them with him being a more honorable thing vnto God to endow second causes with force to cooperate in some things with him then to leaue them without all action in his productions as though they were altogether incapable of the same Howbeit the ratio or essence of merit which is found in the actioÌ„s of men proceeds not from the substaÌ„ce of their worke but from the grace alone which they receaue by the metit of Iesus Christ as S. Augustin obserues saying that the merits of the iust are merits because they are iust that is for that they proceed from persoÌ„s iustified and gratefull vnto God by meanes of his grace which is in them who will thinke that our merits which are the effectes of the grace of Christ alone doe disparage the glorie of the merits of Christ yea who will not planely discouer that the merits of men doe redound to the glorie of Christ his merits No otherwise then the splendour of rich gemmes and the brightnes of the moone and starrs which are effectes of the sunn's Light doe augment his glorie so far are they from diminishing it Vvhich moued Brentius to say In Apologia Confess Vvitemberg cap. de contritione that wee extolled Christ with too great prayses while wee auerre that he merited that our workes should be meritorious And another Authour Ericcius l. 4. de Eccles c. 4. of no smale note confesseth that in this thing we make Christ his glorie wonderfull illustrious Vvhence it is manifest that our merits are so far from iniuring tho merits of Christ that they euen turne to his greater glorie And indeede since the operations of the members belong to the head because this commands them and imparts vertue towards their productioÌ„ how should the dignitie of the workes of the members of Iesus Christ our Heade become rather contumelious then honorable vnto him By euery one of our actions saith a In cap 6. Zachariae Saluator in singulis coronaÌ„ acci S. Hierome our heade is crovvned Our good workes being giftes of God the Father effectes of the Holy Ghost the principale Agent fruites of the passion of Iesus Christ the end for which he suffered the act of the children of God and those who are participant of his diuine nature in conclusion being rather workes of God then of men as the b Matth. 20. 1. Cor. 15. Gaelaet 2. holy scripture doth teach vs who will repute the dignitie of such workes contumelious to God Yea who will not rather iudge those contumelious to God the Father the Holy Ghost to IesuÌ„s Christ his sufferances who like to your selues impugne the merits of good workes since by impugning them they doe truly impugne the giftes of God the operations of the H. Ghost the fruites of our sauiours passion the effectes of grace in fine the dignitie of good workes which proceed rather from God then from men Vvho will not in contemplation herof iudge your religion worthy of hatred yea euen of horrour and ours for the contrarie praise worthy And therfore it is apparent that if your doctrine be hated in respect of that which it teacheth touching merit you cannot as you pretend draw any aduantage from it but contrariwise it turnes to your disaduantage since it is hated not for sustayning a thing which is aduantagious but preiudiciall to Gods glorie Vvhich happens not onely in this point but in all the rest of the points of this Chapter It is truly hated for sustayning things preiudiciall to God not onely in that you deney as I haue alreadie shewen the workes of Saints to be meritoriours but which is more and indeede a thing causing horrour because your Prime Authours whose doctrine you imbrace as distending downe from heauen deney that the workes of Iesus Christ are meritorious I confesse saith Caluine 2. Instit c. 17. §. 1. Equidem fateor si quis simpliciter per se ChristuÌ„ opponere vellet iudicio Dei noÌ„ fore merito locum quiae non reperiretur in homine dignitas quae posset Deum promereri that if any would oppose Iesus Christ simply and nakedly considered in himselfe to God's iudgement there were no place for merit because there is no dignitie found in man which can merit God Vvhence is planely gathered that you repute not the workes of Iesus Christ meritorious before God for their owne dignitie and worth but onely by meanes of God's fauorable acceptance therof There rests no more to be done in this Chapter but to beseech the Reader as I instantly doe to note by the way that though you would be thought to haue no other ayme in these Articles but God's honour and glorie yet is it but a cloake you take vnder which your end is to seeke your selues freeing your selues in this world from all the paine and difficultie which is found in doing well For why doe you establish the Scripture the onely rule of your saluation but to deliuer your selues from obedience to the Church and from subiection to Traditions which are manifestly contrarie vnto you imitating herin that Tertul. praescript c. 17. Necessario â—â—lunt agnosâ—â—â— ea per quae reuincuntur which Tertullian notes in the Heretiques of his tyme when he saith that they will in no sort accnovvledge that wherby they are conuinced To what end doe you deney that S. Peter was the Heade of the vniuersall Church vnder Iesus Christ but onely to cast off the subiection to his Successours authoritie euen as Rebells to be freed from the Vice-Roys authoritie would deney that any other but the king had power ouer him Vvhy will you haue the blood of Christ onely to purge you but onely to auoyd paine and trouble and to be subiect to no satisfaction Vvhat reason haue you to deney the merit of good workes but onely to flatter your owne sloyth and to be obliged to no paines-taking for the obtayning of Paradice shewing your selues herin Epicures shollers who for loue of ease l. 8. Conf. c. 16. Negauit tractus meritorum as S. Augustine notes denyed the course of merits Vvhy doe you reiect the propitiation of the sacryfice of the Masse but by banishing all other propitiation saue that of the sacryfice of the Crosse to take a way all conceipt that we ought to indeuour to make God propitious You haue Gods honour in your mouth but your priuate interest in your hart two specious wayes by which you draw poore sooles to your beleife but to their owne perditioÌ„ which is indeed that which you will purchace to you and yours who cannot dy in your errours but withall they perish eternally CHAP. IIII. Section I. MINISTERS Your Maiestie should also see that we are hated because we would haue the people themselues to know the wayes of saluation in lieu of referring themselues totally to others by an affected scrupule and voluntarie ignoronce which is couered with a cloake of obedience and docilitie and to this effect we would haue
is nothing in all this which is not most conuenient you wrong vs in vpbrading vs with it and in striuing to bring our holy Father into hatred as though forsooth by vertue of that letter he would haue made some aduantage ouer this state which is altogether ridiculous Your strife in this is to make the Popes power be suspected by all the kings of the earth But regall dignitie and the dignitie of the Church haue noe repugnancie the duties which we render to the holy Sea doe no wayes hinder vs to make appeare by effects what you professe in words to wit that a subiect owes his life and all his fortunes to the defence of the dignitie of his king's crowne In this you shall continually haue vs not for companions onely but euen for Guides And doubtlesse if you second vs as I beseech God grant and giue credit vnto vs France shall conserue her peace which hitherto hath bene too much troubled by yours But with what face can you affirme that the Pope hath the thirds of the the territories of France that he hath seduced the fift part of the knigs subiects from their obedience to him and that out of the kingdome we haue another soueraigne in pointe of temporalities It is false that the Pope hath the third part of France seeing he hath onely the Countie of Amgnion which his Predecessours bought of the Counts of that Prouince It is false that he withdrew the Clergie from their obedience to their king sith they preach obedience vnto and will preach it all the dayes of their life in word and worke It is false that we doe not esteeme our selues the kings subiects sithens in subiection to him we are readie to spend our liues for his seruice It is false that we did not submitt our selues to temporall iurisdiction as though to pretend exemptions in certaine cases by the concession and grant of our Princes whose authoritie is in question were to franchise our selues from their iurisdiction and to inioy a benefit granted by a king in vertue of his Grant were not rather an accnowledgment of his authoritie then a withdrawing from it It is false that we accnowledge any other soueraigne in our temporalls then our king It is false that the Pope pretends to haue authoritie to put kings to death False that he practised this pretended power false that he holds this kingdome to be a fief which holds on and owes homage to his chaire false to conclud that the king liues but at his discretion Kings would be immortall if their conseruation depended vpon Popes who wish their good as parents the good of their children Vvhy did he who to the great happines of all Christen dome sits now in the chaire of Peter The censure of Ianuarie 1613. cause Becanus to be censured who had put out seditious propositions and with all importing danger to kings but to prouide for their safetie Vvhy did he approue that the Clergie of France in the assemblie of the states and that Sorbone at other tymes did renew the publication of the article of the Councell of Constance which pronunceth a curse vpon those that doe attempt vpon kings vnlesse their liues were as deare to him as his owne You passe ouer these truthes in obliuion and not without reason seeing they discouer to all men that it is false to affirme that the Popes and Clergie of France doe not affect the kings prosperitie they doe and will alwayes doe in such a measure that the Pope will not omitt to indeuour any thinge which may tend to their good nor will the Clergie-men of France euer spare their owne liues to assure the life of their saueraigne If accusations were enough to make a man culpable none would be found without faulte innocencie would not be exempt You are bold in laying aspersions but that which is your disgrace is that you fall short in your proofes You make vs criminall in point of our dutie towards our France while to you she stands bound for benefits as though forsooth her defence were onely found in your hands and your weapons were her warrant against the vsurpations of strangers You doe wisely to tearme them strangers least your owne enterprises might be comprised which are so frequent and palpable that the weakest witt will with facilitie deserne that it is not your affection to your king which makes you so zealous of their greatnes but your hatred to the Pope and the vniuersall Church And that it may not seeme that I impose vpon you I will make clearly appeare that you grant a far greater power to the people then that which you deny the Pope which is exceedingly disaduantagious to kings for there is no man that doth not esteement a thing far more perilous to be exposed to the discretion of the rude multitude which doth easily though falsly esteeme it selfe oppressed and which is a many headed Hyder which is ordinarily gouerned by its owne passions then to be subiect to the correction of a tender Father whose hart is full of affection for his childrens aduantage The common people a Lib. de iure regni Popule ius est de sceptro regni disponends pro libito suo saith Bucanan whom b Epist. 78. Beza accnowledgeth to be excellent and a man of great merit haue right to dispose of the scepters of kingdomes at their will and pleasure Bad Princes saith an c In Apolog. Godman English man who was d Epist 306. Caluins intimate friend and whom he called brother according to the Law of God ought to be deposed and in case the Magistrates neglect to doe their dutie the people hath also as free libertie to doe it as though ther were no Magistrate at all and in those circunstances of tyme God enlargeth them with leaue to vse the sword a Goodman in Apolog. Reges ius regnandi à populo habent qui occasione data illud reâ—ocare potest The same Authour in the reigne of Marie Queene of England composed a booke intitled of obedience printed at Geneua approued by Beza and Caluine wherin these words are found Kings haue right to raigne from the people who vpon accasion can also reuoke it Nor are you content with saying that kings may be deposed you steppe on further teaching that they may be punished condemned and slayne That a reward is to be giuen to the executioners of so horrible and execrable crimes The People saith Vvicklefs followers as b Osiander in Epist centur art 17. Vulgus provoluntate sua punire potest principes peccantes Osian relates may as they shall please punish their Princes which offend The c Goodman in Apolog. Protestant booke wherof I made mention aboue printed at Geneua in the Raigne of Queene Marie of England saith that if Magistrates transgresse the law of God and oblige others to doe the like they fall from the dignitie and obedience which otherwise is due vnto them and
The Emperour Basilius doth also intimate this when speaking to the layetie c In 8. Syn. nullo modo vobis licet de Ecclesiasticis causis sermonem mouere haec inuestig are quaerere Paetriarcharum Pontificum SacerdotuÌ„ est qui regiminis officium sortiti sunt Ecclesiastic as adepti sunt claues non nostrum qui pasci debemus c. he saith It is no way lawfull for you to medle with Ecclesiasticall causes to sound and examine them belongs to Patriarkes Bishopes priests who haue the gouerment and keyes of the Church It appertaynes not to vs who are to be fedd to be sanctified to be bound vnbound Of the same sense was Constantine in the Councell of Nice Gratiane in the Coun of Aquilea Theodosius the younger in the Ephesine Councell and diuers other Emperours in many other places In contemplation wherof a Lib. 5. epist 25. Scimus piisamos Dominus Sarerdoâ—â—â—tòus negottis non se immiscere S. Gregorie saith we know that our most pious Lords doe not meddle in the affaires of preists And that the Princes if they had any such pretention were not well grounded S. b Epist adsolit â—iâ—aÌ„ agentes Quandoae conatio aeuo anditum est quod indicium Ecclesiae authoritateÌ„ suaÌ„ ab Imperatore accepit Plurima antea Synodi fucre multa iudicia Eecâ—esiae habitae sunt sed neque Patres isliusmodires principi persuadere conati sunt nec Princeps se in Ecclesiasticis causis curiosum praebuit Athanasius doth witnesse Vvas it euer heard saith he from the creation of the world that the iudgment of the Church had authoritie from the Emperour Many Councells haue bene celebrated the Church hath often past her iudgment but nether would the Fathers persuade the Prince to any such thing nor did the Prince shew himselfe curious in causes of the Clergie and a litle after c Quis videns eum in decernendo principeÌ„ se facere EpiscoporuÌ„ praesidere iudiciis Ecclesiasticis â—â—on merito di â—at eum illam ipsam desolaetioneÌ„ esse quae a Daniele praedicta est who is he that seeing him he speakes of Constantius the Arian Emperour take vpon him to be Prince of Bishops to decree and preside in Ecclesiasticall iudgmeÌ„ts that will not say with iust reasoÌ„ that he is the desolation of abomination foretold by the Prophet Daniel S. Ambrose doth the like when writing to Valentinian the yonger who being corrupted by the Arians would iudge in matters of faith he vseth these words a Ambros l. 2. epist 13. Si vel scripturaruÌ„ se rieÌ„ diuinaruÌ„ vel vetera teÌ„porae retractemus quis abnuat in causae inquam fidei Episcopos solere de Imperatoribus Christianis noÌ„ Imperatores de Episcopis iudicare Eris Deofauente etiam insenectutis maturitateprouectior tunc de hoe censebis qualis ille Episcopi â—â— sit qui I aicis ills Sacerdotale substernit .... si confereÌ„dum de fide Sacerdotum debet esse istae collatio sicut factâ— est sabâ— onstaÌ„tino Augusta memâ—riae I 〈◊〉 cipe Et Tract de Basil non tradend Quid honorificentius quam vt Imperator Ecclesiae filius dicatur If we ether reflect vpon the order of Scripture or tymes by-past who will deny but that in points of faith in points of Faith I say the Bishopes were accustomed to iudge of Emperours not they of Bishops Vvith the helpe of God goes he on tyme will ripen thee and then you wilt iudge what kind of Bishope he is who will subiect Priestly right to laymen if a conference be to be had of faith it belongs to the Preists as it happened vnder Constantine Prince of sacred memorie Vvhat hath an Emperour more honorable then to be stiled the sonne of the Church That that which the Fathers say herin is verified by the Scripture the punishment which befell those who would needs lay hand vpon the Thurible doth confirme Further it would not b 2. Agg. 2. v. 12. command that things belonging to the law should be demaÌ„ded from the mouth of the Preist without making any mention at all of kings if both were equally lawfull It would not c 2. Paralypom say that Amarias should preside in things belonging vnto God marrie in those that apperi ayne to the office of a king Zabadias if their Courts were not distinguished To conclude d Ephes 4. v. 11. S. Paule making a long list of those who haue power in the Church had not begun with the Prophetes Euangelists Pastours and Doctours not mentioning kings if their authoritie had extended so far Againe put case the king had power to medle in such causes would you be content he should sitt vpon yours with obligation to stand to his iudgment Yes euen as the Donatists who appealed to Constantine stood to his you will stand to it if it fauour and like you appeale from it if it dislike or goe against you God saith e Vvhitak controu â— q. 5. c. 4. Iudicium sibi Deus reseruanit nulli hominum permisit one of your prime Authours following therin the donatists reserued the iudgement of religion to himselfe alone and did not grant it to any man why then will you haue the king to iudge But le ts see whether you haue a hart to enter into the lists as you make a flourish None will beleeue in my opinion that he that will not admitt of ordinarie weapons hath a desire to fight though otherwise he proclaime a loode chalance and who knowes not that in reiecting the authoritie of the Church Fathers Councells and Traditions you refuse the ordinarie weapons which are vsed in combats of Faith But oh you will admitt of the scripture and we also most willingly admitt of it yet not as it is in your hands that is Scripture not authenticall maymed corrupted interpreted according to your owne braine and most ordinarily against the true sense but the scripture preached and interpreted by the Church the pillar and rock of truth wherby we are to be deliuered from all errour Vvho could away with him that in a ciuile cause in a difficultie of importance would onely stand to the text of written lawes reiecting the explication of Doctours the credit of the historie practise and common custome in fine the authoritie of the Iudges who are appointed to doe iustice to all men But were he not yet more insupportable who onely admitting of written lawes should reiect those that are directly against him and interprete the rest following his owne fanticie In these termes are you wherby it well appeares that though you make shew to desire a conference yet indeed you flie it contenting your selues to haue occasion to bruit abroad amongst your friends that you offered a disputatioÌ„ concealing from them in the interim that you refused the iust and reasonable conditions therof apprehending that you haue done sufficiently in putting out some smale pampletes which decide nothing at all
himselfe from it without schisme and without straying from the Pathes of saluation but now the tymes are changed the circunstances we are in are others corruption hath so crept into the Romane Church that she is no more to be tearmed à Church and hence it was that you both could and ought to depart out of it But this euasion will not serue your turne for the Fathers did not dispute of the truth of the Churches doctrine and thence inferred that the Donatists were scismatikes because they were seperated from the Church who had the true doctrine though indeede it was true but they disputed about the Chaire of S. Peter of Pastorall authoritie brought downe from him by an uninterrupted succession concluding the Donatists Schismatikes because they were diuided from this Chaire and from S. Peters successours sitting in the same No otherwise then one would conuince subiects to be rebelles who should seperate themselues from the Royall throne and from the successour of the first Instituters of this Throne and as in the old law the Samaritans may be concluded to haue bene heretikes because they withdrew themselues from the Chaire of Moyses or Aaron That the Principle whence the Fathers drew their arguments was pastorall authoritie and the Chaire of S. Peter and not the truth of the doctrine it doth manifestly appeare in that S. Cyprians a De Gnitat Eccles Ep. 55â— citat reason is because the Chaire of Peter is the fundation vpon which the Church is built and from whence preistly vnitie takes its origine And that of Optatus b lib. 2. Cisat because in this onely Chaire of S. Peter the vnitie of the Church is conserued And S. Ireneus c lib. 3.5.3 cis son that Peters Chaire enioyes the cheifest power S. Hierome d Epist 57. cit becaus the Chaire of S. Peter is that upon which the Church is built And to conclude because S. Augustin e Contrae Epist fundam c. 4. Tenet me ab ipsa sede Petri Gsque ad praesentem EpiscopataÌ„ successio Sacerdotum saith that the succession of Preists which descended from the Chaire of S. Peter held him in the Catholike Church and that this f In Psal contra partem Donati ipsa est Petra quam non Ginâ—uÌ„t superbia inferorum portae succession is the Rocke against which the Gates of Hell shall not preuayle Nor will your reply be any more to your purpose to witt that albeit the Fathers did indeed argue as we say yet had their argument force and efficacie from the truth of the doctrine which then was adioyned to this authoritie to this Chaire seeing that the Donatistes and Nouatians against whom they disputed did directly deney the truth of the doctrine to be in the Roman Church The a Ambr. lib cont Nouatian Nouatians improuing hir doctrine touching remission of sinns and the b August l. de hare haeres 69. Donatists condemning her opinion of baptising heretikes and admitting the wicked liuers into the Church Which makes à cleare demonstration that the Fathers did not make the truth of the doctrine the Principle of their arguments because that was as doubtfull both to the Donatists and Nouatians as the conclusion it selfe which they were to deduce from it for they deneyed both the one and the other Wherfore S. Donatus doth sufficiently make appeare that he argued from their owne confessions and that which they could not deney to witt that the chaire of Rome was S. Peters chaire c Opt. lib. 2. contra Parmen titat Thou canst not deney vnto me saith he but that thou knowest that S. Peter was the first vpon whom in Rome the Episcopall chaire was conferred in which onely Chaire vnitie was to be obserued by all Furthermore you cannot affirme that they formed their argument from the truth of the doctrine because you doe not allow it to haue bene pure at that tyme which is manifest in that d Beza in Rom. 8. Witat l. 7. contra Durae scit 26. you doe condemne the doctrine of Pope Siricius touching celibate or imgle life as the doctrine of the diuell aÌ„d that yet the Donatists were reputed Schismatikes euen for seperating theÌ„selues from communion with him e Opt. l. 2. For the rest though to proue â man schismatique it were indeed necessarie to make good that he were seperated froÌ„ the Church as true Church yet should I not faile of my purpose being à most facile thing to conuince euen by the testimonies of your owne men that you accnowledge the Romane Church then to haue bene the true Church when you came out of it You accnowledge it both by the verie confession of a Caelu 4. instit c. 2. §. 11. 12. Epist 104. Du Plessis in the treatise of the Church c. 12. Osiander in Epito p. 2. your owne Authours and because b Du Plessis au trascté de l'Eglise chap. 81. Osiander loco citato you your selues deriue your authoritie from it whence it manifestly appeares thar you hold it to be true since otherwise you should deriue your power not from the Church of God but from à societie of the Diuell After all this there rests so litle for you to say that if your tongue would but faithfully interprete your conscience we should without doubt heare you condemne your selues the thing being so cleare and perspicuous that vnlesse you were more then blind or that seeing light you would not see it it were impossible but your soules casting the errour which they row professe should win their cause For if the Nouatians and Donatists vere by the Fathers sufficiently conuinced of schisme for that they were seperated from the Chaire of S. Peter and his successours therin you are also conuinced by the same argument since you are seperated from vs who haue alwayes keept the possession of the same Chaire without interruption of succession Your are certainly coÌ„uinced I speake to all your church and to you Ministers in particular who are not onely Schismatikes as are your flocke but withall Schismaticall Pastours for of your owne authoritie you haue established your selues Pastours not hauing receaued power froÌ„ those whose successours you should be Whence it followes that you are a Opt. l. 2. de â—ictore primo Episcopo DonatistaruÌ„ erat Filius sine Patre tyro sine Principe discipulus sine Magistro sequens sino antecedente Children without Fathers soldiers without Captaines successours without Predecessours Wherupon you shall giue meleaue to say vnto you with the Fathers b Tertul de praescript c. 32. Edant ergo Origines Ecclesiarum suaruÌ„ euoluant ordinem Episcoporum suorum c. Opt. l. 2. cont Parm. Vestrae Catbedrae Gos originem reddite c. Shew vs the origin of your chaire nor returne vs barely for answere that you are extraordinarily sent but bring à place of scripture to verifie your assertion You are obliged to produce such
that he was not also reputed an heretike in sustayning that workes were not profitable to saluation In which matter S. Ireneus and Theodorete remoue all manner of doubt when they bring in his opinioÌ„ that meÌ„ were not saued by their good workes as hereticall Howbeit I vndertake not to proue an intire conformitie betwixt your beleife and theirs not being ignorant that as theeues disguise stolen things to put them out of the knowledge of their owners so you disguise the old heresies that men may mistake them Marrie I most willingly vndertake to shew as indeede I doe that that old Heresiarke held as you doe That we are not saued by good workes And consequently that huing bene condemned in this point the soule of your faith was branded with à sentence of condemnation in the first age of the Church whose authoritie you dare not reiect 2. Point You beleeue that the faith of parents is so efficacious that their children dying without Baptisme are saued a 24. Inslit c. 15. Caluin doth teach this doctrine and withall it is so vulgarly knowen euen to the simplest of your fellowers that it needes no proofe Now albeit you make profession to deteste the Pelagian errours yet your beleife in this point is one of their heresies as it is cleare out of S. Augustine who puts it downe as such in his catalogue of heresies b lib. de Haer. 88. Promittunt eis aeternam beatam quandam vitam They promisse saith he to children not baptised à blessed and eternall life c lib 1. de anima eius origine 1.9 Noli credere nols decere infantes anâ—equam baptizantur morte â—raeuentos peruenâ—re posse ad originalium indulgentiam peccatorum which he doth charge with so heauie à condemnation that in the bookes he wrote against them he addes Beleeue not affirme not teach not that children preuented by death before they were baptised can euer obtayne remission of their originall sinne if you desire to be Catholike Ergo This article of your faith is condemned in the person of Pelagius But if you alleadge for you that your and the Pelagian heresie are far different they holding that euery child that dyed without baptisme did in ioy Gods Glorie wheras you limite it to the predestinate onely And againe they assigned to children dying without baptisme à different place from that which those that were regenerated possesse which you doe not I answere that the first difference which you giue betwixt you and the Pelagians coÌ„sisteth onely in à greater or lesser number of those children whom you beleeue to be saued without baptisme and not in the substance of the errour impugned by S. Aug. who while he teacheth that no child at all without Baptisme can be saued he condemnes you both in that wherin you agree to witt that some are saued without baptisme As for the second difference which consists in this that the Pelagians assigned another place to children dying without baptisme then to the baptised it is disaduantagious to your selues and yet doth no whitte impaire the force of my argument to the validitie of which is it sufficient that you and the Pelagians aggree in this that without baptisme one may inioy life euerlasting Which S. August doth clearly condemne and by way of disgrace obiect vnto them that they promisse à blessed and eternall life to children not baptised And that this difference doth disparage your cause By deduction you will plainly discouer The Pelagians held that children were saued without Baptisme This passage was opposed against them Ioan. 3. Vnles à man be borne againe of water and the spirit he cannot enter c. they being coÌ„uinced by the clearnes of this place graÌ„ted indeede that the kingdome of heaueÌ„ was only prepared for the regenerated marrie besides heauen they assigned à third place as à Residence for children dying without Baptisme So that they gaue way to the clearenes of this passage which you doe for you deney absolutly that it doth exclude children that die without the sacrament from the kingdome of heauen though it reach expressly that they shall haue no patt therin Wherin you clearely diseouer that your heresie is more impudent then that of the Auncient heretikes sith you audaciously deney as à thing which is preiudiciall vnto you that which they durst neuer call in question though it were absolutly against them It is manifest therfore nor haue you what to say against it that this article of your faith wherby you maintain that children dead without baptisme are saued was condemned by the auncient Church in the person of Pelagius Yet fearing that the differences which are betwixt his errout and yours abbeit they be not able to saue you from the Churchs curse might hinder you to confesse that you are condemned in his person to leaue you to your owne condemnation I will shew you the condemnation of your verie errour in S. August Lib. de anima eius origine c. 9. Isle autem Vincentius cum confiteatur paruules origiginali obstrictos esse peccato eis tamen regnum coelorum non baptizatis ausus est pollicert quod nec illi ausi sunt c. in the person of one named Vincentius who without assigning à third place with Pelagius ahsolutly allowed with you the kingdome of Heauen to Children not baptised He durst saith S. Aug. promisse the kingdome of heauen to children not baptised which the Pelagians durst neuer doe 3. Point Your Doctours doe teach that our Sauiour Christ did in his birth violate his mothers integritie as all other children are wont to doe a Whitak controu 2. q 5. c. 7. Docuit â—ouinianus Mariam amisisse Virginitatem in partu Respondeo tum impudetissimus haereticus fuit sed ait nos similiter docere nominat Bucerum Molinaum Respondeo Hoc ait quia non adenittimus fictam â—llam partus ratiorem c. Witakere purging himselfe of diuers errours which the great Cardinal Bellarmine iustly imputes to his sectaries doth ingenuously auow this opinion and striues to defend it which yet puts no obligation vpon me at this present to refute it contenting my selfe onely to shew that it is the auncient heresie of Iouinian which was condemned in the 4. age according to S. Aug. b Haeres Virginitaâ—â—m Mariae destruebat dieeÌ„ eam parieÌ„do fuisse corrupiaÌ„ relation in these tearmes Iouinian saith he did destroye the virginitie of Marie saying that in her Childbrith she was corrupted Nor is it to the present purpose to shew that your beleife doth differe from that of Iouinian for that he forsooth doth abolish the mentall virginitie of the B. Virgine which you de not it being manifest that Iouinian denid corporall virginitie to our B. Lady Both because S. Augustine impugning this Heresiarke defends her corporall virginitie and also for that the reason which he brings to shew that the B. Virgine had not conserued her Virginitie was grounded vpon her childbirth