669. for the priuate masse fol. 675. for an halfe communion Dureus resp Whitak rat 6. fol. 301. Ex Euseb eccles hist lib. 6. c. 44 in Greeke 36. in Latine and 43. in English Eckius enchir loc comm c. 15 fol. 156. If the Communion that is a companie receiueing together bee in that respect better then the priuate masse as M Harding himselfe saith where the Priest receaueth all the people gazing on and receaueing nothing which is the point which M Iewell blamed and the priuate masse be but a matter of small waight and a fact the Priests negligence causing the peoples slacknesse For shame leaue of to write in defence of it as also to make that a true Communion spiritual receauing whē the People stand by receaue nothing as both D. Harding M. Dormā doe Corporally the Preist spiritually the people saith he Then say I the people that receiue spiritually receiue the better for to receiue the flesh and bloud of Christ corporally they assigne to the wicked and reprobate such as Iudas spiritually they assigne only to the elect and godly But how are both these articles of private masse and halfe communion proued against B. Iuell and vs by one example of what a silly boy did giue to a sicke mā at his house in a case of necessity The boy because the Priest was sicke brought from him a little of the sacrament and gaue it the old man Do not these men lacke the practise of the Church for their warrant that wil obtrude such examples The story is to be read in Eusebius in Greeke Latine and English and therfore there can be no mystery in it except men desire to be abused What saith Eckius touching praier vnto Saints departed which doctrine is of great moment in the church of Rome Explicitè non est praecepta sanctorum invocatio in sacris literis The invocation of Saints departed is not expressed in the holy scriptures This inuocatiō of Saints cannot be proued net her by the old Testamēt nor by the newe Not in the old Testament saith he for the Iews were prone to Idololatry and vnder the Gospel it was not commanded least the Gētiles that were converted and beleeued should thinke they should bee brought againe to the worship of Earthly Gods Further saith he if the Apostles Evangelists had taught the Saints had bin to haue bin worshipped it would haue argued great arrogancy in thē as if they had sought renowne after death therfore the Apostles would not by the expresse scripture teach the calling vpon Saints Thus far Eckius Sessio 25. de inuocat The counsel of Trent doth not foūd it in the scriptures but bringeth it in by the window an other way by custome consent of Fathers which they do but pretend neither because they would not let go al their hold at once Saunders reakoneth this amongst other things to be the words of God De visib monarc l. 1. fol 12 Hoker Ecclespoll 1. par 13. The benefit of hauing diuines lawes written not his word written but his worde vnwritten If we in this age of the world be to trust to an vnwritten word I demaund to whom that was deliuered to be kept and preserued In the first age of the world as God gaue Laws to our Fathers without writing so hee gaue them memories which serued in steede of books the defects of that kinde of teaching being knowne vnto him he relieued it by often iterating of one thing by putting thē in minde of onething often After this grew the vse of writing as meanes more durable to preserue the laws of God from oblivion and corruption as the liues of men grew the more to be shortned therfore is Moses said to write al the words of God and vnto the Evangelist S. Iohn expresse Charge is giuen Scribe Exod. 24 4. Apoc. 1.11 14.13 Ioh. 20.30.31 write these things Againe Many other signes also did Iesus in the presence of his disciples which are not written in this booke but these things are written that yee might beleeue that Iesus is that Christ that Son of God So that if now after so much writing the ceasing of God to speake to the worlde but by writing we shal divert from his written worde to his vnwritten it wil be to turne the truth of God into a lie and to follow fables in steed of truth If this part of the doctrine of the Church of Rome in praying to Saints be without al warrāt of holy scripture as Eckius and Saunders do allow how much to blame are they Dureus Conf. Whi rat 1. f. 44 Cope dial 3. fol. 332. to the same purpose who would drawe a prescript rule from Christs owne words on the crosse when he cried Eli Eli My God my God why hast thou forsaken me saying that it was familiar to the faithful Iews to pray vnto Saints because they thought that Christ had called on Elias Is it not a miserable glosse that eateth out the bowels of the text If it were an vsual thing with the Iews to pray vnto Saints how said Eckius that the Iewes had it not in vse because they were prone to idololatry and to whom should they pray The fathers of the old testament saith he also were in Limbo in hel The Iews that said Christ called on Elias did deride mocke him so do the Papists abuse vs Matth. 27.47 that alleadge the holy scriptures to such purposes But into how many shapes wil they turne this one parcel of scripture and make it serue more waies thā one Saunders alleadgeth it for the service in an vnknowne tongue because the Iews seemed to mistake Christ De visib mon. l. 7. fo 679. for the seruice in an vnknowne tongue How neere that speech of Christ on the crosse commeth either in favour of praying to Saints or to the service in an vnknown tongue I wil not sticke even now to make themselues iudges The Doctrine of pardons hath brought no smal treasure to the church of Rome yet Alphonsus Alphons a Castro l. 8. verb. indulg Pardōs haue no ground either in antiquity or in the scriptures Polid. Virg. de invent rerum li. 8. c. 1. f. 614. reverēceth it but for new Against the error of denying pardons saith he I wil contend in few words because amongst al the things whereof we dispute in this work there is none that the holy scriptures haue lesse mentioned then pardons and wherof the ancient writers haue lesse spoken This report of Alphonsus doth Polidore Virgill confirme out of Fisher who was bishop of Rochester in these words No Divine doth at al doubt saith he whether there be purgatory but yet among the ancient fathers there is no mention at al of it or very seldome yea euen the Greekes to this day beleeue it not for so long as there was no care for purgatory nemo quaesivit indulgentias no
THE FAL OF BABEL By the confusion of tongues directly proving against the Papists of this and former ages that a view of their writings and bookes being taken it cannot be discerned by any man living what they would say or how be vnderstoode in the question of the sacrifice of the Masse the Reall presence or transubstantiation but in explaning their mindes they fall vpon such termes as the Protestants vse and allow FVRTHER In the question of the Popes supremacy is shewed how they abuse an authority of the auncient father St. Cyprian A Canon of the 1. Niceene counsell And the Ecclesiasticall historie of Socrates and Sozomen And lastly is set downe a briefe of the succession of Popes in the sea of Rome for these 1600. yeeres togither what diversity there is in their accompt what heresies schismes and intrusions there hath bin in that sea delivered in opposition against their tables wherewith now adaies they are very busie and other things discovered against them By IOHN PANKE 2. Sam. 3.1 There was long warre betweene the house of Saul and the house of David but David waxed stronger and the house of Saul waxed weaker Printed at Oxford by Ioseph Barnes 1608. TO THE RIGHT VVORSHIPFVLL and Reuerend in Christ M. D. A. the heads of Colledges and companies of students in the Vniuersitie of Oxford And their Colleagues and associates against the common aduersarie in the Vniuersitie of Cambridge and all other publike defenders of the true christian religion within this his Maiesties Realme of great Brittaine Iohn Pancke wisheth grace and peace from God the Father and from our Lord Iesus Christ I Haue read it reported Reuerend Fathers and Brethren Reyn in the beeginning of his 6. conclusions And also in his apology of them Quid opus est vt properes periculum suscipere condemnationis loqueÌ„do cum taceÌ„do possis esse tutior Ambro. offic l. 1. c. 2. that it was the fortune of Aulus Albinus to bee reprehended by Cato the censor because being a Romane and writing his historie in Greeke he did seeme to aske pardoÌ„ if he did therin amisse wheÌ„ with lesse adventure hee might haue kept himselfe from all fault in not medling with such a businesse at all My case at this time is euen as his in this matter taken in hand I would both adventure it will also praie your pardons if I haue either done amisse in medling with a businesse that beelongeth to right approued schollers or haue not proceeded so soundly against the aduersaries as the waight of these questions doth requier My defence in both cases is by waie of excuse for seeing I haue for some fewe yeares past bin conuersaÌ„t in al your writings that J could harken out to be printed against the adversaries to whom rather shoulde J giue an account then vnto you either of the profit I haue made by them to ouerthrowe the contrarie part or incite you to continue yet your further labours to the building vp of the spirituall house of the Lord and better accomplish all could doe that by this kinde of dedication Illustres praestantes viri discipulorumcer taminibus noÌ„minus quaÌ„ suis vincunt Amb. offic l. 1. c 41. Si pro otioso verbo reddemus rationem videamus ne reddamus pro otioso si entiâ— Amb. offic l. 1. c. 3. The truth hath spokeÌ„ it we shall render an account for euerie idle word and so shal we for our idle silence J freely confesse vnto you al that next the booke of God your volumes and treatises haue especially tied mee at home when some other my companions haue bin walking abroad The holy truth which in your consciences you knowe you doe vphold is the waightiest assurance of well doing that maie bee The consent of nations Churches abroad is a great motiue to pricke you forward but when by the particular travel of any on man it may also appeare that hauing had your writings tried by the CanoÌ„ of holie scripture and some antiquitie else hauing it found that there is a true Diapason concord in al your voices in arguing the truth of the Lords cause this to bee testified by others that are of the Laitie as children ioining with you Fathers wil J suppose bee noe smal ioie and gladnesse vnto you Macte virtute Go forward J beeseech you with good courage the aduersarie is insoleÌ„t but verie weake Lactant instit lib. 5. c. 20. fol. 465. iam profecto ab amculis quas contemnunt à pueris nostratibus error illocum ac stultitiae irridetur euen of old wiues and yong children which they most contemne is their verie religion derided Illa enim religio muta est non tantuÌ„ quia mutoâ—um est sed quia titus eius in manu digitis estnoÌ„ in corde aut lingua sicut nostra ibid. l 4. c. 3. fol. 303. They can tel now as wel as their teachers that their religion is dumbe as done vnto stockes and blockes and also is idle as beeing placed in the hande and fingers scarcelie comminge into the tongue but neuer into the heart as the auncient father Lactantius saith by the Gentiles which aptly sheweth the vanitie of theirs also for by euens ods they make their praiers long or short Their Beads Iuell Nolo nuÌ„c aut Oxonienses CaÌ„tabrigiensibus aut Cantabrigienses Oxoniensibus anteponere vtrosque constat ingenio eruditione vaâ—uisse Sic. Melc Canus de Graecis Latinis l. 7. fo 231 a. not the one before the other but either of them before the best in the world Lilly Fulke Whita L. B. Winchest Reynoldes Besides lib. de Rom. Ecclesiae Idolol Apolog Thesium Humphrey Erat enim ingenio facili co pioso suavi quae sermonis maxima virtus aperto vt discernere nequeas vtrum ne ornatior in eloquendo an faciliot in explicando an potentior in persuadendo fuerit Lac. de Cyp. lib. de iustitia c. 1. To incite you to this holy conflict I wil cal to your remembrances the paines of very worthy men both aliue and dead Let it bee the honor of Bishop Iuell once bishop of Sarum that his reply Apology stand safe without iust reprehension when his direct adversary D. Harding reioined but to one of 27. articles Stapleton returned but to 4. those so meanly cloathed that himselfe might haue bin ashamed not answering the 10. part of the bishops text leauing out whole sheetes to which he hath not said a word Dorman delt also against the Bishop in 4. articles too but too too porely Propose to your sights the industrious toiles of D. Fulke and VVhitakers the one for his answere to the Rhemish testament as also his defence of our translatioÌ„s against Gregory Martin his answere to Bristow Allen and others The other for his paines against Champion Stapleton Dureus Bellarmine But in this are the liuing to be preferred before the deade in that it hath
even vvith the same vvorship that the trinitie should be worshiped vvith The learned amongst them knowe that this vvhich I saie is true Leaue I beseech you your old and vvorneout excuses which hetherto some of you haue bin accustomed to make in defence of the religion you are in liking with which are so did wee learne so did our ancients teach they were wise enough they knewe what they did and what was best and so spoile your selues of iudgment and banish reason only to rest on other mens errors But if you wil needs go to Fathers ancients go to theÌ„ of 1500. 1400. 1300. 1200. 1000. yeares since not to theÌ„ which lived in the Tyranny of ignorance for 400. 300. or 200. yeares ago wheÌ„ Sathan had covered the greatest Monarkies in darknes and ignorance some few sparkles here and there arising being with the fogge mist that then spread it selfe soone put out Policy is the best point that their religioÌ„ ever thriued by That this is true I wil lay a briefe of the method which your masters vse and you know is true in propagating their religion First they take away al vse of reading the holy scriptures from the Laity whom they teach instruct Next they barre them from al conference or society with any of whom they might learne to vnderstand what they are taught whether agreeable to Gods word or not 2 They take from them al the Protestants books 3 and damne them to the pit of hel not suffering them to read one of them I demand how far either a Turke or Iew or any other miscreant might preuaile against any poore seduced soule that is in their custody if they take them time enough with these meanes Those they vse touching the Ignoraunt for their schollers they haue other First they shall haue the ancient Fathers Doctors as they wil please to deliver them 4 by written notes of their owne gathering 5 if they chance to admit them to the prints they shal then haue such prints as they haue newly set for the purpose the ancient copies being altered Then they haue a devise to shew them counterfait writings of the Fathers and Doctors such as they never wrote insteed of true and therefore learned and vnlearned 6 scholler or not scholler had need take heed to them in that And wheÌ„ they are hardly pursued out comes the Index expurgatorius in maÌ„ner of a note booke to tell the younger sort when wherein they shall refuse any author that maketh against the doctrine of the church of Rome 7 And adde vnto this practise such an opinion as this This is related more at larg in the booke it selfe where speciall mention is made of it The Church of Rome cannot erre whatsoever it decree and the Pope of Rome is not to be accused whatsoever be doth And thus they seduce both one sort and other If ever there were slauery or tyranny this is it the captivitie of the soule being ten thousand times more greate more grievous than that of the body God hath called you vnto liberty not to be servants of sin 8 but to serue erroneous opinions is worse than to beare tyrannous exactions 9 Take froÌ„ them these weapons where with they chiefly fight Gal. 5. 1. Coâ—inth 7. Iudg. 15. and you shal haue them as Sampson without his haire you may take them and chaine them where you list Pardon me I desire you if I be large the earnestnesse of my minde towards you hath caused it because I see the waies that deceiue you where the apprehension of the minde is great words to opeÌ„ it wil be many vincil officium linguae sceleris magnitude Their practises against the truth passe the quicknesse of my pen to describe and therfore every warning should worke some warinesse Touching my person it skilleth not in this who I am I hope you wil consider what is spoken Hoker pref to his 5. booke of Eccles polic Quaeso à vobis vt eadem oratio aequa aeque vale at I'anormitanus Laur. Humfr. cont Camp ratio p. 2. fol. 381 456. spiritus sanctus non alligatur ordini vel gradui vel â—athredae c. Quare nec ex munero homi num nec ex personarum celsitate fed ex causae veritate omnia sunt aestimaÌ„da Act. 20 The cheife that haue written in the controuer sies a litle before Queene Elis raigne ever since and not who it is that speaketh but let the same reason prevaile whether from a young man or an old whether from a clerke or a lay man There was a great man of your Church that once saide There was more heed to be given to a lay man bringing scripture than to the Pope and generall counsell And as great a man amongst vs hath said The holy Ghost is not tyed to any Order degree or chaire but bloweth where he will neither as S. Ierome saith we must not iudge as Pithogoras schollers according to what the teacher shall say but the strength of that which is taught by whomsoever must be waighed If the truth in these cases had bin to be sought for at the hands of any sort of meÌ„ Popes or Cardinals or touching the place Rome Paris or Rhemes or any other seat I am well assured S. Paule when he tooke his leaue from those of Ephesus would not haue omitted to haue named any man or place to haue resorted vnto he only said thus Now bretheren I commend you to God vnto the word of his grace which is able to build further and to giue you an inheritance amongst all them that are sanctified To draw to an end Because you shal as plainly see that I can direct you where you shal finde the true religion taught and mainetained according to the holy scriptures of God as wel as I haue noted vnto you the false boulstred out take into your hands those two treatises of D. Cranmers of the Sacrament Bishop Hoopers and Bishop Ridlies of the same argument Bishop Iuels Reply defence of the Apology against Harding D. Nowell against Dorman D. Fulkes answere to the Rhemists testament D. Humphrey against Campian D. Whitakers against Campian and Dureus Willets Synopsis and Tetrastilon D. Reinolds confetence with Hart and against Bellarmine and defence of his theses D. Sutcline against Bellarmine ofteÌ„ My Lord of Winchesters Dialogues against the Iesuits D. Abbot against Hil or any other treatises of these against your side you shal see the truth of Gods holy worde in seuerall parts discussed in so wonderfull an harmony that though some of them liue now and some be gone they speak al one language they all pronounce Shibboleth plainly Iud. 12.6 it being but one truth which they speake In their volumes and writings be many and insinite quotations both of scriptures fathers Doctors Councels histories laws decrees both Greeke and Latine pervse them view them single them out in
of the celebrating of that one councel Sanders againe in an other place 5. Sand. declaue Dauid I. 4. sol 81. The cosent of the bishop of Rome preambulateth from the matter before hee come to it thus Although the consent of the bishop of Rome alwaies had obtained did confirme the summoning of a general couÌ„sell yet that in a great matter no error should creep in it was the order that the Pope should send his letters to the Emperour touching that matter As who shuld say the Pope commanded the Emperour to summon counsells and then the Emperour having received those letters did by his own letters assemble the bishops wherevpon the bishops assembled at Constantinople do write vnto Damasus in these words you did send for vs as for meÌ„bers of your owne body by the letters of the most holy Emperour to come vnto the counsel which is gathered togither at Rome by the wil pleasure of God And a little after By the commandement of letters from your holinesse sent the last yere vnto the Emperor Theodosius after the councel held at Aquila wee prepared our selues only for our iourney to Constantinople It therefore appeareth saith Sanders from this testimony That there were two Councels holden at once one at Rome the other at Constantinople and to both of them the Pope sent for those bishops by the letters of the Emperour Thus much from Sanders in that place of that matter 6. Staplet ret oâ— untruths art 4. fol. 139. D. Stapleton an other of that side maintaining the Popes soveraignety is no more abashed to abuse the history than those other haue done in the places going before For saith hee Those bishops of Constantinople doe write-vnto Damasus the Pope and shewing a cause of there not coÌ„ming to Rome do further say vnto him That they had assembled themselues but lately at Constantinople by the late letter of your honor sent after the councell holden in Aquilicato the most Godly Emperour Theodosius Letters from your honor which was the reason why they could not come to Rome Now touching this present matter saith he the bishops here doe witnesse that to that counsel of Rome the Pope called them by the letters of the Emperour not as a warrant they haue no such word but rather as a meane For they witnes he calleth theÌ„ as his proper members Bellar. thrise Saund. twise already Staplet once 7. 8 and. de vifib monar l. 7. fol. 312. num 145. 146. The whole masse of falsehood is diseouered The Easterne bishops write to all the bishops of the West and so the letters go in the plurall number This it the sixt canvasse they haue had touching this place of Theodoret The seauenth set downe by Sanders in a thirde place of his booke will quite overthrow both himselfe and them being inlighted a little by the history which they al haue most shamefully abused For in this third place of his hee hath bewraied their shameful dealing There he confesseth that the Bishops of the East did write to other bishops of the West and namely to Ambrose aswel as to Damasus not to him alone as hitherto they al made vs beleeue they did and there he confesseth more over that the Easterne bishops receiued a letter from the Westerne gathered togither at Rome in which letter they were praied to come thither and that in their answere back they declare that all the westerne bishoppes sent for them by letters from the most holie Emperour But saith he further it appeareth from this place that the first beginning of a general counsel is the bishop of Rome but the meanes which the Pope vseth in that matter is to call them by the Emperours letters This is all their report that I finde of this matter I would now but aske them this questioÌ„ whether they tell vs thus much because they beleeue it or beleeue is because they tell it vs If they tell it vs as beleeuing it themselues we can say no otherwise of them than of him that did accustome to tel lies so fast to others that in the end he tooke them for truthes himselfe if they beleeue it because they tell it vs our incredulity in this case shal do them good in aduising theÌ„ not to beleeue that wee will any more take the reporte of any such matter vpon their words so that if our deniall wil profit them I assure theÌ„ I will not credit them in any thing without due evidence of the iustnesse of it Ter. in Eunuc act 2. scen 1. Nihil aliud quam Philumenam volo And therefore I giue them the councel in the Poet quoniam id fieri quod voluâ—t non potest velint id quod possit since they caÌ„not haue what they would that they woulde take what they may But they answere they would haue nothing but the Bishop of Romes supremacy I say again as the Poet saith in that place it were much better for theÌ„ to leaue that fansie rather than by this palpable fraud to go about to perswade it Al their inferences from that text of Theodoret are false and merely suggested either of the Popes power in calling that counsell of Constantinople or of their writing to Damasus oulie to Damasus or that they called him their head or that they confessed themselues his proper members as they haue abused the history The writing which the bishops of the East sent to them of the West is called The true report out of Theodorete eccles l. 5. c. â— Libellus Sinodicus à Concilio Constantinopolitano ad Episcopas missus The Councel of Constantinoples declaration sent vnto the Bishops The superscription is Dominis honoratissimis cum primis reverendis fratribus ac collegis Damaso Ambrosio Brittoni valeriano Acholio Avemio Basilio et cateris sanct is Episcopis To the most renowned Reverend bretheren fellowes and most especial reverend brethren and fellows Damasus Ambrose Briton Valerian Acholius Avemius Basill and the rest of the holy bishops gathered togither in the famous citty of Rome The holy councell of Catholike bishops gathered togither in the famous citty of Constantinople send health in our Lord. Num quid nam hic quod nolis Ter in Eunuc act 2. scen 2. vides Bellarmine Is there any thing here ô Bellarmine that thou wouldest not see Yes neither me nor that which I haue brought Where do they write to Damasus Where do they acknowledge him the head they the members Where be the letters sens froÌ„ his honor All this like religious and loving fathers to the Church of God they confesse each to other because they consented in one catholike doctrine were of one Catholike church though divided by East and West whose head is Christ as S. Paule saith Ephes 4.5 One Lord one faith one baptisme But if you wil speake of what they were in respect of themselues and their authoritie over each other SozoÌ„ l. 6. c.
frustrate or to followe the motion of god And this The father draweth vs and teacheth vs to come to his sonne and beleiue these high and hard mysteries not compelling or violently forcing any against their will or without any respect of their consent but by the sweet internall motions and perswasions of his grace and spirit hee vvholie maketh vs of our owne will and liking to consent to the same And in another place most plainlie The vehement perswasion that god vseth both externally by force of his word miracles and internally by his grace to bringe vs vnto him is called compelling not that he forceth any to come to him against their wils but that hee can alter and mollifie an hard hart make him willing that before would not How these notes agree al men maie see if conuersion from sin heresie bee the gifts of God and of his speciall grace and that hee wholie maketh vs of our owne will and liking to consent and that hee doth alter and mollifie an hard harte and maketh him willing that before woulde not I woulde knowe vvhat free wil man hath to vvish his own conuersion vvhich is a supernaturall thing before Gods grace and illumination come Can it concurre vvith a thing which is not A wil to wish our conversioÌ„ is not there before grace come nether heth it in man to frustrate the grace of God vvhen hee doth effectuallie call vs as appeareth by S Paul called in the Acts Againe if it he in mans power to frustrate or follow the motion of God how is conuersion from sinne and heresie the gift of God which they saie also So that as the two first notes do oppugne each other so doe the two last also ioining fairely with the doctrine of the Church of England in one maine point of controversie which is Free will To say that God altereth and mollifieth an hard hart maketh him willing that before would not is to say That God maketh vs then willing being otherwise by nature vnwilling Perkins Treatise of mans freewill and Gods free grace fol. 102. De gratia lib. arbit l. 6. c. 15. fol. 557. and so he regenerateth vs not against our wils but with our wils yet so as the willingnesse to be regenerate is not of vs but of God If they wil stand to their own notes they may subscribe to this of ours Bellar mine will come to vs himselfe rather theÌ„ we shall be alone in this question of our conversion and free will Conuersio homines addeum vt etiam quodlibet aliud opus pium quatenus opus à libero arbitrio est tantuÌ„ non tamen secluso auxilio generali quatenus pium à SOLA GRATIA est quatenus opus pium à libero arbitreo est gratiaÌ„ The conversion of man vnto God saith he as every other godly worke so farre forth as it is a worke is only of free wil not excluding Gods general helpe so farre forth as it is Godlie it is ONLIE of Grace and so farre forth as it is a Godlie vvorke The good that is in the worke is of grace it is of Free will and Grace together For the efficient cause of everie action of man as it is an action is from the will of man as it is free it is by the freedome of the vvill as it is Godlie it is by the good seede and sufficient helpe for that seed Further Grace only doth make that the action or deed of man be godly and supernatural which nature with al his strength can never reach vnto What is this but our assertion and the overthrow of himselfe and his fellows in this question We never denied a natural power in man simply to wil this or that but to wil that is good Petrus Baro super Ionam Thes 1. fo 326 ex Aug. we hold it a worke of grace only as Bellarmine here confesseth Liberè agere est humanae naturae it a cum ratione coniunctum vt ab ea non separetur liberè agendo malum eligere est corruptae naturae bonum vero eligere est gratiae saith a great protestant out of S. Augustine Freely to do a thing is of the natural power in man and so ioined to his reason that it cannot be separated from it in this free choice to chuse a thing that is naught is the corruptnesse of nature but to chuse the good is of grace Bellarmine in one place complaineth that Pighius De grat lib. arb l. 1 c. 3. f. 50. See the same in Rey. admonit ad lecto in li de Rom. Eccle Idolol q. 3 In very manie things Bellarmine is a protestant or at the least not a Papist Doctor Doue in his book of recusancy De iustific l. 5. cap. 7 fol 424. It is the safest way to trust to the alone mercy of God otherwise a great Catholike went away froÌ„ that side in some questioÌ„s because he addicted himselfe to read Calvins works and I doubt me when Bellarmine shal be called hence they wil say of him he was too nere a protestant For besides that before in the great question of Merite thus he writeth Propter incertitudâ—…eÌ„ propriae iustitiae periculum inauis gloriae tutissi mumest fiduciam totam in sola â—es miserisordia benignitate reponere In respect saith he of the incertainty of our own righteousnesse and for feare of vaine glory It is the safest way to place al our trust and hope in the alone goodnes and mercy of God He seeth wel the weaknes of his cause for which he striveth otherwise he would never haue come to the truth so freely howsoeuer in the expounding of his meaning in those words which are plaine enough and need no exposition he would faine marre them againel For he would yet haue vs beleeue that our workes are vera iustitia very righteousnesse and that they can abide the iudgement of God and may be relyed vpon which if it were so where is the defect which causeth theÌ„ to fly to his alone mercy God is not vniust if their works wil abide his trial let them claime their due of desert without mercy or fauor For to him that worketh is the reward not reakoned of grace but of duty saith S. Paule Rom. 4.4 De iustific l. 5. c. 16. fol. 463. 2. Tim 4.8 Againe discoursing against his ancient brother Durand touching that text of S. Paule which the iust iudge shal gine vnto me at that day he saith that to speake absolutely man caÌ„not exact or require any thing of God since all that we haue is his gift yet taking in as it were the wil of God and his promise in that he wil not exact our works of vs for nothing but vvil render a reward according to the proportion of the workes we may exact a reward of him and therefore saith he the works of the righteous remoto pacto velpromissione Ibid. fol 465. setting his
say Peter is named in speciall as often elswhere for prerogatiue It is said of Midas that he wished every thinge he did touch might be gold I thinke they are as so manie Midasses every thing they deale in maketh for Peters prerogatiue a simple prerogatiue I thinke it is for him to bee named after all the Disciples Tub. Here bee shrewd accusations indeed they accuse you and you accuse them on whom shal I such other that stand in doubt betweene you relie They are very famous for their learning and paines taken in defence iustification of their cause their volumes and bookes are many and it maie be your replies answers are as large but here is the doubt who saith true Rom. Iuell to the reader in the def of the Apologie Indeed it cannot chuse but pitty everie good maÌ„ in behalfe of his vnlearned brother to see his conscience thus assalted this daie with so contrarie doctrines of religion especially when there is a zeale to followe and men knowe not what and would faine please God and cannot tell how or if they finde not themselues armed with Gods holie spirit not are able to discerne their meat from poison nor to wind theÌ„selues out of the snares for Sathan transformeth himselfe into an Angel of light 2. Cor. 11. the wicked are more watchful vehement then the Godly and falshood is oftentimes pointed beautified shineth more glorious then the truth These be the things which as S. Paule saith worketh the subversion of the hearers and by meane wherof 2. Tim. 2. Mat 24 as Christ saith if it were possible the very elect of God shoulde bee deceaued Notwithstanding God in these daies hath so amazed the adversaries of his Gospel and hath caused them so openly and so grossly to laie abroad their follies to the sight and face of all the world that noe man now bee hee neuer so ignorant can thinke he may be iustly excused it is but tolle lego take vp read read and vnderstand by Gods assistance But the indiscretion of manie in the world that doe stand doubtful of the truth betweene them vs is equivalent and semblable to that answere which I once hard a Master giue to on that had bin his Factor or rather indeed his fractor in a case not vnlike to this about some difference between them of accouÌ„ts the Factor pleaded his innocencie and truth by the plainenesse of his proceedings in deliuering his bills and reckonings to his Master from time to time to be examined his M. replied you haue so done indeed but you knowe that I neither did nor would looke on them It is noe basenesse for the greatest to de scend looke into their own estate Bacon sE of expeÌ„ce nor examine theÌ„ I fouÌ„d by that answere that the reason whie the Master would not nor had anie liking to veiw them was because hee woulde haue libertie at anie time as occasion serued to say he could not tell whether his man deceaued him or not Wheras if hee had but taken the paines to haue examined his mans dealings hee might haue bin assured to haue found how he had behaued himselfe towards him whether true or false so fareth it in these daies with vs painfull workes there are enough some of great volume some slighter al concerning the truth of our cause which all men maie see and read but that which galeth vs and most tieth our adversaries to themselues and their errors is that they who condemne vs knowe vs not whether we be white or black they neuer obserue Albi an atri simus nesciunt who say we are heretickes dispisers of the Church and yet neuer read what we hold nor examine vs in any thinge that we doe as publikely complaineth a great scholler of our side D. Doue of Recusancy c. 2 and I my selfe haue oft had experieÌ„ce And therfore in few words between them and vs I can saie as the ancient father Arnobius said against the Gentiles wheÌ„ they accused the christians of those things wherof themselues were guiltie even in the verie entrance of his conference he testifieth roundly to the world Arnob. contra Gentes lib. 1. in princip in these words Efficietur enim profecto rationum consequentium copulatu vt non impij nos magis sed illi ipsi reperiantur criminis estius rei qui renuminum profitentur esse cultores atque inveteratis religionibus deditos It shal be proued saith he by the ioining of our reasons to gether that we are not so wicked as they lay to our charge but that themselues are founde guiltie of that wherof they accuse vs who doe professe themselues worship pers of the Gods and only retainers of the ancieÌ„t religions But if you or any other wil be amated with anie streame of words to beleiue that part without looking into the matter reasons proofes drifts and arguments of al sides wherby you maie rightly iudge indeed the same Father telleth you againe Quid est enim quod humana ingenia tabefactare studio contradictionis non audeant Arnob. Ibid. l. â— fol. 102. what is it saith he that the witts of some meÌ„ dare not ruinate with the studie of coÌ„tradictioÌ„ yea although that which they studie to ouerthrowe be pure and clear and hedged with truth on everie side and who cannot saith hee dispute with arguments of great liklihood yea although he defend a manifest vntruth lye The roote of this error vaine consequeÌ„ce he toucheth in the next words following Cum enim sibipersuaserit quis esse quid aut non esse amat quod opinatur asserere When a man hath perswaided himselfe that anie thing is so or not so he then loueth what he apprehendeth and desireth to excell others in sharpnesse of wit especialliy if the matter which is dealt in be remote hid or darke But God be thanked those learned diuines reuerend prelats before mentioned and a number other in this age with their infinite toile and paine haue threshed and winnowed for vs the doctrine and differences of the Church of Rome and this of England they haue performed the first part of the Apostles speech which willeth to trie all things 1. Thess 5. â—1 the latter part resteth vpon vs to followe that that which is good bee kept nether can there be a keeping of that which is good without a triall of all things doe goe before so that I dare pronounce there is none who maie not if he will see on which side the truth is Epist 105. M. to this purpose I doe remember a sentence of the Godly and learned father S. Augustine which is Ignorantia in cis qui intelligere noluernut sine dubitatione peccatum est Ignorance in them which are notwillng to learne without doubt it is sinne in them which cannot learne a punishment of sin in both there is noe iust excuse but iust damnation Tub. It
sinketh not into my head that men otherwise learned and verie religious should so wilfully hood wincke themselues against the truth as in this last declaration it seemeth you meane they doe for besides their owne words and few of their bookes haue I yet seene in iustification of themselues I see a famous Catholike Church of theires I meane Rome who hath bin and yet is renowned for succession of Bishops This hath bin and yet is maketh all the error Iulius Caesar was once faithful to the Romans but affecting Soue ranitie he cōtinued not so so the Church of Rome was agreat church amongst the rest But now it beareth witnes of it selfe as Simon Magus said That hee was some great mā Act 8.9 Their vsual tables in writing which they giue to their freinds containing a Catalogue of the Bish of Rome and continuance of Apostolike doctrine vvhose gouernor head is the Pope vvho keepeth it in the same integritie and soundnesse of doctrine that S. Peter our Lords cheife Apostle vvhose successor hee is did vvhen hee sate and ruled there as he doth now I tell you I haue a table of the Bishops of Rome from S. Peter to Climens the eight vvho latly deceased as the speech was You cannot shew me the like of any Church in the world but of that Al churches saue a fewe of late yeeares haue ever acknowledged that Church for the mother and head of them al and whatsoeuer was amisse vvas thither referred and determined therfore if you will oppose your selfe against them or their religion you had need bringe sound arguments or else they wil bee quickly confuted Rom. See now you require that of mee already vvhich you cannot performe your selfe To enterinto the discussing of the points of doctrine vvhich concerne either side you haue nether abilitie nor iudgment by reason you are but newly begun to be tutered by them And then if I shoulde of my selfe discourse of them vnto you you vvould in the end say of my labour therin as a merrie fellow in Wilteshire said of an hare in a course with his dogge when my dogge was let slip at the hare quoth he she went forth right was before my dogge some foure acres bredth But my dogge fetcht her and gaue her a turne and awaie she goes againe then he gaue her another and did beat her so that she had many turnes wrenches but in the end quoth he the hare went awaie and had nether turne nor wrench so if I should shew vnto you the vnsoūdnes of the doctrine of the church of Rome from scriptures Fathers Counsells Doctors yea of the intrusions of Bishops into that sea which you from them call succession you would giue me the hearing how soever I did beat the hare in giuing her manie wrentches turnes yet you would saie she went from me in the end and had nether turne nor wrentch I am not ignorant in what painted Cyphers In the 1. petition to his Maiestie Adde fidem dictis Ovid. Medea Ias the Catholikes did of late a greable to your report of them set forth their religion calling it venerable for antiquitie maiesticall for amplitude constant for continuance irreprehensible for doctrine inducing to all kind of vertue and pietie dissuading from all sin wickednesse A religiō beloued by all pri◅tiue Pastors established by all Oecumenicall counsells vpheld by al ancio◅ doctors maintained by the first and most Christian Emperours recorded almost alone in all Ecclesiasticall histories sealed with the blood of millions of Martyres adorned with the vertues of so manie confessors beautified with the paritie of thousands of Virgins so conformable to naturall sence and reason and finally so agreable to be sacred text of Gods word and Gospell Of which speech of theirs I will saie noe otherwise nowe Cor. Tac. hist l. 2. c. 27. then Tacitus doth of Vitellius the Emperour of Rome in these words The daie following saith he as though he had spoken before the Senate and people of a strange Citty he made a glorious speech of himselfe extolling his owne industriousnesse and temperancie when as they vvhich hard him of their owne knowledge vvere witnesses of his lewd actions al Italy besides through which he marched for drowsinesse and riot notoriously infamous Two pillars wherof the Papists must rest Whitak cont Dureum l 9. de Sophia There are two notable pillars which vphold the Church of Rome in al her buildings vnknowen to you yet but herafter better may be against which if you leane they wil surely deceaue you on is The Church of Rome cannot erre whatsoeuer it teacheth the other The Bishop of Rome ought not to bee accused what soeuer he doe Vpon such pillars as these they maie reate what vvorke they wil and so they doe but it fareth with thē as it was wont to the false Prophets One buildeth vp an muddy wall Exech 13.10 and others dawbe it over with a rotten plaister But because it hath pleased God to bringe vs againe thus luckely to gether I wil bend our conference for this time to some good purpose that you goe not altogether awaie without profite Will you graunt mee but so much as common humanitie will afford anie man or the meanest courtesie of freindes allowe Tub. I wil alowe you any reasonable graunt whereof if you doubt you doe me wronge it may be you deeme me so affectioned that I wil neither heare nor read anie thinge aganst my humor I would not haue you so thinke of me that were more beast like to follow the first of the heard then according to anie Christian course and if anie should wish me to it I should the sooner mistract them and grow the wearier of them Rom. You say well and my request shal be yet more reasonable then you would deeme it to be you are you saie vnable to dispute of the points of doctrine betweene them vs vntil you be further instructed in them Tub. I confesse it I haue only hetherto heard their our report without either their proofes or your acceptions Rom. Why then this I saie which you or anie man being neuer so vnlearned maie vnderstand if all their points of their religion be good sound Catholike according to Scriptures Fathers Counsells Doctors histories viz. their Masse their sacrifice their reall presence their meritinge of heauen their free wil in good and holy things their praying to Saints their seruice in an vnknowen tongue The points in con rouersie betweene vs. the forbidding of the lave people to read the Scriptures in their vulgar tongue The Bishop of Romes authoritie worshiping of Images and a number of questions else What need then is there for the Doctors of that side such as haue written in defence proofe of their cause Harding Dorman Saunders Stapleton Allen Cope Bellarmine Rhemists Dureus and manie others to misaleadg any Doctor Counsell Historie or Father either by corrupting of
that sacrifice which the ancient Church of God 1400. yeares before those of Trent spake of was not so caled properly according to the rigor of the word with them the celebration of the Lordes supper is called an oblation for that it is a representatioÌ„ of Christs death sacraments haue names of the things which they signifie because the merits fruits of Christs passion are by the power of his spirit devided bestowed on the faithful receauers of these mysteries Thomas of Aquine was in his time of greater credit with them then the Master of the sentences Acutè diuus Thomas vt omnia Camâ— rat 9. argutissime Canus l. 12 to 408. Melius diuus Thomas vt omnia dixit Allen fol. 419. p. 3. q 83. art I resp dicendum ex Aug. ad sim pl. quest 3. If Thom. had thought that Christ had bin killed sacrificed to God his father as D. Allen disputeth l. 2. c 11 he needed not to haue hand led it as here he doth Camp rat 5. Duraeus eaâ—… fol. 265. Art 17 cont luel fol 206. b. 207. a. though in time later the Master is not euer allowed by them but Thomas they saie hath done all things acutly well yet hee saith as we say in this In two respects saith hee celebratio butus sacraements dicitur immolatio Christi the celebratioÌ„ of this sacrameÌ„t may be called the sacraficing of Christ First because as S. Augustine saith resemblances are wont to be called by the name of those things wherof they are resemblances therfore the celebration of this sacrament is a certaine representatiue Image of the passion of Christ which is his true sacrificing Secondly touching the effect of Christs passion quia scilicet per hoc sacramentum participes efficimur fructus dominicae passionis because by this sacrament wee are made partakers of the fruite of the Lords passioÌ„ This of Thomas were ceaue against their reall external corporal kinde of offering the liue flesh of Christ to God the Father by the Preists handes vnder the formes of bread wine as now they teach they doe With what facilitie of language D. Harding D. Stephan Gardiner proceeded in this question I will now also shew you and the rather because Campian Durâ—us both doe highly commeÌ„d D. Harding his worke he hauing spoken something of the sacrifice of Christ on the Crosse done with shedding of blood in his owne person as the scripture witnesseth commeth to shew how he is handled in their Masse saith Sacramentally or in a mysterie Christ is offered vp to his Father in the daily sacrifice of the Church vnder the forme of bread and wine truly indead not in respect of the maner of offering but in respect of his very body blood really present And after recitinge the words of the Evangelists Luc. 22 how that Christ at his last supper took bread gaue thankes brake it said take eate this is my body which is giuen for you and this is my blood which is shed for you in remission of sinnes out of which he would proue his sacrifice saith they are wordes of sacrificing offering they shew and set forth an oblation in act deed though the tearme it selfe of oblatioÌ„ or sacrifice be not expressed therfore belike seeing nether any tearmes nor words to make for it there afterwards vpon more deliberation he peeceth out the Euangelists S Paul for Christ said Doe yes this in my remembrance he readeth doe yee or make yee this in my remembrance Reioynder f. 283. 305. Tully de natur deotum l. 1. feâ—e fine Elephanto belluarum nullaprudentior at figuraÌ„ quae vastior Of beasts saith Tully none is more wiser then the Elephant in shape none more deformed M. Harding was thought for that time to haue dealt substantially against his aduersary in substance of matter none more weake Who can explaine how Christ is offered really in their Masse yet not in respect of the manner of offering what manner what respect is this Or what words of sacrificing and offering did Christ vse at his last supper without any tearme of oblatioÌ„ sacrificing Hoc non est considerare sed quasi sortiri quid loquare Tull. ibid. This is not to speake with discretion but as it were by lot hap-hazard But the truth is Christ vsed noe word tearme or act of sacrificing at his last supper we maruaile not then though M. Harding say hee expressed it not by any tearme Yet the farthest of from al truth is Hard. Ibid. fol 209. A necessary point of Christian doctrine yet without al manner of Religion that which in the prosecution of this article he deliuereth which is that Christ at the very same instant of time that he offered himselfe on the Crosse with shedding of blood we must vnderstaÌ„d for a necessary point of Christian doctrine that he offered himselfe invisibly as concerning man in the sight of his heauenly father bearing the markes of his woundes and there appeareth before the face of God with that thorne prickt naile boared speare perced other wounded rent torne body for vs. Here are 4 sacrifices made of one The same Christ sacrificed at his last supper the same Christ on the Crosse the same Christ at the same time sacrificed in heauen the same Christ sacrificed in the Masse How M. Harding can bring Christs sacrificed into heaueÌ„ without his tormentors is hard to conceaue Aâ—…as Caiphas Iudas Pilate the rest of that damned crew indeed for without those wretches Christs blood was not shed and without shedding of blood there is noe remission of sinne Where M. Harding shold euer findany such doctrine deliuered before him I cannot iudge Heb. 9. l. 12. fol. 421. a incruentam oblationem Christus in cae lis fecit In his explication assertion of the true catholike faith l. 5. fol. 144 b. Noe iteration of Christs sacrifice except he did allight vpon it in Melchior Canus who amongst other idle vaine discourses of their Masse insinuateth such a thinge speaking of an vnbloody sacrifice in heauen offered there by Christ Stephan Gardiner sometime Bishop of Winchester a sure card to the posters at Rome writing purposly of the sacrifice of the Masse beginneth wel saith it is agreed by the scriptures plainly taught that the oblation sacrifice of our sauiour Christ was is a perfect worke once consummate in perfectioÌ„ without necessity of iteratioÌ„ as it was neuer taught to be iterate but a meere blasphemy to presuppose it This is sound Catholike if he would abide by it but within two leaues after hee saith wee must beleiue the very presence of Christs body and blood on Gods board and that the Priests doe their sacrifice and bee therfore called sacrificers If the Preists doe there sacrifice Ibid. fol. 146. b verie sacrificers theÌ„ doe they either iterate Christs sacrifice or
theÌ„ al there is noe one that standeth sure either to himselfe or to his fellowes it must needes bee iudged the weaknesse of the cause which they maintaine Conâ—ut resp Whitak rat 9. sol 601. that cause them thus to stumble Dureus the Iesuite comming to handle this matter against D Whitakers saith If Christ testified that which hee gaue to his disciples was his body assuredly it could not be bread from whence it necessarily commeth to passe that the bread which Christ took into his haÌ„ds was changed into his body by the force and vertue of his diuine wordes â—oc totam nimirum quam manicus tenebat substantiaÌ„ demonstrans est corpus meum Accipitâ— inquit Christus comedite Take saith Christ eate Quid tandem what then This shewing al that substance which he had in his hands is my body Why how now Dureus why walke you in these cloudes why doe you not tell vs what substance that was which Christ had in his handes Bread or noe bread the bodie or noe bodie That which Christ tooke he gaue although you deny it saying panem in manus accepisse fatcor Dureus rat 2. fol. 94. dedissenego That Christ tooke bread in his hands I confesse that he gaue bread I denie but was not the bread which he took that substance which you saie he shewed hauing it in his hands it cannot be otherwise for the words of chang as you saie this is my bodie not come yet If Dureus aunswere as hee will that he spake not of the bread which he tooke let him yet resolue vs what inbstance that was which he had in his han des shewed his disciples when he said Take eate this is my body Fecistis probèi incertior sum mulâ—o quaÌ„ dudum Teren in Phor. act 2. scen 3. Si verò quenquam illud ad huc moueat quomodo pro. nomina in sacramentalibus verbis possint demonstra re corpns sanguinem quae adhuc non suÌ„t cum ca efferuÌ„tur aut quomodonoÌ„ plane in dicent paneÌ„ vinum quae reuera tum ex istunt-Legat c. AlleÌ„ de sac Euch. l. 1. f. 42â— Bellar. de sacr Euc. l i c. ii f. 83 This doth not demonstrate the bread nor the body according to Thomas It doth not demonstrate the bread precisly Sic tamen vt demonstratio proprie ad species pertineat Sed in obliquo hoc modo Ibid fol. 85. Ibid. fol. 88 This Ens this thinge or this substance If he resolue not this he resolueth not our doubt but leaueth vs more vncertaine theÌ„ before for this is it that troubleth vs how the word this can demonstrate the body and blood which are not there when the word is spoken not demonstrate point the bread wine which certainly are there then as saith D. Allen And if the bread wine be there then euen when the wordes this is my body are spoken then are they there both at the breaking and giuing as they vtterly woulde denie Sâ—…ll Bellarmine the mouth of their senate conclude the coÌ„trouersie yes say they we al agree Heare him theÌ„ a maÌ„ of a polished wit Although saith hee the Catholikes doe agree in the thinge yet doe they not agree in the manner of explaining what the worde this should demonstrate Two famous opinions there are amongst them one that the pronoune this should demonstrate the body which opinion he refuseth as not consonant to the truth howsoeuer Allen and Saunders as you heard before did so teach The other is of Thomas Aquinas others verie manie whoe haue followed him that the pronoune this doth not demonstrate the bread precisely nor the bodie but a substance in common which is vnder those formes yet so that the demonstration appertaineth properly to the formes but not that the fence be This that is these formes are my body but thus on this sort this is my body that is vnder these formes is my bodie So that the word This doth not demonstrate the bread nor the body of Christ but that which is coÌ„tained vnder those forms Therfore we doe not say saith he this that is this substance or as Scotus this Ens but This that is the substance contained vnder these formes Here in Bellarmine you haue al that art or falshood can deuise to darken the truth with all Doth anie man yet conceaue by them what the word This poiuteth vnto but for very shame he wold saie it pointed to the bread he denieth it but in part he saith it doth not preciselie point the bread therfore I say he doth not precisely denie it His fellowes before him wil in noe sort haue it so But hee vtterly denieth that it pointeth to the body yet is he more out then they when hee saith the demonstration this doth properly belonge to the formes and yet the sence must not bee These formes are my body But not withstanding his deniall it must be so if he saiâ— true For if you referre the word this to the bread the sence wil be This bread is my body This body is my body Theâ—… formes are my body 〈◊〉 bread it my bodie therfore they denie it If it be referred to the body the sense must be this bodie is my bodie which Bellarmine denieth And what should let but if he saie it pointeth to the formes it should bee These formes are my body But he wil haue it thus That which is contained vnder these formes is my bodie And what with him them too is contained vnder those formes but the body of Christ Bread they saie there is none so according to Bellarmine the sense wil be This body vnder these formes is my bodie or otherwise to tel vs directly what it was that was contained vnder those formes In the chapter next beefore reciting out of S. Bellar de euch sacra l. 1. c. 10. fol. 69. Allen de Euc. sac l. 1. c. 15. Rhem an not Mat. 26 v. 26. parag 7. Refertur ad materiam quae erat in manibus Luc. 9. Marc. 8 Luc. vlt. Resolue me in this and I will yeild the whol Markes Gospel the order of the EvaÌ„gelists he saith it cannot bee doubred but Christ hauing taken the bread blessed it brake it gaue it to his disciples but as the breaking and giuing is referred to the matter which was in his handes so his blessing too should bee referred thither which was to the bread We grant him if so that wil pleasure him that Christ blessed the bread and that Christ neuer vsed to blesse or giue thanks but at some notable memorable worke as at the multiplying of the loaues in the Gospel and blessing of his disciples is read here in the institution of the supper But did Bellarmine euer read that the blessing of any creature sensible or insensible was the changing transubstantiation of the substance of it so that it was not the same substance after
vs Notwithstanding this saith he it must not be dissembled that there are some diuines amongst whom is Bonauenture Caietane Dominicus Soto who affirme that Christ did not blesse by the wordes of Consecration therfore to blesse the bread and to consecrate the bread was two diuers things in the action of Christ so the chāge was not made by the blessing but after by the sacramentall wordes Which opinion saith he although it may probably be defended may seeme to be agreeable to the vse of the Church which nowe blesseth the bread by the signe of the Crosse before it vse the word of Consecration and may lesse trouble the order of the Evangelists who after the mention of blessing doe put the breaking distributing then in the fourth place the word of the sacrament it bringeth also some reuerence to the sacrament for if bread should bee broken by Christ after it were consecrate some small mites of the cōsecrated host might by likely hood haue fallen away These reasons saith he although they be waighty yet the safer opinion more agreeable to antiquitie and in euerie Church almost allowed which the Tridentine counsel doth in their catechisme follow is that whē Christ blessed he consecrated the things set before him That we ought so vnderstād that Christ blessed by saying This is my body 1. Hee tooke bread 2. Blessed it said 4. This is my body 3. He brake gaue Cicer. offic l. 2. although the Euāgelists by an inverted order of the speech or seting that after which should goe before doe put the distributing the breaking betweene the blessing and the forme of the sacrament which as it is very likly was done after the consecration or else euen as Christ did speake the words Facta omnia celeriter tanquam floscule decidunt This trecherie and deceipt cannot any lōger be hid it is apparent to all mē Neither is it any maruel that they who make of the Gospell as a thing made to bee handled as they thinke good should lose themselues in the labarinth of their owne druises as if reason had euen purposly forsaken them who of purpose forsake God the author therof For haue they these 1605. yeares been mounted on the stage of arrogancie out brauing a better cause then their owne and crying the Gospell the Gospell you Protestants heretiks both denie depraue it now doth D. Allen tell vs freely and vnconstrianedly that the Gospell will not serue their turnes as the Euangelists haue deliuered the order of the Lords supper What shall now become of Campians bragge Agedum pagella scripta superiores sumus ac sententia scripticontenditur Camp 2. ratio Goe to saith he we haue the better of it by the written word now we must debate the meaning No saith Allen the Gospel is not for vs And I say nether the writing nor the meaning of the writing is any for you And therfore Christo proprior ab hac lite remotior that age or antiquity which is nearest to Christ is farthest of from thē in this controuersy And for that one hand washeth an other they both wash the face often one foote strengthneth an other and they both stay the body so the testimonie of Cardinall Caietane in this case shall stay D Allen that hee be not vtterly ruinated because of his large graunt which they both haue yeelded in confirming the truth Caiet commēt super Tho p. 3 q. 75. art 1. Caietane in his Commentary on Thomas Aquinas vpō this question whether in the sacrament there be the body of Christace cording to the truth of it saith that touching that present demaund the rest following for the more manifest cleare vnd erstanding of the difficulties in them it is to be considered that touching the being of the body of Christ in the sacrament of the Eucharist there is nothinge writtē in the holy scripture but the words of our sauiour This is my body and those words must be true And because saith he the words of the scripture are expounded two waies ether properly or figuratiuely Vel propriè vel metaphoricè the first error about those wordes is of them that did interpret them figuratiuely which both the M. of the sentences Thomas doe proue in this article Ft consistit vis reprobationis in hoc the strēgth of the reproofe resteth in this that the words of the Gospell are vnderstood of the Church properly I say of the Church beecause there is not any constraint in the Golpell to cause vs to take them properly ex subiunctis siquidem verbis There is nothinge in the Gospell to cōstraine vs to take these wordes properly without a figure De lapsis ser 5. Cont. haeres l. 3. c. 11. fol. 237 Parisijs anno 1545. Allen vt ante l. 1. c. 16 Reciteth 4. seuerall opiniōs amōgst them touching the words of consecreation The iudgment of that Pope is refused who determined transubstantiation for thē for truly by the words following which shal be giuen for you in remission of sinnes it cannot bee concluded euidently that the former wordes This is my body are to be vnderstood properly So here be two cardinals Allen Catetaine who say that not the Gospel but the Church maketh for them Is there a Church where the Gospel is not Non iungitur Ecclesia qui ab Evangelio separatur he is not ioyned to the Church saith S. Cypriam who is separated from the Gospell S. Ireneus saith Columna firmametum ecclesie est Evāgelium spiritus vitae The Pillar and stability of the Church is the Gospel and the spirit of life But the truth is there is on their side in this question neither the Church nor the gospel nor any antiquitie at all To proceede with D. Allen in the other Chapter specified before by me wherein he laboureth to proue that the words of Christ This is my body are the words of Consecration he is further willing to let vs knowe what differences there hath bin amongst their schoole diuines who euer haue bin the vpholders of popery about the words of Consecratiō which they should be The first opinion is of Innocentius the third who called the great councel of Lateran and decreed Transubstantiatiō who said that Christ did consecrate by his divine power when he blessed and vsed therein the power of his might doing that without forme of words which we cannot do without a prescript order so that after he had consecrated he deliuered to vs these words This is my body by which words the Church should euer after consecrate This opinion of the Pope is reproved by Thomas Aquinas as beeing directly against the words of the scripture and by Allen as being vntrue The second opinion is of some who thought that Christ when hee blessed did consecrate 2. but with other words thā those where with he taught vs to consecrate But
b Stephen Gardiner wil not haue the accideÌ„ts to be broken I would saith hee in other tearmes aunswere thus That thou seest is broken then if any aske further what that is I would saith he tel him the visible matter of the sacrament O marvailous matter you said plainly before that the bread was broken Gardiner darke contrary to himselfe Detection fo 15. b. Answere to M. Iuell art 23. f. 227. Allen de euch sacra l. 1. c. 37. fol 435. will haue somwhat broken besidâ— the body of Christ Christs glorious body mingled with our sinfull flesh And in the detection of the Deuills sophistrie you confesse contrarie to your selfe in both these places That the forme of bread only is said to be broken which doctrine D. Hardinge taking to be the sounder relieth vppon saith The forme only of the sacrament is broken and chewed of the receaner D. Allen forceably as it were against the haire erecting a new opinion touching this breaking wherof we now speake faulting many Catholikes for saying that the accidents only are chewed broken seene affirmeth himselfe that not only those things doe properly truly agree appertaine to the body of Christ which did before agree vnto the bread although by meane of the formes But also by the meane seruice of those formes accidents wee handle the body and bloud of Christ truly eate him carrie him about with vs mingle his body and bloud with our flesh teare him with our teeth can place him in this or that vessell and can shew by the small peeces where he is here or now can sacrifice him sensibly in the accidents can propose him visibly to the eie to be adored c. All which things whether they fall out saith hee to the body of Christ in the sacrament in respect of it selfe or by meanes of the accidents it skilleth not so wee firmly beleeue that these things are truly and properly done to the body of Christ no lesse then if he were in his owne shape forme no lesse then they might be done to the very bread indeed Although saith hee I am not ignorant that Thomas Aquinaâ— followeth an other opinion especially touching the very sight of Christs body in the Eucharist granting that the verie bodie may be touched and not the accidents only P. 3. q. 80. art 4 ad 4. Allen leaueth Aquinas but that the accidents formes are onlie seene and not the body of Christ But as this mans opinion is not cleare by no meanes agreeable to reason for it is most certaine that the body of Christ is no more obuious comprehended by meanes of the accidents of one of our senses then of an other so is the doctrine teaching of other some schoolmen touching the mouing sight place breaking eating of the body of Christ ful of curiosity danger De motu tactu viâ—u loco fractione comestione Here you haue from D. Alten that what the rest of his fellows haue fearefully doubted to affirme he doth not sticke positiuely to deliver affirming every action and thing to be done verily and really to the body and bloud of Christ vnder the shew of bread and wine after consecration as coulde be verised of the bread it selfe before consecration yea that the bodie of Christ should be mingled most groslie with our flesh Corpus sanguis Christi carninostrae immiscentur L. Wâ—nton dialo against the lesuits p. 4 fol. 770. 771. A position as voide of all religion so without all warrant saue theirs that deliuer it and not to sinke into a wise mans head that euer they would deliuer such doctrine A positioÌ„ which maketh our bodies to be fed and nourished with the natural and substantial body of Christ as we are with other meates A position that ioineth the body of Christ with our bodies in one and the same substance For foode doth go into the substance of that thing which it nourisheth and besides D. Allen Hard. Reioyn fol. 150. Rhem. annot 1. cor 10. v. 16. Harding averreth That the flesh of man is fed nourished with the body and bloud of Christ and what more Caparnaitical So the Rhemists say That we are made a peece of Christs body blood But denied vtterly and expresly by the fathers Nostra Christi coniunctio nec miscet personas nec vnit substantias Cypr. de caeâ—… domini sed affectus consociat confoederat voluntates The coniunction saith Cyprian that is betweene vs and Christ neither wingleth persons nor vniteth substances but ioineth affections knitteth wils The mixture of his bodily substance with ours Hooker l. 5. pa. rag 56. ecclespolit is a thing which the ancients disclaime Yet the mixture of his flesh with ours they speake of to signifie what our very bodies through mistical coniunction receiue from that vital efficacy which we know to be in his and froÌ„ bodyly mixtures they borrow diuerse similitudes rather to declare the truth than the maner of coherence betweene his sacred and the sanctified bodies of Saints but this is sundry other waies performed besides than by the Eucharist as by his taking our flesh on him in his nativity and by our regeneration in the water of baptisme by faith and the word preached so that you see when Allen wrote as before is set downe he thought to out-bid those former schoolemen whose doctrine hee taxeth with curiositie and danger verifying that of the Poet Oâ—…llo scelus credibile in avo quodque posterit as noget That no age Senec. in Thyest act i. 4. iaÌ„ nostra sub it stirpe turba quae suum vincat genus ac me innocenteÌ„ faciat in ausa audeat De sacra euch l. 1. c. 2. fol. 28. contrarieth D Allen. ever saw the like and whereof posterity wil be ashamed making those that haue gone him even innocent as Tautalus said of his nephewes But see how it happeneth to those that so peremptorilie and by their only authority abate the credit of others even their credits wil be againe abated Bellarmine handling the same matter affirmeth that it is a doubt of certaine amongst themselues whether those things that are verified of Christ by reason of the accidents may be spoken of him truly and properly or by a trope Some there be saith he and it may be secretly he meaneth Allen though he name him not that will haue all those things verified of Christ truely and properlie in the same manner as they might of the bread if it were present For the bread is verilie and properlie seene handled and broken by meanes of the accidents so will they haue Christs body in the Eucharist to be verily and properly seene handled by meane of the accidents Then those that AlleÌ„ checketh did teach well Peraliquem tropam But the common opinion of the divines doth teach the contrary that is that those
of bread as also the natural property of nourishing feeding the body which is proper to bread Is it called bread because it hath the shew of bread by what figure Hath it the naturall properties of bread yet is it not bread say againe say truly it is called bread therfore it is bread It hath the naturall properties of bread feeding nourishing as also the accidents sauor waight tast colour and al and therfore it hath the name is indeed very bread They are so farre remoued from the center of trueth in these points that rather then they wil leaue their wils shut vp the streame of their owne affections they will leaue all hope of a sound beleefe What eateth the mouse if she or he I know not whether chance to catch of the cōsecrated host Lumb l. 4. dis◠13. a fine Aske the schoolman it becommeth their grauities to treate such questions It cannot bee said saith Lumbard that the body of Christ is eaten of bruite beastes although it seemeth so to bee when the mouse eateth then what eateth hee Deus nouit God knoweth that and hee that saith otherwise God knoweth that is adiudged an hereticke How then escapeth the Angelicall Doctor Quidam autem dixerunt 3. p. 80. q. art 3 ad 3. Some haue saide faith hee that as astone as the sacrament is touched by a Mouse or a Dogge the body of Christ ceaseth to be there But this derogateth from the truth of this sacrament neither must we say that a bruit beast doth eat the body of Christ sacramentally but it must bee saide that the Mouse eateth by chance Ibid. fol. 24. 2. as a man that shoulde eate the consecrated host vnknowne vnto him Now Gardiner saith contrary that no creature can eate the body and bloud of Christ but only man I let passe the rest of Aquinas prodigious base discourses touching some other cautels belonging to this sacramēt Ib. q. 83. art 6 ad 3. as if a spider should fall into the consecrated wine or poison should therewith be mingled which although with warrant good enough I might lay thē before you Tuberius because I am by al honest direct courses to warne you to beware you drinke not at that fountaine The maine scope of this treatise discourse whose fairest Streames are so filthy and loth some yet I will omit him now returne to some hand somer discourse and shew you that as they are found to faulter touching the particular drift of every word in the institution of the Lordes supper as the blessing breaking This is my body so if those were granted vnto them to bee as they would lay thē downe themselues that we should agree and say with them that the reall and substantiall body of Christ is present in the Eucharist yet can they not tel you neither the manner of the presence Art 5. cont Iuell fol. 127. b. Christ gaue his diciples the same body which suffered on the crosse the same body is there corporally carnally and naturally but not after a corporal carnall or natural wise but in visibly spiritually diuinly by way to him onlie knowen The maner of his presence is not locall or natural but such as God only knoweth Art 6. fol. 136. Corporally yet spiritually Carnally yet diuinely Naturally and yet supernaturally and by al these waies yet by none of these God only knoweth the way nor according to what body that presence is as whether according to that wherein hee lived heere in earth or whether as it is now qualisfied and glorious in heaven Whether with parts or without parts neither are they agreed how hee is eaten D. Harding saith it is cleare by many places of holy scripture that Christ at his last supper gaue to his disciples his very body even the same which the day following suffered death on the crosse which haue ministred iust cause to the godly learned fathers of the Church to say that Christs body is present in the sacrament really substantially corporally carnally and naturally by vse of which adverbes they haue ment only a truth of being so that we may say that in the sacrament his very body is present really that is to say indeed substantially that is in substance and corporally carnally naturally by which words is meant that his very body his very flesh and his very humane nature is there not after corporall carnall or naturall wise But invisibly vnspeakeably miraculously supernaturally spiritually divinely and by waie to him onlie knowne Againe Concerning the māner of the presence saith he being of that bodie bloud in the sacrament they that is the fathers we acknowledge and confesse that it is not locall circumscriptine definitiue or subiectiue or naturall but such as is knowen to God only In the next article The body of Christ saith he is made present in the blessed sacrament of the Altar vnder the forme of bread wine not after a grosse carnal maner but spiritually supernaturally yet substantially not by locall but by substantiall presence not by maner of quātitie or filling of a place or by chāging of place or by leaving his sitting on the right hand of God but in such a manner as God only knoweth and yet doth vs to vnderstand by faith the truth of his very presence far passing all mens capacities to comprehend the manner how Historia maxima nascitur do nihilo If M. Hardinge knowe not how it was in him an idle diligence to bee so copious in striuing to expresle the manner how Hath not he told vs He hath expressed our beleefe his owne two which is more then the manner how Corporally Carnally naturally saith he spiritually dininely say wee And yet he saith all confounding substantially spiritually God doth vs to vnderstand saith he by faith the truth of the presence What need faith sale I It is taken into the hād from the hād conferred to the mouth there they fasten their teeth Bellar. de sac euch l. 1. c. 2. f. 28. 29. and from thence to the stomacke The senses of sight feeling haue their offices here faith hath none nether is it hard to comprehend all this and more two Here is also one the same Christ with proportion of body members distinct each from other also without distinction of mēbers parts which ouerthroweth the truth of a naturall body and yet so they make him at one and the lame time at the table and vnder the shew of bread not by local but by substantiall presence not by maner of quantity or filling of a place and yet the same mā did saie before Art 5. fol. 130. b. Put laid Fide intelligamus situm in sacra illa mēsa agnum illū dei sunt verba magni Niceni Synodi ex Cut Tonstall lib. 1. de euchar fol. 40. Bellarm. de sacra
wordes againe so plainly delivered Ibid. fol. 20 a. 21. b Har. vt ante 136. How oft doth Gardner tell vs that but by faith hee knoweth not howe Christ is present in the sacrament God doth vs to vnderstand by faith the truth of Christs presence And Bellarmine himselfe within fowre howers reading after Athanasius vseth the word spiritually answering to the ancient father Athanasius who saith the flesh of Christ is our spiritual nourishment and spirituallie distributed is driven to say that it is most rightly called our spirituall foode Christs body is food for the spirit and not for the body Bellar de sacr euch l. 2. c. 11. fol. 186. because it is given for the food of the spirit and not of the bodie and distributed spirituallie And that Christ made mention of his ascension to shew that his flesh is not to be eaten as other meates are which was the carnall vnderstanding of the Caparnaites sed spirituals quodam modo but after a certaine spirituall maner Is not Bellarmine come to that terme which hee was so much a fraide of If the Caparnaites were grosse and fleshly in thinking that Christs flesh was to be eaten more aliarum carnium as other flesh is I am well assured Bellarmine is a Caparnaite also he hath as grosse a conceipt of Christs flesh Bellar vt ante l. 1. c 2. fol. 28. 2. c. 8. f. 163. l. 1. c. 11. fol. 92 most grosse absurditie as they could haue for hee saith the flesh of Christ is transferred from the hand to the mouth from the mouth to the stomacke which I vnderstand to be as the manner of other meate is and this he inculcateth more than once And if Really be opposed and set to exclude our terme by faith as Bellarmine saith it is let him shewe why it is not opposed against spirituallie and spirit and spirituall manner which they and he vse also We say it is receiued by faith he saith it is meat for the spirit and not for the bodie most absurdly sutting that thing out from being meate for the body which is taken into the hand mouth and stomacke and making that a spirituall food and nourishment and which is receiued after a spiritual manner and apprehended by faith to goe into the mouth and downe into the stomacke by humane natural instrumeÌ„ts as the hand tongue and palate And then againe hee doth most strangely leaue himselfe in ioining the hand mouth tongue pallate and stomacke in the eating of the body of Christ Attritio denti bus facta Bellar. ib. f. 29. and yet deny the chewing or grinding of the teeth which necessarily accompanieth the rest especially having told vs before that infigimus dentes carnichristi we fasten our teeth in the flesh of Christ Neither is this Bellarmines case alone when he is pressed with any authority of the fathers to fly to our very termes and to vse our phrases but al others of theÌ„ also do the like Vt ante ratio 2. fol. 106. A spirituall kind of eating a naturall and substantiall thinge If reall be vsed in oppositioÌ„ to spirituall how can real inter pret spirituall as Dureus saith Dureus being vrged with S. Augustines authority touching the eating of Christ in the sacrament saith that S. Augustine accounted it an horrible thing to eate the flesh of Christ as we do other meates that are solde in the shambles and that therefore he calleth vs from that kinde of eating ad spiritualeÌ„ alium to an other kinde that is spiritual such an one as is agreeable to that sacrament but yet a true and reall eating Here he both commeth to our terme spirituall and yet confouÌ„deth it with reall which S. Augustins whose minde he interpreteth neuer vsed which Bellarmine saith the counsel vsed in opposition to that other A third Iesuite is mightily busied like a builder of the tower of Babel vsing a contrary language to that Torrens conf Au l. 3. de sacr Euch c. 4. fol. 318. b. in gloss CarneÌ„ christi sacramento panis valetaÌ„ with which he began his work for being troubled as his fellow Iesuit was with answering to S. Augustine a father who is most plaine against them is fain to expresse that manner of eating which S. Augustine â—speaketh of to be done dentibus fidei with the teeth of our faith but the body is hid vnder the shewe of bread which latter clause S. Augustine never vsed to shew the maner of Christs body in the sacrament That is only the Iesuits couler to avoide S. Augustine With the teeth of our faith with the eies of our faith Lud. Granat de freq commun fol. 100. vt ante f. 20. a. 21. b. 55. 40. 41. 72. a. But in a spiritual maner I knowe by faith that I haue it in my hand A grosse dull speech The presence is only spirituall and no part of his meaning The teeth of our body caÌ„ doth as they say eate Christs flesh in the shew of bread what need we vse the teeth of our faith or the eies of our faith either to see it there as an other of them saith if hee be really and substantially present in the host the same flesh that the Virgin Marie did beare and the Iews crucified Stephan Gardiner as is before noted vseth the same I knowe by faith Christ to be present we acknowledge by faith Christs bodie present Christs bodie there is present but in a spirituall manner It is called a spirituall maner of presence And yet in receiving that sacrament men vse their mouthes and teeth being by faith instructed that they doe not teare consume or violate that most precious bodie and bloud Onlie faithfull men by faith can vnderstande this misterie of eating Christs flesh in the sacrament And the manner of presence is onlie spirituall What need faith What need spiritual manner onlie What needes faith to bee the instructor when the Councell as Bellarmine saith hath deuised those strong able termes of truelie reallie and substantiallie and opposed theÌ„ against our imaginary termes of spirituallie and by faith which imaginary termes they vse also Tom. 2. trac 2. c. 3. 5. annexed to the 1. p. of Tho. Aquin. soÌ„time to the 3. The body of Christ is taken spiritually in the Eucharist Cardinal Caietane in excuse of those divines who drew the forme of Beringarius confessioÌ„ which was most grosse touching the eating of Christ in the sacrament vseth no other word but spirituallie and saith it is most false to affirme that they held that the body of Christ is taken corporallie for it is taken spirituallie in the Eucharist by beleeing and not by receiving it Againe he saith They eate the true body of Christ in the sacrament not corporally but spiritually The corporal eating is but of the sacrameÌ„tal signes but the spiritual eating which is performed by the soule obtaineth the flesh of
Pighius Sanders and Caietane Bellarmine crying aime and fully consenting with neither But to go forward from Eugenius 4. last mentioned there are none memorable vntil wee come to Alexander 6. vnto whom these succeeded Pius 3. Iulius 2. Leo 10. Adrianus 6. Clemens 7. Paulus 3. Iulius 3. Marcellus 2. Paulus 4. Pius 4. Pius 5. Gregorie 13. Sextus 5. Vrbanus 7. Gregory 14. Innocentius 9. And Clemens 8. now 2. yeers since dead For Alexander 6. I finde no wordes aunswerable to his wickednesses an Oratour may holde a scroule in his hande and not speake beeing astonied to thinke what an husbande the spouse of Christ had all the while he liued vincit officium lingua sceleris magnitudo saith Lactantius the waight of the mischeife kept the tongue silent He excelled in al kinde of wickednesse mischeife he had many bastards one he made Duke of Valence who was called Caesar Borgia whome hee intended to haue made Lord of al Italy Read of him and his villanies in their owne Italian historie of Guictiardinâ— His sonne himselfe died of the same poisoned wine which was prepared for certaine Cardinals such a serpent held the seat of Peter 10. yeares til his owne poison killed him Iulius 2. was a notable warrior he moued warre against the Lords of Bonony Perusium and the land about against the Venetians Duke of Ferarra the state of Genua and the French king and therfore as his owne parasite saith of him Hee was more honourable in warlike prowesse than in bishoplike practise For the rest that follow from Iulius 2. to Clemens 8. the times are yet too young for vs to know any memorable act of theirs they who come after vs shall peradventure haue their dealings also brought to light Thus much at last I would haue you to remember Reade the answere vnto a seditious Bull sent into England by Pyus 5. anno dom 1569 by Iohn Iuell late bishop of Salisbury in the 12 yeare of her Maiesties raigne Regnum Angliae proscripfit praedaeque exposuit Geneb chron l. 4 fol. 5. Vrbanus 1169. God let Queen Elizabeth see 7. of her enimies Popes of Rome aliue dead viz. Pius 5. Gregory 13. Sixtus 7. Gregory 14. Innocentius 9 Clemens 8. That Pius the fift and Gregory the thirteenth two of the last recited Popes did mightily bend themselues against Queene Elizabeth of blessed memory against the whole nobility and commons of the Realme by excommunicating of her person and absolving of her subiects from their oath and obedience and exposed the realme and state to strangers as a pray as much as in them lay But the great God lehova who her Maiestie did alwaies serue in sincerity and truth gaue her health peace and life to see the decay not only of them two but of alitter of rowre more whose ends shee saw and the seaventh in beeing when God called her highnesse to her blessed sleep Thus Tuberius haue I run over many histories in briefe to giue you a taste both howe the succession and chaire of Rome hath stood as also a touch of the faith life honesty and manners of the men in the Chare for these 1600. yeeres yet you must not think that I haue said the hundred part which might be by some others followed touching the inlarging of every thing whereof I haue discoursed And touching the former part of our conference which was concerning some points of religion do but view them againe and consider their manner of handling them by many falshoodes and sleights weaknesse in arguments dissentioÌ„ one amongst an other and there is no question but you will giue iudgement against them and settle your perswasion with vs because they themselues haue set it downe for a ruled case that wheresoever there is any craft sleight shift obliquity or in any one point a manifest lie there cannot be the simplicitie of trueth And that there is such with them let him that wil not beleeue me first view their bookes then confute I pray God that you may make such vse of my labour herein as I wish and I know the trueth of it doth deserue Tuberius I thanke you much for your paines but more for your so well wishing vnto me God I hope will incline my hearte to the apprehension of the truth of your discourse herein And so fare you well The names of the Bishops or Popes of Rome for these 1600. yeeres according to the vsuall account S. Peter Lynus Cletus Clemens Anacletus Euaristus Alexander Sixtus Telesphorus Higinus Pius Anicetus Soter Eleutherius Victor Zepherinus Calixtus Vrbanus Pontianus Anterus Fabianus Cornelius Lucius Stephanus Sixtus 2. Dionisius Felix Eutichianus Caius Marcellinus the first 300. yeeres Marcellus Eusebius Melchiades Silvester Marcus Iulius Liberius Felix 2. Damasus Siricius Anastasius Innocentius Sozomus Bonifacius Celestinus Sixtus â— Leo. Hillarius Simplicius Felix 3. Gelacius Anastatius 2. Symmachus Hormisda Iohannes Felix 4. Bonifacius 2. Iohannes 2. Agapetus Silverius Vigilius Pelagius Iohannes 3. Benedictus Pelagius 2. Gregorius the next 300. yeeres Sabinianus Bonifacius 3. Bonifacius 4. Deus dedit Bonifacius 5. Honorius Severinus Iohannes 4. Theodorus Martinus Eugenius Vitalianus Adeodatus Domnus Agatho Leo 2. Benedictus 2. Iohannes 5. Cuno Sergius Iohannes 6. Iohannes 7. Sisinnius Constantinus Gregory 2. Gregorius 3. Zacharias Stephanus 2. Stephanus 3 Paulus Stephanus 4. Adrianus Leo 3. Stephanus 5. Pascalis Eugenius 2. Valentinus Gregorius 4. Sergius 2. Leo 4. Benedictus 3. Nicholaus in the yeere 858. Adrianus 2. Ioannes 8. Martinus 2. Adrianus 3. Stephanus 6. Formosus Bonifacius 6. Stephanus 7. Romanus Theodorus 2. Ioannes 9. Benedictus 4. Leo 5. Christophorus Sergius 3. Anastasius 3. Lando Ioannes 10. Leo 6. Stephanus 8. Ioannes 9. Leo 7. Stephanus 9. Martinus 3. Agapetus 2. Ioannes 12. Leo 8. Ioannes 13. Domnus 2. Benedictus 5. Banifacius 7. Benedictus 6. Ioannes 14. Ioannes 15. Ioannes 16. Gregory 5. Syluester 2. Ioannes 17. now are wee come to the 1000. yeere Ioannes 18. Sergius 4. Bonedictus 7. Ioannes 19. Benedictus 8. Gregorius 6. Clemens 2. Damasus 2. Leo 9. Victor 2. Stephanus 10. Nicolaus 2. Alexander 2. Gregorius 7. Victor 3. Vrbanus 2. Paschalis 2. Gelasius 2. Calixtus 2. Honorius 2. Innocentius 2. Celestinus 2. Lucius 2. Eugenius 3. Anastasius 4. Adrianus 4. Alexander 3. Lucius 3. Vibanus 3. Gregorius 8. Clemens 3. Celestinus 3. Innocentius 3. Honorius 3. Gregorius 9. Celestinus 4. Innocentius 4. Alexander 4. Clemens 4. Gregory 10. Innocentius 5. Adrianus 5. Ioannes 20. Nicolaus 3. Martinus 4. Honorius 4. Nicolaus 4. Celestinus Bonifacius 8. Benedictus 9. Clemens 5. Ioannes 22. Benedictus 10. Clemens 6. Innoâ—entius 6. Vrbanus 5. Gregorius 11. Vrbanus 6. Bonifacius 9. Innocentius 7. Gregorius 12. Alexander 5. Ioannes 23. Martinus 5. Eugenius 4. Nicholaus 5. Calixtus 3. Pius 2. Paulus 2. Sixtus 4. Innocentius â— AlexaÌ„der 6. heere wee are come well neere to the 1500. yere Pius 3. Iulius 2. Leo 10. Adrianus 6. Clemens 7. Paulus 3. Iulius 3. Marcellus â— Paulus 4. Pius 4. Pius 5. Gregory 13. Sixtus 5. Vrbanus 7. Gregory 14. Innocentius 9. Clemens 8. FINIS