force of his Argument Sunt certe saith the Saint libri Dominici quorum Authoritati utrique consentimus utrique credimus c. There are certain books of our Lord He means Scripture to whose Authority we both yeild we both believe Ibi Quaeramus ecclesiam Let us look for the Church there c. That is seeing we both who now dispute admit of Scripture and believe it let us upon such a supposition go forward and prove the Church by Scripture which is an excellent way of Arguing but if any question the Authority of Scripture it self take it we must when we make a right Analysis upon the Church's Authority solely and say with St. Austin I would not believe the Scripture but for the Church I omit the brags he hath pag. 6. of Protestants being more then indubitably Conquerors meer empty words and observe how he puts himself on a new trouble pag. 7th where he saith Whatsoever we cannot prove by Scripture we disclaim it I will not here tell the Doctor he must then disclaim every Tenet of Protestant Religion no more in Scripture then Arianism as it stands opposite to the Roman Faith But briefly I argue thus A Church secured from Error and which Infallibly proposeth Divine Truth can be proved by Scripture or cannot If the first there was is and shall ever be in the World a society of Christians un-crrable and certain in Doctrine that neither injures Faith nor by intromitting Novelties destroy Apostolical Doctrine for the Scripture as we now suppose saith so and what it saith is true One favour therefore I humbly beg of the Doctor that he would by a plain designation point me out this unerrable body of Christians and clearly also design me such known out cast Christians that are not of this Moral body my demand is reasonable and require's no long discourse nor any definition of a Church but to have this unerring company design'd and candidly If the Scripture Warrant 's not such an Infallible company of Christians the Doctor though he pretend to it can never believe with a true and infallible Act of Supernatural faith that the Ancient Church Inherited Catholick Doctrine that it sent Milions of Souls to Heaven That what we now read is the Apostles Creed that the Ancient Councils erred not in their Definitions No nor that there ever was or is now Pure and Incorrupt Scripture among Christians I say he cannot believe these truths with a certain assent of Supernatural Faith but at most with a meer opinative Judgment which may as well be wrong as right false as true staggering assuredly it is and not steddy if a meer Opinion yes and wholly destitute of that strength which God requires to Supernatural Faith In his 10th page he is fierce against the Church of Rome for pretending to a power not only of declaring New Articles of Faith but of making new Symbols and Creeds and imposing them as necessary to Salvation To this purpose he cites the Bull of Leo the tenth against Martin Luther whose twenty seventh Proposition is this and condemned Certum est in manu Ecclesiae aut Papae non esse statuere Articulos fidei imo nec leges morum seu bonorum operum It is certain that it is not in the hand of the Church or Pope to appoint or determine Articles of Faith nor Laws of manners or good Works First here is not a word of making new Articles or Creeds and the word statuere may as well signifie to determine a Question not yet decided as to make any thing a new but to pass these niceties and shew clearly the Doctors Error I demand whether the Fathers assembled together in the Nicen Council made new Articles of Faith against the Arians whether St. Athanatius in his Creed did the like who was no Pope What the Doctors Answer is here is ours also for all and every Definition made by the Church in after Ages And I would have him to reflect that as he now cavil's at both Pope and Church for constituting new Articles so the Arians might have done against the Nicen Council and Athanasius his Creed yes and cried out Novelties novelties as loud as the Doctor In a word then I answer with St. Gregory in Ezechiel homit XVI post med pag. 1164. 6. edit Antwerp 1615. that per incrementa temporum Crevit scientia spiritalium Patrum With time Faith encreased hut how not that either the Church or Pope have Power to coin Articles at pleasure or to force Christians to the acceptance of Novelties contrary to Scripture or ancient Tradition No but the Power given them is to dispence the Mysteries of the Word of God to lay out more clearly verities contained in Scripture so the Fathers did in the Nicen Council when they defined the Son to be consubstantial with his Father which word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is never read in Scripture Finally to declare more explicitely what the Ancient Tradition of the Church and sence of the Fathers hath been within such a compass the Church holds it self when after mature deliberation it defines in Council Hence both Divines and Canonists teach that rigorously speaking the Church hath no new Articles of Faith but only a more full and explicite knowledge of that belief which anciently was among Primitive Christians yet none there is that reads our Doctor both in the page now cited and elsewhere after but must have this perswasion wrought in him that the Church and Pope may define as it were at Random make new Articles new Creeds as they list and impose them as necessary to Salvation All is false and fraudulent dealing CHAP. II. The Doctors Quotations not true His Errors concerning the Index Expurgatorius His ill dealing with Sixtus Senensis THe Doctor in his tenth page to prove our making new Articles cites Augustinus Triumphus de Anconâ—a quaest 59 Art 1 2. and pittifully abuseth that Catholick Author who in his resolution Art 1. â— concludes thus Respondeo quod hanc quaestionem determinat Augustinus libro 1. de symbolo ubi vult quod omnis symboli condendi ordinandi in sancta dei ecclesia terminatur authoritas I Answer St Austin resolves this Question lib. 1. de symbolo Where he saith That all Authority of making and setting a Symbol in order is within the bounds of the Church Mark first St. Austins words Omnis authoritas condendi ordinandi c. Then follow these other in Anconitanus his resolution wrongfully interpreted and unhandsomly mangled by the Doctor Ex his patere potest quod novum symbolum condere solum ad Papam spectat nam in symbolo ponuntur illa quae universaliter pertinent ad Christianam fidem By this you may see that to make a new Symbol belongs only to the Pope for those things are set down in a Symbol which Universally concern Christian Faith These last words which explicate both St. Austins and Anconitanus his meaning are fraudulently left out
Truth Will out OR A Discovery of some Untruths Smoothly told by Dr. IEREMY TAYLOR In his DISSWASIVE From POPERY With an Answer to such Arguments as deserve ANSVVER By his Friendly Adversary Ed Worsley Ergo inimicus vobis factus sum verum dicens vobis Gal. 4. 16. Printed in the Year 1665. THE EPISTLE To the READER WE say all is not Gold that Glisters and that Most worth lyes not ever hid under a fair Outside A Comet seems sometimes as glorious as a Star a Parelion like the Sun and Falshood got under a handsome Visard well trim'd up may take with many and pass Disguised for current Truth But such slight Beauty beguiles not long True Worth undoes it The Suns lasting Glory the Stars constant Brightness enough Dislustres both Parelion and Comet And Truth though perhaps it may not here quite vanquish Falshood for Some will Defend it to the Worlds end is able at least to pull of it's Gaudy Visard and put it out of Countenance A World of this Counterfeit Lustre we have now a days in Books set forth as is pretended to Beautifie the Heaven of Christianity and Englighten a People that sit in Darkness One I have met with 't is the Disswasive from Popery that Parelion like in a Triple Cloud is as I am told Gloriously out in three Editions and lately appeared in the two Kingdoms of England and Ireland More I believe have been Gazing on it then well discovered the faulty Lustre Real Worth I cannot mention for what find we I beseech you considerable in this Book but a useless Repetition of old defeated Objections which have now for a whole Age run through a few Vulgar worn-out Controversies and in Rigor require only a Return of the Old Answers given a hundred times by Catholick Writers new Arguments which one might have expected from so Great a Doctor seldom appear You have moreover more then a few Mistakes relating to Catholick Doctrine Want enough of Divinity A seeming Zeal 't is true but ill season'd with Jeers and harsher Language Calumnies vented Talk and no Proof Here is what I think the Doctor must own the Inside and best substance of his Disswasive The Flash therefore and fair Lustre of his Book lies neither in the choice of Matter nor manner of handling it but in specious Quotations that flourish in the Margents These set down in the ensuing Treatise I have carefully examined Read with my own Eyes in the Original Authors not one have I taken on trust and after a diligent search must profess with all Candor not one worth notice have I found but 't is either wholly impertinent to what he would Prove or strangely wrested to a sinister Sence or not found at all in the Original nor a Word like it Or finally which is most usual and to be pittied in a Doctor unpardonably corrupted To insist on every less valuable Authority or on such as shew themselves Profless even Read in the Disswasive would be Time mispent and weary a Reader These I offer to your View are of the grosser Sort and Numerous enough to Evidence that the Doctors pretended Faultless Book is Proved Faulty and no more powerful to Disswade from Popery then Error is to draw men from Truth Far am I off from the Doctors Humour in Judging this small Treatise Faultless I willingly acknowledge many Faults but know not how to mend Them One is no little want of English but this I hope dear Reader you will easily Pardon I am sure you would did you but know how long I have been a Stranger to my Country An other is too tedious a length sometimes in Latin Sentences The Fault if any is unavoydable For while the Charge is laid on ill Quotations the Right ones must appear and in their proper Terms To give an Authors Meaning only and Wave his Words seems Forceless And in stead of laying Difficulties may Raise up more Where it most Imports I have done my best to English the Latin faithfully Ad pedem literae the Translation therefore cannot but look Rugged yet that is better then to have the Genuine Sence miscarry in smoother Language Lastly a harsher Word may perhaps through hast or unawares have casually fallen from me if so I here unsay it and Humbly crave Pardon And were my Papers now out of my reach in my Hands again I would in this Correct whatever might justly seem offensive If Doctor Taylor shall please to warn me of greater Faults I 'll thank him for his Charity And if he thinks it worth his Pains to take notice of my Exceptions against his Book my earnest Request is that he mispend not Time in Trifles nor weigh only lesser Matters while he hath greater charged on him that justly require Satisfaction For Example I have plainly tax'd him of wrong done to Sixtus Senensis to the Expurgatory Index to Petrus Lombardus Otho Erisingensis and others in the beginning of my Treatise let him as plainly Purge himself in these Particulars and shew me my Error for most certainly I have either wronged him or he these Authors I press him afterward with undeniable Authorities of most Ancient Fathers both for the Use and Worship of Holy Images His express Answer is herein required also chiefly to St. Basil and St. Iohn Damascen I have told him of his Forging strange Doctrines and Fathering them on Tolet Suarez Bellarmin Emanuel Sa and others If he be injured he can Right himself and shew where Sa affirms That if a man lies with his intended Wife before Marriage it is no sin or a light one Whether the true Sence of Bellarmin in his Quotation pag. 167. be not wholly perverted If the Pope should Err by Commanding c. These for an Essay only more you will have and of greater Concernment hereafter May it please the Doctor to clear himself by a solid Answer he 'll hearten me to Reply Or if he can produce against me but one Quotation so fowly amiss as that one Charg'd on Emanuel Sa to say nothing of many worse I do here profess a Readiness and will comply with it to publish my Fault to the Whole World O would he Encourage himself to proceed with like Candor and unsay only what his own Conscience knows Faulty in his Disswasive he might be Eternally Glorious And why should I forbid my self to hope for so Laudable a Retractation Justice requires it Conscience forcibly presses Truth that suffers strongly Pleads for it Christian Humility easily submits And Gods Victorious Grace is now no less Powerful to do this Work on him then once it was to Reclaim a Blessed St. Austin Quare Arripe obsecro te they are the Pious and well meant Words of this Saint Tom. 2. Epist 9. to a Great Doctor and my Submissive Petition to Doctor Taylor Arripe obsecro te ingenuan vere Christianam cum charitate severitatem ad illud tuum opus corrigendum atque emandandum 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉
〈◊〉 ut dicitur cane Incomparabiliter enim pulchrior est Veritas Christianorum quam Helena Graecorum c. Such I say is my Petition presented to our Doctor and if the Love of Truth bears sway in his Breast yeeld he needs must to a speedy retractation Nothing can Retard him from so generous a Resolution but either Motives of interest drawn from a naughty World or his own once vented 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 So forsooth he hath said in his Disswasive and so it must stand though all run to Ruin and Christianity suffers The Doctor I confess hath been most Unluckily in broaching Heresies and wanting Grace to retract them Some years are now past since he was so Unfortunate as to become a Patron of the Pelagian Heresie when ex professo he Writ a Book against Original sin and stoutly defended it and being Friendly told by his own Brethren that what he said was not only opposite to Catholick Faith but also to the very Doctrine of the Church of England expresly deliver'd in her Liturgy in 39. Articles in the Office of Baptism c. He had yet the boldness to deny all and assert that the Church of England held not Original Sin though both Prince and Prelate knew then and believ'd the contrary I know not that he ever yet Recanted this Heresie if not 't is now high Time to do it and with it to Weep for the Errors in his Disswasive if he fails in both Duties the World will say and say truly that Dr. Taylor is Notior peccans quam paenitens more known for his Sin then for his Repentance and may Prudently Judge that he of all others was the unfittest Man to Write against Popery that disowns the Doctrine of his own Church unless this makes him fit that being a Pelagian his Words though he multiplies Volums will want weight against Catholicks For this is my reflection and I think a true one that this man who dar'd to say that the Church of England holds not Original Sin so plainly taught and believ'd by all will not Boggle to miscite the Fathers remote from our knowledge Read by few and Understood by fewer Farewel Gentle Reader with a thousand well-wishes for thy profitting by this Treatise I bestow as many on Dr. Taylor whose Enemy God knows I am not Nor can he think me one for laying out his Errors and telling Truth Upon this very Account he ought and I hope will to return me Thanks If now I Merit none I may hereafter have better Luck and deserve them If plain dealing may do it he shall have Reason to account me as indeed I am his Faithful True SERVANT and Friendly ADVERSARY E. W. QUOTATIONS Faulty in DOCTOR TAYLORS PREFACE To the READER TO destroy Tradition not contain'd in Scripture the Doctor cites Tertullian thus I adore the fulness of Scripture and if it be not written let Hermogenes fear the Wo that is destin'd to them that detract from or add to it I answer the Dr. turn's the true genuine sence out of this whole sentence chiefly by these guileful particles of his own making And if it be not written which seem exclusive of all unwritten tradition yet this Authority no more relates to Catholick Doctrine concerning Tradition then a Fable in Esop Briefly therefore Tertullian disputing against Hermogenes that held these visible things were created of I know not what prejacent matter speaks thus Lib. adversus Hermog Antwerp Print cap. 22. page 495. In principio c. In the beginning God made heaven and Earth then adds Adoro Scripturae plenitudinem I adore the fulness of Scripture Wherein in what doth he adore this fulness He answers Qua mihi factorem manifestat facta I adore the fulness of Scripture that doth manifest to me both the Maker and things made As who should say in this particular the Scripture is compleat and I adore its fulness c. Now these last words Qua mihi factorem c. which explain the Fathers sence our Dr. wholly omits and beguiles his Reader with these perverted particles if it be not written Tertullian after those words In Evangelio vero amplius goes on An autem de aliqua subiacenti materia facta sint omnia nusquam adhuc legi Whether all these things be made of a subjacent matter I never yet read Scriptum esse doceat Hermogenis officina Let Hermogenes his Work-house shew us that this particular is written Si non est Scriptum timeat vae illud adjicientibus aut detrahentibus destinatum If this thing now in controversie concerning the prejacent matter Hermogenes asserts be not written let him justly fear that Wo destin'd to them that detract from Scripture or add to it Here is exactly the whole context of Tertullian and it renders this sence Hermogenes holds the world made of a strange unknown matter The Scripture directly tells us how it was made and Created of nothing I adore the fulness of Scripture in this particular let therefore Hermogenes when the Scripture hath clearly said all that belongs to the first Creation of things prove by Scripture that unknown matter he defends if he cannot he may well fear that Wo threatned to such as detract from Scripture or add to it a prejacent matter never mentioned in it Judge good Reader whether this Quotation have so much as a likelyhood of gain-saying any constant received Tradition in the Church The Dr. may reply as Hermogenes added to Scripture his unknown matter so we add our unknown Traditions I answer first what Hermogenes defended was not only an addition but expresly contrary to Holy Scripture declaring that God made the VVorld of Nothing No Catholick Tradition is expresly or positively opposite to Gods written VVord unknown tradition we own not 2. Hermogenes had no such approved consent for his foolery as we have for our Catholick and ever received Tradition justly therefore did Tertullian oppugn him by the Authority of Scripture only for destitute he was of all warranted Tradition 3. The Doctrine of our Tradition not a pretended one or any superaddition of new Articles as the Dr. imputes to us is expresly allow'd of by Scripture it self the place is known 2 Thessa 2. 14. and enervates what ever hath the colour of an objection against us He cites next St. Basil de vera fide whose words are these Paris Print 1618. Tom. 2. page 251. Haud dubie manifestissimum hoc infidelitatis argumentum fuerit signum superbiae certissimum si quis eorum quae Scripta sunt aliquid velit rejicere aut eorum quae non Scripta introducere VVithout doubt this is a most manifest Argument of infidelity if one will reject any one of those things which are written these words our Dr. omits to make the Quotation sound to his sence or of those things which are not written introduce to wit into Scripture and so the St. explicates himself clearly in these following words Vehementissime
all peradventure as if he had read where an Image is there is no Religion without all peradventure the good man is deceived I say no more To what he next cites out of Origen we shall answer hereafter Now to the Doctors Chapters and Sections CHAP. I. Of the Doctors ungrounded discourse to the wrongful charge on Catholicks for making new Articles in Faith TOugh my task be chiefly to follow the Doctor in his Quotations and note as he goes along some few of his many Errors Yet touch I must a little on a discourse he is pleased to begin with Chapter the first It seems to enervate much our Christian Faith and weaken the Authority of the most Ancient Councils Page then the fourth and first Section he holds the two Testaments the words of Christ and of the Apostles the Fountains of Faith which none denies but next he adds Whatsoever caeme in after these foris est is to be cast out it belongs not unto Christ This latter assertion to say no more hath too much of the harshness in it for the difinitions of the Nicen Council and of the other three general Councils with St. Athanasius his Creed came in after the words of Christ and Holy Scripture are these Think ye like old Garments to be laid a side or cast out as not at all belonging to Christ belong they do most certainly as Rivers to their Fountains though not own'd as Original Springs and the first Foundations of our Faith Observe therefore I beseech you how the Doctor deals with us how he leads us on in darkness whilst he sets men a seeking after the Fountains of Faith but with it turns by the Stream cuts of the Torrent of Authority whereby to find them that is in a word he makes null all Authority that can assert with certainty Such were the Words of Christ such the Doctrine of the Apostles c. Judge whether I say not aright and demand of the Doctor upon whose certain proposal can he rely or indubitably admit of Christ's words as sacred If he answers Scripture the Question return's again and he is asked a new who it is that doth ascertain him of Scripture If the Fathers they are with him Fallible yes and full of ambiguous sences If the Church that saith he is changeable hath brought in novelties contrary to Ancient Faith if Councils not one is found but lyable to Error Turn by therefore these intermedial Streams running between us and the Fountains of Faith destroy the certainty of such Witnesses say that no man or society of men since Christ and his Apostles hath without a possibility of erring assured us that Christ spake that the Evangelists writ as they did the whole Scripture God knows will be cast aside also yes and become a comfortless an unwarranted Book Whence follow 's a total ruin of Christian Religion This is not my assertion but the great St. Austins the Quotation is known Tom. 6. contra epistolam Manichei cap. 5. Ego vero Evangelio non crederem c. I would not believe the Gospel unless the Authority of the Church moved me to believe it Our Doctor may think he salves this objection in his next ensuing lines pag. 4. where he saith To these that is to Scripture we add not as Authors but as helpers of our Faith and Heirs of the Doctrine Apostolical the sentiments and Catholick Doctrine of the Church in the Ages next after the Apostles not that we think c. I Answer Here is no man knows what confusedly shut up in two Ambiguous VVords Heirs and Helpers to get out of darkness I might first demand how knows the Doctor now exactly what the Sentiments or Catholick Doctrine of the Church Anciently were in the Ages next after the Apostles The Proposal of our present Church overgrown as he saith with a thousand Errors is an infufficient warranty Both Fathers and Councils were even then Fallible and had they been Infallible their writings since that may perhaps have fallen into ill hands and lost their purity But I wave this discourse and propose to our present purpose this Question only Are we Christians now being obliged under Damnation to believe those Sentiments of the Ancient Church as undoubted Helpers as certain apparent Heirs of Divine Truth or no if not They cast us wholly upon uncertainties and may as well help us on to Err as hit right if we are bound to own them as certain Heirs of Divine Truth Scripture must assure it for saith the Doctor To believe any thing Divine that is not Scripture is a divillish spirit and undoubtedly affirm that at least in the Ages next after Christ there was a society of men not lyable to Error that kept our Christian Faith entire without spot or blemish faithfully transmitted it to Posterity c. Now all I can desire of the Doctor is to produce that Scripture which purifies the Ancient Church only and makes the next ensuing Ages of that Church Spurious in Doctrine fearfully despicable and lyable to Error Thus much I am confident he shall never shew for our dearest Saviour that Established a Christian Church promised he would be with it to the end of the World Gods alseeing providence drives not on his work by halfs nor leaves his Church when the Doctors fancy listeth Souls are now as dear to Christ as they were in the Primitive Ages He shed his Sacred Blood for All if then he secured his Church from Error and directed Souls into Truth he doth the like favour now and will not permit his Immaculate Spouse to beguile them with falshood All therefore the Doctor saith here is a deceitful Paralogism yes and Paradoxes not to be tolerated A Paradox it is to talk of Heirs and Helpers of Apostolical Doctrine and rob them of their Infallibility A Paradox it is to say that these Heirs and Helpers sent Milions of Souls into the Bosom of Christ and cast more Milions in after Ages out of his Bosom for want of true Faith A Paradox it is that Christ only remained with his Church for a time and then left it destitute of Divine Assistance yes and in points most Fundamental But the greatest Paradox of all which amuses every one is That now towards an end of the World a new sort of unknown men the Doctor is one will become our Teachers and tell us exactly how long Christ was with his Church and when he leap'd out of it He was with it say they for some three or four hundred years and then left it fluctuating tossed and at last saw it without Mercy overturned with a deluge of Errors And credit this we must upon their bare word because they say it without Sctipture without Reason yes expresly contrary to both and all Ancient Authority The Doctor to prove the Church by Scripture only quotes St. Austin in his Margent pag. 4. de vnit ecclesiae cap. 3 4. 5. but both mangles his words and conceals the
that he saith without conscience is there no Pick-lock of secrets or spie upon Families among those Pious Ministers in the Church of England I have heard the contrary that whole Confessions have been revealed by them whether true or no I say not yet I know well that for the space of forty years that I have lived in Catholick Countries I never heard the least complaint against Confessor for being a Pick-lock The Doctor therefore may well expect Gods just Judgment on him for this injustice unpardonably done unless he repents and makes restitution to Catholick Priests But enough of this Section Pag. 86. Sect. 3. he hath a bout with our Penance and satisfaction and makes a long list of their abuses They are saith he reduced from the ancient Canonical Penances to private and arbitrary from years to hours from great severity to gentleness and flattery from publick shame to the saying over their beads from Cordial to Ritual from smart to money from heartiness and earnest to pageantry and theatrical Images of Penance Answ Though 't is true that the Church hath upon weighty reasons much lessened the rigor of ancient Penances and therefore so frequently grant's Indulgences yet what follows in this pretended Catalogue of abuses is nothing but a long List of Calumnies false and injurious False it is that if the sin confessed deserves a years Pennance we reduce it to an hours False that we turn the severity of Penance into flattery unless the Doctor calls the charitable comforting a poor penitent flattery No so far are we from flattery in this Tribunal of Penance that we lay open the enormity of sin threatning Gods Judgement upon it and spare no pains to beget a horror of sinning in a penitents heart False it is that if the sin be enormious or scandalous the saying ones beads is enough False it is that we exact only Ritual and not Cordial satisfaction False likewise that when the penitent ought to smart for his sin the smart is turned into money though I think the Doctor will not deny but that in circumstances of age or infirmity when the penitent cannot bear austerity the charitable giving of Alms is laudable and satisfactory at least holy Daniel liked well of it Cap. 4. 24. Peccata tua elemosynis redime iniquitates tuas misericordiis pauperum Redeem make amends for thy sins with Alms-deeds and thy iniquities with mercies of the Poor False finally it is that we require not heartiness and earnest in the performance of Penance Now what the Doctor means by his Pageantry and Theatrical Images of Penance God I think only knows Perhaps he blames some publick Penances now and then done in the Church If so first all publick Penances are not laid aside 2. You see the Peevishness of our Doctor nothing escapes his censure if Penances be private the Ancient Canons suffer if publick they are pageantry and theatrical Images What will content the man When one stands there among you at a Pillar for Perjury or in a white Sheet for Fornication is this pageantry or any threatrical Images and what further use have you I beseech ye of these ancient Canonical Penances among the Pious Penitents of the Church of England Well to conclude the Doctor I am sure deserves justly a severe Penance for this heap of Calumnies and if ever God as I wish make him a Catholick and choose me for Confessor he shall have it home without flattery an hours Penance or saying his Beads will be too little in a word his Penance shall be proportionate to his sin and if he thinks it not enough let him go on Gods name to Sancta Maria de populo for the gaining of those thousand Indulgences he mentioneth He holds on this 3d. Section and tells you of strange Indulgences granted to several places whether truly or no it imports little Admit he speaks truth all he gets is that the Church is liberally good to such great sinners as he is who as Holy Iob saith Drink iniquity like water and if after their repentance it grants them Mercy what offence is there in doing so In the rest of that weightless Section while he explicates what Divines say of Indulgences sometimes he hits right sometimes misses but is ordinarily very plentiful in jeers all slight stuff I leave him only be pleased to reflect how though without pointing to any place he cites Gerson and Soto against himself for if it be true that Soto saith in 4 Sent. distinct 21 q. 2. a. 1. That the Pope never grants these Indulgences for a 100. or 1000. years The Doctor hath no more to say but that such pardons are not at all the Questuaries only procured them and consequently impugns what never was CHAP. XIII The sum of our Doctors discourse concerning Indulgences His two mistakes are discovered His Objections answered THe Doctor pag. 91. Sect. 4. pretends much chacharity to our Souls and to unbeguile us will needs add one consideration more And what is this think you Marry There is no Foundation of truth in these new Divices and this to boot that when our Doctors are pinched with an objection they let their hold go c. Good man Are these his considerations A young Student in Divinity would make good sport with such considerations But ad rem I constantly affirm that all he has said in this Section hath not so much as a shadow of an objection in it against the received Doctrine of Indulgences much less any that pinches To prove my assertion be pleased to have in mind what this received Doctrine is which the Council of Trent sess 25. decret de Indulg declares thus Sacrosancta Synodus Indulgentiarum usum Christiano populo maxime salutarem sacrorum conciliorum authoritate probatum in Ecclesia retinendum esse docet praecipit The holy Synod teaches that the use of Indulgences is most wholesome and profitable to Christians and commands this use approved by the Authority of holy Councils to be held still in the Church Next it requires a moderation in granting Indulgences according to the Ancient Custome of the Church and that all abuses crept in be amended c. This Catholick truth supposed you 'll find the Doctor strangely beguiled and his whole discourse chiefly founded on two mistakes weaker then a Bul-rush His first mistake is that because Catholicks cannot arrive to a certain knowledge of gaining an Indulgence or the full fruit of it he thinks no trust is to be had in it no endeavour used to purchase this Grace An error For Divines say and truly no one can know with certainty that he hath an act of true supernatural Faith or of true Charity in that Degree Purity and Measure which God exacts is therefore Faith and Charity without trust to be laid aside is our endeavour to have them carelesly to be left off is it wholly useless and unprofitable God forbid His second error is that he builds too much upon those
restrained sense and only deny the publick manner of his hearing it in that forum not known to others A Disparity here good Doctor perhaps He will answer that the Judge or Tyrant positively demands whether the Priest heard that Sin in Confession and his saying No to it is a flat lye By the way had the Apostles asked our Saviour whether he would ascend to the Solemnity and he had answered as he did non ascendo No would he have told a Lye I am sure No. Neither did he say an untruth when Mark 13. some asked him of the day of judgement he returned this answer De die illo c. of that day and hour none knows not the Angels in Heaven nor the Son but the Father only Yet most certain it is that the Son of God knew of that day which Truth the Fathers asserted against the Arians endeavouring to prove out of this very Scripture that Christ was not God He knew therefore of the day of judgement yet said he did not know both are true Let the Doctor unfold this double Sense and we have enough for our present purpose Hence learn that though a Tyrant positively ask of a Priest a thousand times whether he heard such a Sin in Confession the question is not of his demand for 't is most unjust but whether a Priest may answer as truly No I did not hear it as Christ our Lord said No I ascend not I know not of the day Here is the question Most willingly would I have the Doctors answer if he finds a flaw in the Parity Were our Doctor better versed in Speculation I might here set down the Essential difference between a Ly and mental Restriction In a ly men ever speak against their mind for mentiri est contra mentem ire that is they judge so and speak contrary In mental Restriction a part only of our interior Judgment or as we speak in School Inadaequate is only expres'd by Exterior words or signes For example if the Doctor preaching to his people hath this great truth in his mind God is not in Heaven after a Corporeal manner and should by accident Exteriorly say no more but thus much only God is not in Heaven He doth not by that half Expression thwart his Judgment or speak contrary to his thoughts but only saith not fully out what he thinks And thus it is in mental Restriction what is said is true though not fully spoken to the capacity of the Hearer In the Ambiguous use of words usually called Equivocation there is far less difficulty Hence I infer and it is an Objection of our Doctor pag. 153. that if an Adultress asked whether she be one answers No she speaks no untruth unless she will but only sayes she is none publickly proved Or in some such like Sense Next saith our Doctor if a man compelled to swear to take such a one for Wife he may secretly mean if hereafter she please me And the same is of one compelled by a Thief to give him twenty Crowns I answer No forced Oath extorted by compulsion is an Oath for want of Freedom and Liberty and consequently not Obligatory The case is plain if one should take the Doctors hand per force and make him write thus much All I have said in my Dissuasive from Popery is against my Conscience Would he hold himself obliged to stand to his Writing After this he cites Vasquez bragging I know not of what Doctrine and where In 3. Tom. 4. Quest 93. Art 5. Dub. 13. Answ Vasquez with me Antwerp print 1621. hath only 4. Articles in his 93. Question and not a syllable in his 13. Dubium of any bragging In his 12. Dub. Art 4. he treats of our present matter but nothing do I find there to the Doctors purpose If he hath another Edition let him friendly tell me Page 154. saith he Diana holds That to save a mans credit an honest man who is ashamed to beg may steal what is necessary I answer He deals not well with Diana that speaks more moderately thus Vir honestus cui pro ratione sui status gravissimum maximum dedecus esset mendicare nec posset alia via victum sibi acquirere videtur posse clanculum necessaria surripere c. It seemes that a man of credit and to whom it would be most heavy and a mighty disgrace to beg nor can by any other means get sustenance to live these words the Doctor conceals it seemes I say that such a man may secretly take what is necessary for his sustenance Secus si esset infimae sortis c. But this holds not in case he be of a low condition and might without a notable loss of his honour beg or otherwise find necessaries c. Thus Diana far of from that high Sense the Doctor sets down Read him in his Compendium Rhoan print 1644. verbo furtum pag. 335. n. 18. Page 155. the Doctor saith That it is affirmed and was practis'd by a whole Council of Bishops at Constance that Faith is not to be kept with Hereticks And John Hus and Hierom of Prague felt the mischief of violation of publick Faith c. Answ An old story and as false as old For first the Council never determined that Faith given by Ecclesiastical power to an Heretick is not to be kept Nay it holds it self obliged to stand to such a promise Faithfully also complied with it in the after Councils of Basil and Trent Yet more This Council holds that a Secular Prince or Magistrate after security promised to an Heretick is bound to keep it although neither the one or other can force the Church 't is a distinct Tribunal to do so True it is that King Sigismund who had given a safe conduct to Hus seemed at first to feel his Condemnation but when he perceived the obstinacy of the man neither relenting after his own Princely Counsel nor yeelding to the advice of others he did not only condescend to punish Hus but exhorted the Fathers Assembled at Constance to proceed severely against him And why John Hus violated the Laws of his safe conduct shamefully and ran away from the Council Yet catch'd he was and committed to Prison and had his condigne punishment His running away made him a guilty person on a new score and by it lost the priviledge of his safe conduct Here you have in brief the true Story Spondanus relates it Tom. 2. Paris print anno 1641. ad annum Christi 1415. n. 45. pag. 216. and for more sends you to Joannes Coclaeus lib. 2. 3. Concerning Faith to be kept with Hereticks Spondanus now cited remits you farther to Molanus a Doctor of Loven to Martinus Becanus and Hesibertus Rosweidus all Learned men and no wayes opposite to publick fidelity given to any What the Doctor hath page 156. of the Pope dispensing in Oaths when they hinder a greater good seems to me a childish Objection For do not secular Princes