owne direction and also because your versions not being authenticall as you confesse the Scripture which you vse can be no sufficient rule of saluation euen to the learned That the Church is the true Guide if saint Augustine be beleeued whom a Luther in defensio verbo Caenae Meosaneiudicio post Apostolos Ecclesia now habuit meliorem Augustino Calu. 3. Instit cap. 3. §. 10. Ex Augustino sumant lectores si quid de sensu antiquitatis certi habere volunt you accnowledge to be a faithfull witnes of antiquitie it is a cleare case b August epist 16. Ait rectissimā discipli namesseveimperiti nitātur authoritate Ecclesia It is a most orderly discipline saith this great light that the ignorant should rely vpon the authoritie of the Church There is nothing so behouffull for a soule as to obey a Cone 2. in Psalm 70. Nihil tamexpedit anima quam obedire he adds in another place b Contra Eplani fundam cap. 5. Egovero Euangelio nen crederem nisime Catholicae Ecclesia commoueret authoritas .... qua infirmatae iamnec Euangelio credere potero And againe I would not leleeue the Gospell vnlesse the authoritie of the Catholike Church did moue me thervnto and after that which authoritie being thaken I should not giue credit to the Gospell where it is manifest that he speakes of himselfe as a Catholike not as a Manikie These words doe make a cleare demonstration that the Church is the true guide of the faithfull nor indeede can it be called in question if we consider that the holy Ghost declared it the pillar and strength of truth that the Fathers c August contra Epistolam fundam c. 5. Epist 118. l. De vtilitate cred c. 15. altbi passim Iren. l. 3. c. 3. 4. Hieron contra Luciferi doe accnowledge it to be infallible and that d Calu. 4. Instit c. 1. §. 10. Neque enim parui momentiest quod vxcatur columna fundamentum veritatis domus Dei quibies verbis significat Paulus ne intercidat veritas Deiin mundo Ecclesiam esse fidem eius custodem Etc. 2. §. 2. Verè Ecclesia columna est ac firmamentum veritatis Vvhitak cont 2. q. 4. c. 1. Nos dicinsus eam quae est Christi Ecclesia In absolute necessariis non posse errare Id. contra 1. quaest 3. c. 5 7. Fateor nos haraticos cogi conuinciposse authoritate Ecclesia necasio argumento externo validius ac fortius premi hareticos yours also allow it to be such in points necessarie to saluation And who would now say that a child were not to heare and follow the documents of a mother most louing to her children and who in things concerning their saluation can teach them nothing but truth Vve are bound to heare the Church I will shortly bring your owne Authours to make it good Now let vs examine whether as I haue said you doe not impose vpon vs. You doe openly impose vpon vs while you make your followers beleeue that we make a generall prohibition of the scripture as being a dangerous booke It is true we are not of those wherof a Tertul. Prascript c. 41. Omnes tumēt omnes scientiā pollicētur ipsa mulieres haveticae audent docere contendere c. Tertullian speaketh they are all puffed vp with pride they all promis knowledge yea the verie hercticall Women dare vndertake to teach and dispute Vve are not of that sort of people of whom b Traet 47 in Iean Nihil sic amant isti ac scientiam promittere sidem rerum verarum quas parunls crede we pracipiuntur velut imperitiam deridera saint Augustine affirmes that they are taken with nothing so much as to promis knowledge and laugh at the beleife of true things which the children were taught to beleeue as though it had bene a meere ignorance Vve haue no affinitie with Pelagius who will haue women to reade Scripture as a Hieron dial 1. contr Pelag. saint Hierome doth note and condamne him for it Vve are not of your humour who iudge the scripture so easie to be vnderstode that you make no difficultie to command all the world to reade it In a word we cannot allow of your wayes in making Idiots ignorant persons and women their owne Doctors and Prophetes Yet is it false to affirme that we prohibite the scripture as a perilous booke we doe not so far forgett the respect which we owe to the spirit that did dictate it nor disaccnowledge the happines and truth which it proposeth vnto vs. Marrie we doe boldly affirme that the Scripture such as you propose it that is changed or taken according to the letter without giuing its true sense the knowledge wherof depends vpon the Church her declaration is dangerous for those who ether by ignorance vanitie or malice would rashly make vse of it And in this we doe nothing to which we are not moued by the Scripture the Fathers and your owne men By the Scripture a 2. Corin 3. Litera occidit 2. per 3. Quae indocti instabiles deprauant ad suam ipscrum perditionem saying in expresse termes that the letter doth kill and that the vnlearned doe depraue it to their owne perdition By the Fathers b Lib. de resurrect carn c. 40. Haereses esse non perpe vam scriptura intelligi possent Hilarius l. 2. de Trinit Vigiltus Martyr l. 2. contr Eutych Tertullian saying that there could be no heresies at all if the Scripture could not be ill vnderstoode and saint Hilatie shewing by sundrie examples that they sprung from the false interpretation of the scripture By your owne Luther confessing that the scripture is the Heretiques booke If it be commendable in a carefull mother to take the knife out of her childs hands with which through want of yeares and discretion he might hurt himselfe and to giue it to one of more ripnes to vse you ought rather to prayse then blame vs sithens we prohibite the Scripture in a vulgaire tongue to some that might abuse it and permit it to such as may reape commoditie by it That we permitt it to some it is apparent by the verie confessions of a Vvhit controu 1. q. 2. c. 13. Papista hac in re certam exceptionem rationemque temporum locorum personarum haberi volunt Item Status quaestionis huiusmodiest vtrum vernacule versiones scripturarum sint omnibus promiscuè praponendae permittendae vel non illinegant nos affirmamus your owne men who doe accnowledge that in this we make exception of persons tymes and places and that the question berwixt you and vs is not whether any can reade them or not but whether we doe indifferently permitt all to reade them or no which we affirme saith whitakere and they meaning Catholikes deney that it ought to be done The exception which we make of
c Philip. 2. v 7. he did for vs exinaniee himselfe taking the forme of a seruant That of the greater or lesse honour which doth accrue vnto God is but a bad way to establish one article of Faith and destroy another Vvher vpon d Hil. l. 1. de Trinit Religiese impius l. 4. irreisgiosam de Deo selt â—tudinem S. Hilarie tearmes the Arians who vse that way of proceeding Religiously vvicked people who doe irreligiously serue God Other grounds are necessaire Vve must know what the Church teacheth vs and those that are so carefull of Gods honour ought to be verie carefull to be in structed in it least they iniure him in deedes whom they honour in words which they doe in expressing things otherwise then they are indeede it being certaine as saith a Cassian l. 1. de Incarnat Quod non dicitur it ae vt est etiamsi honor videatur contumelia est Cassian disciple of S. Chrysostome that that vvhich is not exprest as it is though it seeme honourable is indeede a true contumelie That which is true be it of what kinde it will honours God because he would haue it so and that all his wills are to his owne aduantage But what is false though in apparance aduantagious turnes to disaduantage And though many things beare no proportion with the greatnes of the Almightie yet haue they connection with the infinite perfectioÌ„ of his loue and Charitie which appeares somuch the more perfect and accomphished by how much in vertue therof he descends to things more lowe and abiect And therfore it is an abuse to alledge gods honour to dazle and blinde the people Yet this you doe while you represent your Religion hated for fiue points which you esteeme honorable for him as being honorable in your opinion to Iesus Christ which is but yet so in apparance onely Hereupon I am forced to tell you with a Tertul. l. de pudic c. 2. talia tantae sparsilia eoruÌ„ quious Deo adulentur sibi lenocinantur effoeminantia magis quam vigoraÌ„tia disciplinaÌ„ Tertullian that those litle shiftes by vvhich you become flatterers of God and your selues doe rather vveaken then strengthen discipline So considering Religion in the shape you represent it me thinks I see not a chaste wife but a strumpet set out with sundrie adulterate colours to seduce the world and kill you come from you and become mistresse of your life which moues me to the end I may deliuer the people from errour to vndertake to wash her face vnmaske her and discouer her deformitie following the example and foot stepps of the Prophete who speaking of an Idolatrous b Nahu 3. Propter mu. titudinem fornicationuÌ„ meretricis speciosa gratae habeutis maleficiae quae veÌ„didit gentes in fornicationibus suis faemiliaes in maeleficiis suis Reuelabo pudenda tua in facie tua ostendam gentibus nuditaetem tuam regnis ignominiam tuam nation vseth these words For the abundance of the fornications of a faire charmeing and mischieuous strumpet vvho hath sold nations in her formcations families in her diuelish prankes I vvil discouer thy shame in thy face and vvill shevv thy nakednes to all nations and thy ignominie to kingdomes Which I will doe so much the more willingly because I haue learnt of b Concil in psal 36. Tanto magis debemus commemorare vanitatem haereticorum quanto magis quaerimus salutem eorum S. Augustine that by how much more we desire the saluation of Heretikes by so much more we ought to indeuour to make the vanitie of their errour appeare SECTION II. VVe vvould make it clearely appeare vnto him that our religion is hated because it admitts no other rule of saluation then the vvord of God contayned in holy scripture ANSWERE IT is false that your Religion is hated for that it admitts no other rule of saluation then the scripture but true it is that it is worthy of hatred for the diuers abuses which it committs in Scripture That we teach no other rule of saluation then scripture will be manifest to any that knowes that these words an other rule doe importe in proper speach a Rule of a diuers kind as I will hereafter proue in the ensuing Section and withall an intire rule as I will presently make appeare following your owne tenets who will not admitte the Ghospell of S. Mathew to be an other rule then that of S. Marke considering they are but two parts of the same Rule and that this word rule simply taken signifies a compleate rule for as S. Basile saith a Rule admitts no addition but things that are imperfect are neuer rightly instiled by the name of Rule Now we nether admitt Rule of any other king then the scripture nor yet any compleate rule other then it yea we call it the compleate rule of our saluation for two reason both because it contaynes immediatly and formally the substance of our Faith all the articles necessarie necessitate Medij for mans saluation and also because it doth mediately comprehend all that we are to beleeue in that it doth remitt vs to the Church to learne the same which it assures vs is infallible Hence it followes that we draw that truth out of the scriptures which we receaue by the mouth of the Church if reason may preuayle which teacheth that whoso euer deputes another to speake for him speakes mediatly by his mouth and if a Aug. lib. 1. cont Cresco c. 33. Quamuis huius rei certè de scripturis Catholicis non proferatur exemplum earundem tameÌ„ scripturarum etiam in hacre à nobis tenetur veritas cum hoc facimus quod vniuersae placuit Ecclesiae quam ipsarum scripturarum commeÌ„dat authoritas Etsimi lia lib. de vnit Eccles c. 22. S. Augustine who deliuers it in expresse termes may gaine beleife Albeit saith he one can produce no example of scripture concerning this matter yet hold vve in it the truth of the same scripture since vve doe that vvhich is conformable to the vniuersall Church vvhom the authoritie of the selfe same scripture doth commend vnto vs. Behold in what esteeme the Scripture is with vs for which cause we also are to be esteemed Now we will see whether by reason of it you deserue not hatred though not in that sense in which you say you are hated for it But before we come to that point permit me I beseech you to extenuate a litle the glorie you hunt after in establishing the Scripture the onely rule of your saluation by making you share it onely with diuers Here tikes who before your tyme sustayned the same opinion So said the Manichies I can in no sorte saith Fortunatus in a Aug. l. cont Fortunatum Nullo genere rectè me credere ostendere pessum nisieaÌ„dem sideÌ„ scripturarum authoritate firmauerim S. Augustine make appeare that I rightly beleeue vnlesse I confirme my Faith
to pretend also scripture wherin it is contayned To wrong the scripture because it is manifestly necessarie that that which of its owne nature is good as it is must needs be changed before we can draw any euill out of it as errour for exemple And indeede we find both these things obserued in the Fathers For a Vincentius Lyren c. 35. Siue enim apud suos siue aliencs siue publicè siue in sermonibus siue in libris siue in coÌ„uiuijs siue in plateis nihil vnquam de suo proferuÌ„t quod non etiaÌ„ scripturae verbis adumbrare conentur first they wittnes that vpon all occasions at all tymes vpon all subiects heretikes haue still the scripture in their mouth and doe bragge of the authoritie therof because a Tertul. de resurrectione aliuÌ„de scilicèt loqui non possent de rebus fidei nisi ex literis fidei they cannot giue a more apparant colour to their faith then the words of faith nor b Ambr. Com. in Tit. Haeretici illi sunt qui per verbaee legis legem impugnant propâ—ium sensum verbis astruunt legis ve peruersitateÌ„ mentis sine legis authoritate commendeÌ„t more speciously impugne the law then by the law it selfe nor more highly coÌ„mend their malice then by the authoritie of that which is deuoyde of all euill And againe they shew that the source of heresies is the c Aug. tract 18. in Ioan. Neque enim natae sunt haereses quaedam dogmatae peruersitatis illaquiantiae animas in profundum praecipitaentia nisi dum scripturae bonae intelliguntur non bene quod in eis non bene intelligitur etiam temere andacter asseritur wrong which is done to the scripture deriuing their generation from its corruption f Aug. de vnit Eccles c. 15. cauenda est caliditas Haereticorum volentium conuertere verba Dei à veritate propter quam dicta sunt adperuersitatem in qua ipsi sunt conuerting ordinarily the vvords of truth in fauour of vvhich same truth they are vttered into errours and falsities in vvhich they themselues liue the e August 3. de Baptis ad imaginem enim phantaesmatum suorum cum quibus volutars carnalis anima delectatur conuertit omnia Sacramenta verba librorum Sanctorum misteries and words of holie writ into the formes and shapes of their owne fancies accomplishing that which the Apostle in the 2. to the Corinthians obserues in false Prophetes who are to walke in the wayes of craft and to corrupt the word of God SECTION III. MINISTERS NOr other head of the vniuersall Church then Iesus Christ our Lord Nor other Purgatorie of our sinns then his blood Nor other propitiatorie sacrifice for our sinns then his death and passion Nor other merit before God then the obedience vvhich he offered to God the Father for vs. ANSWERE VVe sustaine that there is no other head of the vniuersall Church then Iesus Christ no other Purgatorie of our sinns then that of his passion no other merit then his obedience and therfore it is false that you are hated for the considerations which you pretend Marrie you are worthy of hatred for deceaseing and abusing the people while you make them beleeue that what you teach in this behalfe is to the glorie of Iesus Christ and what we sustayne is iniurious and preiudiciall to the same which is false as I will make distinctly appeare by the examination of all these points one after another That we establish no other heade of the vniuersall Church then Iesus Christ is euident euen by the Pope himselfe who yet you say is interessed in the matter who declares that there is but one onely God Therfore Bonifacius in extrauagante Vnam sanctaÌ„ de maio obedieÌ„tia Itaque Ecclesiae vnius vnice vnum corpus vnum caput non duo capitae quasi monstruÌ„ Christus videlicet Christi Vicarius Petrus eiusque successor saith S. Boniface VIII there is but one body and one head of one onely Church not tvvo heades as though it were a monster to Witt Iesus Christ and his Vitair S. Peter and his successour True it is we sustayne that there are other persons distinct from the person of Iesus Christ who beare vnder him by his vertue and power the name and condition of heade Yet this doth not hinder Christ from being the onely head of the vniuersall Church since scripture Fathers and reason teach vs that there is a maine difference betwixt this proposition There is no other head then Iesus Christ and this no other then Iesus Christ is the head of the Church together with him because this last no other then Iesus Christ is the head of the Church together with him excluds euery man which is not Iesus Christ from hauing any part in qualitie of heade And that the first proposition which saith there is no other heade then Iesus Christ doth onely import that though many doe partake of the name and nature of heade yet is it by subordination of one to another The scripture doth clearely teach vs this distinction in the second of the a Et murus ciuitatis habeÌ„s fundamenta duodecim in ipsis duodecim nomina duodecim Apostolorum Agni Apocalypse and in the second to b Vers 20. Superaedificat super fundamentum Apostolorum Prophetarum the Ephesians where it saith plainely that others then Iesus Christ are the fundation of the Church And in the first to the Corynthians 3. Chap. saint c vers 11. Fundamentum aliud nemo potest ponere praeter id quod positum est quod est Christus Iesus Paule deliuers in expresse tearmes that there is no other fundation of the Church then Iesus Christ Vvhence it is euident that these propositions are to be taken in a diuers sense because otherwise they would be incopatible as being contradictories Hence it is that amongst the workes of saint a In Apocal. 21 Necrepellit nos à nostro intellectuillud quod Apostolus dicit fundamentum aliud nemopotest ponere c. Non enim aliud fundamentum est Petrus aliud Christus Iesus quia Petrus membrum est Christi c. Ambrose to wit in his treatise vpon the Apocalipse we see that this passage where the Apostle affirmes that there is no other fundation then Iesus Christ doth not hinder S. Peter from being a fundation because being a fundation as he is a member of Iesus Christ by subordination vnto him he is not another fundation And this was that which S. b S. Leo ep 89. Hunc enim in consortium indiuiduae vnitatis assumptum id quod ipse erat voluit nominari Leo aymed at when he said that Iesus Christ admitted S. Peter into the societie of an indiuiduall vnitie and would haue him to be called that which he was Vvhence it is manifest that the nature and name of Petrae a rocke
them with him being a more honorable thing vnto God to endow second causes with force to cooperate in some things with him then to leaue them without all action in his productions as though they were altogether incapable of the same Howbeit the ratio or essence of merit which is found in the actioÌ„s of men proceeds not from the substaÌ„ce of their worke but from the grace alone which they receaue by the metit of Iesus Christ as S. Augustin obserues saying that the merits of the iust are merits because they are iust that is for that they proceed from persoÌ„s iustified and gratefull vnto God by meanes of his grace which is in them who will thinke that our merits which are the effectes of the grace of Christ alone doe disparage the glorie of the merits of Christ yea who will not planely discouer that the merits of men doe redound to the glorie of Christ his merits No otherwise then the splendour of rich gemmes and the brightnes of the moone and starrs which are effectes of the sunn's Light doe augment his glorie so far are they from diminishing it Vvhich moued Brentius to say In Apologia Confess Vvitemberg cap. de contritione that wee extolled Christ with too great prayses while wee auerre that he merited that our workes should be meritorious And another Authour Ericcius l. 4. de Eccles c. 4. of no smale note confesseth that in this thing we make Christ his glorie wonderfull illustrious Vvhence it is manifest that our merits are so far from iniuring tho merits of Christ that they euen turne to his greater glorie And indeede since the operations of the members belong to the head because this commands them and imparts vertue towards their productioÌ„ how should the dignitie of the workes of the members of Iesus Christ our Heade become rather contumelious then honorable vnto him By euery one of our actions saith a In cap 6. Zachariae Saluator in singulis coronaÌ„ acci S. Hierome our heade is crovvned Our good workes being giftes of God the Father effectes of the Holy Ghost the principale Agent fruites of the passion of Iesus Christ the end for which he suffered the act of the children of God and those who are participant of his diuine nature in conclusion being rather workes of God then of men as the b Matth. 20. 1. Cor. 15. Gaelaet 2. holy scripture doth teach vs who will repute the dignitie of such workes contumelious to God Yea who will not rather iudge those contumelious to God the Father the Holy Ghost to IesuÌ„s Christ his sufferances who like to your selues impugne the merits of good workes since by impugning them they doe truly impugne the giftes of God the operations of the H. Ghost the fruites of our sauiours passion the effectes of grace in fine the dignitie of good workes which proceed rather from God then from men Vvho will not in contemplation herof iudge your religion worthy of hatred yea euen of horrour and ours for the contrarie praise worthy And therfore it is apparent that if your doctrine be hated in respect of that which it teacheth touching merit you cannot as you pretend draw any aduantage from it but contrariwise it turnes to your disaduantage since it is hated not for sustayning a thing which is aduantagious but preiudiciall to Gods glorie Vvhich happens not onely in this point but in all the rest of the points of this Chapter It is truly hated for sustayning things preiudiciall to God not onely in that you deney as I haue alreadie shewen the workes of Saints to be meritoriours but which is more and indeede a thing causing horrour because your Prime Authours whose doctrine you imbrace as distending downe from heauen deney that the workes of Iesus Christ are meritorious I confesse saith Caluine 2. Instit c. 17. §. 1. Equidem fateor si quis simpliciter per se ChristuÌ„ opponere vellet iudicio Dei noÌ„ fore merito locum quiae non reperiretur in homine dignitas quae posset Deum promereri that if any would oppose Iesus Christ simply and nakedly considered in himselfe to God's iudgement there were no place for merit because there is no dignitie found in man which can merit God Vvhence is planely gathered that you repute not the workes of Iesus Christ meritorious before God for their owne dignitie and worth but onely by meanes of God's fauorable acceptance therof There rests no more to be done in this Chapter but to beseech the Reader as I instantly doe to note by the way that though you would be thought to haue no other ayme in these Articles but God's honour and glorie yet is it but a cloake you take vnder which your end is to seeke your selues freeing your selues in this world from all the paine and difficultie which is found in doing well For why doe you establish the Scripture the onely rule of your saluation but to deliuer your selues from obedience to the Church and from subiection to Traditions which are manifestly contrarie vnto you imitating herin that Tertul. praescript c. 17. Necessario â—â—lunt agnosâ—â—â— ea per quae reuincuntur which Tertullian notes in the Heretiques of his tyme when he saith that they will in no sort accnovvledge that wherby they are conuinced To what end doe you deney that S. Peter was the Heade of the vniuersall Church vnder Iesus Christ but onely to cast off the subiection to his Successours authoritie euen as Rebells to be freed from the Vice-Roys authoritie would deney that any other but the king had power ouer him Vvhy will you haue the blood of Christ onely to purge you but onely to auoyd paine and trouble and to be subiect to no satisfaction Vvhat reason haue you to deney the merit of good workes but onely to flatter your owne sloyth and to be obliged to no paines-taking for the obtayning of Paradice shewing your selues herin Epicures shollers who for loue of ease l. 8. Conf. c. 16. Negauit tractus meritorum as S. Augustine notes denyed the course of merits Vvhy doe you reiect the propitiation of the sacryfice of the Masse but by banishing all other propitiation saue that of the sacryfice of the Crosse to take a way all conceipt that we ought to indeuour to make God propitious You haue Gods honour in your mouth but your priuate interest in your hart two specious wayes by which you draw poore sooles to your beleife but to their owne perditioÌ„ which is indeed that which you will purchace to you and yours who cannot dy in your errours but withall they perish eternally CHAP. IIII. Section I. MINISTERS Your Maiestie should also see that we are hated because we would haue the people themselues to know the wayes of saluation in lieu of referring themselues totally to others by an affected scrupule and voluntarie ignoronce which is couered with a cloake of obedience and docilitie and to this effect we would haue
and doth accnowledge it to be such that by good right it ought to be a Retinenâ—â—m esse eleationem hi vhi vt npiae prohieiur abolendam vbi vt ni cessaria prcipitur retayned and obserued where it is prohibited as impious There be also others of yours who place it amoÌ„gst the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which are nether commanded nor prohibited finally others confesse that it was in vse in the primitiue Church as they make good by the testimonies of the Fathers Wher vpon b Vvitemberegenses refutationâ— Orthodoxi consensus p 101. Eleua tionem ren adiophoraâ— quaea Chris nec praecept nec prohibi sit omnes ir telligentes pios fateriâ—â— non dubium est Et Hospâ—â—nian par 1. Histo l. 2. fo 31. In primâ—tiua Ecclesisymbola Eucharistica paululum eleuata populo ostensa fuetunt we are moued diligently to defend and conserue it and the rather because as you affirme it was the counsell of your first father or if it please your worp that we should change it sith c Dionysj Ecclesiae Hierar cap. 3. Chrysostomihomil 36. in 1. Corinth hom 3. ad Ephes Basilij Lib. d sp s c. 27. c. Rom. 4. v. 15. S. Paule teacheth vs that where there is no law there is no transgression produce I beseech you one passage of the scripture which doth prohibite it which if you cannot performe confesse at least that the Church is indowed with sufficieÌ„t power to institute the same for d S. Augustine holds it to be a meere madnes to contende that that is not to be done which the Church is accustomed to doe through the vniuersall world Wherto e one of yours also doth assent in these words that any may be compelled and conuinced by the authoritie of the Church and that heretikes are not more forcibly and efficatiouly vrged by any externall argument SECT IV. OF MASSES WHERE THE ASSISTANTS DOE NOT COMMVNICATE BY this same rule you will loose this cause too I meane the question which you moue about priuate masses 〈◊〉 Epist. 118. 〈◊〉 Vvhitat â—ontrou 1. q. 〈◊〉 cap. 5. â—â— ffateor â—os haereâ—â—cos cogi â—onuinci posâ—â— author â—taâ—e â—â—elesiae â—ec alto argumento exâ—e â—â—o vâ—â—â—diâ—s ac forâ—ius preâ—â—i â—areticos as you please to tearme them and communion vnder both kinds in both which kinds the Church did many yeares agoe practise what we now practise How beit I will briefely touch both those points hoping to make manifest that you are as ill grounded in those as in the others which we haue alreadie examined There is no man that doth not ingenuously confesse that the celebration of the Euchariste when the people doe communicate is more perfect then that where they communicate not common reason conuinceth that to all the world both because the fruits of the sacrifice are more fruitfully communicated when the hoste is consummated by the assistants worthyly disposed then when it is not receaued by them and also because this mysterie being both a sacrament and a sacryfice is more perfectly accomplished when it is not onely offered to God in sacryfice but also imparted to the people as a sacrament For these considerations the ancient canons and Fathers doe inuite exhort yea command christians to coÌ„municate at the masses which they hearè and the Councell of Trent doth expresly desire it Sess 2â— Wher for if you pretend no more but that it were better that the faithfull should communicate all at the masses they heare we doe loyne hands with you And in this cause in lieu of condemning the good and wholsome doctrine of the Church in this point as in all the rest you should complaine of the indeuotion of the people sith it is their coldnes that is cause of their not communicating not the Pastours fault But â—f your bent be to condemne the masses where the assistants communicate not to be vnlawfull we must oppose and with great reason in all mens iudgment since none are found who iustifie your pretentions and condemne ours If the masses where the people communicate not were vnlawfull it must needs be because the oblation of the Euchariste as it is a sacrifice should be necessarily annected to the participation of the people in the Eucharist as it is a Sacrament which could onely come to passe two wayes other by reason of the nature of the sacrifice or because God would haue it so By reason of the sacrifice it cannot be since it is manifest that its beeing doth not depend of the participation of the assistants none did eate of the holocausts which were wholy coÌ„sumedâ— none did participate after the manner we speâ—ke of of that which was ordayned by Moyses for the remission of sinnes Leuit. 6. for as it is written preists alone had libertie to eate of it Nâ—y in the sacryfice of the Crosse which was offered for vs all none at all did participate in that manner in which our aduersaries would oblige vs to partake in the Eucharist Nether can one affirme that Iesus-Christ would haue no masses celebrated without communicants there nether being any formall law nor expresse word in all the scripture whence you will haue all the truthes of faith to be deriued wherby we may gather it You will happily say that Christ in his last supper communicated his Apostles and consequently that we are bound to imitate him by distributing the Eucharist to the people But this proues no more but that the people may communicate that it is to be desired that they would communicate and that when they will it should not be refused them but it imports not that we are bound to thrust the Eucharist vpon them against their will and that we are not to celebrate vnlesse they communicate For who is able to sustayne that in case the Apostles had not communicated our sauiour had not celebrated the Euchariste Who dare affirme that it was Gods will that so glorious à mysterie should haue depended vpon the will of another and that the indeuotion of the comon people should make the Pastour indeuoute But I would willingly aske you since you make our sauiours imitatioÌ„ an inuio lable law vnto you alwayes to communicate the people Cap. de Euchar. Ad rectam Eucharistiae actionem requiruntur ad minus duo â—idelices Minister bucharistiae benedicens â—s cui Eucharistiae Sacramertum dispensatur why doth it not oblige you also to communicate all the people Which yet you doe not for the Confession of Witemberg is content that one onely should coÌ„municate and againe many are present at your suppers who coÌ„municate not In à word seeing S. Paul doth tell vs that where there is no law there is no transgression and that sinne is à trangession of the law and seing you produce no place of scripture which condemnes vs you your selues stand guiltie of the fault not in this respect onely but in many others First by
the custome of the Church for a Hom 〈◊〉 in Ep. ad Ephes Frustrahabetur quotidiana oblatiâ— cum nemo sit qui simul participeâ— S. Chrysostome confesseth that in his tyme there was such à negligence amongst the people that there were many oblations made wherof none did partake and b Aâ—br 5. de Sacram. c. 4. S. Ambrose doth witnes the same speaking of the Grecians who he saith were wonte to communicate but once à yeare Secondly by the confession of your owne Authours for c Perkinsus in â—rohlem de Mis â—a priuata TeÌ„â—ore Walfridi â—iâ—â—entur caepisse soliteriae missae tempore Gregoriâ— Perkins doth accnowledge that the custome of saying masse wherin the people communiecated nor was obserued in the Church euen from the tyme of walfride and Gregorie the great that is à thousand yeares agoe whence it is manifest that it hath bene obserued in all tymes since none can shew the begining therof Thirdly by your men for d The historie of false Martyrs in â—n thelife of iohn Hus. The memorie of â—o Hus ought to bee in holy esteeme amongst all the faithfull Iohn Hus whose memorie is famous amongst you saith planly witnes e Luth. colloq conuâ—â—alibus Luthere that this custome is not vnlawfull SECT V. Of Communion vnder one kind TO improue and reiect the ancient customes of the Church as you doe without alleading any law for their condemnation is to condemne your selues You crye out Anathema against vs because we communicate vnder one kind onely which yet hath bene in all tymes practised in the Church you persuade the people that we doe them à great iniurie in not permitting them both the kinds wheras you produce no là w which prohibites as an vnlawfull thinge what we practise And that this many ages agoe was the custome of the Church a Ser. de Laepsis S. Cyprian S. b De obitu Satyri Ambrose and c Lib. 2. de vxore Euzeb l. 6. c. 39. Tertulian who liued in the second third and fourth age doe deliuer d Lib. de Lapsis witnessing that the primitiue Christians conserued the Euchariste in there houses vnder the onely species of bread to haue accesse to it at all houres vpon sundrie occasions whether it were in tyme of sicknes to prepare themselues to Martirdorne or for same other respecte Further it appears out of S. Cyprian who notes particularly that Children were communicated vnder the onely species of wine as also out of S. e Basil Epist ad Caesaream August Basile who witneseth that such as liued solitarily in the wildernes coÌ„municated vnder one kinde Manifest therfore it is by these authorities that the custome of communicating vnder one kind hath bene obseruerdin the Church aboue twelue hundred yeares and that which is worthy to be noted without all opposition ether of Geekes or latins till Iohn Hus his tyme. Nay further wheras in the a Actes of the Apostles where mention is made of the CoÌ„munion of the Church he speakes onely of the breaking of the bread we haue iust occasion to conceaue that this custome was not onely introduced in the tymes of the forenamed Auncients but euen in the Apostles tyme. Againe wheras the Fathers are of opinion that our sauiour after his resurrection gaue the Euchariste to his disciples in Emaus vnder the onely species of breade we haue reason to beleeue moued by their testimonie that it was the custome in the verie tyme of Iesus Christ Howbeit none can doubt but that the communion vnder one kind hath bene practised in the Church froÌ„ the second and third age If you did produce any law which did prohibite this vse we should doe amisse to transgresse it But you haue produced none nor are the authorities wheron you rely of any waight or momeÌ„t against vs. As for the passage of S. Iohn the 6. it auayles you not both because according to you it is not vnderstood of the Euchariste saue in the begining onely for in the end of the same Chapter Calu. â—n 6. Ioan. v. 53. Non recti Behâ—râ—â— cum hoc testimonâ—â— probarent vsum calic iâ— pr â—â—missum deâ—ere â—mnibus esse he mentiones that bread onely wherof it is said that it giues life euerlasting and also because that Caluin himfelfe blames the BohemiaÌ„s for indeuouring to proue out of that text that the Chalice is to be imparted to all men If you produce that of S. Paule where he speakes of the Euchariste 1. Corinth 11. it will no wayes aduantage your cause yea contrariwise it will preiudice it since after he had related the institution of Iesus Chr. speaking of the eating of the Euchariste he speakes of it with disiunction saying who shall eate or drinke whence it appeates that it is not necessarie to receaue both the knids together If you obiect our Sauiours example it will be in vaine since you your selues coÌ„fesse that it is not necessari to imitate him in eueri thing and place that it is another thing to instruct Preists as Preists what they are to doe Act. â— and another thing â—o teach theÌ„ what they ought to make the people practise and that the Apost theÌ„selues distributed this SacrameÌ„t without making meÌ„tion of any thing but bread You will alleadge without doubt that place of S. Mathew 26. Matth. 26. Drinke ye all of this which Caluine extolls so much But that will make as litle to your pourpose as the rest because in that passage Iesus-Christ speakes tò his Apostles onely as S. Marke shewes Marc. 14. saying they all dranke of it which word all did plaÌ„ly designe the Apost only since they only draÌ„ke of it It may be you will obiect that if Iesus-Christ by these words Drinke ye all of this meane onely the Apostles then by paritie he speakes of them onely when he saith Eate ye all of this and coÌ„sequeÌ„tly the faithfull should not be obliged to communicate But your consequence is false 1. Corinh 11. v. 28 Probet autem seâ—psum homo sic de pane illo â—edat de calice bibat because albeit in that place this word eate was onely addressed to the Apostles yet is it sufficient that the coÌ„munion of the faithfull is coÌ„manded els wher to witt in the sixt of S. Iohn and in the first Epist of S. Paul to the Cor. We could sufficieÌ„tly defend our selues by the sole title of our possession and your weaknes which is so great that you cannot coÌ„uince vs though by condeÌ„ning vs you are obliged therunto But we will not insiste vpon this point it being an easie taske to manifest that we nether wrong the people nor yet iniure the Sacrament yea on the contrarie side that that which we teach is aduantagious to both and that your doctrine is iniurious to both as also to the institution of Iesus-Christ We doe no wrong to the people because the body and blood of
Iesus-Christ being as well vnder one kind as both and the signification of the Mysterie remayning intire the people receaue Iesus Christ as truly vnder one kind and with as great beneciction of heauen as vnder both Nor doe we iniure the Sacrament because the essence therof doth not absolutly require the two kinds but that it may subsist vnder one onely without loosing any esseÌ„tiall part sitheÌ„s it doth possesse in one the body and blood of Iesus Ch. and innoyes all the significatioÌ„s which belong to its essence the species of bread most fitly signifying the nourishment of the soule by grace and the vnion of the faithfull in one bodie together with their head for as much as it nourisheth and its masse is composed of many cornes of wheate Now hauing shewen that the communion vnder one onely kind is nether iniurious to the people nor to the Sacrament I will not stay there but further I will make manifest that it is profitable and honorable to both To the Sacrament because it preserues it if not from iniuries at least from indecencies contrarie to the honour and reuerence due to the SacrameÌ„t and yet are most obuious for it is manifeste that if the species of wine were coÌ„municated to all men they could not auoyd sheding of it To the people because if it were still necessaire to giue both the kinds it could not easily be keept to communicate the people at all tymes all momeÌ„ts all occurences for besids that à sufficient quantitie of wine is not euery where found to communicate the faithfull ther are also some that doe so loath wine that they cannot onely not drinke it but not so much as smell it Whence we may well gather that Iesus Christ did not establsh the necessitie of communicating vnder both kinds 〈◊〉 Brentius in â—polo confess â—itemb Martyr 〈◊〉 Corinth 10. 〈◊〉 â—mo Buceâ—â—s in colloq â—atisbonensi coÌ„â—sist esse indifâ—rens sumere â—â—am vel vtraÌ„quespecieÌ„ idemque concesserunt Thcologs Protestantes in Colloq Augustano Vade Hospinâ—an part 2 histo an 1536. Et in concordiae discordi cap. 41. Coccium lib. 6. do Eucharist c. 3. since he cannot oblige vs to impossibilities And therfor diuers of your authours doe grant that this hath place and is true in abstemious persons But it is you indeede who iniure the Sacrament and people while you deptiue them both of the reall and true body of Iesus Christ which we doe carefully preserue for them and you giuing onely the appearrences to the people vnder the species of bread and wine are iustly by Luthere coÌ„pared to one who hauing supped vp the meate of the egg doth carefully gather vp the shell to the people to eate Further you are most iniurious to the institution of Iesus Christ Beza Epist. â— Rite celebrabitur Coenae Domini siquod panis aut vini vicem vel vsu communi vel pro teÌ„poris ratione supplet panâ—s aut vini lâ—â—o adhibeatur in that you sustayne that albeit he instituted his Sacrament in bread and wine yet nether the one nor the other of those kinds are necessarie so that it maybe administred in other matters Let the Reader now iudge whether of vs are more iniurious to the Sacrament and more preiudiciall to the people and coÌ„sequently who are to be coÌ„demned Without all doubt you will be held faultie in the iudgement of any Reader yea which is more euen in your owne iudgment For albeit you conteÌ„ne the authoritie of the Church Hospinian l. 1. histo sacram lib. de concord disâ— c. 41. Luther in declarat Euchar â—lâ—bi yet by Gods speciall prouidence Luther deferrs so much vnto it in this point that by the relation of your owne Caluinsts he confesseth that it is not necessarie to giue both the kinds that the Church had power to ordayne one onely that the people are to be satisfied therwith Further he approues the Rule made by the Councell of Latran to that effect which being done so he would find it verie strange saith he if one Bishope of his owne authoritie should opposeit CHAP. VII MINISTERS YOur Maiestie should also see that our religion is disciphered vnto you quite otherwise then it is indeede for if the things which are imposed vpon vs to witt that we are enemyes of saintes and of the Blessed Virgine Marie and that we hold that good workes are not necessarie vnto saluation and that we made God authour of sinne were true we were abominable creatures vnworthy of the societie of men but they are forged calumnies to bring vs into hatred and are refuted by our writings sermons and our verie manner of life ANSWERE If you be men of your word Ennemies of Saintes it is high tyme for you to begin to trusse vp your baggage and to remoue your selues out of the societie of men since you haue sentenced your selues to that punishment in case you be guiltie of à crime of which you will neuer be able to cleare your selues Is it not to be enemy to the Saints to ascribe contumelious names vnto them which the Diuell Pagans and the old Heresiarkes condemned by the primitiue Church gaue them names I say which the Fathers doe disalowe and reiect by the authoritie of Scripture And yet witnes a Kemnitâ—us Exam Conc. part 3. p 228 Vsitat vocantur mortus Hoâ— 58. de S. Babyl Kernnitius one of your prime Authours you doe ordinarily tearme them deade no otherwise then the Diuell according to S. Chrysostome Iulian the Apostata in S. Cyrille b lib. coÌ„t Iulias Vigilantius in S. Hierome c lib. cont Vigilantium who together with the rest of the Fathers reprehend that manner of speach They are not deade saith S. Ambrose d Serm. 10. d. ss Pet Paul Non enim mor tui sunt quor curamus nata lem hodie sed renati viuuÌ„t c. we doe not tearme them deade saith S. Damascene e 4 de Fide c. 16 Eos qui in spresurrectionis si deque erga eun diem extremun clauscrunt mor tuos haud qua quaÌ„ appellamus He is not the God of the deade but of the liuing saith S. Hierome f lâ—b cont Vigit Non est Deu mortuorum seâ— viuorum Item sancti non appel laÌ„tur mortui seâ— dormientes following the Gospell The Saints are not said to be deade but to sleepe saith he againe Is it not to be enemye to the Saints to depriue them of all care and all charitie towards men making them who are in the state of perfection aboue lesse perfect then those that are here below subiect to worldly defectes and yet this you doe They doe not saith Caluine g Calu. in 1. Cor. 13. Charitatem praesentâ—b us offieâ—â—s minâ— me exercent noÌ„ sunt pro nobis soliciti charitatis perpotuitas nihil pertâ—net ad tempus intermedium Et in cap 1 Zachar officia charitatis scimus restringâ—
the fift part of your subiects to witt the Church men who hold not themselues to belyable to the lawes of your Court yea for their temporallities they haue another whom they accnowledge soueraigne out of your kingdome To which adde that which the Pope pretends and that which he hath alreadie practised yea euen in our tyme to witt that he hath authoritie to depriue your Ma. of life and crowne what remaynes dread souueraigne but that your kingdome is held in homage to the Pope and that you liue and raigne at his discretion onely ANSWERE It is an old trike of craft when one is guiltie of à fault to put it vpon another Yet I stand astonishd to thinke how you dare make vse of if it against the whole Clergie of this kingdome whom you striue to make the king suspect accusing them of faction wherof they are wholy innocent and you generally knowen to be stickers in The nature of your Ministerie deptines you of credit in point of accusing priests for S. Augustine a Hareticorum accusationes coÌ„tra Catholicum prebyterum admittere nec possumâ—â— nec debemm doth teach vs that your accusations nether ought to be nether indeed can be admitted and that it is the trike of heretikes b Aug. Epist 137. Hoeretici non hahendo quod in causa sua defensionis defendant non nisi hominuÌ„ crimina colligere affectant ea ipsa plurafalsissime iactant vt quia ipsam diuine scripturae veritatem qua vbique diffusa Christi Ecclesia commendatur crimiuari obscurate non possunt homines per ques pradicatur adducant in odium de quibâ—â— fingere quitquid in mentem Generit possunt when they haue nothing to say to defende them selues in point of their diuision from the Catholike Church to make à list of meÌ„s faults and following their owne fancie falsly to inlarge them selues thervpon to bring them into hatred who teach the truth which they are notable to find faultie or to obscure Hauing alreadie sufficiently manifested in what manner you susteyned the dignitie of this crowne and how litle occasion you had to draw pride or vanitie from it I will onely obserue in this place that you doe too too far swarue from truth and modestie in saying that you are ill vsed in this kingdome and by assuring yourselues that if you were not hated and hardly treated for maintayning the dignitie therof you should for euer after be exeÌ„pt from all hatted and hard vsage To what purpose did you taxe the two first Orders of State accusing the one of factioÌ„ the other of weaknes preiudiciall to the kings Maiestie but to let the world see that when you beare à splene against any one wtih à wonderfull boldnes you faigne faults to diffame him though withont all fundation for none can beignorant but that if there were any faction it gott entrie by their meanes who out of tyme aÌ„d seasoÌ„ would needs moue à question wherof the Church Nobilitie and the greater part of the three states striue to stoppe the course moued therto by diuers reasons which in à few wonds I will deduce First because the questioÌ„ being meerly spirituall whether God had giueÌ„ power to the Church to depose kings in cases of heresie and in fidelitie when they doe not onely make profession of them but doe also shew theÌ„ selues persequutours of the name of Christ aÌ„d the true faith as also whether this power did aggree with the word of God or no finall whether it were lawfull to vrge all the people to take an oath wherby they should affirme that it was not according to Gods word which being handled in the assemblie a body composed of lay-persons could not intermeddle in it without sacriledge without intrenching vpon the liberties of others mounting into Moyses his chaire laying hand vpon the incensoir and consequently without exposing themselues to the desasters which are wont to follow such impious and sacrilegious enterprises Nay euen the Clergie it selfe of a particular Church as of the Church of France could not decide this point since it belongs to the vniuersall Church onely to define Articles of Faith Secondly because all the kings and states in Christendome hauing interest in this cause one onely kingdome could not iudge of it without the appouall and authoritie of all the rest Thirdly because the holy Sea being interressed in this matter your adherents who haue sworne its destruction and who esteeme the ruine therof their establishment could not be held impattiall iudges though some of them indeuoured to deale in it Fourthly because out of the definition which you aymed at there followed a most euident schisme by establishing an article of faith particular to the Churches of France not Catholike or common to the vniuersall Church whence there followed a diuision in faith Lastly because the decision of this question was not onely of no effect to the health and securitie of kings which was yet the sole end of the question but was euen preiudiciall vnto them as may be seene by that which that great Cardinall and honour of his age wrote vpon that subiect who doth most amply handle this matter with eloquence equall to the profunditie of learning which all the world admires in him These reasons being coÌ„sidered without passion will leaue no doubt in any man but that the Clergie-men were worthy of praise not of blame for refusing to decide a question which was proposed vnto them to a bad end nor did the decision therof belong vnto them And therfore it carries no colour but is quite contrarie to truth to accuse them of faction adding that they and a part of the nobilitie made the king loose his cause For how doe you not blush for shame to affirme this since it is notorious to the word that in all the articles of the Clergie and nobilitie there was no proposition made much lesse any determination of any thing that tends in any the least measure to the diminution of the soueraigne power of our kings and the dignitie of their crowne and that the article presented by the aduise of some of the third order was onely reiected without euer deliberating vpon the contents therof it is a grosse impertinence to say that we caused the king to loose a cause where no iudgment was past and to make his Maiestie a partie in a cause where he onely interposed himselfe by his authoritie to conserue things in the same state in which they stoode If any were cast in their cause it is you who vnder pretext of maintayning the authoritie of kings would haue brought inn a schisme amongst Catholikes As for the letters which the Pope wrote vpon this matter if it be a fault in a father to write to his children to receaue their fathers letters his holines is blame-worthy to haue done that honour to the two orders wherof we speake and they culpable in receauing them Marrie seeing common sense doth teach vs that there
The Emperour Basilius doth also intimate this when speaking to the layetie c In 8. Syn. nullo modo vobis licet de Ecclesiasticis causis sermonem mouere haec inuestig are quaerere Paetriarcharum Pontificum SacerdotuÌ„ est qui regiminis officium sortiti sunt Ecclesiastic as adepti sunt claues non nostrum qui pasci debemus c. he saith It is no way lawfull for you to medle with Ecclesiasticall causes to sound and examine them belongs to Patriarkes Bishopes priests who haue the gouerment and keyes of the Church It appertaynes not to vs who are to be fedd to be sanctified to be bound vnbound Of the same sense was Constantine in the Councell of Nice Gratiane in the Coun of Aquilea Theodosius the younger in the Ephesine Councell and diuers other Emperours in many other places In contemplation wherof a Lib. 5. epist 25. Scimus piisamos Dominus Sarerdoâ—â—â—tòus negottis non se immiscere S. Gregorie saith we know that our most pious Lords doe not meddle in the affaires of preists And that the Princes if they had any such pretention were not well grounded S. b Epist adsolit â—iâ—aÌ„ agentes Quandoae conatio aeuo anditum est quod indicium Ecclesiae authoritateÌ„ suaÌ„ ab Imperatore accepit Plurima antea Synodi fucre multa iudicia Eecâ—esiae habitae sunt sed neque Patres isliusmodires principi persuadere conati sunt nec Princeps se in Ecclesiasticis causis curiosum praebuit Athanasius doth witnesse Vvas it euer heard saith he from the creation of the world that the iudgment of the Church had authoritie from the Emperour Many Councells haue bene celebrated the Church hath often past her iudgment but nether would the Fathers persuade the Prince to any such thing nor did the Prince shew himselfe curious in causes of the Clergie and a litle after c Quis videns eum in decernendo principeÌ„ se facere EpiscoporuÌ„ praesidere iudiciis Ecclesiasticis â—â—on merito di â—at eum illam ipsam desolaetioneÌ„ esse quae a Daniele praedicta est who is he that seeing him he speakes of Constantius the Arian Emperour take vpon him to be Prince of Bishops to decree and preside in Ecclesiasticall iudgmeÌ„ts that will not say with iust reasoÌ„ that he is the desolation of abomination foretold by the Prophet Daniel S. Ambrose doth the like when writing to Valentinian the yonger who being corrupted by the Arians would iudge in matters of faith he vseth these words a Ambros l. 2. epist 13. Si vel scripturaruÌ„ se rieÌ„ diuinaruÌ„ vel vetera teÌ„porae retractemus quis abnuat in causae inquam fidei Episcopos solere de Imperatoribus Christianis noÌ„ Imperatores de Episcopis iudicare Eris Deofauente etiam insenectutis maturitateprouectior tunc de hoe censebis qualis ille Episcopi â—â— sit qui I aicis ills Sacerdotale substernit .... si confereÌ„dum de fide Sacerdotum debet esse istae collatio sicut factâ— est sabâ— onstaÌ„tino Augusta memâ—riae I 〈◊〉 cipe Et Tract de Basil non tradend Quid honorificentius quam vt Imperator Ecclesiae filius dicatur If we ether reflect vpon the order of Scripture or tymes by-past who will deny but that in points of faith in points of Faith I say the Bishopes were accustomed to iudge of Emperours not they of Bishops Vvith the helpe of God goes he on tyme will ripen thee and then you wilt iudge what kind of Bishope he is who will subiect Priestly right to laymen if a conference be to be had of faith it belongs to the Preists as it happened vnder Constantine Prince of sacred memorie Vvhat hath an Emperour more honorable then to be stiled the sonne of the Church That that which the Fathers say herin is verified by the Scripture the punishment which befell those who would needs lay hand vpon the Thurible doth confirme Further it would not b 2. Agg. 2. v. 12. command that things belonging to the law should be demaÌ„ded from the mouth of the Preist without making any mention at all of kings if both were equally lawfull It would not c 2. Paralypom say that Amarias should preside in things belonging vnto God marrie in those that apperi ayne to the office of a king Zabadias if their Courts were not distinguished To conclude d Ephes 4. v. 11. S. Paule making a long list of those who haue power in the Church had not begun with the Prophetes Euangelists Pastours and Doctours not mentioning kings if their authoritie had extended so far Againe put case the king had power to medle in such causes would you be content he should sitt vpon yours with obligation to stand to his iudgment Yes euen as the Donatists who appealed to Constantine stood to his you will stand to it if it fauour and like you appeale from it if it dislike or goe against you God saith e Vvhitak controu â— q. 5. c. 4. Iudicium sibi Deus reseruanit nulli hominum permisit one of your prime Authours following therin the donatists reserued the iudgement of religion to himselfe alone and did not grant it to any man why then will you haue the king to iudge But le ts see whether you haue a hart to enter into the lists as you make a flourish None will beleeue in my opinion that he that will not admitt of ordinarie weapons hath a desire to fight though otherwise he proclaime a loode chalance and who knowes not that in reiecting the authoritie of the Church Fathers Councells and Traditions you refuse the ordinarie weapons which are vsed in combats of Faith But oh you will admitt of the scripture and we also most willingly admitt of it yet not as it is in your hands that is Scripture not authenticall maymed corrupted interpreted according to your owne braine and most ordinarily against the true sense but the scripture preached and interpreted by the Church the pillar and rock of truth wherby we are to be deliuered from all errour Vvho could away with him that in a ciuile cause in a difficultie of importance would onely stand to the text of written lawes reiecting the explication of Doctours the credit of the historie practise and common custome in fine the authoritie of the Iudges who are appointed to doe iustice to all men But were he not yet more insupportable who onely admitting of written lawes should reiect those that are directly against him and interprete the rest following his owne fanticie In these termes are you wherby it well appeares that though you make shew to desire a conference yet indeed you flie it contenting your selues to haue occasion to bruit abroad amongst your friends that you offered a disputatioÌ„ concealing from them in the interim that you refused the iust and reasonable conditions therof apprehending that you haue done sufficiently in putting out some smale pampletes which decide nothing at all
it in that it was established 1600. yeares agoe with promisse of a perpetuitie so assured that it cannot departe from its primitiue establishement that is to say from the body first instituted by lesus Christ while he was in the world there is none that doth not accnowledge that a Church like yours which a smale tyme since departed wholy out of another ChristiaÌ„ societie is at least Schismaticall And it will be as litle for your aduaÌ„tage to affirme that you were forced out from vs the Church by her excoÌ„munication compelling you therunto because as I haue said it is enough to know that you are gone out without searching the cause therof and againe that it is a cleare thing that the Church of Rome did neuer bannish you from her communion till after you had diuided your selues froÌ„ her beleife which is iustified in that the Pope did not excoÌ„municate Luther till after he had preached against the Faith of the Romane Church Thus you remayne attainted and coÌ„uicted of schisme nor are you able to purge your selues of it as I shall still make more and more appeare a S. Aug. lib. 2. cont litt Petil. c. 16. Obiicio schismatiscrimen quod tu negabis ego autem statim probabo neque enim commâ—nicas omnibus gentibus illis Ecclesiis Apostolico labcrefundatis S. Augustine saith to Petilian a Donatist I obiect vnto thee the crime of schisme thou lt deney it and I will presently conuince thee of it for thou art not in communion with all the people and Churches founded by the Apostles labour If S. Aug. conuinced Petilian of schisme because he was not in communion with the Church dispersed through all the world and founded by the Apostles can you your selues doubt but that you are conuinced of the same crime sith you haue no communion with the whole vniuerse no nor with the Apostolicall Church your owne consciences I dare assure my selfe will at once both accuse and coÌ„uince you Now if the argumeÌ„ts I haue vsed to conuince you of schisme haue not fully satisfied I will yet further lay before your eyes how the same Fathers and many others hauing condemned some of their tymes as schismatikes onely because they did diuide themselues from the Romane Church doe in that their fact condemne you also of the sam crime as hauing forsaken the said Church He saith S. a Cypr. lib. de vnit Eccles Qui CathedraÌ„ Petri super quod fundatâ— est Ecclesia deserit in Ecclesiaâ—se esse confidit Cyprian who forsakes the Chaire of S. Peter vpon which the Church is built doth he conceaue himselfe to be in the Church Vvhere this great S. doth not onely say that such as diuide themselues from the Chaire of S. Peter are out of the Church but withall renders the primitiue reason therof because they seperate themselues from the fundation of the Church The same b Cyp. epist 55. ad Petri CathedraÌ„ atque ad Ecclesiam principalem vnde vnitas Sacerdotalis exorta est he to acheth in another place where he saith that S. Peters Chaire is that from whence priestly vnitie tooke its origine Thou art not ignorant saith S. c Optat. l. 2. contra Parm. Igitur negare non potes scire te in vrbe Romana Petro primo EcclesiaÌ„ Episcopalem essecollatam 〈◊〉 his qua cathedra vnitas ab omnibus ser uaretur .... vt am schismaticus peccatoresset qui coÌ„trasingularem Carbedram alteram callen cares Optatus to Parmenian Donatist that the Episcopall Chaire was first coÌ„ferred vpon S. Peter in the Citie of Rome in which one chaire all should be so vnited that who soeuer is disunited and setts vp an other chaire against that is a Schismatike and a sinner Vvhence d Lib. 2. Vnde est ergo quod claues regni vobis vsurpare contenditis quicoÌ„tra CathedraÌ„ Petri vestris praesuÌ„tionibus audaciis sacri legio contenditis saith he in the same doe you then pretend to haue the keys of the kingdome of Heauen you that wage warre against Peters e l. 2. in qua vna Cathedra vnitas ab omnibus seruaretur Chaine in which alone the vnitie of the Church is conserued S. f Lib. 3. cap. 3 Ad hanc Ecclesiam propter potentiorem principalitateÌ„ necesse est omnem conuenire Ecclesiam hoc esteos qui sunt vndique fideles Ireneus grounds vpon the same fundation when he saith that it is necessarie that all the Church that is all the faithfull through the whole world agree with the Church of Rome in regard of her more powerfull principalitie It is also for this reason that g Deobitu Satyri vtrumnaÌ„ cum Catholicis hoc est cum Romana Ecclesia conueniret S. Ambrose relating that Satyrus demaÌ„ds of some one whether he did not accord with the Catholikes addes that is to say with the Romane Church taking the Catholike Church and Romane Churh for one and the same thing In fine this would h Ep. 57. Ego nulluÌ„ primum nisi Christnm sequens beatitudinis tuae id est Cathedrae Petri communione coÌ„socior super illam Petram aedificatam Ecclesiam scio Quicunque extra bano domum agnum commederit profanus est non noui Vitalem Meletium respuo ignoro Paulinum Quicunque tecum non colligit spargit S. Hierome writing to Pope Damasus to say Following no other then Iesus-Christ for the first head I ioyne vnite my selfe in Communion with your Holines that is to say to the Chaire of S. Peter knowing that the Church is buillt vpon this Rocke Whosoeuer eates the lambe out of this house is profane Iaccnowledge not Vitalis I reiect Meletius who is Paulinus I am ignorant whesoeuer gathers not with thee disperseth After these so many and so conuincing authorities rests there any more te be said to force you to accnowledge your selues to be ouercome Is it not sufficient to haue shewen that you haue erected à chaire against the Chaire of S. Peter That you are not in communion with his successour That you are not in the vnitie of the Church of Rome That it is not in this house that you eate the Lambe That in the Person of Luther you accnowledge Vitalis and in Caluin you imbrace Meletius In fine that you follow Pauline in following the false Doctours seperated from the Church of Rome May not I say to you with the same S. Hierome a Apol. 1. aduersus Ruffin fidem suam quam Gocat eamue qua Romana pollet Ecclesia si Romanam responderit ergo Catholsci sumus if you professe the Romane Faith ergo you are Catholikes and consequently if you professe it not you are not in the communion of the Catholike Church What doe you answere to all this You will studie some euasion I know and happily say the fathers arguments were good because the Church of Rome being then the true Church à man could not seperate
himselfe from it without schisme and without straying from the Pathes of saluation but now the tymes are changed the circunstances we are in are others corruption hath so crept into the Romane Church that she is no more to be tearmed à Church and hence it was that you both could and ought to depart out of it But this euasion will not serue your turne for the Fathers did not dispute of the truth of the Churches doctrine and thence inferred that the Donatists were scismatikes because they were seperated from the Church who had the true doctrine though indeede it was true but they disputed about the Chaire of S. Peter of Pastorall authoritie brought downe from him by an uninterrupted succession concluding the Donatists Schismatikes because they were diuided from this Chaire and from S. Peters successours sitting in the same No otherwise then one would conuince subiects to be rebelles who should seperate themselues from the Royall throne and from the successour of the first Instituters of this Throne and as in the old law the Samaritans may be concluded to haue bene heretikes because they withdrew themselues from the Chaire of Moyses or Aaron That the Principle whence the Fathers drew their arguments was pastorall authoritie and the Chaire of S. Peter and not the truth of the doctrine it doth manifestly appeare in that S. Cyprians a De Gnitat Eccles Ep. 55â— citat reason is because the Chaire of Peter is the fundation vpon which the Church is built and from whence preistly vnitie takes its origine And that of Optatus b lib. 2. Cisat because in this onely Chaire of S. Peter the vnitie of the Church is conserued And S. Ireneus c lib. 3.5.3 cis son that Peters Chaire enioyes the cheifest power S. Hierome d Epist 57. cit becaus the Chaire of S. Peter is that upon which the Church is built And to conclude because S. Augustin e Contrae Epist fundam c. 4. Tenet me ab ipsa sede Petri Gsque ad praesentem EpiscopataÌ„ successio Sacerdotum saith that the succession of Preists which descended from the Chaire of S. Peter held him in the Catholike Church and that this f In Psal contra partem Donati ipsa est Petra quam non Ginâ—uÌ„t superbia inferorum portae succession is the Rocke against which the Gates of Hell shall not preuayle Nor will your reply be any more to your purpose to witt that albeit the Fathers did indeed argue as we say yet had their argument force and efficacie from the truth of the doctrine which then was adioyned to this authoritie to this Chaire seeing that the Donatistes and Nouatians against whom they disputed did directly deney the truth of the doctrine to be in the Roman Church The a Ambr. lib cont Nouatian Nouatians improuing hir doctrine touching remission of sinns and the b August l. de hare haeres 69. Donatists condemning her opinion of baptising heretikes and admitting the wicked liuers into the Church Which makes à cleare demonstration that the Fathers did not make the truth of the doctrine the Principle of their arguments because that was as doubtfull both to the Donatists and Nouatians as the conclusion it selfe which they were to deduce from it for they deneyed both the one and the other Wherfore S. Donatus doth sufficiently make appeare that he argued from their owne confessions and that which they could not deney to witt that the chaire of Rome was S. Peters chaire c Opt. lib. 2. contra Parmen titat Thou canst not deney vnto me saith he but that thou knowest that S. Peter was the first vpon whom in Rome the Episcopall chaire was conferred in which onely Chaire vnitie was to be obserued by all Furthermore you cannot affirme that they formed their argument from the truth of the doctrine because you doe not allow it to haue bene pure at that tyme which is manifest in that d Beza in Rom. 8. Witat l. 7. contra Durae scit 26. you doe condemne the doctrine of Pope Siricius touching celibate or imgle life as the doctrine of the diuell aÌ„d that yet the Donatists were reputed Schismatikes euen for seperating theÌ„selues from communion with him e Opt. l. 2. For the rest though to proue â man schismatique it were indeed necessarie to make good that he were seperated froÌ„ the Church as true Church yet should I not faile of my purpose being à most facile thing to conuince euen by the testimonies of your owne men that you accnowledge the Romane Church then to haue bene the true Church when you came out of it You accnowledge it both by the verie confession of a Caelu 4. instit c. 2. §. 11. 12. Epist 104. Du Plessis in the treatise of the Church c. 12. Osiander in Epito p. 2. your owne Authours and because b Du Plessis au trascté de l'Eglise chap. 81. Osiander loco citato you your selues deriue your authoritie from it whence it manifestly appeares thar you hold it to be true since otherwise you should deriue your power not from the Church of God but from à societie of the Diuell After all this there rests so litle for you to say that if your tongue would but faithfully interprete your conscience we should without doubt heare you condemne your selues the thing being so cleare and perspicuous that vnlesse you were more then blind or that seeing light you would not see it it were impossible but your soules casting the errour which they row professe should win their cause For if the Nouatians and Donatists vere by the Fathers sufficiently conuinced of schisme for that they were seperated from the Chaire of S. Peter and his successours therin you are also conuinced by the same argument since you are seperated from vs who haue alwayes keept the possession of the same Chaire without interruption of succession Your are certainly coÌ„uinced I speake to all your church and to you Ministers in particular who are not onely Schismatikes as are your flocke but withall Schismaticall Pastours for of your owne authoritie you haue established your selues Pastours not hauing receaued power froÌ„ those whose successours you should be Whence it followes that you are a Opt. l. 2. de â—ictore primo Episcopo DonatistaruÌ„ erat Filius sine Patre tyro sine Principe discipulus sine Magistro sequens sino antecedente Children without Fathers soldiers without Captaines successours without Predecessours Wherupon you shall giue meleaue to say vnto you with the Fathers b Tertul de praescript c. 32. Edant ergo Origines Ecclesiarum suaruÌ„ euoluant ordinem Episcoporum suorum c. Opt. l. 2. cont Parm. Vestrae Catbedrae Gos originem reddite c. Shew vs the origin of your chaire nor returne vs barely for answere that you are extraordinarily sent but bring à place of scripture to verifie your assertion You are obliged to produce such
that he was not also reputed an heretike in sustayning that workes were not profitable to saluation In which matter S. Ireneus and Theodorete remoue all manner of doubt when they bring in his opinioÌ„ that meÌ„ were not saued by their good workes as hereticall Howbeit I vndertake not to proue an intire conformitie betwixt your beleife and theirs not being ignorant that as theeues disguise stolen things to put them out of the knowledge of their owners so you disguise the old heresies that men may mistake them Marrie I most willingly vndertake to shew as indeede I doe that that old Heresiarke held as you doe That we are not saued by good workes And consequently that huing bene condemned in this point the soule of your faith was branded with à sentence of condemnation in the first age of the Church whose authoritie you dare not reiect 2. Point You beleeue that the faith of parents is so efficacious that their children dying without Baptisme are saued a 24. Inslit c. 15. Caluin doth teach this doctrine and withall it is so vulgarly knowen euen to the simplest of your fellowers that it needes no proofe Now albeit you make profession to deteste the Pelagian errours yet your beleife in this point is one of their heresies as it is cleare out of S. Augustine who puts it downe as such in his catalogue of heresies b lib. de Haer. 88. Promittunt eis aeternam beatam quandam vitam They promisse saith he to children not baptised à blessed and eternall life c lib 1. de anima eius origine 1.9 Noli credere nols decere infantes anâ—equam baptizantur morte â—raeuentos peruenâ—re posse ad originalium indulgentiam peccatorum which he doth charge with so heauie à condemnation that in the bookes he wrote against them he addes Beleeue not affirme not teach not that children preuented by death before they were baptised can euer obtayne remission of their originall sinne if you desire to be Catholike Ergo This article of your faith is condemned in the person of Pelagius But if you alleadge for you that your and the Pelagian heresie are far different they holding that euery child that dyed without baptisme did in ioy Gods Glorie wheras you limite it to the predestinate onely And againe they assigned to children dying without baptisme à different place from that which those that were regenerated possesse which you doe not I answere that the first difference which you giue betwixt you and the Pelagians coÌ„sisteth onely in à greater or lesser number of those children whom you beleeue to be saued without baptisme and not in the substance of the errour impugned by S. Aug. who while he teacheth that no child at all without Baptisme can be saued he condemnes you both in that wherin you agree to witt that some are saued without baptisme As for the second difference which consists in this that the Pelagians assigned another place to children dying without baptisme then to the baptised it is disaduantagious to your selues and yet doth no whitte impaire the force of my argument to the validitie of which is it sufficient that you and the Pelagians aggree in this that without baptisme one may inioy life euerlasting Which S. August doth clearly condemne and by way of disgrace obiect vnto them that they promisse à blessed and eternall life to children not baptised And that this difference doth disparage your cause By deduction you will plainly discouer The Pelagians held that children were saued without Baptisme This passage was opposed against them Ioan. 3. Vnles à man be borne againe of water and the spirit he cannot enter c. they being coÌ„uinced by the clearnes of this place graÌ„ted indeede that the kingdome of heaueÌ„ was only prepared for the regenerated marrie besides heauen they assigned à third place as à Residence for children dying without Baptisme So that they gaue way to the clearenes of this passage which you doe for you deney absolutly that it doth exclude children that die without the sacrament from the kingdome of heauen though it reach expressly that they shall haue no patt therin Wherin you clearely diseouer that your heresie is more impudent then that of the Auncient heretikes sith you audaciously deney as à thing which is preiudiciall vnto you that which they durst neuer call in question though it were absolutly against them It is manifest therfore nor haue you what to say against it that this article of your faith wherby you maintain that children dead without baptisme are saued was condemned by the auncient Church in the person of Pelagius Yet fearing that the differences which are betwixt his errout and yours abbeit they be not able to saue you from the Churchs curse might hinder you to confesse that you are condemned in his person to leaue you to your owne condemnation I will shew you the condemnation of your verie errour in S. August Lib. de anima eius origine c. 9. Isle autem Vincentius cum confiteatur paruules origiginali obstrictos esse peccato eis tamen regnum coelorum non baptizatis ausus est pollicert quod nec illi ausi sunt c. in the person of one named Vincentius who without assigning à third place with Pelagius ahsolutly allowed with you the kingdome of Heauen to Children not baptised He durst saith S. Aug. promisse the kingdome of heauen to children not baptised which the Pelagians durst neuer doe 3. Point Your Doctours doe teach that our Sauiour Christ did in his birth violate his mothers integritie as all other children are wont to doe a Whitak controu 2. q 5. c. 7. Docuit â—ouinianus Mariam amisisse Virginitatem in partu Respondeo tum impudetissimus haereticus fuit sed ait nos similiter docere nominat Bucerum Molinaum Respondeo Hoc ait quia non adenittimus fictam â—llam partus ratiorem c. Witakere purging himselfe of diuers errours which the great Cardinal Bellarmine iustly imputes to his sectaries doth ingenuously auow this opinion and striues to defend it which yet puts no obligation vpon me at this present to refute it contenting my selfe onely to shew that it is the auncient heresie of Iouinian which was condemned in the 4. age according to S. Aug. b Haeres Virginitaâ—â—m Mariae destruebat dieeÌ„ eam parieÌ„do fuisse corrupiaÌ„ relation in these tearmes Iouinian saith he did destroye the virginitie of Marie saying that in her Childbrith she was corrupted Nor is it to the present purpose to shew that your beleife doth differe from that of Iouinian for that he forsooth doth abolish the mentall virginitie of the B. Virgine which you de not it being manifest that Iouinian denid corporall virginitie to our B. Lady Both because S. Augustine impugning this Heresiarke defends her corporall virginitie and also for that the reason which he brings to shew that the B. Virgine had not conserued her Virginitie was grounded vpon her childbirth
and withall that he sustayned that the body of Iesus Christ would haue bene conceaued to haue bene an onely Phantome if it had not bene berd and borne after the manner of other children which belonges not to the Virginitie of the mynde but that of body onely Therfor my assertion stands firme that your beleife in this point was condemned in the primitiue Church in the person of Iouinian 4. Poini You hold and teach that the iust onely are in the true Church which is an errour condemned in the Donatists more then 1300. yeares agoe That you are of this opinion a 4. Instit c. 1 §. 7. In Ecclesiam quae reuera est coram Deo nulli recipiuntur nisi qui adoptionit gratia filij Dei sunt Caluine doth make manifest in these tearmes None is receaued into the Church which is truly the Church before the face of God but he onely who is the sonne of God by the grace of adoption And b Art 27. your confession doth beare the same saying we affirme then that the true Church following the word of God is the companie of the faithfull who vnanimously follow the same word and the pure religion depending therupon and who profit in the same all the dayes of their life That this opinion was condemned for heresie in the Donatists S. Aug. makes euident by the passages which he alleageth impugned by him and other Catholikes in the conferences had with them c In collat 3. die c 8. Zizania inter triticum non Ecclesia sed in trundo permixta dixerunt Eâ—t c. 10. Non bene intelligi aiuÌ„t Ecclesiaem inquua simul triticuÌ„ zizania iussa sunt crescere They say that the dernel is mixed amongst the wheate not in the Church but in the world they say that one can not well conceaue à Church in which wheate and cocle growe both together You will say here as in the formar points that there is a faire difference betweene the errour condemned in the Donatists and your beleife because they deneyed that the wicked were in the visible Church which yet you grant deneying onely that they are in the true Church To which I answere that though it were à visible Church from which the Donatists did exclud the wicked yet puts that no impediment why there may not be à coÌ„formitie betwixt them and you in the point I speake of to witt in that both exclude the wicked from the true Church True it is there is this difference betweene them and you that they accnowledge the visible Church to be the true Church which you asscribe onely to the inuisible Church whence it is manifest that the difference betwixt you and the Donatists is whether the true Church be visible or inuisible not whether the wicked are in it or no whence you both equally exclude them Thence it is manifest that hauing shewen that that opinion was coÌ„demned of heresie in the person of the Donatists I haue shewen by consequence that it ought also to be condemned in you That it was from the true Church from which the Donatists excluded the wicked S. Aug. makes it cleare a lib. 2. cont Caudent c. 2. in vera germanaque Catholica Ecclesia saying in expresse words that they deneyed that the wicked were in the true and lawfull Catholike Church and againe b lib. de vnit Eccles c. 2. in corpore Christi cuius Christus est Saluator that they were in the body of Iesus-Chrst wherof Iesus-Christ is the Sauiour Which are a Whitak controu 2. q. 1. c. 7. In Eccles Cath. quae est corpus Cristi Item possunt esse in visibili Ecclesia reprobi sed non in Ecclesia Catholica the verie words in which you expresse the true Church And therfor it is à thinge not to be called in doubt that this article of your faith was condemned in the primitiue Church in the person of the Donatists You will say perhappes that wellingly you will ioyne hands if we can conuince you that these 4. points of your faith were condemned by any generall Councell in the primitiue Church but that the authoritie of one or two Fathers is of smale consideration and consequently that you suffer no preiudice for being condemned by them To this I answere that it is not alwayes necessarie to interpose the authoritie of à generall councell for the condemnation of an heresie which is euident by this that when the Pelagians would not esteeme themselues condemned because it was not performed in à generall councell S. Augustine laughes at such friuolous euasions As though saith b Aug. l. 4. cone duas Epist Pelagii c. vltimo Quasi nulla haeresis aliquando esset nisi Synodâ— congregatione damnata sit cuÌ„ potius rarissime inueniantur propter quas damnandas nesessitas talis extiterit mulioque sint incomparabiliter plures quae vbi extiterunt illic improbari damnarique meruerunt atque inde per caeteras terras deuitandae in nolescere potuerunt he neuer heresie had bene coÌ„demned but by à Synode seeing verie few such haue bene found as that it was requisite for the condemnation of them to assemble à Councell and that there were incomparably more in number which deserued to be reproued and condemned in the same place wher they were hatched whence they might be diuulged through out all the world to the end they might be shunned Secondly I say that I doe not produce the authoritie of one or two Fathers against our aduersaries as reputing their authoritie sufficient to condemne their opinion but as esteeming it sufficient to declare what was the beleife of the Church in their tyme wherby we iustly iudge such condemned of heresie as by their relation appeare so to be Being à thing most reasonable and agreeable euen to iudgements of least capacitie rather to giue credit to those auncients in the relation of things which they affirme to haue past in their tymes then to you who fall far short of them especially seeing S. Augustine teacheth us Lib. cont Iul. c. 10. Quod inuenerunt in Eccles tenuerunt quod didiscerunt docuerunt quod à Patribus acceptrunt hoc filijs tradiderunt that they held what they found in the Church that they taught what they had learnt and left to their children what they had receaued from their Fathers Finding this answere no armour of proofe you will flie for refuge to another saying that S. August S. Epiphanius Theodoret and others who had made à catalogue of heresies did not propose vnto themselues to put onely into it heresies properly speaking whence it appeares that to shew that an opinion is related therin is not à sufficient proofe that it was condemned as hereticall To which I replie 1. that this answere is without grownd or proofe 2. that the Fathers ayme and end in reducing into à certaine order and framing as it were à list of all the heresies doe
oblige consciēces which is à doctrine detested by the Catholike Church and ought to be so by all the world sithens it layes open à broad gate to disobedience ther being no more efficacious meanes to teach the contempt of the authoritie of the Church Kings and Magistrates and to violate their lawes and ordonnances then by openly persuading all men that none of them oblige in conscience Now there remaynes nothing but that I earnestly beseech you to enter into your owne harts to dispose your selues to enter into the way of saluation What will you remayne in à religion which braging of much can proue nothing who knowes not that it is now 1600. Yeares since Iesus-Chr established his Church with promisse of perpetuitie how can that then which was but hatched within the tearme of 100. yeares be his who sees not that the names CATHOLIKE and CHRISTIAN being the Church her proper names the religion to which they belong not and to which the qualities which they signifie cannot agree cannot iustly boast that it hath the true Church Who sees not that à Religion which manifestly contradictes the Scripture in many principall points of its beleife is not that which was left vs by Iesus-Christ and his Apostles Who sees not that they who vnder pretext of Gods honour iniure him who in words pretend holy Scripture and in in deedes foist in place of it that of men and rely vpon it as the fundation of their faith who sees not I say that those men carrie not the torch which we are to follow Who will beleeue that he who denyes the greatest part of the misteries because they are burdensome vnto him who forsakes them to follow his owne wayes and fancie who will haue no visible Heade of the Church that they may liue free from obedience vnto him who to exempt himselfe from labour and painstaking will not haue the blood of Iesus-Christ to render our actiōs purgatiue propitiatorie or merirorious who in à word banisheth all paine to passe to heauē in à feather bed who I say will beleeue that such an one is in the way of saluation nay who doth not see that he runs the straight way to his Erernall perdition Is any so silly as not to discouer that they who promis the people full and intire libertie to use the Scripture and yet giue them no other but to looke upon the letters and receaue into their eares the sounds of words and who put the Bible into their hands as the way of saluation which yet they accnowledge not to be authenticall yea depraued and corrupt are but meere mockers and impostures in things of importance towards saluation Who will not planely see that à man hath no assurance in à religion wherin all the assurance of saluation depends vpon the warranty of mens opinions and of each one in his owne cause in à religion the authours wherof die desperate Shall one follow those who professe punctually to follow Iesus-Christ yet doe the contrarie to that which he did in that most sacred misterie which he instituted before his death Shall one iudge that à true religion which banisheth all sacryfice without which neuer yet religion was Who will not iudge that the true way not to follow the saints is to follow their enemyes and such as vomit out à thousand blasphemies against their honour and puritie Will any deeme it the readie way to Christ to loade him with blasphemies and contumelies issuing out of à sacrilegious mouth And will not euen blind men see that to make God authour of sinne and man's perdition is to perish in ones iudgment and to adiudge ones selfe to eternall flames And verily following the Father's iudgment he is lyable to à more greeuious cryme who diuides the misticall body of Christ then though he should teare in peeces his true body Who then will not hold your religion abominable which stands conuicted of so great and detestable à schisme And who is he that will not condemne it when he obserues it to be patched out of the horred heapes of old heresies and consequently condemned by it owne iudgment since it is condemned by the primitiue Church which it doth accnowledge to be the true Church Can à louer of vertue and hater of vice follow that societie which shuts vp all passages to vertue And will he not planely discerne that to lay open the way to all vice is no other thing then to lay open the broad way to Hell In fine who sees not that that societie which will submitt it-selfe to no lawes spirituall or ciuile cannot be subiect to the lawes of God They are worse then blind men that cannot discouer this light Let euery one open his eyes and beware of being misledd by the comō errour of many to witt that the desire they haue to be saued puts them in assurance where euer they be They may please to know that if our desire were sufficient to iustifie vs then they that thought they did seruice and sacryfice vnto God in putting to death the Apostles wrought their owne saluation and not the damnation of their soules Let them know that though one haue an intention to goe to Rome and yet holde on the way to Geneua they shall neuer arriue at Rome Let them learne of the Fathers that there is no saluation out of the Church none is assured against the wroth of God who is not sheltered vnder that couert Let not the simple deceaue themselues by thinking that their Ministers would not haue the face to preach with such assurāce what they were not assured of because if it were enough for heretikes for the approbation of their doctrine to publish it as good and all contrarie to it as worth nothing one could not accuse the impietie of the greatest Heresiarkes that euer liued for with the pretended assurance of truth they defended their blasphemies I know indeede that the conuersion of à soule is à difficult thing I know that as an impoysoned hart as the report goes cannot be consumed by fire so God who is à consuming fire doth hardly inflame harts infected with the poyson of errour by reason of the obstacles which he finds therin Yet can he and will he doe it if euery one putting of his passion put on à fitt disposition and imbrace the meanes prescribed by the holy Fathers If thou desirest saith a Lib. de vtilit credendi c. 8. Si iam tibi satis iactatus Sideris finemque huiusmodi laboribus vis imponere sequere viam Catholicae disciplinae quae ab ips◠Christo per Apostolos ad nos vsque manauit optime ad posteros manatura est S. Augustine speaking to one that seekes his owne saluation to put à periode to thy miserie put thy selfe into the way of Catholike discipline which by the Apostles descended vpon vs from Iesus Christ and which shall be continued in our posteritie That is to say follow the Roman Church which alone descended by an vninterrupted succession from Iesus Christ To this Church it is that you ought to repaire whither S. August by another more expresse place inuites you b Idid c. 17. Dubitamus nos eius Ecclesia condere Doe we feare saith he to betake our selues into the A TABLE OF THE CHAPTERS and Sections contayned in this booke Chap. j. MInisters pag. 1 Answere pag. 2 Chap. ij Ministers pag. 4 Answere pag. 6 Ch. iij. Sect. j. Ministers pag. 32 Answere pag. 32 Section ij pag. 37 Answere pag. 38 Sect. iij. Ministers pag. 54 Answere pag. 54 Sect. iv Ministers pag. 76 Answere pag. 78 Sect. v. Ministers pag. 84 Answere pag. 58 Sect. vj. Ministers pag. 94 Answere pag. 94 Ch. iv Sect. j. Ministers pag. 108 Answere pag. 109 Sect. ij pag. 126 Ch. v. sect j. Ministers pag. 129 Answere pag. 130 Sect. ij Of Indulgences pag. 147 Ch. vj. Sect. j. Ministers pag. 155 Answere pag. 156 Sect. ij Of the Sacrifice pag. 169 Sect. iij. Of the Eleuation of the Hoste pag. 187 Sect. iv Of masses where the assistāts doe not communicate pag. 189 Sect. v. Of Communion vnder one kind pag. 194 Ch. vij Ministers pag. 202 Answere pag. 202 Ch. viij Ministers pag. 221 Answere pag. 222 Ch. ix Ministers pag. 241 Answere pag. 243 Ch. x. Ministers pag. 254 Answere pag. 254 Ch. xj Ministers pag. 257 Answere pag. 257 Ch. xij Ministers pag. 260 Answere pag. 261 Ch. xiij Ministers pag. 262 Answere pag. 264 Ch. xiv Ministers pag. 276 Answere pag. 277 Ch. xv The Religion Pretended to be reformed is worthy of hatred because it makes à schismè in the Church pag. 282 Ch. xvj That the religion which they call Reformed doth renewall the old heresies pag. 299 Chap. xvij The Religion pretended to be reformed doth banish all vertue pag. 314 Chap. xviij The Religion pretended to be reformed layes open the Gate to all vices pag. 318 Chap. xix The Religion pretended to be reformed doth teach that nether temporall nor spirituall laws of Princes doe oblige in conscience pag. 326 FINIS