indeede for neyther Scripture nor Austen euer mention more then one Bellarm. l. 3. c. 9. p. 229. Thirdly Bellarmine against Turrecremata THat close Infidels that haue neyther faith nor any other Christian vertue yet externally for some temporall commodity professe the Catholike faith belong not to the true Church is taught not onely by the Caluinists but by some of our Catholikes amongst whom is Io. de Turrecremata l. 4. de Eccles. But we follow their phrase of speech which say that those who by an externall profession onely are ioyned to the faithfull are true parts of the body of the Church though drie and dead Bellarm. l. 3. c. 10. pag. 232. Fourthly Alexander Alensis and Turrecremata against Bellarmine THere are some Catholike Doctors which teach in the passion of our Lord there remained true faith in none but the blessed Virgin alone and that they hold to be signified by that one candle which alone is kept light in the third night before Easter So holds Alexander Alensis 3. p. q. vlt. art 2. and Iohn de Turrecremata l. 1. de Eccles. c. 30. But I wonder at Turrecremata who for so slight an argument from a candle saith it is against the faith of the Vniuersall Church to affirme otherwise For Rupertus in his 5. booke of Diuine offices chap. 26. sayeth that in his time the last candle also had wont to bee quenched It may be answered rather with Abulensis that by this candle is signified that onely in the blessed Virgin there was for those three dayes an explicit faith of the resurrection Bellarmine l. 3. c. 17. pag. 27. Fiftly Caietane Francisc. Victoria against other Doctors IF there were no constitution for the choice of the Pope and all the Cardinals should perish at once the question is in whom should be the right of the Election Some hold that the right of the choyce setting aside the positiue law should belong to the Councell of Bishops as Caietane in his treatise of the power of the Pope and Councell chap. 13. Franciscus Victoria Relect. 2. q. 2. of the power of the Church others as Siluester reports in the word excommunication teach that it pertaines to the Clergy of Rome Bellarm. in his first booke of the members of the Church militant c. 10. p. 52. Sixtly Bellarmine against Antonius Delphinus and Michael Medina TO that obiection out of Ierome who saith vpon the first to Titus that a presbiter is the same with a Bishop is answered by Antonius Delphinus l. 2. of the Church that in the beginning of the church all Presbiters were Bishops But this satisfies not Michael Medina in his first booke de sacr hom Origine affirmes that S. Ierome held the same opinion with the Aerian heretickes and that not onely Ierome was in this heresie but also Ambrose Austen Sedulius Primasius Chrisostom Theodoret Oecumenius Theophilact The opinion of these men was condemned first in Aerius then in the Waldenses and after in Wickliffe But this opinion of Medina is very inconsiderate Bellarm. same booke c. 15. p. 75. Seuenthly Bellarmine against Onuphrius THe opinion of Onuphrius concerning the names or titles of Cardinals see confuted by Bellarmine in the same booke c. 16. p. 82. Eightly Io. Maior and Iodoc. Clictonaeus against S. Thomas Caietane Sotus IOhannes Maior holds that the vow of single life of Priests stands by the law of God and therefore cannot be dispensed with So also Iod. Clictonaeus in his booke de Contin Sacerd. who there defends two opinions which cannot hold together but S. Thomas in 2.2 q. 88. art 11. saith plainely that the vow of continency is onely by the decree of the Church annexed to holy orders and therefore may be dispensed with the same teaches Caietane in opusc and Sotus in his seuenth booke of Iustice c. Bellarm. lib. 1. cap. 18. pag. 92. Ninthly Erasmus and Panormitan against the other Popish Doctors ERasmus in a declamation of the praise of Matrimonie holds it profitable that liberty of mariage should be granted to Priests and the same is taught by Card. Panormitan a Catholike and learned Doctor in the Chapt. Cum olim Against these errors we are to proue that the vow of continency is so annexed to holy orders that they neyther may marry nor conuerse with their wiues formerly married Bellarm. same booke c. 19. p. 95. Tenthly the Glosse Innocent Panormitan Hostiensis opposed by all Diuines and some Canonists THe fourth error is of many of the canonists which hold that tithes euen according to the determination of quantity stand by the Law of God and that no other quantity can be set downe by any humane law or custome So the Glosse Innocentius Panormitan Hostiensis but doubtlesse it is a manifest errour as not onely all Diuines but some Canonists also teach as Syluester in the word Decima quaest 4. and Nauar. cap. 21. And herein many of the Canonists offend double once in that they defend a falshood Twise in that they doe almost condemne all those Diuines as heretickes which hold the contrary Bellarm same booke c. 25. p. 145. DECAD VII First Sotus against Syluester and Nauar Bellarmine and Aquinas with both WHether the Precept of Tithes as it is Positiue and Humane may by custome bee altered is doubtfull Sotus holdes directly it cannot booke 9. quaest 4. art 1. and thinkes that this is the iudgement of Aquinaes But I thinke with Siluester and Nauarre that it may and I doubt not but this is the opinion of Aquinas Bellarm. ibid. p. 148. Secondly Bellarmine against Thomas Waldensis THomas Waldensis teaches that Clerkes should eyther giue their goods to the poore or lay them together in common and proues it by some sentences of Fathers Origen Hierome Bernard But it is certaine that Clerkes are not by their profession tyed to put away their patrimony Bellarmine same booke c. 27. p. 156. Thirdly Marsilius Paduan Io. de Ianduno Turrecremata Canonists Glosse Driedonius Francisc. Victoria Dominicus a Soto Couarruuias dissenting IN the question concerning the liberty of Ecclesiasticall persons are three opinions First is of many heretickes that Clerkes are and should be subiect to secular powers both in payment of tributes and in iudgements especially not Ecclesiasticall So also Marsilius of Padua and Io. de Ianduno teach that Christ himselfe was not free from paying tribute and that he did it not voluntarily but of necessity as is reported by Turrecremata The second opinion in another extreame is of many Canonists who hold that by the Law of God Clerkes and their goods are free from the power of secular Princes so teaehes the Glosse in Can. Tributum and of this minde seemes Io. Driedonius to be in his booke of Christian liberty ch 9. The third in the meane is of many Diuines that clerkes are free partly by the law of God partly by the law of men and partly neyther way so thinkes Franciscus Victoria Dominicus a
after the comming of Christ and preaching of the Apostles I cannot hold from laughter that our Sauiour and the Euangelists and Apostles should so cite testimonies of Scripture as the Jews would afterwards depraue them Thus Ierome And the Canon law it selfe hath this determination that the truth and credite of the books of the old Testament should be examined by the Hebrew Volumes of the new by the Greeke And Pope Innocentius as he is cyted by Gratian could say Haue recourse to the diuine Scriptures in their Original Greek The same lastly by Bellarmines owne confession the Fathers teach euery where As Ierome in his booke against Heluidius and in his Epistle to Marcella that the latine Edition of the Gospels is to be called back to the Greek fountaines and the latine Edition of the olde Testament is to be amended by the Hebrew in his Comment vpon Zachary chap. 8. The very same hath Austen in his second booke of Christian doctrine chap. 11.12 15. and Epist. 19. and elsewhere This was the old Religion and ours now heare the new The present Church of Rome hath thus The holy Synode decreeth that the old vulgar latine Edition in all Lectures Disputations Sermons Expositions be held for Authenticall saith the counsell of Trent And her Champion Bellarmine hath these words That the fountaine of the Originals in many places run muddy and impure we haue formerly shewed and indeed it can scarce be doubted but that as the latine Church hath beene more constant in keeping the faith then the Greeke so it hath been more vigilant in defending her bookes from corruption Yea some of the Popish Doctors mainetaine that the Iewes in hatred of the Christian faith did on purpose corrupt many places of scripture so holds Gregory de Valentia Iacobus Christopolitanus in his Praeface to the Psalmes Canus in the second booke of his common places But in stead of all Bellarmine shal shut vp all with these wordes The Heretickes of this time in hatred of the vulgar Edition giue too much to the Hebrew Edition as Caluin Chemnitius Georgius Maior All which would haue euery thing examined and amended by the Hebrew text which they commonly call a most pure fountain See now whether that which Bellarmine confesses to haue beene the iudgement of Hierome Austen and all the auncient Fathers be not here condemned by him as the opinion of the Heretickes Ours was theirs and theirs is condemned vnder our names Iudge whether in this also Popery be not an vpstart Yet one step more Our question is whether the Scripture be easie or most obscure and whether in all essentiall points it doe not interpret it selfe so as what is hard in one place is openly layd forth in another Heare the iudgement of the old Church and ours All things are cleare and plaine and nothing contrary in the Scriptures saith Epiphanius Those things which seeme doubtfully and obscurely spoken in some places of Scripture are expounded by them which in other places are open and plaine saith Basil What could Caluin or Luther say more There is no so great hardnesse in the Scriptures to come to those things which are necessary to saluation saith Austen In those things which are openly layd downe in Scripture are found all those things which containe our faith and rules for our life saith the same Father who yet againe also saith thus The spirit of God hath Royally and wholsomely tempered the holy Scriptures so as both by the plaine places he might preuent our hunger and by the obscure hee might auoyd our nice slouthfulnesse for there is scarce any thing that can be fetch 't out of those obscurities which is not found most plainely spoken elsewhere And because Bellarmine takes exception at this Feré Scarce compare this place with the former and with that which he hath in his third Epistle thus The manner of speech in which the Scripture is contriued is easie to be commed to of al although to be throughly attained by few Those things which it containeth plaine and easie it speakes like a familiar friend without guile to the heart of the learned and vnlearned c. But it inuites all men with an humble manner of speech whom it dooth not onely feede with manifest truth but exercise with secret hauing the same in readinesse which it hath in secrecy Thus Austen To omit Iraeneus and Origen Chrysostome whom Bellarmine saith we alledge alone for vs besides many other playne places writeth thus Who is there to whom all is not manifest which is written in the Gospel who that shall heare Blessed are the meeke Blessed are the mercifull Blessed are the pure in heart the rest wold desire a teacher to learne any of these things which are here spoken As also the signes miracles histories are not they knowne and manifest to euery man This pretence and excuse is but the cloake of our slothfulnesse thou vnderstandest not those things which are written how shouldest thou vnderstand them which wilt not so much as sleightly looke into them take the booke into thy hand read all the history and what thou knowest remember and what is obscure runne often ouer it So Chrysostome yea he makes this difference betwixt the Philosophers and Apostles the Philosophers speake obscurely But the Apostles and Prophets saith he contrarily make all things deliuered by them cleare and manifest and as the common teachers of the world haue so expounded all things that euery man may of himselfe by bare reading learne those things which are spoken yea lastly so far he goes in this point as that he asketh Wherefore needeth a preacher all things are cleare and plaine in the Diuine Scriptures but because ye are delicate hearers and seeke delight in hearing therefore ye seeke for Preachers You haue heard the old Religion now heare the new Bellarmine hath these wordes It must needes be confessed that the Scriptures are most obscure Here therefore saith he Luther hath deuised two euasions One that the Scripture though it be obscure in one place yet that it doth clearely propound the same thing in another The second is that though the Scripture be cleare of it selfe yet to the proud and vnbeleeuers it is hard by reason of their blindnes and euill affections so the Lutherans saith Eckius contend that the Scriptures are cleare and plaine so Duraeus against VVhitakers so the Rhemists in their annotations and generally all Papists Iudge now if all these forenamed Fathers and so the Auncient Church were not Lutherans in this point or rather we theirs and yeeld that this their old opinion by the new Church of Rome is condemned for hereticall and in al these say vpon your soule whether is the elder Let me draw you on yet a little further Our question is whether it be necessary or fit that all men euen of the Laiety should haue liberty to heare and read the Scriptures in a language which they vnderstand
are the foundations these are the confirmations And vpon the Psalmes Least thou shouldst erre saith the same Augustine in thy iudgement of the Church least any man should say to thee this is Christ which is not Christ or this is the Church which is not the Church for many c. Heare the voyce of the Shepheard himselfe which is cloathed in flesh c. He shewes himselfe to thee handle him and see He shewes his Church least any man should deceiue thee vnder the name of the Church c. yet Chrysostome more directly thus He that would know which is the true Church of Christ whence may he know it in the similitude of so great confusion but onely by the scriptures Now the working of miracles is altogether ceased yea they are rather found to be fainedly wrought of them which are but false Christians Whence then shall he know it but onely by the scriptures The Lord Jesus therfore knowing what great confusion of things would be in the last dayes therefore commands that those which are Christians and would receiue confirmation of their true faith should flye to nothing but to the Scriptures Otherwise if they flie to any other helpe they shall be offended and perish not vnderstanding which is the true Church This is the old faith Now heare the new contradicting it and vs. The scripture saith Eckius a Popish Doctor is not authenticall without the authority of the Church for the Canonicall writers are members of the Church Whereupon let it be obiected to an Hereticke that will striue against the Decrees of the Church by what weapons he will fight against the Church he will say by the Canonicall scriptures of the foure Gospels and Pauls Epistles Let it be straight obiected to him how he knowes these to be Canonicall but by the Church And a while after The scripture saith he defined in a Councell it seemed good to the holy Ghost and to vs that you abstaine from things offered to Idolls and blood and strangled the Church by her authority altred a thing so clearely defined and expressed for it vseth both strangled and blood Behold the power of the Church is aboue the scripture thus Eckius And besides Cusanus Bellarmine saith thus If we take away the authority of the present Church and of the present Councell of Trent all the Decrees of all other Councells and the whole Christian faith may be called into doubt and in the same place a little after The strength of all ancient Councels and the certainety of all opinions depends on the authority of the present Church You haue heard both speake say now with whom is true antiquity and on Gods name detest the newer of both It were as easie to bring the same if not greater euidence for the perfection and all-sufficiency of Scripture and so to deliuer all the body of our Religion by the tongues and pens of the fathers that eyther you must be forced to hold them Nouelists with vs or your selues such against them How honest and ingenuous is that confession of your Erasmus who in his Epistle to the Bishop and Cardinall of Ments could say It is plainely found that many things in Luthers bookes are condemned for Hereticall which in the bookes of Bernard and Austen are read for holy and Orthodox This is too much for a tast if your appetite stand to it I dare promise you full dishes Let me therefore appeale to you if light and darkenesse be more contrary then these points of your religion to true Antiquity No no Let your authors glose as they list Popery is but a yong faction corruptly raysed out of auncient grounds And if it haue as we grant some ancient errors falshood cannot be bettered with age there is no prescription against God and truth What wee can proue to be erroneous we neede not proue new some hundreths of yeares is an idle plea against the ancient of dayes What can you plead yet more for your change Their numbers perhaps and our handfuls You heard all the world was theirs scarce any corner ours How could you but suspect a few These are but idle brags we dare and can share equally with them in Christendome And if we could not this rule will teach you to aduance Turcisme aboue Christianity and Paganisme aboue that the world aboue the Church hell aboue heauen If any proofe can be drawne from numbers He that knowes all sayes the best are fewest What then could stir you Our diuisions and their vnity If this my following labour doe not make it good to all the world that their peace is lesse then ours their dissension more by the confession of their owne mouthes be you theirs still and let me follow you I stand not vpon the scoldings of Priests and Iesuites nor the late Venetian iarres nor the pragmaticall differences now on foote in the view of all Christendome betwixt their owne Cardinals in their sacred Conclaue and all their Clergy concerning the Popes temporall power Neither doe I call any friend to be our aduocate none but Bellarmine and Nauarrus shall be my Orators and if these plead not this cause enough let it fall See here dangerous rifts and flawes not in the outward barke onely but in the very heart and pithe of your religion and if so many be confessed by one or two what might be gathered out of all and if so many be acknowledged thinke how many there are that lurke in secret and will not be confessed How loath would we be after all exclamations that your busie Iesuites could rake out so many confessed quarrels out of all our authors as I haue here found in two of yours We want onely their cunning secrecy in the carriage of our quarrels Our few and sleight differences are blazoned a broad with infamy and offence their hundreds are craftily smothered in silence Let your owne eyes satisfie you in this not my pen see now what you would neuer beleeue What is it then that could thus bewitch you to forsake the comely and heauenly truth of God and to dote vpon this beastly strumpet to change your Religion for a ridiculous sensuall cruell irreligious faction A Religion if we must call it so that made sport to our playne fore fathers with the remembrance of her grauest deuotions How oft haue you seene them laugh at themselues whiles they haue told of their creeping crouch kissing the pax offering their candles signing with ashes partiall shrifts merry pilgrimages ridiculous miracles and a thousand such May-games which now you begin after this long hissing at to looke vpon soberly and with admiration A Religion whose fooleries very boyes may shout and laugh at if for no more but this that it teaches men to put confidence in beades medals roses hallowed swords spels of the Gospell Agnus Dei and such like idle bables ascribing vnto them Diuine vertue yea so much as is due to the sonne of God himselfe and his
in faith and manners there are some Catholickes that denie which as yet are not by the Church condemned for Heretickes But surely it is rash erroneous and neare to heresie to affirme that particular Councels confirmed by the Pope may erre Bellarmine l. 2. ch 5. p. 114. Secondly Alanus Copus against Bellarmine IT is a very vncertaine thing what was decreede of Images in the Councell of Francford for the ancient authors agree not with themselues by reason of this confusion Alanus Copus in his fourth and fift Dialogue teaches that in that Synod of Francford the hereticall Councell of Constantinople was onely condemned the Nicene not onely not condemned but confirmed which opinion I wish to be true but I suspect it to be false Bellarmine ibid. chap. 8. pag. 137. Thirdly Bellarmine against Vega. SOme answere as Vega in the Councell of Trent b. 3. c. 39. that any Councell is lawfull if held by the faithfull not for that Historians witnes so but because the Councell it selfe defineth so of it selfe for they vse euer in the beginning of their act so to determine their meeting lawfull and in the Holy Ghost But sure this answere is not found for first the auncient Councels had not wont to witnesse so of themselues Secondly eyther it appeares to vs that the Councell is a lawfull one or it appeares not if it do appeare such a Decree is in vaine if it doe not appeare we shall as well doubt of that Decree as of the Councel Bellarmine same booke cap. 9. pag. 148. Fourthly Parisienses against Caietane Turrecremata and Bellarmine against Canus OF generall Councels there are diuers opinions amongst vs. First the Diuines of Paris and all those which teach that the Councell is aboue the Pope thinke that lawfull generall Councels cannot erre euen before the confirmation of the Pope Contrary to these teach others as Caietane in Apolog. Io. Turrecremata lib. 3. cap. 32.33 34. But when Councels define something with the consent of the Popes Legates not hauing had full instruction what authority they haue is stil in controuersie But I thinke such a Councell may erre before the popes owne confirmation Canus and others hold the contrary Bellarm. l. 2. c. 11. p. 153. Fiftly Bellarmine against Gratian. GRatian dist 19. affirmes that the decretall Epistles of popes ought to be numbred amongst the Canonicall Scriptures and Di. 20. he saith that the Canons of Councels are of the same authority with Decretall Epistles and pope Gregorie in his first B. Epist. 24. saith he reuerences the foure first Councels as the foure Euangelists I answere first that Gratian was deceiued by a depraued copy which he followed c. As for Gregorie I answere that his As doth not signifie equality but similitude Bellarm. l. 2. c. 12. pag. 161. Sixtly Three rankes of Popish Diuines dissenting IN this question Whether the pope be aboue the Councell I finde three opinions of our Doctors First that the Councell is aboue the pope so affirm al the hereticks of this time and the same is taught by Card. Cameracensis Io. Gerson Iacob Almaine and some others Also Nicol. Cusanus Card. Panormitanus and his Master the Cardinall of Florence and Abulensis in cap. 18. of Matthew q. 108. This opinion hath two grounds 1 That the Pope is not properly the head of the whole Church gathered together 2 That the supreame power of the Church is as well in the Councell as in the Pope but in the Councell principally immediately and immoueably And in the defence of this point these Authors againe differ from themselues whiles some hold this power formally and subiectiuely in the Pope and finally in the Church Others will haue it formally and principally in the Church and instrumentally in the Pope Second opinion is of some Canonists which will haue the Pope aboue the Councell and that he cannot vpon constraint be iudged by any but that he may subiect himselfe if he will to the Councell So teacheth the Glosse in Canon Nossi c. The third is the more common opinion That the Pope is so aboue the Councell that he cannot subiect himselfe vnto the iudgement thereof if we speake of a coactiue sentence So al the old Schoolemen hold Albert Thomas Bonauenture Richard Paludanus so Antoninus Turrecremata Al. Pelagius Iacobatius Caietane Pighius Turrianus and Saunders and many other there mentioned Bellarmine l. 2. c. 13. pag. 166. Seuenthly Councell of Basill against Eugenius and Leo Popes THat which the Councell of Basill defined of the authority of the Councell aboue the Pope was neuer by any Pope allowed Pope Eugenius first did professedly reiect it then Pope Leo the tenth in the last Councell of Lateran Sess. 11. as also the whole Church which euer held Eugenius who by the councell of Basill was deposed for the true Pope Bellarm lib. 2. cap. 19. pag. 186. where Io. Gerson is by him confuted Eightly Driedo against Bellarm. and Canus THe Author of the booke de Dog Eccl. c. 74. openly saith that Nouices in Religion dying before their baptisme cannot be saued but this seemes ouerhard Melchior Canus holds they may be saued because though they be not of the christian Church yet they are of that Church that comprehends all faithfull ones from Abel to the end of the world But this satisfies not I answere that this rule No man without the Church can be saued is to be vnderstood of those which neither indeede nor in defire are of the Church Bellarmine lib. 3. cap. 3. pag. 159. Ninthly Bellarmine against Alphonsus de Castro ALphonsus de Castro in his second booke of the iust punishment of heretickes chap. 34. teaches that heretickes and Apostates if once baptized are members and parts of the Church although they openly professe false Doctrine which opinion as it is plainely false so may easily be refuted Bellarm. l. 3. c. 4. p. 196. Tenthly Alphonsus and others against Bellarmine SOme Catholiks doubt concerning Schismaticks whether they be of the Church yea Alphonsus de Castro flatly affirmes them to be of the Church but it is easie to shew the contrary out of Scriptures and traditions of the Fathers Bellarmine l. 3. c. 5. where also he holds the definition which pope Nicholas giues of the church to be imperfect p. 200.203 DECAD VI. First Catechism Rom. Waldensis Turrecremata c. against some namelesse Papists THat persons excommunicate are not of the church is taught by the Catechisme of Rome by Tho. Waldensis Io. de Turrecremata Io. Driedo and some others The contrary is defended by others whose three obiections are answered by Bellarmine Bellarm. lib. 3. cap. 6. pag. 205. Secondly Bellarmine against some not named Papists FOr answering of that place of Austen l. 2. against Cresconius that notorious wicked men are not of the Church not only Brentius and Caluin heretikes but some Catholikes faine two Churches and they doe but faine them
to looke towards our Doctrine the noueltie of our Religion you say hath discouraged you theirs hath drawne you with the reuerence of her age It is a free challenge betwixt vs let the elder haue vs both if there be any point of our Religion yonger then the Patriarkes and Prophets Christ and his Apostles the Fathers and Doctors of the Primitiue Church let it be accursed and condemned for an vpstart shew vs euidence of more credite and age and carrie it The Church of Rome hath beene auncient not the errors neither doe we in ought differ from it wherein it is not departed from it selfe If I did not more feare your wearines then my owne forgetting the measure of a Praeface I would passe through euerie point of difference betwixt vs and let you see in all particulars which is the old way and make you know that your Popish Religion doth but put on a borrowed visor of grauitie vpon this Stage to out-face true antiquitie Yet least you should complaine of words let me without your tediousnes haue leaue but to instance in the first of all Controuersies betwixt vs offering the same proofe in al which you shall see performed in one I compare the iudgement of the ancient Church with yours see therefore and be ashamed of your noueltie First our question is Whether all those bookes which in our Bibles are stiled Apocryphall and are put after the rest by themselues are to be receiued as the true Scriptures of God Heare first the voice of the old Church To let passe that cleare and pregnant testimonie of Melito Sardensis in his Epistle to Onesimus cited by Eusebius Let Cyprian or Ruffinus rather speake in the name of all Of the olde Testament saith he first were written the fiue bookes of Moses Genesis Exodus Leuiticus Numbers Deuteronomie after these the booke of Ioshua the son of Nun and that of the Iudges together with Ruth after which were the foure bookes of the Kings which the Hebrues reckon but two of the Chronicles which is called the booke of Dayes and of Ezra are two bookes which of them are accounted but single and the booke of Esther Of the Prophets there is Esay Hieremie Ezekiel and Daniel and besides one booke which containes the twelue smaller Prophets Also Iob and the Psalmes of Dauid are single bookes of Salomon there are three books deliuered to the Church the Prouerbes Ecclesiastes Song of songs In these they haue shut vp the number of the bookes of the olde Testament Of the new there are foure Gospels of Matthew Marke Luke and Iohn the Acts of the Apostles written by Luke of Paul the Apostle fourteene Epistles of the Apostle Peter two Epistles of Iames the Lords brother and Apostle one of Iude one of Iohn three Lastly the Reuelation of Iohn These are they which the Fathers haue accounted within the Canon by which they would haue the assertions of our faith made good But we must know there are other bookes which are called of the Ancients not Canonicall but Ecclesiastical as the Wisedome of Salomon and another booke of Wisedome which is called of Iesus the sonne of Sirach which booke of the Latines is termed by a generall name Ecclesiasticus of the same ranke is the booke of Toby and Iudith and the bookes of the Maccabees Thus farre that Father so Hierome after that he hath reckoned vp the same number of bookes with vs in their order hath these words This Prologue of mine saith he may serue as a well defenced entrance to all the bookes which I haue turned out of Hebrew into latine that we may know that whatsoeuer is besides these is Apocryphall therefore that booke which is intituled Salomons Wisedome and the booke of Iesus the son of Sirach and Iudith Tobias Pastor are not Canonical the first book of the Macabees I haue found in Hebrew the second is Greeke which booke saith he indeed the Church readeth but receiueth not as Canonicall The same reckoning is made by Origen in Eusebius word for word The same by Epiphanius by Cyrill by Athanasius Gregory Nazianzen Damascen yea by Lyranus both Hugoes Caietan Carthusian and Montanus himselfe c. All of them with full consent reiecting these same Apocryphall bookes with vs. Now heare the present Church of Rome in her owne words thus The holy Synode of Trent hath thought good to set downe with this Decree a iust Catalogue of the bookes of holy Scripture least any man should make doubt which they be which are receiued by the Synode And they are these vnder-written Of the old Testament fiue bookes of Moses then Ioshua the Iudges Ruth foure bookes of the Kings two of the Chronicles two of Esdras the first and the second which is called Nehemias Tobias Iudith Ester Iob the Psalter of Dauid containing one hundreth and fiftie Psalmes the Prouerbes of Salomon Ecclesiastes the Song of Songs the booke of Wisedome Ecclesiasticus Esay Hieremy c. two bookes of the Macabees the first and the second And if any man shall not receiue these whole bookes with al the parts of them as they are wont to be read in the Catholick Church as they are had in the old vulgar latine Edition for holy and Canonicall let him be accursed Thus shee Iudge you now of our age and say whether the opinion of the ancient Church that is ours be not a direct enemy to Poperie and flatly accursed by the Romish Passe on yet a little further Our question is whether the Hebrew and Greeke Originals be corrupted and whether those first Copies of Scriptures be not to be followed aboue all Translations Heare first the ancient Church with vs But saith Saint Augustine howsoeuer it be taken whether it be beleeued to be so done or not beleeued or lastly whether it were so or not so I hold it a right course that when any thing is found different in eyther bookes the Hebrew and Septuagint since for the certainty of things done there can be but one truth that tongue should rather bee beleeued from whence the Translation is made into another language Vppon which words Ludouicus Viues yet a Papist saith thus the same saith he doth Ierome proclayme euery where and reason it selfe teacheth it and there is none of sound iudgement that will gaine say it but in vaine doth the consent of all good wits teach this for the stubburne blockishnes of men opposeth against it Let Ierome himselfe then a greater linguist be heard speake And if there be any man saith he that will say the Hebrew bookes were afterwards corrupted of the Iewes let him heare Origen what he answeres in the eight Volume of his explanations of Esay to this question that the Lord and his Apostles which reproue other faults in the Scribs and Pharisees would neuer haue beene silent in this which were the greatest crime that could be But if they say that the Hebrewes falsified them
Heare first the voyce of the old religion to omit the direct charges of Gregory Nissen and Ambrose thus hath Ierome vpon the Psalmes The Lord will declare and how will he declare Not by word but by writing In whose writing In the writing of his people c. Our Lord and Sauiour therefore tels vs and speaketh in the scriptures of his Princes Our Lord will declare it to vs in the scriptures of his people in the holy scriptures which scripture is read to all the people that is so read as that all may vnderstand not that a few may vnderstand but all What faithfull man saith Augustine though he be but a Nouice before he be baptized and haue receiued the holy Ghost doth not with an equall minde reade and heare all things which after the ascension of our Lord are written in Canonicall truth and authority although as yet he vnderstands them not as he ought But of all other Saint Chrysostome is euery where most vehement and direct in this point Amongst infinite places heare what he saith in one of his Homilies of Lazarus I doe alwaies exhort and will neuer cease to exhort you saith he that you will not here onely attend to those things which are spoken but when you are at home you continually busie your selues in reading of the holy Scriptures which practise also I haue not ceased to driue into them which come priuately to me for let no man say Tush they are but idle words and many of them such as should bee contemned Alas I am taken vp with lawe causes I am employed in publique affaires I follow my trade I maintaine a wife and children and haue a great charge to looke to It is not for me to read the Scriptures but for them which haue cast off the world which haue taken vp the solitary toppes of Mountaines for their dwellings which liue this contemplatiue kinde of life continually What sayest thou O man Is it not for thee to turne ouer the Scriptures because thou art distracted with infinite cares Nay then it is for thee more then for them for they doe not so much neede the helpe of the Scriptures as you that are tost in the midst of the waues of worldly busines And soone after Neyther can it be possible that any man should without great fruit be perpetually conuersant in this spirituall exercise of reading and straight Let vs not neglect to buy our selues bookes least we receiue a wound in our vitall parts and after he hath compared the bookes of Scripture to gold he addeth But what say they if we vnderstand not those things which are contained in those bookes What gaine we then Yes surely though thou dost not vnderstand those things which are there laid vp yet by the very reading much holinesse is got Although it cannot be that thou shouldest be alike ignorant of all thou readest for therefore hath the spirit of God so dispenced this word that Publicanes Fishers Tent-makers Shepheards Goat-beards plaine vnlettered men may be saued by these bookes least any of the simpler sort should pretend this excuse That all things which are said should be easie to discerne and that the workeman the seruant the poore widdow and the most vnlearned of all other by hearing of the word read might get some gaine and profit And the same Father elsewhere I beseech you saith he that you come speedily hither and harken diligently to the reading of the holy Scriptures and not onely when you come hither but also at home take the Bible into your hands and by your diligent care reape the profite contained in it Lastly in his Homilies vpon the Epistle to the Colossians he cries out Heare I beseech you O all ye secular men prouide you Bibles which are the medicines for the soule At least get the new Testament Now on the contrary let the new Religion of Rome speake first by her Rhemish Iesuites thus We may not thinke that the Translated Bibles into vulgar tongues were in the hands of euery Husbandman Artificer Prentise Boyes Girles Mistresse Maide Man that they were sung played alledged of euery Tinker Tauerner Rimer Minstrell The like words of scorn and disgrace are vsed by Hosius and by Eckius and by Bellarmine de verbo l. 2. c. 15. The wise will not here regard say our Rhemists what some wilfull people doe mutter that the Scriptures are made for all men c. And soone after they compare the scriptures to fire water candles kniues swords which are indeede needfull c. but would marre all if they were at the guiding of other then wise men All the Heretickes of this time saith Bellarmine agree that the scriptures should be permitted to all and deliuered in their owne mother tongue But the Catholike Church forbids the reading of the Scriptures by all without choice or the publique reading or singing of them in vulgar tongues as it is decreed in the Councell of Trent Ses. 22 c. 8. and can 9. If you thinke saith Duraeus that Christ had all Christians to search the Scriptures you are in a grosse errour For how shall rude and ignorant men search the Scriptures c. And so he concludes that the Scriptures were not giuen to the common multitude of beleeuers Iudge now what either we say or these Papists condemne besides the ancient iudgement of the Fathers and if euer either Caluin or Luther haue beene more peremptory in this matter then Saint Chrysostome I vow to be a Papist If ours be not in this the old Religion be not you ours Yet this one passage further and then no more least I weary you Our question is Whether the Scriptures depend vpon the authority of the Church or rather the Church vpon the authoritie of Scriptures Heare first the ancient Church with and for vs The question is saith Saint Austen betwixt vs and the Donatists where the Church is what shall we do then shall we seeke her in our owne words or in the words of her head the Lord Iesus Christ I suppose we ought to seeke her rather in his words which is the truth and knowes best his owne body for the Lord knowes who are his we will not haue the Church sought in our words And in the same booke Whether the Donatists hold the Church saith the same Father let them not shew but by the Canonicall bookes of Diuine scriptures for neyther do we therefore say they should beleeue vs that wee are in the Church of Christ because Optatus or Ambrose hath commended this Church vnto vs which we now hold or because it is acknowledged by the Councels of our fellow-teachers or because so great miracles are done in it it is not therefore manifested to be true and Catholicke but the LORD Iesus himselfe iudged that his Disciples should rather be confirmed by the testimonies of the Law and the Prophets These are the rules of our cause these
broken pits that can hold no water what shall be the issue Et tu Domine deduces eos in puteum interitus Thou O God shalt bring them downe into the pit of destruction If you wil thus wilfully leaue God there I must leaue you But if you had not rather die returne and saue one returne to God returne to his truth returne to his Church your blood be vpon my head if you perish ADVERTISEMENTS to the Reader VNDERSTAND good reader that in all these passages following I haue brought in C. Bellarm. speaking in his owne words except in some few plaine references where I mention him in the third person 2 That the edition of C. Bellarmine which I haue followed and quoted in euery page is that in octauo the commonest I thinke set forth at Ingolstadt from the presse of Adam Sartorius in the yeare M.D.XCIX 3 That all those Authors which thou seest named ouer the head of euery Section are Papists of note whose quarrels C. Bellarmine confesseth 4 That such great Doctors could not be singular in their iudgements but must needes in all probability which yet is not confessed be attended with many followers in euery point of variance euery Master hath the fauour of his owne schoole the sides taken by their Scholers is not more secret then likely 5 That one Doctor Pappus a learned German hath vndertaken the like taske but somewhat vnperfectly for of my 303 contradictions he hath noted but 237. the edition followed by him was not the same and therefore his trust could not be so helpfull to mee Besides that two or three of Card. Bellarmines workes are since published 6 That I haue willingly omitted diuers small differences which if I had regarded number might haue caused the Sum to swell yet higher 7 That thou mayest not looke to finde all these acknowledged differences maine and essentiall All Religion consists not of so many stones in her foundation it is enough that deepe and material dissensions are intermingled with the rest and that scarce any point is free from some 8 That Card. Bellarmine acknowledges those dissensions only which fall into the compasse of his owne Controuersies if all those omitting all others For instance of all those sixtie and two differences in the matter of penance which I haue here gathered out of Nauarre and Frâ—a Victoria he hath not confessed aboue fiue or sixe So that by the same proportion wheras three hundred and three Contradictions are acknowledged there cannot but be many hundreds wittingly by him concealed GEN. 11.7 Venite igitur descendamus confundamus ibi linguam eorum vt non audiat vnus quis que vocem proximi sui atque ita diuisit eos Dominus ex illo loco in vniuersas terras cessauerunt aedificare ciuitatem idcirco vocatum est nomen eius Babel c. THE PEACE OF ROME LIB I. FIRST CENTVRY of Dissentions DECAD I. First Bellarmine against Nic. Lyra Carthusian Hugo and Thomas Cardinals Sixtus Senensis THere haue not wanted some which haue held the seuen last Chapters of the booke of Ester because they are not in the Hebrewe Text spurious and counterfet In which opinion was S. Hierom as is gathered out of his praeface and following him not onely before the Councell of Trent Nicholas Lyra Dionysius Carthusianus Hugo and Thomas de Vio Cardinals but also since the said Councell Sixtus Senensis in the first and eight booke of his Bibliotheca Sancta But that they are sacred and Diuine is sufficiently proued by all those Decrees of Popes and Councels and those testimonies of Hebrew Greeke and Latine fathers which we haue noted formerly in the fourth chapter of this booke and so those other chapters which are not in the Hebrew c. Bellarmine in his first booke of the word of God chapt 7. See at large his confutation of Sixtus Senensis in the same place pag. 30. Secondly Iohn Driedo against Bellarmine IOhannes Driedo a Catholike writer denies the booke of Baruch to be Canonical in his first book the last chapter at the last argument But the authority of the Catholicke Church perswades vs the contrary which in the Councell of Trent the fourth sitting numbers the prophet Baruch among the sacred bookes Bellarmine the same booke chap. 8. pag. 41. Thirdly Erasmus and Iohannes Driedo against Bellarmine NOt onely Heretickes Pagans Iewes but of Catholicke Christians Iulius Africanus of olde and of late Iohannes Driedo in his first booke de Script c. chap. last and of semi-Christians Erasmus in his Scholees vpon Hieroms praeface to Daniel haue reiected the story of Susanna as new and foisted into the Canon But notwithstanding it is certaine that all these parts of Daniel are truely Canonicall Bellarm. the same booke chap. 9. pag. 43. Fourthly Caietane a Cardinall and some other namelesse against Bellarmine SOme obiect that the Church receiues those books that Saint Hierome receiues and refuseth those which he reiecteth as it appeares Distinct. 15. Canon Sancta Romana But Hierome flatly affirmes all these fiue bookes not to be Canonicall so reasoneth Caietane otherwise a Catholicke a holy Doctor Some answere that Hierome saith onely that these are not Canonicall among the Iewes but that cannot be for he mentioneth also the booke of the Pastor which was accounted to the new Testament But I admit that Hierome was of that opinion because no generall Councell as yet had defined of these books except onely of the booke of Iudith which Hierome also afterwards receiued That therefore which Gelasius saith in the Distinct aboue cited is to be vnderstood of the bookes of the Doctors of the Church Origin Ruffin and the like not of the bookes of Scripture Bellarm. ibid. chap. 10. pag. 53. Fiftly Bellarmine against Erasmus Caietanus IN our times Erasmus in the end of his notes vpon this Epistle and Caietane in the beginning of his Commentaries vpon this Epistle haue reuiued and renewed a question that hath long slept in silence concerning the Author and authority of the Epistle to the Hebrewes Bellarmine vndertakes to confute their seuerall reasons drawne First From Hebr. 1.5 compared with 2. Sam. 7.14 Secondly From Hebr. 9.4 compared with 1 Kings 8.9 Thirdly From Heb. 9.20 compared with Exod. 24.8 Bellarm. ibid. chap. 17. pag. 77. Sixtly Beda Lyranus Driedo Mercator Sulpitius Genebrard Benedictus Bellarmine dissenting THere are two principall opinions about the storie of Iudith Some would haue that storie to haue happened after the Babilonish captiuity eyther in Cambyses time so Beda Lyranus Io. Driedo or vnder Darius Hystaspes as Gerardus Mercator Seuerus Sulpitius refers it to Artaxerxes Ochus some others hold it to haue beene after the captiuity either in Sedecias times as Gil. Genebrardus or Iosias as Iohn Benedictus But neither of these seemes to me probable enough saith Bellarmine who confuting all them placeth this storie in the raigne of Manasses king of Iuda Bellarm. same booke c. 12.
treatise of Images where he teaches that God in the ten Commaundements simply forbids all Images but that this precept was onely positiue and temporall But this opinion is not allowed of vs especially because Saint Irenaeus directly teaches that the Decalogue is naturall excepting onely that Precept of the Sabboth and Tertullian in his booke of Idolatry holdeth that this precept is most of all now to be obserued so Cyprian also Austen c. The third is of Thomas Caietane vpon 20. Exod. which teacheth that not euery Image or Idoll is there forbidden but onely that there is forbidden to any man to make to himselfe any Image which he will take for his God This opinion displeases me onely in the manner of speech for Caietane takes an Image and an Idoll both for one which is false c. Bellarm. l. 2. contr 7. gener c. 7. That is De Imaginibus sanctorum l. 2. c. 7. p. 176. DECAD X. First Abulensis Durandus Peresius against Catharinus Payua Saunders and Bellarmine THE fourth opinion is Caluins in the first booke of his institutions ch 11. where he saith it is an abominable sinne to make a visible and bodily Image of the inuisible and incorporeall God And this opinion of Caluins is also the opinion of some Catholike Doctors as Abulensis vpon 4. Deuteron quaest 5. and Durandus vpon 3. dist 9. q. 2. and Peresius in his booke of Traditions But I affirme three things First that it is not so certaine in the Church that we may make Images of God or the Trinity as of Christ and the Saints for this all Catholikes confesse Secondly that Caluins fraude and craft is admirable who after he hath proued that Images of God are not to be made digresseth to amplification and triumphes as if he had proued that wee may not make or worship any Image at all Thirdly I say that it is lawfull to paint the Image of God the Father in the forme of an old man and of the holy spirit in the forme of a Doue as is taught also by Caietane Ambrosius Catharinus Diegus Payua Nicholas Saunders Thomas Waldensis Bellarmine ibid. ch 8. p. 179. Secondly Bellarmine against Bartholomaeus Caranza BEsides it must be noted that Bartholomaeus Caranza erres who in the summe of the Councels saith Can. 82. of the 6. Synod that the Image of Christ in the forme of a Lambe and of the spirit in the forme of a Doue is there forbidden Whereas the Councell forbids not these Images but onely prefers to them the Images of Christ in an humane forme c. Besides the reason of Bartholomaeus seemes to conclude against himselfe that the shadowes ceased when the truth came for these Images were not in vse in the olde Testament but began onely after Christs comming but his errour is to be corrected out of the 7. Synod where this Canon is often entirely cyted Bellarmine same booke chap. 8. pag. 182. Thirdly Payua Saunders Alan Copus and others differing PAyua answeres that the Elebertine Councell forbids onely an Image of God which is made to represent the shape of GOD But this seemes not to satisfie Nicholas Saunders answeres that the Councell for bad Images in the Churches because the time and place required it for then there was danger least the Gentiles should thinke we worshipt wood and stones and least that in the persecutions their Images should haue beene reproachfully handled by the persecutors This answere is good Alanus Copus in B. 5. of Dialog ch 16 saith that Images are here forbidden because they began to be worshipped of those Christians as Gods in which sense Saint Ino. takes that Canon in Decret part 3. c. 40. But this exposition is not well warranted by the reasons of the Canon Others say that there is only forbidden to paint images on the wals and not in tables and vayles But howsoeuer it be that Councell is rather for vs then against vs. Bellarm. ibid. ch 9. p. 190. Fourthly Three rankes of Popish Writers dissenting OF the last question what manner of worshippe Images are worthy of there are three opinions First that the Image is no way in it selfe to be worshipped but only that the thing represented is to be worshipped before the Image so some hold whom Catharinus both reports and refutes the same seemes to be held by Alexander 3. part q. 30. art vlt. as also by Durandus 3. Sent. di 9. q. 2. And by Alphonsus a Castro The second that the same honour is due to the Image and the thing expressed by it and therefore that Christs Image is to bee worshipped with the worship of Latria Saint Maries with Hyperdulia the Saints with Dulia so Alexander 3. part q. 30. art vlt. Saint Thomas 3. p. q. 25. art 3. And vpon the same place Caietane S. Bonauenture Marsilius Almain Carthusianus Capreolus and others which opinion stands vpon 7 grounds there specified The third opinion in the meane is of them that say Images in themselues properly should be honoured but with a lesse honour then the thing represented and therfore that no Image is to be worshipped with Latria so holds Martinus Peresius Ambrosius Catharinus Nicholas Saunders Gabriell Bellarm. ibid. c. 20. p. 235.236.237 c. What shift Bellarmine makes to reconcile the second opinion by adoration improperly and by accident See the same booke c. 23. p. 242. Fiftly Bellarmine against Peresius and Durandus c. PEresius answers that it is not true that we are caried with the same motion of the heart to the Image and the thing represented since these two are opposites neither can be knowne but with a double act of knowledge Bellarmine confutes him and shewes that these two are so opposite as that one depends vpon another and that one can neyther be defined nor knowne without the other Durandus answeres otherwise for he admits there is one and the same motion to both but denies that therefore they haue but one and the same adoration Others confirme this answer for that although there be one and the same motion of the minde that is of the vnderstanding towards them both yet there may be contrary motions of will c. But this answere satisfies not I hold there must be another answere giuen See his determination at large that there is the same motion of the vnderstanding and will to the Image and the thing expressed but in diuers respects as eyther of them is made the principall or indirect obiect Bellarm. ibid. c. 24. p. 246. Sixtly Tho. Waldensis against Abulensis Iansenius and others THomas Waldensis holds not improbably in his 3. Tom. Tit. 20. ch 158. that the very Wooden Crosse which is now diuided into many peeces and parcâ—ls shall then be renewed and gathered vp together and shall appeare in heauen The same seemes to be affirmed by Sibilla and Chrysostome and the other fathers doe not contradict it But if this be not admitted at least the bright Image
done by a man not regenerate by Baptisme c. The contrary opinion is receiued and allowed in the Schooles of Catholike Diuines See Pet. Lombard and the Diuines vpon 2. Sent. dist 24. Bellarm. l. 5. of iustification c. 12. p. 438. DECAD VI. First Guliel Altisidoriensis against all Popish Doctors IT was the singular opinion of Gulielm Altisidoriensis l. 3. Tract 12. c. 1. c. that merit doth more principally depend vpon faith then charity which opinion of his doth not a little fauour the heretickes of this time But in truth Scripture is so pregnant against him that I wonder so worthy a man could be so far deceiued Bellarm. ibid. c. 15. p. 454. Secondly Bellarm. against many of their graue Authors THough there be some graue Authors which hold that euery good worke of a iust man and a man indued with charity is meritorious of eternall life yet I hold it more probable that there is further required to merite that the good worke should in the very act of it proceede from charity and be directed to God as the supernatural end c. Bellarm. l. 5. cap. 15. pag 456. Thirdly Thomas Waldensis Paulus Burgensis against Durandus and Gregorius and the common opinion ALL Catholickes acknowledge that good workes are meritorious of eternall life but some holde that these wordes of congruity and condignity are not to bee vsed but onely that wee should say absolutely that good workes by the grace of GOD doe merite eternall life So teacheth Thomas Waldensis Tom. 3. of Sacraments chap. 7. Paulus Burgensis in Psalme 35. Others will haue them to merite by condignity in a large manner So teach Durandus and Gregorius The common opinion of Diuines dooth simply admit a merite of condignity Bellarmine lib. 5. cap. 16. pag. 459 Where note that Bellarmine findes Durandus to hold the same in this point with vs. pag. 460. lin 5. Fourthly Bellarmine against some of their acute Distinguishers HOw some distinguish nicely betwixt Dignum and Condignum and their confutation who will admit a merite of dignity not of condignity See Bellarm. l. 5. c. 16. p. 459. Fiftly Caietane and Dom. a Soto Scotus Andr Vega Tho. and Bonauenture with Bellarm differing SOme hold that the good workes of the iust merite eternall life vpon their very worth in regard of the worke though there were no such agreement betwixt God and vs So hold Caietane in 2.2 quaest 114. and Dominicus a Soto 3. booke of Nature and Grace chap. 7. Others contrarily thinke that good workes proceeding from grace are not meritorious vpon the very worth of the worke but onely in regard of Gods couenant with vs and his gratious acceptation Thus holdes Scotus in 1. Sent. d. 17. q. 2. whom other of the old Schoolemen follow and of the later Andreas Vega yet this opinion differs far from the heresie of the Lutherans c. But to me the meane opinion seemes more probable which teaches that good workes are meritorious of eternall life vpon condignity in respect of the worke and couenant together which opinion I doubt not is agreeable to the Councell of Trent and the chiefe Diuines as St. Thomas and Bonauent Bellarm. l. 5 c. 17. p. 464. Sixtly Thomas and Bonauent against Andr. Vega and the Doctor of Louan THe last question is whether God reward good works of his meere liberality aboue their worthines the common opinion constantly affirmes it as is plaine in Saint Thomas S. Bonauent Scotus Durandus c. But Andr. Vega and that Doctor of Louan many of whose opinions Pius 5. confuted held the contrary and this is the fourteenth opinion by him expressed and condemned Bellarm. l. 5. c. 19. p. 471. Seuenthly some Popish Doctors against Chrysostome confuted by Bellarmine WHether God doe giue punishment to euill workes beyond the worthines or condignity of them is not so certaine St. Chrysostome seemes to patronage the affirmatiue part but Saint Austin rather tolerates then approues it some others defend the negatiue by foure testimonies of Scripture answered by Bellarm. lib. 5. cap. 19. pag. 472. Eightly Caietane against Dominic a Soto and Bellarm. THough Cardinall Caietane teach that those Clerkes and Monkes sinne not deadly which choose the Romane Breuiary and neglect that Breuiary which is proper to their order and Church yet that opinion is not so safe and sure as Dominicus â— Soto well admonishes except it be by consent of the Bishop and whole Chapter Bellarm. of good workes in particular l. 1. cap. 18. pag. 96. Ninthly Bellarmine against Panormitan VVE answere that Clerkes and Monkes are by Gods law bound to pray and praise God more then others but vnto this forme of prayer and praises which is now in vse they are onely tyed by the determination of the Church as for that which Panormitanus otherwise a learned Lawyer holds that the number of seuen houres for Diuine seruice is determined by Gods law when Dauid saith seuen times a day do I praise thee it is very sleight c. Bellarm. ibid. c. 19. p. 102. Tenthly some Popish Doctors opposed by Bellarmine and Pius 5. and Concil Lateran VVHatsoeuer some Doctors haue formerly thought we say that now doubtlesse those Clerkes which doe not their Diuine offices eyther ought to want the fruits of their Benefices or if they haue receiued them to restore them againe for common Almes or reparations of their Churches and there is a flat Decree for this in the Councell of Lateran Sess. 9. Statuimus and in the constitution of Pius 5. Bellarm. ibid. cap. 19. p. 103. DECAD VII First Bellarmine against Io. Cassianus and some others vn-named ANother opinion for Lent is that of Io. Cassianus who teaches that in the Primitiue Church the Fast was alike all the yeare long after when deuotion grewe cold it pleased all the Priests to appoint the Fast of Lent and to establish it in a firme Law But this opinion is built on a false ground The third opinion is of them who referre the institution of Lent to Pope Telesphorus c. But the only true opinion is that the Lent fast was ordained by the Apostles of Christ and enioyned to the whole Church Bellarm. l 2. of good W. in part c 14. p. 177. Secondly Albertus against Thomas and Bellarmine THough the precept of Almes belong not properly to the tenne commandements since therin onely are contained precepts of iustice Yet Diuines vse to reduce all morall precepts to those ten And some as Albertus vpon 4. dist 15. art 16. reduce the precept of Almes to that commandement Thou shalt not steale Others as Saint Thomas in 2.2 quaest 32. c. Honour thy father and mother which opinion is more probable Bellarmine the third booke cap. 6. pag. 233. Thirdly some graue Diuines against St. Thomas Albertus Richardus Paludanus c. ALthough there be graue Diuines that hold the contrary yet I hold that the truer and safer opinion