persons which by the law of God may lawfully marry So there 75. And now who so will paralell this parlament with M. Halls sacred Councell of Trullum The decrees of the CouÌ„cell and parlameÌ„t paralelled shall soone see how short the one commeth of the other the Synod I meane of the Statute for that in the former is only leaue giuen to Priests to keep their wiues which they had marryed before their ordination and in the Parlament is an absolute leaue giuen to all and that whether they were marryed before or after In that Councell Bishops were to put their wiues far from them heer they are permitted to keep them at home or if they had none to seeke and marry them there the second marriage or els the taking of a widdow made men incapable of holy orders heere no multitude of wiues or widdows do hinder at all there to haue known a Nunne was sacriledge heere if she list to marry there is open freedome and no prohibition there euen in M. Halls Canon Subdeacons Deacons and Priests that did serue by course in the Church where to forbeare their wiues for the tyme of their attendance heere is no more restraint for that tyme then for any other there it was a constitution of the Apostles not to marry after they were in holy orders heer wher all things went out of order Gods law is to the contrary in fine this reuerseth all that was ordeyned in that Councel against the Protestants and therefore in the behalfe of the marriage of their Clergy men this is without comparison far more full and absolute then that 76. And as for peremptorines that was heer very singular for what could be more peremptory The Parlament in K. Edwards dayes very peremptory and resolute then for a few Sectaryes of a little Iland to sit vpon all Councells Canons Constitutions and all Ecclesiasticall lawes made and allowed by the whole Christian Church a few loose Grecians excepted and without all controle practised for so many ages togeather and to proclaime them all inualide of none effect and further to call them though defyned againe and againe in neuer so many Councells Generall Prouinciall National as after shall be shewed to be the Lawes Canons Constitutions and ordinances made by authority of man only as if the authority of the whole Church were but the authority of man which is subiect to errour and had not the warrant of Christ for her direction and infalibility and as though that Parlament had had more authority then of a man only to wit either Angelical or Diuine when as many therein assembled were not Angels God wot the chiefe dealers in this broken matter were scant honest men and as for diuine authority it was inough for them to name the law of God which righly vnderstood made as much for them as the lawes or our land doe for theeues murtherers and other malefactours 77. Which desperate attempt was somewhat Iacke Straw in the tyme of K. Richard the second like the proceeding of Iacke Straw VVat Tiler Iohn Bull c. in the tyme of Richard the 2. when without authority they sate in Councell to suppresse al the nobility Bishops Canons c to kill all the lawyers and burne the lawes of the realme and of the Clergy to leaue none aliue but only begging Fryers for as that attempt of subiects was seditious treasonable because done against the authority dignity person of the King and lawes of the land so was this of â— few schismaticall Bishops and other lay men who stil haue beene striuing to meddle in Ecclesiasticall affayres â—o lesse rebellious schismatical and hereticall against the Church of Christ for they who sat in this Councell had no authority ouer the Church but were subiect to her lawes as members thereof and such Pastours as were present in the same were subordinate to others of higher calling without whose consent authority and approbation they could not conclude any Ecclesiastical new law preiudiciall to the former more then Iacke Straw his consorts against the Ciuill much lesse could they ouerthrow a law by diuers Synods so often confirmed and still in vse from the first planting of the The Parlament only a ciuill Court fayth in the Iland that also being no tribunall to decide Ecclesiasticall but temporall and Ciuill for which only all nationall Parlaments are summoned a Parlament may confirme by decree what the Bishops in Synod haue defyned for the better execution of Ecclesiasticall lawes but make laws or define matters of that nature being only a Ciuill Court it cannot 78. Wherefore to end this matter hauing shewed the large difference that is between these two different decrees which is as much as I did vndertake to do against M. Hall or els to be cast in this cause it resteth now that out of these premises his owne graunt I conclud against him and say as our Sauiour sayd to the wicked seruant in the Ghospell ex ore tuo te iudico serue nequam I iudge thee wicked seruant out of thyne owne mouth for thus if you remember he sayd If any Protestant Church in Christendom can make a more M. Hall coÌ„cluded to be faithles peremptory more full and absolute more cautelous decree then the 13. of the Trullan Synod for the marriage of Ecclesiasticall persons let me be cond 〈…〉 ed as saythles to which maior or first proposition set downe in his owne wordes I add this minor bue the statutes of Edward sixt are more peremptory more full more absolute more cautelous for they take away all scruple and remorse then that decree the conclusion wâ—ll necessarily follow ergo he is to be condemned as faythles or els he must shew wherin this syllogisme either for matter forme or figure doth faile which he shal neuer be able to do 79. The Apostle amongst other notes of an heretike putteth this for one that he is proprio iudicio Tit. 3. condemnatus condemned by his owne iudgment or a S. Cyprian in diuers places conforme Heretikes condemned by theÌ„selues to the Greeke readeth à semetipso is condemned by himselfe which may very fitly be applyed to M. Hâ—ll who is taken as you see in his own turne and condemned by himselfe and that either to want honesty if King Edwards lawes be more ful absolute c. then the other which he alleadgeth or els to be deuoyd of all shame if he stand in denyall of that which euery one perceaueth to be so manifest and notorious He shal neuer be able so to direct his barke though he were neuer so skillfull a Pilot as to passe between this Scylla and Carybdis without falling into the gulfe and perishing in the froth of his owne precipitate folly and in case this of King Edward were not full inough as it is too full and runneth ouer yet may the Protestant Churches deuise a fuller so he no lesse then now remaine faithles
virgins by wrestling heere on earth with the allurements and pleasures of the flesh and by continuall combats ouercome the tentation of the Diuell and with singular vertue before the eyeâ— of their Creatour haue preserued their integrity equall euen vnto the purity of Angells So S. Basil But for that this point is more liuely set downe by S. Chrysostome I will with his words end this matter for he who by all these testimonyes is not conuinced will neuer be perswaded by the authority of Fathers 36. Thus then writeth this flowing Father in the prayse of virginity Bonum est virginitas Chrysost l. de virgin cap. 10. 11. ego consentio matrimonio etiam melior hoc confiteor c. You say then that virginity is a good thing and I do graunt it it is better then matrimony and this also I graunt and if you will I shall shew you how much it is better to wit by how much heauen is better then earth Angells then men yea to speake more resolutly more then this for albeit that Angells neither marry nor are marryed yet are they not made of flesh and bloud they dwell not on the earth they feele not the sting of the lust they need not meat nor drinke they are not allured with sweet songs beautifull aspects or any such like thing but as at high noone we see the cleare heauen ouercast with no cloud so their natures most cleare and lightsome must needs be free from all lust but mankind inferiour by Nature to Angells forceth it selfe and by all meanes striueth to match them and this by what meanes Angells marry no wiues nor are marryed no more doth a virgin they assist and serue alwayes before God the like doth a virgin Wherefore the Apostle putteth them from all care or sollicitude that they may be continuall and not deuided if so be that they cannot ascend into heauen as Angells do their bodyes keeping them on earth yet from hence they haue a noble recompense because they receaue the Lord himselfe of heauen because they are holy in body and mynd do you see the honour of virginity It striues to make the liues of them who liue on earth to resemble the liues of the heauenly spirits it makes them contend with Angells and not to be ouercome by these spirituall troops it makes them competitours with Angels And againe after alleadging the examples of Elias Elizaeus and S. Iohâ— Baptist he sayth Etenim qua re dic sodes ab Angelis disferebant Elias Elizaeus Ioannes germani hi virginitatâ— amatores nulla nisi quòd mortali natura erant obstrich c. For tell me I pray you in what thing did Elias Elizaeus and Iohn these sincere louers of virginity differ from Angels in nothing but that by nature they were mortall in other thinges if you consider them well you shall find then nothing inferiour and this very thing wherein they seemed inferiour doth much make to their commendation for liuing vpon the earth and vnder the necessity of mortall nature consideâ— what fortitude and industry was required to be able to reach to so great vertue Hitherto S. Chrysostome 37. Now this being the opinion of these Fathers touching this vow and vertue I woulâ— An ineuitable consequence aske of M. Hall how the obiect can be of such purity such perfection and the act that tendetâ— directly thereunto be impure and vnlawfull That is how chastity can be in it selfe Angelicall yet the vow made of obseruing the same be filthy and diabolicall Truly he may as weâ— tell me that albeit adultery be a damnable sin yet are the adulterers very honest men such as resolutly purpose to be naught in that kind to purpose nothing els but an action of vertue for if in this case he say that the obiect is bad and the intention of committing that act cannot thereby but be necessarily vnlawfull so wil I on the other side answere him that this obiect is Angelicall and consequently the vow made for that end hauing no other ill circumstances annexed must needs of his owne nature be both lawfull vertuous and commendable but these men measuring all matters by their owne manners will commend no more then themselues do practise or admit any other virgins then such as hauing knowne their husbands are now ready to be made mothers 38. If M. Hall do say that in wedlocke there Marriage much inferiour to Virginity is also chastity and that these prayses may be giuen thereunto as I graunt the former part to be true so I deny the later and he shall neuer shew me in the ancient Fathers the state of marriage to be called Angelicall but stil to be inferiour to that title as S. Chrysostome hath now declared who maketh as large a difference betweene the one and the other state as there is between heauen and earth Angells and men Virginalis integritas August de sancta Virginitate cap. 12. sayth S. Augustine per piam continentiam ab omni concubitis immunitas Angelica portio est in carne corruptibili incorruptionis perpetuae mediatio cedat huic omnis soecunditas carnis omnis pudicitia coniugalis Virginall integrity and freedome through pious continency from all carnall knowledge is an Angelicall portion and in this corruptible flesh a meditation of the euerlasting incorruption to this the fruitfull issue of the flesh and coniugall cleanes must yield or giue place So S. Austine and so far doth this holy Father proceed heerin as he sayth Sacratae verò virginitati nuptias De Eccles dogmat cap. â—8 coaequare c. to equall marriage with sacred virginity to beleeue no merit to accrew to such as for the desire of chastizing their bodyes absteyne from wiues and flesh is not the part of a Christian but of an hereticall Iouinian So he 39. S. Cyril and S. Hierome also speaking of Cyril cateches 4. Hier. Apolog ad Pamach c. 1. Lib. 2. ep 13â— the same thing say that virginity or continency in respect of marriage is like gold in respect of siluer both are good both are cleane yet the one more pure more pretious then the other and Isiderus Pelusiota addeth Bonum est matrimonium sed melior virginitas pulchra est Luna sed Sol praeclarior Matrimony is good but virginity is better the Moone is fayer but the Sunne more illustrious And S. Ambrose multò prastantius est diuini operis mysterium Epist â—1 quà m humanae fragilitatis remedium the mistery of Gods worke to wit virginity is more noble then the remedy of human frailty in marriage but because this diuersity is more fully deliuered by S. Fulgentius omitting all the rest I Fulgent ep 3. ad Probam cap. 9. will with his words alone decide this controuersy of the different dignity of marriage and virginity or single life for thus he writeth Dicimus à sanctis nuptijs vbi nubunt qui se continere non
inferred the contrary conclusion for he sayth that this authority doth not perswade vs to beget children in priesthood Habentem enim dixit filios non facientem S. Paul sayth the Bishop that hath children not he who begets them as our English Bishops and Ministers do 36. With the Fathers now mentioned others conspire whome I might also if it were needfull alleadge who all acknowledge in the 1. Tim. 3. 1. Tit. 1. Apostles words a permissiue dispensation not any positiue command and that also at such a tyme when amongst the Heathens conuerted vnto the fayth there could not be found so many single men as the Clergy required which both S. Epiphanius S. Hierome and Theodoret do Epiphan haeres 59. Hier. l. 1. in louin cap. 19. Theod. in comment Chrysosto commâ—nâ—s in 1. ad Titum obserue and truely if he had meant to haue left this matter free there had beene no need of this restrictiue limitation to the husband I meane of one wife but that as S. Chrysostome wel noteth Castigat impudicos dum non eos permittit post secundas nuptias ad Ecclesiae regimen dignitaetemque Pastoris assumi He checketh the incontinent whiles he permitteth them not after their second marriages to be preferred to the gouernment of the Church and dignity of Pastour So he And that this was only for that tyme and out of the errour thereof he further in another place confirmeth saying Voluit orbis Pastores constituere c. S. Paul went about to place Pastours ouer the Chrys ho. 2. in Iob. world and for that vertues were rarely found ordeyning Bishops he sayth to Titus make Bishops as I haue disposed the husbaÌ„d of one wife not to that end that this should now be obserserued in the Church for a Priest ought to be adorned with all chastity And after Non quod id legis loco posuerit sed quod errori ignoscebat Not that he made a law that euery one should marry as M. Hall interprets him but that he condescended to the errour to wit of those tymes 37. I will only adioyne one more whom M. Hall citeth for himselfe and is very eager in defence of his wordes as after you shall see so as his authority must needs be without exception on his behalfe to wit S. Isidore Bishop of Seuill who thus conforme to the other Fathers and truth also expoundeth the former words Isidor dâ— officiâ—s Eccles l. â— cap. 5. Vnius vxoris virum the husband of one wife thus Sacerdotium quaerit Ecclesia aut de Monogamia ordinatum aut de virginitate sanctum Digamus autem haud fertur agere sacerdotium The Church seeketh for priesthood either decent from single marriage or holy from virginity he that hath been twice marryed is not to be Priest So he so others so all And by this any may see who agree with No disagreement betweene S. Ambrose and S. Chrysostome though one do graunt a law in S. Paules wordes the other deny it because they do speake of different lawes the Fathers and who leaue them who interpret the Scriptures out of their owne spirit and who follow the beaten path of the Churches doctrine who antiquity who nouelty who truth who errour which point I might further dilate if the lawes of a letter restrayned me not to a more contracted breuity 38. If M. Hall say that S. Ambrose by me cited acknowledgeth in the Apostles wordes a law and S. Chrysostom denyeth any law to be in them but only a dispensation for that tyme and occasion I answere that both of them speake properly both truly S. Ambrose speaketh vpon supposition that a marryed man is to be made Priest or Bishop and then sayth that there is a law prescribed by the Apostle that he haue beene marryed but once so as this law is negatiue to wit none is to be ordered who hath twice been marryed but S. Chrysostome speaketh absolutly of a positiue law and affirmeth that the Apostle by no such law doth bynd euery Priest of Bishop to marry which I call positiue because it must runne in this tenour Euery Priest or Bishop ought at least once to be marryed for neither doth S. Ambrose graunt this law or S. Chrysostome deny the other but both iointly agree that none heereby is bound to marry and he that Tertull. exhort ad castitateÌ„ cap. 7. Concil Valentin cap. 1. Carthag 4. cap. 69. Toletan 1. cap. 4. Concil Aratisican cap. 25. Arelat 3. cap. 3. Roman sub Hilar. cap. 2. Agath cap. 1. Epaun. c. 2. Gerund cap. 8. Aurel. 3. c. 6. c. Bezal de diuortijs hath beene twice marryed is not to be ordered 39. With this doctrine concurreth the practise in all ages for Tertullian neere the Apostles tymes thus out of his own knowledge writeth Apud nos pleniùs atque strictiùs praescribitur c. Among vs it is more fully and straitly ordained that such alone be chosen to be made Priests who haue beene but once marryed in so much as my selfe remember certaine who were twice marryed to haue been deposed So he And in the 4. Councell of Carthage it is defined that if any Bishop should wittingly order any who had marryed a widdow taken againe his wife whome he had left or taken a second that he should be depriued of all authority of ordering any more And the same was appointed in diuers other Councells heere by me noted and their wordes are alleadged by Coccius in his rich treasure of the Catholike truth Which assertion of ours is so cleare euident as Beza himselfe could not deny it but in his book of Diuorces doth confesse it as he who reads him will confesse that he is the vndoubted scholler of Antichrist Digamos sayth he id est eos qui plures successiuè vxores vel etiam vnam eam viduam duxerant c. So far did most men in tymes past esteeme those who were Digami that is those who had taken more wiues one after the other or els had marryed but one and she a widdow to be vnworthy of the sacred ministery that they did not only exclude them from holy orders to wit of being Bishop Priest Deacon or Subdeacon but once also they excluded them euen from the very Clergy Let this be neuer so ancient notwithstanding I affirme it to be most wicked and not tolerable in the Church So he Giuing at one clap as you see the checke-mate to all Fathers Councells Churches antiquity and whatsoeuer yea if all the Fathers haue not in their commentaryes erred to the very Apostle himselfe so sharp are these men set to defend their wiues as they affect rather as it should seem to be kind husbands then sincere Christians 40. For M. Hall also euen in this very epistle maketh his chiefe plea for his owne and his M. Hall seemeth to set more by his wife then by his Religion fellow ministers trulls out of the Councell of
which is yet more then I need that he hath by this example euinced his cause and will neuer any more mention his diuorce 11. But if in this passage he cog notoriously if he affirme the quite contrary to that which is in his author if as before out of Origen he cut off three wordes with an c. so heer he do add one word which quite altereth the sense then I hope his friends will bethinke them well how they trust such iugglers who with the Aegyptians looke them in the face whiles their fingers be in their purse and I wish that with his falsehood he did but picke their purses and not seduce their soules bought ransomed with the deere price of the precious bloud of the sonne of God And that there be no mistaking betweene What M. Hall doth affirme out of S. Cyprian and I do deny vs remember I pray what M. Hall doth affirme to wit that Numidicus was a marryed Priest and that S. Cyprian auoucheth so much I on the other side deny both the one and the other and say that he was neuer a marryed Priest and that S. Cyprian neuer sayd any such thing but the quite contrary that he was made priest after his wiues death Let S. Cyprian decide the doubt betweene vs. 12. This Numidicus then being a marryed man was by the persecutours carryed togeather with his wife and others to be martyred the rest When Numidicus was made Priest were put to death before him with them he cheerefully saw his wife burned making no other account but to drinke of the same cup and to follow her into the flames he dyd so was left for dead Ipse sayth S. Cyprian semiustulatus Epist 35. iuxta Pamelum alias l. 4. ep vltim lapidibus obrutus pro mortuo derelictus c. He halfe burned couered with stones and left for dead whiles his daughter out of filiall duety sought his body he was found not to be fully departed and being taken out and by carefull attendance somewhat refreshed he remayned against his will after his companions whome he had sent before him to heauen Sed remanendi vt videmus haec fuit causa vt eum Clero nostro Dominus adiungeret But this as we see was the cause why he remayned behind that God might make him of our Clergy and adorne the number of our priesthood made small by the fall of some with glorious Priests Thus far S. Cyprian whose wordes are so plaine as they need not explication for he plainely testifyeth that he was made Priest after his wiues death and for that cause to haue beene preserued aliue and he sayth not as you see Numidicus presbyter vxorem suam concrematam c. Numidicus the Priest saw his wife burned but only Numidicus saw his wife burned A foule corruption the word Priest is added both in the English text and Latin margent by M. Hall and that as you see for his aduantage cleane contrary to the mind of his authour 13. For without that word what doth this testimony auaile him what doth it proue will he reason thus Numidicus after his wife was burned was made Priest therfore he was a marryed Pbesbyter and his example proueth the marriage of all Priests to be lawfull these extremes are too far asunder to meet in one syllogisme and he shall neuer be able to find a medius terminus that can knit them togeather I wish that I were neere M. Hall when some or other would shew him this imposture to see what face he would make thereon whether he would confesse his errour or persist in his folly for I see not but turne him which way he list he must be condemned Protestāt◠neuer write against Catholikes but they corrupt Authors for a falsifyer I know not what fatall destiny followes these men that whatsoeuer they treat of in any controuersy betweene vs them they cannot but shew legier-du-mayne fraud and collusion and yet notwithstanding pretend all candour and simplicity for heer on the word Priest standeth all the force of M. Halls argument and that is foysted in by himselfe not to be found conioyned with the wordes he cyteth in S. Cyprian 14. If M. Hall say which is all he can say that in the beginning of the epistle S. Cyprian hath these wordes Numidicus presbyter ascribatur presbyterorum Carthaginensium numero nobiscum sedeat in Clero c. Let Numidicus the Priest be numbred amongst the Priests of Carthage and let him sit with vs in the Clergy then goeth on with the description of his merits of the courage he shewed in seeing his wife dye c. this plaister cannot salue the soare for this epistle S. Cyprian wrote after he had ordered him Priest and his ordination as there he declareth and you haue now heard was after his wiues death Numidicus himselfe giuing by his rare constancy his so resolutely offering himselfe to dy for Christ occasion of his promotion yea of further preferment for in the end of the same letter S. Cyprian sayth that at his returne to Carthage he meant to make him Bishop as Pamelius doth rightly interpret him So as there is no euasion left for M. Hall to escape 15. I haue purposely transposed the fact of Paphnutius in the Councell of Neece the authority The fact of Paphnutius in the Nicen Councell is discussed whereof although it be more ancient then S. Athanasius who therein albeit present was not Bishop but Deacon yet are the Authors who recount the same much more moderne and all the credit lying on their relation no writer more ancient so much as mentioning any such matter the Councell if selfe disclayming from it these Authors in other things being found vnsincere fabulous I thought it not worth the answering but seeing that M. Hall notwithstanding he saw it fully answered in Bellarmine and others will needs bring it in againe as though nothing had euer beene sayd thereunto Answered by Bellarmine l. ◠de Clericis cap. 20. §. argumentum 5. vltimum and out of his wonted folly and vanity insert heere and there his Greeke words which haue no more force and emphasis then the English with this conclusion in the end His arguments wone assent he spake and preuailed so this liberty was still continued and confirmed I will briefly deliuer what hath beene answered thereunto if first I shew what legier-du-maine is vsed by this Epistler in setting it down with aduantage to make it serue his purpose the better 16. For whereas Socrates recounteth the fact Socrates l. 1. cap. 8. S zom l. 1. cap. 22. of Paphnutius in a particuler matter touching the wiues of such Priests only as were ordered whē they were marryed men whether such should be debarred from their wiues bound to continency as the rest this man from the particuler draweth it vnto the generall from only marryed Priests to
a reason heeroâ— because that marriage was euery where lawfull to the Clergy before the prohibition which must needs be late and in the Easterne Church to this day is allowed and I answere that the glosse as ingenuously altogeather much more truly reiecteth this opinion with an id verò minimè ita esse there was no such matter in another distinctioÌ„ excuseth Gratian The name of Priest extended by Canon lawyers to all that are in holy orders as taking the word Priest in a larger significatioÌ„ as including all in holy Orders and meaning therby Subdeacons only and not Priests which acception is familiar with Canon Lawyers founded euen in the Canon it selfe where it is sayd Si quispiam Sacerdotum id est Presbyter Diaconus vel Subdiaconus c. If any of the Priests that is to say a Priest Deacon or Subdeacon c. in Dist 31. iniâ— can 1. q. 1. Si quispiam in glossa dist 33. cap. 1. dist 81. c. si quispiam Dist 31. Greg. l. 1. epist 42. which sense we may graunt that the tyme was when some who were marryed were made Subdeacons which is further confirmed because in another distinctioÌ„ before Gratian putting down the title Nondum erat institutum vt Sacerdotes continentiam seruarent It was not yet ordeyned that Priests should conteyne from their wiues he presently cyteth a place of S. Gregory touching Subdeacons of which we shall speake in the next Paragraffe 44. But whatsoeuer he meant we are not Bellar. l. de script Eccles in Gratian. Baron in annis 341 774. 865. 876 964. Posseuin in apparatu §. de Gratiano id scienduÌ„ ist eum saepe errasse c. bound to follow him as an infallible wryter but may with free liberty reiect whome so many graue Writers vpon diuers occasions haue so sharply censured that he gathered so many laws decrees Canons togeather argueth great learning great labour in so large a matter coÌ„ used heape of different authorities to be mistaken is no meruaile wherin he did wel we prayse him where otherwise we pitty the errours but follow them not if therefore he were of opinion as is wordes seeme to sound that Priests were first permitted to marry and were after restayned from that liberty we follow the glosse not the Text because al Authors of credit mainteyne the contrary and as for the commentary Gratian of no infallible authority of M. Hall that this prohibition must needs be very late I must needs tell him that it is another vntruth that also refuted by Gratian himselfe throughout all his 31. Distinction which falsity because I shall touch after againe in due place I heere forbeare further to stand vpon and from Gratian come to the mayne bul warke and fortresse of M. Halls defence I meane the sixth Councell as he calls it of Constantinople in answering of which The authority of the I rullaÌ„ Synod cyted and most insisted in by M. Hall at large refuted because he relyeth so much thereon I will be more particuler 45. And for that M. Hall in vrging this Councell is no lesse eager in charging vs then resolute in affirming that marriage of al Clergy men to be decreed therein and the testimony not to be lyable to any exception as of a generall Councell as he stileth it I will first touch the authority of this Councel then what he sayth for himselfe against vs out of the same and last of al what as well by generall as prouincial Councels hath beene defined against the marriage of Clergy men by which I hope it shall appeare what little cause there was of triumph before the conquest how much our poore aduersaryes make of a little who like petty Pedlars lay open their pynnes and poynts obtruding copper for gold and peeces of glasse for pretious stones 46. This Councell then heere cyted is not See Baron in ann 692. the sixth Councell which made no Canons at â—â— but another Conuenticle made some ten years after the sixth was ended that at the procurement of Iustinian the yonger none of the best Emperours The Councell of TrulluÌ„ not the 6. Councell God wot who calling togeather certaine Greeke Bishops made them sit in a place of his pallace called TrulluÌ„ because it was made round and vaulted and there to gather Canons out of the fift and sixth Synodes which indeed they pretended to do but with many erroneous additions of their own and because it made the collection out of these two Councels it was called Quinisextum as much to say as of the fift and sixth the chiefe suggester of this seditious meeting was Callinicus Patriarke of Constantinople and that for extreme hatred of the Westerne Church by which we see which in many historyes we obserue that it is easy for a Prince who intendeth to be naught to find some one or other Clergy man of the same disposition to second him Iustinian had his Callinicus the fourth Henry Emperour his Benno and our King Henry the 8. his Crammer and others the like 47. And further we see all the circumstances occurring in this Councel to demonstrate it rather to haue beene a seditious conspiracy then The Trullan Synod no lawful Councell but a seditious conspiracy any lawful sinod for iâ— had no forme of a Councell no legats of the Pope no inuiting of the Latin Bishops no authority but imperiall no lawfull conuocation and in fine did out of arrogant presumption that which appertayned not vnto it to do for if in the Councell of Chalcedon after the last session was ended when presently Anatolius to further the better without contradiction his ambitious claime ouer the other Patriarches the Patriarch of Alexandria Dioscorus who should haue withstood him being then newly deposed gathered the Greeke Bishops to make another Decree the same as not done in Councell was annulled what is to be thought of this meeting when not one day but ten yeares after a general Councel was ended these men who were but one part and that the least and lesse sincere without calling the rest or being lawfully called themselues layd hands on two generall Councells at once cut out Canons chopped changed added and altered at their pleasures 48. And how generall this Councell was and how generally accepted euen in the Greeke Church where it was held Anastasius Bibliothecarius Anastasius Bibliothecarius will testify in his dedicatory epistle vnto Iohn the eight before the seauenth Councell which he translated into Latin where after he had sayd that all these Canons were vnknowne in the Latin Church he addeth Sed nec in caeterarum Patriarchalium sedium licet Graeca vtantur lingua reperiuntur archtuis c. Nor yet are they found in the treasuries or places where publike charters or records are kept of the other Patriarchall Seas The Trullan Synod not admitted by the other Patriarks because none of these Patriarks did promulgate
cōsent or was present when they were set forth notwithstanding the Grecians report those patriarches to haue promulgated them but this they cannot proue by any certayne arguments So Anastasius So as the credit and authority of this Councell was confined like our Catholikes in England to their fiue miles I meane within very narrow bounds and was euen in the very birth like a base brat branded in the forehead with shame both of the matter and makers 49. And this is further euicted by two graue Authors of that age whereof one to wit Venerable Bede was then liuing and Paulus Diaconus the other not long after who both write of it as of It was presently cōdemned by Pope Sergius a scismaticall and no true Councell and that Sergius the Pope condemned it for which cause the furious Emperour sent Zacharias his Embassadour to Rome to bring the Pope prisoner to Constantinople which had byn effected if the souldiers of Rauenna had not resisted and forced the Embassadour not without shame and feare also of his life to returne backe without him Hic beatae Beda l. de sex aetat in lustin iuniore memoriae Pontificem Romanae Ecclesia Sergium c. Iustinian the yonger sayth Bede commanded Sergius Bishop of Rome of blessed memory to be carryed to Constantinople because he would not fauour and subcribe vnto his erring Councell erraticae Synodo which he had caused there to be made sending for that purpose Zacharias his chiefe captaine but the garryson of the Citty of Rauenna and soldiers of the places adioyning reiected the wicked command of the Prince and made the sayd Zachary not without reproach iniuries to recoyle So S. Bede And the same in the same words Paulus Diaconus and so far was Sergius from approuing it as he sayth of him that Iustinian The rare constancy of Pope Sergius in another embassage before that now recounted had sent vnto the Pope as to the head of all Priests the sayd Councel written out in six tomes to be subscribed vnto Qui beatissimus Pontifex penitus eidem Iustiniano Augusto non acquieuit c. Which most holy Pope yielded not a iote to the Emperour Iustinian neither would he vouchsafe to take or read them Moreouer he reiected them as of no force and cast them away choosing rather to dye then to yield to the errours of these noueltyes So Paulus Diaconus who also recounteth how the same Emperour taking afterwards a contrary resolution sent two of his Metropolitans to Rome to Pope Iohn to confirme or correct these Canons but neither the one or other was done 50. In fine after much wrestling in this matter for Constantin the Pope with Gregory who succeeded him then a priuate man went to Constantinople disputed answered refelled the errours Gods iust reuenge vpon Iustiniā the Emperour and Callinicus the Patriarke declared the truth when notwithstanding the Emperour still persisted God shewed at last which part pleased him best for the first Author or instigatour Callinicus had both his eyes pulled out by the Emperours command was banished to Rome where he knew full well what his intertainement would be and the Emperour himselfe hauing first lost his nose then his Empyre last of all lost also his life hauing first his sonne Tiberius butchered and then his own head cut off by one of his rebell souldiers and sent to Philippus his mortall enemy and successour in the Empyre so as we see iust reuenge sooner or later ouertakes them who are to busy in laying their hands on the sacred Arke of Ecclesiasticall affayres and out of their arrogancy will teach direct those of whome they are themselues to be taught directed for in matters of this nature Bishops or Pastours haue alwayes taught Kings and no Christian Kings in the Primitiue Church haue prescribed vnto Bishops vnles such alone as with their scepters haue violently ouer swayde all reason and Religion togeather 51. This is the true narration of this bastard Councell which of purpose I haue exactly promised and that both for the better perspicuity of the thing it selfe and my answers which depend thereon as also for that you may the better know the vaine humours of our Aduersaryes how they can face out a matter when they intend to deceaue or are not able to shew what they would pretend to proue for heer M. Hall tells vs what this Counsaile sayth To the confusion of all replyers in spight of all contradiction that Singular impudency in facing out matters vpon so small proofe the Catholiks seeing themselues pressed with so flat a decree confirmed by authority of Emperours as would abide no denyall c. And againe that this one authority is inough to weigh downe an hundred petty Conuenticles and many legions if there had beene many of priuate contradictions And what will you say to this pedlar who thus pratleth of his small wares If he had any argument against vs as he hath none how would he vaunt do these men speake out of conscience or knowledge trow you or els ad populum phaleras to entertaine tyme and deceaue their Readers in my iudgment this is impudency in the superlatiue degree and for this alone he deserueth for euer to be discredited seeing he could not but know what we had answered to this Synod and that himself was not able therunto to make any reply but this his tallent of shameles dealing will better appeare in all the other particulers which I will now in order discusse 52. First then he sayth that this was a generall Councell and so he still tearmeth it the sixt generall Councell but this we haue now shewed The Trullan Conuenticle no general Councell to be false for it was neither the sixth nor yet generall as not called by the Bishop of Rome but by him who had no authority no Bishop Priest or Deacon sent from the Sea Apostolike was there which in no generall Councel lawfully assembled was euer wanting none of the rest of the Patriarches of the East were present none of the West inuited and the Canons by supreme authority at their first appearance condemned which things cannot agree to a true generall Councell and if it were Prouinciall as M. Hall shall neuer make more of it if he make so much then can it not make lawes to bind the whole Church but that particuler prouince wherein it was made and if these also by higher power be condemned as in this case it happeneth then doth it not bind that neither or any place els but is to be refused of all as was the Councell of Carthage called by S. Cyprian which allowed the rebaptizing of infāts which had beene christened by heretickes which M. Hall might as well haue vrged against vs as this of Constantinople and better also for that S. Cyprian is of a greater authority more antiquity sanctity and learning then Callinicus was for he dyed a renowned Martyr and the other
orders because now in England there are no Subdeacons and the Latin word atque doth not signify or but and and so he should haue sayd Deacons and Subdeacons and not haue confounded them togeather as he doth besides this peccadillo there are three other mayne vntruthes in these wordes and all the ground whereon it relyeth is false For where he sayth that Catholikes saw themselues pressed with so flat a decree The first vntruth in M. Hals wordes confirmed by authority of Emperours as would abide no denyall we haue before made it abide a denyall and to be so far from a flat decree of any Councel which bindeth all to imbrace it as that hitherto it hath neuer beene receaued in that kind for flat or round and that by authority of such as then liued as S. Bede or not long after as Paulus Diaconus and Anastasius and for the confirmation of Emperours the matter is smal vnles it had first had another confirmation which could not be gotten but was flatly denyed Councells take not their authority from Emperours but Emperours second Councels with their power that all vnder them may obey what they who are in spiritual authority ouer them haue decreed and M. Halls Emperours in particuler to wit Iustinian the yonger Philippicus c. being such as they were we will not much enuy M. Hall their confirmations whose liues and actions were such as they were staynes to Christianity and their deaths so disasterous as well sheweth by whose heauy hand and indignation they were chastized 86. And if M. Hall will haue all Councells confirmed by Emperours to be lawful and their decrees Canonical theÌ„ let him imbrace another Councell of Constantinople called soone after the Touching the confirmation of Councells by Emperours former by Philippicus Bardanes the Emperour wherein the heresy of the Monothelites who will haue our Sauiour not to haue had any humane will was defyned and the true sixth Synod of Constantinople condemned and as well may M. Hall pleade for himselfe out of this Councel as of the former for in this was the authority of the Emperour who called who confirmed it there was Iohn Patriarch of Constantinople and far more Bishops then in the Trullan Conuenticle wherfore in the doctrine of this man the decree is flat confirmed by the authority of the Emperours admits no denyall The Monothelite heretiks will thanke you M. Hall and remaine your debtour How much the Church hath gotten by Imperiall Synods too lamentable experience hath taught vs as well in these as in diuers others whereof one was within few yeares after this of Philippicus called by Leo the Iconoclast who with our Protestants condemned defaced razed pulled downe abused and burned all sacred images of our Sauiour and his Saints and to omit others in the later tymes as the Conuenticles of Henry the fourth against Gregory the seauenth c. it is not the authority of Emperours when we speake of Councells which makes them so firme as they can abide no denyall but the promise assistance of the holy Ghost with the Pastours of the Church without any reference to the ciuill magistrate or els the first Apostolicall Councell had beene void and of none effect when notwithstanding they sayd visum est Spiritui sancto Act. 15. nobis it seemed good to the Holy Ghost and vs the scepter in this must yield to the myter the sheep to the Pastours the ciuill Magistrate to the Ecclesiasticall Kings and Princes vnto Bishops and Prelates The causes are different and the Courts diuers The second vntruth is that Pope Steuen granted that the Clergy of the East might marry which after shall in due place be refuted 87. The last vntruth is touching Steuen the seconds decree for whereas in Gratian there is The vntruth of M. Halls touching Pope Steuen no number of second or third or any els M. Hall as none are more bold then such as know least without more ado resolutly affirmes it to be the second Steuen but truth so reclaimes against it or rather ouerbeareth it so violently as it cannot subsist for the second Steuen liuing but three Gratian. distin 31. can aliter dayes Pope or foure at the most had no leasure to call a Councell or make decrees and that this was done in Councell Gratian witnesseth who sayth that he made the decree in a Councell held in the Lateran Church and three dayes being too short a tyme euen for the very intimation the falshood of this charge doth refute it selfe and demonstratiuely shew this decree not to haue beene made by this Steuen 88. If M. Hall to help himselfe will take the third for the second as some do who by reason of the short life of the second Steuen do not number him among the Popes that will also as little auaile him for in all his tyme there was no Councell held in the Lateran Church or any where els for such were the troubles of those tempestuous tymes Aistulphui raging in the West and the furious firebrands of the Iconoclasts or image-breakers being in perpetuall care trauell from one place to another to compose all seditious tumults and to cancell the decree of another Councell gathered by the Emperours What manner of Councels heretikes do bring for confirmation of their heresies authority to wit Constantinus your friend M. Hall though scant sweet for suppressing of images and called the seauenth Oecumenicall but with as good reason as your TrullaÌ„ was called the sixth for no other Patriarch was present none of the West inuited no Legat of the Popes or authority required no law or forme of a true CouÌ„cel obserued al went by force fury and faction such commonly â—re the Councells you bring for confirmation of your heresy 89. I confesse that Steuen the 4. held there a Councell but that was only called for the deposing of the false Pope Constantine and deposing of such as were ordered by him in that schisme and preuenting the like inconuenience of chosing a lay man to be Pope againe for such was this Constantine chosen by popular tumult without all order or forme of Canonicall election by the seditious and tyrannicall procurement of his brother Toto then in Rome whose power and violence at that tyme none could withstand last of all it disannulled the decree of the false Synod of Constantinople against holy images but of Priests wiues either in the East or West there is no mention nor yet in any Author of these tymesym When M. Hall is more particuler in his charge he shall haue a more particuler answere in the meane tyme I say with Bellarmin that Canon perhaps to be of no authority but an error of the collectours and that for the reasons alleadged and the cause is poorely defended that is grounded on the errours or mistakings of others 90. And in case we graunted all the words which M. Hall bringeth out of this Canon nothing Gratians Canon
memory Reader is to be admonished that this epistle which by error of the writer is referred to Pope Nicholas the first in my mind is rather to be attributed to the name and tyme of Nicholas the second or Nicholas the third And is it so indeed Syr Iohn then why do you put it out of the due place vnder a wronge Pope why did you tel vs that the first Nicholas restrayned marriage and for that was reprehended by S. Vdalricke Did the Saint grauely and learnedly refute and disclaime against the vndiscreet proceeding of Pope Nicholas the first before the letter and after was proued not to haue sayd one word vnto him at all but to haue spoken to another who was Pope more then a hundred yeares after his death which of these Foxes will you beleeue these are such riddles as I cannot vnderstand them and no more as I suppose did he himselfe when he wrote them and so I leaue them to M. Hall to answere who for this matter in his margent remitteth his Reader to M. Fox and yet he in his last admonition contradicteth M. Hall who is resolute that it was written to the first and not to the second or third Nicholas 26. And M. Fox like a bad tinker whiles he would mend a little hole by knocking he The correction of M. Fox refuted beates out the bottome of the kettle or at least makes the hole much larger then it was before for whereas most Authours agree that S. Vdalricke dyed in the yeare 974. as Herm annus Contractus Vrspergensis Baronius and others or 973. as Crusius how could he write to Nicholas the second who was made Pope more theÌ„ fourescore years after S. Vdalricks death For as Platina Baronius others affirme Nicholas the second was not made Pope vntill the yeare 1059. such a foole or prophet do these men make this Saint to be for if he wrote to the first Nicholas he wrote to one buryed more then twenty yeares before he was borne if to the second to one not made Pope till more then fourescore years after he was buryed and as for the 3. Nicholas he is so far off that I thinke his great grand-father was not begotten when S. Vdalricke dyed for he was made Pope in the yeare 1278. and the other departed this life the year 973. so as there are almost three hundred yeares betweene the death of the one and creation of other so exact are these men in historyes and such regard they haue to deliuer the truth or rather are so impudent and shameles as they care not what they write or what they auouch 27. For whereunto now are all M. Halls boasts come of the force warrant of this testimony M. Hall cast in his cause that it is able to answere all cauills satisfy all readers and conuince all not willfull Aduersaryes or els that he would be cast in so iust a cause For who seeth him not only to be cast but crushed also in this matter who seeth nor on what sliding sands he placeth the chiefest foundations of his surest proofs for now all his fayre words and resolute assurance of his so potent Aduocate is proued to be nothing els but light smoke false coyne a meere cogging collusion which bewrayeth in the writer to too much vanity conioyned with affected ignorance or intollerable stupidity in so much as I may conclude this first argument against M. Hall with the words of the Authour who some yeares past set out S. Huldericks life and in this matter thus writeth in the Preface Scio ad haec impuram nescio cuius nebulonis eptstolam Vdalrici aliquando nomine venditam sed cùm â—a ad Nicolaum Pontificem scripta sit Nicolaus autem primus plusquam viginti annis ante Vdalricum natum suerit mortuus secundus Pontificatum octogesimo quod excurrit anno post eum mortuum inierit ferrei sit oris oportet qui tantum mendacium ausit asserere plumbei cordis cui possit imponere So he Which wordes for courtesy I leaue vnenglished least M. Hall should thinke that I applyed these discourteous tearmes vnto him in particuler which I will not and that authour speaketh to the first framer of this fancy alone or to all in general that will be deceaued by such fooleryes 28. Besides this argument of tyme an euiction vnauoydable other presumptions there are which seeme to me to be very effectuall and No such epistle to be found amongst the Epistls of S. Vdalricus not answerable wherof that is one which Staphilus relateth of the epistles of that Saint all registred and reserued in Auspurg amongst which there is not the least signe or shew of any such letter neither doth Martinus Crusius the Lutheran in his Sueuicall History of which Auspurg is the chiefest Citty so much as once infinuate any such thing which yet should not haue beene omitted if it could haue beene found that authour taking all occasions where he can to calumniate Catholikes and gather vp all scraps of any antiquity which may seem to make against them which yieldeth to this argument more perswasiue validity no Author of those tymes when it was written or any other after vntill our age euer mentioned the same or so much as heard thereof till our late Sectaryes set it forth and many reasons there were to haue vrged the authority thereof in case such a thing had byn extaÌ„t written by a man of that fame for sanctity as S. Vdalricke to such a Pope as Nicholas the first in such a matter so often so earnestly debated with such circumstance of more then six thousand childrens heads a lye fit for Lucian and the like which yet none euer did and their silence is to me a sure signe that no such thing was extant in their dayes Two or 3. yeares before the death of S. Vdalrickâ— was the contentioÌ„ of the incontinent Priests begun in England and yet none euer mentioned this letter 29. And to make this more plaine whereas with S. Vdalricke in Germany at the same time liued S. Dunstane in England who also out liued him for some yeares and there that contention was then hoatly pursued by that Saint others against the licentiousnes of Priests it seemeth to me very strange that such an epistle should haue beene written whils that conflict was on foot which lasted for diuers yeares and no acknowledge thereof to haue beene had in England where it might most auayle and with the authority of the Authour haue giuen more credit to the cause then the others should haue beene able to infringe but no such thing was then euer alleadged not one syllable therof in Malmesbury Houeden Huntingdon Matthew VVestminister VVilliam Nubrigensis Florentius or any other and thereof I inferre that there was no such letter euer written which vpon so vrgent an occasion ar so opportune a tyme and so directly for the purpose of the lewd Clergy could not haue The
orders which this epistle will not haue broken but eyther by compulsion to be kept or punished by deposition so carelesse a husband so bad a Christian so weake a protectour he is or els which I rather thinke so light witted a man as he will offer vpon any occasion to aduenture all he hath be it his wife cause or credit though the conditions on which he doth it be neuer so vnequall disaduantagious or preiudiciall vnto him 43. Before I end this matter I will come from M. Halls text vnto his margent where first he maketh this note saying Whether Huldericus Extreme folly to make no doubt of that which is only doubted of or as he is some where intituled Volusianus I enquire not the matter admits no doubt So he But this is extreme folly for it importeth all in all to know the true Author when all the credit of the thing reporteth lyeth thereon as heere it doth or els any may obtrude whatsoeuer broken peece of a letter they shal find on the dunghill to be written by some Father the thing shall challeng authority from the writer and this thing neuer hauing beene seene or heard of in the world before can haue no credit if it were only written by some late sectary as we haue inst cause to suspect and M. Hall cannot disproue whereas if he could proue it written by S. Huldricke we should more esteeme it and answere it with more regard the authority being greater in the behalfe of our Aduersaryes then if it had beene coyned by some MagdeburgiaÌ„ or elâ— by some Sacramentary either moderne or more ancient To auoyd the suspition of this imposture M. Hall cyteth againe his learned Pope Pius 2. or Aeneas Siluius in sua Germania which title Iohn Fox setteth downe more fully saying Aeneas Siluius hath no mention of the counterfeit epistle of S. Vdalricus Meminit ciusdem epistolae Aeneas Siluius in sua peregrinatione Germaniae descriptione Aeneas Siluius maketh mention of this letter in his pilgrimage and description of Germany but it should seem that Iohn Fox his wit was gone in pilgrimage or or els a woll gathering when he made this note for after some search I haue made of his bookes I thinke I haue better meanes to find them out then Fox had I can find none extant vnder the one or other title nor yet vnder the title of his Germany as M. Hall expresseth it neither doth Trithemius in his catalogue or Posseuinus in Apparatu where they set downe all the bookes they could find of this Pope mention any such worke and so the mention made of this letter in this Pilgrimage is a meere idle toy framed out of the wandring imagination of Iohn Fox and vpon to light credit taken vp by M. Hall There is in his workes extant an answere to one Martin Mayer for defence of the holy Roman Church in which he describeth some parts of Germany by which he had passed and speaking of Auspurg he sayth as the Germans haue printed him in Basill S. Vdalricus huic praefidet qui Papam arguit de concubinis c. S. Vdalricus is patron of this place who reprehended the Pope for concubines it lyeth by the riuer Licus So he as these Sacramentaryes haue set him out Which being all graunted belongeth not to this matter in hand but concerneth only the bad life of the young Pope Iohn then thrust by force of friends and maintayned by tyranny in that seat which abuse the Church is forced sometymes to suffer as temporall states do ill Princes but in the one and the other personall crimes as they tend to the impeachment of priuate fame so nothing derogate from publike authority in such the office is to be considered apart from the life as Moyses his chayre from the Pharisyes who sate thereon their power we reuerence their liues we abhorre no state so high no calling so holy no function so laudable but ill men haue beene found therein and if once we confound the life with the office and out of the vnworthynes of the one inferre the denyall of the other we shall leaue no Pope Bishop Priest Emperour King or other Magistrate whatsoeuer and this supposing these to be the words of Aeneas Siluius of which I haue some cause to doubt both for that I haue seene a printed copy without them and moreouer I haue seen three Manuscripts of which as two were lately written had them so the 3. which was much more ancient in the text had them not but in the margent only by which meanes forged glosses so creep in often tymes as they com at length to be printed with the wordes of the Author but howsoeuer to this purpose they make nothing and the other whom M. Hâ—ll ioyneth with him to wit Gaspar Hedio a late heretike is of no credit to iustify this matter no more then M. Iohn Fox Ioseph Hall or any other professed aduersary 44. Againe it is another vntruth to say that somewhere he is intituled Volusianus for though Benefild against M. Leech call the Author of that letter Volusianus yet doubtles he meaneth The Author of the forged epistle vncertains another man distinct from S. Vdalricke who was neuer named Volusianus by any writer and this maketh the whole tale more to reele seeing it is obtruded as a base child that knoweth not his owne Fathers name and if once we remoue it from S. Vdalricke to whome as I haue proued it cannot agree the thing leeseth all credit and proueth nothing but the corrupt dealing of such as alleage it for this Volusianus is a name inuented to make fooles fayne no man knowing what he was where he was borne when he liued of what calling or credit in the world whether of kyt or kin to the man in the Moon for he neuer liued on our inferiour orbe vnder the first second or third Nicholas if I might interpose my ghesse I should thinke him to be brother to Steuen the subdeacon before mentioned out of Gratian for that he is so ready to father the fatherles and take a child to his charge which he neuer begot 45. But sayth M. Hall the matter admits no doubt which is another vntruth for whether by the word matter M. Hall vnderstand the Authour of the letter or the contents themselus both are doubted yea both are denyed and to take that for graunted which resteth in controâ—ersy to be proued is a foule fault in Philosophy and called petitio principij as if one to credit Petitio principij a foule fault in â— Philosopher M. Hall and to proue that for his learning he deserueth to be estcemed against one who shold deny him to be learned at all should thus conclude All learned men deserue to be esteemed but M. Hall as I suppose is a learned man Ergo he is for such to be esteemed no man will allow that he suppose the Minor as graunted which only is called in
question and alone necdeth no proofe which if we apply to the present matter we shall find in a different subiect the same argument We deny that euer S. Huldericke wrote any such epistle how doth M. Hall proue it thus whether you call him S. Huldericus or Volusianus the matter admits no doubt but that he wrote it to which put this Minor but he who wrote the letter is Authour thereof Ergo S. Huldericke is the Author An argument more fit for some Grillus Corebus Alogus some Patch Ioll or VVill Sommer then M. Hall 46. There resteth one more vntruth in the A foule Chronographicall errour touching the tyme when S. Hulderick liued margent which is Chronographical about the tyme when S. Huldricke liued that you may perceaue how this man in all things is rash and negligent if he dispute his arguments be loose if he cyte Authours their authorytyes are either mistaken or corrupted if he inferre one thing out of another it is by wrong illation takes quid for quo the contrary to that which doth follow of his premises if for more exactnes he go about to reduce things to their proper tyme 20. or thirty years difference is not to be regarded for to be exact is against his reputation he will not be taken for such a precision and therefore heere he telleth vs Huldericus Episcopus Argustae anno 860. which is iust thirty yeares before he was borne and yet after his birth he liued either thirty three or thirty foure before he was made Bishop so as he is heer made to be Bishop of Auspurg more then three score years before his tyme are not these men exact writers trow you on whose fidelity so many men with such assurance may rely their saluation 47. And to end all this matter as though An vntruth ioyned with a contradiction he had not hitherto giuen vs vntruths inough he addeth for the finall vpshot one more that also combyned with a contradiction when he sayth after Vdalricus so strong did he plead and so happily for two hundred yeares more this freedome still blessed these parts yet not without extreme opposition historyes are witnesse of the busy and not vnlearned combats of those tymes in this argument So he And I cannot but tell him out of the Comicke Non sat commodè diuisa sunt temporibus tibi Daue haec These tymes agree no better then did the other of S. Vdalricks letter to the first Nicholas and vntrue it is that euer he pleaded so happily so strongly who neuer opened his mouth in this controuersy vntrue it is that this carnal freedome blessed these parts for two hundred yeares more after his death for vnder Pope Gregory the seauenth he confesseth presently after that this cause was vtterly ruined and betweene the death of these two I meane S. Vdalricke Gregory the seauenth there is but one hundred and twelue years and whereas that Pope dealt in that matter some yeares before his death it will follow euen by the graunt of M. Hall himselfe that this cause so strongly so happily pleaded for in the compasse of one age was quite ouerborne and vtterly ruined so as by this account M. Hall in setting downe two hundred years reckoneth only but one hundred too much which is not much in him so subiect euery where to errour and so careles in his assertions as almost nothing cometh from him out of any learning or truth that is in Controuersy betweene vs. The imaginary pleading of S. Vdalricu◠neither strong not happy 48. Againe there is a manifest contradiction in these words for if vpon this strong and happy pleading this freedome blessed the parts of the Latin Church how had it such extreme opposition for before this tyme there was nothing els in M. Halls iudgment but full possession of this freedome and the contrary not to haue preuayled till more then a thousand yeares after Christ so as all the blessing was before S. Vdalricks pleading and all the opposition after and how is not that pleading to beheld rather weak and vnlucky then strong and happy which had no other effect then extreme opposition and quite ouerthrow of the cause defended by that plea For what successe could be more vnfortunate then to be cast in a cause so vehemētly vrged debated with such heate and that betweene the supreme Pastour for authority and a most eminent Bishop for sanctity of those tims which contradiction is made more palpable by the next ensuing words in his letter for thus he writeth 49. But now when the body of Antichristianisme A heap of vntruths began to be complet so it pleaseth this light Companion to prattle and to stand vp in his absolute shape after a thousand yeares from Christ this liberty which before wauered vnder Nicholas the first now by the handes of Leo the ninth Nicholas the second and that brand of hell Gregory the seauenth was vtterly ruined wiues debarred single life vrged So M. Hall And truely if Leo the 9. and Nicholas the second ruined this matter this plea had so short a blessing and so quicke a crosse as it remayned on foote little more then fifty yeares and that still in continuall contradiction vntill it was extinguished and so as before out of two hundred we rebated one so out of that one we must take another halfe leaue him but fifty if his owne words be true that this was ruined by Leo the ninth as heere he pretendeth and the blessing he talketh of is resolued to this that presently this marriage matter was contradicted and the contradiction so followed as it preuailed and this supposing what he sayth to be true of these men and matter which yet are so false as they conteyne in them to speake the least more lyes then lines which I will briefly touch in order 50. The first is that vnder these Popes the body of Antichristianisme began to be complete for all The first vntruth the Popes he nameth to wit Nicolas the first Leo the ninth Nicolas the second and Gregory the 7. were all very holy men all learned al excellent Gouernours of Christs Church and the second Nicolas excepted all registred in the Catalogue of Saints and our Protestants of the primitiue Church in England were wont to tell vs that this body was complete in the tyme of Bonisace the third whome idly they would haue to be that singular Antichrist descrybed in Daniels prophesy and the Apocalyps of S. Iohn some haue much laboured to draw the number of his name to agree vnto the tyme whē he was made Pope with other impertinencyes and if M. Hall make the denyall of Priests marriage the complementall perfection of this body for all the heauen and happynes which these men haue is in their wiues and whatsoeuer sauours or fauours not that is Antichristian then was it complete for some hundreds of years before any of them were borne or thought on as the authorityes of
in a few lines for first it is an vntruth to say that such as misliked or rather condemned the decreee of Pope Gregory were the better sort for then the best of them I meane VVilliam Bishop of Mastrick in Flanders had neuer come to that disastrous end as the historyes do mention that he did for none was more earnest for the Emperour none more eager against the Pope none a greater enemy to al order The wickednes of William Bishop of Mastrick none dealt more none so much in that Councell of VVormes as he for he forced Adalbert Bishop of Herbipolis or VVirtzburg and Herimanus Bishop of Mets to subscribe against the Pope was as Baronius out of Lambertus and others hold him the only Authour of that schisme the Emperour doing nothing without his counsaile direction and when by the Pope afterwards as well he as the Emperour were both excommunicated for the same he being at Mastricke when the newes therof was brought him the Emperour being also there at the tyme of Masse according to his wont he preached vnto the people taught them to contemne the Popes excommunication laughed and made sport at the sentence and being eloquent in speach vsed all the art he could to make light all Ecclesiastical censures to extenuate the Popes authority to complaine of the wrong done him and to canuase part by part the iudiciall sentence made against him which to that wicked Emperour and his light Courtiers made good pastime 68. But these mery sermons ended not so merily for after the holy dayes of Easter ended the Emperour departed this Bishop still Bruno in histor belli Saxonici Lambertus in Chron. aâ—j continuing on his wonted veyne of iesting rayling and contemning all authority euen in the pulpit within lesse then two moneths after the Councell of VVormes he fell sicke went home and the disease increasing there stood by him one of the Emperours family who ready to depart after the Emperour asked what he would command him to his Maister mary quoth the Bishop I send him this message Quod ipse ego omnes cius iniquitati sauentes damnati sumus in A heauy message perpetuum That he and I and all such as fauour his wickednes are damned for euer this was the last message he sent his ghostly child Henry the Desperation fourth and being rebuked by some of his Clergy who were about him for his desperate speach he answered them I can say no otherwise then I see and find for the Diuels enuiron my bed round about that they may take my soule as soone as it is separated from the body therefore when I shall be dead I request you all faithfull people that you trouble not your selues in praying for my soule So this most miserable man the authour and inciter of this tragedy departed this life Who whether he were of the better sort needs no declaration for God giuing the sentence who neuer in such matters forsaketh his friends the matter is out of all doubt or controuersy 69. And the Authour I follow hauing set downe this narration with some more particulers Bruno in hist belli Saxonici which I let passe thus further discourseth Et cur eum solum dico miserabiliter obijsse cum manifestum sit omnes ferè Henrici familiares fideles aequè miseras mortes incurrisse cos miseriores qui fuerant illi fideliores quòd fides illa verè erat perfidia And why do The followers of Henry the 4. M. Halls better sort of men dyed miserably I recouÌ„t this man alone to haue dyed miserably when as it is euident almost all the faythfull friends of Henry to haue had the like miserable ends and those more miserable who were more faythfull vnto him because that fidelity was nothing els but plaine perfidiousnes So he And then setteth down many particulers of the ends of the chiefest Authours instigatours and followers of the Emperour in all his bad courses which were very strange disastrous and lamentable The Patriark who sent from the Pope by seduction adhered after vnto Henry togeather with fifty other of his retinew dyed sodainly the same hapned to Vdo Bishop of Treuirs Eppo another Bishop riding ouer a riuer so shallow as one might wade it ouer on foot without danger was therein no lesse miserably then miraculously drowned and not to insist on other particulers there related the end of the Emperour himselfe was such as well shewed how pleasing vnto God how gratefull vnto men or rather to friendes and enemyes yea euen to his owne children how base and abominable his actions were 70. For after a long rebellion against the chiefe Pastour his spirituall Father and Superiour as he was a disobedient child to his mother The vnfortunate end of Henry the fourth the Church so were his children no lesse rebellious vnto him it falling out with him as it did with our second Henry vpon the like occasion with his Primate S. Thomas after whose death his owne children Henry Richard and Iohn were in continuall reuolt and conspiracy against him euen till his dying day so likewise the Emperour hauing two sonnes Conrade and Henry the first being made King of Germany and thereby declared heir apparent of the Empire because he would not obey his Father in a most filthy action as Dodechinus and Helmoldus relate and out of them Sigonius left his Father tooke Lombardy from him and what els he had in Italy for which the crowne of Germany was taken from him by his Father though otherwise he were a worthy Prince of goodly personage and excellent gifts of mind which made him beloued and admired of all and bestowed it on his yonger brother Henry who more like his Father then Conrade neuer left to prosecute his sayd Father by armes till he had put him from the Empyre ouerthrowne him in the field got him as Sigonius sayth after the discomfiture susteyned in the wars into his hands wher he forced or as some wil haue it famished him to death and then left his body for fiue yeares vnburyed at the towne of Spira in Germany and this Henry prouing no better an Emperour then the Father whome he had deposed God not permitting that wicked race to run on further ended the same in this Henry his person translated the Empire vnto the Saxons of all other most hated by the two former Emperours as he did the like in our King Henry the eight his children who all dyed without issue 71. Another vntruth it is that the Churches did ech where ring of him for Antichrist which is as false as any thing can be imagined for although in Germany such as followed the Emperour might vse many insolent termes yet they neuer that Pope Gregory the 7. neuer by his enemies branded with the name of Antichrist I haue read vsed this so far were all Churchs from vsing the like liberty of
bring his authority by whome Christian Religion was first planted in England we bring the greatest Clerke that euer antiquity yelded vs we bring one who liued when the bickering with S. Dunstane began and what he wrot of Priests wiues we bring S. Anselme when it was againe renewed we bring the approuance of all the best Historiographers and schollers of the Land so as both our authorityes are positiue in the affirmance far more ancient for tyme and without comparison for esteeme more eminent then any can be alleadged to the contrary and if Tertullians rule be true as M. Hall graunted and denyed it togeather in the beginning of his letter that priority of tyme inferreth infallibility of truth then the cause is ours and M. Hall is cast or els let him produce some more ancient writers or of such credit as S. Gregory S. Bede S. Anselme and the like or if authours want to deale for a farewel more friendly with him let him bring me for the first three hundred yeares after the arriuall of S. Augustine into England but one Bishop Priest or Deacon who was marryed and in that state liued freely with his wife and was so allowed and I will rest contented and put him to no further A large offer made to M. Hal. trouble for prouing his freedome and who seeth not this my offer to be very large in case marriage had byn as freely then permitted to Priests as it is now to Ministers as he contendeth And if neither authority in writing nor example of fact can be found and we shew both the one and other for their single life then I trust none will be so vnequall a Iudge and professed enemy of truth as not to acknowledge it appearing so plainly in her natiue colours and so Al authority standeth for the single life of Priests none against it of any account or worth euidently marked with infallible certainty 112. And it must needs be a great comfort vnto Catholiks to see Heresy haue so weake defence to see this cause so ouerborn by vs as you haue heard to see on our side stand S. Gregory our Apostle S. Bede S. Dunstane S. Ethelwold S. Oswald S. Anselme so many Kings Councells Nobility consent of the Realme continuâ—ll custome of tyme all writers of most account in one word all the flower of authority learning and sanctity which euer our Nation yielded since these broyles of the incontinent Clergy began before also on the other side to see M. Hall for want of other help to lay hold on one obscure Authour Henry Huntington for tyme not very ancient for credit small and for the very thing he affirmeth out of him vntrue al others disclayming from him all pleading for vs vnles they be such as are not worth the taking vp and that euen vntill the tyme of Edward the 6. when also those who there dealt against vs had first in another ParlameÌ„t before pleaded for vs and subscribed to that which afterwards they condemned If any say for their excuse that the later Parlaments are of equall authority with the former and that one may repeale what the other hath enacted I answere that so it is in ciuill affayres which depende vpon the present disposition of persons tymes and things for it may so fall out that one law which heeretofore was very expedient may be now hurtfull or the contrary but for matters of fayth or things thereunto appertayning this rule doth not hold for as the certainty of Religion dependeth not on men who are mutable but vpon the sure immoueable and euerlasting truth of Almighty God alwayes one alwayes inuariable so must the same also be constant one and vniforme in it selfe without any change or alteration at all neither is this fayth to be fashioned out by Parlaments of particuler Nations but if any difficulty arise therein or in any other Ecclesiasticall affayre the Pastours who alone are to direct the flocke of Christ in Generall CouÌ„cels are to sit iudges and define the matter lay men not to intermedle therein This alwayes hath beene the practise of the Christian world by this haue errours beene rooted out vnity purity of fayth mainteyned the people kept in peace the Church in esteeme this failing errours as experience hath too deerly taught vs haue increased heresyes without all order or vnity haue beene multiplyed common peace broken holy Church contemned the whole frame of Christianity shaken and al things disioynted and put out of order 113. Another ponderation may be drawn 4. Ponderation from the difficulty of this graunt for marriage in the very beginning when it was first proposed in Parlament in the tyme of King Edward The first grant for marriage of Clergy men gotten in the ParlameÌ„t with great difficulty the sixth and was so strongly opposed as it could find no passage but only for the tyme past and that also not without some hard straynes it seeming indecorum vnto them all to behold the Pastours as fleshly as the people and no purity or perfection of life to be in one more then in the other but sicut populus sic Sacerdos to be all carnall all drowned in sensuality al alike more corporall then spirituall more attent to the body See the three Conuers par 2. cap. 12. §. 22. c. then soule to pleasure then pennance temporall emoluments then eternall happynes but what should they doe deny it absolutly they could not for the Ministers practise had preuented their hindrance and they came prouided in that behalfe not hauing so much patience as to expect the Parlaments permittance and he had giuen them example who for place authority was the chiefest among them their Archbishop Cranmer the first marryed Metropolitan that euer was in England Cranmer I meane the first marryed Metropolitan that euer England saw and it was to no purpose to go about to restrayne the members from the influence of the head or where the root was corrupted to seek to saue the branches from infection this also being the chiefe point of Euangelicall liberty among them happily renewed as M. Hall sayth with the Ghospell but indeed was so new as a new paire of shooes neuer made before could be no newer And this Ghospell was not according to S. Matthew but Martin Luther as we haue shewed and a very lasciuious Ghospell that to satisfy the lust of these wanton companions did breake all bands and promises made before to God of a better life 114. But seeing afterwards all the ofspring to tracke so constantly this path of their progenitours necessity excluding all counsaile of further deliberation and the great multitude of these marryed men all meanes of redresse they were forced in the next Parlament to permit them all to take wiues permit them I say for approue them they did not and that also in despite of all lawes made euer before in al Prouinciall Nationall Generall Councels to the contrary
Hier. l. 1. in Iouin sayth Vnius vxoris virunt qui vnam vxorem habuerit non habeat The husband of one wife who hath had one wife not he that hath her that is none is to be made Bishop who hath beene twice marryed or who yet vseth his wife in matrimony but he who hauing beene once marryed purposeth to liue in perpetuall continency Episcopi sayth he Presbyteri Diaconi aut Virgines eliguntur aut vidui aut certè post sacerdotium Apologia ad Pammach in fine in eternum pudiâ—i Bishops Priests Deacons are either chosen virgins or widdowers or certes after their priesthood such as for euer are continent So he 32. Againe he sayth Non enim dicit eligatur Episcopus qui vnam ducat vxorem sed qui vnam habuerit vxorem S. Paul sayth not let a Bishop be chosen who may marry one wife but who hath had one wife and this for the cleanes required in the Episcopall and Priestly functions as els where he declareth saying Si indignè accipiunt mariti non mihi irascantur sed Scripturis sanctis c. Apol. ad Pammach If marryed folkes take it ill that I preferre virgins so much before them let them not be angry with me but with the holy Scriptures yea with the Bishops Priests and Deacons with all the priestly and leuiticall quier who know that they cannot offer vp sacrifices if they attend to the duty of marriage So S. Hierome Hieron in Vigilant And against Vigilantius as though he had seene as it were in that roote the progeny of our marryed Bishops in England and ordering of Ministers who should charge all the parish Churches with their plentifull offspring he cryeth out Prohnefas Episcopos sui sceleris dicitur habere consortes c. O villany Vigilantius is sayd to haue Bishops partakers of his wickednes if they be to be named Bishops who order not their Deacons till they haue marryed wiues mistrusting the chastity of single men or rather shewing of Note this M. Hall what holines they are themselues who suspect ill of all and minister not the Sacraments of Christ till they see the wiues of Clergy men great with child and yong babes crying in their armes So he speaking in the person of Vigilantius to all our English Clergy who suspect that none can liue chast and therefore will haue all to marry to auoyd forsooth this idle impossibility 33. With S. Hierome agree in this exposition S. Augustine and S. Epiphanius and assigne also the same reason to wit the purity required De boro coniugali cap. 18. in Priests Clergy men Non absurdè est sayth S. Augustine eum qui excessit vxorum numerum singularem c. Not without cause hath it beene esteemed that he who hath exceeded the singular number of wiues should not therby be thought to haue committed any sinne but to haue lost a certayne dâ—cency required to the Sacrament not necessary to the merit of good life but to the Epiphan haeres 59. It is against the ancient Canons that Priests should marry seale of Ecclesiasticall ordination So he with more to the same effect And S. Epiphanius non suscipit sancta Dei praedicatio post Christi aduentum eos c. The holy doctrine of God after the comming of Christ admitteth not those who after one marriage death of their wiues do marry againe and that for the excellent honour and dignity of Priesthood and this the holy Church of God receaueth with all sincerity yea she doth not receaue the once marryed person that yet vseth his wife and begetteth children but only such a one she taketh to be a Deacon Priest Bishop or Subdeacon as abstayneth from his wife or is a widdower specially where the holy Canons are sincerely kept So he and I see not how possibly he could haue spoken more plainely for vs or we for our selues 34. S. Ambrose both in his commentary els where is no lesse cleare and resolute in this point then the former quamuis secundam habere vxorem c. although sayth he it be not forbidden Ambr. in 2. ad Tim. 3. to marry the second wife yet that one may be worthy to be a Bishop he must leaue his lawfull wife for the excellency of that order because he must be better then others who desire that dignity So he And in another place refelling as it were of purpose the opinion of S. Hierome who held that marriage before Baptisme Hier. ep ad Ocean did not hinder but that if a man tooke another wife after as Carterius whom he defendeth did he might notwithstanding his wife marryed after baptisme being also dead be made Priest restrayning bigamy to the second marriage Ambros l. 3. ep 25. edit Vaticanae ad Ecclesiam Vercellensem idem habetur l. 1. officioruÌ„â— vltimo of the faithful only S. Ambrose hereunto replyeth Quisine crimine est vnius vxoris vir teneatur ad legem sacerdotij suscipiendi c. Let him be preferred to priesthood who is without fault the husband of one wife he that hath marryed the second tyme hath no fault by which he is defiled but he is excluded from the prerogatiue of a Priest So he and addeth the Fathers in the Nicen Councell to haue decreed none to be admitted at al into the Clergy after the second marriage 35. And because S. Hierome vrged that all faults by the force and vertue of Baptisme were remitted and so the first marriage by the same either to be taken away if it were a sinne or cleansed if impure he answereth heereunto Culpa lauacro non lex soluitur c. The fault is forgiuen in baptisme the law not dissolued there is no fault in wedlocke but there is a law for priesthood the law is not remitted as a fault but remaines as a law therefore the Apostle made a law saying if any be faultes the husband of one wife So S Ambrose demanding in the same place this question which I likewise demand of M. Hall and all his marryed bretheren in England Quid interesset inter populum Sacerdotem The liues of Priests ought to be more pure then the liues of secular men si ijsdem adstringerentur legibus What difference should there be between Priest people if they should follow the same lawes if both should marry and both liue a like truly none at al and yet as this Father sayth Debet praeponderare vita Sacerdotis sicut praeponderat gratia The life of the Priest ought to be more eminent as his calling is more high and M. Hall as though he acknowledged no purity out of wedlocke or as though all that preferred continency were impure addeth after this testimony of the Apostle that one Ibidem word alone shall confirme me against all impure mouthes but if S. Ambrose had beene his Bishop he would haue taught him better to haue vnderstood the Apostle and to haue
17. in order wherin it is decreed that none can be made Bishop Priest or Deacon who hath marryed a widdow or one who was diuorced from her husband or a seruing mayd which if it were practised amongst them in our country and all such deposed as are so marryed who seeth not that the English Clergy would be soone reduced to a smaller number 59. But the truth is that he maketh no more account of this Canon then of any counterfeit thing whatsoeuer and thereby his Reader especially M. VVhiting may know whom he trusteth for to proue not only the doctrine practise but Constitutions also of the Apostles to stand for the marriage of Priests he produceth for the later this Canon and besids this no nother authority only for the approuance of the sense which he pretendeth the Trullan Councell is cited or rather misalledged as presently I shall declare and this Canon when he talketh with M. VVhiting is so hard a bone as they who gnaw thereon can sucke nothing but bloud out of their owne iawes but afterwards forgetting what he had sayd to him he telleth his tippling ridiculous friend Thomas Iames of Oxford another tale maketh this proofe out of the Apostles Constitutions as light as a fether and with one blast bloweth both it and some nyne or ten Fathers with it away togeather exclayming against vs for relying any authority thereon VVhat a flourish sayth he do they make with vsurâ—ed names whome would it Decad. 4. pag. 18â— not amaze to see the frequent citations of the Apostles owne Canons Constitutions Liturgyes Masses Clement Denis the Areopagite Linus Hyppolitus Martial of Burdeaux Egesippus Donations of Constantyne the Great and Lewys the godly of 50. Canons of Neece of Dorotheus Damasus his Pontificall c. and a little after of all these and others he sayth that all carry in them manifest brands of falshood and supposition and consequently this matter of Priests marriage which he would shew to M. VVhiting to be the Apostles constitution and that out of one of their owne Canons drawing bloud from the iawes of all Catholikes that gnaw theron is only a meer cosenage deceit for this Canon this Constitution is nothing els but a vayne flourish of vsurped names and amazing of M. VVhiting with the citation of a Canon and constitution Apostolicall which by his owne confession hath nothing in it of any Apostolicall authority but only of meere falshood supposition and forgery this is indeed to incurre the Gal. 2. Apostles checke of pulling downe that which before he had built this is to blow hoat and cold with the same breath to say and vnsay allow and disallow any testimony or authority at his pleasure 60. Neither were it a matter of any difficulty to iustify the credit of all the Authors he reproueth if I would digresse so far and the thing it selfe did so require but to auoyd larger excursions into other matters not incident to the controuersy in hand I will leaue all our proofe in this matter and in one word deale with M. Hall as God did with the Aegyptians of whome in the Prophet Isay he sayd Concurrere Isa 19. faciam Aegyptios contra Aegyptios I will set Aegiptians against Aegiptians Protestants against Protestants M. Halls brothers or rather Maisters and Superiours against him to speake to defend to vrge the authority of S. Clement S. Denis S. Damasus S. Dorotheus heere denyed and others of no lesse vncertaine authority with some of our Aduersaryes then any that M. Hall hath named for this is a solemne custome and very currant amongst these men that in case some Catholike do vrge any of these Authours against their heresy then presently to discarde them with contempt to twite them with bastardy or as M. Iewell scornfully was wont to do to say they are of the blacke guard but when Protestants and Puritans warre one against the other then are these Authours classicall their workes vndoubted their words of weight their credit vncontrollable which point as I sayd were not hard to shew in diuers particulers if I would stand vpon them 61. M. Doctour VVhitgift lately tearmed of Canterbury when he wrote against the Puritans vrged the authorityes of the foure aboue named and for that they were denyed by Cartwright and others as branded with falshood and supposition the Author of the Suruey of the pretended discipline in a long chapter wherein the Puritans dealing with the ancient Fathers Ecclesiasticall historyes and generall Councels are layd open checketh them for the same for to pretermit Suruey pag. â—29 330. deinâ—eps Pag. â—â—6 Against the Puritans the ProtestaÌ„ts obiect Fathers which they refuse when they are obiected against themselues other charges of their contempt and reiection of Fathers thus in one place he writeth To proue the antiquity sayth he and lawfullnes of the name of Archbishop there being alleadged the authorityes of Clement Anacletus Aniceâ—us Epiphanius Ambrose Sozomenus c. the Puritans tearme the bringing in of these authorityes the mouing and summouing of hell that those tymes were not pure and virgin-like but departed from Apostolicall simplicity and do tread them all vnder feet with as great facility as may be Clement Anacletus and Anicetus are discharged for rogues and men branded in the fore-head So there with more to the same effect and after to proue S. Timothy to haue beene Bishop of Ephesus are cited among others Dorotheus and Dionysius Areopagita with the like disallowance of the the Puritans as the former whereas yet Oliuer Ormerod in his Picture towards the end to proue the interrogatoryes Pag. 338. made in Baptisme to be no trifles or ioyes as the Puritans tearmed them but vsed in the Apostles dayes citeth S. Denis Areopagita and A. N. in his Bible-bearer doth the like to proue the vse of the Crosse vsed in the same Sacrament saying Dionysius Areopagita who liued in the Apostles Dionys de Ecâ—les hierar l. 7. c. de bâ—ptis tyme maketh mention of the Crosse in Baptisme c. But not to digresse further from the Suruâ—y wher immediatly before the place aboue cited for the antiquity of the name of Archdeacon were alleadged sayth this Surueyour the testimonyes of Damasus Hierome Sixtus Sozomene and Socrates to whose authorityes their answere is two of them are counterfaits Damasus spake in the dragons voyce among men the best ground beareth thistles those tyms were corrupt and yet Sixtus liued Bishop of Rome about the yeare 265. and was a godly Martyr So the Suruey and M. Iewell in his Reply citeth also Fabian Alexander Anacletus and others so as with the Protestants S. Clement S. Denis S. Damasus Anacletus Anicetus Sixtus Alexander Fabian Dorotheus are good Authours and if they speake in their behalfe their words must be admitted for true authority in respect of their vertue and venerable antiquiquity and the Puritans for denying their testimonyes condemned as enemyes to the ancient Fathers 62.
This is the course held by the Protestants against the Puritans but when they write against vs then do they turne their sayles and Iuell Replyart 1. Chark in his Reply to the censure â— Your last then are all these Fathers counterfeit and not the authours of those workes extant vnder their names then will M. Iewell tell vs that this S. Denis cannot be Areopagita S. Pauls disciple and M. VVill. Charke very soberly lets vs know that he hath not beene a companion of our bastard Denis in his iourney to heauen Then againe will M. Iewell demaund from whence commeth M. Hardings Clement then Damasus Anacletus Anicetus Sixtus Alexander Fabian and all other Popes decretall epistles do manifestly Artic. 1. diuis 29. depraue and abuse the Scriptures they maintayne the state and kingdome of the Pope they publish vaine and superstitious ceremonyes and proclaime such things as are knowne to be open lyes then will he labour to shew that they M. Iuells dealing with the Fathers cannot possibly be theirs whose names they beare So he sayth of them all in generall and after by name he casteth of Anacletus Anterus and Fabian but yet in the same diuision forgetting himselfe to confirme what he would haue he citeth a decree of Anaclete and in the next diuision after another of Fabian saying Fabianus also Bishop of Rome hath plainely decreed that the people should receaue the Communion euery Sunday So as if these Decretall epistles make for him they are forth with authenticall if against him then is there nothing in them but deprauation of Scripturs superstitious ceremonyes knowne and open lyes 63. And whatsoeuer M. Hall in wordes doth pretend of the other ancient Doctours whose workes are allowed and whome in one place he setteth forth with their honourable titles as sententious Tertullian graue Cyprian resoâ—ute Decad. 4. ep 3. to M. Matthew Milward Loco supra citat Tryall by the Fathers reiected by the chiefe ProtestaÌ„t writers Zuing. in explanat art 64. Hierome flowing Chrysostome diuine Ambrose deuout â—ernard and who alone is all these heauenly Augustine adding further their Counsells verdicts and resolutions to be wise and holy and in another place confessing the Court of the Fathers as reuerend a tryall as any vnder heauen yet notwithstanding all this when this tryall shall be made this man will stare post principia play least in sight or rather fly far out of the field for the chiefest champions of these later Sectaryes haue still refused to enter into this combat he by name who gaue the first name to the base brat of the Sacramentary heresy Zuinglius I meane in one place thus writeth of them all togeather Mox incipis clamare Patres Patres c. Presently sayth he you begin to crye the Fathers the Fathers so forsooth the Fathers haue deliuered but I reply vnto you that not the Fathers nor the mothers but the word of God it is that I require So he And Musculus so much reuerenced euery where by M. VVhitaker sayth Musculus in loâ—is com tit de Scripturis sacris that he is malignaÌ„t to the Church of God who admits the tryall of Fathers Doctor Humphreyes in Iewells life sayth Quid rei nobis cum Patribus cum carne sanguine What haue we to do with the Fathers with flesh and bloud and M. VVhitaker VVhitak ad 6. ratio Campiani makes this Caueat Cauendum semper est ne nimium Patribus tribuamus cum Papistis c. We must still beware not to giue too much credit to the Fathers with the Papists but that in reading them we maintaine our right and liberty and examine all their sayings by the rule of the Scripture with which if they agree that we receaue them but if they disagree that then with their good leaue we may freely reiect them So he And further demandeth this wise question equum ne iudicas c. do you thinke it meet M. Campian that if the Fathers erred in interpreting the Scriptures that we should follow their steps and that we should forsake the truth we haue found because they could not find it Lo what account these men make of the Fathers whose credit on the sodain is with M. Hall so great and tryall so reuerend 64. But not to enter further into this matter Luther alone may suffice to cleare this question who by name reiecteth all those whom M. Hall in words will seeme to admire S. Cyprian he Sermon conuinialibus tit de Patribus calleth a weake deuine S. Chrysostome a babler S. Ambrose vnlearned Tertullian no better then Carolostadius Luthers coÌ„temptible Antagonist S. Bernard a good preacher a bad disputer in S. Augustine nothing sayth he is singular but especially aboue al others he raileth at S. Hierom to whom he sayth Quin te Hieronyme conculcamus cum tua Bethleem Ad cap. 22. Genes cuculia deserto Why do we not tread thee Hierom vnder our feet with thy Bethleem coole desert And in another place he sayth he was an Heretike and addeth the cause which somewhat concerneth M. Hall Nihil de Christo loquitur Sâ—rm couiu cap. de cholaest Theolog. duntaxat illius nomen ore fert c. he sayth nothing of Christ only he hath his name in his mouth I know none to whome I am so great an enemy as vnto Hierom and why I pray you what hath S. Hierome done to you more then the rest that may deserue so great hatred mary sayth this fat Fryer Tantùm scribit de ieiunio de delectu ciborum de virginitate c. The wrong is euident for he only writeth of fasting of choice of meaner meats of virginity the like which is a yoke that neithee lewd Luther nor M. Hall nor any els of the one or other sect can support and had M. Hall found any reliefe for his cause in any of No Fathers euer fauoured the marriage of Priests these Fathers for the marriage of Priests their names and authorityes had not beene spared in his text or margent but he citeth no one of them al for this matter but two or three words of S. Cyprian about Numidicus they most shamfully mistaken as shall be shewed in the next Paragraffe and when he shall reade their wordes by me cyted against him he will I doubt not deale with their authorityes as he doth heere with the Apostles Constitutions canonize them when they may seeme to make for his purpose and afterwards tell vs they were all men they had their errours he will follow them as far as they follow the Scriptures and no further which is iust as much and as a little as himselfe listeth for if they interprete the Scriptures against him as we see they did the wordes of the Apostle of carrying about a woman sister then their learned Commentaryes shall be childish illusions and he cannot hold but out of the reuerend respect he bears them must