Patrum non sunt regulae nec habent authoritatem obligandi that is The Writs of the Fathers are not Rules neyther haue they authoritie to astrict vs to them The reason whereof their owne Roffensis doeth render saying Nec diffitemur errasse Patres Homines enim erant sicut nos that is Neiâ—her deny wee but the Fathers haue erred for they were Men even as wee are Imo constat sayeth Bellarmine quosdam ex praecipuis eorum in quibusdam non leviter lapsos ut Hilarium vix dolores corporis in CHRISTO agnovisse Cyprianus improbabat Sacramenta tradita ab Hereticis aut Schismaticis that is Yea it is sure that some of the chiefe of them erred and that not lightlie in some things as Hilarie did who searce did acknowledge that CHRIST suffered any paine in His Bodie and Cyprian denyed that they were Sacramentes which were ministred by Heretickes or Schismatickes Item Iraeneus contendit sayeth hee CHRISTUM fere ad annum 50 pervenisse antequam passus est that is Ireâ—â—us also did holde that CHRIST almost came to bee fiftie yeares of age before Hee suffered which is flat contrarie to Scripture and S. Iohns relation who showeth that hee was baptized at 30 and at the third Passeover thereafter that hee suffered Death c. I omit their confession how manie were millenaries as also Augustines condemning of Children vnbaptized to hels fire with Ieromes errour of second marriages c. Therefore sayeth Aquinas Authoritatibus canonicae Scripture utitur sacra doctrina propriè ex necessitate arguendo authoritatibus autem aliorum doctorum Ecclesiae arguendo proâ—abiliter Innititur enâ—m fides nostra revelationi Apostolis Prophetis factae qui canoâ—â—â—cos libros scripserunt non autem revelaâ—ioni siqua fuit aliâ—s doctoribus facta vnde dicit Augustinus in Epistola ad Hieronymum Solis enim Scripturarum Libris qui canonici appellantur didici hunc honorem deferre ut nullum authorem eorum in scribendo errasse aliquid firmissime credam Alios autem it a lego ut quantalibet sanctitate doctrinaque praepolleant non ideo verum putem quia ipsi ita senserunt vel scripserint that is Holie doctrine vseth the authoritiâ— of canonicke Scripture properlie and necessarilie concluding out of them buâ—â—â— gueth onlie probablie out of the authorities of other Doctors of the Church for our fayth is grounded on that which was revealed to the Prophets and Apostles who wryte the canonicall Bookes but not to that which was revealed to anie other Doctors if any such thâ—ng was wherefore sayeth Augustine in his Epistâ—e to â—â—â—â—rome For I haue learned sayeth hee to giue this honour onlie to the Bookes of Scripture which are called Canonicke that I most firmlie belieue that no Author of any of them in their writing erred in a jet but as for others I so reade them that altho they were never so excellent eyther in godlinesse or learning yet I doe not belieue that it is true because they thought or wrote so Wherefore in Patribus legendis sayeth their Salmeron servanda videtur sententia Quintiliani qui sic scribit Neque statim inquit id legenti persuasum sit omnia quae magni Authores dixerunt utique esse perfecta nam labuntur interdum oneri cedunt indulgent ingeniorum suorum voluptati summi sunt homines tamen acciditque lectoribus ut quicquid apud ipsos reperiunt dicendilegem putant ut deteriora imitentur that is In reading of the Fathers the judgement of Quintilian would bee kept who wryteth foâ— neyther instantlie sayeth hee let the Reader bee assured that all thinges which great Authors haue sayde are everie way perfect for they erre sometyme and succumbe and giue loose reines to the pleasure of their own wits It is true they are great Authors but yet they are men and it befalleth their Readers that whatsoever they finde in them they thinke it a Law to their speaches that so they may follow the worse thinges And for a particular practise of this fore-saide direction Lyra setteth downe his owne example saying Nec debet aliquis moveri si in hoc ob opinione Hieronymi discâ—ssero nam dicta sanctorum non sunt tantae authoritatis quin liceat contrarium tenere in iis quae per Scripturas non determinantur ut ait Augustinus ad Vincentium de sanctorum doctorum scriptis hoc genus scribendi à canonicis Scripturis distinguendum est nam testimonia ex eis non depromuntur quasi non liceat aliter sentire that is Neyther should any man bee moved if I depart in this from the opinion of Ierome for the sayings of the holy Fathers are not of so great authoritie but it is lawfull to hold the contâ—arie to them in those things which are not determined by the Scriptures as Augustine sayeth to Vincentius of the writs of the holie Doctors This sort of writing is to bee distinguished from canonicke Scriptures for Testimonies are not taken out of them as if it were not lawfull to any other-wyse to thinke Now then if any Protestant say farder than the foresayde Popish Doctors avouch concerning the Fathers eyther in exposition of Scripture or other points of Faith let the most malicious Adversarie instance and the vnpartiall Reader judge and discerne CHAP. III. Hovv they reject Them all when They make not for them altho consenting in one And first In doctrinall points of Fayth BELLARMINE answering to Hermannus in the matter of Traditions layeth this as a ground Etsi enim erraverint aliqui patrum sayeth hee in quibusdam dogmatibus nunquam tamen omnes simul in eodem errore convenerunt proinde cum ostendimus omnes convenire in Traditionibus non scriptis asserendis satis efficaciter probamus in eo illos non errasse that is Albeit some of he Fathâ—rs haue erred in some points of fayth yet they never agreed all in anie one errour thereâ—ore when wee show that they all agree for the estâ—blishing of vnwritten Traditions wee pâ—oue sufficientlie that they erred not in that Salmeron yet commeth nearer and sayeth Non sunt improbanda veterum testimonia quando omnes vel fere omnes in unam sententiam conveniunt vel in uno aliquo Scripturae loco interpretando concordant quia tunc Patres certissimum inevitabile reddunt argumentum veritatis catholicae certae ac legittimae interpretationis that is The Testimonies of the Fathers are not to bee rejected when they all or almost all agree in one opinion or in the exposition of any place of Scripture because then the Fathers giue a sure and inevitable argument of catholick veritie and of a sure and lawfull exposition of Scripture And yet how they deale with Antiquitie in this point let these particulars heereafter declare FIrst in the freeing of the Virgine Maries owne conception from all originall Sinne Bellarmine is so resolute a decreeter that hee
those same Fathers agaynst them which they obtrude vnto vs as true 1. Disclayming some as counterfeyt 2. Alleadging of others That perhaps only they are so THE Rhemists call this an olde Tricke of Hereticks when they were preassed with the Testimonies of ancient Fathers to deny that those were the Authors but some others of a later age and Rose-weed the Iesuit sayth That this was a common Shift of Hereticks when they were straited with anie cleare Testimonie of Antiquitie to cry out That the booke was counterfeit or corrupt Evasionem saith Harding omnium miserrimam à ratione conjuetudine doctissimâ—rum alienissimam that is A most miserable sort of escaping saith hee and most contrarious both to Reason and Custome of the most Learned And yet notwithstanding how guiltie these Iesuiticall Impostors are of this Practise which they vpbrayde to others and how vnmindfull they are of that saying Omni vitio debet carere qui in alterum paratus est dicere let these few Examples that doe ensue testifie First Bellarmine as also the Rhemists to prooue the Pope's Supremacie as also Popish Reall presence bring their Testimonies out of S. Ambrose his Commentaries on Paul's Epistles and yet when wee object a place out of the same to proue that the Sacramentall Bread is the representatiue Bodie of CHRIST onlie Bellarmine plainlie then disclaimeth those Commentaries and saith they are not S. Ambroses Againe Bellarmine adduceth Augustine Ad Orosium against vs as the true Father to prooue Ecclesiasticus to bee Canonicall Scripture but declareth him counterfeyt when wee oppose him to him agaynst the Order of the Masse Arnobius also is brought foorth as a most ancient Father against vs in the matter of Free-will but disclaimed else-where when hee maketh against him as 〈…〉 and a miere counterfeit In like manner Augustine's Questions on the Olde and New Testament are produced against vs as Augustine's owne worke both to proue the Masse to bee a Sacrifice properlie in one place as also to be propitiatorie in another but are rejected by the same Bellarmine as counterfeit and hereticall when wee prooue out of the same That Sacraments conferre not Grace Ex opere operato Lyke-wyse Bellarmine citeth S. Basill's Questions to proue Monasticall lyfe and a man's incertayntie of his owne Salvation but when wee vrge agaynst them those same Questions agaynst their Distinction of Sinne into Veniall and Mortall he disclaymeth that book to bee Saynct Basill's but one Eustatbius Sebassenus a condemned hereticke More-over Bellarmine adduceth Saynct Cyprian's Sermon Le â—oena 〈…〉 poyntes of Poperie as Transsubstantiation the Sacrifice of the Masse and Purgatorie c. And yet when the same is objected agaynst their Mutilation of the Sacrament by taking away the Câ—p from the People he disclaymeth that Sermon to be Cyprian's but some vncertayne Author's Agayne Bellarmine produceth Chrysostome on Matthew to proue manie Popish poyntes as Monasticall lyfe Veniall sinnes Free-will Transsubstantiation Adoration of the Host and agaynst the Magistrates lawfull power in matters of Reâ—igâ—on But when wee proue out of that same Commentarie on Matthew the perfection of Scripture that the people should reade the same opposeth him in the matter of Matrimonie then he disclaymeth that worke to be Sainct Chrysostome's but some Hereticke's as hee pleaseth to style him In lyke manner Bellarmine bringeth out Clement's Recognitions for Free-will Harding bringeth him for Traditions and yet when they are alleadged agaynst the Pope's Succession to Peter proving that Peter died not at Rome then hee disclaymeth them as Apocryphall and counterfeyt Damasus lyke-wyse an ancient Pope his Pontificall is cited by Bellarmine to proue the tyme of Peter's sitting at Rome and for the setting vp of Images in Churches but is rejected as a Counterfeyt of vncertayne authoritie when out of the same wee proue that Linus whome they make Pope after Peter Clement died before Peter him-selfe so improveth the Line of their Papall Succession as false and absurd Agayne Damasus Epistles are vrged agaynst vs to proue Papall Supremacie and Popish Confirmation But are disclaymed as none of his when they are opposed agaynst Appeales to Rome Lyke-wyse Damascen is cited by Bellarmine agaynst vs to proue the Adoration of Saynctes but is disclaymed as a Counterfeyt when the absurd Tale of their Popes and other Saynctes their Freeing of Soules which were damned out of Hell is objected to them Epiphanius also his Epistle to Iohn of Ierusalem is cited by Bellarmine in the matter of the Sacrament but when the same Epistle is opposed agaynst their Images hee disclaimeth those words thereof to bee but forged and counterfeyt In lyke manner Eusebius Emissenus Homilies are cited by Bellarmine for Adoration of Reliques that Consecration is by these wordes Hoc est Corpus meum and yet are elsewhere freelie acknowledged to be none of his Ignatius also a Greeke Father is oft tymes cited by Bellarmine for sundrie poynts of Poperie as Transsubstantiation and others but when he is adduced clearlie agaynst their Mutilation of the Sacrament Bellarmine aunswereth That Ignatius Greeke Wrytinges are not much to bee trusted to Agayne Martialis as Christe's owne Disciple is produced by Bellarmine for the Vow of Chastitie and other poyntes and yet in his Recognitions hee acknowledgeth both Abdias booke and Martialis to bee miere Counterfeyts and of no Authoritie Lyke-wyse Synopsis Dorothei is cited by Bellarmine to prooue Peter's sitting at Rome as Bishop of that Citie but when the same Synopsis is produced prooving That it was not Peter but rather Barnabas that founded that Church hee dâ—sclaymeth that booke then as full of Lies and Forgerie After the lyke manner hee disclaymeth that booke of Pope Gelasius agaynst Eutyches as none of his when he is cited clearly against Transsubstantiation altho hee bee so styled Romanus Episcopus in their owne Bibliotheca Patrum and that their Massonius lyke-wyse in the lyues of the Popes comming to Gelasius maketh mention of this worke And no lesse causelesse also disclaymeth hee with a shamelesse fore-head the foure bookes of Charles the Great agaynst Images as lyke-wyse that Epistle of Vdalricus to Pope Nicolas agaynst forced Continencie alleadging those former to bee none of theirs and that onelie because they make agaynst him I omit the lyke answere of Gretzer to Athanasius Synopsis agaynst Apocryphall Bookes Of Parsons to Elentherius Epistle to Luciâ—s agaynst the Pope's temporall Supremacie Of the same Parson 's impudent lyke answere to Bertram's booke agaynst Transsubstantiation Of Harding's disclayming also Hilarius Epistle to his Daughter Afra agaynst forced Continencie Of Baronius lyke rejecting of Pope Leo's Epistle which proveth That Pope Honorius was an Hereticke And Of Dureus disclayming that Testimonie of Saynct Bernard's
haue beene conceived in Originall sinne and so all agree that by the word All the whole race of Adam are included that ever were procreated betweene Man and Woman But the Romanists will no-wyse acqulesse to this exposition because they vvill haue the Virgin Maries conception without originall sinne and â—o contrarie to the exposition oâ— all the Fathers will haue her excluded Where also it is to be noted that seeing no Graduate in Divinitie is promoted in Paris without giving a solemne Oath to mayntayne this Priviledge of the Virgine Marie and that this Text and exposition there-of is close contrarie there-to as also to that Ordinance of their owne Councell for exposition of Scripture according to the vniforme consent of Fathers Therefore it will clearly follow that they sweare both to impugne Scripture Veritie as also consenting Antiquitie together with their Popes and his Councells authoritie Stella in lyke manner expounding the 21 verse of the 10 chapter of Luke saith All the Expounders whom I could commonlie see eyther of ancient holie Doctors or of recent Divines all these and their Commentaries declare that the word confiteâ—or is not taken heere for Confession of sinnes but for that sayeth hee which wee call Thanks-giving Commending or to blesse c. Notwithstanding this meaning of theâ—â—s can neyther agree with the wordes nor could it ever satisfie anie-wyse my mynde Agayne Maldonat commenting on Matthew 26 29 where our Saviour sayeth I will not drinke hencefoorth of the fruite of the Vine sayeth thus Origen Cyprian Chrysostome Epiphanius Ierome Augustine Beda Euthymius and Theophilast all these referre those wordes to Christ's blood or that which was so called in the Sacrament but I cannot be perswaded sayeth hee that they can bee referred to the Blood of Christ. Because he forsooth would haue them vnderstood of the common Cuppe before the institution of the Sacrament to avoyde the force of this Testimonie agaynst Transsubstantiation In lyke manner expounding these wordes for Papall Supremacie Thou art Peter and vpon this Rocke I will build My Church hee sayth thus of the interpretation of Fathers expounding the Rocke not to be Peter but Christ Him selfe or that Confession of Fayth which was made of Christ. This meaning sayeth he of these words seemes not to me to be the true meaning which all other Fathers thinke to be so whom ever I remember to haue read except onlie Hilarie Also for mayntaynance of the same Supremacie commenting on the subsequent Verse Neyther will I interpret sayeth hee that this which is spoken heere to Peter is spoken also in the same sense to the other Apostles Whatsoever thou loosest on earth shall be loosed in Heaven altho I see all Interpreters except Origen onelie to bee of that mynde More-over commenting on Matth. 11 13 which speaketh of Elias that was to come meaning Iohn the Baptist hee sayeth Almost all the Fathers so expound that place but this their exposition is not fit enough And why But because the Iesuit would haue Elias yet only to come in the reigne and time of their conceited Antichrist Last of all expounding these words of Matthew All men cannot receiue this Saying after that he hath adduced the interpretation of the Fathers thereon to be this Non omnes praestare possunt ut sint sine uxore quia carent dono continentiae that is All men cannot attayne to this that they may be without a wyfe because they want the gift of chastitie hee concludeth Sic fere omnes exponunt quibus equidem ego non assentior that is Indeede almost all Interpreters so expound with whome not-withstanding I doe not agree And why But because hee is a Pleader agaynst this Text and the exposition of Antiquitie for forced single lyfe and the Vow of Continencie Agayne in the exposition of the last Commandement when Bellarmine hath adduced a number of Fathers holding that Commandement Thou shalt not covet c. to be but one entire CommandemeÌ„t and not divisible in two as the Papists make it to make vp ten confounding the first and second for defence of their Imagerie hee rejecteth al their judgements as grosse and erronious In lyke manner when he hath adduced the expositions of all the Fathers which they giue on that place of the Corinthians 1. Cor. 15.29 where-by hee would establish Purgatorie because they serue not for his purpose hee roundlie therefore rejecteth them all calling them haske and both false and forced and therefore taketh one of later Forgerie more suteable to his mynde Agayne when Cardinall Tolet in the exposition of Iohn 7 37 hath adduced Chrysostome Euthymius and Theophilact their agreement in one yet this is his censure saying that their exposition is both forced and vnfit and therefore hee professeth not to follow it anie way Last of all thus sayeth Cardinall Cajetan of the exposition of Scripture in generall Let no man abhorre sayth hee any new sense of Scripture for this cause because it disagreeth froÌ„ the ancient Doctors but let him search more nearlie the Text and coherence of Scripture and if hee finde agreement let him prayse God who hath not tyed the exposition of Scripture to the meaninges of ancient Doctors but to the integritie of Scripture it selfe How-so-ever then Bellarmine braggeth of their syde that they follow the consent of Fathers falselie imputing to vs that wee onelie followe our owne exposition yet wee see heere-in that it may bee justlie sayde vnto them that of the Poet Mutato nomine de te fabula narretur Their owne Cardinall Baronius besyde their fore-named practise confessing clearlie that al-be-it the holie Fathers whom we sayeth he for their heavenlie learning worthilie doe call The Doctors of the Church were evidentlie endewed beyond others with the grace of the holie Ghost yet in the exposition of Scripture the Catholicke that is the Romane Church doeth not ever and in all thinges follow them CHAP. IIII. How contumeliouslie they deale with the Fathers and especiallie first with those of the Greeke Church conjunctlie and in Councell IT is reported of Pelagius that even when he most disagreed from the Orthodox Fathers of the Primitiue Church yet in his third Booke for Free-will hee soothed vp his Heresie and thought to amaze all men with his prayse of Sainct Ambrose Blessed Sainct Ambrose that Bishop sayeth he in whose bookes the Romane Fayth especiallie appeareth who lyke a beautifull Flowre shyned amongst the Latine Wryters and whose Fayth and most pure vnderstanding of the Scriptures the verie Enemie himselfe dare not reprehende Even so our Adversaries when they most disagree lyke-wyse from the most ancient Fathers and primitiue Councels yet how they doe soothe vp their Errours But with the lyke Salue alleadging the holie Fathers and famous Councels of the primitiue Church al-to-gether to make for them and therefore they highlie extoll and advance them But as Ambrose not-with-standing made agaynst his Prayser Pelagius So doe the Fathers
and Councels make close agaynst the Romanistes and then how they turne their Osanna to Crucifie their Praysing to Depressing and their High Valuing to Low Vilifying let their owne Mouth and these Examples verifie Their ancient Pope Gregorie declareth that hee reverenced the foure first Councels as the verie foure Gospels holding firmlie that they only stood for Trueth and only with-stood Errour and yet what is it that Bellarmine accuseth the verie second of these Councels of Even the standing for decreeing of a most grosse Heresie and the with-standing of such a necessarie Trueth which by the definition of Pope Boniface the eight is of such importance to belieue that by him who holdeth not the same there is no salvation to bee expected because hee is without the Church And this great Poynt is the Pope's Supremacie Bellarmine's owne wordes then are these The first sayeth hee Godâ—81 â—81 would haue the Bishop of Constantinople who before was not a Patriarch at all preferred notwithstanding to the three Patriarches of the East and in the second roome next the Bishop of Rome And this may bee vnderstoode sayeth hee by the second Generall Councell Wher-vnto he might haue joyned like-wise the sixt Canon of the first Nyceâ— Councell no lesse peremptor against the fore-saide Supremacie Where it is to be noted that Papall Supremacie which the Greeke Orthodox Church never would admit can no-wise therefore bee called as the Papists tearme it a Catholicke point of Doctrine as also if the Pope cannot erre ex Cathedra it will follow according to Boniface fore-said definition that all the Greeke Fathers are absolutelie damned Next hee spareth not to blotte those holie Fathers of that fourth and famous Councell of Chalcedon both with Fraud and Deceit in the fore-named point saying Thereafter in the yeare 451 the Greeke Fathers sayth he not being content with their former Determination they preassed to make the Bishop of Constantinople equall alway to the Bishop of Rome for in the Councell of Chalcedon in the sixteenth Act thereof the Grecian Fathers decreed but not without deceit sayeth hee and the Romane Legates beeing absent that the Bishop of Constantinople should bee so in the second Roome after the Bishop of Rome that notwithstanding thereof bee should haue the same equall Priviledges as the other had Now if anie grosser Imputations can bee layde vpon anie than hee doeth vpon these holie Fathers and famous Councels let any man consider making them hereticall in Mind and Opinion and false or fraudulent in Manners and Action Yea what farther falsehood and fraude hee layeth to the charge of that famous Orientall Church in corrupting the works of others let his owne wordes testifie For it was the ordinarie Custome of the Grecians sayeth hee to corrupt the Bookes of other men Where-of hee cleareth the Occidentall or Latine Church by a reason to be laughed at for the palpable evidence of the contrarie as shall bee showne saying Quoniam Romani sicut non accumina it a nec impostur as habent That is Because the Romanes as they haue no sharpnesse of wit so they cannot vse deceit sayth he while as all men know experience hath taught that there are none that haue beene more subtill nor sharper witted than they Secondlie how they deale with the Greeke Fathers severallie and a-part FIrst when Chrysostome is adduced for peoples reading of Scripture Bellarmine answereth That continuallie hee exhorted all men sayeth hee to reade the Scriptures Non quod vellet omnes rudissimos id facere That is But not that hee would had all men altho never so vnlearned so to doe And so hee imputeth to this holie Father that hee spake farre other-wise than hee meant and dissimulatelie required that to bee done which hee would not haue done in earnest Next when wee vrge Ireneus testimonie for proving the Pope to bee Antichrist that the number of the name of the Beast most fitlie is Lateinus according to the olde forme of pronouncing as Lipsius witnesseth thereby showing that hee was to bee a Latine Bishop having his Seate in the Latine Church and more particularlie in Latium or Italie his Decrees also in Latine and all publicke Service in these Churches subject to him in Latine like-wise Vnto this Testimonie of Ireneus Bellarmine answereth thus Conjectura illa Irenei sayth he quae tunc aliqua fuit nunc nulla est That is That light conjecture of Ireneus which was some-what in his dayes is of no account with vs now As if such Varlets were best Valuers or Trueth changed with Time and Veritie ran on the Wheeles of vnconstant Varietie Agayne when Saynct Cyprian is opposed agaynst Traditions Bellarmine answereth that Cyprian wrote so sayeth hee when hee would defend his Errour which hee calleth elsewhere the Heresie of Anabaptisme and therefore it is no marvell that he reason after the manner of Heretickes By which answere hee condemneth not onlie Saynct Cyprian but Augustine lyke-wyse who in this poynt of requyring recourse to bee had onlie vnto holie Scripture greatlie commended Saynct Cyprian Lyke-wyse when Theodoret is objected agaynst Transsubstantiation witnessing in his second Dialogue called Inconfusus That after Consecration the Elements remayne still in their former substance Valentia answereth saying That some of the Ancients in this Matter neyther thought nor wrote truely nor consideratelie as they ought Or hee might haue added At least as the Iesuits now would haue had them In lyke manner when Chrysostome is produced to proue that the Virgine Marie had originall sinne because shee sinned actuallie when Christ rebuked her at the Marriage of Cana in Galile Cardinall Tolet answereth thus onlie In hoâ— Chrysostomus probandus non est that is sayeth hee Chrysostome is not to be approved in saying so More-over when Ignatius a Greeke Father is opponed agaynst the mutilation of the Sacrament Bellarmine answereth Non multum fidendum est Graecis condicibus Ignatii that is sayeth hee The Greeke Writinges of Ignatius are not greatlie to bee trusted Agayne when Origen is objected to proue that Marriage is no Sacrament Bellarmine answereth Origines autem non est tantae authoritatis in Ecclesia ut ejus sententia neâ—essario approbanda sit that is Origen sayeth hee is not of such authoritie in the Church that his opinion necessarilie is to bee followed And yet how frequentlie hee obtrudeth him agaynst vs as of great authoritie let his citation of him and his fellow Iesuits in their Bookes testifie Lindanus when hee citeth him calling him Illustre Alexandriae lâ—men that is The bright light of Alexandria and Durie calling him Testis omni exceptione major that is A Witnesse without all exception greatest Lyke-wyse when Euthimius is alleadged in the matter of the Sayncts beatitude Bellarmine answereth Non est â—ac in re usque adeo magni faciendus that is layeth hee In this matter bee is not so much to
spreading farther they attempt to corrupt the Wrytings of the Ancients Note this But farre spread and inveterate Heresies sayeth hee are not to be dealt with after this manner for as much as by long continuance of tyme a long Occasion hath lyen open vnto them to steale away the Trueth VVhere-of by a few Instances in place of manie wee haue proven the Popish Packe to be most guiltie and whose Errours haue sâ—ielie spread so farre as a contagious Gangren in tyme of prevayling Darknesse and haue continued so long in the Christian Church as a longsome Sicknesse that the very Mayntayners of them hither-to bragge of their Vniversalitie and Duration in the Church CHAP. VII How manie vnder the Names of Fathers Bellarmine acknowledgeth to be meerly counterfeyt and this thorow the first fiue Ages or Centuries of the Church FIrst Clement's Epistles are such for so hee sayth of the fift It is sure sayth hee either that it is not his or else by some mightilie corrupted The like hee sayth of his Recognitions Lib. 5. de lib. arb cap. 25. § ad hunc Also of his Constitutions Baronius sayth that by all men they are counted counterfeyt Againe Iustinus Martyr his Questions are justlie suspect by Bellarmine to bee counterfeit seeing in the 82 Question Origen is made mention of vvho lived after Iâ—stinus more than an hundreth yeares and fiftie The verie like is cleare of Dionysius Areopagita that hee is likewise a counterfeit as their owne Laurentius Valla by the like reason maketh good to vvit because in his booke De divinis nominibê° Clemenâ— Stroâ—ateus is cited who lived two hundreth yeares after Dionysius And yet this is hee whom Bellarmine oft tymes citeth to proue the most points of Poperie as their Hiâ—rarchie Monasticall lyfe Purgatorie and such lyke but of whome Ierome maketh no mention of in his Booke De Viris Illustribus which hee would not haue omitted if anie such had bene acknowledged in his tyme whose name especiallie had beene in-rolled in Scripture and had beene a famous Wryter In lyke manner Bellarmine acknowledgeth Tertullian's Booke De Trinitate not to bee his because the Sabellians are there refuted who rose not in his tyme. For the verie lyke reason also hee declareth that Cyprian his Explicatio Symboli is not his because Arrius Eunomius and Pbotinus who were not borne in Cyprian's tyme are by name refuted Lyke-wyse hee declareth That the Sermons of the Cardinall Vertues of Christ as also his Sermon of the Supper of the Lord are not Cyprian's but counterfeyt In lyke manner hee suspecteth his Sermon of the Vnction of holy Chrisme and the other of the Ablution of Feere to bee none of Cyprian's but to bee meerelie counterfeyt As also he declareth that Booke which is given out vnder the name of Arâ—â—bius Master to Lactantius to bee none of his but a more recent Counterfeyt More-over Bellarmine declareth that the Homilies on Leviticus attributed to S. Cyrill are none of his but a counterfeyt and of no Authoritie Likewise hee suspecteth the Questions attributed to S. Basill to be none of his but a miere counterfeyt The like sayeth Possevin of the Questions attributed to Athanasius that they are mierlie counterfeyt In like manner the same Possevin showeth that manie Treatises attributed to S. Ambrose are surelie onlie Counterfeytes as De virtutum vitiorum conflictu expositio fidei libellus de sp sancto liber de concord Mathei Lucae liber de poenitentia ad poenitentiam exâ—ortatio de â—rigine moribus Brachamorum expositio in Cantica Epistola ad Demetriadem ac opuscula And as for his Commentaries on Sainct Paul's Epistles Bellarmine sayeth they are surelie none of his but counterfeyt As concerning Chrysostome Bellarmine showeth that those Bookes attributed to him are counterfeyt to vvit his Commentarie on the Psalmes and his Homilies on Matthew called Opus imperfectum as also that his Liturgie is counterfeyt appeareth heere-by because Prayer is made there-in for Pope Nicolas who almost 300 yeares lived after Chrysostome Of those workes also that goe vnder the name of Augustine those hee discards as counterfeyt to wit 1 his Exposition of the Apocalypse 2 his Questions vpon the Olde and New Testament 3 his Booke De visitatione infirmorum 4 his Booke De Predestinatione gratia 5 his Booke De Ecclesiasticis dogmatibus 6 his Booke De vera falsa poenitentia 7 his Booke called Hypognosticon he pronounceth also suspicious and last his Booke Contra Donatistas hee declareth to bee corrupt Besides the former also Possevin declareth that those Bookes following attributed to Augustine are none of his De vita eremitica Epistola ad Cyrillum Epistola 16 ad Bonifacium Liber de Spiritu anima Liber de speculo Liber de conflictu virtutum vitiorum item Liber de Antichrâ—sto Also hee showeth that those are suspect his Exposition vpon the Gospell and Epistles of Iohn his booke De Pastoribus De Ovibus De Disciplina Christiana De Homiliis De verbis Apostoli Of those works in like manner which passe vnder S. Ierome's name Salmeron declareth that his Notes and Commentaries on all Paul's Epistles are counterfeyt Senensis likewise disclaimeth his Commentaries on the Proverbes both for vnlyknesse of Style and that the Author on the 30 Chapter commenting alleadgeth by name S. Ierome vpon Ieremie Bellarmine in like manner declareth that Booke attributed to Eusebius Emissenus to be a plaine Counterfeyt vvhich is cleare by this That hee maketh mention there-in of the Pelagian Heresie vvhich was not broached long after his death And for Eusebius Pamphylus Historie as the Councell of Rome defined it to bee an Apocryphall writing so Bellarmine likewise affirmeth it to bee corrupt Thus of the Fathers of the first fiue Ages in the primitiue Church wee see howe manie are confessed by our Adversaries to bee corrupt and counterfeyt and so what vnsure Warrand Men haue to gather or ground their Fayth on such Writs and Workes Which made their owne Senensis ingenuouslie to confesse saying Incertum est quid definiant Patres idque propter libros suppositios qui falso Patribus ascribuntur c. Et propter foedissimas corruptelas quae eis inscribuntur that is It is vncertayne what the Fathers define and that both for the counterfeyt Bookes which falselie are ascrybed vnto them as also for the most filthie Errours that are insert into them More of which Bastardlie Brood who pleaseth to see he may behold in the fore-sayde Senensis and Possevin's apparatus and especially of late in Master Cooke an English Man an Armie of such discovered bred most of them in the Brayne-sicke Pates of ydle Monkes and forged on the Anvill of doting Superstition for building vp of Babell and opposing the Trueth And lyke that Harlot before Salomon
Holie and ancient Fathers which the force of Trueth maketh them elsewhere to acknowledge and confesse to bee counterfeyt let the ensewing practise and these proofs testifie A First Arnobius is adduced by Bellarmine agaynst vs in the matter of Free-will as a most ancient Father but is disclaymed else-where by him as a mâ—ere Counterfeyt and Novice Next Abdias his Workes are cited by Bellarmine for Monasticall lyfe and yet hee confesseth that the Learned of their owne Church holde the same for counterfeyt Agayne Amphilochius his Vita S. Basilii is cited by Bellarmine to proue That vnder the Spece of Bread onlie the Eucharist of olde was had to the Sicke and for proofe of Papall confirmation and yet elsewhere without anie doubt he pronounceth that booke to bee a false Counterfeyt Lyke-wyse Athanasius Sermon De Sanctissima Deipara is cited by Bellarmine for Invocation of Sayncts but is declared by Baronius to bee a miere Counterfeyt So is the 82 Epistle of Saynct Ambrose cited by Bellarmine for the Vow of single life yet Possevin granteth that it is none of Ambroses In like manner Anselmus is cited by Bellarmine for Purgatorie for Reall presence for the Virgines immaculate conception and for Free-will and yet Possevin showeth that one Herveus Natalis who lived onlie 250 yeares since is the writer of those Commentaries falselie attributed to Anselmus More-over Anacletus Epistles are cited by Pighius and Stapleton for the Supremacie and yet Cardinall Cusanus pronounceth them but miere forgerie B. Againe Boniface second Epistle is cited by Pighius Harding Stapleton and Turrecremata to proue that the African Councell submitted theÌ„selues to the Pope yet Bellarmine declareth that this Epistle is but suspicious and counterfeyt C. Likewise Bellarmine citeth Cassianus as a verie ancient Father in the matter of Prayer of Popish Satisfaction of Iustification and set fasts against vs yet he acknowledgeth that Booke else-where to bee but Apocryphall and counterfeyt and condemned as such in a Romane Councell vnder Pope Gelasius In which Councell in like manner was the Canons of the Apostles declared to bee such also and yet as the true Canons of the Apostles are they cited by Bellarmine for proofe of Easters observation and Papall Confirmation Likewise Bellarmine citeth that Sermon De ablutione pâ—dum as S. Cyprian's against vs to proue the indeleble Character of holie Orders and yet else-where he pronounceth the same Apocryphall So are Pope Clement's Epistles cited by Bellarmine for the Supremacie reservation of the Sacrament and Popish Confirmation and yet else-where hee showeth that it is vncertaine who writ them and some hee prooveth clearlie to bee mierlie counterfeyt Of the same Stampe he acknowledgeth Calixtus Epistle the first of Clement's the third of Anacletus the first of Anicetus the first of Victors the first of Zepherius the second of Calixtus the first of Lucius and of Marcellus the third of Eusebius and the first of Melchiades and Marcus which notwithstanding are all adduced by him and others ordinarilie to prooue the Pope's Supremacie Vnder the same Coloures also marcheth Cornelius Epistle cited by Bellarmine for prayer to the Dead which Baronius declareth assuredlie to bee but falselie fathered Also that Booke De Cardinalibus operibus Christi is cited by Bellarmine as Cyprian's for Transsubstantiation and by sundrie others for other points of Poperie and yet hee else-where clearly disclaimeth the same as a craftie counterfeyt In like manner is that Epistle written to S. Augustine of S. Ierome's Miracles cited as S. Cyrils as I shewed before by Suarez and by Eckius for Purgatorie and by others for the Reall presence and worshipping of Saincts which Possevin notwithstanding and that which is before discovered declareth to bee a grosse Forgerie D Agayne Bellarmine citeth Dionysius Areopagita for Invocation of Sayncts Purgatorie and Monasticall lyfe c. And this is that famous S. Dennice say the Rhemists who prooveth playnlie almost all things that the Church now vseth in the ministration of the holie Sacrament and affirmeth that hee learned them of the Apostles giving also testimonie for the Catholicke Fayth in most thinges nowe contraverted so playnlie that our Adversaries haue no Shift but to deny this Dennice to haue bene the Author of them And yet what sayeth their owne Bellarmine of this booke It is vncertayne at all sayeth he if that booke be Saynct Dennices whose name is pretended Lyke-wyse Damasus Pontificall is cited by Bellarmine to proue that Election of Bishops onelie belongeth to the Pope for Chrisme in Baptisme for Images and Ceremonies of the Masse and yet hee sayeth else-where that it is notorlie known that Damasus was never the wryter of that booke but Anastasius onelie the master of the Pope's Librarie Damascen in lyke manner his booke De iis qui in fide migrarunt is cited by Bellarmine for the proofe of Purgatorie and yet else-where hee disclaymeth the same to bee Damascen's at all and sayeth that most easilie the same may bee proven E Agayne Eusebius his third Epistle is cited by Bellarmine for the Supremacie and yet he professeth that it is no-wyse certayne who is the wryter there-of Eucherius Commentaries also on Genesis and the Kinges are cited by Bellarmine for Free-will and the Masse but he declareth elsewhere that those cannot bee Eucherius bookes seeing hee oft tymes citeth Gregorie who lived not an hundreth yeares after In lyke manner Eusebius Epistle of the death of Saynct Ierome is cited by Peresius for Transsubstantiation and by Durandus for the adoration of the Host and yet this Epistle not onlie sayth Bellarmine doeth it manifest the Noveltie there-of but also both Ignorance and Deceit F. Againe Fabianus Epistle is cited by Bellarmine to proue Traditions and by the Rhemists to proue Transsubstantiation but that this Booke is counted counterfeyt and Apocryphal Bellarmine else-where clearlie granteth vnto vs. G. Gregorie Nyssen his 8 books De Philosophia are cited like-wise by Bellarmine for Free-wil yet else-where hee confesseth that they looke no wayes like such a man's bookes So are Pope Gregorie's Epistles frequentlie adduced to proue that Sacraments conferre Grace Ex opere operato for Popish Confirmation and that Concupiscence after Baptisme is no Sinne and yet he confesseth else-where that they are corrupt and vitiate And Possevin declareth also his booke on the Canticlos to bee a miere counterfeyt which Bellarmine citeth for the fore-saide Confirmation H. Againe Hegesippus booke is cited by Bellarmine to prooue Peter's beeing and dying at Rome and yet Baronius testifieth that this booke is a plaine counterfeyt So are Hermes works called Pastoralis cited by Coccius for the Angel
vvhich is produced agaynst the vnlawfull keeping of impossible and vnlawfull Vowes 2. How the Romanists without anie farther Warrand alleadge onlie of some Fathers That perhaps they are counterfeyt FIrst when the Treatise of Gregorie Nyssen or his Epistle is produced against Pilgrymages Bellarmine answereth thus heere-to Fortenon est Nysseni that is Perhaps that Epistle is not Nyssen's Agayne when Basill is cited agaynst their distinction of Sinne into Mortall and Veniall Bellarmine aunswereth That probablie that worke is not Basill's Lyke-wyse vvhen Pope Bonifacius seconde Epistle is brought foorth agaynst papall Supremacie Bellarmine answereth Valde mihi suspecta est haec Epistola that is I suspect that Epistle greatlie In lyke manner when OEcumenius is adduced to proue that Antichrist shall not sit in the Temple of Ierusalem Bellarmine answereth Fortasse depravatus est textus illius that is Perhaps his Text or Copie is corrupt and vitiate Also when pope Honorius owne Epistles are exhibited which proue him to haue beene an Hereticke and are insert in the eight Generall Councell where-in hee was condemned Bellarmine answereth Fortasse illas Epistolas esse confictas insertas Concilia generali ab Hereticis that is Perhaps those Epistles were counterfeyted and inserted in the Generall Councell by Heretickes More-over when Venerable Beda is adduced testifying that this same pope Honorius was an Hereticke and solemnlie condemned in a Generall Councell as such and therefore consequentlie hee prooveth Facto by deed agaynst their doctrine now That the pope may erre Bellarmine heere-vnto aunswereth Videtur aliquis sciolus addidisse nomen Honorii in libâ—o Bedae that is It would seeme that some Smatterer hath added the name of Honorius in Beda's booke Lyke-wyse vvhen in the matter of their superstitious Fast on set Dayes a Canon of the Apostles and Ignatius Epistle also are produced agaynst fasting on Saturday Bellarmine answereth Potest fieri ut tam in Canone Apostolico quam in Epistolam Ignatiâ— solum probiberetur jejunium diei Dominicae sed postea à Graecis posteâ—ioribus insertum fuerit nomen Sabbathi that is It may bee that as well in the Canon of the Apostles as in the Epistle of Ignatius onelie Fasting on the Lord's Day was forbidden but after that the Grecians who were later inserted the word Sabbath In lyke manner when Damasus the Author of the Pontificall and their owne Gratian lyke-wise declareth That Pope Anastasius the second was of one communion with the Hereticke Photinus Bellarmine answereth Illud de Photino forte est mendaciam that is That Relation concerning Photinus Perhaps it is a Lie Agayne when wee produce Socrates Testimonie agaynst the antiquitie of their superstitious fourtâ—e dayes Lent Bellarmine answereth Probabile est codicem Socratis esse corruptum that is It is lykelie or may bee that Socrates booke bee corrupted More-over when a whole Convent of Fathers in a Romane Councell vnder pope Sylvester are brought foorth agaynst the receiving of young Nunnes forbidding them to bee vailed before 72 years of age Yet Bellarmine without anie farther assurance in the contrarie answereth onlie Fortasse multo minorem numerum debeâ—e poni pro 72 that is Perhaps a farre lesse number of Yeares ought to bee put there than 72. And when a Canon of the Councel of Laterane is adduced for the lawfulnesse of the Marriage of the Clergie not reprehended there in the East Church Bellarmine aunswereth Canonem illum forte non esse ullius authoritatis that is That perhaps that Canon is of no authoritie So that what solide answeres these are to elide that which so clearlie maketh agaynst them and howe they would bee hissed at on our part let anie vnpartiall Man judge And yet these are they who shamelesselie clayme all Antiquitie so clearlie to make for them As the Lyon there-fore may bee knowne by his Paw and Hercules hudge stature by his Foote onlie So by these few Examples preceeding and from the practise but of one especiallie proceeding wee may see what is the lyke Trade and Custome of the rest This is the Direction of that Popish Crue at Duay saying of Ancients that make agaynst them Excogitato commento persaepe negemus that is By devising out a Shift let vs even often times disclaime them Which their Cardinal Baronius calleth Honeslum ConfugiuÌ„ or an honest vvay of escaping an vnhonest he should haue saide And their Sanders calleth Verissimum praesentaneum Remedium A most true present Helpe And if they cannot vvithout grosse Impudencie disclaime Auncientes wee see they come next to the last Bore of their conjecturall Alleadgeances of Perhaps and I suspect or It is probable and would seeme or may bee that they are so as they would haue them And this is their Non ultra hic baerent Therefore justlie wee see that wee may turne over vpon them that vvhich Hart saieth to Raynolds Viam tenetis facilem expeditam modo strenue per gatis respuite omnes authores qui contra vos faciunt supposititios esse dicite it a nempe par est patronos impudentes pudendam causam pudendis viis defendere that is Yee haue gotten saieth he an easie and cleare way so that yee cowragiouslie goe forwardes there-in reject all Authors that make against you and call them counterfeit for so it is fit that shamelesse Patrons by shamefull vvayes should defende a shamefull Cause Their practise herein being like that of the Manicheant as Augustine showeth concerning Apostolicall Writs Inde probo saide Faustus the Manichean hoc illius esse illud non esse quia hoc pro me sonat illud contrame that is Hence I proue this to bee Apostolicall Writ and that not to bee because this maketh for me and that maketh against mee Even as Bellarmine hath no better Warrand to reject Paschasius Testimonie cited against their Mutilation of the Sacrament as none of his but corrupt and vitiate Because saieth hee vvhere it is saide Bibite it should haue beene saide Edite Which is as much to say That Paschasius is not Paschasius except hee speake in the Romane Dialect and frame his Daunce to the Pope's Spring CHAP. IX How the Romanists alleadge the Fathers for them in one place and poynt of Doctrine and at their pleasure reject them in another when they can neyther alleadge them to bee corrupt nor counterfeyt FOR PROBATION heere-of first Bellarmine adduceth S. Augustine for him to proue their sore of Reall Presence in the Sacrament but with a nore of Ignorance he rejecteth him where he expoundeth by the Rocke whereon the Church is builded that Christ onelie meaned revoking anie other Exposition that he had made of the same And when wee adduce out of his booke De moribus Ecclesiae which they oft cite Testimonies against their worshipping of Reliques Bellarmine rejecteth the same with this answere