to the Iewes and Greekes repentance towards God and faith towards our Lord Iesus Christ hee could not but have seene the absurditie of his answer wherein he denieth that S. Paul speaketh of the written word For who knoweth not that repentance towards God and faith towards Iesus Christ are written almost in every Sermon of the Prophets and chapter of the Evangelists What hee addeth for confirmation of his answer from the example of our Saviour who made knowne to his Disciples whatsoever hee heard from his Father and yet delivered not one word in writing no whit at all helpeth his cause For albeit we grant that our Saviour wrote nothing except wee give credit to a relation in Eusebius of a letter written by him to King Abgarus yet hee commanded his Apostles to write those things which they had heard and seene what thou seest write it in a booke Euseb eccles hist. l. 1. Apoc. 1.11 and send it to the seven Churches and S. Peter saith 2 Ep. 8.20 that no Scripture is privatae ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã that is as Cal vin well rendereth the words privatae impulsionis of private impulsion or motion for the prophecie came not in old time by the will of man but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the holy Ghost and therefore Irenaeus saith expresly Advers haeres .3 c. 1. non per alios dispositionem salut is accepimus quans per quos E vangelium ad nos pervenit quod primum praeconiaverunt posted secundùm Dei voluntatem in script is reliquerunt columnam firmamentum fidei futurum Euseb hist eccl l. 2. c. 14. fideles iterat is precibus impetrârunt à Marcout monumentum illud doctrinae quod sermone verbis ill is tradidisset etiam script is mandatum apud eos relinqueret Esay 8.20 that what the Apostles preached first by word of mouth by the will of GOD they afterwards delivered in writing to bee a pillar and foundation of our faith and S. Austine affirmeth that what Christ would have knowne of his words and deeds as needfull to our salvation that hee gave in charge to his Apostles to set downe in writing If this suffice not I will stop the mouth of this Iesuit with the free confession of a greater Iesuit then hee Gregorie of Valence in his eight booke of the Analysis of faith the fift chapter minimè in ipsorum arbitrio positum fuit scribere aut alio tempore aut alijs verbis scribere the penmen of the holy Ghost were so guided by the spirit that it was not in their power or at their choyce to write or not to write or to write at another time or to write in other words then they did To the testimonie of Bellarmine the Iesuit gives as sleight an answer as to the former out of S. Luke whereunto I need to reply nothing because in a case so cleere wee need not the Cardinals confession having such expresse testimonie of Scripture and Fathers as namely of Esay to the law and to the testimonie if they speake not according to this word Deut. 4.2 Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things which are written in the booke of the law to doe them And Moses wrote this law and delivered it to the Priests which bare the Arke Gal. 1.8 2 Tim. 3.15 it is because there is no light in them of Moyses yee shall not adde unto the words which I command you which to bee spoken of the written law is apparant by comparing this text with Galathians 3.10 and Deuteronomie 31.9 And the words of Christ Iohn 5.39 search the Scriptures for in them you thinke you have eternall life And of S. Iohn his beloved Disciple Iohn 20.31 these things are written that yee might beleeve that Iesus Christ is the Sonne of God and that beleeving ye might have life through his Name And of S. Paul if we or an Angel from heaven preach unto you any other Gospel then that yee have received Advers hermog c. 22. adoro scripturae plenitudinem scriptum doceat Hermogenes Epist ad Pomp nihil innovetur in quit Stephanus quod traditum est unde est ista traditio Vtrum de Dominicâ Evangelicâ authoritate descendens an de Apostolorum mandatis epistolis veniens ea enim facienda quae scripta sunt Deus restatur siergo aut in evangelio praecipitur aut in Apostolorum epistolis aut Actibus continetur observetur haecsanctatraditio that is as S. Austine expoundeth it praeterquam quod in Scripturis legalibus Evangelicis accepist is if any preach unto you any Gospell beside that which is contained in the writings of the Law and the Gospell let him bee accursed And thou hast knowne the Scriptures from a child which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Iesus for all Scripture is given by Divine inspiration and is profitable for doctrine for reproofe for correction for instruction and righteosnesse that the man of God may bee perfect throughly furnished to all good workes And of Tertullian I adore the fulnesse of Scriptures let Hermogenes prove what hee saith out of Scriptures or otherwise let him feare the woe denounced against all such as adde any thing thereunto or take there-from And of S. Cyprian our brother Steven will have nothing to bee altered in the Church tradition Whence is this tradition is it from the Gospel or the Acts of the Apostles or their Epistles if it be so then let this holy tradition bee kept for God himselfe witnesseth that wee ought to observe those things that are written And of Athanasius Athanas. orat 1. cont Arr. Sufficiunt per se inspiratae scripturae ad veritatis instructionem Basil Serm. de side ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã Hom. 3. in 2. ad Tbess ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã Et in 2. ad Cor. Hom. 3 ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã Ierom. advers Helvid c. 3. credimus quia legimus non credimus quia non legimus Augustin de doc Chris l. 2. c. 9. in ijs quae apertè posita sunt in scriptura inveniuntur illa amnia quae continent fidem mores Cyril in Evang. Iohan. l. 1.2 c. 68 ea conscripta sunt quae scribentes Sufficere put drunt ad mores dogmataque Vincen. Lyrin advers Haeres hic requirat aliquis cum sit perfectus scripturae canon sibique ad omnia sat is superque sufficiat Biel in can mis lec 71. quae agenda quae fugienda quae amanda quae contemnenda quae timenda quae audenda quae credenda speranda caetera nostrae saluti necessaria quae omnia sola docet Sacra scriptura the holy Scripturesare sufficient to instruct us in the truth And of S Basil it is a manifest falling away from faith either to refuse any thing of those that are written or to bring in any of those things which
contradict Romish doctrines not out of disobedience to man but out of obedience to him who commandeth us to contend for the true faith and to reprove and convince all gainesayers What Papists intentions are we take not upon us to judge their doctrines we put to the test of Gods word and finde them false and adulterine and all be it some points of their beliefe considered in themselves might seeme indifferent yet as they hold them they are not because they are not of faith Rom. 14.23 and what soever is not of faith is sinne Now no point of the Romish Creed as they hold it is of that faith the Apostle speaketh of that is divine faith because they ground and finally resolve all their articles not upon Gods word but upon the authority of the Pope Resp ad Archiepis Spalaten c. 47. Firmitas fundamenti ââ firma licet implicita in aureo hoc fundamento veritatis adhaesio valebit ut in Cypriano sic in nobis ad salutem faenum stipula imbecilitas caries in tecto contignatione explicitae erroris opinio non valebit nec in Cypriano nec in nobis ad perââtiem or Church of Rome which is but the authority of man whereas on the contrary as Doctor Crakent horpe demonstrateth If any Protestant build hay or stubble upon the true foundation he may he saved because be holdeth the true foundation which is that every doctrine of faith ought to be built upon Scripture If the Iesuit wonder at this conclusion let him weigh the Authors reasons and he will be forced to confesse that the errors if there be any in Protestants in regard they sticke close to the true foundation and implicitly deny them cannot in them be damnable whereas the very true doctrines of faith in Papists because they hold them upon a wrong ground and foundation very much derogatory to God and his truth are not so safe To the third With what face can the Iesuit avow this considering that Prieras before alleaged and other writers approved by the Church of Rome mainetaine this blasphemous assertion that the authority of the Church is greater then the anthority of Scripture and all Papists of note at this day hold that the Scripture is but an imperfect and partiall rule of faith all Protestants on the contrary teach that it is an entire and perfect rule of faith Papists believe the Scripture for the Churches sake Protestants the Church for the Scripture sake Papists resolve all points of faith generally into the Popes infalibility or Churches authority Protestants into the written word of God which as Bellarmine himselfe confesseth De verbo Dei non script l. 4. c. 11. containeth all things necessary for all men to beleeve and is a most certaine and safe rule of beleeveing Yea but saith the Iesuit out of Vincentius Lerinensis De verbo Dei l. 1. c. 2. he that will avoid the deceits and snares of Haeretikes and remaine soundin the faith must strengthen his faith two wayes to wit by the authority of the divine law and the tradition of the Catholike Church This advise of Vincentius is sound and good if it be rightly understood and not in the Iesuits sense Vincentius there by tradition of the Catholike Church understandeth not unwritten verities but the Catholike expositions of holy Scriptures extant in the writings of the Doctors of the Church in all ages and we grant that this Catholike exposition of the Doctors where it can be had is of great force to confirme faith and confound Heretikes Vt Scripturae ecclesiastice intelligentiae jungatur authoritas For the stopping of whose mouth that Father saith and we deny it not that there is great neede to add to the Scripture the Churches sense or interpretation albeit as he there addeth which cutteth the throat of the Iesuits cause The Canon of Scripture is perfect and sufficient of it selfe for all things nay rather as hee correcteth himselfe Over and above sufficient cum sit perfectus scripturae canon sibique adomnia satis superque sufficiat To the fourth Here the Iesuit would make his Reader study a little and his Adversarie to muse Vero nihil verius certo nihil certius but it is indeed whether hee be in his right wits or no. For first as Seneca well resolveth one thing cannot be said truer than another one truth in Divinitie may be more evident to us than another but in it selfe it cannot be truer or surer Secondly admitting there could be degrees of certainty at least quoad nos there can be yet no comparison in regard of such certaintie betweene an Article of the Creed assented unto by all Christians and a controverted conclusion maintained onely by a late faction in the Westerne Church But the sitting of Christ at the right hand of his Father is an Article of the Creed set downe in expresse words in holy Scripture Mark 16.19 Luke 24. consented unto by all Christians in the world whereas the carnall presence of Christ in the Sacrament by Tranfubstantiation is no Article extant in any Creed save onely that of Pope Pius his coyning in the yeare of our Lord 1564. It is neither in words set downe in Scripture as the other Articles are neither can it be necssarily inforced or deduced by consequence as foure great Cardinals of the Roman Church confesse Cameracensis Cajetan Roffensis and Bellarmine Neither was this Doctrine of the Romane Church ever assented unto by the Greeke Church nor by the Latine anciently or generally as I shewed before Thirdly the Iesuit contradicteth himselfe within eight lines for having said in the eighteenth line Pag. 384. that Christ his corporall presence in the Sacrament was more sure than his presence in heaven at the right hand of his Father about seven lines after forgetting himselfe hee saith that Wee shall find as much to doe marke as much not more in expounding that Article of the Creed as they doe in expounding the words This is my Body Wherein it is well hee confesseth that Papists make much to doe in expounding the words This is my Body which is most true for by the demonstrative Hoc they understand they know not what Neither this Body nor this Bread but an Individum vagum something contained under the accidents of Bread which when the Priests saith Hoc it is Bread but when hee hath muttered out an Vm it is Christs Body Likewise by the Copula est is they understand they know not what either shall be as soone as the words are spoken or is converted unto or is by Transubstantiation Lastly by Body they understand such a body as indeed is no body without the extension of place without distinction of Organs without facultie of sense or motion and will hee make this figment so incredible so impossible as sure nay more sure than the Article of Christs ascension into heaven and his sitting at the right hand of his
4. Art 1. betwixt a Councell approved by the whole Christian world and one that is disclaimed by most Christian Kings and Bishops and the major part of Christendome But you would further know a difference betwixt their two Creeds Let me tell you in briefe When a Romanist like your selfe would needs know of a Protestant the difference betwixt his religion and ours Subesse Romano Pontifici omni humanae creaturae declaramus dicimus definimus pronunciamus omninò esse de necessitate salutis Bonifac. 8. in Extr. de Major Obed cap. Unam sanctam because both beleeved the Catholike Church in the Creed the Protestant made answer that wee beleeve the Catholike faith contained in the Creed but doe not beleeve the thirteenth Article which the Pope put to it when the Romanist was desirous to see that Article the Extravagant of Pope Boniface was brought wherein it was declared to be altogether of necessitie of salvation for everie humane creature to be subject to the Bishop of Rome This thirteenth Article in your Trent Creed besides the newnesse of the rest makes a great difference Mr. Lloyd betwixt the two Creeds and the rather because it is flat contrarie to the decree of the Nicene Councell besides many other differences as shall appeare hereafter But say you they agree in this that as the Arrians of those times cryed out against that Creed as being new and having words not found in Scripture for example Consubstantiation so our Protestants cry out against the Trent profession of faith for the same reasons of noveltie and words not found in Scripture as for example Transubstantiation It is true the Arrians at the time of the Councell cryed out against the Nicene Creed for defining the word Consubstantiall or Coessentiall as being new but it is as true they complained without a cause for long before that time the word was used by Origen Doctos quosdam ex veteribus illustres Episcopos Homousii dictione usos esse cognovimus Socrat. l. 1. c. 8. and other ancient Fathers as appeares by Socrates Wee know saith he that of the old writers certaine learned men and famous Bishops have used the word ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã and accordingly it was resolved by S. Austin that the name was not invented but confirmed and established in the Councell of Nice The word therefore Consubstantiall was not new August contr Maxim l. 3. c. 14. which they complained of but the word Transubstantiation is so new that it was altogether unknowne till the Councell of Lateran Concil Lateranense Anno 1215. Bellarm. 1200. yeeres after Christ therefore your comparison holds not in the first place But ad nit the Councell had first devised the word Quomodo dicis in Scripturis divinis ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã non inveniri quasi aliud sit ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã quà m quod dicit Ego de Deo patre exivi Ego Pater unum sumus Ambros de fide contra Arrian Tom. 2. c. 5. p. 223. in initio August Ep. 174. ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã Athanas Ep. quod decret Synod Nic. Congruis verbis sunt exposita Nihil refert hanc vocem non esse in Scripturâ si vox id significat quod Scriptura docet Vasq in 1. Thom. Tom. 2. Disp 110. c. 1. sect 4. yet it is agreed on all hands that the meaning of the word is contained in Scripture S. Ambrose writing against the Arrians puts to them this very question How doe you say the word Consubstantiall is not in divine Scriptures as if Consubstantiall were any thing else but I went out from the Father and the Father and I are one the word therefore was a pregnant word agreeable to the sacred word of God And albeit saith S. Austin the word perhaps be not found there yet the thing it selfe is found and what more frivolous quarrell is it than to contend about the word when there is certaintie of the thing it selfe In like manner Athanasius answered the Arrians in those dayes as I must answer you Touching the word ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã albeit it be not found in Scriptures yet it hath the same meaning that the Scriptures intend and imports the same with them whose eares are entirely affected towards religion We cry not out against you simply because your word Transubstantiation is not found in the Scriptures but because the true sense and meaning of the word is not contained in them for the words Unbegotten Increate the word Sacrament the word Trinitie and the like are not found in Scripture yet wee teach them wee beleeve them because their true sense and meaning may bee deduced from the Scripture and we professe with your Jesuite Vasques Nihil refert c. It mattereth not whether the word be in Scripture or no so as that which it signifieth be in the Scripture To come neerer to you doe you but prove that the words This is my body imply Transubstantiation and let me be branded for an Arrian if I refuse to subscribe to it but that the world may know we condemne you justly both for the newnesse of the word and your doctrine also hearken to the learned Doctors of your owne Church Your Schoole-man Scotus tels us that before the Councell of Lateran Bellarm. l. 3. de Eucbar c. 23. Transubstantiation was not beleeved as a point of faith It is true your fellow Jesuites are ashamed of this confession and thereupon Bellarmine answers Ibid. This opinion of his is no way to bee allowed Suarez in 3. Tom. in Euch. disp 70. sect 2. and Suarez not content with such a sober reckoning proclaimes that for his lowd speaking hee ought to be corrected and as touching the words of consecration from whence you would inferre both the name nature of Transubstantiation Mont. in Luk. 22. your Arias Montanus saith This is my body that is my body is sacramentally contained in the Sacrament of bread and hee addes withall the secret and most mysticall manner hereof God will once vouchsafe more clerely to unfold to his Christian Church The doctrine therefore of your carnall and corporall presence is not so cleerely derived from the Scriptures nay on the contrarie hee protesteth that the body of our Saviour is but sacramentally contained in the Sacrament as the Protestants hold and therefore not bodyily It is more than evident that the word Consubstantiation used by the Fathers was derived from the Scriptures but you have not that infallible assurance for your word Transubstantiation witnes your Cardinall Cajetan Cajet in Thom. part 3. q. 75. art 1. he assures us that there appeareth nothing out of the Gospel that may inforce us to understand Christs words properly yea nothing in the text hindereth but that these words This is my body may as well be taken in a metaphoricall sense as those words of the Apostle The Rocke was Christ that the words of either proposition may well bee
and tell me if I may not truly retort your Assertion into your owne bosome Scripture you have indeed but so mang led corrupted perverted by Translation that as you have it it is as good as nothing But you have misinterpreted the Scriptures say you according to your owne fancies Your bolt is soone shot and if all your words were Oracles and that Ipse dixit were sufficient your bare word for other proofes you have none would easily conclude us but I will shew you so plainly that without Spectacles you may see that these Aspersions likewise reflect upon your selves It was a question amongst your fellow Jesuits whether Jacob Clemens the Dominican might by Authority of the Scripture kill Henry the third B. Barloes defence of the Articles in his Preface p. 7. King of France and one of your Jesuits reasoned thus with himselfe Ehud killed Eglon and therefore I may kill Henry for Eglon was a King and so is Henry Eglon signifies a Calfe and Henry is a Calvinist and therefore assuredly I may murther him by Scripture I hope you will confesse that this Jesuite although he were of your Society did interpret the Scripture according to his owne fancie In like manner your Patriarke of Venice concludes seven Sacraments from the words of Scripture and I conceive it is according to his owne fancie That saith he which Andrew spake Inn. Gentil exam Concil Trid. l. 4. n. 26. Sess There is a Boy which hath five loaves and two fishes must be understood of the ranke of St. Peters successors and that which is added Make the people sit downe signifieth that salvation must be offered them by teaching them the seven Sacraments And whereas the Prophet David saith Thou hast put all things under his feet Antoninus your Archbishop of Florence Anton. in Sum. part 3. tit 22. c. 5. about two hundred years since expounded those words in this manner Thou hast made all things subject to the Pope the Cattle of the field that is to say men living in the Earth the fishes of the sea that is to say the soules in Purgatory the fowles of the Ayre that is to say the soules of the Blessed in heaven whether this Exposition be according to the sense which the Catholike Church holdeth or according to his owne fancy let the Reader judge To come nearer to you Whitak Camp Rat. 9. Moses saith God made man after his Image Pope Adrian inferreth Therefore Images must be set up in Churches St. Peter saith Behold here are two swords Pope Boniface concludes Extra de Major Obed. Therefore the Pope hath power over the spirituall and the temporall St. Mathew saith Give not that which is holy unto dogges Mr. Harding expounds it Juels Def. p. 52. Therefore it is not lawfull for the vulgar people to reade the Scriptures It was sayd to St. Peter in a vision Arise kill and eate your Cardinall Baronius hence infers In voto Baronii contra venetos The Pope is Peter and the Venetians are the meat which must be killed and devoured To let passe those farre fetched and extravagant senses of Scriptures which your learned men wyer-draw for your Romish Doctrine It is the word of God Goe to my servant Job and he will pray for thee therefore there is an Invocation of Saints in Scripture Give us this day our daily bread Bellar. de SaÌct Beat. l. 1. c. 10. therefore the bread must bee given to the Common people and not the Cup. Roffens adver Luther Art 16. Our Saviour opened the Booke of the Prophet Esay and afterwards closed it Ledis de divinis Script Quâvis linguâ non legendâ cap. 22. therefore Prayer and Service in an unknowne tongue is commanded by the Scripture These and such like false glasses you temper for your Spectacles to deceive your poore ignorant Proselites with the name of Scripture and for feare they should make any doubt of the right interpretation of them Si quis habet interpretationeÌ Ecclesiae Romanae de loco aliquo Scripturae etiamsi tamen habet ipsissimuÌ verbum Dei Hosius de expresso verbo Dei your Cardinall Hosius protesteth to all Romanists If a man have the Interpretation of the Church of Rome of any place of Scripture he hath the very words of God though he neither know nor understand whether nor how it agreeth with the words of Scripture This puts me in minde of that excellent passage of St. Hilary who speaking of the errours and Heresies crept into the Church in the dayes of Constantius makes this generall complaint which in these dayes is truly verified in the Roman Church Hilard 3. ad Constant l. 1. ad Const defunctum Faith is now come to depend rather on time than on the Gospel your state is dangerous and miserable you have as many faiths as wills and as many doctrines as manners whilst faiths are either so written as you list or so vnderstood as you will I come now to your forbidden Bookes wherein the mysterie of iniquitie will manifestly appeare and first touching the sacred Bible which is forbidden in the first place The Bible say you is not so forbidden but that it is in the Bishops power to grant leave if upon Conference with the Parish Priest or Confessor of the partie that desireth leave he finde him to be such a one as may not incurre danger of faith c. which with any reasonable man may be counted sufficient liberty It is true that by the fourth Rule of Pope Pius the fourth the Bible may be licensed by the Bishop but the party must have the license in writing and withall it is decreed Regula 4. in indice libr. prohibit p. 16. If any presume without such license either to reade or have it unlesse he come in first and give up his Bible to his Ordinary let him not have the pardon of his sinnes It is not lawfull then to reade the Bible without a dispensation but with a license any man may reade it and this say you is sufficient liberty for any reasonable man If I should grant you that which you say yet you are never able to make good that license for Pope Clement the eight about thirty yeares after upon this dispensation so granted gives us to understand That upon the Rule of Pius the fourth Observatio circa 4. Regulam Ibid. p. 22. in fine Concil Trident no new power was granted to the Bishops or Inquisitors or Superiors to license the buying reading or keeping the Bible in the vulgar tongue seeing hitherto by the command and practise of the holy Inquisition the power of granting such licenses to reade or keepe Bibles in the vulgar Language or any part of Scripture as well of the New as the Old Testament or any sums or Hystoricall Abridgement of the same in any vulgar Language hath beene taken from them Quod quidem inviolatè servandum est and
present Binius ibid. in his Annot. on the other side Peter Lombard and Gratian Pet. Lomb. l. 4. Sent. Dist 6. Grat. Can. Mulier de Consecr Dist 4. they have put in their exception nisi necessitate cogente except it be in case of necessitie so that in the absence of the Priest and in case of necessitie women may baptize by the authority of your Church notwithstanding the Councels decree And this is according to Bellarmines confession Although saith he those words of exception nisi necessitate cogente be not found in the Tomes of Councels Bell. de Baptis l. 1. c. 7. yet Peter Lombard and Gratian cite the Canon in that manner And thus by your owne Cardinals profession your Priests have added that exception to the Canon to dispense with women for Administration of the Sacrament which is not found in the Councell Againe the same Councell is razed both by the compiler of the decrees and publisher of the Councels for the Councell saith in the 44. Canon a Clericus nec comam nutriat nec barbam radat Concil Carth. Can 44. Let no Clerke weare long hayre nor shave his Beard The decretals and your late Councels published by Binius have left out the word Radat and have quite altered the sense of the decree and so your Church hath gone directly against the meaning of the Councell in shaving of Priests S. Austin Bishop of Hippo is both purged and falsified in favor of your doctrine First for the purging of him your own men make this declaration b Augustinus nuper Venetiis excusus in quo praeter multorum locorum restitutionem secundum collationem veterum exemplarium curavimus removeri illa omnia quae fideliuÌ mentes haeretic â pravitate possent inficere aut a Catholica orthodoxa fide deviare Praefat Ind. lib. prohibit ad LectoreÌ Genevae impress an 1629. St. Austin was lately printed at Venice in which Edition as we have restored many places accerding to the ancient Copies so likewise we have taken care to remove all those things which might either infect the mindes of the faithfull with Heresies or cause them to wander from the Catholike faith This publike profession your men have made and accordingly the c In hunc moduÌ est repurgatus ut in libri inscripsione testaÌtur qui editioni praefuerunt Ibid. p. 6. Booke was purged as those who were present at that Edition doe witnesse in the Inscription of the Booke but let us returne to the corrupted Editions in our view St. d De Civitate Dci lib. 22. c. 24. Austin in his 22. booke of the Citie of God and 24. Chapter is cyted by e Bell. de Purg. l. 1. c. 4. Bellarmine for the proofe of Purgatory yet in that Chapter saith f Lud. Vives in lib de Civit. Dei c. 8. Vives in the ancient Manuscript Copies which are at Bruges and Colein those ten or twelve printed lines are not to be found And in the 22. booke and 8. Chapter he tells us there are many additions in that Chapter without question foysted in by such as make practise of depraving Authors of great Authority Touching forgeries and falsifications in particular The humane nature of Christ is destroyed if there be not given it after the manner of other bodies a certaine space wherein it may be contained In your Edition of Paris printed by Sebastian Nivelle An. 1571. this passage is wholly left out This is observed by Dr. Moulin but the Authour so printed I have not seene But when neither adding nor detracting could make good your Transubstantiation Fryer Walden thought it the surest way to forge a whole passage in the name of St. Austin which indeed strongly proves the very name and nature of it The words are these Wald. Tom. 2. de Sacram. c. 83. p. mihi 141. No man ought to doubt when Bread and Wine are consecrated into the substance of Christ so as the sabstance of bread and wine doe not remaine whereas we see many things in the workes of God no lesse marvellous A woman God changeth substantially into a stone as Lots wife and in the small workemanship of man hay and ferne into glasse Neither must we beleeve that the substance of bread and wine remaineth but the bread is turned into the Body of Christ and the wine into his bloud the qualities or accidents of bread and wine onely remaining This fo gery was judicially allowed by Pope Martin the fist and his Cardinals in their Consistorie and yet it savours rather of a Glasse-maker than an ancient Father but what answer maketh Walden to this invention * Egoenimreperi traÌscripsi de vetustissimo exemplari scripto antiquaÌ valdè manu formatâ Idem Ibid. I found it faith he and transcribed it out of a very ancient Copie written with a set hand Thus one while you adde another while you detract another while you falsifie the ancient Fathers if either they make for us or against you and yet you tell us that we are guiltie of corrupting the Fathers But above all Gratian hath most shamefully and lewdly falsified St. Austin whom he hath made to say Inter Canonicas Scriptur as decretales Epistolae connumerantur Dist 29. In Canonicis fol. 19. A. The decretall Epistles of the Popes are accounted in the number of Canonicall Scriptures The truth is St. Austin in his booke of Christian doctrine informes a Christian what Scripture hee should hold for Canonicall and thereupon bids him follow the greater part of the Catholike Church Amongst which those Churches are which had the happinesse to injoy the seates of the Apostles and to receive Epistles from them Gratian in the Canon Law altereth the words thus Amongst which Canonicall Scriptures those Epistles are which the Apostolicke See of Rome hath and which others have deserved to receive from her and accordingly the title of the Canon is Imer Canonicas Scripturas c. The decretall Epistles of Popes are counted by St. Austin for Canonicall Scriptures Now judge you what greater forgerie nay what greater blasphemie can be devised or uttered against Christ and his Spirit than that the Popes Epistles should bee termed canonicall Scriptures and held of equall authority with the Word of God especially since by your owne men they are censured as Apocryphall and counterfeit Epistles Your owne Bellarmine as a man ashamed of such grosse forgeries would seeme to excuse it Bell. de Concil Author l. 2. c. 12. Primo That Gratian was deceived by a corrupt copie of St. Austin which he had besides him and that the true and corrected copies have not the words as himselfe reporteth Thus Walden excuseth his forgerie by an ancient Manuscript the Cardinall by a corrupt copie and yet by your Cardinals leave this and many other such like forgeries stand printed in the Canon Law no Index Expurgatorius layes hold on them Idem de script Eccles An.
hands who doe not onely raze and falsifie Evidences touching the greatest mysteries of Salvation who I say not onely doe the same but have pleasure in them that doe them Thus much touching the razing and corrupting of the Fathers for the first 800. yeares Now I proceed to your Index Expurgatorius your purging and blotting out the moderne Authours for the last 800. yeares Forasmuch say you as concerneth the late Catholike Authors of this last age for this our Index of which is al the difficultie beginneth but from the yeere 1515. whatsoever needeth correction is to bee amended or blotted out yet for others going before that time it is expresly said that nothing may be changed unlesse some manifest errors through the fraud of Heretikes or carelesnesse of the Printer bee crept in Thus you From your corrupting the ancient Councels and Fathers which I have showne wee are at last come to the correcting of moderne Authors and as I have led you through an Hospitall of maimed Souldiers so now I will send you to the house of correction where I will leave you without Baile or Maine-prize till you have cleared your selfe and your associates for wounding and cutting out the tongues of your owne Authors in speaking truth against the corruptions of the Church But your correcting Index say you began but from the yeare 1515. P. 24. 144. and nothing is changed of Catholike Authors before that time I assure you I have not heard as yet one sentence nay scarce one word of truth fall from your pen wherein you dissent from us and this your assertion will prove as true as the rest Yea but fay you it is expresly declared by the Church that nothing may be changed and if this be true as true it is indeed the lesse credit is to be given you or your Church-men who make decrees and breake them at their pleasure for it shall appeare that your Index doth extend it selfe to the time of the Apostles and howsoever you pretend to purge the Fathers onely in the Index and Table of their Bookes yet I say some you have purged in the Text it selfe others you have corrected in the Index in the expresse words delivered in the bodie of those Bookes And as touching your Assertion that you purge the latter writers onely from the yeare 1515. and not beyond that time this is most false and you had said more truly if you had confessed that for 1515. yeares together your Church spared no Authours ancient or moderne if they speake not Placentia agreeable to your Popes faith and doctrine For the better manifestation of this truth looke first upon your Correctorium for so Lucas Brugensis termes it your worke of correction upon the Bible and tell me if you have not altered by your Popes command above three thousand severall places in the Scripture even in your vulgar Translation which you call St. Hieromes and although you dare not lay a Deleatur upon the sacred word of God yet upon the Commandements upon the Lords Prayer upon severall places of Scripture as I have shewed there is a Deletur a leaving out and a detracting from it Looke upon your Index Expurgatorius printed at Madrid by Cardinall Quiroga and tell me if you have not purged certain places in the Index of the Bible which are ipsissima verba the very words to a letter in the Textit selfe as for instance a Justificamur fide in Christum Galat. 2.16 We are justified by faith in Christ b Justitia nostra Christus 1. Cor. 1.30 Christ is our Righteousnesse c Fide purificantur corda Act. 15.9 By faith our hearts are purified d Justus coram Deo nemo Psal 143.2 No man is righteous before God e UxoreÌ habeat unusquisque 1 Cor. 7.2 Let every man have his wife c. All these passages I say are the very word of God in the Body of the Scriptures and yet they are commanded f Ind. Hisp Madr. f. mihi 15. B. tanquaÌ propositiones suspectae for so are the words of your Index as if they were things questionable to bee blotted out Againe when your glosses or marginall notes agree not to your doctrine you cause your Index Expurgatorius to lay hold on them as for instance in the 26. of Leviticus we reade in your owne Translation You shall not make to your selves an Idoll or thing graven Deleatur illud Sculptilia prohibet fieri Idem fol. 7. when the glosse in the Margent saith God forbiddeth graven Images Let that passage say you be strucken out And whereas Samuel saith Prepare your hearts unto the Lord and serve him onely Ibid. fol. 8. b. the glosse upon the Text which is the same in substance viz. wee must serve God onely you command to be blotted out These and the like places relating to the Scriptures being contrary to your Trent doctrine you have excluded from your late printed Bibles in the places aforesaid as being too obvious to the eye of every Reader Ind. Hisp Madrid p. 6. 7. f. 138. Mihi 62. Crakenthorp adv Spal p. 66. Bell. de verbo Dei l. 4. c. 11. c. Ind. Madrid fol. 62. a. Deleantur ex Textu illa verba Sed ubi non habuerit Dei timorem in seipsis nec Jesum per fidem incolam c. Ibid. Eam verò soluÌmodò naturam quae increata est colere venerari didicimus Ant. Meliss serm 1. Bell. descript Eccl. p. mihi 184. Looke upon the Fathers and tell mee if your Index Expurgatorius doth not correct both St. Chrysostome and Austin and Hilarie and Hierome in their Index touching the prime points of controversie betwixt us Nay more St. Austin saith Vives is purged ten or twelve lines in the body of his workes St. Chrysostome in his 49. Homily is purged 70. lines by Bellarmines confession other places are razed out of him and other Fathers as I have shewed before Looke upon St. Cyrill Bishop of Alexandria who was living above 1200. yeares agoe and tell me if your Inquisitors have not commanded a Deleatur upon his words in the very Text it selfe Looke before his time upon Gregory Nyssen and tell me if through the sides of Antonius Abbas who was living by Bellarmines accompt neare 900. yeares agoe you doe not wound that ancient Father in the body of his workes in commanding this golden sentence to bee blotted out Ind. Belg. p. 270. ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã Greg. Nissen in Orat. 4. Tom. 2. Edit Graeco-lat p. 146. We have learned to worship and adore that nature onely which is uncreated * ParsoÌs warn-word to Sir Fran. Hastings wast-word Enc. 2. c. 9 p. 69. your F. Parsons takes great paines to little purpose to excuse it one while he tells us that the sentence is not to bee found in Gregory Nissen which is most false another while he confesseth that they cannot stand to give a particular reason
deliros senes sed qui magis quà m Phormio deliraret vidisse neminem I will leave the application to your selfe and the interpretation to the Reader because you say I cannot translate Latin Some truth or modesty I should gladly heare from you but this is such an impudent Calumny as Bellarmine himselfe would have beene ashamed to have heard it fall from the Pen of any learned Papalin heare therefore what your owne men confesse of Calvin and others and what we professe in the name of our Church Your F. Kellison saith of Calvin Kellis Surney lib. 4. cap. 5. p. mihi 229. That if hee did meane as hee speaketh hee would not dispute with him but would shake hands with him as with a Catholike And then hee repeats Calvins words I say that in the Mysterie of the Supper by the signe of Bread and Wine is Christ truly delivered yea and his Body and his Blood And a little before those words hee giveth the reason Because saith he Christs words This is my Body are so plaine that unlesse a man will call God a deceiver hee can never be so bold as to say that hee setteth before us an emptie Signe This is likewise Bellarmines confession of him Bell de Euch. lib. 1. cap. 1. Non ergo vacuum inane signum It is no vaine and empty signe Thus you see your fellowes and you agree like Harpe and Harrow you say it is an empty peece of Bread they answer in Calvins behalfe and ours that it is not an empty signe Idem ibid. c. 8. Nay saith Bellarmine both Calvin and Oecolampadius and Peter Martyr doe teach the Bread is called Christs Body figuratively as being a signe or figure of his body but they adde withall it is no bare and empty figure but such as doth truely convey unto them the things signified thereby Bilson in the difference betwixt Subjection and Christistian Rebellion Part. 4. p. mihi 779. for which truthes sake Christ said not this Bread is a figure of my body but it is my body To give you an instance in some of our Church God forbid saith our learned Bilson wee should deny that the flesh and blood of Christ are truly present and truly received of the Faithfull at the Lords Table It is the Doctrine that wee teach others and wherewith wee comfort our selves Wee never doubted but the Truth was present with the Signe and the Spirit with the Sacrament as Cyprian saith Wee knew there could not follow an operation if there were not a presence before Neither doe I thinke you are ignorant of this but that you have inured your selfe to falsities and reproaches For it is apparently true that the question in these dayes is not of the truth of the presence but of the manner that is whether it be to the Teeth and the Belly or Soule and Faith of the Receiver And therupon our learned and Reverend B. Andrews returned his Answer to Bellarmine Wee beleeve the presence Wee beleeve B. Andrew ad Bell. Apol. Resp c. 1. p. mihi 11. I say the presence as well as you concerning the manner of the presence we doe not unadvisedly define nay more wee doe not scrupulously inquire no more than wee doe in Baptisme how the blood of Christ cleanseth us From the Sacraments you procceed to our two and twentie Bookes of Canonicall Scripture and indeed wee allow but two and twentie But will any Catholike say you allow this to have been Catholike Doctrine Yes without doubt Scil. Orig. in Exposit Psal 1. many good Catholikes did follow the Hebrew Canon of the Iewes which saith Origen compriseth but two and twentie bookes of the old Testament according to the number of the letters among them Melito Bellar. de verbo Dei l. 1. c. 20. Bishop of Sardis was a Catholike and saith Bellarmine hee did follow the Hebrew Canon of the Iewes Hilary Hilar. in Prolog in Psal explanat Bishop of Poictiers was a Catholike and he told us The old Testament was contained in two and twentie bookes according to the number of the Hebrew letters St. Cyril Cyril Catechis 4. Bishop of Hierusalem was a Catholike and hee gave us the like Lesson Peruse the two and twentie books of the old Testament but meddle not with the Apochrypha Athanasius Anthanas in Synops Bishop of Alexandria was a Catholike and affirmes that the Christians had a definite number of books comprehended in the Canon which were two and twentie equall to the number of the Hebrew letters Ruffinus was a Catholike Bellar. de verbo Dei l. 1. c. 20. and Bellarmine confesseth hee did follow the Hebrew Canon which conteined our two and twentie books Gregory Nazianzen was a Catholike Naz. Carm. Iamb ad Seleucum Iamb 3. and hee shewed to Seleucus a Catalogue of the Canonicall bookes and hee cites the bookes in order from Genesis to Malachie the last of the Prophets and leaveth out all the Apochrypha The Fathers of the Councell of Laodicea were Catholikes Concil Laod. cap. 59. and in the 59th Canon they allow onely those two and twenty bookes for Canonicall which wee receive There are others whom you terme Catholikes as namely Damascene Hugo de Sancto Victore Lyranus Hugo Cardinalis Tostatus Waldensis Driedo and Cajetan all which differ from your Tenet of the Apochryphall bookes which are canonized by your Trent Councell such agreement is there amongst your best learned touching the greatest point of your Beleefe and yet forsooth your Church cannot be depraved But here is one thing say you which giveth mee much cause of wonder which is that you talke of Traditions as distinct from Scripture I ever tooke you to be so fallen out with them that you made the deniall of them a fundament all point of your Religion that you would not indure the word Tradition but alwaies translated or rather falsified it into Ordinances Thus you It is a true saying of the Heathen Orator Cicero Hee who once goeth beyond the bounds of Modestie had need to be lustily impudent I protest I onely termed your Additions Traditions and you question our Church for false translating of the word And cannot wee indure the word Traditions Doe not we allow of all the Apostolicall Traditions which agree unto the Scriptures Nay more doe wee not translate the word Traditions in the Scripture when the Text will beare it according to the Greeke originall Looke upon the fifteenth of Matthew Matth. 15. v. 2 3 6. and in three severall verses 2 3 6. wee use the word Tradition Looke upon the seventh of Marke Marke 7. v. 3 8 9 13. and in foure severall places of that chapter you shall find likewise wee translate Traditions Looke upon Saint Paul to the Colossians Galatians and upon Saint Peter Colos 2.8 Galat. 1.14 1. pet 1.18 and in all these in the Translation joyned with your Rhemish Testament you shall find the word Traditions How
Anselme and his words Gospell the Knight gaines nothing by it or we lose for though it bee the safest way to cast anchour at the last in the bottome of Gods mercie and put our whole confidence in Christs merits it doth not from hence follow but that men may doe workes meritorious of increase of grace and glory First why doth he lispe here and not speake plaine out the Romish tenet which is that our Workes doe merit not only increase of grace and glorie but remission of sinnes and h Concil Trid. Sess 6. c. 32. Si quis dixerit hominis justificati opera non verè mereri augmentuÌ gratiae vitam aeternam ipfius vitae aeternae si tamen in gratià decesserit consecutionem Anathema sit eternall life Next I would faine know how mercy and merit nay sole mercy and merit can stand together Certainly as mercy excludeth merit so sole mercy all merit Can those workes which is S. Anselmes judgement will not beare scale in Gods ballance weigh downe super-excellens pondus gloriae a super-excellent weight of glorie Certainly the Spectacle-maker put in a burning glasse into his Spectacles which hath much impaired his eye-sight or else hee could not but reade S. Anselmes words in this place in which he renounceth all merit and that in most direct and expresse tearmes I beleeve that none can bee saved by his owne merits Vid loc sup cit p. 4. or by any other meanes but by the merit of Christs passion I set the death of Christ betwixt ' mee and my bad merits and I offer his merits in stead of the merits which I ought to have and have not Concerning Transubstantiation Spectacles chap. 9. Sect. 2. à pag. 132. ad 187. THE Knight and the Protestants commit a great sinne in administring the Sacrament of Baptisme without those Ceremonies which were used in the Church from the Apostles times Elfrick was not the Authour of the Homilie and Epistles the Knight citeth against Transubstantion in which notwithstanding there is nothing against Transubstantiation but much for it if the Knight had not shamefully corrupted the Text by false translating it in five severall places The difference of Catholique Authours about things not defined by the Church maketh nothing for Protestants because they vertually retract all such opinions by submitting their writings to the censure of the Catholique Church Cajetan is falsely alledged by putting in the word supposed and Transubstantiation he denied not the bread to bee transubstantiated into Christs body though hee conceived that those words This is my body doe not sufficiently prove the reall presence of our Saviours body for which he is worthily censured by Suarez and the whole schoole of Divines Biel affirmeth that it is expresly delivered in holy Scriptures that the body of Christ is contained under the species of bread c. Which former words the Knight leaveth out because they made clearely against him and in the latter set downe by the Knight he denieth not that Transubstantiation may bee proved out of Scriptures but that it may be proved expresly that is in expresse tearmes or so many words Alliaco his opinion maketh nothing for the Knight being a Calvinist though hee seeme to favour the Lutherans tenet and though hee thought the Doctrine of consubstantiation to be more possible and easie yet therein hee preferred the judgement of the Church before his owne B. Fisher denieth not that the reall presence can be proved out of Scripture for the fourth chapter of the booke cited by the Knight is employed in the proofe thereof against Luther but that laying aside the interpretation of Fathers and use of the Church no man can be able to prove that any Priest now in these times doth Consecrate the true body and bloud of Christ Durand B. of Maundy doth not deny Transubstantiation to bee wrougnt by vertue of the words This is my body For though in the first place hee saith that Christ then made the bread his body when he blessed it yet hee after addeth that wee doe blesse illâ virtute quam Christus indidit verbis Durand rat c. 41. n. 14. by that power which Christ hath giuen to the words Odo Cameracensis calleth the very forme of Consecration a benediction both because they are blessed words appointed by Christ for so holy an end and because they produce so noble an effect or because they are joyned alwayes with that benediction and thankesgiving used both by our Saviour in the institution of this holy Sacrament and now by the Priest in the Catholique Church in the Consecration of the same Christopherus de capite fontium is put in the Roman Index of prohibited bookes and in the words cited out of him by the Knight there is a grosse historicall errour in this that hee saith that in that opinion of his both the Councell of Trent and all Writers did agree till the late time of Caietan as if Caietan were since the Councell of Trent and in citing this place the Knight is against himselfe for whereas hee maketh Cardinall Caietan and the Archbishop of Caesarea his two Champions against the words of Consecration as if they did both agree in the same here this Archbishop saith quite contrary that all are for him but onely Cajetan Salmeron relateth it indeed to bee the opinions of some Graecians that Christ did not consecrate by those words This is my body but by his benediction but this opinion of theirs is condemned by him as Chamier saith expressely in the place coted by the Knight l. 6. de Eucha c. 7. Bellarmine in the place alledged saith nothing but what is granted by all Papists De Euchar. l. 3. c. 23. to wit that though the words of Consecration in the plaine connaturall and obvious sense inferre Transubstantiation yet because in the judgement of some learned men they may have another sense which proveth only the reall presence it is not altogether improbable that without the authority of the Church they cannot inforce a man to beleeve Transubstantiation out of them Alfonsus à Castro affirmeth that of Transubstantiation there is rare mention in the ancient Fathers yet of the conversion of the bread into the body of Christ there is most frequent mention and the drift of Castro in that place is to shew that though there bee not much mention in ancient Writers of a thing or plaine testimonie of Scripture that yet the use and practice of the Church is sufficient bringing in for example this point of Transubstantiation and the procession of the holy Ghost from the Son The meaning of Yribarne and Scotus saying Transubstantiation of late was determined in the Councell of Lateran is only this that whereas the words of Consecration may bee understood of the reall presence of our blessed Saviours body either by Transubstantiation or otherwise so the substance of bread doe remaine the Church hath determined the words are to be understood in the former
elements is not reall and corporall but spirituall and sacramentall as that was in the Desert of which the Apostle speaketh the c 1 Cor. 10.4 spirituall rock followed them and that rock waes Christ When Manna fell and the rock was strucken Christ was not incarnate nor many hundred yeares after how then could the Manna or the water bee really and properly turned into his flesh and bloud Moreover howsoever hee eludeth the former words of Aelfrick There is a great difference betwixt the body wherein Christ suffered and the body which is received of the faithfull the body in which Christ suffered was borne of the flesh of Mary and consisted of bloud and bone but the other is gathered of many cornes without hloud and bone by saying that the difference which Aelfrick sheweth betweene Christ on the Crosse and Christ on the Sacrament is in his manner of being not in the being it selfe not denying him to bee really in both yet the later words which containe an inference upon the former therefore there is nothing to bee understood in the Sacrament bodily but spiritually admit of no colourable evasion for if nothing bee there understood bodily but spiritually then must needs the words This is my body be understood figuratively then must we not according to the doctrine of those times understand any substantiall change of the bread into Christs very body or the Wine into his bloud really and corporally To the third The difference betweene Papists of most eminent note concerning the words by vertue whereof they teach Transubstantiation is effected maketh much against the doctrine it selfe and by consequence quite overthroweth it For thus we argue against them out of this their difference If the bread bee turned into Christs body then either by the words of benediction before hee brake the bread or gave it c. or by the very words of Consecration viz. hoc est corpus meum But hee neither changed the bread into his Body by the one nor by the other Ergo hee changed it not at all Not by the precedent benediction as Aquinas and Bellarmine prove For till the last instant of the prolation of the words This is my Body the substance of bread remaineth Not by the words of Consecration for as Durand and Odo Cameracensis and Christopherus Archbishop of Caesarea prove Christ could not have said after hee had blessed the Bread This is my body unlesse by blessing it he had made it his body before If when Christ said Take yee and eat yea at that time the Bread by benediction were not changed it would follow that Christ did command his Disciples to take and eate the substance of Bread which to say is to deny the article of Transubstantiation Neither can the Iesuite heale this sore by his vertuall salve in saying that those men above alledged who impugne the prsent tenent of the Schooles concerning the words of Consecration in which the essence of the Sacrament consisteth vertually retracted such opinions because they submitted their writings to the censure of the Catholique Church for so wee may say with better reason that what they held against us they vertually retracted by submitting their judgement to the Catholique Church which we can easily prove not to bee the particular Roman but the Universall which in all times and all places through the Christian world hath professed the common faith once given to the Saints without any of those later Articles which P. Pius the fourth Jud. 13. and the late conventicle of Trent hath pinned unto it To the fourth Cajetan is truly alledged by the Knight for though neither the words Transubstantiation nor supposed are in him yet the sence of them is to be found in him for as both Suarez and Flood himselfe acknowledgeth p. 147. Cajetan said that these words This is my body doe not sufficiently prove the reall presence of our Saviours body without the presupposed authoritie of the Church and if in his judgement they prove not so much as the reall presence of Christs body in the Sacrament much lesse prove they the presence thereof by Transubstantiation or turning the bread into it By the word supposed which the Knight addeth more fully to declare Cajetans meaning hee intended not suppositions or barely pretended authority of the Church but truly presupposed which maketh not the speech sound at all contemptibly of the Church as Flood would have it whose stomack is so bad that it turneth sweet and wholsome meate into choler Nectar cui fiet acetum vaticani perfida vappa cadi To the fifth The Knight transcribeth so much out of Biel as was pertinent to his purpose with the rest he thought not fit to trouble the reader In Can. Miss Lect. 40. notandum guod quamvis expressè tradatur in scriptur â quod corpus Christi veraciter sub speciebus panis continetur à fidelibus sumitur tamen quomodo sit ibi corpus Christi an per conversionem alicujus in ipsum an sine conversione incipiat esse corpus Christi cum pane manentibus substantiâ accidentibus panis in Canone bibliae non invenitur The whole passage in Biel standeth thus It is to bee noted that though it bee expressely delivered in Scripture that the body of Christ is truly contained under the forme or species of Bread and received by the faithfull yet it is not found in the canon of the Bible how the body of Christ is there whether by conversion of any thing into it or whether it beginneth to be there without conuersion or turning the substance and accidents of bread remaining The former words in which passage make nothing against the Knight Who in this chapter for the most part condemneth Papists out of their owne mouth and therefore taking Biel for such hee maketh use of his testimonie against the Roman Church in point of Transubstantiation Which is very direct and expresse and the Iesuites answer is very weake and unsufficient thereunto to wit that hee denieth only that Transubstantiation is found in Scripture in expresse words For first Biel saith not non invenitur expressum but non invenitur It is not found in Scripture whether Christs body be there by conversion of any thing into it Now many things are found in Scripture as the Trinity of persons the eternall generation of the Sonne the procession of the holy Ghost from the Father and the Sonne the number and nature of Sacraments which yet are not set downe in expresse words Secondly it is evident out of the former words of Biel that hee accounted those things expressely to be delivered in Scriptures which yet are not set downe in expresse words for hee saith that it is expresly delivered in Scriptures that the body of Christ is truly contained under the species of bread and yet those words are not found in Scripure If wee should admit then of Flood his glosse upon Biel Transubstantiation is not found in Scripture that is
words This is my Body did demonstrate what was contained in the bread What fault findeth hee in this allegation If the Greekes had no such opinion or Salmeron relateth no such thing the blame must light between Salmeron and Chamier howsoever the Knight is free For hee truly quoteth Chamier neither dare Flood say that Chamier misquoteth Salmeron P. 161. For saith hee though I found not this place in him yet I will not say but it may bee there Let this Spectacle-maker put on a better paire of Spectacles and hee shall plainly reade the words alledged out of Salmeron in the place quoted by Chamier Cie Orat. pro Rosc Amerino The geese in the Capitoll if they gagled without cause were to be beate for it and the dogges to have their legges broken if they barked when there was no suspition of a theefe approaching Some such like punishment they deserve in Tullies judgement who lay foule aspersions upon others without any colour of proofe or semblance of truth To the twelfth At the Knights allegation out of Bellarmine Flood here nibleth but can no where fasten his tooth hee excepteth at the changing of the singular number into the plurall and translating Scriptures for Scripture and the most learned and acute men such as Scotus for most learned and acute men It seemeth this Iesuite is descended of the race of Domitian Sueton in Domitian whose greatest exercise was all day to strike at flies with a sharpe iron bodkin reade Scriptures in the plurall or Scripture in the singular or most acute Bellar. de Euchar l. 3. c. 23. Dicit Scotus non extare locuÌ uilum soripturae tam expressum ut sine ecclesiae declaratione evidenter cogat transubstantiationem admittere at que id non est omninò improbabile nam etiamsi scripturae nob is tam apertae videantur ut cogant hominem non protervuÌ tamen meritò dubitari potest cùm homines doctissimi acutissimi qualis imprimis Scotus fuit aliter sentiant or the most acute the confession of Bellarmine maketh still altogether as strongly against the grounding of Transubstantiation on Scripture Scotus saith that there is no place of Scripture so expresse viz. for Transubstantiation which setting aside the declaration of the Church evidently enforceth a man to admit it For though the Scripture viz. That text of Scripture brought by him to prove Transubstantiation seemed to bee so plaine as to enforce a man not refractorie to beleeve it yet it may bee doubted whether that text viz. Hoc est corpus meum bee cleare enough to enforce it seeing most learned and acute men such as Scotus was thought otherwise If it may bee justly doubted whether the text This is my body inferre Transubstantiation why doe our Adversaries blame us for doubting of it If sharp-sighted Scotus and other most learned and acute men thought the text enforceth no such thing let our Adversaries give us leave to preferre their opinion before the judgement of Flood and others neither so learned nor so acute To the thirteenth L. 8 con haeres verb. indulg de transubslaÌtiatione panis in corpus Chrislirara in antiquis scriptoribus mentio rara c. The Knight regarded not at what Alfonsus à Castro aimed but hee tooke up his arrow where hee found it and shooteth it against your Trent doctrine Of the Transubstantiation saith hee of the bread into Christs body there is rarely or seldome any mention made in ancient Writers What doth I. R. answer hereunto Alfonsus saith hee saith true and the Knight most false For though of Transubstantiation there bee no mention yet of the conversion of the bread into Christs body there is most frequent mention P. 164. Reade my riddle wat 's this rare mention of Transubstantiation but not rare mention of the conversion of the bread into Christs body pugnantia te loqui non vides Is not this a flat contradiction I would faine know what difference there is betweene Transubstantiation and the conversion of the substance of Bread into the substance of Christs body in the Sacrament Neither can the Iesuite free himselfe here from uttering an evident contradiction in the same sentence by saying that Alfonsus speaketh of the word Transubstantiation not of the thing it selfe For Alfonsus there speaketh of things not of words as Flood himselfe confesseth in the same page five lines after saying that Alfonsus his drift in that place is to shew that though there bee not much mention in ancient Writers of a thing or plaine testimonie of Scripture that yet the use and practice of the Church is sufficient bringing in for instance the point of Transubstantiation and procession of the holy Ghost See here Alfonsus speaketh not of the word Transubstantiation but of the point or thing it selfe and of this thing or point hee saith there is rare or seldome mention in ancient Writers To the fourteenth Neither Scotus nor Yribarne speake of the interpretation of the words This is my body Bellar. l. 3. de Euch. c. 23. unum addit Scotus c. quod ante Lateranense concilium Transubstantiatio non fuit dagma fidei Yrib in 4. dist 11. q. 3. disp 42. in primitivâ ecclesiâ de substantia fidei erat cotpus Christi sub speciebus contineri tamin non erat de fide substantiam panis in corpus Christi converti Aug. de doct Christ l. 2. c. 9. omnia quae continent fidem mores in illis inveniuntur quae apertè posita sunt in seripturâ Chrysost in 2. ad Thess hom 3. manifesla sunt in divinis Scripturis quaecunque sunt necessaria Rivet Cathol orthod q. 18.138 Gat. discourse of Tran. pag 60.61 Scotus 4. Sent. dist 11. ad hoc multùm expressè videturloqui Ambrosius nor of the manner of the deliverie of the doctrine of Transubstantiation in former times but de dogmate fidei of a doctrine of faith which they expresly denie Transubstantiation to have beene and what they say may bee confirmed by Flood his owne answer in this place For if Transubstantiation in former ages was not plainly delivered as hee confesseth p. 167. it could not bee then dogma fidei or de substantiâ fidei any doctrine of faith For all doctrines of faith are plainly and evidently set downe in holy Scriptures as S. Austine and S. Chrysostome joyntly teach As for the passage alledged by Scotus out of S. Ambrose it is fully answered retorted by Andrew Rivet Mr. Gataker and others Whereunto I thinke fit to adde nothing but that Scotus in the place alledged speaketh not confidently of S. Ambrose that hee held the doctrine of Transubstantiation but that in words he seemed to favour that opinion To the fifteenth Albeit S. Austine in the place alledged by the Knight speaketh not expresly against your carnall presence yet by consequence hee quite overthroweth it for if the unbeleeving Iewes in the Desert and Iudas in the new Testament died spiritually after
neither nameth all of them either joyntly or severally this the Iesuit knowing well enough bringeth no one testimonie for the proofe of their seven Sacraments out of him but forceth only some sentences to prove out of them that hee held more then two as namely out of his first Sermon upon the 103. Psalme Cast thine eyes upon the gifts or offices of the Church in Baptisme the Eucharist and the rest of the holy Sacraments and Epist 118. having brought in two Sacraments Baptisme and the Lords Supper hee addeth such a generall clause and if there bee any thing else commended in holy Scriptures which words of his import that hee held more sacraments then Baptisme and the Lords Supper in that very sense wherein those two by him named are called Sacraments I answer S. Austine in neither of these places taketh the word Sacrament in a strict sense but in a large for every sacred rite commended in Scripture or gift and office of the Church As for the word coeter is the Iesuit insisteth upon it importeth only a generical convenience and similitude not a specificall and so wee acknowledge that there are many sacred rites in the Church which agree with Baptisme and the Lords Supper in the genericall notion of Sacraments but not in the specificall as the word Sacrament is taken for a peculiar seale of the New Testament having thereunto annexed a promise of justifying grace Now let us weigh what the Knight alledgeth out of S. Austine for two Sacraments only De doct Chris l. 3. c. 9. Our Lord saith that Father and his Apostles have delivered unto us a few Sacraments in stead of many in performance most easie in signification most excellent as is the Sacrament of Baptisme and the Lords Supper To disappoint this testimonie the Iesuit first layeth corruption and falsification to the Knights charge because S. Austines words are signa pauca not sacramenta Which is nothing but a meere cavill for signa and sacramenta are in S. Austine no other then synonima by signa hee can meane no other then sacramenta For he instanceth there in no other neither did Christ deliver unto us any other signa or sigilla but these two Yes saith the Iesuit for it is plaine by the word sicut that hee bringeth in Baptisme and the Lords Supper for example only and doth not restraine the signa to these two It is not plaine for sicut bringeth in an example be it one or more neither can wee from thence inferre that there are more For S. Iohn speaking of our Saviour saith vidimus gloriam ejus sicut unigeniti filij Dei Wee beheld the glorie as of the only begotten Sonne of the Father Will the Iesuit from thence inferre that God had more only begotten sonnes but to expound S. Austine out of himselfe those signes or Sacraments which here hee calls a few in his 118. Epistle hee tearmes most few Sacrament is numero paucissimis surely seven Sacraments are not numero paucissima fewest in number but two are so and therefore in his booke De symbolo ad catechumenos he tearmeth them gemina Ecclesiae sacramenta which passage the Iesuit taketh no notice of because hee could give no answer at all unto it yet hee setteth a good face upon the matter saying this may suffice for such testimonies as were alledged out of S. Austine Of all the Roman Captaines I cannot liken him fitter to any then to Terentius Varro who though hee fought so unhappily against Hanniball at Cannae that hee lost 40000. men upon the place yet hee seemed to bee little daunted therewith and the Roman Senat sent him publike thankes quòd de republicâ non desperâsset that hee despaired not of the Common-wealth To the ninth The authour of the treatise De ablutione pedum who was farre later then S. Cyprian mentioneth indeed five sacraments which are more then two yet lesse then seven and for those five hee nameth it is evident hee intended not that they were Sacraments in a strict sense For one of them is ablutio pedum which if it bee a Sacrament in the proper sense then hath the Iesuit an eighth sacrament as himselfe is sapientum octavus Not so saith hee for ablutio pedum which that Authour meaneth is the sacrament of Penance Then belike Peter and the Apostles did Penance whilest Christ washed their feet Although there may lie hid some mysterie in that ablution L. 2. de sac c. 24. and therefore it may bee tearmed a Sacrament in a large sense as Bellarmine expoundeth that authour Yet our Lord himselfe revealeth unto us no other mysterie nor maketh any other inference from it then a patterne of humilitie Ioh. 13 14. If I your Lord and Master have washed your feet ye also ought to wash one anothers feet Yea but saith Flood the authour speaketh of another Laver after Baptisme and what can that bee other then Penance He speaketh of another laver not of another Sacrament which laver is no other then the laver of penitent teares But dicis causa let ablutio pedum be Penance yet wee have but foure Sacraments mentioned by this Author what becommeth of the other three To this hee answereth that the Authour mentioned not them because his scope was in that place to speake of such Sacraments as had relation to our Saviours last Supper A ridiculous evasion for what relation hath Baptisme or Penance or Confirmation or order to our Lords Supper But the Iesuit like a Lawyer that hath taken his fee of his Client thought himselfe bound in conscience to speake something in behalfe of this Authour though nothing at all to the purpose like Erucius in Tully Ego quid acceperim scio quid dicam nescio Cic. pro. Rosc Amer. To the tenth The Iesuit in his answer to S. Isidore bewrayes extreame negligence For the Knight quoting S. Isidore at large in his sixt book and not naming any chapter this Desultorius Miles posting through one chapter and finding not the words there chargeth the Knight with falsification whereas in the chapter immediatly following to wit the 19. according to the later edition of S. Isidore but in the 18. according to the former the testimonie alledged by the Knight is found in expresse words and Baptisme Chrisme and the Lords Supper reckoned by him for the Sacraments of the Church there without addition of any other If hee had held seven sacraments questionlesse in that place hee would have named all or at least the major part of them The Iesuit applieth a plaister to this sore to wit that else-where the same Father mentioneth Penance and Matrimonie But the plaister is too narrow and the salve of no vertue at all First it is too narrow for though Penance and Matrimonie be added to Baptisme Chrisme and the Lords Supper we have yet but foure or if we take Chrisme not for a Ceremonie used in Baptisme but a distinct Sacrament from it at the most but five
the purpose that that Councell seemed to be an assembly not of Bishops but of Hobgoblins not of men but of Images moved like the statues of Daedalus by the sinewes of others What the Iesuit addeth of night owles not daring to appeare in the splendour of that Councell hath no colour of truth For it is no newes for owles to appeare at popish Councells At a Councell held at Rome by Pope Heldebrand Fascic rerum expetend sugiend Ortwhinus Gratius writeth there appeared an huge great Owle which could not be frayed away but scared all the Bishops As for Protestants whom this Blacke-bird of Antichrist termeth night Owles if they had flocked to that Councell they had shewed themselves not Owles by appearing in that twi-light at Trent but very Wood-cocks to trust any security offerd them by those who after publike faith given to Iohn Huz and Ierome of Prage notwithstanding the safe conduct of Sigismond the Emperour for their going to and comming from the Councell at Constance most cruelly burned them at a stake to ashes To the seventeenth Divine faith must be grounded upon divine authority and that cannot be the Catholike faith which wanteth consent of Fathers As for those Fathers whose authority Bellarmine draweth ob torto collo to testifie for unwritten traditions de verbo Dei lib. 4. cap. 7. the Iesuit may see them fully answered in Iunius Whitaker Daniel Chamierus and Dr. Davenant Bishop of Sarum and a farre greater number of Fathers alleaged to the contrary by Robert Abbot in his answer to William Bishop cap. 7. Phillip Morney in his preface to his booke de sacrâ Eucharistiâ and Iacobus Laurentius in his singular tractate de Disputationibus and others To the eighteenth The assistance of the Holy ghost was more speciall in the times of the Apostles then in latter ages they could not erre in their writings others might yet we charge not the Catholike Church of Christ in any age with any fundamentall errour though we may the Roman Tertullian his rule may have still place and as well in one age as another if it be rightly taken and not misconstrued and misapplied for if it be taken generally that whatsoever is the same amongst many is no errour but tradition it is it selfe a great errour For the same opinion concerning the inequality of the Father and the Sonne is found amongst many to wit the Arrian Churches the same doctrine concerning the procession of the Sonne from the Father onely is found amongst many namely all the Greeke Churches at this day the same practise of administring the Eucharist to children was found amongst many namely all the Churches of Affrica in St. Austines time yea and in all Churches subject to the Bishop of Rome for many ages as Maldonat the Iesuit confesseth yet the above named Positions and this latter practise are confessed on all sides to be erroneous But Tertullian by many understandeth not the practise of some particular Churches Tertul. de prescrip Age nunc omnes ecclesiae erraverint verisimile est ut tot et tante in unam fidem erraverint much lesse of factious persons of one Sect but the generall and uniforme doctrine and practise of the whole Church as his words in the same Chapter quoted by the Iesuit declare Goe too now admit that all Churches have erred is it likely so many so great Churches should erringly conspire in one faith To the nineteenth We derogate nothing from any generall custome of the Catholike Church let the Iesuit produce out of good Authors any such custome for Indulgences to redeeme soules out of Purgatory flames by Papall Indulgences and this controversie will soone be at an end howsoever let me tell the Iesuit the way that this text of St. Paul is impertinently alleaged to prove this or any other article of the Trent faith For St. Paul in this place speaketh not of any Article of faith nor matter of manners necessary to salvation but of habits gestures fashions and indifferent rites in matter of which nature there is no question at all but that the custome of the Churches of God ought to sway as is abundantly proved by Dr. Andrewes late Bishop of Winchester in his printed Sermon upon that text To the twentieth Disputabamus de alliis respondet Iesuita de cepis we dispute of Indulgences the Iesuit answereth of Traditions in matter of Faith These are very distinct questions and so handled by all that deale Work-man-like in points of difference betweene the Reformed and the Romane Churches but the Jesuits common place of Indulgences was drawne drie and therefore hee setteth his cocke of Traditions on running which yeeldeth nothing but muddy water What though Faith be ancienter than Scriptures the Argument is inconsequent Ergo Scripture is not now the perfect rule of Faith Faith neither is nor can be more ancient than the Word of God upon which it is built this Word of God is now written and since the consigning and confirming the whole Canon of the written Word by Saint Iohn in the Apocalypse is become the perfect and as the Schooles speaketh the adequate rule of Faith It is true Christ and his Apostles first taught the Church by word of mouth Lib. 3. advers heres cap. 1. Non enim per alios dispositionem salutis nostrae cognovimus quam per eos per quos Evangelium pervenit ad nos quod quidem tunc praeconiaverunt postea per dei voluntatem in scripturis nobis tradiderunt fundamentum columnam fidei nostrae futuram but afterwards that which they preached was by the commandment of God committed to writing to be the foundation and pillar of Faith as Irenaus testifieth in expresse words To the twentie one If the Iesuit could prove as undoubtedly any words of the Apostles that are not set downe in Scriptures to be their owne words as wee can prove the writings we have to be theirs wee would yeeld no lesse credit to them then to these but that neither can hee nor so much as undertaketh to doe And whereas he further faith that the credit of the Scripture depends upon Tradition unlesse hee qualifie the speech some way it is not onely erroneous but also blasphemous for it is all one as if hee should say that man gives credit and authority to God as Tertullian jeareth the Heathen In Apolloget not receiving Christ for God because the Romane Senate would not give their consent and approbation to make him one Iam homo deo propitius esse debet or that the credit and authority of Gods Word dependeth upon mans receiving it Whereas in truth Gods Word is not therefore of divine and infallible authoritie because the Church delivereth it to be so but on the contrary the Church delivereth it to be so because in it selfe it is so and the Church should erre damnably if shee should otherwise conceive of these inspired Writings then as of the undoubted Oracles of God
to which we owe absolute consent and beliefe Vid. August supr cit without any question or contradiction To the two and twentieth Saint Austine defends no point of Faith against Heretikes either onely or chiefly by the Tradition and practise of the Catholike Church but either onely or chiefly by the Scriptures For example in his booke of Baptisme against the Donatists after hee had debated the point by Scriptures hee mentioneth the custome of the Church and relateth Stephanus his proceeding against such as went about to overthrow the ancient custome of the Catholike Church in that point But hee no where grounds his Doctrine upon that custome though hee doth well approve of it as wee doe Againe in his booke against Maximinus and his 174 Epist to Pascentius hee confirmeth the faith of the Trinity by the written Word against those Heretikes his words Ep. 175 Haec siplacet audire quemadmodum è Scripturis sacris asserantur to the same Pascentius are Here thou maist heare if thou wilt how these points of our Faith are maintained by Scripture So farre is hee from founding those or any other points of faith only or chiefly upon unwritten Traditions What the Iesuit alleageth out of his tenth booke De Genes ad literam cap. 23. Consuetudo matris Ecclesiae in baptizandis parvulis nequaquam spernendus est neque ullo modo superflua deputanda no whit advantageth his cause for there Saint Austine saith no more but The custome of the Church in baptizing Infants is no way to be despised or to be accounted superfluous Wee all say the same and condemne the Pelagians of old and Anabaptists of late who deny Baptisme to be administred to children or any way derogate from the necessitie of that Sacrament The Iesuit saith hee will say nothing of Prayer for the dead yet hee quoteth Saint Austine de curâ pro mortuis as if in that booke hee taught Prayer for the dead and grounded it upon unwritten Tradition Whereas in that booke hee neither maintaineth Prayer for the dead nor maketh mention of any unwritten Tradition for it but on the contrarie solidly out of Scriptures proveth Esaias Propheta dicit Abraham nos nescivit et Israel non cognovit nos si tanti patriarchae quid erga populum ex his procreatur ageretur ignoraverunt quomodo mortui vivorum rebus atque actibus cog noscendis adjuvandisque miscentur et paulo post ibi ergo sunt spiritus defunctorum ubi non vident quecunque aguntur aut eveniunt in istâ vitâ hominibus Ep. 118. Si quid hocum sic faciendum divinae Scripturae praescribat authoritas non est dubitandum quin ita facere debeamus similiter si quid per orbem tota frequentat Ecclesia that the Saints departed have no knowledge of our affaires upon earth the Prophet Esay saith Abraham knoweth us not and Israel is ignorant of us If so great Patriarchs knew not what befell their posteritie after their death how can it be defended that the dead intermeddle with the actions or affaires of the living to helpe them onward or so much as to take notice of them A little after he concludes flat upon the Negative The Spirits therefore of the dead there remaine where they knowe not what befalleth to men in this life To what end therefore should wee call upon them in our troubles and distresse here Neither hath this Father any thing in his 118 Epistle for the Iesuit or against us for there hee speaketh of Ecclesiasticall Rites and Customes as appeares in the very title of that Epistle not of Doctrines of Faith and yet even in these hee giveth a preheminence to the Scriptures If saith hee the authoritie of divine Scripture prescribe any Rite or Custome to be kept there is no question to be made of such a Rite or Custome and in like manner if the whole Church throughout the world constantly useth such a Rite or Custome The Iesuites next allegation out of this Fathers booke De unitate Eccles cap. 22. falleth short of his marke hee saith there that Christ beareth witnesse to his Church that it should be Catholike that is spread over the face of the Earth and not to be confined to any certaine place as the Province of Affrica Wee say the same and adde that the bounds of it are no more the territories of the Bishop of Rome than the Provinces of Affrica Wee grant that Whosoever refuseth to follow the practise of the Church to wit the Catholike or universall Church resisteth or goeth against our Saviour who promised by his spirit to leade her into all truth and to be with her to the end of the World Which promise may yet stand good and firme though any particular Church erre in Faith or manners as did the Churches of Asia planted by the Apostles themselves and the Church of Rome doth at this day Cont. lit Petil. l. 3. c. 6. Now because that testimonie of Saint Austine wherewith the Knight concludes almost every Section If wee or an Angell from heaven preach unto you any thing whether it be of Christ or of his Church or any thing which concerneth Faith or manners besides that which you have received in the Legall and Evangelicall Scriptures let him be accursed is as a beame in all Papists eyes therefore they use all possible meanes to take it out but all in vaine for the words of the Apostle on which Saint Paul commenteth are not as the Iesuit would have them If any man preach unto you Contra against but if any preach unto you Praeter besides Ep. ad Galat. ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã Neque enim inquit si contraria solum predicaverint intulit anathema esto sed si evangelizaverint preter id quod ipsi evangelisavimus hoc est si plusculum quidpiam adjecerent as Saint Chrysostome and Theophylact accutely observe The Apostle saith not if Chrysostome rightly understand him if they should preach any thing contrary but if they shall in their preaching adde any thing be it never so little besides that which wee have preached unto you let him be accursed And Theophylact is altogether as plaine as Chrysostome in his Glosse upon the words The Apostle inferreth not if any man preach contrarie to that yee have received but if any preach besides that which wee have preached unto you that is if they shall presume to adde any thing though never so little let them be accursed Neither doth Saint Austine in his tractate upon Saint Iohn upon which Bellarmine and after him Flood so much beare themselves any whit contradict the former interpretations of Saint Chrysostome and Theophylact. For his words in that place carry this sense The Apostle saith not if any man preach more unto you than you have already received that is perfectly conceived and apprehended for then hee should goe against himselfe who saith that hee desired to come to the Thessalonians to supply
subject unto in it selfe Lastly the Iesuit taketh himselfe by the nose in saying Heretikes in all Controversies run to the letter of the Scriptures leaving the true sense and spirituall meaning for so doe the Romanists apparantly namely in the Controversie of Supremacie Ecce duo gladii Loe here two swords therefore the Pope hath the temporall and spirituall Sword at command Peter rise up kill and eate therefore the Pope hath power to put Princes to death In the question about the number of Sacraments they alleage the letter of that text in the vulgar translation Hoc est magnum Sacramentum to prove marriage a Sacrament whereas the Apostle in the same place saith that hee speaketh not of corporall marriage of a man and his wife but of the spirituall marriage of Christ and his Church Likewise in the Controversie about the reall presence they run to the letter Except yee eate the flesh of the Sonne of man and drinke his blood though Christ in the same place expounding himselfe saith The words which I have spoken unto you are spirit and life the like may be observed in other Controversies For answer to all which texts wee tell him out of Saint Ierome whom himselfe quoteth in the next Paragraph That the Gospell consisteth not in the words of Scripture but in the sense not in the supersicies or barke but in the pith not in the leaves of speech but in the root of reason To the tenth How neere neighbours the Romanists are to Marcion who denied or by consequence overthrew the truth of Christs humaine nature as the Papists doe in the Sacrament vailing him under the outside or accidents of a round water and what affinitie the Iesuit hath with the rest of the ancient Heretikes the Knight shewed him before in his seventh Section and if hee desire to know more of his pedegree from them I referre him to an Appendix to Whitakers answer to Sanders his Demonstration page 801. As for the aspersion of old Heresies which hee casts upon us they are washed away by Bishop Morton and Doctor Field in their Treatises of the Church Ad notam sextam But why hee denies that wee have the Spirit arrogating it onely to himselfe I see no reason but the pride of his owne spirit together with the malice of the evill spirit who suggested unto him this uncharitable censure of us To the eleventh The Scripture is a Light Psal 119. and the nature of a light is first to discover it selfe and then all things else therefore Calvin to his fond question how know you Scripture to be Scripture answereth acutely by retortion how know you the Sun to be the Sun If hee say by his bright lustre and beames wee say the same of holy Scripture that it is discerned by its owne light Which if the Papists see hot the fault ought not to be laid upon the Sun-beames but upon their Owles eyes To the twelfth That rule which needeth any thing to be added to it is imperfect but all Papists teach that to the written Word unwritten Traditions must bee added to make a compleat and perfect rule of Faith all Papists therefore teach the Scripture alone to be an imperfect Rule We on the contrary stand for the perfection of Scripture and constantly and unanimously defend that not onely the whole Scripture is perfect but that every part also hath its owne perfection but not the perfection of the whole Because the eyes have not the perfection of the whole head or the head the perfection of the whole body a man cannot conclude that the eye or the head is imperfect no more can the Iesuit conclude that the Gospell of Saint Matthew Saint Marke or Saint Iohn are therefore imperfect because they containe not in them all doctrines in particular necessary to salvation It is sufficient that they together with the rest perfectly instruct us in all points of faith by themselves they perfectly informe us so farre as the Holy Ghost intendeth that we should be informed by each of them in particular and this is their perfection that they have no defect in matter or forme and that they concurre with the rest of the bookes of Scripture to the maine end of the Holy Ghost in committing the word of God in writing for the infallible and perfect instruction of the Church and every faithfull soule in all Doctrines needfull to salvation To the thirteenth Although many Protestants have written de Scripturâ judice and they have warrant our of Scripture so to stile it the words which I have spoken they shall judge you yet in propriety of speech which especially ought to be used in stating questions the Scripture is rather to be termed a rule and law or sentence of the judge then the judge himselfe the supreame and infallible judge of all controversies we teach to be the Holy Ghost speaking to us out of Scriptures and the subordinate or inferior Judge the consencient authority of the Catholique Church To the fourteenth The Iesuit shewed no such thing nor can shew out of Tertullian De praescrip advers haeret c. 17. who convinced the greater part of Haeretikes in his time by Scripture as appeareth in his writings In the place which the Iesuit quoteth he hath no such words as he alleageth out of him viz. that there is no good to be done with Haeretikes by Scriptures He saith indeede in that place that it was but in vaine to conferre with a certaine kinde of Haeretikes by Scriptures alone quia ista haeresis non recipit quasdam Scripturas et si recipit non recipit integras et si aliquatenus integras praestat c. That is This haeresie admits not of certaine Scriptures or not intire or if in some sort in ire it perverts them by divising divers interpretations In which words he no way disparageth the holy Scriptures or derogateth from their perfection but discovereth the wicked practise of Haeretikes and their evasions and tergiversations when they are most evidently convinced by Scriptures Will you say that if a Bedlam or willfull malefactor either by puffing out the Candle or shutting his eyes or looking another way will not reade or see the evidence that is brought against him that therfore the evidence is not able to convince him To the fifteenth Though it were granted the Iesuit that the Papists have written more upon the Scriptures then Protestants it will not from thence follow that they more reverence or honour the Scripture sithence in their very Commentaries upon Scripture they derrogate from the authority sufficiency and perfection of them by refusing to referre all points of faith in controversie to their decision by resolving their faith last of all not into them but into the Church by teaching that they are obscure even in points necessary to salvation and that unwritten Traditions are equally to be reverenced with them Secondly compare men with men and oportunities with oportunities it may easily be proved that
published by Pope Pius the fourth were never anciently received pag 25. The 39 Articles of the Church of England justified pag. 30. Papists teach that the Pope hath power to create new Articles of Faith pag. 33. Many Doctrines of Poperie are new by the confession of Papists themselves pag. 38. Protestants have a certaine rule of Faith Papists have not pag. 45 The Roman translation of the Bible is most corrupt pag. 51. Three sorts of corruptions and abuses of ancient Fathers 1. By foysting bastard Treatises entitling them to the Fathers 2. By falsifying their undoubted Treatises by additions detractions or mutations 3. By alleaging passages and places out of them which are not extant in their Workes and of all these three kinds Romanists are proved guiltie pag 64. Corruptions and falsifications of ancient Writers by Papists In the first Age. pag. 65. In the 2. Age. pag. 67. In the 3. pag. 68. In the 4. pag. 73. In the 5. pag. 77. In the 6. pag. 89. In the 7. pag. 90. In the 8. pag. 92. In the 9. pag. 105. In the 10. pag. 109. In the 11. pag. 110. In the 12. pag. 111. In the 13. pag. 112. In the 14. pag. 114. In the 15. pag. 115. In the 16. pag. 122. Of implicit Faith and blind Obedience maintained by Papists pag. 143. CHAP. II. Papists their bitternesse against reformed Churches is causlesse pag. 148. The definition of Heretikes agreeth to Papists but no way to Protestants pag. 151. Rome confessed to be Babylon by learned Romanists pag. 157. CHAP. III. Cassander and Caesenus are justified pag 164. Corruption in Faith as well as manners are confessed to have been in the Roman Church by the learned of that partie pag. 165. The Councell of Trent intended a reformation of Faith as well as manners pag. 173. CHAP. IV. The Catholike Faith is not so indivisible but that a man may renounce it in part though not in all as many learned Romanists have renounced the Trent Faith in part pag. 178. Priests marriage is lawfull pag. 181. CHAP. V. Romanists prefer their own interpretations of Scriptures before the ancient Fathers pag. 188. CHAP. VI. Many errours have crept into the Church whose first Authors cannot be named pag. 191. The difference between Heresie and Apostacie pag 196. CHAP. VII The petty degree of the Romish Faith is drawne from the ancient Heretikes namely the Osseni Helcheseite the Capernaites the Manichees the Aâgelici the Collyridians the Tacians and the Cathorists pag. 219. CHAP. VIII The Antiquitie and Vniversalitie of the Protestant Faith in generall is proved by the testimonies of our learned Adversaries pag. 253. There are but 22 Canonicall books of the old Testament as is proved by the testimonies of the ancient Fathers both of the Greeke and Latine Church pag 276. Errata in the first Part. PAge 42. line 8. reade his lin 17. r. authority in marg l. 2 r. ad Dard. p. 57. lin 11. r. their foreseene p. 66. l. 4. r. the deepe p. 75. l. 20. r. Angles p 92 in mar l. 8. r. alius in text l. 29. r. rejected p. 93. l. 16. r. serve p. 109. l. 23. r. making him speake p. 131. in mar l. 12. r. veniali p. 138. l. 25. r. very corruptly p. 139. l. 25. in marg 1. repurgata p. 153. l. 22. r. homoousians p. 164 in marg l. 25. r. vicesimi terrii p. 173. l. 23. r. operierunt p. 189. in mar l. 17 sequuntur p. 218. l. 2. r. Vitalian p. 219. l. 18. in marg r. regnum p 224. in marg l. 10. r. minus p. 248. in marg l. 12. r. curvat l. 14. r. pronus l. 18. r. iudico p. 251. l. 6. r. argument p. 255. l. 3. r. ingenuously p 257. l. 12. r. true body l. 21. r. is l. 22. dele and. p. 270. l. 4. r. looke p. 271. l. 29. r. of the. p. 273. l. 3. dele to the p. 279. l. 22. r. when To J. R. AUTHOR OF THE BOOKE CALLED A paire of Spectacles I Received a Treatise from you Mr. J. R. not long since published against me by the title of A paire of Spectacles or An Answer to a booke called Via tuta The safe way wherein you say the booke is shewed to be a Labyrinth of Errours and the Author a blinde Guide To what end your Spectacles were made for a blinde man I cannot tell for sure I am if I were blinde a paire of your Spectacles could not make me see howsoever if the indifferent Reader will look but upon the Frontispice of your own book he shall easily discerne that your glasses are deceitfull and do justly occasion a Writ of Error to be brought against your selfe for making that to seem in S. Austin your first Author which is not Your words are these Qui autem praetergreditur regulam fidei non accedit in viâ sed recedit de viâ Aug. in Joh. Tract 98. Tom. 9. p. 487. He that goeth besides the rule of faith which is the Catholique Church doth not come in the way but goeth out of the way wherein you have added these words of your owne viz. which is the Catholique Church in the same character with S. Austin and in lieu of Scripture you pretend the Church to be the rule of Faith whereas that ancient Father assures us Civitas Dei credit Scripturis Undè fides ipsa concepta est ex quâ justus vivit Aug. de Civit. Dei l. 19. c. 18. Tom. 5. Sancta Scriptura nostrae doctrinae regulam figit Idem de bono Viduitatis Tom. 4. c. 1. that from the holy and canonicall Scriptures that faith is formed and bred by which the just doe live Nay more hee expressely professeth with us that the holy Scripture doth fix or settle the rule of our doctrine And thus in your first citation you falsifie S. Austin and go besides the rule of faith and good manners also and by stumbling at the threshold you shew your selfe to bee the blinde guide you speake of in the first page and the first place I proceed to your Dedicatorie Epistle first you begin to descant upon my name in paralelling the words Lyend and Lye howsoever say you The title of Sir will be left for you These bee the first flowers of your eloquence and they savour sweetly Now if I should repay you in your owne language and shew you what men are branded with the letter R which stands for your name if I should shoot backe I say your arrowes even bitter words into your owne bosome would it not shew rather want of matter than proofe of doctrine If you delight to sit in the seat of the scornefull it shall be my comfort to tread in the steps of my Saviour who when hee was reviled reviled not againe To let passe your bitter reproaches of my learning and breeding I will come to the matter You have not stated the question say you fully and truly for you were
viz. in leaving out the second and altering the fourth in your Breviaries and Psalters You say you print them in your Bibles and therefore they are not absolutely left out as long as they are elsewhere Mute quod scimus It is true the words are contained in your Bibles But Dic quod rogamus why doe you not publish Gods commandements as hee wrote them Admit that in your Catechismes you should set downe this forme of Baptisme I baptize thee in the name of the Father and leave out the Sonne and the Holy Ghost would it be sufficient to say it is not absolutely left out because it is contained in the Bible Shew mee the man amongst your Papalins that dare alter a Kings command or a Popes Breve and will your Church attempt more against the Precepts of God than against a Popes Bull or a Kings Proclamation But the truth is and you know it too well if the second precept were expressely set downe in your Psalters the common people would be too busie in expostulating the cause why Image-worship should be commanded by the Church and yet condemned by Gods word Yea but it is part of the first commandement say you or otherwise it is ceremoniall Let it bee one or other since God thought it needfull to be added how dare you leave it out Deut. 4.2 It was the voice of God himselfe You shall not adde unto the word which I command neither shall you diminish ought from it that you may keepe the commandement of the Lord your God Againe how is it a part of the first if it be ceremoniall when the first is agreed on all hands to be naturall morall The truth is it is not ceremoniall but morall and plainly distinct from the former for the first forbids the true worship of any false god the second forbids any false worship of the true God and howsoever Peresius and Catharinus and you for company would have gladly the Law against Images to be positive and ceremoniall and so to cease at the comming of Christ yet your owne Bellarmine disavowes it with a Non probatur Bellarm. de Imag. l. 2. c. 7. This opinion is not allowed of us both for the reasons made against the Jewes and for that Irenaeus Tertullian S. Cyprian and S. Austin doe all teach that the commandements excepting the Sabbath are a Law wholly naturall and morall After your Apologie for your maimed commandements you grow so virulent as if the poyson of Aspes were under your lips you crie out I notoriously falsifie some Authors and impertinently alledge others you charge me with execrable perjurie you say I am a framer of lies and I offend in all kinde of falshood and lastly you conclude the booke to bee none of mine but some Ministers because you heare it from some that I scarce skill of ordinarie Latine I professe for my learning I cannot boast of it I doe willingly assume that saying of Origen Gratias ago Deo quod ignorantiam meam non ignoro Orig. 1 Cor. 1.27 Psal 82. I am not ignorant of my ignorance but let me tell you as in Gods cause I seeke no praise so I feare no reproach for God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise nay more out of the mouth of babes sucklings he hath ordained strength to still the enemie and the avenger And howsoever seemingly you condemne mee for ignorance yet I am verily perswaded that if I were more ignorant than you make mee you would love me the more for your Church commends Ignorance for the mother of Devotion and the rather because your owne Clemangis tels us Nich. Clemang c. 6. before the dayes of reformation Many Priests who had cure of soules were sent to their flocks not from their studies or from the schoole but from the plough and they understood as much Latine as Arabick nay they could not read and that which was shamefull they could not distinguish an Alpha from a Beta Neither can it be denied that many Popes have dispensed with ignorant men who per saltum without any learning have leaped into a Bishopricke Pope Paul the third created Robertus Venantius Arch-Bishop of Armach for two speciall qualities Tum quod Missam bellè canere tum quia cursu Veredario in equo vehi peritè diceretur Gentil Exam. Concil Trid. l. 2. sess 1. p. 33. the one because hee could sing Masse sweetly the other because he could ride a Post horse skilfully And in the latter ages it was so usuall to admit any Ignoramus's into a Bishoprick that when our King Edward the third sollicited Pope Clement the sixth to create Thomas Hartfield Bishop of Durham notwithstanding the Cardinals cried out he was a Lay-man and an Ideot the Pope replyed If the King of England had entreated for his Asse Si Rex Angliae pro asino suo supplicâsset votum suum hac vice obtinuisset Walsing citat apud Antig. Brit. in vita foh Uffordi And Godwin in his Catal. of Bishops p. 526. Eras Encom Mor. Heb. 7.3 he should have obtained it at that time To come neerer to the times Julius the third made the keeper of his monkey a Masse-priest and I presume he had small store of Latine The Friar who would prove from the words of Christ An non decem facti sunt mundi that God made ten worlds had scrace skill of ordinarie Latine And lastly hee was Sr. John Lack-Latine who would prove that Melchisedeck offered salt with bread and wine because he read in the text Rex Salem which is the King of peace I speake not this by way of recrimination but to let you know how well you and your fellowes are read in the two titles of the Law De maledicis De Clerico promoto per saltum Take therefore from me what learning you will distraine it and impound it at your pleasure I will never trouble you with Replevin onely I say with S. Austin Seeke others of more learning but beware of them that presume of learning And whereas you conceive a Minister made my booke and I beare the name onely for to countenance the worke If I had received help from some in this kinde you need not blame me for it for it is ordinarie with your men to have whole Colledges joyne their helping hand in defence of your cause But in answer to your supposall and to vindicate our Ministers from those great aspersions of ignorance of corruption of obstinacie of perjurie laid unto their charge as Authors of the worke I witnesse a true confession before God who knowes I lye not a Minister was so farre from making my booke Via Tuta Via Devia that I neither had help from Clergy-man nor Lay-man for composing or making either of my bookes Let it suffice for me to have said the truth which although it appeare never so simple yet it is able to remove a mountaine of learning if
it were not worth the answering Pag. 20â another while hee complaines that there is no place in the whole booke which is not either falsly or impertinently alledged one while hee proclaimes that my endevours are poore indeed and farre short of what is requisite in writing bookes another while he professeth It hath somewhat in it which may draw away an honest-minded man and that his Catholique friend was stumbled at it Now what is the reason of these impertinent excursions and contradictions It was the observation of ancient Maxentius Heretiques when they finde themselves not able to yeeld a reason of their wilfulnesse then they fall into plaine railing And certainly such is the bitternesse of this Author that were I perswaded Pythagoras transmigration of soules into other mens bodies had beene true I should beleeve that the soule of Rabshekah had beene transported into his body for otherwise if he had but a graine of charitie hee would never spurne a blinde man for so he termes me when Christian charitie teaches him another lesson If he were well versed in Antiquities hee would never have cited so many places of ancient Fathers falsly and impertinently in one page and yet condemne others of ignorance and falsification in the Fathers If hee were well read in the Booke of Wisdome I meane in the sacred Scriptures he would never have replyed with such scorne and disdaine for without doubt the Apostle spake to Mr. Lloyd the Romanist as well as to the rest of the Romans Rom. 11.3 Not to thinke of himselfe more highly than he ought to thinke but soberly according as God hath dealt to everie man the measure of faith Hee that accuseth another man of ignorance of lying of malice of execrable perjurie and the like had need be a man himselfe without all exception yet if wee may beleeve the Doctors of his owne Church he is guiltie of these and much more witnesse the Sorbonicall censure at Paris wherein Hallier and Aurelius accuse him of lying Aurelius in libri sui titulo Hallier in Admonit ad Lect. p. 8 9. of ignorance of heresie of profane scurrilitie of blasphemie and impietie of furious filthy and devillish railing of unsufferable arrogancie and the like and as touching his bitter accusations it seemes it is his accustomed manner of writing witnesse his Spongia written against the Sorbonists Aurelius in Vindiciis p. 385. under the title of Hermannus Laemilius otherwise discovered to be John Floyd I say he hath drencht his sponge in that gall of bitternesse such charitie and unitie is there amongst themselves that I may truly say of him as the Spartans sometimes said of the Theban Oratour If he think as he writes his ignorance is desperate if otherwise his conscience is seared To give you a taste of the manner of his writing when I cite authorities that are pregnant and beyond his just exception hee spares my person and condemnes the Authors themselves and complaines they are branded with the note of heresie and singularitie when as in truth they are branded onely by their Inquisitors for speaking against the errors of their Trent Doctrine being otherwise knowne members of the Roman Church When I cite an Author of our owne as namely B. Usher for translating Aelfricks Homily out of the Saxon tongue one while hee cries out Ushers corruptions are laid open to the world another while he tels mee I tooke the words from Usher because I understood not Latine or perhaps because I would be loth not to follow any errours or corruptions that come in my way and thus hee spends about ten pages sometimes inveying against our reverend and renowned Bishop sometimes against mee for false translating Aelfrick out of Latine when as the Latine cited by B. Usher in the margent See B. Ushers answer to the Jesuites challenge chap. of the Reall presence which hee takes to be Aelfricks is the Latine of Bertram and not Aelfricks whose was translated out of the Saxon tongue and not out of the Latine Againe when I cite an Author of his side as namely Petrus Crinitus for taking down of Images in Churches he stretches his throat makes this hideous exclamation Pag. 303. For your authorities of the Common Law there are so many foule faults committed by you that I know not where to begin then hee taxeth me with leaving out two principall words Humi solo whereas the Author which I cite hath no such words I render the place truly as I finde it I put not to him I take not from him I alter not one letter of his words or meaning and yet he cries out the faults are so many that I know not where to begin Againe when I cite ten or twelve Authors for our Communion in both kindes for our prayer in a knowne tongue and the like for most of them he sends me to Bellarmine for an answer for the rest saith he I le question you Then he complaines of falsifications when as in fine the Exception is against the translation of some poore word This for That and when he is destitute of any colour of answer his last refuge is this The book is prohibited As touching my Englishing of Latine Authors I confesse I have not translated whole sentences ad literam for I intended not a volume but a manuell yet I ever faithfully render the true sense and meaning of the Author Well what exception could he take to this Pag. 52. One while hee confesseth I set downe the Latine truly but I doe not translate it literally another while hee cries out It will not serve your turne Pag. 224. to say you place it in the English as you place it in the Latine for intranslation the sense is chiefly to be regarded Lastly Pag. 459. hee protesteth for himselfe that hee hath declined no Author either moderne or ancient when as it will appeare he sends many of them to Bellarmine for an answer others he rejects as condemned by the Index Expurgatorius others hee declines as unworthy of his answer by slighting them or otherwise passeth by them as children use to doe when they cannot read they thinke it best to skip over To say nothing of his Elenchs his Sophismes his Sophistry his Fallacies which are many I will trace him in his steps God willing laying aside all bitternesse and railing accusations In the meane time I will say with the Prophet David Plead thou my cause Psal 35.1 oh Lord with them that strive with me for the flouds are risen the flouds lift up their voyce Psal 93.4 5. the flouds lift up their waves the waves of the sea are mightie and rage horribly but yet the Lord that dwelleth on high is mightier An Answer to J. R. his booke called A paire of Spectacles CHAP. I. The Summe of his Answer to my first Chapter IN this his first Chapter hee endevoureth principally to prove that the Articles of the Roman Creed
true though the things there spoken be not understood in a proper sense but in a metaphoricall sense onely Nay more your Jesuite Suare Suarez Tom. 3. disp 46. confesseth that this Cardinall in his Commentary upon this Article doth affirme that those words of Christ This is my body doe not of themselves sufficiently prove Transubstantiation without the authoritie of the Church and therefore by the command of Pope Pius the fifth that part of his Commentary is sponged out of the Romish Edition Thus one while you correct your Authors another while you purge them for delivering the truth in our behalfe Look upon your Cardinall Bellarmine although he will not allow that sense which the Lutherans give Bell. de Euch. l. 2. c. 19. yet hee granteth that those words This is my body may imply either such a reall change of the bread as the Catholiques hold or such a figurative change as the Calvinists hold And although hee would seeme to prove that the words of Scripture are so plaine that they may compell a refractorie man to beleeve them yet having well weighed the reasons and allegations of other Schoole-men Bell. de Euch. l. 3. c. 23. at last concludes It may justly be doubted whether the text be cleere enough to inforce it seeing men sharp and learned such as Scotus was have thought the contrary How therefore your Church should ground a point of faith upon a doubtfull opinion or on such words as by the testimonies of your best learned Divines may receive a double construction I leave it to be judged But farther in proofe of Pope Pius Creed I could urge Sr. Humfrey say you with the 39. Articles appointed by the authoritie of the Church of England to be uniformely taught by all Ministers which they are to sweare unto which Articles though they be indeed new coyned as the foundation of a new Church yet Sr. Humfrey being his mothers Champion will not I suppose yeeld her or her doctrine to bee new Thus you It is true as you say there are 39. Articles appointed by our Church to bee uniformely taught by all Ministers and it is as true that they are published and received with unitie and consent which your men acknowledge for a proper marke of the true Church And withall let me adde this one thing for your observation and indeed it is a thing remarkable whereas all your Trent Articles have beene questioned and confuted by Chemnitius Chamierus Gentilletus and other Protestant writers yet there was never any Papist could goe farther than to tell us as you doe I could urge you with the novelty of the 39. Articles I say never as yet did any Romanist attempt much lesse was able to confute and overthrow our Articles which stand like a house built upon a rocke immoveable and cannot be shaken Let me tell you further your comparisons betwixt our Articles and yours doe not hold for all your Articles are fundamentall points to your Trent beleevers and the deniall of any of them makes them heretiques and damned persons as your Popes Bull expressely declareth Bulla Pii quarti On the other side some of our Articles concerne the discipline of the Church and are not essentiall to salvation others concerne the ancient and latter heresies wherein we teach the negative and those are not properly Articles of faith which we beleeve but points of doctrine which wee condemne and beleeve not And that you may know our Articles are not new nor newly coyned by our men if you will put on your spectacles you shall finde that most of our prime Articles are taught and received by your owne Church as well as ours and therefore I hope you will confesse they are not coyned and built upon the foundation of a new Church Briefly touching our 39. Articles The first sort are in the Affirmative both ours and yours and all those are uniformely received by both Churches The second sort are ours onely which we affirme and you deny and those are very few in number and are evidently deduced from the Scripture The third sort are yours which we deny and you affirme and for that cause you terme our religion negative and those remaine for you to make good Joyne therefore those negative Articles which are wholly yours to those positive Articles which you hold with us and you shall easily discerne if the denomination followeth the greater part those Articles may most properly bee termed Articles of your faith for I dare confidently avow that of the 39. Articles there are above 35. yours that is either such which you hold with us which are at least twentie or such wherein the affirmative is yours and not ours which are at least fifteene take therefore your owne libertie either confute ours or make good your owne herbam porrigemus and I will give you the bucklers You proceed and upon a false supposall that our Church hath created new Articles you proclaime in the name of your owne Church these words We teach that for Articles of faith the Church can make none as she cannot write a Canonicall booke of Scripture Thus you When Diogenes saw a supposed Bastard casting stones in a presse of much people he gave the boy this caveat Take heed lest thou hit thy father This is like to bee your case for by this Tenet you will wound the Church your Mother and amongst others you will surely hit your holy Father the Pope It appeares first that you endevoured to shew that your Church hath created no new Articles of faith but for want of solid proofes you begin to faint and thinke it the safest way to turne Protestant in this point and say the Church can create none but I wonder how you dare pronounce in the name of the Church we teach whereas in truth your Church teacheth it not This is therefore but a cunning device of yours to dazle the eyes of the ignorant with your false glasses and to make them beleeve it is the generall Tenet of your Church and then you thinke they will conclude according to your Assertion Ergo The Church hath created none when as your saying makes more strongly against you if either your Articles prove new or the Pope and his Agents professe the contrarie Mr. Heigham who first answered my Book Mr. Heigham in his answer called Via verè tuta pag. 199. 200. was a member of your Church and he cries aluod that the Church hath power to decree and promulgate new articles of faith But your third Replyer Tom Tell-troth in his Whetstone of Reproofe thought it the wisest way to decline the question for hee knew well when you were both at odds and taught flat contrarie doctrine each to other the Whetstone of necessitie would belong to one of his fellow writers But to let passe such differences amongst your selves bee it spoken to your comfort Friar Walden about two hundred yeares agoe affirmed the same that you doe Waldens
because the Author of it hath borrowed both the matter and manner of writing from St. Peter and therfore he was thought some scholar of theirs but no Apostle Others said he brought in a profane Author concerning the strife of the Arch-angell and the Devill about the body of Moses which cannot be found in Canonicall Scripture Lastly the Revelation of St. John was likewise doubted of first because of the noveltie of the title of John the Divine secondly because of the difficultie and obscuritie of his Prophecies These and the like reasons were motives to some in the Church to question the Authors of those Books but it was never generally impeached For further proofe of this Assertion let antiquitie be heard and it will appeare that all those Bookes were cited for doctrine of faith by the writers of the first ages and consequently were approved from and after the dayes of the Apostles Hieronym ad Dardanâ de terra repromissionis Ep. 129. p. 1105. Looke upon St. Hierome he proclaimes it to the Church Illud nostris dicendum est Be it known to our men that the Epistle to the Hebrewes is not only received by all the Churches of the East that now presently are but by all Ecclesiasticall writers of the Greek Churches that have beene heretofore as the Epistle of Paul though many thinke it rather to be written by Barnabas or Clemens and that it skilleth not who wrote it seeing it was writby an Author approved in the Church of God and is daily read in the same This ancient Father shewes plainly that howsoever some doubt was made of the Author of that Epistle yet it was received both by the Easterne Westerne Churches And howsoever some of the Ancients did attribute it to St. Luke others as namely Tertullian did attribute it to Barnabas yet all agreed in this that it had an Apostolike spirit and accordingly Cardinall Bellarmine tels you in your eare Ineptè dici vetustatem de hac Epistola dubitâsse Bell. de verbo Dei lib. 1. cap. 17. It is foolishly spoken in saying Antiquitie did doubt of this Epistle when there is but one Caius a Grecian and two or three Romanists in respect of all the rest that speake against it and if we respect not the multitude but the antiquitie of the cause the Roman Clemens is more ancient than Caius and Clemens Alexandrinus than Tertullian and Dionysius Areopagita than both who cites this Epistle of Paul by name Touching the second Epistle of St. Peter it was cited by Higinus Bishop of Rome within an hundred and fiftie yeares after Christ and that by the name of Peter The Epistle of St. Jude was cited by Dionysius Areopagita by the name of Jude the Apostle within seventie yeares after Christ Dionys de divinis nominibus cap. 4. Tertuil de habitu muliebri Orig. l. 5. in c. 5. ad Romanos Cypr. in lib. ad Novatianum by Tertullian within two hundred yeares after Christ by Origen and Cyprian within two hundred and fiftie yeares after Christ Lastly touching the Revelation of St. John it was received for Canonicall in the first and best ages Dionysius Areopagita cals the Revelation The secret and mysticall vision of Christs beloved Disciple Arcanam mysticam visionem dile cti discipuli Dionys Eccles Hier. cap. 3. In Dial. cum Tryphone Iren. lib. 1. cap. ult and this was seventie yeares after Christ Justin Martyr doth attribute this Booke to St. John and doth account it for a divine Revelation and this was an hundred and sixtie yeares after Christ Irenaeus saith this Revelation was manifested unto St. John and seene of him but a little before his time and this was an hundred and eightie yeares after Christ Tertull. de praescript l. 4. Tertullian amongst other things accuseth Cerdon and Marcion of heresies for rejecting the Revelation and this was two hundred yeares after Christ Origen in his Preface before the Gospel of St. John sayth that John the sonne of Zebedee saw in the Revelation an Angel flying thorow the middest of Heaven having the eternall Gospel and hee flourished two hundred and thirtie yeares after Christ Thus you see the Catholique Christians and most ancient Fathers in the first ages received both the Epistle to the Hebrewes the second Epistle of St. Peter the Epistle of St. Jude and the Revelation of St. John with one consent accounting them no better than Hereticks which either doubted of them or denyed them and yet you to outface the truth would make the world beleeve that it was three or foure hundred yeares before they were received into the Church and made canonicall and upon this vaine supposall you would know of me Whether there were any change of faith in the Church when they were admitted or whether those Books received any change in themselves To answer you in a word your proposition is foolish and your question is frivolous for those Books were alwayes received even from the first times and no more could that word of God bee changed than God himselfe who is immutable and yet we see your faith is daily altered for want of that foundation and thereupon it behoves you to get more and better proofes for the confirmation of your new Creed From your justification of your Trent faith you begin to looke asquint thorow your Spectacles at the reformed Churches and after your wonted manner you crie out They have no certaine rule of faith wherewith wee may urge them authoritie of Church they have none Scripture they have indeed but so mangled corrupted perverted by translation and mis-interpreted according to their owne fancies that as they have it it is as good as nothing Thus you Have we no certaine rule of faith What thinke you of the Scriptures Doe not we make them the sole rule of our faith and is not that rule by your own Cardinals confession Bell. de verbo Deo l. 1. c. 2. Regula credendi certissima tutissimaque the most certaine and safest rule of faith And as touching the authority of the Church it is an Article of our Religion Art 20. That the Church hath power to decree rites or ceremonies authoritie in controversies of faith and yet it is not lawfull for the Church to ordaine any thing that is contrarie to Gods word written neither may it so expound one place of Scripture that it be repugnant to another This Article shewes our obedience to the Scriptures it declares the authoritie of our Church and it vindicates our Ministers from perverting and misinterpreting of the Scriptures wherewith you charge us in the next place It is true say you Scripture you have indeed but mangled corrupted perverted by translation Here your charge is generall and your accusation capitall therefore you must give me leave for the better discoverie of the truth to send out a Melius inquirendum that your Translation and ours being compared in particulars the truth may better appeare First then
likewise you shall observe that he hath rased and purged an ancient Record and speciall Evidence against the universality and supremacie of the Bishops of Rome It is an Epistle written by Firmilianus Bishop of Caesarea to St. Cyprian which St. Cyprian translated into Latin as your Pamelius doth confesse wherein he professeth that he is justly moved with indignation at the manifest folly of Stephanus then Bishop of Rome that boasting so much of his Bishoprick At que ego hâc in parte justè indignor ad hanc tam apertam manifestam Stephani stultitiam Firmilian Cyp. S. Ep. 75. p. 203 Noli te fallere siquidem ille est verè schismaticus c. p. 204. Insuper Cyprianum Pseudo-Christum Pseudo-Apostolum dolosum operarium dicere qui omnia inse conscius praevenit c. p. 205. and that he hath the succession of Peter upon whom the foundation of the Church was set brings in many other Rockes c. He bids him not deceive himselfe he hath made himselfe a Schismaticke by separating himselfe from the Communion of the Ecclesiasticall unitie for while he thinkes he can separate all from his Communion he hath separated himselfe onely from all He taxeth him for calling St. Cyprian a false Christ a false Apostle and a deceitfull workeman which he himselfe being guilty of and privie to himselfe that those termes of right belong to himselfe by way of prevention he objected them to another Touching these severall Additions and Extractions Pamelius by whom the Antwerp and Paris Cyprian were set forth first excuseth Manutius for adding the words in his Roman print and tells us they were found in a written Copie of the Cambron Abbey in Hannonia which was the best of all the Copies he had and therefore saith he we were not afraid to insert that Reading into the Text. Nonsumus veriti in textum inserere Yet Manutius himselfe professeth he perused five and twenty printed and Manuscript Copies which had none of those Additions and as touching the Epistle to or from Firmilianns which proves a resistance anciently made against the usurped power of the Pope Pamelius thinkes it was left out purposely by Manutius Argumentum Ep. 75. p. 198. and saith he Perhaps it had beene more wisedome it had never been set out at all but withall he addeth because Morelius did publish it before me I thought it not fit to let it passe but print it Now let us looke backe and examine the reason of these severall Editions and falsifications Mr. Hart sayth that the Additions were taken from a very ancient Copie gotten from Verona Pamelius saith they were borrowed from a Manuscript in the Cambron Ahbey in Hannonia but in 25. Copies the Additions were not to be found Mr. Hart saith the true Copie was printed at Rome by the Popes command and with the advise of vertuous and wise men to be perfectly corrected and free from all spots Pamelius saith it was better than any other but withall it was not so exact but that the old Proverbe might take place the latter is commonly the better Lastly touching the razing out the Epistle of Firmilianus Pamelius concludeth that his Copie which doth cite it is so perfect Indiculus Codicum in initio Cypriani that be it spoken without envie there will need no further recognition yet happely saith he it had beene better it had never come forth Thus you may discerne what forgeries are used by your men to support the circumgestation of your Sacrament and the Popes Supremacie which is a maine Pillar of your Faith And this may serve to shew your falsifications and forgeries in the third Age. In the fourth Age. The fourth age An. 300. to 400. The first Generall Councell of Nice is forged by Zozimus Bishop of Rome in behalfe of his owne supremacie The pretended Canon is this In Concil Carthag c. 1. Binius Those who in the Nicene Synod gave their sentence concerning Appeales of Bishops said in this manner If a Bishop shall be accused and the Bishops of his owne Province shall thereupon condemne and degrade him if he thinke fit to appeale and thereupon flye to the most holy Bishop of Rome if he be pleased to have the hearing of it the Bishop is to write to the Bishops adjoyning and let it be at his pleasure to doe what he will and as he in his judgement shall thinke fittest to be done This Canon is not to be found either in the Greeke or Latine Copies of the Nicene Councell and those Canons in all were but 20. It is true that you pretend that there were in all 60. Canons where of 40. were burned by the Arabians amongst which this Canon was one But if they were extant how were they burned And if they were burned how came you to the knowledge of them The truth is their Bastardie saith Contius your Lawyer is proved even by this that no man no not Gratian himselfe Raynold chap. 9. Divis 2. pag. 575. durst alledge them Eusebius Caesariensis Bishop of Caesarea is corrupted to prove the Popes supremacie In the Basil print translated by Ruffinus he sayth Peter James Euseb impr Basiliae ex Officinâ Henr. Petrina Ruffino Aquiliensi Interprete Sed Jacobum qui dicebatur Justus Apostolorum EpiscopuÌ statuerat Eus l. 2. Eccl. Hist c. 1. p. 677. Petrum Jacobum Johannem non de gloriâ honore contendisse interse sed uno consensu Jacobum JustuÌ Hierosoly monum EpiscopuÌ designâsse Coloniae Allobrogum excudebat Petrus dela Roviere An. 1612. and John after the Assumption of our Saviour although they were preferred by him before all the rest of the Apostles yet did they not challenge the honor of Primacie to themselves but appointed James which is called Justus to be Bishop of the Apostles In your Coleine Edition you have altered the sense in this manner Peter James and John when they had obtained of our Lord a high degree of dignity they did not contend about glory and honor amongst themselves but with one consent made James Bishop of Jerusalem Thus the true and ancient Eusebius saith Peter and the rest did not challenge the honor of primacie the latter saith they did not strive about glory and honour the ancient saith they appointed James which is called Justus to be Bishop of the Apostles the other saith they nominated Justus Bishop of JerusaleÌ This Authority is so pregnant against the Popes Jurisdiction claimed from Peter that Bellarmine hath nothing to answer but this Although those words be found in the Basil print translated by Ruffinus yet in a Colein print translated and published by a Roman Catholike Bellar. de Rom. Pont. l. 1. c. 26. the word Primacie is not to bee found and in stead of the words Bishop of the Apostles are inserted Bishop of Jerusalem The Cardinall doth not complaine that Ruffinus Translation was false and corrupt for they are the words in the Originall
of the ancient Eusebius neither could he say truly that the Colein was translated by a Catholike for indeed it is the property of an Here-ticke to falsifie and corrupt the Text. And thus you have done in your Colein Edition where you have altered the sense in that manner Eusebius Emissenus Bishop of Emesa in Syria is forged by Gratian for the doctrine of Transubstantiation Grat. Dist 2. de Consecrat Quia corpus fol. Mihi 432. his words are these Christ the invisible Priest turned the visible creature into the substance of his body and bloud with his word and secret power saying Take eate this is my Body whereas there are no such words to be found in all his Works The Councell of Laodicea is falsified in favour of your Iâvocation of Angels The words of the Originall are these a ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã c. Conc. Laod. Can. 35. Bin. Tom. 1. p. 245. Christians ought not to forsake the Church of God and depart aside and invocate Angels and make meetings which are things forbidden If any man therefore be found to give himselfe to this privie Idolatrie let him be accursed Now in the same Councell published by James Merlyn and Fryer Crab by transmutation of a letter you are taught a lesson contrary to sense and reason saying b Quod non oporteat EcclesiaÌ Dei relinquere abire at que angelos nominare congregationes facere Merlin Tom. 1. Concil edit Col. An. 1530. f. 68. Crab. edit An. 1538. Colon. fol. 226. Verit as non quaerit Angulos It is not lawfull for Christians to forsake the Church of God and goe and nominate or invocate Angels or corners and make meetings and thus Angeli are become Anguli Angels are become Angles or Corners as if truth did seeke Corners when so faire an Evidence is brought against Invocation of Angels St. Basil the great Archbishop of Caesarea was forged by Pope Adrian the first at the second Councell of Nice for the worship of Images his words are these c Pro quo siguras ImaginuÌ eorum honoro adoro veneror specialitèr hoc enim traditum est à Sanctis Apostolis necest prohibendum acideò in omâibus Ecclesiis nostris eorum designamus Historias Citat ab Adriano in Synod Nic. 2. Act. 2. p. Mihi 504. For which cause I honor and openly adore the figures of the Images speaking of the Apostles Prophets and Martyrs and this being delivered us by the Apostles is not prohibited but in all Churches we set forth their Histories This Authority was cited by Pope Adrian in the name of Basil the Great in his Epistles when as in all his Epistles of which are extant 180. there are no such words to be found St. Hierome is likewise forged for the same doctrine and by the same Pope the words in the Epistle are these Sicut permisit Deus ador are omnem gentem manufacta c. Citatur ibid. Ep. Adr. p. Mihi 506. As God gave leave to the Gentiles to worship things made with hands and to the Jewes to worship the carved workes and two golden Cherubins which Moses made so hath he given to us Christians the crosse and permitted us to paint and reverence the Images of Gods workes and so to procure him to like of our labour These words you fee are cited by your owne Pope at a generall Councell as you pretend for a point of your Romish faith and yet there are no such words nor the meaning of of them to be found in either of those Fathers and without doubt there was great scarcity of true ancient Fathers to bee found at that time to prove your adoration of Images when your Pope was driven to shifts and forgeries especially when your owne Polydore tells you Polyd. de ReruÌ Invent. that the worship of Images not onely Basil but almost all the ancient holy Fathers condemned for feare of Idolatrie as S. Hierome himselfe witnesseth This puts me in mind of Erasmus complaint that the same measure was afforded to Basil Eras in Praefat. lib. de Spirit Sanct. Bas which hee had otherwise observed in Athanasius Chrysostome Hierome that in the middle of Treatises many things were stuffed and forced in by others in the name of the Fathers St. Ambrose Bishop of Millaine is falsified and corrupted Franciscus Junius as an eye witnesse Junius Praefat. in Ind. Expurg Belg. tells us that at Leyden in the yeare 1559. being familiarly acquainted with Ludovicus Saurius Corrector of the Printing house and going to visit him hee found him revising of St. Ambrose workes which then Frelonius was printing after some conference had betwixt them Ludovicus shewed him some printed leaves partly cancelled and partly razed saying this is the first Impression which wee printed most faithfully according to the best Copies but two Franciscan Fryers by command have blotted out those passages and caused this alteration to my great losse and astonishment It may be the discoverie of it by Junius might stay their further printing of it or else might be an occasion to call it in after the printing for otherwise if that Impression may be had it were worthy the examination Bolseus dicit se in manibus Secretarii hâc testimonium vidisse inspexisse In disp de Antichristo in Apend Nu. 49. 53. Laurent Rever Rom. Eccl. p. 190. Non habent Petri haereditatem qui Petri sedem non habent Grat de Paenit Dist 1. c. Potest fieri But for a proofe of this falsified Ambrose Lessius the Jesuit tells us that Bolseck doth confesse he saw the Copie in the hands of a Secretary howsoever their later Editions are sufficient proofe of your manifold falsifications But I will speak of Impressions onely that have been within my view First to prove your succession in doctrine in your owne Church Gratian tells us from St. Ambrose They have not the succession of Peter who have not the Chayre of Peter and thus he hath changed Fidem into Sedem Faith into Chaire This forgery in time may creepe into the Body of Ambrose but as yet the words of Ambrose are agreeable to our doctrine that is a Non habent Petri haereditatem qui Petri fidem non habent Ambr. de Paenit c. 6. Tom. 1. p. 156. Basil apud Joh. Frob. An. 1527. Ambr. de Sacr. l. 4. c. 5. Tom. 4. p. 393. Basilâut supra they have not the succession of Peter which want the faith of Peter These be the words of true and ancient Ambrose hereby declaring unto us and them that they may have the See of Peter and yet want the faith of Peter Againe in his Booke of the Sacrament St. Ambrose saith b Fac nobis haÌc oblationem ascriptam c. quod fit in figuram corports sanguinis Jesu Christi Amb. Colon. Agripp An. 1616 Tom. 4. p. 173. Make this Oblation to be a reasonable acceptable one quod est
which is more your Non conficient Priests doe generally commit that Sacriledge by receiving the consecrated Bread without the Cup flat contrary to the decrees of the ancient Bishop of Rome In the sixth age the second Councell of Orange is falsified in the behalfe of your merits the words of the Councell are these Hoc etiam salubriter profitemur credimus quod in omni opere bono non nos incipimus posted per Dei misericordiam adjuvamur sed ipse nobis c. Concil Arausicanum Can. 25. Bin. Tom. 2. p. 639. We solemnely professe and beleeve that in every good worke wee our selves doe not first begin and are helped afterwards by the mercie of God but he Nullis praecedentibus bonis meritis no good merits of ours going before doth first of all inspire us with faith and love towards him This Councell condemned the Pelagians for their doctrine of Merits and Freewill and accordingly declared that we have neither free will of our selves to doe good neither any fore-going workes to merit any thing of our selves and this is a safe and humble confession both of our weaknesse and Gods good grace and mercy towards us But observe your Church-men for the defence of their merits they have falsified the Canon and quite perverted the sense and meaning of the Councell and in the place of nullis meritis no merits have inserted the word multis many merits so that the Fathers of the Councell are taught to reade a new lesson flat contrary to the ancient Doctrine of the Church viz. We solemnely professe that wee first beginne many of our owne merits going before c. than which assertion what can be more arrogant in assuming power to our selves and derogating from the goodnesse of our God In the seventh age Gregory the great Bishop of Rome is falsified his words be these The King of Pride is neare Greg. Ep. lib. 4. Indict 13. Ep. 38. p. mihi 146. b. Edit Antwerp 1515. Paris An. 1521. fol. 384. in Aedibus Francisci Regnault and which is a haynous thing to name Exercitus Sacerdotum a whole armie of Priests is provided to attend his comming In your Edition of Antwerpe and Paris for the word exercitus you thrust in exitus Sacerdotum so that whereas Antichrist comming it is observed that an host of Priests shall belong unto him now on the contrary it is read that at Antichrists comming there shall be an end of Priesthood Now as you have detracted from Pope Gregories doctrine in one place so likewise you have added to him in another for honour of his See and the Canons of your Church the words are these Let not the reverence due to the Apostolike See bee trouhled by any mans presumption Greg. l. 11. Indict 6. Ep. 42. Citatur à Bel. in Ep. ad Blackwell contra jus regium Vide Jacob. Regis ope a. p. 262. 279. for then the state of the members doth remaine sound when the head of the faith is not bruised by any injury and the authority of the Canons alwayes remaine safe and sound This was urged to Blackwell the Priest by your Cardinall Bellarmine as a principall testimonie Contra jus regium and yet as it is observed by a learned Divine M. Stephanus these and many such particular passages are inserted into the printed Gregory which are not to bee found in the ancient Manuscripts Againe in the former Epistle St. Gregorie is likewise falsified by Stapleton in behalfe of the Popes Supremacie the words of St. Gregorie are these Greg. Regist l. 4. Indict 13. Ep. 38. Certainly Peter is the first member of the universall Church Paul Andrew and John what are they but heads of particular people and notwithstanding they are all members of the Church under one head And lest any should apply the name of head to Peter in his 36. Epistle being the second Epistle before this he saith Omnia soli uni capiti cohaerent viz. Christo Ep. 36. Stapl. de princip doctrin l. 6. c. 7. All the members are joyned to one head Christ Now observe the addition and falsification of your learned Stapleton Andrew James and John saith he were heads of severall Congregations and all members of the Church under one head Peter And thus your Popes creature hath left out Peter in the first place where hee was made a member and added the name of Peter in the last place to make him a head Againe Gratian who was ever ready to supply all defects for the Popes title hath given us an inexcusable forgerie in the name of Gregorie for the Papall power the truth of it was this When Anatolius Deacon of Constantinople had written to Pope St. Gregory that the Emperour commanded another Bishop to be chosen in the place of the Bishop of Justiniana by reason of his head-ache St. Greory made this answer Greg l. 9. Ep. 41. Indict 4. p. 370. You wrote unto me that our most religious Lord the Emperour commanded another to be chosen in the place of our reverend Brother John Bishop of Justiniana because of the paine of his head by which tenour St. Gregory shewes that the Popes obeyed the Princes lawes so they were not against their Canons Now observe Gratian hee leaves out first the words Grat. causa 7. quest 1. fol. Mihi 186. our most religions Lord and in stead of the Emperours name he assumes the Popes person saying Your lovingnesse wrote to me that I should command another to be chosen whereas in those dayes by the confession of Pope Gregory the Emperors made Election of the Bishops and not the Popes The sixt Councell of Constantinople is falsified corrupted by Gratian in the 36. Canon of the said Councell it was thus decreed We determine that the See of Constantinople shall have equall priviledges and honour with the seat of elder Rome and in Ecclesiasticall matters be advanced as far forth as it being next unto it Gratian cites the former non tameÌ in Ecclesiasticis saith he but not in matters Ecclesiasticall which is flat coÌtrary to the meaning of the Councel In the eight age venerable Bede was living The eight age An. 700. to 800. and taught our doctrine touching the Sacrament but was afterwards forged by Fryer Walden to prove the doctrine of Transubstantiation against Wickliffe Ibi forma panis videtur ubi substantia panis non est nec est ibi inquit panis alius quam panis qui de coelo descendit Wald. Tom. 2. de sacr c. 82. fol. mihi 138. b. his words are these There the forme of Bread is seene where the substance of Bread is not neither is any other Bread there but that which descends from heaven This is alledged out of the Booke de mysteriis Missae in the name of Bede when as in all his 8. Tomes hee never wrote or mentioned any such worke The Councell of Franckford is likewise corrupted and falsified for the
of every censure or expurgation that is made which is most foolish But tell mee in good sooth if those places of Scriptures and Fathers did make for your Religion would you purge them Or must we beleeve that your Inquisitors would take such infinite care and paines to review all Authours for 1600. yeares and spunge them onely in the Index Without doubt that man who doth willingly deface the Kings picture stamped in his coyne would if he durst attempt it upon his person the Tables of Authors and Glosses were especially intended for the benefit of the Reader both for his better understanding and his more speedie searching of the truth They resemble the Phylacteries of the Jewes which had a Ribband of Blue upon the borders of their garments that by them they might the better remember the Commandements of God he that would have cut the fringes of those garments in those dayes to prevent the remembrance of Gods law would no doubt have offered violence to the Tables on which God himselfe had written if hee durst attempt it The truth is the words imprinted in the skirts and tables of your Bibles and Fathers are thornes in your eyes and goades in your sides and from hence we may easily discerne why you leave out the second Commandement and alter the fourth in your Psalters and Breviaries which you dare not alter in your Bibles And that your Assertion may more particularly appeare to bee most untrue viz. that you purge no Authours before the yeare 1515. I will begin from the ninth age where I last left and shew your owne Authours purged and forbidden in all the succeeding ages for this last 800. yeares First therefore the Reader shall understand that your Roman Inquisitors have published an Index of prohibited Bookes and in that Index they have divided the Authors into three severall Classes or orders Classis 1. In the first they ranke all those Bookes which are adjudged by your men for Heretikes as namely Berengarius Wickliffe Luther Cassander Erasmus Raynolds and divers others whose Bookes not onely now written but whatsoever shall be published in their names hereafter are prohibited as Hereticall Classis 2. In the second Classis they have ranked all those whose doctrine is not very sound but suspected and offensive although the Authors themselves never forsooke the Church and therefore not personally to bee noted and of this sort are Charles the great Agobardus Bertram Huldericus Cajetan and divers others whose Bookes are now purged and some of them lived 800. years since Classis 3. The third is of namelesse Authors which say they deliver pernitious doctrine and are condemned by the Roman Church and those onely which have beene published without a name since the yeare 1584. These three rankes of Classicall Authors according to our Adversaries doome may be destinated to these three severall places The first sort to Hell which containes the Heretikes and damned persons never to be redeemed The second sort to Purgatory which are suspended and restrained upon suspicion of false doctrine or veniall sinne and must not be freed till they be purged and have payd the utmost farthing to the Pope The third to Limbus Infantum and those are Anonymoi such as were unbaptized and have beene published without a name from the yeare 1584. Of these three sorts I will produce onely the Authors of the second Classis which lived and died members of your Church such as were never condemned for heresie but touse you own words have Suspectam Doctrinam that is to say in plaine English Protestant Doctrine whereof some you have purged in your new Editions others you have forbidden to be read till they be purged The ninth age An. 800. to 900 See Crakenthorp p. 56. Carolo magno falsò adscriptuÌ de Imaginibus cujus Titulus est Opus illustrissimi c. Ind. l. prohib p. Mihi 18. and this as shall appeare was many ages before the time prefixed 1515. I proceed In the ninth age Charles the Great wrote foure Bookes concerning Images he professeth that hee began the worke in his owne Kingdome and your owne Ecchius and Luzenburgus both witnesse that this Emperour wrote all those Bookes yet your Index Expurgatorius layes hold on him and forbids the worke pretending that it is falsely ascribed to him when as the true reason is because he condemned Image-worship and forbids the 7th Councell to be called either agenerall or lawfull Councell for otherwise your owne Hincmarus Archbishop of Rhemes Hinckm RheÌ contr Hinchm Jandun Episc c. 20. who was living when these things were fresh in memorie professeth that a generall Synod was kept in Germany by the convocation of the Emperour Charles and there by the Rules of Scripture and doctrine of the Fathers the false Councell of the Grecians was confuted and utterly rejected of whose confutation there was a good bigge Booke sent to Rome by certaine Bishops from Charles the Great which in my younger yeares I read in the Palace Now admit that Charles were not the Authour of those Bookes although your owne men witnesse he was yet the Authour you see was ancient and living in that age hee condemned your Image-worship hee confuted the reasons of the Nicene Councell and by this it appeares that your Church hath transgressed her limits above 700. yeares and therefore your Trent decree was made sutable to your Spectacles which makes that seeme to be which is not Agobardus Bishop of Lyons An. 840. is purged propter non sanam suspectam doctrinam because he delivers our Protestants doctrine which you account non sanam in these words If the workes of Gods hands be not to be adored and worshipped Sioperd manuum Dei c. Bibl. Pp. Tom. 9. p. mihi 590. no not in honour of God how much more the workes of mens hands are not to be adored and worshipped in honour of those whom they represent Titulo de Imaginibus expurgantur omnia quae sub hoc titulo continentur usque ad titulum 2. Classis Ind. lib. prohib pag. mihi 711. This passage is yet extant in your late Bibliotheque of Fathers under the title of Images but your Spanish Inquisitors have commanded all the things which are contained under that Title to bee blotted out usque ad Titulum to the very title Papirius Massonus the publisher of Agobardus workes delivered the argument touching Images and Pictures in this manner Detecting most manifestly the errours of the Grecians that is the Fathers of the second Nicene Councel touching Images and Pictures he denyeth that they ought to be worshipped which opinion all wee Catholikes doe allow and follow the testimony of Gregory the Great concerning them This passage together with more ample authorities are already purged according to command by the Divines of Cullen in their late corrupt Edition of the great Bibliotheque of the ancient Fathers Bibl. P P. Tom. 9. par 1. edit Colon. Anno 1618. p.
Aeneas when he retracted as Pope that which he had written or when he condemned that which hee had retracted No surely he was Pius in nothing in the opinion of your Church but in his Bull of Retractations and he was Aeneas in nothing more than in condemning that which he retracted And accordingly he himselfe beggs of your Church Bulla Retractat Pii 2. Illud Gentile nomen parentes indidere nascenti hoc Christianum in Apostolatu suscepimus Ibid. Pium recipite Aeneam rejicite Receive you Pius but reject Aeneas and he gives his reason for it Aeneas is a heathenish Name which our Parents gave us at our Birth but Pius is a Christian name which we assumed in our Apostolike calling You may adde to this Aeneas was a private man and subject unto errour but Pius was a Pope and therefore in his determinations infallible or rather you may truly say with him Nihil mentiti sumus nihil ad gratiam nihil ad odium retulimus Bulla Retractat that Aeneas before he was Pope delivered the truth neither for feare nor hatred and yet he was forced to retract it but Pius * Cum doctrinaÌ non sanam suspectam quae offensionem parere potest contineant c. Class 2. in Ind. lib. prohibit when he was Pope delivered false and suspected doctrine and such as was offensive to your Church and for that cause is commanded to bee purged Quid Pius Aeneas in te committere tantùm What ill hap had good Aeneas or rather what ill fortune had Pope Pius that he could neither satisfie your Church either as he was Aeneas or as he was Pius neither as a private Doctor nor as an infallible Pope Rivet CriticuÌ Sacr. Specimen c. 7. p. 49. or rather I may say with your owne Canus What doth it availe men who desire to know the truth to raze Records out of their Bookes when they cannot blot it out of their mindes Petrus Crinitus was a Romish Priest Anno 1450. and is commanded to be purged and if we shall examine the reason we shall finde it for no other cause but that he speakes the truth against your Pope and Popish Doctrine To instance in particulars Let both the Title and the Chapter be razed say your Inquisitors touching Pope Boniface the 8. Petr. Crinit l. 7. c. 13. de dom Disciplinâ and the reason is pregnant that Chapter shewes the insosolencie and pride of the Pope in particular in matter of fact and it further declares that under pretence of Religion the Popes in generall thinke they may doe what they list Againe when he speakes of ancient Lawes Idem l. 14. c. 5. made in generall for Marriage and propagation of Children they command that page to be strucken out and there can be no other reason but because on the contrary it is a positive law of your Church to forbid Marriage Lastly whereas he shewes that Leo the Emperour made an Edict Idem l. 9. c. 9. that all Images in Churches and houses of the Christians should be razed and hee declares in his opinion that it doth not appertaine to Religion to adore any mans Image and that Valens and Theodosius made Proclamation to all Christians that they would suffer no man to fashion to grave or paint the Image of our Saviour either in colours or in stone or in any other kinde of metall or matter and that wheresoever any such Image should bee found they commanded it to be taken downe Index Belgic p. 421. Index Madrid p. 150. Ind. lib. prohibit p. 79. 718. Bulla Pii 4. Art 9. Art 22. These and the like passages your Inquisitors in three severall Indices command to be razed out and what cause can you pretend but that it makes against a speciall Article of your faith viz. that Images should be set up in Churches and worshipped and by this meanes you strike likewise at the Articles of our Church and when you have made such Doctrines and Evidences invisible by razing the records then you bid us shew where the Church was visible before Luther Now what credit shall the Reader give unto you and to your Trent Councell that would assure us that your Church intended the purging of no Authors but from the yeare 1515. when as it appeares plainely that you have spared neither the writings of the Apostles nor the Fathers in razing and falsifying their owne very words and sentences And as touching other Authors in the latter ages you have gone beyond your Commission hundreds of years in falsifying corrupting forbidding and purging them and this was long before your prefixed yeare of 1515. In the sixteenth age Luther began his Heresie saith Bellarmine Anno 1517. Anno 1517. Bell. Chronol p. 3. pag. 117. and your Church to make some shew that your Index Expurgatorius had a relation onely to Luther and his followers tooke her rise from the yeare 1515. which was but two yeares before his comming as if all the members of your Church before his comming had lived in the unity of one faith and doctrine This deceivablenesse of your unrighteousnesse I have in part discovered Now I come to your Authors of this last age for I will cite none but your owne Authors and therein lieth another mysterie not inferiour to the first and that is this your Index Expurgatorius was first proclaimed generally against all Heretickes meaning the Protestants but when it comes to examination it points especially at the particular members of your owne Church and that which is most remarkable after that your Trent Councel had distinguished with Anathema's her Roman faith from the faith of Protestants after she had forbidden and condemned by her Index divers of your owne Authors as savouring of suspected and false and scandalous doctrine nay more after she had declared all to be Heretickes and their Doctrine Hereticall who would dare to teach or publish any contrary beliefe to that which was once established by a Generall Councell yet I say the members of your owne Church and those not of the meanest ranke both Bishops and Cardinals have delivered in print many points of Doctrine agreeable to the Articles of our Church and yet you say they never left the Church they are not personally to be noted nor ranked amongst Heretickes when for the very same Tenets we are accused accursed forbidden and utterly condemned as Heretickes and Reprobates and thus the head of your Church being divided from the members in points of saving faith may say unto the tongue I have no need of thee and consequently may cut it out Howsoever this use we may safely make of your Index that if in after ages by new Impressions the true doctrine of Protestants shall be razed and utterly abolished in your Roman Authors yet your very Index will appeare as a strong Evidence to shew that such doctrines were taught in former Ages and howsoever the faction in the
Papacie formerly prevailed yet it is more than evident by the Testimonies and Records of your owne men that we had not two Churches before Luther but that we had alwayes Testes Veritatis witnesses of Gods truth and our owne Religion in all Ages in the bosome of the Roman Church I proceed to particulars in this last age Anno 1500. Cardinall Cajetan is purged in severall and maine points of doctrine being different from your owne Church Touching the ground of Transubstantiation he denies that the words of Scripture This is my body are availeable to prove it of themselves and thereupon your Jesuit Suarez complaineth Ex Catholicis c. a Ex Catholicis solus Cajetanus in Commentario hujus Articuli qui jussu Pii 5. in Romana editione expunctus est docuit seclusâ Ecclesiae authoritateverba illa Hoc est corpus meum ad veritatem hanc confirmaÌdam nonsufficere Suarez Tom 3. Disp 46. Sect. 3. quaest 75. Art 1. p. 515. Impress Mog An. 1509. Amongst the Catholikes Cajetan onely teacheth that the words This is my Body bee not sufficient without the authoritie of the Church to confirme the truth of it And therefore by the command of Pope Pius the 5. this passage is blotted out in the Roman Edition Touching justification by faith onely whereas hee saith b Absque exceptione aliqua coÌditionis sexus qualiatis c. dicitur omni credenti sola fides exigitur ad salutem Cajet Ep. Paulï c. Parisus 1571. fol. 4. Ind. lib. prohibit p. 876. without any exception of person of any Sexe or quality or condition It is said of every Beleever faith alone is required to salvation your Index commands those latter words to bee blotted out Lastly in speaking of the Crosse and the like he saith These are altogether unlawfull and not to be embraced because they are part of an ill worship you cause these words to be strucken out and in lieu of them you subjoyne these words following which are flat contrary c Idem p. 805. These are altogether lawfull and are to be embraced because they are part of the divine worship and the better to colour these miserable shifts and falsifications you give this Caveat to the Reader Idem ibid. p. 805. Be warie if you finde any such Doctrine for it is to bee feared the Heretikes have suggested it Alphonsus à Castro wrote a large Booke against Heresies Anno 1500. and in particular he charged Luther with many Yet in his first Booke and fourth Chapter hee attributeth the same title of Heretike to the Pope and shewes the Pope as Pope is subject to Heresie but behold the record stands published against Luther but is wholly razed touching the Pope Quod autem alii dicunt eum quierraverit in fide obstinatè jam non esse Papam ac per hoc affirmant Papam non posse esse haereticum in reseria verbis velle jocari Ad hunc enim modum quis posset citra impudentiam asserere nullum fidelem posse in fide errare nam cum haereticus fuerit jam desinit esse fidelis Non enim dubitamus an haereticum esse Papam esse coire in unum possint sed id quaerimus an hominem qui alià s in fide errare potuisset dignitas Pontificalis efficiat à fide indeviabilem Non enim credo aliquem esse adeo impudentem Papae assentatorem ut ei tribuere hoc velit ut nec errare aut in interpretatione sacrarum literarum hallucinari possit Nam cùm constet plures eorum adeo illiteratos esse ut Grammaticam penitus ignorent quî fit ut sacras literas interpretari possent Alph. à Cast advers haer l. 1. c. 4. p. mihi 6. b. Coloniae excudebat Melchior Nouesianus Anno 1543. The words in my Edition are these Whereas some say that he which erreth wilfully in the faith is now no longer Pope and thereupon concludes the Pope cannot be an Heretike they seeme in a sad matter to dally with words For saith he wee make no doubt whether the Pope and an Heretike may agree in one person but this is our question whether a man that otherwise might have erred in the Faith by vertue of the Papall dignity be made such as he cannot erre For I doe not beleeve that there is any so impudent a flatterer of the Pope that will give him this preheminence to say that he can neither be deceived nor misse in the expounding of the Scriptures for seeing it is well knowne that many Popes be so utterly void of learning that they know not the Principles of their Grammer how may it be that they should be able to expound the Scriptures These words I have cited at large out of my Edition 1543. for if you looke into Alphonsus printed within these last threescore yeares I beleeve you will finde them razed in this particular without an Index Expurgatorius which plainly shewes that as the Pope was and may be an Heretike so likewise falsifying of Records is a proper marke of Heretikes Johannes Ferus a Frier Minorite An. 1500. Usher p. 162. and prime Preacher at Mentz in Germany is purged and falsified in many points of controversie which he held with us Touching the power of Priesthood in remitting of sinnes it was the doctrine of Ferus a Non quòd homo propriè remittat peccatum sed quòd ostendat ac certificet à Deo remissum Neque enim aliud est absolutio quam ab homine accipit quà m si dicat En fili certifico te tibiremissa esse peccata annuncio tibi te habere propitium Deum quaecunque Christus in Baptismo Evangelio nobis promisir tibi nunc per me annunciat promittir Fer. Comment in Matth. l. 2. c. 9. Mogunt An 1559. Lugdun apud Johannem à S. Paulo An. 1609. Contr. Man did not properly remit sinne but did declare and certifie that it was remitted by God so that the absolution received from man is nothing else than if hee should say Behold my sonne I certifie thee that thy sinnes are forgiven thee I pronounce unto thee that thou hast God favourable unto thee and whatsoever Christ in Baptisme and in his Gospell hath promised unto us hee doth now declare and promise unto thee by me Of this thou shalt have me to be a witnesse goe in peace and in quiet of conscience This declarative power of remitting sinnes was Ferus doctrine this is ours But behold the case is altered for in Ferus printed at Lyons 1609. all those words are razed out and on the contrary saith that b Sacerdos enim Dei minister verè remittit peccata ac certificat à Deo remissa fol. mihi 160. b. In Matth. l. 2. c. 9. the Priest doth truely remit sinnes and as the Minister of God doth also certifie that they are remitted of God Touching our justification by faith onely the true Ferus
saith Nempe quòd solâ fide in Christum nullis meritis nostris justificamur In Ep. Pauli ad Rom. c. 16. In verba illa deleatur Ind. lib. prohibit p. mihi 629. Ind. Madrid fol. 133 Ind. Belg. p. mihi 393. That we are justified by faith alone in Christ and by none of our merits That our owne workes whatsoever they be are not of that value that they should merit a reward of condignitie or congruitie but so farre forth as God in his mercie doth accept them These and the like passages are commanded to be blotted out And whereas hee sayth a Sic verè nullum hominum genus est quod minimè movetur verbo Dei quà m hi qui in sua justitia confidunt Idem in Joh. c. 1. There is no kinde of men that are lesse moved with the word of God than those which trust in their owne righteousnesse your men as being guilty of their trust in their merits of workes command this and the like passages to bee stricken out Your Index of prohibited Bookes published by the b Opera tamdiu prohibentur quaÌdiù expurgatio noÌ prodierit Ind. l. prohibit p. 56. Cardinall of Sandonall and Roxas tells us that the workes of Ferus are forbidden to be read till such time as they shall be purged and sure I am when they are purged they are none of his For I appeale to you and your fellow Jesuites Mr. Floyd whether these passages following be his or yours I meane either the Protestant doctrine which he published before Luthers dayes or the Popish tenets which are since altered by the Inquisitors and taught by the Trent Fathers In the third of St. Matthew the true Ferus sayth c Quòd si aliquando mercedem audis pollioeri scias non ob aliud esse debitam quà m ex promissione divina Ferus in Math. 3. If at any time thou heare of a reward promised know that it is not due for any thing else but for the divine promise sake Your Inquisitors command it to be altered thus Quòd si aliquando mercedem audis polliceri scias non sine promissione esse debitam Ind. Madrid fol. mihi 125. If thou heare of a reward promised know that it is not due without the promise The one saith it is not due for any respect but for the divine promise ex promissione divina the other saith it is not due without the promise when the true Ferus addes Gratis promisit gratis reddidit He promised freely and he hath given freely you command these words to be stricken out And whereas Ferus commenting upon the words of Christ Ind. Belg. p. mihi 372. Ind. lib. prohib p. 627. Qui hanc fidem nescit ad EcclesiaÌ non pertinet etiamsi videtur primus esse in Ecclesia Idem in Mat. l. 3. c. 16. p. mihi 25. Ind. Madrid p. 125. Ind. Belg. p. 370. Tues Petrus c. Thou art Peter and upon this Rocke I will build my Church she wing that this Rocke was meant of Christ by the confession of Peters faith And saith hee whosoever is ignorant of this Faith belongs not to the Church although hee seeme to be the chiefe in the Church These words are otherwise read in your generall Indices and are commanded to bee stricken out And upon the words Si quis natus fuerit c. he saith a In Joh. c. 3. p. mihi 69. Ind. lib. proh p. 625. The Preachers of Gods Word ought first to teach faith by which a man is justified and afterwards good workes there the words by which a man is justified are commanded to be stricken out Now as you have purged many places so likewise you have forged and falsified others by addition or retraction Looke upon his Commentary on the first Epistle of Saint John and you shall behold strange additions and the true Protestant Doctrine wrested to flat Poperty as for instance b Scriptura sacra data est nobis seu certa quaedam regula Christianae doctrinae Idem in 1 Ep. Joh. c. 2. edit Antwerp An. 1556. The holy Scriptures saith the true Ferus are given us as a certaine sure rule of Christian Doctrine In Ferus printed at Rome he is taught to say The holy Scriptures and a Romana edit An. 1577. traditions are given us as a certaine sure rule of Christian Doctrine The true Ferus saith b Justus lic èt in Christo manet tamen sine peccato nec esse potest septies enim in die etiam justus cadit Idem in cap. 3. Though the just man remaineth in Christ yet he is not neither can be without sinne for even the just doe fall seven times a day your Roman Ferus addeth c Sine peccato originali not without veniall sinnes The true Ferus saith d FiâeÌ charitateÌ conjungit Apostolus ita tamen ut fidem praeponat Ibid. The Apostle conjoyneth faith and charity yet so as hee preferreth faith your Roman Ferus addeth he preferreth faith e Additur ordine non perfectione in order not in perfection The true Ferus saith f Charitas timoremexpellit quia fidem quâ Christum vitaÌ propitiationem salvatorem nostrum apprehendimus probat confirmat certámque reddit Ib. c. 4. Aliter Charity driveth out feare because it trieth confirmes and makes assured our faith whereby we apprehend Christ our life propitiation and salvation your Romane Ferus saith g Charitas timorem expellit quia peccata remittit Spirit us saÌctus eam consolatur testimonium perhibens quòd filii Dei sumus Ibid. Charity drives out feare because it forgiveth our sinnes and the Holy Ghost doth comfort it giving testimony that we are Gods children The true Ferus saith h Ibid. cap. 5. There be some who after faith doe earnestly urge good workes but because they teach not withall to what end they are to be directed and how much is to be ascribed unto them they give cause that almost all the common people doe trust in their owne workes and so they build upon the sand the Roman Ferus saith There were some who after faith and with faith did earnestly urge good workes but because they cast away their necessity and others ascribed too much to them they all did build upon the sand Lastly in the true Ferus sometimes by changing of a word or by taking away of a word you pervert the sense and meaning of the Author As for instance whereas the true Ferus saith Saint John condemned all glorying in our workes omnem gloriam your Roman Edition hath turned omnem into inanem and saith Saint John condemned inanem gloriam vaine glory Ridiculum est quod quidam bîc volunt Cephas idem esse quod caput Idem in Joh. c 1. p. mihi 43 c. And whereas the true Ferus saith It is ridiculous that some will have Cephas for the head your
this great Fisher Peter for feare of a Girle denies his Master all the people laughing at her question and hissing at his deniall and in all these revels and ridiculous stirs Christ onely is serious and severe but seeking to move passion and sorrow in the audience he is so farre from that that he is cold even in the divinest matters to the great guilt shame and sinne both of the Priests that present it and the people that behold it These words and blasphemous actions Ind. l. expurgat p mihi 41. as being ashamed of them you doe well to command them to bee blotted out but yet they are reprinted and your men are not a shamed to continue the practice of it in your owne Religion And lastly where he sayes That those who preferre the Latin Translation before the Greeke and Hebrew fountaines Idem in Aug. l. 15. c. 13. p. 83. are men of evill mindes and corrupt judgements that passage is left out in the Antwerpe print And whereas he saith that the story of Susanna Idem l. 18. c. 31 of Bell and the Dragon are Apocryphall Scriptures and not received of the Jewes nor translated by the Septuagint Ind. l. expurg p. mihi 41. all those words are commanded to be stricken out Jacobus Faber Stapulensis a member of the Roman Church taught the Protestant doctrine in many points and therefore he is purged by your severall Indices Whereas the Rhemists translate the Greek word ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã Penance he defined it Repentance Jac. Fab. in Evang. Matth. c. 3. fol. mihi 13. b. Ibid. c. 5. fol. 24. in initio and makes a distinction betwixt Repentance and Penance such as the Protestants doe and therefore it is commanded to be stricken out Againe speaking of the Scribes and Pharisees who did attribute righteousnesse to themselves and their owne workes Ibid. c. 6. f. 30. a. Ind. Madr. fol. 112. The faithfull saith he which are of the Law of grace doe worke most diligently but doe attribute nothing to themselves or their owne workes but all of them doe impute their righteousnesse to the grace of God All consisteth with the one in the merit of workes with the other in grace the one respect themselves and their workes and are delighted therein the other regard not themselves but the grace of God they admire his goodnesse and therein is their chiefe delight Againe if any man shall doe good in this world hee must not doe it because it is his will but because God commandeth it For he which is perfect hath not a will peculiar to himselfe but his will must be the will of God and this is the third Petition of the Lords Prayer In the sixteenth Chapter of St. Matthew upon the words Thou art Peter c. he shewes that according to St. Pauls doctrine Ibid. fol. c. 16. mihi 74. b. the Rocke was Christ Hee shewes that Peter was so farre from being a firme rocke that Christ himselfe did intimate the contrarie when he said Get thee behinde me Sathan for thou savourest not the things of God but of men He shewes us further that our Lord Christ promised to Peter the Keyes of binding and loosing but withall testifies that those Keyes were not Peters but Christs whereby Peter doth not binde or loose by his power but by the will of Christ He addeth moreover that not onely Peter received those Keyes but also all the rest of the Apostles But saith he there be some which understand by the Keyes of binding and loosing the Popes power as Christ spake of that faith witnessing that he was the Sonne of the living God which is one of the Keyes of the heavenly Doctrine upon which the Church is founded and Peters faith as upon the true Rocke Christ was builded a Deleatur ab illis verbis Ne quis putet Petrum c. usque ad Aeterni Patris infusio Ind. Madr. fol. mihi 113. Ind. Belg. p. 51. This and much more to the same purpose for thirty lines together is commanded to be strucken out In his 20. Chapter he saith b Verum qui operibus suis aliquo modo fidunt minus Deo fidunt minusque amant Deum qui autem nullo modo sed pacto sed promissioni imo omnia Deo tribuunt plus Deo fidunt cujus ineffabili bonitate qui novissimi suerunt operando factisunt primi gratiam recipiendo qui primi operando novissimi gratiam recipieÌdo Quare bonum c. deleatur usque ad Dei autem omnia Ind. ut supra Those which any wayes trust in their workes have the least affiance in God and love him the lesse but those which give all to his promise and to God himselfe they trust most in God by whose ineffable bounty those which are last in working are made first by receiving grace and those that are first in working are become last in receiving Whatsoever therefore a man doth it is good for him to trust wholly to God his goodnesse for it is the will of God and of his speciall grace that wee are saved and not of our will or workes These words and much more to the same purpose in the same chapter are commanded to be blotted out Touching his Commentaries upon Saint John your Inquisitors have pronounced this definitive sentence c Ind. Madr. fol. mihi 115. Because they cannot be handsomely purged let them all be spunged and blotted out Touching his Commentaries upon Timothy In Tim. c. 3. fol. mihi 205. hee shewes that it was lawfull for Priests to marry a Virgin till the time of Gregory the seventh which was nine hundred yeeres after Christ hee shewes likewise that the Grecians kept the Apostolicall Tradition in marrying of Wives and could not change them and that other Churches which vowed single life by their incontinencie fell into the snares of the Devill And lastly in his Commentary upon the Galathians at large he proves a Per solam fidem Christi infunditur justificatio In Gal. c. 2. fol. 154. That by the Faith of Christ alone we are justified and that he which b Idem c. 3. fol. 156. Qui autem confidit in operibus in seipso confidit baculo innititur arundineo qui frangitur in seipso supernum lumen non videt unde descendit Justificatio trusteth in his works trusteth in himselfe and leanes upon a staffe of Reed which is broken in it selfe whereby he doth not discern the heavenly light from whence our justification doth descend These and many other like passages in severall places of his Workes which are consonant to our Protestant Doctrine are commanded by the c Ind. Madr. f. mihi 118 119. Inquisitors to be strucken out d Friderici Furii Cenolani Valentini Bononia sive De libris sacris in vernaculam linguam convertendis Fridericus Furius writes a whole Book of translating the Bible into the vulgar tongue
for the benefit of the Lay people hee dedicates his Booke to Cardinall Bovadillius and he tells him that wee esteeme it an excellent thing to reade the workes of Greeke and Latine Philosophers and therefore much more ought wee to search and know the will of God out of his sacred Scriptures for the one is a matter of pleasure and the other is a matter of necessity the not knowing of the one may hurt little or nothing at all but to bee ignorant of the other brings a grievous mischiefe besides eternall destruction of the soule Againe what is it saith hee to forbid the Scriptures to bee read in the vulgar tongue than to forbid God his owne purpose and as it were to command God which doth declare himselfe to all by his Word that hee should not be manifested unto us This is the whole scope of the Author and for this cause lest the reading of the Scripture in a knowne tongue should discover Antichristian Doctrine by frequent reading a Ind. lib. proh p. mihi 36. the Book it selfe is forbidden till it bee purged in this and the like places witnessing against your Romane Doctrine Johannes Langus is numbred amongst your Heretiques in the first Classis pag. 51. Yet his Annotations upon b Permittuntur verò ejusdem in D Justinum annotatioÌes iteÌ in Nicephorum scholia si expurgentur Ind. l. proh p. mihi 51. Justin Martyr and his Commentaries upon Nicephorus are allowed if they bee purged Now let the Reader observe for what cause you would have him purged First touching his Annotations upon Justin Martyr c Multa continet parum Catholicae Religioni consona inter ea autem illud est praecipuum quòd transubstantiationem non agnoscit sed opertè contendat cum corpore sanguine Christi remanere veram panis vini substaÌtiaÌ They containe many things disagreeing to the Catholike Religion but among those that is chiefe that hee doth not acknowledge Transubstantiation but doth openly maintaine that the true substance of bread and wine doth remaine with the body and bloud of Christ. Againe d Perversè admodum interpretatur illud Malachiae In omni loco offertur sacrificium nomini meo de doxologia benedictione laudibus hymnis Sic Ind. ut upra He doth very maliciously interpret that place of Malachy In every place a sacrifice shall be offered to my name that is saith he in giving of glory blessing laud and praise to the Name of God e Gerardi Lorichii Adamarii collectio triuÌ libroruÌ c. de missa publicaproroganda Ind. l. proh p. 11. Gerardus Lorichius is prohibited till he be purged for the reproving and condemning your private Masse and Communion in one kinde his words be these There be false Catholikes that are not ashamed by all meanes to hinder the Reformation of the Church they to the intent that the other kinde of the a Dâ Missa pub Racemationum lib. 2. Canonis pars 7. p. mihi 177. Sacrament may not be restored to the Lay people spare no kinde of blasphemy b Excusum an 1536. For they say Christ said onely to his Apostles Drinke yee all of this but the words of the Canon of the Masse are Take and eate you all of this Here I beseech them let them tell mee whether they will have this word All to pertaine onely to the Apostles Then must the Lay people abstaine from the other kinde of the bread also which thing to say is an Heresie and a pestilent and detestable blasphemie Ambrosius Catharinus Archbishop of Compsa wrote against Cajetan and saith * Bellar. de Ec. Scrip. p mihi 312. Bellarmine hee wrote likewise against Luther e Opuscula verò similiter prohibentur nisi corrigantur Ind. l. prohib p. 4. Yet something hee wrote is disallowed of the Church as namely touching the words of consecration other things are commonly refuted by the Doctours of the Church viz. the certainety of Grace of Predestination c. therefore his Workes are warily to be read Thus you have Cajetan against Luther and Catherinus against Cajetan and Luther both against the Tenets of their own Church insomuch as the Inquisitors have commanded a deleatur upon Cajetan and Catharinus in the second Classis and against f Commentaria in Lucam nisifuerint ex repurgaââ impressââ ab an 1581. vel nisi anteà edita expurgentur Ind. l. prohib p 26. p. 318. Ind-Belg p. 317. Ind. Hisp p. 63. Luthers whole Workes in the first Classis Didacus Stella is prohibited to bee printed before hee be purged The places which are purged are such wherein hee teacheth Protestant Doctrine as may be seen in g See Appendix to the Romish Fisher caught in his owne net Mr. Crashaw and Dr. James and D. F. Observations Andreas Masius in his Commentarie upon Josuah is purged for this Protestant doctrine Ad solam vitae benè actae imitationem non etiam ad religiosum cultum quem adorationem vocant Theologi DivoruÌ monumen ta conservare fas est In Comment Jos hist c. ult Ind. l. expurg p. 31. Wee ought to preserve the Monuments of Saints onely for the imitation of their godly life not for Religious worship which Divines call Adoration Againe hee saith a Idem in Jos c. 22. The Church sets before our eyes the figure of Christs Crosse not that wee should worship it which latter words are commanded to bee razed out Lastly Cardinall Bellarmine who was the first and best that ever handled all controversies indifference betwixt us b Ind. Belg. p. 269. was in danger of a prohibition or rather of an absolute suppression of all his workes Your owne Barclay witnesseth of him Barclay of the authoritie of the Pope c. 13. p. 66. Engl. That there is not one of the Popes partie who hath either gathered more diligently or propounded more sharply or concluded more briefly or subtilly than the worthy Divine Bellarmine who although he gave as much to the Popes authority in temporalties as honestly hee might and more than he ought yet could he not satisfie the ambition of the most imperious man Sixtus the 5th who affirmed that he had supreme power over Kings and Prince of the whole Earth and all People Countries and Nations committed unto him not by humane but by divine Ordinance and therefore he was very neare by his Pontificiall censure to the great hurt of the Church to have abolished all the writings of that Doctour which doe oppugne Heresies with great successe at this day as the Fathers of that order whereof Bellarmine was then did seriously report unto me How probable this may seeme his worke of Recognitions doth witnesse to the world wherein he was inforced to recant that doctrine which he had both sincerely taught and published according to the truth As for instance whereas he professed that the Pope was subject to the Emperour in temporall affaires on the
else doe you and your associates confesse that the contrary Tenets were taught and revived by the Ancients And as touching the name of Antichrist if that be appropriate to Heretikes it cannot touch the members of our Church for we make Christ and his Apostles the sole rule of our Faith On the other side if you consider the Pope either as he sits in the place of Christ as his Vicar Generall ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã is agââââ Christ in the place of Christ as his Vicar or as he and his adherents teach and uphold a doctrine against Christ for the word Antichrist imports both without doubt they beare the markes of Antichrist and consequently the word Heretike reflects upon your selves Cassander tells us there be some who make the Pope of Rome Almost a God Cassand de officio Pii viri preferring his authoritie not onely above the whole Church but above the sacred Scriptures holding his judgement equall to the divine Oracles and for an infallible rule of Faith I see no reason saith he but that these men should be called Pseudo-Catholikes or Papists Indeed I must confesse I much wonder that any Protestant should give you that honourable title of Catholike especially when you terme them by the name of Heretikes Those that have the marke of the Beast imprinted in their foreheads have borrowed both the Name and Nature from him and therefore your Cardinall tells us Bell. de Not. Eccles c. 4. The word Papist is derived from the Pope such as was Peter And more particularly your Gregory Martin and the Rhemists give you to understand Rhem. Annot. in Acts. 11.26 that to be a Papist is to bee a Christian man a childe of the Church and subject to Christs Vicar You that are so inquisitive after other mens pedigrees see if with all your Heraldrie you can make good your nominal descent from Christ and as you stile him Pope Peter Your Father Bristow Bristow Demand 8. as a knowne Antiquarie in this point gives your Father Bellarmine the lye for he avowes it for certaine that your name Papist was never heard of till the dayes of Pope Leo the Tenth and this was 1500. yeares after Christ and this opinion I am sure is most probable and more sutable to the Noveltie of your Religion But say you we Catholikes stile the Knight and the Reformers by the common name of Hereticks You told me formerly the title of Sir would be left for me now you have added to the title the name of Hereticke and you professe it is the worst word of all It seemes the worst word you have is good enough for me But I pardon you and I must let you know that the name of Catholike is as comely with the Professors of your new doctrine as a golden ring in a swines snout And as touching the name of Hereticke wherewith you charge me you rightly resemble Athalia 4 Kings 11. who when shee understood that Joas the right inheritour of the Crowne of Judah was proclaimed King ranne in her furie to the Temple and cryed out Treason Treason when the treason was not in King Joas but in herselfe that wrought it Your Alphonsus à Castro hath written a Booke against the Heretickes in all ages and in his Index haereticorum I have searched diligently and I finde the names of certaine Popes among them but mine owne name I doe not finde For I professe with St. Austin Errare possum haereticus esse nolo I may erre but I will not bee an Hereticke Shall I make my confession unto you I beleeve all things which are contained in the Scriptures and nothing contrary or besides them as matter of faith necessary to salvation Cum hoc credimus priuscredâmus nihil amplius credendum esse Tertul. Ibid. I beleeve the holy Catholicke Church This is an Article of my Faith and this I first received from the Apostles Creed Next I undoubtedly beleeve the Nicene Creed and this was called Catholicke by those holy Fathers to distinguish the Heretikes from the Orthodoxe Christians in the Primitive Church or according to your owne words Chap. 1. p. 2. appointed to be publikely professed by all such as meant to bee counted Catholikes Concil Trid. Sess 3. and for the same cause your Councell of Trent decreed it to be received as a Shield against Heresies and therefore by your owne confession the Councels decree and your Creed it selfe I am free from the name of Heretike Lastly I professe and beleeve Athanasius Creed and that Holy and ancient Father witnesseth of that confession Haec est fides Catholica This is the Catholike Faith If therefore I beleeve the Scriptures and Catholike Church which teacheth the true Faith If I beleeve the Articles of the Nicene Creed which distinguisheth the right Beleevers from the Heretikes If I receive Athanasius Creed which containes the summe and substance of all Catholike Faith and doctrine what remaines then why I should not be exempted from the name of Heretike unlesse I shall acknowledge with you the fourth Creed published by Pope Pius the fourth and consequently subscribe to new particular doctrines which as you confesse doth ever accompanie the nature of Heresie But the Reformers are Heretikes He that shall heare but the word Reformers in all probability will conceive that they were men which opposed some errors or heresies crept into the Church and for that cause desired a Reformation In the Churches of Corinth Galatia Pergamus and Thyatira there were some of the Sadduces opinion who denied the Resurrection others that joyned Circumcision and the workes of the Law with Christ and the worke of salvation The Apostles you know did reprove those errors in their dayes and no doubt many accordingly did reforme themselves Now will you condemne those reformed persons for Heretikes because they differed from the rest with an utter dislike of those errors which the seduced partie retained Surely this is the true state and condition of our Church and accordingly your Trent Fathers made a decree for Reformation in the Councell and pretended that it was summoned to redresse Heresies which were crept into the Church and will you say if they had redressed them the Reformers had beene Heretikes The Rogatian Heretikes would have made the world beleeve that they were the onely Catholikes and the Arrian Heretikes called the true Christians sometimes Ambrosians sometimes Athanasians sometimes Homoâsians And in this manner St. Paul himselfe was called before the Judges to make answer to matter of Heresie and according to this way which you call Heresie Acts 24. so worship we the God of our Fathers beleeving all things which are written in the Law and the Prophets They that so rashly pronounce and call every thing Heresie are often stricken with their owne dart Alph. de Heres l. 1. c. 7. saith your owne Alphonsus and fall into the same pit which themselves have digged for others Hee shewes therefore
beyond exception who spake as it were prophetically of the Church of Rome in her most flourishing state St. Hierome writing to Marcella a noble Lady exhorteth her to depart from Rome which he compares to Babylon Hier. ad Marcel Ep. 17. ToÌ 1. p. mihi 156. Reade saith he the Revelation of St. John and consider that which is there said of the woman clothed in purple of the blasphemy written in her forehead of the seven Mountaines of the great waters of the fall of Babylon Goe out from thence my people Babylon is falne and is become the habitation of Divels and the hold and cage of every foule spirit Now that wee might understand this was not spoken by him of heathen Rome he adjoyneth these words following Est quidem ibi sancta Ecclesia There is a true or holy Church there are the Trophies of the Saints and Martyrs there is the true confession of Christ published by the Apostle Ludovicus Vives your very friend in commenting upon this place tells us that St. Hierome thinketh there is no other Babylon described by St. John in the Revelation than the City of Rome But now saith he it hath put off the name of Babylon Lud. Vives in August de Civ Dei l. 18. c. 22. there is no confusion now you cannot buy any thing now in matter of Religion without a faire pretence of holy Law for selling it yet may you buy or sell almost any kinde of cause holy or hellish for money In D. August Annot. Ludov. Vives prohibentur nisi corrigantur Ind. l. prohibit Class 2. For this and the like passages your Vives is forbidden till hee be purged I must confesse I doe not thinke that the Rhemists would have interpreted Babylon for Rome if it had not beene to prove Peters being at Rome It is happy therefore for you that Peter wrote his Epistle from Babylon for otherwise your succession from Peter had beene questioned and it is as well for us that you are contented to allow Babylon for Rome for by this meanes your Antichristian Doctrine is discovered and your succession of Peters faith is quite abolished But say you if you meane as you expresse your selfe that a true Church may bee depraved I know not what to say but to stop my eares against that mouth of blasphemie And is it blasphemie to say a true Church may be depraved Sure I am it is not blasphemie against the holy Ghost for the mouth of St. Paul hath spoken it in parricular to the Roman Church even at that time when she was a most incorrupt Church Towards thee goodnes Rom. 11.22 if thou continue in his goodnesse otherwise thou also shalt be cut off And may not a Church thinke you be depraved that is in possibility of being cut off What thinke you of the Church of Hierusalem Psalm 48.19 Did not the Prophet David terme it the City of God and was it not afterwards termed a Harlot by the Prophet Esay What say you to the Temple of Solomon was it not termed by him 1 Kings 8.20 the house of Prayer and in Christs time was not that house of Prayer become a denne of Theeves Mat. 21.14 He that sayes Antichrist shall sit in the Temple of God doth plainely intimate that the true Church may be depraved and that before his comming there was a true Church In his answer to Card. Peron p. 9. Eng. What Babylon is saith learned Casaubon thus much the matter it selfe doth plainly shew that whether some private Church be understood in that place by the name of Babylon or the greater part of the whole it was before this a true Church with which the religious might religiously communicate but after it was more depraved the religious are commanded to goe out and to breake off communion with her And as touching the authority you cite that he would be with them to the worlds end that the Church is built upon a Rocke that the gates of Hell should not prevaile against it these promises I say concerne no more the particular Roman Church than the seven Churches of Asia that are falne away The blasphemie then you lay to my charge if any such be is but against your Roman Church and of such blasphemie many of your best learned are guilty in acknowledging a depravation of their faith notwithstanding all the promises of Christ to the Catholicke and universall Church Your Bishop of Bitonto by way of prevention cryes aloud in your Councell of Trent Cornel. in Concil Trident. Would to God they were not wholly with generall consent gone from religion to superstition from faith to infidelitie from Christ to Antichrist I could bring you a world of complaints against the falling away and depravation of your Roman Faith but that your eares will not endure such blasphemie Howsoever since your best learned have acknowledged Babylon to bee meant by Rome and that Rome is falne from her first faith Jerem. 51.6.9 I say with the Prophet Jeremie Fly out of the midst of Babylon and deliver every man his soule we would have healed Babylon but she is not healed forsake her and let us goe everie one into his owne Country for her judgement reacheth unto Heaven and is lifted up even unto the skies CHAP. III. The summe of his Answer to my second and third Sections IN the second Section he saith I labour to prove the contention betwixt the Churches to proceed originally from them The third Section is to prove the corruption both in faith and manners Both which are easily answered First by asking what is this to the purpose for the visible Church Secondly with the contradiction of a former lye he telleth a new one for the Reformation was sought for manners onely and not for doctrine This is the substance of your third Chapter in answer to my second and third Sections The Reply You have answered two Sections almost in two words the first in denying it to be to the purpose the latter in giving me the lye And thus like another Caesar you have briefly expressed the expedition of your victory in few words Veni vidi vici I came I saw I overcame First you demand what is this to the purpose of a visible Church But I rather wonder to what purpose you make such a demand For my Booke is entitled The Safe Way not the visibility of the Church Yet let me tell you the Authors which I cite are for the most part members of your Church and their authorities tend much to the proofe of a visible Church if your Index Expurgatorius did not spunge them and cause their testimonies to be often invisible For instance in our behalfe I cite Cassander To Cassander you answer he is like your selfe an Hereticke or next doore to them and yet elsewhere you say with much adoe he may passe for a Catholike Pag. 21. Oportet esse memorem I cite Cecenas Generall of the
sense of the Calvinists and withall confesseth that St. Austins opinion is more probable If this I say may bee deemed raving then will I confesse your railing is a good answer But he despaires say you of his cause who seeth Maldonats saying practised by the Church of Rome against his Church and doctrine I confesse with the blessed Apostle Acts 5.38 39. If our counsell or worke be of men it will come to nought and then I might despaire of it but if it be of God yee cannot overthrow it lest happely yee be found even to fight against God We have no cause blessed be God to despaire of our Religion which in one Age hath spread over the better part of Christendome But I conceive there is little hope of you or your cause who have sold your selves either with Ahab to worke wickednesse and maintaine Idolatrous worship for your owne advantage or like Maldonat See Maldonat Col. 1536. Unum è duobus intelligatur necesse est aut tunc non scandaliz abimini cùm videritis filium hominis ascendenteÌ ubi erat prius aut contra tunc magis scandaliz abimini prioremsensum plerique sequaÌtur Chrysost Augustin c. Yet Maldonat followeth the latter openly to professe greater hatred to Protestants than love to the truth it selfe For it is apparent ex professo he preferreth his owne opinion without any authoritie before St. Austin nay contrarie to St. Austin and hee gives this reason for it Because this sense of mine doth more crosse the sense of the Calvinists But I may say to you as sometimes a Ludov. Viv. de Civ Dei l. 13. c. 24. Ludovicus Vives spake upon the like occasion St. Austin is now safe because of his age but if he were alive againe he should be shaken off as a bad Rhetoritian or a poore Grammarian And yet this good Saint was so farre from defending any opinion against the knowne truth that on the contrarie he preferreth the interpretation of b August contr Cresc Grammat l. 1. c. 32. l. 2. c. 32. p. mihi 218. 241. Cresconius a Grammarian before St. Cyprian the Martyr because it seemed to him more probable and agreeable to the truth CHAP. VI. The summe of his Answer to my Sixth Section THe Knight saith he seemes to acknowledge that he cannot assigne the time and persons when and by whom the errors of the Roman Church came in Good Physitians use to enquire of the causes effects and other circumstances and upon the circumstance dependeth the knowledge of the disease We pleade prescription for our doctrine from the beginning The difference betwixt Heresie and Apostasie The Church cannot fall away without some speciall note and observation The Reply Iâ is to be wondered what art and policie your Church doth use to put off the triall of her cause when it should come to hearing If we speake of a depravation of your Faith you crie out it is blasphemie If we shew your owne mens complaints for a reformation of your doctrine you say they meant a reformation onely of Discipline If we plainly prove the noveltie of your Trent Articles by comparing them with the Tenets of ancient Religion you threaten to bring an action of the Case against us for slandering and defaming of your Church except we can assigne the precise time and person when those errors came in Let us use the words of your fellow Campian Can I imagine any to be stuffed in the nose Camp Rat. 2. that being forewarned cannot quickly smell out this subtle juggling Why doe you not rather complaine of the Noveltie of our doctrine and bid us shew the time when and the Authors who first broached our two Sacraments our Communion in both kindes our Praier in a knowne tongue our spirituall presence and the like if I faile in these then say The Knight seemeth to acknowledge he cannot doe it The errors in your Church which wee complaine of are negative Articles amongst us and the proofe lies on your side If you cannot shew Apostolicall Authors for your owne doctrine must we be therefore condemned because we doe not prove the Negative Or otherwise it must needes follow by your Logick that it is the same doctrine which was once delivered to the Saints because we cannot shew the first Author of it You cannot denie that there are many particular errors in the Church whose first Authors cannot be named by you nor us and therefore will you conclude they are no errors The custome of communicating little children in the Sacrament of the Lords bodie and bloud was an error and continued long in the ancient Church yet the first Author of it was not knowne There were many did hold there was a mitigation and suspension of the punishment of the damned in hell by the suffrages of the living this error was anciently received yet the first Anthor was not knowne The opinion that all Catholike Christians how wicked soever shall in the end be saved as by fire was an ancient error but the Author is not knowne Againe Alph. contr haeres verbo Indulgentia p. mihi 354. there are many things saith your Alphonsus knowne to later writers which the Ancients were altogether ignorant of There is seldome any mention of Transubstantiation amongst the Ancients almost none of Purgatorie what marvell if it so fall out with Indulg ences that there should bee no mention of them by the Ancients If therefore such errors crept into the Church in the first and best Ages which are now condemned by your selves and us without enquiring after the time and Authors that first broached them Nay more if your points of Faith as namely Transubstantiation Purgatorie and Indulgences were altogether unknowne to the Ancients as your men confesse why should you require us to shew the first Authors of your doctrines which were utterlie unknowne to the ancient Fathers Or rather why do you not condemn them with us as you do the errors which were received for true doctrines amongst the Ancients If St. Peter were at Rome no doubt the Church received beleeved his Prophesies There shal be false Teachers among you 2 Pet. 2.1 who privily shall bring in damnable heresie If the Apostle both forewarned you and us that errors and heresies must steale in privily sensim sine sensu secretly and by degrees into the true Church and yet would not reveale the Authors of the heresies what madnesse were it in you or us to passe by those damnable Heresies or rather to pleade for them because wee cannot learne the name of the false Teachers Vincentius Lyrinensis Vincent Lyr. de haeres c. 15. who was living 400. yeeres after the Apostles time complaines that certaine in his dayes did bring in errors secretly which a man saith he cannot soone finde out nor easily condemne The Serpent hides himselfe as much as hee can saith Tertullian and sheweth his chiefe skill in wreathing himselfe into folds Tertull.
advers Valent. c. 3. and in thrusting himselfe into dark and blinde holes Such is the nature of false teachers they seeke nothing more saith the same Author than to hide that which they preach Idem c. 1. if yet they may be said to preach that they hide But good Physicians say you use to enquire of the causes effects and circumstances Pag. 73. for upon these circumstances dependeth the knowledge whether it be a disease or no. It is most true that Physicians will enquire of the causes of the disease but will they deny the Patient to be sicke or refuse to minister Physicke to him unlesse he tell them precisely how or when he first tooke his disease or infection For this is our case and the point in question touching a reformation Neither doth the knowledge of the disease of the body depend upon the circumstances of time place and person I thinke you never read such Aphorismes either in Gallen or Hyppocrates neither doth your knowledge of errors and heresie in your Church depend on the circumstances of time place and persons For some Authors at the same time and in the same place might have broached truth when another set his heresie abroach as namely Saint Austin precisely in the time and place delivered the Orthodox Doctrine of grace when and where Pelagius spread his heresie From your Rules of Physicke you returne to the Rules of Divinity and tell us from Saint Austin that * Quod universa tenet Ecclesia nec Conciliis institutum sed semper retentum est non nisi authoritate Apostolicâ tradituÌ rectissimè creditur De Baptis contr Donat. l. 5. c 24. in initio Tom. 7. p. mihi 433. whatsoever the Catholike Church doth generally beleeve or practise so as there can be no time assigned when it began it is to be taken for an Apostolicall tradition This place of Austin you neither quoted in your Answer neither have you recited his words faithfully for hee speakes not of assigning the time when the Doctrine begins but whatsoever the universall Church doth hold not being ordained by Councels but hath beene ever held that is most rightly beleeved for an Apostolicall tradition This is his Tenet and this is ours but you have put in the word Catholike in your sense for universall you have added generall beleefe and practise you have thrust in these words so as no time can be assigned when it began and you have omitted the principall verb that hath been ever held which makes me suspect you omitted the citing of this place lest your fraud should be descried But I pardon you let us heare the rest P. 73. But such say you are all those things which you are pleased to call errors If this were as easily proved as spoken you should not neede to put us to the search of times and Authors for the first Founder of your Faith For if your Popish Doctrines were alwayes held by the universall Church and not ordained by Councels we should not need to looke into your Councell of Lateran for your Doctrine of Transubstantiation nor into your Councell of Constance for Communion in both kindes nor into your Councell of Florence for your seven Sacraments nor into your second Councell of Nice for your worship of Images for these and many such traditions were first ordained by Councels and were not the generall beliefe and practice of the Church Againe if the universall Church had alwayes held your Doctrines from the Apostles times why doe you your selfe confesse that your prayer in an unknowne tongue Pag. praecedenti your private Masse your halfe Communion were taught otherwise in the primitive Churches Nay if they be Apostolicall how comes it that they are flat contrary to the Doctrine of the Apostles And thus much of your two rules of Physicke and Divinity let us he are the rest of your authorities Tertullian say you hath this Rule for discerning heresie from truth Tertul. praescrip 31. p. mihi 78. That which goeth before is truth and that which commeth after is errour This Rule is most true but these words you cite by the halves for hee saith expresly Id autem extraneum falsum quod sit posterius immissum Id Dominicum verum quod sit prius traditum That was first delivered which was true and came from the God of truth and this was the Doctrine of Christ and his Apostles for that which commeth after saith he is sarre different where hee shewes likewise in these words following that after Christs time and in the dayes of the Apostles there might be heresies Ut aliquem ex Apostolicis viris qui tamen cum illis persever averint habent authorem Ibid. for the mystery of iniquitie began then to worke and therefore hee will not have it enough to derive a Doctrine from a man which lived with the Apostles unlesse it can be proved that he continued with them and the reason as I conceive was given by Nicephorus After the sacred company of the Apostles was come to an end Niceph. l. 3. c. 16. and that their generation was wholly spent which had heard with their eares the heavenly wisdome of the Sonne of God then that conspiracie of detestable errour through the deceipt of such as delivered strange Doctrine tooke rooting and because that none of the Apostles survived they published boldly with all might possible the doctrine of falshood and impugned the manifest and knowne truth But wee plead say you prescription from the beginning It is not sufficient to plead it you must prove it The Mahometists at this day assume the name of Saracens as your men doe the name of Catholikes as if they came from Sara the free woman Abrahams true and lawfull wife when in truth they tooke their first beginning from Agar the bond-woman neither can there be any prescription against the ancient Records and Evidences of the Word written by Christ and his Apostles Indeed you have found a right and easie way to claime a prescription from the time of the Apostles for you have razed many prime Evidences of the Fathers for the first 800. yeeres which make for our Doctrine and you have proscribed many learned Authors and their Records as I have shewed before for the last 800. yeeres which testified against your errors And now I come to your Churches apostacie or falling from the truth which occasioned these errors Apostacie say you is a defection or forsaking of the Name of Christ and profession of Christianity as all men understand it I shewed in this Section that in the primitive Church when any heresie did arise that indangered the foundation such as was the heresie of the Arrians of the Pelagians and the like the Authors were observed the times were knowne the place was pointed at and forthwith letters of Premonition were sent to all the sound members of the Catholike Church by which publike advertisement the steale-truth
he hath wrote a Tract De haeresi communicandi sub utrâque specie And to passe by all the Trent Articles the deniall of all or any of which makes a man an Heretike your infallible Pope Nicholas proclaimeth Qui Romanae Ecclesiae privilegium auferre conatur hicproculdubio labitur in haeresin that whosoever goeth about to abrogate the priviledges of the Church of Rome he is no doubt an Heretike If the deniall of all or any of these make an Heretike there is no doubt all the Reformed Churches stand guilty of that capitall crime by the law of your Church and your Popes doome Yet let me tell you the Scriptures were translated into all Languages in the Primitive times and Christ and his Apostles did communicate in both kindes and your first foure generall Councels did bound and limit those privile dges of the Church of Rome which are now extended into all parts of the Christian world and were all these Heretikes If you call this Heresie goe on and fill up the measure of your wrath untill the time come that Christ and his Saints acquit us or condemne us of that imputation In the meane time you shall doe well to reflect upon your selfe and consider rather the case at this day betwixt the Sorbonists and the Jesuites which meerely toucheth your owne particular Aurcl in vindiciis pag. 383. Idem in libro sine titulo Hermannus Laemelius that is to say John Floyd termes the propositions of the Parisians destructive to the Church and hereticall on the other side they accuse him of heresie Hadier in ad mâait ad Lect. p. 8. 9. 16. 24. blasphemie and impietie and the like Are you all members of one Church under one head the Pope and are your propositions different and hereticall on both sides and must I say that you and the rest have the name of heresie onely by the condemnation of the Church But you are sure the Pope will not condemne his owne members and without his judgment they are but words of course or at best but course phrases delivered in heate against an adversary For say you The Fathers did forbeare absolutely to condemne things for heresies till they had acquainted the Bishop of Rome and had his judgement as is cleere by St. Cyrill of Alexandria in the case of Nestorius Neither doe we denie that in this and the like case the Bishop of Rome ought to be acquainted For Nestorius was Patriarch of Constantinople and therefore good reason the Bishop of Rome as another Patriarch should be acquainted with it that hee might be judged by his Peeres but in other cases they sent Letters without acquainting the Bishop of Rome neither ought you to require or expect that we should produce any such letters of premonition against the points of Trent doctrine for which we now condemne you because those errors which then began to spring in the Church by custome and pertinacies became heresies in many ages after About that time and in that very Age St. Austin condemned the superstition of some in worshipping Sepulchers and Images which at this day is an Article of your Faith but you answer that he condemned the heathenish and superstitious worship of dead perhaps wicked mens tombs and pictures and for a solution of this place you referre me to Bellarmine It seems you could give me no satisfactory answer of your own and therefore you returne me to your Cardinal but I wonder why you do not recite his answer to this place I conceived that you were ashamed of it or there was some misprision that made you conceale it thereupon I have perused it and find that he hath falsified both the place and meaning of it As for instance whereas Austin saith Aug. de moribus Eccles âa thot l. 1.6.34 p. mihi 774. ToÌ 1. Bell. de Reliquiis Sanct. l. 2. c. 4. I know many worshippers of tombes and pictures your Cardinall leaves out the word pistures and saith I know many worshippers of tombes and for his full solution he subjoyneth Austin wrote this in the beginning of his first conversion Again he cites another place of S. Austan as it were to illustrate the former without any respect or mention of the worshippers of pictures and tells us Ibid. that the Emperour did pray at the Sepulcher of St. Peter yet proves not the point in question that he did worship the Sepulcher it selfe for who doubts but that we also may worship God at St. Peters shrine and yet not wo ship the shrine it selfe Nay hee goeth on further and she wes that Austin did not reprehend Chrysostome and Hierome but the ignorant sort of people for Chrysostome saith Let us adore the Tombes of Martyrs when as there are no such words in Chrysostome but rather Let us adorne them Ut Tumulos Martyrum de center cur ari Chrys And whereas he saith further that Hierome wisheth Marcella a Ladie to worship the ashes of the Prophets in Bethlem so likewise I say he doth wish her in the same place to lick their dust and therefore it was not to be understood as a thing spoken properly but figuratively For elsewhere he saith expresly against Vigilantius I say not we worship not nor adore thereliques of Martyrs but neither the Sunne nor the Moone nor Angels nor Archangels nor Cherubin nor Seraphin Neither did S. Austin speak as you say of the heathenish and superstitious worshipping of wicked mens Tombes Andr. resp ad Card. Bell. pag. mihi 49. but of them which in ipsa vera Religione in true Religion were worshippers of pictures and shrines For he shewes that his owne mother Monica did usually bring to the shrines of Saints certaine Bread and Wine August Confes l. 6. c. 2. and other provision but because the celebrating after the manner of the memory of the dead did very much resemble the superstition of the heathen she was forbidden it by St. Ambrose which forbidding saith he shee did so piously and obediently embrace as that my selfe did wonder to see her made with such ease rather a condemner of her owne ancient custome than a questioner of the present prohibition For a conclusion whereas you would excuse it that St. Austin did condemne onely the superstitious worship of wicked mens Tombes your men are likewise guiltie of the same worship For your owne Cardinall will tell you Bell. de Sanct. Beat. l. 1. c. 7. that the people of the Roman Church did for a long time celebrate Sulpitius for a Martyr who afterwards did appeare and told them that he had heene a theefe and was damned Idem ibid. And that Alexander the third reprehended certaine men for worshipping one as a Martyr that was killed in his drunkennesse and thus to use your owne words for these I send you backe againe to Bellarmine for an answer I come to the rest of your answers First I cited out of Ferus that Masses Monasteries Ceremonies
Feasts Images are otherwise now used than they were in the beginning I produced likewise Polydore Virgil Erasmus Scotus Agrippa Cassander Gregorie de Valentia in severall points against your new doctrine now let us heare your severall answers to them Touching Ferus he is a Frier say you in your Bookes but not in ours save onely in the Roman Index of forbidden Bookes Touching Polydore he saith as the Knight telleth us and as much as any Heretike can say but it booteth not for his Booke is forbidden Touching Erasmus he is no Authour for us to answer he is branded in the Roman Index Touching Scotus you neither condemne him nor answer him he tells you plainly that Transubstantiation was not received for a point of Faith till the Councell of Lateran above 1200. yeares after Christ but of this passage Ne gry quidem And yet you might have answered with Bellarmine this opinion of his is no way to be allowed or with Gregorie de Valentia for this saying he ought to be corrected As touching Agrippa and Cassander you will not vouchsafe them an answere but reject them inter damnatos authores as men to be cast out of your Synagogue Lastly touching Gregorie de Valentia you sav his authoritie doth make against the Knight why else should he corrupt and mangle it But whether I or you have corrupted it let the Reader judge my words were these The Communion in one kind when it got first footing in the Church minimè constat it doth not appeare saith Greg de Valentia Youto prove my corruption cite the words in this manner When that custome began in some Churches it appeareth not but that there hath been some use of one kind ever from the beginning I shewed before so Valentia and thus you But in truth this is none of Valentia's own period but one of your owne making who cunningly joyne the latter words which follow in Valentia 4. or 5. lines after to the former with a But which is none of Valentia's the former part of the period is notably mangled by you For thus it stands When that custome began in some Churches Augustana Confessio it appeares not as is acknowledged by the Augustane Confession Now in that Confession the words are these The custome of both kindes remained long in the Church neither doth it appeare when or by what Author it was changed so that he plainly speaketh of the Church in general sheweth the corruption here pretended by M. Floyd to be but a cavill viz. That Valentia saith this not of the Church in generall but of some particular Churches Thus either you blot prohibit all Authors that make forus although they be members of your own Church or else you vouch safethem no answer or else you quarrell without any just occasion offred and this wil prove an easie way for the weakest scholar in your Church to answer all that can be produced against your faith and doctrine Now as the Reader hath heard your answer in the generall so let him see your exceptions to the particulars For whereas I said with St. Paul Forbidding of marriage is a doctrine of Devils you answer as if you were angrie with St. Paul that he hath been answered more often than the Knight hath fingers and toes and it seems for that reason you will vouch safe him no answer at all This puts me in minde of the saying of Ludovicus Vives amember of your owne Church who assures us Lud. Vives de Civ Dei l. 13. c. 24. If St. Paul were living in these dayes he would be held either a mad man or an heretike And since you will not resolve me of St. Pauls meaning in that place I will appeale to St. Bernard an Abbot who was restrained from marriage by the law of your Church who speaking of that restraint gives us the true sense and exposition of St. Paul in these words All heresies have an heretike for their founder the Maniches had Manes Bernard in Cant. Serm. 66. the Sabellians had Sabellicus the Arrians had Arrius c. so that we know the Authors of those plagues but by what name will you terme the Author of those that forbid marriage Surely it is not of man or by man and far be it from the spirit-of God but it is foretold by the Apostle St. Paul to be the fraud doctrine of devils But marriage fay you is not a thing evil in it selfe but because it lesse agreeth with the holinesse which is required for the exercise of Priestly function I pray then what thinke you of a concubine Doth companie with her better agree for exercise of your sunction than with a wife Sure I am this is the doctrine of your Church nay more your Pope Siricius would inferre by authoritie of Scripture that martiage is unholy in it selfe for he cites the Text for it They that live in the flesh cannot please God Qui in carne sunt Deoplacere non possunt Now I pray you what difference is there betwixt the ancient heretikes and the members of your Church The Montanists the Tatiani the Eucratitae did not prohibite marriage to all no more than you doe but onely to their perfecti as being a disparagement to their perfect estate or as you interpret not agreeing to the holines of Priesthood Again whereas I proved out of Polydore that the marriage of Priests was not altogether forbidden till the time of Gregorie the 7. that is to say above a thousand yeares after Christ you answer that which Polydore cites is most evidently false as appeareth particularly by a Canon of the first Councell of Nice and the second Councell of Carthage Now if Polydore were mistaken it concernes not me for I cited him truly and he is a member of your Church but the truth is you are much mistaken touching those two Councels Sozom. l. 1. c. 22. For the Councell of Nice saith Sozomen commended Paphnutius judgement and touching this matter of mariage made to decree an all but left it to each mans owne will without any force of necessity And the Councell of Carthage forbiddeth not marriage in Priests but commandeth abstinence from marriage rites for a certaine time as St. Paul doth that they may more freely give themselves to prayer and the offices of their sacred function Which plainly shewes that both Priests were married in those dayes and consequently that those two Councels make flatly against you But Marius say you cannot find the beginning of this prohibition Polydore findeth it and yet both make for the Knights purpose And without doubt they doe for they contradict not one the other Polydore speaketh of publike absolute and reall prohibition Marius of the first condemning it in any Priest and these confessions may well stand together CHAP. VII The summe of his Answer to Sect. 7. 1. That the imputations of ancient Haeresies are false 2. That Succession besides Antiquity importeth continuance and perpetuity
without intermission 3. That Protestants have no shaddow of succession in person or doctrine 4. That Papists have a most cleare personall succession being able to shew 200. and odde Popes succeeding the other in place and office 5. That personall succession is a firme argument of succession in faith IT is my promise in my seventh Section to shew a descent of both Religions as namely that the Romish faith was derived from antient Haeretiks and the Protestant faith was drawne downe from Christ and his Apostles But say you It is one thing to prove a thing to have beene anciently taught another to have beene successively taught It is true Antiquity and Succession differ neither did I undertake to prove that those Haeretikes or your Church had a perpetuall succession in person and doctrine but for the truths sake I have acknowledged the antiquity of your Trent faith although descended from ancient Haeretikes and I made the first instance in Latin Service and prayer in a strange tongue brought in by Pope Vitolian as is witnessed by Wolphius but you cry out It is a most strange absurdity to averre fuch a knowne falsehood upon no other authority pag. 87. then a professed Haeretike And is he an Haeretike that speaketh the truth of your Religion What say you to your prime Champion Mr. Harding He saith expresly About nine hundred yeares past it is certaine the people in some Countries had their service in an unknowne tongue Iuel in his 3. Article Divis 1. as it shall be proved of our owne Country of England Now observe the difference Wolphius said the Latin Service came in after Christ about the yeare 666. Mr. Harding who wrote these 67. yeares since as appeares by Bishop Iuels Epistle tells us it came in 900. yeares past compute Wolphius 666. with Mr. Hardings time of 967. and you shall finde that they agree about one and the same time and therefore it was neither absurd nor false which Wolphius uttered Neither doe you disprove the reason of Wolphius but you make a quâere upon his assertion During his 600. and odd yeares what other Lyturgies were there in the Latin Church but Latin And I may aswell say what were there in the Greeke Church but Greeke But this demand maketh against your Service in an unknowne tongue not against Wolphius who affirmeth not that the Latin Service was not in the Latin Church before the yeare 666. but that the Pope obtruded it upon all Churches even there where the Latin was not understood as in England saith Mr. Harding and elsewhere For Origen tells us before that time Orig contrd Celsum lib. 8. the Greekes call upon God in the Greeke tongue and the Latins in the Latin tongue and all severall Nations pray unto God and praise him in their owne natur all and mother tongues for he that is the Lord of all tongues heareth men praying in all tongues none otherwise then if it were one voice pronounced by divers tongues for God that ruleth the whole world is not as some one man that hath gotten the Greeke or Latin and knoweth none-other The ancient Primitive Churches therefore taught the Doctrine in a knowne tongue agreeable to the profession at this day But the truth is A. 30.666 A. 1.666 T. 300.666 E. 5.666 I. 10.666 N. 50.666 O. 70.666 M. 200.666 Sed ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã nomen sexcentinum sexagiata sex numeruÌ habens valde verisimile est quonlam verissimum nomen hobet vocabulum Latini enim sunt qui nunc regnaÌt sed non in hoc nos gloriabimur Irenae l 5. cap 25. p mihi 355. the Latin Service and the name of the Latin Church is one of the most essentiall markes of the Roman Hierarchie And I know not whether it were by conjecture or by inspiration that Irenaeus above foureteene hundred yeares agoe in the word Lateinos found out the name of Antichrist and the number of 666. The name Lateinos saith he conteining the number of six hundred sixty six is very likely because the truest kingdome hath that name for they are the Latines that now raigne but saith he we will not glory in this You proceede to the Haeretikes Ossem and you say first I am notably mistaken in placing them towards the Apostles time and withall you have read the Chapter there twice over and the second time more attentively then the first and yet you find not any such word so cited by mee First Trajan Anno 100. Bel. de script Eccles pag. mihi this Sect continued till Trajans time not an hundred yeares after the Apostles and therefore it was no errour in me to place them towards the Apostles time and if you please to peruse the place a third time with your Spectacles you shall find these words ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã Epiph heres 19 Nemo quaerat interpretationem sed solum in oratione haec dicat and there hee repeats a Prayer which if you peruse the Greeke text is more expresse Let no man inquire after the meaning only in his Prayer Let him say such words viz. such Hebrew words which Epiphanius there setteth downe Are not these Heretikes thinke you neere kinne to them who say Heare Latine Masse and say after the Priest it mattereth not whether you understand what hee saith or not From Epiphanius you flie to Saint Ambrose and there you make a great complaint that I put in words of my owne in the same Character with Saint Ambrose which are none of his as namely There were certaine Iewes amongst the Graecians Ambr. in 1 Cor. 14. as namely the Corinthians who did celebrate the Divine Service and Sacraments which the common people understood not I confesse ingenuously it is an errour in the print and I shall willingly alter the letter but not the words at the next impression But I confidently professe it is agreeable to the true sense and meaning of the Author and the strength of the argument is not in the words but in the sense and therfore I may truly answer you with S. Austine What folly is it to contend about words Aug. Ep. 174. when there is the certainty of the thing it selfe It cannot be denied that Ambrose taxeth the Hebrewes who amongst the Corinthians in Tractatibus oblationibus used sometimes the Syriack and sometimes the Hebrew tongue which without doubt the Greeks understood not And therefore in his Commentarie on this place hee gives the Hebrew to understand If you meet together to edifie the Church Ambr. in 1 Cor. 14. those things must be delivered which the hearers understand for to what purpose or profit is it that any one speake a tongue which hee himselfe onely understands and whereof hee that heareth can reape no fruit And a little after The Apostle saith I had rather speake five words in the Church according to the Law that I may edifie others than any long and large discourse in obscuritie Againe by
Oblationibus which you interpret Offrings Saint Ambrose cannot meane the peoples gifts or offrings for there was no need of any speech much lesse a long speech at these offrings It must therefore follow that either he meanes the celebration of the Sacrament or some spirituall sacrifices of Praise and Thanksgiving You proceed from one heresie to another viz from your unknown Service to your Transubstantiation This Doctrine I shewed had his descent from the Heretikes Helcesaitae from Marcus from the Capernaites Touching the Helcesaitae you say It is an hereticall fable for those Heretikes make two Christs pag. 92. wee acknowledge but one and the same both in heaven and in the consecrated Host It is true this particular Instance is cited amongst the Tables of Theodoret but yet you have affinitie with their Tenets as neere as cosen Germans once removed For as you acknowledge but one Christ in the heavens and in the Host no more did those Heretikes in words for they rehearsed the Apostles Creed Et in Iesum Christum and not in Christos and as they made a two-fold Christ one in heaven another in earth so likewise you teach that Christ in the Sacrament here on earth is invisible and indivisible but in heaven at the same time visible and with dimensions of quantitie and distinctions of Organs And what is this but consequently to make two Christs or at least to make contradictories true at the same time of one and the same Christ in respect of his humane nature to be visible and invisible Touching Marcus the Heretike you say Hee changed the colour but you teach that the colour and accidents remaine and the substance is changed It is true and your opinion in this is more absurd than that of Marcus for hee changed the Colour to make the people beleeve it was true blood and you make them beleeve it is blood when there is neither tast nor colour of blood Lastly touching the Capernaites you deny there is any likenesse of Doctrine For say you the Capernaites thought they should eate Christs body piece-meale but wee receive Christ whole and entire not in the forme and shape of flesh but of bread c. But I pray which of the Evangelists ever charged them with any such conceit The truth is they understood the words of Christ as you doe in a grosse and carnall manner and therfore Christ in reproving them saith not Flesh eaten piece-meale profiteth nothing but absolutely The flesh profiteth nothing As touching your eating of Christ whole and intire it is all one with their eating of him by piece-meale for there may be many differences in eating but all eating the flesh of Christ with teeth and jawes is Caperniticall But you neither see nor taste the flesh of Christ which they dream'd they should for you receive it Not say you in the forme of flesh but of bread I will returne you an Answer from a learned Divine on our side B. Bilson in the difference between Christ subject and unchristian Rebellion pag. 748. You chaw the flesh of Christ actually with your teeth and swallow the same downe your throats and these be proper actions and right instruments of externall and Caperniticall eating your eyes and your taste be not else blind men and such as by reason of Sicknesse can taste nothing by your Divinitie can eate nothing Since then you concurre with the Capernaites in eating and swallowing notwithstanding you vary from them in sight and taste yet your opinion establisheth a corporall eating of Christs flesh and a perverting of the meaning of Christs words no lesse than theirs did Let mee paralell them together with the most favorable construction I can yet your Church must have her Antiquitie and descent from those Capernaites For suppose the Capernaites did beleeve that Christ would kill himselfe and give his body to be eaten yet the Church of Rome teacheth that Christ did eate his owne flesh a thing no lesse barbarous being meant litterally than to kill himselfe Admit the Capernaites did beleeve that Christ would give his flesh to be mangled by pieces or by halves yet your Churches opinion is no lesse cruell to beleeve that in the Sacrament Christs flesh is swallowed up whole at one morsell Lastly let it be granted that the Capernaites did believe that Christs flesh should be eaten when hee was dead yet the opinion of the Romanists is more brutish to imagine his flesh to be eaten when he was alive being a higher degree of crueltie to devoure men alive Apertissimi loqâimur corpus Christi veri à nobis attrectari manducan circumgestari dentibus atteri sensibiliter sacrificari non minâââ quà m ante consecrationem panis Alanus lib. 3. de Euchar. cap. 37. than when they are dead Sure I am they both agree in this that according to the letter they should eate the flesh of Christ Orally Corporally and Substantially they both agree in the sensible handling of his body in devouring him with the mouth and in grinding him with the teeth Alanus the Romanist professeth openly in the name of the Church Apertissimi loquimur Wee affirme plainly the body of Christ is truly handled of us carried about ground with the teeth and sensibly sacrificed Long before him Pope Nicholas confirmed this doctrine in a Councell at Rome and taught it for a lesson to Berengarius Verum Corpus Domini nostii Iesu Christi sensuclitèr non solum in Sacramento sed in veritate manibus Sacerdotum tractari frangi ac fideliùm dentibus atteri Grat. de con secr d. 2. c. 4.2 Ego Berengarius to let him know the great difference betwixt Papist and Protestant in the same Church I beleeve that the body of our Lord Iosus is sensibly and in very deede touched with the hands of the Priest and broken and rent and ground with the teeth of the faithfull This confession stands a Record in the Roman Decrees and unlesse you mince the words strangely you must needs acknowledge that you eate the flesh of Christ peice-meale and then you sympathize in all things with your first Parents the Capernaites From Transubstantiation you proceede to the Popes Supiemacy wherein you say pag. 93. I am mistaken in saying that Phocas gave that authority to the Bishop of Constantinople It is true this is a mistake of the Printer but no corruption Rogatu Bonifacij phocas constituit sedem Romanae Apostolicae Ecclesie caput esse omnium Ecclesiarum nam anteà Constantinopolitana Ecclesia se scribebat primam omnium Vsperg in Phoc. fol. mihi and in the last Impression which you should have taken you shall finde Rome for Constantinople and this you might well understand to be an error in the print because my purpose was to shew a descent of the Bishop of Romes Supremacy not of the Bishop of Constantinople And this authority stands good against you notwithstanding all your exceptions viz. that the Pope of Rome and that
the Lords blood a Sacrilegious sleight Against these Heretikes also wrote another Bishop of Rome in the same age Grat. de Consecrat Dist 2. Comperimus namely Pope Gelasius We have intelligence saith hee that certaine men receiving only a portion of the sanctified Body abstain from the Cup of the sacred blood who for that it appeareth they be intangled with I know not what superstition let them either receive the whole Sacraments or be driven from the whole because the dividing and parting of one and the same mystery cannot be without grievous Sacrilege What thinke you of your halfe Communion you that brag so much of the antiquitie of your Church The Manichees without doubt were the first Authors of your Doctrine and by the suffrages of two infallible Popes your Sacrament is sacrilegious But say you as at that time the Church forbad the use of one kind so now it forbiddeth the use of both and may againe give way when it shall seeme convenient for the use of both kinds Thus you It seemes you make no scruple to thwart the Institution of Christ nor the Custom of the Ancient Church but because in this point your Church is branded with Sacrilege I thinke indeed you could be content to joyne with the Protestants and restore the Cup to the Lay-people but I would gladly know how it can be done Is not your Communion in one kind published and decreed by your Pope and Councell for an Article of Faith And is it in your Churches power to alter and dispense with Articles of Faith at her pleasure Bulla Pij 4 Act. 6. Concil Trid Sess 13 Surely this Confession proves that your Church can create new Articles of Beleefe which elsewhere you deny or else this is no Article of Faith being contrary to the practise of the first and best ages and by consequent your infallible Pope and Councell are guilty of Error and Sacrilege in a high degree For a conclusioÌ of this point you say the words Drinke yee all of this from whence we draw our succession in Doctrine were spoken to the Apostles and in them to Priests not to the Laitie By this reason who seeth not but you may aswell take the Bread from the Lay people as the Cup for that also was given onely to the Apostles but if the Cup were proper for the Priests onely why doe you deny it to your Non-conficient Priests doe they stand in the place of Lay people Nay more were not all Non-conficients at the time of Christs Institution what strange shifts and evasions hath your Church to uphold the Novelty of your faith I will give you but one testimony of Antiquity There is saith St. Chrysostome where the Priests differ nothing from the people Chrys 18. in 2. Corinth as when we must receive the dreadfull mysteries for it is not here as it was in the old Law where the Priest eates one part and the people another neither was it lawfull for the people to be partaker of those things of which the Priest was but now it is not so but rather one Body is proposed to all and one Cup to all To passe by innumerable authorities of the Ancients which you know are full in our behalfe I will shut up this haereticall point of doctrine for such is the foundation of it with a testimony of your owne side Gerard. Lorichius de Missa publica proroganda p. mihi There are some false Catholikes that feare not to stop the Reformation of the Church what they can these spare no blasphemy lest that other part of the Sacrament should be restored to the Lay people for say they Christ spake drinke yee all of this onely to the Apostles but the words of the Masse be these Take and eate yee all of this Here I would know of them whether this were spoken onely to the Apostles then must lay men abstaine likewise from the Element of bread which to say is an haeresie yea a pestilent and detestable blasphemy It is therefore consequent that both these words Eate yee Drinke yee were spoken to the whole Church Thus your Ancient Bishop of Rome termed your halfe Communion a Sacriledge and this latter Author of your owne termes it an haeresie and a pestilent Blasphemy and this may serve to prove your descent from the Haeretikes the Manichees in this point From your halfe Communion you proceede to your Invocation of Angels which I derived from the Haeretikes Angelici and for answer to them you say they were Haeretikes swarving from the rule of the Catholike faith by excesse that is honouring Angels more then their due And this is your very case for you doe not onely honour them but religiously worship them and call upon them I will compare your worship with theirs and let the Reader judge if you be not the children of those haereticall Authors called Angelici St. Austin saith Angelici in Angelorum cultu inclinati Aug. de haeres c. 35. Angelici vocati quia Angelos colunt Isid Orig in l. 8. c. 5. Rhem. Annot. in Apoc. 19. Sect. 4. that those haeretikes were inclined to the worship of Angels or as Isidore noteth they were called Angelici because they did worship Angels The one saith they were but inclined to worship the other saith they did worship On the other side you teach that there is a religious reverence honour and adoration which is not to be denied to Angels nay more you make it a point of Faith and have decreed that the Saints and Angels reigning with Christ are to be worshipped and prayed unto Art 8. in Bulla Pij 4. Thus whereas the ancient Haeretikes were but inclined to adoration your men have made it a doctrinall determination flatly to adore them and whereas they did worship them with a religious honour as a custome learned from the Heathen Philosophers you receive it as a Dogmaticall resolution of your Faith delivered by your Trent Fathers and surely in this if there be any excesse in the worship it is in your selves Againe those Haeretikes learned their lesson from the Gentiles For Celsus the Philosopher had said of the Angels Orig. lib. 8. contrà Celsum that they belong to God and in that respect we are to put our trust in them and make Oblations to them according to the Lawes and pray unto them that they may be favourable untous And is not this your very doctrine and yet these men say you swerve from the rule of the Catholike faith Observe then what was the Chatholike doctrine of those times Origen returnes his answer in the name of all true beleevers Idem Ibid. Away with Celsus councell saying that we must pray to Angels and let us not so much as afford any little audience to it Againe St. Chrysostome was living in the fourth age when Apostrophes began to be used to Saints and Angels yet hee telleth us it was the Devills doing to draw men unto the
calling upon Angels These saith hee be the inchantments of the Devils though he be an Angell Chrys in 1. Cor. Homil. 1. though an Archangell though they be Cherubins endure it not For neither will those powers themselves admit it but reject it when they see their Lord dishonored I have favoured thee saith he and have said call upon me and dost thou dishonour him with calling upon others This agrees with the doctrine of Theodoret shewing Theod. in Coloss 3. that the Synod of Laodicea following that rule made a Law that they should not pray unto Angels nor forsake our Lord Iesus Christ and accordingly they decreed it with a curse Christians ought not to forsake the Church of God and depart aside Concil Lao. dic Can. 35. Anno 364. and invocate Angels and make meetings which are things forbidden If any man therefore be found to give himselfe to this priuie Idolatry let him be accursed Merlin Edit 1530. fol. 68. Crab Edit 1538. fol. 216. This Canon makes so plainely against your Church doctrine that both Merlin and Crabbe as I have shewed have turned the word Angelos into Angulos and so by transposition of a letter say we must not leave the Church of God and have recourse to Angles or corners Heiron Epist ad Riparium And St. Heirom at the same time opposed Vigilantius and professeth of himselfe and the Catholike Christians of his time Wee doe not adore or worship the Reliques of Martyrs no nor the Sunne nor Moone nor Angels nor Archangels nor Cherubins nor Se raphins nor any name that is named in this world or in the world to come lest we should serve the creature rather then the Creator who is blessed for ever You see then by these few observations that you are righth descended from the Haeretikes in this point and accordingly you have swerved with them from the Catholike faith by excesse Wherefore I will conclude this Invocation with that memorable passage of St. Austin August lib. Confess 10. c. 42. Whom should I finde that might reconcile me unto thee should I have gone unto the Angels with what prayer with what Sacraments Many endeavouring to returne unto thee and not being able to doe it by themselves as I heare have tried these things and have fallen into the desire of curious visions and were accounted worthy of illusions From your Angell-like or Angelicall predecessors you proceede to the Cathari or Puritans These were Novations say you who out of pride and selfe conceits as if they were more cleane and holy did condemne Catholikes And doe not your Cloister Monkes so conceive of themselves who beleeve they doe more then God commanded and that they can supererrogate and doe they not condemne the Reformed Catholikes as the Novatians did To come neerer to you is not the proud generation of Merit-mongers derived from the Catharists Epiph. haeres 59. But saith Epiphanius whilst these men call themselves Puritans by this very ground they prove themselves to be impure for whosoever pronounceth himselfe to be pure doth therein absolutely condemne himselfe to be impure Againe touching your Predecessors who for bad Marriage I cited out of Epiphanius and St. Austin the Haeretikes Tatiani and the Manichees But say you That they did disallow it especially in Priests I doe not finde it in Epiphanius It is true neither did I cite him for it but I cited Saint Austin in the Margent which you wittingly omitted Aug. ep 74. Yet both Authors declare the Haeretikes to bee founders of your doctrine Continentiam viro hic praedicat nuptias autem scortationem corruptionem putat Epiph. haeres 46. 47. p. mihi 93.95 Auditores eorum ex carnibus vescuntur si voluerint uxores habent quorum nihil faciunt qui vocantur electi Aug. ep 74. Qui cum uxore exercent carnale commercium in carne sunt Deo placere non pessunt sancti esse non possunt Dist 82. cap. Proposuisti Epiphanius shewes that the Tatiani had two proper markes of your Church for their first Leader Tatianus accounted of Marriage as whoredome and corruption and forbad the eating of meates St. Austin likewise tells us that the Manichees did permit their hearers to eate flesh to use husbandry and to marry wives but those which were called Elect did use none of those things Now if those Elect were not the hearers they must needs be their Teachers and consequently their Priests And thus you have two forts of Haeretikes to defend your Monasticke life the one viz. the Tatiani who agree with Pope Innocent saying They which live in the flesh cannot please God neither can they be holy The other viz. the Manichees who permit Marriage to all but to their Priests Lastly touching the Collyridian Haeretikes so called from the Collyrides or cakes which certaine women used to offer to the blessed Virgin I say againe they were your first Leaders and particularly for this reason which you alledge to excuse your selves Because they did exceede the measure of honor due to our blessed Lady Pag. 99. And as touching the Antidico-Marianitae with which haeresie you charge us they were such who out of malice to the blessed Virgin being puffed up with pride or envy saith Epiphanius would possesse men Epiph. haeres 78 p. mihi 244. that after the birth of our Saviour Ioseph knew Marie which never Protestant to my knowledge ever taught or thought Therefore by way of prevention you put this as a scandall upon our Church to excuse your owne But the truth is we ascribe honour of preheminence unto that glorious person before all other vessells of blessednesse we proclaime it with the Angel Gabriel that she was highly favoured and blessed among women Luke 1.28 but withall we testifie with Epiphanius Christ said unto her woman what have I to doe with thee my hower is not yet come lest any man should thinke our Lady was of greater excellency Epiph. l. 3. haeres 79. contr Collyridianos he called her woman as it were prophecying of the kinds and sects of haeresies that were to come into the world lest any man having too great an opinion of that Holy Saint should fall into this haeresie and into the dotage of the same And as touching her perpetuall virginity that golden saying of St. Hierome against Helvidius we unfainedly professe and testifie with heart and voice Hleron contrà Helvidium That God was borne of a Virgin we beleeve because we reade it That Mary had Matrimoniall company with her husband after her delivery we doe not beleeve because we reade it not And to make good my assertion that you tread in the steps of those haeretikes which did exceede the measure of honor due unto our Lady first looke upon Epiphanius who opposeth this haeresie he tells us Although Mary be beautifull Epiph. l. 3. haeres 79. and holy and honourable yet is shee not to be
adored For these women worshipping St. Mary renew againe the Sacrifice of Wine mingled in the honour of the Goddesse Fortune and prepare a Table for the Devill and not for God as it is written in the Scriptures Their women boult flower and their children gather sticks to make fine Cakes in the honour of the Queene of Heaven Therefore let such women be rebuked by the Prophet Ieremie and let them no more trouble the world and let them not say we worship the Queene of Heaven Here we see the words which were spoken of the Heathenish Idolls were applied by Epiphanius unto the Mother of Christ not to deface the blessed Virgin but to declare the fond errors of the Haeretikes Now let us compare this doctrine with yours Bernardinus de Busto Adornamentum regni terreni est quod habeat Regem Reginam c. Bernard de Busto part 9. Serm 2. Bb. Vshers answer to a shalling p. mihi 437. who was living almost 200. yeares since tells us That it is for an ornament of an earthly Kingdome that it should have both a King and a Queene and therefore when any King hath not a wife his subjects often request him to take one Hereupon the eternall King and Omnipotent Emperour minding to adorne the Kingdome of Heaven above did frame the Blessed Virgin to the end that he might make her the Lady and Empresse of his Kingdome and Empire that the Prophecy of David may be verified saying unto her in the Psalme upon thy right hand did sit the Queene in clothing of Gold He tells us further that your Pope Sixtus the fourth granted an Indulgence of twelve thousand yeares for every time that a man in the state of grace should repeate this short Salutation of the Virgin Haile most holy Mary the Mother of God the Queene of Heaven the Gate of Paradise the Lady of the world thou art a singular and pâre Virgin thou didst receive Christ without sinne thou didst beare the Creator and Saviour of the world Deliver mee from all evill and pray for my sinnes Amen Looke upon Gregory the Great printed at Antwerpe Apud Iohannem Keerbergium 1615. Tom. 1. p. mihi 490. Anno 1615. and there you shall find the Miter of Pope Sylvester the first who was living Anno 314. with the picture of the blessed Virgin and Christ in her armes figured with this Motto Ave Regina Coeli Haile Queene of Heaven And this was in the same age wherein Epiphanius complaines of the womens custome in his dayes Wee worship the Queene of Heaven Lastly Bellar. in Praef. de Eccles Militante Bellarmine himselfe doth terme her Regina Coeli the Queene of Heaven which attribute is rebuked and forbidden by Hieremie saith that ancient Father and in his dayes condemned for a Heresie Constituta quippe est super omnem creaturam et quicueque Iesu curuat genu matriquoque primus supplicat filij gloriam cum matre non tam communem iâdiâo quam eandem Arnold Carnotens tract de laudibus Virginis And as touching the excessive honour which you complaine of that the Heretikes gave unto our Lady I verily beleeve if your Churches Magnificats be compared with theirs they will be found to exceed them farre For first the same Author testifies That shee is constituted over every Creature and whosoever boweth his knee unto JESVS doth fall downe also and supplicate unto his Mother so that the glory of the Son may be judged not so much to be common with the Mother as to be the very same Neither are your men contented to make her the Queene of Heaven and to make her equall to him whom she her selfe termed her Saviour and Redeemer but your Schooleman Bonaventure goes in a high straine and in one of his Orizons prescribed to her hee saith O Empresse Iure Matris impera tuo dilectissâmo filio nostro Iesu Christo Bonav Corona B. Mariae Virginis Operum Tom. 6. edit Rom. An. 1588 and our most kind Lady by the authority of a Mother command thy most beloved Son our Lord Iesus Christ or as wee may reade in the 15th Psalme of your Ladies Psalter Incline the countenance of thy Son upon us compell him by thy prayers to have mercie upon us sinners But that which is most remarkable the Psalmes of David which were wholly framed and dedicated to the honour of our Lord E tranverso are all applied to the name and honour of our Lady as for Instance Psalter Bonav edit Partsiis An. 1596. Psal 15.31.56.71.94 Preserve mee ô Lady for in thee have I put my trust Blessed are they whose hearts doe love thee ô Virgin Mary their sinnes by thee shall mercifully be washed away Have mercie upon mee ô Lady have mercie upon mee because my heart is prepared to search out thy will and in the shadow of thy wings will I rest Give the King thy Iudgements ô Lord and thy mercie to the Queene his Mother O come let us sing unto our Lady let us make a joyfull noise to Mary our Queene that brings salvation And for a conclusion Let every spirit Psal 150. or every thing that hath breath praise our Lady After all these and many such like passages of excessive honour attributed to our Lady your Bernardinus at last concludes Truly if it be lawfull to speake it thou in some respect didst greater things to God then God himselfe did to thee and to all mankind Volo ergo ego dicere quod tu ex humilitate reticuisti Tu enim folus cecinisti Quia fecit mihi magna qui potens est ego verò cano dico Quia tu fecisti majora ci qui potens est Bernardin de Bust Martial part 6. Serm. 2. memb 3. I will therefore speake that which out of thy humility thou hast past in silence For thou onely didst sing Hee that is mighty hath done to mee great things but I doe sing and say That thou hast done greater things to him that is mighty Now I appeale to your selfe and to all your fellow-Jesuites whether your Hyperdulia to the blessed Virgin be not transcendent or to use your owne words doth not exceed the measure of honour due unto our Lady And consequently whether in this particular upon your owne confession you are not descended from the Collyridian Heretikes your first parents This is so apparently true that you know no way to free your selves from the guilt of Heresie but by waving the question telling us The line should be drawne along by a continued succession from the beginning to the end whereas I told you at first I did not undertake to prove that those Heretikes or your Church had a perpetuall succession in person and doctrine but to shew How neere affinity you have with their adulterate issue For those were my very words and thereupon I concluded that you had no succession in person and doctrine but let us heare your answer This is
so false and so apparently false as that it is not to be doubted but hee that shall averre it will make no soruple of any lie how lewd soever Thus you Good words and found proofes would better become men of your profession If you affirme that you have a Lineall Succession the proofe lyes on your side and when I shall see it as plainly proved as spoken I shall readily confesse my error till then let me tell you it is not your Catalogue of Popes which you say are sold and printed at London that can make a firme agreement of succession in Faith For by that reason our Queene Elizabeth of blessed memorie succeeded Queene Mary in Faith and consequently our Faith must be good by your owne confession By that reason Ahaz and Manasses that shut up the doore of the Temple succeeded David in the Faith By that reason Pope Liberius the Arrian succeeded Iulius a Catholike Bishop in the Faith By that reason your Cardinall Poole succeeded Bishop Cranmer our Protestant Martyr in the Faith This most firme Argument therefore as you call it is but weake and infirme and accordingly it was resolved by Saint Ambrose and the ancient Fathers Ambr. de Poenit. cap. They have not the succession of Peter that want the faith of Peter In fine if for no other cause yet for this alone your succession in Faith is interrupted because you your selfe confesse that some Articles which are received as points of Faith in your Church are different from those which were received in the Primitive Churches and therefore want succession in the true doctrine And that you may yet farther know there was an interruption of the true Faith in succeeding Ages Genebr Chrone lib. 4. your owne Genebrard confesseth that there were fifty Popes succeeding one another rather Apostaticall than Apostolicall Cardinall Bellarmine in his Chronologie tels us of six and twentie Schismes in the Papacie wherein it was questionable betwixt the Popes and Antipopes who were the true successors of Peter Your Cardinall Baronius tels us that base Harlots beare all the sway at Rome Baron An. 912. and gave Bishopricks at their pleasures and intruded their Paramours into Peters chaire false Popes whose names are written in the Catalogue of Popes onely to note and designe the times It is not then your Catalogue of Popes which you so much brag of that can free you from Heresie or make good your succession in the Faith and therefore I will conclude as I first began The pedigree of the Romish Faith is drawne downe from the ancient Heretikes and the Protestant Faith from Christ and his Apostles CHAP. VIII The summe of his Answer to Sect. 8. 1. That I allege but three Authors Adrian Coster and Harding and them falsly or impertinently for three severall points of the Protestant Faith none for the universality of it in generall as the title promiseth 2. That it is not sufficient to name some in the Roman Church who held some of our opinions but that I must shew a distinct companie from the Roman making a Church 3. That it is not to purpose to shew the Antiquitie and Vniversality of those points wherin we agree with you but in those other points wherein wee disagree 4. That if it were granted the Protestant Church in former ages lay hid in the bosome of the Roman Church that proveth it to have been invisible rather than visible The Reply IN the eighth Section I assumed to prove the Antiquitie and Vniversalitie of our Religion by and with the consenting testimonies of the Romane Church you tell mee It is a bold and unlikely adventure and it is shamelesse and impudent These words be like a house full of smoake without fire but what is the occasion of all this heinous complaint Forsooth the Knight bringeth not one Author I say not one for the Vniversalitie and Antiquitie of his Church And is this so grievous an accusation Surely I thought there was none so ignorant or impudent as to denie both the Vniversalitie and Antiquitie of three Creeds two Sacraments instituted by Christ the two and twentie books of Canonicall Scriptures of the first foure Generall Councels of the Apostolike Traditions of the Ancient Liturgies of the Ordination of Priests and Deacons These are our Tenets and these were the particular Instances which I made and to bring Authors for the proofe of these as if we made a doubt of that which all true Christians did generally receive and beleeve I say with St. Austin Insolentissimae dementiae Aug. It were a signe of most insolent madnesse But admit I should produce some Authors for proofe of this generall beleefe would their Authoritie free me from your termes of Shamelesse and impudent adventure Certainly no for say you If hee should have one two or three or ten men it would not be sufficient for him unlesse hee have the Authoritie of the Catholike Church or Church of Rome To cite many Authors or to bring none then is all alike to you for in your doome nothing will free mee from the name and punishment due to Heresie but the authoritie of the Church and yet in this you have granted mee more than I could expect for you have given mee liberty to take my authoritie from the Church so it be from the Catholike or the Roman And hereby you have made your Roman Church distinct from the Catholike which is most true which both you your selfe and most of your fellow Jesuits have made all one and confirmed by the title of Roman Catholike in all your writings This being granted I proceed to the rest of your exceptions In this Section say you he bringeth onely three Catholike Authors Adrian Costerus and Harding but no word for Antiquitie or universalitie Thus you Hee that shall reade my Section in Via tuta with this your Answer must needs confesse that you deale not fairly nor ingeniously with mee for sometimes you leape from the beginning of a Chapter to the end then you returne againe to the beginning being willing to conceale or confound the truth of my Assertions You so mingle my words with your own in the same Character that a prudent Reader can hardly discerne mine from yours but most usuall it is with you to cry down my words with bitter passages and decline the question in all As for Instance in this Section whereas I said the Church of Rome doth confesse the Antiquitie and Vniversalitie of our Religion long before Luther I instanced in our three Creeds and the rest before named One while you cry out of my impudencie that I cite no Authors another while that if I did cite them they would not serve my turne but you never mention either the Creeds or Scriptures or Councels or any of the points which you well knew had Antiquitie and Vniversalitie in the name and opinion of all Christians After that you flie to the later end of my Section and there you tell mee
is a poore Pedanticall observation for to spend many lines about such toyes and trifling words and to passe by the maine sinew strength of the Citation this is to confesse in plaine termes that you cannot justifie your doctrine and the rather it appeares in this particular point wherein Master Harding doth not onely condemne the people for their neglect but excuseth hereby your Churches ordinance in generall as being not guilty of the coldnesse of the people Nay more hee plainly intimates the Antiquitie and Vniversalitie of our Doctrine in these words Iuel Divis 7. p. mihi 11. In case the people might be stirred to such devotion as to dispose themselves worthily to receive their Howsel every day with the Priest as they did in the Primitive Church what would these men have to say And as touching Safety and Certainty of our Doctrine hee freely expresseth his thoughts and liking of our Communion of Priest and People saying It were to be wished Iuel in Art 1. Divis 9 p. 17. as oftentimes as the Priest doth celebrate the high Sacrifice that there were some who worthily disposed might receive their Rites with him and be partakers Sacramentally of the Body and Blood of Christ with him and hee gives a reason for it Idem Divis 25. p. mihi 45. Because it would be more commendable and more godly on the Churches part And thus much touching your three Authors whom say you I have so egregiously belyed Touching your worshipping of Images I referre it to his proper Section And whereas wee charge you with flat Idolatrie in the adoration of the Sacrament of Reliques of Images and the like howsoever I say you excuse your selves with the manner of your adoration yet to our endlesse comfort be it spoken you cannot charge us in the Positive Doctrine of our Church no not with the least suspition of Idolatrie This I told you before and blessed be God you have not wherewith to charge us in your Reply But you say It is far greater evill for you to be truly charged with Heresie than for us to be charged with Idolatrie yet neither you nor all your fellow-Jesuits could ever prove us guilty of either But what may wee thinke of your Church which is justly charged and highly guilty of both Your Popes which the Jesuits resolve to be the Church are condemned for Heretikes by your Councels acknowledged Heretikes by the Popes themselves and condemned of Heresie by your best learned Divines Your worship of Images and Saints concludes in flat Idolatrie and in particular by the Doctrine of your owne Church the adoration of the Sacramentall Bread and Cup for want of a right intention becomes an Idoll in the Temple These things I have in part proved which in place convenient shall be more fully handled hereafter But it is observable after I had ended my Section with this point of Idolatrie I say after this conclusion you flye backe to the middle of the chapter and now question me where our Church was before Luther but when I answered that from your addition and Articles of Faith The question doth truly result upon your selves Where was your Church that is where was your Trent Doctrine and Articles of the Roman Creed received de fide before Luther You are so farre from shewing it that you cunningly suppressed these words and not so much as mentioned them and thus one while suppressing the point in question other whiles by declining the true state of the question you shew your wit is better than your cause and declare your Sophistrie to be better than your Divinitie But to follow you backe againe you say Wee must shew you a companie of men in former times distinct from yours It were no difficult matter to shew you many that did seperate both from you and the errours of your Church in former Ages The Waldenses were a distinct companie of Beleevers and separate from your Church above 500. yeares since Reinerius the Inquisitor confesseth upon their examination that hee found they had in one Diocese one and forty Schooles in another ten B. pp. Tom. 13. Reiner contrà Wald. cap. 3. p. mihi 299. and withall reckons up forty Churches by name in Lombardy in Province in France and other Kingdomes he protesteth that amongst all Sects There was none more pernitious to the Church of Rome than it and that for three causes First Ibid. because it is of longer continuance for some say it hath continued from the time of Sylvester which is three hundred yeares after Christ others say from the time of the Apostles Secondly because it is more Vniversall for there is scarse any Country wherein this Sect hath not crept Thirdly whereas all other sorts blaspheme God this Sect hath a great shew of godlinesse for they live justly before men they beleeve all rightly concerning God and the Articles of the Creed onely they speake evill of the Church of Rome and hate it and by this meanes draw multitudes to their beliefe after them Thus if you require Antiquity for their Doctrine they derive it either from Christ or from Sylvester 300. yeares after Christ if Vniversality all Countries were filled with their Doctrine if good life they lived well before men and beleeved all rightly concerning God and the Articles of their Faith and this the force of truth hath extorted from your grand Inquisitor Augustus Thuanus Presicent of the Parliament of Paris Thuan. hist Tom 1. 1550. p. 457. 465. tells us that these who are commonly called Waldenses Picards Albigenses Cathari Lollards though by their difference of place they had divers names yet they held the same faith which Wicliffe held in England and Husse in Bohemia and gathered strength at the comming of Luther especially in the Caparienses who professed a Religion agreeing almost in all things with Martin Luther But withall he ingeniously professeth that Cardinall Sadolet did examine them and found many things malitiously fained against them Poplinerius saith that about the yeare 1100. these men did publish their doctrine differing but a little from the Protestants Poplin Hist Franc. l. 1. Bb. Vsher de statu Eccl. c. 8. p. 209. not onely through France but also through all the coasts of Europe For both French Spaniards English Scots Italians Germans Bohemians Saxons Polonians Lituanians and other nations doe peremptorily defend it to this very day And by reason they separated from the doctrines of the Roman Church Pope Innocent the third about the yeare 1198. authorised certaine Monkes who had the full power of the Inquisition in their hands to deliver the people by thousands into the Magistrats hands and the Magistrats to the Executioners Histor of the Wald. c. 3. St. Dominick who instituted the order of the begging Monkes called Dominicans was a great persecutor of them and their doctrine The Mother of this Monke saith your Martyrologe Martyrologe in the life of St. Dominick P. mihi 556.
is not found expressely Yet our Argument from Biels testimonie is no way disabled thereby because it appeareth out of Biels owne words that hee holdeth that to bee expresly delivered in Scriptures which is either expressed in word or sence the reall presence he saith is expresse not in the letter or forme of words in the text yet in the sence but so saith he is not Transubstantiation the apparant opposition betweene the members of his sentence sheweth that what hee beleeved of the reall presence hee beleeved not of Transubstantiation but the former he beleeved could bee proved out of Scripture though not in expresse words yet in sence therefore the later hee beleeved could not be proved so much as in sense much lesse in expresse words To the sixt Although Petrus de Alliaco inclineth rather to the Lutherans opinion in the point of the Sacrament then to the doctrine of the Church of England yet the Knight upon good reason produceth him as a witnesse for hee speaketh home against Transubstantiation Cameracë in 4 sent q. 6. art 2. patet quòd ille modus sit possibilis nec repugnet rationi nec authoritati bibliae imò facilior ad intelligendum rationabilior est quum c. his words are that the conversion of bread into Christs body cannot evidently bee proved out of Scripture and that that manner or meaning which supposeth the substance of bread still to remaine in the Sacrament is possible neither is it contrary to reason or to the authoritie of the Scripture nay it is more easie to bee understood and more reasonable then that which saith the substance doth leave the accidents If this bee not as Flood will have it so much as in shew for the Knight I am sure it is both in shew and substance against the Trent faith for if it bee granted that Consubstantiation is not contrarie to Scripture nor reason it followeth necessarily that Transubstantiation is grounded upon neither but rather repugnant to both for as trans denieth con so con trans If the remaining of the substance of bread with the substance of Christs body be not repugnant to the authoritie of Scripture nor the meaning of Christs words then doe not these words This is my body signifie or make Transubstantiation which necessarily abolisheth the substance of Bread and putteth in place thereof the substance of Christs bodie If Consubstantiation bee more easily to bee understood and more agreeable to right reason in Alliacoes judgement then Transubstantiation it is evident but for feare of his Cardinalls cap hee would have simply avowed the former and renounced the latter To the seventh Take Roffensis his words at the best the Iesuite is at a great losse admit hee said no more then I.R. here confesseth that no man can bee able to prove that any priest now in these times doth consecrate the true body of Christ see what will follow hereupon that no man is able to prove that your priests and people are not grosse Idolatours adoring a piece of bread for Christ Secondly that none is able to prove that Christ is really and substantially offered in your Masse for if it cannot bee proved that he is there corporally present as Roffenfis confesseth and you be are him out in it it cannot bee proved that hee is corporally offered restat itaque ut missas missas faciatis Roff. cont Luth captiv Bab. c. 4 neque ullum posituÌ hic verbum est quo probetur in nostrâ missâ veram fi lci carnis sanguinis Christi praesentiam non potestigitur per ullam scripturam probari it remaineth therefore that you dismisse your misses or Masses For what can they availe the living or the dead if nothing but meere accidents and shewes of Bread and Wine bee offered which are meere nothing Wee may yet gather farther upon Roffensis his words if it cannot bee proved by any Scripture that Christs body and bloud are present in the Roman masse it cannot bee proved that they are present in any Masse unlesse it bee granted that the Roman masses are of a worser condition then others if not in any masse much lesse must Papists say in any Sacrament without the Masse What then becommeth of the maine and most reall article of the Trent faith which hath cost the reall effusion of so much Christian bloud I meane the reall and carnall presence of Christ in the Sacrament To Roffenfis I.R. should have added Cajetan and so hee might have had a parreiall of Cardinalls for the Knight alledged him and his words are most expresse not only against the proofe of Transubstantiation Caje in 3. p. Tho. g. 75. dico autem ab ecclesiâcum non appareat ex Evangelio coactivum aliuod ad intellg ââdum haec verba propriè quod evangelium non explicavit expressè ab ecclesia accepimus viz. conversionem panis in corpus but also of the corporall presence of Christ as out of the words hoc est corpus meum The Cardinalls words are that which the Gospell hath not expressed wee have received from the Church to wit the conversion of the bread into the body of Christ I say from the Church because there appeares nothing out of the Gospell that can enforce a man to beleeve that the words This is my body are to bee taken properly How doth this Flood swell in pride that to so great a Cardinal so profound a Schoole-man so eminent a Doctour so divine a Commentatour so golden a Writer all which titles are given by the Roman Church to Cajetan he vouchsafeth not a looke But indeed he held a Wolfe by the eares and was in a quandarie what to doe whether to keepe his holt or to let him goe if hee had taken notice of his testimonie against the Roman Church either hee must have disparaged the Cardinall or given his Trent faith a grievous wound To the eight Durand his words are plaine enough to prove that the conversion of bread into the body of Christ is wrought by the vertue of Christs benediction before hee uttered the words Benedixit benedictione caelesti virtute verbi qua convertitur panis in substantiam corporis Christi Dur. rat c. 41. This is my body hee blessed saith hee the bread by his heavenly benediction and by vertue of the Word whereby the Brend is turned into the substance of Christs body Yea but faith Flood hee addeth Wee blesse ex illa virtute quam Christus indidit verbis wee blesse by that power or vertue which Christ hath given to the words true verbis benenedictionis not consecrationis according to Durands mind by that power which Christ gave to the words of benediction going before not those words which you call the words of Consecration ensuing after viz. This is my body which words yet Durand there rehearseth not to prove the conversion to bee wrought by them but to prove Christs body to be truly there To the ninth Though
For indeed those bookes of the Cardinall are no other then the exercise of his readers patience or at the best of his owne wit or imagination To the eighteenth For Wickliff and the Waldenses the Knight insisted not upon their testimonie though well hee might for they were most eminent professours of the truth and most free from those foule aspersions which their sworne enemies and bloudy persecutors cast upon them because his purpose was in this chapter as hee professeth in the title vos vestris gladijs jugulare to cut your throat with your owne swords and condemne you out of your owne mouth as Christ doth the evill servant in the Gospell 'T is true Wickliffe was condemned for an heretique in the Councell of Constance many yeares after his death and barbarous inhumanitie was also exercised upon his bones Yet will it follow no more from hence that Wickliffe was an heretique then that Ieremie was a false Prophet or Christ and his Apostles false teachers because they were condemned by councells of Priests And of all Councells that of Constance carries the least credit because it is not only condemned by all the reformed Churches but by the Roman Church her selfe and the Decrees thereof repealed in later Councells Touching the Waldenses what the Iesuite here writeth of them hee confirmeth by no testimonie and the contrarie may be demonstrated out of Orthwinus Gratius Histoire des Vaudois and the Historie and confession of the Waldenses lately set forth out of authenticall records in French To the nineteenth The Iesuits answer to Durand concerning the materiall part of bread remaining in the Sacrament but not the substance implying that the materiall part of Bread and the substance are different things is not materiall nor true For though the materiall part of any substance be a distinct thing both from the forme the compositum yet is it a substance and hath accidents inherent in it For according to the axiome of the metaphysickes ex non substantijs non fit substantia a substance or substantiall compound is not made or composed of non substances Sith the whole is not distinct really from all the parts united together the compound cannot bee substantiall unlesse the parts of which it consisteth be substances Durand therefore affirming that the materiall part of the bread remained in the Sacrament after Consecration held that some part of the substance of bread remained and therefore the Knight no way wrongeth Durand but Flood the Knight If Durand held that the whole substance of the bread was turned into the body of Christ according to your Trent Decree De Euch. l. 3. c. 13. why doth Card. Bellarmine censure his doctrine as hereticall if he taught not that the whole substance was converted hee must needs hold that some part of the substance remained as it was before which is all the Knight chargeth him with As for that the Iesuite addeth to salve the matter that he acknowledgeth all others to bee against him in this point Durand in 4. sent dist 11. q. 1. let him put on his Spectacles and reade the place againe and hee shall see there are no such words Only I find quest 3. This modest parenthesis salvo meliori judicio Which indeed are respective words befitting a modest man but no way amounting to a confession that his opinion in that point was singular and that all others were against him which notwithstanding Flood puts upon him To the twentieth Touching Gaufridus and Hostiensis cited by the Knight out of Durand In 4. sent dist 10. q. 1. n. 13. it is evident that howsoever they might peradventure incline to that which the Roman Church determined viz. the second opinion that the bread doth not remaine but is changed yet they no way condemne the third opinion viz. the substance of bread remaines and is together with tho body of Christ For as Durand well noteth they call it an opinion not an errour or an heresie neither doe they say it is to bee reproved but let it passe without any censure which they would not have done if they had held Transubstantiation to be a doctrine de fide to be beleeved of all upon paine of damnation To the twentie one Cutbert Tunstall was a Bishop and in great esteeme among all the learned in his time In his Epitaph in Lambeth Chancell he is styled Aureusiste Senex Tunst de Euch. l. 1. pag. 46. de modo quo id fieret fortasse satiùs erat curiosum quemque relinquere conjecturae sicut liberum fuit ante concilium Lateranense and therefore not lightly to bee filliped off and sleighted by a priest and Iesuit de face vulgi by saying that the matter is not great whether Tunstall said that for which hee is alledged or no because one single Author or two contradicted by others carrieth no credit For I find not that hee is contradicted by any His words are these of the manner and meanes of the reall presence either by Transubstantiation or otherwise perhaps it had beene bettter to leave every man that would bee curious to his owne conjecture as before the Councell of Lateran it was left free Neither did that learned Bishop of Duresme ever retract this opinion For Mr. Bernard Gilpin a holy man and a kinsman of the Bishop affirmeth that the Bishop his Diocesan often told him that Innocent the third had done very unadvisedly in that he had made the opinion of Transubstantiation an article of faith Neither doe wee find that any in his dayes or since before Flood taxed this Bishop for this his opinion To the twentie two None more sleight men of worth then those who want it Erasmus will live both in his owne workes and in the writings of the ancient Fathers and other Classick Authours corrected and set forth by him when a thousand Floods and Leomelij and Daniels a Iesu shall bee buried in perpetuall oblivion Erasmus was in great esteeme with Archbishop Waram and Sir Thomas Moore Lord Chancellor of England and of divers Bishops yea and Cardinalls also beyond the Sea and what Tully spake of Aristotle may bee truly said of him A golden river A hellish lake there is in his writings aureum slumen but in the Iesuit his adversarie lacus averni Concerning private Masses Spectacles Paragraph 3. à pag. 187. vsque ad 199. OVR Saviours words take yee eate ye make nothing against private Masse for Christ there spake to all his Apostles who did all eate and out of that place a man might as well say that all must communicate that are in the Church at the same time as two or three S Pauls words where hee inviteth Christians to imitate him are meant of chastening the body fasting and praying and the like in which Protestants follow him not and if the words bee extended to the Sacrament Catholike Priests imitate S. Paul therein because they are readie to communicate with all such as come worthily to
every one hee meeteth First hee falleth upon the Knight for creating a Cardinall to wit Hugo de S. Victore Flood p. 188. of his owne free goodnesse to make up the number of his Bishops and Cardinals I answer for the knight that he created no supernumerall Cardinall for he would not usurpe upon the Poges priviledge but committed a small errour in an ãâã and cry which was made after one Hugh in stead of another yet peradventure it was not the Knights mistake but the Correctors For Hugh of S. Victor though he hath his Cardinals hat in the margent yet hee standeth bare-headed in the text it is called a Communion Lynd safe way p. 119. because it is a common union of Priests and people otherwise saith Hugo it is called a Communion for that the people in the primitive Church did communicate every day But admit the Knight mistooke Hago de S. Victore for Hugo Cardinalis as Bellarmine confesseth that many learned men of his owne side mistooke Anselmus Laudunensis for Cantuariensis yet Flood should have pardoned or let passe and overseene this small oversight because wee tooke him at a worse fault in the like kind in examining his last Section wherein as I there shewed hee grosly mistaketh Bertram for Elfrick and a collation of two Authours for a translation of one Loripedem rectus derideat Aethiopem albus Eras Adag after this hee jeareth at the Knight for saying that the Councell of Trent wished well to our doctrine P. 189. What saith hee have you Masses Sir Humfrey take heed it may cost you money an Informer that should heare this might catch you by the backe and bring you in for so many hundred markes as you have received bits of bread in your Church which truly might prove a deere ordinarie for you The Orator said well Cic. pre Coel. nihil tam volucre quà m maledictam nothing is so easily cast out as a contumelious word and I may adde nothing so easily returned backe The Knight no where saith that wee have any Masses in our Church but only that the Councell of Trent wisheth well to publike Communions wherein the people communicate with the Priest which are not certainly your private Masses but admit hee had said wee have Masses in our Church hee might very well have defended this speech by my Lord of Duresme his distinction of Christ his Masse Tho. Mor. episc Dunelm l. nitit Christ his Masse and the Pope his Masse Wee have Christ his masse at every communion neither is any man merced for being present at it but for being absent from it For Masses are not sold with us as they are with Papists where there is a price set for drie Masses and wet Masses for low Masses and high Masses the ordinarie was but a groat for the one and a tester for the other but now it is raised and so to speake in the Iesuits language the Priests Masses prove a Deere ordinarie for the Laitie After this madde Tiger hath left the Knight hee fastens his teeth upon our Communion Table calling it an emptie Communion nothing but a morsell of bread P. 190. and a sup of wine and a prettie service and good-fellow Communion P. 199. Flood is the same full and fasting in jeast and in earnest for in both hee contradicts himselfe which discouereth an idle and addle braine If our Communion bee emptie and nothing but a morsell of bread and a sup of wine what good-fellowship can there bee in it But in good earnest how can the Iesuit call ours an emptie Communion which is every way full and fuller then theirs both for the signes and the things signified for the signes we have the substance of Bread and Wine they nothing but hungrie accidents and shewes a bit of quantity and a morsell of colours and a soppe of figures neither have the Laitie among them so much as a sup of the consecrated cup. For the thing signified we teach that all communicants by faith feed on the very body and bloud of Christ and all that so feed partake of all the benefits of Christs passion they teach that Infidels and reprobates eate Christs body and reape no benefit at all by it As for his good-fellow Communion let him take it to himselfe for Aquinas noteth that sometimes their Priests are overseene by drinking the liquor in the Consecrated cup Missal in cautel si in casu gulae Eucharistiam evomuerit and the cautels of the Masse appoint what is to bee done in case the Priest being drunke before cast up the host As for our Communion there can bee no excesse or as hee tearmeth it good-fellowship in it For the people have warning a weeke at least before to prepare themselves and they receive alwayes fasting before and the quantitie is so smal that it cannot distemper any which this bone Compaignion could not bee ignorant of But it seemeth hee tooke a cup of vinum Theologicum in the Taverne before hee set pen to paper in this section For besidemanifold contradictions before noted hee tearmeth in it our Commnuion sacrilegious P. 199. not considering that they sacrilegiously take the cup from the Laity and that we have restored it and he concludeth the Section with these words here is enough of such an idle subject Now the subject as appeares by the argument of the Section and the title he putteth throughout is Private Masse Nay which is a most certaine demonstration of his distemper when hee wrote this Section hee forgot that hee was a Priest and reckoneth himselfe among the Laitie saying the union may remaine betweene us and the Priest P. 197. l. 1. though he say Masse and wee not receive Concerning the 7. Sacraments Spectacles paragraph 4. a pag. 199. usque ad 242. THe Knight unjustly chargeth Bellarmine for laying a foundation of Atheisme Concil Trid. Sess 7. can 1. Bell. de effect sacram l. 2. c. 25. si tollamus authoritatem praesentis ecclesiae praesentis concilij in dubiuÌ revocari poterunt omnium aliorum coÌciliorum decreta tota fides christiana 1 Eliz. 1. in saying that if wee should take away the credit of the Roman Church and Councell of Trent which decreeth the precise number of 7. Sacraments the Decrees of other Councels nay even Christian faith it selfe might be called in question for if such a generall Councell may erre the Church may erre if the Church may erre the faith which that Church teacheth may faile and consequently there can bee no certaintie S. Gregorie the great did often say and write that hee did hold the 4 first Councels in the same honour that hee did the 4. Gospels which is the same as to say they could as little erre as the 4. Gospels And the Parliament lawes of England give as great authoritie to those 4. first Councels as S. Gregorie doth acknowledging that for heresie whatsoever is condemned for such by any of
alledged by the Knight saith not that there are no more then foure Sacraments but on the contrarie concludes Par. 4. q 5. n. 7. art 2. that there bee neither more nor fewer then seven Sacraments t is true indeed that Hales was of opinion that the forme and matter which wee now use in the Sacrament of confirmation were not appointed by our Saviour but by the Church in the Councell at Melda but this Hales saith sine praejudicio that is with leave not stifly nor arrogantly maintaining his owne opinion Hugo de Sancto victore excludeth not Penance from being a Sacrament For in his 23. chapter hee calleth Penance the second board after shipwrack C. 12. Septem sunt principalia ecclesiae sacramenta c. and saith that if any man endanger his cleansing which he hath received by Baptisme he may arise and scape by Penance Moreover the same Hugo in his Glasse of the mysteries of the Church saith that there are seven prinoipall Sacraments of the Church whereof five are called generall because they belong unto all to wit Baptisme Confirmation Eucharist Penance Extreame vnction and two speciall to wit Matrimonie and Order Although Bellarmine denieth that Extreame Vnction can be deduced out of the last of S. Marke and Cajetan out of the first of S. Iames and although Hugo and Peter Lomberd and Bonaventure and Alenfis and Altisiodorensis denie it to bee instituted by Christ yet none of them all denie it to be a Sacrament Bessarion the Cardinall saith not that there are but two Sacraments for he was a great man in the Councell of Florence wherein seven Sacraments are precisely taught but that we find these two Sacraments expresly delivered and that wee find none other and none of the rest so delivered that is so plainly Soto though he denieth that ordination of Bishops is truly and properly a Sacrament yet hee denieth not the Sacrament of order in the Church Durand saith indeed that Matrimonie is not ae Sacrament univocally agreeing with the other six but all acknowledge it to bee an errour in him and Divines of his owne time did note it for such though the matter then were not so clearely defined Cajetan saith indeed that the prudent reader cannot inferre out of the words of S. Paul Ephes 5. hoc est magnum Sacramentum that Matrimonie is a Sacrament yet hee denieth it not to bee a Sacrament For though it bee not inferred from that place Locor Theol. l. 8. c. 1. si Lutheram de hoc matrimoniorum genere disceptare voluerint intelligant se in scholae disceptationem incidisse necoportere catholicum ad eorum argumenta respondere sin verò argumententur matrimonium cum sacris ceremonijs administratum Sacramentum ecclesiae non esse tunc catholicus respondeat fidenter securè contra pugnet it may be inferred from oiher or if neither from that nor other yet it may bee deduced out of tradition Canus telleth us that the Divines speake so uncertainly of the matter and forme of Matrimonie that hee should bee accounted an unwise man who in so great differences of opinion would take upon him to establish any thing certainly yet hee denieth not Matrimonie to be a Sacrament For these are his words if the Lutherans argue that Mariage administred with sacred Ceremonies sacred matter sacred forme and by a sacred Minister as it hath ever beene administred in the Roman Church even from the Apostles time if I say they argue that this is not a Sacrament of the Church then let a Catholique answer confidently let bim defend stoutly let him gainsay securely Vasquez doth not say that Matrimonie is not a Sacrament properly so taken but that S. Austine speaking of Matrimonie doth use the word Sacrament but in a large sense This is true but it is but Vasquez his private and singular opinion not in a point of faith but only in the meaning of one Father in the use of a word and in this his opinion he is contradicted by other Catholique Divines Bellarmine saith that the Sacraments signifie three things De Sacram. in Gen. l. 1. c. 9. one thing past to wit the Passion of Christ another thing present to wit sanctifying grace which they worke in our soules another thing to come to wit eteruall life The signification of these three things is most apparant in Baptisme and the Eucharist but not so apparant in the rest Thus farre the Knight quoteth Bellarmine but leaveth out that which followeth tamen certum est implicitè illa omnia significari but it is certaine that the rest of the Sacraments signifie all these things at least implicitly The Hammer ALthough the Iesuit was very angrie when hee wrote this Paragraph as appeareth by his snarling at every passage almost yet in his discretion hee thought good not to meddle with some things which were too hard for his teeth To Theophylact Fulbert and Paschasius and the last passage out of S. Austine as also to the refutation of the popish arguments for their septenarie number of Sacraments from incongruous and ridiculous congruities hee replieth not a word and three of their prime Schoole-men Durand Vasques and Cajetan hee lets shift for themselves defend them he neither will nor can yet for all this hee puts up as if hee had done wonders in this Paragraph and filleth up the defect of solid answers with bragges and swelling words of vanitie Bullatis vndique nugis pagina turgescit But these bubbles wee shall see will dissolve of themselves in the particular answer to his twentie severall exceptions against the Knights discourse To the first The Iesuit in this Paragraph thinketh that hee discourseth very profoundly for page 201. he saith the Knight is not capable of it whereas his chanel here is so shallow that any child instructed in his Catechisme may wade thorow it Without an infallible rule saith he there can be no certaine beliefe in God An extreame veritie without an unerring Pope no certaine rule of faith an extreame falsitie the Iesait cannot see Christ for the Pope nor the Scripture for the Trent Canons Let him remove them out of the way and if hee have an eye of faith hee may clearly see both and in them an infallible rule of faith and certaine meanes to learne true beliefe in God The occasion of this discourse of the Iesuit was the Knight charging Cardinall Bellarmine for laying a foundation of Atheisme in saying that if we should take away the credit of the Roman Church and Councell of Trent the Christian faith it selfe might bee called in question The charge lieth heavie upon the Cardinall For to disparage the selfe-sufficiencie of the holy Scriptures and suspend our Christian faith upon the Decrees of a late factious conventicle rejected by the greater part of the Christian world is a ready way to overthrow all Divine faith and true religion Yet the Iesuit seeketh to cover the nakednesse of the Cardinall with these fig leaves If
for the good of others not a necessary grace of the Spirit sanctifying and saving the soule of the ordained Besides this Sacrament of order is out of order For it hath no element added to the sanctified forme of words Yes that it hath saith Flood the Host Chalice and Patent or Letters of order The Bread and Wine I grant are elements appointed by Christ but in another sacrament the Eucharist not in this and t is confessed on all sides that as in the Sacraments of the old Law so of the New the elements must not bee confounded Neither doth Christ any where command that in the ordination of Bishops or Priests such a Rite or Ceremonie should be used neither doth the Host or Chalice signifie or represent the invisible Grace or Ghostly power then given And as for the instrument it is a parchment but no element it is a legible writing testifying the party is ordained but no visible signe of an invisible grace no Seale of the new Covenant For the Patent Chalice and Bible they are not as before was said any sacramentall signes of divine grace but only ensignes and tokens of their severall offices and functions or instruments that are to bee used in their ministration besides every one of these orders is conferred by words and Ceremoniss cleane differing one from another whereupon it followeth that either none of them is a Sacrament properly so called or that each of them apart is a Sacrament and so the number of Sacraments will bee neere doubled Bellarmines evasion De Sacram. ordin l. 1. c. 8. to wit that they are all unum genere and referred to one end will not serve the turne for so all the other six Sacraments are unum genere and all referred to one end to wit to unite the receivers some way to Christ or derive some grace from Christ to them and yet they are not one Sacrament but as they teach six distinct species For Confirmation we allow of it as an Apostolicall tradition not as a Sacrament of Divine Institution For where doth Christ command that those who have heene baptized should bee after confirmed by a Bishop Where is an element or forme of words prescribed by Christ as in Baptisme and the Lords Supper The Iesuit answereth that the element in this Sacrament is chrisme or oyle but this cannot be as well because in divers Sacraments there ought to bee divers elements and therefore sith Chrisme and oyle is the element in Extreame Unction which taketh the name from thence it cannot bee the matter or element in Confirmation Accedit verbum ad elementum saith S. Austine fit Sacramentum the word of promise being added to another element appointed by God maketh a Sacrament In this we have neither Word nor Element therefore as the Greeke Oratour spake of the evill lawes enacted in his time Aristor Rbet l. 2. ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã the lawes need a law to mend them so we may say of this Sacrament of Confirmation it needeth confirmation and better proofe for it then yet we see For Penance as it is practised at this day in the Roman Church it is not of divine institution as it was practised in the Primitive Church and is at this day in ours is a Divine ordinance but yet no Sacrament because we find in it no outward element with a forme of words prescribed by Christ no visible signe of invisible grace No saith Flood is not the true sorrow of heart declared by humble confession together with prayer fasting and Almes-deeds an outward element or thing to bee perceived by sense I answer that every thing perceived by sense is not presently an element in a Sacrament it must bee as the Schooles out of S. Austine define a visible signe of invisible grace Confession and prayer are indeed audible but not visible Fasting and Almes-deedes are visible but visible workes of pietie and charitie not visible elements in the Sacraments they are morall duties not sacramentall Rites For what correspondencie is betweene these and absolution or remission of sinnes how doth Fasting or Almes exhibit to the eye this invisible grace Contrition of the heart of which hee speaketh is no visible or sensible signe Confession is sensible but not visible nor ordained as the elements are in Sacraments to signifie the grace of God but to aske it the sacred signes ought to be administred by the Priest but Confession is made by the penitent the same may be said of corporall satisfactions which are accomplished by the sinner and commonly in his house by fastings or whippings or abroad by pilgrimages whereas sacred signes are to bee administred by the hands of the Priest and ordinarily in the Church Absolution also cannot bee a sacred signe of the grace of God seeing that if it bee good and available it is the grace of God besides this Absolution is not an element nor a visible signe of an invisible grace for the words are not seene if it be said that it is sufficient that it is significantly the grace of God by the same reason the preaching of the Word should bee a sacrament for it is significantly the grace of God In all Sacraments the Word must bee joyned to the element but here they will have the Word to bee an element the imposition of the Priests hands on the penitent is a visible action but not a visible element nor is it instituted by Christ When the Trent Councell and the Roman Catechisme come to assigne the matter of this Sacrament they doe it very faintly with a quasi materia Sess 14. de poenit c. 3. Catechis Rom. part 2. c. 5. They say the actions of the penitent are quasi materia and such as the matter is such is the Sacrament quasi sacramentum For Matrimonie it is a holy ordinance of God but more ancient then the New Testament and therefore can be no seale of it it was instituted by God in Paradise not by Christ in the Gospell yea but saith the Iesuit though it were before a naturall contract yet might it not be exalted by Christ to the dignitie of a Sacrament I answer the Iesuit must not dispute what Christ might doe but what hee did When hee proveth out of the Evangelists or Apostles that Christ exalted it to the dignitie of a Sacrament wee will hold it in that high esteeme but this hee can never doe for none of the Evangelists relate that hee altered the Law or nature of Matrimonie but only that hee confirmed it and honoured it with his presence and the first Miracle which hee wrought Other exaltation wee find not in the Gospell And as S. Ierome speaketh in the like kind quia non legimus non credimus because wee reade it not wee beleeve it not Our second exception against the Sacrament of Matrimonie is that in it there is no outward element sanctified by the Word of promise To this the Iesnit answereth the bodies of men and women
vpon S. Iohn that out of the side of Christ the Sacraments of the Churchissued he would seeme to answer something First he quarrelleth at the quotation saying I doe not thinke you will find in Chemnitius your good friend S. Ambrose and Bede cited Whereunto I answer that though the Knights good friend Chemnitius cite not Ambrose and Bede yet the Iesuits good friend Card. De Sacram. in gen l. 2. c. 27. Amb. l. 10. in Luc. Bed c. 19. Ioh. intelligunt per sanguinem qui è latere effluxit redemption is pretium per aquam baptismum Bellarmine citeth them both his words are Ambrose in his tenth booke upon S. Luke and Bede in his comment upon the 19. of S. Iohn understand by blood which issued out of our Saviours side the price of our redemption by water Baptisme Next the Iesuit endeavoureth to untwist this triple cord by saying that these three Fathers speake of Sacraments issuing out of Christs side but no way restraine the number to two Whereunto I reply that though the word Sacramenta for the number may bee as well said of seven as two Sacraments yet where S. Austine alludeth to the same text of Scripture and falleth upon the same conceite he restraineth the number to two saying there issued out of Christs side water and blood quae sunt Ecclesiae gemina Sacramenta Now I would faine know of the Iesuit where ever hee read gemina to signifie seven or more then two Were the Dioscuri which are commonly knowne by the name of gemini seven or two only to wit Castor and Pollax As for S. Ambrose and Bede though they say not totidem verbis that the two Sacraments of the Church issued out of Christs side as S. Austine doth yet they can bee understood of no more then two Sacraments for there were but two things which issued out of our Saviours side to wit water and blood whereby they understand Baptisme and the Lords Supper Had there issued out of our Saviours side together with water and blood Chrisme or balsamum or had a rib beene taken from thence the Iesuit might have some colour to draw more Sacraments out of it but now sith the Text saith there issued onely two things water and blood and the Fathers say the Sacraments of the Church are thereby meant it is most apparant that by Sacramenta they meant those two only which they there name in expresse words Baptisme and the price of our redemption that is Christs blood in the Eucharist To the seventh The authoritie of S. Ambrose is as a thorne in the Iesuits eye for it cannot but bee a great prejudice to their cause that so learned a Bishop as S. Ambrose writing six bookes professedly of the Sacraments omitteth the Romish five and spendeth his whole discourse upon our two If the Church in his time beleeved or administred seven Sacraments hee could no way be excused of supine negligence for making no mention at all of the greater part of them it were all one as if a man professing to treate of the elements or the parts of the world which are foure or of the Pleiades or the Septentriones or the Planets which are seven should handle but two of that number Bellarmine therefore and after him Flood pluck hard at this thorne but cannot get it out saying that S. Ambrose his intent was to instruct the Catechumeni only as the title of one of the books sheweth For first S. Ambrose hath no booke of that title viz. An instruction to them who are to bee catechized or are beginners in Christianitie The title of that booke is De ijs qui initiantur of those who are initiated or entred into holy mysteries Secondly this is not the title of any of the six bookes de sacramentis alledged by the Knight but of another tractate Thirdly admit that S. Ambrose as S. Austine and Cyrill wrote to the Catechumeni and intended a Catechisme yet they were to name all the Sacraments unto them as all Divines usually doe in their Catechismes because the Sacraments are alwayes handled among the grounds and principles of Christian religion And though the Catechumeni are not presently admitted unto all yet they are to learne what they are that they may bee the better prepared in due time to receive them Fourthly it is evidently untrue which the Iesuit saith that S. Ambrose writeth not to the beleevers of that age but only to some beginners The very front of his booke proves the Iesuit to bee frontlesse For S. Ambrose his first words are I will begin to speake of the Sacraments which wee have received c. In Christiano enim viro prima est fides for the first thing in a Christian man is faith And as hee writeth to all beleevers not beginners only so hee speaketh also of the chiefe Sacraments of the New Testament and not of those only which the catechumeni received as is apparant out of the fourth chapter of the first booke De sacramentis Wherein hee proveth according to the title of that Chapter Quôd sacramenta Christia norum diviniora sint priora quà m Indaeorum That the Sacraments of the Chrìstians are more ancient and more divine then those of the Iewes and hee instanceth especially in the Sacrament of the Lords Supper Lastly the Iesuit in this answer apparantly contradicteth himselfe first saying that S. Ambrose intent in that Worke was only to instruct the catechumeni in those things that were to be done in the time of Baptisme p. 210. and within a few lines after he saith Bud. deasse Veritas nonnunquam invitis erumpit as fallens inter mendacia ab audientibus demuns agnoscitur cum interim loquentes adbuc se habere in potestate putent that he writeth of the Sacraments whereby they were so initiated which are three Baptisme Confirmation and the Eucharist So true is Budaeus his observation That lyes dash one with the other and truth breakes out of the mouth of the lyar ere hee is aware Who ever heard of the Eucharist to bee administred in the time of Baptisme or that the Eucharist was administred at all to the punies or catechumeni whilest they were such certainly if the catecumeni or younger beginners to whom hee saith S. Ambrose wrote were capable of the doctrine of the Eucharist containing in it the highest mysteries of Christianitie they were much more capable of Penance Matrimonie and Extreame Unction which are easie to bee understood by any novice in Christian religion To the eight That it may appeare what was the judgement of S. Austine in this maine point of difference betweene the Reformed and the Roman Church I will weigh what is brought on both sides first what the Iesuit alledgeth for seven and then what the Knight for two S. Austine having written divers Catechisticall treatises in which hee had occasion to name and handle the Sacraments yet no where defineth the number of them to bee seven
wee are still out of our reckoning wee heare nothing of Order and Extreame Vnction Secondly as the plaister is too narrow so the salve spread on it is of no vertue at all For though S. Isidore compareth Penance to Baptifme in respect of the effect thereof viz. washing away of sinne yet he maketh not thereby Penance a Sacrament Whatsoever washeth away sinne is not therefore a Sacrament Acts 15.9 Faith purifieth the heart as the Apostle speaketh Luk. 11.41 and Christ himselfe saith doe Almes and all things shall bee cleane unto you Yet doth it not from thence follow that either Faith or Charitie are Sacraments For Matrimonie he saith indeed there are three boones or good things in it or as the Iesuit translateth the words three goods of it fides proles sacramentum faith issue and a Sacrament but by sacrament there hee understandeth the great mysterie of the union of Christ with his Church whereof Matrimonie is a signe and hee alludeth to the words of the Apostle Ephes 5.34 ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã this is a great my sterie Apoc. 17.17 I will tell thee the myslerie of the woman and of the beast which the Latine interpreter translateth sacramentum as hee doth also the sacrament of the woman and as strongly might they conclude out of him that the Whore of Babylon is an eight Sacrament as Matrimonie is the seventh So S. Aug. de peccaâââât remis l. 1. c. 26 calleth bread which was given to the Catecumeni an holy Sacrament and in Psal 44. the mysteries of Christian religion Sacramenta docl rinae In our booke of Homilies Mariage is called a Sacrament as all sacred Rites may in a large sense The Iesuit should have proved according to his undertaking pag. 202. that Mariage is a Sacrament in a strict sense but his proofes are as his honesty is at large To the eleventh Hallensis lived in a darke age yet in this point hee saw some light through a chinke whereby he discovered that three of their supposed Sacraments to wit Order Penance and Matrimonie had their being before the New Testament Part. 4. q. 5. memb 2. and consequently were not to bee said properly the Sacraments of the new Law and hee giveth us also a sufficient reason to exclude the fourth to wit Confirmation because as hee teacheth the forme and matter thereof were not appointed by our Saviour but by the Church in a Councell held at Melda Yea but saith the Iesuit hee addeth fine praejudicio dicendum let this bee spoken with leave adding let us heare but such a word from the Knights mouth and hee shall see the matter will soone bee ended For answer whereunto I say first that the words of Hallensis sine praejudicio no whit prejudice the truth of his assertion but only shew the modestie of the man Next for the Knight whosoever peruseth his Booke with the Preface shall find that hee speaketh farre more modestly and submissively then Hallensis here doth Part. 4. q. 5. memb 7. art 2 Sed tumor Iesuitae non capit illius modum What Hallensis concludeth that there be neither more nor fewer then seven Sacraments maketh little against us for he neither addeth Sacraments properly so called nor Sacraments of the new Law in quibus vertitur cardo quaestionis if the Iesuit so expound Hallensis he maketh him contradict himselfe and so utterly disableth his testimonie For all Sacraments properly so called of the new Law must be instituted by Christ the authour of the new Law which Hallensis denieth of Confirmation Againe they must have their being by the new Law not before which hee affirmeth of three of the seven Sacraments as I shewed before To the twelfth Wheresoever the Knight maketh mention of Hugo the Iesuit maketh an hideous noise like an hue and cry you say saith the Iesuit P. 231. of Hugo that hee excludeth Penance from the number of the Sacraments and admitteth holy water For both which Sir Humphrey a man may hold up his finger to you and wagge it you know what I meane c. The Knight knoweth well what you meane and also what manner of men they are who hold up their finger in such sort viz. fooles or mad-men utrum horum mavult accipiat Is it a matter that deserveth such hooting to alledge Hugo de sancto victore out of Master Perkins in his Problemes a most learned worke against which never a Papist yet durst quatch How many hundred testimonies doe Bellarmine and Baronius and this Iesuit alledge at the second hand Were the allegation false Master Perkins must beare the blame who misquoted Hugo not the Knight who rightly alledgeth Master Perkins but the Iesuit neither doth nor can disprove the allegation but out of another booke of Hugo he alledgeth a passage for seven Sacraments which yet as I shall shew hereafter may well stand with that which Master Perkins alledgeth out of him against Penance But before I expound Hugo I wish the reader to observe in the Iesuit how true that is which the Naturalists relate concerning Serpents that the more venemous they are Plin. l. 8. c. 23. Aspidi hebetes oculi dati eosque non in fronte sed in temporibus habet the shorter sighted they are Hee who odiously and malitiously chargeth the Knight with a false quotation in this very place falsly quoteth the same Authour himselfe For the words hee alledgeth out of him to wit that there are seven principall Sacraments of the Church are not found in the booke he quoteth viz. speculum de myst Eccles c. 12. It is true such like words are found in another Treatise of his to wit de sacrament is but this neither excuseth the Iesuits negligence nor helpeth at all his cause For he that saith there are seven principall Sacraments implieth that there are more then seven though lesse principall Either Hugo taketh the word Sacrament in a large or strict sence if in a large he contradicteth not us if in a strict sence he contradicteth the Iesuit and the Trent Fathers for they teach there are no more then seven Sacraments whether principall or not principall Hugo reckoning seven as principall tacitly admitteth other as lesse principall Yet the Iesuit singeth an Iôpoean to himselfe and most insolently insulteth upon the Knight P. 231. saying Bcause you may lesse doubt of Penance whereof for thus abusing your authour and reader you deserve no small part he hath a particular ââ hapter wherein hee calleth it as wee doe with S. Ierome the second board after shipwrack and saith that if a man endanger his clensing which hee hath received by Baptisme he may rise and escape by Penance How say you to this Sir Humfrey have I not just cause to tell you your owne Agreed suum cuique let the Iesuit tell the Knight and I will tell the Iesuit his owne the Knight neither holdeth with the doctrine of Merit nor the sacrament of Penance the
Iesuit who holdeth both may by his beliefe merit their holy sacrament of Penance for egregiously abusing Hugo de Sancto Victore and S. Ierome and his reader by making a Sacrament of a metaphor and out of them arguing thus wooddenly against the Knight Hugo hath a particular chapter wherein hee calleth Penance as wee doe with S. Ierome the second boord after shipwracke Ergo Penance is a Sacrament of the new Law doth he not deserve for concluding so absurdly to have the character of his owne sacrament indelebly imprinted upon his flesh To the thirteenth The Knight alledgeth not Bellarmine nor Hugo nor Peter Lombard nor Bonaventure nor Hallensis nor Altisiodorensis nor Suarez himselfe as if they expresly and in direct tearmes denied Extreame Unction to bee a sacrament this they doe not neither as things stood with some of them might doe safely the Roman Church having defined the contrarie Yet so great is the force of truth that what in words they affirme they consequently deny and thus much Suarez ingenuously confesseth some Suar. tom disp 39 sect 2. nonnulli negârunt hoci sacramentum fuisse à Christo institutum ex quo planè sequebatur non esse verum sacramentum saith hee have denied that this Sacrament was instituted by Christ whence it followeth by plaine consequence that it is no true Sacrament Yea but saith Flood if those Schoole-men had lived in this age they would have said that Christ did institute it Whereunto I answer that all Iudgements proceed ex allegatis probatis not allegandis probandis upon things alledged and proved not upon things to be alledged and proved in future times neither is it likely that they would have altered their opinion upon notice of the Trent decision for if the Church of France and divers other Romish Catholiques as they tearme them submit not at this day to all the Decrees of that Councell much lesse may it bee thought that those ancient and acute schoole Divines who bare the greatest sway in their times would have suffered themselves to baffled by the pretence of a pettie Councell charging her canons with nothing but paper-shot every Sacrament of the New Testament is supported with two pillars institution by Christ and a promise of justifying grace annexed to the due receivers thereof set downe in Scripture the former pillar the ancient Schoolemen take from Extreame Unction the later Bellarmine and Cajetan how then can it stand The Iesuit answereth upon a third pillar unwritten tradition But this I have proved before to be a weak and rotten one and to speake the truth it serveth Papists as pons Asinorum did the ancient Logicians to which they fly for shelter when all other helpe faileth them Albeit they bragge much of Scripture yet upon examination of particulars it will appeare that their new Trent Creed consisting of twelve supernumerarie Articles hath no foundation at all in Scripture and therefore they are forced for their support to fly to verbum Dei non scriptum an unwritten word of God which I would faine know of them how they prove to be Gods word Whether by Scripture or by unwritten tradition by Scripture they cannot say for it implies a flat contradiction that verbum non scriptum should be scriptum that unwritten traditions should be found in or founded on Scripture if they say they prove it to bee Gods word by tradition then they prove idem per idem the same thing by it selfe and build their faith upon a sillie sophisme called petitio prÃncipij the begging the maine point in question To the fourteenth In the allegation of Cardinal Bessario the Iesuit chargeth the Knight with ambiguous translation P. 225. and so placing the words that they may have a double sence the one to deceive the simple and the other to excuse himselfe against the objections of the learned and for this he pronounceth a woe against him vae peccatori terraâ ingredienti duabus vijs Woe to the sinner going on the earth two wayes But the truth is as Pentheus after he was distracted imagined duplices se ostendere Phoebos Oresles apud Euripidem Electram sororem appellat Furiam quòd eam ne fureret in lectlo constringeret that hee saw two Sunnes when yet there was but one in the skie so the Iesuit in a fit of frantick malice imagined the Knight to goe two wayes whereas hee goeth but one and that a faire and streight way for he setteth the Latine words of the Cardinall without any adition or detraction in the margent haec duo sola sacramenta in Evangelijs manifestè tradita legimus and hee translateth them faithfully wee reade that these two Sacraments only were delivered us plainly in Scriptures hee rendereth not the words we reade plainly in Scriptures that there were two only Sacraments delivered unto us which had beene a misplacing of Bessarions words and mis-interpretation of his meaning bu wee reade that these two only were plainly delivered in the Gospell there is no more ambiguitie in the translation then in the originall which though it denieth not that other Sacraments may bee delivered in the Gospell yet it affirmeth that these two only are plainly delivered there and consequently that these two only are de fide matter of faith and upon paine of damnation to be beleeved for as I proved before out of S. Austine and S. Chrysostome all things that concerne faith and manners and are necessarie to salvation are plainly delivered in holy Scriptures To the fifteenth Some Papistsas Flood confesseth denie the foure inferiour Orders to be Sacraments P. 234. and Soto denieth the superiour what a confusion is here in your sacrament of order If the ordination of Bishops be not truly and properly a Sacrament as Dominicus Soto acknowledgeth neither is the ordination of Priests a Sacrament for what can be alledged more for the one then the other and if the ordination of Priests be no sacrament much lesse Deacons or subdeacons or Acolytes or Exorcists Whether there be the same character imprinted in the ordination of Bishops and Priests it is not materiall to our present question for if it be the same then it followeth according to the doctrine of the Schooles that they are one and the selfe-same Sacrament if a diverse character bee imptinted by the one and by the other then are they two distinct Sacraments If they are the same Sacraments then Soto denying the one consequently denieth the other to bee a Sacrament if they are distinct Sacraments then there are eight Sacraments Yea but saith the Iesuit Whither there bee a new character in a Bishop or the same extended is no matter of faith and therefore wee are not to dispute with you of it but keepe you off at the staffes end or rather out of doores when you are once admitted into the Catholique Church wee may admit you to speake of a Schoole-point or else not Wee know well that yee are loath that
use them and therefore wee may administer the Sacrament at another time to a greater or lesser number then twelve we may receive it also with another gesture then Christ or his Apstles used because he no where tieth us to those circumstances but wee may in no wise administer or receive it in one kind because he commandeth us to communicate in both saying drinke ye all of this and what though the Councell joyne not the word notwithstanding to Christs institution in both kindes but to his administring after supper yet this no way excuseth the Fathers in it from confronting Christ and abrogating his commandement by their wicked Decree for notwithstanding Christs command drinke you all of this that Councell by a countermaund forbiddeth any Priest under a great penaltie to exhort the people to communicate in both kindes or to teach that they ought so to doe To the third If the Iesuits forehead had not beene made of the same metall which hee worshipeth in his images hee would have blushed to utter so notorious an untruth contrary to the Records of all ages and the confession of all the learned of his owne side Never any before this Iesuit durst to say that the halfe Communion was the beliefe and practise of the whole Church before the Councell of Constance for besides Salmeron Arboreus Aquinas Tapperus Alfonsus a Castro the Councell of Constance Bellarmine and Cassander alledged by the Knight See grand Sacrilcg Sect. 17. I could adde Estius the Sorbonist Ecchius the great adversarie of Luther Suarez their accomplished Iesuit Soto their acutest Schoole-man and Gregorie de Valentia who of all other hath most ãâã laboured in this argument all not only affirming but some of them also confirming that the Communion in both kindes was anciently and universally administred to the people It is well knowne that the Easterne Churches in Greece and Asia and Southern in Africa and Northerne in Muscovia have ever and at this day doe administer the Communion to the Laitie in both kindes and in the Westerne and Roman Church it selfe for a thousand yeares after Christ and more the Sacrament was delivered in both kindes to all the members of Christs Church which is manifest saith Cassander Cassand consult art 22. by innumerable testimonies of ancient Writers both Greeke and Latine And when the new custome of communicating in one kinde began a little before the Councell of Constance Soto artic 12. q. 1. in dist 12. non modo inter baeretieos verùm inter Catholicos ritus ille multo tempore iuvaluit it was impugned not by heretiques as Flood would beare us in hand but by good Catholiques as Soto a man farre before Flood ingenuously confesseth To the fourth Albeit I grant there is some difference betweene an institution or constitution or command yet our argument drawne from Christs institution in both kindes is of force against the Romish halfe Communion For a command is as the genus and an Institution is as the species every command is not an institution but every institution is a command for what is an institution but a speciall order or appointment in matter of Ceremonie or Sacrament was not the institution of Circumcision an expresse command to circumcise every male child was not the institution of the Passeover a command for every familie to kill a Lambe and eate it with sowre herbes Was not the institution of Baptisme a command to Baptise all Nations in the name of the Father Sonne and holy Ghost Was not the institution of the Lords Supper by words imperative Take eate doe this in remembrance of mee and drinke yee all of this Yea but the Iesuit instanceth in Mariage which we acknowledge to be instituted by God yet not commanded I answer all sacred Rites and namely the ordination of Mariage are injunctions and commands to the Church or mankind in generall though they bind not every particular person but such onely as are qualified for them Gen. 2.24 if crescite multiplicamini bee rather a benediction upon Mariage then a command to marrie yet certainly those words used in the Institution of Mariage therefore shall a man leave his father and mother and shall cleave to his wife and they shall bee one stesh containe da direct command not to every man simply I grant but to every one that hath not the gift of continencie 1 Cor. 7.2 to avoide fornication saith the Apostle let every man have his owne wife and let every woman have her owne husband And againe if they cannot containe let them marry V. 9. for it is better to marry then to burne To the fist There needs no subtiltie of wit to find out the opposition betweene the Decree of the Trent Councell and Christs institution the dullest wit cannot but stumble upon it For if whole Christ be received in either kind why did Christ who doth nothing superfluously institute the Sacrament in both kindes If the Sacrament can no otherwise exhibit Christ unto us then by vertue of his Institution how can wee be assured that whole Christ is communicated unto us when we violate his institution administring the holy Communion but by halfes the Sacrament exhibiteth nothing but what it signifieth but the bread signifieth Christs body not his blood the wine signifieth his blood not his bodie therefore accordingly the one exhibiteth only his body the other his bloud Againe if Christ bee whole in either kinde then a man might receive whole Christ in drinking of the cup only though he eate not at all of the bread and consequently a man may without sinne at the Lords board drinke only of the Consecrated cup and not eate of the bread which yet no Papist to my knowledge ever durst affirme To the sixt This evasion of the Iesuit is exploded by Philip Morney De Euch. l. 1. c. 10. Chamierus tom 4. resp Bellar. in D. F. his conference with Everard p. 256. and divers others This may suffice for the present for the overthrow of this generall answer of all Papists to the words of the institution Drinke you all of this viz. that by all in S. Mathew and S. Marke Priests only are to be understood First I note at this time the Apostles were not fully ordained Priests For as yet Christ had not breathed on them nor given them the power of remission of sinnes next admit they were Priests yet in the institution of this Sacrament they were non conficients supplying the place of meere communicants and therefore consequently whatsoever Christ commanded them hee commanded all receivers after them Thirdly Christ commanded the same to drinke to whom before hee said Take eate this is my body but the former words take eate are spoken to the Laye-people as well as Priests therefore the words drinke you all of this are spoken to them also Math. 9.6 those things which God hath joyned together let no man put asunder Fourthly I would faine know of
our Adversaries when Christ saith This is the cup of the New Testament which is shed for many for the remission of sinnes who are those many will they say Priests only have the Laytie no sinnes or no remission of sinnes by Christ bloud if they have as all professe they have why do they forbid them that which Christ expresly commandeth them saying Drinke ye all of this for it is shed for you and for many All worthy communicants are to drinke Christs bloud for whom it was shed thus much Christs reason importeth but it was shed for the Laytie as well as the Clergie they therefore are alike to drinke it If the Laytie expect life from Christ they must drinke his bloud as well as eate his flesh Iohn 6.53 for except a man eate the flesh of the Sonne of man and drinke his bloud hee hath no life in him Lastly 1 Cor. 11.28 when the Apostle enjoyneth all to examine themselves before they receive the holy Communion I desire to bee informed by our Adversaries whether this Precept of examination concerneth not the Laytie especially I know they will say it doth because the people most need examination that they may confesse their sinnes and receive absolution for them before they presume to communicate let them then reade what followeth in the same verse and so let them eate of that bread and drinke of that Cup let a man examine himselfe and so let him eate of that Bread and drinke of that Cup the coherence of the members in this sentence inferreth that as none are to be admitted without precedent examination so that all who have examined themselves are to be admitted to the Lords table both to eate of that Bread and drinke of that Cup. To the seventh There is no force at all in the inference which the Iesuit would make from Christ his breaking of bread with the two Disciples at Emmaus to prove the Communion in one kind for neither is it likely Christ instituted any supperafter his last Supper neither was the place fit for a Communion being a common Inne neither reade wee of any preparation on the Apostles part nor of any words of institution used then by Christ neither could the Iesuit alledge any one Father who saith that Christ at that time administred the Communion to those two Disciples in bread only For it is well knowne to all that are acquainted with the language of Canaan that breaking of bread in Scripture by a Syneodoche is taken for making a meale and it is very unlikely that the disciples travelling at that time of the yeare in so hot a countrey as Iudaea is when they came to their Inne for a repast should call for bread only and no drinke To the eighth Though the Iesuit make many a bravado here and else-where yet upon the matter in granting to the Knight that the generall practise of the primitive Church was to communicate in both kindes he yeeldeth up the bucklers For the maine scope of the Knight in this and other Sections is to prove the visibilitie of our reformed Church in former ages by the confession of our Romish adversaries this hee doth in the point of the Communion in both kindes abundantly in this Section and the Iesuit cannot denie it it followeth therefore that in this maine point of controversie betweene us and the Church of Rome wee have antiquitie universalitie and eminent visibilitie and the Roman Church none of all whereby any understanding reader may see that the Knight hath already wonne the day Yet for the greater confusion of the Iesuit I adde that what the primitive Church did uniformly they received it from the Apostles and what the Apostles did joyntly no doubt they did by the direction of the holy Ghost according to our Lords will and so their example amounteth to a Precept Againe the practise of the Catholique Church is the best expositour of Scripture therefore the question being concerning the meaning of that text of Scripture Drinke you all of this whether they concerne the Laytie or Clergie only that must bee taken for the true exposition which the Catholique Church by a constant and vniforme practise hath allowed Lastly either this practise of the Catholique Church was grounded upon some divine Precept or it is a meere will-worship which the Iesuit dare not say if it be grounded upon any divine precept undoubtedly upon this Drinke yee all of this that is as well Ministers as Laye people as Paschasius commenteth upon the words To the ninth The arguments of Bellarmine drawne from six ancient Rites to prove the frequent use of Communion in one kind are answered at large by Philip Morney and Chamierus in the places above mentioned and they are every one of them retorted against Bellarmine himselfe by D. F. in his booke intituled the Grand sacriledge cap. 14. accipe quomode das si tibi machera est nobis vervina est if it be sufficient for him to object by proxe why may not we answer by proxe To the tenth To the instance in the Nazarites I answer first that I read of no other Nazarites since Christs time in the writings of the ancient Fathers then certaine Heretiques so tearmed of the sect of Ebionites who went about to cloath the Gospell with the beggarly rudiments of the Law upon whom S. Austine passeth this verdict L. De haeres ad quod vult Deum dum volunt Iudaei esse Christiani nec Iudaeisunt nec Christiani that whilest they laboured to bee both Iewes and Christians they became neither Iewes nor Christians but a sect of heretiques partly judaizing partly Christianizing Secondly if there were any Nazarites that sincerely imbraced the Gospell questionlesse they communicated in both kindes for though they had vowed against drinking of wine yet either their Vow was to be understood of drinking it civilly not sacramentally for their corporall refection not for their spirituall repast or if their vow were absolutely against wine yet Christs command Drinke yee all of this implied a dispensation for their Vow in that case A private vow of any man must give place to a publike command of God even now a dayes those who upon any great distemper of body or mind by wine vow to abstaine from it yet make no scruple of conscience to take a small quantitie of it physically for the recoverie of their health how much more ought they to doe so notwithstanding their vow if it bee prescribed by the heavenly physician for the cure and salvation of their soules To the eleventh Concerning Tapperus the Knight no way misquoteth him though hee leave out some passges in him for the truth is Tapperus halteth betweene two opinions he speaketh some words plainly in the language of Canaan and others hee lispeth in the language of Ashdod where he speaketh in the language of Canaan as hee doth most plainly in those his words if wee regard the Sacrament and perfection thereof and the
integritie of corporall refection and the example of Christ it were more convenient to have the Communion under both kindes the Knight hearkeneth to him but where hee lispeth in the language of Ashdod saying that in consideration of the reverence due to this Sacrament it is ill and inconvenient to communicate in both kindes the Knight had reason to turne a deafe eare to him for it is cosin germane to blasphemie to say that is ill and inconvenient which Christ and his Apostles and the whole Church in all places for more then a thousand yeares practised the Knight might well say to Tapperus in the words of him in the Poet ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã I will be sober with you but I will not runne madde with you To the twelfth For the statute made in the dayes of that Phoenix of his age King Edward the sixt the meaning is unlesse among the people there bee some that either by a naturall antipathie to wine or other infirmitie cannot receive the Sacraments in both kindes it is ordained that it be delivered to every one in both kindes cessante ferreâ necessitate obtinet haec aurea regula that all receive the whole Sacrament in which the Statute and the articles of Religion published first in the reigne of this blessed Prince fully accord For so wee reade Article the thirtieth both parts of the Lords Sacrament by Christs ordinance and command ought to bee ministred to all Christian people alike To the thirteenth That every article of faith ought to have sufficient proofe out of Scripture is proved by innumerable testimonies of antiquitie produced by Philip Morney in his Preface to his booke De Eucharistia Bilson of Supremacie part the fourth Abbot against Bishop chapter the seventh and Laurentius de disp Theolog Neither doth S. Ierome any way contradict them or us for wee beleeve that the consent of the whole Christian Church is an infallible argument of truth Albeit wee teach that any particular Church as namely the Roman or the French or the Dutch or the Greeke Church may erre yet we denie that the catholique Church universally hath ever erred or can erre in matter of faith necessarie to salvation and further I adde for conclusion that as the words of S. Ierome alledged by the Iesuit make nothing against us so if they bee applied to our present subject they make most strongly against him being propounded after this manner Although the authoritie of holy Scripture were wanting for the Communion in both kindes which is not so yet the consent of the whole world on this side testified by their uniforme practise confessed by Papists themselves ought to have the force of a divine Precept and so there would bee an end not only of this Section as the Iesuit speaketh but of this whole Controversie Concerning Prayer in an unknowne tongue Spectacles Sect. 6. a pag. 259. usque ad 283. THe Knight falsly chargeth the Councell of Trent with approving prayer in the vulgar tongue for though the Councell saith that the Masse containeth great instruction yet it doth not say that it ought to bee in the vulgar tongue nay contrarily it pronounceth an anathema against any whosoever shall say that the Masse ought to bee celebrated in the vulgar tongue It hath beene the generall practise and custome in the Church of God of having the Masse and the publike office in Latine all over the Latine and Westerne Church both in Italie Spaine France Germanie England Africa and all other places and so likewise in Greeke in the Graecian or Easterne Church though it were as large in extent and had as much varietie of languages in it as the Latine Church hath Vniformitie which is fit to be used in such things and unitie of the Catholique Church is excellently declared and also much maintained by this unitie of language in the Church office The use of vulgar tongues in the Masse or Church office would cause not only great confusion but breed an infinite number of errours by many severall translations The use of vulgar language in such things would breed a great contempt of sacred things with prophanenesse and irreligiositie besides the danger of heresie which commeth no way sooner then by misunderstanding of holy Scripture The place of Scripture alledged by the Knight concerning announcing our Lords death is not understood by words but by deeds as is most plaine by the circumstances The text of S. Paul where he asketh how hee that understandeth not the prayers shall say Amen is not of the publike prayers of the Church which no man can doubt of either for the truth or goodnesse and therefore he may confidently say Amen to them but of private prayers made by private and Laye men extempore in an unknowne tongue Haymo requireth not that all that are present at Divine service should understand but only that he that supplieth the place of the idiot or Laye-man in answering for the people should bee so farre able to understand as to answer Amen at the end of every prayer Iustinian the Emperour is ordinarily taxed for taking too much upon him in Ecclesiasticall matters yet all that hee saith may bee well maintained without prejudice to the present practise of the Roman Church for in the Decree alledged by the Knight hee requireth nothing more but that Bishops and Priests should pronounce distinctly and clearely that which according to the custome of the Easterne Church was to bee spoken aloud The Canon law capite quoniam in plerisque requireth only that where divers Nations are mingled that the Bishop of the Citie should substitute one in his roome to celebrate the divine Office and administer the Sacraments according to their ownerites and language for indeed it is a matter of necessitie in administration of some Sacraments to use the vulgar language as in Mariage and Penance but not so of other things Lyra Belithus Gretzer Harding Cassander and the rest of the Authours quoted by the Knight say indeed that in the beginning Prayers were in the vulgar tongue but the reason was because those three holy languages Hebrew Greeke and Latine dedicated on the crosse of Christ were then most vulgar none of them speake a word of any Precept There is no precept in the Scripture commanding prayers in a knowne tongue or forbidding in an unknowne whose authority or example can you bring for your selfe in this matter name him if you can It was more needfull in the Primitive Church that the people should understand because they were to answer the Priest which now is not so as Bellarmine noteth because that belongs only to the Clarke That the Knight contradicteth himselfe in one place saying That the alteration of the Church service was occasioned by certaine Shepheards who in the dayes of Honorius having learned the words of Consecration by heart pronounced them over their Bread and Wine in the fields and thereby Transubstantiated them into flesh and bloud and for this prophane abuse were strucken
dead by the hand of God In another place hee saith that the alteration was brought in by Pope Vitalian about the year 666. which cannot well agree with his former observation for Honorius the first was the sixt Pope before Vitalian by which computation the alteration must have beene fourescore or a hundred yeares before Vitalian The Hammer AMong the knowne errours of the Roman Church there is none more grosse or palpably absurd then this concerning Prayers in an unknowne tongue For as Velleius the Epicure in Tully goeth about to maintaine by reason that it had beene better a man had not beene indued with reason then with it so in this argument our Adversaries in good earnest strive cum ratione insanire to prove by reasons that it is best to exhibit to God an unreasonable service to speake understandingly for speech without understanding and that in the publike worship of God to perswade civill men that in their prayers the Priest ought to bee a Barbarian to the people and the people to the Priest In a word to enforce the people instead of offering the calves of their lippes to God to offer to him the lippes of calves bellowing without understanding The Knight therefore upon very just reason taketh the Church of Rome to taske for this unsufferable abuse and undeniable aberration from the Primitive and catholique Church Wherein he confoundeth all Papists not only with pregnant testimonies of Scripture and ancient Fathers but also with the confession of the learnedest of their side Yea but Flood the Iesuit maketh great brags that he will reckon with him for it and reckon he doth according to his best skill in Arithmeticke but to halves for the Knight presseth the Romanists with the historie of the Councell of Trent and the contradictions of their Bishops there and other passages of moment which the Iesuit lisently passeth by being willing to charge himselfe with no more then he thought he was fairely able to put off What he saith either by way of objection against the practise of the reformed Churches or in answer to our arguments shall be particularly discussed in my replie to his particular heads To the first The Knight saith not that the Councell of Trent approveth in expresse and direct words the practise of our Church Concil Trent Sess 22. c. 8. but that by consequence it doth so in saying the Masse containeth great instruction for the common people and commanding that the Masse Priest or some other should frequently expound or declare unto them the mysteries of the Masse for if the Masse containe as the Councell saith great instruction for the people and for that end ought to bee expounded unto them by the same reason it ought to be translated into the mother-tongue and so read unto them Unlesse they will say that the people receive as much instruction form that they understand not as from that they understand Which none will say but he that were a degree below S. Pauls idiot In 1. ad Cor. c. 14. melius ad edificationem ecclesiae est orationes publicas quae audiente populo dicuntur dici lingua communi clericis populo quam dicilatinâ .. Contar. in catec interrogat ult populus linguâ non intellect â orans caret eo fructu quem perciperet siorationes eas quas ore proferunt etiam intelligerent nam speciatim intenderent animum mentem in deum ut ab eo impetrarent etiam speciatim ea quae ore petunt magis aedificarentur ex sensu pio earum oraftonum quas ore proferunt Doubtless that which was written and appointed to bee read before the people for their instruction and edification ought to be delivered unto them in a language which they understand but the Masse was written and appointed to beeread before the people for their edification and instruction as the Councell agnizeth therefore it ought to be celebrated in a knowne tongue This reason alone prevailed so far with two Roman Cardinals Cajetan and Contarenus that they subscribed to the doctrine of the reformed Church in this point The former his subscription is in these words It were better for the edification of the Church that the publique prayers which are made in the audience of the people should bee said in a tongue common to the Priest and people then that they should bee said in Latine The other in these words The people that prayeth in an unknowne tongue wanteth that fruit which they might reape if they understood those things which they pronounce with their lips for they would in a speciall manner apply their mind to God that they might obtaine of him those things which they pray for especially and they would bee more edified by a godly feeling of those prayers which they utter with their mouth To the second The generall practise and custome of the Westerne Church having their publike service in Latine and of the Easterne Churches having their service in Greeke maketh for us not against us For the Latine service was generally understood in the Westerne Church and the Greeke in the Easterne when and where it was not so generally understood they had their service in their Mother-tongue as namely among the Syrians Armenians Russians Egyptians Aethiopians While the Roman Empire flourished and the Imperiall lawes bare the sway as namely in It alie Spaine France Germanie England Africa and wheresoever the divine service was celebrated in the Latine tongue the people generally understood the Latine If the Iesuit speake of later times after the inundation of Gothes and Vandals when the Latine tongue was corrupted and degenerated into severall languages as Italian Spanish and French in such sort that the people in those parts underdood not the Latine God stirred up in these Westerne parts many religious and learned men who turned the Bible and the common prayers into the vulgar tongue and the Bishops of Rome were very much to blame who commanded not the like to be done throughout all their jurisdiction and it is worth the observation that Irenaeus teacheth L. 5. c. 30. that the number 666. containeth the name latinus and that in that very yeare of our Lord Pope Vitalian commanded the Latine service generally to be received in the Westerne Church though at that time in most parts few of the people understood it To the third We are not so much to regard uniformitie in the Church service as conformitie to the will and word of God which requireth that all things in the Church bee done to edification 1 Cor. 14.15 16.26 that we pray with the spirit and with understanding also that the people joyne with the Priest in all parts as well prayers as giving of thankes and testfie it by saying Amen Which cannot be done if prayers be said in a tongue which people understand not Moreover as diversitie of instrumentstuned together marreth not the musicke but maketh it sweeter so diversitie of languages in which the
other man to be present at a prayer which he understandeth not then for a Parish-Clarke whom alone hee will have here to be understood Who is very much beholding to him for bestowing the name of idiot upon him and truly such a Clarke as the Iesuit here defineth may very well take the idiot in the worst sence to himselfe For he requireth no more in a Clarke then that hee understand the Service so farre P. 265. as to bee able to answer Amen But it seemeth the Iesuit tooke his holy orders per saltum and skipt over the Clarke For if hee had well considered what belongs to the Clarkes office he should find that he hath more in his part then to say only Amen for in all ancient and later Liturgies that I have seene many short sentences or responds are to be said by him as namely Christe eleeson cumspiritn tuo habemus ad Dominum and the like neither can hee say Amen to any prayer in the Apostles sence unlesse hee perfectly understand it for to say Amen is not only to utter the word which a Parret or Popenjay may doe but to joyne in prayer with the Priest and to give his assent to every clause To the ninth The Iesuits answer to Iustinian is lame on both feet For whereas hee taxeth him for taking too much upon him it will appeare to any who peruseth the Code Digests that hee taketh no more upon him then God commendeth to Princes to wit the custodie of both tables he did no more then S. Austine affirmeth appertaineth to Christian Kings to command those things that are just and honest not only in civill affaires but also in matters of religion for what he did hee had many excellent presidents before him in David Salomon Hezekiah and Iosiah Kings of Iudah and Constantine and Theodosius and other Christian Emperours as is declared at large by B. Bilson in his defence of the oath of supremacre and Doctor Crakenthorpe in his most learned Apologie of this Emperour Next what hee saith that the Decree of this religious Emperour may well stand with the present practise of the Roman Church is most false Novel constit 123. For the words of the Emperour are generall commanding all Bishops and Priests to celebrate the sacred oblation of the Lords Supper and prayer used in Baptisme not in secret but with a lowd and cleare voyce that the mindes of the hearers might bee stirred up with more devotion to expresse the prayses of God Now I would faine know to what end all Bishops and Priests are commanded to pronounce their words clearely and distinctly both at the administration of Baptisme and the Lords Supper but that their hearers might undetstand what they say and bee affected with those things they heare which cannot beif the Priest speak to them in an unknown tong For how can the lowd pronouncing of words in a strange language stirre up the devotion of the people to praise God for his benefits which the Emperour here requireth under a great penaltie saying Let the Bishops and Priests know that if they neglect to doe according to our princely command they shall yeeld an account in the dreadfull judgement of the great God for it and wee having information of them will not leave them unpunished To the tenth After the Imperiall Decree the Knight alledgeth a text out of the Canon law not to shew his skill in both lawes as the Iesuit would have it but to demonstrate that the practise of the Roman Church in this point of prayer in an unknowne tongue is against all law both Ecclesiasticall and civill Tit. 3. de Offic. and that the walls of the Romish Babell are battered by her owne canons for though the Decree of Pope Gregorie were made upon a speciall occasion yet it is grounded upon this generall rule that Service and Sacraments must bee said and administred to the people in a language they understand which the Iesuit himselfe confesseth in part saying that it is a matter of necessitie in the administration of some Sacraments to use the vulgar tongue as in Mariage and Penance as for the Councell of Lateran and the Pope in his Decree they speake indefinitely of holy Service and Sacraments and the Logitians rule is that indefinite propositions in materia necessaria are to be taken for universals and by the same reason which the Iesuit alledgeth for Penance and Mariage to be celebrated in a knowne tongue wee may conclude that Baptisme also and the Lords Supper ought to bee so celebrated For in both questions are put to the people to the god fathers in the one and communicants in the other and answers are expected from them To the eleventh The Iesuit is like them taxed by the Apostle who knew not what they spake nor whereof they affirme Our question is not whether divine Service ought alwayes to bee said in the mother tongue for wee our selves doe other wayes in divers Colledges but the point in controversie is whether the service ought alwayes to besaid in a tongue understood by those that are present this all the Authours alledged by the Knight affirme and therefore they make for us and assuredly if for seven or 800 yeares the publike prayers of the Church were offered to God in a language understood by the people as is confessed questionlesse in many places the prayers were turned into vulgar languages For it cannot be imagined that all the people in the Christian world before Pope Vitalians time understood Hebrew Lyra in 1 Cor. 14. in primitiva ecclesia bene dictiones coetera fiebant in linguâ vulgari Gretz def Bel. l. 2. de verb. Dei linguâ auditoribus non ignotâ omnia peragebantur consuetudo tunc ferebat ut omnes psallerent Harding apud Iewel ia 3. art divis 28 Verely in the primitive Church prayers were made in a common tongue knowne to the people Liturg. canonicam precem in primis dominici corporis sanguinis consecrationem ita veteres legebant ut à populo intelligi Amen ucclamari possint Ioban Belit in sum de divin offic in primitiva ecclcsia prohibitum erat ne quis lo quereturling u is nisi esset qui inter pretaretur quid enim prodesset c. Wald. in doct art eccies tit 4. c. 31. fuit ergo ratio talis benediction is in ecclesiâ tempore Apostoli cui respondere solebat non tantùm clerus sed omnis populus Aquin as lect 4. ideò erat insania in primitivâ ecclesiâ quia erant rudes in ritu ecclesiastico Greeke or Latine neither is it a point much materiall whether the Authours alledged by the Knight speake of any Precept of praying in a knowne tongue or not it is sufficient that they confesse that it was the generall practice of the Primitive Church to performe their devotions in the vulgar tongue For certainly what they generally practised in their divine
Service they thought to be fittest and most agreeable to Gods commandement If wee had nothing but their practise for us it alone would prove the visibilitie of our Church in this maine point wherein wee stand at a bay with the Roman Church but the truth is though the Iesuit would bee loath to heare it his owne witnesses Cassander Belithus Waldensis and Aquinas speake home to the point even of a Precept the words of Cassander are the Canonicall prayers and especially the words of Consecration of the body and blood of our Lord the Ancients did so read that all the people might understand it and say Amen according to the precept intimated by the Apostle 1 Cor. 14. 16. The words of Belithus are that in the Primitive Church it was forbidden that any should speake with tongues unlesse there were some to interpret for what saith hee should speaking availe without understanding Waldensis saith more then that in the Apostles time the giving of thankes was in a knowne tongue he confirmeth the practise with a reason saying There was reason it should bee so because in those times not only the Priests but the people also were wont to answer Amen Aquinas goeth a step farther that it was madnesse in the Primitive Church for a man to have prayed in an unknowne tongue because then the people were rude and ignorant in Ecclesiasticall rites Now if the Iesuit thinke that it was not prohibited in the Apostles time to doe any madde act in time of divine Service he himselfe is bound for the Anticyrae Now for that the Iesuit addeth for the imbellishing of his former answer that none of the vulgar languages but the three learned to wit the Hebrew Greeke and Latine were Dedicated on the crosse of Christ and consequently that they being the best and perfectest of all languages were fittest for divine Service to be said in them it is more plausible then substantiall For though I grant that every devout soule so affecteth the person of our Lord and Saviour that shee loveth the very ground hee trod upon and honoureth those languages above all other in which his titles were proclaimed for the greater advancement of his kingdome yet the reason holdeth not in our present case For though a golden key bee simply better then a key of iron yet a key of iron which will open to us a casket of most pretious Iewells is better for that use then a key of gold which will not open the lock Admit the originall languages of Greeke and Hebrew are simply perfecter and better then any other which are derivatives from them yet the Mother-tongue or vulgar language is better and fitter for the congregation in time of divine Service because it answereth the wards of their understanding and openeth to their capacity the Divine mysteries then celebrated which the learned languages cannot doe As for Pilats writing over the Crosse it is certaine he had no end therein to honour the three Languages with this title but to dishonour our Saviour thereby and put a scorne upon him and therefore that inscription in the three languages was rather a pollution then a Dedication of those tongues If Pilats action herein bee of any force it maketh rather against then for our Adversaries For Pilat therefore commanded the title to be written in those three languages that it might be understood of all or the greater part of those that then were at Ierusalem By which reason people of divers languages ought to have their mysteries for so the Iesuit calleth this title celebrated in their owne severall langurges Praef. in psal his maximè tribus linguis sacramentum voluntatis Dei beati regni expectatio praedicatur ex eoque illud Pilati fuit ut in his tribus linguis regem Iudaeorum Dominum nostrum Iesum Christum esse praescriberet S. Hilarie who is alledged by Baylie the Iesuit for the consecration of these tongues neither saith that these tongues were consecrated by that inscription not that Christs kingdome is to be proclaimed in them only His words are in these three languages especially the mysterie of Gods will and the expectation of his blessed kingdome is preached and hence it was that Pilat wrote our Lord Iesus Christ King of the Iewes in those three tongues This testimonie cutteth the throate of our Adversaries for the adverbe maximè or chiefly implieth that the mysteries of Christs kingdome were to be preached in other tongues though in these especially because these were then and are some of them at this day most generally knowne and understood Inc. 15 Marc. Deus voluit ut causa mortis Christi varijs linguis scriberetur quo ab omnibus intelligeretur Et Hieron ib. hae tres linguae in crucis titulo conjunctae ut omnis lingua commemoraret perfidiam Iudaeorum Baron tom 10 Anno Chris 880. ep 147. liter as Slavonicas à Constantino philosopho repertas quibus Deo laudes debitas resonent jure laudamus ut in cadem lingua Christi Dei nostri praeconia opera enarrentur jubemus neque enim trilus tantùm linguis sed omnibus Dominum laudare authoritate sacrâ monemur quae praecepit dicens laudate Dominum omnes gentes nec sanè fidei vel doctrinae allquid obstat five missas in eadem Slavonica lingua canere sive sacrum evangelium vel lectiones divinas N. V. Testamenti benè translatas interpretatas legere out alia horarum officia psallere quoniam qui fecit tres linguas principales Hebraeam scilicet Graecaem Latinam ipse creavit alias omnes ad laudem gloriam suam Lyra and S. Ierome harpe upon this string God would have saith Lyra that the cause of Christs death should bee written in divers tongues that every tongue might declare the trecherie of the Iewes and which marreth all the Iesuits musick the Popes Diapason soundeth out the same note for so wee reade in Bope Iohns Epistle to the King of Moravia we commend the Slavonian letters found out by Constantine the Philosopher whereby those of that countrey set forth the due prayses of God and we command that the preaching and workes of Christ our God bee declared in them for we are admonished by the Divine authoritie which commandeth saying Prayse the Lord all yee Gentiles to prayse the Lord not in three tongues only but in all for hee who made the three principall languages Hebrew Greeke and Latine hee created also all other for his glorie To the twelfth To this insolent interrogation of the Iesuit wee answer that in generall prayer in an unknowne tongue is commanded in all those texts of Scripture which require us to come neere unto God and pray unto him with our heart For by the heart the understanding as well as the will and affections are meants as appeareth by that prayer of Solomon Da mihi cor intelligens in particular and expresse words it is commanded in the 1
Cor. 14. chapter through the whole out of which wee thus argue if it be better in the Church to speake five words with understanding that by our voyce wee may teach others then a thousand words in an unknowne tongue then certainly the publike Service of the Church ought to be in a knowne tongue but it is better in the Church to speake five words with understanding to instruct others thereby then a thousand words in an unknowne tongue v. 19. Therefore the publike Service of the Church ought to bee in a knowne tongue If all things ought to be done in the Church to edification then ought the publike Service to bee in a knowne tongue for hee that speaketh in an unknowne tongue edifieth not v. 5. but in the Church all things ought to bee done to edification v. 26. Ergo the publike Service ought to bee in a knowne tongue If in the prayers of the Church the people are to joyne with the Priest and testifie their consent with him by saying Amen to his prayers and giving of thankes then ought the publike Service to be in a knowne tongue But in the prayers of the Church the people ought to joyne with the Priest and testifie their consent by saying Amen to his prayers and giving of thankes Ergo the publike Service ought to bee in a knowne tongue If in the Church prayers wee ought to pray and sing with understanding then ought Church service to bee in a knowne tongue for if wee pray in an unknowne tongue our spirit prayeth but our understanding is unfruitfull v. 14. But in the prayers of the Church wee ought to pray and sing with understanding v. 15. Ergo the publike Service ought to bee in a knowne tongue Neither can the Iesuit shift off these passages with a wish saying that S. Paul indeed adviseth and wisheth that when any prayer is made in an unknowne tongue there should bee some to interpret but that hee requireth no such thing to bee observed as a divine precept for v. 37. hee addeth if any man thinke himselfe a prophet or spirituall let him know that the things which I write unto you are the commandements of God To conclude when S. Iames commandeth that whosoever prayeth Iames 1.6 aske in faith nothing doubting but that hee shall receive what he asketh hee necessarily implieth that wee ought to pray to God in a knowne tongue For how can hee beleeve that hee shall receive what he prayeth for if he knoweth not what himselfe saith in his prayers or what an other prayeth for him to whose prayers hee saith Amen To the Iesuits second quaere where prayer in an unknowne knowne tongue is forbidden I answer Esay 29.13 and Marke the 7.10 Well Esay prophesied of you hypocrites this people honoureth mee with their lips but their heart is farre from mee and 1 Cor. 14. where the Apostle professedly disputeth against speaking in the Church in an unknowne tongue But the Iesuit excepteth that S. Paul in that chapter condemneth not simply prayers in an unknowne tongue though hee preferreth prophecie By which his ignorant exception it should seeme that hee read that chapter in an unknowne tongue for hee speaketh so wide from the matter as if hee understood never a word in it It is true that the Apostle in that chapter comparing the gift of tongues and prophecie together condemneth neither of them but preferreth the gift of prophecie and in prosecution of the comparison falleth upon those who used the gift of tongues in publike prayers in the Church and hee expresly condemneth that practise of them because they that prayed in such sort uttering words that were not understood spake not to men because no man understood them v. 2. spake into the ayre v. 5. edified not by those prayers v. 12.17 because others could not joyne with them in their prayers nor say Amen to their thankes v. 15. Now if the Apostle reproved the use of the miraculous gift of tongues which redounded so much to the honour of God in the Church without an interpreter v. 28. saying if there bee no interpreter let them keepe silence in the Church How much more may wee conceive would he have sorbidden the use of an unknowne tongue acquired by humane industrie To his third quaere what authoritie we can bring for our selves or example I answer that the Knight hath brought the authoritie and example of the catholique Christian Church for 700. yeares at the least and because he calleth upoÌ us to name any Father who teacheth as we do that the service of the Church ought to bee in a knowne tongue Exposit in psal 18. vult ut quod conamus intelligamus ac humana ratione non quasi avium voce canamus nam psittaci corvi picae hujusmodi volucres saepè abhominibus docentur sonate quod nesciunt sciunter autem cantare naturae hominis divina bonitate concessum est I name S. Chrysostome who in his Commentarie upon the 14. chapter of the first to the Corinthians saith that the Apostle teacheth that we ought to speak with our tongues and withall to minde what is spoken that wee may understand it and S. Austine willeth that wee understand what wee sing like men indued with reason and not chatter like birds for ousels parrats crowes pies and such other birds are often taught by men to sound out that which they know not but to know what they sing or sing with knowledge and understanding is by Gods will peculiarly given unto man I name also Iustine Martyre and S. Basil and many other ancient Doctours whose testimonies are plentifully alledged by Bishop Iewell Article the third and Bilson of Supremacie part the fourth and not yet answered by any Papist to my knowledge To the thirteenth The observation of Cardinall Bellarmine concerning the different custome of the ancient Church and the present Roman maketh rather against the Iesuits then for them For who will not attribute more to the uniforme practise of the primitive Church then to the heteroclyte practise of later Churches assuredly the practise of the primitive Church wherein the people answered the Priests and not the Clarke only is most agreeable to the doctrine of S. Paul and consonant to reason For publike prayers were instituted especially for three ends first for the most solemne worship of God when thousands of hands are at once lifted up to him and as many tongues confesse his name secondly for the stirring up of greater devotion when many hundreds praying and blessing and singing together like so many coales on the same hearth kindle one the other and increase the flame Thirdly for more prevalencie with God when we offer violence as it were to heaven and send up our united devotions like a vollie of shotte to batter the walls of it They who pray in a tongue which the people understand not and therefore cannot joyne with them in their prayer faile of all these ends Yet to sodder
all the Iesuit beareth us in hand that the Masse being the same continually the people understand it sufficiently for the exercise of their devotion though not to satisfie vaine curiositie which speech of his is partly sencelesse and partly blasphemous it is sencelesse to imagine that a man who never learned his Grammar nor ever was taught Greek or Latine by hearing onely the Masse read over though a thousand times should come to understand it secondly it is blasphemous to say that to desire to understand the particular contents of the Epistles and Gospels read in the Masse or the psalmes of David sung in the Church is vaine curiofitie or hereticall pride Loe here Flood his channell falleth againe into the Stygian lake To the fourteenth There is no contradiction at all in the Knights observations For though this story of the shepheards abusing the words of Consecration and strucke dead for it might peradventure occasion some alteration in those Churches where it was beleeved yet there was no generall command for the practise of the Latine Service in all Christian Churches before Vitalians time who in the yeare 666. verified the number of the name of the beast in himselfe which according to the interpretation of S. Irenaeus who flourished within two hundred yeares after Christ is lateinos as before I noted But for mine owne part I have no faith at all in that legendarie fable of the Sheepheards First because those that coyned it agree not in their tale for some say that the Bread and Wine were transubstantiated into flesh and bloud and the sheepeheards for their prophane abuse strucke dead others tell it otherwise Cassand liturg c. 28. Honorius in Gem. animae Bellar. l. 2. de Mis c. 22. that neither the Bread nor the Wine were transubstantiated but consumed by fire from heaven nor the sheepheards strucken dead but onely laid for dead As for the Authour of the booke called Pratum spirituale hee is of no credit at all For in his Spirituall meadow as hee tearmeth his worke there are many such Eutopian flowers as this is where I leave the Iesuit to gather him a nosegay till I have leisure to meete with him in the next Section Concerning worshiping of Images Spectacles Sect. 7. a pag. 283. usque ad 319. THe text of Scripture which the Knight quoteth maketh not any mention of Image-worship but Idoll-worship which hee could not but know to bee a different thing having beene so often told it It followeth not the Iewes might not adore Images Ergo wee may not for the Iewes might not eate bloud nor swines flesh nor many other things which wee may If the second Commandement were morall and now in force the Knight could not have his wives picture nor shee his without breach of that Commandement therefore in that sence hee cannot urge it more against our pictures then wee against his Cornelius Agrippa was a Magician and therefore no heed to be given to what he testifieth against the Roman Church Philo Iudaeus saith nothing but that the Iewes admitted no image into the Temple which is true for God cannot bee painted neither could they have the Image of any Saint for there was none as yet which might have that honour to have their images or pictures in the Temple themselves being not yet admitted into the heavenly Temple of God It is no marvaile that the Iewes hate crucifixes sith they could not indure Christ himselfe Notwithstanding the prohibition in the second Commandement were it Morall or Ceremoniall men did adore the Cherubins in the Temple and the Arke and the Temple it selfe There may in the New Testament bee some precept or example both of our Saviour and his Apopostles for the adoration of images though not written in Scripture because as S. Iohn saith that all is not written or rather a very small part is written as his words import Wee have the example of our Saviour and his Apostles testified by good authenticall histories many great and grave Authours make mention of two severall images made miraculously by our blessed Saviour himselfe one was that which hee sent to Abgarus King of Edessa who had a desire to see him the other was that of Veronica which hee made with wiping his face as hee was carrying his Crosse a third was one which Nicodemus gave to Gamaliel all which are testified not only by grave and learned Authours but by God himselfe though not in Scripture yet by great and wonderfull miracles S. Austine taketh not Simulachrum for an image as the Knight falsly translateth him but for an idoll and so commendeth Varro for comming neerer to the knowledge of the true God and going further from idolatrie then other Gentiles Eusebius saith not that images sprang from an heathenish custome but hee meaneth by mos gentilis the fashion of their owne people and kindred who were wont to honour such that had done them any benefit or helpe by erecting statues in memorie of them Moreover Eusebius relateth this storie of the womans statua with approbation upon the basis or foot thereof there grew a certaine strange and unusuall kind of herbe which as soone as it grew up so high as to touch the hemme of the brazen garment it had vertue to cure diseases of every kind The Councell of Elliberis was an obscure provinciall Synod of 19. Bishops onely without any certaintie of the time when it was held to which we oppose one of Constantinople another at Rome under Gregorie the third and a third at Nice of 350. Bishops Moreover this Councell forbiddeth not pictures absolutely but painting on walls and soleaving them to the furie and scorne of the Gentiles and it is plaine that the Councell made the Decree out of honour to images because they thought not the walls a place convenient because the plaster breaking off in some places they might become deformed and so contemptible Valens and Theodosius whom the Knight joyneth in making a law against images were not alive together Valens being killed 23. yeares before Theodofius was borne besides Valens was a wicked Arrian heretique upon whom God did shew his judgement by a disasterous end and the law made by him cited by the Knight is fowly corrupted and the meaning wholly perverted for the law was made in honour of the Crosse towit thus wee command that it shall not bee lawfull for any to carve or paint the signe of our Saviour Christ either on the ground or in any stone or marble lying on it Nicolaus Clemanges was himselfe a Wiclefian heretique Cassander Erasmus and Wicelius are of no account in the Roman Church The Councell of Nice held under Constantine and Irene was not condemned at Frankford Nay in that very Councell an Anathema is said to all such as deface Images Polidore Virgill in saying the ancient Fathers condemned the worship of images for feare of Idolatrie speaketh not of the Fathers of the New Testament but those of the Old particularly naming Moses
and Hezekias nay farther Polydore accounteth him a dissolute and audacious man who judgeth otherwise of the worship of Images then hath beene approved by the Decree of two or three Councels which he there alledgeth Peresius denieth not the worship of Images but that the picture is to bee adored with the same worship as the prototype or thing represented by it which maketh nothing against the doctrine of the Catholique Church touching the worship of Images Agobardus his drift in his booke De picturis imaginibus is onely against the idolatricall use or abuse rather of images against which hee speaketh very much by occasion of some abuses in his time Although it were true that some silly women or ignorant rusticks should bee so blockish as to conceive some Divinitie in pictures and accordingly adore them yet the use of pictures must not bee taken away for the abuse for the axiome of the law is utile perinutile non vitiatur The Hammer AS those who beheld the head of Medusa wereturned into stocks and stones and presently deprived of all life and sense so those who gaze upon with admiration this head of the Romish doctrine concerning Image-worship become so stupid and senslesse as if they were turned into those stocks and stones to which they give religious veneration A notable experiment hereof we have in a conference in France in which a Sorbon Doctour present hearing how absurdly the Patrones of Images maintained the worship of them said of a truth I find the words of Psalmist verified those that make them are like unto them and so are all they that put their trust in them But wee need not goe so farre for an instance the Iesuit in this Section maketh good that observation shewing us a forehead of the same metall the images are made for which hee pleadeth For he loadeth the Knight with shamelesse calumnies and most impudently defendeth such grosse idolattie as the wiser of the heathen were ashamed of hee whetteth his poysonous tooth and like a mad dogge snaps at all hee meeteth with and farre out-raileth Rabsekah himselfe as the Reader cannot but judge if hee peruse but a few passages ensuing namely first page 298. This is your discourse Sir Humphrey wherein you have given so sufficient testimonie of notorious had dealing especially in the two places of Eusebius and of the civill law that if there were nothing else falsified or corrupted in your whole booke this were enough utterly to deface all memorie of you from among honest men And page 301. What say you to all this Sir Humphrey looke now into your owne conscience and see whether it can flatter you so much as to say you are an honest man And page 205. May not you then beare away the bell from all lying and corrupting fellowes that have ever gone before you Hee that seeth such foule stuffe come out of the Iesuits mouth would hee not thinke that he were sicke of the disease called miserere but I leave his Grobian language and come to consider first what hee laieth to the Knights charge and after how hee dischargeth himselfe of the idolatrie and superstition wherewith the Knight in this chapter burdeneth the Roman Church First he chargeth the Knight with false translation of the Councell of Trent Wee teach that the image of Christ the Virgin Mother of God and other Saints are chiefly in Churches to be had and reteined which Decree he might have translated a little better and more clearely by saying that those images are to bee had and reteined especially in Churches the Latine word being praesertim and his translating it chiefly and placing it so odly gives cause to thinke he had an evill meaning therein as if hee would have his reader thinke that the Councell taught that those images were the chiefe things to be had in Churches c. It is a signe of a light head to stumble at a straw yet here lyeth not so much as a straw in the Iesuits way only he wanted a festrawe to point to the accent which is set upon Churches not upon had the meaning of the Councell and the Knights is all one to wit that images by that Decree were to bee had and reteined chiefly or especially in Churches not to bee had or held to bee the chiefe thing in Churches For no man would imagine that the Councell could bee so absurd and impious as to preferre images before the sacred Scriptures the Font and Chalice the Altar or communion Table much lesse the sacred Symbols of Christs body and bloud Secondly he chargeth the Knight with grosse ignorance in Chronologie But I may aske you saith hee how come you to say the Iewes never allowed adoration of Images for foure thousand yeares when as the people of the Iewes were not such a people above two thousand yeares nay Moyses lived not past 1500. yeares before our Saviour so that of your owne liberalitie and skill in Chronologie you have added 2000. yeares to make your doctrine seeme ancient There is a grosse mistake I confesse but in the Iesuit not in the Knight who saith not 4000. yeares but for almost 4000. yeares in the first edition and in the later editions this scape of the presse is mended and the figure altered For the matter it selfe the Knight might truly have said that the people of God who lived partly under the law of nature partly under the law of Moyses never allowed adoration of Images for 4000. yeares so ancient is the doctrine of the reformed Churches in this point Thirdly he chargeth the Knight with Simbolizing with Iewes in the hatred of Christ You saith hee in alledging the Iewes hate of the crosse as an argument why you should also hate the same tacitly confesse that you love Christ so well as they 1 Cor. 16.22 A fearefull charge for whosoever loveth not the Lord Iesus let him bee anathemamaranatha but a ridiculous proofe for a man may hate an idolized crucifix out of love of Christ because hee cannot endure Christ his honour to bee given to graven images Heate of zeale against idolatrie doth no way argue coldnesse of affection to the true religion 2. King 15.4 Witnesse King Hezekiah the non pareil of a religious Prince who demolished the brazen Serpent and stamped it to powder calling it nehustan though it were an image and type of Christ crucified as Christ himselfe teacheth us Io. 3.14 As Moses lifted up the Serpent in the wildernesse So must the Son of man be lifted up Witnesse Saint Peter who loved Christ more then the rest of the Disciples 1 Pet. 4.3 Diligis me plùs quà m hi and yet hee brandeth all Image worship by the title of abominable idolatrie Nay witnesse S. Iohn the beloved Disciple who went behind none in zeale against idolatrie 1 Io. 5.21 saying babes keepe your selves from idols It is one thing to dislike crucifixes in Churches out of hatred of Christ as Iewes Turkes and Infidels
silver chaines hee that is so impoverished that hee hath no oblation chooseth a tree that will not rot hee seeketh unto him a cunning work-man to prepare a graven image that shall not bee moved c. And this may serve to illustrate the texts alledged by the Knight Now for the words imago idolum upon which the Iesuit foundeth his distinction of image-worship and idol-worship if wee respect the originall and ancient use of them they are all one for ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã is derived from ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã signifying the shape or forme of any thing L. de sensu sensibili and Aristotle calleth the species of such things as we apprehend by sence idola and Tullie interpreteth the word imagines by idola Cic. de fin imagines quae idola nominantur and the second Councell of Nice action the sixt tearmeth the images then used in the Churches idols saying these idols may bee converted to other uses And lastly Cardinall Cajetan in his Comment upon the 20. of Exodus speaking of the images of the Angels in the Arke tearmeth them idola Cherubinorum word for word the idols of the Cherubins But if wee have regard to the more common use the words imago idolum differ as much as mulier scortum a woman and a strumpet For as such women only as are abused and defiled by corporall fornication are tearmed strumpets so now for the most part those images only which are abused to spirituall fornication are called idols Thus Tertullian defineth idolatrie to be the consecration of images De idel c. 4. imaginum consecratio est idololatria Isid l. 8. Origâ c. 11. idolum est simulacrum quod humana effigie est consecratum or devoting of them to a religious use or setting them up to be worshipped and agreeably hereunto S. Isidore defineth an idoll to be an image consecrated in a humane shape and such were all idols at the first but in processe of time as men in a quagmire sinke still deeper and more foule themselves so the Pagans fell by degrees into grosser idolatrie and turned the glorie of God not only into the similitude of a corruptible man but also of beasts and fowles and creeping things Rom. 1.23 24. The difference which Cardinall Bellarmine maketh betweene an image and an idoll viz. that an idoll is the representation of that which hath no existence in nature De tradit p. 3. multa idola erant in quiâus nec daemon aliquid respondebat sed tantùm benefactorum Deum representârunt but an image the likenesse of something existent is very false and absurd For as Martinus Paresius confesseth there were many idols of the Gentiles in which they represented God as a benefactour The mother of Mica dedicated the hundred shekels of silver unto the Lord to make a graven and a molten image L. 2. de imag c. 24. idololatria non solùm fit cum adorantur idola relicto Deo sed etiam adoratur idolum cum Deo quod si latria quae exhibetur imagini propter aliud est idem cultus cum eo qui exhibetur Deo aequè colitur creatura atque ipse Deus quae certè idololatria est Lor. Comment in Act. c. 17. si verum est Cherubin ore manibus cruribus erectione corporis humanam jubis à pectore cervice pendentibus leoninam alis Aquilinam ungulis pedum vitulinam figuram retulisse and perswaded her selfe that God would blesse her for it yet no man doubteth but that was an idoll and shee an idolatresse Iud. 17.4 Nay the Cardinall him selfe ingenuously acknowledgeth that to exhibit divine worship even to the image of God is idolatrie which saith he is committed not only when an idoll is worshipped in stead of God but also when an idoll is worshipped together with God By his owne confession then an image made to represent the true God may bee an idol by attributing to it latria or the worship proper to God Moreover the Cherubins hee will have to bee as they were indeed images and not idols in his sence yet never was there any thing in nature existent in that forme as they were expressed namely as the Rabbins teach and the popish Painters draw them at this day in the shape of a child with wings or as Lorinus hath it with the face hands thighes and body of men but with the mane of Lyons wings of Eagles and parted feet of Calves And no man doubteth but that the image which Aaron made and which Ezekiah brake downe and which the Philistines consecrated and the Baalites worshipped were idolls yet were they representations of things existent in nature the first of a calfe the second of a Serpent the third of a fish the fourth of the Sunne To the second The Iesuit maketh a brutish replie unworthy a Christian much lesse a Divine For who knoweth not that delectus ciborum the difference of meates was apart of the Ceremoniall law abrogated by Christ who teacheth us that it is not that which goeth into a man which desileth him Matth. 15.17 but that which commeth out of him Who sent Peter to Cornelius Acts 10. and by a miraculous vision revealed unto him ver 14.15 that he might not account any meate common or uncleane what God hath cleansed saith he that call not thou common Let the Iesuit shew us a like abrogation of the law concerning making and worshipping of images and then wee will free his Church from idolatrie in this point But on the contrarie it is so evident that the second commandement in the Decalogue is not ceremoniall and positive but morall Clemens Alex in protrept Tertul. de Idol c. 4. Bellar. de imag l. 2. c. 7. that not only the ancicient Fathers but their great Cardinall is forced to confesse as much nay he is so zealous in the point that he taketh Peresius Catharinus and all such Romanists to taske as affirme the second Commandement to bee juris positivi and solidly proveth out of Irenaeus Cyprian and S. Austine that it is a morall and consequently bindeth us as strict as the Iewes To the third The Iesuits argument is a non sequitur for God by Moses forbiddeth not simply to make any image but to make any image to our selves thou shalt not make thy selfe any graven image to wit to bow downe to it or to worship it as the words following declare thou shalt not bow downe to them nor worship them Now what a loose kind of arguing is this of the Iesuit the law forbiddeth us to make any image of God thereby to worship him therefore it forbiddeth us to make any image of man or woman to remember them the law forbiddeth all superstitious use of images therefore it forbids all civill use of them scilicet To the fourth Although Cornelius Agrippa wrote bookes De occultâ philosophiâ wherein he seemeth to hold too neere correspondencie with Magicians and
atque depictum habens imaginem quasi Christi vel sancti alicujus non enim satis memini cujus imago fuerit cum ergo hoc vidissem in ecclesiâ Christi contra authoritatem scripturaruÌ hominis pendere imaginem scidi illud magis dedi consilium custodibus ejusdem loci ut pauperem mortunm eo obvolverent atque efferrent Ierome in Ezek l. 4. c. 16. nos unam habemus vivam unam veneramur imaginem quae est imago invisibilis omnipotentis Dei. Amphiloc citat à pat concil Constantinop An. 754 ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã Aug. de mor. Eccl. c. 34 novi multos esse sepulchroruÌ picturarum adoratores c. Ep. 109. ad Ian. in primo praecepto prohibetur coli aliqua in figmentis hominum Deisimilitudo non quia non habet imaginem Deus sed quia nulla imago ejus coli debet nisi illa quae hoc est quod ipse L. de fid symb tale simulacrum Deo nefas est Christiano in templo collocare but you must understand that that was joyned to the glory of his God-head in so much that his Apostles could not behold the glory of his flesh in the mount much more glorious is it now having put off mortalitie who is therefore able with dead and livelesse colours and a shadowed picture to expresse those bright and shining beames of so great glorie Epiphanius as zealous as either for entring into a Church at Anablathra and finding there a vaile hanging at the doore died and painted and having the image as it were of Christ or some Saint seeing this that contrary to the authoritie of Scriptures the image of a man was hung upin the Church of Christ he cut it and the vaile and gave counsell to the Keepers of the place to wrap and burie some poore dead man in it and he intreated the Bishop of Ierusalem to give charge hereafter that such vailes as that was being repugnant to Christian religion should not bee hanged up in the Church of Christ S. Ierome in his Comment upon the sixteenth of Ezekiel teacheth that Christians never acknowledge nor worship any image of the invisible and omnipotent God save one to wit his Sonne In the fift age Amphilochius Bishop of Iconium instructeth us what account the Church made of images in these words Wee have no care to figure by colours the bodily visages of Saints in tables because wee have no need of suchthings But by vertue to imitate their conversation and S. Austine treating of the catholique Church professeth that hee knew many worshippers of graves and pictures and withall addeth the Church censure of them but the Church saith hee condemneth them and seeketh every way to correct them as ungracious children and in his 109. Epistle to Ianuarius C. 11. hee writeth that in the first Commandement any similitude of God devised by man is forbidden to bee worshipped not because God hath not an image but because no image of him ought to bee worshipped but that which is the same thing that hee is as for drawing him after the similitude of a man hee utterly disliketh it saying it is unlawfull for a Christian to erect any such image and place it in the Church for as else-where hee argueth images prevaile more to bow downe the unhappy soule in that they have a mouth eyes eares Psal 113. Conc. 2. plus enim valent simulacra ad curvandam infaelicem animam quòd os babent oculos habent aures habent nares habent manus habent pedes habent quam ad corrigenâam quòd non loquantur non videant c. God li. 8. tit 12. prohibemus basilicam alicujus imagine obscurari Greg. Regis l. 7 ep 109. ad Seren praetereà judico dudum ad nos pervenisse quòd fraternit as vestra quosdam imaginum adoratores aspiciens easdem ecclefiae imagines confregit atque projecit quidem zelum vos ne quid manufactum adorari possit habuisse laudavimus sed frangere easdem imagines non debuisse judicamus idcirco enim pictura in ecclesia adhibetur ut ' hi qui liter as nesâiunt saltem in parietibus videndo legant quae legere in codicibus non valent Vid. Concil Nic. 2. Act. 6. Zonoras hist Tom. 3. ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã nostrills hands and feet then to correct it in that they neither heare nor see nor smell nor handle nor walke In the sixt age The Emperour Iustinian setteth downe a law made by Theodosius and Valentinian which forbiddeth Churches to bee obscured with any images or painted tables In the seventh age When Images began to be set up in the Churches Serenus Bishop of Marsilis brake them downe which fact of his though Gregorie disliked because he thought that images might profitably be retained as lay-mens books yet in this hee commended his zeale that hee would by no meanes suffer them to bee worshipped In the seventh age There was a Councell held at Constantinople Anno 754. whereinlt was decreed by 338. Bishops in this manner Wee doe declare that all images of what nature soever made by the wicked art of the Painter be cast out of Christian Churches whosoever from this day forward shall dare to set up any images of God either in the Church or in a private house if hee be a Bishop let him bee deposed if he be a lay-man let him bee accursed Zonoras saith that in the hearing of all the people they openly forbad the worshipping of Images H. de orthodox fid l. 4. c. 17. orat de imag calling such as adored them idolater And in the yeare 794. Charles the great called a Councell of 300. Bishops of France Italie and Germany in which the second Synod of Nice which decreed the erecting and worshipping of images is refuted and condemned yea and some of the patrones of images as namely Durand and Gregorie the second professedly inveigh against all Images and Pictures made to represent the Deity or Trinitie it is unpossible saith Damascene that God who can neither bee seene by man nor circumscribed should be expressed in any shape or figure nay saith hee it is extreame madnesse and impietie to make a representation of the Godhead Ep. Greg. ad Leo. Imper. de imag in and Gregorie the second giveth this reason to Leo the Emperour why they painted not God the Father Quoniam quis sit non novimus because wee know not who hee is and the nature of God cannot be painted and set forth to mans sight In the eighth age Rhem. cont Hinc Laud. c. 20. Hincmarus Archbishop of Rhemes tells us that not long before his time a generall Synod was called in Germanie by Charles the great and therein by the rule of Scriptures and Fathers the Councell of Nice indeed saith he a wicked Councell touching images which some would have to bee broken in pieces and some to bee worshipped was utterly rejected In this age in the yeare
our Saviour and much tending both to the confirmation of the Gospell in generall and that particular miracle of Christ for who would not beleeve that the woman was cured of her bloudy issue by touching the hemme of Christs garment when hee saw an unusuall kind of herbe growing at the foot of that Statua which as soone as it grew up so high as to touch the hemme of the brazen garment received a miraculous vertue from it to cure diseases of every kind notwithstanding all this faire weather Eusebius falleth fowle upon the Originall of this erecting statuaes to the memorie of the dead attributing it to a heathenish rite or custome Neither doth the Knight any way wrong Eusebius in the relation or translation of this passage For certaine it is that the people of God began not first to set up images or erect statuaes The first which wee ever read of was consecrated to Belus the successour of Ninus by the Assyrians who were Paynims and the word ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ethnicus or gentilis signifieth Gentile or Heathen whatsoevr the Iesuit alledgeth out of Thomasius Dictionarie to the contrarie saying Looke in your Dictionarie of Thomas Thomasius whether amongst all the Englishes of Gentilis which are there set downe P. 300. you can find heathenish which I dare say you cannot The Greeke word in Eusebius text is ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã and the Latine gentilis signifieth the same thing to wit belonging to a countrey people stocke or family had the Iesuits and Seminarie Priests at Doway and Rhemes better studied Thomas Thomasius Dictionarie they would not have fraught their English translation of the Bible with so many affected harsh-sounding and uncoth words to English eares as announce archisynagogue azymes commessations depositum didrachme euroclydon exinanited holocaust hosts victimes paraclete pasche resuscitate neophyte superedified and the like Againe though Thomasius render not the word Heathenish yet he rendereth it gentile which is all one and let the Iesuit turne over all his Thomasius and Eliots and Riders and Coopers and Calepines and see whether hee can find any other proper Latine word answering to the English Heathen or heathenish then gentilis or ethnicus a word derived of the Greeke ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã or ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã the very word used by Eusebius in this place When so often in the holy Scriptures of the old Testament the word gentes occurreth as in the 2 Psal v. 1. the 9. v. 5. and the 10. v. 16. and the 44. v. 2. and the 98. v. 1. and the 135. v. 15. and else-where what can the Iesuit meane by it but Gentile Orat. de obit Theodos regem adoravit non lignum utique quia bic gentilis error est vanit as impiorum or how can he translate it in pure and proper English but heathen or heathenish nations according to the meaning of the holy Ghost in those texts What will hee say to the words of S. Ambrose When Helena read the title upon the Crosse then newly found shee fell downe and worshipped what or whom The King saith that Father to wit Christ there entitled the King of the Iewes not verily the wood for that is a heathenish errour and a vanity of ungodly men Doth not gentilis here signifie prophane Pagan and heathenish therefore the Knights credit is salved in that his translation of Eusebius and the Iesuits credit and cause also lyeth a bleeding For though the word ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã in Greeke and gentilis in Latine sometimes in good authours signifieth no more then belonging to a countrie or nation Verisimile est quod majores nostri ad gentilis consuetudins similitudinem quà mprimùm accedentes eos qui tanquam servatores illis fuissent apud se honore ad hunc modum afficere consueverunt be it Christian or heathenish yet in this place of Eusebius it cannot be other wayes taken then for heathen for Eusebius a little before saith it is not to be wondered that those who are sprung of the Gentiles or came of heathenish parents and received benefits of our Saviour where he lived did thus unto him adding it is very likely that our ancestours herein followed the custome of the heathen who honoured all such with Statuaes who had been as saviours unto them preserving their lives To the twelfth The Councell of Eliberis is as a thorne in the Iesuits eyes and therefore he hath many plucks at it yet he plucks it not out but pricketh his owne fingerse First he saith it was an obscure Councell Vid suprà verba Agobardi without any certainty of the time when it was held As obscure as he maketh it it is a Councell of reverend antiquity cited by S. Agobardus and approved by him and honourably mentioned by all Writers who impugne idolatrous innovations corruptions in the Church As for the time Baronius and the best Chronologers affirme that it was held in the yeare of our Lord 305. in the time of Marcellus the first and was consequently more ancient then the first most famous Councell at Nice if to this Councell the Iesuit oppose one of Constantinople the other at Rome under Gregory the third and the third at Nice in favour of images we in like manner oppose to those idolatrous and hereticall many Councels of better note condemning image-worship as namely the Councell of Constantinople held in the yeare 754. and another celebrated there in the yeare 814. and a third at Frankford in the yeare 794. and a fourth at Paris under Ludovicus in the yeare 824. together with the book of Charles the great and the Epistle of the English Bishops penned by Alcuinus and mentioned by Houeden in his storie of England and many other tractates of famous writers of England France who professedly impugned and refuted the Decrees of the second Councel at Nice establishing image-worship Yea but saith the Iesuit the Canon of Eliberis shooteth not home to the point in question for it forbiddeth not pictures absolutely in Churches but only painting them on the walls I reply first that the Councell forbiddeth pictures in Churches absolutely the expresse words of the Canon are placuit in ecclesiâ pictur as esse non debere it seemed good to the Councell that pictures should not be in Churches Whereof the 19. Fathers present at that Synod render this reason ne quod collitur in parietibus depingatur lest that which is worshipped should be painted on the walls Secondly I reply if the Councell of Elliberis as the Iesuit granteth forbiddeth any image to be painted on the Church-walls why doe Papists every where in their Churches at this day paint images on the walls Yea but the Iesuit addeth who is best at a dead lift that we are besides the matter in producing the Canon of this Councell against images which was made in honour of them si crederefas est For the Councell saith the Iesuit forbad painting images on
were true might not a man thinke you tell as good a tale of some Protestants who in their pots have made so bold with Almighty God himselfe as to drinke a health to him and were not this a fine argument to prove that there is no God It is intollerable presiemption in the Knight to take upon him to censure so great a Councell as that of Trent Wherein the whole flower of the Catholique Church for learning and sanctity was gathered together the splendour of which Councell was so great that your night owle Heretiques durst not once appeare though they were invited to goe and come freely with all the security they could wish Whoreas the Knight saith that it is a senselesse and weake faith that giveth assent to doctrine as necessary to be believed which wanteth authority out of Scriptures and consent of Fathers I answer he knoweth not what he saith for all the Fathers agree that there are many things which men are bound to believe upon unwritten traditions whose authority you may see in great number in Bellarmine De verbo Dei l. 4. c 7. The consent of Doctours of the Catholique Church cannot more erre in one time then another the authority of the Church and assistance of the Holy Ghost being alwayes the same no lesse in one time then another Tertull. de prescript cap. 28. quod apud multos unum invenitur non est erratuÌ sed traditum and Tertullians rule having still place as well in one age as another that which is the same amongst many is not errour but a tradition St. Paul thought he answered sufficiently for the defence of himselfe and offence of his contentious enemy when he said 1 Cor. 11. If any man seeme to be contentious we have no such custome nor the Churches of God It is false which the Knight againe repeateth that an article of faith cannot be warantable without authority of Scriptures for faith is more ancient then Scripture to say nothing of the times before Christ faith was taught by Christ himselfe without writing as also by the Apostles after him for many yeares without any word written As no lesse credite is to be given to the Apostolicall preaching then writing so no lesse credit is still to be given to their words delivered us by tradition then by their writings the credite and sense of the writings depending upon the same tradition St. Austine defendeth many points of faith De baptisme l. 2 c. 7. l. 5 c. 25. cont Maximin l. 3. c. 3. et Epist 174. de Genesi ad litteram l. 10. c. 23. l. de cura pro mortuis et Epist 118. de unit eccles c. 22. et tract 98. in Iohan. either onely or chiefely by tradition and the practise of the Catholique Church as single Baptisme against the Donatists consubstantiality of the Sonne the divinity of the Holy Ghost and even unbegottennesse of the Father against the Arrians and the Baptisme of children against the Pelagians to say nothing of prayer for the dead observation of the feasts of Easter Ascention Whitsontide and the like Nay this truth was so grounded with him that he accounted it most insolent madnesse to dispute against the common opinion and practise of the Catholique Church In his booke of the unity of the Church he saith that Christ beareth witnesse of his Church and in his Tractates upon John having occasion to handle those words of St. Paul If we or an Angell from Heaven c. wherewith the Knight almost concludeth every Section he thus commenteth upon them the Apostles did not say if any man preach more then yee have received but besides that which you have received for if he should say that he should prejudicate that is goe against himselfe who coveted to come to the Thessalonians that he might supply that which was wanting to their faith but he that supplieth addeth that which was lacking taketh not away that which was before these are the Saints very words in that place by which it is plaine that he taketh the word praeter besides not in that sense as to signifie more then is written as you would understand it but to signifie the same that contra St. Paul himselfe useth the same word ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã para besides Rom. 16.17 for contra and you in your owne Bibles translate it so I beseech you brethren marke them which cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which you have learned and avoid them The Hammer AS Erucius the accuser of Roscius Amerinus having little to say against him Cic. pro Rosc Amer. to fill up the time rehearsed a great part of an invective which he had penned in former time against another defendant so the Iesuit here failing in his proofes for indulgences for which little or nothing can be said to fill up the Section transcribeth a discourse of his which he had formerly penned concerning the necessity of unwritten traditions which hath no affinity at all with the title of this Chapter de Indulgentiis In other paragraphs we finde him distracted and raving but in this he turneth Vagrant and therefore I am to follow him with a whip as the law in this case provideth Touching the point it selfe of Indulgences which Rivet fitly termeth Emulgences but the Iesuit the Churches Treasury whosoever relieth upon the superabundant merits and satisfaction of Saints for his absolution for his temporall punishment of sinne after this life shall finde according to the Greeke proverbe ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã instead of treasure Eras Adag Thesauri Carbones glowing coales heaped upon his head in hell For neither are there any merits or superabundant satisfactions of Saints Luk. 17.10 Christ saying when you have done all you are unprofitable servants nor were there any could they be applied or imputed to any other men 2 Cor. 5.10 the Apostle teaching that every man shall receive according to that which himselfe hath done in his body whether it be good or evill 2 Cor. 11.15 nor hath the Pope any more power to dispose of this treasury for the remission of sinnes our Saviour Matth. 18. v. 18. and Iohn 20.23 conferring the same power of remitting sinnes upon all the Apostles which he promised to S. Peter Matth. 16. Neither if the Pope had any speciall power of granting Indulgences could it extend to the soules in Purgatory quia non sunt de foro Papae because they are not subject to the Popes court Serm 2. de defunct 9 9. as Gerson rightly concludeth Neither lastly can it be proved that there is any Purgatory fire for soules after this life St. Iohn expresly affirming that the blood of Christ purgeth us from all our sinnes 1 Iohn 1.7 the fire therefore of Purgatory is rightly termed chymerica and chymica chymericall and chymicall chymericall because a meere fiction and chymicall because by meanes of this fire they extract much gold The Apostle saith there is
the bad Popes To the thirteenth The Knight after Alfonsus quoted Antoninus Cajetan and Bellarmine to prove the noveltie of Indulgences and that there is no ground for them in Scriptures or the writings of the ancient Fathers to whom the Iesuit answereth not a word and here the second time hee is Gravelled in this Section To Alfonsus hee seemeth to say something but upon due examination as good as nothing first hee falsifieth his words saying page 334. that Alfonsus confesseth the use of Indulgences to be most ancient and of many hundred yeares standing whereas his words are not that the use of Indulgences was most ancient but that it was said by some to be most ancient among the Romanes Apud Romanos vetustissimus praedicatur illarum usus this praedicatur is of no more credit than Plinie his fertur or Solinus his aiunt For notwithstanding this report Alfonsus resolves in that very place It seemes that the use of Indulgences came but lately into the Church Secondly the Iesuit forceth a wrong Inference from Alfonsus his words For albeit hee affirmeth that Indulgences are not to be contemned because they have beene in use in the Church for some hundreds of yeares yet hee condemneth not a man for an Haeretique that shall deny them but any one that shall contemne the Church or despise her autority his words are Quoniam ecclesiâ Catholicâ tantae est authoritatis ut qui illam contemnat Haereticus meritò censeatur we say the same also Matth. 18.17 and the Scripture beareth us out in it tell the Church and if he refuse to heare the Church let him be unto thee as a Heathen or a Publican but what if Alphonsus out of feare blowes hot and cold with one breath what 's that to us He lived and died a professed Papist and therefore what he writeth against Protestants is little to be set by but what he writeth against the Church of Rome whom he had a minde to defend in all things and whose feed advocate he was must be thougt to be drawne from him by evidence of truth howsoever let it be noted that Alphonsus calleth not him an Haereticke who denieth Indulgences as the Knight doth Vid. Rain Thes Romana ecclefia nec est Catholica nec sanum membrum Catholicae ecclesie but who contemneth the Catholike Church which neither the Knight nor any Protestant doth we deny not much lesse doe we contemne the authority of the Catholike Church But we deny that the Roman Church is the Catholike or a sound member thereof To the fourteenth Our Ministers doe not like Flood and other Iesuits bring muddy stuffe in their sermons out of Petrus de Voragine and the like fabulous Authors but what they produce in this kinde against the Pope for his base sale of Indulgences and making merchandize of his ghostly power they proove out of good Authors grave Historians Canonists and Schoolemen such as are the author of the lives of Popes and the booke called Taxa camerae Apostolicae Centum granamina together with Wescelius Croningensis Guicciardine Henricus de Gandavo Altisiodorensis If Altisiodorensis words are not plaine enough Summ l. 4. d. relap Dicunt quidam quod relaxatio non valeat quantum ecclesia permittit sed facit ut excitentur fideles ad dandum et decipit eos ecclesia some say that the Popes Indulgence prevailes not so much as the Church promiseth but that thereby men are stirred up to give more freely and that therein the Church deceaveth them what say they to that note in Taxa camerae Apostolicae Nota diligenter quod hujusmodi gratiae non consceduÌtur pauperibus quia non sunt nec possunt consolari Matth. par in Hen. 3. Romanorum loculos impregnare note diligently that such favours to wit Indulgences are not graunted to poorâ folke because they have not wherewithall they cannot be comforted or that pregnant phrase of Matthew Paris that Christs blood alone though it be all sufficient to save soules yet the same without saintly satisfaction applied by the Pope is not sufficient to impregnate his holinesse Coffers If the Iesuit smell not in thâse sentences the fat steame of the Popes Kitchin he hath no nose To the fifteenth It is well the Iesuit termeth the drinking of a health to Almighty God a tale and by his quoting no authouâ or it sheweth that it was a signal lye of his owne inventing when he was betweene hawke and buzzard Never any but himselfe who can blush at nothing affirmed any such thing of any Protestant that ever came to that height of impiety and prophannes as to drinke a health to his Maker Historia Ital. l. 13. Leo nullo temporum et locorum habito delectu per universam orbem amplissima privilegia quibus non modo vinis delictorum veniam consequendi sed defunctorum animus ejus ignis in quo delicta expiari dicuntur paenis eximendi facultatem pollicebatur promulgavit quae quia pecuniae tantum a mortalibus extorquendae gratia concedi notum erat a questoribus huiâ negotio praefectis impudenter administrabantur magnam plerisque locis indignationem offensionemque concitarant presertim in Germania ubi a multis ex ejus ministris hujusmodi mortuos penis liberandi facultas parvo pretio vendi vel in canponum tabernis aleae subiici cernebantur but Luitprandus and Polonus telleth us of one Iohn the twelfth a Pope of Rome and consequently no Protestant who made so bold with Almighty God as to give Orders in a Stable and so familiar with the Divell as to drinke a health to him As for the Knights prophane jeast as he calleth it it is no jeast but a serious testimony out of a grave historian convincing the Popes agents of Atheisme and prophannes and the Popes themselves of sordid covetousnesse his words are Leo published large privileges through the whole world without any distinction of times and places by which he promised not onely pardon to the living but also power to deliver soules of the dead out of Purgatory paines which because it was knowne that they were granted onely to fill the Popes coffers and because his farmers carried themselves lewdly in the sale of them great offence was taken at them especeally in Germanie where such Indulgences were set at a low price and seene to be staked in Tavernes and Ale-houses at games of Tables To the sixteenth The Trent Synod was not a Councell but a Conventicle wholly swayed by the Italian faction wherein not the flower of the Catholique Church for learning but the bran of the Romish boulted by the Pope was gathered together Let Andreas Dudithius the Bishop of Quinque eccles Ep. ad Maximil who was present at this Councell speake his minde of it the matter came to that passe through the wickednesse of those hungry Bishops that hung upon the Popes sleeve and were created on the suddaine by the Pope for
Vicar using humane diligence and proceeding prudently in a matter of that moment Ep. 68. vivebant ut latrones honoraebantur ut martyres to erre and whereas St. Austine saith that many were tormented with the Devill in Hell who were worshipped by men on earth it may be well understood of the Martyrs of the Donatists who were Canonized by those Haeretikes to be Martyrs whose soules were tormented in Hell and whereas Sulpitius and Cassander speake of wicked Robbers and damned persons honoured by the name of Holy Martyrs it followeth not that because some people in St. Martins time did erre in worshiping a dead theefe for a Saint without any approbation of the Church ergo Catholikes may erre in worshiping of Saints Canonized and Authorized by the Church Though Gregorie and other Catholike Divines differ about the place manner punishment and durance of Purgatorie yet none rejecteth the beliefe of Purgatorie it selfe And as for Saint Austine alleaged by the Knight to the contrary his words are to be meant of the finall and eternall place of soules For otherwise Saint Austine is so expresse for Purgatory in the very booke and place quoted by the Knight to wit in his Enchiridian ad Laurentium that Mr. Antonie Alcock a zealous Disciple of Luther as it seemeth translating it into English is faine to write certaine annimadversions upon this Chapter wherein hee confesseth C. 110. Neque negandum est defunctorum animus c. Saint Austines opinion is here for Purgatorie The Saints owne words are Neither is it to be denied that the soules of the dead are relieved by the pietie of their friends living when the sacrifice of our Mediatour is offred for them or almes given in the Church The same Father elswhere saith The whole time betweene the death of a man and the generall resurrection containeth the soules in hidden receptacles as each is worthy either of ease or paine The Doctrine of Catholikes concerning worshipping of Images is not uncertaine it being this onely that Images are to be worshipped but not as Gods For the second Councell of Nice it requireth not onely kissing of Images and a civill kind of imbracing but a prostration on the ground and praying on the knees before them Gregorie de Valentia taketh the word Simulacrum in a good sense and concludeth out of Saint Peter that some Image-worship is lan full not any Idoll worship as the Knight imposeth on him The Hammer IN this Chapter the Iesuit in the fourth fift sixt seventh twelfth fifteene and sixteene Paragraphs doth nothing but seeth againe his old Coleworts which were tasted before and after cast into the dunghill From whence I purpose not to gather them againe or set them before the Reader lest his stomacke should rise at them but I addresse my selfe to examine onely such Sophismes Cavils and Evasions whereby hee indeavoureth to elude or retort the Knights arguments brought against him in this Section in order as I have set them downe To the first The consequence of the Iesuit drawne from the Knights supposed failing in his proofes failes many wayes as may be proved by manifold instances For albeit many later Mathematitians faile in refuting Copernicus his giddy opinion of the earths circular motion and the heavens standing still yet this their failing is no sufficient proofe of Copernicus his new fancie neither will it follow that the religion of Pagans Infidels hath sufficient ground because Lactantius failes in his proofes of Christianitie in Saint Ieromes judgement and Cyprian also in the judgement of Lactantius The defects of the Patron or Advocate ought not to be imputed to the cause It is a weake and silly Religion whose whole strength consisteth in the weakenesse of some of the opposers of it The truth is the Knight hath not failed in his proofes of the noveltie of the Trent Creed as the judicious Reader will find yet if there were any defect in them it may be abundantly supplied out of Iuels challenge at Saint Pauls-Crosse Abbots answer to Bishop intituled The true ancient Roman Catholike and Doctor Faner in his Booke of Antiquitie triumphing over noveltie and divers others To the second That the salvation of all soules dependeth upon the Popes supremacie which the Iesuits are bound by a fourth and supernumerary vow to defend is a bold and blasphemous assertion derogatorie to Christ himselfe who is the Saviour of his body Ephes 5.23 1 Cor. 3.11 and only foundation which beareth up the waight and frame of the whole Catholike Church When Christ said to Peter Thou art Peter and upon this Rocke will I build my Church hee meant not as Saint Austine rightly observeth To build himselfe upon Peter but Peter and the whole Church upon himselfe non super te edificabome sed super me edificabo te The Church was founded and established before there was any Pope or Bishop at Rome and shall so continue when Rome shall perchance be burnt with fire Tract de auferibilit Papae and the Papacie which now tottereth shall be utterly destroyed Doth not their owne Gerson teach that the Pope may be quite removed and yet the Catholike Church still remaine how then can the Jesuit say that the waight and frame of the whole Catholike Church dependeth upon the authoritie of the Pope To the third The Knight used a dilemma or two-forked Argument Either the Popes sworn-Servants and our sworne enemies whose depositions before wee heard against divers articles of the Trent Faith concurred with other Papists in judgement or not if they concurred then by the joynt confession of all for those points at least they are destitute of universality which yet they make a prime note of their Church if others concurred not with them in judgement then their Doctors are divided amongst themselves and consequently they want another speciall marke of their Church which they make unitie in point of Faith To avoid the push of this Ramme the Iesuit starts * Quintil. Institut orat lib. 6. Diverticula et anfractus suffugia sunt infirmitatis ut qui cursu parum valent flexu eludunt aside into a Scholasticall speculation whether any thing is to be held for an article of Faith before it be defined and resolveth the matter thus When a a thing is once defined to wit by the Church then it becomes a matter of Faith Hee should rather determine because this or that is a matter of Faith therefore the Church defineth it to be so and not because the Church defineth it to be so therefore it is a matter of Faith For Faith if it be divine is founded upon Gods Word not the Churches definition if nothing be matter of Faith before it be defined by your Church then Transubstantiation was no article of Faith before the Councell of Laterane and Innocentius the third his dayes nor the Doctrine of Concommitancie and lawfull communicating in one kind before the Councell of Constance under Martin the fift nor the
the Protestants in their preaching and writings upon Scripture have beene farre more laborious then the Papists Name me one Papist who Preached so often and wrote so accurately upon the Holy Scriptures as Calvin I grant their bookes exceede in bulke and number because they have a hundred to one and they abound with leisure and meanes having many thousands maintained in their monasteries who are not charged as our Divines are with care of soules and perpetuall labours in their Pastorall function To the sixteenth If it were sufficient to bandy sentences without proofe and words without reasons how easily could we say mutato nomine de te fabula narratur It is but changing the names of Marcion Valentine and Apelles into Bellarmine Valentia and Lessius or if you will into Iohn Flood and it will fit as well as if it were made for him How proves he that Papists are in the Church and Protestants out of it He shall never prove but that we have as good title and much better to the Holy Scriptures the deedes and evidences of our salvation then they To the seventeenth Possession of a land proveth not necessarily a right to the writings and evidences belonging unto it For possession may be got by violent usurpation or intrusion but on the contrary the writings and evidences left by the disposer and bequeather of the land being examined will shew who hath the true title to the land that is the Church By these deedes and evidences we offer to be tried but they refuse the triall pretending I know not what nuncupatory will by word of mouth and disparaging these writings and evidences as uncertaine ambiguus and unperfect as the Knight hath made good against him in this Section Concerning the testomonies of Cardinall Bellarmine Chapter 15. Spectacles a page 464. usque ad 485. THE testimonies alleaged by the Knight out of Cardinall Bellarmine for the Protestant faith in the points of Transubstantiation private Masse Prayer in an unknowne tongue Communion in both kindes the number of Sacraments the necessity of good workes and justification by faith alone have beene all answered in the former Sections and that which he addeth concerning universality and miracles maketh for the Catholike and against the Protestant faith The Hammer THe testimony of an adversary is of great force Isid Polus ep ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã especially a learned one most of all one his death-bed when he looketh every houre to be summoned before the Judge of all flesh and therefore we have all reason to make great dainties of the noble confession of the learnedest of all our Romish adversaries in the maine point of faith wherewith he gave up the ghost Domine me admittas in numerum sanctorum tuorum non meriti astimator sed veniae largitor Lord admit me into the number of thy Saints not weighing my merits but pardoning my offences this testimony and prayer of his printed in his will the Knight in this Section backeth with another taken out of his third booke Dejustificat c. 17. Vel habet homo vera merita vel non habet c. Either a man hath true merit or he hath not if he hath not he is dangerously deceived and seduceth himselfe whilest he trusteth in false merits for these are deceitfull riches saith Saint Bernard which rob a man of the true but if he hath true merits he looseth nothing by this that hee regardeth them not but putteth his whole trust in Gods mercie only This is not only Forte but Fulgens telum to use the words of Quintilian Not onely a strong but a beautifull bright and shining weapon wherwith the Knight giveth his Adversary such a deadly wound that hee panteth as it were for life through all this Section Much adoe hee hath to say any thing which yet is as good as nothing to wit that Bellarmine in his first booke De Iustificatione cap. 1. saith that Hee will indeavour by five principall Arguments to demonstrate that a man is not justified by Faith onely What will the Iesuit conclude from hence that the Cardinall contradicteth himselfe I grant it and I take it for a singular Argument and Evidence of Truth on our side which inforced this great Cardinall after hee had spent all his strength in justifying the Romish Tenet concerning justification by workes and the merit therof in the end to undoe all that he had done and conclude fully with the Knight that In regard of the uncertainty of a mans owne justice and the danger of vaine-glory it is safest to renounce all mans merit and to put our trust onely in Gods mercie Sufficit ad meritum scire quod non sufficiant merita For other passages in this chapter I shall passe them over with a drie foot because there is nothing materiall in them said in excuse of Bellarmine his warping from the Romish Religion which hath not beene discussed before As for such Rotten-stuffe wherewith hee pieceth it up in his later Paragraphs namely five six seven and eight fetched from Romish Broker-shops concerning the name Catholique and multitude of Professours and miracles because none of it sutes with the title or argument of this Chapter I will not defile my hands with it onely I wish the Reader to take notice that the Iesuit twice in this Chapter convinced by evidence of Truth yeeldeth the Knight the Bucklers acknowledging out of Cardinall Bellarmine That our Doctrine is safer than theirs in two maine points the one concerning the Sacrament the other justification by Faith onely For the first Linea 28. Page 465 hee is constrained to confesse that though hee holdeth Private Masse to be lawfull yet that It is a more perfect and in a certaine sort more lawfull Masse where there be some to communicate with the Priest for then it hath both the ends for which it was ordained Certainly that which is more lawfull is safer our Communion therefore wherein some of necessitie communicate with the Priest is safer than their Private Masse by the Iesuits owne confession For the second I find page 471. that though much against his will yet in Terminis hee concurres with Bellarmine in acknowledging our Doctrine concerning relying onely on Christs merits and Gods mercie for salvation to be safest and what else doe all Protestants contend for in the point of Justification by Faith alone but that all men renounce their owne inherent righteousnesse and trust onely to Gods mercie in Christ for Justification and Salvation If at Christs dreadfull Tribunall the safest Plea are Christ his merits applied to us by Faith I wonder any dare to use any other If there be safety nay most safety as the Iesuit confesseth in this point of Protestant doctrine there must needs be truth in it for there can be no safetie for the soule in a lye Concerning Romish Martyrs Spectacles Chapter 16. a page 485. usque ad 490. THE blessed Martyr Edward Campian in his tenth reason bringing all sorts of
soever to exception saith nothing for him Pelagius was not so absurd as to hold this position that Peters Chaire and Faith goe alwaies together but only spake in a glozing manner thus to Pope Sozimus Thou holdest Peters Chaire and Faith and will the Iesuit inferre an universall from a particular Pope Sozimus held Peters Chaire and Faith therfore all that hold Peters Chaire hold his Faith What holdeth these two together Luke 22.32 Quest vet N. Test q. 75. Quid ambigitur pro Petro rogabat pro Iacobo et IohaÌne non rogabat ut caeteros taceam manifestum est in Petro omnes contineri a most strong and effectuall Bond saith the Iesuit namely Christs promise to Peter I have prayed for thee that thy Faith faile not The time will faile me to declare particularly how many waies this Argument of the Iesuit failes first Christ prayed not here for Peter onely as Saint Austine affirmeth What doth any man make question hereof did Christ pray for Peter and not for James and John To say nothing of the rest it is manifest that in Peter all the rest are contained This prayer then no more privilegeth the See of Rome from error than of Ierusalem or of Ephesus or any other See of the Apostles Secondly Christ prayed not that Peter might not erre who afterwards erred Gal. 2.14 and was reproved by Saint Paul Galathians the second but that his Faith might not faile that is be overcome in that fearfull temptation in such sort that hee might not rise againe after his fall Thirdly Christs prayer is for Peter himselfe in his person and the Apostles whom Satan winnowed not for his See Fourthly if this promise any way belonged to his Successors certainly no more to those of Rome than Antiochia so infirme is this the Iesuits proofe which yet hee saith Must stand firme till Sir Humphrey can tell what Pope began to varie from his Predecessours Agreed Sir Humphrey shall presently tell him by name Liberius the Arrian Vigilius the Eutychian Honorius the Monothelite condemned in three generall Councels sixth seventh and eighth Iohn the three and twenty deposed in the Councell at Constance as for other enormous crimes so for this his damnable heresie that Hee denied the immortalitie of the soule and the life to come To which after the Iesuit hath replied instance shall be given in many other Popes which have beene branded with the note of heresie in like manner To the third A strange and loose inference three and thirty Popes adored Images because their Predecessor had the pictures of Saint Peter and Saint Paul Pope Gregorie allowed of the standing of pictures in the Church Vid. supr yet would have them by no meanes adored Helena the mother of Constantine had the wood of Christs crosse yet adored it not saith Saint Ambrose If to have the picture of Saint Peter or Saint Paul nay or of Christ himselfe maketh a man an Idolater or a Papist then not onely all the Lutherans generally but very many of the most orthodoxe Divines in our and other reformed Churches will be proved as good Papists as Pope Sylvester To the fourth Not only Protestants whom the Iesuit nick-nameth Heretikes but also Contius and other Romanists have disparaged these Epistles and if the Iesuits nose be not very flat and stuffed also hee may smell the forgerie of these Decretals by the barbarisme of the stile disagreeing to those times and many absurdities and contradictions noted in them by Coqueus and others To the fift If it be no matter of Faith that this particular Priest Transubstantiateth the Bread because no man knowes his intention nor that particular Priest Et sic de caeteris It followeth that it is no matter of Faith to beleeve that any Priest in the Roman Church by the words of Consecration turneth the Bread into Christs Body As for that hee addeth that it is no matter whether any ever died for this point in particular I answer it is a matter of great moment for if Garnet would not take it upon his salvation that this Bread hee consecrated immediately before the death was turned into Christs Body nor any ever would or did pawne his life for Transubstantiation it is evident that Papists themselves doubt of the certainty of that Article On the contrarie wee can produce hundreds nay thousands who for denying Transubstantiation have beene put to death and have signed the truth of the Doctrine of the Reformed Churches concerning the Sacrament with their blood and therefore the Doctrine of the Protestants in this point is of more credit than the contrarie because it is strengthened and fortified by a Noble armie of Martyrs Concerning the Protestants charitable opinion of the salvation of Papists Spectacles Chap. 17. Ã page 491. usque ad 508. THE Knights discourse in this Chapter is wholly from his purpose which he pretendeth in the title of his Chapter which is to answer our objections The Knights eight instances in the Doctrine of Merits Communion in both kinds publike use of Scripture Priests marriage Service in a knowne tongue Worship of Images Adoration of the Sacrament and Traditions are all answered before and proved some false for the things wherewith he chargeth us are all absurd if we consider the proofes of Scripture which he bringeth All testimonies from an enemy proceede not from charity but from truth and such are those which Catholikes bring out of learned Protestants to prove that a man dying in the Romish Religion may be saved Free-will Prayer for the Dead Honouring of Relikes Reall Presence Transubstantiation Communion in one kinde Worshiping of Images the Popes Primacy Auricular Confession and the like are all acknowledged some by one Protestant some by another not to be materiall points so as a man may without perill beleeve either way the severall authors are Perkins Cartwright Whitgift Fulke Penrie Somes Sparks Reynolds Bunnie and Whitaker John Frith a Foxean Martyr acknowledgeth that the matter touching the substance of the Sacrament bindeth no man of necessity to salvation or damnation whether he beleeve it or not John Huz held the Masse Transubstantiation Vowes Freewill Merit of workes and of the haeresies now in controversie held onely one to wit communion in both kindes Dr. Barrow acknowlegeth the Church of Rome to be the Church of God Hooker a part of the house of God and limbe of the visible Church of Christ Dr. Somes that all learned and reformed Churches confesse that in Popery there is a Church a Ministry and true Christ Field and Morton that we are to be accounted the Church of God whose words may be seene in the Protestants Apologie Tract 1. Sect. 6. Whereas the Knight saith that men otherwayes morally good relying wholly on the merits of Christ that is living Papists and dying Protestants in the principall foundation of our faith may finde mercy because they did it ignorantly where hath the Knight learned this Theologie that a man
may be saved in one Religion yet so as he must die in another This is a new conceite never heard of before that a man may be saved in a Religion but so as not to die of it To conclude since Protestant Doctors make no doubt but we may be saved in our faith and no Doctour of ours saith so of your faith it is out of doubt the safer way to embrace ours The force of which argument the Knight goeth not about to avoid otherwise then by denying that to be the opinion of learned Potestants which being proved to be so manifestly the argument still hath his force and the more because he cannot answer it The Hammer IN the former Chapters the Knight brandished his sword but in this he holdeth up his Buckler to beare off a blow wherewith some Professors especially of the Female Sex are said to have beene wounded to death For thus they whet their sword and shape it on the Protestant anvile Protestants confesse at least many of them that there may be salvation in the Roman Church but Papists absolutely deny that there may be any salvation in our Churches Fisher relation of a 3. conference therefore it is safer to come to theirs then to stay in ours to be where almost all grant salvation then where the greatest part of the world deny it Hereunto the Knight truely and solidly answers First that our Protestant Tenents are of that nature that the Papists themselves cannot pretend with any probability that there is any danger in them but rather in the contrary as he maketh it evident by eight remarkeable instances Secondly that our Religion is not to be accounted the worse but rather the better for our charitable opinion of our Adversaries for true piety is ever joyned with compassionate charity Thirdly Rom. 14.4 What have I to doe to judge another mans servant seeing he standeth or falleth to his owne master that though we leave the persons of Papists to their and our judge not pronouncing damnation on them as they doe on us yet we proclaime confidently to all the world that their doctrine is not safe Fourthly he distinguisheth also the persons of Papists some are invincibly ignorant who are compelled to resigne up their own eye-sight and to look through such Spectacles as their Priests and Pastors have tempered for them for these poore soules if they make as good use as they can of the publike and private means afforded them for saving knowledge and hold fast the Articles of the Apostles Creed without opposition to any ground of Christian Religion and furthermore have a minde and purpose to obay God and keepe his Commandements according to that measure of knowledge and grace which they have received and live for outward things in the unity of the Church where they dwell much may be said other live under Princes and States who as Gods true Watchmen and Shepherds desire they should be better informed and take care that they may have meanes to be instructed in the true saving knowledge of Christ such Papists shutting their eyes against Gods light and persisting in their ignorance and saying in effect Wee will not the knowledge of thy wayes Iob 21.14 goe not safely out of the world How the Iesuit refuteth these answers wee shall see in the examination of his particular exceptions To the first That cannot be farre from the Knights purpose which agreeth with the title of his whole Booke Via tuta The safe Way this safe way hee proves to be the Protestants way by divers instances in which the Papists affirmation is dangerous but our Negation cannot but be safe For example there is apparant danger in maintaining the adoration of Images and the creatures of Bread and Wine in the Sacrament because it is expressely forbidden under many fearfull curses to offer Sacrifice burne Incense or exhibit any Divine Worship to any save God onely Psalm 97.7 Confounded be all they that worship graven Images and boast themselves of Idolls but there can be no danger in not Worshipping the Creature insteed of the Creatour who is blessed for ever Rom. 1.25 They are in danger of a curse that forbid Marriage and hold it in some persons to be unlawfull and uncleane which Saint Paul calleth The Doctrine of Devils 1 Tim. 4.1 3. But there can be no danger in not prohibiting Marriage in any which is Honorable in all and the bed undefiled Heb. 13.4 They are in danger who equall Traditions with Scripture because it is written Cursed be hee that addeth or taketh away from the words of the Law or the Gospell Deut. 4.2 Apoc. 22.18 There is danger in confidence in our owne merits because Cursed is hee that putteth his trust in man or maketh flesh his arme Ier. 17.5 but there can be no danger in not relying upon our owne merits for Blessed are they that trust in Christ and him onely Psalm 2.12 for that the Cardinall himselfe confesseth to be Tutissimum There is danger in taking away the Cup from the Laity for it is a violation of Christs institution for Jesus said unto them Iohn 6.53 Except yee eate the flesh of the Son of man and drinke his blood yee have no life in you but there can be no danger in not taking away the Cup from the Laity but reaching it to them for Whosoever eateth Christs flesh and drinketh his blood hath eternall life vers 54. There is danger in keeping the Scriptures from the Laity for The people perish for want of knowledge Hos 4.6 and God powreth his wrath upon the people that know not his name Psal 79.6 but there can be no danger in permitting them to Search the Scriptures for in them they have eternall life Ioh. 5.39 and Blessed are they whose delight is in the Law of the Lord and that exercise themselves in that Law both day and night Psal 1.2 There is danger in praying in an unknowne tongue for they which doe so Worship they know not what draw neere to God with their lips but their hearts is farre from him but there can be no danger in Service in a knowne tongue for the Apostle saith I will pray with the spirit I will pray with understanding also I will sing with the spirit I will sing with understanding also 1 Cor. 14.15 It was a curse inflicted upon the builders of Babel that they understood not what was spoken and the gift of tongues hath beene ever esteem'd a singular blessing conferred upon the Church whereby the people of all Nations and Countries understood the Apostles and their Successors preaching to them and praying for them To the second I reply that all his answers are refuted in my Animadversions upon the former Chapters onely some Cavils hee addeth which I will answer in a word Flood I presume his Father had some Apprentise bound not to marry during his Apprentiship I would then know of him whether his Father in that case did forbid marriage
and teach the Doctrine of Devils Answer It had beene fitter for the Iesuit to be bound Prentise than set to schoole hee is so dull and stupid that hee maketh it all one to forbid a Boy under age to marry during the time of his Apprentiship and that under a legall penalty without any vow or oath and to forbid the whole Clergie to marry at all by tying them to single life by a vow and solemne oath whether they have the gift of continencie or not Flood Saint Paul saith the gift of Tongues is a signe for Infidels but Prophecie that is Exhortation or Interpretation is for the Faithfull or those that believe already wherein I would know what any man can find against Prayer in the Latine tongue Answer I will easily helpe the Iesuits ignorance herein Prayer in the Latine tongue when it is not understood is Prayer in a Strange tongue which the Apostle here implyeth No way tendeth to edification Nay farther he proveth it to be a curse out of the Prophet Esay 28.11 to a people to heare a Language which they understand not and if that people were accursed in that they heard a Language which they understood not our people in this regard must needs be blessed who heare in the Church the Word of God read and Divine Service said in a Language which they understand Flood The Catholike Church doth draw in severall Nations to unity of Language making all to speake one and the same Tongue whereas Heretikes in the severall places by use of other Languages understand not one the other and therein most perfectly resemble the Babel-builders as well in their diversitie of tongues as in the diversities of Doctrines Answer The Iesuit here ignorantly babbleth about Babel and the builders thereof upon whom God sent as a curse not simply the diversitie of Languages which Acts 2. was given to the Apostles by miracle for a blessing but confusion of Languages whereby it came to passe that though they all spake one to another yet none understood one the other This curse cannot be denied to be fallen upon the Lay-people in Poperie in the time of their benediction and hereby the Romane Church as by many things else may be discerned to be Spiritually Babylon Now whereas the Iesuit saith that they make all Nations to speake one and the same tongue his tongue runneth before his wit for though the Pope by injoyning Latine Service make all Nations under the Romane jurisdiction heare one and the same tongue in their Service yet hee maketh them not to speake it nor so much as understand it Whereas all the Reformed Churches as they agree in the unity of their Doctrine against Romish errours and superstitions so they also concurre in this that they have all their Liturgies in their Mother tongue that all the children of our Churches may heare their heavenly Father speake unto them in his Word and they to him in their Prayers in a language understood Flood But for that which hee saith that hee acknowledgeth universalitie of Nations and people not to be a marke of his Church I cannot but wonder at it for what is this but even in plaine termes to confesse his Church not to be the Church of Christ Esay saying All nations shall flow unto it and the Prophet David describing the kingdome of Christ saith that Hee shall beare sway from Sea to Sea and Daniel describeth the kingdome of Christ Like a mountaine growing from a little stone and filling the whole Earth Saint Iohn seeth a Multitude which no man could reckon of all Nations and Tribes and People Answer Wee doe not say that the Church of England is the Church of Christ that is the whole or only Church of Christ but a Church of Christ or to speake more properly a member of the Catholike Church scattered over the face of the the whole earth The texts alleaged by the Iesuit are meant of the Catholike or universall Church not of a particular for it implieth a kind of contradiction that a part should be the whole and all Nations comprised in one Secondly the Knight speaketh not Page 312. simply of multitudes nations and tongues when hee denieth that wee have any such in our Church but of multitudes and nations and tongues that are at the Woman her command in the Apocalypse The Citie which raigneth over the Kings of the Earth Apoc. 17.4 5 6 c. which sitteth on seven mountaines and is drunke with the blood of Saints and Martyrs of whom it was foretold that shee should ascend out of the bottomlesse pit and goe into perdition These can be no markes of our Church as all the world seeth and if they be as indeed they are most visible and apparant markes of the Romane Church let them lay claime to her and keepe her to themselves wee no way grudge or repine at it But if the question be where it is safer being with the Woman that fled into the wildernesse or this Queene-regent of the world wee give warning to all that have Care of their salvation to come out of Babylon that they be not partaker of her plagues To the third It is not true that all testimonies proceeding from an enemie are from evidence of Truth for a testimonie may proceed from an enemie sometimes from weaknesse of judgement as Tertullian long agoe hath observed concluding that it is no certaine and undoubted Argument of strength and valour to conquer an Enemie for many times the victorie is gotten not because the conquerour was a man of might and well handled his weapons Sed quia qui vincebatur infirmis erat viribus but because hee had the good hap to enter into the lists with a weake Adversarie Yet let the Iesuits Observation be generall the Knight will gaine by it for the greatest part of his booke consisteth of Testimonies taken from the mouth of learned Romanists and therefore by this Rule laid downe by the Iesuit all must be presumed to proceed from evidence of Truth For the testimonies which hee here alleageth out of Protestants against us though they have beene long agoe answered in the Prostants Apologie written against Brerely his falsly so called Catholike Apologie yet in the due place I shall shew that they make nothing for but rather against the Romish Church To the fourth The Iesuit cannot be ignorant that the misnamed Catholike Apologie set forth by Brerely was refuted seven and twenty yeares agoe by a Catholike Appeale for Protestants there all these shafts which Brerely taketh out of the Protestant Quivers are either broken or their heads so taken off that they can doe no hurt to any that hath his Buckler of Faith on or his eyes in his head To which Appeale I referre the discreete Reader when the Iesuit shall quote any of these Authors for any particular point he shall have a punctuall answer To the fift Frith was a worthy and glorious Martyr whose faith may be knowne by his
bookes yet extant wherein he no way approveth of Transubstantiation but condemneth it expressely Neither doth he say that a right beliefe in the Sacrament touching the substance thereof is no matter of salvation but that it is no matter of salvation to beleeve after what manner the substance of Christs body is in the Sacrament whether by Consubstantiation or Transubstantiation which is most true for as Doctor Andrewes late Bishop of Winton acutely observed Christ said hoc est Corpus meum non hoc modo est or fit Corpus meum this is my Body not the bread is after this manner my body To the sixt If communion in both kindes be an haeresie Christ his Apostles and the Primitive Church which administred and received the Communion in both kinds as is confessed in the Councell at Constance cannot be free from haeresie And whereas the Iesuit saith that this Martyr in all other points held with Papists the contrary appeares in his printed bookes and by the prayer he made at his death mentioned by Cocleus in the history of the Huzzites wherein he prayeth to God that his soule after his death might be where the soule of Wickliffe is To the seventh To the Iesuit his allegations out of Barrow Hooker Some Bunnie and Covell Dr. Morton now Bishop of Duresme answereth at large in his Catholike appeale l. 4. from the first Section to the sixth where he proveth that the testimonies themselves and the reasons annexed to them doe shew that the above cited Protestants yeeld no more security to the Romish Church then they doe to any other erroneous Church wherein there is true baptisme and the the profession of the chiefe principles of faith Barrow acknowledgeth the Church of Rome to be a Church of God that is a Church professing Christianity in which there may be a possibility of salvation not an Orthodox or right believing Church in which there is certainty of salvation Hooker saith that the Church of Rome is a member of the visible Catholike Church a member not the Catholike Church and no sound member neither according to that Thesis of Doctor Reynolds Romana ecclesia nec est Catholica nec sanum membrum Catholicae Dr. Somes saith as likewise Iunius Iunius de Eccles l. sing Papatuâ est in Ecclesia seu in papatu est Ecclesia Papatus tamen non est Ecclesia that in Popery there is a Church that is under the Popes dominion Christ hath his Church or that Popery is in the Church yet that Popery is not the Church Bunnie saith that we are not a severall Church from the Papists that is not essentially defferent from it no more then a sicke man differeth from a sound Covell saith the Church of Rome is a part of the Church of Christ but a very unsound part From all which passages this onely may be concluded of the Roman Church as of other erroneous assemblies that though in regard of their manifold errors they must be esteemed sicke and unsound Churches yet in regard of the being and essence of a Church they must be acknowledged visible Churches of Christ Neither Field nor Morton saith that the Church of Rome is the Church of God but a Church of God Fields words are Romana ecclesia est verè ecclesia non vera ecclesia is truely a Church not a true Church Morton proveth in one whole Section that the Church of Rome is not properly the Catholike Church but a particular Church subject to error Sect. 6. Protest appeal l. 4. But in this point in what sense the Protestants call the Church of Rome a true Church see a late Treatise set forth by Doctor Hall the Bishop of Exton called the Reconciler wherein both he and Bishop Davenet and Morton in their letters affixed thereunto cleare the matter nothing at all I assure you to your advantage To the eight The Knight saith not that a man may be saved in one Religion yet so as he must not die in it but that a man living in one Religion to wit the Popish may be saved so that he renounce it before his death and dye in a better for not onely the bosome of the Church but also the gates of Heaven are alwayes open to the penitent as the Prophet Ezekiel teacheth C. 18.23 neither is this any new conceit of the Knight but the generall opinion of all Protestants as the Iesuit may read in the Catholike Appeale l. 4. c. 1. The Reverend Bishop now mentioned understanding how that great and honourable personage in the last Act of her life renounced all presumption of her owne inherent righteousnesse and wholly affianced her soule to Christ in beliefe to be justified onely by his satisfactory justice did therefore conceive hope of her salvation by vertue of that Cordiall prescribed by the Holy Apostle viz. that where sinne aboundeth the grace of God doth superabound which the Apostle hath ministred for the comfort of every Christian who erring by ignorance shall in sincere repentance for all his knowne sinnes depart this mortall life having the heele or end of his life shod with the preparation of the Gospell of peace not of the new Romish but of the old Catholike faith which is the faith of all Protestants C. 15. p. 363. And againe in his booke intituled the Grand Imposture If you demand why Protestants have so charitable opinion of some Romanists you are to understand that it is in regard of that without which they cannot be saved that they died in the beliefe of this Protestant Article of Faith which is to be justified by remission of all their sinnes through the satisfactory righteousnesse of Christ apprehended by faith and not by the legall justice or perfection of inherent righteousnesse in themselves as your Councell of Trent hath decreed and this opinion we finde verified in the experience of many Papists who howsoever in their life time they professe and magnifie your doctrine of perfection of works yet on their death bed as soone as the least glimpse of the majesty of Christs tribunall is revealed unto them and the booke of their conscience begins to be unclapsed and so laid open before them that they cannot but reade their sinnes which in their life-time they held as veniall to be deadly and written in Capitall litters then they take Sanctuary in the wounds of Christ from whence floweth the Ocean of all expiatory merit and satisfaction by which it is impossible but that every faithfull penitent should receive life To the ninth To this argument I say that it is paralyticall and weake in the sinewes For how doth this follow the Donatists held as the Papists doe that all men were damned that were not of their sect St. Austine de unit eccles c. 12. and other Catholike Bishops thought that some of them might be in the state of grace and that their Baptisme was good Ergo it is a safer way to embrace the Donatists haeresie then the Catholike
are very idle and all his instances in Turkes Iewes and Haeretikes nothing to the purpose for the unbeleeving Iewes and Turkes never were nor yet are members of the Catholike Christian Church the Arians Nestorians Eutychians and Marcionites have beene long agoe excluded out of the true Church of Christ and their Haeresies are by name condemned in ancient generall Councells approved by the whole Christian world These therefore come not within the verge of the Knights proposition which is restrained to Christian Churches and such whose Tenets have not in particular as yet beene cryed downe and censured as erroneous in any oecumenicall Councell among such doubtlesse those are in the safer way who hold nothing for an Article of faith necessary to salvation which is not clearely deduced out of Holy Scripture and assented unto even by the opposite part whose testimony saith the Iesuit Page 498. must needs proceede from evidence of truth To the second The Iesuit hath received answer already to the former of these demands where I shewed by twenty instances that we stand not single as they doe by affirming what they deny and denying what they affirme for the most if not all the affirmative Articles of our Creed are firmed and subscribed by Papists themselves whereas their additionalls to them are firmed by none but themselves and therefore herein our cause hath a great advantage on theirs For if their beliefe be true our beliefe in all the affirmative Articles thereof must needs be so but not on the contrary because they have many affirmative Articles which we give no credit unto To his second demand I answer that though a multitude of Professors is no perpetuall and infallible marke of the true Church Luke 12.32 Matth. 7.13 Apoc. 13.17 Apoc. 20.2 Apoc 1â 4 The woman arrayed in purple and scarlet called The Whore of Babylon had a cup of gold in her hand c. Apoc. 13.3 All the world wondered and followed the Beast ver 8. All that dwell upon the earth shall worship him whose names are not written in the Booke of Life for Christs flocke is but a little flocke in comparison and broade is the way that leadeth to death and destruction and though it is true that in the latter and worser ages of the Church especially after the yeare 666. which is the number of the name of the Beast and much more after the thousandth yeare wherein Satan was let loose the Romish Church was much more visible to the eye of the world then the Protestant as it is prophecied in the Apocalypse the 16. 6. that the false and malignant Church should be farre more glorious and pompous then the true Spouse of Christ yet in the first and best ages of the Church our adversaries have not so much as one single witnesse who can be proved to have given testimony to their Trent faith and since the happy reformation began by Martin Luther in King Henry the eights dayes the better part of Europe is fallen from the Pope adde we to them all those who in Asia and Africa professe the Christian faith and yet acknowledge not the Pope nor subscribe to the Trent faith and it will appeare we have neere a thousand for one in the Catholike visible Church scattered far and wide over the face of the earth as may be seene in the Mapps set forth in a booke printed the last yeare and intituled Christianographie or the Description of the multitude and sundry sorts of Christians in the World not subject to the Pope with their unity and how they agree with the Protestants in the principall points of difference betweene them and the Church of Rome To the third If the argument bee so weake let the Iesuit remember that it is his owne and that he confesseth as much in the first words of this Chapter which are these The substance of this Section is contained in the title and it is nothing but to turne the Catholike argument mentioned in the former Section the other way for the Protestant side The argument then is a Catholike argument of their owne and if it make for Haeretikes Iewes and Turkes as he saith it doth the blame and shame thereof must light upon the Iesuits that first framed it and not upon the Knight who retorteth it onely upon them for thus it mooveth upon their Axletree that wherein Professors of different religions both agree is safer to beleeve then that wherein they stand single but Iewes and Christians agree in the beliefe of the old Testament Christians and Turkes agree in the truth of Christs humane nature in other points the Christians are single therfore the beliefe of a Iew or a Turke is safer then the beliefe of a Christian The conclusion is here false and blasphemous the minor or assumption is evidently true and confessed on all sides the fault therfore must needs be in the major or ground of this argument but the major or ground is your owne as will appeare by reducing the Iesuits Argument propounded in the former Section into forme That Church wherein parties of a different Religion as Papists and Protestants agree is a safer way than that wherein one party stand single But Papists and Protestants both agree that salvation may be had in the Romish Church but the Protestants stand single in that they say salvation may be had in the Protestant Church therefore it is safer living and dying in the Papists Church than in the Protetestant In this Syllogisme the Knight and all Protestants though they answer to the Assumption by distinguishing as is expressed in the former chapter yet they simply absolutely deny the Major which is not universally true nor at all necessarie Secondly Dato non concesso that the Major is true the Knight nimbly turnes the mouth of the Papists owne Canon to batter their owne walls thus That position say you in which both Papists and Protestants agree is safer than that wherein one partie standeth single but in the eleven Points mentioned by the Knight Papists and Protestants agree in the twelve Articles coyned by Pope Pius the fourth the Papists stand single therefore the Protestant Faith is the safer To the fourth A strange Argument for the Iesuit to conclude other mens sight from his owne blindnesse because hee seeth not how the Knight can avoid the instances in Jewes Heretikes and Turkes whereby hee goeth about to disable the Knight his retorted Argument therfore will hee inferre that any man may see that the Knight is no good guide For pitty let some fit the Iesuit with a paire of Spectacles that he may better see the Knight his way and his own wandrings * How far the Romish ReligioÌ is distant from Heresie Iudaisme and Turcisme or rather trencheth upon all three See P Croy his booke of Conformities and Sutcliffe his Turco papismus Iews and Turks are out of the Christian Church hold not all Positive Articles necessary to salvation and therefore they come not in the Knights way at all nor hath hee to doe with them in this Argument which proceedeth from professed Christians and not open enemies to the Faith For the Knight from his heart detesteth all pathes leading to any of those dangerous precipices and chaulketh to all men Viam vere tutam certam rectam regiam a faire and Safe Way and the very Kings High-way to his Pallace wherein wee have Christ and his Apostles for our Leaders the holy Spirit for our Guide the blessed Angels for our Convoy the ancient Fathers and Doctors of the Church for our fellow Travellers through the whole and the best learned of the Romane Popes Cardinals Bishops and Schoolemen to beare us companie the greater part of our way Wherefore I doubt not but that the indifferent peruser of the Knights Book and the Iesuits Answer and my Reply unto it will breake out into the Apostles exclamation and say to this Romish Sorcerer Acts 3.13 or rather if hee will so false Spectacle-maker Flood O full of all subtiltie and mischiefe thou child of the devill wilt thou not cease to pervert the right way of the LORD FINIS Laus DEO sine fine
Article of your Faith and ours and this is agreed on both sides to be without feare or perill of Idolatry Lastly as if you were guilty of false accusations you say suppose Adrian hath erred in this or in any other point doth it follow that he agreeeth with you in all other Then you tell a story of the Popes Bull against Luther You quarrell with your owne shadow for I had no relation at all to your Pope nor made any instance of him more then in a Marginall Note but since you stand so much upon the justification of his Doctrine hearken I pray wherein he maketh for you and wherein he is wholly against you Agrippa de vanit scient c. 64. p. mihi cap. de Lenonia Your Agrippa tells us that in these latter times Pope Adrian erected a most famous Stewes at Rome I confesse in this particular you may challenge him wholly for your owne But whereas you say he detested Luthers doctrine as most wicked and damnable you might have added likewise he wished a reformation of his owne and withall taught that doctrine for which you condemne both Luther and all his adherents for Haeretikes History of Trent l. 1. pag. 25. 26. 30. First witnesse his Nu tio Francisco Chiericato who had Commission from his Holinesse To ackowledge that the confusion of the Church was caused especially by the sinnes of Priests and Prelats confessing that some abhominations some yeares since were committed even in the Holy See that there were many abuses in spirituall things so that it may be said that the infirmity is passed from the head to the members from the Popes to the inferiour Pelates And lastly he resolves himselfe that he would use all diligence that the Church of Rome should be first reformed and the rather because hee saw all the world did earnestly desire it And that you may know the Church of Rome as well as the Court of Rome was fallen into errors and heresies hee himselfe publisheth that he heard it related of his Predecessor Pope Iohn the 22th That hee would have induced the Vniversitie of Paris to beleeve that the soules of the righteous doe not see God face to face and that no man should take his degree in Divinitie unlesse hee should first sweare to maintaine that perstiferous Heresie and perpetually to cleave unto it And that you may be assured hee was not wholly yours hee affirmeth for certaine one Position which would confound all Poperie Adrian in 4. de Sacram. Confir sub finem viz. That the Pope may erre even in things touching the Faith and avouch that which is Heresie y his determination or decree And thus your Pope Adrian complaines of many abominable things in his owne Church he tels us his Predecessor was reputed a Heretike he confesseth that both himselfe and all his Successors after him were in possibilitie of erring even in matters of Faith and it is very probable in his erring opinion hee began to erect that most noble Brothell-house in his owne See And thus much touching the Marginall note of Pope Adrian Your second exception is touching Costerus occasioned by these words Wee accuse them for taking away the Cup from the Lay-people they excuse it that it was not taken up by the commandment of the Bishops but is crept in the Bishops winking thereat saith Costerus In answer to this say you I would know what excuse you can find for such a notorious lye Let the Reader judge whether this modestie of yours deserve an Anser or whether this saying of Costerus may not be termed an Excuse Howbeit say you this custome came in not so much by the commandement of the Bishop as by the peoples use and practise Well take it as you would have it yet I say his meaning must bee understood not at all by the Commandement of the Bishops for that which is done by Command cannot bee said to have crept in But the truth is under colour of quarrelling with words and giving me the lye you seeke to dazle the eyes of your Reader and when you omit the weightier things of your Church then you question Where is Costerus testimony for Antiquitie Vniversalitie Certaintie and Safetie when as you know well this testimony was not cited for that ende And thus you straine at a Gnat and swallow a Camell Let us heare the rest of your verball discourse Since you are so shamelesse as to say That we doe not condemne you for receiving in both kinds Looke into the Councell of Trent and see whether you doe not finde a heavy curse c. Thus you And are you sure that your Councell hath sufficiently cursed us For following Christs example and receiving in both kinds for those were my very words Following Christs example which you altogether omitted If therefore we have altered any part of Christs Institution I say againe Curse on in Gods name and let your curses take effect but if the celebration of our Mysteries be answerable to his will and word that first ordained them you curse not us whom you would hurt but him that your cursed tongues cannot hurt which is God to be blessed for ever But let us heare your Councels The Councell of Trent say you layes a heavie curse against any that shall say that all and every of the Faithfull ought by the precept of God or necessitie of salvation to receive both kinds This cursing Councell toucheth not my Assertion for this Canon speaketh of the Precept of Christ whereas I spake of his Example onely Bell. de Euch ãâã cap. 7. and for proofe of this wee have Bellarmines testimony as well as ours It is not to be doubted but that is best and sittest to be practised which Christ himselfe hath done And therefore my Assertion still stands good viz You doe not condemne us for following Christs example Touching the Councell of Constance it condemnes not our receiving in both kinds but prevents the condemnation of her owne They decreed their halfe Communion with this Caution Concil Constant Sess 13. that If any should obstinately maintaine that it was unlawfull or erronious to receive in one kind hee ought to be punished and driven out as an Heretike And howsoever you would seeme to condemne our Assertion yet you condemne not our practise as unlawfull for the Councell of Basil not twentie yeares after your Decree in the Councell of Constance granted the use of the Cup to the Bohemians Your third exception is touching Mr. Harding who in the question betwixt him and Bishop Iuel of Private Masse stands not to justifie his solitary or private Masse but rather excuseth it in this manner Iuels Articles of Private Masse pag. That it is through their owne default and negligence whereof the godly and faithfull people have sithence the time of the Primitive Church much complained This say you hath no sense for here is a Relative Their without an Antecedent And let me tell you this