which I saw in the Records of that University are as follow Post susceptam itaque per nos quaestionem ante dictam cum omni humilitate devotione ac debita reverentia convocatis undique dictae nostrae Academiae Theologis habitoque complurium dierum spatio ac deliberandi tempore satis amplo quo interim cum omni qua potuimus diligentia Justitiae Zelo Religione conscientia incorrupta perscrutaremur tam Sacrae Scripturae libros quam super cisdem approbatissimos interpretes eos quidem saepe saepius à nobis evolutos exactissime collatos repetitos examinatos deinde disputationibus solennibus palam publice habitis celebratis tandem in hanc sententiam unanimiter omnes convenimus ac concordes fuimus viz. Romanum Episcopum majorem aliquam jurisdictionem non habere sibi a Deo collatam in Sacra Scriptura in hoc Regno Anglia quam alium quemvis Externum Episcopum We therefore after having taken in hand this question with all humility devotion and due reverence the Divines of our University being called together from all places and the space of many daies and time enough bein given for deliberating whereby with all diligence possible zeal of Justice Religion and upright conâ—â—ience we should search as well the Books of Holy Scripture as the most approved interpreters of them and they being very often turned over by us and most exactly conferred together review'd examin'd moreover having celebrated held public solemn disputes on this subject at last we have all unanimously agreed upon this sentence viz. That the Bishop of Rome hath not any more Jurisdiction given to him by God in holy Scripture in this Kingdom of England then any other foreign Bishop hath Having met with this religious and learned declaration of the University of Oxford I thought convenient to relate it here as well for the autority the opinion of this great University is apt to give to the matter as also that it may be to us an argument of the zeal and diligence wherewith the other Scholes Monasteries and Churches did proceed to deliver their opinion upon this subject And if it be true what the famous Canonist * Navar. cap. Cum conti gat de rescript remed 1 n. â—o qui unius Doctorâ—s eruditione ac animi pretate celebrâ—s autoritate dâ—ctus secerit al quid exâ—usatur etiamâ—â—d non esset justum alii contrarium tenerent Navar saies and now is more commonly said and confirmed by Casuists and Canonists that who do's any thing following therein the opinion of one Doctor of known learning and piety tho others be of contrary opinion is excused tho happily what he did should not be just in it self and if the authority of one Doctor of learning and piety can justify a mans proceeding shall not the opinion of so great a number of men famous for learning and piety that were then in the Universities Monasteries and Churches of England justify the proceedings of King Henry in freeing his Kingdom from the slavery it was in under the Bishop of Rome This indeed was to lay the axe to the root of the Romish usurpations and corruptions in this Land Their pretended authority in it being found and declared not to be from God nor grounded upon his divine word but illegally and fraudulently intruded upon the Nation it followeth that they were all at their own liberty to reform their Church by a National Synod of their own Prelats and Clergy under the protection and inspection of their Prince as in other times was don in this land in consequence to this the states of the Kingdom being congregated in * Stat. 26. Hen. 8. c. 1. begun Nov. 3. end Dec. 18. 1533. Parliament an 1533 have declared that his Majesty his heirs and successors Kings of this Realm shall have full power and autority from time to time to visit repress redress all such errors heresies abuses c. which by any manner of spiritual authority or jurisdiction may be lawfully reformed repressed ordered redressed c. And this was not to assume a new power but to renew and publish the ancient right of the Kings of this Land It is true that Popes in former ages not finding means to hinder our Princes from exercising this right of their own would by priviledg continue it unto them So Pope Nichelas finding our Kings to express one part of their office to be Regere populum Domini Ecclesiam ejus wrote to Edward the Confessor Vobis posteris vesâ—ris regibus Angliae committimus convocationem ejusdem loci omnium totius Angliae Ecclesiarum vice nostra cum consilio Episcoporum Abbatum constituatis ubique quae justa sunt We commit unto you and your successors Kings of England the government of that place and of all the Churches of England that in our name ye may by the Councils of Bishops and Abbots order in all places what will be just The same Pope did allow the like priviledg to the Emperor * Bar. 11. Annal. 1059. n. 23. Nicolaus Papa hoc domino meo privilegium quod ex paterno jure susceperat praebuit Said the Emperors advocat Pope Nicholas allowed this priviledg to my Master which himself had by his birth-right By the like art finding the People of England unwilling to acknowledg any Ecclesiastic power besides that of the land and the Arch-Bishop of Canterbury for supreme of it under the King the Popes have contrived that the Arch-Bishop of Canterbury should exercise that power as from them under the name of Legatus natus or Legat by his place of the Roman Sea This may seem like what they report of the great Cham of Tartary that after he had dined he orders to give leave by the sound of a Trumpet to all the Kings of the World that they may go to dinner But the Pope drives further in his grants that in time if power should assist him he may force upon them a subjection to him as if really the Princes did owe their power to him But the arts of Rome are too much known in England for the people to be further deluded by them And therefore a National Synod or a Convocation of the Arch-Bishops Bishops Abbots and other Clergy of the Kingdom being celebrated at London by order of King Henry the sixth in the sixth year of his reign being that of our Lord 1552. a summary of Articles was agreed upon to remove dissentions in Religion and reform the Church from corruptions that crept into it so pious and moderate so well grounded upon Divine Scripture and upon the Doctrine and practice of the Primitive Apostolic Church that Romanists may more easily rail and rant at then discover any real error in them My adversary N. N. after highly inveighing against these Articles and boasting to discover Heresies in them singles out the 22. Article which runs thus The Roman
that the words of their Pontifical accipe potestatem offerendi Sacrificium provivis defunctis are contained in those others of our Saviour at the last Supper hoc facite in meam commemorationem Do this in remembrance of me is notoriously weak gratis dicitur gratis negatur as t is said without ground so it may be denied without regard Now as to the form of Ordination * Bellar. de Sacramento Ordinis lib. 1. c. 9. Bellarmine tells us that all agree in taking for form the words that are pronounced by the minister when he exhibits the sensible signs or matter he adds that tho the Scripture doth not mention particular words to be pronounced in each order yet the ancient Fathers of the Church Ambrose Jerome and Augustine do expresly teach that a forme of words suitable to each Order is required and was practiced so in the ancient Roman Ordinals and so is practiced to this day in the Ordinal of the Church of England which in King Edward the sixth his time was disposed according to the more qualified ancient Ordinals used in the Catholic Church In the Ordination of Deacons the Bishop laies his hands severally upon the Head of every one of them kneeling before him saying Take thou authority to execute the office of a Deacon in the Church of God committed unto thee in the Name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost c. After delivering to every one of them the New Testament he saith Take thou authority to read the Gospel in the Church of God and to preach the same if thou be thereto licensed by the Bishop himself In ordaining Priests the Bishop with the Priests present do lay their hands severally upon the Head of every one that receiveth the order of Priesthood the Receivers kneeling and the Bishop saying Receive the Holy Ghost for the office and work of a Priest in the Church of God now committed unto thee by the imposition of our hands whose Sins thou do'st forgive they are forgiven and whose Sins thou do'st retain they are retained and be thou a faithful dispenser of the word of God and of his holy Sacraments in the Name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost In the consecration of Bishops the Archbishop and Bishops present do lay their hands upon the Head of the elected Bishop kneeling before them and the Archbishop saying Receive the Holy Ghost for the office and work of a Bishop in the Church of God now committed unto thee by the imposition of our hands in the Name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost Amen And remember that thou stir up the Grace of God which is given thee by this imposition of our hands for God has not given us the Spirit of fear but of power and love and soberness The Church of England being thus exact in observing the form and matter essential to holy Orders it appears how rash and false was Kellison in saying that in King Edwards time neither matter nor form of Ordination was used How vain and windy * Fitz Symons Britonomach p. 3â—9 Fitz Symons his flourish cum in Sacramento mutatur materia forma intentio faciendi quod facit Ecclesia quae ejus essentiam conficiunt desinit esse Sacramentum omnium qui ante te vixerunt tecum vivunt post te victuri sunt orthodoxe sentientium consensu When in the Sacrament the matter form and intention of doing what the Church do's which make up the essence of it are changed it ceases to be a Sacrament by the common consent of all Catholics that lived before you do live with you and after you shall live Truly Fitz Symons seem'd to study more how his phrase should be round and sounding then to furnish it with sense and truth so as without injury I may say here of him dat sine mente sonum Setting aside what belongs to the matter and form who told Fitz Symons that the Ministers of the Church of England in the administration of Sacraments have not an intention to do what the true Church of God do's And tho their intention were to do expresly what their own Church of England do's and not what the Church of Rome Bellarmin declares that not to be an alteration annulling the Sacrament non est opus intendere quod facit Ecclesia Romana sed quod facit vera Ecclesia quaecunque illa sit vel quod Christus instituit vel quod faciunt Christiani imo si quis intendat facere quod aliqua Ecclesia particularis falsa ut Genevensis intendat non facere quod Ecclesia Romana respondeo etiam id sufficere nam qui intendit facere quod Ecclesia Genevensis intendit facere quod Ecclesia universalis It is not necessary saies Bellarmin to have an intention of doing what the Church of Rome do's but what the true Church which soever that be nay if he should intend to do what some particular false Church which he thinks to be true as that of Geneva saith the Cardinal even that will suffice for he that intends to do what the Church of Geneva * Bellar. de Sacra in Gen. lib. 2. c. 27. do's intends to do what the Universal Church do's of which he believes the Church of Geneva to be a member Then Fitz Symons was mistaken when he said that the supposed alteration in the intention of the Ministers did annul the Sacrament by consent of all Catholics if he will not have Bellarmine to be put out of that number not to take notice of his extravagancy in making the intention of the Minister an essential constitute of the Sacrament nor of the dismal confusion and discomfort he brings upon his proselytes by making the effects of Sacraments depending upon the foresaid intention whereof no Man receiving a Sacrament can have a full certainty the words of the Minister I can hear and his action I can see but of his intention I can never be entirely assured Then if the matter and form of Order necessary and essential be retained in our Church as we have seen and no reasonable doubt is left of the intention of our Ministers to do what the Church of England do's which according to Bellarmin's supposition now mentioned is sufficient How comes Fitz Symons to say that in the matter and form and intention of our Ministers such alteration is made as annulls our Sacraments CHAP. VII How far the form of Ordination used in the Church of England agrees with that of the ancient Câ—â—rch declared in tâ—e fourth Council of Carthage and how much the form prescribed by tâ—e Roman Pontifical of this time differs from the ancient fâ—rm AS in many other points so in this of Crdination especially I cannot but admire how bold the Romish Writers are in imposing upon the ignorant that themselves are the observers of antiquity and the Reformed Churches the contemners of it whereas indeed
be added the Christians called Nestorians for having maintained antiently the errour of Nestorius spread over a great part of Asia For besides the Countries of Babylon Assâ—ria Mesopotamia Parthia and Media wherein many of them are found they are scattered far and wide in the East both northerly to Cathaia and foutherly to India So that beyond the river Tigris eastward there is no other Sect of Christians to be found as learned Brerewood relates except only the Portugals and the Converts made by them in India The Patriarch of the Nestorians to whom all those of the East parts acknowledg obedience hath his seat in the City of Musale on the River Tigris in Mesopotamia or in the Patriarchal Monastery of Saint Ermes fast by Musale In which City tho subject to Mahometans it is recorded that the Nestorians retain yet 15. Temples being esteemed about 40 thousand Souls Sanders relates the great number of suffragan Bishops and Metropolitans subject to the Patriarch of Musale Next to these we may name the Christians of Egypt called Cophti under the Patriarch of Alexandria to whose jurisdiction belong not only the native Christians of Egypt but also those about the bay of Arabia and in the Mount Sinai Eastward and in Afric as far as the greater Syrtis westward To him likewise are subject the Christians called Habassins spread over the wide Empire of Aethiopia with their Prince commonly called Prester John For tho they have a Patriarch of their own whom they call in their idiome Abuna our Father yet are they limited b Zaga Zabo de relig mor. Aethiop apud Damian Goes to chuse one of the jurisdiction of Alexandria and a Monk of Saint Anthony he must be Besides the confirmation and consecration of him belongeth to the Patriarch of Alexandria and by him is he sent with Ecclesiastical a Tho. Ã Jesul 7. p. 3. Tho. Ã Jes lib. 7. p. 3. charge into Habasia The conferring of Bishopries and other Ecclesiastical benefices except the Patriarcship belongeth only to the King Their Priests and other inferiour Ecclesiastical Ministers as also Monks live by their labour as having no tithes nor any Ecclesiastical revenues to maintain them nor being suffered to crave alms All which is recorded by Zaga Zabo an Ethiopian Bishop The Christians of Egypt are so constant in the profession of Christianity that if any of them are by force circumcised by the Turks he is marked in the forehead or hands with the sign of the Cross that all Men may know him to be a Christian The Patriarch of Alexandria's dwelling is now neer the Church of Saint Nicholas in Caire which City is one of the greatest Cities in the World reputed to be eight and twenty miles in length and fourteen in breadth as a Lithgows travels p. 306. Lithgow reporteth and that of Greeks Copates Armenians others there are about two hundred thousand Christians in that City of Caire b Tho. a Jesu de convers gent. lib. 7. par 1. c. 6. p. 363. Thomas a Jesu relates a foul mistake in Baronius who in the end of his sixth to me tells that in the time of Pope Clement the 8. an Embassage was brought from the Church of Alexandria to the Roman Bishop in which the Patriarch and all the Provinces of Egypt and others adjoyning did acknowledg him chief and universal Pastor of the Church but the matter being more diligently examined appeared to be a meer ly and fiction of a certain Impostor Bartavis How great is the extent of Christianity in Aethiopia may appear by the vast extent of that Empire which according to Mr. Brerewood his dimension is equal with Germany France Spain and Italy Others do report it to be as great as all Europe a Apud Pagit p. 38. Horatius Malegueius maketh the dominion of the Aethiopian Emperour larger then any other excepting the Dominion of the Catholic King b Godig de Abass reb lib. 1. c. 32 p. 195. Godignus reports that there are in Aethiopia one hundred and twenty seven Arch-Bishops c Alvares c. 14. Alvares a Portuguese Priest relates that in Macham Talacem which is the Church of the Holy Trinity he saw two hundred mitred Priests together and sixty four Canopies carried over them Their Churches are built round and very rich with hanging of Cloth of Gold Velvet and Plate They have many goodly Monasteries to the Monasteries of the vision of Jesus belong about 3000 Monks Many were the attacks of Rome upon this flourishing Christianity of Aethiopia to bring it under the Dominion of the Pope d Godig p. 367. The more famous I find recorded is that of Andreas Oviedo sent thither with the title of Patriarch in the year 1557. who coming with his letters to the Emperor Claudius received this answer from him That he would never yield obedience to the Bishop of Rome he gave him leave to teach the Portugals but forbad him to speak one word to his Abassins touching Religion and that he would not suffer the Roman yoak to be laid on him or his This Emperor Claudius dying Adamas succeeded who banish'd the said Patriarch Andreas and this was the issue of the Embassy as Godignus relates Under the Patriarch of Jerusalem a Chytr de statu Ecclesiae p. 24. are the Christians inhabiting Palestine mingled with Turks and others The Patriarch keeps his residence in Jerusalem where are now remaining ten Churches of Christians The Patriarchal Church is the Church of Saint Sepulcher in Jerusalem and his house is near unto it To this Patriarch did belong the three Palestines Tyrius adds two Provinces more Rubensis Beritensis He relateth also five Metropolitans to have belonged to this See and about 101 Bishops The Armenians Georgians Abassins and other Christians have several Churches in Jerusalem Under the Patriarch of Antioch are the Christians called Syrians of the place of their chief habitation and Melchites which according to the Syrian Etymology is as much as to say Royalists because their Bishops have followed alwaies in Faith and in their Councils the example and autority of the Emperors of Constantinople They inhabit mingled with Mahumetans part of Syria Beritus Tripolis Alepo and other places in Asia b Boter relat univers par 3. lib. 2. Boterus saith they are the most numerous sort of Christians in the East They live under the jurisdiction of the Arch-Bishop of Damascus by the title of Patriarch of Antiochia For Antiochia it self where the name of Christians was first heard in the World lying at present wast or broken into small villages the Patriarchall seat was translated thence to Damascus where are reported to be above a thousand houses of Christians For altho the Patriarch of the Maronites and of the Jacobites whereof the former keepeth residence in Libanus and the latter in Mesopotomia entitle themselves Patriarchs of Antiochia and by the Christians of their own Sects be so acknowledged yet do the Melchites
Papam de parte mea salutate Apostolica praecepta humiliter audite sed superfluas adinventiones regno meo adinferre nolite salute the Pope from him hear his precepts but bring no superfluous devices or innovations into his kingdom True it is That several of our Godly Kings did permit appeals should be made to Rome in matters wherein our own Bishops could not agree and directions to be sought from thence as from a flourishing and learned Church not as a superior Judicature And when the Roman Bishops did pretend to any such superiority our Kings did protest against it So Henry the fifth having demanded of Martin the fourth some particulars to which his Embassadors not finding him ready to assent they b Arthur Duc. in vita Henrici Chichly p. 56. 57. told him That they had orders to protest before him that the King would use his own right in those particulars as things which he demanded not out of necessity but for the honour respect he was willing to shew to that Sea that they should make a public protestation thereof before the whole Colledg of Cardinals And to this purpose are sundry examples remaining on c Rot. parliam 17 Edward 3. n. 59. 25. Edw. 3. oct purif n. 13. 7. Hen. 4. n. 114. 13. Hen. 6. n. 38. record where the King at the Petition of the Commons for redress of some things amiss belonging to Ecclesiastic cognizance first chuses to write to the Pope but on his delay or failing to give satisfaction doth either himself by statute redress the inconveniency or command the Archbishop to see it don For certain it is by the course of all our Chronicles and histories that our Kings together with the convocation of their Bishops and Clergy had in themselves absolute and entire power of governing and reforming the Church of this kingdom without any dependency uppon any forreign authority It was never doubted neither could it be denied upon any warrantable ground that they had within their own dominions the same power which Constantine had in the Empire and that our Bishops had the same which St. Peter had in the Church For which since the Erection of Canterbury into an Archbishoprick the Bishops of that Sea were held * Malms de Pontif. lib. 1. in Ansel fol. 127.15 Quasi alterius orbis Papae as Vrban the Second styled them and did exercise vices Apostolicas in Anglia that is they used the same power within this Island which the a Eadmer p. 27. Pope did in other parts And in our writers the Archbishop of Canterbury is frequently called Princeps Episcoporum Angliae b ib. p. 107. 33. Pontifex summus c Gervas Boro ber col 1663. 54. Patriacha King Edgar asserted this power to be in himself and in his Clergy in his memorable speech made to them d Apud Ailred col 361.16 Ego Constantini vos Petri gladium habetis in manibus I bear in my hand the sword of Constantin and you that of Peter And therefore as the affairs of most concerns in the Church had their dependance on the Emperor and the holy men of those times did not doubt to continue to him the style of Pontifex maximus as e Tom. 3. an 312. n. 106. Baronius notes sine ulla christianitatis labe So f Regularis Concordia c. Not. Seldeni ad Eadmerum p. 146. 16. King Edgar was solicito is of the Church of his Kingdom veluti domini sedulus Agricola pastorum pastor And wrote himself the Vicar of Christ and by his g Concil Spelm. Ã p. 444. aâ— p. 476. laws and Canons he made known that he did not assume those titles in vain King h Leg. Edw. Confes c. 17. p. 142. Rex quia vicartus summi Regis est ad hocest constitutus ut regnum terrenum populum domâ—ni sâ—per omnia sanctam veneretur Ecclesiam ejus regat ab injurtis defendat Edward the Confessor a canonized Saint did declare the same and practised accordingly The King saies he being vicar of the supream King his duty is to govern and defend the earthly Kingdom and the people of the Lord from injuries and over all to reverence govern and defend his Church The same was declared and practised by i Leg. Inae in pras p. 1. Ina whom Baronius styles a most pious King by k Leg. fol. 11. p. 109. Canutus acknowledged for a most bountiful benefactour of Churches and of the servants of God Erga Ecclesias atque Dei servos benignissimus largitor as l Epist 97. fol. 93. Canut c Furbertus Carnotensis relates of him and several other godly Kings of England whose several laws touching Ecclesiastic affaires you may see related by Jorvalens c. 2. col 761. c. 5. col 830. c. 23. col 921. as also the laws of Emperors to the same purpose in the books of m Codex Theodos de seriis de nuptiis c. de sâ—de Catholica de Episcopis Ecclesiis clericis de monachis de haereticit de Apost de Religione de Episcopali judicio cod Jast l. 1. Tit. 1 2 3 4 5. passim in co Theodosius and Justinian The Emperors did employ their Bishops and Divines in resolving upon wholsome decrees touching Church affaires and these decrees they espoused themselves for Laws so as the transgressors of them should be subject to penalties This same course our Kings have taken as well in former ages as in this latter of the Reformation of our Church Henry the Eighth haveing those occasions of discontent with Pope Clement the Seventh which as too much known I omit to relate and being urged by the States of the Kingdom to execute at last what long time was desired and often attemted in England viz. to throw off the usurped power and jurisdiction of the Bishop of Rome over this Kingdom to proceed with due legality and consideration in so weighty a matter he wrote to the Universities and great Monasteries and Churches of the Kingdom in the year 1534. and the eighteenth of May of the same year to the University of Oxford requiring them like men of vertue and profound Literature diligently to intreat examine and discuss a certain question viz. An Romanus Episcopus habeat majorem aliquam Jurisdictionem sibi collatam in Sacra Scriptura in hoc Regno Angliae quam alius quivis Externus Episcopus Whether the Bishop of Rome had any greater jurisdiction given to him in holy Scripture over this Kingdom of England then any other foreign Bishop and to return their opinion in writing under their common Seal according to the meer and sincere truth of the same To which after mature deliberation and examination they returned answer That he hath no such jurisdiction in this land The words of the University of Oxford returning their answer to the King upon this subject the 27. of June of the aforesaid 1534.
alledg that that he did not mean he could carry so much alone but he and a Horse with him Such quibbles as these are more becoming Mr. S. then S. Paul and so he may keep them for himself and not father them upon the great Apostle Further he proceeds to oppose St Paul saying that when he wrot that Epistle to Timothy the whole Canon of Scripture was not completed and only the whole Canon and no part of it can be sufficient means for our instruction therefore the Scripture that S. Paul spoke of cannot be a sufficient means for instructing us to Salvation Herein our Sophister is twice impious first in taxing the great Apostles assertion with untruth next that the Oracle of God delivered to men in each time for their instruction to Salvation should not be complete and sufficient By this it appears well how much a stranger this man is to the common Doctrine of Divines who affirm that in the Apostles Creed are contained all necessary verities to be believed for Salvation and in the Ten Commanâ—ments all duties to be performed of necessity to the same end And may not the Creed and Ten Commandments be known without a knowledg of the whole Canon of Scripture His boldness is prodigious in asserting extravagances without exhibiting any proof but his bare ipse dixit Pythagoras-wise Finding me say I was not fit for Pâ—thagoras his Schole where ipse dixit was the rule and men will not give reason for what they teach he opposes that if I am to expect reason for what I believe I am not fit for Christs Schole nor learning from Scripture which affords nothing but a bare ipse dixit But if the Man had any ingenuity in him he would spare this Objection seeing it prevented in the 18. page of my discourse where I acknowledg with thanksgiving to God that I never doubted of the Truth of Holy Scriptures nor of the Creed proposed to us by the Catholic Apostolic Church and dictated by God Almighty worthy to be believed without examen not so Pythagoras nor the Pope CHAP. V. Mr. S. his prolixe excursion about the Popes Authority requisite to know which is the true Scripture declared to be Impertinent and the state of the Question cleared from the confusion he puts upon it OUR Adversary finding the Popes Infallibility to be an expression odious and ridiâ—ulous to all knowing men and whereof even the sober part of * Vid. Cress in exomologesi cap 4. Sect. 3. Romanists grow ashamed endeavours to serve us up the same Dish under another dress calling it the Autority of the Church Universal And if therein he did speak properly or sincerely he would have less opposition from us But if you do enquire what he means by Church Universal he tells you it is the Congregation Subject to the Pope of Rome excluding all other men and particularly the Church of England from being any part of that his Universal Church The said Congregation subject to the Pope whether diffusive or representative in a general Council depending upon the Pope and confirmed by him he pretends to be Infallible And whatever I alledge against the Infallibility of the Roman Church he thinks to elude by pretending I speak of the particular Diocese of Rome a gross misunderstanding or willful misrepresentation of my meaning for which I never gave any ground in my writing or discourses He is to know I speak in proper terms as used among Learned men speaking upon this Subject taking the Roman Church for the party following the Popes faction wheresoever extant whether congregated or dispersed prescinding from his Altercations with the rest or any they have among themselves for both he and the rest agreeing in making that Infallibility depending ultimately upon the Popes Autority we may well represent their assertion as opposite to the sentiment of all other Christians under the notion of the Popes infallibility * That all is bottomed upon the Popes Authority Bellarmin declares saying totam firmitatem conciliorum legitimorum esse á Pontifice non-partim à Pontifice partim à concilio lib. 4. de Rom. Pon. c. 3. sect at contra The terms and state of the Question being thus cleared it follows to declare how impertinent his prolixe excursion and vain ostentation is in telling us the diversity of Opinions that were in different times about Canonical Scripture and the difficulty of ascertaining us which is the true one This is an old device of those of his faction to decline the main controversy in hand wherein they still betray the weakness of their Cause They and he should remember the points controverted are among parties that agree in reverencing the Bible for the infallible Word of God And if he thinks the part of it received for Canonical by common consent will not suffice for ending our Controversies we admit willingly St. Augustins rule for clearing the difficulties touching particular Books the Authority of the Church and the Tradition of it as described by Lirinensis Quod semper quod ubique quod apud omnes What was in all time in all places and by all Christians delivered that we take for a true Apostolic Tradition and to it we resolve to stand or fall as well for discerning Canonical Scripture as for understanding the true meaning of it If Mr. S. did take Church and Tradiâ—ion in the sense that the Holy Fathers did and the Learned Men of the Church of England do he would find in us all due reverence to those sacred Fountains of Christian verities But to call Church Universal the faction adhering to the Pope of Rome in opposition to the rest of Christians is a presumtion like that of the Turk in calling himself King of Kings and Emperor of all the World such as are Vassals to him may revere that calling others do laugh at it But we do not find the Turk to have plaâ—'d the sool so far as to take that his assumed title as granted by other Princes independing upon him or to alledg it for ground of his pretentions with them This is Mr. S. his folly in taking for granted in his debates with us that the Romish faction is the Catholic Universal Church So great an Intruder upon disputes should learn that rule of Disputants Quod gratis dicitur gratis negatur what is barely said without proof is sufficiently refuted with a bare denial This alone well considered will suffice to overthrow man Chapters of Mr. S. his Book What makes him spend time in telling us of the difficulty of finding out which is true Scripture the rule truly infallible of our belief when he sees us thus ascertain'd of it why do's he trouble us with speaking of a Criterion or beam of light pretended by Fanatics confessing at the same time that to be exploded by Protestants is it to make his Book swell But finding he cannot hide Scripture from us he will have us to be beholden to the Pope for the true
1. opusc tract 8. q. 4. says the foresaid testimonies are without doubt to be understood of a remission to be given by way of Sacraments not of the remission of pains in the other life as the Pope doth practice in the giving of Indulgences and finally gives for the only reason the Authority of the Church and of Pope Leo then governing which he tells us must suffice tho no other reason should appear by these remarkable words Absque hasitatione aliquâ etiamsi nulla adesset ratio fatendum est dicti Thesauri dispensationem non solùm per Sacramenta quoad merita Christi sed aliter quam per Sacramenta qnoad merita Christi Sanctorum commissam esse Praelatis Ecclesiae praecipuè Papae hoc tanto magis fatendum est quanto per Leonem decimum determinatum est We are to believe without staggering tho no reason appear for it that the dispensing of the Treasure of the Church not only by way of Sacraments as to the merits of Christ but otherwise then by Sacraments as to the merits of Christs and the Saints is committed to the Prelates of the Church and especially to the Pope And this is so much the more to be confessed because it is so determined by Leo X. A very special reason to convince Luther and the rest of the World that do not believe the Pope to be Infallible Suarez tom 4. in 3. partem disp 49. sect 1. delivers his opinion of the foresaid Testimonies of Scripture to be insufficient to prove the doctrine of Indulgences Of that of Joh. 20. he says the same that Cajetan above mentioned Of the other touching the power of binding and loosing Matth. 18.18 he says the literal sense of those words to be the power of binding by Laws and Censures and of absolving from Censures and dispensing in Laws And finally in the number 17. of the same Section he concludes there is no place in the Gospel whence the giving of this power may be concluded if it be not Joh. 21.16 where our Savior said to S. Peter feed my Sheep in which words Suarez doth pretend the power Universal and Supremacy over all the Church to have bin given to S. Peter and under that Universalïty the power of Indulgences to have bin given to him But as S. Peter did never receive such an Universal power over the Church as the Bishops of Rome do now usurp so did he never pretend it nor ever troubled Thomas in India or Andrew in Achaia or James in Jerusalem or any other of his Fellow-Apostles and Bishops in their respective Provinces about a power over them or a dependance of them upon him all and eaâ—h one of them complying faithfully with their Ministry without incroaching one upon the other nor staining the repute of Christian holiness with the profane spirit of Ambition which in Rome did grow to the confusion and distraction of Christendom But tho such a Supremacy would have bin granted to the Pope and to the succeeding Bishops of Rome farr must Suarez go for a consequence of the doctrine of Indulgences to be inferred from such a grant If the power of dispensing those immense Treasures of the merits of Christ and all Saints was given to S. Peter in those words of our Savior commending to him the feeding of his Sheep how came he and the other succeeding Bishops of Rome for so many Ages to neglect the use of this power to the benefit of Souls and great advantage of the Roman Church as now is practised Suarez did easily perceive the weakness of his argument from this testimony and so betook himself in the second Section following to the common refuge of the use and autority of the Church That there is such a use says he is not denied we see it that it is not an abuse but a lawful use is proved first by the authority of the Council of Trent last Session where is added that this use hath bin approved by the autority of sacred Councils for which purpose are wont to be related the Council of Nice Can. 11. of Carthage 4.75 of Neooaesarea ch 3. of Laodicea Can 1.2 but in these Councils says Suarez we only find that it was lawful for Bishops to remit some of the public Penitences enjoined by Canons for divers crimes but that such a remission should be extended to a pardon of penalties due in the Tribunal of God may not be inferred from those Councils Another main argument for the Antiquity of Indulgences they fetâ—h out of 2. Cor. 2.10 where S. Paul remits a part of the penalty due to an incestuous Person whom he had formerly punished saving To whom you forgave any thing I forgive also for if I forgive anâ— thing to whom I forgave it for your sakes forgave I it in the pâ—rson of Christ From these latter words in the person of Christ they pretend to infer that the practice of Indulgences now used in the Roman Church had its beginning from Christ and that S. Paul did practise it in the occalion now mentioned by autority received from Christ This Argument Suarez proposes in the above mentioned second Section num 3. but from the following fourth Number to the 11. he doth most vigorously prove the inefficaciousness of that argument That the remission given by S. Paul to that incestuous man did only relate to an exterior penalty due by course or Canon of Ecclesiastical Government not to penalties of the other life depending from Divine Justice that the words in the person of Christ only proves it to be an act of Jurisdiction or power received from Christ which may be sufficiently verified by a remission of an exterior temporal penalty due by the common course of Ecclesiastical human power and finally concludes that there is no warrantable history or testimony extant by which it may be convinced that the practise of Indulgences now used in the Roman Church was known before the times of Gregory the great of whom he says is reported that he gave a Plenaâ—y Indulgence tho even of this says Suarez I find no written History but a public report in Rome and other places And finally what Suarez says with resolution is only that this practise is now in use in the Church so as they are reputed heretics who reprehend such a custome and it is impossible that the Universal Church should err herein for it were says he an intolerable moral error in practise If the Universal Church indeed did practise now and always from the beginning and in all places this custom according to the rules of Apostolic lawful Tradition delivered by Lyrinensis and S. Augustin l. 4. de Baptismo cap. 24. we would look upon this argument as of force But Suarez himself doth acknowledg and confess that this practise is neither so ancient nor Universal And therefore it may not be taken for Apostolic tradition but ranked among the modern Institutions of the present Romish Church to stand or fall
and the meaning of them then when he hears the same Psalm without understanding the words or sense of them Your comparison of a Polander presenting a Petition in English to the King of England which himself doth not understand doth aggravate your crime and publish the misery of the People abused by you Would not that Polander wish to know the English tongue for acting in his own cause and to be sure he was not abused by a Notary who possibly might have framed a Petition for him to the King for hanging his Father or Mother for Traitors If the King did understand the Polish Language as well as the English were it not a madness in the said Polander to have his Petition penn'd in a Tongue he doth not understand with the foresaid disadvantages being able to do it in his own Tongue with the contrary advantages What madness then is it in your People to frame their Praiers in a Tongue unknown to them to speak like Parrots without feeling or knowing what they say and exposed to the danger of being abused by a knave teaching them or reading before them blasphemous words in which they are to join with him bâ— their Amen And in case the Praier be good that is read before them what proportion can it have with elevating the minds of the People to a conjunction in sense with the Minister if they do not understand what he says And thus ill it go's with you even for the act of praying in your Liturgy which you allow to be an elevation of the mind to God Even in this point I have your own judgement against you and so may return your text upon you saying Ex ore tuo te judico serve nequam But what of the second part of the Liturgy above mentioned containing a speech of God to the People by the Epistles Gospels Psalms and other sacred Lectures directed to the Spiritual direction and food of their Souls can this end be compassed without sense and feeling in the People of what is said to them You confess that S. Paul 1. Cor. 14. prohibits preaching to the People in a Tongue unknown to them and are not those sacred Lectures a kind of preaching exhortation and instruction of the People and the best that can be as proceeding immediatly from God himself Then you act against the Apostles order by your own confession proposing such exhortations to the People in a Tongue unknown to them and so your text returns upon you here in full measure Ex ore tuo te judico serve nequam It is a discredit to a cause so clear to make more delay upon it but let the World cry against the tyranny you use this way with Souls in depriving them of their Spiritual food What you say of submitting your judgment herein to the Church is idle and absurd when our present business is to rebuke the abuses and corruptions of your Church the causes of our dislike of it CHAP. XXXXII. The cruelty of the Roman Church in prohibiting the reading of Scripture to the people and their common pretence of Sects and Divisions arising among Protestants refuted FRom the page 101. of my former Discourse I declared the cruelty used with the faithful people in prohibiting them the reading of Scripture which is the food of their Souls how contrary that is to the doctrine of Scripture it self often inviting us to the reading of it and to the doctrine and practice of the Fathers and people of the Primitive Church To all which Mr. I. S. replies that the fruit we have in the Protestant Church of permitting the people to read the Bible is the variety of Sects sprung from the reading of it But this you may tell better to others then to me that know now matters go on both sides and am certain that there are more divisions in several Societies of your Communion both in Doctrine and in Ceremonies then in the Protestant Church He that knows the differences of opinions betwixt Jesuists and Dominicans each one condemning the other of heresie and doctrines destructive of good life and of the merits of Christ and the great difference in Rites and Ceremonies used among them will clearly see they differ more in all the one from the other then the Orthodox Protestants do from any other Congregation of Christians in the Reformed Church Their differences are not in matters so fundamental and necessary to Salvation and a good Life as those of the dissenting Romish Societies Their censures of one another are not so heavy yea the very stating of their Questions on both sides do declare so much both supposing they are touching things indifferent the Dissenters or Non-conformists pretending that the points in Debate being only Ceremonial and indifferent not essential to Salvation or good life ought not to be forced upon them The Orthodox alledging that very thing to render Dissenters criminal that the things ordered being of their own nature indifferent and not opposite to Gods Law there is a necessity upon them of obeying lawful Autority ordering such matters So much we may say in relation to Rites and Ceremonies that there is not near so great a diversity in them used by Orthodox Protestants and other Congregations dissenting as there is in the Ceremonies and Rites used in Colledges of Jesuites and Convents of Dominicans Carmelites Franciscans Carthusians and other very many Societies differing both in Habit Diet Rites and Ceremonies one from the other All these differences both of Doctrine and Rites the Pope can wink at provided they agree in paying obedience to him and advancing his quarrel The great Union required by the Church of England makes meaner dissentions appear more sensible and greater would the Dissentions and Errors be if the light of holy Scriptures were removed for St. Hierome saith that infinite evils do arise from ignorance of Scripture from hence saith he most part of Heresies have come and so they are of their own nature and well used not a cause of Dissentions and Errors but a cure of them And therefore the Roman Church being resolved not to be cured of her corruptions decreed the Scriptures to be removed from the eies of the people as appears by the Council of Bishops mentioned by Dr. Stillingfleet and by other grave Writers of whose Autority you doubt And what need we the Autority of that Council for a thing that we see with our eies and ordered by the Council of Trent by Pius IV. Clement the VIII and Alexander the VII in the places alledged in the page 100. of my former Discourse CHAP. XXXIII Mr. I S. his Engagement touching the Immaculate Conception of the Virgin Mary and the practice of Confession confuted FOR instance of the cruelty of the Romish Church in pressing upon the belief of the faithful things uncertain and repugnant to their judgment I made a brief mention of the opinion about the Immaculate Conception of the Virgin Mary how they make people swear to
the main purpose of the Reformation was to cut off the superstitious innovations of the Romish Church and stiâ—k to the Christian simplicity and gravity of the Primitive Apostolic Church This will appear evidently by comparing the present form of Ordination used in the Church of England with the most qualified of ancient formularies established in the fourth Council of Carthage celebrated by 214. Fathers whereof St. Augustine was one in the year 398. Honorius and Arcadius being Emperours of which Council Baronius gives this honorable Character Extitit hujusmodi Carthaginense Concilium veluti Ecclesiasticae promtuarium disciplinae non quidem recens inventae sedantiquioribus * Baron An. 393. n. 68. usu receptae atque ad pristinam consuetudinem revocatae This Council of Carthage was as it were a treasure of Ecclesiastic Discipline not newly invented but used by the ancient and restored to the former custom He adds that this Council was taken as a pattern by the other Churches both Eastern and Western I have perused carefully this Council and conferred it with our form of ordination set down in the Book of Common Praiers as also with the form of Ordination used in the Roman Church as contained in their latter Poâ—tifical published by Autority of Pope Clement the 8. printed at Rome in the year 1595. Clement complains of many errors crept into the former Pontificals and purposes to mend them in this latter according to the rule of ancient integrity for which purpose it seems no better rule could be taken then the foresaid Council of Carthage for the reasons aforesaid of Baronius Now if we shew that our form of Ordination is more agreeable to that of the Council of Carthage then the form prescribed in the Roman Pontifical we shall prove that we stand for the most warrantable antiquity and consequently for right in this point I will not dispute now about those called inferiour Orders in the Roman Church both because none will pretend them to be essential to Church Discipline and the duties appropriated to them are performed in both Churches sometimes by persons constituted in no order and sometimes by those in sacred Orders I will therefore only treat of the three sacred orders proposed by Suarez out of Optatus Milevitanus as necessary to the constitution of Ecclesiastical Hierarchy to wit Bishops Priests and Deacons And beginning with Deacons the said Council in the fourth chapter hath only these words Diaconus cum ordinatur solus Episcopus qui eum benedicit manum super caput illius ponat quia non ad sacerdotium sed ad ministerium consecratur When a Deacon is ordained only the Bishop who blesseth or ordaineth him is to lay his hand on his Head because he is not ordained to Priesthood but to ministery Here we have three things declared the Minister the matter the order the Minister is only the Bishop the matter or the exteriour sign is the imposition of hands the form is not described in particular but is included in the word benedicit for to bless here is nothing else but to pronounce the words by which the power of this order is conferred to the Person ordained all which is exactly performed in the Ordinationof Deacons by the Church of England as we have seen in the Chapter precedent Now touching the Ordination of Priests the Council decrees thus Presbyter cum ordinatur Episcopo eum benedicente manum super caput illius tenente etiam omnes Presbyteri qui praesentes sunt manus suas juxta manus Episcopi super Caput illius teneant When a Priest is ordained the Bishop blessing him and laying his hand on his Head the Priests present are likewise to lay their hands on his Head together with the Bishops hands Of this decree likewise the Church of England is as observant as the Roman is negligent for in their present Pontifical above mentioned of Clement the Eighth I see no mention made of what the Council decrees that the Priests present should lay their hands together with the Bishops hands upon the Head of him that is to be Priested and their practice goes accordingly But in lieu of this ceremony decreed by the Council of Carthage I find many others substituted in the foresaid Pontifical of which the Council makes no mention such as those about the amict albe girdle maniple stole cope candles crosses oil and the like And which is more remarkable the Council makes no mention of that great and chief ceremony used in the Roman Church and appointed in the aforesaid Ponâ—ifical and wherein some of their Authors will have the very essence of Priestly ordination to consist as we have seen above out of Bellarmin that the Bishop is to deliver to the person to be Priested after having anointed his hands with holy Oil the Chalice with wine and water and the Patin over it with the hoast or wafer saying Accipe potestatem offerre Sacrificium Deo missasque celebrare tam pro vivis quam per defunctis Receive power to offer sacrifice unto God and to celebrate Mass for the living and the dead If this ceremony were so essential or the power of sacrificing were so inherent to Priestly ordination as the present Church of Rome will have it to be certainly that grave and venerable Council of Carthage would not have passed it over with so deep a silence when it descended to particularize the duties and performances of inferiour Ministers not so necessary as those of Priests as may be seen in the ensuing Chapters of that Council from the fifth chapter forward Finally touching the Ordination of Bishops the aforesaid Council of Carthage has these words Episcopus cum ordinatur duo Episcopi ponant teneant Evangeliorum Codicem super Caput cervicem ejus uno super eum fundente benedictionem reliqui omnes Episcopi qui adsunt manibus suis Caput ejus tangant When a Bishop is ordained let two Bishops put and hold the Book of the Gospels over his head and neck and one blessing him let all the other Bishops that are there present touch his Head with their hands Here three things are required the giving or placeing of the Book the imposition of hands and the blessing to be given whereof the placeing of the Book is no essential part as * Vasquez in 3. p. disp 240. w. 63. Vasquez declares and so both Churches deviate somthing from the form mentioned for if we are to believe Vasquez and the Pontifical he quotes the Book of the Gospel is put upon the shoulders of the Bishop consecrated not by the Bishops consecrating but by one of the Chaplains and he relates out of Pope Clement that anciently it was performed by the Deacons who are no Ministers of this Order Neither do I find by Mr. Mason that the Pontifical he saw do's contradict what Vasquez saies yet I find it otherwise in the Roman Pontifical forementioned of Clement the Eighth to be seen
the Romish party Now it remains to shew that the succession of our Bishops and Clergy from those of unquestioned legality before the Reformation and the due Ordination of them according to the said rules and rites is more cleer and unquestionable with us then with the Roman Church As for the Bishops of England Mr. Mason giveth an exact account of their Succession and lawful Ordination the time and place of it the persons conscerating them running upon several Dioceses especially that of Canterbury from the time he published his Book which was the year 1638. to the time of K. Henry the Eighth when the validity of Ordination was not questioned grounding his narrative upon the authentic Records kept in London And in the same Records may be found the like account of the ensuing ordinations from Mr. Masons time to this day The like account may be found in the several Registries of the Churches of Ireland from our daies up to the aforesaid time of Henry the Eighth and touching the prime Church that of Armagh I found the ensuing account of the Succession and Ordination of Arch-Bishops in it from the present Arch-Bishop the most Reverend Father in God James Lord Arch-Bishop of Armagh Primate of all Ireland to the great comfort and benefit of it since the blindest passion can't miss to see in his Grace the Idea of a most renowned and perfect Prelate In the hands of his worthy Vicar General and Judge of his Prerogative Court the noble and Learned Dudley Loftus Doctor in Laws I found I say the account following of his Grace his lineal succession from the Bishops of unquestioned authority in Queen Maries time James Margetson Consecrated the 27. of January 1660. by John Bramhal Arch-Bishop of Armagh c. in the Cathedral Church of St. Patric in Dublin John Bramhal Doctor of Divinity was Consecrated Bishop of Derry in the Chappel of the Castle of Dublin the 26. of May 1634. by James Vsher Arch-Bishop of Armagh c. James Vsher Doctor of Divinity was Consecrated Bishop of Meath at Droghedah in the Church of St. Peter Anno 1621. by Christopher Hampton Arch-Bishop of Armagh c. Christopher Hampton Doctor of Divinity was Conseciated Bishop of Derry May the 5. 1613. in the Cathedral Church of St. Patric by Thomas Jones Arch-Bishop of Dublin c. Thomas Jones Doctor of Divinity was Consecrated Bishop of Meath in the Cathedral Church of St. Patric Dublin the 12. of May 1584. by Adam Loftus Lord Arch-Bishop of Dublin c. Adam Loftus Lord Arch-Bishop of Dublin was Consecrated Arch-Bishop of Armagh in the Church of St. Patric Dublin Anno 1562. by Hugh Curwin Lord Arch-Bishop of Dublin c. Hugh Curwin Doctor of Laws was Consecrated Arch-Bishop of Dublin the 8. of September 1555. being the third of Queen Mary together with James Turbirwill Bishop of Exeter and William Glin Bishop of Bargor Each one of the other Bishops of Ireland may give the like account of their lawful ordination and lineal succession from the Bishops of unquestioned autoâ—ity in King Henry the Eighth and Queen Maries time no exception is known to have bin taken against the legality of any of them and the Laws being so severe and the penalties of premunire so heavy against any Bishop that would enter otherwise then by the Rites and requisites above mentioned and justified 't is morally incredible that any would permit any defect to intervene in his Consecration that might bring upon him so great a damage 'T is not so with the Bishops or Popes of Rome We have not only conjectures but cleer evidences by a learned and exact Pen of their own party that none of the Bishops or Popes who usurped that see from Gregory the 13. was a lawful Bishop or Pope The treatise pen'd upon this subject in Latin and dedicated to King James bore this title The new Man or a supplication from an unknown person a Roman Catholic unto James the Monarch of Great Britain and from him to the Emperour Kings and Princes of the Christian World touching the causes and reasons that will argue a necessity of a General Council to be forthwith assembled against him that now usurps the Papal chair under the name of Paul the Fifth This treatise being published by order of so excellent a Prince as the World knew King James to be it were a blind insolence to say it should not be real and unfeigned and a treatise so destructive to the credit and interest of the Roman Court being not disproved for the space of nine years by any of that party as reported by Mr. William Crashaw translator of the said treatise from Latin into English in the year 1622. nor to this day by any that we know 't is a cleer argument they wanted means to gainsay the truth of it I will reduce to a brief sum the heads of his proof as well to matter of fact as of Law that the election of Pope Sixtus the fifth succeeding Gregory the thirteenth was null and invalid and consequently the Cardinals created by him were no true Cardinals nor the Popes elected by such Cardinals true Popes For ground of this discourse it is to be supposed that any simoniacal contract intervening in the election of a Pope such an election is therefore rendred null and invalid as is declared in the Bull of Julius the 2d set out against Simonaical elections of the Pope whose words are as followeth If it shall hereafter fall out through the Devils malice the Enemy of Mankind or the ambition or covetousness of the Elector that when we or any of our Successors shall by Gods appointment be removed from the Government of the Church on Earth the election of the new Pope be made and don either by him that is châ—sen or by any other or more of the Colledge of Cardinals by the Heresie of Simonaical contract giving promising or receiving any goods of any kind or Lands or Castles or offices or benefices or by making any other promise or obligation of what kind soever whether they do it by themselves or another by a few or by many and whether the election be accomplished by the voices of two parts of the Cardinals divided in three or by the uniform consent or voices of them all whether it be done by way of assumtion or adoration yea tho there be no writing made at all We determine define and declare That not only the election or assumtion so made shall be from that very moment void and of none effect and no power or faculty shall accrew to him thereby thrust in of any administration government or jurisdiction in matters spiritual or temporal but also that it shall and may be lawful to any Cardinal present at the said election to except against the said intruder and to call him into question for the crime of Simony as of a true and undoubted Heresie that so being an Heretic he may be of all men accountedas no Pope or
Parisian Doctors in their Declaration against the forementioned Thesis of Clermont Colledg presented to all the Bishops of France extant in the hands of many both in French and English And if their reason exhibited for their censure be considered well we shall find it to comprehend Mr. I. S. his opinion no less then that of the Clermont Jesuits since both the one and the other do bottom the pretended Infallibility of their Church upon the Popes Autority whether in a Council or out of it and so the reason of the Parisian Divines doth conclude in either case that it is a Blasphemy injurious to Jesus Christ to ascribe to the Pope that Infallibility which Christ alone possesses and that men should render that Supreme Cultus of Divine Faith to the words of the Pope which is only due to the word of God The allegations of our Adversary for obedience due to the Church as to Christ and of promises made of the assistance of the Holy Ghost to the Apostles and the Church governed by them will appear very impertinent to his purpose in favor of the Pope and his faction when we come to examine the Texts alledged for which I will assign the Chapter following In the mean time we may conclude from what is said in this Chapter That to ascribe Infallibility to the Pope is Blasphemy in the opinion even of Popish Doctors and Mr. I. S. his pecular way of defending that tenet declared for heretical by Doctors of his own party which was my present undertaking To which may be added the opinion of Mr. * Tabul Suff. cap. 19.20.21 Thomas White of the same Communion whose whole Book called his Tabulae suffragiales is purposely designed against this doctrine of the Popes personal Infallibility affirming it to be not heretical but Archiheretical and that the propagating of this doctrine is in its kind a most grievous sin so weary men of Learning and Parts begin to grow of this intolerable Arrogance of the Roman Church or Court and of their Flatterers CHAP. VII Our Adversaries corruption of Scripture detected OUR Adversary certainly never look'd into the Bible for the Texts he alledges for the Infallibility of his Church but snatch'd them out of some of his old Controvertists whose custom is to clip and cut Scripture to their own pretences without regard of their true meaning Or if he has seen them with their contexts he has bin strangely dull in not perceiving the right sense of them very obvious to any ordinary good understanding or malicious in misrepresenting the meaning of them This is especially seen in his Allegation of these words Joh. XV. 26. When the Paraclete will come whom I will send from my Father the spirit of truth he will give testimony of me and ye will give testimony This he will have us take for a certain testimony of the Holy Ghosts assistance promised to his Church If he did see the half verse immediatly following which he left out or his Tutors cut off he would find that these words were spoken to the Apostles with circumstances making them impossible to be applied to his Church The verse restored to its integrity saies thus And ye also shall bear witness because ye have bin with me from the beginning What man in his senses would think those words appliable to the Council of Trent Were the Fathers of that Council with Christ from the the beginning was the Holy Ghost not yet descended He confirms further his opinion out of Acts the XV. 28. where the Council of the Apostles and Elders at Jerusalem deciding the controversy concerning Circumcision delivers their opinion thus It seemed good to the Holy Ghost and to us signifying that the Holy Ghost did assist them and that grounded on the words aforesaid of our Saviour Joh. XV. 26. When the Paraclete will come he shall give testimony of me and you shall give testimony of me If that be the ground of the Apostles Phrase we have seen before to whom that promise was given whether to the Apostles alone or the Bishops of Rome to be for ever We have seen that the Text in its integrity cannot be applied to the latter But Mr. I. S. of his own autority declares that promise was made by Christ not only to the Apostles but to the Roman Church for ever And to make this latter Text sound somthing like to his purpose he patches it up with a piece of a verse fetch'd out of Matth. XXVIII Vntil the consummation of the world This usual art of theirs of cutting from the Texts what is against their purpose and patching them with other words far fetch'd that may have a gloss or appearance of their pretention may be practiced with more safety in conversation or in a Sermon to a vulgar Auditory then in a serious debate by print exposed to a strict examen This is a cheat like that used in Italy with rotten Apples to set them out for sound They cut off the rotten pieces and glue together the sound fragments to an appearance of a fair Apple but being handled more close it falls in pieces and discovers the cheat This abominable Legerdemain is too often seen in their Pulpits fathering upon the Gospel forsooth most execrable Blasphemies extolling their several new Saints to whom they would gain devotion and by that devotion mony to their Coffers above the Apostles above the Angels above Christ and all that is in heaven to the perpetual scandal of the discreet part of their own flock and edification of none All is sanctified with them by repeting at the end of every desperate discourse some words of the Gospel as a burden of the song tho with no relation in its sense to their purpose This is the art Mr. I. S. useth with the testimony related of Acts XV. touching the assistance of the Holy Ghost in the Council at Jerusalem grounded as he confesses upon the aforesaid Text of John XV. 26. declared to relate only to the Apostles then present and Mr. I. S. of his own head will have it extended to the Roman Church for ever and his Interpretation must be taken for Canonical Scripture by closing it up with this fragment of the twentieth verse of Matthew the XXVIII Vntil the consummation of the world The Text he corrupts and cuts off Matth. XXVIII contains a promise of Christ to the Apostles and Church founded and Faith preached by them that he will assist them for ever saying I am with you all the daies until the consummation of the world St. Hierom better then Mr. I. S. will tell us the meaning of these words glossing thus upon them qui usque ad consummationem seculi cum discipulis se futurum esse promittit illos ostendit semper esse victuros se nunquam à credentibus recessurum In these words our Saviour promises to his Disciples life everlasting and to the Church founded by them and to all true believers in him his
the Queen acknowledging his Primacy and the Reformation from him It is not the loss of Souls but the loss of Peter-pence and command did trouble him and made him and his Successors bring so much trouble on us all His Successor Pius IV. continued the same proffer to the Queen by Letters written the fifth of May 1560. and sent by Vincentius Parpalia and gave assurance of it to a noble Man of England that he would comply with her request to the utmost of his power provided she would allow his Primacy In ejus gratiam quaecunque possim praeterea facturus dum illa ad nostram Ecclesiam se recipiat debitum mihi primatus titulum mihireddat And surely he that can dispense with the Laws of God and alter them as we saw the Popes do may better dispense with and alter what other Popes did decree against the Reformation Priests may marry the people may drink consecrated Wine at Communion they may pray in English c. if they did but allow his Primacy and with it his pence to the Pope Here lies Petra scandali the stumbling block and lapis offensionis Ambition and Avarice cloaked with Religion did profane the Church and put the World in confusion See the Fact here alledged and proof of it in b Twisd c. 19. p. 177. Sir Roger Twisden his historical Vindication of the Church of England chap. IX Where he adds that himself relating this passage to an Italian Gentleman vers'd in public Affairs had this reply from him If this were heard in Rome among religious men it would never gain credit but with such as have in their hands the Maneggi della Corte the management of Affairs it may be held true Such as understand the mystery of the Roman Court do know that Ambition and Interest is the primum mobile and Soul that animates all their motions So true we find Gregory his prediction to be that the usurpation of this Supremacy would be a calamity to the Church I am to take notice here of another reason St. Gregory gives why the former good Bishops of Rome his Predecessors would not accept of this proud calling * St. Greg. lib. 4. Ep. 60.76 Nullus eorum unquam hoc singularitatis vocabulum assumpsit nec uti consensit ne dum privatum aliquid daretur uni honore debito Sacer dotes privarentur Vniversi No one of the ancient Bishops of Rome for six hundred years took upon him the calling of Supreme or Universal Bishop nor permitted it should be given to them least the singularity given to one should deprive the Clergy of due honor And this indeed was the consequence of the Popes immoderate Ambition in this kind To it we may attribute the too much contemt fallen upon the Clergy in general in this corrupt Age. The extravagant boundless ambition of the Bishops of Rome mak's men fearful to allow even decent and due Autority to the Clergy least they should improve it to the prejudice of Christian people and Princes as now we shall see some Popes did This proud calling which St. Gregory called Blasphemous and Anti-christian his Successor Boniface the Third took upon himself bâ— the assistance of the Emperor Phocas who being offended with Ciriac Patriarch of Constantinople for sheltering from his fury the Empress Corstantina relict of Maurice and the immunit of his Church which they made their Saâ—ctuar transferred upon Boniface the Title of Universal Bishop Baron an 606. which dignity and calâ—ing the following Popes did advance so far that â—nnocent the Third compares the Papal Dignity and Regal to the Sun and Moon so that the Papal Dignity do's exceed the Regal on earth as much as the Sun exceedeth the Moon in the Heavens a Ad firmamentum coeli id est Vniversalis Ecclesia secit Deus duo luminaria magna hoc est duas instituit potestates Pontificalem Regalem c. ut quanta inter Solem Lunam tanta inter Pontifices Peges differentia cognoscatur Innocent Ter. Ep. ad Imp. Constantin decret lib. 1. de Majoritate Obedientia tit 33. cap. solit And least you may not understand how much the Pope is made greater then Kings by this comparison The Gloss furnishes you with this singular Declaration of it saying b Igitur cum serra sit septies major Luna Sol autem octies major Terra restat ergo ut Pentificalis dignitas quadragesies septies sit major Regali dignitate Gloss in decret praed That since the Earth is seven times greater then the Moon and the Sun eight times greater then the Earth it must needs follow that the Popes power is forty seven times greater then that of Kings I leave the ingenious Reader to consider the heap of absurdities contained in this Gloss as suitable to that Text of it the trespasses against Latine Arithmetic and Astronony contained in it and much more against truth for the Regal Dignity being Solo Deo minor as * Tertul. ad Scap. Tertullian saith it cannot be a Moon to any other Sun But all this saies Mr. I. S. is to be understood of a Spiritual power that 's the pretext but that Spiritual power must be assisted by the Temporal and where the word will not do the sword must follow So the same Innocent the Third declared in the third Lateran Council and acted accordingly with King John of England as other Popes did with several Emperors and Kings mentioned in the 45. page of my discourse devesting them of their Kingdoms and Dominions and absolving their Subjects from their Allegiance to them Mr. I. S. saies the Lateran Council did not assume the power of deposing Princes but finding it a probable Opinion among Divines grounded their Fact upon that Opinion and issued their Decree of that Punishment against such Princes In a good condition the World stands if 't is to be governed by such Councils If any Opinion found probable among Divines may be a sufficient ground to a conciliary Definition or Decree what desperate Definitions and Decrees may we not expect from their Councils when we see so many desperate Opinions come forth daily among their Divines and all taken for probable if countenanced by one Author or two reputed to be Learned CHAP. XVI How falsly Mr. I. S. affirms that the Irish did not suffer by the Popes prohibiting to subscribe to the Remonstrance of Fidelity proposed to them I Bemoaned the misery of the Irish prohibited severely by the Pope to subscribe a Remonstrance of Fidelity proposed to them wherein they were to disclaim the Popes power of deposing Kings tho they should suffer never so many penalties and suspicions for it This Mr. I. S. calls a Fiction with his Ordinary confidence not regarding to be openly convicted of untruth Whether the Irish did not undergo suspicions and disfavors for refusing to subscribe to the said Remonstrance let themselves tell Whether such as subscribed were not persecuted by
old Law the cases proposed above of Hezekiah and Josiah do assure us that this hath bin the practice of the best Kings of those times And if you consult the acts of Constantine the great of Arcadius and Honorius of Theodosius the elder Justinian Charles the great and others the best of Christian Emperors and greatest supporters of the Churches honor you shall find them intervening frequently and moderating the greatest consultation touching Religion and the good conduct of Church affairs It was a wonder to S. Augustin that any should doubt it should be the duty of an Emperor or Prince to do so a Aug. l. 1. in Epist contra Ep. Parm c. 9. An forte de Religione fas non est dicat Imperator vel quos miserit Imperator What doth it not belong to the Emperor or to him he employs to deliver his opinion touching Religion and elsewhere he says that to be the chief care and charge of the Emperor of which he is to give account to God b Aug. Ep. 50.162 ad Imperatoris curam de quâ rationem Deo redditurus est res illa maximè pertinebat All this being so that it is the duty of our Princes to govern all the states and affairs of this Kingdom and the dut◠of Subjects to obey them in all and that for conscience as S. Paul declareth Rom. 13.5 That you must needs be subject not only for wrath but also for Conscience sake how can I omit to condole the misery of my Country-men and others so deluded by the arts of Rome as to take it for a breach of Conscience what S. Paul declares to be a duty of Conscience I mean an acknowledgment of their Princes Supreme Authority over all his Subjects and their obligation of obeying him accordingly Especially when I see what S. Bernard saw and lamented that it is not the welfare of Souls nor the zeal of their Salvation makes the Court of Rome to put this horror into the hearts of Men against their dutyful obedience and subjection to their Princes Non quod valdè Romani curant quo fine res terminetur sed quia valdè diligunt munera sequuntur retributiones not that the Ministers of Rome do regard much the end or purpose of Controversies raised so they obtain their own end of encreasing their own interest and power I wish with all my heart with S. Bernard that these corruptions of Rome were not so public and known to all the World * Bernard Ep. 42. ad Archiep. Senonens Vtinam nobis relinquerent Moderni Noae unde à nobis possint aliquatenus operiri nunc vero cernente Orbe mundi fabulam soli tacebimus I wish these modern Noahs did leave unto us some possibility of covering their shame but all the World beholding it shall we alone conceal it This being so consider Mr. I. S. how blind is your zeal or great your malice in saying it should be a cruelty in our Princes to demand from their subjects an acknowledgment of his supreme power over them and in them a blasphemy to acknowledg it And to make us believe it is so you produce the autority of Calvin When I alledg Vasquez or Suarez his doctrine to you if it be not to your liking you tell me they have bin mistaken as well as I so much I say to you at present of Calvin that if he be of your mind in this particular he is mistaken and in a foul error as well as you Calvin and Luther have no more autority in the Church of England then Suarez and Vasquez among you and I observe you are as singularly impertinent as unreasonable wheresoever you speak to me of Luther and Calvin it is not their writings which I never saw brought me to the Church of England nor conserves me in it The Scripture Fathers and the History of the Church did work both upon me Of them you are to speak to me as I do to you Many a thousand poor simple Souls in these Kingdoms misled by the Pope and his busy Emissaries do cry against the Oath of Supremacy without knowing or examining what it means or what is their Princes meaning in demanding it crying up the Popes Supremacy much like those 200. seduced by Absalon to follow him out of Jerusalem to rebel against the King his Father when they thought they did service to the King And with Absalon went two hundred men out of Jerusalem that were called and they went in their simplicity and they knew not any thing 2. Sam. 15.11 So it is with many seduced by the art and activity of Rome to den◠due submission to their lawful Prince and give it to a Forreign usurper under pretext of following a pretended Vicar of God to rebel against God S. Paul declaring that whosoever resisteth the power resisteth the Ordinance of God and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation A conclusion he doth very legally infer from a verity he had immediatly before premised That the powers that be are ordained of God Rom. 13.1.2 We are to believe in Charity that many have the excuse of those 200. seduced by Absalon That they went in their simplicity and they knew not any thing But the corruptions and impostures of Rome being so universally known even in S. Bernards time as declared above and much more now we may fear justly that too many do err with knowledg or for want of due inquiry and so resisting lawful power they may receive to themselves damnation Of which latter sort Mr. I. S. may seriously fear himself to be one if he be so conversant in the doctrine of both Churches Protestant and Popish and in that of primitive Christianity as he pretends to be This I commend to his mature consideration while I pursue him in his engagement about Transubstantiation CHAP. XVIII Our Adversarys Essay in favour of Transubstantiation examined His Challenge for solving two Syllogisms answered MR. I. S. I do generally find you unexact and much unlike a Scholar in your Arguments but more when you boast most and stand in defiances Now you defy all my Divinity to answer two Syllogisms you would have us believe to be of your own invention But a piece of my Logic will make both appear Paralogisms unworthy of any answer no formal Syllogisms The first grounded upon Luke 22.19 Eat this is my Body which is given for you runs thus He gave to them what he gave for them But what he gave for them was not a sigure but his real and true Body therefore what he gave to them was not a figure but his real and true body In this Syllogism nothing is new but the form you give it and that guilty of several vices against the rules of Logic. I say nothing is new in your argument nor any sense or force added to it by passing the case from Christ giving the last Supper to Christ suffering upon the Cross All your Syllogism may be