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
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
haue done in prayse of our Blessed Lady or in honour of the Crosse or the like then being taken literally can well be iustifyed But they were more bold so to write because they as then hauing no Aduersaries to their Catholike doctrine in those points might rest assured that their words would be taken in that pious sense wherein they deliuered them Of which kind of their writing our Aduersaries take hould against the said Fathers The last obseruation heere shal be that when the Catholikes do alledg the Fathers the Protestants seeke to charge the said Fathers so alleged with some one Errour or other and therefore say they his authority is to be reiected in any other point which especially happeneth in Tertullian Origen Cyprian as is aboue intimated But to this you may answere that you produce the Fathers only in such Catholike points touching the which they were not written against by any other Father and therefore their authority therein is of force since it is presumed hereby that all the other Fathers and consequently all the Church of God agreed with them therein Animaduersion LXVIII YF your Aduersaries pretend that all the wrytings and memory of Protestants in former ages were extinguished by the Popes of the said and after succeeding ages you may shew how absurd this Assertion is And the reason hereof is in that the Popes of those tymes could not presage that Protestancy should in these our tymes sway more then any other Heresies condemned in their very tymes which other Heresies remayne yet registred to this very day by the acknowledgment of the Protestants Againe the personall (x) Benedictus the third was written against by the Councell of Constance Gregory the sâ—auenth by Benno Eugeniuâ— the Pope was written against by the Councell of Basill vices and faults of some Popes are recorded in histories yet to be read Is it then probable that the Popes were so solicitous to extinguish all remembrance of the Protestant fayth yet content to suffer their owne lesse iustifiable liues of themselues and their predecessours to be registred for all ages after to peruse Lastly in the Canons of ech age there is made mention of all particular Heresies of those tymes condemned by the said Councells Stands it then with any shew of Reason that the Pope and the Councells should be so voyd of iudgment as carefully to register all other impugned Heresies and on the other syde as carefully to suppresse all arising opinions of Protestancy Animaduersion LXIX YF you intend to bring and obiect any foule and wicked sayings especially out of Luther against the Blessed Trinity or about his acknowledged Lust and sensuality be carefull to note the Edition of the Booke wherein such sayings are to be found For in some later Editions of his workes many such sentences are for very shame left out and vnprinted And thereupon there are diuers Protestants who vtterly deny that euer any such wicked or sensuall words were written by him Animaduersion LXX OVr Aduersaryes labour by seueral wayes to depresse the force of Miracles exhibited in proofe of the Roman Religion For first some of them do deny the working of all Miracles and to fortify this their denyall they thinke it sufficient if they can produce but any one or two strange relations supposed to be Miracles and yet after discouered to be but forgeryes to the disgracing of all true Miracles but this euasion is weake seeing by force thereof we should deny all the bookes of Scripture because some false wrytings were in the Primitiue Church obtruded vnder the names of the Apostles as (y) Cont Aduers log prophet l. 1. c. 20. Austin and (z) Hist l. 3. c 19. Eusebius do record Againe if they will deny all Miracles they may also by the same reason deny all History eyther prophane or Ecclesiasticall Therefore if we will ascribe so much confidence to the wrytings of Eusebius Zozomene Austin Ierome and others as we do to the lyues of Liuy or Commentaryes of Cesar or to Speeds Cronicle we cannot reiect all Miracles for forgeryes vntruths Other of our Aduersaryes confesse the doing of many Miracles vrged by the Catholykes but then they ascribe them to the power of the Diuell and do commonly style them Antichristian (a) So do the Cent. call them Cent. 4. col 1445. Cent. 5 1486. In like manner Osiand also stileth them Cent. 10. 11. 12. wounders and lying signes But against this subterfugion I say it cannot be applyed to the Miracles wrought in the primitiue Church and eecorded by Zozomene Austin Ierome and others long before the comming of Antichrist since most of our Aduersaryes do place Antichrists first comming in (b) So doth D. Willet teach in his Synop. p. 160. D. Fulke in his answere to a counterf Cath. p. 36. D. Downenam in but his Treatise of Antichrist lib. 2. pag. 4. Boniface who was Pope in the yeare 1006. loÌ„g after the dayes of the former Fathers Secondly I say that our Aduersaryes in ascribing the Miracles to the working of Antichrist consequently of the Diuell do ouer neere interleage with the Iewes condemning the Miracles of Christ in these wordes This man (c) Math. 1. casteth not out Deuills but by Belsebub the Prince of Deuills Agaiâ—â— I say that the Protestant Vrsinus trulâ— sayth that the (d) In Comment Catech. 21. Power of the Miracles oâ— Antichrist are not true Miracles but such aâ— the Order of Nature obserued may be effected by the deceyte of men or Deuills But diuers miracles are recorded which transcend the power of the Deuill as to stay the flux and reflux of the sea or to cure incurable diseases without applying any secondary meanes and such like c. Of which there are many miracles recorded by the former Fathers Thirdly I auer that the Miracles of the Deuill are euer done to some vaine and pernicious end and not for the good of the particular person vpon whom they are wrought Fourthly if the Deuill could effect such stupendious workes how chanceth it that he would neuer concurre with condemned and on all sydes acknowledged miscreants to strenghthen and countenance thereby those mens misbeliefe and Heresies I meane with Simon Magus Porphiry Iulian the Apostata Mahomet c. and other Sects condemned euen by the Protestants for most erroneous Lastly I conclude that our Aduersaries in condemning all Miracles either but as forgeries or as the Works of the Deuill do charge diuers Princes Commonwealths Ecclesiasticall persons and infinite multitudes of people both of former and later tymes with extreme simplicity yea Lunacy in suffering such forgeries and delusions to be obtruded vpon them I will adioyne hereto the miraculous preseruation for many hundred yeares of certaine Relicks I will passe ouer the vncorrupted bodies of many Saints euen till this day and will insist in the miraculous preseruation of the Eucharist stabbed with knyfes by the Iewes many scores of yeares since if not
â—e booke But they did wryte either a â—â—tory as the Euangelists did or Epistles â—on some speciall occasion as Peter Paul â—â—es Iudas Iohn and in the same did disâ—te or discourse of dogmaticall points of â—yth only obiter and as circumstances inâ—eed them Animaduersion CLXXI. â—He first Proposition touching Indulgences The foundation and groundworke of â—he Doctrine of Indulgences is that there reâ—ayneth in the Church of Christ a certaine â—pirituall Treasury of the satisfactions of â—hrist and his Saincts which may be applied â—o those who stand subiect to temporal puâ—ishment after the guilt of eternall punishment is remitted in the Sacrament of Penance for the better explicating of which doctrine these following propositions are to be deliuered The first proposition In one and the samâ— good action or worke of a iust man a double price or value is assigned to it the one of Merit the other of Satisfaction For example the one and same act of giuing of Almes is Satisfactory in that it is a laborious or penalâ— worke It is also Meritorious because it is a good worke proceeding from Charity Now the giuing of Almes proceeding from charity is not lesse good because it is laborious and penall vpon the same reason theâ— it followeth that the same prayer may be both impetratory and meritorious The second Proposition A good worke in that respect as it is meritorious cannot be applyed to another but it may be applyed as it iâ— Satisfactory The first part of this proposition is proued because it cannot come to passe that in respect that one doth worke well another should be said to worke well in the said Action The second part is proued because satisfaction is a compensation of the punishment or paying of what iâ— due but it is euident that one man may make compensation of punishment for another man or pay the debt of another man The third Proposition There remayneth in the Church an infinit Treasury of Christs satisfactions which can neuer be exhausted or dryed vp This is euident since the passion of Christ 〈◊〉 of an infinite worth price and dignity â—or it was the Passion of an infinite Person 〈◊〉 wit of the Word Incarnated for he was 〈◊〉 who shed his bloud for the Church â—ut did shee l it in Mans flesh Hypostaticalâ— assumpted Now the dignity of satisfaâ—ion receaues its measure from the dignity 〈◊〉 the person satisfying euen as the greatâ—es of the offence taketh its proportion â—om the dignity of the person offended â—herefore from hence it is inferred that â—â—ere is yet remayning a great part of the â—orth and price of the Passion of Christ â—â—ich may alwayes be applyed to Man The fourth proposition To this superaâ—â—dant Treasury of the satisfactions of Christ â—â—ng the passions or sufferings of the B. Virgin â—as a such other Saints who haue suffered more 〈◊〉 this world then their sins haue deserued For 〈◊〉 is euident not to speake of other Saints â—â—t the Blessed Virgin neuer committed any â—â—tuall Sinne yet it is said that the sword 〈◊〉 griefe pierced her soule Luc. 2. In like sort 〈◊〉 Iohn Baptist being sanctifyed in his moâ—ers wombe did lead a most innocent life â—â—d stood obnoxious to most few and most â—ght or small Sinnes and yet in defence of â—â—e truth hee was beheaded Therefore it â—â—nnot be doubted but that a great heape â—f passions and sufferings of the B. Virgin 〈◊〉 S. Iohn Baptist were vpon their deaths reâ—ayning of which themselues did not staÌ„d in need for the satisfying for any temporall punishment All which superabundanâ—â— of satisfactioÌ„s were layed vp in the Treasâ—â— house of the Church Thus farre of thâ— poynt only I add that so the person mâ—â— be capable of Jndulgences two things are required The first that he be in state of Grace the second that he performe all that whicâ— is inioyned to him for the obtayning of the Jndulgence Animaduersion CLXXII WHen it is said Indulgences do profit the soules of the departed only per moduâ— suffragij the meaning hereof is because Jndulgences do not profit the departed by way of Iuridicall absolution but by way of solution or payment that is by way of Satisfaction Thus when a Man giueth Almes or fasteth or goeth on pilgrimage to holy places for the reliefe of a soule departed he doth not absolue that soule from the guilt of punishment but he only offereth vp that satisfaction that God accepting thereof would free and deliuer it from the due punishment which otherwise it were to suffer Euen so the Pope doth not absolue the departed soule but out of the Treasury of satisfactions remayning in the Church offereth vp so much to God as is needfull to free and deliuer the soule For the close of these Animaduersions touching the Doctrine of Indulgences the Reader is to take particular notice and the rather through the wlilfull malitious mistaking of our Aduersaries â—ho do mightily calumniate vs in this question of Jndulgences that we teach the guilt of eternall damnation being remitted only by the Sacrament of Confession or by most perfect contrition in lieu therof when there is not oportunity of the other the subiect of an Indulgence is only a temporall punishment due to be suffered after the guilt of damnation is remitted which temporall punishment by meanes of Indulgences we hold may be either lessened or wholy taken away in a Man who is in state of Grace but not if he be in state of Mortall Sinne. Animaduersion CLXXIII IT is certaine that the English Translations of the New Testament made by the Protestants are most corrupt and in diuers places most different from the Greeke in which tongue either all or most of the New Testament was first written I will exemplify in two passages The New Testament makes mention of good or pious Traditions of wicked and Iewish Traditions expressing them both by one the same Greeke word to wit 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which properly signifyeth Traditio Now the imposture here resteth For our English Protestant Translations in such Texts wherein are vnderstood Good and profitable Traditions as in 1. Cor. 2. and 2. Thess 2. do translate insteed of the word Traditions the word Ordinances But where the Texts speake of wicked and friuolous Traditions there our Aduersaries put downe most punctually as it Math. 15. in their Translation the right word Traditions Now this calumny is vsed in dislike of Apostolicall Traditions that so the ignorant Reader should neuer find the word Tradition in Scripture in a good sense but alwayes in a bad and disalowed though now in their last Translation but not in any former for the better saluing of their credit they put only in the Margent of such Texts speaking of godly Traditions the word Traditions The like course they hould in translating the Greeke word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifying dignus in English Worthy and the Verbe 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be made worthy For in those Texts which