father that he will send him I will pray saith he vnto the Father and he shall send you another coÌ„forter And in the same place where he saith he will send him he preuenteth say they the opinion might be conceyued of his proceeding from him in that he sayth he wil send froÌ„ the Father the spirit of truth which proceeds froÌ„ the father c To which they further adde that there is a great difference betweene the teÌ„poral sending of the holy ghost at our Lords request on the Apostles and the eternall proceeding of the said Spirit which is the poynt in question D. Tillenus his answere The proceeding of the Holy-Ghost which is the thirde poynte which he maynteineth to haue no ground in scripture hath his proofe in the scripture by the schoolmen themselues against the Greeks who receiued this article without any greate difficulty in the Councell of Florence in which was present Iohn Paleologus Emperour of Constantinople but they receiued but fainedly and by constraynte of theire Emperour who stood in neede of the Westerne Churches the Articles of the Popes Supremacy of TraÌ„substantiation of Purgatory and other like which are without and against the scripture Yet ther were some Bishops there that would neuer consent vnto them but afterwards caused all to be reuoked imputing the losse of the Easte Empire which hapned shortly after this councell to that vnluckie vnion that there was made with the Pope Now as the principall questions touching the holy ghost of his nature and of his office haue alwayes been determined by the scripture against the ArriaÌ„s Eunomians Macedonians so also may therein be shewed his proceeding from the father and from the Sonne The place in saint Paule cannot be shifted of by his distinction of possession and proceeding 〈◊〉 8.9 〈◊〉 .6 as if he spake onely of the gifte possession of the spirit that Iesus Christ receued according to his humaÌ„ity For the same spirit is there called both the spirit of Christ the spirit of him that raysed vp Christ And when saint Peter saieth that it was the spirit of christ by which the Prophets haue prophecied 〈◊〉 1.11 he quite cutteth of the bishops answere For seeing that the prophets haue prophesied before the incarnatioÌ„ of christ they cannot haue prophesied by the spirit in as much as it was giuen to the humanity of christ and on the other side the Scripture witnesseth in infinite places that this spirit of the Prophets was the spirit of God the father which sheweth as cleerely that the holy ghost proceedeth from the father the sonne as the consubstaÌ„tiality of the son with the Father by confereÌ„ce of the places in the Prophets that speak of Iehoua with the places in the Euangelists and Apostles which appropriate them vnto Christ The exaÌ„ple of Heliseus that receiued the Spirit of Helias is as little to purpose as the former distinctioÌ„ Iohn 15 Iesus Christ saith that it is he that well send this spirit shewing his diuine power Helias answereth to Helizeus when hee asked him double portion of his spirit Thou askest a hard thing meaning that it is not giuen by the power of man Christ saith not that it is an hard thing for him to send the Comforter contrariwise he saith all that his father hath is his also He gaue it indeed and in effecte to the Apostles breathing on them and saying Receaue the Holy ghost Iohn 20 And whereas du Perron sayth that this may bee expounded of the possession domination of the creatures ouer which the Father hath giuen him all power As wheÌ„ the father of the prodigal child saith to his eldest son the like words All that is mine is thine J answer as aboue is alredy sayd that the spirit is in the son as in the Father And as is shewed that the Spirit proceedeth from the father by the places which say That the Father seÌ„deth him froÌ„ the Father so also may be shewd his proceeding froÌ„ the soÌ„ by the places Gal 4.6 Iohn 5.1 god seÌ„deth the spirit of his soÌ„ the soÌ„ doth al things that the Father doth c. Jt is obiected that it is said That the Spirit proceedeth froÌ„ the father That Christ sayth he wil pray the father to seÌ„d him to which J answer that Christ in those places speketh as Mediator in which he is lesse that the father so hee sayth that the father is greater than hee And yet he saith the father wil send him in his name Iohn 14 Iohn 15 which couÌ„teruayleth that other saying that he will send him from the father As for the difference betwixt the temporall mission of the holy Ghost and his eternall proceeding J say that this eternall proceeding is nothing else but the communication of the Diuine esseÌ„ce by which the third person of the Trinity receiues all the same Essence from the Father and from the sonne as being the spirit of them both And seeing that the Greekes beleeue with vs that the holy Ghost is God that he is equall to the father and to the Sonne against the Arrians and Macedonians and that he is a distinct person from the father and from the sonne againste the Sabellians we are not to hould them for heretickes in this poynt though they had certaine particulare manners of speaking for as much as heresy is not in the words but in the sense as Saint Hierome saith Many among the auncient fathers are not held for hereticks though they speake often improperly of the misteryes of the trinity of which number is S. Hillary 2 de Triâ—c who in many places putteth three substances in God against the sownd maner of speaking whereof hee excuseth himselfe saying that these things surpasse al signification of wordes all intention of sence all conceptioÌ„ of sence all conception of vnderstanding But the Church of Rome is rightly holden for heretical which in many things doth attribute vnto it self the office of the holy ghost As wheÌ„ it sayth that one caÌ„not be assured of the truth and diuinity of the Scripture but onely by the testimony that that Church giueth of it The Bishop of Eureux The fourth poynte which we haue propounded is the translation of the Saboath to Sunday Euery one knoweth how rigorous the commandement of the Sabaoth was in the old law and how the gretest both thretnings promises of god were made to those that violated or obserued his Sabbaths And notwithstanding this commandement of God that god had vouchsafed to write with his own hand in the 10 precepts of the decalogue to sequester it as by speciall priuiledge froÌ„ all precepts of the ceremoniall law for to insert it in the Epitome of the morall law Yet the church hath changed it with out any written ordinance both as touching the end the forme â—â—d the matter First as concerning the end Saturday was ordayned to commemorate the Creation of the world gods rest after
euer was a Celsus Lact. lib. 5. c. 3. a Lucian a Iulian a Porphyrius which Saint Cyrill calleth the Father of Calumnie and others which openly opposed Plato to Moses Aristotle to S. Paul Apollonius Tyanaeus to Christ at least wise if as the camell he can drinke none but muddie water because the cleare maketh him haue gripes in his bellie De mirabil Scrip. libri 3 apud August tom 3. Annales Tem pli secundi if the B. of Eureux cannot relish the pure and sincere word of God because it sendeth Ecebolian vapours into his head I wish him to content himselfe to trouble it for himselfe onely without spreading abroad this mudde of his Traditions on the brinke of the fountaine which watereth the sheep of our Lord without driuing them from it by this his impious cry proclamation of the Insufficiencie of the Scripture when contrariwise the Ancient fathers made Collections and descriptions of the wonders of the scripture he maketh collections and descriptions of the defects and imperfections of the same making it seeme fauorable to the most monstrous Hereticks euen to the Saduces whose doctrine wholy ouerthroweth and abolisheth all Religion And that they haue heard of the secret Academie which was instituted some few yeares agoe in a certain place of Normandie in imitation of that which Sadoc and Baithos erected in the mountain Garizim where was planted the first stocke of that damnable doctrine of the Saduces which since is so welspread and increased they that know the contents of the new Alcoran that was there expounded to their auditors which were already there to the number of fortie wil easily iudge by the Emblemes scattered throughout this booke of the insufficiencie of the Scripture what Mahomet was the author of the other knowing the Lyon by his long nailes Now as it was not without terrour and daunger of the new Musilmans when Feuardent Doctor of Sorbone preaching then in the said place dissolued that Synagogue being a true colony of the Synagogue of the Saduces and Libertines so could I not publish the treatise of the insufficiency of the scripture without doing displeasure to the author who chafeth that I found meanes to get or as he saith to filch a copy of it for he nowaies desired that his mysteries should be discouered in publicke and exposed to the common view of all his intention being not to shew it but in secret to his yong beginners hauing first stipulated or conditionally required of them a religious silence as in times past the Priests and Maisters of the Isiac Mithriac Cleusinian and Orgian ceremonies vsed in the exhibition of their Phalles and Ithyphalles Tertul. adâ— valentin Clem. Alex in Protrep Arnob. Euseb Thâ— alii Plat. in Ser wherefore seeing the Proper name of his booke to bee hideous and feareful he giueth it another name lesse monstrous in imitation of that Pope who hauing to name Swines-snout was the first deuised to change that filthie name on the other side he letteth loose out of his mouth all the windes of his slaunder to see if he can ouerwhelme swallow me vp into the chaos of his iniurious speeches â—â—ing nips â—iting â—â—u by force of exclaming against me deceiuer Sycophant Parasite beast druÌ„kard seÌ„celes falsifyer impudent blinde desperate c. to omitt here his mockeries and Saâ—casmes which he applyeth vnto me as leuitiues after he had so stoned and rent me â—his treatise 10. As for the fir t vnles he race out the blasphemies out of his booke it is to no purpose to scrape out the title from the forefront seting vp a new bush to his Tauerne for they which read this conclusion in his discourse the Scripture therefore containeth not sufficiently all the Princ ples of doctrine necessary to Diuinitie if they let their eyes be still dazelled by his prestigious delusions if they can not beleeue of him that he accuseth the Scripture of vnsufficiency â—ril Hieron â—â—roch 6. one may well beleeue of them that they are like to Idols which haue eyes and see not As for the other I verily beleeue that the Christian reader will rather hast to passe ouer his inuectiues stopping his nose than stay to sente such filthines Now the qâ—estion is not on whether side is the subtiltie but the truth not where the Eloquence but the edification not the science but the conscience He is not enuied the quality he attributeth to himselfe to be the greatest disputer of the world whether herein he would imitate Manes who taking this name of purpose for to tearme himselfe such in the Persian tongue made himselfe a mad man in the Greek or whether he imitate that Doctour of Paris of whome Lodouic viues speaketh who made himselfe be called the Horrible Sophister De caus câ— art lib. 3. esteeming this title no lesse honorable than the surname of Affricanus or Asiaticus Neither can he hinder whosoeuer seeth a firebrand in the Cittie the Gaules on the Capitoll Sacriledge in the Temple from crying against him were he a childe yea a goose Herodo l. 1 And if in times past a childe dumb by nature seeing a soldier come for to murder his father found suddainly his tongue vnloosed for to crie out and vtter wordes which stayed the murtherer from passing further If the same happened to a wrastler Aul. Gel. l 5 c 9 when one would haue deceiued him why should we not hope that he that will haue the mouth of little ones to sound forth his praise giueth sometimes to the dumb the facultie of speach to children strengh to crie to the ignoraÌ„t efficacie to perswade Psalm 8.2 Math 21.17 at least one that is not altogether out of his witts that he cease to deceaue and to murther the soules that Iesus Christ hath redeemed from discrediting or calling in the coyne wherewith he payed our ransome and from clipping the letters which teach vs the value of it And sith that cannot be done without manifestly accusing iniuring the heauenly Father who hauing caused this money to be made and stamped with these letters as true Soueraigne ordeyneth it for all subiects and giueth it to his Children If this caller in or descrediter of it wil be thought to be of the number of these let him reuerence the almightie and the Christian people at least so farre forth as did that wicked sonne who accusing his father before Tiberius â—â—cit an â—â—l l. 4. was so terrified at the noyse of people which detested that fact that he gaue ouer his accusation and fled Now my purpose in this writing is to treat of and to examine all the points instances from whence he forgeth this calumnious accusation of the scripture without refuting more amply his falshoodes which hee mingleth in the recitall of our verball conference considering how little reason he hath to beleeue he hath well done in disguising so the matters â—â—stic l. 1. for on the one
side he hath learned of Cicero that faith is a truth constancie of that which one saith or doth on the other side the Councill of Constance forbiddeth him to keepe faith with heretickes VVhence he ingeniously concludeth â—els 19. that if he had not kept the truth of that was said and done in our conference he had not kept the Decree of the councill but had burst and let out the winde of that holy and sacred Canon considering withall that such frauds cannot be tearmed wicked but godly according to the doctrine of the same Church because they are done for a good intent As for me sith such Canons are not forged in our Church nor such distinctions in our schooles I am not permitted to vse the same liberty wherefore I will adde nothing to the bare recitall of that historie where I haue imitated neither his disguisements nor his inuectiues But if there be found any word somewhat free let him attribute that eyther to the necessitie of my defence or to the delicatenesse of the dayes and let him call to minde that he which saith whatsoeuer hee listeth shall in the end heare what he liketh not when the sharpenes of the truth beginneth to alter the sweetnesse of the delight And since he taketh a verie great pleasure when he reproacheth me that I would not continue the conference vnlesse it were written and signed on both parts so farre am I from repenting me of it or denying it that heere againe I confesse that I insisted vpon it with all endeuour that hee may see that when the truth permitteth me I oppose not my selfe any whit to his delight For it sufficeth me for my contentation to beleeue that the courteous Reader will make none other iudgement of this my iust and necessarie instance Epist 74. than that which S. Augustine hoped when Pascentius the Arrian hauing refused to write and to signe in a disputation that hee had with him neuerthelesse vaunted that hee had ouercome him knowing well that his falsehood could not be conuinced by any act For in that are the lurking holes saith S. Augustine which they seeke that are more desirous of contention than of the truth And as touching the vanities and lies of Pascentius he answereth It is easie to ouercome Augustine but heed is to bee taken whether it be by the truth or by exclamations If it hath not beene easie for the Bishop of Eureux to vanqâ—ish mee in the one sort yet hath it beene most easie for him to doe it in the other being in the middest of his Satellites or parasites who by their acclamations did reenforce his his cries and did like the birds of Psaphon sing his praises But this Psaphon proclamed great god by the chirping of birds Cool Rhod. antiqu Lact. l. 3. c. 5 was soone after declared great deceiuer by the iudgement of meÌ„ For conclusion I giue him the same aduertisement that S. Augustine gaue to Pascentius that he busie not himselfe in seeking how he may ouercome Tillenus which is but a man and the least of men but that he take heed how he may ouercome the truth Vbi sup the perfection of the scripture how with his hammer of winde he can spoyle breake or clippe the tables of the law of God more pure more hard than any Gold than any Diamond the least piece or shiuer of which is more than sufficient to pierce and breake in pieces the forehead of this Goliah though it be of brasse and shamefully to ouerthrow to the earth al this great Colossus which so proudly lifteth vp himselfe against heauen against the voyce which breaketh Cedars Psal 29. and which maketh the mountaines to quake ⧠An Aduertisement to the Reader THou shalt vnderstand Christian Reader that the Bishop wrote since a reply câ—ncerning onely some of the first pointâ— heerein touched priuily passing it into the hands of some of his frienâ—s and fauorites and some whom he laboured to peruert Wherein though his principall intent was secretly to disgrace both the sacred Scripture and this defender of it yet hath it turned wholy to his own disgrace by occasioning this learned man largely to answere it and so more fully to cleare the truth concerning the points touched in his reply VVhich aunswere of D. Tillenus I haue heere also for thy benefit added onely the Bishops reply I haue purposely omitted partly because the ground or as much as is needfull for the vnderstâ—nding of the matter is alreadie aboue at large set downe and partly because it being not meete to trouble thee with needlesse superfluities each word and matter of any moment or worth the answering is in the answere euerie where verbatim for the most part expressed A DEFENCE OF THE SVFFICIENCIE and perfection of the Holy Scripture Against the Cauillations of the Bishop of EVREVX by which he endeauoureth to maintaine his Treatise of the Vnsufficiencie and Imperfection of the holy Scripture THE first question betweene the Bishop of Eureux and I is general namely whether the holy Scripture be perfect and sufficient for to instruct vs in the knowledge of saluation or whether it be not sufficient for that effect The other is speciall namely whether these articles the Immortalitie of the soule the Resurrection of the bodie the last Iudgement Paradise Hell the Creation and distinction of the orders of Angels the Beeing and Creation of Diuels are contained in the bookes of Moses or no In these questions I had attributed the Negatiue to the Bishoppe of Eureux taking the Affirmatiue for my selfe He calleth that Deceiptes because he saith not that the Scripture is vnperfect or vnsufficient but that without Tradition it is not sufficient to refute all heresies And for that hee saith not that these things are not contained in the writings of Moses but either that they were not or did not appeare to the Iewes to bee therein conteined Let vs treate sincerely and leaue deceipts to those who beleeuing none of the foresaide points haue termed Moses a Deceiuer perhaps because he spake too euidently for their liking To the first deceipt he casteth on me is sufficiently answered by a discourse of purpose vpon the Iustification of the Title of his Treatise As touching the other we will first see whether these things be in Moses or no. Secondly we will dispute whether they doe appeare to be there or no. If they be there to what purpose doth hee frame InstaÌ„ce from it to shew the imperfection of the Scripture which is the only scope of his booke Why reiecteth he the places quoted to this purpose out of the fiue bookes of Moses Why are all the reasons brought for the affirmatiue but vaine cold coniectures with him Why sheweth hee not the proper formal places whence I should take them in which alone they are conteined But if they be not contained in the books of Moses wherefore is hee ashamed to confesse it Why am I a Deceiuer with
commaunded it to the Patriarches And the Bishop of Eureux cannot shew vs by his tradition wherein the particulars and formes of the Sacrifices vsed before the Law and writing of Moses and them which we see therein set downe did differ or agree no more than we can beleeue that the knowledge of the former was as necessarie to the Israelites that liued vnder the Law as was the knowledge of the latter I would know of him froÌ„ what tradition he learned that this sprinkling of the people by the bloud of beasts was rather execratory thaÌ„ expiatory as he saith not for to purifie the Israelites but for to bind bequeath to cursing c. S. Paul Heb. 9.22 after he had recited this sprinkling with the sprinkling of the tabernacle of the holy vessels addeth that almost al things by the law are purified with bloud referring this purification in general to all the legall aspersions or sprinklings but especially to that which he had more particularly specified than any other namely which our Bishop by I know not what cursed and execrable Tradition calleth cursing and execration And if that be true then these words which Moses pronounced in performing this sprinkling This is the bloud of the Couenant which the Lord hath contracted with you shall not signifie vnto vs the purifying of our soules by the bloud of Iesus Christ as the Apostle expouÌ„deth it coÌ„paring the figuratiue bloud of beasts with the bloud of Christ our Lord which spiritually washeth purifieth our soules as the other bloud did ceremonially purifie the corporal things But shal signifie our curse execration the reall accomplishment execution wherof should be found for vs in the death in the bloud of him whom we call our Sauiour and Redeemer as hauing deliuered redeemed vs from the curse execration of the law vnder which we were without the shedding sprinkling of his bloud wheÌ„ he himself was made a curse for vs. He yeeldeth a reason worthy himselfe why this bloud signified rather execration than purification Gal. 3.13 Because the children of Israel were alreadie purified by the former washings True but if the washing with water sufficed to purifie them to what purpose so much bloud as was shed in the ordinary expiatory sacrifices to what purpose are said so many masses preteÌ„ded expiatory sacrifices if holy water sufficeth to purify those that are sprinkled with it Why behoued it that after baptisme Iesus Ch. shuld shed his bloud why was not remissioÌ„ of sins without shedding of bloud if the washing by water purifieth that is taketh away sins to conclude what mad Enthymema is this same The children of Israel were purified by the former washings Ergo the bloud wherwith Moses sprinckled them afterward signified vnto them cursing and execration But it agreeth not euill that he that beleeueth or maketh shew to beleeue that the masse is a sacrifice expiatorie and propitiatorie which indeed is execrable and execratorie call execration the sacrifice of the couenant that God contracteth with his for to put away their sins therwith wherof the sacrifice described by Moses was the figure that of the crosse the Truth At least wise he should consider that this sprinkling with bloud was not only done on the people but also on the altar vpoÌ„ which Moses sprinkled halfe on the booke which Altar represented nothing else but God who in this couenant was one of the parties conditioning promising of his side shall we say that Moses in sprinckling the Altar with halfe of the bloud bound bequeathed God also to cursing The booke that conteined the law and which was sprinkled with it likewise was it cuâ—sed also There remained no more but this heape of blasphemie for him who ceaseth not to calumniate of imperfection and vnsufficiency the sacred booke to say that it was bequeathed to cursing and execration Indeede we read in profane histories of the couenants and leagues which the Pagans made ratifying them by Sacrifices with oathes and horrible execrations yea sometimes tasting of the bloud of the sacrifices offered or of their owne as it is said of Catilina and some others Which is not farre from the Cyclopian barbaritie of those Capernaites or rather Canibals which think they cannot partake in the bloud of the spiritual couenant we haue with Iesus Christ vnlesse they carnally drink it 〈◊〉 cons Dist 〈◊〉 Can. Ego â—â—ieng vnlesse they breake his body with their teeth sensibly as their Pope Nicholas saith As for the sprinckling of the tabernacle of the holy vessels also the purple coloured wooll hysop wherof Moses speaketh in the 24. chapter of Exod. It should be our bishops part to shew that S. Paul in his 9. chap. to the Hebrews protesteth bindeth himselfe to touch nothing of the writings of Moses but only what he saith in expresse tearmes in that place Exo. 24. Which shal not be so easie for him to do as it is for vs to shew for euery one to see the coÌ„trary For the scope drift of the Apostle is to confront to compare together the two Testaments the Priests the sacrifices all the other ceremonies of the old with the onely Priests sacrifice of the new The Leuiticall Tabernacle corruptible and transitory wherinto the Iewish Priests entred with the humane nature of Iesus Christ in which dwelleth all the fulnes of the godhead as in a Temple permanent the bloud of the hee goat which the hie priest offered euery yeare once when he entred into the most holy place with our sauiour Christs own bloud by which he opened vnto vs heauen for euer Now it is certain that Moses speaketh of these figures in diuers places of his writings by what Logick theÌ„ should wee conclude that that which is not fouÌ„d in the 24. chap. of Ex. cannot be found elsewhere he speaketh not there of the purple wool nor the hysop but Num. 19. he speaketh of theÌ„ Neither of the sprinkling of the Tabernacle and of the holy vessels but he speaketh of it Leuit. 8.16 30. 9.9 16.14 and so following And that S. Paule meaneth not to speake onely of the Act of the dedication as our Bishoppe would make vs beleeue it is manifest as well by that wee haue said of the Apostles intention as by the conclusion which is Heb. 9.22 And almost all things are by the Lawe purged with bloud By which euery one may see that he no wise meaneth to stay on the acte onely of the consecration of the Couenant but that he mixeth together diuerse ceremonies of expiations in which there was but one and the same end referring all those shadowes to their bodies the figures to the Trueth without staÌ„ding to reckon the syllables of Moses or to quote the places he alledgeth or to obserue the order of the times wherin consisted not the force of his arguments therefore he protesteth Ch. 9.5 not to speake of those things
of the new nor yet of these two Epistles which he had written to him of purpose for to instruct him how he should walke in the house of God which is the Church of the liuing God 1. Tâ—m 3 the pillar and foundation of truth Whereas I said that the Romish Church causeth an infinite number of thinges to be obserued as the lawes of God which we know by their owne histories to haue been instituted many ages after the Apostles he answereth two things 1 That the practise of certaine poynts is found haue beene in the Church a long time before them which we imagine to be the inuentors of it wherof he coteth afterwards seuen examples namely Prayer for the dead Lent Single life Confirmation the Mixture of water and wine Consecrations of Altars and the Oblation or Sacrifice of the Masse 2 That they confound not vnder the name of Apostolike Traditions all the Customes obserued in the Church but that they distinguish betweene the vniuersall and the particular And that euen among the vniuersall some onely are Apostolike to wit such as haue alwayes since the Apostles times beene vsed in the Church but the other that haue beene ordained in latter ages are Ecclesiasticall But the question is not howe they of the Romish Church distinstuish their Traditions But by what authoritie and power they cause men obserue as the lawes of God and as necessarie to saluation things that were not instituted by Christ nor his Apostles For those which they call Ecclesiasticall and which by their owne confession came not in vse nor yet into knowledge till many ages after the death of the Apostles are not lesse but much more rigorously commanded then those which they call Apostolicall It shall suffice to verifie and manifest this by one example It is generally knowne that the most solemne and most religious deuotion at this day in the Romish Church is that which they call Gods feast or Corpus Christi day to the obseruation wherof Pope Vrban the 4. attributeth remission of sins â—â—lla â—uck which is the knowledge of saluation according to the Gospel And the number of pardons granted onely to the beholders of the same is almost infinite And whether wee consider the seueritie of Prelates in commanding it and the magnificence in celebrating it or the deuotion of the people in preparing themselues thereunto and the efficacie they imagine of it We shall find that it is a thing that they pretend to be much more necessarie and more diuine than to say Requiescant in pace than to abstain from flesh and egges in Lent or any other points of the pretended Apostolike Tradition In the meane while our Bishop himselfe though he denie all cannot denie that this deuotion was instituted neer 12. huÌ„dred years after the death of the Apostles if he denie it Bellarmine wil reproue him â—acr Euch. 〈◊〉 30. who confesseth that Pope Vrban 4. is the first authour of it And no writer of the Romish Church denieth it though they agree not all touching the motiue of this institution For some wil haue that the cause of it was a certaine miracle happened in Italie of a Wafer cake that bled as a certaine Priest doubting of Transubstantiation helde it in his handes Others attribute it to a woman of the country of Liege whom the said Pope had familiarly knowne before his Popedome and who hauing giueÌ„ the Pope to vnderstande a Vision or Reuelation that she had touching the institutioÌ„ of this Feast he streight ordayned it and celebrated it first at Rome And afterwards Clement the fift made a most rigorous law concerning it confirmed euen by the Councill of Vienna Hereupon I demaund our Bishop to what vse is his distinction that he maketh betweene Apostolike and Ecclesiasticke Traditions seeing that these latter are commaunded for as much or more necessarie meritorious and diuine as the former Againe I demaund to what purpose hee taketh so much paines for to shewe that certaine things are verie auncient seeing there bee newer and latter things which haue more authoritie necessitie and efficacie than the olde And seeing it is sufficient that some Pope hath ordained a thing without enquiring of the antiquitie or noueltie of the same For the Pope now a daies attributeth as much yea much more power and authoritie to himselfe than they did that were seauen or eight hundred yeares agoe and requireth no lesse but much more obedience in that which at this day he commaundeth than in that which his predecessours commaunded a thousand yeares ago For as before the God of heauen a thousand yeares are as one day so before this God on earth one day is as a thousand years when there is question to make himself be obeyed Yea the time hath been when Popes thought they could not well establish their owne lawes vnlesse they did abolish the lawes of their predecessors that is vnlesse they displanted Antiquitie to plant in noueltie Moreouer if euerie thing that concerneth saluation as those doe that bring remission of sinnes ought to bee grounded on the worde of God either written or vnwritten as he graunteth and presupposeth throughout his Booke By what conscience could the Popes institute this newe meanes of saluation with manie other in which number are our Bishops graines If the worde of God be onelie found either in the Canonicall Scripture or in the pretended Apostolike Tradition conteyned in the writings of the ancient fathers doth it not follow that that which is found in neither of both these two Registers is by his owne confession the worde and inuention of man And therefore a vaine thing and displeasing to God by Iesus Christ his owne sentence Math. 15. But let vs heare Bellarmine on this poynt De Verb. â— l. 4. c. 9. Nothing is of the faith but onely that which God hath reuealed by the Apostles or by the Prophets or that which is euidently deduced from it For the Church is no more gouerned by newe Reuelations but persisteth in them which those men that haue beene Ministers of the word haue giuen by Tradition For therefore it is said Ephe. 2. Builded vpon the foâ—ndation of the Prophets and Apostles Wherefore all the thinges which the Church holdeth to be matters of faith haue been giuen by the Apostles and Prophets eyther by writing or by word of mouth After he addeth When the whole Church obserueth something that none could institute but onely God and which notwithstaÌ„ding is fouÌ„d no where writteÌ„ We must say it was giuen by the TraditioÌ„ of Iesus Christ himself and of his Apostles The reason is for that the vniuersall Church cannot erre not onely in that which it beleeueth but as little in that which it dooth and principally in CEREMONIE or Diuine worship Let vs conclude then by the confession of this great Rabbi who acknowledged that this ceremonie of Corpus Christi day was instituted well neere 1200. yeres after the Apostles by Pope Vrbane 4.
the Pope and euerie other Bishop vnattainted or conuinced of notorious crime He was forced to graunt it mee But when I requested further that he would giue me this proposition in wrighting signed by him hee would not heare of it no more then he found it fitte to insert this question in the number of the seauen that he treateth There was also spoken of the institution of Monkes of their rules and ceremonies specially of the Charter-house Monkes which instance importuned him much finding neither canall pipe nor deuise whatsoeuer that could make to flowe forme apostolick traditioÌ„ that Angelicall perfection whereof the Charterous and other Monks do boast In this altercatioÌ„ he said diuers things so enormous and contrary euen to the Doctrine of the Romish Church that if they had been set downe in writing as I moste instantly required wee should haue a goodly mirror of Theology or rather Pyrronian Technologie And seeing hee then rather chose to breake off the conference then graunt mee this iust request Hee shall permitte mee also to finish rather heere this answere to his reply then to wander with him from our principall question for to extrauagte vppon the new Instances that hee propoundeth besides the purpose Considering also that before the treating of them after the methode that hee obserueth and requireth namely by the onely authoritie of the Fathers without any testimonie consequence or analagie of Scripture these questions were to be handled I. Whether controuersies ought to be decided by the writinges of Fathers II. Who gaue them that authoritie seeing themselues neuer haue acknowledged nor demaunded it III. Whether if it were true that the visible Church cannot erre this same priuiledge appertaine to euerie Doctor or particular Bishop of the Church IV. If it belong onely vnto some by what workes we shall discerne these infallible ones from others V. Vpon what ground is builded our Bishops distinction that the fathers may erre in quality of doctors and Bishops but not in qualitie of Witnesses seeing that by this meanes one part of their writings is manifestly made equall to the writings of the Prophets and Apostles to whome onely by speciall prerogatiue belongeth this qualitie or title of Witnesses irreprochable and without exception Luk. 24 4â— Act. 18. â— 15. â— in that which concerneth the points of our Saluation For though Antipas and other Christians are called faithfull witnesses of Christ Reu. 2.1 This testimonie hath onely reference to their constant confession of the Truth in the midst of torments not for to make authenticall vnto vs any point of doctrine Otherwise all the Martyrs should be made equall to the Apostles who were chosen instructed and sent immediatly by our Lord Christ and all that the Fathers haue written as Witnesses should be incerted into the Canon of the scripture for to make it an entire Rule seeing that after Bellarmine the Scripture is but a Rule partiall De verbo L. 4. c. 12 not totall Yea the very Treatise of the vnsufficiencie of the Scripture if our Bishop haue not written it as a false Witnesse and if all that which containeth Truth is as he maintaineth armed with Canonicall authoritie should be added to the Scripture as an excellent peece of worke and singular ornament of the same VI. Wherefore the Romish Church hath chaunged reformed censured and abolished so many things which the Father 's reported as Witnesses concerning the ceremonies and pollicie of the ancient Church and which they teach as Bishops and Doctors in expounding the holy Scripture which expositions are nothing else according to the saying of the Bishop of Eureux but the Subsidiarie Tradition without which the bare text of the Scripture is vnprofitable not being able to be vnderstoode or dangerous not being well vnderstood And of such reformations censures and abolishments we will produce when neede shall be innumerable Instances Meane-while the deposition of Cardinall Baronius shall suffice a witnesse yet liuing and who is worth many others both for his learning and for his dignitie â—l Eccl. â—1 ad aen â—4 impres â—nt These are his wordes All the Bishops that haue succeeded the Apostles haue not attained the meaning and vnderstanding of the Scriptures neither hath it beene necessarie they should alwayes haue excelled in this grace For the Catholike Church followeth not alwayes nor in all things euen the MOST HOLY FATHERS whom we rightly call the Doctors of the Church because of their excellent doctrine though it be manifest that they be induced with this grace of the holy Ghost aboue others See here the Subsidiarie Tradition planted by our Bishop supplanted and cut downe to the verie rootes by the Axe of this Cardinall the Popes Librarie keeper But dooth hee leaue at leastwise to the ancient Fathers this dignitie of vnfallible and irrefragable Witnesses As little truly contrariwise hee exceedingly reiecteth this outragious flatterie 〈◊〉 1. ad an â—39 â—22 when he saith The Actes of the Apostles written by Saint Luke deserueth more credit then any authoritie of the Ancients Yea he confesseth not onely that many things haue bene falsly attributed to the Apostles but also that those things which true and sincere Writers haue reported â—n chr 44 â—2 haue not remained intire without being corrupted VII Why wee may not beleeue of many Fathers that which this same Cardinall affirmeth of Saint Cyprian â—al tom 1 â—n 258. namely that he abode not in his errour but renouÌ„ced it before his death though that do not appeare neither by his writings nor by any other testimonie of the Fathers If Charitie was the only cause of this affirmation touching one ancient Fathers acknowledgement why may not we vse the like charitie giue the same iudgement conclude in like sort of others considering the Retractions that one of the most excellent amongst them â—ugustine hath left vnto vs who happily added many others before his death either by writing or at least wise in his mind Himselfe also doth authorise as to say of him that which he said of S. Cyprian De Bapâ— contr Dâ— L. 1. c. 4. It may be this holy soule consented to the Truth as though we know it not For all that was then done among the Bishops could not be written or preserued Neither know we all that was written And in another place Epist 48 We find not that he corected this opinion but it is not without reason that we are to iudge of such a person that he corrected it and perhaps that was suppressed by those that tooke too great pleasure in this error and would not be depriued of the defence of such an Aduocate These are my seuen questions which must first bee cleared before we come vnto his seuen the most important of which which is the sacrifice of the Masse is elsewhere dispatched and as yet by him vnanswered And as for the lies he giues to Caluin Viret and Chemnicius touching the institution of the other six points they fall backe not onely vpon Polidorus Virgilius Platina Sigebert Bergomas and such other Historians minorum gentium or vpon Gratian the compiler of the Decretals which serueth for Text in the Schooles of the Romish Church as the holy Scripture doth in ours Vide to â— Biblio S. trum P 1345. But also vpon the head of a Pope himselfe namly Damasus who reporteth the institution of certaine points euen as the others that follow him Also vpon Pope Eugenius 2. attributing soueraigne authoritie to Gratians Decretals and in generall on all the Popes that haue approoued it since But what would he get by it if we should take the originall of these things higher and of an elder date seeing that no authoritie of the ancients commeth neer the authoritie of an Euangelist since that which the truest writers haue reported since hath not remained entire by Baronius his owne confession To conclude De verbâ— L. 4. c 11 seeing that Bellarmine confesseth on the other side That the Apostles haue wtitten ALL the thinges that are necessarie for all and the things which they had publikely preached to all It shall be lawfull for me to crown the former questions with this CoÌ„clusion which floweth from the Confession of that Arch-Rabbi namely That the seuen Articles which the Bishop of Eureux propoundeth are not necessarie to all men seeing they haue not beene publikely preached by the Apostles Or if they be necessarie to all he must shew by their writings that they haue preached them publikely This is it that I summon him to do If he cannot do it I counsell him to be silent and to acknowledge his owne imperfection and vnsufficiencie rather than to attribute it to the Scripture which is most perfect and most sufficient as well to saue them that follow it as to confound those that blaspheme it FINIS