Boniface the Arch-bishop of Mentz Hosius Eckius and others Against which Master B. C. reasoneth thus If Cardinall Cusanus neuer writ any such booke then there is no such blasphemie But Cardinall Cusanus neuer writ any such booke Ergo there is no such blasphemie I denie the consequence of the proposition though Master B. C. would insinuate by the question and answere That there had béene no other proofe to iustifie my accusation but that of the Cardinals saying But where is this blasphemie conteined In a Booke as he telleth vs of Cardinall Cusanus which is intituled De Authoritate c. Of the Authoritie c. What In that booke onely And not also in diuers other places and authors Why are all those omitted Why is this one singled out of the heard Surely because this seemed likely to admit some cauill they were out of daunger But is it a iust difference whether the blasphemie be in the Title of the Booke or in the booke it selfe For albeit it were not in the title of the booke as both Bishop Iewell and Doctor Downam affirme it is yet it is in the booke of his Epistles as I haue shewed in the Preface And to conuince euidently this blasphemie of the Cardinals I will shew once againe The Blasphemie mainteined is that they were to receiue the Communion in both kindes according to the Scriptures against which the Cardinall opposeth himselfe in diuers places of his Epistles and for the iustifying of his assertion he vrgeth these words as I haue set them downe in the Preface It is no maruaile saith he though the practise of the Church Nicola Cusa ad Bohem Epist 7 expound the Scriptures at one time one way and at another time another way For the vnderstanding or sense of the Scriptures runneth with the practise and that sense agreeing with the practise is the quickning spirit And a litle after he concludes And therefore the Scriptures follow the Church but contrariwise the Church followeth not the Scriptures Now that which precedes in authoritie is aboue that which followes and so the Church by their diuinity is auouched to bee aboue the Scriptures And if the Church follow not the Scriptures it is euident if God and his word be both one That he that is not with the Scripture is against it And so the matter of the Epistle is all one with that title of the authoritie of the Church and Councel aboue and against the Scriptures though the Epistle it selfe be not so intituled And that you may know this opinion or blasphemie is not peculiar to the Cardinall or to one Papist onely Eckius in his Enchiridion of the authoritie of the Church Answ the third hath set down that this position The Scripture is greater then the authoritie of the Church is to bee reputed amongst hereticall assertions and that the contrary proposition is Catholique And this blasphemie of theirs is so generall that you shall find this sentence often inserted in the Common Law The Church is aboue the Scriptures The other place of the Cardinals there noted is this This is the iudgement saith he of all them that thinke rightly that they found the authoritie Ad Bohem. Epist 2. and vnderstanding of the Scriptures in the allowance of the Church and not contrariwise lay the foundation of the Church in the authoritie of the Scriptures Now if this bee sound diuinitie then may your proud Clergie assume vnto themselues to bee Lords of the Scriptures For how directly so euer the Scriptures be against them as in this instance of the communion to be had in both kinds it is most directly they may giue it what sense they list yea expound it to day after one fashion and to morrow after another as shall please the Pope and his Clergie which can no way agree with the spirit of God who is alwayes one and the same And if this conuince not the Cardinals blasphemie See the 3. Epistle of the same booke pag. 838. where hee saith When the Church chaungeth her iudgement God also chaungeth his But admit I had failed in this proofe yet had the other testimonies bene sufficient to approoue the truth of my accusation if these and such like may iustly be tearmed blasphemies a Syluest Prier cont Lutheri conclusiones de potest Pap. That indulgences are warranted vnto vs not by the authoritie of the Scriptures but by the authoritie of the Church and Pope of Rome which is greater b Dist 40. C. Si Papa That they rather desire the ancient institution of Christian Religion from the Pope then from the holy Scripture c Eckius de Eccles That the Scripture is not authenticall but by the authoritie of the Church d Henric. Magist Sacr Paâ—atii Romae ad legat Bohem sub Felice pap 1447. That the Pope may change the holy Gospell c. e Vid. Kempnit exam part 1. pag. 47. That the Scripture without the authority of the church is of no better worth then Esopes Fables And because I will bee as charitable to Master B. C. and as full of good wishes though I haue no hope of his conuersion as he is to me I could wish that he would not imploy his time so badly as to colour or iustifie such open and palpable blasphemie And surely would such as read both Popish and Protestants bookes Trie the spirits whether they be of God or no would not the Popish Priests prohibite the reading of our bookes would the Papists therin hold any indifferencie it were not possible that they could be so sedused with Popery B. C. Sect. 3. IN his fourth page thus he writeth Yea Arias Montanus a chiefe Papist in his Hebrew Bible writeth in the forefront and principall leafe of the booke There are addded saith he in this edition the bookes written in Greeke which the Catholike Church following the Canon of the Hebrews reckneth amongst the Apocrypha The true sense of Arias Montanus words is corrupted either by Master Vdall or some other from whom he had them by foysting in diuers of their owne That learned man in the edition of the Hebrew Bible Arituerplae ex officinâ— Christoph Plaut 1584. with the Latin interlineall interpretation in the Title page saith There are adioyned to this edition the bookes written in Greeke which are called Apocrypha Hee saith not they bee Apocrypha but that they are so called by some that is the Iewes who exclude them from their Hebrew Canon which he had there set foorth That other addition viz. which the Catholike Church following the Canon of the Hebrewes reckoneth amongst the Apocrypha vpon which the force of his charge dependeth are not in Arias Montanus where Master Vdall had them himselfe best knoweth T. V. IT is true that in the fourth page I haue shewed how the Papists dissent from the Fathers both auncient and moderne The reason there may thus be deduced That Church which dissents from the Fathers both antient
not because it was profitable to the question then handled yet doth Pope Adrian vse these words In sextae Sinodi Diuine legaliter praedicatis Canonibus In the Canons of the sixt Synode holily and lawfully published And the Popes Legates demanded of the sacred Synode whether they receiued the letters of the most holy Pope or no The sacred Synode answered we folow receiue approue them And what other thing is this but to confirme the Canons of the sixt Synode Neither is it any strange matter for one Pope and a Councell to condemne the decrees of another Pope and Councell As I haue shewed in my booke pag. 58. 59. Of Pope Stephan and Pope Iohn And thus much for the first note The reason of his second note lies thus If Venerable Bede saith that the Pope did disanull that erraticall Synode then cannot Master Vdall with conscience call it a generall Councell and vrge the authoritie thereof as authenticall But the antecedent is true Ergo the consequent I denie the consequence and demaund of Master B. C. why I may not with as good a conscience as Bellarmine and diuers Popes and Papists before alleaged call it a generall Councell for Bellarmine reckoneth this Councell amongst those generall Councels which are partly approued partly reproued And Caranza that gathered the summe of the Councels sheweth immediatly before the Canons that nine Canons of the same Synode were reiected as bastards and that these 102. Canons were not as yet forsaken and cast off And though many hold that this Councell made no Canons yet a Councell made them with credit of a generall Councell Prefat Synod Trul. ad Iustini And the next generall Councell did confirme them Conc. Nic. 2. cap. 1. And Caranza sheweth that the Canons were made in supplie of the other two Councels that wanted and therefore it was not numbred as the sixt but called Quini Sexta because it supplied that which was wanting to the fift and sixt And yet hee cals it a generall Councell Now could any man of M. B. C. learning vpon Bedes authoritie vrge such consequents against all these proofes before alleaged And for my vrging it as Authent'call I haue shewed before how farre we receiue the authority of generall Councels and the reason why I vrged it But I pray you master B.C. is this a Maxime in your Diuinitie That whatsoeuer any ancient Father hath said is to be beleeued Surely Saint Austin was of another mind For he challengeth to himselfe a libertie to iudge In quorumlibet hominum scriptis De natur gra contr pelag ca. 61. Ibidem In the writings of all men whatsoeuer And addeth this reason because I doe consent without any stay to the Canonicall Scriptures onely Cont. Faust lib. 11. ca. 5. The rest must be read as hee teacheth Non cum credendi necessitate sed cum iudicandi libertate Not with a necessitie to beleeue them but with a libertie to iudge them Epist 48. de Peccat Merit Remiss l. 1. c. 22 And must bee distinguished from the authoritie of the Canon For that the authoritie of the sacred Scriptures can neither deceiue nor be deceiued Cont. Crescon lib. 2. cap. 3. And by those bookes we may freely iudge of other writings both of Christians and Infidels And thus much for the second note The reason of the third note lies thus If the Reuelation of Saint Iohn be omitted by the Councell of Laodicea then doth not the Councell set downe the same Canon of the Scriptures which the Church of England alloweth But the antecedent is true Ergo the consequent Master B. C. would faine finde a knot in a rush so much doth it please his cauelling carping spirit For if he had obserued in the third page of my Booke that the aunswere which I there set downe in the name of the Protestant toucheth onely the bookes which are in question beeweene vs hee might haue found that the proofe I there brought was touching the Hebrew Canon of the old Testament Whereof I might truely say that this Councell setteth downe the same Canon of the Scriptures which both the old Church had and our Church doth hold for reproofe whereof the omitting of the Reuelation by the Councell of Laodicea which was not in question was impertinently alleaged by you And thus much for the third note The reason of his fourth note lies thus If the Councell forbid the reading of other bookes not there expressed then Master Vdall can hardly show how the Church of England reading the history of Iudith and Tobie in their publique assemblies agreeth with the decree of that Councell But the antecedent is true Ergo the consequent Is not this substantiall stuffe and worthy of Master B. C. learning What if I could not shew this What inconuenience were it to the Church of England or what aduantageth it my aduersary Doth any of vs acknowledge that the Church of England is bound to follow the decrees of councels in all things Blush then for shame is reason thus idely yet wee say with S. Hierom That the Church readeth those bookes See the 4. page of my booke Hierom. praefa in lib. Solom Rufin in expos Symb. apud Cyprian but receiueth them not amongst the Canonicall Scriptures And that they are read for instruction of manners but not alleaged for confirmation of doctrine But it seemes Master B. C. was much pressed by some of his followers to answere my booke And therfore to giue them some satisfaction he would say somewhat though it were to little purpose And thus much for the fourth note The reason of his fift note lieth thus If these words And receiued into authoritie be not to be found in that Councel then M. Vdall hath corrupted the Councell by adding some thing of his owne But the Antecedent is true Ergo the consequent To this I answere that those words are found in the Councell and therefore Master Vdall is slaunderously charged by Master B. C. The words are these Quae autem oporteat legi in authoritatē recipi hec sunt Those Bookes which must be read and receiued into authoritie are these From which thus I dispute those bookes which are to bee receiued into authoritie are those set downe by the Councell But the bookes we call Apocrypha are not there set downe by the Councell Ergo those bookes which we call Apocrypha are not to be receiued into authoritie Now that I may pay M B. C. in his owne coine how many of these his worthie notes may be returned him for hauing neither truth nor Schollership as the vsing that silly shift of wrangling Sophisters to take that for graunted which hee should haue proued The weakenesse of his consequence the charging me to vse the testimonie of the Councell for the Canon of the New Testament which he knew I applied to the old Testament the vrging of impertinent reasons without end or purpose and the charging me with
corrupting the Councell when the same wordes are there found would any man haue thought that he that takes vpon him to be a Censurer of others should haue bene iustly conuinced of so many grosse ouersights before alleaged B. C. Sect. 6. IN the same fift page he maketh vs to allow the fourth booke of Esdras most vntruely and that contrary to his owne knowledge when as in the second page he confesseth that we account both the third and fourth of Esdras for Apocrypha T. V. IN the same page from whence you take this exception my wordes are these I omitte many seuerall contradictions in all or moste of the bookes which we reiect and they allow wherby they may be conuinced not to be written by the spirit of God which is alwayes one and the same See the 4. of Esdras 10.20 and 2. Maccab. 2.4 and 1. Mac. 1.6 and 8. touching Antiochus My reason here may be thus deduced Those bookes which imply contradiction in themselues cannot come from the spirit of God who is alwayes one and the same But all or most of the bookes which we reiect and they allow implie contradiction in themselues Ergo all or most of the bookes which we reiect and they allow cannot come from the spirit of God who is alwayes one and the same The Maior is euident and the Minor is in part thus proued and may more largely hereafter if occasion be offered Antiochus is said in the first booke of Maccabees ca. 6. to die in Babylon for griefe of the good successe of the Iewes and in the 2. booke cap. 1. Antiochus was with the rest of the Souldiers slaine in the Temple of Nanea and his head cut off and throwne foorth And in the ninth chapter That hee died a miserable death in a strange Country amongst the mountaines against which Master B. C. reasoneth thus He that makes vs to allow and disallow one and the same booke speakes vntruly contrary to his knowledge But T. V. in his fift page makes vs allow the fourth booke of Esdras which in the second page hee confesseth wee disallow Ergo T.V. speakes vntruly contrarie to his owne knowledge You here charge me with the right nature of a lie though you pretend you would not haue the quarrell of God prosecuted like the quarrels of the world but you haue invred your tongue to such immodest tearmes that you cannot much taxe me if I haue beene more sharpe then I purposed But I denie your Minor and if you can withall your Schollershippe out of my wordes which I haue set downe of purpose conuince me either of vntruth or contradiction I will acknowledge you to haue more learning then you haue yet shewed in your booke All that I might haue bene charged with was the misquoting of the Chapters and the bidding you see the fourth of Esdras which being receiued by both cannot fit your cauelling spirit to imply any contradiction or vntruth in my words but you are fitter to cauell then to answere the reason there brought and yet this place must make vp the number but I pittie your necessitie B. C. Sect. 7. Lib. 1. de Con. cil cap. 6. and not lib. 10. cap. 60. as M. Vdall quoteth it PAge 51. To eneruat the force of generall coūcels thus he writeth Bellar. reiecteth wholy seauen generall Councels That learned Prelate is iniuriously intreated for who would not thinke that Master Vdall spake of lawfull and true generall Councells as though such were reiected by Bellarmine which is nothing so for he speaketh of certaine detestable conuenticles assembled by the Arrians and other like perfidious heretikes which they called generall Primum generale c. The first Generall Councell saith Bellarmine in the opinion of the Arrians which is reiected is the Councell of Antioch c. If these bee detested by Protestants also for vnlawfull and wicked why is Cardinall Bellarmine singled out as though hee alone refused them or the matter so cunningly deliuered as though they were reuerenced by Master Vdall and Protestants for lawfull generall Councels This is not to deale sincerely and to seeke truth with a pure and vpright heart vnlesse he bee so carelesse as to receiue all vpon the report of others which yet cannot wholy bee excused T. V. IN the 51. page my reason lies thus If Papists reiect generall Councels we may reiect them But Papists reiect generall Councels Ergo we may reiect them The Minor is prooued in the 50. 51. page c. by Andradius Bellarmine Pighius and Pope Leo. Against which Master B. C. reasoneth thus If those Councels reiected by Bellarmine were the vnlawfull conuenticles of the Arians and no other and such as the Protestants hold for vnlawfull and wicked Councels Then is that learned Prelate iniuriously delt with by Master Vdall to eneruate the force of generall Councels which is not to seeke the trueth with an vpright heart But the Antecedent is true Ergo the Consequent I denie the Minor for Bellarmine in the same Section reiectes the Councell of Constantinople and Chalcedon as no doubt be doth diuers other Councels that haue resisted the Bishop of Rome But doe not I charge Bellarmine truly with the reiection of seuen generall Councels But you will say these were no lawfull Councels Why so you must now runne to your old shift and say because they were not confirmed by the Pope Damasus in pontificuli vide Fulk Rhem. Test Act. 15. Sect 7. And yet Liberius the Pope subscribing to the heresie of the Arians as S. Hierom saith no doubt confirmed some of them But you wil say These were wicked and detestable Conuenticles so say the Protestants But what makes them detestable not the want of confirmation for then this doctrine was not dreampt of but their corruption in doctrine For many Councels lawfully called and lawfull and generall Councels and such as Popes haue confirmed haue broached many vnsound doctrines as I haue giuen some particular instances in my booke and shall giue more as occasion shall be offered Which yet I will confirme by a learned Papist equall with Master B. C. in learning and iudgement as I haue cited him in my booke Pighius saith It is certaine that not onely these Councels of Constance and Basill Pighius Hierar Eccle lib. 6. ca. 4. 5. 13. which we now disprooue haue shamefully and absurdly erred but also many others And againe we find that generall Councels euen of holy Fathers haue erred in decrees of faith for example of generall Councels The Councell of Ariminum vniuersall no doubt and also the Councell of Ephesus and that likewise vniuersall these I say are witnesses that euen generall Councels and those lawfully gathered may erre You see Master B. C. That Pighius no partiall witnesse for vs calles some of those Councels lawfull and generall which Bellarmine reiects and likewise he reiects the Councels of Constance and Basill wherein no doubt Bellarmine agrées with him in that point where