Selected quad for the lemma: authority_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
authority_n apostle_n church_n father_n 3,042 5 5.0420 4 false
View all documents for the selected quad

Text snippets containing the quad

ID Title Author Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) STC Words Pages
A88669 The ancient doctrine of the Church of England maintained in its primitive purity. Containing a justification of the XXXIX. articles of the Church of England, against papists and schismaticks The similitude and harmony betwixt the Romane Catholick, and the heretick, with a discovery of their abuses of the fathers, in the first XVI ages, and the many heresies introduced by the Roman Church. Together with a vindication of the antiquity and universality of the ancient Protestant faith. Written long since by that eminent and learned divine Daniel Featly D.D. Seasonable for these times. Lynde, Humphrey, Sir.; Featley, Daniel, 1582-1645. 1660 (1660) Wing L3564B; ESTC R230720 398,492 686

There are 20 snippets containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

Cor. 14. chapter through the whole out of which wee thus argue if it be better in the Church to speake five words with understanding that by our voyce wee may teach others then a thousand words in an unknowne tongue then certainly the publike Service of the Church ought to be in a knowne tongue but it is better in the Church to speake five words with understanding to instruct others thereby then a thousand words in an unknowne tongue v. 19. Therefore the publike Service of the Church ought to bee in a knowne tongue If all things ought to be done in the Church to edification then ought the publike Service to bee in a knowne tongue for hee that speaketh in an unknowne tongue edifieth not v. 5. but in the Church all things ought to bee done to edification v. 26. Ergo the publike Service ought to bee in a knowne tongue If in the prayers of the Church the people are to joyne with the Priest and testifie their consent with him by saying Amen to his prayers and giving of thankes then ought the publike Service to be in a knowne tongue But in the prayers of the Church the people ought to joyne with the Priest and testifie their consent by saying Amen to his prayers and giving of thankes Ergo the publike Service ought to bee in a knowne tongue If in the Church prayers wee ought to pray and sing with understanding then ought Church service to bee in a knowne tongue for if wee pray in an unknowne tongue our spirit prayeth but our understanding is unfruitfull v. 14. But in the prayers of the Church wee ought to pray and sing with understanding v. 15. Ergo the publike Service ought to bee in a knowne tongue Neither can the Iesuit shift off these passages with a wish saying that S. Paul indeed adviseth and wisheth that when any prayer is made in an unknowne tongue there should bee some to interpret but that hee requireth no such thing to bee observed as a divine precept for v. 37. hee addeth if any man thinke himselfe a prophet or spirituall let him know that the things which I write unto you are the commandements of God To conclude when S. Iames commandeth that whosoever prayeth Iames 1.6 aske in faith nothing doubting but that hee shall receive what he asketh hee necessarily implieth that wee ought to pray to God in a knowne tongue For how can hee beleeve that hee shall receive what he prayeth for if he knoweth not what himselfe saith in his prayers or what an other prayeth for him to whose prayers hee saith Amen To the Iesuits second quaere where prayer in an unknowne knowne tongue is forbidden I answer Esay 29.13 and Marke the 7.10 Well Esay prophesied of you hypocrites this people honoureth mee with their lips but their heart is farre from mee and 1 Cor. 14. where the Apostle professedly disputeth against speaking in the Church in an unknowne tongue But the Iesuit excepteth that S. Paul in that chapter condemneth not simply prayers in an unknowne tongue though hee preferreth prophecie By which his ignorant exception it should seeme that hee read that chapter in an unknowne tongue for hee speaketh so wide from the matter as if hee understood never a word in it It is true that the Apostle in that chapter comparing the gift of tongues and prophecie together condemneth neither of them but preferreth the gift of prophecie and in prosecution of the comparison falleth upon those who used the gift of tongues in publike prayers in the Church and hee expresly condemneth that practise of them because they that prayed in such sort uttering words that were not understood spake not to men because no man understood them v. 2. spake into the ayre v. 5. edified not by those prayers v. 12.17 because others could not joyne with them in their prayers nor say Amen to their thankes v. 15. Now if the Apostle reproved the use of the miraculous gift of tongues which redounded so much to the honour of God in the Church without an interpreter v. 28. saying if there bee no interpreter let them keepe silence in the Church How much more may wee conceive would he have sorbidden the use of an unknowne tongue acquired by humane industrie To his third quaere what authoritie we can bring for our selves or example I answer that the Knight hath brought the authoritie and example of the catholique Christian Church for 700. yeares at the least and because he calleth upō us to name any Father who teacheth as we do that the service of the Church ought to bee in a knowne tongue Exposit in psal 18. vult ut quod conamus intelligamus ac humana ratione non quasi avium voce canamus nam psittaci corvi picae hujusmodi volucres saepè abhominibus docentur sonate quod nesciunt sciunter autem cantare naturae hominis divina bonitate concessum est I name S. Chrysostome who in his Commentarie upon the 14. chapter of the first to the Corinthians saith that the Apostle teacheth that we ought to speak with our tongues and withall to minde what is spoken that wee may understand it and S. Austine willeth that wee understand what wee sing like men indued with reason and not chatter like birds for ousels parrats crowes pies and such other birds are often taught by men to sound out that which they know not but to know what they sing or sing with knowledge and understanding is by Gods will peculiarly given unto man I name also Iustine Martyre and S. Basil and many other ancient Doctours whose testimonies are plentifully alledged by Bishop Iewell Article the third and Bilson of Supremacie part the fourth and not yet answered by any Papist to my knowledge To the thirteenth The observation of Cardinall Bellarmine concerning the different custome of the ancient Church and the present Roman maketh rather against the Iesuits then for them For who will not attribute more to the uniforme practise of the primitive Church then to the heteroclyte practise of later Churches assuredly the practise of the primitive Church wherein the people answered the Priests and not the Clarke only is most agreeable to the doctrine of S. Paul and consonant to reason For publike prayers were instituted especially for three ends first for the most solemne worship of God when thousands of hands are at once lifted up to him and as many tongues confesse his name secondly for the stirring up of greater devotion when many hundreds praying and blessing and singing together like so many coales on the same hearth kindle one the other and increase the flame Thirdly for more prevalencie with God when we offer violence as it were to heaven and send up our united devotions like a vollie of shotte to batter the walls of it They who pray in a tongue which the people understand not and therefore cannot joyne with them in their prayer faile of all these ends Yet to sodder
published by Pope Pius the fourth were anciently received though newly defined by the Councell of Trent for proofe he instanceth in the first Councell of Nice and compareth that Councell and their Creed with this of Trent hee proceeds by way of recrimination to question the 39. Articles of our Church he accuseth us for corrupting and misinterpreting the Scriptures for declining Traditions Fathers and Councels hee excuseth their Index Expurgatorius and accuseth us for falsifying the Fathers and lastly he concludeth with the doctrine of implicite faith and this is the substance and contents of his answer to my first Chapter All which and whatsoever else is materially contained therein and the rest of his sections following I will take into severall parts distinctly and returne him a moderate answer The Reply to Mr. Lloyd FIrst touching your Trent Creed you complaine that according to the common fashion of our Ministers by way of derision I divide it into twelve points as it were into twelve Articles which say you he and they might with as much reason divide it into foure and twentie Here you begin to quarrell at your first entrance but I hope you will gladly forgive us this wrong for if wee accuse your Trent Fathers for coyning twelve Articles in stead of foure and twentie they and you are more beholding to us for laying the lesser number to your charge and yet if you please to review them you shall finde they fall most naturally within the number of twelve But you would know what difference there is betwixt the Councell of Nice and the Councell of Trent and their two Creeds Let mee tell you if ever the proverb held true Comparisons are odious it holds betwixt the two Councels and their two Creeds the Councell of Trent is not worthy to be named the day wherein the Councell of Nice is mentioned That famous Councell of Nice was the first and best generall Assembly after the Apostles time that was summoned in the Christian world it had in it 318. Bishops Totius orbis terrarum lumina saith Victorinus amongst whom were the foure Patriarchs of the Easterne and Westerne Churches It was called by the first and best Christian Emperour Quasi servator medicus animarum Euseb in vita Conslant orat 3. c. 10. Constantine the Great who was Vocalissimus Dei praeco and as it were the Preserver and Physitian of our soules saith Eusebius This Emperour exhorted the Fathers and Bishops of that Councell Omni igitur seditios â contentione depulsâ literarum divinitùs inspiratarum testimoniis res in quaestionem adduct as dissolvamus Theod. Hist Eccl. l. 1. c. 7. p. 208. to lay aside seditious contention and resolve all doubts and questions by the testimonies of divine Scriptures and accordingly they framed their Creed out of the doctrine of the Apostles and all who were not of the Arrian faction did assent and agree to it saith Theodoret. Now take a view of your Trent Councell and compare them together Your Councell of Trent like Demetrius Assembly was summoned by Pope Paul the third without a lawfull calling the three Patriarchs of Constantinople of Antioch of Alexandria refused to be present the Legates of the Kingdome of Denmark of Suetia and the Dukedome of Prusia were all absent and returned their answer that the a Gravamina opposita Concil Trid. Causa 1. pag. 21. Pope had no right to call a Councell Our Queene b Epit. rerum in orbe gest sub Ferd. 1. ann 1561. apud Scard tom 3. p. 2171. E Belgio in Insulam trajicere prohibuit ibid. Elizabeth of blessed memory disavowed the Councell in so much that when the Pope sent Hieronymus Martinengus as Legate into England to summon our Bishops shee would not suffer him to land or set his foot on her Dominions The French King signifieth by his Legate James Amiot that hee for his part neither held it for a generall not yet for a lawfull Councell but for a private Conventicle and accordingly hee wrote Conventui Tridentino The Emperour Innoc Gentil sess 12. and Hist of Trent l. 4. p. 319. Illyric in Protest contr Concil Trid. Charles the fifth declared by his Embassadour Hurtado Mendoza in the name of the whole Empire that the Bishops wholly hanging at the Popes becke had no authoritie to make lawes in causes of reformation of religion and manners Andreas Dudithius Dudith in Ep. ad Maximil 2. de Calice Sacerdotum conjugio the Bishop of five Churches told the Emperours Maximilian and Ferdinand that the Trent Fathers were like a paire of countrey Bag-pipes which unlesse they were still blowne into could make no musick The Holy Ghost had nothing to doe with that Councell and therefore they could create no new Articles of faith Your historie of Trent tels us The historie of Trent the Spirit was sent in a Carriers cloak-bag from Rome to Trent but when there fell store of raine the Holy Ghost could not come before the flouds were abated and so it fell out that the Spirit was not carried upon the waters as wee read in Genesis but besides them Looke upon your Bishops they were but fortie and two at the first meeting and two of them titular the rest for the most part saith Dudithius were but hirelings Andr. Dudith ut suprà young men and beardlesse hired and procured by the Pope to speake as hee would have them To say nothing of those Emperours who called the first and best Councels and were present in person when as the Popes send but their Legates Euseb in vitâ Constant orat 3. c. 16. Ego intereram Concilio saith Constantine I was present at the Councell amongst you as one of you Touching his Imperiall seat in the Councell Ibid. c. 10. his throne was very great and passed all the rest saith Eusebius whereas there is no greater distance in the time Advertendum quod locus ubi sedet Imperator 〈…〉 tenet 〈◊〉 Pontifex Liber Ceremon l. 2. c. 2. than there is now difference in the places for the Emperour is allowed but to sit at the Popes foot-stoole and it is specially to bee noted saith your booke of ceremonies that the place whereupon the Emperour sitteth may bee no higher than the place where the Pope setteth his feet Your Councell of Trent hath made many decrees for reformation of manners but did they ever reforme this abuse and restore the ancient custome You then that are so confident in equalling those two Councels doe you thinke there is no difference betwixt a conventicle and a generall Councell betwixt a Councell lawfully called and one summoned by usurpation betwixt a late Councell held in a corner of the world in the worst age and an ancient Councell in a most famous citie held in the most flourishing age betwixt a Councell that layes her sole foundation in the Scriptures and one that builds her first Article of faith upon Traditions Bulla Pii
of the ancient Eusebius neither could he say truly that the Colein was translated by a Catholike for indeed it is the property of an Here-ticke to falsifie and corrupt the Text. And thus you have done in your Colein Edition where you have altered the sense in that manner Eusebius Emissenus Bishop of Emesa in Syria is forged by Gratian for the doctrine of Transubstantiation Grat. Dist 2. de Consecrat Quia corpus fol. Mihi 432. his words are these Christ the invisible Priest turned the visible creature into the substance of his body and bloud with his word and secret power saying Take eate this is my Body whereas there are no such words to be found in all his Works The Councell of Laodicea is falsified in favour of your I●vocation of Angels The words of the Originall are these a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Conc. Laod. Can. 35. Bin. Tom. 1. p. 245. Christians ought not to forsake the Church of God and depart aside and invocate Angels and make meetings which are things forbidden If any man therefore be found to give himselfe to this privie Idolatrie let him be accursed Now in the same Councell published by James Merlyn and Fryer Crab by transmutation of a letter you are taught a lesson contrary to sense and reason saying b Quod non oporteat Ecclesiā Dei relinquere abire at que angelos nominare congregationes facere Merlin Tom. 1. Concil edit Col. An. 1530. f. 68. Crab. edit An. 1538. Colon. fol. 226. Verit as non quaerit Angulos It is not lawfull for Christians to forsake the Church of God and goe and nominate or invocate Angels or corners and make meetings and thus Angeli are become Anguli Angels are become Angles or Corners as if truth did seeke Corners when so faire an Evidence is brought against Invocation of Angels St. Basil the great Archbishop of Caesarea was forged by Pope Adrian the first at the second Councell of Nice for the worship of Images his words are these c Pro quo siguras Imaginū eorum honoro adoro veneror specialitèr hoc enim traditum est à Sanctis Apostolis necest prohibendum acideò in om●ibus Ecclesiis nostris eorum designamus Historias Citat ab Adriano in Synod Nic. 2. Act. 2. p. Mihi 504. For which cause I honor and openly adore the figures of the Images speaking of the Apostles Prophets and Martyrs and this being delivered us by the Apostles is not prohibited but in all Churches we set forth their Histories This Authority was cited by Pope Adrian in the name of Basil the Great in his Epistles when as in all his Epistles of which are extant 180. there are no such words to be found St. Hierome is likewise forged for the same doctrine and by the same Pope the words in the Epistle are these Sicut permisit Deus ador are omnem gentem manufacta c. Citatur ibid. Ep. Adr. p. Mihi 506. As God gave leave to the Gentiles to worship things made with hands and to the Jewes to worship the carved workes and two golden Cherubins which Moses made so hath he given to us Christians the crosse and permitted us to paint and reverence the Images of Gods workes and so to procure him to like of our labour These words you fee are cited by your owne Pope at a generall Councell as you pretend for a point of your Romish faith and yet there are no such words nor the meaning of of them to be found in either of those Fathers and without doubt there was great scarcity of true ancient Fathers to bee found at that time to prove your adoration of Images when your Pope was driven to shifts and forgeries especially when your owne Polydore tells you Polyd. de Rerū Invent. that the worship of Images not onely Basil but almost all the ancient holy Fathers condemned for feare of Idolatrie as S. Hierome himselfe witnesseth This puts me in mind of Erasmus complaint that the same measure was afforded to Basil Eras in Praefat. lib. de Spirit Sanct. Bas which hee had otherwise observed in Athanasius Chrysostome Hierome that in the middle of Treatises many things were stuffed and forced in by others in the name of the Fathers St. Ambrose Bishop of Millaine is falsified and corrupted Franciscus Junius as an eye witnesse Junius Praefat. in Ind. Expurg Belg. tells us that at Leyden in the yeare 1559. being familiarly acquainted with Ludovicus Saurius Corrector of the Printing house and going to visit him hee found him revising of St. Ambrose workes which then Frelonius was printing after some conference had betwixt them Ludovicus shewed him some printed leaves partly cancelled and partly razed saying this is the first Impression which wee printed most faithfully according to the best Copies but two Franciscan Fryers by command have blotted out those passages and caused this alteration to my great losse and astonishment It may be the discoverie of it by Junius might stay their further printing of it or else might be an occasion to call it in after the printing for otherwise if that Impression may be had it were worthy the examination Bolseus dicit se in manibus Secretarii h●c testimonium vidisse inspexisse In disp de Antichristo in Apend Nu. 49. 53. Laurent Rever Rom. Eccl. p. 190. Non habent Petri haereditatem qui Petri sedem non habent Grat de Paenit Dist 1. c. Potest fieri But for a proofe of this falsified Ambrose Lessius the Jesuit tells us that Bolseck doth confesse he saw the Copie in the hands of a Secretary howsoever their later Editions are sufficient proofe of your manifold falsifications But I will speak of Impressions onely that have been within my view First to prove your succession in doctrine in your owne Church Gratian tells us from St. Ambrose They have not the succession of Peter who have not the Chayre of Peter and thus he hath changed Fidem into Sedem Faith into Chaire This forgery in time may creepe into the Body of Ambrose but as yet the words of Ambrose are agreeable to our doctrine that is a Non habent Petri haereditatem qui Petri fidem non habent Ambr. de Paenit c. 6. Tom. 1. p. 156. Basil apud Joh. Frob. An. 1527. Ambr. de Sacr. l. 4. c. 5. Tom. 4. p. 393. Basil●ut supra they have not the succession of Peter which want the faith of Peter These be the words of true and ancient Ambrose hereby declaring unto us and them that they may have the See of Peter and yet want the faith of Peter Againe in his Booke of the Sacrament St. Ambrose saith b Fac nobis hāc oblationem ascriptam c. quod fit in figuram corports sanguinis Jesu Christi Amb. Colon. Agripp An. 1616 Tom. 4. p. 173. Make this Oblation to be a reasonable acceptable one quod est
advers Valent. c. 3. and in thrusting himselfe into dark and blinde holes Such is the nature of false teachers they seeke nothing more saith the same Author than to hide that which they preach Idem c. 1. if yet they may be said to preach that they hide But good Physicians say you use to enquire of the causes effects and circumstances Pag. 73. for upon these circumstances dependeth the knowledge whether it be a disease or no. It is most true that Physicians will enquire of the causes of the disease but will they deny the Patient to be sicke or refuse to minister Physicke to him unlesse he tell them precisely how or when he first tooke his disease or infection For this is our case and the point in question touching a reformation Neither doth the knowledge of the disease of the body depend upon the circumstances of time place and person I thinke you never read such Aphorismes either in Gallen or Hyppocrates neither doth your knowledge of errors and heresie in your Church depend on the circumstances of time place and persons For some Authors at the same time and in the same place might have broached truth when another set his heresie abroach as namely Saint Austin precisely in the time and place delivered the Orthodox Doctrine of grace when and where Pelagius spread his heresie From your Rules of Physicke you returne to the Rules of Divinity and tell us from Saint Austin that * Quod universa tenet Ecclesia nec Conciliis institutum sed semper retentum est non nisi authoritate Apostolicâ traditū rectissimè creditur De Baptis contr Donat. l. 5. c 24. in initio Tom. 7. p. mihi 433. whatsoever the Catholike Church doth generally beleeve or practise so as there can be no time assigned when it began it is to be taken for an Apostolicall tradition This place of Austin you neither quoted in your Answer neither have you recited his words faithfully for hee speakes not of assigning the time when the Doctrine begins but whatsoever the universall Church doth hold not being ordained by Councels but hath beene ever held that is most rightly beleeved for an Apostolicall tradition This is his Tenet and this is ours but you have put in the word Catholike in your sense for universall you have added generall beleefe and practise you have thrust in these words so as no time can be assigned when it began and you have omitted the principall verb that hath been ever held which makes me suspect you omitted the citing of this place lest your fraud should be descried But I pardon you let us heare the rest P. 73. But such say you are all those things which you are pleased to call errors If this were as easily proved as spoken you should not neede to put us to the search of times and Authors for the first Founder of your Faith For if your Popish Doctrines were alwayes held by the universall Church and not ordained by Councels we should not need to looke into your Councell of Lateran for your Doctrine of Transubstantiation nor into your Councell of Constance for Communion in both kindes nor into your Councell of Florence for your seven Sacraments nor into your second Councell of Nice for your worship of Images for these and many such traditions were first ordained by Councels and were not the generall beliefe and practice of the Church Againe if the universall Church had alwayes held your Doctrines from the Apostles times why doe you your selfe confesse that your prayer in an unknowne tongue Pag. praecedenti your private Masse your halfe Communion were taught otherwise in the primitive Churches Nay if they be Apostolicall how comes it that they are flat contrary to the Doctrine of the Apostles And thus much of your two rules of Physicke and Divinity let us he are the rest of your authorities Tertullian say you hath this Rule for discerning heresie from truth Tertul. praescrip 31. p. mihi 78. That which goeth before is truth and that which commeth after is errour This Rule is most true but these words you cite by the halves for hee saith expresly Id autem extraneum falsum quod sit posterius immissum Id Dominicum verum quod sit prius traditum That was first delivered which was true and came from the God of truth and this was the Doctrine of Christ and his Apostles for that which commeth after saith he is sarre different where hee shewes likewise in these words following that after Christs time and in the dayes of the Apostles there might be heresies Ut aliquem ex Apostolicis viris qui tamen cum illis persever averint habent authorem Ibid. for the mystery of iniquitie began then to worke and therefore hee will not have it enough to derive a Doctrine from a man which lived with the Apostles unlesse it can be proved that he continued with them and the reason as I conceive was given by Nicephorus After the sacred company of the Apostles was come to an end Niceph. l. 3. c. 16. and that their generation was wholly spent which had heard with their eares the heavenly wisdome of the Sonne of God then that conspiracie of detestable errour through the deceipt of such as delivered strange Doctrine tooke rooting and because that none of the Apostles survived they published boldly with all might possible the doctrine of falshood and impugned the manifest and knowne truth But wee plead say you prescription from the beginning It is not sufficient to plead it you must prove it The Mahometists at this day assume the name of Saracens as your men doe the name of Catholikes as if they came from Sara the free woman Abrahams true and lawfull wife when in truth they tooke their first beginning from Agar the bond-woman neither can there be any prescription against the ancient Records and Evidences of the Word written by Christ and his Apostles Indeed you have found a right and easie way to claime a prescription from the time of the Apostles for you have razed many prime Evidences of the Fathers for the first 800. yeeres which make for our Doctrine and you have proscribed many learned Authors and their Records as I have shewed before for the last 800. yeeres which testified against your errors And now I come to your Churches apostacie or falling from the truth which occasioned these errors Apostacie say you is a defection or forsaking of the Name of Christ and profession of Christianity as all men understand it I shewed in this Section that in the primitive Church when any heresie did arise that indangered the foundation such as was the heresie of the Arrians of the Pelagians and the like the Authors were observed the times were knowne the place was pointed at and forthwith letters of Premonition were sent to all the sound members of the Catholike Church by which publike advertisement the steale-truth
Anselme and his words Gospell the Knight gaines nothing by it or we lose for though it bee the safest way to cast anchour at the last in the bottome of Gods mercie and put our whole confidence in Christs merits it doth not from hence follow but that men may doe workes meritorious of increase of grace and glory First why doth he lispe here and not speake plaine out the Romish tenet which is that our Workes doe merit not only increase of grace and glorie but remission of sinnes and h Concil Trid. Sess 6. c. 32. Si quis dixerit hominis justificati opera non verè mereri augmentū gratiae vitam aeternam ipfius vitae aeternae si tamen in gratià decesserit consecutionem Anathema sit eternall life Next I would faine know how mercy and merit nay sole mercy and merit can stand together Certainly as mercy excludeth merit so sole mercy all merit Can those workes which is S. Anselmes judgement will not beare scale in Gods ballance weigh downe super-excellens pondus gloriae a super-excellent weight of glorie Certainly the Spectacle-maker put in a burning glasse into his Spectacles which hath much impaired his eye-sight or else hee could not but reade S. Anselmes words in this place in which he renounceth all merit and that in most direct and expresse tearmes I beleeve that none can bee saved by his owne merits Vid loc sup cit p. 4. or by any other meanes but by the merit of Christs passion I set the death of Christ betwixt ' mee and my bad merits and I offer his merits in stead of the merits which I ought to have and have not Concerning Transubstantiation Spectacles chap. 9. Sect. 2. à pag. 132. ad 187. THE Knight and the Protestants commit a great sinne in administring the Sacrament of Baptisme without those Ceremonies which were used in the Church from the Apostles times Elfrick was not the Authour of the Homilie and Epistles the Knight citeth against Transubstantion in which notwithstanding there is nothing against Transubstantiation but much for it if the Knight had not shamefully corrupted the Text by false translating it in five severall places The difference of Catholique Authours about things not defined by the Church maketh nothing for Protestants because they vertually retract all such opinions by submitting their writings to the censure of the Catholique Church Cajetan is falsely alledged by putting in the word supposed and Transubstantiation he denied not the bread to bee transubstantiated into Christs body though hee conceived that those words This is my body doe not sufficiently prove the reall presence of our Saviours body for which he is worthily censured by Suarez and the whole schoole of Divines Biel affirmeth that it is expresly delivered in holy Scriptures that the body of Christ is contained under the species of bread c. Which former words the Knight leaveth out because they made clearely against him and in the latter set downe by the Knight he denieth not that Transubstantiation may bee proved out of Scriptures but that it may be proved expresly that is in expresse tearmes or so many words Alliaco his opinion maketh nothing for the Knight being a Calvinist though hee seeme to favour the Lutherans tenet and though hee thought the Doctrine of consubstantiation to be more possible and easie yet therein hee preferred the judgement of the Church before his owne B. Fisher denieth not that the reall presence can be proved out of Scripture for the fourth chapter of the booke cited by the Knight is employed in the proofe thereof against Luther but that laying aside the interpretation of Fathers and use of the Church no man can be able to prove that any Priest now in these times doth Consecrate the true body and bloud of Christ Durand B. of Maundy doth not deny Transubstantiation to bee wrougnt by vertue of the words This is my body For though in the first place hee saith that Christ then made the bread his body when he blessed it yet hee after addeth that wee doe blesse illâ virtute quam Christus indidit verbis Durand rat c. 41. n. 14. by that power which Christ hath giuen to the words Odo Cameracensis calleth the very forme of Consecration a benediction both because they are blessed words appointed by Christ for so holy an end and because they produce so noble an effect or because they are joyned alwayes with that benediction and thankesgiving used both by our Saviour in the institution of this holy Sacrament and now by the Priest in the Catholique Church in the Consecration of the same Christopherus de capite fontium is put in the Roman Index of prohibited bookes and in the words cited out of him by the Knight there is a grosse historicall errour in this that hee saith that in that opinion of his both the Councell of Trent and all Writers did agree till the late time of Caietan as if Caietan were since the Councell of Trent and in citing this place the Knight is against himselfe for whereas hee maketh Cardinall Caietan and the Archbishop of Caesarea his two Champions against the words of Consecration as if they did both agree in the same here this Archbishop saith quite contrary that all are for him but onely Cajetan Salmeron relateth it indeed to bee the opinions of some Graecians that Christ did not consecrate by those words This is my body but by his benediction but this opinion of theirs is condemned by him as Chamier saith expressely in the place coted by the Knight l. 6. de Eucha c. 7. Bellarmine in the place alledged saith nothing but what is granted by all Papists De Euchar. l. 3. c. 23. to wit that though the words of Consecration in the plaine connaturall and obvious sense inferre Transubstantiation yet because in the judgement of some learned men they may have another sense which proveth only the reall presence it is not altogether improbable that without the authority of the Church they cannot inforce a man to beleeve Transubstantiation out of them Alfonsus à Castro affirmeth that of Transubstantiation there is rare mention in the ancient Fathers yet of the conversion of the bread into the body of Christ there is most frequent mention and the drift of Castro in that place is to shew that though there bee not much mention in ancient Writers of a thing or plaine testimonie of Scripture that yet the use and practice of the Church is sufficient bringing in for example this point of Transubstantiation and the procession of the holy Ghost from the Son The meaning of Yribarne and Scotus saying Transubstantiation of late was determined in the Councell of Lateran is only this that whereas the words of Consecration may bee understood of the reall presence of our blessed Saviours body either by Transubstantiation or otherwise so the substance of bread doe remaine the Church hath determined the words are to be understood in the former
atque depictum habens imaginem quasi Christi vel sancti alicujus non enim satis memini cujus imago fuerit cum ergo hoc vidissem in ecclesiâ Christi contra authoritatem scripturarū hominis pendere imaginem scidi illud magis dedi consilium custodibus ejusdem loci ut pauperem mortunm eo obvolverent atque efferrent Ierome in Ezek l. 4. c. 16. nos unam habemus vivam unam veneramur imaginem quae est imago invisibilis omnipotentis Dei. Amphiloc citat à pat concil Constantinop An. 754 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Aug. de mor. Eccl. c. 34 novi multos esse sepulchrorū picturarum adoratores c. Ep. 109. ad Ian. in primo praecepto prohibetur coli aliqua in figmentis hominum Deisimilitudo non quia non habet imaginem Deus sed quia nulla imago ejus coli debet nisi illa quae hoc est quod ipse L. de fid symb tale simulacrum Deo nefas est Christiano in templo collocare but you must understand that that was joyned to the glory of his God-head in so much that his Apostles could not behold the glory of his flesh in the mount much more glorious is it now having put off mortalitie who is therefore able with dead and livelesse colours and a shadowed picture to expresse those bright and shining beames of so great glorie Epiphanius as zealous as either for entring into a Church at Anablathra and finding there a vaile hanging at the doore died and painted and having the image as it were of Christ or some Saint seeing this that contrary to the authoritie of Scriptures the image of a man was hung upin the Church of Christ he cut it and the vaile and gave counsell to the Keepers of the place to wrap and burie some poore dead man in it and he intreated the Bishop of Ierusalem to give charge hereafter that such vailes as that was being repugnant to Christian religion should not bee hanged up in the Church of Christ S. Ierome in his Comment upon the sixteenth of Ezekiel teacheth that Christians never acknowledge nor worship any image of the invisible and omnipotent God save one to wit his Sonne In the fift age Amphilochius Bishop of Iconium instructeth us what account the Church made of images in these words Wee have no care to figure by colours the bodily visages of Saints in tables because wee have no need of suchthings But by vertue to imitate their conversation and S. Austine treating of the catholique Church professeth that hee knew many worshippers of graves and pictures and withall addeth the Church censure of them but the Church saith hee condemneth them and seeketh every way to correct them as ungracious children and in his 109. Epistle to Ianuarius C. 11. hee writeth that in the first Commandement any similitude of God devised by man is forbidden to bee worshipped not because God hath not an image but because no image of him ought to bee worshipped but that which is the same thing that hee is as for drawing him after the similitude of a man hee utterly disliketh it saying it is unlawfull for a Christian to erect any such image and place it in the Church for as else-where hee argueth images prevaile more to bow downe the unhappy soule in that they have a mouth eyes eares Psal 113. Conc. 2. plus enim valent simulacra ad curvandam infaelicem animam quòd os babent oculos habent aures habent nares habent manus habent pedes habent quam ad corrigen●am quòd non loquantur non videant c. God li. 8. tit 12. prohibemus basilicam alicujus imagine obscurari Greg. Regis l. 7 ep 109. ad Seren praetereà judico dudum ad nos pervenisse quòd fraternit as vestra quosdam imaginum adoratores aspiciens easdem ecclefiae imagines confregit atque projecit quidem zelum vos ne quid manufactum adorari possit habuisse laudavimus sed frangere easdem imagines non debuisse judicamus idcirco enim pictura in ecclesia adhibetur ut ' hi qui liter as nes●iunt saltem in parietibus videndo legant quae legere in codicibus non valent Vid. Concil Nic. 2. Act. 6. Zonoras hist Tom. 3. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 nostrills hands and feet then to correct it in that they neither heare nor see nor smell nor handle nor walke In the sixt age The Emperour Iustinian setteth downe a law made by Theodosius and Valentinian which forbiddeth Churches to bee obscured with any images or painted tables In the seventh age When Images began to be set up in the Churches Serenus Bishop of Marsilis brake them downe which fact of his though Gregorie disliked because he thought that images might profitably be retained as lay-mens books yet in this hee commended his zeale that hee would by no meanes suffer them to bee worshipped In the seventh age There was a Councell held at Constantinople Anno 754. whereinlt was decreed by 338. Bishops in this manner Wee doe declare that all images of what nature soever made by the wicked art of the Painter be cast out of Christian Churches whosoever from this day forward shall dare to set up any images of God either in the Church or in a private house if hee be a Bishop let him bee deposed if he be a lay-man let him bee accursed Zonoras saith that in the hearing of all the people they openly forbad the worshipping of Images H. de orthodox fid l. 4. c. 17. orat de imag calling such as adored them idolater And in the yeare 794. Charles the great called a Councell of 300. Bishops of France Italie and Germany in which the second Synod of Nice which decreed the erecting and worshipping of images is refuted and condemned yea and some of the patrones of images as namely Durand and Gregorie the second professedly inveigh against all Images and Pictures made to represent the Deity or Trinitie it is unpossible saith Damascene that God who can neither bee seene by man nor circumscribed should be expressed in any shape or figure nay saith hee it is extreame madnesse and impietie to make a representation of the Godhead Ep. Greg. ad Leo. Imper. de imag in and Gregorie the second giveth this reason to Leo the Emperour why they painted not God the Father Quoniam quis sit non novimus because wee know not who hee is and the nature of God cannot be painted and set forth to mans sight In the eighth age Rhem. cont Hinc Laud. c. 20. Hincmarus Archbishop of Rhemes tells us that not long before his time a generall Synod was called in Germanie by Charles the great and therein by the rule of Scriptures and Fathers the Councell of Nice indeed saith he a wicked Councell touching images which some would have to bee broken in pieces and some to bee worshipped was utterly rejected In this age in the yeare
etiam patres Ambrosius Hilarius c. minime loquuntur de indulgentiis Prierias cont Luth. de Indul. Indulgentiae authoritate scripturae non intuere nobis sed authoritate ecclesiae Romanorum Pontificum Major in 4. sent dist 2. q. 2. Difficile est modum indulgentiarum fundare authenticè in scripturâ sacrâ Roffensis artic 18. cont Luther Quamdiù nulla fuerat de purgatoria cura nemo quesivit indulgentias nam ex illo pendet omnis indulgentiarum estimatio ceperunt igitur indulgentiae postquam ad purgatorii cruciatus aliquandiù trepidatum erat The Scriptures speak not expressely of Indulgences neither the Fathers Austine Hilarie Ambrose Jerome c. Sylvester Prierias affirmeth that Pardons have not beene knowne to us by the authority of Scriptures but by the authority of the Church of Rome and the Popes Fisher Bishop of Rochester confesseth that of Purgatorie there is little or no mention amongst the ancient Fathers and that as long as Purgatory was not cared for there was no man sought for Pardons sith Purgatorie therefore hath beene so lately knowne and received of the whole Church who can now wonder concerning Indulgences And here Master Flood is at a stand his Flumen is turned into Stagnum for having made offer to answer Durand and finding that his answer would not hold his heart failed him and hee durst not venture to shape any answer at all to the Authours last mentioned namely Alfonsus a Castro Alfon. de verbo Indulg Harum usus in ecclesiâ videtur serò receptus de Transubst antiatime rara in antiquis mentio de purgatorio fere nulla quid ergo mirum si ad hunc modum contigeret de indalgentiis ut apud priscos nulla sir mentio Antonin part 1. tit 10. de indulgentiis nihil expressè habemus in sacrâ scripturà aut etiam patrum scriptis Cajet opus 15. 1. Nulla scriptura sacra nulla priscorum doctorum grecorum aut latinorum authoritas indulgentiarum ortum ad nostram deduxit notitiam Bellor de indul l. 1. c. 17. Neque mirum videri debet si authores antiquiores non habemus qui harum mentiorum faciunt whose words are There is nothing in Scripture lesse opened or wherof the ancient Fathers have lesse written than of Indulgences and it seemeth the use of them came but lately into the Church there is seldome any mention of Transubstantiation among the Ancients almost none of Purgatorie What marvell then if it so fall out with Indulgences that there should be no mention of them by the Ancients Antoninus There is not any expresse testimonie for proofe of Indulgences either in Scriptures or in the writings of the ancient Fathers Cajetan There is no authoritie of Scriptures or ancient Fathers Greeke or Latin that bringeth the originall of Indulgences to our knowledge Bellarmine It is not to be wondered if wee have not many ancient Authours which make mention of Indulgences for many things are re●●●ned in the Church onely by use and custome without writing See how the Romanists second one the other Bellarmine saith That not many ancient Authours make mention of Indulgences Cajetan and Antoninus say Not any Durand saith that The Scriptures speake not expresly of them Prierias saith That they speake not at all of them To the tenth The Indulgences those Fathers and Councells speake of have no more affinitie with the Pardon 's the Pope selleth now adaies than the Rivers of Paradise have with Styx or Avernos or Simon Peter with Simon Magus or Phillip the Apostle with Phillip King of Macedon as I shewed before To the eleventh The Iesuit hath neither proved the practise of the Catholike Church nor of the Romane time out of mind for Indulgences but onely practises of later times since manifold abuses crept into the Roman Church As for his negative Argument to wit that It is a strong evidence of consent for Indulgences because none is found to have spoken against them unlesse hee otherwise qualifie it it will no more prove Purgatorie or the lawfull use of Indulgences than it will prove there is a Common-wealth in Eutopia or Cities or Countries in the Moone or many worlds because peradventure none is found to have spoken or written against them And for the Waldenses that they were the first impugners of Indulgences is said by the Iesuit but not proved much lesse that these Waldenses were known Heretikes For they were farre from heresie by the confession of their greatest adversarie the Inquisitor Rainerius Cont. Wald. cap. 4. They live saith hee justly before men and believe all things well concerning God and all the Articles contained in the Creed Solummodo Romanam Ecclesiam blasphemant Clerum onely they speake evill of the Romane Church and Clergie To the twelfth It was happy for Durand that hee lived before the Inquisition and Index Expurgatorius Durand in 4. sent dist 2. q. 3. Quod dictū est Petro. Mat. 16. tibi dabo claves c. intelligitur de potestate ei data in foro poenitentiae de collatione autem indulgentiarum non est quomodò debeat intelligi sancti enim Ambrosius Hilarius Augustinus Hieronimus minime loquntur de indulgentiis For he argueth so strongly against Indulgences saying that Little can be spoken of any certainty concerning them because the Scripture speaketh not expressely of them for what is spoken Matthew the 16. to Peter I will give thee the Keyes and whatsoever thou bindest on earth shall be bound in heaven is understood of the power given him in the penitentiall Court and cannot be understood of the bestowing of Indulgences for the holy Fathers Ambrose Hilarie Augustine Jerome speake not at all of Indulgences that his writings if not his person would have beene purged by fire if hee had lived in these times yet true it is that having argued strongly against Indulgences and the Church Treasurie so farre as it consisteth of the merit of Saints hee bethought himselfe and pro formâ alleageth to the contrarie the Custome and Doctrine of the Church meaning the Romane Church whose lash hee feared if hee should not have given backe that by Whole-sale which hee had taken away from her by Re-tale It s true also that hee mentions Indulgences at the stations of Rome in the dayes of Saint Gregory but let it be noted that Gregory is without the compasse of the Primitive times and that hee was interested in the cause for Purgatorie fiers began to singe men in his time and thereupon Indulgences to be in request which afterwards proved a Staple commoditie to the See of Rome Lastly Mart. Epig. de Lab. Non es crede mihi bonus quid ergo ut verum loquar optimus malorum Pisones Senecasque Memmiosque et Crispos mihi redde sed priores fies protinus ultimus bonorum as Martial writeth of Labulla it may be truly said of this Gregory that hee was the worst of the good and best of
to which we owe absolute consent and beliefe Vid. August supr cit without any question or contradiction To the two and twentieth Saint Austine defends no point of Faith against Heretikes either onely or chiefly by the Tradition and practise of the Catholike Church but either onely or chiefly by the Scriptures For example in his booke of Baptisme against the Donatists after hee had debated the point by Scriptures hee mentioneth the custome of the Church and relateth Stephanus his proceeding against such as went about to overthrow the ancient custome of the Catholike Church in that point But hee no where grounds his Doctrine upon that custome though hee doth well approve of it as wee doe Againe in his booke against Maximinus and his 174 Epist to Pascentius hee confirmeth the faith of the Trinity by the written Word against those Heretikes his words Ep. 175 Haec siplacet audire quemadmodum è Scripturis sacris asserantur to the same Pascentius are Here thou maist heare if thou wilt how these points of our Faith are maintained by Scripture So farre is hee from founding those or any other points of faith only or chiefly upon unwritten Traditions What the Iesuit alleageth out of his tenth booke De Genes ad literam cap. 23. Consuetudo matris Ecclesiae in baptizandis parvulis nequaquam spernendus est neque ullo modo superflua deputanda no whit advantageth his cause for there Saint Austine saith no more but The custome of the Church in baptizing Infants is no way to be despised or to be accounted superfluous Wee all say the same and condemne the Pelagians of old and Anabaptists of late who deny Baptisme to be administred to children or any way derogate from the necessitie of that Sacrament The Iesuit saith hee will say nothing of Prayer for the dead yet hee quoteth Saint Austine de curâ pro mortuis as if in that booke hee taught Prayer for the dead and grounded it upon unwritten Tradition Whereas in that booke hee neither maintaineth Prayer for the dead nor maketh mention of any unwritten Tradition for it but on the contrarie solidly out of Scriptures proveth Esaias Propheta dicit Abraham nos nescivit et Israel non cognovit nos si tanti patriarchae quid erga populum ex his procreatur ageretur ignoraverunt quomodo mortui vivorum rebus atque actibus cog noscendis adjuvandisque miscentur et paulo post ibi ergo sunt spiritus defunctorum ubi non vident quecunque aguntur aut eveniunt in istâ vitâ hominibus Ep. 118. Si quid hocum sic faciendum divinae Scripturae praescribat authoritas non est dubitandum quin ita facere debeamus similiter si quid per orbem tota frequentat Ecclesia that the Saints departed have no knowledge of our affaires upon earth the Prophet Esay saith Abraham knoweth us not and Israel is ignorant of us If so great Patriarchs knew not what befell their posteritie after their death how can it be defended that the dead intermeddle with the actions or affaires of the living to helpe them onward or so much as to take notice of them A little after he concludes flat upon the Negative The Spirits therefore of the dead there remaine where they knowe not what befalleth to men in this life To what end therefore should wee call upon them in our troubles and distresse here Neither hath this Father any thing in his 118 Epistle for the Iesuit or against us for there hee speaketh of Ecclesiasticall Rites and Customes as appeares in the very title of that Epistle not of Doctrines of Faith and yet even in these hee giveth a preheminence to the Scriptures If saith hee the authoritie of divine Scripture prescribe any Rite or Custome to be kept there is no question to be made of such a Rite or Custome and in like manner if the whole Church throughout the world constantly useth such a Rite or Custome The Iesuites next allegation out of this Fathers booke De unitate Eccles cap. 22. falleth short of his marke hee saith there that Christ beareth witnesse to his Church that it should be Catholike that is spread over the face of the Earth and not to be confined to any certaine place as the Province of Affrica Wee say the same and adde that the bounds of it are no more the territories of the Bishop of Rome than the Provinces of Affrica Wee grant that Whosoever refuseth to follow the practise of the Church to wit the Catholike or universall Church resisteth or goeth against our Saviour who promised by his spirit to leade her into all truth and to be with her to the end of the World Which promise may yet stand good and firme though any particular Church erre in Faith or manners as did the Churches of Asia planted by the Apostles themselves and the Church of Rome doth at this day Cont. lit Petil. l. 3. c. 6. Now because that testimonie of Saint Austine wherewith the Knight concludes almost every Section If wee or an Angell from heaven preach unto you any thing whether it be of Christ or of his Church or any thing which concerneth Faith or manners besides that which you have received in the Legall and Evangelicall Scriptures let him be accursed is as a beame in all Papists eyes therefore they use all possible meanes to take it out but all in vaine for the words of the Apostle on which Saint Paul commenteth are not as the Iesuit would have them If any man preach unto you Contra against but if any preach unto you Praeter besides Ep. ad Galat. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Neque enim inquit si contraria solum predicaverint intulit anathema esto sed si evangelizaverint preter id quod ipsi evangelisavimus hoc est si plusculum quidpiam adjecerent as Saint Chrysostome and Theophylact accutely observe The Apostle saith not if Chrysostome rightly understand him if they should preach any thing contrary but if they shall in their preaching adde any thing be it never so little besides that which wee have preached unto you let him be accursed And Theophylact is altogether as plaine as Chrysostome in his Glosse upon the words The Apostle inferreth not if any man preach contrarie to that yee have received but if any preach besides that which wee have preached unto you that is if they shall presume to adde any thing though never so little let them be accursed Neither doth Saint Austine in his tractate upon Saint Iohn upon which Bellarmine and after him Flood so much beare themselves any whit contradict the former interpretations of Saint Chrysostome and Theophylact. For his words in that place carry this sense The Apostle saith not if any man preach more unto you than you have already received that is perfectly conceived and apprehended for then hee should goe against himselfe who saith that hee desired to come to the Thessalonians to supply
likewise you shall observe that he hath rased and purged an ancient Record and speciall Evidence against the universality and supremacie of the Bishops of Rome It is an Epistle written by Firmilianus Bishop of Caesarea to St. Cyprian which St. Cyprian translated into Latin as your Pamelius doth confesse wherein he professeth that he is justly moved with indignation at the manifest folly of Stephanus then Bishop of Rome that boasting so much of his Bishoprick At que ego hâc in parte justè indignor ad hanc tam apertam manifestam Stephani stultitiam Firmilian Cyp. S. Ep. 75. p. 203 Noli te fallere siquidem ille est verè schismaticus c. p. 204. Insuper Cyprianum Pseudo-Christum Pseudo-Apostolum dolosum operarium dicere qui omnia inse conscius praevenit c. p. 205. and that he hath the succession of Peter upon whom the foundation of the Church was set brings in many other Rockes c. He bids him not deceive himselfe he hath made himselfe a Schismaticke by separating himselfe from the Communion of the Ecclesiasticall unitie for while he thinkes he can separate all from his Communion he hath separated himselfe onely from all He taxeth him for calling St. Cyprian a false Christ a false Apostle and a deceitfull workeman which he himselfe being guilty of and privie to himselfe that those termes of right belong to himselfe by way of prevention he objected them to another Touching these severall Additions and Extractions Pamelius by whom the Antwerp and Paris Cyprian were set forth first excuseth Manutius for adding the words in his Roman print and tells us they were found in a written Copie of the Cambron Abbey in Hannonia which was the best of all the Copies he had and therefore saith he we were not afraid to insert that Reading into the Text. Nonsumus veriti in textum inserere Yet Manutius himselfe professeth he perused five and twenty printed and Manuscript Copies which had none of those Additions and as touching the Epistle to or from Firmilianns which proves a resistance anciently made against the usurped power of the Pope Pamelius thinkes it was left out purposely by Manutius Argumentum Ep. 75. p. 198. and saith he Perhaps it had beene more wisedome it had never been set out at all but withall he addeth because Morelius did publish it before me I thought it not fit to let it passe but print it Now let us looke backe and examine the reason of these severall Editions and falsifications Mr. Hart sayth that the Additions were taken from a very ancient Copie gotten from Verona Pamelius saith they were borrowed from a Manuscript in the Cambron Ahbey in Hannonia but in 25. Copies the Additions were not to be found Mr. Hart saith the true Copie was printed at Rome by the Popes command and with the advise of vertuous and wise men to be perfectly corrected and free from all spots Pamelius saith it was better than any other but withall it was not so exact but that the old Proverbe might take place the latter is commonly the better Lastly touching the razing out the Epistle of Firmilianus Pamelius concludeth that his Copie which doth cite it is so perfect Indiculus Codicum in initio Cypriani that be it spoken without envie there will need no further recognition yet happely saith he it had beene better it had never come forth Thus you may discerne what forgeries are used by your men to support the circumgestation of your Sacrament and the Popes Supremacie which is a maine Pillar of your Faith And this may serve to shew your falsifications and forgeries in the third Age. In the fourth Age. The fourth age An. 300. to 400. The first Generall Councell of Nice is forged by Zozimus Bishop of Rome in behalfe of his owne supremacie The pretended Canon is this In Concil Carthag c. 1. Binius Those who in the Nicene Synod gave their sentence concerning Appeales of Bishops said in this manner If a Bishop shall be accused and the Bishops of his owne Province shall thereupon condemne and degrade him if he thinke fit to appeale and thereupon flye to the most holy Bishop of Rome if he be pleased to have the hearing of it the Bishop is to write to the Bishops adjoyning and let it be at his pleasure to doe what he will and as he in his judgement shall thinke fittest to be done This Canon is not to be found either in the Greeke or Latine Copies of the Nicene Councell and those Canons in all were but 20. It is true that you pretend that there were in all 60. Canons where of 40. were burned by the Arabians amongst which this Canon was one But if they were extant how were they burned And if they were burned how came you to the knowledge of them The truth is their Bastardie saith Contius your Lawyer is proved even by this that no man no not Gratian himselfe Raynold chap. 9. Divis 2. pag. 575. durst alledge them Eusebius Caesariensis Bishop of Caesarea is corrupted to prove the Popes supremacie In the Basil print translated by Ruffinus he sayth Peter James Euseb impr Basiliae ex Officinâ Henr. Petrina Ruffino Aquiliensi Interprete Sed Jacobum qui dicebatur Justus Apostolorum Episcopū statuerat Eus l. 2. Eccl. Hist c. 1. p. 677. Petrum Jacobum Johannem non de gloriâ honore contendisse interse sed uno consensu Jacobum Justū Hierosoly monum Episcopū designâsse Coloniae Allobrogum excudebat Petrus dela Roviere An. 1612. and John after the Assumption of our Saviour although they were preferred by him before all the rest of the Apostles yet did they not challenge the honor of Primacie to themselves but appointed James which is called Justus to be Bishop of the Apostles In your Coleine Edition you have altered the sense in this manner Peter James and John when they had obtained of our Lord a high degree of dignity they did not contend about glory and honor amongst themselves but with one consent made James Bishop of Jerusalem Thus the true and ancient Eusebius saith Peter and the rest did not challenge the honor of primacie the latter saith they did not strive about glory and honour the ancient saith they appointed James which is called Justus to be Bishop of the Apostles the other saith they nominated Justus Bishop of Jerusalē This Authority is so pregnant against the Popes Jurisdiction claimed from Peter that Bellarmine hath nothing to answer but this Although those words be found in the Basil print translated by Ruffinus yet in a Colein print translated and published by a Roman Catholike Bellar. de Rom. Pont. l. 1. c. 26. the word Primacie is not to bee found and in stead of the words Bishop of the Apostles are inserted Bishop of Jerusalem The Cardinall doth not complaine that Ruffinus Translation was false and corrupt for they are the words in the Originall
1100 de Gratiano Aiph advers haereses l. 1. c. 2. in fine Ad transmarina qui putaverint appellandum a nullo infra Africam in Communione suscipiatur Bin. in Concil Milevit Cā 22 Codex Can. Eccl. Afric Can. 28. v. Nisi forte ad Apostolican sedem appellaverint Grat. causa 2. quest 6. Placuit fol. Mibi 153. Haec exceptio non videtur quadrare Bell. de Pont. l. 2. c. 24. notwithstanding hee professeth the worke was purged and restored to his integrity by most learned men by the command of Gregory the 13. in the yeare 1580. Your Alphonsus à Castro tells us that this shamefull errour ought to be made knowne to all men lest others by this abuse take occasion to erre in like manner as namely Johannes de Turrecremata and Cardinall Cajetan who both cited this place out of Gratian for the Romish faith and the Popes Supremacie and yet no such thing is to be found in St. Austin The Councel of Milevis alias the African Councell is falsified by Gratian for the Popes Supremacie The words of the Councell are these Those that offer to appeale beyond the Seas let none within Africa receive them to Communion Gratian observing that this was a strong evidence and barre to the Popes Supremacie according to his custome hath thrust in these words into the Canon Except it bee to the Apostolike See of Rome Now what saith Bellarmine to this falsification He confesseth that some say This exception doth not seem to square with the Councell I know not how the squares goe with your men at Rome but I finde that amongst your partie there is no rule without an exception especially if it make against your doctrine St. Cyrill Bishop of Alexandria is purged in the Text it selfe and is forged by Aquinas for two principal points of faith viz. Transubstantiation and the Popes Supremacie Touching the first he saith That we might not feele horrour Aquin. in Catena in illud Luc. 22 Accepto pane c. seeing flesh and bloud on the sacred Altar the Sonne of God condescending to our infirmities doth penetrate with the power of life into the things offered to wit Bread and Wine converting them into the verity of his owneflesh that the body of life as it were a quickening seed might be found in us Here is a faire Evidence or rather a foule falsification for your carnall presence But what saith your owne Vasques the Jesuit Citatur Cyrillus Alex. in Epistola ad Casyrium quae inter ejus opera non habetur illius tamen testimonium citat S. Thomas in Catena Cyrils testimony is eyted by Thomas but there is no such Tract to be found in all his workes Againe touching the Popes Supremacie hee brings in St. Cyrill saying As Christ received power of his Father over every power a power most full and ample that all things should bowe to him so hee did commit it most fully and amply Aquinas in opusculo contra errores Graecorum ad Urbanum quartum Pontificem maximum both to Peter and his Successors and Christ gave his owne to none else save to Peter fully but to him be gave it And the Apostles in the Gospels and Epistles have affirmed in every doctrine Peter and his Church to bee instead of God And to him even to Peter all doe bowe their head by the law of God and the Princes of the world are obedient to him even as to the Lord Jesus And we as being members must cleave unto our head the Pope and the Apostolike See That it is our duty to seeke and enquire what is to be beleeved what to bee thought what to be held because it is the right of the Pope alone to reprove to correct to rebuke to confirme to dispose to loose and binde Here is a large and ample testimony cited in the name of an ancient Father for the honour and power of the universall Bishop This passage is alledged out of Cyrils worke intituled The Treasurie against Heretiques Thesaurus adversus haeticos Tom. 2. p. 1. but whereas there are 14. Bookes written by him of that Title there are no such words to be found in the whole Tract But observe the proceedings of your good Saint hee conceived the authoritie of one Father though rightly cited was not a sufficient proofe for an Article of faith and thereupon to make good his former Assertion hee summons 630. Bishops who saith hee with one voice and consent made this generall acclamation in the Councell of Chalcedon Aquinas in opusculo ut supra God grant long life to Leo the most holy Apostolike and universall Patriarch of the whole World He tels us further it was decreed by the same Councell If any Bishop be accused let him appeale to the Pope of Rome because we have Peter for a rocke of refuge and he alone hath right with freedome of power in stead of God to judge and try the cause of a Bishop accused according to the keyes which the Lord did give him Without doubt this decree was a good inducement for the Church of England to subscribe to the Popes Supremacie if you could make good this proofe out of the Councell of Chalcedon for it is one of the first foure generall Councels which we subscribe unto by our Acts of Parliament An. 1. Elizab. But where are those words to bee found in that Councell Your Pope Zozimus falsified a Canon in the first Councell of Nice as I have shewed and your Popes Champion St. Thomas hath falsified another and both for the universality of the Pope by which you may easily discerne that you wanted antiquity to prove your faith when your men are driven to forge and faine a consent of many hundred Bishops in an ancient and generall Councell See Concil Chalced. Can. 28. Act. 15. for the supporting of your Lord Paramount when as in truth it decreed the flat contrary doctrine Gelasius Bishop of Rome is corrupted Grat. de Consecr dist 2. c. Comperimus Gelasius Pap● Majorico Johanni Episcopis Ibid. where hee condemneth halfe Communion as sacrilegious his words are these We finde that some receiving a portion of Christs holy Body abstaine from the Cup of his sacred Bloud which because they doe out of I know not what superstition we command therefore that either they receive the entire Sacraments or that they be entirely with-held from them because the division of one and the selfe-same Mystery cannot be without grand Sacriledge Gratian the compiler of the Popes Decrees borrowed his chapter out of that Epistle of Gelasius saith Bellarmine withall prefixed this Title before it Bell. de sacr Euch. l. 4. c. 26. The Priest ought not to receive the Body of Christ without the Bloud Ea Epistola Gelasii quae modò fortasse non extat Ibid. that is to say without the consecrated Cup and yet by Bellarmines confession That Epistle peradventure is not now extant and
of every censure or expurgation that is made which is most foolish But tell mee in good sooth if those places of Scriptures and Fathers did make for your Religion would you purge them Or must we beleeve that your Inquisitors would take such infinite care and paines to review all Authours for 1600. yeares and spunge them onely in the Index Without doubt that man who doth willingly deface the Kings picture stamped in his coyne would if he durst attempt it upon his person the Tables of Authors and Glosses were especially intended for the benefit of the Reader both for his better understanding and his more speedie searching of the truth They resemble the Phylacteries of the Jewes which had a Ribband of Blue upon the borders of their garments that by them they might the better remember the Commandements of God he that would have cut the fringes of those garments in those dayes to prevent the remembrance of Gods law would no doubt have offered violence to the Tables on which God himselfe had written if hee durst attempt it The truth is the words imprinted in the skirts and tables of your Bibles and Fathers are thornes in your eyes and goades in your sides and from hence we may easily discerne why you leave out the second Commandement and alter the fourth in your Psalters and Breviaries which you dare not alter in your Bibles And that your Assertion may more particularly appeare to bee most untrue viz. that you purge no Authours before the yeare 1515. I will begin from the ninth age where I last left and shew your owne Authours purged and forbidden in all the succeeding ages for this last 800. yeares First therefore the Reader shall understand that your Roman Inquisitors have published an Index of prohibited Bookes and in that Index they have divided the Authors into three severall Classes or orders Classis 1. In the first they ranke all those Bookes which are adjudged by your men for Heretikes as namely Berengarius Wickliffe Luther Cassander Erasmus Raynolds and divers others whose Bookes not onely now written but whatsoever shall be published in their names hereafter are prohibited as Hereticall Classis 2. In the second Classis they have ranked all those whose doctrine is not very sound but suspected and offensive although the Authors themselves never forsooke the Church and therefore not personally to bee noted and of this sort are Charles the great Agobardus Bertram Huldericus Cajetan and divers others whose Bookes are now purged and some of them lived 800. years since Classis 3. The third is of namelesse Authors which say they deliver pernitious doctrine and are condemned by the Roman Church and those onely which have beene published without a name since the yeare 1584. These three rankes of Classicall Authors according to our Adversaries doome may be destinated to these three severall places The first sort to Hell which containes the Heretikes and damned persons never to be redeemed The second sort to Purgatory which are suspended and restrained upon suspicion of false doctrine or veniall sinne and must not be freed till they be purged and have payd the utmost farthing to the Pope The third to Limbus Infantum and those are Anonymoi such as were unbaptized and have beene published without a name from the yeare 1584. Of these three sorts I will produce onely the Authors of the second Classis which lived and died members of your Church such as were never condemned for heresie but touse you own words have Suspectam Doctrinam that is to say in plaine English Protestant Doctrine whereof some you have purged in your new Editions others you have forbidden to be read till they be purged The ninth age An. 800. to 900 See Crakenthorp p. 56. Carolo magno falsò adscriptū de Imaginibus cujus Titulus est Opus illustrissimi c. Ind. l. prohib p. Mihi 18. and this as shall appeare was many ages before the time prefixed 1515. I proceed In the ninth age Charles the Great wrote foure Bookes concerning Images he professeth that hee began the worke in his owne Kingdome and your owne Ecchius and Luzenburgus both witnesse that this Emperour wrote all those Bookes yet your Index Expurgatorius layes hold on him and forbids the worke pretending that it is falsely ascribed to him when as the true reason is because he condemned Image-worship and forbids the 7th Councell to be called either agenerall or lawfull Councell for otherwise your owne Hincmarus Archbishop of Rhemes Hinckm Rhē contr Hinchm Jandun Episc c. 20. who was living when these things were fresh in memorie professeth that a generall Synod was kept in Germany by the convocation of the Emperour Charles and there by the Rules of Scripture and doctrine of the Fathers the false Councell of the Grecians was confuted and utterly rejected of whose confutation there was a good bigge Booke sent to Rome by certaine Bishops from Charles the Great which in my younger yeares I read in the Palace Now admit that Charles were not the Authour of those Bookes although your owne men witnesse he was yet the Authour you see was ancient and living in that age hee condemned your Image-worship hee confuted the reasons of the Nicene Councell and by this it appeares that your Church hath transgressed her limits above 700. yeares and therefore your Trent decree was made sutable to your Spectacles which makes that seeme to be which is not Agobardus Bishop of Lyons An. 840. is purged propter non sanam suspectam doctrinam because he delivers our Protestants doctrine which you account non sanam in these words If the workes of Gods hands be not to be adored and worshipped Sioperd manuum Dei c. Bibl. Pp. Tom. 9. p. mihi 590. no not in honour of God how much more the workes of mens hands are not to be adored and worshipped in honour of those whom they represent Titulo de Imaginibus expurgantur omnia quae sub hoc titulo continentur usque ad titulum 2. Classis Ind. lib. prohib pag. mihi 711. This passage is yet extant in your late Bibliotheque of Fathers under the title of Images but your Spanish Inquisitors have commanded all the things which are contained under that Title to bee blotted out usque ad Titulum to the very title Papirius Massonus the publisher of Agobardus workes delivered the argument touching Images and Pictures in this manner Detecting most manifestly the errours of the Grecians that is the Fathers of the second Nicene Councel touching Images and Pictures he denyeth that they ought to be worshipped which opinion all wee Catholikes doe allow and follow the testimony of Gregory the Great concerning them This passage together with more ample authorities are already purged according to command by the Divines of Cullen in their late corrupt Edition of the great Bibliotheque of the ancient Fathers Bibl. P P. Tom. 9. par 1. edit Colon. Anno 1618. p.
lust and riot of his wordly state which he hath lifted up above Kings and Emperours Lastly he complaines that the Study of Divinity is made a mocking stocke and that which was most monstrous for the Popes themselves they preferred their owne traditions before the Commandements of God These bee the pretended errors Mr. Floyd which causeth your Index expurgatorius to spare no Author for his age and yet you tell us such corner-correcting you leave for such corner-companions as shunne the light p. 144. Aeneas Sylvius who was afterwards Pope Pius the second is forbidden by your Index and the reason is given for it Aeneas wrote in behalfe of the Councell of Basil when he was a young man saith a Bell. de script Eccles de Aenea Sylvio p. 289. An. 1450. Bellarmine but when he was an old man and Pope he retracted it and so his Bookes are deservedly forbidden But what say you then to his Retractations are you pleased with them No b Cautè legenda opera Aeneae Sylvii ipse enim in Bulla Retractationis nonnulla quae scripserat dānavit c. Ind. lib. prohib Class 2. a. p. 3. you must yet warily read the Workes of Aeneas Sylvius for in his Bull of Retractations hee hath condemned something himselfe which he had written and therefore when a new Edition shall come out let that Bull also be purged in the beginning of his Workes It seemes then neither that which hee wrote as a private man in his younger dayes nor that which he retracted as Pope in his latter dayes are well pleasing to your Church Let us therefore compare the difference of his Doctrine with the difference of his degrees and then you shall observe whether according to the ancient saying Honours have changed manners Aeneas Sylvius as a private man protested that c Antè Nicenā Synodum unusquisque sibi vixit parvus respectus ad Ecclesiā Romanam habebatur Aene. Sylv. in Epist 288. before the Councell of Nice each Bishop lived severally to himselfe and little regard was there then had to the Church of Rome Pope Pius the second being the same man but onely that hee was now become a Pope doth exhort and d Suadete omnibus ut id solium prae caeteris venerentur in quo salvator Dominus suos vicarios collocavit c. Bulla Retract Pii 2. Tom. Concil 4. post Concil Floren. p. 739. perswade all that they would reverence the See of Rome or that Throne of Majesty above all Aeneas Sylvius saith They thinke themselves well armed with authority that say no Councell may be kept without the consent of the Pope Ex hisce authoritatibus mirum in modum se putant armatos qui Cōcilia n●gant fieri posse sine consensu Papae Quorū sententia si ut ipst volunt inviolata persistat ruinā secum Ecclesiae trahet Quid enim remedli erit si criminosus Papa perturbet Ecclesiam si animas perdat si pervertat malo exemplo populos si denique contraria fidei praedicet haereticisque dogmatibus inbuat subditos sinemusque cum ipso cuncta ruere At ego dum veteres lego historias dumastus perspicio Apostolorum hunc equidem morem non invenio ut soli Papae Concilia convocaverint nec post tempore Constantini magni aliorū Augustorū adcongreganda Concilia quaesitus est magnopere Romani consensus Papae Idem de Concil Basil l. 1. Whose judgement if it should stand as they would have it would draw with it the decay and ruine of the Church For what remedy were there then if the Pope himselfe were vitious destroyed soules overthrew the people with evill example taught Doctrine contrary to the faith and filled his subjects full of Heresies should wee suffer all to goe to the Devill Verily when I read the old Stories and consider the acts of the Apostles I finde no such order in those dayes that onely the Pope should summon Councels And afterward the time of Constantine the Great and of other Emperours when Councels should be called there was no great accompt made of the Popes consent On the contrary Pope a Bulla Pii 2. Retractat p. mihi 739. Pius saith Order requireth that inferiours should be governed by their superiours and all should appertaine to one as the Prince and Governour of all things which are below him As Geese follow one for a leader and amongst the Bees there is but one King even so in the Church militant as also in the Church triumphant there is one Governour and Judge of all which is the Vicar of Christ Jesus from whence as from a head all power and authoritie is derived into the subordinate members Thus when he was young and had read the old Stories and considered the acts of the Apostles hee found no such Authority and respect given to the Pope but when he was Pope and old it seemes he forgat the Apostles and ancient Writers then hee attributes all power and reverence to the Pope of Rome Briefly Aeneas Sylvius saith a De Rom●nis Pontificibus liceret exempla admodum multa adferre si tempus sineret quoniam aut haeretici aut aliis imbuti vitiis sunt reperti Idem de Concil Basil lib. 1. Of the Popes of Rome wee might shew forth very many examples if time would permit that they have beene found either Hereticks or else defiled with other vices But Pope Pius saith speaking of these and the like assertions b Pudet erroris poenitet malè fecisse male dictorū scriptorumque vehementer poenitet c. Bull. Retract ut supra I am ashamed of my error I earnestly repent both of my words and deeds and I say Lord remember not the faults and ignorance of my youth And thus being Pope saving all advantages to his See he hath condemned him selfe and his Writings as published by him when he was a private man and yet notwithstanding the Inquisitors professe hee hath retracted that as Pope which afterwards hee condemned and therefore by their doome hee must have a new purgation and from thenceforth Tum Pius Aeneas But tell mee I pray was hee Pius Aeneas when he complained that at Rome the c Nam ipsae manus impositiones Spiritus sancti dona venduntur Aene. Sylv. Ep. 66. imposition of hands and the gifts of the Holy Ghost were sold for money Was hee Pius Aeneas when he complained that the Court of d Quid est Romana curia his qui summam tenent nisi turpissimum pelagus ventis undique durissimis rēpestatibus agitatū Idem Ep. 188. Rome in the chief amongst them was but a most filthy Sea tossed on every side with winds and strong tempests Was hee Pius Aeneas when he protested with griefe that e Jacet spreta religio justitiae nullus honos fides penè incognita Ep. 398. religion was despised righteousnesse dishonoured faith in a manner unknowne Or was hee Pius
contrarie hee recants it saying a Bel. Recognit de summo Pont. p. 16. I allow not that which I said with Albertus Pighius that Paul appealed to Caesar to be his lawfull Judge Againe whereas it was said the Popes used to be chosen by Emperours the word Emperor potest fortè debet deleri b Idem de Cler. p. mihi 52. it must and peradventure ought to be blotted out And when I sayd that Paul was subject to Caesar as to his temporall Lord I meant it was so c De facto non de jure Ib. p. 17. Sapendo M. Paolo chasotto Sisto Quinto usci un Indice de libri prohibiti il quale se ben subito si occulto non fu pero cio cosi presto fatto che non ne restassero gli essemplari Et in questo erano compresse le opere del Bellarmino In lib. Confirmatione del considerationi del M. Paulo di Venetia di M. Fulgentio Brestiano servita In Venetia appresso Ruber to Mejetti 1606. Con licentia de superiori in 4 to in fact but not of right And in truth it seemes that neither the Pope nor his Inquisitors were well pleased with this Catholike doctrine For Frier Paul of Venice acknowledged Cardinall Ballarmine and Baronius for learned men and further saith that he hath knowne the one and the other in Rome but he could wish withall that they had written that which they sincerely thought without being forced to recant any thing that they had spoken For Frier Paul knew well that under Sixtus Quintus there came out an Index of prohibited Bookes which though it were suddainly stayed and called in yet it was not so closely acted but that there remained Copies of it and in that Index the workes of Bellarmine were comprehended If this learned Cardinals Booke had beene forbidden you and your fellowes would have beene to seeke of an answere for many objections made against you for it is usuall with you to referre me for an answer to Bellarmine But as it is observed they recanted many things in their writings Dum plurima Annalibus digerendis pervolutanda fuere agnovit ingenuè quae primis editionibus autmāca aut non omnino ad plenam veritatem abs se fuerāt scripta id quod in Annalibus non semel testatus est For Baronius confesseth that in his first Editions many things were imperfect and not altogether true which were corrected in the other impressions And I am perswaded ere long wee shall have an Index a Defēsio Johānis Marsilii in favorem respōsi 8. propositiones continentis adversus quod scripsit illustrissimus Cardinalis Bellarminus Venetiis 1606. Expurgatorius lay hold on him For saith Johannes Marsilius I have heard that as he hath taken a liberty to mend the Fathers Canons and Historians so he will correct the Councels after his manner and for his owne purpose and so assume unto himselfe a licence hereunto which God forbid Againe saith he b Marsil p. 357. See B. Mortons encounter against M. Parsons reckoning l. 1. c. 1. p. 10 11 the Answers of Cardinall Baronius are not unlike the answers of Cardinall Bellarmine who whilst he cannot finde an objected argument to be assoiled by Historie he saith that those words have beene inserted into the Bookes much like to Mr. Floyd when there is no answere to be made to some particular objections out of the Authors you reject them all as condemned by your Inquisitors And this answere I am sure may serve for all objections that can bee made from most Classicall Authors The last thing which I here meane to speake of is a certaine distinction of explicite and implicite faith which the Knight and his Ministers cry out against and are pleased sometimes to make themselves merry withall as if they would laugh out but it is too well and solidly grounded to bee blowne away with the breath of any such ministeriall Knight as he is Thus you You professed formerly to teach mee for my learning now it seemes you would instruct me for my manners you tell me I make my selfe merrie with your doctrine as if I would laugh out truly I am sorry to thinke you teach such ridiculous doctrine as should deservedly cause laughter Shall I make you my Confessor I cannot chuse but smile when I consider what great paines you have taken in this whole Chapter to uphold the Articles of your Faith with sixe pretended rules and all infallible as namely Scripture in the plaine and literall sense Tradition or common beliefe and practice of the whole Church Councels either generall or particular confirmed by the See Apostolike the authoritie of that whole See it selfe defining Ex Cathedra though without either generall or particular Councell the common and uniforme consent of ancient Fathers or moderne Doctours and Schoole-men delivering any thing unto us as matter of Faith All these sixe rules say you we acknowledge and are ready to make good whatsoever is taught any of these wayes When I say you assume confidently that all these are infallible rules to leade men to the knowledge of your Faith and at last you conclude and as it were shut up all those rules of knowledge with the doctrine of an implicite faith This I confesse is such a mystery of foolishnesse as deserveth rather laughter than an answer For as Cato said He marvelled that a Soothsayer did not laugh when he saw a Soothsayer So I am verily perswaded that your selves doe smile when you meet each other to thinke how you cousen the poore ignorant people with a blind obedience and an implicite Faith To let passe your Golden Legends and leaden miracles which occasion sufficient mirth in long winter nights for all sorts of people what I pray is that implicite Faith that you condemne me and our Ministers for laughing at Mistake us not I know no Protestant doth laugh at an implicite Faith which is directed to the proper object the holy Scripture we laugh not at an implicite Faith which cannot be well unfolded or comprehended by reason as namely the unsearchable mysterie of the Trinitie of Christs conception by the holy Ghost and the like but we disclaime and condemne your Catholike Colliers Faith which is canonized for your Popish Creed that is to pin our Faith upon the Churches sleeve and to assent to every thing the Church propoundeth to be beleeved without examination whether it be agreeable to the Scripture or besides it We laugh or rather wee pitie that Merchant of Placentia who chose rather to bee a Papist than a Protestant Laurent Discept Theolog. p. 5. because saith he I can briefly learne the Roman faith For if I say what the Pope saith and deny what the Pope denyes and if he speake and I hearken unto him this is alone sufficient for me And wee cannot choose but smile at the judgement pronounced by your Gregorie de Valentia upon this poore ignorant
alledgeth is falsly translated Ecclesiasticus 3.11 he should have rendred the Greeke thus A Mother in dishonour or defamed is a reproach to her children such a Mother wee grant the Church to be a reproach to all her children To the fourth The number of Sacraments we prove two manner of wayes first 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 2 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 first by demonstrating our two secondly by refuting the five they adde there unto Howsoever the Iesuit here as also Baylie the antagonist of Rivet insult upon us as if it were unpossible to prove the precisenumber of two Sacraments and no more because neither the name nor the number of Sacraments is any where set downe in terminis in Scripture yet they shall find that wee faile not in proofes of this point but they in their answers For to reserve the refutation of their five to the next Paragraph we demonstrate our two by arguments drawne first from the name secondly from the definition of Sacraments thirdly from the example of Christ fourthly from the end of the Sacraments fiftly from the testimonies of the ancient Doctours of the Church 1. From the name Sacramentum is derived from the verbe sacrare to consecrate and signifieth a holy thing a holy Rite whereby wee are consecrated unto God Now it is evident that by Baptisme wee give our names to Christ wee take our militare sacramentum to fight under his banner and that thereby wee are sanctified and consecrated to his service the like wee may observe in the Lords Supper wherein wee offer our bodies and soules as a holy and lively sacrifice unto God we are incorporated into Christs body and made one bread and one body because wee partake of one bread the bread which we breake Is it not the Communion of the body of Christ the Cup of blessing which wee blesse is it not the Communion of the bloud of Christ In the rest which our Adversaries tearme Sacraments there cannot bee given the like reason of the name For by them wee neither put on Christ as in Baptisme nor are made members of his mysticall Body as by the Lords Supper 2. From the definition of Sacraments every Sacrament of the New Testament is a seale of the new Covenant Rom. 4.11 Now it is agreed on all parts that he only hath authoritie to seale the charter in whose authoritie it is to grant it But wee find that Christ in the New Testament set only two seales Baptisme the Institution whereof wee have Teach all nations baptizing them Math. 28.19 in the name of the Father and of the Sonne and of the holy Ghost and the Lords Supper the institution whereof wee have bee tooke bread and brake it saying Luk 22.19 this is my Body doe this in remembrance of mee In these Sacraments wee have all the conditions required first an outward and visible sign in Baptisme water in the Eucharist bread and wine Secondly an Analogie or correspondencie betweene the signe and the thing signified betweene Water which washeth the body and the spirit which washeth the soule betweene bread and wine which nourisheth the body and Christs body and bloud which nourisheth the soule Thirdly a promise of sanctifying and saving grace to all that use the outward rite according to our Lords institution the promise annexed to Baptisme wee find Mar. 16.16 Mtch. 26.28 Hee that beleeveth and is baptized shall be saved to the Eucharist wee find this is the bloud of the new Testament which is shed for you Iohn 6.51 and for many for the remission of sinnes and if any one eate of this bread hee shall live for ever When our adversaries shall prove in each of their five supernumerarie sacraments these three conditions wee will subscribe to their whole number of seven till then wee content ourselves with our two 3. From the example of Christ Christ our head consecrated in his owne person all those holy rites which hee instituted for his owne members Mat. 3.15 This Christ himselfe intimateth when being repelled by S. Iohn from his baptisme saying I had need to bee baptized of thee and commest thou to mee He answered Suffer it to bee so now for thus it becommeth us to fulfill all righteousnesse And S. Austine saith therefore Christ would bee baptized Serm. de Epiph baptizari voluit quia voluit facere quod faciendum omnibus imperabat ut bor us magister doctrinam suam non tam verbis insinuaret quam actibus exerceret because hee would doe that which hee commanded all others to doe that as a good master hee might not so much insinuate his Doctrine by words as exhibit it by acts But this our good Master exhibited by acts the doctrine of two Sacraments only whereof hee participated himselfe of Baptisme Math. 3.16 And Iesus when he was baptized went up straight way out of the water of the Eucharift Matth. 26.29 I will not drinke hence-forth of this fruit of the vine untill the day when I drinke it new with you in my Fathers kingdome Which words necessarily imply that before hee uttered them hee had drunke of the cup which hee gave to them saying Drinke yee all of this 4. From the end of the Sacraments We need but two things to instate us in grace remission of our sinnes and ablution no more to maintaine us in our christian life but birth apparell food and physick but all these are sufficiently represented and effectually conveied unto us by two Sacraments For we receive ablution by the one absolution by the other wee are bred by the one wee are fed by the other wee are clothed by the one wee are healed by the other 5. From the testimonies of the ancient Doctours of the Church S. Anstine L. 2. de Symb. ad catechumenos c. 6. percussum est latus ut Evangelium loquitur statim manavit sanguis aqua quae sunt ccclesiae gemina Sacramenta aqua in quâ sponsa est purificata sanguis ex quo invenitur esse dotata I sid l. Origin sunt autam Sacramenta baptismus Chrisma corpus sanguis Christi Rupert de vict verb. l. 12. c. 11. quae quot sunt praecipua salut is nostrae sacramenta Sacrū baptisma sancta corporis ejus sanguinis Eucharistia geminum spiritus sancti datum Pasc l. de coena dom sacramenta Christianae Ecclesiae Catholicae sunt baptismus corpus sanguis Domini Fulbert ep 1. lib. part Tom 3. tertium est noscere in quo duo vitae sacramenta continentur Christs side was strucken as the Gospell speaketh and presently there issued out of it water and bloud which are the two twin Sacraments of the Church water whereby the Spouse is purified and bloud wherewith shee is endowed S. Isidore the Sacraments are Baptisme and Chrisme the body and bloud of Christ Rupertus which and how many are the chiefe Sacraments of our salvation Hee answers two holy
fiery Serpent yet perinutile vitiabatur it was corrupted and made scandalous and unprofitable by the peoples abusing it to idolatrie and if that Image being a type of Christ and set up by Gods speciall command was yet broken in pieces by good King Ezekiah after the people began to worship it how much more ought those images to bee knocked downe and stamped to powder which are set up in popish Churches against GODS commandement and have beene abused to idolatrie above eight hundred yeares in such a grosse manner especially by the vulgar that as Polydore Virgill ingenuously confesseth many of the ruder sort of them magis ijs fidunt quàm Christo put more confidence in the image then Christ himselfe Concerning Indulgences Spectacles paragraph 8. a page 319. usque ad 345. THE Knight himselfe granteth the use of giving Indulgences to have been in the ancient Church and that Bishops had power to grant them Christs Merits lying in store for the need of all men may be fitly compared to a common Treasure and be called by that name So farre forth then as those Pardons were grounded on Christs merits or granted by application of them to the penitent there is no difference betweene theirs and ours Saint Paul forgave the incestuous Corinthian not onely in the person of Christ but for their sake also which importeth the prayer and deserts of Saints to have some place in the bestowing of that Indulgence and so likewise it was the practise of the Primitive Church and what was this but by applying the superabundant merits in the one to supply the want in the other That the merits of Martyrs were applied to others appeareth by Tertullian who being become now an Heretike did reprehend that custome saying that a Martyrs merits were little enough for himselfe without having any surplussage to helpe others withall Many a man continueth his great austerity of Fasting Watching Praying and other exercises of all vertues after hee hath obtained pardon for the fault it selfe by hearty contrition and by humble confession obtained also remission of the temporall punishment within the space of 1 2 3 7 10 or 12 yeares for example sake hee then leading the same life for 20 30 40 50 or 60 yeares as many have done what shall become of all that satisfaction which is over and above for that sinne or sinnes which hee committed before It doth not perish or passe without fruit though not of him yet of others and if they be not applied presently why may they not then be said to lye in deposito as money in a Treasurie Sith all grant Indulgences for the living why not for the dead so long as they pertaine to the Communion of Saints and have need thereof The authority which the Knight citeth to make Indulgences applyed to the soules in Purgatorie to be ridiculous out of the old Sarum booke of the houres of our Lady doth not mention Purgatorie but onely saith That whosoever shall say these and these prayers shall gaine so many thousand yeares of pardon which is no more for the dead than for the living It is false which the Knight averreth that wee give Pardons for thousands of yeares in Purgatory after death For wee doe not so neither doe wee understand those Pardons wherein are mentioned such number of yeares so as if men were without those Pardons to remaine so long in Purgatorie but wee understand those yeares according to the penitentiall Canons by which many yeares penance were due for one sinne and many mens sinnes being both very grievous and as a man may say without number according to the account of the ancient penitentiall Canons they may soone amount to thousands of yeares which though a man cannot live to performe here in this world nor even in Purgatory for the length of time yet hee may in Purgatorie in few yeares space nay few months or few weekes space suffer so much punishment as is answerable to all that penance of many thousand of yeares which a man should have performed here if hee could have lived so long The Authours alleaged by the Knight against Indulgences prove no more than wee grant that there is not so expresse mention in Scriptures or ancient Fathers of them as of many other points because there was not so much use of them in those dayes Though some Fathers mention them not wee prove the use of them out of others more ancient to wit out of Saint Cyprian and Tertullian as you may see in Bellarmine lib. de indul c. 3. and besides them the authority of certaine Councels as that of Nice Ancyra and Laodicea Though wee had not either the testimonie of these Fathers nor of those Councells yet would not that follow which the Knight groundeth thereon to wit that wee want antiquitie and consent of Fathers for them for it is a most strong argument of antiquitie that it is the practise of the Catholike Church time out of mind and of consent that no man is found to have spoken against them but onely knowne Heretikes In contrariū est generalis consuetudo doctrina ecclesiae quae contineret falsitatem nisi per indulgentias dimitteretur aliquid de paenâ peccatori debitâ such as the Waldenses who were the first impugners of Indulgences Durand whom the Knight alleageth in the first place having propounded the question in 4. sent dis 20. q. 5. an aliquid valeant indulgentiae after the manner of the Schooles putteth two arguments against them in the first place and then commeth with his arguments Sed contra agreeing expresly with his conclusion On the contrarie saith he is the generall custome and doctrine of the Church which should containe falshood 13. De here sibus l. 8. tit indulg verum ●tsi pro indulgentiarum approbatione sacrae scripturae testimonium apertum de sit non tamen ideo contemnend e erunt quoniam ecclesiae catho licae usus a multis annorū centuriis tantae est autboritatis ut qui illam contemnat haereticus merito cen seatur if something of the punishment due to a Sinner should not be forgiven by Indulgences and presently after hee nameth Saint Gregory and saith of him that hee did institute Indulgences at the stations in Rome Alfonsus a Castro though hee confesse the use of Indulgences not to have beene so much in those ancient times as since yet hee alloweth them so farre as to condemne any man for an Haeretike that shall deny them 14. The Knight prateth very freely of the Popes selling of Indulgences and bringing money to his owne coffers by them but to that I need to make no other answer but that it is such riff-raff-stuffe as their Ministers are wont to eeke out their bookes Sermons without being able to shew any Bull of Pope or testimony of good authour of any Indulgence so granted For the Knights prophane jeast out of Guicciardine of playing a game at Tables for an indulgence suppose that
were true might not a man thinke you tell as good a tale of some Protestants who in their pots have made so bold with Almighty God himselfe as to drinke a health to him and were not this a fine argument to prove that there is no God It is intollerable presiemption in the Knight to take upon him to censure so great a Councell as that of Trent Wherein the whole flower of the Catholique Church for learning and sanctity was gathered together the splendour of which Councell was so great that your night owle Heretiques durst not once appeare though they were invited to goe and come freely with all the security they could wish Whoreas the Knight saith that it is a senselesse and weake faith that giveth assent to doctrine as necessary to be believed which wanteth authority out of Scriptures and consent of Fathers I answer he knoweth not what he saith for all the Fathers agree that there are many things which men are bound to believe upon unwritten traditions whose authority you may see in great number in Bellarmine De verbo Dei l. 4. c 7. The consent of Doctours of the Catholique Church cannot more erre in one time then another the authority of the Church and assistance of the Holy Ghost being alwayes the same no lesse in one time then another Tertull. de prescript cap. 28. quod apud multos unum invenitur non est erratū sed traditum and Tertullians rule having still place as well in one age as another that which is the same amongst many is not errour but a tradition St. Paul thought he answered sufficiently for the defence of himselfe and offence of his contentious enemy when he said 1 Cor. 11. If any man seeme to be contentious we have no such custome nor the Churches of God It is false which the Knight againe repeateth that an article of faith cannot be warantable without authority of Scriptures for faith is more ancient then Scripture to say nothing of the times before Christ faith was taught by Christ himselfe without writing as also by the Apostles after him for many yeares without any word written As no lesse credite is to be given to the Apostolicall preaching then writing so no lesse credit is still to be given to their words delivered us by tradition then by their writings the credite and sense of the writings depending upon the same tradition St. Austine defendeth many points of faith De baptisme l. 2 c. 7. l. 5 c. 25. cont Maximin l. 3. c. 3. et Epist 174. de Genesi ad litteram l. 10. c. 23. l. de cura pro mortuis et Epist 118. de unit eccles c. 22. et tract 98. in Iohan. either onely or chiefely by tradition and the practise of the Catholique Church as single Baptisme against the Donatists consubstantiality of the Sonne the divinity of the Holy Ghost and even unbegottennesse of the Father against the Arrians and the Baptisme of children against the Pelagians to say nothing of prayer for the dead observation of the feasts of Easter Ascention Whitsontide and the like Nay this truth was so grounded with him that he accounted it most insolent madnesse to dispute against the common opinion and practise of the Catholique Church In his booke of the unity of the Church he saith that Christ beareth witnesse of his Church and in his Tractates upon John having occasion to handle those words of St. Paul If we or an Angell from Heaven c. wherewith the Knight almost concludeth every Section he thus commenteth upon them the Apostles did not say if any man preach more then yee have received but besides that which you have received for if he should say that he should prejudicate that is goe against himselfe who coveted to come to the Thessalonians that he might supply that which was wanting to their faith but he that supplieth addeth that which was lacking taketh not away that which was before these are the Saints very words in that place by which it is plaine that he taketh the word praeter besides not in that sense as to signifie more then is written as you would understand it but to signifie the same that contra St. Paul himselfe useth the same word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 para besides Rom. 16.17 for contra and you in your owne Bibles translate it so I beseech you brethren marke them which cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which you have learned and avoid them The Hammer AS Erucius the accuser of Roscius Amerinus having little to say against him Cic. pro Rosc Amer. to fill up the time rehearsed a great part of an invective which he had penned in former time against another defendant so the Iesuit here failing in his proofes for indulgences for which little or nothing can be said to fill up the Section transcribeth a discourse of his which he had formerly penned concerning the necessity of unwritten traditions which hath no affinity at all with the title of this Chapter de Indulgentiis In other paragraphs we finde him distracted and raving but in this he turneth Vagrant and therefore I am to follow him with a whip as the law in this case provideth Touching the point it selfe of Indulgences which Rivet fitly termeth Emulgences but the Iesuit the Churches Treasury whosoever relieth upon the superabundant merits and satisfaction of Saints for his absolution for his temporall punishment of sinne after this life shall finde according to the Greeke proverbe 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 instead of treasure Eras Adag Thesauri Carbones glowing coales heaped upon his head in hell For neither are there any merits or superabundant satisfactions of Saints Luk. 17.10 Christ saying when you have done all you are unprofitable servants nor were there any could they be applied or imputed to any other men 2 Cor. 5.10 the Apostle teaching that every man shall receive according to that which himselfe hath done in his body whether it be good or evill 2 Cor. 11.15 nor hath the Pope any more power to dispose of this treasury for the remission of sinnes our Saviour Matth. 18. v. 18. and Iohn 20.23 conferring the same power of remitting sinnes upon all the Apostles which he promised to S. Peter Matth. 16. Neither if the Pope had any speciall power of granting Indulgences could it extend to the soules in Purgatory quia non sunt de foro Papae because they are not subject to the Popes court Serm 2. de defunct 9 9. as Gerson rightly concludeth Neither lastly can it be proved that there is any Purgatory fire for soules after this life St. Iohn expresly affirming that the blood of Christ purgeth us from all our sinnes 1 Iohn 1.7 the fire therefore of Purgatory is rightly termed chymerica and chymica chymericall and chymicall chymericall because a meere fiction and chymicall because by meanes of this fire they extract much gold The Apostle saith there is
the purpose that that Councell seemed to be an assembly not of Bishops but of Hobgoblins not of men but of Images moved like the statues of Daedalus by the sinewes of others What the Iesuit addeth of night owles not daring to appeare in the splendour of that Councell hath no colour of truth For it is no newes for owles to appeare at popish Councells At a Councell held at Rome by Pope Heldebrand Fascic rerum expetend sugiend Ortwhinus Gratius writeth there appeared an huge great Owle which could not be frayed away but scared all the Bishops As for Protestants whom this Blacke-bird of Antichrist termeth night Owles if they had flocked to that Councell they had shewed themselves not Owles by appearing in that twi-light at Trent but very Wood-cocks to trust any security offerd them by those who after publike faith given to Iohn Huz and Ierome of Prage notwithstanding the safe conduct of Sigismond the Emperour for their going to and comming from the Councell at Constance most cruelly burned them at a stake to ashes To the seventeenth Divine faith must be grounded upon divine authority and that cannot be the Catholike faith which wanteth consent of Fathers As for those Fathers whose authority Bellarmine draweth ob torto collo to testifie for unwritten traditions de verbo Dei lib. 4. cap. 7. the Iesuit may see them fully answered in Iunius Whitaker Daniel Chamierus and Dr. Davenant Bishop of Sarum and a farre greater number of Fathers alleaged to the contrary by Robert Abbot in his answer to William Bishop cap. 7. Phillip Morney in his preface to his booke de sacrâ Eucharistiâ and Iacobus Laurentius in his singular tractate de Disputationibus and others To the eighteenth The assistance of the Holy ghost was more speciall in the times of the Apostles then in latter ages they could not erre in their writings others might yet we charge not the Catholike Church of Christ in any age with any fundamentall errour though we may the Roman Tertullian his rule may have still place and as well in one age as another if it be rightly taken and not misconstrued and misapplied for if it be taken generally that whatsoever is the same amongst many is no errour but tradition it is it selfe a great errour For the same opinion concerning the inequality of the Father and the Sonne is found amongst many to wit the Arrian Churches the same doctrine concerning the procession of the Sonne from the Father onely is found amongst many namely all the Greeke Churches at this day the same practise of administring the Eucharist to children was found amongst many namely all the Churches of Affrica in St. Austines time yea and in all Churches subject to the Bishop of Rome for many ages as Maldonat the Iesuit confesseth yet the above named Positions and this latter practise are confessed on all sides to be erroneous But Tertullian by many understandeth not the practise of some particular Churches Tertul. de prescrip Age nunc omnes ecclesiae erraverint verisimile est ut tot et tante in unam fidem erraverint much lesse of factious persons of one Sect but the generall and uniforme doctrine and practise of the whole Church as his words in the same Chapter quoted by the Iesuit declare Goe too now admit that all Churches have erred is it likely so many so great Churches should erringly conspire in one faith To the nineteenth We derogate nothing from any generall custome of the Catholike Church let the Iesuit produce out of good Authors any such custome for Indulgences to redeeme soules out of Purgatory flames by Papall Indulgences and this controversie will soone be at an end howsoever let me tell the Iesuit the way that this text of St. Paul is impertinently alleaged to prove this or any other article of the Trent faith For St. Paul in this place speaketh not of any Article of faith nor matter of manners necessary to salvation but of habits gestures fashions and indifferent rites in matter of which nature there is no question at all but that the custome of the Churches of God ought to sway as is abundantly proved by Dr. Andrewes late Bishop of Winchester in his printed Sermon upon that text To the twentieth Disputabamus de alliis respondet Iesuita de cepis we dispute of Indulgences the Iesuit answereth of Traditions in matter of Faith These are very distinct questions and so handled by all that deale Work-man-like in points of difference betweene the Reformed and the Romane Churches but the Jesuits common place of Indulgences was drawne drie and therefore hee setteth his cocke of Traditions on running which yeeldeth nothing but muddy water What though Faith be ancienter than Scriptures the Argument is inconsequent Ergo Scripture is not now the perfect rule of Faith Faith neither is nor can be more ancient than the Word of God upon which it is built this Word of God is now written and since the consigning and confirming the whole Canon of the written Word by Saint Iohn in the Apocalypse is become the perfect and as the Schooles speaketh the adequate rule of Faith It is true Christ and his Apostles first taught the Church by word of mouth Lib. 3. advers heres cap. 1. Non enim per alios dispositionem salutis nostrae cognovimus quam per eos per quos Evangelium pervenit ad nos quod quidem tunc praeconiaverunt postea per dei voluntatem in scripturis nobis tradiderunt fundamentum columnam fidei nostrae futuram but afterwards that which they preached was by the commandment of God committed to writing to be the foundation and pillar of Faith as Irenaus testifieth in expresse words To the twentie one If the Iesuit could prove as undoubtedly any words of the Apostles that are not set downe in Scriptures to be their owne words as wee can prove the writings we have to be theirs wee would yeeld no lesse credit to them then to these but that neither can hee nor so much as undertaketh to doe And whereas he further faith that the credit of the Scripture depends upon Tradition unlesse hee qualifie the speech some way it is not onely erroneous but also blasphemous for it is all one as if hee should say that man gives credit and authority to God as Tertullian jeareth the Heathen In Apolloget not receiving Christ for God because the Romane Senate would not give their consent and approbation to make him one Iam homo deo propitius esse debet or that the credit and authority of Gods Word dependeth upon mans receiving it Whereas in truth Gods Word is not therefore of divine and infallible authoritie because the Church delivereth it to be so but on the contrary the Church delivereth it to be so because in it selfe it is so and the Church should erre damnably if shee should otherwise conceive of these inspired Writings then as of the undoubted Oracles of God
Quillets concerning Images namely whether they are to be worshipped in themselves and for themselves or onely ratione prototypi in regard of that they represent whether properly or improperly whether with kissing and imbracing and other civill complements as Tharasius the Patriarke of Constantinople teacheth or with prostration or corporall submission before Images as the Iesuit indeavoureth to prove out of the Acts of the second Councell of Nice Neither is it certaine and resolved among all Papists that Images are to be worshipped but not as Gods For some of them deny that they are at all to be worshipped others over-lavish on the contrary and teach that they are to be worshipped as God De Imag. sanct l. 2. c. 22. For though Bellarmine himselfe approve not the opinion of those Roman Catholikes who teach that Latria or divine honour is due to Images unlesse it be improperly and by accident yet hee confesseth that Alexander de Hales Aquinas Cajetanus Bonaventure Marsilius Almaine Carthusian Capreolus and Henricus teach that The Images of God are to be worshipped with the same worship wherewith God himselfe is worshipped and what is this lesse than to worship Images as God As for the Canons and curses of the Councell of Nice they are but Bruta fulmina and if the Iesuit be not as senselesse as the Images which hee worshippeth hee must needs confesse as much For to speake nothing of the ridiculous arguments used in that Councell such as these are God made Man after his owne Image therefore we may make or worship Images and the Angels are to be painted quia corporei sunt because they are bodily substances What is there spoken in the 115 Psalme the 4 5 6 7 and 8 verses against Idols which may not be applied to your Popish Images It is said of them They are the workes of mens hands are yours the worke of Angels or Devils It is said of them They have mouthes and speake not eyes and see not eares and heare not noses and smell not hands and handle not feet and walke not doe any of your venerable Images made of silver and gold or rather of which you make so much silver and gold of speake see heare smell handle or walke I conclude therefore in the words of the Psalmist They that make these Images are like unto them and so are all they that defend the worship of them For Gregorie de Valentia the Iesuit telleth but a sorry tale for first hee disparageth his learning in the Greeke saying that alleaging a Text out of Saint Peter who wrote in Greeke hee followed the Latine translation never looking to the originall which argueth in him either grosse ignorance in the Greeke or grosse negligence After hee hath thus disgraced their noble Champion hee leaveth him in the open field saying pag. 377. Neither doe I allow Valentia his use of the word Simulacrum nor his explication of Saint Peters text neither this his argument drawne from thence The truth is Gregorie de Valentia is unexcusable De Idolatr l. 2. Quid attinebat ita determinatè cultus simulacrorum illicitos notare si omnino nullos simulacrorum cultus licitos esse censuisset for howsoever hee distinguisheth of Image and Idoll-worship and intendeth to prove no more out of Saint Peter then that some Image-worship is lawfull yet if his collection were good out of Saint Peter it would prove some Idoll-worship to be lawfull For Saint Peters word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 unlawfull Idolatries and if because Saint Peter brandeth Idolatrie with the epithet of Vnlawfull he will infer that therefore some Idolatrie is lawfull by the same reason he might conclude that some Adulterie or Theft were good and profitable because the Apostle Ephes 5.21 biddeth us to have no fellowship with the unfruitfull workes of darknesse For the distinction of an Image and an Idoll I have spoken at large heretofore here onely I observe that the Iesuit in saying that Idolum according to the prime signification of the word might be taken more indifferently because it signifieth the seeming shape or beauty of a thing or person contradicteth himselfe and the whole current of his owne Doctours and strengthneth our Arguments against them drawne from the prohibition of making or worshiping Idols that is the shape or beauty of any thing or person Flood pag. 337. The shape or beauty of any thing or person according to the prime signification and etymologie of the word is an Idoll but all Popish Images are the shapes of some thing or person they are all therefore Idolls and the worshipers of them Idolaters according to the primitive signification of the word The truth is every Idoll is an Image and every Image an Idoll according to the first signification of the word but according to the present use an Idoll for the most part is taken in the worst sense and signifieth such an Image onely as is idolized that is made for religious worship or rather irreligious as all Popish Images are and because they are so the places of Scripture which we bring against the worship of Idolls as this of Saint Peter are strong and in force against them and their Worshippers And this may serve for answer of the fourteenth Paragraph of this tenth Chapter In the 15. and 16. following he doth but champe somewhat of that which before he chewed and therefore I conclude this Chapter with his owne words a little altered we finde nothing in matter of faith uncertaine in the Protestant Church nothing certaine on the Iesuits side but onely this that he is alwayes and every where himselfe that is a Proteus whose motto may be that of the Heathens Goddesse Fortune constans in levitate suâ constant to his inconstancy and true to his false dealing Concerning the greater safety and comfort in the Protestant faith then in the Romish Spectacles Chap. 11. a page 381. usque ad 404. THE Knight though he talke so much of proving the safety and comfort of the Protestant faith out of Catholike Roman Authors yet he cannot name that man that saith any such thing for suppose he finde one or two Authors that say some thing different from the common opinion doth he presently say the Protestant faith is safe Even those points of Protestant religion which of themselves perhaps might seeme indifferent their disobedience and spirit of contradiction makes damnable The Protestant religion is not safer then the Roman in regard of the all-sufficiency of Scripture on which the Protestants relie for the Catholikes relie upon the same ground of safety acknowledging and reverencing the authority of Scripture as much nay much more then Protestants It is not safer to adore Christ as Protestants doe sitting at the right hand of his Father in Heaven then to adore the Sacrament for Christ is as surely in the Sacrament as in heaven the same Catholique faith teaching both verities and to make you study a little saith hee I may say
contradict Romish doctrines not out of disobedience to man but out of obedience to him who commandeth us to contend for the true faith and to reprove and convince all gainesayers What Papists intentions are we take not upon us to judge their doctrines we put to the test of Gods word and finde them false and adulterine and all be it some points of their beliefe considered in themselves might seeme indifferent yet as they hold them they are not because they are not of faith Rom. 14.23 and what soever is not of faith is sinne Now no point of the Romish Creed as they hold it is of that faith the Apostle speaketh of that is divine faith because they ground and finally resolve all their articles not upon Gods word but upon the authority of the Pope Resp ad Archiepis Spalaten c. 47. Firmitas fundamenti ●● firma licet implicita in aureo hoc fundamento veritatis adhaesio valebit ut in Cypriano sic in nobis ad salutem faenum stipula imbecilitas caries in tecto contignatione explicitae erroris opinio non valebit nec in Cypriano nec in nobis ad per●●tiem or Church of Rome which is but the authority of man whereas on the contrary as Doctor Crakent horpe demonstrateth If any Protestant build hay or stubble upon the true foundation he may he saved because be holdeth the true foundation which is that every doctrine of faith ought to be built upon Scripture If the Iesuit wonder at this conclusion let him weigh the Authors reasons and he will be forced to confesse that the errors if there be any in Protestants in regard they sticke close to the true foundation and implicitly deny them cannot in them be damnable whereas the very true doctrines of faith in Papists because they hold them upon a wrong ground and foundation very much derogatory to God and his truth are not so safe To the third With what face can the Iesuit avow this considering that Prieras before alleaged and other writers approved by the Church of Rome mainetaine this blasphemous assertion that the authority of the Church is greater then the anthority of Scripture and all Papists of note at this day hold that the Scripture is but an imperfect and partiall rule of faith all Protestants on the contrary teach that it is an entire and perfect rule of faith Papists believe the Scripture for the Churches sake Protestants the Church for the Scripture sake Papists resolve all points of faith generally into the Popes infalibility or Churches authority Protestants into the written word of God which as Bellarmine himselfe confesseth De verbo Dei non script l. 4. c. 11. containeth all things necessary for all men to beleeve and is a most certaine and safe rule of beleeveing Yea but saith the Iesuit out of Vincentius Lerinensis De verbo Dei l. 1. c. 2. he that will avoid the deceits and snares of Haeretikes and remaine soundin the faith must strengthen his faith two wayes to wit by the authority of the divine law and the tradition of the Catholike Church This advise of Vincentius is sound and good if it be rightly understood and not in the Iesuits sense Vincentius there by tradition of the Catholike Church understandeth not unwritten verities but the Catholike expositions of holy Scriptures extant in the writings of the Doctors of the Church in all ages and we grant that this Catholike exposition of the Doctors where it can be had is of great force to confirme faith and confound Heretikes Vt Scripturae ecclesiastice intelligentiae jungatur authoritas For the stopping of whose mouth that Father saith and we deny it not that there is great neede to add to the Scripture the Churches sense or interpretation albeit as he there addeth which cutteth the throat of the Iesuits cause The Canon of Scripture is perfect and sufficient of it selfe for all things nay rather as hee correcteth himselfe Over and above sufficient cum sit perfectus scripturae canon sibique adomnia satis superque sufficiat To the fourth Here the Iesuit would make his Reader study a little and his Adversarie to muse Vero nihil verius certo nihil certius but it is indeed whether hee be in his right wits or no. For first as Seneca well resolveth one thing cannot be said truer than another one truth in Divinitie may be more evident to us than another but in it selfe it cannot be truer or surer Secondly admitting there could be degrees of certainty at least quoad nos there can be yet no comparison in regard of such certaintie betweene an Article of the Creed assented unto by all Christians and a controverted conclusion maintained onely by a late faction in the Westerne Church But the sitting of Christ at the right hand of his Father is an Article of the Creed set downe in expresse words in holy Scripture Mark 16.19 Luke 24. consented unto by all Christians in the world whereas the carnall presence of Christ in the Sacrament by Tranfubstantiation is no Article extant in any Creed save onely that of Pope Pius his coyning in the yeare of our Lord 1564. It is neither in words set downe in Scripture as the other Articles are neither can it be necssarily inforced or deduced by consequence as foure great Cardinals of the Roman Church confesse Cameracensis Cajetan Roffensis and Bellarmine Neither was this Doctrine of the Romane Church ever assented unto by the Greeke Church nor by the Latine anciently or generally as I shewed before Thirdly the Iesuit contradicteth himselfe within eight lines for having said in the eighteenth line Pag. 384. that Christ his corporall presence in the Sacrament was more sure than his presence in heaven at the right hand of his Father about seven lines after forgetting himselfe hee saith that Wee shall find as much to doe marke as much not more in expounding that Article of the Creed as they doe in expounding the words This is my Body Wherein it is well hee confesseth that Papists make much to doe in expounding the words This is my Body which is most true for by the demonstrative Hoc they understand they know not what Neither this Body nor this Bread but an Individum vagum something contained under the accidents of Bread which when the Priests saith Hoc it is Bread but when hee hath muttered out an Vm it is Christs Body Likewise by the Copula est is they understand they know not what either shall be as soone as the words are spoken or is converted unto or is by Transubstantiation Lastly by Body they understand such a body as indeed is no body without the extension of place without distinction of Organs without facultie of sense or motion and will hee make this figment so incredible so impossible as sure nay more sure than the Article of Christs ascension into heaven and his sitting at the right hand of his
Spiridion that famous Bishop of Cyprus Eccles Hist l. 1. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 they lived in wedlocke and had many children without any disparagement at all to their Sacred function As the Rod of Aaron in these brought forth fruit in Holy Matrimony so it budded also in others in our Church who followed virginall chastity and lead a single life as Iewell Reinolds Andrewes Lakes and many other reverend Prelates and Doctors who for eminent learning and examplary life may compare with any of the Romish Mitred Prelates or late Canonized Saints Neither can they pretend that any Eve gave these an Apple whereby their eyes were opened but on the contrary we can produce many a Lucretia who have given Apples to their Popes Lucretia nomine sed re Thais Alexandri filia sponsa nurus whereby their eyes have beene blinded and their reputation for ever blasted See Picus Mirandula his oration extant in Fasciculus rerum expetendum fugiendum and Mantuan his Poem Sanctus ager scurris venerabilis ara cinaedis Servit honorandae Divûm Ganymedibus aedes As for Olivereus Manareus his Legend of Buxhorne if the Reader will be pleased to peruse an apologie for this Buxhorne written to the Chancellor of Lovan wherein the true cause is related for which this licentiate Divine abandoned the Papacy he shall finde in that treatise printed in the yeare of our Lord 1625 a Rowland for his Oliver or Oliverius Manareus the Iesuit to whose relation as much credit is to be given as to Cocleus his History of Luther and Bolsecs of Calvin The Devill the grand Calumniator hath suborned in all ages men of prostituted consciences and corrupt mindes and mouthes to staine with their impure breath the golden and the silver vessells of the Sanctuarie but Illi linguarum nos aurium dominsumus their tongues are their owne they may speake what malice dictateth our eares are our owne and we will hearken unto and assent onely to what truth confirmeth As for their Lutheran baits he mentioneth aurum gloria dilitiae veneres gold glory delights and Venus if these things abound any where it is in the Roman Church where the Pope who pretends himselfe to be the successor of Peter the fisher fisheth with a golden hooke and baits it with fleshly lusts what so pompeous and glorious as his Holinesse triple Crowne and his Cardinals Hats and his Bishops Miters and Croziours for what sence hath not the Romish Religion baits for the eyes they have gawdie shewes for the eares most melodious musicke for the smell sweetest incense and perfumes for the taste feasts without number for the touch whole streets of Curtezans not onely in Rome it selfe but in all the Popes Townes which are commonly knowne by this fowle Cognizance Concerning our adversaries their blasphemous exceptions against the Scripture Spectacles Chap. 14. à page 447. usque ad 463. THough Catholikes hold for most certaine that the Scripture is not the sole rule of faith nor that out of it alone all controversies can be decided as for example in particular which bookes be Canonicall Scripture which not yet for most things now a dayes in controversie many Catholikes have offered to trie the matter onely by Scripture Though Catholikes ground many points upon tradition and practice of the Church yet they ground others upon plaine and expresse authority of Scripture from which Protestants are faine to flie running to this or that corner of I know not what figurative or tropicall interpretation Though the Pope question not much lesse condemne Scriptures of obscurity and insufficiency yet his Apostles and Evangelists have left some things in writing of which some are hard even by the judgment of Scripture it selfe for so saith Saint Peter of the Epistle of Saint Paul which saith he the unlearned and unconstant doe abuse as they doe other Scriptures to their owne perdition If any condemne the Scripture of insufficiency it is St. John in saying that all things are not written and St. Paul in willing the Thessalonians to hold the traditions which they had learned whether by speech or letter Whereas the Knight chargeth us with ranking the Bible in the first place of prohibited bookes wee say it is false for it is not in the Catalogue of such bookes onely in the rules which concernes the Index there is mentioned how the free use of vulgar translations is not to be permitted but for the Latine vulgar translation there is no manner of restraint though if there had beene we might very well have warranted it by the authority of St. Jerome who did no way admit such free use even of the Latine Bibles It is no such crime to forbid the reading of Scripture to some sort of people as may appeare by the testimony of this holy Father who in the same place saith moreover that the beginning of Genesis and the beginning and end of Ezekiel were not to be read by the Iewes till they came to thirties yeare of age A kinde of forbidding of reading the Scripture is no derogation but a great commendation of it for they are forbidden to be read out of reverence and honour due unto them and in regard of the danger which may come by them not of themselves but in regard of the weakenesse of the Reader for want of necessary learning and humility For Cornelius Agrippa it maketh no more matter what he saith then what the Knight saith for it is but aske my brother if I be a theefe Not to answer the places objected by the Knight out of Lindan Lessius Turrian and Pighius I say in generall that those things are spoken not of the Scripture as it is in it selfe that is consisting of both words and meaning but of bare words and letters only which Haeretikes still do and ever have abused as the Devill himselfe did to our Saviour and in this sense it is a wood of theeves Our Authors say no more then St. Jerome doth in effect Marcion Basilides and other plagues of Haeretikes have not the Gospell of God Comment in 1. ad Gal. because they have not the Holy Ghost without whom it becommeth the Gospell of man which is taught nor let us thinke that the Gospell consisteth in the words of Scripture but in the sense not in the superficies or barke but in the pith not in the leaves of speech but in the roote of reason so that if the Knight will say any more of this matter he must undertake the quarrell against St. Ierome Lessius in particular whom the Knight most up braideth to us is farre from saying that the Scripture is uncertaine in it selfe that is that the doctrine thereof is doubtfull but onely that our rule will be uncertaine or rather wee uncertaine of the rule because wee cannot know the Scripture by it selfe It is not all one to say that Scripture alone is no sufficient Rule and to say it is imperfect For although the Knight imagineth that the