Adoration or Jnuocation or in any other sort To this Peter (10) Peter Martyr lib. contra Gardin part 1. obiect 150. Martyr and others do answere that if any such reuerence was exhibited by the Fathers to the Eucharist this reuerence was not terminated in the Eucharist it selfe but directed to Christ signifyed therein and so by the mediation of those earthly elements transferred vnto him No otherwyse tâ—â— when the Papists for thus do they partâ—câ—larly instance praying before Jmages 〈◊〉 not their prayers to the Images but to Christ 〈◊〉 the Saint represented therein But against tâ— Euasion I first aske what secret intelligâ— haue our Aduersaryes with the Fathers â—tention herein since the Fathers words gâ— not the least intimation thereof Seconâ— I say that (11) L de Hierarch Eccles c. 3. part 3. saying O Diuinissimum Sacrosanctum Sacram. c. Dionysius doth inuoke 〈◊〉 Sacrament it selfe and not Christ only â—fore the Sacrament Thirdly this their â—sweare admitting it for true doth waâ— euen in their iudgements the Catholâ—â— praying before Images and the reuereâ—â— giuen to them which Doctrine the Proâ—stants do so much inueigh against Animaduersion CLXVII THe Scripture is most difficult for three â—spects First in regard of its multiplieâ— of the Senses of one and the same passage Scripture Secondly in respect of the phrâ—â— wherein the Scripture is deliuered Thirdâ— by reason of the height of the subiect wheâ— the Scripture intreateth To touch all tâ—â— briefly First concerning the Sense Tâ—â— are in diuers passages of Scripture three â—uerall senses besydes the literall all iâ—â—ded by the Holy Ghost The senses are â—led Allegoricus Tropologicus and Anagogâ— Now how shall an ignorant maÌ„ know 〈◊〉 texts of Scripture be capable of all these 〈◊〉 of them The Style of the Scripture is â—â—de difficult as being stored with figures 〈◊〉 Allegoryes and full of Hebrew phrazes 〈◊〉 Dialects as appeareth in perusing the â—â—lms and the Apocalyps The subiect of the â—â—â—ipture is most high as discoursing of the â—â—eation of the world of Nothing of the â—ysteryes of the Trinity and the Incarnatiâ—â— besides many other Dogmatical points 〈◊〉 transcending the light of mans naturall â—â—prehension And therefore S. Ambrose had â—â—od cause thus to pronounce of the holy â—â—â—ipture Mare (12) Ambros Ep. 44. ad Constantium est scriptura Diuina haâ—â—s in se sensus profundos Ad hereto that the â—â—â—ipture hath to an ignorant eye diuers seeâ—ng contrarietyes though in theÌ„selues they are most true and reconcileable For example these two texts (13) Ezec. 18. Filius non portabit iâ—quitatem patris anima quae peccauerit ipsa â—â—rietur And this other Visitans (14) Exod 10. iniâ—â—tatem patrum in filios in tertiam quartaÌ„â—â—nerationem how can an ignorant man or â—o man reconcile these passages And what â—â—ity then may one discerne in a Mechaniâ—â—l fellow or silly woman who can only â—t reade carrying the bible vnder their â—â—me to the Church and vaunting of the â—ines of the Scripture and auerring that â—â—emselues are able to vnfould expound â—e most abstrusest passages there O pride â—â—d ignorance Ad finally that in the Scripâ—â—e the plurall number is sometymes vsed for â—â—e singular number as Marc. 15. we read they that were crucifyed with him rayled at hiâ— and yet we know it was but only one of the theeues that did so the good thiefe honoring our Sauiour See the like hereto touching this kynd of phraze of the Scripture besydes other places in Hebr. 7. Againe the Scripture in diuers texts doth vnderstaÌ„â— by the word Omnis only quidam For example in Math. 27. we reade dicunt omnâ— vt crucifigatur and yet the B. Virgin S. Maâ— magdelen the Apostles and diuers others dâ— not so cry out against our Sauiour The liâ— phraze is in those words Omnes quae sâ— sunt querunt Philip. 2. yet the Apostles and many other good Christians were eâ—empted out of this sentence But now heâ—â— I demand how can an vnlearned man râ—concile these and the like sentences wâ—â— the true meaning of the Holy Ghost in tâ— Scripture Animaduersion CLXVIII THe Catholike Church deliuereth câ—taine Rules for the more perfect knoâ—ledg of true Traditions The first When 〈◊〉 vniuersall Church doth imbrace any doctriâ— as a point of fayth the which is not found in 〈◊〉 holy Scriptures it is necessary to say that thesâ— point proceedeth from the Tradition of the Aâ—â—stles The reason hereof is in that the vniuâ—â—sall Church as being the (1) 1. Timoth 3. pillar and fouâ—dation of truth cannot erre And therefâ— what the Church belieueth to be of fayâ— â—e same doubtlesly is of fayth But no â—int or Article is of fayth but what God â—th reuealed either by the Apostles or Proâ—ts since at this present the Church is not â—ouerned with new Reuelations The second When the vniuersall Church â—h obserue any thing which not any but only â—d had power to institute and yet which is not â—nd written in the Scripture the same we are â—resume to be deliuered from Christ and his â—ostles the reason hereof is like to the reaâ—n of the former Rule to wit in that the â—iuersall Church cannot erre either in belieâ—g or in working especially if the worâ—g doth concerne any rite of diuine worâ—â— And such is the Baptisme of Infants The third That which is obserued throughâ— the vniuersall Church and cannot fynd any 〈◊〉 institution thereof in the most ancient tymes same we are to belieue that it was first ordâ—yâ—â— by the Apostles though it be of that nature that the Church had power firct to ordayne it â—is is the rule of (2) Lib. 4 contra Donat. cap. 24. S. Austin The fast of â—t may be an example hereof For this fast â—ght haue been instituted by the Church Christ or his Apostles had not afore instiâ—ed it Yet we maintayne that it was instiâ—ed by Christ or his Apostles because asâ—ding vp to higher tymes and seeking afâ— the first Origen therof we find no beâ—ning thereof but only in the tyme of Apostles The fourth When all the Doctours of the Church being gathered together either in a generall Councell or in their seuerall writings and bookes do teach with a common consent that such or such a point descendeth from Apostolicall Tradition we are to belieue that it is an Apostolicall Tradition The reason of this rule is because if all the Doctors of the Church shold erre then followeth it that the whole Church should erre since she is obliged to follow her Pastours and Doctours Now where we speake of the Fathers touching any point in their seuerall writings here we are to vnderstand that we hould it not necessary that all the Fathers should write therof but it is sufficient if some Fathers of the chiefest note and eminency do expressely affirme the point in writing and that other Fathers do not contradict them therein taking notize of such their writings Here we say
mâ—n forcible to wring out Confession then any racâ—â— torment For the proofe of this verity I refer the studious Reader to the Booke of the Protestants Apology where beginning at the Page 684. sâ—quentib at the letter M. in the margent he shall find fyfty at least of our Affirmatiue and Catholike Doctrines defended and maintayned by the most learned Protestants that euer did write I will here only reckon the tiles of diuers of the said Articles so belieued and taught by the Protestants viz. 1. Real presence 2. That Sacraments do confer grace 3. The sufficiency of Chricts corporall Death 4. That Christ descended in soule into Limbus Patrum 5. The continuall Visibility of the Church 6. The Necessity of Good works to Saluation 7. Euangelicall Counsells 8. The Doctrine of vniuersality of Grace 9. That God doth only permit sinne but decreeth it not 10. That men are not certaine of their Election 11. That to Children of the faythfull dying vnbaptized saluation is not promised 12. Free-will 13. That in regard of Christs Passion and promisse our Good works are meritorious 14. TeÌ„porall punishment reserued by God in Iustice after the sinne is remitted 15. Peters Primacy 16. Intercession of Angells 17. Intercession of Saincts 18. Jnuocation of Saincts 19. Vowed Chastity 20. Voluntary â—ouerty Chastity and Obedience 21. Prayer for the Dead 22. Purgatory 23. Limbus Patrum 24. Images in Churches 25. Worshipping of Images 26. Reuerence and bowing at the name of Jesus 27. That the good Works of one may help another 28. Power of a priest to remit sinnes 29. Confession of sinnes 30. Distinction of mortall and veniall sinne 31. The indifferency of Communion vnder one kind 32. Sacrifice of the New Testament according to the Order of Melchisedech 33. The possibâ—lity of the Commandements 34. Transubstantiation 35. That Christ is God of God 36. Thaâ— Christ as Man was from his Natiuity free from Ignorance and was full of knowledg 37 Baptisme of Women and Lay persons in tyme oâ— Necessity 38. Seauen Sacraments 39. Implicitâ— fayth called Fides implicita 40. That Antichrist is yet to come 41. Patronage and protection of certaine Angells ouer certaine Countryes and Kingd mes 42. That the Obseruation of Sunday for our â—abaoth is not alterable 43 That the alteration of the â—aboth from Saturdâ—â— to Sunday not proued by Scripture 44. Set tymes of fasting 45. The true visible Church cannot erre 46. Externall iudgment and not onâ—y Scripture appointed for determining of Contrâ—uersies 47. That the gouerment of the Church is Monarchicall 48. Which is true Scripture determined to vs only by the Church 49. That the Church of Rome is a part of the house of God 50. Vnwritten Traditions besides some other Catholike points taught by the learned Protestants Here now I demand that if the Protestants Proselyts and followers do belieue their Grand-maisters in diuers points of their owne Religion why then should not they belieue the learned Protestants maintayning our Catholike doctrines â—ntâ— abstracting from the authority of the Church both the said seuerall sorts of Protestants do maintayne their contrary Tenets euen with equall and indifferent priuiledg of their owne Priuate Spirit Animaduersion CLXXXVIII AS aboue I compared Luther being Catholike touching manners and Conuersation of Lyfe with Luther being Protestant So heere I will make another comparatiue betweene the Liues of Catholikes and of Protestants And here it is to be obserued that I will not compare the most pious men in former tymes with the best of the Protestants nor the worst men for life of the one Religion with the worst of the other but for the greater confronting of our Aduersaries and aduantage to our Catholike Cause I will compare the declining state of Catholike tymes with the best tymes of Protestancy which is presumed to be at the first entrance and beginning of Protestancy when the first Protestants enioyed the â—rimitiae and first fruites of their Religion This point will be made euident euen from the confessions of the Protestants themselues First then we fynd Luther himself thus to write From (n) Luth in postill super Euangel Dominiâ—ae primae Aduentus the tyme in which the pure Doctrine of the Gospell was first reuealed to light the world hath growne dayly worse Men are more reuengefull couetous licentious then they were euer before in the Papacy With whom Musculus agreeth thus complayning hereof Vt verum (o) Musculus in loc com in cap de Decalog pag. 62. essâ— fateor c. To confesse the truth men are become so vâ—â—ike themselues that whereas in the Pâ—pacy they were religious in their Errours and Superstition now in the light of the knowne truth they are more prophaâ—â— then the very Sonnes of the world I wiâ—â— conclude with the testimony of Erasmus thus discoursing of this point Quos (p) Erasmus Ep. ad fratres Inferioris Germaniae aâ—tea noueram c. Such men as I knew to be before vpright candid modest and sincere in theâ— Conuersation after they had embraced thâ—â— new Sect meaning of the Gospell they iâ—stantly begun to talke of young Women to playâ— dice to leaue of prayer to be most impatient reuengfull of Iniuries and to conclude to abaâ—don all humanity expertus loquor Thus far â—rvsmus And thus much of the balancing oâ— men of these two seuerall Religions Noâ— I heere refer to an indifferent Iudgmenâ— whether it be not a great blemish to Protestancy that it is confessed by the Protâ—stants that the Professours thereof euen 〈◊〉 their best tymes were far worse and moâ— wicked in manners then the Catholikâ—â— their worst and most declyning tymes Animaduersion CLXXXIX THe Protestants much solace themselâ—â— in alledging certaine Texts of Scriptâ—â— in proofe of Iustification by fayth only whâ—â— passages being truly weighed are found 〈◊〉 be most weakely or rather impertineâ—â— alledged as in Math. 9. Thy fayth hath sâ—â— thee Iohn 3 Who belieueth in the Sonne hâ— eternall Lyfe Finally to omit some oâ—â— such seeming Texts Rom. 5. We being â—â—â—fyed by fayth let vs haue peace towards God Tâ— these and such like I answere and deny that it followeth That Fayth only iustifyeth though only Fayth be named For sometymes also other Vertues are only named or the Sacraments For example Luc. 7. we read Many sinnes are forgiuen her because she loued much Iob. 12. Almes deeds freeth from death Rom. 8. By hope we are saued Finally Titus 3. He hath saued vs by the Lawes of regeneration besydes many other such passages And yet no man will gather from theâ—e authorities that Charity or Almesdeeds or Hope or Baptisme do iustiâ—y without Fayth Therfore when many different causes concur to produce one Effect the Scripture ascribeth the same Effect sometymes to one Cause sometymes to another and yet the Scripture doth not intend thereby to signiâ—y that one cause is sufficient without the other causes Now the reason why the Apostle more frequently attributes Iustification to fayth
in some Copyes and of King James in other Copyes and yet both of them reigned long after K. Edward Animaduersion IV. WE ought not to reiect the Authority of ancient approued Authors because there appeare some seeming repugnances in their wrytings For vpon this ground an vnbelieuing Atheist might bring the Holy Scriptures into question For example in Matth. 27. words are alledged vnder the name of Jeremy which are not found in Ieremy but in Zachary c. 11. In like sort in Mark our Sauiour is sayd to be crucifyed in the third hower whereas in Iohn 19. we read that Pilate sate in iudgement vpoÌ„ him about the sixt hower Therefore whereas our Aduersaryes vpon the former ground of incertainty of Mens writings do in like sort seek to impugne S. Peters being at Rome because diuers Historiographers do not agree of the time of his coÌ„ming to Rome his stay there we must content our selues in sobriety with acknowledging that receaued Axiome amoÌ„g the learned That is Saepâ— constat de re quando non constat de modo rei Since otherwise we shold not acknowledge that Hester had any husband or that at any tyme Iudith did liue For the opinions of the Iewes are various both touching the persons and the time herein yet we all acknowledge that Hester had a husband that there was such a woman as Iudith The like vncertainty of the tymes wherein actions were performed though the thing it selfe be most certaine is made euident euen from our owne Cronicles for example touching King Iohn his death whereof see the seuerall opinions in Holinshead in his last Edition 3. volume pag. 1â—4 Animaduersion V. IT is worthy consideration to obserue First how the Protestants in seuerall points make the same Arguments against some articles of our Religion which the Iewes were accustomed to make against the same Secondly how the Protestants somtimes vse the same answers to our Arguments which the Jewes did For example touching the Reall Presence and our receauing of Christs body in the Sacrament the Protestants chiefe Argument is taken from the impossibility therof to wit that God cannot performe all those points aboue nature which are found therein And is not this obiection borrowed from the Jewes against Christ giuing his body to eate in these wordes Quomodo (m) Iohn 6. potest hic nobis carnem suam dare ad manducandum Againe The Puritans especially condemne the confession of Sinnes to Man vpon this ground that only God can remit sinne And do they not compart with the Iewes herein demanding Quis (n) Marc. 1. potest dimittere peccata nisi solus Deus And where it is vulgarly obiected by the ignorant that man cannot remember all his sinnes to man therfore his Confession of them is imperfect and maymed I say by this reason we should not coÌ„fesse them to God since we cannot number them to God no more then to man Now to shew how our Aduersaries in like manner borrow from the Iewes their Answers to our Catholike Arguments one instance in place of many shall serue We Catholikes in proofe of our Religion do vrge one chiefe Argument drawne from Miracles exhibited by God in warrant of the same All which testimonies taken from the patration of infinite Miracles recorded by both Ancient and Moderne Authours our Aduersaries do euade by stiling them Antichristian (o) Ofiand cens 10.11 1â— Cent. 4. col 1445. Cent. 5. col 1486. wonders and lying signes and as wrought by the assistance of the Diuell how conspiring is this answere wâ—â— the Answere of the Iewes against the Miâ—cles of Christ Hie (p) Mat. 11. non eijcit Daemonia 〈◊〉 in Beelzebub Principe Daemoniorum Animaduersion VI. AS here aboue we haue shewed how oâ— Aduersaries conspire with the Ieweâ— both in obiecting and answering so I hoâ— it will not be impertinent to discouer in lyne or two how that the Protestants 〈◊〉 agree with the Ancient and condemnâ— Heretiks in obiecting the arguments agaiâ— vs obiected long since by the said Heretiks in impugning our said Catholiâ— points as also how our Aduersaries do coâ—sociate with the very Gentills or Heathenâ— â—gainst the Catholiks yea against our belieâ—â— in Christ. For touching the first we 〈◊〉 find that place to be obiected by Fauâ—â—â— the old Heretike against Abstinence aâ—â— single life and so recorded by Austin In (q) Austin l. 30. c. 4. contra Faust Manich. the later dayes (r) 1. Ti. c. 4. there shall come some forbâ—ding to Marry and to abstaine from certaiâ— Meates A passage of Scripture wherein tâ— Protestants chiefly insist against single lâ—â— and Abstiâ—ence Againe to omit many â—ther such like instances Iustinus (s) Iust Dial. cum Triphon Euseb l. hist 5. c. 1. Marâ—â— recordeth that the Heretikes of his day did as in respect of the Sacrament charâ—â— the true Christians with the grosse and câ—â—nall eating of human flesh with which veâ—â— point the Protestants do at this present 〈◊〉 â—â—aid vs Catholikes Now concerning the Heathens it is cleare that the Heathens and â—ur Aduersaries do mutually agree in denying many points maintained and affirmed by the Catholike Roman Church For both the Heathens and the Protestants do promiscuously deny Freewill Purgatory Jnuocation of Saints vniuersality of Grace Euangelicall Counsells Merit of workes Sacrifice of the Masse and many other Catholike and â—ffirmatiue articles taught by the present Church of Rome But to come to the Seâ—ond point to wit the deniall of the necessity of Christian Religion do we not find Swinglius himself thus to geÌ„tilize with the Heathens Ethnicus (t) Zuin. in Epist. Zuingliâ— Oecolamp l. 1. pag. 30. si piam mentem domi foueat Christianus est etiamsi Christum ignoret and hereupon Zwinglius particularly auerreth that (u) Zuin glâ—tom 1. in exposit fideâ— Christ fol. 150. Hercules Theseus Socrates Aristides all Heathens are now in Heauen which said Blasphemy is in like sort taught by (x) Gualter in Apol pro Zuing. Gualter (y) â—ullinger as is reâ—orded by Simlerus a Protestant in vita Bullingeri Bullinger and other Protestants Thus farre for this present of the strict association and commerce of the Protestants with the Iewes the ancient stigmatized Heretikes and the Heathens or Pagans touching matter of Religion Animaduersion VII THe doctrine of the Reall Presence to the mouth of Fayth is maintained against â—he Puritans by Doctor Whitaker (z) D. Whiâ—ak contra Duraum pag. 168. Bucer in Script Angl. p. 548. c. and diâ—ers other learned Protestants all which men do hould our Catholike Doctrine far more probable then the doctrine of the others who only acknowledge a typicall presence of Christ in the Sacrament Againe many moderate and learned Protestants (a) In his booke of Eccles policy pag. 188. D. Couâ—â— in his defence of â—â—â—er p. 77. do teach the Church of Rome to be the true Church of God and that men dying in
(n) So doth D. Whit. l. de Eccles Bellar. Contro 2. q. 4. pag. â—23 Iewell in his Apolog of the Church of England act 4. cap. 4. absolutely deny that infallible Authority of the Church of God in interpreting the holy Scripture and disclayming from it appeale to their owne Priuat Spirit for the true interpretation of the same Finally in the last place if the Catholiks confirme their Religion with the Authority of Miracles the Protestants in answere thereto absolutely reiect the force of Miracles tearming them (o) So the Conturists â—all them Cent. 4. col 1445. Osiâ—â—â—â—â— Cent. 10. 11. 12. but Antichristian wonders and lying signes as aboue is shewed Thus we see how our Aduersaryes disclayming from all heads of proofes do finally reduce all to their owne priuate Iudgment or Spirit And is not this I demand the foresaid vicious Circulation from the first to the last answere which aboue is disalowed in the â—rotestants impugning or disputing Animaduersion XXIII THat the words of Christ at his last Supper are to be taken literally and not Figuratiâ—ly is proued by these Reasons following in that Christ saying this is my Body (p) Math. â—6 Marc. 14. c. This is my bloud did adioyne therto Quod pro nobis datur qui pro nobis effundetur which later words are conformable to the literall acceptance of the former words The same verity is proued from the seuerall circumstaÌ„ces of the foresaid place of the Scripture The first circumstance may be taken from the matter or Obiect Here the matter or subiect of the former words containes the Institution of a Sacrament the foundation of a supreme point of Christian Religion A will or Compact contracted with the Church But it is most improbable to affirme that a Sacrament a supreme Article of beliefe or a Compact or last Will made by Christ with the Church should be deliuered in figuratiue words The Second Circumstance we may take froÌ„ the person of Christ speaking with whose diuine wisedome and Charity it is not agreabâ—e to haue giuen and ministred the Sacrament by speaking the former words of the Institution in shew in a literall sense but in meaning a figuratiue only an ineuitable occasion of false iudgement in the Hearers and of perpetuall Idâ—latry in the mynds and wils of the sucâ—â—ding Christians during the continuance 〈◊〉 the world Another Citcumstance may be takeâ— from the persons of the Euangelists and thâ— Apostles repeating and relating this speacâ— of Christ Hoc est corpus meum c. Aâ— which men whereas they did write in seuâ—rall times when some of them were presenâ— at the Institution others receaued relatioâ— thereof from them that were present thereat whereas also they had seene the practise of the Apostles about this Sacrament wheâ—â— as lastly they had the spirit of true vndeâ—standing notwithstanding all this they aâ—â— did vnanimously conspire in deliuering 〈◊〉 playne and literall construction of our Sauiours words Which reason is more preuayling by obseruing the contrary course which they tooke in explicating other obscure sentences of our Sauiour for thosâ— words Soluite templum hoc in tribus diâ—bus reaedificabo illud the Euangelist did interpret of Christs Body saying ille (q) Iohn cap. 1. aâ—tem dicebat de templo corporis sui to preuent that the Iewes should not thinke that ouâ— Sauiour spake of the Temple of Salomoâ— In like manner the said Euangelist is founâ— to haue expounded other of our Sauiours doubtfull sayings though in themselues of much lesse importance as Christs (r) Cap. 11. exaltation from the earth The sleeping of Lazarus â—â—e (s) Cap. 11. girding of Peter and stretching forth his â—â—ndes c. And yet neuer expounded the â—oâ—ds of the Institution otherwise then in â—heir plaine direct literall sense Another from the Persons of the Apostles â—earing Christ instituting the Sacrament Now â—f there were any figuratiue speech in â—he words of Christ especially concerning â—o great a matter the Apostles then preâ—ent would neuer haue omitted to haue asâ—ed Christ what had beene the meaning of â—hose strange words being vttered a little â—efore his death As they did touching oâ—her darke speaches spoken by Christ and â—hus we read them to haue said Edissere (t) Math. 13. 15.5 â—obis parabolam Zizaniorum And againe Edisâ—ere nobis hanc Parabolam Againe from â—he persons of the Capharnaits who did take our Sauiours words in that sense as he did properly speake of his flesh to be truly and really eaten and at such their construction they rested much scandalized Neuerthelesse Christ did not therefore explane his former speach nor excuse it by any Tropes or figuratiue phrase of words but more vehemently affirmed his sentence in the same words and with earnest asseueration repeated the same Another Circumstance may be taken from the place of his last supper which Christ did choose to be very secret admitting thereto only his Apostles to whom it was giuen to know and to haue the Intelligence of the diuine Mysteries Therefoâ— in this most secret and reserued schoole 〈◊〉 the Apostles wherein a supreme mystery 〈◊〉 fayth was deliuered he did speake sincere simply plainly and not by figures In this last place we may call to mind 〈◊〉 the circumstances of this busines as tâ— Pronouncing of the sacred words of the Jâ—stiâ—â—tion the washing of the Apostles seet Christs â—â—sire of performing this Mystery his casting vp 〈◊〉 his eyes towards Heauen his application of tâ— words to the matter his separated and disioynâ— blessing of both the Elements his fraction 〈◊〉 giuing and inuiting to a new supper his owâ— eating and after commanding the eating of it tâ— others and lastly his most holy speach deliâ—erâ— therof in Iohn 14.15 c. Here now I conclude that all these reasons with the formeâ— obseruations are most sufficient to persuade any man of iudgment that our Sauiour did not speake Figuratiuely in so serious a matter Animaduersion XXIV THe various interpretation of the words of the Jnstitution made by Protestants doth sufficiently discouer their Errour in the doctrine thereof Carolostadius (u) Carolostad in lib. â—diâ—o Basil 1524. teacheth that by the Pronoune Hoc the Aduerb Hic is to be vnderstood so as the meaning of the words he saith is Hic that is in this place staet corpus meum Bucer (x) In retract affirmeth that by the Pronoune Hoc is vnderstood the whole action of the Supper so 〈◊〉 the sense should be Hoc c. This action â—â—th represent the body of Christ. Swinglius (y) Swingl l de vera falsa relig cap. de Eucharist â—aintayneth that the figure is not in Hoc â—ut in the verbe est which here ought to be â—â—ken figuratiuely for significat Boquinus (z) Boquinus in exam lib Heshufij teacheth that the bread is truly called â—he body of Christ propter communicationem â—â—omatum as by the same we truly say of
â—hrist This man is God Oecolampadius (a) L. de genuina explicat Vâ—rb â—cknowledgeth not any Trope either in the â—ronoune Hoc or in the Verbe Est but in â—orpus thus interpreting the words by the â—gure Metonymia Hoc est corpus meum id est â—ic panis est figura corporis mei Finally to â—mit others Caluin (b) Câ—lâ— l 4. Inst c 17. §. â—â— admitteth with â—ecolampadius the figure to be in the word â—orpus but withall he addeth that the bread of the Eucharist is not a naked signe of the body of Christ but it is a signe or fiâ—ure which doth truly exhibit the thing it selfe to wit the body of Christ Thus we see what diuers interpretations and all false our Aduersaries do giue of the words of the Jnstitution And thus as they all reiect our Catholike interpretation of them so â—ot any one of the former ProtestaÌ„ts doth 〈◊〉 holy imbrace the exposition of another Animaduersion XXV DO not admit this Inference as good Some Fathers do interpret this or that text of Scripture figuratiuely Therefore the said Fathers do teach that such Texts are not to be expounded literally This is a meere Sophisâ— for seeing diuers texts of Scripture beside the literall are capable of allegoricall sense as all learned men both Catholicks anâ— Protestants do teach therefore the figuratiue sense doth not exclude but rather often presuppose and admit of the literall According hereto S. Austin passing ouer a presumed and granted the literall sense 〈◊〉 those words Qui (c) Iohn â— bibit meum sanguineâ— c. allegorically expoundeth them in thâ— sort Bibere sanguinem Christi est credere 〈◊〉 Christum to drinke the bloud of Christ is to belieue in Christ. In like sort also do not approue this kind of disputing for it is a meere Schiomachia or fighting with a shadow The Scriptures speake honourably oâ— Mariage which all we Catholiks do willingly acknowledg therefore vowed virginity is not to be allowed our Aduersaries here laboring to disualew the worth of Virginity by the acknowledged dignity of Mariage its opposit For the worth of both these may stand together the one not crossing the other and in things that are good we must acknowledg there are degrees of goodnes and accordingly we here say Mariage is good but yet vowed virginity is better In like sort our Aduersaries vse another fraudulent kind of reasoning called Logomachia where leauing the sense childishly contend with the naked word for exaÌ„ple find say they the word Purgatory or Masse 〈◊〉 the Scripture if you can But what â—lloweth from hence for are the words â—rinity Person Consubstantiality c. in the â—cripture they are not must we therefore â—â—iect the doctrine of them To proceed â—â—other captious arguing of our aduersaâ—es is taking hold of the very letter conâ—â—ary to the approued mind of the Church â—r example the word Presbyter in Greeke 〈◊〉 nothing but a Seniour therefore in the â—hurch of the new Testament there are no â—riests so truly called But S. Thomas in 1. â—art quaest 13. shall salue this Argument â—ying we are to obserue in words non tam a â—o quam ad quid not so much from whence â—hey are deriued as to what by a warrantaâ—e custome they are applied Animaduersion XXVI THe peruersity of our Aduersaries is such who lighting vpon some few straying â—assages in the Fathers writings where the â—ucharist is called bread they mainely câ—y â—ut that in the Fathers Iudgment it is noâ—hing but materiall bread And yet when in â—uery leafe or page of the Fathers works â—pon this matter they find it termed The body and bloud of Christ all such places or els we wrong them must be interpreted figuratiuely Thus they insisting much in those â—phrazes which are but rare in the Fathers and passing ouer with a censuring neglect such forme of speeches as most frequently occurre in their Bookes Now the Eucharist may be called bread by the Fathers afteâ— consecration without any preiudice to our Catholike doctrine for seuerall reasons the Fathers borrowing this kind oâ— phraze from the Scripture Panis (e) 1. Cor. 10. queâ— frangimus c. First because it is an accustomed Dialect of the Scripture to call a thing by that name which afore it was Thus it Genes 3. Eua is called the bone of Adam because she was made thereof and the Serpents of Moyses in Exod. 7. are termed wandes because the wandes were turned into serpents so for this very reason the Eucharist is somtimes termed bread by the Fathers Another reason why the Eucharist may be called bread by the Scriptures and consequently by the Fathers is in regard of the similitude which it hath with bread I meane in nourishing the soule as bread doth nourish the body A third reason in that the Scripture and in like manner the Fathers do often call things as they do externally appeare to the Eye so the Scripture calls Angels who appeared in humane shape Men and the Brazen serpent a serpent c. Therefore the Eucharist may be termed bread and Wyne either by the Scripture or the Fathers in that to the eye it seemeth only Bread and Wyne Animaduersion XXVII IF it be not lawfull to pray to Saincts the reason hereof must be either because they will not heare vs praying to them But this cannot be seeing they are now endued with more Charity then when they here conuersed vpon earth and being secure of their owne felicity are more sollicitous of our spirituall good and health Or els because the Saints cannot helpe vs. But neither this For if they could help vs with their prayers while they were pilgrimes in this world much more are they now able being arriued to their owne Country Or because they do not know what we pray But not this because from what ground the Angells do know the conuersion of sinners for which conuersion they so much reioyce as is said in Luke 15. from the same ground the Saints do know our prayers Or lastly which is the most ordinary reason giuen by our Aduersaries because an Jniury is committed against God if any other be prayed inuoked vnto then he But not this for then it were vnlawfull to inuocate and pray to the liuing and consequently S. Paul sinned and offended God when he writ thus to the f Romans Brethren I beseech you that you would helpe me in your prayers for me to God Which kind of prayer the Apostle vseth in his Epistle to the Ephesians c. 6. in the first to the Thessalonians c. 5. in his Epistle to the Colossians c. 4. finally in his Epistle to the Hebrews c. 13. Animaduersion XXVIII TOuching Communion vnder one kind oâ— vnder both the true state of this Question is not whether Christ did institute thâ— Eucharist vnder both kinds or whetheâ— himselfe and the Apostles at the first Instiâ—ution of it receaued â—t vnder both kindâ— or whether the Apoâ—â—les and the Father afterwards at sundry tymes
endued with splendour of Grace and vertue c. After this manner also Vertues are paynted as Iustice fortitude c And it is not prohibited to paynt or picture God after this third maÌ„ner notwithstaÌ„ding our Aduersaryes great dislyke thereof For if (m) Dan. c. 7. Daniel doth describe God sitting in a throne and describeth there also his head his gray hayres his white garments therby to expresse his Maiesty power and his Antiquity from all ages his purity and brightnes c. why may not then God be so pictured to the Eye as the Holy Scripture by reciting of it doth expresse him in words to the Eare Animaduersion XXXII IT is a peculiar sleight of Caluin and other our more learned Aduersaryes that wheras they deny a Conclusion or Proposition of fayth affirmatiuely mantayned by the Catholiks after we haue brought authority either out of Scripture or from forâ— of Reason prouing the same denyed pointâ— then in answere thereto they grant the conclusion of that point but then they render a cause or reason why in such a Case our Conclusion may be admitted so they subtilly obtruding a reason of the Conclusion granted in such or such a case for a sufficieâ—â— answeare in deniall of the Conclusion Bâ—â— this is most exorbitant and in no sort satisfying the Catholiks arguments For the more cleare explicating of my selfe herein 〈◊〉 will instance this their imposture in an example or two We affirme that the Angels and consequently God though all incorporeall may be pictured The Protestants absolutely deny this Proposition We in proofe that the Angels may be pictured produce our authorityes out of the booke of Exodus c. 25 out of the third of Kings c. 6. in which places we reade that Angels were pictured (o) L. 5. Instit. cap. 11. c. Caluin n answereth hereto saying that that was done in fauour of the Pedagogy and more facill instruction of Men in the Old Law which tyme is now past Now here I say this answere is merely impertinent for the Question is not in this place why or to what end things incorporeall might be pictured let the cause be what it will but only whether it be lawfull to picture things incorporeall or not â—hich conclusion this answere of Caluin â—mitteth for true In like manner to proue Freewill we vrge â—â—ose words Si (o) Math 19. vis ad vitam ingredi serua â—â—ndata if thou wilt enter into life keep the â—â—mmandments where we vrge that promise â—f Heauen is made vnder condition that God will not command any thing vnder an impossible condition and that therefore â—e haue Freewill to keep Gods Commandements Caluin answereth hereto that it is not absurd to maintayne that God sometimes for some reasons knowne to himself â—â—omiseth to men things vnder impossible â—onditions to wit to the wicked he maketh such promises thereby to manifest how vnworthy they are of his diuine goodnes But â—ere we reply We demand not why or to what end God doth make his promises either to the wicked or to the pious but we only maintaine that a thing cannot rightly be promised vnder condition but only to him who hath the vse of Freewill This imposture is most familiar with Caluin and his followers and therefore I could wish the serious reader to be obseruant therof Animaduersion XXXIII IN my iudgment the Question of Images in a point to be discussed chiefly by Philosophy as taking its warrant and ground from thence so far forth as there be no abuse of the Images My reason is this what thing soeuer man vnderstandeth the same he vnderstandeth by the help of a Species or Imaâ—â— thereof first wrought in the Phantasy according to that Axiome in Philosophy Quicquid intelligitur intelligitur per moâ—â—â— Phantasmatis And thus we cannot apprehend or worship God but by the help mediation of an Image of God which wâ— frame in our Imagination and phantasy Againe if a picture be capable of disgrace iniury in regard of the person therein represented then by the same reason a picture may be capable of honour and reuerence I meane that kind of honour reuerence which is due to inanimate things Noâ— that a picture is capable of disgrace or contumely is euident For example if a subiect disloyally affected to his Prince should deface breake or otherwise indecently handle the picture of his Prince by stabbing it with his dagger or otherwise or if some Atheâ—â— denying the Scripture should be trample vnder his feete through scorne and malice the Bible it selfe would not these Actions be seuerely punished and might not the picture of the Prince and the Bible be said to haue suffered disgrace and indignity thereby with reference to the wrong and indignity committed against the Prince the sacred Scriptures Then by the same reason may the Picture of Christ and the Saincts be affected with due religious respect aboue other things in regard of Christ and his Saincts represented in them of â—hom they are pictures Animaduersion XXXIV TO vindicate our selfes from the calumny of our Aduersaries touching the worâ—hip which we exhibit to Saints Images â—hey are for their instruction to take noâ—â—ze that Adoration containeth three difâ—â—rent (p) S. Thom. in 3. sent dist 9. Acts the first is of the vnderstanâ—ing by the which we apprehend the excelâ—â—ncy of any thing The Act of the Will by the which we are inwardly moued to manifest and protest our worship by some exteriour or interiour Act The third is an Exteriour Act by the which we moue our hat or bow our leg or shew some other externall signe in manifestation of our inward worship giuen Of which three Acts the second which is of the will is most essentiall seeing the first may be without adoration and the third with irrision and scorne as the Jewes worshipped our Sauiour vpon the Crosse Here further we are to note that that worship which is giuen to God is a chiefe and supreme prostration and inclination of the will with the apprehension of God as the beginning and last end of all things and therefore as our chiefe good and it is called by Deuines Latria and cannot be communicated without Idolatry to any creature Worship giuen to Creatures is distinguished according to the different degrees of excelleÌ„cies in the Creatures and so according to the different degrees of the worth of Creatures the worship exhibited is seuerally called as Duâ—â—â— hyperdulia cultus religiosus cultus ciuilis Lastly it is further to be obserued that by the exteriour Act it is not easy to distinguisâ— the seuerall kinds of worship for almoâ—â— all exteriour Acts of worship Sacrifice only excepted are common to euery kind oâ— worship For according hereto we read thâ—â— Abraham with the same Act of bowing hâ—â— body to the ground did adore God Genes 17. did worship Angels Genes 18. and diâ— worship Men Genes 23. In like sort all meâ— do vse to kneele to
vincula reis profer lumeÌ„ caecis c which acts say they are peculiar to Christ And againe in the same Hymne they obiect those words Monstra te esse Matrem as implying a mother and awfull authority ouer Christ. In explication of the first we demaÌ„d that our Lady would loose our Sinnes and bring light to the blynd only by her impâ—tration and praying to her blessed Sonne not otherwyse and therfore in most of our set pâ—ayers to her we adioyne these words following Per Dominum nostrum Iesum Christum Touching the second sentence We do not wish her to impose any command or Motherly authority ouer her Some But we only vnderstand hereby shew thy selfe a Mother by appeasing thy sonne in our behalfe this by the remembrance of all thy Motherly tender care and loue towards him in his Infancy through the whole course of his life that by thee he may receaue our prayers and therefore it immediatly followeth in the same Hymne sumat per te preces But now if these words be such an eye-sore to the ProtestaÌ„ts what will they say to those words of S. Paul Omnibus (p) 1. Cor. 9. omnia factus sum vt omnes facerem saluos J am become to all men all things that I may saue all Where the Apostle in words assumeth to himselfe the Saluation of others In like manner in that Antiphone in our Ladies office beginning Salue Regina c. Our Apuersaries insist in those words Et Iesum benedictum fructum ventris tui nobis post hoc exilium ostende And shew to vs after this our exile Jesus c. To which I answere That it is lesse to say To shew the Sauiour vnto men then to say To saue men And yet we read the Apostle thus to say Et teipsum (q) 1. Tim. 4. saluam facies eos quite auâ—iunt Thou shalt â—â—ue thy selfe and them that do heare thee Moreouer it is obiected out of that Antiphone that the B. Virgin is stiled Spes nostra Our Hope To this I say that these words are vsed because next after our Lord Iesus Christ being God and Man we chiefly place our confidence in the mediation of the Blâ—sâ—â—d Virgin Since our Hope is not to be placed only in the Authours of our Good but also in the Intercessours and ministers thereof And according hereto when our Loâ—d said to the Iewes It (r) Iohn 5. is Moyses who accusâ—s you in quo speratis in whom you hopâ— Our Sauiour did not reprehend the Iewes in that they hoped in Moyses but because they did not belieue Moyses Finally our Aduersaries cannot brooke our Lady to be called Mater misericordiae because say they God is the Father of Mercy therefore the B. Virgin cannot nor ought to be called so But this is no good consequence for we read that Christ is called Lux (s) Iohn 9. mundi and yet Christ sayth of his Apostles Vos (t) Math. 5. estis lux mundi Thus such titles may be giuen to God and men in a different relation without any dishonour to God Animaduersion XLVII THe puritans do most maliciously peruert seuerall texts of Scripture in dishonour of our B. Lady For example First they obiect as seeming at least to rest doubtfull of the continuance of our B. Ladyes Virginity that Text Et non (u) Math 1. cognoscebat eam donec peperit filium primogenitum which words say they seeme to afford a double Argument The first is taken from the word Donec inferring from thence that after the byrth of her Sonne she should carnally know Joseph The second from the words following Filium primogenitum seeing Primogenitus properly signifieth that sonne which is first borne in reference to those Sonnes or children which are after borne I answere first touching the word Donec which word as also the word vsque doth not euer signify an affirmation after the time expressed if a Negation did goe before neither alwayes do they signify a Negation when an affirmation did precede For example Sede a (x) Psal 109. dextris mâ—is donec ponam inimicos tuos scabellum pectum tuorum Sit at my right hand vntill J make thy Enemyes thy footestoole Now these words do not import that after he shall not fit at the right hand of his Father The like sentences to these are these following Donec (y) Math 5. transeat Caelum Terra iota vnum aut vnus apex non praeteribit á lege And againe Ego (z) Math. 28. vobiscum sum vsque ad consummationem mundi In all which locutions sentences of Scripture that which is doubtfull is expressed but that which is certaine is not expressed or spoken of Now touching the word Primogenitus Epiphanius (a) Haeres 78. denieth that Christ was called Primogenitus Mariae the first borne of Mary for the Euangelist sayth not Primogenitum suum but he sayth Fitium suum primogenitum signifying therby that he was the Sonne of the B Virgin but withall the first begotten Sonne of God Seing accordingly we thus read Ipse (b) Coloss 1. namque est primogenitus omnis Creaturae He to wit Christ was the first borne of all Creatures S. Ierome sayth that Christ was called (c) Adueâ—s Heluid Primogenitus Mariae not because she brought forth any other Sonne after him but because before him she brought forth no other Sonne For it is the phrase of Scripture that those who are Vnigeniti are called Primogeniti So S Paul calleth Christ Primogenitus (d) Heb. 6. Dei for the only-begotten sonne of God Lastly they vrge that sentence Jnter (e) Math. 11. natos mulicrum non surrexit maior Iohanne Baptista There hath not risen among the borne of women a greater then John the Baptist intimating hereby that the Blessed Virgin is inferiour in dignity to S. Iohn Baptist. This is easely answered First if the words as they lye be literally taken as our Aduersaries pretend then should John Baptist be greater then Christ Secondly because S. Iohn Baptist in those words spoken by Christ is compared only with the Holy men of the old Testament but Christ and his Mother as also the Apostles belong to the new Testament Animaduersion XLVIII DIuers Protestants as aboue is shewed do hould such bookes to be Scripture which other Protestants reiect as Apocryphall therefore it followeth that the Scripture it selfe cannot shew at least to vs which is the point controuerted which is Scripture which doubt is only to be referred to the Authority of the Church And therefore M. Hooker truly sayth Of things (f) Eccles Pol. lâ—â— 1 Sect. 14. p. 8â— necessâ—ry the very chiefest is to know what Bookes we are to esteeme Holy which point is confessed impossible for the Scripture it selfe to teach And againe It is (g) Ibidem l. 2. Sect. 4. p. 102 â—4â— and D. Couell in defence of M. Hooker art 4. pag. 31.
not the word of God which doth or possibly can assure vs we do well to thinke it is his word Nâ—w if the Scriptures be confessedly vnable to afford vs certaine proofe of themselues then in all true consequence of Reason much lesse are they able to direct exempt vs in case of doubt and question infallibly from Errour the rather as D. Reynolds truly confesseth in (h) Confer c. 2. Diuis 2. pag. 68. that it is not the shew but the sense of the Scripture that must decide Controuersies Now from this I infer that if according to the learned (i) The Authour of the Treatise of the Scripture and the Church cap. 16. fol. 75. Whita con Staplet l. 2. c. 4. p. 203. Kempn in Exam. part 1. pag. 69. and diuers others Protestants here cited it is to be determined to vs which is Scripture by the iudgment of the Church which confessedly hath the assistance of the Holy Ghost in infallibly discerning to vs which Books of Scripture are sacred and which not then necessarily followeth the Churches no lesse needfull assistance of the same Spirit in her like discerning vnto vs the sense of the said Scripture for what auayleth it vs to be made certaine of the Bookes and least vncertaine of the Sense Or what reason can our Aduersaries alledg whereby to acknowledge the Churches priuiledg in the one and deny it where it is no lesse needfull in the other This inference being granted vtterly ouerthroweth the Priuate spirit in its interpretation of Scripture Animaduersion XLIX IT is a demonstration in confutation of the Priuate spirit interpreting the Scrippture to obserue the different or rather contrary constructions which Luther and Caluin and others giue of that short sentence Hoc est Corpus meum c. Hic est sanguit meus And yet they all do vant of their enioying the said Spirit And therfore it is the lesse wonder that S. Austin (k) Austin cont Maximum Arian l. 1. affirmeth that it hath euer beene the custome of all Heretikes to flie to Scripture alone as it is interpreted by this Priuat Spirit The absurdity of which opinion more euidently appeares since it is certaine that among diuers meere contrary or coÌ„tradictory pointâ— of fayth the Scripture condemneth the onâ— And yet both the maintainers of the said contrary doctrines do flie to the Scripture as Iudge Now what madnes is it for 〈◊〉 man willingly to couet to appeale to that Iudg by whom it is certaine his cause shal be condemned Neither can either of the Litigants put any confidence in the meanes of truly interpreting the Scripture to wit Prayer Conference of places of Scripture knowledg in the Tongues c. since all these meaneâ— are most vncertaine euen by the Confession of D. Whitaker thus writing (l) Whitak l. 2. de Eccles cont Bellar. contr 1. quaest 4 Medâ—â— interpretandi â—oca scripturae sunt incerta c. The meanes of interpreting the obscure places oâ— Scripture are vncertaine doubtfuâ—l and ambiguous Therfore it cannot be otherwise but the interpretation it selfe must be vncertaine Si incerta tum potest essâ— falsa if the interpretation be vncertaine then may it be false Thus far the said Doctour Animaduersion L. TOuching the depressing of General Councells Peter Martyr thus writeth As long (m) L. de votis pag. 476. as we insist in Generall Councells so long we shall continue in the Papists Errours with whom D. Whitaker conspires in these words Generall (n) Lib. de Concil cont Bellar. q. 6. Councells may erre Now let vs see the great and many disparities wherby a Generall Councell is infinitly aduantaged in respect of not erring aboue the Priuate Spirit of any one man First then a Councell I heere only speake of Generall Councells is in S. Austins (o) So doth S. Austin terme a Generall Councell Ep. 161. iudgment The supreme Tribunall in the Church of God The Priuate Spirit hath but his owne braynes for the Seate of his Iudicature A CouÌ„cell receaues its promise from (p) Where two or three are gathered together in my name c. Math. 18. Christ that his assisting presence shall not be wanting thereto The priuate Spirit euen by Gods (q) No prophesy is of any priuate interpretation 2. Per. c. 1. owne sentence wanteth the certainty of expounding the Word truly A Councell is much reuerenced by the ancient (r) Ierom. l. cont Lucifer Ambr. Ep. 32. Athan Epist ad Epicterum Fathers and acknowledged by diuers of our learned (s) D. Couel in his modest Exam. p. 110. c. Aduersaries to be the only certaine meanes of determining Controuersies The Priuate Spirit it that of which we are (t) Dearely beloued belieue not euery Spirit c. commanded to doubt and of whose seducing (u) These things I haue written to you concerning those who deâ—eaue you Iohn 1. c. 2. God himselfe in Scripture premonisheth vs And which is much condemned euen by the more moderate (x) D. Couell in his defence of Hooker p. 86. D. Sarauia contra Respons Bezae pag 306. and others Protestant A Councell consisteth of many hundred venerable Doctours Pastours gathered from the most remote nations of Christendome and therfore the lesse subiect vpon such their meeting iointly and with mutuall consent 〈◊〉 stampe any Nouelismes in Doctrine presenting that only to be belieued in theâ—â— Canons which is decreed by the mutuaâ— consent of all or the greatest number of them The priuat Spirit is but its owne only weening oftentimes dissenting from others of his Brethren in diuers points of fayth To conclude A Councell as being composed of seuerall hundreds of Bishops Doctours hath many members of it most eminent for vertue readines of the Scriptures skill in the Tongues they all besieging the eares of God with their daily prayers accompanied with many corporall austerities and all to the end that God would be pleased so to guyde their tongues and pens as that they may decree only such doctrines as are agreable to Gods holy Word The Priuate spirit as being but one man doth want for the most part not only Vertue but also those other gifts of the Vnderstanding aboue specified as Learning knowledg in the Scriptures c. And as for Prayer and other meanes of pleasing God it reiecteth all this as superstitious and Papisticall relying in lieu therof vpon his owne Enthusiasmes illuminations from the Lord. And thus much touching the balancing of a Generall Councell with the Protestanticall Priuate Spirit Animaduersion LI. IF you attempt to charge a Protestant-writer with Corruptions or lyes in their wrytings of which Impostures their books are most luxuriant rather insist in a few those manifest and vnanswerable then in a great number seing if your Aduersary can make shew to salue but three or foure of a greater number the which he may the more easely do by how much the number of his falsifications is greater
the supposed answering of those few chosen and picked out by him must serue through the partiality of iudgement in his followers to disgrace all the rest of the Corruptions or falsifications vrged by you Animaduersion LII THe Protestants in falsly alledging the authorityes of Authours do abuse their Readers chiefly foure seuerall wayes First which is the most vsuall by concealing some part of the alledged authority SecoÌ„dly by adding some words of his owne to make the produced Authour or Father to speake like a Protestant Thirdly by transposing the words of an authority thereby to make the sense different from the Authors true meaning Fourthly by a wilfull mistaking or confusion of tymes I will exemplify these foure sorts in the wryting of D. White a great Impostour in his Scripts in his booke called The way to the true Churcâ— Well then the said Protestant in p. 119. oâ— his said Booke produceth a place out of the Rhemists to proue that the Church of Româ— can make that Scripture which is not anâ— vnmake that to be Scripture which is Scripture To proue this he produceth the Rhâ—mists (y) Gaelat 1. thus saying The Scriptures are 〈◊〉 knowne to be true neither are Christians bonâ—â— to receiue them without the attestation of thâ— Church Now heere marke the true wordâ— of the Rhemists and therein obserue his impurity of dealing committed by concealing part of the Sentence iust crossing his intended drift of vrging that authority Their true words are these The Scriptures whicâ— are indeed of the Holy Ghosts inditing being pâ—â— into the Churches triall are found proued anâ— testifyed vnto the World to be such and not maâ—â— true altered or amended by the same Since the Holy Scriptures in themselues were alwayes true before but not so knowne to be to all Christians All these are the words of the Rhemists where you see the wilfull concealement of this Parcell The Scriptures are nâ—â— made true altered or amended by the Church as also that other the Holy Scripturs in themselues were alwaies true meaning without the attestation of the Church Now all that can truly be gathered out of this authority is that the Scriptures though most sacred and true in themselues cannot be so made knowne to vs in which words lyeth the touch of the point without the Churches attestation But how farre off is this from M. Whytes vrging of this place Touching his imposture committed in â—dding of words this one place shall serue Thus then the said D. White produceth Bellarmine in contempt of the Churches authority saying Other meanes may deceiue me but nothing is more knowne nothing more certaine then the Scriptures That it were the greatest madnes in the world not te belieue theÌ„ c. Now in this sentence these words viz. Other meanes may deceiue me are not in Bellarmine but most subtily added to the begining of Bellarmines words and caused to be printed in the same kynd of Character or letter wherein the other words of Bellarmine are printed thereby to make the Reader belieue that they are words of Bellarmine wheras they are added as I about insinuated for the more depressing of the Churches Authority Now the whole sentence of Bellarmine was directed against the Swinkseldians who absolutely denyed Scripture and against whom Bellarmine in that place disputeth Touching the fraud consisting in a cuÌ„ning transposition of words without adding any words to the authority alledged or concealing any parcell therof this example of the foresaid M. Whyte may serue In pag. 344. of his way to the true Church he produceth for the ouerthrow of the religious vse of Images the Councell of Eliberis thus saying No (z) Can. 36. Picture is to be made in the Church lest that be adored which is painted on the walls But the true words of the Canon are these Placâ—â—â— picturas in Ecclesia non habere ne quod coliâ—â— adoretur in parietibus depingatur Jt pleaseth the Councell that pictures should not be in the Church lest that which is worshipped anâ— adored be painted on the Walls The nyce difference in words resteth thus Lest that which is worshipped be painted and as Mâ— Whyte translateth Lest that which is painted be worshipped Where the words of the Councell acknowledging the worship of Images maketh the worship due to them to be the cause why they are not painted on the walls to wit because they were subiect to be defaced either by inuasion of Enemyes or rayne c. Now M. Whites translation only by a subtill transposition of the words imports that Pictures are not to be worshipped at all Lastly concerning the Calumny resting in a wilfull confusion of tymes The said Protestant in pag. 61. for proofe of Priests lawfull mariage produceth a Testimony from Sinesius Bishop of Ptolemais thus writing of himselfe to a friend The sacred hand of Theophilus hath giuen me a wyfe and hereupon Iustify to all men that J will neither forsake her nor priuily as an adulterer keep her Company but I will pray to God to send me by her many and good children This Epistle is at large set downe in (a) Eccl. hist l. 14. c. 55. Nicephorus Now heere tâ—e fraud lyeth that at the tyme when this Epistle was written Sinesius was but a Lay-man but eminent for learning Now after he made himselfe priest and was created Bishop of Ptolemais he euer liued separated from the company of his wyfe as fully appeareth out of Nicephorus in the place aboue alledged Here then the Ministers deceit lyeth in applying that to him as if he had beene then Bishop which was spoken by him being a Layman and so M. White most fraudulently confoundeth those two different tymes together as if all had hapned at one and the same tyme. Animaduersion LIII YF your Aduersary will vant that he will proue all by Scripture only as most of them giue it out they will then force him to draw both his Premisses I meane both his Propositions if so they should be reduced to a forme of Argument from the Scripture alone of which Method within two Arguments at least he is certaine to fayle For if he take either of his Propositions from humane Authority or from naturall Reason you may tell him he leaueth his vndertaken of prouing by Scripture alone and consequently you may deny his force of Argument though Logicall in forme Here I further aduertize that if your Aduersary vndertake the part of an Opponent tye him precisely euer to Oppose which Scene perhaps he being brought to a Non-plus would flyely transferre vpon you In like sort if he taketh vpon him to answere suffer him not to oppose thought he labour so to do to free himselfe from answering Thus be sure that ech of you keepe your chosen Station Animaduersion LIV. IF the Protestant should seeke to expouÌ„d by way of conference of places those words of our Sauiour This is my body this is my Bloud figuratiuely by those other words of his J
spake (e) Luth. tom 7. Wittenberg to him in a base great voice so as he made Luther to sweate his hart to tremble againe the same apppeareth in that Luther saith as is set downe aboue that he was first awake and that then after the Disputation begunne But howsoeuer admit it were but a spirituall fight or Disputation yet in either case the persuasions arguments wherunto Luther heere yealdeth came confessedly from the Diuell what difference then is there whether the Diuell made them to Luther by sensible coÌ„ference or by inward suggestion Animaduersion LIX AS Luther was instructed by the Diuel to impugne the Masse so were Carolostadius and Swinglius two great introducers of Protestancy in those former tymes in like manner indoctrinated by the Diuel against the Masse Touching Carolostadius whom Luther calleth a Man (f) Luth. in loc com Class 5. pag. 47. giuen ouer vnto a reprobate sense This man impugned the Masse vnder pretence of Visions and pretended conferences with God of whome the Booke entituled Conspiracy for pretended reformation thus writeth Carolostadius (g) Luth tom 3. Penens fol. 68. a preacher professing the Gospell c. attributed much to Cabinet teachers and pretended conference with God And yet his pretended visions were but meere Illusions of the Deuill of whom euen Luther thus sayth Carolostadius (h) In Theol. Calu in Prâ—â—em had his expositions from the Deuill As concerning Swinglius whom Conradus Schlusseâ—burg the Protestant calleth a man of vnfortunate memory This man disputed publikly at Zurick for the abolishing of the Masse and receaued confessedly his nightly Instruction by Dâ—eame from an Admonisher (i) So writeth Swinglius of himselfe herein tom 1. l. de sub fid Eucharist fol. 249. whether Black or Whyte sayth he I remember not Which Instruction is acknowledged by Protestants themselues to be a meere Imposture of Satan For thus hath Conradus Schlusselburg left recorded Sole (k) In Theol. Caluinist in â—roaem meridiano clartus est non Deum verum sed Diabolum ipsissimum c. It is more cleare then the Sunne that not the true God but the Deuill himselfe did inspire the Sacramentary Heresy into Swinglius by Dreame Thus far of these three former mayne Impostours I meane Luther Carolostadius and Swinglius all of them receauing their instruction from the Deuill for their abolishing and impugning of the Masse Animaduersion LX. DIuers Aâ—liaphorists or Neutralls in Religion do maintayne that whosoeuer belieueth the Apostles Creed liuing a good life may be saued Now that the Creed cannot be the Boundary or limit of Christian fayth is thus proued First because though the Protestant and the Catholike do indifferently repeat the Creede yet they vnderstand euery Article thereof in a different sense thâ—one from the other For example I belieue 1. in God The Catholike belieues that his God no way cooperateth or worketh sinne in man The Protestant belieues that God doth and therefore Beza sayth that God (l) In his Display of Popish practises p. 102. exciteth the wicked will of one thiefe to kill another And in Iesus 2. Christ his only Sonne The Catholike belieues in Christ who is God of God and equall to his Father who suffered Death quoad sufficientiam for all mankind A Sauiour who died only in Boâ—y and not in Soule Finally a Sauiour who from his first Conception was endued with all knowledge wisdome and prouidence exempt from all ignorance passion and perturbation The Protestant beliâ—ueth in Christ as his Sauiour yet in all these circumstances touching Christ differently from the Catholike Descended 3. into Hell The Catholike by Hell in this place vnderstandeth Limbus Patrum from whence our Sauiour did deliuer the soules of the lust there detayned till his comming But the greatest part of Protestants do vnderstand in this article the graue by the word Hell He 4. ascended into Heauen both the Catholiks and the Protestants do teach that Christ truly in body ascended vp into Heauen whereas the Lutherans (m) Luther bib de sacra Caena Domini tom 2. fol 11â— do teach that Christs Body is in all places with the Diuinity And that therefore it did not after his passion really ascend vp into Heauen it being there both before and after his passion To iudge 5. the quick and the Dead The Catholike belieues that Christ shall so iudge man as that his good works receauing all their force from our Sauiours Passion shal be rewarded The Protestant belieueth that Christ shall reward only a baâ—e and speciall fayth The like disparity of the beliefe of the Articles of the Creed by the Catholike and the Protestant might be exemplifyed in the other following Articles of the Creed here omitted for breuity Only I conclude that seeing it is the sense and not the words only which makes the Creed which Christians ought necessarily to belieue and seeing the Catholike the Protestant bâ—lieue the words therof in different or rather contrary senses therefore it followeth that it is not sufficient for a Christian in respect of fayth only nakedly to belieue the words of the Creed but he is obliged if so he expecteth saluation to belieue the Articles thereof in that sense and in no other wherein the Apostles did dictate them Animaduersion LXI ADmitting that both Protestant and Catholike did belieue the Creed in a true sense yet followeth it not that this beliefe I meane in respect of beliefe only were a sufficient beliefe or fayth for the saluation of Man The reason hereof is this because it is most certaine that there are diuers points of Christian Religion houlden necessarily to be belieued in the iudgment both of the Protestant and Catholike and yet the same points are not contayned or expressed in the Creed And to insist in these following 1. That there are certaine Diuine writings of infallible authority penned by the Holy Ghost which wâ— commonly call the Scriptures of the Old and New Testament 2. That there are spirituall substances which we call Angells and that many thousands of them did fall after their Creation and are become those malignant spirits which we call Deuills 3. That there is any materiall place of Hell for the wicked of which we find nothing in the iudgment of the Protestants seeing they vnderstand the graue by the word Hell in the Creed 4. That the paynes of the damned shal be for all Eternity 5. That Adam presently vpon his Creation did fall from the Grace of God and thereby transferred Originall sinne vpon all mankind 6. That the world was once drowned for sinne which inundation is commonly called Noes floud 7. That our Sauiour whilest he conuersed here vpon earth did worke any miracles 8. That S. Iohn Baptist was our Sauiours precursour or forerunner 9. That our Sauiour did chuse to him certaine Men for his Apostles who first did preach and plant the Christian fayth throughout the whole world 10. That Circumcision
Superstitious then a Protestant And a Protestant sooner becom an Atheist then a Catholike The Reason of both is euident And first whereas the Catholike Religion besides the beliefe of many dogmaticall points of fayth retayneth the practise of many Ceremonies the true vse of which Ceremonies as being first instituted by the primitiue Church are most lawfull but now if the ignorant Catholike through want of due instruction do ascribe more to them then is due or do put greater cōfidence in them then he ought as forgetting them to be but Ceremonies then perhaps he may haue a superstitious conceite of them as it happened in the Brazen Serpent though otherwise seruing as the figure of Christ To which the Iewes through abuse thereof in ascribing more worship to it then they ought at length bare a Superstitions respect But now touching the Protestants greater propension to Atheisme the reason is in that Protestancy euer refynes it selfe by Negatiues Thus for example The Caluinist or Puritan denies more then Lutheran or the moderate Protestāt The Anabaptist more then the Puritan The Anti-trinitarians more then the Anabaptists the Iew or Turks more then the Anti-trinitarians and for the last sublimation through deniall of all Iudaisme and Turcisme resolues into Atheisme And hereupon we find that whereas many Protestants by their often refyning of their Religion and all by Negatiues do in the end become Atheists denying euen the being of a Deity that few or no Catholikes immediatly from Catholike Religion euer fall into the open Blasphemy of Atheisme Animaduersion CVIII THe preaching of the Word and Sacraments supposing them to be Notes of the Church as our Aduersaries do suggest proue only the Place where the Church is but not which is the Church For the Church consisteth of men and we cannot tell who they are that receaue the Word truly preached or the Sacraments truly administred Againe whereas as Lubbertus (k) L. 4. de Eccles cap. 1. a Protestant truly teacheth Notius est duplex vnum Naturae alterum nobis Now here the Question is only of such Notes as are Notes in respect of vs for our better informing which is the true Church and not as they are Notes in respect of Nature For here we are instructed a posteriori and according to the measure of that knowledg which God vouchsafes to afford to vs. Now in reference hereto we freely grant that the true preaching of the word and Administration of the Sacraments may be termed Notes of the Church but not Notes to vs which is only the point here stood vpon For though they be Notes in Nature of the truth of the Church yet what doth this auayle vs since they are not Notes to vs for our direction to find which is the true Church Againe the true preaching of the word and the Administration of the Sacraments cannot be Notes to vs which is the true Church seeing the Scripture it selfe cannot be made knowne to vs for Scripture but only by the attestation of the Church as M. Hooker testifieth in these words Of (l) Hooker in Eccles Pol. saec 14. l. 1. pag. 86. things necessary the very chiefest is to know what Bookes we are to esteeme holy which is confessed impossible for the Scripture it selfe to teach And againe We (m) Vbi supra l. 3. p. 146. all know the first outward Motiue to esteeme of the Scripture is the authority of the Church Thus he Now this being granted it ineuitably followeth that first we must know which is the true Church to giue this approbation of the Scripture before we can know which is the Scripture and much more then before we can be assured of the true preaching of the Word and which is the true construction of the Scripture To these former Arguments I adioyne this pertinent obseruation It is this When the Catholikes demand to set downe the true Notes of the Church our Aduersaries answering That is the true Church which enioyeth a true preaching of the Word and an auayleable administration of the Sacraments Now I here affirme that this description of Notes is but our owne Question returned vs back in other termes and consequently but a Sophisme consisting in an idle circulation of the same point inuested with a new forme of words For when I demand which is the true Church I vertually implicitly and according to the immediate meaning of my words demand which Church is that which enioyeth the true preaching of the word and the true vse of the Sacraments since only the true Church is honored with this kind of preaching and distribution of the Sacraments Thus far touching the Notes prostituted by our Aduersaries as the true Notes of Christ his Church Animaduersion CIX SVch Protestants as do mantayne that there were Protestants in all ages before Luther giue the reason that the feare of Persecution was the cause why the said Protestants did then lye latent and became not visible to the world But this is a meere aēry suggestion For thus I argue The Church of God vnder persecution either communicateth openly with a false visible Church in participation of Sacraments and externall professiō of fayth Or els she doth refrayne from all such externall Communion if she do communicate with a false Idolatrous Church as diuers of our Aduersaryes repute the Church of Rome to be then is she not the true Church since the true Church cannot brooke any such dissimulation For we read With the hart a (n) Rom. 10. Mā belieueth vnto Iustice and with the mouth confesseth vnto Saluation If she doth not communicate with it then by such her forbearing she is made knowne and consequently is become thereby visible for who are persecuted but Men that are knowne Or how can one lying secretly and hiddenly be said to be persecuted The truth of this point is further warrantable from the examples of the persecution in the primitiue Church which of all other pressures of the Church was incomparably the greatest And yet we fynd that the particular Bishops Confessours and Martyrs are euen to this day made knowne who they were what false Opinions and Heresyes they impugned And the like may be said of the English Catholikes persecuted in Queene Elizabeths reigne since the names and memoryes of those reuerend Pryests and others of the Laity to speake nothing of many worthy Confessours and other suffering great losses and disgraces who lost their lyues in her dayes only for Religion are euen to this day fresh and recorded Therefore I heare demaund that if the Catholiks in this our Country being but a small part of Christendome could not but for some few nūbers of yeares in comparison escape the search and hands of their persecutours and become thereby most visible knowne How could then the Protestants being supposed to be dispersed thtoughout many Nations lye hid and auoyd for so many ages together as is pretended the force of that persecution which is affirmed by
Some aduerse to Mans naturall propension as the Doctrines of Virginity Pouerty Obedience most of them consisting not only in an internall beliefe but euen in an externall action and operation and therefore the first entrance of them are become thereby most discernable Such are the Doctrines of praying to the Saints of praying vpon beades Pilgrimage single life in the Clergy and to omit diuers others all Monachisme And lastly some supposing their doctrine to be false subiect to externall Idolatry as the worshipping of Christ with supreme honour in the Eucharist Here then I conclude that if any man shall affirme that these Doctrines could stealingly creep into Gods Church without all resistance of its Pastous Doctours and Fathers and without any mention recorded of their first entrance that Man not only giues the lye openly to the Holy Scripture in seuerall place◠witnessing the contrary but that withall he ceaseth to be a man by loosing wholy the naturall light of all humane discourse and Reason Animaduersion CXVIII IT is most cleare that the Heresies rising in the beginning of the primitiue Church as the Heresies of the Valentinians Tationists Manichees Arians and diuers others as also the Heresies of the foresaid Heretikes before S. Gregories tyme are recordeth both by the ancient Fathers and euen by the Centurists our Aduersaries In lyke sort the Heresies of Berengarius Waldo Wicleffe c. are also registred That this is most true I proue from the Centurists who in the fift Chapter of euery seuerall Century from Osiander in his Centuries from Pantaleon the Protestant in his Cronology haue recorded all the said ancient Heresies And as for Berengarius Lanfrancus Guitmundus and Algeru◠make mention of his Heresy Waldo is recorded by (i) In his Catalog testium veritatis Illiricus as also by Osiander (k) In Epitom histor Eccles Wicleff by M. Fox as also by Stow and by Wicleffs owne writings as is aboue shewed This then being most true and indeniable I thus infer Seeing it is manifest that the Heresies rysing within the first foure hundred yeares the Heresies budding vp the next two hundred yeares the Heresies hatched in euery age during the last thousand yeares are most largly recorded partly in the wrytings of the ancient Fathers in particular and set Tracts against them partly in the Canons of Generall Councells condemning them partly by the obseruing diligence of Ecclesiasticall Historiographers whose designed labour is to transmit and commend ouer to after ages the true state of Christs Church in former ages and partly by the Protestants like endeauours who haue written seuerall Volumes of this very subiect Seing I say all this is manifest can it then enter into any brayne but to weene that so many Articles of the present Roman Religion being in number far more then all the aboue rehearsed in weight and consequence greatly exceeding them for diuersity of Countryes and Nations far further diuulged and spread then all or any of the former Heresies euer were most of these others being restrayned only to one Country or Nation could euer so vnespiedly infect the whole Church of Christ with their Contagion and worke a more notorious change therein then euer yet was wrought by all the Heretiks since Christs tyme put together And yet not one Father Pastour or Doctor of those times either to take notice of any of those supposed Heresies or knowing them not to impugne the first assaults by preaching or writing neither any one Ecclesiasticall History but to mention in their Histories any one of the said Articles or Innouations in fayth Can this I say be imagined or can it be in the power of man thus to create a new Religion at his pleasure without controule or discouery To mantaine this is to maintayne an assertion against all probability against all reason against all possibility Animaduersion CXIX THe Greeke Church hath beene for many ages emulous of the Church of Rome and therefore if the present Church of Rome had anciētly made any diuision or Schisme from the true Church of Christ the Grecian no doubt would haue been most apt to recōmend the memory of such a chāge in our Church to all after ages in their Historyes But no such records we find in any of their writings Yea the Grecians are so farre from that as that on the contrary side the present Church of Rome is able to specify and note out of most auncient and approued Authours the very tymes when the Grecians introduced those particular Opiniōs wherein at this day they dissent from our Roman and Catholike Church For example to insist in some few The Grecians deniall of their Obedience to the Church of Rome was first begunne by Iohn of Constantinople and was written against by Gregory (l) Greg. l. 4. Ep. 34. 36 the Great and Pelagius (m) Pelag in his Epistle vniuersis Episcopis Their deniall of the proceeding of the Holy Ghost from the Father and the Sonne tooke it beginning about the yeare 764. was gain-said and contradicted at its first rysing as (n) In System Theol. p. 68. Kekermanus a Protestant witnesseth Their Deniall of Prayer for the Dead was begunne by Aerius and impugned by Epiphanius (o) Epiph Haeres 75 and Austin (p) Aug. Haeres 53 Finally their bringing in of Leauenes Bread by the Grecians in the celebration of the Eucharist was first begunne about the yeare 1053. as appeareth out of the wrytings of Leo (q) In Epist ad Michael Episcopum Constan. cap. 5. the Nynth and the (r) Cent. 11. cap. 8. Centurists Now heere I demand Can it be imagined that these Innouations of the Grecians being few in number could be so precisely contradicted gain-said and left registred to all Posterity and yet this supposed chāge of the Church of Rome consisting in bringing in of farre more Articles in number and as of great consequence should neuer be noted nor impugned by any one Doctour or Father nor recorded nor obserued by any one Historiographer the said Fathers and Historiographers liuing in the very same Ages wherein this supposed alteration is said to haue happened Animaduersion CXX IT is certaine that what generall propension Nature or rather God himselfe by Nature as by his Instrument hath ingrafted in all mē the same is in it selfe most true certaine and warrantable since otherwise it would follow that God should insert in the Soule of Man idly vainly and as directed to no end certaine naturall impressiōs and instinctions which to affirme is most derogatory to his diuine maiesty and wisedome and repugnant to that auncient receaued Axiome God and Nature worke nothing in vayne Now to apply this against our Neutralists in Religion who thinke a Man may be saued in any Religion We fynd according hereto both by History experience that diuers zelous and feruent professours of all Religions whatsoeuer both true and false haue beene most ready to expose their liues in defence of
â—â—gurae illae verborum offendunt Jndurabo Coâ— Pharaonis similes Certum ect enim Hebraâ—â—phrazi significare Permissionem non voluntatem efficacem That is these formes of words 〈◊〉 not offend vs for it is certaine that in the Hebrew phraze they signify only permission and nâ—â— any efficacious will Add hereto how repugnant our Aduersaries exposition of this 〈◊〉 diuers other such Texts is to the words of God deliuered by Ezechiell cap. 33. which words may serue as a Syntax or Comment to paraphraze al the threatning passages set downe in Scripture against Sinners and against the doctrine of Reprobation shewing that all such comminations are only Conâ—â—tional Thus then Ezechiel in the Person of God Si dixero impio c. Yf J shall say to the wicked Thou shalt dye the death and he do pâ—â—nance for his Sinne and do Judgment and Iâ—stice liuing he shall liue and shall not dye Animaduersion CLI THe example of Elias is much prostituted by our Aduersaries for the warranting of their owne Churches Inuisibility for so many ages but how impertinently it is vrged obserue what followeth First I say this example maketh wholy against the Protestants seing the words of Elias Relictus sum (27) Reg. 1. solus were not spoken generally of all the Iewish people but only in regard of the Country of Israell and accordingly God answered the complaint of Elias with restraint to that only Country the Scripture saying immediatly after I haue left to me in Jsraell seauen thousand which haue not bowed vnto Baal Add hereto that in those very tymes the Church did greatly florish in the adioyning Countryes of Iuda as was to Elias then knowne and visible vnder the reigne of Asa and Iosaphat And thus is this obiection so much prized by diuers of our Aduersaries answered by (28) In corpore Doctrinae pag. 530. Melancthon Enoch (29) In his Soueraigne remedy pag. 17. Clappam Againe admitting these seauen thousand were vnknowne to Elias yet followeth it not that they were vnknowne to all others at that tyme Much lesse then is this example of force to proue that the Church of God may be latent and inuisible for many hundred yeares together not to one Elias only but to the whole World But for a further discouering of the weakenes of this Example let vs grant for the tyme that the Iewish Synagogue was in the dayes of Elias wholy inuisible yet is this example most defectiuely alledged as applyed to the Church of Christ Since the predictions and promisses made to the Church of Christ whose (30) Hebr cap. 8. testament is established in better promises are far greater and more worthy then those of the Iewish Synagogue Againe the foresaid Example doth not extend to the whole Châ—rch of God before Christ but only to the Iewish Synagogue as being a part or member therof for besides the Iewes there were diuers others faythfull as Melchisedech Cornelius the Eunuch of the Queene of Candace c. Thus far in solution of this obiection Animaduersion CLII. OVr Aduersaries do first teach that concerning Matter of fayth they are to belieue nothing for certaine but only the holy Scripture Secondly they teach that (31) So writeth D. Reynolds in his Conference with M. Hart. pa. 68. it is not the shew but the sense of the worâ—â— of Scripture that must decide Controuersies And that herein the Scripture doth not instruct them of it self but by certaine meanes as M. Hooker (32) In Eccles Policy l. 2 pa. 116. affirmeth Thirdly these Meanes are affirmed to be the reading (33) These meanes are set downe by D. Reynolds in his Conference p. 83. 84. sequentib and by D. Whitaker de sacra scriptura p. 521 522. 523. thereof the Conference of places the weighing of the circumstances of the Text skill iâ— tongues diligence and prayer Fourthly they affirme that these being Actions on their behalfe are but humane Endeauours and such wherein euery man without extraordinary priuiledge from God is subiect to Errour Fiftly they teach that these meanes according to the Nature of themselues afford a necessary doubtfulnes and vncertainty of opinion and therfore D. Whitaker thus writeth hereof Qualia (34) D. Whitak de Eccles contra Bellarm. Controu 2. q. 4. p. 227. illa media sunt talem ipsam interpretationem esse necesse est at media interpretandi loca obscura sunt incerta dubia ambigua Ergo fieri non potest quin ipsa etiam interpretatio incerta sit Si incerta tunc esse potest falsa Thus D. Whitaker discourseth of the foresaid meanes of interpreting the Scripture Now these being the confessed grounds and principles of our Aduersaries Doctrine they do appeare to be no other but as it were linked chaynes or naked connexions of vnauoydable vncertainty which point appeareth more fully from the example of Luther Swinglius Caluin all who vanted that they did vse the foresaid meanes in interpreting these few words Hoc est corpus meum and yet the end was that they deliuered mere contrary constructions of the said words so as supposing one of their constructions to be true it followeth necessarily that the other Construction is false Animaduersion CLIII THe Absurdities necessarily accompaning the doctrine of the Pope being Antichrist are many and great For the more cleere vnderstanding whereof we are here to repeate what was aboue deliuered vpon other occasions First then Luther thus writeth We (35) Luth lib. contra Anabaptist Confesse that there is vnder the Papacy most of the Christian good yea rather all the Christian Good and that from thence it came to vs. Verily we confesse that in the Papacy thâ—â—â— is true Scripture true baptisme the true Sacrament of the Altar the true Kâ—yes of Remission of sinnes c. Yea further that there is in the Papacy true Christianity or rather the true Kernâ—â— of Christianity Thuâ— fâ—r Luther with whom to omit diuers other Protestants D. Doâ—â— conspireth saying (36) D Doue in his persuasion to English Recusants pag. 23. We hold the Creed of the Apostles of Athanasius of Nice of Ephesus of Constantinople and the same Bible which 〈◊〉 receaued from them Now marke the ineuitable absurdity rysing from the premisses Yf the Pope being the head of the Papacy 〈◊〉 Antichrist as our Aduersaries do dreame doth it not then inauoydably follow that with Antichrist there is all the Christian Good that from Antichrist the Protestants receaue the true Scripture true Baptisme the true vse of other Sacraments to wit of the Altar and Absolution of our sinnes Finally that from Antichrist they receaue the Apostles Creed and the other Creeds aboue specifyed What impossibilityes are these and is not this potentially and implicitly to turne Christ into Antichrist Againe the Scripture prophesyeth that the Church of Christ as I haue shewed aboue shall conuert Kings and Kingdomes of the Gentills vnto it according to those words of Esay speaking of the
concerne Merit of workes as in Luc. 20. and 21. 2. Thess 1. wherein those said words are vsed they translate them To seeme to be worthy or to seeme only to be made worthy therby to weaken such texts for the prouing of Merit of works But in other Texts not touching the Doctrine of Merit they can be content to translate those words truly that is to be worthy and to be worthy indeed as in this Text O how (*) Heb. 20. much sorer punishment shall he be worthy of who treadeth vnderfoote the Sonne of God Thus much for a Tast Animaduersion CLXXIV THe English Protestant Translation of the Bible is not only by the Catholiks ackâ—owledged to be corrupt and impure but â—so by many Protestant themselues M. â—urges thus censureth of that Translation â—ying How (17) M. Burges in his Apology sect 6. shall I approue vnder my haÌ„d 〈◊〉 Translation which hath many omissions many â—dditioÌ„s which sometymes obscureth sometymes peruerteth the sense being sometymes sensles sometymes contrary To whose Iudgment herein subscribe diuers Ministers in their ioint consent thereof in these words A (18) The ministers in their abridgment of a Booke deliuered to king Iames. pag. 11. 12. Translation that taketh away from the Text that addeth to the Text and this sometymes to the changing or obscuring of the meaning of the Holy Ghost And againe A Translation which is absurd and sensles peruerting in many places the meaning of the Holy Ghost All whose Censures herein agree with the like censure of D. Reynolds deliuered in King Iames his presence in Hampton Court who refused to subscribe to the Communion booke because said he it warranted a false corrupt translation of the Bible Now from hence I thus deduce The Protestants by their owne ConfessioÌ„s haue had as yet neuer any true English Translation of the Scriptures Therefore as yet the English Protestants neuer enioyed according to their owne Principles a sufficient and competent Iudge of Controuersies Since admitting the Scripture were the sole Iudge of Controuersyes in fayth yet this of necessity must be vnderstood of the Scripture as it is pure and incorrupt not 〈◊〉 it is impure and abastarded with false Translations From the Scripture I will descend to the English Communion booke or Booke of Common Prayer This Communion booke as it is euen at this present we fynd to be thus condemned by Protestanâ—s Twenty two preachers in London in (19) The Booke is intituled The Petition of twenty two Ministers in London one Petition did thus charge the Common Prayer Booke saying Many things in the Communion Booke are repugnant to the word of God And againe In the Communion Booke there be things of which there is no reasonable sense There is contradiction in it euen in necessary and essentiall points of Religion The holy Scripture is at graced by it A point so euident that D. Couell rebuketh and censureth other Protestants herein saying The (20) D. Couell in his Examen pag. 179. Communion Booke is boldly despised meaning by the Puritans Grosse errours and manifest impietyes meaning in their opinion are in the Communion Booke So he redargueth his owne brethren Now here in like manner as aboue I do thus argue Yf the English Protestants haue had no forme of Common Prayer published to them but such as is repugnant to the Scripture and in which there is contradiction euen in the necessary points of Religion them followeth that euen to this day the ignorant English Protestant neuer prayed to God auayleably For it is Prayer sorting to the word of God and not what is accompanied with errours which is piercing in Gods eaâ—es See here what dangerous Resuâ—tancies proceed to the English Protestants from their own Brethrens Confessions though most true that as yet they enioy not the Scripture as truly translated nor a pâ—ouâ— set forme of Prayer or Communion Booke Animaduersion CLXXV SEeing we who professe the Roman religion are commonly yea often euen by our Aduersaries called Catholikes therfore I will here briefly shew by laying open the Antiquity of that Title how much we are honored by being so styled whereas other false Doctrines commonly take thâ—ir Denomination from the first Authour thereof or from the Doctrine it selfe Well then (21) Cyril Cateâ—his 18. Cyrill thus writeth hereof Si iueris in aliquam vrbem c. Yf thou shalt goe into any Citty thou demaundest not wherâ— is the Church or house of God for euen the Heretikes say they haue the house of God the Church sed petas vbi sit Catholica Ecclesia c. quasi dicas si hoc petas nullus Haereticorum suam Ecclesiam ostendet But thou demaundest where the Catholike Church is for that name is peculiar to this holy Church the mother of vs all as if thou shouldest say if thou demaundest this no Heretike will â—hew to thee his Church Pacianus Christianus (22) In Epist. ad Sympronianum quae est de Nomine Catholico mihi nomen est Catholicus vero cognomen illud me nuncupat istud me ostendit A Christian is my Name a Catholike my surname by the former J am named by this other J am knowne or discerned And againe Catholicum istud nec Marcionem nec Apellem c. This Name Catholike neither doth it sound or meane Marcion or Apelles or Montanus nec haereticos sumit authores neither doth it admit any Hereticall Authours Now on the other syde how Heresies and their Professours take their appellation this one testimony of Chrysostome for greater breuity shall serue Illi habent (23) Chrysost hom 33. in acta Apost ol quosdam à quibus appellantur prout enim Haerefiarchae nomen ita secta vocatur c. Those men meaning Heretikes haue some men from whom they take their Name for as the Name of the Arch-Heretike is so is the sect called Which saying we find verifyed euen at this day by the words Lutheran Swinglian Caluinist c. Now whereas our Aduersaries by way of retortion call vs Papists To this I answere as is aboue in this Treatise touched that this word Papist is not deriued from any knowne Authour or Arch-Heretike as the words Lutheran Swinglian Caluinist c. but from the Pope and such was S. Peter yea Christ himself Add hereto that (24) Homil 33. in Act 4. Chrysostome as if it were by way of foreseeing we should be called Papists sayth Jt is not hurtfull if Catholikes be called by the name of those who gouerne the Church in the name of Christ so that they receaue not their name from any particular man as Heretikes are named Thus S. Chrysostome To conclude it is to be obserued that we are called Papists only by the Lutherans in Germany and Heretikes in some neere Countryes but we are not so called to omit Jtaly and Spayne in Greece Asia Affrike or in the Jndyes Animaduersion CLXXVI THough the many Controuersyes agitated betweene
and 5. Luke â— 16 both who leaue out this exposition saying thus absolutely Whosoeuer putteth aâ—ay his wyfe and marrieth another committeth adultery And this exposition is giuen by S. Thomas Sent. in 4. distinct 35. quaest vnica art 5. So as in these former words of Math. 1â— a Parenthesis is to be vnderstood after this manner Whosoeuer putteth away his wyfe which is not lawfull except it be for fornication marrieth another committeth adultery Now that the exposition of our Aduersaries of the said text was coÌ„demned throughout all ages of the primitiue Church is most cleere since the Fathers of ech such age euâ—â— taught that a man putting away his wife â—pon any occasion yea for Fornication couâ—â— not marry any other Woman For examâ—â— thus in the first Age Clemens teacheth 〈◊〉 Canon Apostol can 48. In the secoâ— Age Iustinus Martyr in Apolog. pro Christ. nis In the third Tertullian l. 4. in Marcâ—nem In the fourth Age the Councell of Eâ—â—â—ris can 9. In the fifth Concil Mileuitanâ—â— can 17. and S. Austin lib. de adulterinis conâ—gijs In the sixt age Primasius in Comment 〈◊〉 cap. 7. prioris ad Corinth Now here I vrâ— that if the former exposition of the Cathâ—likes be false then did the Primitiue Chuâ—â—â— wholy erre therein which is most absurdâ— maintayne In like manner the Primitâ—â— Church of Christ did then wrong maâ— Christians in not suffering them to vse â—pon occasion of the wyues Fornication tâ—â— priuiledg which Christ may seeme to graâ— to them I may add hereto that diuers leâ—â—ned Protestants by maintayning that 〈◊〉 case of Diuorce vpon adultery the innoceâ— party cannot marry againe do reiect câ— Aduersaries exposition of the former 〈◊〉 of Matthew 19. According hereto to â—mit many other moderate Protestants tâ—â—ching the same with vs Catholikes D. Hâ—â—son in his tertia Thesi printed 1602. maintâ—â—neth the same publikely in Oxford In lâ—â— sort some thirty yeares since more or leâ—â— the same Doctrine was preached at Paâ— Crrsse by D. Doueâ— Now to all this aboue â—aid I may adioyne the exposition of S. Auâ—â—in in l. 1. de adulterinis coniugijs cap. 9. of the â—oresaid text who there sayth That the â—ords in Math. 19. vz. nisi ob fornicationem â—ught to be taken negatiuè non exceptiuè by â—ay of negation not of exception So as the sense of them may be this Whosoeuer shall put away his wyfe nisi ob fornicationem that is extra causam fornicationis without the cause of fornication and shall marry another commitâ—â—th adultery From which exposition the Aâ—ultery of him is affirmed who putting away his wyfe without the cause of fornicaâ—â—on shall marry another But nothing is â—ere said of him who putting away his wyfe â—y reason of fornication shall marry anoâ—her Thus far of this Text. Animaduersion CLXXX AS the Inuisibility and Latency of the Protestants Church hath beene fully aboue demonstrated so here I hould it not imperâ—â—nent if I proue the Continuall and vninâ—â—rrupted visibility of our Catholike Church â—nd consequently that it is that Church of God to which so many Prophesyes haue â—eene made of its vneclipsed splendour and â—â—diancy Thy (46) Esa 60. Gates shal be contiâ—â—ally open neither day nor night shall they be â—â—nt c. Now this verity is proued seuerall wayes â—nd first from the confessed Jnuisibility of the Protestant Church during all former ages till Luthers insurrection And this the rather seeing the learned Protestants confesse that all the former Inuisibility of the Protestant Church was wrought by the labour power and diligence of the Catholike Roman Church Now how could the Roman Church effect so much for so long a tyme except it selfe during all that tyme were most visible According to this assertion we find M. Napper to confesse the same reason of his Churches Jnuisibility in these words During (47) Napper vpon the Reuelations caps 11. 12. euen the second thâ—s age meaning since Christ the true Churâ—â— of God and the light of the Gospel was obscureâ— by the Roman Antichrist himselfe Secondly the euer Visibility of the Catholike Church is proued from the acknowledged succession of Pastours in oâ—â— Catholike Church euer since the Apostles since those visible Pastours were the visible and most eminent members of our said Church preaching and instructing others who in this respect must become also viâ—itâ— and knowne Now this our visible succession of Pastours in our Roman Church is confessed euen by our Aduersaries for thus D. Fulke exprobrateth the Catholiks in these words You (48) D. Fulke in his answere to a Counterfayte Catholike p. 27. can name chiefe Personages in all ages marke these words in all ages and their gouerment and ministery and especially the succession of the Popes you haue vpon your fingars Thus D. Fulke Thirdly and lastly the same is thus proued Yf the most ancient and reuerend Fathers of the primitiue Church I meane Ignatius Dionysius Areopagita Iustinus Irenaeus Tertullian Origen Cyprian Athanasius Hilarius the Cyrills the Gregories Ambrose Basill Opratus Gandentius Chrysostome Ierome Austin and diuers others be accounted by our Aduersaries most earnest Professours of our Catholike Roman fayth then it follâ—weth most consequently that our Catholike Church was most coÌ„spicuous in those tymes since those Fathers were the visible Pastours of the Church then in Being Now that the Fathers of those primitiue tâ—mes were Papists professing the present Roman fayth appeareth besides from what is already most fully confessed by our Aduersaries in that behalfe euen from that acknowledgment of Peter Martyr saying As long (49) Peter Martyr l. de votis p. 476. as we insist in the fathers so long we shal be conuersaÌ„t in the Papists errours Now that our Catholike Church hath beene further also most visible since the tymes of those primitiue Fathers I meane for these last thousand yeares is so fully confessed by our Aduersaryes in this Treatise as that I hould it ouer wearisome and fastidious so often to repeate such their Confessions Animaduersion CLXXXI THe mayne ArgumeÌ„t drawne from Reason which our Aduersaryes vrge against vnwritten Traditions is this It seemeth say they impossible that vnwritten Traditions can be kept and conserued since there are diuers hinderances thereof as Forgetfulnes Jgnorance negligence peruersnes of mens Natures and the like And hence it is that we see that such Sentences which Lycurgus Pythagoras and others deliuered only in words and not in wryting are at this day lost and perished To this I answere that I hould it impossible that Apostolicall Traditions should not be preserued since this care is not properly incumbent vpon Man but vpon God who gouerneth the Church Now besydes the prouidence of God which is the chiefe cause of preseruing the Traditions of the Church there are foure other inferiour or subordinate Causes for their preseruation The first is the committing of Traditions to wryting For although they be not set downe in Holy writ I meane in the
diuine Scriptures yet they are recorded and written in the Monuments of the auncient Authours and in Ecclesiasticall bookes The second reason may be the continuall vse of them For diuers Traditions are in continuall obseruation practise as the Rites and Ceremonyes of administring the Sacraments Holy-dayes appoynted tymes of fasting the Celebration of the Masse and of Diuine office or prayers and such like The third cause are certaine externall Monuments which continue for a most long tyme as most ancient TeÌ„ples or Churches in which are Altars the Holy Fonts for Baptisme the Memorialls or Toumbs of Saincts Crosses Images Ecclesiasticall bookes c. The fourth Reason is Heresy it selfe For God doth wonderfully vse the Enemyes of the Church to the preseruation of the Church For because as in euery age there haue risen vp some Heretyks who haue impugned diuers dogmaticall Traditions of the Church So hath God in ech age raysed certaine learned Orthodoxall Men who that they might better resist the Heretykes haue with most great diligence and labour searched out the Doctrine of the Church and ancient Traditions and haue transmitted them in wryting to all posterity I will ad this following obseruation in fuller warrant of vnwritten Traditions against such who restrayne the proofe of all poynts to the Scripture it selfe To wit that it is one thing for an Article of fayth to be expressed in Scripture Another thing for an Article of fayth to be grounded vpon â—cripture All Christian doctrine is not expressed in Scripture yet euery Christian doctrine is so grounded on Scripture that it may in somâ— sort or other be proued from Scripture And in this sense all Traditions receaued by the vniuersall Church of Christ may be said to be grounded on Scripture since they are grouÌ„ded vpon the authority of the Church admitting them To which Church Christ himselfe hath promised an infallibility of Truth and of not erring according to that Ego vobiscum sum omnibus diebus vsque Consummationem saeculi Math. 18. And againe Portae inferi non praeualebunt aduersum eam Math. 16. to wit against the Church of Christ Animaduersion CLXXXII PRotestancy is proued to be an intentionall thing in it selfe and voyde of all Reall fayth This is proued from the Definition of Fayth giuen by the Apostle thus defining fayth fides est sperandarum substantia rerum argumentum non apparentium That is fayth is the (50) Heb. 11. substance of things to be hoped for the argument of things not appearing This definition sheweth that fayth is a supernaturall Vertue and the Obiect thereof is that which through its owne abstrusenes sublimity cannot be apprehended or conceaued by force of Mans owne wit it transcending all Naturall Reason This we see exemplyfyed in the two supreme Articles of the Trinity and the Incarnation the Mysteryes and difficulties of which transcend all humane reason or light of Nature And hence it is that the Conclusion of the Schoole Deuines is this Quae (51) S. Thomas part 1. 2. quaest 1. fidei sunt non possunt esse scita Now to apply this Yf Protestancy be a supernaturall fayth or els it is no true sauing fayth then the Obiect of this Protestanticall fayth is of that difficult Nature as that Man through the force of Naturall reason only cannot giue any assent thereto without the speciall concurrency of Gods Grace But here I demand that seeing the Obiect of Protestancy as Protestancy is meere Negatiues and denialls as deniall of Reall Presence deniall of Purgatory deniall of Freewill deniall of praying to Saincts briefly deniall of most of the affirmatiue points taught by our Catholike Church here I say I demand what supernaturality or force of Gods speciall concurrency is required that man should giue an assent to these Negations or denyalls Nay I here say that mans naturall reason euen of it selfe without any externaâ—l help is propense and inclyning to belieue these and other such like Negations except the Affirmatiues to those Negations can be conuinced as for true either by Diuine or Humane proofe and Authority Thus it followeth that Protestancy euen from the Definition of Fayth giuen by the Apostle is no supernaturall Fayth but in respect of such a Fayth is a meere Irreality and wast of fayth Animaduersion CLXXXIII THe reasons which S. Thomas Aquinas (52) S. Thom in 3. part quaest 27. Artic 4. doth insist vpon being most probable inducements for freeing the Blessed Virgin Mary from Originall Sinne are these following The first Seeing God did decree to aduance the Blessed Virgin to so supreme dignity that she should excell euen the Angells themselues therfore it was most sutable agreeable that no priuiledg should be conferred vpon any pure Creature which was not conferred vpon the B. Virgin except such a priuiledg were repugnant to the condition state Nature or Sex But to be sanctifyed in the first instant of Creation was giuen to our First Parents As also to be sanctifyed in the first instant of Creation and neuer to be polluted with any Sinne was giuen to the holy Angells But this priuiledg is in no sort repugnant to the condition state Nature or Sex of the B. Virgin Therefore it is a pious thing to belieue that the Mother of God did not want this priuiledge Secondly because that testimony of the Heauenly Spouse ought in all probability to be accomplished and fulfilled in the Blessed Virgin Tota (53) Can. 4. pulchra es amica mea macula non est in te Thirdly because the Mother of Christ hath a singular Affinity and Coniunction with Christ himselfe Fourthly in that the Sonne of God who is the wisdome of the Father did as it were inhabitate in the wombe of the Mother after a most peculiar and wonderfull manner But it is said in holy Scripture In maleuolam (54) Wisdoms c. 1. animam c. Wisdome cannot enter into a wicked hart nor dwell in the body which is subiect to sinne Lastly because as well the honour as the ignominy of the Mother redoundeth to the Sonne Now touching the proofe of the Assumption of our B. Lady both in Body Soule pretermitting the Authority of the (55) S. Ierome writeth a sermon styling it de Eesto assumptionis Mariae The Centurists alledge that S. Austin did write a Book-entituling it de Assumptione Virginis Mariae Ancient Fathers herin I will at this present content my selfe with the Argument of S. Bernard in proofe thereof who thus disputeth Seeing God hath discouered and reuealed the Bodies of many Saincts which lay hid in diuers places that they might be honored of faythful Christians It then ineuitably followeth that if the sacred Body of the Blessed Virgin had beene still on earth he would in like maÌ„ner haue made knowne no doubt in what place or Country it did lye But it not being certainly knowne where that Body or any part thereof is in any place of the world it may irrâ—pliably