the wordes and this is the doctrine of that famous Papist whose workes two Popes Vrbanus and Innocentius haue confirmed plenitudine potestatis for authenticall Whatsoeuer therfore proceedeth from this fountaine the Papists must perforce receiue it as pure and wholsome water And for this end I haue imployed my labors to set down his wordes at large Out of these golden wordes and sound doctrine of this graue Writer a verie learned man in deed though elsewhere in sundrie points he sheweth mans imperfections I note first that a man may speake the truth and yet bee a lier to wit when hee thinketh that truth which he vttereth to be a lie I note secondly that a man may speake falsely and vtter an vntruth and yet be no lyer at all The reason of both the assertions is euident by the doctrine of this famous Papist whose doctrine herein is also the constant doctrine of Saint Austen as shortly shall be proued Because forsooth the formalitie of a lie doth precisely and properly consist in the intention of the speaker This point is yet more apparant by these wordes of the selfe same Writer Si vero aliquis formaliter falsum dicat habens voluntatem falsum dicendi licet sit verum id quod dicitur in quantum tamen buiusmodi actus est voluntarius moralis habet per se falsitatem per accidens veritatem Vnde ad speciem mendatii pertingit If a man shall vtter a falshoode formally being minded to speake falsly then although it be true which he sayth yet seeing such an action is voluntarie and morall it implyeth falshood per se and of it owne nature and truth but onely accidentally And so it reacheth to the nature of a lie This doctrine is confirmed by the testimonie of Saint Austen that worthie Father and mightie piller of Christes Church These are his words Non omnis qui falsum dicit mētitur si credit aut opinatur verū essequod dicit Quisquis autē hoc enuntiat quod vel creditū animo vel opinatū tenet etiamsi falsum sit nō mentitur Sequitur ex quo fit vt possit falsum dicere non mentiens si putat ita esse vt dicit quamuis non ita sit vt possit verum dicire mentiens si putet falsum esse pro vero enuntiat quamuis renera ita sit vt enuntiat Ex animi enim sententia non ex rerum ipsarum veritate vel falsitate mentiens aut non mentiens iudicandus est Potest itaque ille qui falsum pro vero enunciat quod tamen verum esse opinatur errans dici temerarius mentiens autem non recte dicitur quia cor duplex cumenunciat non habet nec fallere cupit sed fallitur Not euerie one that vttereth a falshood is a lier if he beleeue or thinke that to be true which he saith For whosoeuer saith that which he either beleeueth or thinketh in his heart although it be false yet doth he not lie Wherevpon it commeth that one may vtter a falshood and bee no lier if he thinketh it be as he sayth though it bee not so in deed And likewise that one may speake the truth and be a lier if he thinke it be false and vttereth it for a truth though in very deed it be as hee saith For one must be iudged a liar or not a liar of his owne mind and meaning not of the veritie or falsehoode of the things in themselues He therefore that affirmeth falshoode for truth which hee thinketh to bee the truth may truly bee saide to erre and to bee temerarious but hee can not rightly be called a lyar for that hee hath not a double heart when hee vttereth the falsehoode neither desireth to deceyue others but is deceyued himselfe I note thirdly that it is impossible for mee to haue giuen the lie to the reuerend worthie and godly learned man maister Doctor Sutcliffe as E. O. that shamelesse calumniator doeth most impudently affirme The reason is euident if the foundation which Saint Austen and Aquinas haue laide bee well remembred because forsooth I published my Suruey manie yeares before maister Doctor Sutcliffes newe chalenge whereof E. O. speaketh in his Detection And consequently I could not haue any intention as the world knoweth once to thinke of that future challenge which then was not in esse much lesse coulde I haue intention to giue the lie to that reuerende and woorthie man for anie thing conteyned in the same I note fourthly that the foule-mouthed swaggering Diuine E. O. is both materially and formally an impudent liar in verie deede I proue the same many wayes First because he doth not onely auouch a falshoode but also hath a minde and intention so to do wherein consisteth the formalitie of a lie and without which none can be a liar as is already proued But this sillie Diuine E. O. who so bestirreth himselfe to giue the lie to others seemeth not to vnderstand or know what a lie is in verie deed but hath neede to goe againe to the Schoole to learne the true nature and essence thereof Secondly because I affirme the verie selfe same thing in effect which maister Gough doth affirme who for all that as this impudent lyar E. O. auoucheth but with a brazen face doth giue the lie to me For I proue and shew by degrees how late popish inuocation of Saintes crept into the Church and I haue put downe seuen Canons with six conclusions to that effect In the fourth Canon I proue that in the dayes of Origen the first seede of inuocation of Saints began to be sowne In the fift Canon I proue that about twentie years after Origen it became a setled doctrine which in the dayes of Origen was but opinatiue and disputable In the sixt Canon I proue that about an hundred yeares after Saint Cyprian some of the Fathers by Rhetoricall apostrophees did applie their Orations to the dead as if they had beene liuing Who though they did but inuocate the Saints figuratiuely and of a certaine excessiue zeale yet did such their inuocations minister occasion to the Papists of all their superstition in that behalfe And in my aunswere to an obiection of the seuenth Canon I say plainely that late Popish inuocation had in the yeare 400. after Christ gotten deepe roote in the hearts of the vulgar sort Whereupon it is most apparant to all indifferent Readers that the swaggering Diuine E. O. is condemned in his owne conscience when he affirmeth maister Gough to be opposite to mee touching my doctrine of inuocation of Saints For I doe affirme vniformely with maister Gough that inuocation of Saints was in some degree euen in the dayes of Saint Cyprian and of Origen afore him Albeit I truly say withall that it tooke not deepe roote in the peoples hearts for many yeares after them I note fiftly that maister Doctor Sutcliffe if I bee not deceyued doth by the auncient Church
irritum fecestis pactum Leui dicit Dominus exercituum But you are gone out of the way and haue scandalized many by the law ye haue made frustrate the couenant of Leui saith the Lord of hostes Now of Leui it is thus said in the same place Lex veritatis erat in ore eius The law of truth was in his mouth And what was the law of truth S. Hierome telleth vs in these wordes Lex veritatis hoc est doctrina populorun quae in Sacerdote nullo debet mendacio deturpari sed tota de veritatis fonte procedere The law of truth that is the doctrine of the people which in the Priest ought not to be stained with any lie but wholy to proceede from the fountaine of truth By which exposition we see plainly that the priests lippes should indeede keepe knowledge but for all that are often void of all knowledge and teach falshood instead of truth Touching the words of Deuteronomie the sense and true meaning is plainly gathered out of the verie text it selfe For first the text in the 17. chapter speaketh as well of the politicall and ciuill iudge as of the Priest which thing Bellarmine himselfe cannot denie And yet that the ciuill Prince may erre all both Iesuites and other Priests will confesse Again in another place of the law the same promis that is here made to the Priests is made generally to all ciuill Iudges and officers These are the wordes Iudges and Officers shalt thou make thee in all thy Cities and they shall iudge the people with righteous iudgement Where I note by the way the falshoode of the Latine Vulgata editio which the late Councel of Trent extolleth aboue both the Greeke and the Hebrew For in the 16. chap. the text sayth thus Vt iudicent populum that they may iudge the people But in the 17. chap. it is thus and they shall teach the people And in Malachie thus and the Priests lippes shall keepe knowledge And yet in the Hebrew text which is the fountaine and originall the worde and is in euery place which the papists guilefully change into the worde that in the 16. chapt so to make their matter good if it would be But let vt be made as it is in the Hebrew and the question will be at an end Melchior Canus a famous learned papist hath these expresse words Fatemur Sacerdotes non esse audiendos nisi docuerint iuxta legem Domini We grant sayth he that the priests ought not to be heard or obeyed vnlesse they shall preach and teach according to Gods law Oh sweet Iesus How can any papist deny that which we affirme seeing the best learned and most renowmed Papists confesse the same euen in their written bookes and printed Commentaries published to the view of the world Lyranus in his Commentaries hath these expresse wordes Hic dicit glossa Hebraica si dixerint tibi quod dextra sit sinistra vel sinistra dextra talis sententia est tenenda quod patet manifestè falsum Quia sentētia nullius hominis cuiuscunque sit authoritatis est tenenda si contineat manifestè falsitatem vel errorem Et hoc patet per id quod praemittitur in textu Iudicabunt tibi iudicii veritatem Postea subditur docuerint te iuxta legem eius Ex quo patet quod si dicant falsum declinent à lege Dei manifestè non sunt audiendi Here sayeth the Hebrew glosse if they shall say to thee that the right hand is the left or the left hand the right such sentence is to be holden which thing appeareth manifestly to bee false For no mans sentence of how great authoritie soeuer he bee must bee holden or obeyed if it manifestly containe falshoode or errour And this is manifest by that which goeth before in the text They shall shew to thee the veritie and truth of iudgement It followeth also and they shall teach thee according to his law Hereupon it is cleare that if they teach falsely and swarue from the law of God manifestly then are they not to bee heard or followed Out of these words well worthy to be engrauen in golden letters I note first that our Papists now a dayes are as grosse and senselesse as were the olde Iewish Rabbins as who labor this day to enforce vs to belieue the Pope though he erre neuer so grosly telling vs that chalke is cheese and the left hand the right I note secondly that Nicho. de Lyra a great learned papist whose authority is a mighty argumēt against the papists doth here expresly cōdemne the grosse error of the Hebrew doctors in thē the impudent error of all Iesuits Romish parisites who to satisfie the humor of their Pope and to vpholde his Antichristian tyranny doe wrest the holy scripture from the manifest truth thereof I note thirdly that we must neyther belieue Bishop nor Pope nor any other liuing man of what authority soeuer if hee teach vs contrarie to the manifest truth of Gods word I note fourthly that Lyra doth gather out of the Text it selfe that the High Priest might erre and teach false doctrine And consequently that the Iesuite Bellarmine doth but flatter the popes Holinesse when he be stirreth himself to proue out of this place that the Bishops of Rome cannot erre because the Iewish Bishoppes had the like priuiledge and could not teach against the truth I note fiftly out of Lyra Carthusianus and Melchior Canus whose words are already set down that the Priestes of the old law erred grossely and taught false doctrine And that all the world may see the falshood of Romish Popery I will adde a notorious and most execrable error of the High Priest himselfe Caiphas the High Priest pronounced before a great multitude that Christ blasphemed whē he thus spoke Hereafter shall ye see the Sonne of man sitting at the right hand of the power of God and come in the cloudes of heauen Now I ween neither the Iesuite nor any other papist in the world will or dare call this blasphemie which Christ Iesus spoke of himselfe If they dare so say the scripture is a plaine testimonie against them and all the world will crie fie vpon them If they neyther wil nor can so say then is the controuersie at an end then hath the High Priest erred iudicially then may their Pope also erre as he hath done indeed then was not Christ Iesus guilty of deat has the hie Priest and the people affirmed him to be Marke the answere to the next obiection The fourth Obiection If the people may controll the Priest then in vaine are the Priestes commaunded to teach the people And it is absurde that the sheepe should rebuke the shepheard The Aunswere I say first that when the Priestes commaund the people to doe against Gods law then may not the people doe thereafter but remember the doctrine and
cōsequently as we are enforced to grant that when we say Christes bodie is broken then is but the signe of his bodie broken euen so likewise are we enforced to graunt that when Christ saide This is my body hee gaue onely the signe and sacrament of his bodie The reason is euident because his bodie can no otherwise be eaten then it is broken that is to say sacramentally or in a signe or if you will so say figuratiuely or spiritually which is all one Here then is no certaintie of iudgement to be found CAP. 6. Shewing that generall Councels may erre THat generall Councels may erre and de facto haue erred euen in matters of faith it is so plaine as nothing can be more plaine when the truth thereof shall betold as it is in deed In the great and generall Councell of the Iewes in which were present as Christes Gospel telleth vs all the Priests the Scribes the Elders togither with the hie Priest Christ Iesus was condemned to death because he named himself the sonne of God Yea Caiphas the high Priest with the consent and assent of the whole Councell pronounced openly that Christ blasphemed when he called himselfe the sonne of God And yet is it euident to all Christian people and all Papists will and must confesse the same that the hie Priest Caiphas erred perniciously and vttered most execrable blasphemie when hee denied Christ to be the sonne of God and true Messias of the world The great and famous Councell of Lateran holden vnder Innocentius the third in which were present the Patriarkes of Hierusalem and Constantinople Metropolitanes 70 Bishops 400 Abbots 12 Priors Conuentuals 800 the Legates of the Greeke and Romane Empire the Orators of the Kinges of Hierusalem France Spaine Englande and Cypres either erred notoriously aboute the creation of Angels or at least made it euident to all the worlde that the decree of generall Councels is not an infallible rule of faith I proue this to bee so by two important reasons First because the Councell hath these wordes Firmiter credimus simpliciter confitemur quod vnus est solus Deus verus creator omnium visibilium inuisilium spiritualium corporalium qui simul ab initio temporis vtranque de nihilo condidit creaturam spiritualem corporalem angelicam scilicet mundanam We firmely beleeue and simplie confesse that there is one onely true God the creator of all things visible and inuisible spirituall and corporall who from the beginning of time created of nothing both creatures togither the spirituall and the corporall that is to say the angelicall and the terrestriall Secondly because great learned men and most renowmed fathers Gregorius Nazianzenus Basilius Magnus Ambrosius Hieronimus Damascenus doe all holde constantly that albeit the Angels had a beginning yet were they before the world was made And this their opinion is deemed probable both to Saint Austen and to the great School-doctor Aquinas Which Aquinas liued after the said Councell of Lateran and had read the same had also written Commentaries vpon this very Canon and consequently he did not repute the decree of the sayde Councell to be an infallible rule of fayth Loe the generall Councell held constantly and firmely beleeued that the Angels were created at one and the same time with the world But the holy fathers and the great Papist Aquinas thought the contrary opinion to be probable notwithstanding the decree of the Councell Whervpon it followeth of necessity that that is not alway the vndoubted truth which is decreed by a generall Councell For which end and purpose Melchior Canus a lerned popish bishop hath written most excellently in these wordes Non satis est vt Conciliorum Pontificum iudicia firma esse credantur in diuino officio publicè à tota etiam Ecclesia celebrari It is not enough to make the iudgements of Councels and Popes firme so as wee may safely beleeue them to celebrate the same publiquely in diuine seruice throughout the whole Church of God These are golden wordes they may not bee passed ouer rawly and negligently but we must firmely imprint them in our hearts And in so doing wee doubtlesse shall reape commoditie more then a little For if we cannot safely giue credite to the Popish seruice which is publiquely done in their Churches how can they or how dare they auouch their doctrine to bee agreeable to Gods worde Nay it is a worlde to heare that the Pope is not ashamed to enforce the worlde as much as in him lyeth to embrace and beleeue that new no Religion lately start vp Popish doctrine whereof the best Popish writers can giue no better reasons The generall Councell of Constance decreed firmely that it was lawfull to debarre the lay-people from the one part of the Eucharist to wit the cuppe And the generall Councell of Basill affirmeth constantly that so to holde and doe is not agaynst the holy institution And yet is it vndoubtedly true that the lay-people ought by Christes institution to receyue both the kindes Saint Paule writing to the vnpriested Corinthians may bee a sufficient proofe hereof For hee telleth them that they ought according to the commaundement which hee receyued of the Lord to drinke of the cuppe as well as to eate of the bread The matter is so plaine as I deeme it a thing needlesse to stand long vpon the same The Councel of Trent a famous general councell by Popish iudgemēt hath flatly decreed that to bee no matrimonie which was euer approued matrimonie in the Catholique Church and is this day perfect matrimonie by Christes institution The wordes of the Councell are these Dubitandum non est clandestina matrimonia libero consensu facta rata vera esse matrimonia quamdiu ecclesia ea irrita non fecit There is no doubt but clandestine and secrete matrimonies made with free consent were perfect and true matrimonies so long as the Church did not disanull the same Yet so it is gentle reader that such secret matrimonies are this day to bee reputed no matrimonies at all Of which kinde of matrimonies I haue written more at large in my booke of motiues That generall Councels may erre the sole and onely testimony of Panormitanus is sufficient and of force enough against all papists because hee was their famous Canonist their most reuerend Archbishop their renowmed Cardinall His expresse words are these nam in concernentibus fidem etiā dictum vnius priuati esset preferendum dicto Papae si ille moueretur melioribus rationibus noui veteris testamenti quam Papae Nec obstat si dicatur quod concilium non potest errare quia Christus orauit pro ecclesia sua vt nō desiceret quia dico quod licet cōcilium generale representet totam ecclesiam vniuersalem tamen in veritate ibi non est vera ecclesia vniuersalis sed representatiuè quia vniuersalis
of all my books and played all their trickes and fetched all their friscoles their crestes are fallen their spirites rampant are become couchant and all that they can deuise to obiect against mee is nothing else in the world but one silly falsly so supposed contradiction For can any Wiseman thinke if they had any better stuffe which could better serue their turne or giue more credite to their cause or be more likely to satisfie the peoples long expectation that they would conceale it for my sake and the loue they beare to me No no my dearest they meane nothing lesse They will neuer while I liue publish any such confutation Their own consciences condemne them they know they are not able to performe it I would most gladly I protest before God and the world once see any such confutatiō during my life therfore here once again I challenge Robert Parsons that trayterous Iesuite whom I take to be this masked E. O. George Blackwell that seditious Arch-priest as the seculars tearme him and all other English Iesuites and Seminaries whosoeuer and wheresoeuer daring them all to publish the confutation of my saide bookes They are many in number and they busie themselues with publishing other needles bookes Pamphlets and libels and consequently they must of necessitie and will vndoubtedly accept of this challenge now after so many yeares and after so long consultation and mature deliberation aswell for their owne credites sake as for the consolation of their silly seduced Popelinges if they dare take the matter in hand But alas they haue said all they can and done what they were able possibly to performe CAP. III. Of the notorious lies of E. O. POpe Siricius as Thomas Bell affirmeth was seduced by Satā published wicked doctrine and taught the flat doctrine of the diuell These are the expresse wordes of E. O. whom as it seemeth the Diuell did euen then possesse when hee vttered them For not one of these words taught the flat doctrine of the Deuill can bee found in my Suruey in the place which E. O. hath quoted but these wordes which he of purpose did omit prohibited marriage as an vnlawfull thing This therefore is a notorious and a most malitious lye It is a lye in graine and that a knocker to vse his owne words else where adorned with the name of the Diuell to giue the more grace vnto it And that worthily because the Deuill is the Architect and chiefe workeman in that arte and occupation Where I wish the Reader to obserue seriously that my proceeding in all my books hath beene such and so sincere as the aduersaries for the space of eight whole yeares can but espie one onelie falsly so supposed contradiction neyther that but by belying mee and by falsifying my wordes So then it is hereby most apparant to all the worlde that if they had any iust matter agaynst me they woulde load my backe till my bones should cracke This is E. O. his first lie The second lie of E. O. is contained in these his wordes both Bell and Gough giue the lie to maister Sutcliffe denying prayer to Saints to bee auncient and Gough to Bell affirming that it was not knowne till the yeare of our Lord 370. For both Origen and Saint Cyprian liued before that time This is an other notorious lie as shall bee cleared by an euident demonstration I therefore say first that Vitium Scriptoris the negligence ignorance and ouersight of the Printer hath beene often is the cause of many faults extant in my bookes which I note here once for al wishing the reader euer to haue the same in remembrance This is apparant two wayes first because this number of 370. should haue beene 350. as is euident by the sixt Canon Secondly for that the number of 274. in my suruey is otherwise in my booke intituled the hunting of the Romish Foxe viz. 1215. and so the indifferent Reader may easily perceyue that the calumniation and cauill of E. O. proceedeth of meere malice against the truth I say secondly that the famous popish writer Aquinas surnamed the Angelicall doctor will confesse with me against E. O. to his euerlasting shame in this combat These are his expresse wordes Actus morales procedunt a voluntate cuius obiectum est bonum apprehensum Et ideo si falsum apprehendatur vt verum erit quidem relatum ad voluntatem materialiter falsum formaliter autem verum Si autem id quod est falsum accipiatur vt falsum erit falsū materialiter formaliter Si autem id quod est verum apprehendatur vt falsum erit verum materaliter falsum formaliter Moral actes proceede from the will whose obiect is good apprehended And therefore if falshood bee apprehended as truth it being related to the will shall be false materially but true formally But if that which is false be taken as false it shall be false both materially and formally But if that which is true be apprehended as false it shall bee true materially and false formally Againe in an other place the same Author hath these words Si ista tria cōcurrant scilicet quod falsū sit id quod enūciatur quod adsit voluntas falsum enūciandi iterū intētio fallendi tunc est falsitas materialiter quia falsum dicitur formaliter propter voluntatem falsum dicendi effectiue propter voluntatem falsitatem imprimendi Sed tamen ratio mendacii sumitur à formali falsitate ex hoc scilicet quod aliquis habet voluntatem falsum inunciandi Vnde mendaciū nominatur ex eo quod cōtra mentem dicitur Et ideo si quis falsum enunciet credens id esse verum est quidem falsum materialiter sed non formaliter quia falsitas est propter intentionem dicentis vnde non habet perfectam rationem mendacii id enim quod praeter intentionem dicentis est per accidens est If these three things concurre to wit that the thing be false which is vttered and that there be also a will to vtter falshoode and withall an intention to vtter falshood then there is falshood materially because falshood is auouched and there is falshoode formally because there is a will to speake falsly and there is also falshood effectiuely for that there is a will to imprint falshoode in the hearts of others But for all that the formalitie of the lie is deriued from the formal falshoode in that forsooth that one hath a desire to speake falsly Whervpō a lie hath the name of this that it is spoken against the mind And therefore if any man vtter a falshood thinking it to be the truth then is it a lie materiallie but not formally because the falshood is beside his intention that speaketh it and so it hath not the perfect nature of a lie For that which is beside the intention of the speaker is meere accidentall These are