is quenched the light and zeale and comfortable assurance thereof is taken away and all sorts of people are imboldened to security negligence in seeking that quantity of knowledge whereto God hath enabled them to attaine So that hereby the people of God in whom p Col. 3.16 his word ought to dwell plentifully with all manner of knowledge q Ro. 10.10 that should be able both to beleeue with the heart and confesse with their mouth to saluation r Heb. 5. vlt. that through long custome should haue their wits exercised to discerne both good and euill ſ 1 Pet. 3.15 that should be alway ready to giue an answer to euery one that asketh a reason of the hope that is in them are turned into sencelesse Idols that can neither heare nor see nor vnderstand the which kind of ignorance the ancient Church neuer allowed Thirdly we cōdemne the defining of faith yea entire Catholicke faith by this kind of beleeuing for albeit the faith knowledge of the best of Gods children be intangled as Caluin hath freely confessed with the relickes of much ignorance when many things beleeued necessary to saluation are not yet distinctly vnderstood yet there is a progres increase in knowledge wherby the dullest ignorantest of Gods children are inlightned more and more vntill they reach that quantity of apprehension that the commandement of faith requires In which sense we allow the faith of any man liuing specially the vnlearned to be implicite First when he knowes and apprehends in generall the substantiall articles belonging to faith which are contained in the Scriptures and rule of faith Secondly when the ignorance is only in the particulars whereby the said generall articles are demonstrated as a lay man beleeuing the Vnity and Trinity of Persons in God yet is not able to expresse or conceaue the difference betweene the essence and the Persons nor the different manner of persons proceeding 3. When withall he vses the meanes to increase in knowledge by searching the Scriptures and hearing the word preached and in the meane time obediently submits himselfe to the ministry and direction of the Church herein The implicite faith of such persons as haue this threefold disposition concurring in them we condemne not but this is not it which our aduersaries pleade for who defēd that it is enough to assent to the Church though all this be wanting that is to say to professe himselfe a Romane Catholicke beleeuing as the present Church holds without any knowledge of the things in themselues 8 Note lastly that the distinct knowledge of things beleeued which against this implicitie of faith we require is the knowledge of that which God hath reuealed not of the essence and reason of the things For the vnderstanding whereof we must consider that the Scriptures and Church by their proposition reueale the points of faith vnto vs and bid vs learne beleeue thē as that there is one God the maker of all things and one mediator Iesus Christ that was conceaued by the Holy Ghost borne of the virgine Marie and as followes in the Rule of Faith Which things thus mentioned vnto vs are profound mysteries and haue many abstruse and secret notions belonging to them as for example the deepe reasons of the Trinitie in the Godhead and the Vnion of the two natures in Christ Now when we require knowledge to be ioyned with the faith of these things we meane the knowledge of the Reuelation not of the reason and whole nature of the things reuealed for is any man so presumptuous as to imagine that a supernaturall obiect beleeued by faith reuealed by God can by discourse of reason be reduced to naturall vnderstanding the Apostle t 1. Cor. 2.14 saying The naturall man perceaues not the things of God neither can he know them Or do our aduersaries imagine the knowledge we require to be such as is in humane sciences where conclusions are demonstrated by their principles and things are comprehended in their causes and properties Haue they that power ouer their people to make them beleeue that we require for example men to be able to vnderstand and vtter the manner and reasons how God is one How 3. in Person How the dead shall be raised againe How our nature subsists in the word How the redemption of mankinde could be wrought by the sufferings and death of the Sonne of God How the Sacraments confer Grace How man could be predestinate before the world was made We do not require the world to know these things u 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Theodor. de prouid l. 10 sub fin which are reserued to the beatificall vision in the life to come but onely in such sort and measure as is reuealed which is by conceauing that God is one that the Persons are 3. that the dead shall be raised againe c. and such things concerning them as may without error be vnderstood * Deut. 29 29. For secret things belong to the Lord our God but things reuealed belong to vs and to our children for euer * The state of the question The true state of the question therefore touching implicite faith is whether the beleeuer besides his generall assenting to the Church and Scripture be also bound to haue in himselfe a distinct knowledge of things propounded him to beleeue so that he can according to any true notion of conceauing apprehend and conceaue that which is reuealed to him in which question the distinction of Necessary as the meanes and Necessary by the command is friuolous because whatsoeuer is omitted against Gods commandement is sinne and consequently damnable without repentance and therefore if knowledge be commanded it is also the meanes of Saluation so farre foorth as the obseruation of the commandements is the meanes But our aduersaries apply this distinction which in some question is of good vse in this place to lay their people a sleepe on their pillow when they shall heare knowledge to be commanded but yet not as a Necessary meanes Now there be twenty wayes to escape from a commandement 9 These things thus premised now I answer my aduersaries arguments made for implicite faith against distinct knowledge The first that I dispute so whotly against that which M. Wootton admits is false For M. Wootton admits no more then he insinuates in his conclusion that a generall beleefe of some points may suffice some persons without danger of damnation and this pleases me well enough for I haue shewed this not to be the question but let my aduersary deale sincerely and hold him to that which is taught in his Church and it will please himselfe neuer a whit When that doctrine allowes ignorance in all points and the other which is somewhat honester allowes it in more points and defines the ignorance otherwise then M. Wootton will do My aduersary therefor hath not M. Wootton on his side nor against me but directly with me
Syllogisme here set downe Whereto I answered First granting the maior and acknowledging it to be a point of faith necessary to be beleeued that the Canonicall bookes which the Church vses are true diuine Scripture but I denied the second proposition that they cannot be proued so to be by themselues secluding Church authority and tradition And I distinguish for the Authority and direction of the Church is Gods outward ordinance to teach vs as a condition how to see the Scripture to be diuine but not the thing whereby they are prooued so to be and whereon our faith leaneth but this diuinity the Church as a bare Minister out of the Scripture it selfe prooues to be in the Scripture not by her owne authority that vpon her word and testimony either onely or particularly it should be taken for Scripture rather then the books of other men In the same manner that a man shewes a star giuing light to it selfe which yet another cannot see till the man point to it Or as a dead mans will kept in the Register of necessity must be sought there and thence receiued yet all the authority of that court which is great and ample specially in preseruing records neither makes nor prooues the will to be legitimate but is onely a requisite condition to bring it forth and vs to the sight and knowledge of it the will proouing it selfe by the hand and seale of him that made it affixed to it So it is with the word of God which we do not ordinarily see to be the word of God vntill the Church teach and traine vs vp therein But when it hath done the arguments whereby it is proued so to be and the authority whereupon I beleeue it are contained in the word it selfe which I expound and confirme by this that euermore and perpetually the Church by the Scripture it selfe and by no other argument prooues it to be diuine to those she teaches and vpon that ground at the first receiued them for such her selfe and many times it fals out as with some Atheists and Pagans that where no Church authority ministry or perswasion is vsed by onely reading of the Scripture it selfe in respect of the outward meanes a man coms to faith which could not be if the Scripture it selfe had not conuinced him forsomuch as an Atheist or vnbeleeuer will not be perswaded by any thing but that which he euidently sees to be Gods owne word and this perswasion arises in him from the very booke it selfe without Church authority 3 And this is yet confirmed by that which the Iesuites teach against the Anabaptists Swinkfieldians holding the motions of their inward spirit to be Gods word for Bellarmine c De verb. Dei l. 1. c. 1. 2. sayes that to the faithfull acknowledging the Scripture to be Gods word it may be prooued out of the Scripture it selfe that the Scripture is the word of God Molhusine and Gretsers d Gretser def Bellar. l. 1. c. 2. pag. 34. D. words are these It is manifest that Bellarmine onely affirmes that it may be prooued OVT OF THE SCRIPTVRES THEMSELVES and the Canonicall books thereof onely TO THE FAITHFVLL who receiue and reuerence them for such that the word of God is not the inward spirit whereof fantasticall men boast but the word of God is truly it which is contriued in those books which the faithfull hold for Canonicall In which words they say three things First that the faithfull who acknowledge the Scripture to be Gods word are they persons of whom they speake not such as receiue it not Secondly that to such it may be prooued that not the inward spirit of fantasticall men but the Canonicall Scripture is the word of God Wherein they affirme two things may be prooued A Negatiue that the inward spirit is not Gods word and an Affirmatiue that Gods word is truely it which is contained in the Canonicall books of the Scripture Thirdly that both this Negatiue and this Affirmatiue may be proued out of the Scriptures themselues Hence I reasō thus To the godly that receiue and acknowledge the Scripture this affirmatiue that Gods word is it which is contained in the Canonicall Bookes of the Scripture may be proued out of the Scriptures themselues therefore the Scripture it selfe can proue it selfe to be the word of God Therefore that the Scripture it the very word of God is contained in the Scripture because otherwise it could not be proued so to be out of the Scripture it selfe Therefore all things needfull are contained in this Scripture No wrangling can auoid this If to such as receiue them it may be proued out of themselues that these Bookes are the word of God then this point that these bookes are diuine Scripture is contained in Scripture and the cause why some see it not is their owne indisposition and vnbeleefe wherewith the Scripture must not be charged but to such as receiue these Bookes the Iesuits affirme it may be proued out of themselues that they are the word of God that is without all Church authoritie which is externall and not in the Scripture 4 Secondlie this being admitted that it is a a point of faith necessary to be beleeued that the Canonical Books are diuine and then againe that they could not be shewed so to be out of themselues yet doth it not follow ineuitably that all points of faith are not contained in them for the question is not whether the Scripture be Gods word or no which is granted of all hands but whether being confessed so to be it containe all such verities as a Christian man is bound to know in such measure that there is no point to be beleeued that is not contained therein The reason is because the Scriptures are the principles of diuine knowledge and the faith thereof * Not in nature but in proportion like the credite we yeed to the rules of humane sciences which are knowne and beleeued of themselues without any further demonstration And as the kings lawes containe all things whatsoeuer the subiect is bound to do and yet the said lawes not prouing themselues to be of authoritie but supposing it to be known before and otherwise are not thereby proued to be vnperfect or defectiue but being receiued then there is nothing wanting in them that is necessary for the common-wealth and as in all arts and sciences that we learne the rules and precepts thereof need not proue themselues for that which is the generall rule of other things is not ruled it selfe in the same kinde and yet it were folly to say they were therefore imperfect So may it be said to be in the Scripture supposing it had no more light thereby to authorize it selfe then Princes lawes and humane principles haue that it containes all points of faith though it were not expressed that it selfe is the word of God For the readier vnderstanding whereof let the Reader againe cast his eie vpon the occasion
may define contrary to that they all writ as the B. Virgin not to be conceiued in sin and so they shall beleeue iust that they beleeued not and the direct contrary CHAP. LVII 1 Touching the first coming in of errors into the Church with the persons Time and Place 2 Purgatory and pardons not knowne in the ancient Church nor in the Greeke Church to this day 3 The true reason why the ancient praied for the dead Pag. 287. A. D. To conclude it is not enough for M. White to name these eight or any other points of our doctrine and to say that we hold or practise contrary to the doctrine of the ancient Church but I must require him to set downe the time place persons and other circumstances of this supposed innouation which circumstances are commonly noted in Histories when any such innouation against the vniuersall doctrine of the Church did arise This my demand 1 White Digr 5. pag. 374. M. White who will it seemeth sticke at nothing taketh vpon him to satisfie by naming seauen points of our religion offering to shew the time when and manner how they got into the Church And thereupon first he nameth pardons and purgatory the vse whereof he sayeth came lately into the Church To this I answer first that he nameth not the particular Time Place not Persons that first brought in the vse of pardons and purgatory and so he saieth nothing to the purpose Secondly I answer that our questions is not so much about the vse of pardons and purgatory as whether the doctrine which holdeth purgatory to be and pardons duely vsed to be lawfull came in of late contrary to the former doctrine of the Church Now M. White will neuer be able to shew that that Church did at any time vniuersally beleeue that 2 Concerning praier for the dead which supposeth the beleefe of Purgatory learned Protestants grant it to haue bene general in the Church long before S. Austins time as may be seene in the Protest Apol. tract 1. sect 2. nu 4. purgatory was not or that pardons duely vsed were vnlawfull or that the doctrine concerning the substance of these points was first brought in of late naming the first time place or persons which brought it in contrary to the former faith and shewing who resisted it as an heresie and who continued to resist it 1 HAuing no power to answer the examples I gaue of the Church of Romes now holding contrary to the ancient Church he concludes that it is not enough to name the points or to say they hold contrary to the doctrine of the ancient Church vnlesse I set downe the Time Places Persons and other circumstances of the innouations as Histories vse to note them when any such innouations arises and therefore he must require me to set them downe I answer it is sufficient that I haue shewed the points not to haue bene holden by the ancient Church For if the ancient Church held them not what skills it when or by whom they were brought in when they were brought in since the times of the ancient Church for that which was not at the first is not Catholike but by some at some time was brought in contrary to that which is Catholicke And a THE WAY §. 50. n. 5 6. I haue shewed that there be many confessed changes wherein these circumstances cannot bee shewed Neuerthelesse for example b THE WAY Digr 51. I named him seauen points and the circumstances of Time Place and Persons of their getting in whereof the vse of PARDONS was the first He replies that I haue not named the particular time place nor persons that brought them in and therefore say nothing to the purpose Here let the Reader iudge whether hauing shewed out of the confession of his owne writers that they are not from the Apostles times not expressed in the Scripture or Fathers nor brought to our knowledge by their authority but lately come into the Church this be not enough for what is not from the Apostles times came in since there is the Time when What came in lately was not vsed in the Primitiue Church There is the Time againe what is not mentioned by the Scripture Fathers and ancient Church was deuised by innouators there is the Persons What the Scriptures and Pastors of the Church reueals not that growes vp as cockle and weed in the Church there is the place Let me adde to the rest whom I alledged in the Digression the words of B. Fisher c Art 28 p. 86. b. Pardons therefore began AFTER men had a while trembled at the torments of Purgatory I haue therefore brought euidence sufficient to proue pardons to be an innouation because it proues they were not vsed in the ancient Church nor reuealed by the Apostles 2 He replies that the question is not so much about the VSE of pardons and purgatory as whether the DOCTRINE that holds them came in of late CONTRARY to the doctrine of the Church And I answer againe affirmatiuely that it did For the vse is founded on the doctrine and the doctrine cannot be without vse There was no vse ergo there was no doctrine But M. White will neuer be able to shew that the Church beleeued there was no Purgatory or that pardons were not lawfull This is follie for how should M. White shew the Church condemned that which was not yet in rerum natura no man being able to speake of that which is not in being If pardons therefore were not M. White must be pardoned if he cannot shew how the Church condemned them And touching Purgatory though it be much ancienter yet neither did the Catholicke Church beleeue it There were some in the Church that conceited such a thing and the Fathers began in Saint Austines time but a Non redarguo quia forsitan verum est c. Aug ciuit l. 21. c. 26. see Enchirid. c. 69. and the Apol of the Gre. p. 132. waueringly and without any resolute certainety to mention it but it was not beleeued in their daies as a matter of faith that he which denied it should be an hereticke as it is now beleeued in the Church of Rome Besides the East Church beleeued it not to this day therefore the vniuersall Church beleeued it not Heare their owne words in an Apology written touching this matter b Apol. Graec. p. 119. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 We haue not receaued from our Doctors that there is any such Purgatory or temporary punishment by fire and we know the East Church neuer thought so Heare also what the B. of Rochester c Art 18. p. 86. b. saies No true beleeuer NOW doubts of Purgatory whereof notwithstanding among the ancient there is very litle or no mention at all The Greekes also to this day do not beleeue there is a Purgatory Let whose will reade the commentaries of the ancient Greekes and so farre as I see he shall finde very rare
whereby vnanswerably it followes that there was no visible head of the Church infallibly knowne all that time but according to our Aduersaries owne principles the Church wanted meanes to instruct and confirme her people in the faith yea the liuing rule of faith ceased and was ouerthrowne in these schismes The Iesuite replies that in all these schismes either the true Pope was knowne or if he were not yet there was meanes to cleare the doubt by electing a new The first of these is false that in all the schismes the true Pope was knowne For in some of them there were so many learned men and Princes of the earth following each part deuided one against another that it was impossible there should be any certainety And my Aduersarie could not haue instanced with me in a worse then in Vrbanus whose reputation was so small by reason of a Whereof reade Theodor à Niem de schism l. 1. c. 2. the manner of his entrance and gouernment that he was generally nicknamed Turbanus and so odious to his Cardinals that in reuenge b Ibi. cap. 51. Pandulf Collenut hist Neapolit l. 5. p. 233. some he tormented vpon the racke in base and miserable fashion and afterward tied vp in sackes and so drowned them and others he baked in an ouen and carried them when he had done vpon mules before him when he trauelled with their Cardinal hats vpon them Now it is a rule among our c Petr. Cresper sum Cathol fid verb. Disciplinae pag. 180. Aduersaries themselues that a doubtfull Pope is to be accounted for no Pope The succession therefore failed all the time of these schismes And albeit as the Reply speaketh there was meanes by a Councell to elect a new Pope yet what successe these meanes had he may perceiue by the stories of the Councels of Pisa Constance and Basil whereof this last d Aen. Sylu. comment de Gest Basil Concil lib. 2. deposed Eugenius and elected the Duke of Sauoy calling him Faelix the fift and yet our aduersaries still hold the succession in Eugenius yea the Replier hath put him in his Catalogue and left Faelix out which by this his rule he should not haue done And besides though a Councell may depose the schismatickes and elect a new Pope yet who shall he that is thus elected succeed or how can a Councell or any other meanes that shall be vsed peece together the interruption past that it may truly be said the succession was neuer broken Martin was elected by the Councell of Constance but let the Iesuite and Gregory of Valence his master of whom he hath borrowed all that he sayes answer whom he succeeded whether Vrban and his successors or Clement and his which side soeuer he takes he cannot rid himselfe For Clement and they that followed him in his time are thrust out of the catalogue and Vrbane with those that followed him put in yet the said Vrban in his time was thought no right Pope and Eugenius that immediatly followed this Martin was deposed by the Councell of Basil 13 The Iesuites hope therefore that he hath answered the obiections will faile him things may wittily and cunningly be pretended but let euery man that will stablish his conscience in the truth enquire whether the reason of true succession can hold where such things as these fall out and whether it be possible or can stand with Gods prouidence that a succession planted for such purposes as our aduersaries pretend this of Rome to be shall be furnished and peeced out with boyes women hereticks ignorant and vnlettered dotards simoniacall intruders and so many times diuers of them at once Two things therefore touching this matter of succession are the truth First that the outward and personall succession of Bishops in the Church of Rome is not so entire as is pretended but hath bene defiled and poisoned with so many disorders that it is as lame a succession as any is wheresoeuer in the world Their catalogues assigned and drawne to exhibite to the vulgar people looke smooth on the outside and nothing but well is discerned in them but examine the particulars and enquire into the histories of their succession and there was neuer any thing so patched and peeced together as they Secondly the succession of doctrine is the true succession and is not tied to that which is in place and persons and therefore let not the Iesuites blaze out their catalogues of names vntill they can prooue the corruptions which they haue added to religion wherein onely we forsake the Church of Rome were holden and beleeued by the persons named For what foolery is it to make a catalogue of Iesus Christ Saint Peter all the Apostles and Euangelists the virgin Marie and the whole Church of the first six hundred yeares as if these had professed what the Pope and his rabble now teach did these adore images vse the Communion in one kind beleeue Purgatorie did these teach it lawfull for the Pope to excommunicate depose murder the Kings of the earth Are not all these things against their expresse doctrine Let our aduersaries retire backe to modestie and truth and giue ouer their courses There are two parts of their religion One wherein they and we agree as that there is one God three persons one redeemer Iesus Christ that the Scripture Canonicall is Gods word that the dead shall rise and all the rest wherein we consent Another part of their religion is it which we and all the reformed Churches haue cast off as Images Transubstantiation Purgatorie Traditions and a hundred such like points The Catalogue assigned sufficiently shewes the former part both for them and vs against all Iewes and Gentiles that denie it The latter part they cannot shew to haue bene holden by the persons named vntill many ages after Christ as they came in by degrees in all which time the truth maintained by the Protestants against them was holden still and the Papacie was but a faction in the Church opposing the sounder part thereof And so the visible Church of Rome it selfe is it wherein the Protestants faith in all ages hath bene professed for the substance thereof Vincat veritas I. Wh.
subiects are generally of the Smiths mind to wish these sonnes of Beliall that fly-blow Religion and blast the lawes and honour and the estimation of Princes with their breath placing their greatest pietie in the greatest mischiefes they can bring to their Prince and countrey may feele the mettall harder that by law is tempred for such as are of their spirits and know not how to vse your Highnesse clemency I speake not of simple Recusants but fugitiue Iesuites and Seminaries that haue renounced their allegiance to their naturall Soueraigne and made themselues the Popes creatures and vowed him blind obedience in all that he shall command them For many Papists Maffae vit Ignat. when their seducers are remoued shall come home to obedience and repenting them of their Idolatrie and superstition imbrace your Highnesse gouernment and the Religion stablished but when vnnaturall fugitiues and such as they haue Iesuited haue attempted to consume vs and by blasphemous writings vnnaturall reports traiterous libells barbarous conspiracies from time to time these fiftie yeares together haue vndermined our state and by the wofull ruine of some haue shewed what they intend to all Kings and Princes that entertaine not their vassallage Sylu. Girald Topograph Hib. M. Wrightinton and M. Brettergs horse oxen and kine killed in their pastures a little before the late Queens death and now lately the messengers horses poisoned at Wigan in Lancashire it is not to be hoped that their faire protestations can giue vs assurance as we had experience lately in him that writ the QVODLIBETS but as it is noted of the Irish long ago A securibus nulla securitas si securum te reputes securim senties est longè fortius timenda eorum ars quam Mars eorum pax quam fax eorum mel quam fel malitia quam militia proditio quam expeditio amicitia praefucata quam inimicitia despicata Their poisoning of so many your Highnesse subiects with heresies and reuiling Gods blessed truth their preying vpon the states and persons of their followers and filling them with hatred and reprochfulnesse against their brethren till it come to the killing of our very cattell and dumbe beasts is the least of their doings the state and gouernment hath bene odiously defamed the lawes reuiled the Iudges railed on and threatned the Nobles disgraced and in fauour of the formallest Miscreants and to bolster out the damnablest treason that euer was the PVBLICKE ACTS AND RECORDS of the kingdome entred in the view of God and men and Angels are discredited and denied Yet these are the persons beginning where the Diuell did when he seduced Adam that become our ghostly Fathers and are canonized for Martirs Sine Scriptura Theologi sine miraculis Apostoli sine veritate Catholici sine pace sacrifici sine patientia Martyres sine vera fide religiosi Their zeale for the Catholicke faith and saluation of soules is pretended but their drift is to captiuate all to the Popes Monarchy and their owne ambition Plutarch Zonar When Caesar was desirous to leade Cleopatra in triumph that she should not mistrust or preuent him he sent her word that he was in loue with her Philostrat Philip of Macedon leading an armie against Byzantium said that hearing of the beautie of the citie he was going a wooing and would make loue to her But the Orator told him againe it was not the manner in his countrie to go a wooing with swords but with musicke and they that were in loue brought not instruments of warre but of melodie It were to be wished that as Philip by this conceite was intreated to spare the citie so your Highnesse clemency might haue perswaded these men to let the Popes plenitudo tempestatis alone spare their countrie but when their practises are made the profession of their Catholicke faith and their loathsomest treasons the cause of the Catholicke Church and the punishments inflicted for the same accounted martyrdome when they haue made their priuate quarrels the publicke faith of their Church what hope is there but they will perseuere When Ephesus was distressed with a dangerous battery Polyaen in a time of siege the Gouernor with ropes tied the walls and gates to Dianaes Temple that so being consecrate to the goddesse the enemie should assault them at his perill This is now become the Iesuites policy first to tie euery thing to the Temple making their innouations and conspiracies the Churches cause and then cry them downe for heretickes that finde any fault that so neither Church nor state nor magistrate nor subiect nor lawes nor Religion nor Court nor country can be free from their intermedling Cedren There was a time when the Eunuchs were so potent and busie in the Greeke Empire ouerruling and disturbing all things that it became the saying of a great man if you haue an Eunuch in your hand dispatch him but if you haue none buie one and dispatch him The Iesuite and the Masse Priest hath plied his statizing in such fashion that his name may well bee put in the roome of the Eunuch and before your Highnesse lawes against them be put in execution that their haunts and harbours may be stopt and the places of their entertaintment scoured and the femall hierarchy where they breed be put downe their plots will neuer haue end nor is it possible your Highnesse state or person shold haue security Our words against them are many and some mislike our earnestnesse But the Kings danger made Croesus dumbe sonne speake Herodot and we had rather sustaine the enuie of our words then another day feele the issue of their deeds Silu. Girald When the King of Meth asked aduice of one Turghesie how certaine noisome birds lately come into Ireland that did much harme in the countrey might be destroyed he answered Nidos eorum vbique destruendos the next way was to destroy their nests where they bred They are none of Saint Colmans birds that there should be any such danger in chasing them but what manner of birds they are your Highnesse may perceiue by a story in Maximus Tyrius One Psapho Max. Tyr. serm dwelling in the parts of Lybia desirous to be canonized a God tooke a sort of prating birds and secretly taught them to sing PSAPHO IS A GREAT GOD and hauing their lesson perfitly he let them flie into the woods and hills adioyning where continuing their song other birds also by imitation learned the same till the hedges rang with nothing but Psaphoes dittie GREAT IS THE GOD PSAPHO The countrey people hearing the birds but ignorant of the fraud thought Psapho to be a God indeed and began to worship him This same is the Popes practise desirous to effect his ambition and shew himselfe to be a God he maintaines a sort of discontented fugitiues in his Seminaries as it were in so many cages where dieting them for the nonce he easily teaches them what tune he pleases and hauing
vnworthiest things that are and my knowledge of the meanes whereby and the ends whereto they are trained vp to this writing and my daily exercise in their bookes haue long since remooued from me all opinion of them and taught me that learning as beawty can play the baude and make them loue it that shall fall by it and inamoured of it that little know the danger of it Let the seuerall points of their faith which with that learning they maintaine be well vnderstood and considered for the most vnderstand them not and let the manner of their proceeding in that they defend be iudiciously looked into and it will easily appeare that learning and wit Gen. 38. like Thamar hath prostituted her selfe and sits in the highway and so she may haue children she will deceiue Iudah her owne father And when all learning and the ripest wits and holiest Diuines the Church of Rome hath are now wholly imploied in maintaining the Popes power ouer Princes absoluing subiects from their alleagiance excusing equiuocating and the POWDER-TREASON and making the actors Martyrs and dissoluing the very ioints and bands whereby the world and Christian society is holden together it is high time to let the authoritie of mens persons alone and looke another while into the reasons and causes they maintaine and when they haue found the truth to cease from contending and labour by obedience and submission therunto to bring glory to God that our tongues may professe and our liues glorifie his heauenly Maiestie Hauing therefore written in my former booke to this effect and plainely shewed all this and much more that my countreymen and the people of our nation if they pleased might see the triall of things it is fallen out that the Romish side findes it selfe in an extraordinary manner touched therewith after many rumors vowes to confute me at last about 18. monethes since I receaued this Reply which here thou seest And although I take no pleasure in contentious writings but as time shall shew if I continue my course and God giue meanes intend that which shall cleare the controuersies without contention yet when I had heard many reports of something that would be done with effect against me I was willing to giue satisfaction againe least the ignorant might be perswaded something was writtē indeed that could not be answered It is not vnlikely but others also for they haue more helps meanes and leasure then I haue as soone as they can be furnished wil be doing more may yet be written for so he sends me word that writ the last Triumph of Purgatory an Author that sure will ouerthrow the Chariot and lay all in the mire if he be set to driue it and so I haue bene often told and sent word and therefore if any shall chance to write in forme and without passion whereof this man is full and with modesty will say what he thinks speaking directly and home to that I haue said without declining or shrinking from the point that presses him that I may finde him an honest minded man and not a Mercurialist I will gratifie him againe with the same that he brings and freely reuoke and confesse any error that he shall shew to haue escaped me If I be otherwise dealt with that nothing be sought but the disgrace of my persō vndirect discrediting of my booke it is likely that I shall take my resolution from the circumstances of my aduersary when I see him and do as his booke against me shall deserue In the meane time be admonished of 4. things touching this Reply and my owne Defence First that whereas he hath in the same booke written against M. wootton a learned Diuine as well as me I meddle onely with that which concernes my selfe and therefore taking his booke before me I answer onely the passages that are against me Next all that I meddle with is set downe verbatim as it lies and the number of his page in the margent ouer against his text Then I haue in this sort gone through his whole booke til within a little of the end which containing no new matter but the same that I had occasion to answer diuers times afore I would lose no time about it Fourthly I haue answered fully and directly to euery word he saieth by which diligence I haue benefited the Reader so much that howsoeuer my Aduersary may seeme meane and vnworthy confuting yet he shall not lose his labour in reading but finde my paines bestowed profitably vpon him such as he is who yet to giue him his due though he raile hard and vnciuilly and write an obscure and vnpleasing stile hath replied with all the best and sutablest arguments he could finde in Stapleton Bellarmine and Valentia touching the points depending and onely failes in replying to that which I had answered before Hereafter let me intreate the good and courteous Reader if he will vouchsafe to vse my writings not to iudge of them but by his owne triall and examination For they haue secretly to their wel-willers laid imputations vpon them who being surprised with conceit are afraid to make the triall or to meete the truth The quotations for example or Authors alledged may be challenged reported to be false yet this Reply hath charged but onely one in all his booke and they which haue bene lowdest and earnestest may finde in such a multitude possible some to proue that the diligentest writer may be ouerseene but the substance they cannot discredit If I haue erred in any thing or mistaken an Author I acknowledge my selfe to be a man that may erre and I humbly submit what I haue done not onely to the Church wherein I liue but to euery moderate and peaceable minded man therein yea I will with all respect of his person heare and aduise of any thing that an aduersary shall informe me of if he will hold the rules of Christian truth and charity and go forward with me in that course to seeke the truth which all men see euermore to be lost where words and wrangling giue the sound And I intreate euen those that cleaue most to the Church of Rome to perswade themselues that whatsoeuer I haue written is for their sakes that if it were possible they might discerne the truth offered them and the wickednesse of the Iesuites that leade them I maligne no mans person I hate none that is among them but being called to be a Preacher of the Gospell I am desirous to bestow my spare houres in maintenance of that I preach and for the which I were ready to sacrifice my life much more to bestow my time and trauell that if it might so please God we might be all as one and the state and gouernement wherein we liue be no longer tossed and intangled with our disagreements They cannot but see that God by establishing the Kings throne and blessing it against the malice vnnatural practises of their Church giues testimony on our
rendred to him that well did The same is taught generally in the Church of Rome by all them that hold h Vasq 1.2 tom 2. pag. 803. c. 4. in these words deliuers his opinion of merit when a man being in the state of righteousnesse through the grace of God doth good workes then the said workes merit eternall life and are equally worthy of the reward though God make no couenant in Christ to accept them and that they haue no increase of dignitie coming to them by the merits or person of Christ but before God make any promise to vs in him they are in iustice worthy the reward and though God haue made a couenant to accept such workes done by grace yet the merit and worthines thereof arises not nor is founded on that couenant but the promise is founded on the merit of the worke because it were iniustice if God should not reward a good worke And thus the greatest Diuines in the Church of Rome teach a Panopl pâ—g 110. Lindan I thinke they do not worthily enough set forth the grace of Christ in our good workes who thinke God rewards the good workes of iust men with eternall life of free grace and the vouchsafing of his owne clemencie because the reason of true merit which is ingendred in good works through the dignitie of Christs Spirit their author seemes to deserue GREATER praise then that God should only VOVCHSAFE it the reward FREELY Anard b Artic. 9. pag. 126. Far be it from vs that we should waite for eternall life AS A POORE MAN DOTH FOR ALMES for it is MORE GLORIOVS for vs like conquerers and triumphers to possesse it as the garland and crowne that is DVE to our labours Suarez c Tom. 1. pag. 645. B. It must not be denied but our merits are true merits in such sort that the workes of the godly proceeding from grace haue in themselues an inward dignitie and the same proportion to the reward which they should haue vnderstanding a man to be iust and to worke well without the merits of Christ as many thinke of the Angels and of man in the state of innocencie d 12. disp 214. c. 4. n. 17. Vasquez Although God haue made a promise to the workes of iust men yet neither that promise nor any couenant or fauour of God belongs any wayes to the reason of the merit Bellarmine e De iustif l. 5. c. 17. pag. 993. A The workes of the iust merit eternall life condignely by reason of Gods couenant and the worke together NOT BECAVSE THE GOOD WORKE HATH NO PROPORTION TO ETERNALL LIFE WITHOVT GODS COVENANT TO ACCEPT IT but because God is not tied to accept it to the reward though it be equall thereto vnlesse his couenant come betweene D. Stapleton f De iustificat pag. 237. We are said to please God and to be acceptable to him in and for Christ and our iustice is said to leane vpon Christs iustice because the beginning and progresse thereof is of Christ and depends thereon as on the efficient cause and Christs iustice supplies our defects NOT BY SVPPLYING ANY VNPERFECT ACT THAT IS IN OVR RIGHTEOVSNES and so making it perfect that it might stand before Gods iudgement seate but if such imperfection of our righteousnesse be without sinne it is admitted for true righteousnesse and admitted in the iust iudgement of God g Alph. Virvés Andrad Horát Caiet BonaueÌ„ Mart Distor Thom. Ricard Romae Conrad Capraeol Dried Clictouae Tilet Vincent Soto all cited for this opinion by Vasq 12. disp 214. n. 9. 18. The most of our aduersaries hold this and teach a condignitie in our workes arising out of THEMSELVES abstracting from the merits of Christ and promise of God which promise is founded on the worke and which merits of Christ adde nothing to the value of the worke but onely eleuates the person of him that workes Whence it followes that the reward must needs be giuen by the first couenant made with Adam which is as much of Baius his opinion as I alledged 4 Thus I haue shewed that Baius in his words by me quoted teaches no other doctrine then is ordinarily taught by other Diuines in the Church and the Iesuites arguments to the contrary are easily answered To the first there can be no more shewed out of their writings but that life eternall is obtained by grace and the merit of Christ inasmuch as they are the roote of merit which h Quicquid ad humani generis reparationem pertinet id non nostris moritu propriis neque iusto Dei iudicio tribuendum est quia alioqui saltem ex parte essemus nostri redemptores sed tantum proposito gratiae Dei per redemptionem quae facta est in sanguine Christi Pag. 12. Baius denies not but yet for all that holding that workes so done haue in them an intrinsecall righteousnesse and worthinesse of their owne they must needs hold consequently that God in iustice is bound to reward them in the same maner that he rewards Angels or would haue rewarded Adam if he had neuer fallen which was by the couenant of workes And it should seeme the Iesuite by his manner of citing them saw not the bookes theÌ„selues but borowed the quotations of his friends For first touching Alexander he quotes 3. part 9.69 which I presume is mis-printed in stead of qu. 69. memb 5. art 3. 5 whereas in the 5. m. there are only 4 articles and in the 3d art i Pag. 249. he speakes expresly against him that if a man do that which is in himselfe to doe God necessarily giues him grace In which words he plainly ascribes merit to workes done by nature which is Pelagianisme The best that he sayes against nature for grace is in k Concedendum est ergo necessariam esse gratiaÌ„ indistincte ad merendum consequendum beatitudinem m. 1. art 1. another place but that Grace whereby he sayes we merit he expounds to be our owne worke wrought by the power of Gods grace which is the very point that Baius holds Bellarmines opinion is vncertaine he doth nothing but chop and change a man of no resolution but a very weather-cocke yet he hath one good saying on the Iesuites side l De iustif l. 5. c 7. By reason of the vncertaintie of a mans owne righteousnesse and for feare of vaine-glorie it is the safest way to repose our whole confidence in the sole mercie and goodnesse of God But m See Vasqu 1.2 tom 2. pag. 794. c. 7. his fellowes whip him for it The other three Tapper Fisher and Thomas say no more but that our workes merit by grace in which point they crosse not Baius for he also allowes grace and sayes not that they merit by nature but that being done by grace the reward is giuen not by a new couenant in Christ but by the same that God made with Adam in pure nature from
must we alone hold our peace my head is broken on euery side and when the blood gushes out round about shall I thinke to hide it Whatsoever I put about it will be bloodied and my shame will be the greater thus to go about to hide that which will not be hidden This is it that I say for my selfe against the Iesuites reproches come we now to his Reply First he answers that in all his acquaintance here there he may protest that he neuer heard any one of these his examples and absurd forms of Prayer to be vsed by any and divers Catholikes of far better credite then M. White being demaunded their knowledge about this point haue not knowen any Catholike man or woman to vse them Wherein he mocks the reader to his face three times ouer First in producing himselfe and his Catholikes for witnesses whom no man knowes against M. White that stands openly in the face of the world and is knowne to all where he dwels and what he is and lies subject in his person and name to the open and secret censure of the world if he speake vntruly whereas this masked Iesuite and his Catholikes of so good credit and his person of good esteeme whose words he alledges are all shadowes and Idols that no man knowes to whom any thing that they say can be imputed because they are inuisible we heare the sound of an A and a D. and the Ghost possibly of a Gentlewoman but what they are and where and how I may let my countrey see their face that thus walke in the darke I know not but these are the waies of Iesuites a maske a darke roome a blinde lanterne a vault and two or three blanke letters and thence they fight with all this noise Next he mocks vs againe in that he sayes he neuer heard any of these formes for no doubt he hath heard as bad as these in other words if he haue not heard these and I make no question but some of those Catholikes that haue bene demanded their knowledge about this point if they were ouerheard when they say their prayers would speake no better For I haue heard many repeat their praiers yet neuer did I heare one speake in any tollerable forme And any man may easily perceiue it is scarce possible that they which vnderstand no Latine should pronounce it otherwise then as I haue set downe Thirdly where he saies he and his Catholikes neuer heard any of these things as though Seminaries ordinarily vsed to examine or heare how their people say their praiers who are well knowne to haue many things else they minde more and when their people haue learned to refuse the Church that they once possesse them they greatly passe not either what they be or how they pray so they pray not with vnderstanding But he saies M. White met at an Alehouse some drunken old man or some dâ—â—ing wife and of them he might receiue this rotten stuffe Indeed the Legend tels of Iohn the Almoner that seeing his people in the time of diuine seruice going out of the Church to the Alehouse tooke his booke and followed them saying that where the sheepe were there the Shepheard must be also yet M. White neuer vsed that course when his people went to the Ale-house but left it to Seminaries who were as good Alebeaters in their disguised habit as either the drunken old maÌ„ or the doting old wife here mentioned And to let the Iesuit plainly vnderstand where I receiued this ridiculous rotten stuffe I observed and learned it of the people where I dwelt diuers whereof I haue heard thus to say their praiers when I haue examined them or otherwise intreated them sometime at their owne houses where they dwelt and somtime at mine and I know the guise of popish people so well that schollers excepted the laity of them generally as well yong as old sober as drunken gentle as simple pronounce their Latine praiers no better which is the barbarous ignorance that I reported We reade in a De consecrat d. 4. Retulerunt Gratian how Priests baptised in Nomine Patria Filia Spiritua sancta and no man I thinke will deny but in king Henry and Queene Maries times many Masse priests in all parts of the land went ordinarily to the Grammar schoole to learne to reade their Portuisse that no man wonder at this brutishnesse in the laity which was little lesse in a great part of the Cleargy and what I said of their Ceremonies also those that liue in the countrey know to be true And what they sauour of whether the purity and simplicitie of Christianity or the fashion of the Gentiles b Tertull. de coron militis so much detested by antiquitie let who so will iudge For my own part though I iudge not such as vse them in their simplicity and ignorance yet I abhorre and detest those wreches that taking vpon them to be their ghostly fathers yet suffer them to liue in that brutish superstition 2 But that which the Reply takes most vnkindly is a speech that I added after I had set downe those formes of praier It cannot be answered that these are the customes of a few simple people for this is generall throughout the Countrey the most men and women deuoted to Papistry though well borne and of good place yet lye plunged in this ignorance which last wordes were it should seeme a Prophecy For you see how the touching of this sore puts him into passion and my Booke was scarce come out when many of this Better sort had it by the ende and quarrelled it yet if we had meanes to make the triall it would fall out to be true for I know not what faculty or priuiledge a gentleman or his wife for example that vnderstands no Latine hath to pronounce it any better then their tenants here I auouch againe in his presence that knowes all things that the same ignorance and rudenesse wherewith I charge the vulgar people I haue obserued in diuers of the better sort and the Iesuit is but vnwise to deny it For if white Pater noster and little Creed be good Physicke for the vulgar I know not but Catholiks of greater note may vse them too c Phil. Camerar meditat hist When an Emperour lay in the pangue of the gout he cried out that now he differed nothing from a cloune he felt the same disease and the same paine and pangs without any difference So I suppose this rude ignorance in such as are well borne and of good place is of no other nature then that which is in the common sort yet the Iesuit you see is earnester for them then the rest and possibly he hath reason Ladies and Gentlewomen and men of worth can see better then a poore client it s not a drunken old man or a doting wife that can merit a Seminaries zeale leaue them in an Alehouse with M. White saying their white
they do to God I answer two things first granting that words and outward gestures are qualified and conditioned by the meaning of him that vses them as he that called the Prophet h 2. Reg. 2.12 13.14 my Father my Father meant not that hie degree of Honor that he did when he called God his Father and therefore I will not deny but Papists vsing these inuocations mentioned to the Saints may meane them otherwise then they do to God as for example calling the virgin Mary their Aduocate their Hope their Sauiour they may meane she is so not of her selfe but vnder Christ and not principally by her owne merits but subordinarily by the merits and grace of her Sonne This I will easily grant may be the meaning of their wordes but then I answer secondly that it doth not follow that therefore we may with such reseruation of our meaning in the same wordes inuocate and worship the Saints departed first because the said inuocation is diuine honour from what minde soeuer it proceed whether the Saint be called vpon as the supreme and eternal beginning or whether onely as the friend of God that by reason of his nearnesse to him can sooner intreate him then my selfe If he be inuocated with the titles of Aduocate Sauiour Redeemer though the intent be but onely to vse him as a friend to intreate yet this is diuine honour belonging to Iesus Christ For all prayer is diuine honour and such titles as are giuen them in their worship Mediator Hope Aduocate Confidence Sauiour Redeemer Ladie Queene of heauen c. exceed the measure of all ciuill reuerence and adoration whatsoeuer and therefore are not like the calling of our earthly parent father or kneeling to him Secondly the worshipping of a creature is idolatrie though he that worship it acknowledge it to be but a creature subordinate to God a thousand times because the commandement is i Mat. 4.10 Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God and him onely thou shalt serue When the diuell tempted our Sauiour to fall downe before him he did not require him to perswade himselfe that he was Iehouah or that he had those things of himselfe for he confessed vnto him k Luc. 4.6 he had receiued them but onely that he would kneele vnto him and accept those things at his hands And our Sauiour refused it not onely because he was the diuell but also because the commandement forbids the giuing diuine honour to a creature with any opinion estimation or iudgement whatsoeuer l Apoc. 19.10 22.8 When S. Iohn would haue fallen downe and worshipped the Angell he was not so ignorant or stupid as to thinke he was God or to intend him that highest honour that belongs to God but onely by that office he wold present his loue to the Angell and possible procure some fauour at his hand yet the Angell forbad him by a reason that proceeds vnanswerably against the inuocation of all Saints See thou do it not for I am thy fellow seruant and one of thy brethren which haue the testimonie of Iesus Worship God For it is a generall rule in the Scripture that no creature may with any estimation be worshipped with diuine honour A.D. If M. White insist and vrge Pag. 43. that outward words and actions are signes of inward meaning therefore where words and outward actions are the same towards Christ and towards his Saints at least ignorant people haue cause giuen them to thinke we haue the same inward meaning and so by our example are encouraged to commit formall idolatrie I answer that inward meaning is indeed gathered by outward words and actions ordinarily but not alwayes nor ordinarily by the bare outward shew of the action or by that precise sound of one or other word or sentence but by the whole connexion and circumstance of the matter and person about which the speech and action is and by the presupposed and knowne conceit of the partie which speaketh the said words or doth the action Now although in some of our prayers one or other word or sentence may seeme harsh as it is considered precisely in the outward sound especially to those that are not acquainted with the like as also to those who neuer had seen men kneele to any but to God himselfe nor to call any Father besides him it would seeme very harsh to see one kneele to his earthly parent and to call him Father yet when we consider the whole connexion of the words of our prayers hauing respect also to the different circumstances of the persons and matters spoken of and to the commonly knowne conceit of the speaker the sense of our prayers are found neither to be idolatrous nor superstitious nor scandalous none being ordinarily among vs so simple or ill instructed but they know that there is a different inward conceit and more estimation had reuerence done when the words are applied to our Sauiour Christ being God and man then when they are applied to Saints who are knowne to be not Gods but onely men 5 That which the Iesuite still assumes for his defence is still false He presumes that intending their prayers to the Saints no otherwise then they do they are lawfull And as long as God is confessed to be the first beginning of mercie and goodnesse and Christ the Mediator of redemption and the Saints no more but aduocates and friends to present our prayers all is well and those Saints may be inuocated as they are but the answer is that euen this kind of inuocation with no further opinion touching them is vnlawfull as I haue shewed And let the Reader alwayes remember that it is m Mat 6.9 Luc 11.1 Nam quaÌ„libet alia veil a dicamus nihil aliud dicimus quaÌ„ quod in ista Dominica oratione positum est si rectè congruenter oramus Quisquis auteÌ„ id dicit quod ad istam preceÌ„pertinere non possit etiamsi non illicitè orat carnaliter orat c. Aug. op 121. c. 12. Neque ensm propria tantuÌ„ orationis officia complexa cit venerationem Dei aut hominis petitionem sed om nem pene sermoneÌ„ Domini omnem commemorationeÌ„ disciplinae â—t â—â—â—era in oratione Breuiarium totius Euangelij comprehendatur Tertul. de orat c 1. no lawfull prayer that is not according to Christs rule When ye pray do it after this maner Our Father which art in heaueÌ„ c. Let your praiers be made to him that you may say is your Father that is in heauen who forgiues vs our sinnes and to whom belongs the kingdome and power and glorie for euer 6 But that which he chiefly intends in this place is to excuse the harshnesse and scandalousnesse of the words of their prayers albeit if a man should view them well he might maruell what excuse could be deuised for them Yet the Reply not onely excuses them that they must not be measured by their sound and outward
sayes A minde well disposed discernes the doctrine of God as the mouth being in taste doth the difference of tastes Saint Austin h Aug. tract 35. in Ioh. In the night of this world the Scriptures as a candle are lighted vp vnto vs that we should not remaine in darknesse i Rob. Parsons in his Directorie sets downe against the Atheist how the certaintie of these Scriptures is layed before vs. 1. By the Antiquitie thereof pag. 63. 2. Their manner of writing Authoritie and Preseruation p. 65. 3. Their sinceritie and the vprightnesse of the writers pag. 67. 4. The Consent of the Writers one with another pag. 72. 5. The Scope whereto they tend pag 73. 6. The Simplicitie Profoundnesse and Maiestie of the writers pag. 76. 7. The Contents pag. 80. 8. The Testimonie giuen to them by heathens pag 100. c. Pars Christ Directorie printed ann 1585. This light and heauenly maiestie by all men with one consent affirmed of the Scriptures proues that they are the word of God If the light k Vbi priùs saith the same Saint Austin be able to shew those things that are not light shall we say it failes in it selfe doth not that open it selfe without which other things are not opened and do you light a candle to see a burning candle Is not the Sunne or a starre seene by his owne light to them that haue eyes And if the ministerie of the Church be required to propose and offer and expound them to vs as it were l Apoc. 1. vlt. a candlesticke * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Areth. ibi to hold vp the candle so that as the Iesuites vse to reply to this argument this light should not shine nor this diuinitie appeare in the Scripture vnlesse the Church proposed them m Possibâ—le est actu crâ—dere omma credendâ— per solam fidem infusam ABSQVE TEâ—TIMâ—Nâ—O Dâ—CTRINA â—T MAGâ—STâ—RIO ECCLESIAE Stapl. princip l 8. c. 3. PER ILLAM SOLAM Sp sancti persuasioneÌ„ quodlibet credendum credi queat TACENTE Pâ—ORSVS VEL NON AVDITA ECCLESIA fide priuata via extraordinaria testimonio interno Relect. in Adm. Whitak §. Iam quum doth this light and maiestie therefore arise from the Church doth the light of the candle arise from the socket that beares it Doth the man that carries a torch before his master giue light to the torch and not the light thereof rather from out of it selfe enlighten both his master and him This light hath immediatly conuerted Atheists enlightened Infidels reclaimed heretickes that neuer so much as receiued or knew this Church-authoritie and tradition Which propertie of the Scripture thus to eleuate it selfe aboue all Church-authoritie inuincibly shewes that they prooue themselues to be the word of God In all this that hath bene said I grant we beleeue the Scripture and the things of faith by the ministerie of the Church but not for the authoritie of the Church Pag. 111. A. D Thirdly they hold that by this Spirit they are made infâ—llibly sure of the diuine authoritie of the Scriptures insomuch that when they heare or reade any booke they can by their spirit discerne clearly and infallibly whether it be diuine Scripture or not holding the Scripture of it selfe to shine like a candle to them and that they discerne it from other writings and the true sense of it from false in matters necessary to saluation as the sense of taste discerneth sweet from sower Vpon this bold presumption of hauing and being taught by the Spirit proceedeth their audacious and impudent neglect of the authoritie of the ancient Fathers generall Councels or whatsoeuer else standeth against that which they imagine to be taught them by the Spirit especially when they haue seeming words of Scriptures to second that which is suggested by this their spirit Pag. 114. A. D. Againe M White saith pag. 126 that the publicke word of God speaketh in the Scripture openly though the children of God onely know and beleeue it 4 He sayes it is our doctrine that we are made infallibly sure of the diuine authoritie of the Scriptures by this spirit insomuch that reading the Scripture we can thereby discerne whether it be Scripture or no c and to shew this he alledges some words of mine M. White saith that the sheep of Christ know his voice To which purpose my other words also are vsed that he alledges three pages after M. White saith that the publicke word of God c. There is little hope of reducing our aduersary to any indifferencie when they will not so much as sincerely report nor ingenuously acknowledge that we hold for if they would there were an end and the world should see we hold the truth Yet I wil make all things plaine and let the Reader iudge for in the ordinary course of attaining to faith we do not in the first place referre men to their owne spirit but binde them to heare the Church and stoope to her ministery which hauing done then we bid them examine themselues and affirme that such as are led by the Spirit of God through the helpe and teaching of the Church going before are by this Spirit made sure of the diuine authoritie of the Scriptures and can discerne thereof as of the light c. This Spirit therfore neither goes before the Church teaching ORDINARILY nor is the priuate spirit of man but the Spirit of God * For Gods Spirit testifies to our spirit all truths that are beleeued giuing that light that infused faith immediatly rests vpon 1. Ioh. 2.20 27. witnessing with our spirit This being premised the Reply sayes we hold that by THIS spirit they are made infallibly sure of the diuine authoritie of the Scriptures insomuch that by THEIR spirit they can discerne c. This is vntrue For the spirit whereby the authoritie of the Scripture is assured vnto vs is neither this spirit nor their spirit nor yet n For in pâ—ocesse of time when the Church began to abound in temporals forgetting in a manner all conscience many rulers therein cloking the Scriptures with sundrie wiles feared not to falsifie the vpright iudgements of God therein We see persons hauing neither conscience nor science gouernâ— the spouse of Christ sayes Fascie rerum antiq an 1414. the vnsauorie spirit of the Pope and his cleargie but the Spirit of God testifying to our spirits that it is his word after the Church hath begun to teach vs. So that it giues not testimonie to euery one immediatly without al ministery of the Church but theÌ„ wheÌ„ the Church propounds and reueales the Scripture to such as know it not the Spirit of God by that ministery descending into their hearts and assuring them and then all the testimonie and authoritie of the Church in this her ministery giues place againe to this greater light of the Spirit of God in the beleeuers heart and is no part of that authoritie whereon
presume to attaine faith without vsing the meanes Secondly to helpe such as despaire when they either know not that there is such a meanes or vnderstand not what in particular it is To take away presumption and desperation he layes downe this conclusion touching the rule of faith the which when he afterward defines to be his Romane Church speaking by the mouth of the Pope you may perceaue what a ready way he takes to keepe men from Presumption and Desperation 2 But whatsoeuer his intent were he sayes I grant him 4. things which is in a manner as much as he desires First that there is such a rule left Secondly that by this rule we may be infallibly instructed what is to be holden for true faith Thirdly that the cause why men misse the truth is because they either finde it not or obey it not Fourthly this rule is of such nature that it is able to direct al men yea the simplest and vnlearnedst aliue The which I granted him then and by these presents do grant againe vpon condition he will not be proud of that I giue him without any vantage to his purpose as if he had obtained some great boone but hold him to my grant mannerly and incroach no further For I gaue him warning that if he meant such a rule as all men at all times may haue accesse vnto as being concealed from none but visible and reuealed or manifest to all places ages and persons I would not grant it him for the reasons there expressed the which my exception in this place he calles vnorderly running before the Hare and in his next Section answers by expounding himselfe that he did not meane it should be actually manifest but onely such as * Doth he meane I maâ—uell in his Potentia remota whereof pag. 165. below c. 26. might be knowne but I ranne not before the Hare for I hunted a Foxe that was closely stealing to the wood in which game good Fox-hunters say it is not against the law to crosse the way and marke his headding For his head is to the wood in euery conclusion aiming at nothing but to traine by degrees such as follow him into his visible Church and the Popes authority ruling therein and therefore I distinguisht the diuers sences of his words being acquainted before with old Reinard Gregory of Valence in whose steppes I saw the Reply to tread and shewed which was true and which false that there might be no ambiguity And although he answer that I mistake him when I thought his meaning was this rule should be manifest and actually knowne to all yet I am not satisfied for though I giue him leaue to expound himselfe and accept his exposition yet what I suspected necessarily followes still of that he saies afterward as I then obserued for g Treat c. 10. in the WAIE §. 13. he defines the teaching of the Church to be the rule and this Church he maintaines to be such as not onely is of it nature visible and such as may be seene but h Treat c. 12. in the WAIE §. 18. inde manifest and actually knowne to all places ages and persons in the world And it followes manifestly of that if you say that sometime the Church could not be knowne nor be a meanes whereby the true faith might be knowne then men liuing at such time should want the meanes and so it were not vniuersally true that God would haue all men saued and come to the knowledge of his truth He that saies the Church is the Rule and such a rule as all men vniuersally may at all times know meanes that the rule is manifest and actually knowne to all this meaning he disclaimes and I am satisfied with it yet it followes violently vpon his owne wordes 3 Thirdly from the 4. things I graunt he gathers 3. things more First that No man must presume or once hope to attaine to true faith without finding and following the rule thereof ordained by God Secondly that No man neede to despaire though he be neuer so vnlearned or simple but by seeking finding and follwing this rule he may be sufficiently instructed in faith Thirdly that it concernes euery one careful of his saluation to seek follow this rule for his instruction in the faith which is necessary to saluation These three I likewise yeeld him though they be not that which he principally almes at to encourage him because it will be some little honesty for him when his friends reade his booke to shew them what materiall points he hath extorted from M. White but the gift is not great my aduersary will returne the whole 7. backe againe in exchange for one single one that I can name him CHAP. XXV The text of 1. Tim. 2.4 God willes all men to be saued c. expounded The diuers expositions that are giuen of those wordes Gods antecedent will as they call it is not his will formally The antecedent consequent will of God expounded diuers wayes A.D. § 1. Concerning the meaning of the Apostles wordes Pag. 145. GOD WIL ALL MEN TO BE SAVED c. First it is certaine that the meaning of the Apostles words is not that God hath an absolute effectuall will and decree to saue euery man or to bring euery man in particular to the knowledge of the truth or to the knowledge of that â—â—â—diate rule and meanes which he hath ordained to instruct men in faith This is euident because if there were any such absolute and effectuall will and decree in God then since his will is alwaies fulfilled all should effectually be saued or should actually come to the knowledge of the truth or at least to the knowledge of that Rule and meanes which God hath ordained to instruct men in faith which euident experience telleth vs not to be true By which my assertion M. White may see how much he mistaketh when he thinkes me to meane that the Rule and Meanes ordained by God is not onely as I speake visible that is such as may be assigned and knowne White pag. 9. but also manifested as M. White speaketh that is such as is actually knowne to all places ages and persons in the world Secondly whereas there are diuers expositions of these wordes of the Apostle giuen by good authors the chiefe question betwixt me and my aduersaries is about the exposition of S. Damascen S. Thomas and many other learned Diuines who hold that the Apostle saying that God will all men to be saued meaneth that God hath an Antecedent will to saue euery man although considering the sinnes of men he he hath a consequent will to condemne some This exposition my Aduersaries mislike either in their ignorance because they do not vnderstand it aright or for that they adhere to some part of Caluines error about Praedestination with which it cannot stand Wherefore to instruct their ignorance in this point and to deliuer them or at least others
from the poison of that most pestilent opinion which Caluine holdeth concerning Praedestination I will first declare the foresaid exposition therewithall prouing it to be good Secondly I wil relate Caluines opinion about Praedestination and will shew it to be erronious in it selfe pernitious to men and impious towards God It seemeth that my aduersaries in their ignorance haue a strange conceit of the Antecedent will by which according to this exposition God will haue all men saued For M. White saith that this Antecedent will is not Simply White pag. 95. Properly Wootton p. 59. and Formally the will of God and M. Wootton although he do not expresly say yet he seemeth to thinke the same when he saith this exposition of S. Damascen cannot be enforced out of the text nor is so warrantable for truth as some other exposition is How false this their saying is will appeare by the example of an earthly king which I will vse to declare and explaine this point 1 IF the Reader will vnderstand how and vpon what occasion this text and the matter thereof comes in question betweene vs in this place he must obserue that my aduersary to shew that God hath prouided and left sufficient me◠〈◊〉 for the instructing of all men whatsoeuer in the true faith a In THE WAY §. 3. alledged this text of 1. Tim. 2.4 God will all men to be saued c. concluding from it that seeing his will is a true will it must needs follow that he hath left such a meanes Then againe to prooue not onely that God hath promised such a meanes of saluation which is the visible Church but that he hath also made it manifest and visible to all men whereby they might be directed to the faith he alledges the same text b In THE WAY §. 18. againe God would haue all men to be saued as if this will of God affirmed in the text could not stand vnles the Church which is the meanes were alway visible because he cannot be said to will that which he allowes no meanes to effect It was not therefore brought in against me in any dispute about praedestination but as you see vpon the By to proue the visibility of the Church in all ages for the reuealing of the faith to the world Neuerthelesse knowing how grosly the Papists vse to expound it and seeing how absurdly my aduersary applies it to proue such a visibility of the Church as he imagined affirming that if the Church were at any time not visible in his sence the world should want the necessary meanes of saluation so it should not be vniuersally true that God would haue all men to be saued therefore I briefly expounded it c THE WAY §. 3. n. 2. first only in the words of Gregorius Ariminensis a schoole Doctor of his owne but in d §. 18. n. 6. the second place more at large confirming the sence I gaue out of the Fathers and diuerse principall Papists where I briefly touched an obscure distinction of Gods antecedent and consequent will inuented as e Damascenus hanc distinctionem introduxit Capreol 1. d. 45 q. 1. ar 2. coÌ„cl 4. Videtur primus hoc modo diuinam voluntatem distinxisse Valentia to 1. pag 360. A. they say by Damascen first noting out of Durand a popish Schoole-man the distinction not to be reall and then shewing that if it were yet the visiblenesse of the Church was not prooued thereby which I concluded in a Syllogisme set in the margent and so held me wholly to the point we had in hand All which discourse my aduersarie passeth ouer answerlesse perceiuing well enough the exposition I gaue of the words to be such as cannot be denied and the application that himselfe made of them to be false and vnsound and therefore in this place pretending to inquire out the true sence of the words hee leaues that which we had directly in hand inuerts the purpose whereto the text was mentioned forsakes his question how the necessitie of a visible rule is proued by it and runnes into an impertinent discourse about predestinationâ— wherein if hee would haue dealt hee had faire opportunitie offered him in f Digress 41. it owne place Neuerthelesse so farre as he meddles with that I said touching the meaning of the Apostles words I wil go with him and examine what he sayes 2 First hee grants it to be certaine that the meaning is not God hath an absolute or effectuall will to saue all men Which I say too For whatsoeuer God wills and decrees absolutely shall be effected which the saluation of some neuer is 3 Next he sayes that by this I may see how much I mistooke him when I thought him to meane that the rule of faith is not onely such as may be knowne but such as actually is knowne to all places ages and persons But he mistakes himselfe For whatsoeuer his meaning be it followes necessarily vpon his words For albeit he say God haue no absolute or effectuall will to saue all men yet maintaining that he reprobates none but for the fore-sight of their vnbeliefe he must consequently suppose the rule of faith to be actually manifested to all because God cannot reprobate for vnbeliefe fore-seene those to whom he neuer reuealed the rule of faith because it was neuer in the power of such to beleeue Or if he say they are reprobated because they finde not the rule of faith or because it is not manifested to them then the visible Church cannot be the rule for that according to the doctrine of the Papist is alway and actually manifest in euerie age to all sorts of people as himselfe defends in the twelfth Chapter of his Treatise I might therefore mistake his meaning but the consequence of his words I mistooke not THE DIVERS EXPOSITIONS OF THE PLACE OF 1. TIM 2.4 4 Secondly he grants there are diuers expositions of those words of the Apostle giuen by good authors and this is likewise true but yet himselelfe gaue no exposition at all but barely alledged the text and therefore he might the better giue me leaue briefly to touch an exposition or two vsed by the Fathers and the learned of his owne side and suspect the issue of his owne discourse wherein he knowes he maintaines that exposition which the Fathers g See Sixt. Senens biblioth lib. 6 annot 251. where hauing set downe the words of Chrysostome and certaine other Fathers affirming predestination to be for workes foâ—eseene he sâ—veâ— Haec Patrum dicta ex quibus colligi videtur praescientiam meritorum esse causam diuina praedestinationis quae quidem sententia in Pelagio damnata est after the rising of Pelagius heresie especially condemned and the Papists whom I quoted that knew it well enough thought not so probable or likely as the exposition that I gaue h Tho. 1. p. qu. 19 art 6. ad 1. Dionys 1. d. 46. qu. 1. sub sin Dom. Bann
VISIBLE profession of the Romish faith for so much as nothing is VISIBLE that cannot be shewed in their writings Thirdly this answer debarres our aduersaries for euer from alledging the Fathers for their Romish faith which I shew thus First the Iesuites promise is that he will assigne a continuall visible Church professing his now Romane faith for that is the thing vndertaken to name in all ages the names of such as successiuely professed the religion now maintained by the Church of Rome Secondly to effect this he sets downe his catalogue containing the Bishops Doctors and Councels that were in the first 600 yeares Thirdly we obâ—ect that these Bishops Doctors and Councels in diuers things that is to say in all the substantiall points wherein the Church of Rome and we dissent beleeued not as the now Church of Rome doth because such points are not mentioned in their writings To this he answers that they held more either explicitè or implicitè then is expresly to be found in their writings This answer supposeth one of these three things either that they both held and writ expresly those diuers things which we denie or that they writ them not but held them explicitè or that they writ them not nor held them explicitè but held them onely implicitè The first he grants they did not but answers that they beleeued diuers things they writ not Neither is the second for what they held explicitè they writ But the third that they held diuers points of Papistrie onely implicitè is the answer Now this is it that laies all those points of Papistrie on Gods cold earth and shewes them not to haue bene knowne to the Fathers For a Rosel v. Fides n. 2 Altisiod l 3 tract 3. c. 1. q. 5 Dionys 3. d. 25. qu. vnic to beleeue implicitè is to beleeue as the Church beleeues as when a man is demanded whether Christ be borne of the virgin Marie or whether there be one God and three persons he answers that he cannot tell but beleeues touching these things as the Church holdeth And as the Repliar himselfe here expounds it To beleeue whatsoeuer was reuealed by God in word or writing to the Church diuers particulars whereof are not necessary to be knowne or written expresly at all times but this vnfolded faith shall be vnfolded as necessity shall require that is when some heresie arises oppugning the truth of the point which is thus implicitely beleeued Hence it followes that he confesses these Fathers Doctors and Bishops mentioned in the first 600 yeares of this catalogue knew not professed not defended not taught not diuers points of the now Romane faith because in their times they were not points of faith but made so since and therfore by his owne confession they held them onely in this sence that they beleeued and taught whatsoeuer the Church should after their time vnfold by which deuice they may also be said to haue beleeued and visibly professed that the Moone is made of a greene cheese or any thing that the Church of Rome shall hereafter deuise whatsoeuer it be for they implicitely beleeued all the faith of the Church and this coyning of new doctrines shall be but vnfolding some part of the Churches faith that was infolded before and so the Fathers shall be iustified to haue beleeued any thing and the Romane Church to haue bin visibly succeeding in them that neuer vnderstood her doctrine Is this then the meaning of the catalogue that so gloriously he displaies and are all those brags shew vs a visible Church in all ages as we do you our faith is no other but what the ancient Doctors held what they held I hold what they taught I teach what they beleeued I beleeue resolued into this poore shift They beleeued as we do at least implicitely Is this the antiquitie of our Romish Church and can her age be painted no better then thus Were so many diuerse points of her faith beleeued by the ancient Church onely infoldly and vpon condition If this Romane Church after 600 or 1000 yeares should vnfold them where then is the visibilitie of these things in the Church of the Fathers and the light thereof that shined so clearly in their daies Zeuxis the painter b Zuing Theat pag. 1201. they say choked him selfe with laughing at the picture of an old woman that he had drawne in a table His owne conceit with beholding the wrinkles and shadowes and lookes he had set vpon her face so affected him that he which had but a little before drawne the beautie and youth of Helena to the admiration of others with a foolish counterfet of old age killed himselfe And I am perswaded that our aduersaries this Replier and his fellows when they behold the picture of this good old wife their mother the Papacie how ridiculously they haue drawne it making her to looke elder then she is by so many hundred yeares and hanging it forth for the counterfet of antiquitie cannot at the least but smile at their owne deuice to thinke how they mocke both others and themselues if they make not others burst with laughter But to quit this deuice of the Fathers holding implicitely that which is not expressed in their writings let my replier consider that they not onely make no mention of the things which we denie but they write that which by all consequence and discourse ouerthrowes them Though therfore we allow them a litle of the implicite faith which God wot they neuer dreamed of it being a deuice of the latter School-men to serue another purpose yet they could not implicitè beleeue any thing which would be opposite to that they mention and hold expresly as those things are opposite which the Replier confesses to be the diuers things they beleeued implicitè and their Church hath now vnfolded against new heresies that are arisen Thus I reason the Fathers held contrary to that which the Church of Rome now holds ergo they beleeued it not implicitly For implicite faith holds nothing that is coÌ„trary to that which is explicite Again if they only held implicitely what the Church of Rome now holds and not explicitely hence it followes that the Romane faith in such points cannot be visibly shewed in the Fathers for to be visible and to be onely implicitè are contrary in as much as no man can see or discerne that which is implicite so the Romish faith may be shewed in a catalog of Turks as wel as in a catalog of the Fathers by the Iesuits distinctioÌ„ CHAP. XLIIII 1. The whole Christian faith deliuered to the Church hath succeeded in all ages yet many corruptions haue sometime bene added How and in what sence the Church may erre 2. A Catalogue assigned of those in whoÌ„ the Protestants faith alway remained 3. What is required to the reason of successioÌ„ Pag. 268. A. D. Secondly I said that the ancient Fathers of the Primitiue Church did hold explicitè or
as giue the diuine honour of the immortall God to a dumbe creature whose image soeuer it be And if Azorius e Azo vbi sup say true that this doctrine of Thomas and his Diuines was insinuated by the Councell of Nice then my Replier is guiltie of a third vntruth because he denies it presuming vpon the words contained in the seuenth act of the Councell which yet these Iesuites expound to containe nothing against their opinion which exposition and report of the Iesuites if you adde to that I cited out of the Emperours booke and ioyne withall the words of Baronius who reporteth that the Bishops of France conceiued the minde of the Nicene Councell to be that images should be adored with latria The Replier will haue something to doe before he can quit his Nicene Councell from that which he sayes I impute vnto it But if his Councell of Trent also be of the same minde as f Suar. tom 1. disp 54. sect 4. Vasq a dorat disp 8. c. 14. Azor. inst mor. tom 1. l. 9. c. 6. the Iesuites resolutely affirme it is then this grosse conceit went farre and their case is but indifferent that hitherto haue built their faith touching this and other points of religion vpon such as by the Repliers owne verdit were no Christians nor knew the first rudiments of religion 3 Thirdly he vpbraids me with malepertnesse for calling the Bishops of the Nicene Councell simple and vnlearned but it is his destiny still to crosse and infatuate himselfe with his forwardnesse for his owne words calls them grosse conceited and ignorant of the first rudiments of religion that hold the seruing and adoring of images with the same adoration and seruice that is giuen to the Trinitie And that they thus held and defined the Emperours booke and the Iesuites themselues testifie that I might well say they were both simple and vnlearned and something worse Thus therefore I excuse my selfe it is no malepertnesse to call them simple or vnlearned who teach the giuing of diuine honour to an image because the Replier confesseth this to be a grosse conceite of such as know not the first rudiments of religion nor that there is a God But the second Nicene Councell taught this For Azorius sayes it insinuated the worshipping of images with the same worshippe that is giuen to the samplars which is diuine worshippe in the images of God and Christ They insinuated therefore that images should be worshipped with diuine honour the same that is giuen to God and Christ Therefore they were a packe of simple and vnlearned heretickes But because he is so zealous for his friends I will if I can a little coole him till hee know better what and who they were Claudius Espencaeus a Doctour in his owne Church g Com. in 2. Tim. pag. 151. Paris hath written of them that the Greekes in their contention about Images on both sides handled the matter out of fabulous and vncertaine writings They which opposed them with writings falsely inscribed by heretickes and * Qui propugnabant daemoniaÌ„ etiam spectris muliebribus somnijs parùm verecundè abutentes they which defended them did it also with delusions of diuels and with little modestie thereto abused womens dreames as may be read in the Nicene Councell This is more then I said For I spake as temperately as it was possible of so fond Idolaters but Espencaeus giues it them with open mouth It may be read in the second Nicene Councell how images were defended with womens dreames and delusions of diuels which speech whosoeuer mislikes must consider it comes from a learned Papist and not from mee and the actes and processe of the Councell will shew it to be true The forgeries and fables and trifling discourses therein contained being such as are able to prouoke any that reades them and our aduersaries themselues are not a little intangled in them 4 Hauing thus affirmed how truly it skilleth not to the point in question that the Nicene Councell defined not the worshippe of Images with diuine honour hee passeth to the Councell of Frankford wherein I said the Nicene was condemned and the actes thereof concerning images abrogated Whereto hee answers not one true word First hee sayes the Councell of Frankford was not generall But I had witnesses in the margent that it was h Ouand 4 d. 2. prop. 8. Ouandus There were present three hundred Bishops with the Popes Legats so that the Fathers who were present called it a full Synod and in truth it cannot be cast off as a Prouinciall Councell or as without a head If it were not Prouinciall and had the Pope for head it must not bee denied to bee generall Baronius i An. 794. n. 1. sayes It is found to be called a plenarie Councell for the multitude of the Bishops and presence of the Legats of the Apostolicke sea The Bishops of Italie France and Germanie were there Hincmarus sayes it was a generall Councell whose words see * In the letter o below Secondly he shuffles with a parenthesis as if the Popes Legats were not there But you see what Baronius and Ouandus say k Chr. l. 2. n. 794 Rhegino and l Chro. an 793. the Abbot of Vrsperge testifie the same Thirdly he sayes if they were there they confirmed not any such condemnation The which is impertinent For I onely intend to shew that in the iudgement of the Christian world the bringing in of image-worship was condemned Whether the want of the Legates assent make the condemnation voide or no I care not but the reader may see Pope Adrians packing with the Greekes to set vp images was noted and resisted by all the Prouinces of the Westerne Empire Let our aduersaries proue the want of the Legats assent makes this a nullitie Fourthly hee sayes no such condemnation is to be found in the Councell of Frankford but onely in a booke ascribed to Charles and I answer the Councell of Frankford as it is set foorth in the tomes of the Councels hee knowes well enough is imperfect and containes not all that was done therein But marke what Bellarmine m De imag l. 2. c. 1◠§. Primò quâ—â— sayes That booke of Charles containes the acts of the Councell of Frankford and it may not be doubted but the Councell therein condemned is indeed the second Nicene n An. 794 n. 31. Baronius sayes that Hincmarus the Archbishop of Rhemes a writer of those times affirmes the booke to containe the acts of the Councell of Frankford that we are not to doubt thereof it containes many chapters against the Nicene Councell The words of this Hincmarus are these that my aduersarie may a litle blush at his rashnesse o Hincmar lib. cont landun c. 20. But the seuenth Synod vntruly so called which the Greekes call vniuersall not long before my time was holden at Nice and sent to Rome which the Pope againe directed
therfore with more then the same in name likenesse or proportion Secondly the words of the Popish DD. import more Coster the Iesuite c Pag. 370. Ench saies All the honour which is due to the samplar may also be giuen to the image if All then more then the name and proportion seeing as himselfe d Pag. 368. a little before said All kinde of honour is giuen to Christ For if all contained within the definition of diuine honour be giuen to Christ and all that is giuen Christ be due to his image it followes that all contained within the definition of diuine honour is giuen to his image Suarez e To. 1. d. 54. s 4. §. Secundo infero saies By this adoration * In his conclu §. dicendum whereby the sampler in the image and the image for the samplar is worshipped the image also is adored not onely with the externall act as of kneeling or creeping or capping which is not sufficient for adoration but with the internall motion and intention also of him that adores and that not abusiuely only but TRVLY PROPERLY f §. Alij vero And hauing reported the opinion of Biel Cordubensis and others who distinguish as the Reply doth that the worship is but analogicall he confutes them and saies they neither speake to the purpose nor according to Thomas his minde but cleane beside it It is false therefore that the Reply sayes they worship Christs image improperly and at the most but analogically D. Saunders g Treat of imag c. 17. p. 185. b saith the adoration of the image so passeth immediately to the first sampler and patterne that it becometh not first one in the image and then afterward another in Christ but it passeth altogether remaining still one and the same from the image to Christ himselfe He addes * because he was not of the Thomists and Iesuites opinion Being then in the image doulia it is doulia in Christ but by his leaue if this be so being diuine honour in nature properly and definition in Christ it must needes be the same in his image But Thomas his conclusion and the ground thereof is so plaine that it will not admit these distinctions h Vbi sup q. 25. art 3. see Caiet vpon the place His conclusion is seeing Christ is to be adored with diuine worship his image also must be adored with the same worship His ground is Because the motion of the minde is one and the same to the image and the samplar And expounds how when the minde conceaues the image onely as a meere thing then the motion is two-fold one to the image and another to the thing but when it conceaues it as an image of another thing then the motion is one and the selfe same both to the image and to the thing signified by it Hence I thus reason So as Thomas intended the motion of the minde to be one and the same both to the image and the samplar so and in the same manner did he intend the adoration to both to be the same But its cleare he intended the motion of the minde to be one and the same to both not improperly or accidentarily or analogically but the same to both in nature and definition Therefore it is cleare he inteÌ„ded the adoration to both to be one and the same not improperly accidentarily or analogically but in nature and definition You will possible demand what it is then that Thomas and his sectaries truely hold touching this matter I answer they hold 4. things First that images are to be adored with the same honor that is due to the samplar Secondly that therefore the images of Christ and his crosse must be adored with diuine honour the same that belongs to Christ himselfe Thirdly that this diuine honour is not diuine onely in name and analogy but indeed and vniuocally For that being the exposition of i 3. d. 9. qu. vnic concl 6. Gabriell is reiected of all hands Fourthly that this honour is giuen the image respctiuely for Christ thereby to honor him to conuey their seruice to him not for the images own sake He that reades Thomas and the Iesuites shall finde this to be true wherein they haue onely the last point to helpe themselues and wherewith to excuse their idolatry But it doth them no good forsomuch as the Iewes worshipping the calfe and the Gentiles adoring their idols did it not for the images owne sake but respectiuely and intentionally to God vsing the image but as an instrument to conuey their seruice to him yet notwithstanding for so much as in this manner they imparted diuine adoration to the image by creeping bowing capping kneeling informed also by religious motions of the heart k Psal â—06 19 20 Rom. 1.23 God without respecting their intention vpbraids them with idolatrie 6 Neuerthelesse to shew that images may be adored with the diuine honour of Christ improperly accidentally and analogically as he hath distinguished he reasons thus the worshipping of a crucifixe or image in this maner and the creeping to the crosse as in Catholicke countries it is vsed on Good-fridayes is no more then kneeling to the chaire of estate or to one that in a Play represents the Kings person But to kneele to the chaire of estate or to one that in a play represents the Kings person is no treason or preiudiciall to the honor of the King Therefore the worshipping of Christs image in this maner is no idolatrie nor preiudiciall to the honor of Christ I answer denying the proposition there is not the like reason in worshipping the image of Christ that there is in kneeling to the chaire of estate or to him that represents the Kings person they are not equall The comparison doth well shew and explicate how it is possible to worship Christ in the crucifixe and the crucifixe for Christ but it doth not proue this to be lawfull For it is true that the chaire of estate is in a sort vnited to the person of the King and the person of the King is by a certaine habitude vnited to him that represents him But how will the Replier proue that so also Christ is vnited to the image I know the idolater in his conceit vnites them but who hath taught him so to do what law what word what promise of God hath repealed any such vnion or allowed him to conceiue it Secondly it is true the chaire of estate or he that represents the King and the King himselfe may be conceiued both together with one thought and they may be reuerenced both together with one worship the one properly the other improperly but thus to conceiue and thus to worship Christ and his image together is the thing that I say is forbidden and was condemned in the Primitiue Church Thirdly it is also true that the chaire of estate or the embassador are not worshipped properly because they are not worshipped at al
but the King onely in them but the worship giuen to the image is bounded in the image it self as it is an image and if it were not but Christ onely were worshipped before the image as God was before the Arke yet that practise hath no warrant Albeit therefore there be as the Reply speakes no danger in kneeling to the embassador or chaire of the King but it may be done without treason or preiudice to his honor yet is it not so in the worship of images first because the one is ciuill the other religious worship and that may be done without treason in the one that cannot be done without idolatry in the other Secondly Gods word permits the one but no where the other Thirdly the chaire and embassador are signes of the Kings presence but the image is no signe ordained or allowed so to be of Christs presence neither is Christ any way vnited to it by his own ordinance but onely by the worshippers idolatrous intention And it is so true that nothing may be adored with God that is not really vnited to him a Alexan. 3. par q. 30. m. 2. Tho. 3. q. 25. ar 1. 2. Scot. 3. d. 9 q. vnic ibi communit Scholast Suar. to 1. d. 53. sect 2. that if the humanitie of Christ were separated from his person and did not subsist in the word it might not be adored with diuine honour for no cause but because then it should not be one with him 7 This I haue answered allowing the Papists to do no more to their images then courtiers do to the chaire of Estate or then is done in a play to him that represents the person of a King But they do more and to take the repliers owne example they do not onely on Good-fridays exhibite their crosse-creeping to Christ but they pray grosly to the Crosse it selfe b Primer of our Ladie tit the Hymnes p. 10. O thou right faire and comely tree Whose worthy chosen stocke was such As kingly purple did adorne And did so holy members touch Blest be the tree vpon whose bowes This worlds valew did depend His bodie made the price so iust To free from hell it did intend All haile ô Crosse our onely hope Now at this present passion time Vprightnesse in the good increase And quit the guilty of their crime In which prayer many things are that can be said of nothing but the wood it selfe as c Pontifex imponit thuâ— in thâ— ribulum deinde aspergit crucem aquae benedicta mox eam incensat Tum Pontifex flexis ante crucem genibus ipsâ—m deuote adorat osculatur Jdem faciunt quâ—cunque alij voluerint Pont. Ro. p. 164 the bowing of the knee kissing incensing it are too soule to be washed off with this distinction And all the instruction that popish Pastors vse to giue who themselues speaking thus not with their eyes fixed on the crucifix but to the crucifix it self euen in their pulpits all ouer Italy and Spaine and teaching withall that it must be adored at least improperly or analogically as wel as Christ himselfe euen with diuine honor may not for shame be said to keepe the people from falling into idolatry when by this meanes they teach them and embolden them in it 8 His second reason is this The thing wherewith Christ is vested and wherein he shines as a Prince clothed in his robe and without which he cannot so easily be conceiued may and must necessarily be worshipped with him But such is the image of Christ that he is vested with it c. Ergo. This argument lies couched in his second note or if it do not then all he sayes there is to no purpose for to what end should he shew by the vesture and robes wherewith a Prince is vested and by the phantasmes mentioned whereby things are conceiued how the image may accidentally be conceiued and adored with Christ if by the same things he intend not to proue the lawfulnesse of that adoration I answer therfore first as I did before that these examples will serue to shew how it is possible to worship an image onely accidentally but not how it is lawfull Secondly the doctrine of the Church of Rome is that all images are worshipped more then accidentally or improperly a Bel. c. 21.2 seÌ„t They are worshipped of themselues properly so that themselues are the obiect of the worship as they are considered in themselues and not onely as they are vicegerents of the samplar He meanes not they are thus worshipped with diuine honor but with some honour of another kind yet he shewes the Replier to say false that they are worshipped onely accidentally Nay by this conclusion it must be holden that they are worshipped for themselues as images and properly with diuine honour because all the worship giuen them is to worship Christ withall and no man may worship Christ but with diuine honor Now if the Church of Rome honor the crucifix in a higher degree then the Kings robe is honored what facultie is there in the robe to proue the honor of the crucifixe Thirdly it is vtterly false that an image is the vesture of Christ or that his maiestie shines to vs in it it is rather the vesture of Satan wherein he shewes himselfe to all that worship it whose image soeuer it be Fourthly allowing that by phantasmes I come to the conceiuing of things and see not the King but vested in his robe and in my vnderstanding the image is not conceiued without Christ but the motion of my mind is one to both as to the phantasmes and the things to the robe and the King yet I do not conceiue them as one but as distinct things conceiuing the robe to be a robe the king to be a king the image to be an image and Christ to be God whereupon it followes that the adoration following the conception I need not nor must adore any more then I conceiue to be capable of adoration which the robe and the image is not Durand whom Gerson b To. 1. p. 559. e. thinkes to be one of them that haue written most purely and substantially c 3. d. 9. q. 2. sayes Though the motion of the minde be one and the same to the image and the thing whereof it is an image yet the mind neuer says the image is the thing but alway distinguishes between them and therefore the worship giuen to the thing is neuer giuen to the image The Repliers argument therefore may wel proceed in that opinion that holds Christ to be worshipped only before an image though so also it iustifies it not but it cannot conclude that worship either diuine or any at all must in any sence be giuen to the image because the mind conceiuing both at once yet vnderstands the image to be a block and Christ to be God To the same effect writes Peresius a professor of Diuinitie among our aduersaries a
Tradit p. 224. Though we may be caried with one and the same knowledge to the image and the samplar yet is it not hence concluded that the same may be done in worshipping and adoring them for there is great dissimilitude betweene this and that For it is not repugnant to an image as it is an image to be conceiued with the same knowledge wherewith the thing represented is knowne but it seemes to be against the nature of an image as it is an image that it should be reuerenced with the same reuerence wherewith the samplar is seeing it exceeds not the limits of an insensible creature and of this comparison of a Kings robe he sayes There is no likenesse betweene an image and the robes of an Emperor 9 In his third note the Reply hauing explicated his analogicall adoration which he sayes is the most they giue to images he sayes thereupon the worship giuen to images in the Church of Rome is not the same in nature substance or equalitie of perfection to that is giuen to God but farre inferiour demonstrating it by two reasons Thus he distinguishes because the Digression had said The Church of Rome worshippeth images with diuine honour the same that is due to God But I haue sufficiently adswered that euen this analogicall honour thus giuen as he distinguishes and proues is condemned by the Scripture and authorities alledged in the Digression for two causes first because it is some kind of worship and all kinds of worship are condemned secondly it is diuine worship though not of the highest degree yet diuine in analogie and in some sort also of the nature and substance of diuine worship because as I haue said before it can be reduced to any other kind then that which by the image is giuen to God Secondly I answer and haue shewed before that the Church of Rome worshippeth images in a higher degree then with analogicall worship For it was c Omnia coniuncta adorandu siue vt partes praesentes vel praeteritae siue vt alias specialem ordinem ad ipsae habeâ—tia propter se â—â—o adorabiliat adoranda sunt eadem specie adoratâ—onis analogice 3 d. 9 q. vnic concl 6. id lect 49. Biels opinion they ought indeed to be worshipped no otherwise but the Iesuites as I haue shewed confute him For there are three opinions whereof this of the analogicall worship is one but the Iesuites and others in the Church of Rome hold it not but go further 10 Now followes that which is worth the noting For the Replier hauing distinguished the maner how diuine honour is giuen to images sayes Perhaps it is too subtill for euerie ones capacitie being intended onely for the satisfaction of more pregnant and iudicious wits But this latter clause he should haue left out For Bellarmine d De imag c. 22 sayes It is not to be said at all that the worship of Latria which is diuine adoration is due to images First because the Councels do not affirme it but simply denie it then it is not without great danger to say so For they who defend images are to be adored with diuine honour are enforced to vse most subtill distinctions which THEMSELVES hardly vnderstaÌ„d much lesse the rude people c. This is a notable dog-trick thus to teach the adoration of images and when they haue done to confesse it is not fit to vtter it What shall the doctrine be then that men shall hold them to It may suffice for the simple sort to vnderstand that IN TRVTH and SPEAKING PROPERLY not the same but a farre inferiour kind of honour is due to the image then is due to the thing whose image it is If this be the truth then e Azor. tom 1. l. 9. c. 6. that which is the constant iudgement of the Romish Diuines is a lie and comes from the father of lies and shall be punished accordingly by him that hates all lies pestilent hypocrites thus to maintaine that in whole volumes which themselues know not to be the truth But now the doctrine of Thomas and the Iesuites and so many great School-men and the constant iudgement of all Diuines is cast off and this inferiour kind of worship is supplied how shall it appeare this also is not to be misliked he answers that as a man bearing respect to the picture of his friend yet is not counted iniurious to him though he respect not the picture so much as his friend but rather so much the more gratefull so this inferior religious reuerence giuen to images is so farre from hindring the respect we owe to Christ that it shewes and practises it the more and increases it and so cannot be thought iniurious but gratefull to Christ and his Saints So he But let him take heed that while he labours to please Christ and his Saints he displease not Thomas and his disciples for he knowes they cannot abide this inferiour worship but seeing the motion of the mind is one and the same to Christ and his image they will haue the worship to both be one and the same And howsoeuer they take the matter let the Replier go roundly to the point and shew how this gratifying Christ with his inferiour worship was gatefull to the ancient Church And let him make demonstration where Christ hath commanded it For a man may make and vse the picture of his friend as he pleases though f Paleot imag l. 2. c. 20. a great Cardinall be somewhat strait-laced in the matter and allowes not all that libertie that we see vsed But where is any allowance to gratifie Christ by worshipping his picture and where is the word of God permitting to make the pictures of the Trinitie let this be shewed and there is an end in the controuersie for that is the point which the Digression affirmes the ancient Church to haue holden against the now-church of Rome whose words against such things he should haue answered and not with an vnlike comparison of a humane picture haue imposed vpon the vulgar But his owne picture for this tricke shall neuer be made because he flies out of the field and leaues the matter behind him For no man will make the picture of a coward that flies and dares not abide it g In 3. Ps sayes S. Chrysostome 11 For the testimonies both of the Scriptures and Fathers though briefly pointed to yet very clearly shew that images in religion might no wayes be vsed vnder any pretence but all worship of them they condemne so farre that they will not admit it with any distinction be it religious worship diuine or ciuill proper improper accidentall analogicall inferiour the same that is giuen to God or not the same if it be worship seruice adoration kneeling kissing crouching capping vowing they condemne it all and the second Nicene Councell 800 yeares after Christ was the first that confirmed it to the great discontent of the godly in the Church as I haue