elements is not reall and corporall but spirituall and sacramentall as that was in the Desert of which the Apostle speaketh the c 1 Cor. 10.4 spirituall rock followed them and that rock waes Christ When Manna fell and the rock was strucken Christ was not incarnate nor many hundred yeares after how then could the Manna or the water bee really and properly turned into his flesh and bloud Moreover howsoever hee eludeth the former words of Aelfrick There is a great difference betwixt the body wherein Christ suffered and the body which is received of the faithfull the body in which Christ suffered was borne of the flesh of Mary and consisted of bloud and bone but the other is gathered of many cornes without hloud and bone by saying that the difference which Aelfrick sheweth betweene Christ on the Crosse and Christ on the Sacrament is in his manner of being not in the being it selfe not denying him to bee really in both yet the later words which containe an inference upon the former therefore there is nothing to bee understood in the Sacrament bodily but spiritually admit of no colourable evasion for if nothing bee there understood bodily but spiritually then must needs the words This is my body be understood figuratively then must we not according to the doctrine of those times understand any substantiall change of the bread into Christs very body or the Wine into his bloud really and corporally To the third The difference betweene Papists of most eminent note concerning the words by vertue whereof they teach Transubstantiation is effected maketh much against the doctrine it selfe and by consequence quite overthroweth it For thus we argue against them out of this their difference If the bread bee turned into Christs body then either by the words of benediction before hee brake the bread or gave it c. or by the very words of Consecration viz. hoc est corpus meum But hee neither changed the bread into his Body by the one nor by the other Ergo hee changed it not at all Not by the precedent benediction as Aquinas and Bellarmine prove For till the last instant of the prolation of the words This is my Body the substance of bread remaineth Not by the words of Consecration for as Durand and Odo Cameracensis and Christopherus Archbishop of Caesarea prove Christ could not have said after hee had blessed the Bread This is my body unlesse by blessing it he had made it his body before If when Christ said Take yee and eat yea at that time the Bread by benediction were not changed it would follow that Christ did command his Disciples to take and eate the substance of Bread which to say is to deny the article of Transubstantiation Neither can the Iesuite heale this sore by his vertuall salve in saying that those men above alledged who impugne the prsent tenent of the Schooles concerning the words of Consecration in which the essence of the Sacrament consisteth vertually retracted such opinions because they submitted their writings to the censure of the Catholique Church for so wee may say with better reason that what they held against us they vertually retracted by submitting their judgement to the Catholique Church which we can easily prove not to bee the particular Roman but the Universall which in all times and all places through the Christian world hath professed the common faith once given to the Saints without any of those later Articles which P. Pius the fourth Jud. 13. and the late conventicle of Trent hath pinned unto it To the fourth Cajetan is truly alledged by the Knight for though neither the words Transubstantiation nor supposed are in him yet the sence of them is to be found in him for as both Suarez and Flood himselfe acknowledgeth p. 147. Cajetan said that these words This is my body doe not sufficiently prove the reall presence of our Saviours body without the presupposed authoritie of the Church and if in his judgement they prove not so much as the reall presence of Christs body in the Sacrament much lesse prove they the presence thereof by Transubstantiation or turning the bread into it By the word supposed which the Knight addeth more fully to declare Cajetans meaning hee intended not suppositions or barely pretended authority of the Church but truly presupposed which maketh not the speech sound at all contemptibly of the Church as Flood would have it whose stomack is so bad that it turneth sweet and wholsome meate into choler Nectar cui fiet acetum vaticani perfida vappa cadi To the fifth The Knight transcribeth so much out of Biel as was pertinent to his purpose with the rest he thought not fit to trouble the reader In Can. Miss Lect. 40. notandum guod quamvis expressè tradatur in scriptur â quod corpus Christi veraciter sub speciebus panis continetur à fidelibus sumitur tamen quomodo sit ibi corpus Christi an per conversionem alicujus in ipsum an sine conversione incipiat esse corpus Christi cum pane manentibus substantiâ accidentibus panis in Canone bibliae non invenitur The whole passage in Biel standeth thus It is to bee noted that though it bee expressely delivered in Scripture that the body of Christ is truly contained under the forme or species of Bread and received by the faithfull yet it is not found in the canon of the Bible how the body of Christ is there whether by conversion of any thing into it or whether it beginneth to be there without conuersion or turning the substance and accidents of bread remaining The former words in which passage make nothing against the Knight Who in this chapter for the most part condemneth Papists out of their owne mouth and therefore taking Biel for such hee maketh use of his testimonie against the Roman Church in point of Transubstantiation Which is very direct and expresse and the Iesuites answer is very weake and unsufficient thereunto to wit that hee denieth only that Transubstantiation is found in Scripture in expresse words For first Biel saith not non invenitur expressum but non invenitur It is not found in Scripture whether Christs body be there by conversion of any thing into it Now many things are found in Scripture as the Trinity of persons the eternall generation of the Sonne the procession of the holy Ghost from the Father and the Sonne the number and nature of Sacraments which yet are not set downe in expresse words Secondly it is evident out of the former words of Biel that hee accounted those things expressely to be delivered in Scriptures which yet are not set downe in expresse words for hee saith that it is expresly delivered in Scriptures that the body of Christ is truly contained under the species of bread and yet those words are not found in Scripure If wee should admit then of Flood his glosse upon Biel Transubstantiation is not found in Scripture that is
4. Art 1. betwixt a Councell approved by the whole Christian world and one that is disclaimed by most Christian Kings and Bishops and the major part of Christendome But you would further know a difference betwixt their two Creeds Let me tell you in briefe When a Romanist like your selfe would needs know of a Protestant the difference betwixt his religion and ours Subesse Romano Pontifici omni humanae creaturae declaramus dicimus definimus pronunciamus omninò esse de necessitate salutis Bonifac. 8. in Extr. de Major Obed cap. Unam sanctam because both beleeved the Catholike Church in the Creed the Protestant made answer that wee beleeve the Catholike faith contained in the Creed but doe not beleeve the thirteenth Article which the Pope put to it when the Romanist was desirous to see that Article the Extravagant of Pope Boniface was brought wherein it was declared to be altogether of necessitie of salvation for everie humane creature to be subject to the Bishop of Rome This thirteenth Article in your Trent Creed besides the newnesse of the rest makes a great difference Mr. Lloyd betwixt the two Creeds and the rather because it is flat contrarie to the decree of the Nicene Councell besides many other differences as shall appeare hereafter But say you they agree in this that as the Arrians of those times cryed out against that Creed as being new and having words not found in Scripture for example Consubstantiation so our Protestants cry out against the Trent profession of faith for the same reasons of noveltie and words not found in Scripture as for example Transubstantiation It is true the Arrians at the time of the Councell cryed out against the Nicene Creed for defining the word Consubstantiall or Coessentiall as being new but it is as true they complained without a cause for long before that time the word was used by Origen Doctos quosdam ex veteribus illustres Episcopos Homousii dictione usos esse cognovimus Socrat. l. 1. c. 8. and other ancient Fathers as appeares by Socrates Wee know saith he that of the old writers certaine learned men and famous Bishops have used the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and accordingly it was resolved by S. Austin that the name was not invented but confirmed and established in the Councell of Nice The word therefore Consubstantiall was not new August contr Maxim l. 3. c. 14. which they complained of but the word Transubstantiation is so new that it was altogether unknowne till the Councell of Lateran Concil Lateranense Anno 1215. Bellarm. 1200. yeeres after Christ therefore your comparison holds not in the first place But ad nit the Councell had first devised the word Quomodo dicis in Scripturis divinis 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 non inveniri quasi aliud sit 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 quà m quod dicit Ego de Deo patre exivi Ego Pater unum sumus Ambros de fide contra Arrian Tom. 2. c. 5. p. 223. in initio August Ep. 174. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Athanas Ep. quod decret Synod Nic. Congruis verbis sunt exposita Nihil refert hanc vocem non esse in Scripturâ si vox id significat quod Scriptura docet Vasq in 1. Thom. Tom. 2. Disp 110. c. 1. sect 4. yet it is agreed on all hands that the meaning of the word is contained in Scripture S. Ambrose writing against the Arrians puts to them this very question How doe you say the word Consubstantiall is not in divine Scriptures as if Consubstantiall were any thing else but I went out from the Father and the Father and I are one the word therefore was a pregnant word agreeable to the sacred word of God And albeit saith S. Austin the word perhaps be not found there yet the thing it selfe is found and what more frivolous quarrell is it than to contend about the word when there is certaintie of the thing it selfe In like manner Athanasius answered the Arrians in those dayes as I must answer you Touching the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 albeit it be not found in Scriptures yet it hath the same meaning that the Scriptures intend and imports the same with them whose eares are entirely affected towards religion We cry not out against you simply because your word Transubstantiation is not found in the Scriptures but because the true sense and meaning of the word is not contained in them for the words Unbegotten Increate the word Sacrament the word Trinitie and the like are not found in Scripture yet wee teach them wee beleeve them because their true sense and meaning may bee deduced from the Scripture and we professe with your Jesuite Vasques Nihil refert c. It mattereth not whether the word be in Scripture or no so as that which it signifieth be in the Scripture To come neerer to you doe you but prove that the words This is my body imply Transubstantiation and let me be branded for an Arrian if I refuse to subscribe to it but that the world may know we condemne you justly both for the newnesse of the word and your doctrine also hearken to the learned Doctors of your owne Church Your Schoole-man Scotus tels us that before the Councell of Lateran Bellarm. l. 3. de Eucbar c. 23. Transubstantiation was not beleeved as a point of faith It is true your fellow Jesuites are ashamed of this confession and thereupon Bellarmine answers Ibid. This opinion of his is no way to bee allowed Suarez in 3. Tom. in Euch. disp 70. sect 2. and Suarez not content with such a sober reckoning proclaimes that for his lowd speaking hee ought to be corrected and as touching the words of consecration from whence you would inferre both the name nature of Transubstantiation Mont. in Luk. 22. your Arias Montanus saith This is my body that is my body is sacramentally contained in the Sacrament of bread and hee addes withall the secret and most mysticall manner hereof God will once vouchsafe more clerely to unfold to his Christian Church The doctrine therefore of your carnall and corporall presence is not so cleerely derived from the Scriptures nay on the contrarie hee protesteth that the body of our Saviour is but sacramentally contained in the Sacrament as the Protestants hold and therefore not bodyily It is more than evident that the word Consubstantiation used by the Fathers was derived from the Scriptures but you have not that infallible assurance for your word Transubstantiation witnes your Cardinall Cajetan Cajet in Thom. part 3. q. 75. art 1. he assures us that there appeareth nothing out of the Gospel that may inforce us to understand Christs words properly yea nothing in the text hindereth but that these words This is my body may as well be taken in a metaphoricall sense as those words of the Apostle The Rocke was Christ that the words of either proposition may well bee
published by Pope Pius the fourth were never anciently received pag 25. The 39 Articles of the Church of England justified pag. 30. Papists teach that the Pope hath power to create new Articles of Faith pag. 33. Many Doctrines of Poperie are new by the confession of Papists themselves pag. 38. Protestants have a certaine rule of Faith Papists have not pag. 45 The Roman translation of the Bible is most corrupt pag. 51. Three sorts of corruptions and abuses of ancient Fathers 1. By foysting bastard Treatises entitling them to the Fathers 2. By falsifying their undoubted Treatises by additions detractions or mutations 3. By alleaging passages and places out of them which are not extant in their Workes and of all these three kinds Romanists are proved guiltie pag 64. Corruptions and falsifications of ancient Writers by Papists In the first Age. pag. 65. In the 2. Age. pag. 67. In the 3. pag. 68. In the 4. pag. 73. In the 5. pag. 77. In the 6. pag. 89. In the 7. pag. 90. In the 8. pag. 92. In the 9. pag. 105. In the 10. pag. 109. In the 11. pag. 110. In the 12. pag. 111. In the 13. pag. 112. In the 14. pag. 114. In the 15. pag. 115. In the 16. pag. 122. Of implicit Faith and blind Obedience maintained by Papists pag. 143. CHAP. II. Papists their bitternesse against reformed Churches is causlesse pag. 148. The definition of Heretikes agreeth to Papists but no way to Protestants pag. 151. Rome confessed to be Babylon by learned Romanists pag. 157. CHAP. III. Cassander and Caesenus are justified pag 164. Corruption in Faith as well as manners are confessed to have been in the Roman Church by the learned of that partie pag. 165. The Councell of Trent intended a reformation of Faith as well as manners pag. 173. CHAP. IV. The Catholike Faith is not so indivisible but that a man may renounce it in part though not in all as many learned Romanists have renounced the Trent Faith in part pag. 178. Priests marriage is lawfull pag. 181. CHAP. V. Romanists prefer their own interpretations of Scriptures before the ancient Fathers pag. 188. CHAP. VI. Many errours have crept into the Church whose first Authors cannot be named pag. 191. The difference between Heresie and Apostacie pag 196. CHAP. VII The petty degree of the Romish Faith is drawne from the ancient Heretikes namely the Osseni Helcheseite the Capernaites the Manichees the Aâ—gelici the Collyridians the Tacians and the Cathorists pag. 219. CHAP. VIII The Antiquitie and Vniversalitie of the Protestant Faith in generall is proved by the testimonies of our learned Adversaries pag. 253. There are but 22 Canonicall books of the old Testament as is proved by the testimonies of the ancient Fathers both of the Greeke and Latine Church pag 276. Errata in the first Part. PAge 42. line 8. reade his lin 17. r. authority in marg l. 2 r. ad Dard. p. 57. lin 11. r. their foreseene p. 66. l. 4. r. the deepe p. 75. l. 20. r. Angles p 92 in mar l. 8. r. alius in text l. 29. r. rejected p. 93. l. 16. r. serve p. 109. l. 23. r. making him speake p. 131. in mar l. 12. r. veniali p. 138. l. 25. r. very corruptly p. 139. l. 25. in marg 1. repurgata p. 153. l. 22. r. homoousians p. 164 in marg l. 25. r. vicesimi terrii p. 173. l. 23. r. operierunt p. 189. in mar l. 17 sequuntur p. 218. l. 2. r. Vitalian p. 219. l. 18. in marg r. regnum p 224. in marg l. 10. r. minus p. 248. in marg l. 12. r. curvat l. 14. r. pronus l. 18. r. iudico p. 251. l. 6. r. argument p. 255. l. 3. r. ingenuously p 257. l. 12. r. true body l. 21. r. is l. 22. dele and. p. 270. l. 4. r. looke p. 271. l. 29. r. of the. p. 273. l. 3. dele to the p. 279. l. 22. r. when To J. R. AUTHOR OF THE BOOKE CALLED A paire of Spectacles I Received a Treatise from you Mr. J. R. not long since published against me by the title of A paire of Spectacles or An Answer to a booke called Via tuta The safe way wherein you say the booke is shewed to be a Labyrinth of Errours and the Author a blinde Guide To what end your Spectacles were made for a blinde man I cannot tell for sure I am if I were blinde a paire of your Spectacles could not make me see howsoever if the indifferent Reader will look but upon the Frontispice of your own book he shall easily discerne that your glasses are deceitfull and do justly occasion a Writ of Error to be brought against your selfe for making that to seem in S. Austin your first Author which is not Your words are these Qui autem praetergreditur regulam fidei non accedit in viâ sed recedit de viâ Aug. in Joh. Tract 98. Tom. 9. p. 487. He that goeth besides the rule of faith which is the Catholique Church doth not come in the way but goeth out of the way wherein you have added these words of your owne viz. which is the Catholique Church in the same character with S. Austin and in lieu of Scripture you pretend the Church to be the rule of Faith whereas that ancient Father assures us Civitas Dei credit Scripturis Undè fides ipsa concepta est ex quâ justus vivit Aug. de Civit. Dei l. 19. c. 18. Tom. 5. Sancta Scriptura nostrae doctrinae regulam figit Idem de bono Viduitatis Tom. 4. c. 1. that from the holy and canonicall Scriptures that faith is formed and bred by which the just doe live Nay more hee expressely professeth with us that the holy Scripture doth fix or settle the rule of our doctrine And thus in your first citation you falsifie S. Austin and go besides the rule of faith and good manners also and by stumbling at the threshold you shew your selfe to bee the blinde guide you speake of in the first page and the first place I proceed to your Dedicatorie Epistle first you begin to descant upon my name in paralelling the words Lyend and Lye howsoever say you The title of Sir will be left for you These bee the first flowers of your eloquence and they savour sweetly Now if I should repay you in your owne language and shew you what men are branded with the letter R which stands for your name if I should shoot backe I say your arrowes even bitter words into your owne bosome would it not shew rather want of matter than proofe of doctrine If you delight to sit in the seat of the scornefull it shall be my comfort to tread in the steps of my Saviour who when hee was reviled reviled not againe To let passe your bitter reproaches of my learning and breeding I will come to the matter You have not stated the question say you fully and truly for you were
it were not worth the answering Pag. 20â— another while hee complaines that there is no place in the whole booke which is not either falsly or impertinently alledged one while hee proclaimes that my endevours are poore indeed and farre short of what is requisite in writing bookes another while he professeth It hath somewhat in it which may draw away an honest-minded man and that his Catholique friend was stumbled at it Now what is the reason of these impertinent excursions and contradictions It was the observation of ancient Maxentius Heretiques when they finde themselves not able to yeeld a reason of their wilfulnesse then they fall into plaine railing And certainly such is the bitternesse of this Author that were I perswaded Pythagoras transmigration of soules into other mens bodies had beene true I should beleeve that the soule of Rabshekah had beene transported into his body for otherwise if he had but a graine of charitie hee would never spurne a blinde man for so he termes me when Christian charitie teaches him another lesson If he were well versed in Antiquities hee would never have cited so many places of ancient Fathers falsly and impertinently in one page and yet condemne others of ignorance and falsification in the Fathers If hee were well read in the Booke of Wisdome I meane in the sacred Scriptures he would never have replyed with such scorne and disdaine for without doubt the Apostle spake to Mr. Lloyd the Romanist as well as to the rest of the Romans Rom. 11.3 Not to thinke of himselfe more highly than he ought to thinke but soberly according as God hath dealt to everie man the measure of faith Hee that accuseth another man of ignorance of lying of malice of execrable perjurie and the like had need be a man himselfe without all exception yet if wee may beleeve the Doctors of his owne Church he is guiltie of these and much more witnesse the Sorbonicall censure at Paris wherein Hallier and Aurelius accuse him of lying Aurelius in libri sui titulo Hallier in Admonit ad Lect. p. 8 9. of ignorance of heresie of profane scurrilitie of blasphemie and impietie of furious filthy and devillish railing of unsufferable arrogancie and the like and as touching his bitter accusations it seemes it is his accustomed manner of writing witnesse his Spongia written against the Sorbonists Aurelius in Vindiciis p. 385. under the title of Hermannus Laemilius otherwise discovered to be John Floyd I say he hath drencht his sponge in that gall of bitternesse such charitie and unitie is there amongst themselves that I may truly say of him as the Spartans sometimes said of the Theban Oratour If he think as he writes his ignorance is desperate if otherwise his conscience is seared To give you a taste of the manner of his writing when I cite authorities that are pregnant and beyond his just exception hee spares my person and condemnes the Authors themselves and complaines they are branded with the note of heresie and singularitie when as in truth they are branded onely by their Inquisitors for speaking against the errors of their Trent Doctrine being otherwise knowne members of the Roman Church When I cite an Author of our owne as namely B. Usher for translating Aelfricks Homily out of the Saxon tongue one while hee cries out Ushers corruptions are laid open to the world another while he tels mee I tooke the words from Usher because I understood not Latine or perhaps because I would be loth not to follow any errours or corruptions that come in my way and thus hee spends about ten pages sometimes inveying against our reverend and renowned Bishop sometimes against mee for false translating Aelfrick out of Latine when as the Latine cited by B. Usher in the margent See B. Ushers answer to the Jesuites challenge chap. of the Reall presence which hee takes to be Aelfricks is the Latine of Bertram and not Aelfricks whose was translated out of the Saxon tongue and not out of the Latine Againe when I cite an Author of his side as namely Petrus Crinitus for taking down of Images in Churches he stretches his throat makes this hideous exclamation Pag. 303. For your authorities of the Common Law there are so many foule faults committed by you that I know not where to begin then hee taxeth me with leaving out two principall words Humi solo whereas the Author which I cite hath no such words I render the place truly as I finde it I put not to him I take not from him I alter not one letter of his words or meaning and yet he cries out the faults are so many that I know not where to begin Againe when I cite ten or twelve Authors for our Communion in both kindes for our prayer in a knowne tongue and the like for most of them he sends me to Bellarmine for an answer for the rest saith he I le question you Then he complaines of falsifications when as in fine the Exception is against the translation of some poore word This for That and when he is destitute of any colour of answer his last refuge is this The book is prohibited As touching my Englishing of Latine Authors I confesse I have not translated whole sentences ad literam for I intended not a volume but a manuell yet I ever faithfully render the true sense and meaning of the Author Well what exception could he take to this Pag. 52. One while hee confesseth I set downe the Latine truly but I doe not translate it literally another while hee cries out It will not serve your turne Pag. 224. to say you place it in the English as you place it in the Latine for intranslation the sense is chiefly to be regarded Lastly Pag. 459. hee protesteth for himselfe that hee hath declined no Author either moderne or ancient when as it will appeare he sends many of them to Bellarmine for an answer others he rejects as condemned by the Index Expurgatorius others hee declines as unworthy of his answer by slighting them or otherwise passeth by them as children use to doe when they cannot read they thinke it best to skip over To say nothing of his Elenchs his Sophismes his Sophistry his Fallacies which are many I will trace him in his steps God willing laying aside all bitternesse and railing accusations In the meane time I will say with the Prophet David Plead thou my cause Psal 35.1 oh Lord with them that strive with me for the flouds are risen the flouds lift up their voyce Psal 93.4 5. the flouds lift up their waves the waves of the sea are mightie and rage horribly but yet the Lord that dwelleth on high is mightier An Answer to J. R. his booke called A paire of Spectacles CHAP. I. The Summe of his Answer to my first Chapter IN this his first Chapter hee endevoureth principally to prove that the Articles of the Roman Creed
doct Fidei Tom. 1. l. 2. Art 2. c. 22. p. 203. viz. that the Church could not create a new article of faith How can any such article saith he framed after many yeares be catholique and universall when as it was unknowne to our fore-fathers for foureteen hundred yeares before It was not beleeved because not heard of when the Apostle tels us faith commeth by hearing Such an article therefore although it be of faith yet it cannot be catholique and this hee proves directly from Fathers and Councels And whereas you affirme that your Church can no more make an article of faith than shee can make a Canonicall Booke of Scripture Canus loc Theol. l. 2. c. 7. p. 38. Canus your Bishop of Canaries will joyne with you That the Church of the faithfull now living cannot write a Canonicall Booke of Scripture and hee gives the reason for it There are not now any new revelations to be expected ither from the Pope or from a Councell or from the universall Church and from hence it will follow of consequence by your owne Logick Therefore the Church can create no new article of faith Thus farre I have waded in your behalfe that you may the better justifie your owne Assertion for you wil find your Church is like a house divided against it selfe and therefore cannot stand long I say that Quere which was made in Waldens dayes was resolved above two hundred yeares before by your profound Schoole-man Thomas Aquinas in your Churches behalfe that the Pope had power Condere articulos fidei to create new articles of faith to remove therefore these fig-leaves with which you would cover the naked truth This learned Doctour well understood that there were many new articles of religion crept into the Church in his dayes he knew well that albeit he were the prime Schoole man of his time yet with all his sophistrie hee could not make them comply with the ancient Catholique faith and thereupon he thought it the surest way to give the Pope an absolute and independant power over faith and religion and accordingly resolved Ad solam authoritatem summi Pontificis pertinet nova Editio Symboli sicut alia omnia quae pertinent ad totam Ecclesiam Thom. 2.2 q. 1. Art 10. It belongs onely to the authoritie of the Soveraigne Pope to make a new Edition of the Creed and all things else that concerne the universall Church Then he concludes the question and gives this reason for it The publishing of a new Creed belongs to his power who hath authoritie finally to determine matters of faith and this saith he belongs unto the Pope Upon which passages Andradius a chiefe pillar of your Trent Councell confesseth that the Bishops of Rome Romanos Pontifices multa definiendo quae anteà latitabant Symbolum Fidei augere consuevisse Andrad Def. Concil Trid. lib. 2. in defining many things which had beene formerly hidden have been accustomed to increase their Creed Now what thinke you of your Aquinas position and your Andradius confession I hope you perceive that your learned Schoole-men are of another opinion And that you may know that your Church doth not approve your pretended Tenet for Catholique doctrine hearken and consider what your holy Father the Pope declareth touching this question and then consider in what case you stand Pope Leo the tenth sent out his Bull against Luther and amongst other articles Certum est in manu Ecclesiae aut Papae prorsus non esse statuere articulos fidei Tom. 4. Conc. Par. 2. in Bulla Leon. 10. in fine Lateran Conc. novissimi p. 135. he chargeth him in particular with this that Luther should say It is certaine that it is no way in the power of the Church or Pope to ordaine articles of faith This you see is Luthers Tenet and this is yours Now what exception think you might the Pope take at this your Assertion Behold for this and the like Tenets he thundereth Anathema against him hee declareth this with the rest of his Articles to be a pestiferous pernicious scandalous and seducing errour to well-minded men he protesteth it was contrarie to all charitie contrarie to the reverence of the holy Church and mysteries of faith and in conclusion condemnes all his Articles as hereticall Inhibentes in virtute sanctae obedientiae ac sub majoris excommunicationis latae sententiae Ibid. p. 136. forbids them to be received by vertue of holy obedience and under paine of the graund Excommunication You have heard the sentence of your Lord Paramount and by it you may know your owne doome If you hold with Luther you are in danger of Excommunication and stand as a condemned heretique by his Holinesse with the Lutherans If you forsake your hold you have lost your faith And thus you have a wolfe by the eares you stand in danger whether you hold him or let him goe I wonder that you having taken so long a time to answer so poore a Work and having many Assistants for the composing of it they and you could be all ignorant of the Popes infallible Bull. Your Cardinall Bellarmine Quasi Ecclesia posterioris temporis aut deserit esse Ecclesia aut facultatem non habeat explicandi declarandi constituendi etiam jubendi quae ad fidem mores Christianos pertinent Bell. in Barcl who in these latter times hath laboured more than any other to uphold your new Articles of faith yet in obedience to the Pope and saving all advantages to his cause when in the question of deposing Kings he failed of antiquitie and proofe out of Scriptures and Fathers at last returnes this peremptorie answer As if the Church of these latter times had ceased to be a Church or had not power to explaine and declare yea to ordaine and command those things which appertaine to faith and Christian manners and that you may know that you and your Co-adjutors stand single in opinion against the Pope and his Cardinals your Jesuite Salmeron will shew you Doctrina fidei admittit additionem in essentialibus Salm. Tom. 13. Disp 6. Par. 3. §. Est ergo Idem Disp 8. that it stands with great reason to make additions in essentiall points of faith and hee gives this answer for it Because nature is not capable of all truths at one time and from this and the like reasons he concludes therefore there may be new traditions concerning faith and manners though they were never created or declared by the Apostles Thus you see the unitie amongst your selves and howsoever these positions may seeme strange to you and others of your opinions yet your Schoolmen and Lawyers have played the Popes Midwives yea Pope Leo the tenth hath put to his helping hand to deliver your Pope Pius the fourth of that issue I meane those new borne Articles of which your Church hath so long time before travailed Briefly let mee tell you your Articles are detected by your owne men
present Binius ibid. in his Annot. on the other side Peter Lombard and Gratian Pet. Lomb. l. 4. Sent. Dist 6. Grat. Can. Mulier de Consecr Dist 4. they have put in their exception nisi necessitate cogente except it be in case of necessitie so that in the absence of the Priest and in case of necessitie women may baptize by the authority of your Church notwithstanding the Councels decree And this is according to Bellarmines confession Although saith he those words of exception nisi necessitate cogente be not found in the Tomes of Councels Bell. de Baptis l. 1. c. 7. yet Peter Lombard and Gratian cite the Canon in that manner And thus by your owne Cardinals profession your Priests have added that exception to the Canon to dispense with women for Administration of the Sacrament which is not found in the Councell Againe the same Councell is razed both by the compiler of the decrees and publisher of the Councels for the Councell saith in the 44. Canon a Clericus nec comam nutriat nec barbam radat Concil Carth. Can 44. Let no Clerke weare long hayre nor shave his Beard The decretals and your late Councels published by Binius have left out the word Radat and have quite altered the sense of the decree and so your Church hath gone directly against the meaning of the Councell in shaving of Priests S. Austin Bishop of Hippo is both purged and falsified in favor of your doctrine First for the purging of him your own men make this declaration b Augustinus nuper Venetiis excusus in quo praeter multorum locorum restitutionem secundum collationem veterum exemplarium curavimus removeri illa omnia quae fideliū mentes haeretic â pravitate possent inficere aut a Catholica orthodoxa fide deviare Praefat Ind. lib. prohibit ad Lectorē Genevae impress an 1629. St. Austin was lately printed at Venice in which Edition as we have restored many places accerding to the ancient Copies so likewise we have taken care to remove all those things which might either infect the mindes of the faithfull with Heresies or cause them to wander from the Catholike faith This publike profession your men have made and accordingly the c In hunc modū est repurgatus ut in libri inscripsione testātur qui editioni praefuerunt Ibid. p. 6. Booke was purged as those who were present at that Edition doe witnesse in the Inscription of the Booke but let us returne to the corrupted Editions in our view St. d De Civitate Dci lib. 22. c. 24. Austin in his 22. booke of the Citie of God and 24. Chapter is cyted by e Bell. de Purg. l. 1. c. 4. Bellarmine for the proofe of Purgatory yet in that Chapter saith f Lud. Vives in lib de Civit. Dei c. 8. Vives in the ancient Manuscript Copies which are at Bruges and Colein those ten or twelve printed lines are not to be found And in the 22. booke and 8. Chapter he tells us there are many additions in that Chapter without question foysted in by such as make practise of depraving Authors of great Authority Touching forgeries and falsifications in particular The humane nature of Christ is destroyed if there be not given it after the manner of other bodies a certaine space wherein it may be contained In your Edition of Paris printed by Sebastian Nivelle An. 1571. this passage is wholly left out This is observed by Dr. Moulin but the Authour so printed I have not seene But when neither adding nor detracting could make good your Transubstantiation Fryer Walden thought it the surest way to forge a whole passage in the name of St. Austin which indeed strongly proves the very name and nature of it The words are these Wald. Tom. 2. de Sacram. c. 83. p. mihi 141. No man ought to doubt when Bread and Wine are consecrated into the substance of Christ so as the sabstance of bread and wine doe not remaine whereas we see many things in the workes of God no lesse marvellous A woman God changeth substantially into a stone as Lots wife and in the small workemanship of man hay and ferne into glasse Neither must we beleeve that the substance of bread and wine remaineth but the bread is turned into the Body of Christ and the wine into his bloud the qualities or accidents of bread and wine onely remaining This fo gery was judicially allowed by Pope Martin the fist and his Cardinals in their Consistorie and yet it savours rather of a Glasse-maker than an ancient Father but what answer maketh Walden to this invention * Egoenimreperi trāscripsi de vetustissimo exemplari scripto antiquā valdè manu formatâ Idem Ibid. I found it faith he and transcribed it out of a very ancient Copie written with a set hand Thus one while you adde another while you detract another while you falsifie the ancient Fathers if either they make for us or against you and yet you tell us that we are guiltie of corrupting the Fathers But above all Gratian hath most shamefully and lewdly falsified St. Austin whom he hath made to say Inter Canonicas Scriptur as decretales Epistolae connumerantur Dist 29. In Canonicis fol. 19. A. The decretall Epistles of the Popes are accounted in the number of Canonicall Scriptures The truth is St. Austin in his booke of Christian doctrine informes a Christian what Scripture hee should hold for Canonicall and thereupon bids him follow the greater part of the Catholike Church Amongst which those Churches are which had the happinesse to injoy the seates of the Apostles and to receive Epistles from them Gratian in the Canon Law altereth the words thus Amongst which Canonicall Scriptures those Epistles are which the Apostolicke See of Rome hath and which others have deserved to receive from her and accordingly the title of the Canon is Imer Canonicas Scripturas c. The decretall Epistles of Popes are counted by St. Austin for Canonicall Scriptures Now judge you what greater forgerie nay what greater blasphemie can be devised or uttered against Christ and his Spirit than that the Popes Epistles should bee termed canonicall Scriptures and held of equall authority with the Word of God especially since by your owne men they are censured as Apocryphall and counterfeit Epistles Your owne Bellarmine as a man ashamed of such grosse forgeries would seeme to excuse it Bell. de Concil Author l. 2. c. 12. Primo That Gratian was deceived by a corrupt copie of St. Austin which he had besides him and that the true and corrected copies have not the words as himselfe reporteth Thus Walden excuseth his forgerie by an ancient Manuscript the Cardinall by a corrupt copie and yet by your Cardinals leave this and many other such like forgeries stand printed in the Canon Law no Index Expurgatorius layes hold on them Idem de script Eccles An.
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
else doe you and your associates confesse that the contrary Tenets were taught and revived by the Ancients And as touching the name of Antichrist if that be appropriate to Heretikes it cannot touch the members of our Church for we make Christ and his Apostles the sole rule of our Faith On the other side if you consider the Pope either as he sits in the place of Christ as his Vicar Generall 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is agâ—â—â—â— Christ in the place of Christ as his Vicar or as he and his adherents teach and uphold a doctrine against Christ for the word Antichrist imports both without doubt they beare the markes of Antichrist and consequently the word Heretike reflects upon your selves Cassander tells us there be some who make the Pope of Rome Almost a God Cassand de officio Pii viri preferring his authoritie not onely above the whole Church but above the sacred Scriptures holding his judgement equall to the divine Oracles and for an infallible rule of Faith I see no reason saith he but that these men should be called Pseudo-Catholikes or Papists Indeed I must confesse I much wonder that any Protestant should give you that honourable title of Catholike especially when you terme them by the name of Heretikes Those that have the marke of the Beast imprinted in their foreheads have borrowed both the Name and Nature from him and therefore your Cardinall tells us Bell. de Not. Eccles c. 4. The word Papist is derived from the Pope such as was Peter And more particularly your Gregory Martin and the Rhemists give you to understand Rhem. Annot. in Acts. 11.26 that to be a Papist is to bee a Christian man a childe of the Church and subject to Christs Vicar You that are so inquisitive after other mens pedigrees see if with all your Heraldrie you can make good your nominal descent from Christ and as you stile him Pope Peter Your Father Bristow Bristow Demand 8. as a knowne Antiquarie in this point gives your Father Bellarmine the lye for he avowes it for certaine that your name Papist was never heard of till the dayes of Pope Leo the Tenth and this was 1500. yeares after Christ and this opinion I am sure is most probable and more sutable to the Noveltie of your Religion But say you we Catholikes stile the Knight and the Reformers by the common name of Hereticks You told me formerly the title of Sir would be left for me now you have added to the title the name of Hereticke and you professe it is the worst word of all It seemes the worst word you have is good enough for me But I pardon you and I must let you know that the name of Catholike is as comely with the Professors of your new doctrine as a golden ring in a swines snout And as touching the name of Hereticke wherewith you charge me you rightly resemble Athalia 4 Kings 11. who when shee understood that Joas the right inheritour of the Crowne of Judah was proclaimed King ranne in her furie to the Temple and cryed out Treason Treason when the treason was not in King Joas but in herselfe that wrought it Your Alphonsus à Castro hath written a Booke against the Heretickes in all ages and in his Index haereticorum I have searched diligently and I finde the names of certaine Popes among them but mine owne name I doe not finde For I professe with St. Austin Errare possum haereticus esse nolo I may erre but I will not bee an Hereticke Shall I make my confession unto you I beleeve all things which are contained in the Scriptures and nothing contrary or besides them as matter of faith necessary to salvation Cum hoc credimus priuscredâ—mus nihil amplius credendum esse Tertul. Ibid. I beleeve the holy Catholicke Church This is an Article of my Faith and this I first received from the Apostles Creed Next I undoubtedly beleeve the Nicene Creed and this was called Catholicke by those holy Fathers to distinguish the Heretikes from the Orthodoxe Christians in the Primitive Church or according to your owne words Chap. 1. p. 2. appointed to be publikely professed by all such as meant to bee counted Catholikes Concil Trid. Sess 3. and for the same cause your Councell of Trent decreed it to be received as a Shield against Heresies and therefore by your owne confession the Councels decree and your Creed it selfe I am free from the name of Heretike Lastly I professe and beleeve Athanasius Creed and that Holy and ancient Father witnesseth of that confession Haec est fides Catholica This is the Catholike Faith If therefore I beleeve the Scriptures and Catholike Church which teacheth the true Faith If I beleeve the Articles of the Nicene Creed which distinguisheth the right Beleevers from the Heretikes If I receive Athanasius Creed which containes the summe and substance of all Catholike Faith and doctrine what remaines then why I should not be exempted from the name of Heretike unlesse I shall acknowledge with you the fourth Creed published by Pope Pius the fourth and consequently subscribe to new particular doctrines which as you confesse doth ever accompanie the nature of Heresie But the Reformers are Heretikes He that shall heare but the word Reformers in all probability will conceive that they were men which opposed some errors or heresies crept into the Church and for that cause desired a Reformation In the Churches of Corinth Galatia Pergamus and Thyatira there were some of the Sadduces opinion who denied the Resurrection others that joyned Circumcision and the workes of the Law with Christ and the worke of salvation The Apostles you know did reprove those errors in their dayes and no doubt many accordingly did reforme themselves Now will you condemne those reformed persons for Heretikes because they differed from the rest with an utter dislike of those errors which the seduced partie retained Surely this is the true state and condition of our Church and accordingly your Trent Fathers made a decree for Reformation in the Councell and pretended that it was summoned to redresse Heresies which were crept into the Church and will you say if they had redressed them the Reformers had beene Heretikes The Rogatian Heretikes would have made the world beleeve that they were the onely Catholikes and the Arrian Heretikes called the true Christians sometimes Ambrosians sometimes Athanasians sometimes Homoâ—sians And in this manner St. Paul himselfe was called before the Judges to make answer to matter of Heresie and according to this way which you call Heresie Acts 24. so worship we the God of our Fathers beleeving all things which are written in the Law and the Prophets They that so rashly pronounce and call every thing Heresie are often stricken with their owne dart Alph. de Heres l. 1. c. 7. saith your owne Alphonsus and fall into the same pit which themselves have digged for others Hee shewes therefore
may your Proselytes beleeve you another time when you say Wee alwaies translate it or rather falsifie it into Ordinances For a conclusion of this Section you say that the three Creeds the two Sacraments the foure Generall Councels the two and twenty books of Canonicall Scripture We had them from you Let it be your comfort then that you had something in your Church which was worth the gleaning after the devill had sowed the Tares amongst the good Corne. But I would not have you overmuch confident of that neither for originally wee had them from the Church Catholike before there was a Roman For the Gospell was preached in England before it was in Rome and we had in England a Christian Church and King before Rome had a Christian Emperor yea long before Poperie or the name of Pope was heard of in the Christian world in the sense you now take it And in after Ages when the Gospell of Christ was rooted out by Heathen persecutors where it was first planted it was afterwards replanted by Preachers partly sent from Rome partly by the Greeke Church but by neither was the Faith preached and restored which your present Church now teacheth and maintaineth at this day And lastly if wee had the three Creeds the two Sacraments the 22. bookes of Canonicall Scripture and the first foure Generall Councels from you then you cannot deny that we teach the Ancient Faith first given to the Saints and that we had a Church visible long before Luthers dayes for those Tenents were sufficient of themselves to make a glorious and a visible Church in the first and best ages they were received by succeeding Christians in all the later Ages and are now become the Positive and Affirmative Articles of our Beleefe which for the greater part were ever taught and received in the bosom of your owne Church To shut up all your bitter Aspersions of Corrupting of Falsifying of Lying of Lynding and I know not what reproches cast upon me in these first 8 Sections I will shut up all I say which hitherto hath beene delivered by you with that answer of Socrates to his accusers before the Judges Plato in Apologia Socratis My Lords saith hee in what sort your affections have been stirred with mine accusers eloquence which you heard them speake I cannot tell But well I wot for mine owne part I my selfe whom it toucheth most was almost perswaded to beleeve that what they said was true yea although it were against my selfe so handsomly they can tell their tale and so likely and so smoothly they convey their maters every word they spake had appearance of Truth and yet in good sooth they have scarsely uttered one word of Truth The Titles of the severall Chapters and Sections in the ensuing Treatise Chap. 9. Alphab 1. Sect. 1. Of Iustification by Faith onely Pag. 2. d Sect. 2. Of Transubstantiation Pag. 12. Sect. 3. Of Private Masses pag. 42. Sect. 4. Of the seven Sacraments pa. 69 Sect. 5. Of Communion in both kinds pa. 127 Sect. 6. Of Prayer in an unknowne tongue pa. 145 Sect. 7. Of the Worship of Images pa. 176 Sect. 8. Of Indulgences Alphab 2. pag. 8. Chap. 10. Of the certaintie of the Protestant and uncertaintie of the Romish Faith pag. 44 Chap. 11. Of the greater safetie and comfort in the Protestant Faith then in the Romish pa. 68 Chap. 12. Of respect due to the Ancient Fathers pa. 84 Chap. 13. Of razing Records and clipping Authours tongues by the Roman Indices Expurgatory pa. 92 Chap. 14. Of the perfection and perspicuitie of Scripture and our Adversaries blasphemous Exceptions against it pa. 104 Chap 15. Concerning Bellarmine his subscription to Protestant Doctr in the main point of Iustification pa. 122 Chap. 16. Of Martyrs and particularly that the primitive Martyrs were not Papists pa. 128 Chap. 17. Concerning the Protestants charitable opinion of Papists pag. 137. And in what sense some affirme the Romane a true Church pag. 148 Chap. 18. Concerning the Confession on all sides for the Safetie of the Protestant Religion pa. 154 A Sermon preached at the Funerall of the Right Worshipfull Sir Humphrey Lynde at Cobham in Surrey p. 171 Errata in the second Part. PAge 5. lin 7. reade authors in marg l. 15. reade gloriamur p. 17 l 8. r. eat ye p. 22. l. 8. in mar r. fieri p. 40 l. 1. dele of p. 98. l. 28. in marg r. alleviationem p. 109. l. 2. in mar r. de pecc mer. p. 148. l. 10. r. at the first in p. 151. l. 9. r. Of. p. 191. l. 12. in mar r. perhibeat p. 202. l. 12. dele visible p. 203. l. 6. r. Miracles l. 14. wonders shew p. 218. l. 6. dele the. Alphab 2. pag. 39. l 12. in mar r. hic p. 51. l. 5. add hee p. 58. l. 16 r. et l. 26. r. her p. 62. l. 19. r. Of. p. 92. l. 8. r. Caietans p. 134. lin 5. r. the. Errata in the Sermon Pag. 181. l. 12. in mar r. vertit p. 184. l. 14 in mar r. Condemnant p. 191. l. 1. r. menacing p. 192. l. 35. in mar r. illaqueet l. 36. oblectet p. 195. l. 27. r. conseruare p. 202. l. 8. in marg r. puteum p. 204. l. 16. in mar r. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 l. 17. r. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 pa. 211. l. 6. in mar r. volentibus l. ult r. his p. 212 l. 3. r. dores l. 8. in marg r. Christo pa. 214. l. 7. in marg r. obdâ—citur l. 11. in mar r. Epitaphii l. 14. in mar r. laâ—rymis implentur CONCERNING IVSTIFICATION BY FAITH ONLY Spectacles Chap. 9. Sect. 1. THE Knight faileth in the proofe of his first point of Iustification producing but one only place out of a booke intituled Ordo baptizandi visitandi and that of no speciall good anthoritie as hee alledgeth it out of Cassander and Author placed in the first Classis in the first index librorum prohibitorum and even in that which he alledgeth there is nothing that doth not very well stand being rightly under stood with the Catholique faith which wee now professe L. 1. de Iustific c. 7. prop 3. for there is nothing but that which was shewed before out of Bellarmine to wit that in regard of the uncertaintie of our owne justice that is whether wee bee just or no and for the perill of vaine-glory it is most safe to put our whole confidence in the sole mercy and benignitie of God Which word sole doth import confidence in that and in nothing else with which it may stand very well that men in the favour and grace of God may doe workes meritorious of encrease of grace and glory which is the controversie betweene us and heretiques The Hammer AS David cut off Goliahs head with his owne Sword a Eras Apoph Laconum and Brasidas ranne through his Antagonist with his owne Speare and Iustine Martyr refuteth the Philosophers out
Anselme and his words Gospell the Knight gaines nothing by it or we lose for though it bee the safest way to cast anchour at the last in the bottome of Gods mercie and put our whole confidence in Christs merits it doth not from hence follow but that men may doe workes meritorious of increase of grace and glory First why doth he lispe here and not speake plaine out the Romish tenet which is that our Workes doe merit not only increase of grace and glorie but remission of sinnes and h Concil Trid. Sess 6. c. 32. Si quis dixerit hominis justificati opera non verè mereri augmentū gratiae vitam aeternam ipfius vitae aeternae si tamen in gratià decesserit consecutionem Anathema sit eternall life Next I would faine know how mercy and merit nay sole mercy and merit can stand together Certainly as mercy excludeth merit so sole mercy all merit Can those workes which is S. Anselmes judgement will not beare scale in Gods ballance weigh downe super-excellens pondus gloriae a super-excellent weight of glorie Certainly the Spectacle-maker put in a burning glasse into his Spectacles which hath much impaired his eye-sight or else hee could not but reade S. Anselmes words in this place in which he renounceth all merit and that in most direct and expresse tearmes I beleeve that none can bee saved by his owne merits Vid loc sup cit p. 4. or by any other meanes but by the merit of Christs passion I set the death of Christ betwixt ' mee and my bad merits and I offer his merits in stead of the merits which I ought to have and have not Concerning Transubstantiation Spectacles chap. 9. Sect. 2. à pag. 132. ad 187. THE Knight and the Protestants commit a great sinne in administring the Sacrament of Baptisme without those Ceremonies which were used in the Church from the Apostles times Elfrick was not the Authour of the Homilie and Epistles the Knight citeth against Transubstantion in which notwithstanding there is nothing against Transubstantiation but much for it if the Knight had not shamefully corrupted the Text by false translating it in five severall places The difference of Catholique Authours about things not defined by the Church maketh nothing for Protestants because they vertually retract all such opinions by submitting their writings to the censure of the Catholique Church Cajetan is falsely alledged by putting in the word supposed and Transubstantiation he denied not the bread to bee transubstantiated into Christs body though hee conceived that those words This is my body doe not sufficiently prove the reall presence of our Saviours body for which he is worthily censured by Suarez and the whole schoole of Divines Biel affirmeth that it is expresly delivered in holy Scriptures that the body of Christ is contained under the species of bread c. Which former words the Knight leaveth out because they made clearely against him and in the latter set downe by the Knight he denieth not that Transubstantiation may bee proved out of Scriptures but that it may be proved expresly that is in expresse tearmes or so many words Alliaco his opinion maketh nothing for the Knight being a Calvinist though hee seeme to favour the Lutherans tenet and though hee thought the Doctrine of consubstantiation to be more possible and easie yet therein hee preferred the judgement of the Church before his owne B. Fisher denieth not that the reall presence can be proved out of Scripture for the fourth chapter of the booke cited by the Knight is employed in the proofe thereof against Luther but that laying aside the interpretation of Fathers and use of the Church no man can be able to prove that any Priest now in these times doth Consecrate the true body and bloud of Christ Durand B. of Maundy doth not deny Transubstantiation to bee wrougnt by vertue of the words This is my body For though in the first place hee saith that Christ then made the bread his body when he blessed it yet hee after addeth that wee doe blesse illâ virtute quam Christus indidit verbis Durand rat c. 41. n. 14. by that power which Christ hath giuen to the words Odo Cameracensis calleth the very forme of Consecration a benediction both because they are blessed words appointed by Christ for so holy an end and because they produce so noble an effect or because they are joyned alwayes with that benediction and thankesgiving used both by our Saviour in the institution of this holy Sacrament and now by the Priest in the Catholique Church in the Consecration of the same Christopherus de capite fontium is put in the Roman Index of prohibited bookes and in the words cited out of him by the Knight there is a grosse historicall errour in this that hee saith that in that opinion of his both the Councell of Trent and all Writers did agree till the late time of Caietan as if Caietan were since the Councell of Trent and in citing this place the Knight is against himselfe for whereas hee maketh Cardinall Caietan and the Archbishop of Caesarea his two Champions against the words of Consecration as if they did both agree in the same here this Archbishop saith quite contrary that all are for him but onely Cajetan Salmeron relateth it indeed to bee the opinions of some Graecians that Christ did not consecrate by those words This is my body but by his benediction but this opinion of theirs is condemned by him as Chamier saith expressely in the place coted by the Knight l. 6. de Eucha c. 7. Bellarmine in the place alledged saith nothing but what is granted by all Papists De Euchar. l. 3. c. 23. to wit that though the words of Consecration in the plaine connaturall and obvious sense inferre Transubstantiation yet because in the judgement of some learned men they may have another sense which proveth only the reall presence it is not altogether improbable that without the authority of the Church they cannot inforce a man to beleeve Transubstantiation out of them Alfonsus à Castro affirmeth that of Transubstantiation there is rare mention in the ancient Fathers yet of the conversion of the bread into the body of Christ there is most frequent mention and the drift of Castro in that place is to shew that though there bee not much mention in ancient Writers of a thing or plaine testimonie of Scripture that yet the use and practice of the Church is sufficient bringing in for example this point of Transubstantiation and the procession of the holy Ghost from the Son The meaning of Yribarne and Scotus saying Transubstantiation of late was determined in the Councell of Lateran is only this that whereas the words of Consecration may bee understood of the reall presence of our blessed Saviours body either by Transubstantiation or otherwise so the substance of bread doe remaine the Church hath determined the words are to be understood in the former
agener all Councell may erre the Church may erne if the Church may erre the faith which that Church teacheth may faile and consequently there can bee no certaintie How easily are these leaves plucked away and torne in pieces 1. Though such a Councell as the Councell of Trent consisting of a few Bishops swaied by the Italian faction may erre it would not from thence follow that the whole representative Church might erre 2. Though the whole representative Church in a free and generall Councell lawfully called might erre yet many millions in the Catholique Church may hold the orthodox beliefe and consequently the faith of the Church not totally faile Yea but saith the Iesuit take away the infallibilitie of the Church there is no rule of faith This assertion of his is open blasphemie as if God would not bee true though all men were found liars though the Roman Church and Pope erre a thousand times yet the rule of faith remaineth unvariable in the holy Scriptures Yea but S. Gregorie equalizeth the foure first generall Councels to the Gospel and saith in effect that they could as little erre as the 4. Gospels and that upon the deniall of their authoritie the Christian faith might be shaken as well as by the deniall of the Gospels and the like authoritie giveth your Parliament unto them I answer S. Gregorie equalizeth the foure first generall Councels to the foure Gospels not in respect of authoritie but in respect of the veritie of the articles defined in them he saith not they could as little erre but they did as little erre in their decisions or to speake more properly that their doctrine was as true as Gospell because the determinations in those first generall Councels against Heretiques are evidently deduced out of holy Scriptures Our Parliament alluding to the words of S. Gregorie speaketh in the same sense as hee doth Yea but saith the Iesuit your Parliament lawes acknowledge that for heresie whatsoever is condemned for such in any of those Councels which is in other words to acknowledge them for a rule of faith and consequently to bee of infallible authoritie and to joyne them in the same ranke with the Canonicall Seriptures Idem jungat Vulpes by the like reason the Iesuit might say we joyne the booke of Articles of Religion and Homilies in the same ranke with the Canonicall Scriptures because we condemne for heretiques all that obstinatly maintaine any doctrine repugnant to them which wee doe not because we hold the Decrees of a provinciall Synod to bee of in fallible authoritie but because wee are able to prove all the Articles there established to be consonant to the holy Scriptures Yea but further saith the Iesuit in the same statute P. 203. you give power to the Court of Parliament with the assent of the Clergie in their Convocation to adjudge or determine a matter to be heresie which is the very same as to give it power to declare faith or to be the rule thereof I answer the statute giveth power to the Convocation to declare faith and determine heresie out of Gods word and by the sentence thereof and no otherwise In such sort to declare faith is not to be the rule of faith but to judge and measure things by the rule There is a maine difference betweene these two which yet the Iesuit here confoundeth as if they were coincident to declare faith and to bee the rule of faith every Iudge declareth the Law yet is he not the rule of the Law The Inquisitors in their jndices expurgatorij and the Sorbonists in their censures declare what is heresie yet the y are not Itrow the Rule of popish faith every meater in the market declareth that such or such is the measure of corne and graine yet is not every or any corne-meater the Winchester standerd It is one thing to be the rule and another to measure by the rule and declare what we have measured But to retort the Iesuits phrase upon himselfe hee is not capable it seemes of this discourse which yet every market-woman or boy is Well let the authoritie of generall Councels bee great in the Church and of the foure first Councels greatest of all quid hoc ad Rombum what maketh this for the infallibilitie of the Trent conventicle much saith the Iesuit every way for what saith hee can you say more against the present Church and present Councell of Trent then against the Church and Councels of those times What can we say nay what can we not say what have we not said or what could all the Papists in the world answer to what wee have already said After hee hath taken away the legall exceptions made against this conventicle by the Authour of the historie of the Councell of Trent and of the litterae missivae and Iewel his Treatise affixed to that Historie and Chemnisius his Examen and Doctor Bowles his latine Sermon preached to the Convocation and lately printed after hee hath proved which hee will never bee able that the Assemblie at Trent was a free and generall Councell and called by lawfull authoritie and all the proceedings in it according to ancient Canons yet it will still fall as short of the Councell of Nice in authoritie as in antiquitie that consisted of most eminent learned and holy Bishops and Confessors this for the most part of hungrie animals depending on the Popes trencher as Dudithius a Bishop present at that Councell declareth at large in his letter set before the Historie of the Councell of Trent to which I referre the reader To the second The testimonies alledged by the Knight for the sufficiencie of holy Scriptures are ponderous and weightie and the Iesuits exceptions to them are sleight vaine and frivolous To the testimonie out of the Acts I have kept backe nothing that was profitable unto you and I am pure from the bloud of all men Act. 20.20.27 for I have not shunned to declare unto you all the Councell of God hee saith that S. Paul speaketh of the doctrine by him preached not of the written word of God as in like manner our Saviour saith that what hee heard from his Father hee made knowne unto them Iohn 15.15 and yet delivered not one word in writing It is true S. Paul speaketh of the doctrine which he preached but it is as true that the doctrine which he preached hee confirmed unto them by testimonie of Scripture For S. Luke saith Acts 17.2 that S. Paul as his manner was reasoned with them out of the Scriptures opening and alledging that Iesus whom hee preached unto them was Christ and they that received the word with all readinesse of mind searched the Scriptures daily whether those things were so Act. 24.14 and again I confesse that after that way which they call heresie so worship I the God of my fathers beleeving all things which are written in the Law and the Prophets If the Iesuit had read the verse immediatly following testifying
vpon S. Iohn that out of the side of Christ the Sacraments of the Churchissued he would seeme to answer something First he quarrelleth at the quotation saying I doe not thinke you will find in Chemnitius your good friend S. Ambrose and Bede cited Whereunto I answer that though the Knights good friend Chemnitius cite not Ambrose and Bede yet the Iesuits good friend Card. De Sacram. in gen l. 2. c. 27. Amb. l. 10. in Luc. Bed c. 19. Ioh. intelligunt per sanguinem qui è latere effluxit redemption is pretium per aquam baptismum Bellarmine citeth them both his words are Ambrose in his tenth booke upon S. Luke and Bede in his comment upon the 19. of S. Iohn understand by blood which issued out of our Saviours side the price of our redemption by water Baptisme Next the Iesuit endeavoureth to untwist this triple cord by saying that these three Fathers speake of Sacraments issuing out of Christs side but no way restraine the number to two Whereunto I reply that though the word Sacramenta for the number may bee as well said of seven as two Sacraments yet where S. Austine alludeth to the same text of Scripture and falleth upon the same conceite he restraineth the number to two saying there issued out of Christs side water and blood quae sunt Ecclesiae gemina Sacramenta Now I would faine know of the Iesuit where ever hee read gemina to signifie seven or more then two Were the Dioscuri which are commonly knowne by the name of gemini seven or two only to wit Castor and Pollax As for S. Ambrose and Bede though they say not totidem verbis that the two Sacraments of the Church issued out of Christs side as S. Austine doth yet they can bee understood of no more then two Sacraments for there were but two things which issued out of our Saviours side to wit water and blood whereby they understand Baptisme and the Lords Supper Had there issued out of our Saviours side together with water and blood Chrisme or balsamum or had a rib beene taken from thence the Iesuit might have some colour to draw more Sacraments out of it but now sith the Text saith there issued onely two things water and blood and the Fathers say the Sacraments of the Church are thereby meant it is most apparant that by Sacramenta they meant those two only which they there name in expresse words Baptisme and the price of our redemption that is Christs blood in the Eucharist To the seventh The authoritie of S. Ambrose is as a thorne in the Iesuits eye for it cannot but bee a great prejudice to their cause that so learned a Bishop as S. Ambrose writing six bookes professedly of the Sacraments omitteth the Romish five and spendeth his whole discourse upon our two If the Church in his time beleeved or administred seven Sacraments hee could no way be excused of supine negligence for making no mention at all of the greater part of them it were all one as if a man professing to treate of the elements or the parts of the world which are foure or of the Pleiades or the Septentriones or the Planets which are seven should handle but two of that number Bellarmine therefore and after him Flood pluck hard at this thorne but cannot get it out saying that S. Ambrose his intent was to instruct the Catechumeni only as the title of one of the books sheweth For first S. Ambrose hath no booke of that title viz. An instruction to them who are to bee catechized or are beginners in Christianitie The title of that booke is De ijs qui initiantur of those who are initiated or entred into holy mysteries Secondly this is not the title of any of the six bookes de sacramentis alledged by the Knight but of another tractate Thirdly admit that S. Ambrose as S. Austine and Cyrill wrote to the Catechumeni and intended a Catechisme yet they were to name all the Sacraments unto them as all Divines usually doe in their Catechismes because the Sacraments are alwayes handled among the grounds and principles of Christian religion And though the Catechumeni are not presently admitted unto all yet they are to learne what they are that they may bee the better prepared in due time to receive them Fourthly it is evidently untrue which the Iesuit saith that S. Ambrose writeth not to the beleevers of that age but only to some beginners The very front of his booke proves the Iesuit to bee frontlesse For S. Ambrose his first words are I will begin to speake of the Sacraments which wee have received c. In Christiano enim viro prima est fides for the first thing in a Christian man is faith And as hee writeth to all beleevers not beginners only so hee speaketh also of the chiefe Sacraments of the New Testament and not of those only which the catechumeni received as is apparant out of the fourth chapter of the first booke De sacramentis Wherein hee proveth according to the title of that Chapter Quôd sacramenta Christia norum diviniora sint priora quà m Indaeorum That the Sacraments of the Chrìstians are more ancient and more divine then those of the Iewes and hee instanceth especially in the Sacrament of the Lords Supper Lastly the Iesuit in this answer apparantly contradicteth himselfe first saying that S. Ambrose intent in that Worke was only to instruct the catechumeni in those things that were to be done in the time of Baptisme p. 210. and within a few lines after he saith Bud. deasse Veritas nonnunquam invitis erumpit as fallens inter mendacia ab audientibus demuns agnoscitur cum interim loquentes adbuc se habere in potestate putent that he writeth of the Sacraments whereby they were so initiated which are three Baptisme Confirmation and the Eucharist So true is Budaeus his observation That lyes dash one with the other and truth breakes out of the mouth of the lyar ere hee is aware Who ever heard of the Eucharist to bee administred in the time of Baptisme or that the Eucharist was administred at all to the punies or catechumeni whilest they were such certainly if the catecumeni or younger beginners to whom hee saith S. Ambrose wrote were capable of the doctrine of the Eucharist containing in it the highest mysteries of Christianitie they were much more capable of Penance Matrimonie and Extreame Unction which are easie to bee understood by any novice in Christian religion To the eight That it may appeare what was the judgement of S. Austine in this maine point of difference betweene the Reformed and the Roman Church I will weigh what is brought on both sides first what the Iesuit alledgeth for seven and then what the Knight for two S. Austine having written divers Catechisticall treatises in which hee had occasion to name and handle the Sacraments yet no where defineth the number of them to bee seven
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
our Adversaries when Christ saith This is the cup of the New Testament which is shed for many for the remission of sinnes who are those many will they say Priests only have the Laytie no sinnes or no remission of sinnes by Christ bloud if they have as all professe they have why do they forbid them that which Christ expresly commandeth them saying Drinke ye all of this for it is shed for you and for many All worthy communicants are to drinke Christs bloud for whom it was shed thus much Christs reason importeth but it was shed for the Laytie as well as the Clergie they therefore are alike to drinke it If the Laytie expect life from Christ they must drinke his bloud as well as eate his flesh Iohn 6.53 for except a man eate the flesh of the Sonne of man and drinke his bloud hee hath no life in him Lastly 1 Cor. 11.28 when the Apostle enjoyneth all to examine themselves before they receive the holy Communion I desire to bee informed by our Adversaries whether this Precept of examination concerneth not the Laytie especially I know they will say it doth because the people most need examination that they may confesse their sinnes and receive absolution for them before they presume to communicate let them then reade what followeth in the same verse and so let them eate of that bread and drinke of that Cup let a man examine himselfe and so let him eate of that Bread and drinke of that Cup the coherence of the members in this sentence inferreth that as none are to be admitted without precedent examination so that all who have examined themselves are to be admitted to the Lords table both to eate of that Bread and drinke of that Cup. To the seventh There is no force at all in the inference which the Iesuit would make from Christ his breaking of bread with the two Disciples at Emmaus to prove the Communion in one kind for neither is it likely Christ instituted any supperafter his last Supper neither was the place fit for a Communion being a common Inne neither reade wee of any preparation on the Apostles part nor of any words of institution used then by Christ neither could the Iesuit alledge any one Father who saith that Christ at that time administred the Communion to those two Disciples in bread only For it is well knowne to all that are acquainted with the language of Canaan that breaking of bread in Scripture by a Syneodoche is taken for making a meale and it is very unlikely that the disciples travelling at that time of the yeare in so hot a countrey as Iudaea is when they came to their Inne for a repast should call for bread only and no drinke To the eighth Though the Iesuit make many a bravado here and else-where yet upon the matter in granting to the Knight that the generall practise of the primitive Church was to communicate in both kindes he yeeldeth up the bucklers For the maine scope of the Knight in this and other Sections is to prove the visibilitie of our reformed Church in former ages by the confession of our Romish adversaries this hee doth in the point of the Communion in both kindes abundantly in this Section and the Iesuit cannot denie it it followeth therefore that in this maine point of controversie betweene us and the Church of Rome wee have antiquitie universalitie and eminent visibilitie and the Roman Church none of all whereby any understanding reader may see that the Knight hath already wonne the day Yet for the greater confusion of the Iesuit I adde that what the primitive Church did uniformly they received it from the Apostles and what the Apostles did joyntly no doubt they did by the direction of the holy Ghost according to our Lords will and so their example amounteth to a Precept Againe the practise of the Catholique Church is the best expositour of Scripture therefore the question being concerning the meaning of that text of Scripture Drinke you all of this whether they concerne the Laytie or Clergie only that must bee taken for the true exposition which the Catholique Church by a constant and vniforme practise hath allowed Lastly either this practise of the Catholique Church was grounded upon some divine Precept or it is a meere will-worship which the Iesuit dare not say if it be grounded upon any divine precept undoubtedly upon this Drinke yee all of this that is as well Ministers as Laye people as Paschasius commenteth upon the words To the ninth The arguments of Bellarmine drawne from six ancient Rites to prove the frequent use of Communion in one kind are answered at large by Philip Morney and Chamierus in the places above mentioned and they are every one of them retorted against Bellarmine himselfe by D. F. in his booke intituled the Grand sacriledge cap. 14. accipe quomode das si tibi machera est nobis vervina est if it be sufficient for him to object by proxe why may not we answer by proxe To the tenth To the instance in the Nazarites I answer first that I read of no other Nazarites since Christs time in the writings of the ancient Fathers then certaine Heretiques so tearmed of the sect of Ebionites who went about to cloath the Gospell with the beggarly rudiments of the Law upon whom S. Austine passeth this verdict L. De haeres ad quod vult Deum dum volunt Iudaei esse Christiani nec Iudaeisunt nec Christiani that whilest they laboured to bee both Iewes and Christians they became neither Iewes nor Christians but a sect of heretiques partly judaizing partly Christianizing Secondly if there were any Nazarites that sincerely imbraced the Gospell questionlesse they communicated in both kindes for though they had vowed against drinking of wine yet either their Vow was to be understood of drinking it civilly not sacramentally for their corporall refection not for their spirituall repast or if their vow were absolutely against wine yet Christs command Drinke yee all of this implied a dispensation for their Vow in that case A private vow of any man must give place to a publike command of God even now a dayes those who upon any great distemper of body or mind by wine vow to abstaine from it yet make no scruple of conscience to take a small quantitie of it physically for the recoverie of their health how much more ought they to doe so notwithstanding their vow if it bee prescribed by the heavenly physician for the cure and salvation of their soules To the eleventh Concerning Tapperus the Knight no way misquoteth him though hee leave out some passges in him for the truth is Tapperus halteth betweene two opinions he speaketh some words plainly in the language of Canaan and others hee lispeth in the language of Ashdod where he speaketh in the language of Canaan as hee doth most plainly in those his words if wee regard the Sacrament and perfection thereof and the
same prayers are said breeds no deformitie at all but uniformitie rather Sith it is not the different sound of words but of sense that makes a difference either in the beliefe or practice of the Church There was never more unitie then in the Apostles time Acts 2.46 when all the be leevers were of one mind yet then they praised God in divers languages Acts 2.9 Parthians and Medes and Elamites and the dwellers in Mesopotamia and in Indaea and Cappadocia in Pontus and Asia Phrygia and Pamphylia in Egypt and the parts of Lybia about Cyrene and strangers of Rome Iewes and Proselites Creets and Arabians wee doe heare them speake in our tongues the wonderfull workes of God To the fourth The diversitie of translations either of the Scriptures or the Church office breedeth no inconvenience at all provided care betaken that the translations bee revised by the learned and licenced by authoritie nay on the contrarie the Church reapeth much benefit by it for languages have beene therby improved and the Scriptures much opened For oftentimes that which is obscure in the originall is cleared in a good translation An unknowne tongue is like a vaile before a beautifull picture or a filme before the eye which by a good translation is taken a-away If it were either unlawfull or inconvenient to translate the holy Scriptures or choyce parts of them in the Church Liturgie into vulgar languages why did Severus translate them into the Syrian S. Ierome into the Dalmatian S. Chrysostome into the Armenian Vlphila into the Gothian Methodius into the Slavonian Bede into the British and the Divines of Doway and Rhemes of late into the English Aeneas Sylbist Bohem. c. 30. Nay why did the Pope himselfe signe and subscribe unto the Petition of Cyrill and Methodius Monkes sent to convert the flaves and Dalmatians who in behalfe of their Converts desired of his holinesse that he would give leave to say service unto them in the Slavonian tongue which the Pope consented unto upon their much pressing him with that text of holy Scripture Ps 150. v. ult Let every thing that hath breath praise the Lord and let every tongue confesse unto him To the fift If there were any force in the Iesuits reason at all it would prove that neither the Scriptures of the Old Testament should have beene delivered to the Iewes in the Hebrew nor the New Testament to the Greekes in the Greek For Hebrew was then the vulgar tongue of the Iewes and the Greeke to the Gentiles yet wee find that neither the writing the Old Testament in the Hebrew nor the New in the Greeke which were then the vulgar languages to those people bred any contempt of sacred things with prophanesse and irreligiousnesse but the cleane contrarie effects The use of Scripture in a vulgar tongue is not the cause why any disesteeme or undervalew it but want of instruction in heavenly mysteries and carelesse and superficiall reading without searching into the bottome of the spirituall meaning where Orient Pearles lie A counrerfeit stone if it bee often handled is discovered to be false and thereby looseth its valew whereas a rich Diamond though it be worne every day on the finger loseth nothing of the price or valew of it If the publike use of Scriptures would have derogated any thing from the worth and valew of it God would never have commanded the children of Israel to rehearse the booke of the Law continually to their children Deut. 6.7 8 9 to talke of it when they tarried in their house and when they walked in the way when they lay downe and when they rose up to bind the words of the law for a signe upon their hand and as frontlets between their eyes to write them upon the posts of the house and upon the gates Worldly wise men seeke to improve their knowledge by concealing it or at least impropriating it to some few but God contrariwise valeweth his wisdome by making it common Earthly commodities the rarer the dearer but heavenly Iewels the more common they are the more pretious of other liquour the lesse wee tast the more we thirst after it but heavenly wisedome thus speaketh of her selfe Hee that drinketh of me the more he drinketh the more hee shall thirst As the comfortable beames of the Sun which shineth daily upon us are not lesse valewed then the raies of those starres that seldome appeare in our horizon so the word of God which is the light of our understanding issuing from the Sunne of righteousnesse loseth nothing of the reverend estimation and religious respect due unto it by the frequent irradiation thereof at the preaching and reading of Scripture nay it gaineth rather with all hearers in whom there is any sparke of grace As for danger of heresie Rain l 1. de Idol indeed Claudius Espenceus writeth that a friend of his in Italie told him that in that countrey they made shie of reading Scripture for feare of being made heretiques thereby but by heretiques hee meaneth such as S. Paul was who after the way which they call heresie worship the God of their Fathers Acts 24.14 beleeving all things which are written in the Law and the Prophets for otherwise if heresie bee taken in the proper sence for erroneous doctrine in point of faith it is as absurd to say that the stequent use of Scriptures is a cause or occasion to bring men into heresie as that the often taking of a sovereigne antidote against poyson is the ready meanes to poyson a man 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Chrys tom 5. Matth. 22.29 S. Chrysostome in his Homilie de Lazaro exhorteth all his Christian hearers to the frequent reading of Scriptures as a speciall meanes to preserve them from errours and heresies For all errours in point of faith arise from the ignorance of Scriptures as our Saviour teacheth the Saduces saying Yee erre not knowing the Scriptures Assuredly there is lesse danger of falling into heresie by reading Scriptures then any other booke whatsoever partly because they alone are free from all possibilitie of errour partly because God promiseth a blessing to those that reade and meditate on them yet our Adversaries suffer all other bookes to bee translated out of the learned Languages into the vulgar only they forbid the translation and publike use of the Scriptures which containe in them most wholsome receipts not only against all the maladies of the will but of the understanding also not onely against all morallvices but also all intellectuall errours in matters of faith which wee call heresies To the sixt Had the Iesuit but an ounce of discretion and common understanding hee would never translate 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to announce which is no English word at all neither is hee of sufficient authoritie to coyne new words at Doway or Saint Omers and make them currant in England For the matter it selfe it is false which hee saith that the Actions at the Lords
etiam patres Ambrosius Hilarius c. minime loquuntur de indulgentiis Prierias cont Luth. de Indul. Indulgentiae authoritate scripturae non intuere nobis sed authoritate ecclesiae Romanorum Pontificum Major in 4. sent dist 2. q. 2. Difficile est modum indulgentiarum fundare authenticè in scripturâ sacrâ Roffensis artic 18. cont Luther Quamdiù nulla fuerat de purgatoria cura nemo quesivit indulgentias nam ex illo pendet omnis indulgentiarum estimatio ceperunt igitur indulgentiae postquam ad purgatorii cruciatus aliquandiù trepidatum erat The Scriptures speak not expressely of Indulgences neither the Fathers Austine Hilarie Ambrose Jerome c. Sylvester Prierias affirmeth that Pardons have not beene knowne to us by the authority of Scriptures but by the authority of the Church of Rome and the Popes Fisher Bishop of Rochester confesseth that of Purgatorie there is little or no mention amongst the ancient Fathers and that as long as Purgatory was not cared for there was no man sought for Pardons sith Purgatorie therefore hath beene so lately knowne and received of the whole Church who can now wonder concerning Indulgences And here Master Flood is at a stand his Flumen is turned into Stagnum for having made offer to answer Durand and finding that his answer would not hold his heart failed him and hee durst not venture to shape any answer at all to the Authours last mentioned namely Alfonsus a Castro Alfon. de verbo Indulg Harum usus in ecclesiâ videtur serò receptus de Transubst antiatime rara in antiquis mentio de purgatorio fere nulla quid ergo mirum si ad hunc modum contigeret de indalgentiis ut apud priscos nulla sir mentio Antonin part 1. tit 10. de indulgentiis nihil expressè habemus in sacrâ scripturà aut etiam patrum scriptis Cajet opus 15. 1. Nulla scriptura sacra nulla priscorum doctorum grecorum aut latinorum authoritas indulgentiarum ortum ad nostram deduxit notitiam Bellor de indul l. 1. c. 17. Neque mirum videri debet si authores antiquiores non habemus qui harum mentiorum faciunt whose words are There is nothing in Scripture lesse opened or wherof the ancient Fathers have lesse written than of Indulgences and it seemeth the use of them came but lately into the Church there is seldome any mention of Transubstantiation among the Ancients almost none of Purgatorie What marvell then if it so fall out with Indulgences that there should be no mention of them by the Ancients Antoninus There is not any expresse testimonie for proofe of Indulgences either in Scriptures or in the writings of the ancient Fathers Cajetan There is no authoritie of Scriptures or ancient Fathers Greeke or Latin that bringeth the originall of Indulgences to our knowledge Bellarmine It is not to be wondered if wee have not many ancient Authours which make mention of Indulgences for many things are reâ—â—â—ned in the Church onely by use and custome without writing See how the Romanists second one the other Bellarmine saith That not many ancient Authours make mention of Indulgences Cajetan and Antoninus say Not any Durand saith that The Scriptures speake not expresly of them Prierias saith That they speake not at all of them To the tenth The Indulgences those Fathers and Councells speake of have no more affinitie with the Pardon 's the Pope selleth now adaies than the Rivers of Paradise have with Styx or Avernos or Simon Peter with Simon Magus or Phillip the Apostle with Phillip King of Macedon as I shewed before To the eleventh The Iesuit hath neither proved the practise of the Catholike Church nor of the Romane time out of mind for Indulgences but onely practises of later times since manifold abuses crept into the Roman Church As for his negative Argument to wit that It is a strong evidence of consent for Indulgences because none is found to have spoken against them unlesse hee otherwise qualifie it it will no more prove Purgatorie or the lawfull use of Indulgences than it will prove there is a Common-wealth in Eutopia or Cities or Countries in the Moone or many worlds because peradventure none is found to have spoken or written against them And for the Waldenses that they were the first impugners of Indulgences is said by the Iesuit but not proved much lesse that these Waldenses were known Heretikes For they were farre from heresie by the confession of their greatest adversarie the Inquisitor Rainerius Cont. Wald. cap. 4. They live saith hee justly before men and believe all things well concerning God and all the Articles contained in the Creed Solummodo Romanam Ecclesiam blasphemant Clerum onely they speake evill of the Romane Church and Clergie To the twelfth It was happy for Durand that hee lived before the Inquisition and Index Expurgatorius Durand in 4. sent dist 2. q. 3. Quod dictuÌ„ est Petro. Mat. 16. tibi dabo claves c. intelligitur de potestate ei data in foro poenitentiae de collatione autem indulgentiarum non est quomodò debeat intelligi sancti enim Ambrosius Hilarius Augustinus Hieronimus minime loquntur de indulgentiis For he argueth so strongly against Indulgences saying that Little can be spoken of any certainty concerning them because the Scripture speaketh not expressely of them for what is spoken Matthew the 16. to Peter I will give thee the Keyes and whatsoever thou bindest on earth shall be bound in heaven is understood of the power given him in the penitentiall Court and cannot be understood of the bestowing of Indulgences for the holy Fathers Ambrose Hilarie Augustine Jerome speake not at all of Indulgences that his writings if not his person would have beene purged by fire if hee had lived in these times yet true it is that having argued strongly against Indulgences and the Church Treasurie so farre as it consisteth of the merit of Saints hee bethought himselfe and pro formâ alleageth to the contrarie the Custome and Doctrine of the Church meaning the Romane Church whose lash hee feared if hee should not have given backe that by Whole-sale which hee had taken away from her by Re-tale It s true also that hee mentions Indulgences at the stations of Rome in the dayes of Saint Gregory but let it be noted that Gregory is without the compasse of the Primitive times and that hee was interested in the cause for Purgatorie fiers began to singe men in his time and thereupon Indulgences to be in request which afterwards proved a Staple commoditie to the See of Rome Lastly Mart. Epig. de Lab. Non es crede mihi bonus quid ergo ut verum loquar optimus malorum Pisones Senecasque Memmiosque et Crispos mihi redde sed priores fies protinus ultimus bonorum as Martial writeth of Labulla it may be truly said of this Gregory that hee was the worst of the good and best of
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
contradict Romish doctrines not out of disobedience to man but out of obedience to him who commandeth us to contend for the true faith and to reprove and convince all gainesayers What Papists intentions are we take not upon us to judge their doctrines we put to the test of Gods word and finde them false and adulterine and all be it some points of their beliefe considered in themselves might seeme indifferent yet as they hold them they are not because they are not of faith Rom. 14.23 and what soever is not of faith is sinne Now no point of the Romish Creed as they hold it is of that faith the Apostle speaketh of that is divine faith because they ground and finally resolve all their articles not upon Gods word but upon the authority of the Pope Resp ad Archiepis Spalaten c. 47. Firmitas fundamenti â—â— firma licet implicita in aureo hoc fundamento veritatis adhaesio valebit ut in Cypriano sic in nobis ad salutem faenum stipula imbecilitas caries in tecto contignatione explicitae erroris opinio non valebit nec in Cypriano nec in nobis ad perâ—â—tiem or Church of Rome which is but the authority of man whereas on the contrary as Doctor Crakent horpe demonstrateth If any Protestant build hay or stubble upon the true foundation he may he saved because be holdeth the true foundation which is that every doctrine of faith ought to be built upon Scripture If the Iesuit wonder at this conclusion let him weigh the Authors reasons and he will be forced to confesse that the errors if there be any in Protestants in regard they sticke close to the true foundation and implicitly deny them cannot in them be damnable whereas the very true doctrines of faith in Papists because they hold them upon a wrong ground and foundation very much derogatory to God and his truth are not so safe To the third With what face can the Iesuit avow this considering that Prieras before alleaged and other writers approved by the Church of Rome mainetaine this blasphemous assertion that the authority of the Church is greater then the anthority of Scripture and all Papists of note at this day hold that the Scripture is but an imperfect and partiall rule of faith all Protestants on the contrary teach that it is an entire and perfect rule of faith Papists believe the Scripture for the Churches sake Protestants the Church for the Scripture sake Papists resolve all points of faith generally into the Popes infalibility or Churches authority Protestants into the written word of God which as Bellarmine himselfe confesseth De verbo Dei non script l. 4. c. 11. containeth all things necessary for all men to beleeve and is a most certaine and safe rule of beleeveing Yea but saith the Iesuit out of Vincentius Lerinensis De verbo Dei l. 1. c. 2. he that will avoid the deceits and snares of Haeretikes and remaine soundin the faith must strengthen his faith two wayes to wit by the authority of the divine law and the tradition of the Catholike Church This advise of Vincentius is sound and good if it be rightly understood and not in the Iesuits sense Vincentius there by tradition of the Catholike Church understandeth not unwritten verities but the Catholike expositions of holy Scriptures extant in the writings of the Doctors of the Church in all ages and we grant that this Catholike exposition of the Doctors where it can be had is of great force to confirme faith and confound Heretikes Vt Scripturae ecclesiastice intelligentiae jungatur authoritas For the stopping of whose mouth that Father saith and we deny it not that there is great neede to add to the Scripture the Churches sense or interpretation albeit as he there addeth which cutteth the throat of the Iesuits cause The Canon of Scripture is perfect and sufficient of it selfe for all things nay rather as hee correcteth himselfe Over and above sufficient cum sit perfectus scripturae canon sibique adomnia satis superque sufficiat To the fourth Here the Iesuit would make his Reader study a little and his Adversarie to muse Vero nihil verius certo nihil certius but it is indeed whether hee be in his right wits or no. For first as Seneca well resolveth one thing cannot be said truer than another one truth in Divinitie may be more evident to us than another but in it selfe it cannot be truer or surer Secondly admitting there could be degrees of certainty at least quoad nos there can be yet no comparison in regard of such certaintie betweene an Article of the Creed assented unto by all Christians and a controverted conclusion maintained onely by a late faction in the Westerne Church But the sitting of Christ at the right hand of his Father is an Article of the Creed set downe in expresse words in holy Scripture Mark 16.19 Luke 24. consented unto by all Christians in the world whereas the carnall presence of Christ in the Sacrament by Tranfubstantiation is no Article extant in any Creed save onely that of Pope Pius his coyning in the yeare of our Lord 1564. It is neither in words set downe in Scripture as the other Articles are neither can it be necssarily inforced or deduced by consequence as foure great Cardinals of the Roman Church confesse Cameracensis Cajetan Roffensis and Bellarmine Neither was this Doctrine of the Romane Church ever assented unto by the Greeke Church nor by the Latine anciently or generally as I shewed before Thirdly the Iesuit contradicteth himselfe within eight lines for having said in the eighteenth line Pag. 384. that Christ his corporall presence in the Sacrament was more sure than his presence in heaven at the right hand of his Father about seven lines after forgetting himselfe hee saith that Wee shall find as much to doe marke as much not more in expounding that Article of the Creed as they doe in expounding the words This is my Body Wherein it is well hee confesseth that Papists make much to doe in expounding the words This is my Body which is most true for by the demonstrative Hoc they understand they know not what Neither this Body nor this Bread but an Individum vagum something contained under the accidents of Bread which when the Priests saith Hoc it is Bread but when hee hath muttered out an Vm it is Christs Body Likewise by the Copula est is they understand they know not what either shall be as soone as the words are spoken or is converted unto or is by Transubstantiation Lastly by Body they understand such a body as indeed is no body without the extension of place without distinction of Organs without facultie of sense or motion and will hee make this figment so incredible so impossible as sure nay more sure than the Article of Christs ascension into heaven and his sitting at the right hand of his
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
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