâ—smata nec sensus omnes operari posse operationes suas immanentes And therefore the Externall much lesse Disp 190. c. 3. Citat Thomam alios Scholasticos de non posse moveri per se Vasquez denying to Christs Body all Possibility of either doing or suffering as it is in this Sacrament And of 2 Gordon Scoâ—â—â— Ies Controv. 8. cap. 4. â— 19. Corpus Christi 〈◊〉 specie paâ—â—â— est modo planè 〈…〉 mortem in cruce sepulchro neque enim videt audit aut loquitur aur alias corporis 〈◊〉 actiones exercet prout est in hoc Sacramento cum in eo sit modo indivisibili et spirituali Gordon affirming the Body of Christ as it is in this Sacrament to be Plainly after a deadly maner as hee was in the grave neither hearing nor seeing nor exercising any virtuall Act âšœ That this is a new brutish and barbarous Doctrine destitute of all ancient Patronage either of written or of unwritten Tradition but against Both. SECT III. HAve you any Text yea or yet pretext either of Scripture or humane Tradition for countenancing this so prodigious and monstrous a conception Certainely Scripture telleth us that Christ his Body by Resurrection is perfected in Sense and Agility and his soule in Iudgement and Capacity Nor can you shew any Father in the Church of Christ within the Circumfrence of 1400. yeares after Christ who held this your doctrine so much as in a Dreame or who hath not esteemed the Body of Christ to be of the most absolute perfection we say no one Father or Teacher of the Evangelicall Truth once fancied this un-christian and false faith âšœ No no your own 3 Fran. Collius lib. 5. De sanguine Christi Disp 5. cap. 1. Athanasius Serm. 2. in illa verba ad Philip 2. Propter quod Deus eum exaltavit Hic solus è mortuâ—s integer resurrexit Et libro de Incarnat verbi Cum omni integritate surrexit quae est Patrum omnium doctrina Et Leo Papa Tract explicans illud 2. Cor. 5. Cognovimus Christum secundum carnem Christi corpus post Resurrectionem factum est Impassibile nihil in eo enim infirmum remansit Doctor of Theology will tell you out of Athanasius of many surnamed the Great and out of Pope Leo whom you your selves instiled Great Both so intituled for their singular worthinesse who taught that Christ rose againe Perfest in his Bodie So Athanasius And that No infirmitie remained in him So Leo. And addeth of himselfe that All the Fathers were of the same Iudgement If so then were they directly Adversaries to your prodigious Beliefe except you will dare to say that Blindnesse Deafenesse and Senslesnesse are no
hee preaching unto his Africans a knowne Proverbe in the Punick tongue which I will render unto you in Latine because all of you do not understand Punick The Proverbe is this The Pestilence seeketh money So hee shewing that the Africans understood Latine better than Punick although this were their Nationall Language Farre otherwise your Glosser that the Latine was unknowne to the Africans because their native language was Panick Whereby hee bewrayeth a Proverbially so called Punick Faith Flatly contradicting S. Augustine 23 August lib. 1. Confess cap. 14. Latina didici inter etiam blandimenta Nurricum who furthermore confesseth of himselfe saying I learnt the Latine tongue from the fawning and flattering Speeches of my Nourses Our Conclusion by way of Censure of this mans Exposition of the Articles of the Church of England and of the Romish Authorizers of the same Treatise This one Point being the first of his Paraphrase that fell in our way concerning any doctrine appertaining to the Romish Masse wee have beene the more Copious in Confutation thereof that our Reader might take a just scantling of the judgement of this Paraphrazer in the rest and of those who were the Censurers Approvers and Authorizers of the same more principally Thomas Blacklous 24 Censura Thomae Blacklouse de Libellis de Articulis Confessionis Angl. Catholico animo conscriptis ut Errantes ad Christi caulam reditum inveniant who shewes to what end this Tractate was writ and approoved as he saith To bring those that wander out of the way unto the fold of Christ Meaning the Church of Rome So then wee perceive it was not as he seemeth to pretend in the behalfe of Protestants to free them from any of the former Censures and Anathema's or from the curses and cruelties of the Romish Church against them but onely to ensnare them if it may be in the same Babylonish thraldome of Superstition and Idolatry from whence by the marvailous and gracious providence of God they have beene delivered Therefore from these our Premises VVee Conclude Blacklous and his fellow Privilegers of this Booke to be guilty of all the above-manifested strange dealings in perverting of the senses of the Articles and Authors by him alleged Besides that which surmounteth the rest is the hainous Crime of wilfull Perjurie if they have taken the oath enjoyeth unto all Romish Priests by Pope Pius after the Councell of Trent swearing To expound no Text of Scripture without the unanimous consent of ancient Fathers yet now have allowed such an Exposition of the text of the Apostle concerning Prayer in an unknowne tongue which they were never able to justifie by any one Father of Primitive times for the space of 600 that wee say not a thousand yeares after Christ as hath beene sufficiently proved Before Wee end Wee should aske your Censurers what Church of Rome it is whose doctrine they would reduce Protestants unto Is it the old and primitive Religion of Rome Why this is that which Wee so constantly professe But meane they the Religion of the new Church of Rome in her new Creede of new Articles conformable to the Councel of Trent Wee must say then of your Doctrine as Christ said of Wine No man drinking the Old desireth the New for hee will say the Old is better Luc. 5. 39. The sixt Transgression of the Canon of Christ his Masse contradicting the Sense of the next words of Christs Institution TAKE YEE SECT VIII THus said Christ to his Disciples by which words what is meant your Iesuite will expresse to wit that c Quia Apostoli non acciperent nisi quod ipse dabat verbum Dandi Translationem de manibus Christi in manus Discipalorum significat Sabneron les Tom. 9. Tractat. 18. pag. 126. Videtur quod Christus aut singulis in manus dederit partem à se sumendam aut patinam tradider it propinquioribus c. Iansen Episc Concord cap. 131. Because the Apostles tooke that which Christ gave the word GAVE doth signifie a Delivery out of Christ his hands into the hands of them that did take Here you see is Taking with hands especially seeing that Christ in giving the Cup said Drinke you all Matth. 26. one delivering it to another as it is said of the Paschall Cup Luc. 22. 17. as it is f Iansen Concord in eued locum Fracto pane in duodecim buccellas singulis in manus dederit Calicem propinquiores sequentibus tradiderunt sic enim dixit Accipite dividite inter vos confessed The contrary Canon in your now Romane Masse Concerning this It is to be noted say g Notandum est quòd laudabiliter Ecclesia prospexit ut ab isto modo olim licito nempè accipiendi proprijs manibus Sacramentum pro reverentia Eucharistiae abstineant Et rursus Olim ex patina suis quisque manibus sumpsit suam particulam ut moris fuit ad Sextam usque Synodum nempè Caesar-augustanam verum ob sacram hujus Mysterij singularem reverentiam Ecclesia instituit nè Laici nudâ manu Eucharistiam attingerent sed à Sacerdote in os sumentis mitteretur Salmeron quo supra Tract 12. pag. 78. 79. you that the Church of Rome hath judged it laudable that Lay-people abstaine from taking the Sacrament with their owne hands but that it be put into their mouthes by the Priest which is so ordained for a singular reverence So you CHALLENGE VVHat we may note of this your Notandum the h Apostoli primùm manibus suis panem sanctum acceperunt hujus ritus meminerunt veteres Patres Nam Tert. lib. ad uxorem inquit Eucharistiae Sacramentum nec de aliorum manibus quam praesidentium sumimus Et ex Cyprian Serm. de lapsis ob nonnulla exempla quae producit constat Eucharistiam in manibus Cōmunicantum Laicorum dari Vt constat ex Concil Teletano cap. 14. ex sexta Synodo in Trullo 101. ubi prohibentur fideles offerre vascula aurea argentea in quibus accipiant Eucharistiam ut per ea communicent sed proprijs manibus Idem colligitur ex Epistol Cornel. Papae quam refert Euseb lib. 6. Hist c. 35. ex Dionys Alex. ut refert Nicephor cap. 9. ex verbis Ambrosij Suarez les Tom. 3. In Tho. Disp 49. Sect. 6. initio Hoc intelligi potest ex Greg. Nazian Morom fuisse ut Christiani Eucharistiam quam accepissent ad os admoverent unde relictam esse credo Consuetudinem in multis locis quando non communicant dùm Eucharistia ostenditur manus tendant quasi gestientes manibus sumere Maldon Ies de Euch. §. Nova creatura pag. 283. Confessions of your owne Iesuites will shew first that the Practice of the Apostles and Primitive Church for above 500 yeares was according to Christs Institution to deliver the Bread into the hands of the Communicants Secondly that the same Order was observed at Rome as appeareth by the
Counterfeiting of the Seale of Christ II. By making this Sacrifice in her pretence Christian but indeed c Booke 6. Cha. 5. Sect. 1. Earthly and Iewish III. By dignifying it with a Divine property of d Ibid. Chap. 10. Meritorious and Satisfactorie Propitiation IV. By professing another properly Satisfactory and c Ibid. and after c. Propitiatory Sacrifice for Remission of Sins besides that which Christ offered upon the Crosse As if after one hath paid the Debts of many at once upon condition that such of those Debters should be discharged whosoever submissively acknowledging those Debts to be due should also professe the favour of their Redeemer It cannot but be extreme folly for any to thinke that the money once paid should be tendred and offered againe as often as One or Other of the Debters should make such an acknowledgment the Surety having once sufficiently satisfied for all So Christ having once for all satisfied the justice of God by the price of his Blood in the behalfe of all penitent Sinners who in Contrition of heart and a living Faith apprehend the Truth of that his Redemption it cannot but be both injurious to the justice of God and to the merit of Christ that the same satisfactory Sacrifice as it were a new payment ought againe by way of Satisfaction be personally performed and tendred unto God V. By detracting from the absolute Function of Christ his f B. â—â— Chap. 3. Sect. 7. Priesthood now eminent and permanent before God in Heaven and thereupon stupifying the mindes of Communicants and as it were pinioning their thoughts by teaching them so to gaze and meditate on the matter in the hands of the Priest that they cannot as becometh Spirituall Eagles soare aloft and contemplate upon the Body of Christ where it 's infallible Residence is in that his heavenly Kingdome VI. By transforming as much as they can the Sacrament ordained for Christians to eat with their owne mouthes into a g Ibid. Theatricall Sacrifice wherein to be fed with the mouth of the Priest VII By abasing the true value of Christ his Blood infinitely exceeding all valuation in making it but h Ibid. Chap. 10. Sect. 4. finite whereas Christ being 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 God and Man in one person every propitiatory worke of his must needs be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and therefore of a infinite price and power VIII By denying the Effect of his * Ibid. Chap. 11. Propitiation for sinne to be plenary in the Application thereof IX There hath beene noted by the way the Portion appropriated to the Priest out of your Sacrifice and to be applyed to some particular Soule for money being an Invention as hath beene confessed void of all i Ibid. Chap. 11. Sect. 4. Warrant either by Scripture or by Ancient Tradition To say nothing of your fine Art of cheating mens Soules by Priestly Fraud whereof as also of the Rest wee have discoursed at k Booke 6. thorowout large A New Instance for proofe of Romish Sacrilegiousnesse in the Prayer set downe in the Liturgie of their Masse SECT III. IN your Missall after Consecration it is prayed thus a Missal Rom. Offerimus Majestati tuae Domine immaculatam Hostiam sanctum panem vitae aeternae Calicem salutis perpetuae supra quae propitio vultu respicere digneris sicut dignatus es munera justi pueri tui Abel And in the next place Iube haec perferri per manus sancti Angeli in sublime Altare tuum coeleste Wee offer unto thy Majestie O Lord this immaculate Host this holy Bread of eternall life this Cup of everlasting salvation upon which vouchsafe to looke with a propitious and favourable Countenance as thou didst accept the gifts of thy holy servant Abel and command these to be carried up into thy celestiall Altar c. So the Canon of your Masse Some Protestants in their zeale to the glory of Christ impute unto you hereupon a Sacrilegious Profanenesse whilest you beleeving That Host and That Cup to be the very Body and Blood of Christ and a Propitiatory Sacrifice in it selfe yet do so pray God to be propitious unto it and to accept it as hee did the Sacrifice of Abel yeelding thereby no more estimation to Christ than to a vile sheepe which was offered by Abel At the hearing of this your Cardinall See the b Bellarm. lib. 2. de Missa cap. 24. Facilis est responsio Non petimus pro Christi reconciliatione apud Patrem sed pro nostra infirmitate etsi enim oblatio consecrata ex parte rei quae offertur ex parte Christi principalis offerentis semper Deo placebat tamen ex parte Ministri populi astantis qui simul etiam offerunt fieri potest ut non place at Paulò post Comparatio non est inter Sacrificium nostrum Sacrificium Abelis sed tantùm ratione fidei devotionis offerentium ut nimirùm tantâ fide offerant quantâ Abel quod Sacrificium Abelis non haberet in se quod Deo placere eumque placare possit quaâ—e dicitur Heb. 11. per fidem obtulit Abel Deo Sacrificium melius Ratio Gen 4. Respexit Deus ad Abel Sacrificium post §. Porrò Deferii Sacrificium per manus Angeli nihil aliud est quà m intercessione Angeli commendari Deo nostrum obsequium cultum So also Suarez Tom. 3. Disp 83. Art 4. Iube haec id est Vota nostra Et Salmeron Ies Tom. 9. Tract 32. sub finem Margin 1. Prefaceth 2. Answereth 3. Illustrateth 4. Reasoneth First of his Preface The Answer saith hee is easie As if that Objection which seemeth to us a huge logg in your way were so little an obstacle that any might skip over it But have you never seene men in trusting too much to their nimblenesse to over-reach themselves in their leape stumble fall and breake their limbes Semblably hee in his Answer which is the second point The meaning of our Church saith hee is not to pray for Christs reconciliation who was alwayes well pleasing to God but in respect of the infirmity of the Priest and people that the offering may be accepted from them So hee But whatsoever the meaning of the Priest in his praying is sure wee are this cannot be the meaning of the Prayer for the matter prayed for is set downe to be Holy Bread of life and Cup of Salvation which you interpret to be Substantially the Body and Blood of Christ in the Sacrament and the tenour of prayer expressely is Vpon which Lord looke propitiously wee say upon which not upon whom which point is confirmed in that which followeth Thirdly therefore hee illustrateth The Comparison saith hee is not absolutely betweene the Sacrifice of Abel and of Christ but in respect of the faitb and devotion of the Priest and people that they with like faith may offer as Abel did But this piece of Answer is
esse hujus Authorem Editionis Spiritus Sancti mentem assequutum In omnibus igitur locis vult Concilium Eam haberi pro Authenticâ exceptis erroribus Typographorum Vt Iudic. cap. 11. pro altera Matre lectum fuisse adultera Matre ut quidam objiciunt Nam Concilium probavit veterem benè Typis impressam Post §. Porrò Nullo modo audiendi sunt ii qui post Concilium Tridentinum contendunt Editionem Vulgatam aliquibus in locis quod ad ipsam sententiam attinet emendari Quin potiùs Graeci Hebraici Codices siquidem dissideant à nostra sunt per eam corrigendi Valentia who thinke that Oath to be violated if the Vulgar Latine be rejected at all as lesse true than the Originals And your Spanish Inquisitors finding in one of your Romish Doctors the Rule of Hierome and Augustine urged which is that no Translation Latine or other be further allowed than as it agreeth with the Originals they faire and cleanly wipe it out saying that h Index Expurgatorius Hispanicus ad nomen Martinz Quamvis haec quae Hieronymus Augustinus docuerunt vera sunt tamen post Concilii Tridentini Decretum non licet Vulgatae Latinae Testimonia quovis praetextu rejicere prout in ipsius Concilii Decreto constitutum est fol. 145. Although that which Hierome and Augustine taught be true yet now since the Councel of Trent it is not lawfull to reject the same Translation upon any pretence whatsoever ⚜ Accordingly your Iesuite Lorinus in a matter concerning neither faith nor maners i Lorinus Ies Comment in Lib. Sap. ca. 12. Versq 6. §. Vatablus Non licet nobis discrepantem expositionem ab Editione nostra Vulgata jam correcta sequi It is not lawfull for us saith hee to follow an Exposition differing from the Vulgar Edition which is now corrected ⚜ So they And so farre unsatisfied are your Doctors in taking this Oath Wee are furthermore not destiture of matter for a large Confutation first of your assuming Saint Hierome as the Author of your Vulgar Latine Translation to manifest that it is no more the Translation of Hierome or yet of any one Author than the divers habits of a mans Body from head to foot can be called the worke of one singular work-man Secondly concerning the Authority thereof you professe it to be Authenticall that is as you have defined Conformable to the Originall Hebrew and Greeke although it may be as easily proved not to be that Ancient Vulgar which had continued as the Decree speaketh from divers ages than the Ship of Theseus which after some Ages had beene so thorowly battered and pierced that at last the keele and bottome therof did onely remaine which could be called the Same But passing by all further Dispute wee shall referre you to the judgement of the Patrones of the former Rule so insolently contemned by the Spanish Inquisitors as you have heard by one Instance which may be sufficient in it selfe for triall of the Case now in hand The Text of Scripture is Ephes 1. 14. in the Latine Translation even in that which is set forth by Pope i Clem. Octavus In perpetuam rei memoriam Textus accuratissime mendis purgatus Clement as The most accurate Edition thus k Ephes 1. 14. Lat. Vulg. Spiritu signati promissionis quae est pignus haereditatis Graecè 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in quem locum Hieronym Pignus Latinus interpres pro Arrhabone posuit Arrhabo futurae emptionis quasi quoddam testimonium obligamentum datur Pignus verò pro mutuâ pecuniâ ponitur cùm illa reddita fuerit reddenti debitum pignus à Creditore Aug. Serm. de visione Dei Tom. 10. pag. 1687. Accipis Codicem ab amico cui das pignus cum reddideris quod accopisti illc cui reddis habebit tu pignus accipies non enim habebit ambas res sed quando pretium paras dare pro ea re quam tenes bonae fidei contractu de ipso pretio das aliquid exit Arrha non pignus quod sit complendum non quod sit auferendum Sed si Deus charitatem dat tanquam pignus per spiritum suum cum eam rem ipsam reddiderit quâ promissa pignus dedit auferendum est à nobis Pignus Absit Sed quod dedit hoc implebit ideo melius Arrha quà m pignus hoc enim implebitur cum Arrha data est You are sealed with the spirit of promise which is the Pledge of your inheritance But in the Greeke it is You are sealed with the spirit of promise which is the Earnest of your inheritance The Question is whether of these is to be preferred and Hierome and Augustine are ready to resolve you herein both of them Correcting the Vulgar Translation in the word Pledge and one of them giving an Absit against this Sense of it The Reason of both is because hee that giveth a Pledge taketh it againe when the Thing for which it was pledged is received But hee that giveth an Earnest will have it continue with him to whom it was given And so God assuring his Chosen by his Spirit doth for their greater Confidence give it as an Earnest and not as a Pledge So they Therby advancing Gods gracious love towards man and mans faith in Gods love Here will be no corner of Pretence that this being an Errour of Print and not of Doctrine may be rejected by you without Prejudice to your Oath no for Errour of Print ariseth from some affinity of words as where these words This is a sound Reason being delivered to the Print was returned from the Presse thus This is a fond Reason But betweene Pignus and Arrhabo there is no more Symphonie than betweene an Horse and a Saddle Nor will it avayle you to say that the Originall Greeke was corrupted for it is the same Greeke word which Hierome himselfe who as you know used the perfectest Greeke Text doth here avow to be True II. Overture of Perjury in your Disputers is in swearing to the Romish Expositions of Scripture THe Tenour of the Oath in this respect is a Bulla eadem Sacram Scripturam admitto juxta eum sensum quem Tenuit Tenet Mater Ecclesia extra quam nemo salvus c. I admit the sacred Scriptures in that Sense which the Mother Church hath held and doth hold By Mother Church understanding the Church of Rome as without which there is no salvation which is expressed in the same Oath as another Article therein and which else-where wee have proved to be a GRAND IMPOSTVRE in a full Tractate from the Doctrine of the Apostles of Generall Councels of severall Catholike Churches and from such Primitive Fathers whose memories are at this day registred in the Romish Calender of Saints How then can the Oath for this point be taken without danger of Perjury But to come to the Article concerning the Expositions of
Scriptures According to the sense of the Church of Rome which would thereby be thought to Hold no Sense of Scripture now which shee had not Held in more Ancient Times Wee for Triall hereof shall for this present seeke after no other Instances than such as in this Treatise have beene discussed and for brevity-sake single out of many but onely Three A first is in that Scripture Ioh. 6. Except you eate the flesh of the Son of man you cannot have life The word Except was extended unto Infants in the dayes of Pope Innocent the First continuing as hath beene b Booke 1. Ch. 2. Sect. â—1 confessed six hundred yeares together when the Church of Rome thereupon Held it necessary for Infants to receive the Eucharist Contrarily the now Romane Church Holdeth it Inexpedient to administer the Eucharist unto Infants as you have heard Secondly Luk. 22. Take Eate c. Your Church of Rome in the dayes of Pope Nicholas in a Councel at Rome Held that by the word Eate was meant an c Booke 3. Chap. 5. Sect. 1. Eating by Tearing the Body of Christ sensually with mens teeth in a Literall sense Which your now Romane Church if wee may believe your Iesuites doth not Hold as hath appeared Thirdly the Tenour of the Institution of Christ concerning the Cup was Held in the dayes of Pope d Booke 1. Ch. 3. Sect. 7. Gelasius to be peremptory for the administration thereof to prove that the Eucharist ought to be administred in both kindes to all Communicants and judging the dismembring of them a Grand Sacrilege as you have heard whereas now your Romish Church Holdeth it not onely lawfull but also religious to with-hold the Cup from all but onely Consecrating Priests Vpon these omitting other Scriptures which you your selves may observe at your best leasure wee conclude You therefore in taking that Oath swearing to admit all Interpretations of Scripture both which the Church of Rome once Held and now Holdeth the Proverbe must needs be verified upon you viz. You hold a Woolfe by the eare which howsoever you Hold you are sure to be Oath-bit either in Holding TENVIT by TENET or in Holding TENET by TENVIT III. Overture of Perjury in your Disputers is in swearing to the pretended Consent of Fathers in their Expositions of Scriptures HEare your Oath a Bulla ead Nec Scripturam ullam nisi juxtà unanimem Consensum Patrum interpretabor Neither will I ever interpret any Scripture but according to the unanimous consent of Fathers Here the word Fathers cannot betoken Bishops and Fathers assembled in a Councel where the major part of voices conclude the lesse for Councel never writ Commentaries upon Scriptures but from Scriptures collect their Conclusions And although the word Vnanimous doth literally signifie the universall Consent which would inferre an Impossibility because that all Fathers have not expounded any one Scripture and very few All yet that you may know wee presse not too violently upon you wee shall be content to take this word Morally with this Diminution For the most part and hereupon make bold to averre that your Iuror by this Oath is sworne to a flat Falsity because you cannot deny but that the Fathers in their Expositions dissent among themselves insomuch that you your selves are at difference among your selves which part to side with b Valent. Ies Anal. lib. 8. cap. 8. Patet nobis via urgendi unum aut alterum Doctorem authoritate reliquorum With the greater saith Valentia nay but sometime with the c Canus Ioc. Theol. lib. 7. cap. 3. num 8. Plurium Sanctorum authoritas reliquis licet paucioribus reclamantibus firma Argumenta sufficere praestare non valet Lesser saith Canus Can you dreame of an Vnanimity in Disparity Sometime there is a Non-Constat what is the Iudgement of the Fathers in some points which you call matter of Faith What then Then saith your d Valent. quo supra Quod si per Sententiam Doctorum aliqua fidei controversia non satis commodè componi posset eo quod de eorum consensu non satis constaret sua tunc constet Authoritas Pontifici ut consultis aliis ad definiendum regulis de quibus est dictum Ecclesiae proponat quid sit sentiendum Iesuite the Authority of the Pope is to take place who being guided by other rules may propound what is the Sense Behold here the very ground of that which wee call Popery which is devising and obtruding upon the Church of Christ new Articles of Faith unknowne for ought you know to Ancient Fathers And is it possible to find an Vnanimity of Consent in an Individuall Vnity or rather a Nullity for what else is an Ignorance what the Sense of the Fathers is whether so or so Next that it may appeare that this Article touching the Vnanimous Consent of Fathers is a meere Ostentation and gullery and no better than that Challenge made by the wise man of Athens of all the Ships that entred into the Road to be his owne as if you should say All the Fathers do patronize your Romish Cause Wee shall give you one or two Examples among your Iesuites as patternes of the Disposition of others in neglecting sleighting and rejecting the more Generall Consent of Fathers in their Expositions of Scriptures One Instance may be given in your Cardinall who in his Commentaries upon the Psalmes dedicated to the then Pope professeth himselfe to have composed them e Bellar. Epist Dedic Paulo Quinto entè CoÌ„ment in Psal Psalmorum ego tractationeÌ„ magis propriâ meditatione quam mulâ—â librorum lectione composui Rather by his owne meditation than by reading of many Bookes whereas hee that will seeke for Vnanimous Consent of Fathers must have a perusall of them all In the second place hearken unto the Accents of your Iesuite Maldonate in his rejecting the Expositions of the Fathers as for Example f Maldon Ies in Matth. 20. Existimant Patres filios Zebedaei temerè respondisse ego vero credo eos verè esse locutos Item in Mat. 16. 18. Non praevalebunt Quorum verborum sensus non videtur mihi esse queÌ„ omnes praeter Hilarium quos legisse memini Authores putant IteÌ„ in Mat. 11. 11. Variae sunt PatruÌ„ opiniones sed ut liberè fatear in nulla earum aquiesco Item in Matth. 11. 13. Prophetae lex Omnes fere veteres ita exponunt sed non est apta satis interpretatio Item in Mat. 19. 11. Non omnes capiunt i e non omnes capimus Sic omnes fere veteres exponunt quibus equidem non assentior Item in Ioh. 6. 62. Sic quidem expono licet Expositionis hujus Autorem nullum habeo hanc tamen magis probo quaÌ„ illam Augustini caeterorumque alioqui probabilissimam quia hoc cum CALVINISTARUM sensu magis pugnat So indeed said the Fathers but I believe the Contrary Item This