were true might not a man thinke you tell as good a tale of some Protestants who in their pots have made so bold with Almighty God himselfe as to drinke a health to him and were not this a fine argument to prove that there is no God It is intollerable presiemption in the Knight to take upon him to censure so great a Councell as that of Trent Wherein the whole flower of the Catholique Church for learning and sanctity was gathered together the splendour of which Councell was so great that your night owle Heretiques durst not once appeare though they were invited to goe and come freely with all the security they could wish Whoreas the Knight saith that it is a senselesse and weake faith that giveth assent to doctrine as necessary to be believed which wanteth authority out of Scriptures and consent of Fathers I answer he knoweth not what he saith for all the Fathers agree that there are many things which men are bound to believe upon unwritten traditions whose authority you may see in great number in Bellarmine De verbo Dei l. 4. c 7. The consent of Doctours of the Catholique Church cannot more erre in one time then another the authority of the Church and assistance of the Holy Ghost being alwayes the same no lesse in one time then another Tertull. de prescript cap. 28. quod apud multos unum invenitur non est erratū sed traditum and Tertullians rule having still place as well in one age as another that which is the same amongst many is not errour but a tradition St. Paul thought he answered sufficiently for the defence of himselfe and offence of his contentious enemy when he said 1 Cor. 11. If any man seeme to be contentious we have no such custome nor the Churches of God It is false which the Knight againe repeateth that an article of faith cannot be warantable without authority of Scriptures for faith is more ancient then Scripture to say nothing of the times before Christ faith was taught by Christ himselfe without writing as also by the Apostles after him for many yeares without any word written As no lesse credite is to be given to the Apostolicall preaching then writing so no lesse credit is still to be given to their words delivered us by tradition then by their writings the credite and sense of the writings depending upon the same tradition St. Austine defendeth many points of faith De baptisme l. 2 c. 7. l. 5 c. 25. cont Maximin l. 3. c. 3. et Epist 174. de Genesi ad litteram l. 10. c. 23. l. de cura pro mortuis et Epist 118. de unit eccles c. 22. et tract 98. in Iohan. either onely or chiefely by tradition and the practise of the Catholique Church as single Baptisme against the Donatists consubstantiality of the Sonne the divinity of the Holy Ghost and even unbegottennesse of the Father against the Arrians and the Baptisme of children against the Pelagians to say nothing of prayer for the dead observation of the feasts of Easter Ascention Whitsontide and the like Nay this truth was so grounded with him that he accounted it most insolent madnesse to dispute against the common opinion and practise of the Catholique Church In his booke of the unity of the Church he saith that Christ beareth witnesse of his Church and in his Tractates upon John having occasion to handle those words of St. Paul If we or an Angell from Heaven c. wherewith the Knight almost concludeth every Section he thus commenteth upon them the Apostles did not say if any man preach more then yee have received but besides that which you have received for if he should say that he should prejudicate that is goe against himselfe who coveted to come to the Thessalonians that he might supply that which was wanting to their faith but he that supplieth addeth that which was lacking taketh not away that which was before these are the Saints very words in that place by which it is plaine that he taketh the word praeter besides not in that sense as to signifie more then is written as you would understand it but to signifie the same that contra St. Paul himselfe useth the same word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 para besides Rom. 16.17 for contra and you in your owne Bibles translate it so I beseech you brethren marke them which cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which you have learned and avoid them The Hammer AS Erucius the accuser of Roscius Amerinus having little to say against him Cic. pro Rosc Amer. to fill up the time rehearsed a great part of an invective which he had penned in former time against another defendant so the Iesuit here failing in his proofes for indulgences for which little or nothing can be said to fill up the Section transcribeth a discourse of his which he had formerly penned concerning the necessity of unwritten traditions which hath no affinity at all with the title of this Chapter de Indulgentiis In other paragraphs we finde him distracted and raving but in this he turneth Vagrant and therefore I am to follow him with a whip as the law in this case provideth Touching the point it selfe of Indulgences which Rivet fitly termeth Emulgences but the Iesuit the Churches Treasury whosoever relieth upon the superabundant merits and satisfaction of Saints for his absolution for his temporall punishment of sinne after this life shall finde according to the Greeke proverbe 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 instead of treasure Eras Adag Thesauri Carbones glowing coales heaped upon his head in hell For neither are there any merits or superabundant satisfactions of Saints Luk. 17.10 Christ saying when you have done all you are unprofitable servants nor were there any could they be applied or imputed to any other men 2 Cor. 5.10 the Apostle teaching that every man shall receive according to that which himselfe hath done in his body whether it be good or evill 2 Cor. 11.15 nor hath the Pope any more power to dispose of this treasury for the remission of sinnes our Saviour Matth. 18. v. 18. and Iohn 20.23 conferring the same power of remitting sinnes upon all the Apostles which he promised to S. Peter Matth. 16. Neither if the Pope had any speciall power of granting Indulgences could it extend to the soules in Purgatory quia non sunt de foro Papae because they are not subject to the Popes court Serm 2. de defunct 9 9. as Gerson rightly concludeth Neither lastly can it be proved that there is any Purgatory fire for soules after this life St. Iohn expresly affirming that the blood of Christ purgeth us from all our sinnes 1 Iohn 1.7 the fire therefore of Purgatory is rightly termed chymerica and chymica chymericall and chymicall chymericall because a meere fiction and chymicall because by meanes of this fire they extract much gold The Apostle saith there is
because the Author of it hath borrowed both the matter and manner of writing from St. Peter and therfore he was thought some scholar of theirs but no Apostle Others said he brought in a profane Author concerning the strife of the Arch-angell and the Devill about the body of Moses which cannot be found in Canonicall Scripture Lastly the Revelation of St. John was likewise doubted of first because of the noveltie of the title of John the Divine secondly because of the difficultie and obscuritie of his Prophecies These and the like reasons were motives to some in the Church to question the Authors of those Books but it was never generally impeached For further proofe of this Assertion let antiquitie be heard and it will appeare that all those Bookes were cited for doctrine of faith by the writers of the first ages and consequently were approved from and after the dayes of the Apostles Hieronym ad Dardan◠de terra repromissionis Ep. 129. p. 1105. Looke upon St. Hierome he proclaimes it to the Church Illud nostris dicendum est Be it known to our men that the Epistle to the Hebrewes is not only received by all the Churches of the East that now presently are but by all Ecclesiasticall writers of the Greek Churches that have beene heretofore as the Epistle of Paul though many thinke it rather to be written by Barnabas or Clemens and that it skilleth not who wrote it seeing it was writby an Author approved in the Church of God and is daily read in the same This ancient Father shewes plainly that howsoever some doubt was made of the Author of that Epistle yet it was received both by the Easterne Westerne Churches And howsoever some of the Ancients did attribute it to St. Luke others as namely Tertullian did attribute it to Barnabas yet all agreed in this that it had an Apostolike spirit and accordingly Cardinall Bellarmine tels you in your eare Ineptè dici vetustatem de hac Epistola dubitâsse Bell. de verbo Dei lib. 1. cap. 17. It is foolishly spoken in saying Antiquitie did doubt of this Epistle when there is but one Caius a Grecian and two or three Romanists in respect of all the rest that speake against it and if we respect not the multitude but the antiquitie of the cause the Roman Clemens is more ancient than Caius and Clemens Alexandrinus than Tertullian and Dionysius Areopagita than both who cites this Epistle of Paul by name Touching the second Epistle of St. Peter it was cited by Higinus Bishop of Rome within an hundred and fiftie yeares after Christ and that by the name of Peter The Epistle of St. Jude was cited by Dionysius Areopagita by the name of Jude the Apostle within seventie yeares after Christ Dionys de divinis nominibus cap. 4. Tertuil de habitu muliebri Orig. l. 5. in c. 5. ad Romanos Cypr. in lib. ad Novatianum by Tertullian within two hundred yeares after Christ by Origen and Cyprian within two hundred and fiftie yeares after Christ Lastly touching the Revelation of St. John it was received for Canonicall in the first and best ages Dionysius Areopagita cals the Revelation The secret and mysticall vision of Christs beloved Disciple Arcanam mysticam visionem dile cti discipuli Dionys Eccles Hier. cap. 3. In Dial. cum Tryphone Iren. lib. 1. cap. ult and this was seventie yeares after Christ Justin Martyr doth attribute this Booke to St. John and doth account it for a divine Revelation and this was an hundred and sixtie yeares after Christ Irenaeus saith this Revelation was manifested unto St. John and seene of him but a little before his time and this was an hundred and eightie yeares after Christ Tertull. de praescript l. 4. Tertullian amongst other things accuseth Cerdon and Marcion of heresies for rejecting the Revelation and this was two hundred yeares after Christ Origen in his Preface before the Gospel of St. John sayth that John the sonne of Zebedee saw in the Revelation an Angel flying thorow the middest of Heaven having the eternall Gospel and hee flourished two hundred and thirtie yeares after Christ Thus you see the Catholique Christians and most ancient Fathers in the first ages received both the Epistle to the Hebrewes the second Epistle of St. Peter the Epistle of St. Jude and the Revelation of St. John with one consent accounting them no better than Hereticks which either doubted of them or denyed them and yet you to outface the truth would make the world beleeve that it was three or foure hundred yeares before they were received into the Church and made canonicall and upon this vaine supposall you would know of me Whether there were any change of faith in the Church when they were admitted or whether those Books received any change in themselves To answer you in a word your proposition is foolish and your question is frivolous for those Books were alwayes received even from the first times and no more could that word of God bee changed than God himselfe who is immutable and yet we see your faith is daily altered for want of that foundation and thereupon it behoves you to get more and better proofes for the confirmation of your new Creed From your justification of your Trent faith you begin to looke asquint thorow your Spectacles at the reformed Churches and after your wonted manner you crie out They have no certaine rule of faith wherewith wee may urge them authoritie of Church they have none Scripture they have indeed but so mangled corrupted perverted by translation and mis-interpreted according to their owne fancies that as they have it it is as good as nothing Thus you Have we no certaine rule of faith What thinke you of the Scriptures Doe not we make them the sole rule of our faith and is not that rule by your own Cardinals confession Bell. de verbo Deo l. 1. c. 2. Regula credendi certissima tutissimaque the most certaine and safest rule of faith And as touching the authority of the Church it is an Article of our Religion Art 20. That the Church hath power to decree rites or ceremonies authoritie in controversies of faith and yet it is not lawfull for the Church to ordaine any thing that is contrarie to Gods word written neither may it so expound one place of Scripture that it be repugnant to another This Article shewes our obedience to the Scriptures it declares the authoritie of our Church and it vindicates our Ministers from perverting and misinterpreting of the Scriptures wherewith you charge us in the next place It is true say you Scripture you have indeed but mangled corrupted perverted by translation Here your charge is generall and your accusation capitall therefore you must give me leave for the better discoverie of the truth to send out a Melius inquirendum that your Translation and ours being compared in particulars the truth may better appeare First then
advers Valent. c. 3. and in thrusting himselfe into dark and blinde holes Such is the nature of false teachers they seeke nothing more saith the same Author than to hide that which they preach Idem c. 1. if yet they may be said to preach that they hide But good Physicians say you use to enquire of the causes effects and circumstances Pag. 73. for upon these circumstances dependeth the knowledge whether it be a disease or no. It is most true that Physicians will enquire of the causes of the disease but will they deny the Patient to be sicke or refuse to minister Physicke to him unlesse he tell them precisely how or when he first tooke his disease or infection For this is our case and the point in question touching a reformation Neither doth the knowledge of the disease of the body depend upon the circumstances of time place and person I thinke you never read such Aphorismes either in Gallen or Hyppocrates neither doth your knowledge of errors and heresie in your Church depend on the circumstances of time place and persons For some Authors at the same time and in the same place might have broached truth when another set his heresie abroach as namely Saint Austin precisely in the time and place delivered the Orthodox Doctrine of grace when and where Pelagius spread his heresie From your Rules of Physicke you returne to the Rules of Divinity and tell us from Saint Austin that * Quod universa tenet Ecclesia nec Conciliis institutum sed semper retentum est non nisi authoritate Apostolicâ traditū rectissimè creditur De Baptis contr Donat. l. 5. c 24. in initio Tom. 7. p. mihi 433. whatsoever the Catholike Church doth generally beleeve or practise so as there can be no time assigned when it began it is to be taken for an Apostolicall tradition This place of Austin you neither quoted in your Answer neither have you recited his words faithfully for hee speakes not of assigning the time when the Doctrine begins but whatsoever the universall Church doth hold not being ordained by Councels but hath beene ever held that is most rightly beleeved for an Apostolicall tradition This is his Tenet and this is ours but you have put in the word Catholike in your sense for universall you have added generall beleefe and practise you have thrust in these words so as no time can be assigned when it began and you have omitted the principall verb that hath been ever held which makes me suspect you omitted the citing of this place lest your fraud should be descried But I pardon you let us heare the rest P. 73. But such say you are all those things which you are pleased to call errors If this were as easily proved as spoken you should not neede to put us to the search of times and Authors for the first Founder of your Faith For if your Popish Doctrines were alwayes held by the universall Church and not ordained by Councels we should not need to looke into your Councell of Lateran for your Doctrine of Transubstantiation nor into your Councell of Constance for Communion in both kindes nor into your Councell of Florence for your seven Sacraments nor into your second Councell of Nice for your worship of Images for these and many such traditions were first ordained by Councels and were not the generall beliefe and practice of the Church Againe if the universall Church had alwayes held your Doctrines from the Apostles times why doe you your selfe confesse that your prayer in an unknowne tongue Pag. praecedenti your private Masse your halfe Communion were taught otherwise in the primitive Churches Nay if they be Apostolicall how comes it that they are flat contrary to the Doctrine of the Apostles And thus much of your two rules of Physicke and Divinity let us he are the rest of your authorities Tertullian say you hath this Rule for discerning heresie from truth Tertul. praescrip 31. p. mihi 78. That which goeth before is truth and that which commeth after is errour This Rule is most true but these words you cite by the halves for hee saith expresly Id autem extraneum falsum quod sit posterius immissum Id Dominicum verum quod sit prius traditum That was first delivered which was true and came from the God of truth and this was the Doctrine of Christ and his Apostles for that which commeth after saith he is sarre different where hee shewes likewise in these words following that after Christs time and in the dayes of the Apostles there might be heresies Ut aliquem ex Apostolicis viris qui tamen cum illis persever averint habent authorem Ibid. for the mystery of iniquitie began then to worke and therefore hee will not have it enough to derive a Doctrine from a man which lived with the Apostles unlesse it can be proved that he continued with them and the reason as I conceive was given by Nicephorus After the sacred company of the Apostles was come to an end Niceph. l. 3. c. 16. and that their generation was wholly spent which had heard with their eares the heavenly wisdome of the Sonne of God then that conspiracie of detestable errour through the deceipt of such as delivered strange Doctrine tooke rooting and because that none of the Apostles survived they published boldly with all might possible the doctrine of falshood and impugned the manifest and knowne truth But wee plead say you prescription from the beginning It is not sufficient to plead it you must prove it The Mahometists at this day assume the name of Saracens as your men doe the name of Catholikes as if they came from Sara the free woman Abrahams true and lawfull wife when in truth they tooke their first beginning from Agar the bond-woman neither can there be any prescription against the ancient Records and Evidences of the Word written by Christ and his Apostles Indeed you have found a right and easie way to claime a prescription from the time of the Apostles for you have razed many prime Evidences of the Fathers for the first 800. yeeres which make for our Doctrine and you have proscribed many learned Authors and their Records as I have shewed before for the last 800. yeeres which testified against your errors And now I come to your Churches apostacie or falling from the truth which occasioned these errors Apostacie say you is a defection or forsaking of the Name of Christ and profession of Christianity as all men understand it I shewed in this Section that in the primitive Church when any heresie did arise that indangered the foundation such as was the heresie of the Arrians of the Pelagians and the like the Authors were observed the times were knowne the place was pointed at and forthwith letters of Premonition were sent to all the sound members of the Catholike Church by which publike advertisement the steale-truth
Feasts Images are otherwise now used than they were in the beginning I produced likewise Polydore Virgil Erasmus Scotus Agrippa Cassander Gregorie de Valentia in severall points against your new doctrine now let us heare your severall answers to them Touching Ferus he is a Frier say you in your Bookes but not in ours save onely in the Roman Index of forbidden Bookes Touching Polydore he saith as the Knight telleth us and as much as any Heretike can say but it booteth not for his Booke is forbidden Touching Erasmus he is no Authour for us to answer he is branded in the Roman Index Touching Scotus you neither condemne him nor answer him he tells you plainly that Transubstantiation was not received for a point of Faith till the Councell of Lateran above 1200. yeares after Christ but of this passage Ne gry quidem And yet you might have answered with Bellarmine this opinion of his is no way to be allowed or with Gregorie de Valentia for this saying he ought to be corrected As touching Agrippa and Cassander you will not vouchsafe them an answere but reject them inter damnatos authores as men to be cast out of your Synagogue Lastly touching Gregorie de Valentia you sav his authoritie doth make against the Knight why else should he corrupt and mangle it But whether I or you have corrupted it let the Reader judge my words were these The Communion in one kind when it got first footing in the Church minimè constat it doth not appeare saith Greg de Valentia Youto prove my corruption cite the words in this manner When that custome began in some Churches it appeareth not but that there hath been some use of one kind ever from the beginning I shewed before so Valentia and thus you But in truth this is none of Valentia's own period but one of your owne making who cunningly joyne the latter words which follow in Valentia 4. or 5. lines after to the former with a But which is none of Valentia's the former part of the period is notably mangled by you For thus it stands When that custome began in some Churches Augustana Confessio it appeares not as is acknowledged by the Augustane Confession Now in that Confession the words are these The custome of both kindes remained long in the Church neither doth it appeare when or by what Author it was changed so that he plainly speaketh of the Church in general sheweth the corruption here pretended by M. Floyd to be but a cavill viz. That Valentia saith this not of the Church in generall but of some particular Churches Thus either you blot prohibit all Authors that make forus although they be members of your own Church or else you vouch safethem no answer or else you quarrell without any just occasion offred and this wil prove an easie way for the weakest scholar in your Church to answer all that can be produced against your faith and doctrine Now as the Reader hath heard your answer in the generall so let him see your exceptions to the particulars For whereas I said with St. Paul Forbidding of marriage is a doctrine of Devils you answer as if you were angrie with St. Paul that he hath been answered more often than the Knight hath fingers and toes and it seems for that reason you will vouch safe him no answer at all This puts me in minde of the saying of Ludovicus Vives amember of your owne Church who assures us Lud. Vives de Civ Dei l. 13. c. 24. If St. Paul were living in these dayes he would be held either a mad man or an heretike And since you will not resolve me of St. Pauls meaning in that place I will appeale to St. Bernard an Abbot who was restrained from marriage by the law of your Church who speaking of that restraint gives us the true sense and exposition of St. Paul in these words All heresies have an heretike for their founder the Maniches had Manes Bernard in Cant. Serm. 66. the Sabellians had Sabellicus the Arrians had Arrius c. so that we know the Authors of those plagues but by what name will you terme the Author of those that forbid marriage Surely it is not of man or by man and far be it from the spirit-of God but it is foretold by the Apostle St. Paul to be the fraud doctrine of devils But marriage fay you is not a thing evil in it selfe but because it lesse agreeth with the holinesse which is required for the exercise of Priestly function I pray then what thinke you of a concubine Doth companie with her better agree for exercise of your sunction than with a wife Sure I am this is the doctrine of your Church nay more your Pope Siricius would inferre by authoritie of Scripture that martiage is unholy in it selfe for he cites the Text for it They that live in the flesh cannot please God Qui in carne sunt Deoplacere non possunt Now I pray you what difference is there betwixt the ancient heretikes and the members of your Church The Montanists the Tatiani the Eucratitae did not prohibite marriage to all no more than you doe but onely to their perfecti as being a disparagement to their perfect estate or as you interpret not agreeing to the holines of Priesthood Again whereas I proved out of Polydore that the marriage of Priests was not altogether forbidden till the time of Gregorie the 7. that is to say above a thousand yeares after Christ you answer that which Polydore cites is most evidently false as appeareth particularly by a Canon of the first Councell of Nice and the second Councell of Carthage Now if Polydore were mistaken it concernes not me for I cited him truly and he is a member of your Church but the truth is you are much mistaken touching those two Councels Sozom. l. 1. c. 22. For the Councell of Nice saith Sozomen commended Paphnutius judgement and touching this matter of mariage made to decree an all but left it to each mans owne will without any force of necessity And the Councell of Carthage forbiddeth not marriage in Priests but commandeth abstinence from marriage rites for a certaine time as St. Paul doth that they may more freely give themselves to prayer and the offices of their sacred function Which plainly shewes that both Priests were married in those dayes and consequently that those two Councels make flatly against you But Marius say you cannot find the beginning of this prohibition Polydore findeth it and yet both make for the Knights purpose And without doubt they doe for they contradict not one the other Polydore speaketh of publike absolute and reall prohibition Marius of the first condemning it in any Priest and these confessions may well stand together CHAP. VII The summe of his Answer to Sect. 7. 1. That the imputations of ancient Haeresies are false 2. That Succession besides Antiquity importeth continuance and perpetuity
is not found expressely Yet our Argument from Biels testimonie is no way disabled thereby because it appeareth out of Biels owne words that hee holdeth that to bee expresly delivered in Scriptures which is either expressed in word or sence the reall presence he saith is expresse not in the letter or forme of words in the text yet in the sence but so saith he is not Transubstantiation the apparant opposition betweene the members of his sentence sheweth that what hee beleeved of the reall presence hee beleeved not of Transubstantiation but the former he beleeved could bee proved out of Scripture though not in expresse words yet in sence therefore the later hee beleeved could not be proved so much as in sense much lesse in expresse words To the sixt Although Petrus de Alliaco inclineth rather to the Lutherans opinion in the point of the Sacrament then to the doctrine of the Church of England yet the Knight upon good reason produceth him as a witnesse for hee speaketh home against Transubstantiation Cameracë in 4 sent q. 6. art 2. patet quòd ille modus sit possibilis nec repugnet rationi nec authoritati bibliae imò facilior ad intelligendum rationabilior est quum c. his words are that the conversion of bread into Christs body cannot evidently bee proved out of Scripture and that that manner or meaning which supposeth the substance of bread still to remaine in the Sacrament is possible neither is it contrary to reason or to the authoritie of the Scripture nay it is more easie to bee understood and more reasonable then that which saith the substance doth leave the accidents If this bee not as Flood will have it so much as in shew for the Knight I am sure it is both in shew and substance against the Trent faith for if it bee granted that Consubstantiation is not contrarie to Scripture nor reason it followeth necessarily that Transubstantiation is grounded upon neither but rather repugnant to both for as trans denieth con so con trans If the remaining of the substance of bread with the substance of Christs body be not repugnant to the authoritie of Scripture nor the meaning of Christs words then doe not these words This is my body signifie or make Transubstantiation which necessarily abolisheth the substance of Bread and putteth in place thereof the substance of Christs bodie If Consubstantiation bee more easily to bee understood and more agreeable to right reason in Alliacoes judgement then Transubstantiation it is evident but for feare of his Cardinalls cap hee would have simply avowed the former and renounced the latter To the seventh Take Roffensis his words at the best the Iesuite is at a great losse admit hee said no more then I.R. here confesseth that no man can bee able to prove that any priest now in these times doth consecrate the true body of Christ see what will follow hereupon that no man is able to prove that your priests and people are not grosse Idolatours adoring a piece of bread for Christ Secondly that none is able to prove that Christ is really and substantially offered in your Masse for if it cannot bee proved that he is there corporally present as Roffenfis confesseth and you be are him out in it it cannot bee proved that hee is corporally offered restat itaque ut missas missas faciatis Roff. cont Luth captiv Bab. c. 4 neque ullum posituÌ„ hic verbum est quo probetur in nostrâ missâ veram fi lci carnis sanguinis Christi praesentiam non potestigitur per ullam scripturam probari it remaineth therefore that you dismisse your misses or Masses For what can they availe the living or the dead if nothing but meere accidents and shewes of Bread and Wine bee offered which are meere nothing Wee may yet gather farther upon Roffensis his words if it cannot bee proved by any Scripture that Christs body and bloud are present in the Roman masse it cannot bee proved that they are present in any Masse unlesse it bee granted that the Roman masses are of a worser condition then others if not in any masse much lesse must Papists say in any Sacrament without the Masse What then becommeth of the maine and most reall article of the Trent faith which hath cost the reall effusion of so much Christian bloud I meane the reall and carnall presence of Christ in the Sacrament To Roffenfis I.R. should have added Cajetan and so hee might have had a parreiall of Cardinalls for the Knight alledged him and his words are most expresse not only against the proofe of Transubstantiation Caje in 3. p. Tho. g. 75. dico autem ab ecclesiâcum non appareat ex Evangelio coactivum aliuod ad intellg â—â—dum haec verba propriè quod evangelium non explicavit expressè ab ecclesia accepimus viz. conversionem panis in corpus but also of the corporall presence of Christ as out of the words hoc est corpus meum The Cardinalls words are that which the Gospell hath not expressed wee have received from the Church to wit the conversion of the bread into the body of Christ I say from the Church because there appeares nothing out of the Gospell that can enforce a man to beleeve that the words This is my body are to bee taken properly How doth this Flood swell in pride that to so great a Cardinal so profound a Schoole-man so eminent a Doctour so divine a Commentatour so golden a Writer all which titles are given by the Roman Church to Cajetan he vouchsafeth not a looke But indeed he held a Wolfe by the eares and was in a quandarie what to doe whether to keepe his holt or to let him goe if hee had taken notice of his testimonie against the Roman Church either hee must have disparaged the Cardinall or given his Trent faith a grievous wound To the eight Durand his words are plaine enough to prove that the conversion of bread into the body of Christ is wrought by the vertue of Christs benediction before hee uttered the words Benedixit benedictione caelesti virtute verbi qua convertitur panis in substantiam corporis Christi Dur. rat c. 41. This is my body hee blessed saith hee the bread by his heavenly benediction and by vertue of the Word whereby the Brend is turned into the substance of Christs body Yea but faith Flood hee addeth Wee blesse ex illa virtute quam Christus indidit verbis wee blesse by that power or vertue which Christ hath given to the words true verbis benenedictionis not consecrationis according to Durands mind by that power which Christ gave to the words of benediction going before not those words which you call the words of Consecration ensuing after viz. This is my body which words yet Durand there rehearseth not to prove the conversion to bee wrought by them but to prove Christs body to be truly there To the ninth Though
agener all Councell may erre the Church may erne if the Church may erre the faith which that Church teacheth may faile and consequently there can bee no certaintie How easily are these leaves plucked away and torne in pieces 1. Though such a Councell as the Councell of Trent consisting of a few Bishops swaied by the Italian faction may erre it would not from thence follow that the whole representative Church might erre 2. Though the whole representative Church in a free and generall Councell lawfully called might erre yet many millions in the Catholique Church may hold the orthodox beliefe and consequently the faith of the Church not totally faile Yea but saith the Iesuit take away the infallibilitie of the Church there is no rule of faith This assertion of his is open blasphemie as if God would not bee true though all men were found liars though the Roman Church and Pope erre a thousand times yet the rule of faith remaineth unvariable in the holy Scriptures Yea but S. Gregorie equalizeth the foure first generall Councels to the Gospel and saith in effect that they could as little erre as the 4. Gospels and that upon the deniall of their authoritie the Christian faith might be shaken as well as by the deniall of the Gospels and the like authoritie giveth your Parliament unto them I answer S. Gregorie equalizeth the foure first generall Councels to the foure Gospels not in respect of authoritie but in respect of the veritie of the articles defined in them he saith not they could as little erre but they did as little erre in their decisions or to speake more properly that their doctrine was as true as Gospell because the determinations in those first generall Councels against Heretiques are evidently deduced out of holy Scriptures Our Parliament alluding to the words of S. Gregorie speaketh in the same sense as hee doth Yea but saith the Iesuit your Parliament lawes acknowledge that for heresie whatsoever is condemned for such in any of those Councels which is in other words to acknowledge them for a rule of faith and consequently to bee of infallible authoritie and to joyne them in the same ranke with the Canonicall Seriptures Idem jungat Vulpes by the like reason the Iesuit might say we joyne the booke of Articles of Religion and Homilies in the same ranke with the Canonicall Scriptures because we condemne for heretiques all that obstinatly maintaine any doctrine repugnant to them which wee doe not because we hold the Decrees of a provinciall Synod to bee of in fallible authoritie but because wee are able to prove all the Articles there established to be consonant to the holy Scriptures Yea but further saith the Iesuit in the same statute P. 203. you give power to the Court of Parliament with the assent of the Clergie in their Convocation to adjudge or determine a matter to be heresie which is the very same as to give it power to declare faith or to be the rule thereof I answer the statute giveth power to the Convocation to declare faith and determine heresie out of Gods word and by the sentence thereof and no otherwise In such sort to declare faith is not to be the rule of faith but to judge and measure things by the rule There is a maine difference betweene these two which yet the Iesuit here confoundeth as if they were coincident to declare faith and to bee the rule of faith every Iudge declareth the Law yet is he not the rule of the Law The Inquisitors in their jndices expurgatorij and the Sorbonists in their censures declare what is heresie yet the y are not Itrow the Rule of popish faith every meater in the market declareth that such or such is the measure of corne and graine yet is not every or any corne-meater the Winchester standerd It is one thing to be the rule and another to measure by the rule and declare what we have measured But to retort the Iesuits phrase upon himselfe hee is not capable it seemes of this discourse which yet every market-woman or boy is Well let the authoritie of generall Councels bee great in the Church and of the foure first Councels greatest of all quid hoc ad Rombum what maketh this for the infallibilitie of the Trent conventicle much saith the Iesuit every way for what saith hee can you say more against the present Church and present Councell of Trent then against the Church and Councels of those times What can we say nay what can we not say what have we not said or what could all the Papists in the world answer to what wee have already said After hee hath taken away the legall exceptions made against this conventicle by the Authour of the historie of the Councell of Trent and of the litterae missivae and Iewel his Treatise affixed to that Historie and Chemnisius his Examen and Doctor Bowles his latine Sermon preached to the Convocation and lately printed after hee hath proved which hee will never bee able that the Assemblie at Trent was a free and generall Councell and called by lawfull authoritie and all the proceedings in it according to ancient Canons yet it will still fall as short of the Councell of Nice in authoritie as in antiquitie that consisted of most eminent learned and holy Bishops and Confessors this for the most part of hungrie animals depending on the Popes trencher as Dudithius a Bishop present at that Councell declareth at large in his letter set before the Historie of the Councell of Trent to which I referre the reader To the second The testimonies alledged by the Knight for the sufficiencie of holy Scriptures are ponderous and weightie and the Iesuits exceptions to them are sleight vaine and frivolous To the testimonie out of the Acts I have kept backe nothing that was profitable unto you and I am pure from the bloud of all men Act. 20.20.27 for I have not shunned to declare unto you all the Councell of God hee saith that S. Paul speaketh of the doctrine by him preached not of the written word of God as in like manner our Saviour saith that what hee heard from his Father hee made knowne unto them Iohn 15.15 and yet delivered not one word in writing It is true S. Paul speaketh of the doctrine which he preached but it is as true that the doctrine which he preached hee confirmed unto them by testimonie of Scripture For S. Luke saith Acts 17.2 that S. Paul as his manner was reasoned with them out of the Scriptures opening and alledging that Iesus whom hee preached unto them was Christ and they that received the word with all readinesse of mind searched the Scriptures daily whether those things were so Act. 24.14 and again I confesse that after that way which they call heresie so worship I the God of my fathers beleeving all things which are written in the Law and the Prophets If the Iesuit had read the verse immediatly following testifying
the bad Popes To the thirteenth The Knight after Alfonsus quoted Antoninus Cajetan and Bellarmine to prove the noveltie of Indulgences and that there is no ground for them in Scriptures or the writings of the ancient Fathers to whom the Iesuit answereth not a word and here the second time hee is Gravelled in this Section To Alfonsus hee seemeth to say something but upon due examination as good as nothing first hee falsifieth his words saying page 334. that Alfonsus confesseth the use of Indulgences to be most ancient and of many hundred yeares standing whereas his words are not that the use of Indulgences was most ancient but that it was said by some to be most ancient among the Romanes Apud Romanos vetustissimus praedicatur illarum usus this praedicatur is of no more credit than Plinie his fertur or Solinus his aiunt For notwithstanding this report Alfonsus resolves in that very place It seemes that the use of Indulgences came but lately into the Church Secondly the Iesuit forceth a wrong Inference from Alfonsus his words For albeit hee affirmeth that Indulgences are not to be contemned because they have beene in use in the Church for some hundreds of yeares yet hee condemneth not a man for an Haeretique that shall deny them but any one that shall contemne the Church or despise her autority his words are Quoniam ecclesiâ Catholicâ tantae est authoritatis ut qui illam contemnat Haereticus meritò censeatur we say the same also Matth. 18.17 and the Scripture beareth us out in it tell the Church and if he refuse to heare the Church let him be unto thee as a Heathen or a Publican but what if Alphonsus out of feare blowes hot and cold with one breath what 's that to us He lived and died a professed Papist and therefore what he writeth against Protestants is little to be set by but what he writeth against the Church of Rome whom he had a minde to defend in all things and whose feed advocate he was must be thougt to be drawne from him by evidence of truth howsoever let it be noted that Alphonsus calleth not him an Haereticke who denieth Indulgences as the Knight doth Vid. Rain Thes Romana ecclefia nec est Catholica nec sanum membrum Catholicae ecclesie but who contemneth the Catholike Church which neither the Knight nor any Protestant doth we deny not much lesse doe we contemne the authority of the Catholike Church But we deny that the Roman Church is the Catholike or a sound member thereof To the fourteenth Our Ministers doe not like Flood and other Iesuits bring muddy stuffe in their sermons out of Petrus de Voragine and the like fabulous Authors but what they produce in this kinde against the Pope for his base sale of Indulgences and making merchandize of his ghostly power they proove out of good Authors grave Historians Canonists and Schoolemen such as are the author of the lives of Popes and the booke called Taxa camerae Apostolicae Centum granamina together with Wescelius Croningensis Guicciardine Henricus de Gandavo Altisiodorensis If Altisiodorensis words are not plaine enough Summ l. 4. d. relap Dicunt quidam quod relaxatio non valeat quantum ecclesia permittit sed facit ut excitentur fideles ad dandum et decipit eos ecclesia some say that the Popes Indulgence prevailes not so much as the Church promiseth but that thereby men are stirred up to give more freely and that therein the Church deceaveth them what say they to that note in Taxa camerae Apostolicae Nota diligenter quod hujusmodi gratiae non consceduÌ„tur pauperibus quia non sunt nec possunt consolari Matth. par in Hen. 3. Romanorum loculos impregnare note diligently that such favours to wit Indulgences are not graunted to poorâ— folke because they have not wherewithall they cannot be comforted or that pregnant phrase of Matthew Paris that Christs blood alone though it be all sufficient to save soules yet the same without saintly satisfaction applied by the Pope is not sufficient to impregnate his holinesse Coffers If the Iesuit smell not in thâ—se sentences the fat steame of the Popes Kitchin he hath no nose To the fifteenth It is well the Iesuit termeth the drinking of a health to Almighty God a tale and by his quoting no authouâ— or it sheweth that it was a signal lye of his owne inventing when he was betweene hawke and buzzard Never any but himselfe who can blush at nothing affirmed any such thing of any Protestant that ever came to that height of impiety and prophannes as to drinke a health to his Maker Historia Ital. l. 13. Leo nullo temporum et locorum habito delectu per universam orbem amplissima privilegia quibus non modo vinis delictorum veniam consequendi sed defunctorum animus ejus ignis in quo delicta expiari dicuntur paenis eximendi facultatem pollicebatur promulgavit quae quia pecuniae tantum a mortalibus extorquendae gratia concedi notum erat a questoribus huiâ— negotio praefectis impudenter administrabantur magnam plerisque locis indignationem offensionemque concitarant presertim in Germania ubi a multis ex ejus ministris hujusmodi mortuos penis liberandi facultas parvo pretio vendi vel in canponum tabernis aleae subiici cernebantur but Luitprandus and Polonus telleth us of one Iohn the twelfth a Pope of Rome and consequently no Protestant who made so bold with Almighty God as to give Orders in a Stable and so familiar with the Divell as to drinke a health to him As for the Knights prophane jeast as he calleth it it is no jeast but a serious testimony out of a grave historian convincing the Popes agents of Atheisme and prophannes and the Popes themselves of sordid covetousnesse his words are Leo published large privileges through the whole world without any distinction of times and places by which he promised not onely pardon to the living but also power to deliver soules of the dead out of Purgatory paines which because it was knowne that they were granted onely to fill the Popes coffers and because his farmers carried themselves lewdly in the sale of them great offence was taken at them especeally in Germanie where such Indulgences were set at a low price and seene to be staked in Tavernes and Ale-houses at games of Tables To the sixteenth The Trent Synod was not a Councell but a Conventicle wholly swayed by the Italian faction wherein not the flower of the Catholique Church for learning but the bran of the Romish boulted by the Pope was gathered together Let Andreas Dudithius the Bishop of Quinque eccles Ep. ad Maximil who was present at this Councell speake his minde of it the matter came to that passe through the wickednesse of those hungry Bishops that hung upon the Popes sleeve and were created on the suddaine by the Pope for
to which we owe absolute consent and beliefe Vid. August supr cit without any question or contradiction To the two and twentieth Saint Austine defends no point of Faith against Heretikes either onely or chiefly by the Tradition and practise of the Catholike Church but either onely or chiefly by the Scriptures For example in his booke of Baptisme against the Donatists after hee had debated the point by Scriptures hee mentioneth the custome of the Church and relateth Stephanus his proceeding against such as went about to overthrow the ancient custome of the Catholike Church in that point But hee no where grounds his Doctrine upon that custome though hee doth well approve of it as wee doe Againe in his booke against Maximinus and his 174 Epist to Pascentius hee confirmeth the faith of the Trinity by the written Word against those Heretikes his words Ep. 175 Haec siplacet audire quemadmodum è Scripturis sacris asserantur to the same Pascentius are Here thou maist heare if thou wilt how these points of our Faith are maintained by Scripture So farre is hee from founding those or any other points of faith only or chiefly upon unwritten Traditions What the Iesuit alleageth out of his tenth booke De Genes ad literam cap. 23. Consuetudo matris Ecclesiae in baptizandis parvulis nequaquam spernendus est neque ullo modo superflua deputanda no whit advantageth his cause for there Saint Austine saith no more but The custome of the Church in baptizing Infants is no way to be despised or to be accounted superfluous Wee all say the same and condemne the Pelagians of old and Anabaptists of late who deny Baptisme to be administred to children or any way derogate from the necessitie of that Sacrament The Iesuit saith hee will say nothing of Prayer for the dead yet hee quoteth Saint Austine de curâ pro mortuis as if in that booke hee taught Prayer for the dead and grounded it upon unwritten Tradition Whereas in that booke hee neither maintaineth Prayer for the dead nor maketh mention of any unwritten Tradition for it but on the contrarie solidly out of Scriptures proveth Esaias Propheta dicit Abraham nos nescivit et Israel non cognovit nos si tanti patriarchae quid erga populum ex his procreatur ageretur ignoraverunt quomodo mortui vivorum rebus atque actibus cog noscendis adjuvandisque miscentur et paulo post ibi ergo sunt spiritus defunctorum ubi non vident quecunque aguntur aut eveniunt in istâ vitâ hominibus Ep. 118. Si quid hocum sic faciendum divinae Scripturae praescribat authoritas non est dubitandum quin ita facere debeamus similiter si quid per orbem tota frequentat Ecclesia that the Saints departed have no knowledge of our affaires upon earth the Prophet Esay saith Abraham knoweth us not and Israel is ignorant of us If so great Patriarchs knew not what befell their posteritie after their death how can it be defended that the dead intermeddle with the actions or affaires of the living to helpe them onward or so much as to take notice of them A little after he concludes flat upon the Negative The Spirits therefore of the dead there remaine where they knowe not what befalleth to men in this life To what end therefore should wee call upon them in our troubles and distresse here Neither hath this Father any thing in his 118 Epistle for the Iesuit or against us for there hee speaketh of Ecclesiasticall Rites and Customes as appeares in the very title of that Epistle not of Doctrines of Faith and yet even in these hee giveth a preheminence to the Scriptures If saith hee the authoritie of divine Scripture prescribe any Rite or Custome to be kept there is no question to be made of such a Rite or Custome and in like manner if the whole Church throughout the world constantly useth such a Rite or Custome The Iesuites next allegation out of this Fathers booke De unitate Eccles cap. 22. falleth short of his marke hee saith there that Christ beareth witnesse to his Church that it should be Catholike that is spread over the face of the Earth and not to be confined to any certaine place as the Province of Affrica Wee say the same and adde that the bounds of it are no more the territories of the Bishop of Rome than the Provinces of Affrica Wee grant that Whosoever refuseth to follow the practise of the Church to wit the Catholike or universall Church resisteth or goeth against our Saviour who promised by his spirit to leade her into all truth and to be with her to the end of the World Which promise may yet stand good and firme though any particular Church erre in Faith or manners as did the Churches of Asia planted by the Apostles themselves and the Church of Rome doth at this day Cont. lit Petil. l. 3. c. 6. Now because that testimonie of Saint Austine wherewith the Knight concludes almost every Section If wee or an Angell from heaven preach unto you any thing whether it be of Christ or of his Church or any thing which concerneth Faith or manners besides that which you have received in the Legall and Evangelicall Scriptures let him be accursed is as a beame in all Papists eyes therefore they use all possible meanes to take it out but all in vaine for the words of the Apostle on which Saint Paul commenteth are not as the Iesuit would have them If any man preach unto you Contra against but if any preach unto you Praeter besides Ep. ad Galat. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Neque enim inquit si contraria solum predicaverint intulit anathema esto sed si evangelizaverint preter id quod ipsi evangelisavimus hoc est si plusculum quidpiam adjecerent as Saint Chrysostome and Theophylact accutely observe The Apostle saith not if Chrysostome rightly understand him if they should preach any thing contrary but if they shall in their preaching adde any thing be it never so little besides that which wee have preached unto you let him be accursed And Theophylact is altogether as plaine as Chrysostome in his Glosse upon the words The Apostle inferreth not if any man preach contrarie to that yee have received but if any preach besides that which wee have preached unto you that is if they shall presume to adde any thing though never so little let them be accursed Neither doth Saint Austine in his tractate upon Saint Iohn upon which Bellarmine and after him Flood so much beare themselves any whit contradict the former interpretations of Saint Chrysostome and Theophylact. For his words in that place carry this sense The Apostle saith not if any man preach more unto you than you have already received that is perfectly conceived and apprehended for then hee should goe against himselfe who saith that hee desired to come to the Thessalonians to supply
All-sufficiencie or containing of all things expressely is a necessarie point of perfection hee is deceived for then would it follow that the Gospell of Saint Matthew Saint Marke and other particular Bookes should be imperfect and especially that of Saint John wherein hee saith expressely that all things are not written Were the Scripture perfect in the Knights sense yet would it not then be a sufficient rule of Faith of it selfe alone for it would still be a booke or writing the very nature whereof doth not suffer it to be the sole rule of Faith or judge of Controversies for a Iudge must be able to speake to heare and to answer whereas the nature of a Booke is as it were to leave it selfe to be read and expounded by men No Catholike declineth the triall of Scripture in regard of imperfection but onely in regard that it being a written Word no Heretike can be convinced by it as I shewed you even now out of Tertullian who saith It is lost labour to dispute with an Heretike out of Scripture Let any man by the effects judge who reverence the Scripture most Catholikes or Protestants let him compare the labours of the one in translating and expounding Scriptures with the labour of the other and hee shall find the truth of this matter In admitting any triall with Protestants by Scriptures De praescript c. 15. Non esse admittendos haereticos ad ineundam de scripturis provocationem quos sine scripturis probamus ad scripturas non pertinere Vos qui estis quando unde venistis quid in meo agitis non mei Quo denique Marcion jure sylvaâ—â— meas caedis wee condescend more to their infirmitie than wee need or they can of right challenge For wee acknowledge that saying of Tertullian most true that Heretikes are not to be admitted to the Scriptures to whom the Scripture in no wise belongeth who are you when and whence are you come What do you in my ground you that are not mine By what right ô Marcion dost thou fell my wood By what leave ô Valentine dost thou turne my fountaines By what authoritie ô Apelles dost thou remove my bounds c. This is Tertullians discourse and words where it is but changing the names of Marcion Valentine and Apelles into Luther Calvin and Beza and it will fit as well as if it were made for them You must first shew your selves owners of the Land before you can claime the writings and evidences belonging to it and which make good the Title The Hammer VVHereas many other things argue that our Adversaries maintaine a desperate cause so especially their excepting against the holy Scriptures of God and refusing to be tried by them in the points of difference betweene us and them For what was the reason why the Manichees called in question the authoritie of the Gospell of Saint Matthew Aug. l. 28. cont Faust cap. 2. and the Acts of the Apostles Desperation because by those writings they were convinced of blasphemous Errour What was the reason why the Ebionites rejected all Saint Pauls Epistles Desperation Irenaeus l. 8. cap. 26. because by them their heresie was most apparantly confuted Iren. l. 3. c. 2. Cum ex scriptur is arguuntur in accusationem convertuntur ipsarum scripturarum quasi non recte habeant nec sint ex authoritate nec possit ex iis inveniri veritas ab his qui ignorunt traditionem Tertul. praesc advers haeret What was the reason why the Gnosticks and Valentinians disparage the Scriptures saying that They were not of authoritie and the truth could not be found out of them by those who were ignorant of Tradition Desperation What was the cause why Papias and the Millenaries preferred word of mouth before Scriptures and pretended 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 unwritten tradition for many of their fables Desperation What was the reason why the Heretikes in Tertullians daies refused to examine their Doctrines by the touchstone of the Scriptures saying More things were required than the Apostles had left in writing for that either the Apostles knew not all or delivered not all to all In like manner wee can impute it to nothing else but diffidence and distrust of their cause that Lyndan Turrian Lessius and Pighius speake so disgracefully of holy Scriptures as they doe terming them dead Characters a dead and killing Letter a shell without a kirnell a leaden rule a boot for any foot a nose of wax Sybils Prophesies Sphinx his riddles a wood of Thieves a shop of Heretikes imperfect doubtfull obscure full of perplexities If they should bestow the like scandalous Epithets upon the Kings Letters patents or the Popes Buls or Briefes they would bee soone put into the Inquisition or brought into some Court of Judicature and there have either their tongues or their eares cut or their fore-heads branded yet the Iesuit is so farre from condemning these blasphemous speeches in his fellow-Jesuits and Romanists that hee deviseth excuses for them and sowes fig-leaves together to cover these their Pudenda which I will plucke off one after another in my answer to his particular exceptions against the Knight To the first It is true that some Roman writers of late have made an assay to prove some of their Popish doctrines out of Scripture but with no better successe than Horantius had in undertaking to refute Calvin his Institutions as appeareth by Pilkington his Parallels If the Scriptures were so firme for our Adversaries why are not they as firm for them why doth the Iessuit in the fore-front of this Section bid as it were defiance to them professing in plaine termes that The Scripture is not the sole rule of Faith nor that out of it alone all Controversies can be decided Doubtlesse any indifferent Reader will conceive that the Scriptures make most for them who stand most for their authoritie and perfection as all the reformed Divines doe not onely affirming but also confirming that the Scripture is not only a most perfect but the only infallible rule of faith Ep. 112. Si divinarum Scripturarum earum scilicet quae in Ecclesiâ Cano. nicae nominantur perspicuâ firmatur authoritate siâ—e ullâ dubitatione credendum est aliis verò testibus vel testimoniis quibus aliquid credendum esse suadetur tibi credere vel non credere liceat quantum ei momenti ad faciendam fidem vel habere vel non habere perpenderis Ep. 97 Solis iis Scripturarum libris qui jam Canoniti appellantur didici hunc timorem honoremque deferre ut nullum earum authorem scribendo aliquid errasse firmissimè credam lib. de Nat. Grat c. 61. Me in hujusmodi quorumlibet Scriptis hominum liberum quia solis Canonicis debeo sine recusatione consensum l. 11. c. 5. Ep. 48. every article of divine faith must be grounded upon a certaine and infallible ground to us but there is no certaine and infallible ground to
it were not worth the answering Pag. 20â— another while hee complaines that there is no place in the whole booke which is not either falsly or impertinently alledged one while hee proclaimes that my endevours are poore indeed and farre short of what is requisite in writing bookes another while he professeth It hath somewhat in it which may draw away an honest-minded man and that his Catholique friend was stumbled at it Now what is the reason of these impertinent excursions and contradictions It was the observation of ancient Maxentius Heretiques when they finde themselves not able to yeeld a reason of their wilfulnesse then they fall into plaine railing And certainly such is the bitternesse of this Author that were I perswaded Pythagoras transmigration of soules into other mens bodies had beene true I should beleeve that the soule of Rabshekah had beene transported into his body for otherwise if he had but a graine of charitie hee would never spurne a blinde man for so he termes me when Christian charitie teaches him another lesson If he were well versed in Antiquities hee would never have cited so many places of ancient Fathers falsly and impertinently in one page and yet condemne others of ignorance and falsification in the Fathers If hee were well read in the Booke of Wisdome I meane in the sacred Scriptures he would never have replyed with such scorne and disdaine for without doubt the Apostle spake to Mr. Lloyd the Romanist as well as to the rest of the Romans Rom. 11.3 Not to thinke of himselfe more highly than he ought to thinke but soberly according as God hath dealt to everie man the measure of faith Hee that accuseth another man of ignorance of lying of malice of execrable perjurie and the like had need be a man himselfe without all exception yet if wee may beleeve the Doctors of his owne Church he is guiltie of these and much more witnesse the Sorbonicall censure at Paris wherein Hallier and Aurelius accuse him of lying Aurelius in libri sui titulo Hallier in Admonit ad Lect. p. 8 9. of ignorance of heresie of profane scurrilitie of blasphemie and impietie of furious filthy and devillish railing of unsufferable arrogancie and the like and as touching his bitter accusations it seemes it is his accustomed manner of writing witnesse his Spongia written against the Sorbonists Aurelius in Vindiciis p. 385. under the title of Hermannus Laemilius otherwise discovered to be John Floyd I say he hath drencht his sponge in that gall of bitternesse such charitie and unitie is there amongst themselves that I may truly say of him as the Spartans sometimes said of the Theban Oratour If he think as he writes his ignorance is desperate if otherwise his conscience is seared To give you a taste of the manner of his writing when I cite authorities that are pregnant and beyond his just exception hee spares my person and condemnes the Authors themselves and complaines they are branded with the note of heresie and singularitie when as in truth they are branded onely by their Inquisitors for speaking against the errors of their Trent Doctrine being otherwise knowne members of the Roman Church When I cite an Author of our owne as namely B. Usher for translating Aelfricks Homily out of the Saxon tongue one while hee cries out Ushers corruptions are laid open to the world another while he tels mee I tooke the words from Usher because I understood not Latine or perhaps because I would be loth not to follow any errours or corruptions that come in my way and thus hee spends about ten pages sometimes inveying against our reverend and renowned Bishop sometimes against mee for false translating Aelfrick out of Latine when as the Latine cited by B. Usher in the margent See B. Ushers answer to the Jesuites challenge chap. of the Reall presence which hee takes to be Aelfricks is the Latine of Bertram and not Aelfricks whose was translated out of the Saxon tongue and not out of the Latine Againe when I cite an Author of his side as namely Petrus Crinitus for taking down of Images in Churches he stretches his throat makes this hideous exclamation Pag. 303. For your authorities of the Common Law there are so many foule faults committed by you that I know not where to begin then hee taxeth me with leaving out two principall words Humi solo whereas the Author which I cite hath no such words I render the place truly as I finde it I put not to him I take not from him I alter not one letter of his words or meaning and yet he cries out the faults are so many that I know not where to begin Againe when I cite ten or twelve Authors for our Communion in both kindes for our prayer in a knowne tongue and the like for most of them he sends me to Bellarmine for an answer for the rest saith he I le question you Then he complaines of falsifications when as in fine the Exception is against the translation of some poore word This for That and when he is destitute of any colour of answer his last refuge is this The book is prohibited As touching my Englishing of Latine Authors I confesse I have not translated whole sentences ad literam for I intended not a volume but a manuell yet I ever faithfully render the true sense and meaning of the Author Well what exception could he take to this Pag. 52. One while hee confesseth I set downe the Latine truly but I doe not translate it literally another while hee cries out It will not serve your turne Pag. 224. to say you place it in the English as you place it in the Latine for intranslation the sense is chiefly to be regarded Lastly Pag. 459. hee protesteth for himselfe that hee hath declined no Author either moderne or ancient when as it will appeare he sends many of them to Bellarmine for an answer others he rejects as condemned by the Index Expurgatorius others hee declines as unworthy of his answer by slighting them or otherwise passeth by them as children use to doe when they cannot read they thinke it best to skip over To say nothing of his Elenchs his Sophismes his Sophistry his Fallacies which are many I will trace him in his steps God willing laying aside all bitternesse and railing accusations In the meane time I will say with the Prophet David Plead thou my cause Psal 35.1 oh Lord with them that strive with me for the flouds are risen the flouds lift up their voyce Psal 93.4 5. the flouds lift up their waves the waves of the sea are mightie and rage horribly but yet the Lord that dwelleth on high is mightier An Answer to J. R. his booke called A paire of Spectacles CHAP. I. The Summe of his Answer to my first Chapter IN this his first Chapter hee endevoureth principally to prove that the Articles of the Roman Creed
this is inviolably to be observed You see then that howsoever your Pius Pope gave a dispensation for the reading of the Scriptures yet Pope Clement his Successor declared that license to be void and of none effect and that which concludes your Assertion for an untruth it was by him decreed to bee kept without any dispensation or violation Inviolatè servandum Thus touching the sacred Bible you have severall Translations upon severall paines to be received and both different each from other in many hundred places you have ranked the sacred Bible amongst the Bookes prohibited and lastly you seemingly grant a license for the Ignorant to reade the Scripture and by another decree you abridge that license so granted I proceed from the forbidding of Scriptures to your purging and falsifying of the ancient Fathers As for Fathers say you it is most grossely false which the Knight after the ordinary Ministeriall tune stands canting that we blot out and raze them at our pleasures What is it then that these men would have What is it they can carpe at Nothing but that they themselves are stung in that hereby they are kept either from publishing their owne wicked workes or corrupting the Fathers at their pleasure and to wipe away this blemish from themselves would lay it upon us Thus you It seemes you have beene well acquainted with Rogues and sturdy Beggers who have taught you the Terme of Canting a word proper for such kinde of people but whereas you say it is grossely false that you blot and raze the Fathers and that therein we seeke to wipe away the blemish from our selves and lay it upon you for the better manifestation of the truth first looke I pray upon the place where the corrupted Fathers were printed see by whom they were licensed then heare your owne men witnessing their owne confession of purging them and lastly peruse the places which I shall produce razed and corrupted and then tell me if the Mysterie of Iniquity doth not closely worke in your Roman Church and that the ancient Fathers are grossely falsified and notoriously corrupted by your owne men even in the principall points of Doctrine controverted betwixt us First then wee must observe that corruptions and abuse of ancient Fathers may be of three sorts either by foisting into the Editions bastard Treatises and intitling them to the Fathers or by falsifying their undoubted Treatises by additions detractions or mutations or lastly by alledging passages and places out of them which are not extant in their workes and of all these three kindes your men are guilty Expurgari emaculari curâsti omnium CatholicoruÌ„ scriptoruÌ„ praecipuè veterum Patrum scripta Sixt. Senens in Ep. Pio 5. as it shall appeare by instances in their severall Ages for the first 800. yeares First concerning the purging of Fathers your Sixtus Senensis in his Epistle dedicated to Pope Pius the fifth amongst his many and famous deeds recounts this for one of the greatest That he caused the writings of all Catholike Authours but especially those of the ancient Fathers to bee purged And Greâ—zerus your Jesuit proclaimes it by way of justification Gretz l. 2. c. 10 If it be lawfull to suppresse or inhibite whole Bookes as namely Tertullian and Origen then it is lawfull likewise to suppresse a greater or lesser part of one by cutting out razing blotting out or by omitting the same simply for the benefit of the Reader And Possevine your Jesuit tells us Adistos enim quoque purgatio pertinet Possev l. 1. Bib. lioth select c. 12. that Manuscript Books are also to be purged as well as printed which shewes your good intention to the ancient Writers I may adde to these that you doe not onely purge and corrupt the Fathers as shall appeare in matter of fact in severall Ages but you forge Bastard Epistles in the names of ancient Bishops and you thrust counterfeits into the Chayre of the true and Catholike Doctors Peter Warbeck is taken for Richard Duke of Yorke and obscure Authors as namely Dorotheus Hormisda Hermes Hypolitus Martialis and other counterfeits for famous Writers and all to supply your defects of doctrine in the Orthodox Fathers Severinus Binius hath published certaine decretall Epistles in the names of Clemens Anacletus Evaristus Sixtus and many others to the number of thirty one all Bishops of Rome Insomuch as their Epistles are cited by Bellarmine by Peresius by Coccius by Baronius by your Rhemists for severall proofes of your Trent Doctrine Gratian saith Grat. Dist 20. Decretales they are of equall Authority with Councels nay more he labours to prove out of St. Austin Distinct 19. in Canonicis that those decretall Epistles were reckoned by him amongst the Canonicall Scriptures and yet by the severall Confessions of your learned Writers are adjudged to be all counterfeit and without doubt their leaden-stile their deepe silence of Antiquity concerning them the Scriptures alledged by them after St. Hieroms Translation being long before his time doe easily convince them of falshood Antoninus Contius the Kings Professor of Law in the Universitie of Bruges tells us that he brought many reasons in his Preface An. 1570. and notes upon your Canon Law which was printed at Antwerp by which hee proved and shewed manifestly that the Epistles of the Popes Silvester An. 314. who were before Silvester were all false and counterfeit The Preface with the reasons alledged against it is now razed and purged and Plantin the Printer gives this answer for it Raynold Hart. Cap. 8. Divis 3. p. 451. The Censor who was to oversee the printed Bookes would not suffer it to passe and what became of it he remembred not nor knew how to procure it Thus your men are not onely ashamed to publish their Bastard Epistles and equall them to the Word of God in behalfe of your new doctrine but you censure also and purge your owne men for condemning such lying inventions Whether to forge a false deed or to raze a true one be the greater fault it is not greatly materiall for your owne men are guilty of both And lastly when neither purging nor falsifying will serve the turne which you have practised in Bookes set out the first 800. yeares you bring a Prohibition against all Authors Priests and Professors in the bosome of your owne Church which testifie the truth of our doctrine and injoyne them silence by your Index Expurgatorius by cutting out their tongues and refining them with a new impression and this hath beene your ordinarie practice for the last 800. yeares I will give you instances in both and so I come to the second Age. In the second Age Ignatius Bishop of Antioch witnesseth the antiquity of our Doctrine he shews that our Communion in both kindes was practised in his dayes There is one Bread saith he broken for all and one Cup distributed to all 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ignat Ep.
likewise you shall observe that he hath rased and purged an ancient Record and speciall Evidence against the universality and supremacie of the Bishops of Rome It is an Epistle written by Firmilianus Bishop of Caesarea to St. Cyprian which St. Cyprian translated into Latin as your Pamelius doth confesse wherein he professeth that he is justly moved with indignation at the manifest folly of Stephanus then Bishop of Rome that boasting so much of his Bishoprick At que ego hâc in parte justè indignor ad hanc tam apertam manifestam Stephani stultitiam Firmilian Cyp. S. Ep. 75. p. 203 Noli te fallere siquidem ille est verè schismaticus c. p. 204. Insuper Cyprianum Pseudo-Christum Pseudo-Apostolum dolosum operarium dicere qui omnia inse conscius praevenit c. p. 205. and that he hath the succession of Peter upon whom the foundation of the Church was set brings in many other Rockes c. He bids him not deceive himselfe he hath made himselfe a Schismaticke by separating himselfe from the Communion of the Ecclesiasticall unitie for while he thinkes he can separate all from his Communion he hath separated himselfe onely from all He taxeth him for calling St. Cyprian a false Christ a false Apostle and a deceitfull workeman which he himselfe being guilty of and privie to himselfe that those termes of right belong to himselfe by way of prevention he objected them to another Touching these severall Additions and Extractions Pamelius by whom the Antwerp and Paris Cyprian were set forth first excuseth Manutius for adding the words in his Roman print and tells us they were found in a written Copie of the Cambron Abbey in Hannonia which was the best of all the Copies he had and therefore saith he we were not afraid to insert that Reading into the Text. Nonsumus veriti in textum inserere Yet Manutius himselfe professeth he perused five and twenty printed and Manuscript Copies which had none of those Additions and as touching the Epistle to or from Firmilianns which proves a resistance anciently made against the usurped power of the Pope Pamelius thinkes it was left out purposely by Manutius Argumentum Ep. 75. p. 198. and saith he Perhaps it had beene more wisedome it had never been set out at all but withall he addeth because Morelius did publish it before me I thought it not fit to let it passe but print it Now let us looke backe and examine the reason of these severall Editions and falsifications Mr. Hart sayth that the Additions were taken from a very ancient Copie gotten from Verona Pamelius saith they were borrowed from a Manuscript in the Cambron Ahbey in Hannonia but in 25. Copies the Additions were not to be found Mr. Hart saith the true Copie was printed at Rome by the Popes command and with the advise of vertuous and wise men to be perfectly corrected and free from all spots Pamelius saith it was better than any other but withall it was not so exact but that the old Proverbe might take place the latter is commonly the better Lastly touching the razing out the Epistle of Firmilianus Pamelius concludeth that his Copie which doth cite it is so perfect Indiculus Codicum in initio Cypriani that be it spoken without envie there will need no further recognition yet happely saith he it had beene better it had never come forth Thus you may discerne what forgeries are used by your men to support the circumgestation of your Sacrament and the Popes Supremacie which is a maine Pillar of your Faith And this may serve to shew your falsifications and forgeries in the third Age. In the fourth Age. The fourth age An. 300. to 400. The first Generall Councell of Nice is forged by Zozimus Bishop of Rome in behalfe of his owne supremacie The pretended Canon is this In Concil Carthag c. 1. Binius Those who in the Nicene Synod gave their sentence concerning Appeales of Bishops said in this manner If a Bishop shall be accused and the Bishops of his owne Province shall thereupon condemne and degrade him if he thinke fit to appeale and thereupon flye to the most holy Bishop of Rome if he be pleased to have the hearing of it the Bishop is to write to the Bishops adjoyning and let it be at his pleasure to doe what he will and as he in his judgement shall thinke fittest to be done This Canon is not to be found either in the Greeke or Latine Copies of the Nicene Councell and those Canons in all were but 20. It is true that you pretend that there were in all 60. Canons where of 40. were burned by the Arabians amongst which this Canon was one But if they were extant how were they burned And if they were burned how came you to the knowledge of them The truth is their Bastardie saith Contius your Lawyer is proved even by this that no man no not Gratian himselfe Raynold chap. 9. Divis 2. pag. 575. durst alledge them Eusebius Caesariensis Bishop of Caesarea is corrupted to prove the Popes supremacie In the Basil print translated by Ruffinus he sayth Peter James Euseb impr Basiliae ex Officinâ Henr. Petrina Ruffino Aquiliensi Interprete Sed Jacobum qui dicebatur Justus Apostolorum Episcopū statuerat Eus l. 2. Eccl. Hist c. 1. p. 677. Petrum Jacobum Johannem non de gloriâ honore contendisse interse sed uno consensu Jacobum Justū Hierosoly monum Episcopū designâsse Coloniae Allobrogum excudebat Petrus dela Roviere An. 1612. and John after the Assumption of our Saviour although they were preferred by him before all the rest of the Apostles yet did they not challenge the honor of Primacie to themselves but appointed James which is called Justus to be Bishop of the Apostles In your Coleine Edition you have altered the sense in this manner Peter James and John when they had obtained of our Lord a high degree of dignity they did not contend about glory and honor amongst themselves but with one consent made James Bishop of Jerusalem Thus the true and ancient Eusebius saith Peter and the rest did not challenge the honor of primacie the latter saith they did not strive about glory and honour the ancient saith they appointed James which is called Justus to be Bishop of the Apostles the other saith they nominated Justus Bishop of Jerusalē This Authority is so pregnant against the Popes Jurisdiction claimed from Peter that Bellarmine hath nothing to answer but this Although those words be found in the Basil print translated by Ruffinus yet in a Colein print translated and published by a Roman Catholike Bellar. de Rom. Pont. l. 1. c. 26. the word Primacie is not to bee found and in stead of the words Bishop of the Apostles are inserted Bishop of Jerusalem The Cardinall doth not complaine that Ruffinus Translation was false and corrupt for they are the words in the Originall
of the ancient Eusebius neither could he say truly that the Colein was translated by a Catholike for indeed it is the property of an Here-ticke to falsifie and corrupt the Text. And thus you have done in your Colein Edition where you have altered the sense in that manner Eusebius Emissenus Bishop of Emesa in Syria is forged by Gratian for the doctrine of Transubstantiation Grat. Dist 2. de Consecrat Quia corpus fol. Mihi 432. his words are these Christ the invisible Priest turned the visible creature into the substance of his body and bloud with his word and secret power saying Take eate this is my Body whereas there are no such words to be found in all his Works The Councell of Laodicea is falsified in favour of your Iâ—vocation of Angels The words of the Originall are these a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Conc. Laod. Can. 35. Bin. Tom. 1. p. 245. Christians ought not to forsake the Church of God and depart aside and invocate Angels and make meetings which are things forbidden If any man therefore be found to give himselfe to this privie Idolatrie let him be accursed Now in the same Councell published by James Merlyn and Fryer Crab by transmutation of a letter you are taught a lesson contrary to sense and reason saying b Quod non oporteat EcclesiaÌ„ Dei relinquere abire at que angelos nominare congregationes facere Merlin Tom. 1. Concil edit Col. An. 1530. f. 68. Crab. edit An. 1538. Colon. fol. 226. Verit as non quaerit Angulos It is not lawfull for Christians to forsake the Church of God and goe and nominate or invocate Angels or corners and make meetings and thus Angeli are become Anguli Angels are become Angles or Corners as if truth did seeke Corners when so faire an Evidence is brought against Invocation of Angels St. Basil the great Archbishop of Caesarea was forged by Pope Adrian the first at the second Councell of Nice for the worship of Images his words are these c Pro quo siguras ImaginuÌ„ eorum honoro adoro veneror specialitèr hoc enim traditum est à Sanctis Apostolis necest prohibendum acideò in omâ—ibus Ecclesiis nostris eorum designamus Historias Citat ab Adriano in Synod Nic. 2. Act. 2. p. Mihi 504. For which cause I honor and openly adore the figures of the Images speaking of the Apostles Prophets and Martyrs and this being delivered us by the Apostles is not prohibited but in all Churches we set forth their Histories This Authority was cited by Pope Adrian in the name of Basil the Great in his Epistles when as in all his Epistles of which are extant 180. there are no such words to be found St. Hierome is likewise forged for the same doctrine and by the same Pope the words in the Epistle are these Sicut permisit Deus ador are omnem gentem manufacta c. Citatur ibid. Ep. Adr. p. Mihi 506. As God gave leave to the Gentiles to worship things made with hands and to the Jewes to worship the carved workes and two golden Cherubins which Moses made so hath he given to us Christians the crosse and permitted us to paint and reverence the Images of Gods workes and so to procure him to like of our labour These words you fee are cited by your owne Pope at a generall Councell as you pretend for a point of your Romish faith and yet there are no such words nor the meaning of of them to be found in either of those Fathers and without doubt there was great scarcity of true ancient Fathers to bee found at that time to prove your adoration of Images when your Pope was driven to shifts and forgeries especially when your owne Polydore tells you Polyd. de ReruÌ„ Invent. that the worship of Images not onely Basil but almost all the ancient holy Fathers condemned for feare of Idolatrie as S. Hierome himselfe witnesseth This puts me in mind of Erasmus complaint that the same measure was afforded to Basil Eras in Praefat. lib. de Spirit Sanct. Bas which hee had otherwise observed in Athanasius Chrysostome Hierome that in the middle of Treatises many things were stuffed and forced in by others in the name of the Fathers St. Ambrose Bishop of Millaine is falsified and corrupted Franciscus Junius as an eye witnesse Junius Praefat. in Ind. Expurg Belg. tells us that at Leyden in the yeare 1559. being familiarly acquainted with Ludovicus Saurius Corrector of the Printing house and going to visit him hee found him revising of St. Ambrose workes which then Frelonius was printing after some conference had betwixt them Ludovicus shewed him some printed leaves partly cancelled and partly razed saying this is the first Impression which wee printed most faithfully according to the best Copies but two Franciscan Fryers by command have blotted out those passages and caused this alteration to my great losse and astonishment It may be the discoverie of it by Junius might stay their further printing of it or else might be an occasion to call it in after the printing for otherwise if that Impression may be had it were worthy the examination Bolseus dicit se in manibus Secretarii hâ—c testimonium vidisse inspexisse In disp de Antichristo in Apend Nu. 49. 53. Laurent Rever Rom. Eccl. p. 190. Non habent Petri haereditatem qui Petri sedem non habent Grat de Paenit Dist 1. c. Potest fieri But for a proofe of this falsified Ambrose Lessius the Jesuit tells us that Bolseck doth confesse he saw the Copie in the hands of a Secretary howsoever their later Editions are sufficient proofe of your manifold falsifications But I will speak of Impressions onely that have been within my view First to prove your succession in doctrine in your owne Church Gratian tells us from St. Ambrose They have not the succession of Peter who have not the Chayre of Peter and thus he hath changed Fidem into Sedem Faith into Chaire This forgery in time may creepe into the Body of Ambrose but as yet the words of Ambrose are agreeable to our doctrine that is a Non habent Petri haereditatem qui Petri fidem non habent Ambr. de Paenit c. 6. Tom. 1. p. 156. Basil apud Joh. Frob. An. 1527. Ambr. de Sacr. l. 4. c. 5. Tom. 4. p. 393. Basilâ—ut supra they have not the succession of Peter which want the faith of Peter These be the words of true and ancient Ambrose hereby declaring unto us and them that they may have the See of Peter and yet want the faith of Peter Againe in his Booke of the Sacrament St. Ambrose saith b Fac nobis haÌ„c oblationem ascriptam c. quod fit in figuram corports sanguinis Jesu Christi Amb. Colon. Agripp An. 1616 Tom. 4. p. 173. Make this Oblation to be a reasonable acceptable one quod est
present Binius ibid. in his Annot. on the other side Peter Lombard and Gratian Pet. Lomb. l. 4. Sent. Dist 6. Grat. Can. Mulier de Consecr Dist 4. they have put in their exception nisi necessitate cogente except it be in case of necessitie so that in the absence of the Priest and in case of necessitie women may baptize by the authority of your Church notwithstanding the Councels decree And this is according to Bellarmines confession Although saith he those words of exception nisi necessitate cogente be not found in the Tomes of Councels Bell. de Baptis l. 1. c. 7. yet Peter Lombard and Gratian cite the Canon in that manner And thus by your owne Cardinals profession your Priests have added that exception to the Canon to dispense with women for Administration of the Sacrament which is not found in the Councell Againe the same Councell is razed both by the compiler of the decrees and publisher of the Councels for the Councell saith in the 44. Canon a Clericus nec comam nutriat nec barbam radat Concil Carth. Can 44. Let no Clerke weare long hayre nor shave his Beard The decretals and your late Councels published by Binius have left out the word Radat and have quite altered the sense of the decree and so your Church hath gone directly against the meaning of the Councell in shaving of Priests S. Austin Bishop of Hippo is both purged and falsified in favor of your doctrine First for the purging of him your own men make this declaration b Augustinus nuper Venetiis excusus in quo praeter multorum locorum restitutionem secundum collationem veterum exemplarium curavimus removeri illa omnia quae fideliū mentes haeretic â pravitate possent inficere aut a Catholica orthodoxa fide deviare Praefat Ind. lib. prohibit ad Lectorē Genevae impress an 1629. St. Austin was lately printed at Venice in which Edition as we have restored many places accerding to the ancient Copies so likewise we have taken care to remove all those things which might either infect the mindes of the faithfull with Heresies or cause them to wander from the Catholike faith This publike profession your men have made and accordingly the c In hunc modū est repurgatus ut in libri inscripsione testātur qui editioni praefuerunt Ibid. p. 6. Booke was purged as those who were present at that Edition doe witnesse in the Inscription of the Booke but let us returne to the corrupted Editions in our view St. d De Civitate Dci lib. 22. c. 24. Austin in his 22. booke of the Citie of God and 24. Chapter is cyted by e Bell. de Purg. l. 1. c. 4. Bellarmine for the proofe of Purgatory yet in that Chapter saith f Lud. Vives in lib de Civit. Dei c. 8. Vives in the ancient Manuscript Copies which are at Bruges and Colein those ten or twelve printed lines are not to be found And in the 22. booke and 8. Chapter he tells us there are many additions in that Chapter without question foysted in by such as make practise of depraving Authors of great Authority Touching forgeries and falsifications in particular The humane nature of Christ is destroyed if there be not given it after the manner of other bodies a certaine space wherein it may be contained In your Edition of Paris printed by Sebastian Nivelle An. 1571. this passage is wholly left out This is observed by Dr. Moulin but the Authour so printed I have not seene But when neither adding nor detracting could make good your Transubstantiation Fryer Walden thought it the surest way to forge a whole passage in the name of St. Austin which indeed strongly proves the very name and nature of it The words are these Wald. Tom. 2. de Sacram. c. 83. p. mihi 141. No man ought to doubt when Bread and Wine are consecrated into the substance of Christ so as the sabstance of bread and wine doe not remaine whereas we see many things in the workes of God no lesse marvellous A woman God changeth substantially into a stone as Lots wife and in the small workemanship of man hay and ferne into glasse Neither must we beleeve that the substance of bread and wine remaineth but the bread is turned into the Body of Christ and the wine into his bloud the qualities or accidents of bread and wine onely remaining This fo gery was judicially allowed by Pope Martin the fist and his Cardinals in their Consistorie and yet it savours rather of a Glasse-maker than an ancient Father but what answer maketh Walden to this invention * Egoenimreperi trāscripsi de vetustissimo exemplari scripto antiquā valdè manu formatâ Idem Ibid. I found it faith he and transcribed it out of a very ancient Copie written with a set hand Thus one while you adde another while you detract another while you falsifie the ancient Fathers if either they make for us or against you and yet you tell us that we are guiltie of corrupting the Fathers But above all Gratian hath most shamefully and lewdly falsified St. Austin whom he hath made to say Inter Canonicas Scriptur as decretales Epistolae connumerantur Dist 29. In Canonicis fol. 19. A. The decretall Epistles of the Popes are accounted in the number of Canonicall Scriptures The truth is St. Austin in his booke of Christian doctrine informes a Christian what Scripture hee should hold for Canonicall and thereupon bids him follow the greater part of the Catholike Church Amongst which those Churches are which had the happinesse to injoy the seates of the Apostles and to receive Epistles from them Gratian in the Canon Law altereth the words thus Amongst which Canonicall Scriptures those Epistles are which the Apostolicke See of Rome hath and which others have deserved to receive from her and accordingly the title of the Canon is Imer Canonicas Scripturas c. The decretall Epistles of Popes are counted by St. Austin for Canonicall Scriptures Now judge you what greater forgerie nay what greater blasphemie can be devised or uttered against Christ and his Spirit than that the Popes Epistles should bee termed canonicall Scriptures and held of equall authority with the Word of God especially since by your owne men they are censured as Apocryphall and counterfeit Epistles Your owne Bellarmine as a man ashamed of such grosse forgeries would seeme to excuse it Bell. de Concil Author l. 2. c. 12. Primo That Gratian was deceived by a corrupt copie of St. Austin which he had besides him and that the true and corrected copies have not the words as himselfe reporteth Thus Walden excuseth his forgerie by an ancient Manuscript the Cardinall by a corrupt copie and yet by your Cardinals leave this and many other such like forgeries stand printed in the Canon Law no Index Expurgatorius layes hold on them Idem de script Eccles An.
by way of conclusion what hee would have called Heresie Ibid. This would I rather call Heresie saith he to accompt mens writings among the Scriptures of God and so doe they that thinke it a wicked matter to dissent from the writings of man no lesse than it were the judgements of God Now that your men are guilty of such Heresies in the highest degree appeares by his owne confession Ibid. l. 1. c. 2. p. 14. for he complaines of Gratian who did insert the Popes decretall Epistles amongst the holy Scriptures as if they were of equall authoritie with them and he speakes as an eare witnesse of others who in their publicke Sermons have declared that whosoever shall dissent from the opinion of St. Thomas is to be censured for an Hereticke O fortes verbi Dei Praecones O powerfull Preachers of the word of God saith he or rather I may truly say of St. Thomas doctrine l. 1. c. 7. for by this meanes it will come to passe that blessed Bonaventure must be censured of heresie Ibid. p. mihi 31. for he crosseth St. Thomas and blessed Anselme must be suspected of Heresie because contrary to Thomas opinion he thinketh him not a lover of our blessed Virgin who refuseth to celebrate the Feast of her Conception As this Author wrote a tract against Hereticks so likewise he professeth that the head of the Roman Church as well as the members are subject to that capitall accusation whereof you accuse the Reformers and particularly he doth instance from Platina in Pope Liberius for an Arrian Hereticke and Pope Anastasius for a favourer of the Nestorian Heretickes and withall hee resolves the question which without all question is so to bee resolved that the Pope which you make one of the infallible Rules of your Faith may become an Hereticke You shall doe well therefore to forbeare your name Catholicke till you can free your Pope and his adherents from the markes of Heretickes In the meane time I might more justly retort your owne words cum faenore into your owne bosome and say We Reformed Catholickes not onely stile but prove J. R. and the Romanists to be rightly stiled by the common name of Heretickes I proceed to the rest of your accusations Theodoret say you is wholly impertinent Bellarmine his meaning is abused and his words corrupted First touching Theodoret his proofe notwithstanding your exception stands good for if the agreement of both parties in the Nicene Councell in his judgement ought to have allayed the heate of contention in the Church of Antioch I might well conclude much more that the three Creeds and the first foure Generall Councels wherein both sides agree ought to have abated the edge of your sharpe and bitter Invectives against our Church And as for abusing of Bellarmine I assure you it was farre from my thoughts and you cannot be ignorant that the inference according to true meaning standeth thus If Protestants beleeve and hold all things necessarie for all Christians then are they not to be accompted damned persons and worse than Infidels But they beleeve the Apostles Creed they teach the ten Commandements and administer some few Sacraments which in your Cardinals opinion are those things which are simply necessarie for all to know and beleeve and to this argument you answere nothing but you quarrell about words When I translate nonnulla a few Sacraments you say I falsifie Bellarmine for the word few is not there and yet you know well that by nonnulla hee doth not meane omnia Nonnulla is a diminutive terme signifying not none that is some be they never so fevv and therefore those which he meaneth are but few The word utilia is in the same place of Bellarmine and as for other words added or left out they alter not the sense nor are wee bound precisely to the words but to the sense in translating a passage out of any Author But say you what man ever tooke Babylon for a true Church If by Babylon you understand literally the ancient Citie of Chaldea or that famous City in Aegypt once called by the name of Memphis and now of Cair you know well that it is not my meaning so to take it for you confesse that I otherwise expresse my selfe but that a particular Church as namely your Church of Rome which was sometimes a sound that is a right-beleeving Church may afterwards fall into Heresie and become spirituall and mysticall Babylon this is not onely my assertion but your Romanists and fellow Jesuites in the Church of Rome Ribera your fellow Jesuite of Salamanca in Spaine tells us by way of prevention If Rome shall commit the same things hereafter which she committed in the time of John she shall be called Babylon againe as it was in the case of Hierusalem which of a faithfull City once became afterwards a Harlot And according to the Prophesie of St. John he protesteth in this manner We know this truth so perspicuously by the words of the Revelation Ut ne stultissimus quidem negare possit that the veriest foole cannot deny the same Then he concludes Riberae Comment in Apoc. 14. v. 8. in c. 14. num 31. n. 32. Since Babylon shall be the shop of all Idolatrie and of all impieties therefore it cannot be doubted but that this shall be the condition of Rome hereafter I will come nearer to you Your Monke Sigebert about 500. yeares agoe interpreting the words of St. Peter The Church at Babylon salutes you delivereth this doctrine Sigeb Ep. p. mihi 188. in l. Goldasti Replic Hitherto Peter by Babylon did signifie Rome because Rome at that time was confounded with Idolatrie and all uncleannesse but my griefe doth now interpret unto mee that Peter by a Propheticke spirit by the Church of Babylon foresaw the confusion of dissention with which the Church of Rome at this day is rent in pieces Honorius Bishop of Anthun in France speaking of the fall of the Church of Rome not long after the same time cryes out to the members of his Church Honor. Angust in Dial. de Praedest l. arbit Turne to the Citizens of Babylon and see what they are behold the buildings of that damned Citie consider the principall persons there and thou shalt finde the See of the Beast Thus you see the first Babylonian tels what he feared would come to passe in the Church of Rome hereafter but these two later proclaimed openly that Rome was become Babylon many hundred yeares since and for their loud cries their tongues are now cut out by the command of your Inquisitors How undeservedly were these men punished and forbidden to speake the truth let the Reader judge but that which is observable you raze the Records which testifie for us you forbid them to speake if it make against your Church and then you demand of us What man ever tooke Babylon for Rome I will give you one witnesse more who is ancient and
order of Franciscans as witnessing the visibilitie of our Church above 300. yeares agoe you answer he was condemned for disobedience and rebellion for he said Pope John the 22. was an Apostata and an Hereticke and therefore not true Pope And in this manner you can easily resolve all doubts and reject all Authors that speake not Placentia according to your pallate onely say you St. Bede is a Catholicke Now if you please take a review of these Authors Cassander you know was a learned man he was highly favoured for his wisedome by two Emperours Maximilian and Ferdinand he was moderate in all his writings he sought to extenuate the palpable errors and heresies of your Church he indevoured to accord and if it had beene possible to reconcile the differences on both sides and lastly he lived and died in the communion of the Roman Church Cecenas was a Frier and Generall of the Order of Franciscans he was condemned de facto by the Pope but it doth not appeare quo jure by what right for if the accusation were true the Pope deserved the punishment and not the innocent Frier listen therefore to the rebellion and disobedience for which he was accused Cecenas shewes in particular that Pope John was a schismaticke and an heretike in his peremptorie opposition against the Word of God and the Catholicke Church Mich. de Cecena tractat contra errores Papae p. mihi 1314. 1336 in Tom. 2. Gul. Occham de Jurisdictione Imperiali Naucler Gener 45. Anno 1324. he charged him with twelve severall errors which you may reade at large in the place cited and for those and the like accusations he was excommunicated and deposed by the Pope I confesse the accusation was capitall but it was no other than was justly laid to his charge For Nauclerus saith Many great and famous Divines of great learning and good life proclaimed Pope John by the name of Pope to be an Hereticke for certaine errors Tepidè which errors notwithstanding it is said that he coldly revoked at the time of his death and hee addes withall that Pope Benedict his immediate successor openly condemned the same errors You see then it was not the Franciscan Frier onely but many Divines both good and learned did condemne him of Heresie and not they alone but the Pope himselfe who succeeded him publikely condemned him for an Hereticke And thus much touching Pope John the 21. called by some the 22. There was another Pope John by the name of 22. otherwise called 23. who was living one hundred yeares after he was chosen Pope at a Plat. in Joh. 24. Bononia by the consent of all the Cardinals Against this John it was specially objected at the Councel of Constance b Quinimo dixit pertinacitèr credidit animam hominis cum corpore humano mori extingui ad instar animalium brutorum Concil Constant That he obstinately held that the soule of man dieth together with the body and is consumed to nothing as the soule of brute beasts Neither did he hold this Tenet as a private man which is your generall Answer for Antoninus saith plainely Pope John held this error in the time of his Popedome c Johannes sermonē faciens in publico consistorio dixit quaedam haeresin sapientia Anton. part 3. tit 21. c. 6. and pronounced words savouring of heresie openly in the Consistorie Neither was this accusation of these men accounted rebellion and disobedience in them as it was in Ceaenas for saith Gerson d Falsitas doctrinae Papae Jobānis vicessimi quae dānata fuit cum sono buccinarum vel tubarum coram Rege Philippo per Theologos Parisienses Gers serm in Festo Paschae Tom. 4. pag. mihi 491. his false doctrine was condemned by the Divines of Paris and proclaimed with sound of trumpets in the presence of King Philip and withall the Councell it selfe deprived him of his Popedome which shewes plainly the authority of a Councell is above the Pope And to his deposition subscribed 4. Patriarkes 29. Cardinals 47. Archbishops 270. Bishops 564. Abbots and Doctors in all above 900. deposed both Benedict the 12. and John the 23. and yet these men are reputed by you for an infallible Rule of the Roman Faith And thus not onely Ceaenas was deposed for his disobedience towards an Hereticke and is now thrust into your first Classis of damned Authors but the whole Councell of Constance touching that Session where they decred the Councell to be above the Pope is rejected and disavowed by your Church It is no difficult thing then to prove your infallible Pope may bee an Hereticke but if any man of your owne Church shall say so and manifestly prove it yea although it be a generall Councell it must therefore be censured and condemned by your Church And this may briefly serve in answer to what you say against my second Section The third Section say you is of corruption both in Faith and manners Pag. 50. which the Knight proveth out of the Councell of Pisa and out of the Councell of Trent To which I answere For matter of manners wee willingly acknowledge a reformation to be needfull but for doctrine with the contradiction of his owne former lye hee telleth a new one It is a true saying of Chrysostome A lyar thinkes no man speakes the truth Qui mendax est neminen◠verum putat dicere Chrys in Matth. Hom. 19 But that the truth of my assertion may appeare looke upon the Letters of summons they declare that the Councell was called to reforme errors that concerned Faith they shew there was a due and wholesome reformation to be made aswell of the Church doctrine as of the manners of men for quieting the consciences of the faithfull And accordingly Pope Alexander did assemble the most learned of all Nations Idem dixit quod ipse volebat vacare circa Reformationem Ecclesiae c. Acta Concil Pis Sess 20. Bin. Tom. 3. Pars 2. p mihi 837. the Cardinals did binde themselves with an Assumpsit that they would not proceed to the election of a new Pope when his predecessors Gregorie the 12. and Benedict the 13. were deposed unlesse the Pope would agree to a reformation in the Head and Members and will you say the Pope did assemble the most learned of all Nations to teach good manners onely Cardinall de Aliaco was living in his dayes De squallor Rom. Eccles p. 34. in Biblioth Westmonasteriensi Gers declaratio defect virorū he complaines that Pagan abuses and diabolicall superstitions were so many in the Church that they could not be imagined Gerson Chancellor of Paris complained of particular errors that Images in Churches occasioned Idolatrie Apocryphall Scriptures were brought into the Church to the great damage of Christian Faith Occham compēdium contr errores Papae p. 957. Incipit Prologus Looke into the age before him Occham a Frier Minorite cries out Alas
elements is not reall and corporall but spirituall and sacramentall as that was in the Desert of which the Apostle speaketh the c 1 Cor. 10.4 spirituall rock followed them and that rock waes Christ When Manna fell and the rock was strucken Christ was not incarnate nor many hundred yeares after how then could the Manna or the water bee really and properly turned into his flesh and bloud Moreover howsoever hee eludeth the former words of Aelfrick There is a great difference betwixt the body wherein Christ suffered and the body which is received of the faithfull the body in which Christ suffered was borne of the flesh of Mary and consisted of bloud and bone but the other is gathered of many cornes without hloud and bone by saying that the difference which Aelfrick sheweth betweene Christ on the Crosse and Christ on the Sacrament is in his manner of being not in the being it selfe not denying him to bee really in both yet the later words which containe an inference upon the former therefore there is nothing to bee understood in the Sacrament bodily but spiritually admit of no colourable evasion for if nothing bee there understood bodily but spiritually then must needs the words This is my body be understood figuratively then must we not according to the doctrine of those times understand any substantiall change of the bread into Christs very body or the Wine into his bloud really and corporally To the third The difference betweene Papists of most eminent note concerning the words by vertue whereof they teach Transubstantiation is effected maketh much against the doctrine it selfe and by consequence quite overthroweth it For thus we argue against them out of this their difference If the bread bee turned into Christs body then either by the words of benediction before hee brake the bread or gave it c. or by the very words of Consecration viz. hoc est corpus meum But hee neither changed the bread into his Body by the one nor by the other Ergo hee changed it not at all Not by the precedent benediction as Aquinas and Bellarmine prove For till the last instant of the prolation of the words This is my Body the substance of bread remaineth Not by the words of Consecration for as Durand and Odo Cameracensis and Christopherus Archbishop of Caesarea prove Christ could not have said after hee had blessed the Bread This is my body unlesse by blessing it he had made it his body before If when Christ said Take yee and eat yea at that time the Bread by benediction were not changed it would follow that Christ did command his Disciples to take and eate the substance of Bread which to say is to deny the article of Transubstantiation Neither can the Iesuite heale this sore by his vertuall salve in saying that those men above alledged who impugne the prsent tenent of the Schooles concerning the words of Consecration in which the essence of the Sacrament consisteth vertually retracted such opinions because they submitted their writings to the censure of the Catholique Church for so wee may say with better reason that what they held against us they vertually retracted by submitting their judgement to the Catholique Church which we can easily prove not to bee the particular Roman but the Universall which in all times and all places through the Christian world hath professed the common faith once given to the Saints without any of those later Articles which P. Pius the fourth Jud. 13. and the late conventicle of Trent hath pinned unto it To the fourth Cajetan is truly alledged by the Knight for though neither the words Transubstantiation nor supposed are in him yet the sence of them is to be found in him for as both Suarez and Flood himselfe acknowledgeth p. 147. Cajetan said that these words This is my body doe not sufficiently prove the reall presence of our Saviours body without the presupposed authoritie of the Church and if in his judgement they prove not so much as the reall presence of Christs body in the Sacrament much lesse prove they the presence thereof by Transubstantiation or turning the bread into it By the word supposed which the Knight addeth more fully to declare Cajetans meaning hee intended not suppositions or barely pretended authority of the Church but truly presupposed which maketh not the speech sound at all contemptibly of the Church as Flood would have it whose stomack is so bad that it turneth sweet and wholsome meate into choler Nectar cui fiet acetum vaticani perfida vappa cadi To the fifth The Knight transcribeth so much out of Biel as was pertinent to his purpose with the rest he thought not fit to trouble the reader In Can. Miss Lect. 40. notandum guod quamvis expressè tradatur in scriptur â quod corpus Christi veraciter sub speciebus panis continetur à fidelibus sumitur tamen quomodo sit ibi corpus Christi an per conversionem alicujus in ipsum an sine conversione incipiat esse corpus Christi cum pane manentibus substantiâ accidentibus panis in Canone bibliae non invenitur The whole passage in Biel standeth thus It is to bee noted that though it bee expressely delivered in Scripture that the body of Christ is truly contained under the forme or species of Bread and received by the faithfull yet it is not found in the canon of the Bible how the body of Christ is there whether by conversion of any thing into it or whether it beginneth to be there without conuersion or turning the substance and accidents of bread remaining The former words in which passage make nothing against the Knight Who in this chapter for the most part condemneth Papists out of their owne mouth and therefore taking Biel for such hee maketh use of his testimonie against the Roman Church in point of Transubstantiation Which is very direct and expresse and the Iesuites answer is very weake and unsufficient thereunto to wit that hee denieth only that Transubstantiation is found in Scripture in expresse words For first Biel saith not non invenitur expressum but non invenitur It is not found in Scripture whether Christs body be there by conversion of any thing into it Now many things are found in Scripture as the Trinity of persons the eternall generation of the Sonne the procession of the holy Ghost from the Father and the Sonne the number and nature of Sacraments which yet are not set downe in expresse words Secondly it is evident out of the former words of Biel that hee accounted those things expressely to be delivered in Scriptures which yet are not set downe in expresse words for hee saith that it is expresly delivered in Scriptures that the body of Christ is truly contained under the species of bread and yet those words are not found in Scripure If wee should admit then of Flood his glosse upon Biel Transubstantiation is not found in Scripture that is
same prayers are said breeds no deformitie at all but uniformitie rather Sith it is not the different sound of words but of sense that makes a difference either in the beliefe or practice of the Church There was never more unitie then in the Apostles time Acts 2.46 when all the be leevers were of one mind yet then they praised God in divers languages Acts 2.9 Parthians and Medes and Elamites and the dwellers in Mesopotamia and in Indaea and Cappadocia in Pontus and Asia Phrygia and Pamphylia in Egypt and the parts of Lybia about Cyrene and strangers of Rome Iewes and Proselites Creets and Arabians wee doe heare them speake in our tongues the wonderfull workes of God To the fourth The diversitie of translations either of the Scriptures or the Church office breedeth no inconvenience at all provided care betaken that the translations bee revised by the learned and licenced by authoritie nay on the contrarie the Church reapeth much benefit by it for languages have beene therby improved and the Scriptures much opened For oftentimes that which is obscure in the originall is cleared in a good translation An unknowne tongue is like a vaile before a beautifull picture or a filme before the eye which by a good translation is taken a-away If it were either unlawfull or inconvenient to translate the holy Scriptures or choyce parts of them in the Church Liturgie into vulgar languages why did Severus translate them into the Syrian S. Ierome into the Dalmatian S. Chrysostome into the Armenian Vlphila into the Gothian Methodius into the Slavonian Bede into the British and the Divines of Doway and Rhemes of late into the English Aeneas Sylbist Bohem. c. 30. Nay why did the Pope himselfe signe and subscribe unto the Petition of Cyrill and Methodius Monkes sent to convert the flaves and Dalmatians who in behalfe of their Converts desired of his holinesse that he would give leave to say service unto them in the Slavonian tongue which the Pope consented unto upon their much pressing him with that text of holy Scripture Ps 150. v. ult Let every thing that hath breath praise the Lord and let every tongue confesse unto him To the fift If there were any force in the Iesuits reason at all it would prove that neither the Scriptures of the Old Testament should have beene delivered to the Iewes in the Hebrew nor the New Testament to the Greekes in the Greek For Hebrew was then the vulgar tongue of the Iewes and the Greeke to the Gentiles yet wee find that neither the writing the Old Testament in the Hebrew nor the New in the Greeke which were then the vulgar languages to those people bred any contempt of sacred things with prophanesse and irreligiousnesse but the cleane contrarie effects The use of Scripture in a vulgar tongue is not the cause why any disesteeme or undervalew it but want of instruction in heavenly mysteries and carelesse and superficiall reading without searching into the bottome of the spirituall meaning where Orient Pearles lie A counrerfeit stone if it bee often handled is discovered to be false and thereby looseth its valew whereas a rich Diamond though it be worne every day on the finger loseth nothing of the price or valew of it If the publike use of Scriptures would have derogated any thing from the worth and valew of it God would never have commanded the children of Israel to rehearse the booke of the Law continually to their children Deut. 6.7 8 9 to talke of it when they tarried in their house and when they walked in the way when they lay downe and when they rose up to bind the words of the law for a signe upon their hand and as frontlets between their eyes to write them upon the posts of the house and upon the gates Worldly wise men seeke to improve their knowledge by concealing it or at least impropriating it to some few but God contrariwise valeweth his wisdome by making it common Earthly commodities the rarer the dearer but heavenly Iewels the more common they are the more pretious of other liquour the lesse wee tast the more we thirst after it but heavenly wisedome thus speaketh of her selfe Hee that drinketh of me the more he drinketh the more hee shall thirst As the comfortable beames of the Sun which shineth daily upon us are not lesse valewed then the raies of those starres that seldome appeare in our horizon so the word of God which is the light of our understanding issuing from the Sunne of righteousnesse loseth nothing of the reverend estimation and religious respect due unto it by the frequent irradiation thereof at the preaching and reading of Scripture nay it gaineth rather with all hearers in whom there is any sparke of grace As for danger of heresie Rain l 1. de Idol indeed Claudius Espenceus writeth that a friend of his in Italie told him that in that countrey they made shie of reading Scripture for feare of being made heretiques thereby but by heretiques hee meaneth such as S. Paul was who after the way which they call heresie worship the God of their Fathers Acts 24.14 beleeving all things which are written in the Law and the Prophets for otherwise if heresie bee taken in the proper sence for erroneous doctrine in point of faith it is as absurd to say that the stequent use of Scriptures is a cause or occasion to bring men into heresie as that the often taking of a sovereigne antidote against poyson is the ready meanes to poyson a man 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Chrys tom 5. Matth. 22.29 S. Chrysostome in his Homilie de Lazaro exhorteth all his Christian hearers to the frequent reading of Scriptures as a speciall meanes to preserve them from errours and heresies For all errours in point of faith arise from the ignorance of Scriptures as our Saviour teacheth the Saduces saying Yee erre not knowing the Scriptures Assuredly there is lesse danger of falling into heresie by reading Scriptures then any other booke whatsoever partly because they alone are free from all possibilitie of errour partly because God promiseth a blessing to those that reade and meditate on them yet our Adversaries suffer all other bookes to bee translated out of the learned Languages into the vulgar only they forbid the translation and publike use of the Scriptures which containe in them most wholsome receipts not only against all the maladies of the will but of the understanding also not onely against all morallvices but also all intellectuall errours in matters of faith which wee call heresies To the sixt Had the Iesuit but an ounce of discretion and common understanding hee would never translate 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to announce which is no English word at all neither is hee of sufficient authoritie to coyne new words at Doway or Saint Omers and make them currant in England For the matter it selfe it is false which hee saith that the Actions at the Lords
image-worship which is so directly and expresly forbidden by God in the law That the Iewes are thus scandalized at the idolatrous practice of the Roman Church the Knight proveth by an eye-witnesse Sir Edwine Sands who in his description of the religion in the West parts observeth that the worship of images as it is at this day practised by the Roman Church is such a stumbling block to the Iewes and hinderance to their conversion that when they come to Christian Sermons as in Rome they are enjoyned at least once a yeare so long as they see the Preacher direct his speech to a little woodden crucifix that standeth on the Pulpit by him to call it his Lord and Saviour kneele to it embrace it and kisse it to weepe upon it as it is their fashion in Italie it is preaching sufficient for them and perswadeth them more with the very sight of it to hate Christian religion then any reason the world can alledge to love it To the seventh The argument drawne from the Cherubins is refelled professedly by Tertullian De idol c. 5. Apostolus affirmat omnia tunc figuratè populo accidisse addit benè quòd idem Deus quilege vetuit similitudinem fimilitudinem fieri extraordinario praecepto serpent is similitudinem fieri mandavit si eundem Deum observas habes logem ejus nefeceris similitudinem si praeceptum factae posteà similitudinis respicis tu imit are Mosen ne facias adversus legem simulacrum aliquod nisi tibi Deus jusserit the Apostle saith he affirmeth that all things happened to the Iewes in figures and hee addeth well the same God who in his generall law forbad any similitude to be made by an extraordinary precept commanded some similitude to bee made if thou dost serve the same God thou hast his law Make to thy selfe no graven image or similitude if thou regardest the Precept of making a similitude as of the Cherubins or brazen serpent e. imitate thou Moses make thou no image against the law unlesse God command thee by a Precept Whereunto wee may farther adde that the Cherubins were not made publikely to bee seene and gazed upon by the people but were kept in the holy place whither the Priests only resorted neither were they worshipped by the Priests as Lyra cited by the Iesuit who was himselfe a Iew at the first and well knew their practice professeth the Iewes saith he worshipped not the Arke nor the Cherubins nor the mercy seate but the true God which promised to helpe them neither were they set up in the Temple for adoration but for ornament L. 9. c. 6. q. 7. non ut adorarentur sed ob ornatum pulchritudinem Tabernaculi vel Templi ad majestatem Dei plenius ostendendam Lorin in Act Apost c. 17. de Cherubinis jussu Dei factis de alijs imaginibus â— Solomone dicendum fuisse duntaxat ut appendices additamenta ornatus alterius rei non verò per se propositas modo accommodato ad adorationem quam conslat quoque ab Haebreis ipsis non fuisse exhibitam quod utrumque docet Tertullianus eritque id magis verum si verumâ—est Cherubin ore manibus cruribus erectione corporis bumanam jubis à pectore cervice pendentibus Leoninam alis aquilinam ungulis pedum vitulinam figuram retulisse Vasq I de adorat 2. disp 4. c. 6. nunquam cherubinis honor aut adoratio adhibita fuit aut osculo aut genuflexione aut oblatione â—huris aut alio signo peculiari ad ipsos directo nec quisquam nisi ex suo cerebro absque ullo fundamento contrarium poterit affirmare as Azorius convinced by evidence of truth acknowledgeth saying the Cherubins were not painted or engraven on the Arke to the end they might bee adored but only to adorne and beautifie the Tabernacle and more fully to expresse the majestie of God with whom Lorinus and Vasquez accord concerning the Cherubins made by the command of God and other images in Solomons Temple wee must say that they were there as appendices and additions for the adorning of something else not set forth by themselves in a manner fit for adoration which it is manifest that the Iewes never exhibited to them both which Tertullian teacheth Vasquez commeth not behind Lorinus teaching a contrarie lesson to Flood here his words are That the Cherubins were never adored nor worshipped neither by kissing them nor with bowing of the knee or by offering Frankinsence or by any other meanes neither can any man affirm the contrarie except it be out of his owne braine without any foundation or ground at all To the eighth In this allegation the Iesuit sheweth from whence he and his fellowes are descended L. 3. cont haeres c. 2. cum ex scripturis arguuntur in accusationem convertuntur ipsarum scripturarum quasi non rectè haheant neque sint ex auiboritate quia variè sint dictae juia non possit ex his inveniri veritas ab his qui nesciunt traditionem non enim perliter as traditam illam sed pervivam vocem Aug. in 10. tract 49. Sanctus Evangelifia testatur multa Dominum Christum dixisse fecisse quae scripta non sunt electa sunt autem quae scriberentur quae saluti credentium sufficere videbantur Cyr. in 10.12 c. 68. non omnia quae Dominus fecit conscripta sunt sed quae scribentes sufficere put ârunt tam admores quà m ad dogmata ut rect â fide operibus virtute rutilantes ad regnum caelorum perveniamus viz. from the ancient Gnosticks and Valentinians who as Irenaeus testifieth against them When they are convinced of their heresies out of Scripture they fall on accusing the Scriptures themselves impeaching their authoritie and charging them with ambiguity and saying that the truth cannot be found out of them by those who know not tradition for that it was not delivered by letters but by word of mouth But because I have beate the Iesuit heretofore out of this dodge and have proved abundantly the sufficiencie and perfection of Scriptures I will spare farther labour herein and only shew how shamefully he depraveth one text to the derogation of the whole Scripture S. Iohn in the place alledged by him speaketh not of points of faith or manners precepts or examples for our imitation but of miracles 10.20 30. Many things truly did Iesus in the presence of his Disciples which are not written in this booke Upon which words S. Austine and S. Cyrill thus glosse full in the Protestant language the holy Evangelist testifieth that Christ did and said many things that are not written but those things were chosen to bee written which seemed sufficient for the salvation of them that beleeve and S. Cyrill all things which Christ did are not written but what the writers thought to bee sufficient as well for our conversation as doctrine
the purpose that that Councell seemed to be an assembly not of Bishops but of Hobgoblins not of men but of Images moved like the statues of Daedalus by the sinewes of others What the Iesuit addeth of night owles not daring to appeare in the splendour of that Councell hath no colour of truth For it is no newes for owles to appeare at popish Councells At a Councell held at Rome by Pope Heldebrand Fascic rerum expetend sugiend Ortwhinus Gratius writeth there appeared an huge great Owle which could not be frayed away but scared all the Bishops As for Protestants whom this Blacke-bird of Antichrist termeth night Owles if they had flocked to that Councell they had shewed themselves not Owles by appearing in that twi-light at Trent but very Wood-cocks to trust any security offerd them by those who after publike faith given to Iohn Huz and Ierome of Prage notwithstanding the safe conduct of Sigismond the Emperour for their going to and comming from the Councell at Constance most cruelly burned them at a stake to ashes To the seventeenth Divine faith must be grounded upon divine authority and that cannot be the Catholike faith which wanteth consent of Fathers As for those Fathers whose authority Bellarmine draweth ob torto collo to testifie for unwritten traditions de verbo Dei lib. 4. cap. 7. the Iesuit may see them fully answered in Iunius Whitaker Daniel Chamierus and Dr. Davenant Bishop of Sarum and a farre greater number of Fathers alleaged to the contrary by Robert Abbot in his answer to William Bishop cap. 7. Phillip Morney in his preface to his booke de sacrâ Eucharistiâ and Iacobus Laurentius in his singular tractate de Disputationibus and others To the eighteenth The assistance of the Holy ghost was more speciall in the times of the Apostles then in latter ages they could not erre in their writings others might yet we charge not the Catholike Church of Christ in any age with any fundamentall errour though we may the Roman Tertullian his rule may have still place and as well in one age as another if it be rightly taken and not misconstrued and misapplied for if it be taken generally that whatsoever is the same amongst many is no errour but tradition it is it selfe a great errour For the same opinion concerning the inequality of the Father and the Sonne is found amongst many to wit the Arrian Churches the same doctrine concerning the procession of the Sonne from the Father onely is found amongst many namely all the Greeke Churches at this day the same practise of administring the Eucharist to children was found amongst many namely all the Churches of Affrica in St. Austines time yea and in all Churches subject to the Bishop of Rome for many ages as Maldonat the Iesuit confesseth yet the above named Positions and this latter practise are confessed on all sides to be erroneous But Tertullian by many understandeth not the practise of some particular Churches Tertul. de prescrip Age nunc omnes ecclesiae erraverint verisimile est ut tot et tante in unam fidem erraverint much lesse of factious persons of one Sect but the generall and uniforme doctrine and practise of the whole Church as his words in the same Chapter quoted by the Iesuit declare Goe too now admit that all Churches have erred is it likely so many so great Churches should erringly conspire in one faith To the nineteenth We derogate nothing from any generall custome of the Catholike Church let the Iesuit produce out of good Authors any such custome for Indulgences to redeeme soules out of Purgatory flames by Papall Indulgences and this controversie will soone be at an end howsoever let me tell the Iesuit the way that this text of St. Paul is impertinently alleaged to prove this or any other article of the Trent faith For St. Paul in this place speaketh not of any Article of faith nor matter of manners necessary to salvation but of habits gestures fashions and indifferent rites in matter of which nature there is no question at all but that the custome of the Churches of God ought to sway as is abundantly proved by Dr. Andrewes late Bishop of Winchester in his printed Sermon upon that text To the twentieth Disputabamus de alliis respondet Iesuita de cepis we dispute of Indulgences the Iesuit answereth of Traditions in matter of Faith These are very distinct questions and so handled by all that deale Work-man-like in points of difference betweene the Reformed and the Romane Churches but the Jesuits common place of Indulgences was drawne drie and therefore hee setteth his cocke of Traditions on running which yeeldeth nothing but muddy water What though Faith be ancienter than Scriptures the Argument is inconsequent Ergo Scripture is not now the perfect rule of Faith Faith neither is nor can be more ancient than the Word of God upon which it is built this Word of God is now written and since the consigning and confirming the whole Canon of the written Word by Saint Iohn in the Apocalypse is become the perfect and as the Schooles speaketh the adequate rule of Faith It is true Christ and his Apostles first taught the Church by word of mouth Lib. 3. advers heres cap. 1. Non enim per alios dispositionem salutis nostrae cognovimus quam per eos per quos Evangelium pervenit ad nos quod quidem tunc praeconiaverunt postea per dei voluntatem in scripturis nobis tradiderunt fundamentum columnam fidei nostrae futuram but afterwards that which they preached was by the commandment of God committed to writing to be the foundation and pillar of Faith as Irenaus testifieth in expresse words To the twentie one If the Iesuit could prove as undoubtedly any words of the Apostles that are not set downe in Scriptures to be their owne words as wee can prove the writings we have to be theirs wee would yeeld no lesse credit to them then to these but that neither can hee nor so much as undertaketh to doe And whereas he further faith that the credit of the Scripture depends upon Tradition unlesse hee qualifie the speech some way it is not onely erroneous but also blasphemous for it is all one as if hee should say that man gives credit and authority to God as Tertullian jeareth the Heathen In Apolloget not receiving Christ for God because the Romane Senate would not give their consent and approbation to make him one Iam homo deo propitius esse debet or that the credit and authority of Gods Word dependeth upon mans receiving it Whereas in truth Gods Word is not therefore of divine and infallible authoritie because the Church delivereth it to be so but on the contrary the Church delivereth it to be so because in it selfe it is so and the Church should erre damnably if shee should otherwise conceive of these inspired Writings then as of the undoubted Oracles of God
contradict Romish doctrines not out of disobedience to man but out of obedience to him who commandeth us to contend for the true faith and to reprove and convince all gainesayers What Papists intentions are we take not upon us to judge their doctrines we put to the test of Gods word and finde them false and adulterine and all be it some points of their beliefe considered in themselves might seeme indifferent yet as they hold them they are not because they are not of faith Rom. 14.23 and what soever is not of faith is sinne Now no point of the Romish Creed as they hold it is of that faith the Apostle speaketh of that is divine faith because they ground and finally resolve all their articles not upon Gods word but upon the authority of the Pope Resp ad Archiepis Spalaten c. 47. Firmitas fundamenti â—â— firma licet implicita in aureo hoc fundamento veritatis adhaesio valebit ut in Cypriano sic in nobis ad salutem faenum stipula imbecilitas caries in tecto contignatione explicitae erroris opinio non valebit nec in Cypriano nec in nobis ad perâ—â—tiem or Church of Rome which is but the authority of man whereas on the contrary as Doctor Crakent horpe demonstrateth If any Protestant build hay or stubble upon the true foundation he may he saved because be holdeth the true foundation which is that every doctrine of faith ought to be built upon Scripture If the Iesuit wonder at this conclusion let him weigh the Authors reasons and he will be forced to confesse that the errors if there be any in Protestants in regard they sticke close to the true foundation and implicitly deny them cannot in them be damnable whereas the very true doctrines of faith in Papists because they hold them upon a wrong ground and foundation very much derogatory to God and his truth are not so safe To the third With what face can the Iesuit avow this considering that Prieras before alleaged and other writers approved by the Church of Rome mainetaine this blasphemous assertion that the authority of the Church is greater then the anthority of Scripture and all Papists of note at this day hold that the Scripture is but an imperfect and partiall rule of faith all Protestants on the contrary teach that it is an entire and perfect rule of faith Papists believe the Scripture for the Churches sake Protestants the Church for the Scripture sake Papists resolve all points of faith generally into the Popes infalibility or Churches authority Protestants into the written word of God which as Bellarmine himselfe confesseth De verbo Dei non script l. 4. c. 11. containeth all things necessary for all men to beleeve and is a most certaine and safe rule of beleeveing Yea but saith the Iesuit out of Vincentius Lerinensis De verbo Dei l. 1. c. 2. he that will avoid the deceits and snares of Haeretikes and remaine soundin the faith must strengthen his faith two wayes to wit by the authority of the divine law and the tradition of the Catholike Church This advise of Vincentius is sound and good if it be rightly understood and not in the Iesuits sense Vincentius there by tradition of the Catholike Church understandeth not unwritten verities but the Catholike expositions of holy Scriptures extant in the writings of the Doctors of the Church in all ages and we grant that this Catholike exposition of the Doctors where it can be had is of great force to confirme faith and confound Heretikes Vt Scripturae ecclesiastice intelligentiae jungatur authoritas For the stopping of whose mouth that Father saith and we deny it not that there is great neede to add to the Scripture the Churches sense or interpretation albeit as he there addeth which cutteth the throat of the Iesuits cause The Canon of Scripture is perfect and sufficient of it selfe for all things nay rather as hee correcteth himselfe Over and above sufficient cum sit perfectus scripturae canon sibique adomnia satis superque sufficiat To the fourth Here the Iesuit would make his Reader study a little and his Adversarie to muse Vero nihil verius certo nihil certius but it is indeed whether hee be in his right wits or no. For first as Seneca well resolveth one thing cannot be said truer than another one truth in Divinitie may be more evident to us than another but in it selfe it cannot be truer or surer Secondly admitting there could be degrees of certainty at least quoad nos there can be yet no comparison in regard of such certaintie betweene an Article of the Creed assented unto by all Christians and a controverted conclusion maintained onely by a late faction in the Westerne Church But the sitting of Christ at the right hand of his Father is an Article of the Creed set downe in expresse words in holy Scripture Mark 16.19 Luke 24. consented unto by all Christians in the world whereas the carnall presence of Christ in the Sacrament by Tranfubstantiation is no Article extant in any Creed save onely that of Pope Pius his coyning in the yeare of our Lord 1564. It is neither in words set downe in Scripture as the other Articles are neither can it be necssarily inforced or deduced by consequence as foure great Cardinals of the Roman Church confesse Cameracensis Cajetan Roffensis and Bellarmine Neither was this Doctrine of the Romane Church ever assented unto by the Greeke Church nor by the Latine anciently or generally as I shewed before Thirdly the Iesuit contradicteth himselfe within eight lines for having said in the eighteenth line Pag. 384. that Christ his corporall presence in the Sacrament was more sure than his presence in heaven at the right hand of his Father about seven lines after forgetting himselfe hee saith that Wee shall find as much to doe marke as much not more in expounding that Article of the Creed as they doe in expounding the words This is my Body Wherein it is well hee confesseth that Papists make much to doe in expounding the words This is my Body which is most true for by the demonstrative Hoc they understand they know not what Neither this Body nor this Bread but an Individum vagum something contained under the accidents of Bread which when the Priests saith Hoc it is Bread but when hee hath muttered out an Vm it is Christs Body Likewise by the Copula est is they understand they know not what either shall be as soone as the words are spoken or is converted unto or is by Transubstantiation Lastly by Body they understand such a body as indeed is no body without the extension of place without distinction of Organs without facultie of sense or motion and will hee make this figment so incredible so impossible as sure nay more sure than the Article of Christs ascension into heaven and his sitting at the right hand of his
of Baruch and the second booke of the Macchabees and the booke of Nehemiah which the present Romane Church receiveth for Canonicall Secondly Gelasius with his Roman Councell freely give their censure of all Theologicall bookes then extant but they clip not the tongues of any Authors nor burne their bookes If the Romish Inquisitors had done no more if they had let the Records and Evidences remaine and onely censured them at their pleasure wee would not so much have blamed them for using the freedome of their judgements wee would only freely have censured their Censures Lips Epist Critica nostra non effugêre 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and left all to the judicious and intelligent Readers judgement An errour in Criticisme is pardonable but the making away of the evidence of Truth Advers Gentes l. 3. Intercipere scripta publicatam velle submergere lectionem non est Deos defendere sed veritatis testificationem timere and defacing authenticall Records is a damnable practise and an undoubted Argument both of an evill conscience and a desperate cause as Arnobius layeth the Law to the Gentiles To the third Gelasius his testimonie of the Romane Church whereof hee was then Bishop can be of no great moment It seemeth at that time the Church of Rome wanted good neighbours that the Pope was faine to blazon his owne armes and guild his owne Diocese not thinking of the old Proverbe Laus propria sordet in ore Howbeit wee grant in Gelasius his time the Romane Church had not many spots and wrinkles for then shee was young in comparison now she is old and decrepit and all full of wrinkles and after the manner of crooked old age boweth downe to wit to rood-lofts Images and Pictures But neither then nor now hath shee any power to forbid the use of any Books through the whole Church but onely within her owne jurisdiction To the fourth This Plaister is a great deale too narrow for the Sore of the Romane Church to which the Iesuit applieth it For it is not their admonitions to the Children of their owne Church which we here complaine of but their cutting out of the tongues of learned Authors when they witnesse the truth not the censuring their own Writers but the mangling of some of them and utterly abolishing others Vnder colour of taking away Rats-bane out of the way they take away Sugar from their Children and which is worse debarre them from the sincere Milke of the Word I meane the Scriptures in the vulgar language Yet were there Rats-bane in some of the Writers with whom the Inquisitours have to deale they should have onely given notice thereof or prescribed some Antidote against it considering that Physitians and Apothecaries and Housholders also make good use of Rats-bane sometimes To the fift The Iesuit doth well not to undertake justifying of the Inquisition which hee well knoweth hee is not able onely here and there hee nibleth at some Author or other that hath falne into their hands as Bertram in this place whom the Knight long agoe rescued and gave unto him the wings of the Presse to flie abroad whereby hee hath received no disgrace but many thankes from all that love the Truth in sinceritie For the translation thereof which the Iesuit imputeth to the Knight as a great disparagement to him the truth is the Knight translated not Bertram but published the translation of another by re-printing it and gracing it with a learned and elegant Preface of his owne Which I marvell not that the Iesuit kicketh at because hee and his fellow Iesuits are sore Galled with it When the Iesuit shall prove any falsification in the translated Copie or any errour inserted into it hee shall receive a further answer Till then let the brand remaine upon the Romane Index for damning the originall and upon the Iesuit for defaming the true translated Copie of so learned and orthodox a Writer as Bertram was To the sixt In citing the Councell of Laodicea and detecting the Inquisitours foule dealing with it by turning Angels into Angles to gaine a starting hole for their Idolatrie the Iesuit by recrimination objecteth to the Knight errour in Chronology and corruption of the Councell To the first I answer that the Primate of Armath and other learned Antiquaries have set this Councell about the yeare mentioned by the Knight your Binius ingeniously confesseth quo anno celebratum fuit incertum est It is uncertaine in what yeare of our Lord this Councell was held hee saith it was celebrated before the Councell of Nice but hee brings no proofe of it If wee should grant him that this Councell were elder by 40 or 50 yeares than the Knight accounteth it it would be more for our advantage and against him sith Councels the more ancient they are caeteris paribus the more authority they carrie with them To the second I answer that the translation which the Knight followed agreeth verbatim with the originall 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which words two of the Romish Translators set in Columnes one against the other by Binius render as followeth The first thus Quod non oporteat Christianos relictâ dei ecclesiâ abire Angelos nominare The other thus Quod non oporteat ecclesiam dei relinquere atque Angelos nominare That is that Christians ought not to leave the Church of God and goe their wayes and name Angels that is mention them in our Prayers or take their names in our lips as the Psalmist speaketh of Idoll-worshippers Psal 16.4 Their drink-offerings of blood will I not offer nor take their name in my lips And thus Theodoret in his Comment upon the second Chapter of St. Paul to the Colossians vers 18. alleageth the Canon of this Councell Because saith hee they commanded men to worship Angels Saint Paul enjoyneth on the contrarie that they should send up Thanksgiving to God the Father by him that is Christ and not by the Angels The Synod of Laodicea also following this rule of the Apostle and desiring to heale that old disease made a Law that they should not pray unto Angels 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Here the Iesuit hath both the Canon and the Report the Canon of the ancient Councell held at Laodicea thundring against their Invocation of Angels and the learned and ancient Father Theodoret his Report of it To the seventh Those men whom the Iesuit nameth were not Fathers of our Religion but Brethren onely of our profession neither was their motive for the change of their Religion carnall love as the Iesuit like impure Nero judging others by himselfe conceiveth but a voyce from Heaven saying unto them goe out of Babylon my people Apoc. 18.4 lest you partake of her Plagues It is true those instruments of Gods glory were married as the Apostles St. Peter and St. Phillip and many of the chiefe Bishops and Pastours in the Primitive Church were of whom it may be said as Sozomen spake of
every one hee meeteth First hee falleth upon the Knight for creating a Cardinall to wit Hugo de S. Victore Flood p. 188. of his owne free goodnesse to make up the number of his Bishops and Cardinals I answer for the knight that he created no supernumerall Cardinall for he would not usurpe upon the Poges priviledge but committed a small errour in an 〈◊〉 and cry which was made after one Hugh in stead of another yet peradventure it was not the Knights mistake but the Correctors For Hugh of S. Victor though he hath his Cardinals hat in the margent yet hee standeth bare-headed in the text it is called a Communion Lynd safe way p. 119. because it is a common union of Priests and people otherwise saith Hugo it is called a Communion for that the people in the primitive Church did communicate every day But admit the Knight mistooke Hago de S. Victore for Hugo Cardinalis as Bellarmine confesseth that many learned men of his owne side mistooke Anselmus Laudunensis for Cantuariensis yet Flood should have pardoned or let passe and overseene this small oversight because wee tooke him at a worse fault in the like kind in examining his last Section wherein as I there shewed hee grosly mistaketh Bertram for Elfrick and a collation of two Authours for a translation of one Loripedem rectus derideat Aethiopem albus Eras Adag after this hee jeareth at the Knight for saying that the Councell of Trent wished well to our doctrine P. 189. What saith hee have you Masses Sir Humfrey take heed it may cost you money an Informer that should heare this might catch you by the backe and bring you in for so many hundred markes as you have received bits of bread in your Church which truly might prove a deere ordinarie for you The Orator said well Cic. pre Coel. nihil tam volucre quà m maledictam nothing is so easily cast out as a contumelious word and I may adde nothing so easily returned backe The Knight no where saith that wee have any Masses in our Church but only that the Councell of Trent wisheth well to publike Communions wherein the people communicate with the Priest which are not certainly your private Masses but admit hee had said wee have Masses in our Church hee might very well have defended this speech by my Lord of Duresme his distinction of Christ his Masse Tho. Mor. episc Dunelm l. nitit Christ his Masse and the Pope his Masse Wee have Christ his masse at every communion neither is any man merced for being present at it but for being absent from it For Masses are not sold with us as they are with Papists where there is a price set for drie Masses and wet Masses for low Masses and high Masses the ordinarie was but a groat for the one and a tester for the other but now it is raised and so to speake in the Iesuits language the Priests Masses prove a Deere ordinarie for the Laitie After this madde Tiger hath left the Knight hee fastens his teeth upon our Communion Table calling it an emptie Communion nothing but a morsell of bread P. 190. and a sup of wine and a prettie service and good-fellow Communion P. 199. Flood is the same full and fasting in jeast and in earnest for in both hee contradicts himselfe which discouereth an idle and addle braine If our Communion bee emptie and nothing but a morsell of bread and a sup of wine what good-fellowship can there bee in it But in good earnest how can the Iesuit call ours an emptie Communion which is every way full and fuller then theirs both for the signes and the things signified for the signes we have the substance of Bread and Wine they nothing but hungrie accidents and shewes a bit of quantity and a morsell of colours and a soppe of figures neither have the Laitie among them so much as a sup of the consecrated cup. For the thing signified we teach that all communicants by faith feed on the very body and bloud of Christ and all that so feed partake of all the benefits of Christs passion they teach that Infidels and reprobates eate Christs body and reape no benefit at all by it As for his good-fellow Communion let him take it to himselfe for Aquinas noteth that sometimes their Priests are overseene by drinking the liquor in the Consecrated cup Missal in cautel si in casu gulae Eucharistiam evomuerit and the cautels of the Masse appoint what is to bee done in case the Priest being drunke before cast up the host As for our Communion there can bee no excesse or as hee tearmeth it good-fellowship in it For the people have warning a weeke at least before to prepare themselves and they receive alwayes fasting before and the quantitie is so smal that it cannot distemper any which this bone Compaignion could not bee ignorant of But it seemeth hee tooke a cup of vinum Theologicum in the Taverne before hee set pen to paper in this section For besidemanifold contradictions before noted hee tearmeth in it our Commnuion sacrilegious P. 199. not considering that they sacrilegiously take the cup from the Laity and that we have restored it and he concludeth the Section with these words here is enough of such an idle subject Now the subject as appeares by the argument of the Section and the title he putteth throughout is Private Masse Nay which is a most certaine demonstration of his distemper when hee wrote this Section hee forgot that hee was a Priest and reckoneth himselfe among the Laitie saying the union may remaine betweene us and the Priest P. 197. l. 1. though he say Masse and wee not receive Concerning the 7. Sacraments Spectacles paragraph 4. a pag. 199. usque ad 242. THe Knight unjustly chargeth Bellarmine for laying a foundation of Atheisme Concil Trid. Sess 7. can 1. Bell. de effect sacram l. 2. c. 25. si tollamus authoritatem praesentis ecclesiae praesentis concilij in dubiū revocari poterunt omnium aliorum cōciliorum decreta tota fides christiana 1 Eliz. 1. in saying that if wee should take away the credit of the Roman Church and Councell of Trent which decreeth the precise number of 7. Sacraments the Decrees of other Councels nay even Christian faith it selfe might be called in question for if such a generall Councell may erre the Church may erre if the Church may erre the faith which that Church teacheth may faile and consequently there can bee no certaintie S. Gregorie the great did often say and write that hee did hold the 4 first Councels in the same honour that hee did the 4. Gospels which is the same as to say they could as little erre as the 4. Gospels And the Parliament lawes of England give as great authoritie to those 4. first Councels as S. Gregorie doth acknowledging that for heresie whatsoever is condemned for such by any of
them which is in other words to acknowledge them for a Rule of faith and consequently of infallible authoritie neither can any thing be said more against the present Church and present Councell of Trent then against the Church of that time and the Councels of those times The Knight impertinently alledgeth the testimonies of S. Paul You know that I have withdrawne nothing that was profitable v. 27. I have not shrunke to declare unto you the whole counsell of God Acts 20.20 and Bellarmine l. 4. d. verb. Dei All those things are written by the Apostle which are necessarie for all men and which they preached generally unto all For S. Paul speaketh not of the written word but of the doctrine of Christ by him preached neither doth Bellarmines saying helpe any thing because though those things which are necessarie in generall for all to know which are but few bee written there bee yet many more not written which are necessarie to bee knowne by some in the Church The Knight in praying that the Anathema decreed by the Councell of Trent might fall upon his head if any Papist could shew the number of seven Sacraments to have beene the beliefe of the Church for a thousand yeares after Christ is too forward to draw malediction upon himselfe it will come fast enough to his cost It is an heavier thing then he is a ware of to have the curse of a mother and such a mother as the Church which doth not curse without cause Ecclesiasticus 3.11 nor out of passion For as the Scripture saith maledictio matris eradicat fundamenta the malediction of a mother doth roote out the foundations The Knights definition of a Sacrament to wit that it is a seale witnessing to our consciences that Gods promises are true is senselesse and without ground largely refuted by Bellarmine Bell. l. 1. de sac in genere c. 14.16 and proved to bee most absurd For how can the Sacraments bee seales to give us assurance of his words when all the assurance wee have of a Sacrament is his word this is idem per idem Besides what promises are these that are sealed or if they be sealed what need we more seales and Sacraments then one if there may bee more why not seven as well as two Againe how doe wee see the promises of God in the Sacraments these are but foolish fancies bred in hereticall braines and so to be contemned The Knights Argument against five of our Sacraments that in them the element is not joyned to the Word or they have not their institution from Christ or they bee not visible signes of invisible saving grace is frivolous For confirmation and extreame Vnction have the element and the Word to wit oyle and the forme order and penance have institution from Christ as is confessed in order the patten with an Host and Chalice with wine in it is the outward element in penance humble confession with prayer fasting and almes-deedes are the outward element in Matrimonie the bodyes of a man or woman are as much an outward element as water in baptisme and though Matrimonie might bee a naturall contract before the Gospell yet was it exalted to the dignitie of a Sacrament by Christ and though it bee an holy thing as order is yet as order is forbidden to all women so upon good reason Mariage is forbidden to all Priests because it is good but of an inferiour ranke and not so agreeable to the high estate of Priest-hood That S. Ambrose Austine Chrysostome and Bede Aug. in Iohan. tract 15 de latere in cruce pendentis lanceâ percusso sacramenta ecclesiae profluxerunt teaching that out of Christs side came the Sacraments of the Church prove no more two then seven Sacraments For they say not that they were then instituted or that there were no more Sacraments instituted or that other Sacraments did not issue from thence Saint Ambrose maketh expresse mention of the Sacrament of confirmation L. 2. de sacram c. 24. and of penance as Bellarmine sheweth who also yeeldeth a reason why S. Ambrose in his bookes de Sacramentis mentioneth no more but three Sacraments because his intent in that worke is only to instruct the catechumenie in those things which are to bee done at the time of Baptisme For hee neither writeth to the beleevers of his age but only to some beginners as is manifest by the title of one of his bookes neither doth he there speake of the Sacraments which the Church hath taught and declared but of the Sacraments which those beginners that hee spake to had newly received S. Austine in those places where hee speaketh of two Sacraments restraineth not the number to two only Respice ad munera ecclesiae munus sacramentorum in baptismo in Eucharisliâ et caeteris sanctis sacramentis For in his first Sermon upon the 103. psalme hee saith cast thine eyes upon the gifts or offices of the Church in Baptisme the Eucharist and the rest of the holy Sacraments and in his Epistle 118. having brought in the two Sacraments Baptisme and the Lords Supper he addeth this generall clause and if there bee any thing else commended in canonicall Scriptures Neither doth the place the Knight citeth out of the third booke de doctrinâ christianâ availe him any thing for it is plaine by the word sicuti that he bringeth in Baptisme and the Lords Supper for example only which doth no way restraine the number Besides his word in this place is not sacraments as the Knight citeth him but signa signes which is therefore a corruption of the Knights S. Cyprian de ablutione pedum reckoneth but five Sacraments not that hee thought there were no more Cyp. doi ablut ped propter hoc benignissime Domine pedes lavas discipulis quia post baptismum quem sui reverentia iterari non patitur aliud lavacrum procurasti quod nunquam debeat intermitti but that it pertained not to his purpose to speake of more in that place his scope being only to speake of such Sacraments as had relation to our Saviours last Supper and by ablutio pedum that Authour meaneth the sacrament of penance as appeareth by the words following for this O most benigne Lord thou didst wash thy Disciples feet because after Baptisme which may not be iterated thou hast procured another laver which must never bee intermitted S Isidore in his sixt booke of Etymologies cited by the Knight doth not so much as intend to speake of any Sacrament at all but his only intent is to treat of the names of certaine feasts as the title of the chapter sheweth to wit of feasts and their names Among which he putteth Christs Supper Moreover to shew that S. Isidore held more then the three Sacraments the Knight speaketh of in his second booke de Ecclesiast offic c. 16. l. 23. c. 19. he mentioneth two more Penance and Matrimonie Alexander hales in the place