of the Greekes hee mixeth Papists and Protestants and yet both put together they are not able to shew the distinct time without a circum circa and turne about for so hee expresseth it The denyall of vnleavened bread in celebration of the Sacrament was begunne about anno Domini 1053. as appeareth by Leo the 9. in his Epistle to Michael Bishop of Constantinople y Reply pag. 10 The Iesuite hath produced nothing but vanity for the finding the beginning of this notorious heresie For Leo the 9. saith no such thing viz that Michael was the first that broached this errour neither doth he cite the first author of it For it cannot follow because Michael did oppose the Azymes used in the Latin Church about the yeare 1053. therefore about that age it did beginne For that Patriarch charged the Church of Rome with other practises quod Sabbat a quadrageâ—â—mâ— observâ—â—â—◠〈◊〉 quod suffocata comederunt gentiliter quod 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 tantùm in Paschate nunquam vero in quadragesimali tempore decantarent Brovius in anno 1653. All which I thinke you will not say were first distasted by Michael at that time The Iesuitè runneth from his path and vainely without any relation to the thing in controversie telleth vs that the Greeke Church doth vehemently professe to detest the Protestants Religion a Reply pag 10 c. Wherein we have no reason to beleive him in regard he bringeth not any particular out of the Authors cited by himselfe to convince the same which I make no question but hee would have done if they had fairely offered it vnto his hands Secondly there would not be that freindly entercourse betwixt some of the Patriarchs of the Greeke Church and our Bishops as there is neither would they have sent their Preists to our Vniversities for instruction omitting yours which are nearer to them neither would the Grecians that are amongst vs frequent our Chappels Churches when they avoyd yours if they conceived them equally polluted or held vs in equall detestation b Concil Lateran 4. sub Inno 3. apud Bin. c. 4. In tantum Graeci coeperunt abominari Latinos quod inter alia quae in derogationem 〈◊〉 in 〈◊〉 committeâ—â—â—â— si quando sacerdotes Latini super corum celebrâssent altarianon prius ipsi sacrificare vo lebant in illis quam ea tanquam per hoc inquinata lavissent Baptiâ—atos etiam à Latinis ipsi Graeci rebaptizare ausu remerario praesumebant adhuc sicut accepimus quidam agere hoc non verentum with â—â—â—â—selves Neither doe they differ from vs in the fundamentall points of Doctrine we giving them as we ought a charitable interpretation although in some of the points in the Iesuites Catalogue taken from the Divines of Wittemberge they may be censured somewhat to savour of superstition and errour And that it may appeare whether the Greeke Church doth most favour Papists or Protestants I will insert here a Confession of faith of Cyrill Patriarch of Constantinople translated into English and published at London 1629. An other translation whereof I have seene vnder which is written This Copy hath beene translated out of the originall made * * done by the hands of the most reverend Patriarch Cyrill which I know well The writing it selfe being in my hands and having examined it my owne selfe I doe testifie that it doth agree with it word for word Corneille Hague Embassadour of the vnited Provinces of the Low-Countreyes at the gate of the Grand Seignour IN THE NAME OF THE FATHER AND OF THE SONNE AND OF THE HOLY GHOST VEE beleive one God Almightie and infinite three in Persons the Father Sonne and Holy Ghost the Father vnbegotten the Sonne begotten of the Father before the World consubstantial with the Father the Holy Ghost proceeding from the Father by the Sonne having the same ofsence with the Father and the Sonne wee call these three Persons in one essence the Holy Trinity ever to bee blessed glorified and to bee worshipped of every creature Wee beleive the Holy Scripture to bee given by God to have no other Authour but the Holy Ghost which wee ought vndoubtedly to beleive for it is written Wee have a mere sure word of Prophecy to the which â—ee doe well to take â—eede as to a light shining in a darke place Besides we beleive the authority thereof to be aboue the authority of the Church It is a farre different thing for the Holy Ghost to speake and the tongue of man for the tongue of man may through ignorance erre deceiue and bee deceiued but the Word of GOD neither deceiueth nor is deceiued nor can erre but is alwayes infallible and sure Wee beleiue that the best and greatest GOD hath predestinated his Elect vnto glorie before the beginning of the World without any respect vnto their workes and that there was no other impulsiue cause to this election but onely the good will and mercy of God In like manner before the world was made hee hath rejected whom hee would of which act of reprobation if you consider the absolute dealing of God his will is the cause but if you looke vpon Gods orderly proceeding his justice is the cause for God is mercifull and Iust Wee beleive that one GOD in Trinity the Father Sonne and Holy Ghost to bee the Creator of all things visible and invisible Inuisible things wee call the Angels visible things the Heauens and all things vnder them And because the Creator is good by nature hee hath created all things good and cannot doe any evill and if there bee any euill it proceedes from the Diuell and man for it ought to bee a certaine rule to vs that GOD is not the Author of evill neither can sinne by any just reason bee imputed to him Wee beleiue that all things are governed by GODS Prouidence which wee ought rather to adore then search into sith it is beyond our capacity neither can wee truely vnderstand the reason of it from the things themselves in which matter wee suppose it better to embrace silence in humilitie then to speake many things which doe not edifie Wee beleive that the first man created by God fell in Paradise because neglecting the Commaundement of God hee yeelded to the deceitfull counsell of the Serpent from thence sprung vp originall sinne to his posterity so that no man is borne according to the flesh who doeth not beare this burthen and feele the fruits of it in his life Wee beleive that IESVS CHRIST our Lord hath made himselfe of no accompt that is hath assumed mans nature into his owne Subsistence that he was conceived by the Holy Ghost that hee was made Man in the Wombe of Mary alwayes a Virgin was borne and suffered death was buryed and glorified by his resurrection that hee brought salvation and glory to all beleivers whom wee looke for to come to judge both quicke and dead Wee beleive that our Lord IESVS CHRIST sitteth
informed hee might have alledged But Luther tels us that Gods will which way soeuer it is made knowne unto us ought to be reverently embraced and therefore it is not lawfull to gainsay rashly the Bishop of Romes Supremacie And this reason is of such force that although there were no other it alone ought to bee sufficient to â—urbe the temeritie of all opposers n Reply pag â— The Argument is thus Whatsoever is permitted by God is reverently to bee embraced But the Papall altitude is permitted by God Therefore with all reverence to be embraced May not this argument serve for Pope Ioan the stewes the holy Ladie Maâ—ylda Iudas Iulian yea for all villany without exception or interruption For we must not thinke that any thing can come to passe without Gods voluntary permission God made the world shall we say that like Gallio he câ—reth for none of these things * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 God hath permitted many evils many tyrannies among the Babyâ—nians Persians Grecians Romans yet this doth not justifie them in their impieties or make us reverently to embrace them therein Wee know God placed Peter in the sheepe-fould to â—eedâ— his Lambes as hee sent the the rest to the same worke but shew us that hee tooke him from the Ewes great with young to make him the King of Israell the Monarch of the Church and this is something to the purpose Yet this Argument is not the Charter by which Peter got his Primacie but those Popes that came in the last dayes For when Luther was in his best witts hee could not finde the Popes Primacie in Pasce â—ves or Oravi pro te Petre or in any other place of Scripture or from any other reason but from experience So that we perceive the Bishop of Rome hath as much right to his pretended greatnes as Nimrod to Babylon and all former Tyrants to their Usurpations Now the Iesuite addresseth himselfe to Antiquity and wherefore Because our Answerer will needes be a scholler of their maddest humours in this point wee present him heere saith he with the Doctrine of Antiquity utterly condemning the same o Reply pag. â—0 The most learned Answerer is no Scholler of Luther or of Bucer neither are their humours directories of his Faith or opinions One is his Doctor and that is Christ and as farre as Luther and Bucer follow him so farre they may have his company but no further It is your holy Brother-hood that are tyed to madde humours nay to such as a madde man would not embrace Who can presume that a Iesuite hath his wits that casting aside Gods Law in the place thereof embraceth the rule of Ignatius as if it were their Decalogue or Square for direction And for any thing we can see the Prescripts of their Generall are little lesse esteemed by them in their practise then what God himselfe appoints them p Hassenmuller Hist Ies c. 6 de voâ— Obedieniiae Impudentissimos istos homines non pudet haec sigmenta capiâ—is sui haâ— Loiolae nugaâ— ipsi Dei Deca â—â—go praeponeâ—â— quod Iacobus Crusius Novitiorum Landspergensium Rector facit Noster inquiens Decalogus eâ—â— Râ—gula voâ—orum ab Ignatio Lâ—â—â—â—â— traditâ— This goeth farre but yet all this is nothing to the requisites that they prescribe to themselves vizâ— that if the Church you know who they meane should determine white to be blacke it must not be opposed q Regulae Iesu it ad finem Histor interdict tenet regula 132. si quod oâ—ulis nostris apparet album nigrum illa esse definierit debemus itidem quod nigrâ—â— sit pronunciare Now seeing hee hath urged Bucer Luther disputing â—â— concessis he will make it cleare by Antiquity it selfe So that he will not accept that the Roman Church is the Head of all other Churches by a bare Concession or graunt of her enemies but will further make it apparant by her owne evidences and auncient Prerogatives And his first testimony is the Inscription of an Epistle of Ignatius the disciple of S. Iohn the Evangelist to the Romans where amongst other prerogatives he confesseth that it beareth sway ever all other Churches r Reply pag 10 The person cannot want authority and esteeme being an holy Bishop and Martyr Yet I am sure the Iesuite hath besmeared the face of this Epistle with falshood fraud for where will he finde this sway-bearing to be Oecumenicall and over all other Churches Bellarmine dare not be so bold but contractedly speakes in the Region of the Romans Å¿ Bellarm de Rom. Pont l. 2. c. 15. Primus igitur sit Beatus Ignatius qui Epistolam ad Romaâ—â—â— inscribiâ— Ignatius Ecclesiâ— sanctifiâ—aâ—ae quae praesideâ— in regione Romanorum and yet more largely then the truth of the Epistle will beare 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in loco Regionis Romanorum and what Patriarch had not the like to beare sway in divine matters over all the Churches of the Province or Provinces that were subordinate unto him Nay further the Arch-Bishoppes of Yorke and Dublin are styled Primates the one of England the other of Ireland and yet this doth not make them Universall Swayers of the Church in those Kingdomes much lesse to obtaine headship for their Churches above all others therein So that I am perswaded if ever God had given the Roman Church such a capitall priviledge the Catholicke Church would have had plainer wordes to have declared CHRISTS favour and particular bountie unto it But you may remember who it was that tooke our Saviour to the pinacle of the Temple that offered him all the Kingdomes of the world that hee might neare sway over them and you cannot forget mitte te dâ—â—rsum If in these things you will not reject Saâ—â— with your Master take heed you fall not from the pinacle of the Temple with him that you embrace as your Lord. It is more glorious for a Bishop to bee a fatherly guide and governour then a sway-bearing President and it would more commend the Roman Bishop to attend those suburbane Churches and Provinces committed to his care by the Nicene Councell as Ruffinus â— expounds it and not to distend his holines with the vaste thoughts of universall Regiment The second Witnesse of Antiquity hee maketh Cypriâ—â— and two places he citeth out of him The first out of his third Epistle in his first booke where this Father calleth the Romane Church Cathedram Petri â—â—clesium principalem the Chaire of Peter and the cheâ—â—â— Church Ruffinus histâ—ccles l. 1. c. 6. â—t ut apud Alexandriam in urbe Roma vetusia conâ—uâ—â—â—do serâ—â—ur ut vel ille 〈◊〉 vel hic â—â—â—aroicariatum ecclesiarum solicitudinem gerat And might not the Church of Antioch have the first title or stile And yet this would not bee sufficient to give that Church such an universall headship and preheminence Reply pag. 50 For the other phrase of Ecclesiam principalem it makes it not the
Pont. l 4. c. 7 Cyprianus pertinaciter restitit Stephano Pontifici doâ—â—â—ienti haereticos non rebaprixandâ—â— ut patet ex Epistola ejusdem Cypriani ad Pompeiâ—â— tamen non solum non fuit haereticus sed neque mortaliter peccavit et tamen Ecâ—â—esia Cypriaâ—um ut sanctam colit qui non videtur unquam resipuisse ab illo suo error To the African Bishops in the cause of Appeales Å¿ Epist Bonifacii â— ad Alex. Episc Aurelius enim praefatae Carthaginensis Ecclesiae olim Episcopus cum câ—llegis suiâ— instigante Diabolo superbire temporibus praedecessorum noâ—â—â—orum Bonifacii atque Coelestiâ—i contra Romanam Ecclesiam coepit Sed videâ—s se modo peccatis Aurelij Eulalius à Romanae Ecclesiae communione segregatum humiliam recognovit se pacem communionem Romanae Ecclesiae petens subscribendo non cum collegis suiâ— damnavit Apostolica auctoritate omnes Scripturas quae adversus Romanae Ecclesiae privilegia factae quoquo ingenio fuerunt Must all Africa not afford one Bishop that is catholick or Lay-man that is a right Christian and true Catholicke How are they acknowledged Martyrs How Saints Besides I wonder that this truth never appeared in Canon of Councell nor was ever registred by the Fathers in the ages mentioned with generall consent For that phrase upon this rocke I know the Church is built meaning S. Peters chaire I dare say with reverence to S. Hierome that it was either upon Christ or Peters confession of Christ to bee the Sonne of God as the Fathers in multitudes doe interprete it or upon Peter himselfe whom your owne would have thâ— rocke and not upon Peters â—haire which was not of such an unmooveable stability â—s that rocke ought to bee upon which the Church is builded Further I thinke Mr Malone will not deâ—y that the foundation of the Church was layde before Peter had any chaire either at Antioch or at Rome and if hee say S. Hierome meant not his chaire but in relation to Peter then who can deny but all the Apostles are rockes as Peter was Petrae omnes Apostoli All the Apostles are rockes upon which the Church is built saith Origen t Origen in Mat. hom 1. The Iesuite proceedes and brings two places from St Augustine if we will believe him to bee the Author of the questions of the old and new testament For to make this other then a counterfeit he shall never bee able but what saith he that may procure such an universal preheminence to this onely Father Why hee is called caput fidelium Head of the faithfull u Reply pag. 51. So may every Preist in his Parish unlesse his flocke be Infidels And for the other title Pastor gregis Dominici Pastor of our Lords flock Reply ibid. What Bishop is not Pastor of the flocke of Christ but Papall Bishops who poore Delegates have not their institution from CHRIST but as poore hirelings from the Papacie In the second place the Iesuite tels us thot S. Augustiâ—â— giveth this testimonie of the Church of Rome that the Principalitie or supremacie of the See Apostolicke hath alwayes borne sway therein y Reply pag. 52 This Father will not serve the Iesuites turne without a glosse Principalitie Supremacie must be the same so the Iesuite would have it for if this be not true Augustine forsakes his engager But the Iesuite may know that principalitie is not Papall Dominion there was a primatuâ— or principalitie of the Church of Constantinople z Theodoret. l. 2 c 27. and a primatus or primacie of the Church of Hierusalem 〈◊〉 l. 7. â— 6. into which seates ascended none of these Monarcâ—s He commeth to the principalitie of a See or Bishoprick that entereth by orderly election as Augustine acknowledgeth the Bishop of Rome to have done And a man may get a principalitie in the Church by sedition and ambition as Leo expresseth himselfe to the Bishops of Africke Leo Epist 87. ad Episc Africanos Principatus autem quem seditio exâ—orfit auâ— ambitus occupavit etiam si â—oribus atque actibus non â—ssendâ—t ip 〈◊〉 tamen iniâ—â—â—â—ui est 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 What hee can picke out of the word Apostolicall hath beene answered before Next to the Master he produceth the Scholler Prosper in two places but to no more purpose or advantage then the former For who will deny the Church of Rome in Prospers time in regard of her outward eminencie to bee made the head of pastorall honour unto the world c Reply pag. 52 and that she was more conspicuous by being a towre to Religion in defending the faith against hereticks then by exercising any power not temporall * No such word in the originall quotation out of Prosper as the Iesuite addeth but Ecclesiasticall that was given him by Councels Whereby we may see the difference betwixt Rome now and then their eminencie their honour then was extended arce religionis by defâ—nding the true faith Your holy Fathers now seeke advancement solio potestatis by obtaining a Monarchie and bringing all powers but hell that must triumph over you * Revel 19. â—â— into subjection under their feete But the Iesuite confident of Prosper telleth us Therefore the holy Bishop 〈◊〉 doth testifie how in his dayes The whole world agreed with Pope Siricius in one and the same fellowship of communion d Reply pag. â—â— Here is a Logicall therefore Prosper telleth us that Rome the See of Peter is made the head of pastorall honour unto the world c. therefore Optaâ—â—â— that lived many Decades of years before him doth testifie how in his dayes the whole world agreed with Pope Siriâ—â—us in one and the same fellowship of communion We will leave the inference the evidence is nothing For was there not reason that they should doe as they did to wit agree in truth with the eminentest opposing Bishop for otherwise they should have beene Donatists Make your Popes as Siricius was and we will agree with them in communion not because Popes but because they â—defend the true Doctrine against Donatisticall and hereticall rashnes Doe you thinke Hierome thought himselfe bound to Liberius his Communion when he styled him an Arian e Hieroâ— Catalog Scrip. Eccles Fortunatianus Episcopus Liberium Romanae Vrbis Episcopum ad subscriptioâ—â—â— Haereseâ—â— compuiit Ambrose would not endure to give a stupide consent to the Church of Rome itselfe unlesse he saw reason for it lib. 3. de sacram cap. 1. In omnibus cupio sequi Romaâ—â—â— Ecclesiaâ— sed tamen nos omnes sensum habeâ—â—â— Id quod alibi rectius servatur nos custodimus Heere you may see how the Auncients did adhere to the Roman Bishop not in every thing from opinion of his authoritie infallibilitie mother-hood or mistresseship for they thought in other places something might be more rightly observâ—d but so farre as they might convince them of the truth of their doctrine and profession
edita â—â—gua Sed visum est 318. patribus Sancto spiritu repletis in praeâ—â—â—â—o Concilio congregatis maximè jam dicto Alexandro Apostolicae sedis Apoâ—â—â—sarijs ut decem capitula a dunarentur alijs atque congruis locis inscrerentur ad forâ—â—â— septuaginta discipulorum vel potius totius orbis terrae linguarum sepungiâ—â—â— discipulorum tam excellentis concilij fierent capitula And if these bee not sufficient to marke out an Impostor let us heare what their owne speake and you shall find Bellarmine accompting them both viz. Athanasius his epistle and Markes â—â—â— script supposititious c Bellarm. de scriptor Eccles ut 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 De Epistolis Athanasi ad Marcum Papam Marci Papâ— ad Athanasium 〈◊〉 extratione temporis â—â—â— epistolas esse supposititiâ—s Baronius takes them as Coâ—â—entitious and forged by certaine well-willers of the Roman Church d Baron tom 3. ad an 336 〈◊〉 â—â— 59. â—◠〈◊〉 ille 〈◊〉 Architectur bene esse consultum assertion 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 de Nicâ—â—o Canone extra numerum vicentarium allegatum Hoâ—â—â—â—â—â—â—◠〈◊〉 〈◊〉 qui ignoravit ex apertissimâ— veritate solutionem 〈◊〉 For the second Epistle to Felix c Reply pag. â— if we observe what the Iesuite urgeth out of him unlesse we be wilfully perverse wee cannot thinke Athanasius and the Bishops of Egypt to bee so farre from sence as this Epistle makes him that they dare not presume to yeeld to the Errors of their enimies the Arrians without acquainting the Pope therewithall as if with his dispensation they might adhere to any corruption whatsoever Besides the Rescript to this Epistle was dated Agario Iuliano Cass f Vide rescriptum hujusmodi apud Biâ—â—ium tom 1. conciliorum when as never any that did number the Roman Consuls did make mention of Agarius And also the Rescript declares what wee may conceive both of it and the Epistle of Athanasius to wit that they are of no better stampe then the Decretall Epistles the latter part of the Rescript being taken out of the latter part of the Epistle of Felix the first to the Bishops of Frannce And to close up this Binnius will tell this Iesuite that the Epistle it selfe is of suspected birth both from the time when it was written and other circumstances g Bin. tom 1. Concil in 〈◊〉 in Epist Athanasij c. ad Felicem Felicis ad Atha Haec Epistola sub nomine Athanasij ad Felicem ex synodo Alexandâ—â—na scripta ab Episcopis â—â—gypti Thebâ—â—dis Lybiae de fide suspecta est tum quod hoc tempore quâ— Athanasius â—â—ga clapsus in cremo latitabat 〈◊〉 â—â—â— Liberio 〈◊〉 Episcopi orthodoxi decrâ—â— Imperatoris 〈◊〉 〈…〉 quod hunc epistola ad 〈◊〉 scripta ipsum 〈◊〉 de sua ipsi â—â—◠〈◊〉 〈◊〉 reddat and Baronius doth also disparage this Epistle and derides the Merchant that maketh vse of such baggage Commodities h Baron Annal. tom â— ad Annum 217. â—â—â— 66. Quae fertur Athanasij nomine ad Felicem Romanum 〈◊〉 ex Synido Alexandrina scripta haâ—d aeque probatur c. At ipse 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 From whence wee may see how this Iesuite is voyde of all shame who as if he had hit the Eagle on the eye doth not onely produce these counterâ—â—its but swolne with impudencie in his wonted manner of rayling bitterly reviles the Answerer for justly telling him that the good Fathers assembled in that Synode neuer dreamed of such a busines nor established any such Decrees or Canons at all Beholde heere saith he how precisely this holy Father doth alledge the Canons and decrees of the Nicene Councill for the authority of the Roman Church and for her absolute Supremacie over all other Christian Churches throughâ—â— the world And what will not our Adversaries venture to say and doe against the Catholicke Truth when as they stick not with brasen faces to avouch that the good Fathers assembled in that Synode never dreamed oâ— such a businesse c. But I leave it to the judgment of the unpartiall Reader to determine whether the abovesaid Testimony of S. Athanasini given but twenty yeares or thereabouts after the said Nicene Councell doth not sufficiently bruise and hurst their face of brasse and force them to swallow downe againe their enormious untruthes and calumniations i Reply pag. 59 Heere wee may see a discourse fit for a Iesuite all confidence â—â—t builded upon no truth Cardinall Bellarmine confesseth the Iesuites proofe from the Epistle of Athanasius to Pope Marke and the Rescript to Athanasius to be unsound k Bellarm. de Rom Pontâ—â— l. 2. c 25. Quod illi â—anâ—nes non sunt omnes probant nonâ—â—â—lti ex Epistoâ—â— Athanasij ad Marcum Papam in quaâ—e tit exemplum Nicaeni concilij ex Romani Pontificis scrinio 〈◊〉 â—â—empla quae erant Alexandriae fuisse creâ—â—â— ab Ariaâ—â—â— Sed hoc 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ◠〈◊〉 〈◊〉 â—â— verè NON â—â— SOLIDV â—â— and what sound evidence he hath brought from his INDIAN Tale and the other Epistle to Felix hath beene declared So that the Iesuite may consider that Fures clamorem theeves may slye from his voyce but true men tremble not at the noyse He may strain himselfe against brazen faces enormious untruths calumniations but whom doth he wound but himselfe that among all the ancient Fathers cannot bring one Argument for these Arabicke Canons but these false birthes lying counter feit and yet doth swagger triumph rage and swell against him that justly putts desiance to his folly But leaving these counterfeits the Iesuite would â—â—â—swade us that he will proceede in laying downe the judgâ—â—â—â— of the anncient Fathers concerning the derivation of S. Peterâ— supreme jurisdiction unto all his lawfull Successours in the Romane See Reply pag. â— The Iesuite doth well to distinguish those that follow from those that in this point hee hath alreadie alleadged but with whom doth he beginne With him I suppose that will faile him when it commeth to tryall and that is S. Augustine m Augâ—in Psal mum contra partem Donati who expresseth what the Iesuite is to prove most plainely Reckon saith he the Preists even from Peters seat and observe who to whom hath ever succeeded in that ranke of Fathers that same is the rocke which the proud gates of hell doe not overcome n Reply pag. â—â— Loe here saith the Iesuite S. Augustine maketh the very succession of Bishops in the Roman See that invincible rocke upon which Christ built his Church forasmuch as it is grounded in Peter and thereby is partaker of the promise of Christ that the gates of hell shall not prevayle against it o Reply pag. 59 S. Augustine speaketh nothing here to the Iesuites purpose for he neither maketh Peter the Monarch of the Church nor the Pope his sole Successor in that Monarchie Neither doth S. Augustine as the Iesuit affirmeth make the very successioÌ„