neede no more to assure thy selfe of the truth of Romane religion His conclusion is That traditions are so vncertaine as the learnedest Papists contend about them This he proueth because S. Victor P. contended with the Bishops of Asia S. Policarpe with S. Anicetus P. Surely he meaneth that these men were Papists or els his conclusion is vnproued And consequently Papists and Popery were 1400. years agoe within 200. Popery confessed to be vvish in 200. years after Christ Great Britany conuerted first to Popery years after Christ when the Church as he saith was in good estate And if P. Victor were a Papist then was also his immediat predecessor S. Eleutherius who sent S. Fugatius and Damian to conuert Britany and consequently this Iland was first conuerted from Paganisme to Popery Moreouer both sides earnestly alleadged Apostolical tradition and stowtly defended the same saith Bel Ergo nether side was Protestant and Bel against al Gods Church vvhich liued vvithin 200. years after Christ both agreed against him thar there are Apostolical traditiōs that they are of great weight seeing such great Saints so long agoe did so stowtly defend them on what side now is Bel who stowtly oppugneth what Saints with al Gods Church so long agoe defended what need more proofe of traditions or of Papistry Surely Bel quasi sorex suo iudicio periit Here he hath bewraied him selfe to be against al Saints that were within 200 years after Christ and against the Church when she was in good estate 3. But now to Bels argument The tradition of keeping Easter was vncertaine 200 years after Christ Ergo it is now Answer Euseb lib. 5. c. 23. 25. l. 3. de vit Constan c. 18. 19. Nicephor l. 4. c. 36. Theodoret. l. 2. hist c. 9. Epiphan haer 70. Tripart lib. 9. c. 38. Epist 2. Petri 2. 3. Ioan. Epist Iudae ad Hebraeos Apocalipsis See S. Hierom. in Script ecclesiasticis Et Euseb l. 5. c. 3. This tradition was then vncertaine only in Asia and certaine in the rest of Christendome as is euident by the Councels then helde in Rome Palestine Pontus France Achaia who al accepted this tradition as did after the first general Councel in Nice And though it had bene then vncertaine Bel could no more infer it to be so now then he can infer the same of many parts of the Bible which both then and long after were doubted of and yet accepted now of Protestants But wel may I infer if S. Policarpe and his fellowes erred in not accepting one popish tradition much more Bel in accepting none 4. But saith Bel S. Policarpe Policrates pag. 129. and other Bishops did in those daies make no more account of the Popes opinion then of an other mans did thinke them selfs his equals in gouernment that he defended an error and withstood his proceedings Here is false conueiance to ioyne S. Policarp who liued and dyed in vnion Euseb lib. ◠c. 24. Iren. apud ipsum and communion of the Pope and before this controuersy was defyned with Policrates and his fellows who were excommunicated as declining saith Eusebius into Loc. cit heresy for their obstinacy in error after the whole Church had defyned the contrary These indeed as heretiks vse to do made no account of the Popes opinion or iudgement but condemned him of error and withstood his proceedings though they neuer thought them selfs his equals as Bel without al truth or proofe affirmeth yea Polecrates when he saith I wil not feare S. Hierom. de script eccles in Papia Nicephor l. 4. c. 37. them who threaten me and I must obey God more then men sheweth him selfe to be vnder the Popes obedience but supposing him selfe to defend truth feared not his excommunication But how much al Christendom at that tyme and euer since made account of the Popes sentence appeareth by that as Eusebius and others write they al followed Euseb sup it and condemned them as Heretiks who withstood it And S. Policarp so esteemed Euseb lib. 5. cap. 24. 5. Ireney apud ipsum Nicephor l. 3. c. 30. it as that he came to Rome to confer with the Pope about that matter doubtles wold haue subscribed to his sentence if it had bene pronounced in his daies as his scholler S. Ireney did by whom we may gather his maisters account of the Church of Rome He therfore lib. 3. cap. 3. S. Iren. calleth Rome the greatest and antientest Church founded by S. Peter and Paul and that by Tradition which it hath from the Apostles and alwaies keapeth by succession of Bishops we confound saith he al them that gather otherwise then they should and that al Churches must recur to Rome for her more potent principality 5. The second Tradition is that of keeping Bel p. 130. lent which saith Bel is not Apostolical because S. Chrisostom writeth That Christ S. Chrysost hom 47. in Math. to 2. Euseb lib. 5. c. 24. bid vs not imitat his fast but be humble Nor certain because Eusebius out of Ireney writeth That in his tyme some thought we ought to fast one day others two others more and non nulli forty which variety of fasting began not now first or in our daies but long before I thinke by them who keeping not simply what was traditum deliuered from the beginning did afterward fal into an other custome ether of negligence or of ignorance Here Bel sheweth his lacke of iudgement in citing a place clearly against him selfe For here S Ireney and Eusebius after him clearly affirme That at the beginning there was one manner of fasting lent appointed though some afterward ether of ignorance or negligence did breake it which proueth not the said Tradition to be vncertain in the whole Church vnles Bel wil impute the fault of some few to the whole And of the Roman Church she saith Ireney lib 3. cap. 3. alwaies keapt the S. Ireney Ex histor tripart lib. 9. c. 38. Apostles Tradition And by this is answered what he bringeth out of Socrates touching the diuersity of tyme and meat vsed in fasting lent Albeit what Socrates saith of the Roman Church fasting but three weeks before Easter and not on Saterday is an vntruth For they fasted 40. daies as witnes S. Leo. serm 12. de Quadrag and S. Gregory S. Leo. S. Gregory S. Innocent S. Augustin hom 16. in Euang. And likewise Saterdaies as testify S. Innocent epist ad Decent and S. Austin epist 86. and 118. where also he alleadgeth S. Ambrose 6. And that lent is an Apostolical Tradition not only S. Hierom epist ad Marcel S. Hierom. S. Ambros. witnesseth and S. Ambrose serm 25. 34. and 36. saith it was cōmanded by Christ and S Austin haer 53. accounted the Aërians S. Augustin S. Epiphan haer 75. heretiks for denying the set fast of lent and others to be solemnely kept But it is euident also because
of this reason First I deny that any religious Emperour of the East would haue sate aboue the Pope in Councel as appeareth by the fact of the two great Emperours Constantin and Theodosius before rehearsed and by Iustinus humbling himselfe vnto the Pope prostrate on the ground Iustinians See Art 1. c. 6. parag 6. lowly adoring and Iustinian the second his kissing of his feeet Is it likely that these who so honoured the Pope out of Councel would haue sate aboue him in Councel And albeit one grecian Emperour after both religion and reuerence thereto was decayed in Greece and the whole nation fallen into Schisme and heresy did in the CouÌ„cel of Florence attempt Concil Florent in initio to sit aboue the Pope yet the like is not to be thought of other religious Christian Emperours whereof diuers as Bel testifyeth art 1. pag. 17. humbled themselues and yeelded euen their soueraigne rights to Popes Yea the selfe same Emperour who by some euil suggestion would haue sate aboue the Pope would at his first meeting with him haue kneeled vnto him But suppose Concil Florent sup that the grecian Emperours by reason of their temporal superiority would haue sitten aboue the Pope Doe they therefore deny his spiritual primacy No more surely then a gentleman doth deny his pastours spiritual authority ouer him because he wil sit aboue him Did not the grecians euen in the Florentin Councel where they attempted In lit vnionis to place the Emperour aboue the Pope defyne together with the Latins that the Bishop of Rome hath primatum in vniuersum orbem primacy ouer the whole world 8. In two other matters Bel iniuryeth Bel p. 127. the Pope auouching that he would neuer shew his face in any Councel And that he shamefully vntruth 102. vntruth 103. abuseth the worlde because he can not communicate his supreame iudicial authority to his Legates and wil approue nothinge decreed in Councel vnles it be agreable to that vvhich he decreeth a part in his chaire at home For the first of these is a manifest vntruth because the Pope hath bene personally present almost in al the general councels helde in the west as at Florence at Constance at Viena at Lyons at Rhemes at Claremount and diuers councels of Lateran In the other the Pope abuseth the worlde no more then doth the Prince abuse the Parliament when sending thither the L. Chaunceller to supplie his place and praeseed in his roome wil neuerthelesse approue nothing what the Peeres doe or decree vnles himselfe iudgeth it conuenient CHAP. XIIII Of the oath vvhich Bishops vse to make vnto the Pope BECAVSE Bishops sweare fidelity to the Pope and to keep and defend the primacy of the Romane Church and rules of holy fathers against al men and neuertheles as Bellarmin writeth are not to obey Bellarm. lib. 1. de concil cap. vlt. him but when he commandeth according to Gods law and holy canons and may notwithstanding their oath speake their minde in councel and depose the Pope if he become an heretike Bel inferreth diuers pag. 125. 126. things requisit to be answered First that Bishops sweare the Pope can depose al Emperours and Kings in the Christian wordle Secondly that they sweare to admit his decree whome they vntruth 104. freely graunt may be an hereticke Thirdly that they sweare obedience to him in matters of faith whome they can depose for heresy Fourthly that the Pope is not supreame Iudge of controuersies seeing Bishops may examyne and iudge whether what he commaundeth be agreable to Gods worde and the Canons Lastly that they sweare flat rebellion against their Soueraigns seeing they sweare to defend the Popes Primacy against al men whomsoeuer 2. Answer As for the oath of Bishops made to the Pope the lawfulnes thereof appeareth because it is made withal Catholique princes consent and meant only in iust and lawful things which are according to Gods law and holy Canons And it hath bene vsed aboue a thowsand yeare agoe as is euident by the like oath made by a Bishop vnto S. Gregory the great And S. Boniface the S. Gregor â—â— 10. ep 31. Baron Ann. 723. Apostle of Germany and worthiest man that euer England bredde did sweare when he was consecrated Bishop to concurre with See Concil Tolet. 11. can 10. the Pope and commodities of his church And as for the first point which Bel inferreth it is vntrue as appeareth by the answer to the first article The second and third contayne no inconuenience For we must obey what he decreeth or defyneth Iudicially as sitting in S. Peeters chaire though in hart he were an hereticke As our Sauiour coÌ„manded S. Math. 23. v. 3. S. Mare 8. v. 15. S. Math. 16. v. 6. the Iewes to follow what the Scribes taught out of Moyses chaire but abstaine from their priuate leauen If Bel can not imagine how a man by Gods disposition may vtter truth coÌ„trary to his owne minde let him remember Balaam and Caiphas Numer 22. Ioh. 11. v. 52. Chap. 10. parag 9. Bellarm. lib. 4. de Rom. Pont. cap. 6. 7. Bel p. 125. and what hath bene said before out of S. Austin Besides we graunt not freely as Bel freely forgeth that the Pope may be an hereticke For Bellarmin whose only testimony saith Bel is most sufficient in al popish affaires defendeth the contrary And by that which hath bene said to these two points appeareth the answer to the fourth Because Bishops must not examin the doctrine which the Pope deliuereth iudicially out of S. Peters chaire as supreame pastour of Gods church but only that wherein he vttereth his owne priuate opinion 3. And as for the last point Bishops sweare no rebellion Both because they sweare to defend the Popes primacie only according to Gods worde and holy Canons which admit no rebellion As also The vveapons of our vvarfare are not carnal 1. Cor. 10. v. 4. Euseb lib. 6. c. 25. Gelas epist ad Anast S. Chrysost lib. cont Gent. because the defence which Bishops are to vse is not by insurrection and rebellion but by spiritual chastisment and correction In which sort S. Fabian defended the orders of the Church against the Emperour Philip. S. Innocent defended S. Chrisostom against Archadius S. Babilas and S. Ambrose punished their Emperours without any rebellion at al. 4. After the foresaid collections Bel pag 128. Rhemists Act. 15. vntruth 105. auoucheth an vntruth vpon the Rhemists affirming them to tel plainely and rowndly that the determination of Councels is needles because the Popes iudgement alone is infallible Where as they in that place which Bel cyteth write that though the Sea Apostolique haue infallible assistance yet the determinanation of Councels are necessary for many causes as for searching out the truth for the recouery of hereticks and contentation of the weake who not alwaies giuing ouer to one mans determination yet wil either yeeld to the iudgement
auoucheth That ordinarily he can not depose Princes euen for iust causes 7. But let vs heare Bel disproue him self Anatomy of Popish tyrany in the Caueat to the Reader and lib. 2. cap. 4. §. 10. c. 9. 1. Contradiction Secular Priests saith he write plainly and resolutly that the Pope hath no power to depriue Kings of their royal Scepters and regalities nor to giue away their Kingdomes to an other In which opiniō likewise the French Papists do concurre iump with them Item The Seculars although they acknowledge the Popes power supereminent in Spiritualibus yet do they disclaime from it in temporalibus when he taketh vpon him to depose Kinges from their empires and translate their Kingdomes And least we should thinke these few Priests who wrote so were no Papists Bel him self testifieth that they are the Popes deare Vassals and professe the selfe same religion with Epistle to the King other Catholiques 8. The third vntruth conteined in the proposition is that we teach the doctrine of his proposition as a pointe of our faith wherevpon he inferreth in his conclusion our religion and faith to be false Because we teach no such doctrine at al and much lesse as a point of our religion or faith And the grauest best learned amongst Catholiques attribute to rhe Pope onely spiritual superiority ouer Princes and power to depose them in that case wherin our Sauiour said Math. 18. that it were better for a man to be cast into the sea then to liue to wit when they so scandalize others as their deposition is necessary for the saluation of soules as I haue already shewed out af Bellarmin Bel. parag 29. whose testimony in this matter Bel can not refuse seing he calleth him the mouth of Papists and auoucheth his doctrin to be the Popes owne doctrin And this doctrin good Christiā Princes account no more preiudicial or iniurious to their estates then they do the like doctrin of S. Paul 2. Cor. 10. where he professeth him self to haue power to destroy al loftines extolling it self against the knowledge of God to be ready to punish al disobedience 9. Wherfore to requite Bel with a syllogisme like vnto his owne I argue thus you Bel tel vs that we Papists saie the Pope is aboue al powers and potentates on earth that he can depose Kings and Emperours and translate their empiers at his good wil and pleasure But this your tale is a very tale false absurd and nothing else but a mere fable and consequently your late chalenge consisteth of mere falsehoods fables flat leasings The proposition is your owne wordes the truth of the assumption appeereth by my answer to your argument And thus much touching Bels vntruthes vttered in his proposition and proofe therof now let vs come to his dissemblinge CHAP. II. The opinion of protestants touching Princes Supremacie set dovvne LVTHER an Euangelist as he termeth him selfe or as other accompte him Luther lib. cont stat eccles in prologo in glossa cont decreta Caesar Ex Sur. An. 1531. 1539. Pope of Recusamy p. 31. 32. Magdeburg praefat Centur 7. Caluin in c. 7. Amos. an Apostle a prophet a third Elias a beginner of protestantisme in his booke of secular power condemneth those Princes who prescribe laws to their subiects in matter belonging to faith and the Church Magdeburgians his first and cheefest childeren write thus Let not Magistrats be heads of the Church because this Supremacy agreeth not to them Caluin saith they were blasphemers who attributed the supremacy to King Henry 8. And lest we shold think that only forayne Protestāts are of this opinion Antony Gilby in his admonition to England and Scotland Gilby calleth King Henry a monstrous bore for taking the supremacy that he displaced Christ was no better then the Romish Antichrist made him selfe a God And lately VVillet cōtract 791. part 1. and 3. p. 269. 270. Willet auoucheth That Bishops and Pastors haue a spiritual charge ouer Kings that Kings ought to yeeld obedience to those that haue ouersight of their soules That Heathen Princes had the same power and authority in the Church which Christian Princes haue and yet soone after affirmeth That heathen Princes cold not be heads of the Church that is to haue the Souereingty of external gouernment Againe That the King is nether mistical nor ministerial head of the Church that the name of head is vnproperly giuen to the Prince and if any think it to great Kings not so much is ministerial heads of the Church by vvillet a name for any mortal man we wil not saith he greatly contend about it So we see he denyeth both name and authority of the head of the Church to Kings 2. And his Maiesty perceaued that Reanolds and his fellows aymed at a Scottish Presbitry which agreeth with a Monarch Conference p. 82 83. as wel as God and the diuel page 79. and acknowledged his supremacy only to make their partes good with Bishops as Knox his fellow ministers in Scotland made his grandmother head of the Church therby to pul downe the Catholique Bishops Yea that the whole English Clergy is in their harts of the same opiniō appeareth by their open profession to agree in religion with forayne Protestants who plainly deny the supremicy of Princes by their writing and Apologia pag. 28. teaching that Christ alone can behead of the Church by their condemning Catholiques for attributing such authority to man and finally by their Synodical explication of the article of supremacy which they expound thus That Princes should rule al estates Lib. 39. Artic. art 37. and degrees committed to their charge by God whether they be Ecclesiastical or temporal and restrayne with the ciuil sword the stubborne and euil doers wherein we see no power in Ecclesiastical causes granted to Princes but only ouer Ecclesiastical persons And we deny not that Princes haue any power ouer Ecclesiastical persons yea in the very canon of the Masse as priests pray for Papa nostro N. and Antistite nostro N. for our Pope and Byshop so they pray for Rege nostro N. acknowledging the one to be their King as the others to be their Prelates and consequently both to haue power ouer them For as S. Augustin said and it is euident Rex à Augustin in Psalm 44. 67. regendo dicitur a King is so called of power to gouerne And as ecclesiastical persons be ciuil or politique members of the common wealth wherein they liue so haue they See Stapelton relectione Controuersiae 2. q. 1. a. 1. ad 2. Victoria relectione de potesta ecclesiastica sect 7. the same politique or ciuil head which that commonwealth hath for otherwise either ciuil members should haue no ciuil head at al which were monstrous or not be vnder the head of that body whereof they be members but onely vnder a ciuil head of an other body which is
to preach and testify his truth to infidels to whom if she be no fit witnes the fault is in God to send such insufficient witnesses as infidels are not bound to beleeue 6. And Bel is far deceaued in thinking that seeing or hearing make men sufficient witnesses of deuine and infallible truth or VVhat maketh sufficient vvitnesses of Gods truth the want of them maketh insufficient For not humane sense vvhich is subiect to error and deceit but Gods deuine assistance maketh men infallible and sufficient witnesses of his truth and the want of this insufficient Wherfore S. Mathew was as sufficient a witnes of Christs natiuity which he saw not as of other things he saw and S. Luke as sufficient a witnes of the things he wrote by hear say as S. Ihon who saw and heard almost al he wrote because they were equally assisted by God in their writing And in like sort the Church of what tyme soeuer is equally a sufficient and infallible witnes of Christs truth though she be not an eye or eare witnes of his speeches and actions as the primatiue Church was Because Math. 28. v. 20. Ioan. 14. Math. 16. Christs promises of his presence and the holy Ghosts assistance and that the gates of Hel should not preuaile against her appertaine equally to the Church of al tymes 7. But suppose that the present Church could not be a fit witnes as the primatiue Bel ansvvereth not to the purpose was what is this to the argument that proueth necessity of Tradition because without testimony of the Church we can not discerne true Scripture from false This Bel should ether graunt or deny if he meant to answer to the purpose and not tel vs of an other matter vz. That the present Church can be no fit witnes whereof if it were true wold follow that we can beleeue no Scripture at al seeing we haue no other infallible external witnes of Scripture 8. His second answer is That as Papists Bel p. 134. admit the Iewes Tradition of the old Testament to be Gods word and vvithal refuse many other Traditions of theirs So Protestants admit this Tradition Bel admitteth tradition of the Bible to be Gods worde and reiect al other And pag. 128. He dareth not deny Traditions absolutly yea admitteth them when they be consonant to Scripture Behold the silly fox in the toyle We contend against Protestants That Scripture is not sufficient to proue al points of Christian faith but that Tradition is necessary for some and Bel here confesseth it where is now the downeful of Popery Me thinks it is become the down fal of Protestantry Where is now Bels first proposition pag. 86. 88. That Scripture conteineth in it euery doctrine necessary to mans saluation Where is now that pag. 87. vve must not adde to Gods vvritten vvorde if this Tradition must needs be added therto where is now that the present Church can be pag. 134. not fit vvitnes if by her testimony we come to know Gods truth Where is now the curse which S. Paul as thou saist pag. 117. pronounceth Bel cursed of S. Paul by his ovvne iudgement against him that preacheth any doctrine not conteined in Scipture where is now That Scripture is the sole and only rule of faith 9 But seeing the fox is in the toyle we pag. 128. must needs haue him preach and tel vs of whome he first had this Tradition Perhaps he wil confesse with his brother Doue that Protestants had the Bible as Gods worde Doue of Recusancy pag 13. from Papists Sure I am he can name no other of whome he first had it Likewise he must tel vs. How he beleeueth this Tradition Whether as fallible and humane truth or as infallible and deuine If as fallible and humane surely he can beleeue nothing in the Bible as deuine truth If as infallible and deuine truth surely the Papists Church for whose only testimony speaking of outward testimonies Protestants first beleeue as an infallible truth that the Bible was Gods worde hath infallible authority 10. Nether is Bels comparison true For we beleeue not the old testamēt to be Gods worde for any Tradition which the Iewes haue but which the Catholique Church hath from the Apostles their successors euen as S. Austin writeth from the very Cont. epist fundam c. 4. to 6. seat of Peter to whom our Lord commanded his sheepe to feed to this present Bishop who deliuered vnto the Church and she to vs as wel the olde as the new testament for Gods worde Let Bel if he list beleeue the old testament for the tradition of Iewes and if he can not finde the like vninterrupted tradition for the new testament but in the Papists Church let him confesse that for her authoriry he beleeueth this tradition as infallible truth and I aske no more 11. But what shift findeth he for this notorious contradiction in admitting one tradition and before impugning traditions in general Forsooth because as he saith and it is his fourth solution VVhen Protestants Bel p. 135. say Scripturs conteine al things necessary to saluation they speake of Scripturs already agreed vpon Protestants admit tradition to be such and so exclude not this tradition but vertually include it in their assertion Behold the fox againe in the toile admitting one tradition ful sore against his wil. O violence of truth saith S. Austin l. cont Donatist post Collar c. 24. stronger then any racke or torment for to wring out confession For here Bel in name of Protestants confesseth that Protestants ouerthrovv their ovvne arguments against traditions they must needs admit one tradition which not only ouerthroweth al their arguments against other traditions For why may they adde one tradition to Gods written worde rather then more why may they beleeue any thing out of Scripture and no more why is one tradition equal to Gods written worde and no more How is one tradition certaine and no more But also sheweth that ether they receaue this tradition for no authority at al but only because it pleaseth them or that they beleeue it as infallible verity for the authority which they account but fallible For I aske why they beleeue this tradition If they answer because it commeth from God I demand how they know that Not by the Bible as is euident If by the Church then I aske why they beleeue the Church rather in this tradition then in other and whether they beleeue her testimony to be infallible in this point or no And whatsoeuer they answer they must needs fal into the toile 12. His third solution is That the nevv Bel p. 135. Testament is but an exposition of the olde and therfore may be tryed and discerned by the same But Syr wil you indeed try the new testament Bel vvil examin Scriptures wil you take vpon you to iudge Gods worde Surely this pride exceedeth Lucifers this is
this place serueth nothing 18. Bels sixt solution is That we beleeue Bel p. 136. not the Scripture to be Gods worde because the Church teacheth vs so but because it is of it selfe axiopistos worthy of credit and God inwardly moueth vs to beleeue it That we beleeue it not for the Churches authority he proueth Because els the formal obiect of our beleefe and last resolution therein should not be the first verity God him selfe but man which is contrary to S. Dionis and S. Thomas S. Dionis de diuin nom c. 7. S. Thom. 2. 2. q. 1. art 1. Aquinas who teach That the formal obiect of our faith is the first verity and S. Thom. addeth That faith beleeueth nothing but because it is reuealed of God Also because S. Austin saith That man learneth S. Augustin tractat 3. in Ioan. to 9. not of man that outward teachings are some helps and admonitions but who teacheth the hart hath his chayre in heauen That the Scripture is of it selfe axiopistos or worthy of credit we deny not only we deny that by it selfe without testimony of the Church we can knowe that it is so worthy Nether deny we that God inwardly moueth our harts to beleeue it only we say that therto he vseth also the testimony of the holy Church nor ordinarily moueth any therto without the external testimony of the Church wherfore albeit it be most true that we beleeue the Scripture to be Gods worde because God moueth vs therto yet false it is to deny that we beleeue it not also because the Church doth teach it Because Gods inward motion and the Churches outward testimony are no opposit causes and impossible to concurre to one and the same effect but the second is subordinate to the first and can not worke without it as the first though it can doth not worke this effect without the second Wherfore wel said S. Austin Non crederem Euangelio nisi Cont. epist fundam c. 4. to 6. me Ecclesiae authoritas commoueret I wold not beleeue the Ghospel vnles the authority of the Church did commoue me therto 19. This place of S. Austin so stingeth pag. 137. Bel as he wyndeth euery way to auoid it First he telleth vs that there is a great difference Bels lacke of latin betweene mouere and commouere because mouere is to moue apart by it selfe commouere to moue together with an other This difference is false For nether is mouere to moue apart but absolutly as it is cōmon to mouing apart or with an other Nether though commouere do more properly signify mouing with an other is it alwaies so taken as infinit places both of holy and prophane writers can testify yea Bel him selfe with in 8. lynes pag. 138. after englisheth it absolutly mouing But suppose it were what inferreth Bel thereupon Forsooth that S. Austins meaning is nothing els but that the authority of the Church did outwardly concurre with the inward motion of God to bring him to beleeue the Ghospel That the Church did ioyntly concurre to S. Austins faith of the Ghospel is certaine and so Bel translating commouere for iointly mouing I refuse not But false it is that the Church did iointly concurre with God only to the bringing of S. Austin to the faith of the Ghospel and not to the conseruing him in the same faith Because c. 4. he saith That if thou percase canst finde any manifest S. Austin thing in the Ghospel of Maniches Apostleship thou shalt weaken the authority of Catholiques with me who bid me beleeue not thee which authority being weakned now nether can I beleeue the Ghospel Behold the authority of Catholiques conserued S. Austin in the faith of the Ghospel without which he professeth that he could beleeue the Ghospel no longer And againe Amongst other things which most iustly as he saith holde him in the Church he reckoneth authority and succession in the Church 20. But do you thinke that Bel wil stand to his expounding of commouere and graunting the Church to concurre with the inward motion of the holy Ghost to bring a man to beleeue the Ghospel No surely For in the next page he telleth vs. That the pag. 138. authority of the Church did moue beholde iointly mouing forgotten S. Austin to heare the Ghospel preached and to giue some humane credit vnto it For deuine faith proceedeth not from the outward teachings of man as I haue proued saith he already out of S. Austin This denyal of deuine faith to proceed from outward teaching of man is directly against Scripture and S. Austin For Rom. 10. v. S Paul Roman 10. 17. Faith commeth of hearing the preacher The Colossians learnt the grace of Christ of Epaphoras Coloss 1. v. 7. The Thessalonians Coloss 1. learnt the Traditions which they should keep by speech and letter 2. Thess 2. Thessalon 2. 1. Corinth 4. Philemon 2. v. 15 S. Paul begate the Corinthians in the Ghospel 1. Corinth 4. v. 15. He begate Onesimus Philem. v. 11. He and Apollo were Gods helpers in bringing the Corinthians to Christs faith 1. Corinth 3. v. 9. They that succour preachers are called cooperators of the truth 3. Ioan. v. 8. and therfore 3. Ioan. 8. much more the preachers them selfs And if deuine faith proceede not at al from outwarde teaching of men why did Christ send his Apostles to teach al nations Math. Math. 28. 28. v. 19. why appointed he in his Church some teachers for consummating of Saints Ephes Ephes 4. 4. v. 11 Why was S Paul a teacher of Gentils 1. Timoth. 2. v. 7. others act 13 v. 4. How 2. Timoth. could S. Paul bestovv some spiritual grace vpon Act. 13. the Romans Rom. 1. v. 11. Did Christ send these Apostles to teach humaine faith was Rom. 1. S. Ihon Baptist sent before Christ to giue humane knowledge of saluation to his people Luc. 1. v. 77. Lastly nothing is more Luc. 1. frequent in Scripture then that one man teacheth an other and surely it meaneth not of humane learning or beleefe For what careth the Sctipture for that but of deuine and such as bringeth to heauen saluation such as made Iewes compunct in hart act 2. v. 37. such as disposed Gentils Act. 2. 10. to receaue the holy Ghost act 10. v. 44. 21. Likewise it is against S. Austin First he thinketh as Bel confesseth the Church to concurre with the inward motion of the holy Ghost to the faith of the Ghospel But faith of the Ghospel to which the holy Ghost inwardly concurreth is deuine Ergo to this the Church concurreth Besids S. Austin affirmeth that authority holdeth Cont. epist fundam c. 4. tom 6. him in the Catholique Church And that if the authority of Catholiques were weakned he wold not beleeue the Ghospel which he would neuer say if his deuine faith did not depend vpon the Catholiques authority Moreouer what more
though Q. Elizabeth had vtterly cast of the Popes friendship yet he forsooke not hir For Pius 4. supposing P. Pius 4. A. 1560. that she had reuolted from that Sea rather for feare lest her title to the crowne might be called in question because one P. had before declared her birth to be vnlawful then for dislike of the religion which in her father and sisters daies she had professed sent a Nuntio to promise her al fauor touching her title to the crowne And soone after an other to request her to send her diuines to the Councel of Trent with promise of al security and liberty Neither may I leaue your Maiestie out of the number of the Princes of this land who haue tasted the loue frindship of the Sea Apostolike Because P. Clement 8. 1603. out of your owne grateful mind you haue publiquely professed your Proclamat â—â— 1. â—egni selfe behoulding vnto P. Clement 8. for his temporal carriadge and diuers kinde offices towards your Maiestie Besides he hath as it is reported censured al such as shal molest your grace and hath often times professed that he would willinglie giue his life for the eternal good of our countrey VVhich is the greatest loue that one can beare as our Sauiour testifieth vnto his friend Oh how great enimies are they vnto England who seeke by false slaunders to make such friends odious vnto vs. By this which hath bene said omitting much more for breuity your Maiestie clearlie seeth how greatlie and how continally the Sea Apostolique hath euer fauored the Christian Princes of this land how many and how great benefits both spiritual and temporal Popes haue bestowed vpon them and in their dangers and distresses according to their power assisted them VVeigh I beseech your grace in the ballance of your Princely wisdome the forsaid benefits with such as your selfe or Auncitors haue receaued from the rest of Christendom and Popes haue benefited Engl. more then al Christendome besyds you shal finde that the Sea Apostolicke alone hath more benifyted England then al Christendom besides and consequentlie that the forsaking of the Popes friendship hath more endammaged your Realme then if it had forsaken the rest of Christendom But especiallie I humblie beseech your Maiestie weigh them with such as Bel or any minister can shew you to haue receaued from their two seats of pestilence in witenberge and Geneua VVhat kingdomes haue they bestowed vpon you vnto what imperial or Royal dignity haue they exalted you from what Paganisme haue they conuerted your land what enimies haue they appeased what assistance haue they afforded you in any need what good litle or great haue they brought to this land Now what mischeefe haue they not brought That Bel in his ovvne iudgemeÌ„t vvas both an Apostata and Traiter vvhiles he vvas Preist one Apostata and fierbrand of seditioÌ„ Knox sent from Geneua brought more mischiefe to your Grandmother your B. mother to your father and Kingdom of Scotland then I can rehearse or your Maiestie without great griefe can remember Ministers pretend the loue of the Ghospel as the cause of persuading you from friendship with the Pope But yet disswade not from friendship with the Turke They pretend also your graces See Conser at Hampton Court p. 80. 81. security But the true cause indeed your Maiestie descried discouered in Knox to wit their owne security aduauÌ„cement which they fear would be endangered if you kept your ancient and surest friend and therefore with your losse as your maiestie perceaued in your Grandmothers case they worke their owne wealth and security And thus much of the Popes The laue benefits of the British Kings to the Sea Apostolik Note this As for the Christian Princes of this land though they haue bene of foure different and most opposite nations to wit Britons English Danes and Normans yet haue they al agreed in keeping the league of friendship with the Pope being officious vnto him accouÌ„ting him their especial friend Of the British kings of this land first K. Lucius A. 156. Beda lib. 1. c. 4. is King Lucius whose particular affection towards the Sea Apostolick is euident by that he neglecting other Christian Churches neare vnto him he sent so far as to Rome for Preachers As for Constantin the great Constantin Mag. 324. the immortal glory of the British kings his extraordinary loue and affection vnto the Sea of Rome is more notorious then I need rechearse For he not only gaue vnto the Pope the gouernment of Rome and of a good parte of the west as besides him selfe and Latin historiographers Constant in edicto Isidor Eugubin de donat ConstaÌ„t Grat. d. 69. Iuo Genebr in chron Photius seu Balsam in nomoran R. Abraham in Zikron Dibre Romi Abben Estra 11. Daniel Cadualader Polid. lib. 3. both Greecks and Iewes professed enimies to the Pope do testifie but also serued him as a lackey houlding his stirrop and leading his horse by the bridle Cadwallader also the last British king in England hauing lefte his countrey went no whither but to Rome and there ended his daies And if the histories of those ancieÌ„t times were more perfect or the Britons had raigned longer in this Iland no doubt but we should haue more examples of their deuotion to the Sea of Rome as appeareth by Salomon A. 869. Argenteus histor Brit. lib. 2. c. 27. Baron An. â—â—9 Salomon their King in litle Britany after they had bene driuen hence by the Saxons who writing to Pope Adrian the second beginneth his letter thus Domino ac beatissimo Apost sedis Rom Hadriano Salomon Britanorum Rex flexis genibus inclinatoque capite And sendeth him his statua in gold with diuers rich guifts and money promiseth a yearlie pension and acknowledgeth his Royal title to haue bene giuen to him by Popes This was the loue of the British kings vnto the Sea Apostolike To the British kings succeeded the The loue benefits of the English Kings K. Ethelbert An. 596. Beda lib. â— c. 25. Saxons or English as wel in their loue and reuerence to the Sea of Rome as in their kingdome For king Ethelbert at the very first receaued S. Gregory his Legats very courteouslie prouided them of al things necessary and freelie licensed them to preach vsing these gratious words worthie to be imitated of your Maiestie in the like case For so much as you are come so far to impart vnto vs such knovvledge as you take to be true vve vvil not trouble you but rather vvithal courtesie receaue you After him king Ofwin hauing K. Osvvin A. 665. perfectly learned that the Church of Rome saith S. Beda was the Catholique Lib. 3. c. 29. and Apostolicke Church sent thither in the yeare 665. a Priest to be consecrated Archbishop of Canterbury And in a conference about the obseruation of Easter hearing that the keies of heauen were giuen to S. Peter
concluded thus I vvil not gaine Bed lib. 3. c. 25. Bar. An. 664. say such a Porter as this is but as far as I knovv and am able I vvil couet in al points to obey his ordinance And in the yeare 670 he bare saith S. Bede such loue and affection lib. 4. cap. 5. to the Apostolike Sea of Rome as if he might haue eskaped his sicknes he purposed to goe to Rome and to end his life in those holie places there But what he could not through death performe the valiant Prince King Cedwalla did in the very flour K. Cedualla An. 689. of his age and prosperity For in the yeare 689. forsaking his kingdome saith S. Beda he vvent to Rome thinking it to Beda lib. 5. c. 7. be a singular glory and renovvme for him to be regenerated vvith the Sacrament of Baptisme at the Sea Apostolicke And vvithal conceaued hope that as soone as by baptisme he vvas cleansed from sinne he should depart from this vvorld to immortal ioy VVhich by Gods prouidence was perfourmed and he honourablie buried by the Pope in S. Peters Church Not long after him to wit in the year 709. two English Kings Coenred and K. Coenred and Offa. 709. Offa forsooke their kingdomes went to Rome and there became Moncks Lib. 5. cap. 10. Baron 709. Huntingt l. 4. p. 337. Malmesb 1. reg c. 6. Marian. chro VVestmonast 710. Sigeb 707. Polid. lib. 4. Fox l. 2. K. Ina. An. 726. Lib. 5. cap. 7. Baron 726. Ethelvvead l. 2. c. 13. Huntingt l. 4. p. 338. Malmefbur l. 1. Marian chron Stovv 685. Fox l. 2. VVestmon An. 727. Geneb 741. Polid lib. 4. Stovvv in Ina. continuing saith S. Beda at the Apostles tombes in praying fasting dealing almes vntil their dying day Ina al. Hun successor to K. Cedwal in his kingdome succeeded him also in his deuotion to the Sea Apostolike for after he had raigned saith S. Beda 37. years he gaue ouer his kingdome vvent him selfe to the tombs and monuments of the Apostles in Rome as in those daies many English both of the Nobility and Commons spiritual and temporal men and vvoemen vvere vvont to doe vvith great emulation Neither went he only to Rome but became there a Monke and was the first that paied the Peter pence appointing that euery householder of his kingdome who English Seminary in Rome almost 900. years agoe had thirty peny worth of Cattel of one sort should pay yearlie one penny to Rome which money was partlie for the P. partlie for the maintenance of an English schoole or Seminary which VVestmon A. 727. 794. he then built in Rome for bringing vp of English youths there in vertue and learning Not long after about the 750. yeare S. Richard K. forsooke his kingdome S. Richard K. A. 750. Sur. 7. Februar Baron 750. leauing his two sonnes in Germany with S. Boniface an Englishman the Popes Legate there went him selfe in Pilgrimage to R. but dying in the way at Luca is there honourablie buried And the yeare 775. King Offa though K. Offa. An. 775. Fox l. z. Martyr a warlike Prince gaue ouer his kingdome went to Rome and there became a Monke and imitating the example of King Ina increased the English See Malmesbur l. 2. reg c. 2. p. 38. VVestmon An. 794. Bar. 775. Polid. l. 4 Hunting l. 4. p. 342. Greg. 7. l. 8. epâ—st vlt. Baron A. 782. Seminary begun by him and imposed the like pension of Peter pence vpon his kingdome of Mercia as Charles the great about the same time imposed vpon France the like tribute to be paid to Rome The loue and affection of King Kenulph a worthie K. Kenulph An. 808. Annal. Fran. Baron 808. Malmesbur 1. Reg. c. 4. p. 30. 33. Prince and successor to King Offa appeareth by his redeeming the Popes Legate taken of Pirats in the yeare 808. and by his submissiue letter to the Pope wherin he humblie craueth his blessing as al his predecessors had desireth to be adopted for his sonne as I saith the King loue you like a father embrace you vvith al obedience And protested to be willing to spend his life for the Pope After him King Ethelwolph in the K. Ethelvvolph An. 855. VVestmon Baron 855. Ethelvverd lib. 3. cap. 3. Srovv Ingulphus yeare 855. went to Rome tooke with him his best beloued sonne Alfred for to be instructed saith westmonaster of the Pope in manners and religion where he abode a whole yeare and procured his sonne to be crowned of the Pope and adopted of him for his sonne he also notablie repaired the English Seminary Malmesb. l. 2. cap. 2. p. 38. Stovv Ann. 839. at Rome which had bene burnt a litle before and confirming guifts of K. Ina and Offa imposed Malmesbur sup Marian. 877. Platina in Leone 4. the pension of Peter pence vpon al England which was afterward paid vntil the later end of K Henry 8. About the same time King Burdred leauing K. Burdred Ethelvvead l. 4. c. 3. Malmesb l. 1. c. 4. p. 33. Ingulph Stovv 875. K. Ganute a Dane 1032. Malmesb. l. 2. cap. 1. Ingulph Polid l 7. Huntingt lib 6. Stovv in Canute Marian A. 1033. his kingdome went to Rome and was there buried in the English schoole Neither would King Canute though a Dane be found vngrateful to the Sea Apost but went to Rome in the yeare 1032. confirmed the payment of the Peter pence gaue great guifts of golde siluer and pretious things to S. Peter obtayned of Pope Iohn immunity for the English Seminary And finally K. Edward Conf the last but K. Eduard Conf. An. 1056. Ealted in vit eius one of the Saxon bloud would haue gone to Rome in Pilgrimage had not his people vpon feare of the Danes inuasion hindred him yet sent he Embassadors to the Pope with great presents and confirmed al the dueties customes belonging to him in England And thus continewed the English Kings al the time of their raigne in singular affection and deuotion to The loue benefits of the NormaÌ„ Kings the Sea Apostolicke To whom as the Norman Princes succeeded so they followed them in their piety and religion For beside that they paid the Peeter pence in particular K. william Conqueror hauing K. VV. Conqueror An. 1066. Stovv in Herald subdued England and slaine K. Herald in the yeare 1066. sent straight his standard to the Pope as to his peculiar K. Henry 1. Malmesb. l. 1. Pont. p. 226. friend And K. Henry 1. professed by his Embassadour to P. Paschal 2. that England was a peculiar prouince of the Church of Rome and paid vnto her yearlie tribute King Henry 2. about the yeare K. Henry 2. An. 1180. Genebr in chron 1180. 1180. together with Lewis King of France ledde P. Alexanders horse and with great pompe conducted him K. Richard 1. Polid. lib. 14. Genebr 118. Stovv through
the Citty Tociacum K. Richard Ceur de Lion at the exhortation of the P. went in person to the holy land with an army of 30. thowsand foote and fiue thowsand horse in which voiage he conquered the kingdome of Ciprus citty of Ptolemais and ouerthrew the Souldan in a great battel and the like enterprise afterward vndertooke K. Edward the K. Henry 2. An. 1241. Stovv An. 1241. first in the yeare 1241. King Henry 3. placed the Popes Legate in the most honourable roome of the table at a publique banquet in Christ-masse betwixt him selfe and the Archebishop of yorke And afterward vvith great pompe saith Stowe and innumerable company of Nobles and trumpets sounding before brought him to the Sea How deuout K. Richard 2. and Englishmen K. Richard 2. Stovv An. 1407. in his time were to the Sea of Rome appeareth by their building an hospital there for receit of English Pilgrims insteed of the foresaid Seminary which as it seemeth was destroyed in that great burning of Rome in the yeare 1084 in the place where S. Thomas of Canturbury had before built a chappel in honor of the B. Trinity This hospital was afterward in the raigne of K. Henry 6. and Henry 7. reedified and much encreased and lastlie in the yeare 1570 was much bewtifyed and augmented both in buildings and reuenews by P. Gregory 13. and by him conuerted to the auncient vse of a Seminary retayning stil the obligation of an hospital The affection of K. Henry 4. appeareth K. Henry 4. A. 1409. Stovv Ann. 1409. by his letter to the Pope A. 1409. which he beginneth thus Most holy father our humble recommendations in filial vvise premised And afterward hauing taken vvith our said sonne and also vvith our Prelats and Nobles mature deliberation vve beseech vvith al humility require your clemency vvhose state and honor vpon diuers causes as a deuout sonne of the Church so far as vve might vvith God vve haue euer embraced and do embrace by the expresse and vvhole assent of the estates aforesaid c. And as for King Henry 5. he in the yeare 1416. sent his K. Henry 5. An. 1416. Stovv Ann. 1416. Embassadors to the general Councel at Constance at whose procurement it vvas there ordained that England saith Note this Stowe should obtaine the name of a nation be said one of the fiue Nations that ovve their deuotiō to the Church of Rome vvhich thing vntil that time men of other Nations for enuie had letted Behould what an honor K. Henry 5. the Alexander of England and Conqueror of France and England in his most florishing triumphant time accounted it to owe deuotion to the Church of Rome VVhich now Ministers would accoūt so dishonourable And as for K. Henry K. Henry 7. An. 1505. 7. your Maiesties great grandfather his affection is euident by the sword and cup of maintenance sent to him from the Pope spoken of before But none of the kings of the Norman bloud euer shewed so great signes of loue affection to the Sea Apostolike as K. Henry 8. did for a long time K. Heury 8. A. 1511. 1521. Stovv 1511. 1512. 1513. Onuphr in Iul. 2. for first in the yeare 1511. he wrate to the French K. to desist from molesting Pope Iulius 2. and in the next yeare sent an army of ten thousand men into France for the Popes defence And in the yeare 1513. wēt him selfe in person with a royal army conquered Turwin and Turnay And not content to defend the Pope with his sword in the yeare 1521. wrate an excellēt booke Stovv An. 1521. in his defence against Luther And againe in the yeare 1527. when Pope Clement 7. was taken prisoner by the Emperors souldiers he gaue monethlie Stovv An. 1532. 60. thowsand Angels to the maintenance of an armie for the Popes deliuery And in this singular affection towards the Sea Apostolik continewed he vntil the 22. yeare of his raigne Stovv 1530. deinceps An. 1530. when not vpon any iniury offered by the P. or dislike of his religion which except the matter of supremacy he defended to his death and persecuted the Protestants but only vpon occasion of delaie saith Stowe made by the Pope in his controuersie of deuorcement and through displeasure of such reports as he he ard had bene made of him to the court of Rome and thirdlie pricked forvvards by such counsellers to follovv the example of the Germanes he first forbad the procurement of any thing from Rome and soone after prohibited al payments and appeales to Rome and lastlie tooke vpon him that supremacy which al his Christian predecessors had acknowledged to be in the Pope Thus your Maiestie seeth how long how honourablie and how profitablie also vnto both parties hath the mutual amity and league of friendship betwixt the Sea Apost and the Princes of al the foure Nations that haue swaied the Scepter of England continewed and flourished how of late it was broken by one Prince vpon meere passion contrary to the example of al his Predecessors and Successors also except one childe and a woeman VVhat dangers and troubles he and his kingdome incurred thereby and how his progeny according as Frier Poeto did then foretel him is now consumed and his Crowne translated to an other Royal lyne against which in his time he made sharpe war I need not here declare Only I wil say that him selfe being after more free from passion laboured to be reconciled to the Sea Apostolike and employed therein B. Gardener as he professed in a sermon at Paules Crosse and had easelie obtained it if he would haue acknowledged his fault and done penance VVhat remaineth for me to conclude this long epistle but prostrate at your Maiesties feet humblie to beseech you for your owne good and in the name of the foresaid Christian Princes that as you are the head of the fieft Nation which according to Gods prouidence foretolde by a holy man Hunting l. 6. p. 359. many hundred years agoe hath attained to the rule of this land so you would continew that most auncient honourable and proffitable league of friendship which was betwixt them al and the Sea Apostolicke who I beseech your grace wil giue you more faithful councel then your owne Progenitors and forefathers who can giue you more safe and secure directiō in gouernement of your kingdome then your owne Predecessors who soe happily and so long time gouerned it who are so worthie to giue you example or whom can you with so much honor imitate as so many so valiant so prudent Princes and yet they al with one voice counsel and request you to follow in this so importāt a matter not so much them selues as the councel of the wisest King that euer was yea of God himselfe in these words Thine ovvne Prouerb 27. friend and thy fathers friend see thou forsake not especiallie such a one as hath euer
bene not only your owne friend and particularly your B. mothers friend but of al your Christian forefathers VVho as they haue lefte vnto your grace their Crowne and kingdome so haue they also bequeathed their faith religion friendship with the Sea Apostolick as no smal portion and stay of their inheritance VVe estieme your publique acknowledging of Rome to be the Mother Church and your selfe to be behoulding to P. Clement 8. for his temporal cariadge and kinde offices as sparks of a greater fyer of loue inkindled in your Princely hart towards that Sea which we beseech almighty God so to increase as it may one day burst forth to your owne good and the vniuersal ioy of Christendome Our Lord Iesus long preserue your Maiestie with al grace health and prosperity Your Maiesties duetiful Subiect and daily Oratour S. R. THE EPISTLE TO THE CHRISTIAN READER AS no water Christian Reader waxeth so could as that which hath bene once hot no enemies become so cruel to a common wealth as Rebels who haue bene once subiect So none are so eager aduersaries to Gods Church as Apostataes S. Maximus serm de Apost who heue once bene her members and children Amongst Heretikes none more earnest against the Apostles then the S. Hieron de Scriptor in Petro. first Apostata Simon Magus who dared to encounter hand to hand with the principal Apostle S. Peter and labored to seduce by Baron Annal An. 68. his magik whom he by myracles had conuerted Amongst the Tyrants and persecutors Nazianz. orat 1. in Iulian Theodoret. lib. 3. c. 21. none more cruel then Iulian the Apostata who by blood endeuored to wash away his Christendom and both by sword pen laboured al he could not only to extinguish the religion but also the very name and memory of Christians Amongst Philosophers none more vehement then Porphirius Iulian. rabidi in Christum canes Hieron Porphyry the Apostata who writ fifteen books against Christian religion and for his singuler hatred therof was syrnamed tou Christianon polemios the Christians aduersary And in these our miserable daies none haue bene so spiteful so malicious so vehement against Catholiques ether in persecuting speaking or writing as they who haue bene once Catholiques And in England now none sheweth him selfe so forward or so vehement against Catholiques as the Apostata Bel daring challenging and adiuring al Papists iointly and seuerally to the combat with him being desirous as it seemeth of the tytle of ton catholicon polemios The Catholiques aduersary These Apostataes be like to him who Luc. 11. v. 25. 26. being deliuered of one diuel the house clensed with beesoms and trimmed vp was afterward possessed with seauen diuels See S. Ireney lib. 1. c. 13. worse then the former and his end made worse then his beginning For such is the estate of this miserable caitiue Bel who being once deliuered from the diuel of Heresy clensed with the beesom of confession and Penance and trimmed with patient sufferance for the Catholique faith falling afterward to idlenes and dissolute life wherof him self since hath boasted is possessed again of his old diuel of Heresy accompained with seuen other wicked sprits of blasphemy railing pride slaundering lying dissembling and abusing of Gods and holy Fathers words and his end becomme far worse then his beginning was His spirit of blasphemy he descryeth in many places as p. 149. where he saith that God hath giuen vs those commandements which we can not possibly keep This the holy Father S. Hierom both calleth and accutseth as S. Hieron epist ad Damasc de exposi ione fidei blasphemy in these words VVe curse their blasphemy who say that God hath commanded to man any impossible thing And no maruel For what reason can ther be in God to command Quod rationem non habet dici non debuit S. Eugenius apud Victorem de persecut vandal l. 2. a thing which he knoweth can not be done what fault in vs not to do that which can not be done what iustice in him to punish and that with eternal death the not performance of that which can not be performed If neuer there was man so void of reason as would commaÌ„d a thing which he knew could not be done neuer Tyrant so cruel as wold punish with temporal death the vnperformance of impossible matters shal we think it no blasphemy to God to attribute that to him which we can not imagin that any man who hath any spark of reason or humanity wold attempt Hauing thus blasphemed against God no meruail if he blaspheme against his Church of late daies saying p. 134. that she is no sufficient witnes of his truth p. 41. against our iustification calling it supposed holy wherby he giueth vs to vnderstand that as he is fallen from God and his Church and lost holy iustification so he is an enemy to them al. His railing spirit he could so il maister as in the very first period of his epistle to the Epistle to the King King without respect of his Maiestie he must needs cal vs the cursed brood of traiterous Iesuits and streight after speaking ex abundantia cordis and reuiling especially against the Iesuits who haue bene his maisters he auoucheth them to be traiterous seditious brutish barbarous cruel villanous most bloody treacherous prowd cruel tyrants firebrands of al sedition theeues murderers right Macheuels coosiners malicious and dependers vpon the diuel And of this Rhetorik I expect good store for my part but the more the merrier such reprochful terms in this quarrel shal be to me super millia auri argenti His pride is more notorious then I need shew it For if it were pride in Golias though a Gyant to challenge any of Gods hoste what is it in this puny not only to challenge but to adiure al Papists seuerally and iointly being him selfe not worthy to cary the books after many of them as shal appeare by his manifold ignorance not only in deuinity See the Index but also euen in Latin principlâ—s of Logik Histories and Preaching as shal be made manifest in this answer His slauÌ„ders reach euen from the highest pag 17. to the lowest Kings and Emperours he slaundereth with no les matter then opening the window to al Antichristian tyranny Bels ingratitude Popes who long tyme manteined him at school with challeÌ„ging powre equal p. 16. 40. 106. to God with dispensing with one to marry his ful sister with burning the Scripture and the like And Papists he slaundereth p. 22. with killing Christ a thousand tymes a day with affirming that the Pope can depose Kings and Emperors and translate their p. 1. Linpires and regalities at his good wil and pleasure with attributing to the Pope powre equal to God thinking the breach p. 16. p. 130. of Lent to be a greater sin then adultery periury or murder His other three spirits of
together whereby the indifferent Reader may by Bels euil and corrupt dealing in the very beginning of his chalenge take a taste of the rest of his proceedings for as Tertullian saith well vvhat truth doe they Tertull. l. do praescript defend vvho begin it vvith lyes 3. I demand therfore of Bel who they are whome he chalengeth to whome he speaketh and whome he vnderstandeth by You Papists Surely I suppose he writeth in English to none but such as vnderstand English whome in his preface he termeth English Iesuyts Seminary Priests Iesuyted Papists Yf these Maister Bel be they whome ye meane I tel you in their name that as your propositioÌ„ hath two parts viz. the Popes Superiority ouer al Princes and of his power to depose them so it conteineth three to vse your owne tearme flatte leasinges For though concerning Christians they beleeue the Pope to be spiritually superiour aboue al whatsoeuer accordinge to Christs words spoken to the first Pope S. Peter Matth. 16. viz. Thou art Peter and vpon this rocke vvil I buylde my Church and Io. 21. v. 17. Feede my sheepe which sheepe conteine and include as wel Christian Princes and potentates as subiects and vnderlings And concerning infidels they also beleeue that the Pope ought to be spiritually aboue them and they vnder him in that they be bound to be Christians neuerthelesse vntil these be Christened he is not actually their superiour vntil they be made members of Christs Church he is not de facto their head vntil they be in Christs fould he is not their sheape hearde For as Bellarmin writeth Bellarm. lib. 5. de Rom. Pont. c. 7. Bel p. 29. 125. whose testimonie saith Bel is most sufficient in al Popisshe affaires Christ vvas aboue as vvel infidels as faithful But to S. Peter he committed onely his sheepe that is the faithful Wherefore S. Paul as not acknowledging that he had any superiority or iurisdiction ouer infidels said vvhat belongeth it to me to iudge of them that are vvithout 1. Cor. 5. And although the Pope may preach him selfe or send others to preache to infidels without their licence yet this argueth no more but that the commission which he hath from God to preach the Ghospel vnto al nations is independent of the infidels and that they ought to be vnder his iurisdictioÌ„ Wherefore vntil Bel doe prooue that there are no powers or poteÌ„â—ates on earth which are infidels I must needs tel him that he vntruly auoucheth vs to say that the Pope is spiritually aboue al powers and potentates on earth 4. And much lesse did we euer tel you that the Pope hath temporal superiority ouer al Princes on earth but teach the quite contrary with VValden Bellarmin and VValden tom 1. lib. 2. art 3. c. 78. Bellarm. lib. 5. de Rom. Pont. c. 4. Gelas 1. de vincul Anathematis Nicol. 1. de 96. Can. cum ad verum others For as two most auncient Popes Gelasius 1. and Nicolaus 1. taught vs the Pope by his Pontifical dignity chalengeth neither royal soueraignity nor imperial name But what royalties he hath either in the Popedome or els where he chalengeth by the guift of Christian Princes whereof Some as your selfe confesse haue yeelded Pag. 17. vp their soueraigne rights vnto him And what superiority we thinke him to haue ouer Christian Princes he should haue though he were not Lord of one foote of land but as poore as he that said Math. 19. v. 27 Behould vve haue forsaken al. For his S. Mathevv Papal superiority and authority is not temporal or of this world nor the weapones of his warfare carnal but as S. Paul speaketh S. Paul 2. Cor. 10. mighty to God vnto the distruction of munitious destroying Counsels and al loftines extolling it selfe against the knowledge of God and hauing in readines to reuenge al disobedience Wherupon P. Innocent Cap. per venerab extra qui filij suâ—â— legitimi 3. professeth that the Pope hath ful power in temporal matters only in the Popedome and that Kings acknowledge no superior in temporal affaires And this also teach S. Ambros de Apol. Dauid c. 4. 10 Gloss S. Ambros tom 4. Lyra in psalm 50. and others By which it appeareth how much he is abused who is made to beleue That the Pope present challengeth an imperial ciuil power ouer Kings Emperors or that English Papists do attribute vnto him any such power For neither doth Paulus 5. challeng more authority then Innocent 3 did not English Papists attribute vnto him other authority ouer Kings then spiritual But do with tong and hart and with the Popes good liking professe That our Souereigne Lord King Iames hath no superior on earth in temporal matters If Bel reply that some Canonists haue affirmed the Pope to be temporal Lord ouer the world let him challeng them not like a wise man strike his next sellows the English Papists who mantayne no such opinion 5. The second parte of his Proposition touching the Popes deposition of Princes pag. 1. 4. 17. at his pleasure though he repeat it thrise is most vntrue For no Catholiques English or strangers teach that the Pope can depose Princes but for iust causes yea ordinarily saith Bellarmin not for iust causes but when Bellarm. lib. 5. de Rom. Pontif. c. 6. it is necessary for the sauing of souls And surely otherwise Princes shold be but his tenants at wil and he haue more power ouer them then they haue ouer their subiects which is far from al Catholiques imaginations let vs see therfore how Bel proueth vs to teach Bel p. 1. this doctrin 6. Because saith he Bellarmin setteth it downe Bellarm. de Rom. Pontif lib. 5. c. 7. in these words If therfore any Prince of a sheep or a ram become a wolfe that is to say of a Christian be made an heretike then the Pastor of the Church 4. vntruth may driue him away ly excommunication and withal command the people not to obey him and therfore depriue him of his dominion ouer his subiects Behold good Reader the forsaid vntruthes proued with an other Because Bellarmin calleth the Pope Pastor of the Church Bel auoucheth him to think the Pope to be aboue al Princes Potentates on earth as if there were no Princes infidels or out of the Church and because he teacheth that the Pope may excommunicate and depose Princes for Heresy that he may depose them at his pleasure as if matters of Heresy which is one of the greatest sinns that is were the Popes pleasure An indifferent reader would rather haue inferred that because the Pope is Pastor of the Church he is not aboue any infidel Prince or subiect which Bellarmin teacheth in Bellarmin expresse words in the same booke c. 2. c. 4. And because he can not excoÌ„municate so neither depose Princes for his pleasure which Bellarmin euery where supposeth yea in the same book c. 6.
to haue celestial arbitremēt what wil he say to S. Chrisostome Chrisosto hom 5. in illud Esaiae vidi Dominum homil 4. item hom 60. ad populum worthely in his own iudgment Sirnamed the gouldē mouthed doctor auouching that the Priests throne is in heauen that he hath authority to iudge of celestial busines and that God hath put the verie Princes head vnder the hands of the priest to teach vs that the priest is a Prince greater then he And in an other place affirmeth hom 83. in Matth. Hom. 2. in 2. in Timoth Gregor lib. 4. epist 31. S. Ciprian lib. 3. epist 9. noteth that the beginning of Schismes Heresies is by contempt of Priests and Bishops Themistius in l. consul apud Socratem l. 3. c. 25. Arian Bishops more for the palace then for the Church Hilar. l. cōt Constant a Deacon to haue greater power then an Emperour and aduiseth vs that vvho dispiseth the Priest at length falleth to contemne God and S. Gregory writing to the Emperour him selfe saith priests are certaine Gods amongst men and therefore to be honoured of al euen of Kings But Bel in debasing priesthood and too too much exalting Princes sheweth him selfe to be a right Apostata from priesthood and a right heretike who as Themistius said honour not God but Princes And thus much of Bels eight steppes 32. Thus thou seest Christian reader that of these eight steps which Bel imagined the Pope had to climbe to his superiority ouer Princes two of them to wit the first and secōd were steps rather to fal then to climbe by three vz. the fourth sixth and seauenth were euident acts of such authority alreadie enioyed acknowledged by Princes the third was but a recouery of his auntient libertie the fieft is no more a step for the Pope to climbe then temporal liuings are to other bishops And the eight and last is a manifest vntruth But the true step he Matth. 16. v. 18. Ioan. 21. v. 17. omitted which is Christs promise to S. Peter to build his Chruch vpon him and his commission to feed his sheepe by vertue whereof al S. Peters successours challendge to be spiritual superiour to al that are in Christs church or be his sheepe be they Princes or subiects as is euident out of the Bonif 8. extrauag vnā sanctam de maioritate obedientia Sed epist Ioan. 2. ad Iustinianum Imper. Gregor lib. 1. epist 24. Bel pag. 17. Bel slandereth Princes foresaid decree of Boniface 8. 33. Bel hauing thus as you haue heard slandred Popes thought not to let ether Kings or Emperors passe free but saith that some of them haue opened the windovv to al Antichristian tyrany Greater iniury he could not do to Christian Princes then to accuse them of such horrible impiety of opening the window not to some but to al Antichristian tirany No maruel if he spare nether Pope nor Priest who thus handleth Princes If one ask proofe of his slander he bringeth none but it suffizeth that he hath said it his word alone is sufficient to condemne many Kings Emperors This is the respect Protestants beare euen to the greatest Monarches when they are against their proceedings So Luther said Princes for Luther lib. de saecular potest edit 1523. lib. cont duo edicta Caesaris 1524. Lib. cont Henric. Regem Angl. the most parte were ether the veriest fooles or arrantest knaues And againe The Turk is ten tymes better and wiser then the Emperor and other Princes whome he cals idiots doults madde furious and frantik fooles and namely King Henry 8. he reuileth with such shameful such spitful and scurrilous tearmes as I am ashamed to write And amongst Protestants nothing more vsual then to cal Princes Antichrists and slaues of Antichrist 34. Bel not yet satisfied with iniuring pag. 17. vntruthe 26. the Pope addeth that he hath made it sacriledge to dispute of his povver which is a manifest vntruth disproued by him selfe art 2. p 26 where he affirmeth that the Pope alloweth Bellarmins works who at large disputeth of his power And because Sigebert whome Bel vntruly calleth the Popes deare fryer vntruthe 27. Trithem in Sigebert for he was his vtter enemy and to his power fauored the schismatical and Excommunicated Emperor Henry 3 in whose behalfe he fained diuers things as Baron proueth Baronius tom 9. An. 774. reprehendeth them who taught the people that they owe no obediēce to euil Kings Bel inueyeth against Catholiques Whereas Catholiques vtterly Art 15. damnat in Concil Constantien defie such Doctrin condēned it lōg since in the Protestants great grandfather wiclife and haue learned of the first Pope S. Peter to be subiect in al feare not onely to good and modest 1. Pet. c. 2. v. 18. Cap. 3. parag 4. 5. 6. maisters but also to way ward But Protestants teach that and worse Doctrin as appeareth by what hath bene sayd before and by Godman who as Couel writerh published to the world that it was lawful to kil Couel of Church gouernment c 4. p 35. vvicked Kings and whitingham a deane of no smal account in his preface before Godmans booke of firmed it to be the doctrin of the best learned meaning Protestants think it lavvful to kil euil Kings Bel pag. 18. 28 vnttuth 29 vntruth 30 vntruth as Couel thinketh Caluin and the rest 35. Finally because the end of this article should not be vnlike the beginning he concludeth it with three vntruthes as he began it saying That the Popish religion hath bene alwaies condemned of great learned Papists If he had named the men and points of religion as he told the tyme the three vntruthes wold haue appeared in their likenes As I guesse he meaneth of the Popes power for deposing Princes which I confesse some Papists haue denyed but nether were they the greatest learned men nor alwayes were there any such nor hath he proued it to be a point of Popish religion And thus much of Bels first Article VVherfore remember Bel from whence thou art fallen and doe pennance Apoc 2. THE SECOND ARTICLE TOVCHING THE MASSE PREFACE Bel deuideth this Article into foure members in the first wherof he impugneth the real presence of Christ in the Eucharist in the second the sacrifice of the Masse in the third he inueigheth against the recantation which Berengarius made when he adiured Bels heresie and in the fourth he treateth of apparent contradictions which saith he are in the Masse And the like method we wil keepe in our answer CHAP. I. Bels reason against the Real Presence of Christ in the B. Sacrament answered his vntruth and dissimulation therin discouered S Paul prophetied That in the 1. Timoth. 4. v. 1. last tymes some shal depart from the faith attending to the spirits of errors and doctrin of diuils Which prophecy is most manifestly fulfilled in these heretiks who impugne the Catholique doctrin of the B Sacrament For
beleeue he hath great skil in that tongue though the wordes be in his booke neither accented nor printed right but remitting this fault to the printer the text he englisheth thus But the gift of God is life euerlasting in Christ Iesus our lorde and then argueth in this manner Eternal life is the free gift of God therfore it can be no way due to the merit of mans workes 2. Answer First the consequent seemeth opposite to this other proposition of his pag. 77. Eternal life is due to the workes of Gods elect Secondly the Antecedent is false Foure reasons vvhy eternal life is grace and neither here nor any where els taught by S. Paul He calleth here eternal life grace as it may be called for diuers causes 1. because God gratiously couenanted with vs to giue it as a rewarde of our good workes which we being his slaues by creation he might haue exacted of vs without any rewarde at al. This is S. Thomas his reason S. Thomas 1. 2. q. 114. art 2. 2. because the workes them selues for which God giueth vs life eternal were freely giuen vnto vs by Gods grace This is S. Austins reason epist 105. 5. Austin 3. because the workes haue no perfect actual equality to eternal life but only virtual and proportionate and this reason giueth Theodoret. in cap. 6. Rom. where he Theodoret. saith that temporal paines and eternal ioyes in aequilibrio non respondent and Bel falsly translateth Bel pag. 63. Fals translation 4. are nothing answerable 4. because as workes are rewarded euen aboue their virtual and proportionate equality as Deuines say vltra condignum No maruel if S. Paul called eternal life rather grace or gift then a stipend seeing it hath much more of grace then it hath of iustice yet notwithstanding he no where called it meere grace yea in 1. Cor. 3. Philip 3. v. 14. 2. Timoth. 4. v. 8. S. Paul might haue called glory a stipend S. Austin calling it a rewarde a goale and crowne of iustice he clearly declareth that it is no meere grace nor free gift beside that as S. Austin writeth epist 105. he might haue called it a stipende as he calleth death in respect of sinne but forbore lest we should thinke it were so iustly deserued by good workes as death is by euil And perhaps he called it so in the next verse before where he calleth eternal life in greeke telos which as Beza Beza Rom. 6. confesseth may there signify vectigal or mercedem and is equiualent to stipend 3. Notwithstanding this Bel exclaimeth pag. 62. against the Rhemists that they translated Charisma grace in steed of gift for to extenuate the clearnes of this text wherin he sheweth his malice and folly For malice it is to accuse men to corrupt Scriptures of set purpose and to bring no proofe therof yea to confesse as he doth that they follow the auncient vulgar edition of which S. Hierom was either Author or amender And folly it is to condemne that translation as done for to extenuate the clearnes of Scripture and withal to confesse as he doth that it is according to the olde vulgar edition and that it may be here admitted and to approue an other translation of Donation or Gift which maketh no more for his purpose then Grace which him selfe in the next page englisheth Free grace and finally to alleadge in his owne behalfe Theodoret. S. Chrisostom Origen Ambros Theophilact In cap. 6. ad Rom. and Paul of Burges whoe al in the very places which he citeth for him selfe read as the Rhemists translate grace though some of them explicate it by Gift as it is indeed though no free gift 4. But let vs heare why the Rhemists did not wel translate the worde Charisma by Bel sup Perkins refor Cathol p. 107. Grace Because saith he it signifieth a gift freely bestowed If so Syr why did not you your mates and your Bibles so translate it but Bibles printed by Barker 1584. absolutly by gift So you condemne other and commit your selfe the like fault Remember what S. Paul saith to such Rom. 2. But how proueth he Charisma to signify a Gift freely giuen Forsooth autos ephe This Lexicon Grynaei Basileae 1539. vvho citeth Budaeus Lexicon Gesneri auctū per Arlemium Iunium Hartengum Basileae great Grecian hath said it contrary to the Lexicons made and printed by Protestants who make Charisma al one with Charis and to signify Grace or gift without mention of Free gift contrary to the old vulgar translation contrary to the vniforme reading of Fathers contrary to his owne and his fellows translations Are these your cleare and euident demonstracions which shal be able to put al Papists as you promise to silence for euer in this behalfe pag. 62. 5. Novv saith he let vs vievve the iudgement of holy Fathers vpon this text With a good wil Syr But marke good Readers how the Fathers are holy their wordes are golden See Bel p. 62. 64. 65. 71. 75. 67. 59. 104. 132. their mouthes golden and them selfes glistering beames and strong pillers of Gods Church when they seeme to make for Bel who otherwise amongst Protestants are but plaine Austin and Hierom and their doctrine stubble errors spottes blemishes Likewise when Popish writers seeme to fauour Bel they are with him famous renowned zealous great schoole doctors great Clerks indeed whoe other whiles are but parasites and dunces 6. First he produceth out of Theodoret pag. 62. Theodoret. in c. 6. Rom. that S. Paul did not cal here eternal life a revvarde but grace because it is the gift of God and al our labours are not of equal poise vnto it This is nothing against vs who neither say that S. Paul did in this verse cal eternal life a rewarde nor deny that it is the gift of God nor affirme that our labours are of equal poise vnto it Next he produceth S. Chrisostom in c. 6. Rom. writing S. Chrysost p. 63. that The Apostle called not eternal life a revvarde but grace as Brixius translateth or gift as Bel hath to shevv that they vvere deliuered not by their ovvne strength nor that there is debt revvarde or retribution of labour but that al those things came by Gods grace or as Bel hath they receaued them freely by Gods gift Here S. Chrisostom at the first sight seemeth to deny Genes v 1. Prouerb v. 18. 2. Paralip v. 7. Sap. v. 16. Eccl. v. 22. Isai v. 10. Math. v. 12. 1. Corinth v. 8. S. Chrysost eternal life to be a rewarde or retribution of good workes which is not only contrary to Scripture Gen. 15. 2. paralip 15. prouerb 11. psal 118. Sapient 5. Eccles 18. Isai 40. Math. 5. 1. Corinth 3. Apoca. vlt. v. 12. but euen to him selfe hom 43. in 1. Corinth saying that VVe shal haue perfect revvarde and most ful retribution not only for the good vve do but
That no points of Christian faith nor that al can not by some way or other be proued by some similitude congruity or probable illation nor that immediatly by testimony of the Church whose testimony in al doctrine of faith can be immediatly proued out of Scripture But only deny that al can be immediatly proued out of scripture by the very words of Scripture and so sufficiently as it sufficeth to captiuate our vnderstanding Articles 39 decreed by Bishops and Ministers 1562. and 1571. into obedience of faith This is directly against the sixt Article of Protestants faith and against Bel in this whole Article But I prooue it as I did the former conclusion For there is no place of al the Scripture which sufficiently proueth al the test Al thinges can not be taken out of Scripture Epiphan haer 61. to be Canonical our B. Lady to be a perpetual virgin and the Sabbath to be lawfully translated from Saterday to Sunday And it shal be more euident out of that which we shal say of Traditions and in answer to Bels arguments For the present it sufficeth that it is so cleare as our very aduersaries do somtime confesse it As See Couel art 4. p. 31. Hooper vvith him Bel p. 134. 135. Luther See Roffens con Luther verit 4. Bellarm. lib. 4. de verb. Dei c. 4. col 164. Luther certaine of Purgatory Bel pag. 134. and 135. art 7. admitteth one point of faith which is not in the Bible professeth that they meane not of it when they say al things necessary to saluation are contained in Scriptures And Luther art 37. said That purgatory can not be proued out of Scripture and yet in the assertion of the same he said That he was certaine there was Purgatory nor cared much what Hereticks babled to the contrary Now let vs come to Bels obiections which albeit for the most part be against Traditions yet because the matters of sufficiency of Scripture and of Traditions are connexed and because we wil keepe his order as much as we can we wil here answer them in that order as they are propunded by him CHAP. II. Bels arguments out of the oulde Testament concerning the sufficiency of Scripture ansvvered Bel citeth dyuers places which make Bel pag. 86. 87. 88. 89. nothing for absolute sufficiency of Scriptures or against Traditions but only bid vs obey and follow the law as Iosue 1. v. 7. and 23. v. 6. Malach. 4. v. 4. omitting therfore these places I answer to other as Deuter. 4. v. 2. and Prouerb 30. v. 6. where God forbiddeth vs to adde to his worde and Deuter. 12. v. 32. where we are bidden to doe to the lorde onely that which he commandeth without adding or taking avvay First that these places make as much against Protestants as Catholicks For they admit one vnwritten Tradition as Bel confesseth and appeareth Bel p. 134. 135. Brent in prolegom Kemnit in examin Conc. Trid. by Brentius Kempnitius the Deane of the chappel and the places cyted by Bel forbid as wel the adding of one thing as of many to Gods worde 2. Secondly I answer that they make nothing against these Traditions which Bel impugneth vz. such as are necessary to Bel pag 86. in praesat Articuli mans saluation for such are indeed Gods worde though vnwritten For the two first places only forbid adding to Gods worde any thing of our owne head or which is mans worde as may be proued First by the reason of the forbiddance prouerb 30. cit vz. least we be disproued and fownde lyers as no doubt we might by adding mans worde which is subiect to lye but not by adding Gods Worde which can neuer proue vntrue though it be not written Secondly because the Iewes did euer adde one thing to Gods written worde as Bel confesseth Conference at Hampton Court p 68. pag. 134. and the Deane of the chappel affirmed they added both signes and words vnto the institution of the Passouer prescribed vnto them by Moyses which addition and Tradition of Ievves added signes and vvords to Gods vvord and their addition confirmed by Christ. theirs saith he was approued by our Sauiour at his last supper And this doctrine was exceeding wel liked in the conference at Hampton Court Thirdly because the Prophets and Euangelists did adde to Moyses law without breaking of the commādement in the aforesaid places 3. Bel answereth That the doctrine of the Bel pag. 89. Prophets is nothing els but an explication of the law But if by the worde explication he vnderstand only such as adde nothing to the sense or meaning of the law but only explicate in other words types or figures the bare meaning of the law he speaketh most absurdly For beside that it is spoken without any reason at al it is against reason and sense to say that al the books of Iosue Iudges Kings and Prophets adde no sense to the law of Moyses For where doth the law of Moyses tel vs of euery worde or action of euery particuler man or woeman recorded in the books of the oulde Testament written since the law was giuen where is euery worde or deede of euery perticuler person in the new Testament And although dyuers actions of Christ especially his death and passion was prefigured in the law yet the like can not be thought of euery action or speech of euery perticuler person so that the words or figures of Moyses law actually tolde whatsoeuer perticuler things ether Prophets or Euangelists euer wrote Wherfore S. Austin S. Austin lib. 1. retract c. 22. recalled what he had said lib. cont Adimant c. 3. That al the precepts and promises in the new Testament are in the oulde For certaine precepts there be saith he not figured but proper which are not found in the oulde Testament but in the new And for this cause Tertullian lib. cont Hermog Tertullian called the Ghospel a supply of the oulde Testament 4. But if Bel by the word explication Hovv traditions are explicatiōs of the lavv comprehend al such additions as though they adde to the sense and meaning of the law yet are ether of their nature or of the intention of the adder referred to the better vnderstanding comprehension and fulfilling of the law as al the reasons similitudes comparisons examples and sentences in an oration are explications of the theame therof because though they adde sense to the sense of the theam yet they al tend to the perfect comprehension of the theame I graunt al the writings of Prophets and Apostles to be explications of the law as hath bene explicated in the second conclusion Chapt. 1. parag 7. 8. but withal adde that the Traditions of the Church are such like explications For what they containe is in like sort referred as a meane to the end to the perfect vnderstanding and fulfilling of the said law and so they are no other additions
contained Ergo it is truth But perhaps Bels dul head thought it al one to say Al conteined in Scripture is truth wherupon the said Syllogisme dependeth Scripture coÌ„teineth al truth As for S. Athanasius his reuerence of Traditions it is euident by his prouing S. Athanas l. de Nicen. Synod epist ad African apud Theodoret. lib. 1. c. 8. the Godhead of Christ and name of consubstantiality by Tradition by his words lib. de incarn verbi who sticketh to Traditions is out of danger 10. S. Epiphan he alleadgeth writing Bel pag. 98. S. Epiphan haer 65 Chapt. 1. parag 8. S. Epiphan That vve can tel the finding of euery question by consequence of Scripture But these words haue bene explicated before As for Tradition he saith haere 61. VVe must vse it for althings can not be taken out of Scripture For the Apostles haue deliuered some things by writing some things by Tradition The like he saith haere 55. and 75. S. Cyril he citeth where he saith That vve S. Cyrill lib. 2. de recta fid ad Regin must follovv Scriptures in nothing depart from their prescript This maketh not against vs who professe so to doe and yet Withal follow Traditions And what account S Cyril S. Cyril made of Traditions appeareth by his obseruing lent lib. 10. in leuit and vse of the Crosse lib. 6. in Iulian. which are Traditions Apostolical as witnes S. Ambros ser S. Ambros Tertullian 25. 34. 36. Tertul. de corona mil. and others 11. He citeth S. Chrisostome writing Bel pag. 98. Chrysost in psalm 95. That if any thing be spoken without Scripture the hearers mynde wauereth somtymes doubting somtymes asâ—enting otherwhile denying But maruel it is that Bel would touch S. Chrisostome S. Chrysost who hom 42. Thesal vpon these words Holde Traditions saith Hence it appeareth that the Apostles deliuered not althings by letters And the one as vvel as the other are worthy of the same credit wherfore we thincke the Churches Traditions to deserue beleefe It is a Tradition marke Bel aske no more And if Bel had cyted the words immediatly before he had explicated of what kinde of speaking without Scripture S. Chrisostom meant namely sine testibus solaque animi cogitatione vvithout vvitnesses and of his ovvne head But Churches Traditions haue her for witnes descend from the Apostles An other place he bringeth out of the same S Chrisostom as he Author imperf hom 41. in Math. saith but it is out of the Author imperfect who was a flat Arian and therfore his testimony is worth nothing otherwise then he agreeth with holy fathers though his saying cyted by Bel That al is fulfilled in Scripture vvhich is sought to saluation may be explicated by the first or second conclusion 12. Next he bringeth S. Ambrose bidding Bel pag. 98. S. Ambros 1. de fide ad Gratian. c. 4. vs not to beleeue argument and disputations but aske the Scriptures Apostles Prophets and Christ This maketh rather for vs because it alloweth enquiring of others besides Scriptures namely of Apostles from whom the Churches Traditions came And nothing against Traditions because they be no arguments or disputations And indeed S. Ambrose meaneth of humane arguments and reasons such as in the Chapter before he said the Arians vsed to proue Christ to be vnlike to his Father Besides he speaketh only concerning one point vz. the consubstantiality of Christ And therfore though he had bidden vs therin seeke only Scripture he had nothing preiudicated Traditions which plainly he maintaineth ser 25. 34. 36. 38. epist S. Ambros 81. and other where Only I maruel wherfore Bel corrupted S. Ambrose his words Corrupt of Fathers For where he saith vve deny yea abhorre Bel maketh him say vve deny not but abhorre Making S. Ambros teach heresy in graunting Christ to be vnlike his Father which was the matter he spake of and to speake absurdly in abhorring a speech which he doth not deny 13. S. Basil he citeth saying vvhatsoeuer is Bel pag. 99. S. Basil in Ethic. defin vlt ad Eustachium â—icdicum extra scripturam out of the Scriptue seeing it is not of faith is sinne And in an other place Let vs stand to the iudgment of Scripture and let the truth be iudged on their side whose doctrine is agreeable to Gods oracles Answer In the first place by extra scripturam he vnderstandeth things contrary to Scripture as in the same place he vnderstandeth with the Apostle by non ex fide things contrary to faith as appeareth both because he saith such things are sinne which is not true of things which are barely beside Scripture as also because he proueth such things to be sinne because they be non ex fide contrary to faith as the Apostle speaketh Rom. 14. v. 23. Beside by Scripture he vnderstandeth al Gods words as vsually we vnderstand the whole by the cheefest part Which may be proued because before he defined faith to be certaine persuasion of Gods vvorde affirmed it to a rise of hearing Gods worde and therupon inferreth what is beside Scripture is not of faith In which illation if he tooke not Scripture for Gods whole worde as he did in the Antecedent he did manifestly paralogize And thus vnderstood he speaketh nothing against Traditions which are part of Gods worde and as him selfe saieth otherwhere of as equal S. Basil lib. de Spir. c. 27. 29. force as the written worde is 14. The second place maketh nothing to the purpose For he biddeth not vs be iudged by only Scripture yea in allowing those opinioÌ„s for true which are agreable to Scripture he insinuateth that to discerne the truth of opinioÌ„s it is not necessary to proue them out of Scripture so they be consonaÌ„t thereto How earnest a defender of Traditions S. Basil was appeareth lib. de spir c. S. Basil 29 I thincke quoth he it an Apostolical thing to sticke vnto Traditions not written and c. 27. Some doctrine vve haue by writing some vve receaued of the Apostles Tradition and both haue equal force to piety Nor any contradicteth these marke Bel vvho neuer so slenderly haue experienced the rights of the Church And c. 10. he writeth That Hereticks abolish Apostolical Tradition A Trick of Heretiks to reiect tradition Bel pag 99. S. Hierom. and reiect vvritten testimonyes of Fathers as of no account 15. The last Father he citeth is S. Hierom out of whom he alleadgeth three places The first is in math 23. This because it hath no authority from Scripture is as easely reiected as it is affirmed The second is in psal 86. where vpon that verse Dominus narrabit in scripturis populorum he saith God vvil shew not by worde but by Scripture that excepting the Apostles what is said afterward shal haue no authority The third place is in Hierem. c. 4. That we must not follow the error of our Auncestors or parents
and ought to read Scriptures and can not othervvise attaine to eternal life passeth exact speech and albounds of truth Because S. Chrysostom hath no such exact words yea the words which Bel wresteth to his purpose S. Chrysostom him selfe otherwise expoundeth as hath bene shewed And thus much of Bels second reply to the foresaid answer 12. Thirdly saith he Dauid and the Berheans had no regard of this popish distinction of pag. 116. more exact speech vttered in schools then in pulpit Because Dauid Psalm 119. v. 9. affirmeth That a yong man shal cleanse his waies by study meditation and keeping of Gods lavv The Berrheans Corrupt of Script searched the Scriptures and examined the Apostles doctrine by them Ansvver Dauid Psalm 118. al. 119. v. 9. saith A yong man shal correct his waies by keeping Gods lawes But study and meditation are added by Bel I wonder he added not also reading But suppose Dauid had said That a yong man amendeth his life by reading Scripture shal we infer that he thought preachers speake as exactly as Schoolmen The like reason is the other The Berheans examined the Apostles doctrine by Scripture Ergo they thought the doctrine of the pulpit as exact as the schoole O wit whither wilt thou But Chapt. 11. parag 4. of the Berheans fact we shal speake more hereafter 13. After this Bel falleth to entreat in Of vvoemens teaching and reading Scripture perticuler of woemens teaching and reading Scriptures propounding vnto him selfe this obiection of Catholiques S. Paul wil haue woemen to learne in silence and permitteth them not to teach 1. Timoth 2. v. 12. Bel p. 116. answereth That though S. Paul permit them not to teach publikly before men yet he forbiddeth them not to read Scripture nor to teach priuatly Prouerb 31. v. 1. Act. 18. v. 26. 2. Timoth. 1. v. 5. c. 3. v. 15. where due circumstances occurre because Bethsabe taught Salomon Priscilla expounded Scriptures to Apollo Eunice and Lois instructed Timothy in Scriptures Here Bel is ashamed to lycence woemen to teach publikly before men though he was not to make one of them head of the Church which is a far greater matter and necessarily includeth authority to teach the Church publikly but whether Heretical vvoemen hovv malepert vvho dare teache Tertull. l. de praescript Some preached publikly in Germany Sur. An. 1522. they may teach publikly before woemen or priuatly before men and what the due circumstances are when they may teach priuatly he setteth not downe Nether do I thinke his Protestant sisters wold regard them who publikly before men at table and in their assemblies in houses take vpon them to expound Scriptures Surely he should do wel to informe his sisters of his circumstances But as for S. Paul he giueth them no lycence at al to read or to teach Scriptures excepting the case of perticuler inspiration or of necessity when they are permitted also to baptize For he in the foresaid words not only forbiddeth them absolutly to teach but withal appointeth them to learne as if this alone were their duety and belonged to them And lest we should thinke they might learne of them selfs by reading Scriptures he explicateth 1. Corinth 14. v 35. both of S. Paul whome and where they must learne vz. of their husbands and priuatly at home If they list to learne saith he any thing let them not read Scriptures aske their husbands at home Behold woemen appointed not to teach ether publikly or priuatly but to learne and that priuatly at home and of their husbands And the same saith S. Chrisostom S. Chrysost S. Hierom. hom 9. in epist ad Coloss S. Hierom dialog 1. contr Pelag. where he reprehendeth the Pelagians for licensing their woemen to sing with them as Protestants do now and Bel passeth in silence and saying they ought to be skilful in Scripture But no maruel if Protestants being Luther de vo coiug Assert artic 16. vid. serm de matrimon edit VVitemberbergens fol. 126. S. Paul so womanish as they professe they can no more liue without them then without meat or drinke and heresies haue bene euer spred by fauour and helpe of woemen as S. Hietom saith epist ad Cresiphontem be more liberal to woemen then the Apostle who said tt was good not to touch them 1. Cor. 7. v. 1. 14. The examples alleadged by Bel for woemens teaching are partly false partly not to the purpose For Bethsabees words came ether from Gods perticuler inspiration and so her teaching maketh not to the purpose or from her owne head and so she taught not Gods word though what she said being after recorded by Salomon becâ—me Gods worde Priscilla is not said act 18. v. 16. as Bel affirmeth to haue expounded Scriptures but the way of the Lord to Apollo which she might do without expounding Scripture as S. Ihon prepared Luc. 1. v. 76. Math. 3. v. 3. the way of the Lord without preparing Scripture That of Eunice and Lois is vncertaine For albeit it be said 2. Timoth. 1. v. 5. That they vvere faithful vvoemen and c. 3. v. 15. that Timothy vvas instructed from his infancy in Scripture Yet it is not said he was instructed of them but might wel be instructed of some other at their procuremeÌ„t as it is vsual for to hyre maisters to teach children wherfore fondly doth Bel auouch it to be cleare and euident by their example that mothers must teach and yong babes learne Scripture 15. But suppose that they taught their childe or grandchild for want of sufficient men to teach as may be presumed because his father was a Gentil Act. 16. v. 13. what is this to woemen teaching without al necessity priuarly whome soeuer euen their husbands contrary to the prescript and otder sette down by S. Paul yea suppose that Bethsabe Priscilla Eunice and Lois had without perticuler inspiration or necessity which Bel can not proue taught men priuatly Scriptures who seeth not but that S. Paul knew better woemens duety then they and that we ought rather to follow his prescript and order then the example of two or three woemen not the learnedest nor greatest Clerks 16. After this Bel alleadgeth Origen for Bel p. 107. proofe of common peoples reading Scripture and affirmeth him to exhort the people to read Scriptures because he writeth Origen homil 4. in Leuit If we can not al things let vs at lest remember that we are now taught or is rehearsed in the Church But Origen here exhorteth the people only to remembring at lest saith he Bel p. 111. those things which are taught and rehearsed this day in the Church to wit by ecclesiastical persons He bringeth like wise S. Austin exhorting S. Augustin serm 55. de tempore his people not only to heare diuine lessons in the Church but also at home to read them selfs or to heare others Wherupon Bel noteth That we must read Scriptures at
parag 13. and arâ— 7. c. 9. parag 19. vntruth 92 made oftentymes of coblers tinkers and taylers who may thanke the Lord as one of them did that they know nothing of the Romish tongue 4. That in the Churches vve read vnto the common people latin sermons In deed we read such in our seruice but read them to the common people no more then we read the Masse to them But read both in honour and seruice to God who vnderstandeth as wel latin as english And thus much touching Scripture now let vs come to Traditions CHAP. IX Of Apostolical Traditions vvhether there be any or none OF the Traditions which the Church manteineth some were instituted by Christ some by his Apostles by the inspiration of the holy Ghost and others by the Church it selfe The question is whether there by any of the two former kinds of Traditions instituted or deliuered by the Apostles and therupon called Apostolical vvhat â—ind of traditioÌ„s Bel impugnâ—th without writing which concerne things as Bel saith in the beginning of this article pag. 86. necessary to mans saluation For though as I said before the Scripture conteine al Chapt. 1. things which are necessary to be knowne actually of euery one yet because euery one is bound to deny no point of christian faith but at lest vertually and implicitly to beleeue al such traditions as concerne matters of faith or manners may as Bel speaketh be said to concerne things necessary to mans saluation This supposed I affirme with the vniforme consent of al holy Fathers that there are such traditions and it followeth of that which we proued in the first chapter that the Scripture conteineth not actually al points of christian faith and otherwise I proue it because S. Paul 2. S. Paul S. Basil de Spirit c. 29. S. Chrysost 2. Thessalon hom 4. S. Epiphan haer 61. S. Damascenus 4. de fid c. 17. Thess 2. v. 15. saith Hold the Traditions which you haue learned whether it be by worde or by our epistle therfore he deliuered some Traditions only by worde as S. Basil S Chrisostom S. Epiphanius S. Damascen out of this place do gather 2. Secondly S. Ihon the last writer of Scripture said Hauing many things to vvrite to 3. Ioan. v. 13. you I vvould not by paper and inke Ergo many things which were to be told to christians S. Shon left vnwritten yea thought it not expedient to write them Bel answereth Bel p. 117. That the Apostles taught no needful doctrin which they did not after commit to vvriting This answer insinuateth that the Apostles taught some needles matter contrary to S. Paul 2. Timoth. 2 Tit. 3. and that which S. Paul commanded the Thessalonicenses to hold S. Ihon said he had to write were needles things which is but to blaspheme the Apostles Thirdly in the law of nature there were traditions as is euident and testifyed Gen. 18. v. 19. Likewise in tyme of the Conference at Hampton Court p. 68. Valer. Max. lib. 3. c. 319. de scauro vario seuero S. Dionis l. 1. eccles hier c. 1. S. Ignat. ep ad Heron. S. Iren. lib. 3. c. 3. S. Ciprian l. 2. epist 3. S. Basil lib. de Spirit 6. 27. 29. law written as English Protestants confesse why not therefore in tyme of the Ghospel 3. Fourthly I wil propose to the Reader a choise som what like to that which a Roman made to his Citizens when being accused of his aduersary in a long oration he stept vp and said my aduersary affirmeth I deny it whether beleeue you citizens And so in few words reiected his aduersaries long accusation For S. Dionisius Areopag S. Ignatius both schollers of the Apostles S. Ireney S. Cyprian S. Basil S. Chrisostom S. Epiphanius S. Hierom. S. S. Chrysost 2. Thessal hom 4. S. Epiphan haer 61. S. Hierom. dial contr Lucif S. Augustin epist 118. l. 10. de Genen ad lit c. 23. Austin and others affirme that there are Apostolical Traditions Bel some few new start vp Heretiks deny it Whether beleeue you Christians This choise is far aboue that of the Roman For there was but one against one yea ones bare denyal against the others proofs But here are many against few Saints against to say the lest ordinary fellows Doctors of Gods Church against vnlearned Ministers Catholiques against Heretiks yea manifest proofs against bare denyals And shal we not especially in a matter of fact as is whether the Apostles left any vnwritten Traditions or no beleeue many most holy most learned most incorrupt most antient witnesses yea wherof some were eye witnesses of the matter before a few vnlearned vnconstant iangling new fellowes S. Hierom. epist 61. c. 9. S. Augustin de Symbolo ad Catechumen Ruffin in Symbol S. Hierom. con Heluid S. Augustin haer 55. S. Epiphan haer 78. Locis supra cit c. 3. 4. Moreouer whence haue we the Apostles Creed but by Tradition as testify S. Hierom S. Austin and Ruffinus whence the perpetual virginity of our B. Lady as appeareth by S. Hierom S. Austin S. Epiphanius whence the lawful transferring the Sabbath day from Saterday to Sonday but by Tradition Whence many other things as testify S. Hierom S. Dionis S. Iren. S. Cyptian Tertull. Origen S. Basil S. Epiphan S. Chrisost S. Hierom S. Austin S. Ambrose and others but by Tradition But especially whence haue we the Bible it selfe Whence haue we that euery booke chapter and verse of it is Gods worde and no one sentence therin corrupted in al these 1600. years where haue we that the Gospel bearing the name of S. Thomas who was an Apostle and eye witnes of Christs actions is not as wel or better Christs Ghospel then that which carrieth the name of S. Luke and was written only by heare-say Luc. 1. v. 2. S. Hierom. de Scriptur eccles in Luca. Bel bringeth six ansvvers as is professed in the very beginning but by Tradition This reason so courseth Bel vp and downe as like fox many tymes vn-earthed euen for wearines he runneth into the hunters toyle graunting what the argument would 5. His first answer is That there is great difference Bel p. 134. betvvixt the primmatiue Church and the Church of late daies For the Apostles heard Christs doctrine savv his myracles and were replenished with the holy Ghost and consequently must needs be fit vvitnesses of al that Christ did and taught vvhich adiuncts the Church of Rome hath not Here Bel blasphemeth Christs Church of late daies auouching her to be nether replenished with the holy Ghost Symbol Apostol contrary to our Creed professing her to be holy and Christs promise that the holy Ghost should remaine with her for euer Nor to be a Ioan. 14. v. 16. fit witnes of his truth contrary to S. Paul affirming her to be the piller and strength of 1. Timoth. 3. v. 15. truth and to Gods sending her
euident then the holy Fathers when they speake of beleeuing the Ghospel they meane of deuine and Christian faith And what faith should S. Austin meane of but of such faith as he exhorted the Maniches vnto which was deuine And in the place alleadged by Bel he calleth outward teaching helpe to faith and only meaneth that a man can not learne faith of man alone without al inward teaching of God And therfore addeth That if he be not within who teacheth the Tract 3. in 1. Ioan. 10. 9. hart in vayne is our sound and where Gods inspiration is not there in vaine words sound outwardly which is most true and nothing against vs. Lastly it is against reason For the authority of Gods Church is not meere humane but in some sort deuine as a witnes by God him selfe appointed to testify his truth And therfore he said vvho heareth Luc. 10. v. 16. you heareth me therfore the faith that proceedeth from such authority is not humane 22. Wherfore Bel not trusting much to this shift flyeth to an other vz. That S. Austin said not these vvords of him selfe as he vvas then a christian but as he had bene in tymes past a Maniche This he proueth Because in the same chapter he saith That the authority of vntruth 93 1. vntruth 94 2. vntruth 95 3. the Ghospel is aboue the authority of the Churche in the chapter before That the truth of Scriptures must be preferred before authority consent of nations and the name of Catholique and promiseth to yeeld to Maniches doctrine if he shal be able to proue it out of Scripture But both this answer and proofs are most falsly auouched vpon S Austin For if he had meant the foresaid words of him selfe only as when he was a Manichist he wold not haue said Non crederem nisi commoueret c. I wold not beleeue vnles the Church did commoue me But non credidissem nisi commouisset I had not or wold not haue beleeued vnlesse the Church had commoued me Which Bel wel marking made him say so in english though he had not said it in latine Besides False translat 12. in the same chapter he addeth Qua authoritate Catholicorum infirmata iam nec potero Euangelio credere which authority of Catholiques being discredited I shal not be able now marke Bel to beleeue the Ghospel Moreouer cap. 4. he said That besides other motiues the authority of Catholiques tenet doth holde me in the lap of the Church 23. Bels proofs are nothing but his owne vntruths For though it be true That the Scripture is of greater authority then the Church yet nether doth S. Austin say it in that place nether maketh it any thing against vs. For albeit the Scripturs be in it selfe of greater authority yet the authority of the Church is both infallible and more euident to me And what maruel if for an infallible authority more euident I beleeue an other though greater yet not so manifest As S. Ihon was sent to giue testimony of Christ Ioan. 1 v. 8. and yet far inferior to Christ Nether saith S. Austin That truth of Scripture is to be preferred before authority and consent of Catholiques But Bel added the worde Scripturs as though S. Austin meant that their truth could be knowne without the authority of Catholiques or be opposit vnto it which he manifestly denyeth Nether meaneth he of the truth of Scripturs which the Manichist against whom he wrote reiected almost wholy and he him selfe professeth he could S. Austin speaketh of most manifest and euident truth and such is not the Scriptures not take for truth if it were contrary to Catholiques but of any knowne truth in general which he saith and truly is to be preferred before al authority opposit vnto it because such authority is not infallible but false and deceitful And therfore he speaketh vppon supposition that if it were true which other where he auoucheth to be impossible that Manichists taught truth and Catholiques error then their truth vvere to be preferred before the name of Catholiques consent of nations and authority begun with miracles nourished vvith hope encreased vvith charity established vvith antiquity and succession of Priests euen from the seat of Peter to vvhom our Lord after his resurrection commanded his sheep to be fed vnto this present Bishop But saith the glorious Saint vnto maniches I after him to Protestants Amongst you only soundeth the promise of truth vvhich if it vvere so manifest as it could not be doubted of it vvere to be preferred before al things that hold me in the Catholique Church 24. His third vntruth of S. Austins promise is directly contrary to S. Austin in the S. Austin vvold not beleeue Maniche though he had manifest Scripture Sup. paragr 18. same place If saith he thou shalt read any manifest thing for Manichey out of the Ghospel I vvil beleeue nether them nor thee Not them because they lyed to me of thee Not thee because thou bringest me that Scripture vvhich I beleeued through them vvho haue lyed As for Bels reasons to proue that we beleeue nothing with deuine faith for authority of the Church they are easely answered For though the formal obiect of faith be the first verity yet not simply as it is in it selfe but as it is proposed vnto vs by the Church And therfore though we beleeue nothing but because it is spoken and reuealed by God yet because he speaketh not immediatly to vs by him selfe but by the mouth of his Church whome who so heareth heareth God and Luc. 10. v. 16. 1. Thess c. 2. v. 13. whose worde is not mans worde but truly Gods worde therfore faith is not without the testimony of the Church As for S. Austins authority it hath bene answered before as also his arguments which Bel bringeth against Traditions CHAP. X. Of the certainty of Apostolical Traditions THERE are certaine and vndoubted Apostolical traditions This is against Bel pag. 128 129. c. But I proue it because the traditions of the Byble to be Gods worde of the perpetual virginity of our B. Lady of the transferring of the Sabbath and such like are certaine and vndoubted Besids if in the law of nature and Moyses traditions were keapt certaine why not in the law of grace But more euident wil the conclusion be if we descend to perticuler traditions which Bel endeuoreth Bel p. 128. 129. to proue vncertaine First he setteth-downe this Proposition Vnwritten traditions are so vncertaine as the best learned papists are at great contētion about them This he proueth in the tradition of Easter about which contended S. Victor P. the Bishops of Asia aboue 1400 years agoe both earnestly alleadging Apostolical traditions Likewise S. Anicetus and S. Policarpe who liued al within 200. years after Christ when the Church was in good estate and stayned vvith fevv or no corruptions 2. Marke good Reader his conclusion and proofs therof and thou wilt
shold that font be conserued so long but as a monument of so memorable a christning How can Constantin be worthely surnamed great of Christians if at his death he communicated with Arians and was baptized of them at Nicomedia as their fellow heretik Eusebius first reported to purchase credit to his heresy If this had bene so he shold rather haue bene syrnamed of Catholiques the Apostata or Heretike 11. The last tradition of honoring Saints Bel p. 133. Bel saith made some to honor Heretiks for Saints as Platina saith he writeth of the Platina in Bonif. 8. corps of Herman an heretike honored as Saints reliques at Ferrara for 20. years together Answer vntruth 97 How Apostolical a thing the honoring of Saints is Bellarmin sheweth lib. de Sanct. beatit c. 19. Where besids Scripturs and Councels he proueth it by the testimony of 30. Fathers wherof 25 liued aboue a thowsand years ago But is not this a strange metamorphosis to make the error of common people a popish Tradition Beside Platina affirmeth no such thing him selfe but only that some others write so But nether he nor any other write that it rose of popish Tradition That is Bels accustomed vse of addition And therfore where he noteth danger in beleeuing Tradition he might haue noted danger in crediting his owne relation Yea what danger is in not beleeuing Roman Tradition appeareth both by the testimony of Fathers before cited and by the example of Policrates and his fellows the Quartadecimans and by S. Cyprian Quartadecimans are Heretiks ex Epiphan haer 50. 70. Nicephor l. 4. c. 39. August haer 29. Socrates lib. 5. c. 22. Tripartita hist Vincent Lytin and his followers the Donatists reproued only by Roman Tradition As testifyeth Tripartit lib. 9. c. 38. and Vincent Lyrinen But suppose that they of Ferrara had vpon Tradition taken occasion to commit Idolatry Shal we reiect al things wherof men take occasion to offend So we might reiect Christ who was set vnto the ruine of many Luc. 2. v. 34. and by whom the Iewes took occasion of scandal So we might reiect Scripturs by which heretiks haue taken occasion he heresy Sunne and Moone because Gentils haue by them fallen into Idolatry Cannot Bel distinguish between vse abuse of Traditions betwixt scandal giuen taken Thus much of the certainty of Tradtions Now let vs come to the examination of them CHAP. XI Of the examination of Traditions APostolical Traditions are not to be examined by Scripture This is against Bel pag. 117. but euident Because Apostolical â—el p. 117 Tradition is the Apostles word their S. Paul â— Luke word is Gods word 1. Thess 2. v. 16. But Gods word is not to be examined at al Ergo nether is Apostolical Tradition Wel might the Church at first examine a Tradition whether it were Apostolical or no as she did examine diuers parts of the Bible whither they were Scripture or no but finding it to be Apostolical she could no more examine it by the Bible then she can examin one part of the Bible by an other And Bel in saying That the new testament may Bel p. 135. al. 117. be examined by the old sheweth him selfe rather to be a Iew then a Christian For how dare he examin that which is certaine to be deuine truth Or how can he examin the new testament by the old if he be not more certain of the old then of the new But how Traditions ought to be proued heare Tertullian Tertullian lib. de Corona It can not seeme none or a doubtful fault against Custome which is to be defended for it name sake and is sufficiently authorized by protection of consent Plainly reason is to be enquired but so as the Custome be reteined not to destroy it but to vphold it That thou maist obserue it more when thou art sure of the reason of it But what a thing is it that one shal cal Custome in question when he hath fallen from it 2. But saith Bel Scriptures are called canonical Bel p. 117. because they be the rule of faith Therfore al things are to be examined by them And for this cause saith he Esay sent vs to the Law and testimony Esaiae 8. to try the truth Malachias bid vs be myndful Malach. 4. Psalm 119. 2. Pet. 1. Ioan. 5. Math. 22. Act. 17. 1. Ioan. 4. Gal. 1. of Moises lavv Dauid said Gods word is a lathern S. Peter a shyning light For this cause Christ exhorted the Iewes to read Scripturs and said the Pharises erred because they knew not the Scripturs The Berheans examined S. Paules doctrin S. Ihon bid try the spirits S. Paul pronounced him accursed That preached any doctrin not conteined in Scripture as S. Austin and S. Basil expound him S. August l. 3. cont Petil. c. 6. S. Basil sum 72 c. 1. Bible onely Canonical Scripture but not it alone Canonical Sup. c. 2. parag 1. 7. c. 9. paragr 17. 3. Answer The Bible alone is called Canonical Scripture because it alone of al Scripturs the Church followeth as an infallible rule in beleeuing or defyning any thing But it nether is nor is called the only Canon of faith In the rest Bel affirmeth but proueth not that that was the cause why the Scripture said so As for the places of Esay Malachy Dauid and S. Peter they haue bene answered before As for exhortation of Christ I might deny that he there exhorted the Iewes to read Scripture but Scrutamini Scripturas See S. Gyrill l. 3. in Ioan. c. 4. affirmed that they did read them because they thought they conteined life But suppose he did exhort them to read Scripturs for to finde whether he were the Messias or no wheroâ— as he saith there they giue testimony what is this for trying of al matters by them Can Bel inferre an vniuersal propositioÌ„ of one singuler That of the Pharises Corrupt of Script conteineth two corruptions of Scripturs For neither did Christ say The Pharases but the Saduces erred about the resurrection nether doth he say the cause of their error therin was only ignorance of Scripture as Bel insinuateth leauing out the words povvre of God but ignorance both Math. 22. v. 29. of Scripture and of Gods powre you erre saith he knovving nether Scripturs nor the powre of God So if they had known Gods powre though it had not bene by Scripture but by Tradition or reuelation as Iob and Iob 19. v. 25. the faithful vncircumcised did they had not erred about the resurrection Beside the resurrection is a perticuler matter and euidently testifyed in Scripture what proueth this concerning al points of faith 4. As for the Berhaeans whom Bel wil haue to haue examined the truth of S. Pauls Act. 17. doctrin I ask of him whither they were faithful whilst they examined it or faithles If faithles why proposeth he them to vs as an example to imitat
c. 8. See epist ad Epictetum l. cit Apud Athanas Theodoret l. cit S. Grego Nazianz orat 2. de Theolog Councel did not inuent that word but set it downe testimonio patrum by testimony of their Fathers and Eusebius though an Arian confesseth the same And S. Gregory Nazian writing against the Arians saith that it should suffice vs that our Fathers thought not as they do and the same argumeÌ„t vseth also S. Athanasius writing against the Apollinarists And how vntruly he affirmeth that the Fathers did not say many vnwritten things are to be beleeued I refer my selfe to their testimonies alleadged aboue cap. 4. But saith Bel S. Athanasius proued homousion because though the word was not in Scripture the sense was A goodly reason He proued it out of Scripture therfore not out of Tradition as if one should say He proued it out of S. Ihon therfore not out of S. Paul 3. Origen saith Bel hom 25. in Math. Bel p. 118. and hom 1. in 1. Hierem counselleth vs to try al doctrins by Scripture This is vntrue vntruth 101. Origen For Origen speaketh not of al but only of our opinions and doctrins Our opinions and expositions saith he haue no credit without their testimonies Againe VVe must alleadge the sense of Scripture for testimony of al the words we vtter Terrullian calling that truth which is first and false which is after maketh nothing to his purpose Next he alleadgeth S. Austin saying That we must not consent euen S. Augustin lib. de vnit eccles c. 10. to 7. to Catholique Bishops error or priuat opinion against Scripture Error against Scripture is not to be followed Ergo nether Apostolical Traditions contested by the whole Church Surely Bel hath great facility in inferring quodlibet ex quolibet He bringeth also S. Chrisostom calling Gods lawes a S. Chrysost hom 13. in 2. Cor. to 4. most exact rule and bidding vs learn not what this or that man thinks and of these things enquire these points also out of Scripture Answer S. Chrysostoms meaning is that Gods word is most exact in the matter whereof he talked vz. whither pouerty be to be preferred before riches in which matter we ought saith he to leaue the opinions of this or that worldly man who prefer riches but seek what the Scripture saith of it And Bel to make him False translat 13. seeme to say That al truth is to be sought out of Scripture translated these words Deque his à Scripturis haec etiam inquirite thus Search the truth out of the Scriptures Englishing nether de his nor haec 4. After S. Chrysostom he citeth two pag. 120. Chap 5. parag 5. sentences out of Victoria cited by him and answered by vs before To whome he adioyneth Canus teaching That Priests are not Canus l. 3. de loc c. vlt. to be heard vnles they teach according to Gods law Certain And then inferreth That Papists teach plainly that no doctrine is to be receaued which is not tryed by Gods word True also if it be rightly vnderstood vz. of such doctrine as may be tryed not of deuine as Apostolical Traditions be which may not be tryed And of Gods whole word not of a part thereof as the Scripture is And that expounded not according to the humor of priuat spirits but according to the vniforme consent of Fathers Councels This most iust and reasonable rule of trying al matters in controuersy the Councel of Concil Trident sess 18. in saluo coductu dato Protestantibus Trent prescribed to the Protestants But they wil try deuine truth conteined not only in Traditions but also in Scripture that part by which they wil try the rest they wil expound according to their owne priuat spirits which is to make them selfs rule and iudges of al wherfore vainly doth Bel professe to agree with the Pope in al coÌ„trouersies pag. 120. if he wil be tryed by Gods word For vnles Bel be made iudge and tryer both of Gods word and of his meaning or as Protestants speake vnles he may iudge which is Scripture and which is the true sense there must nether tryal nor iudgement passe For vnles Protestants may haue al the law in their owne hands they wil accept no iudgement 5. But because Bellarmin graunteth that Bellarm. lib. 2. de Concil c. 52. singuli Episcopi al Bishops seuerally may erre and somtyme do erre and dissent one from an other so that we know not which of them is to be followed Bel thinketh pag. 121. that he hath a great catch yet remembring him self better that though Catholiques graunt that euery Bishop seuerally may erre yet deny that they can erre al when they are gathered in a Synode confirmed by the Pope he taketh occasion to make a long digression about Councels CHAP. XIII Of the authority of late general Councels GENERAL Councels in these our dayes are as certaine as before tymes This is against Bel pag. 123. saying that in our dayes they are like a nose of waxe and as vncertaine as the winde And because he denyeth not but that general Councels in some times haue bene certaine forsooth such as defyned nothing contrary to Protestantisme I wil only proue that they are now as certaine as euer First because Christ promyseth that he would be in the midst of them that are gathered in his name Math. 18. v. 20. S. Math. That the holy Ghost should teach vs al truth Iohn 16. That the gates of hel should not preuaile S. Iohn v. â—3 S. Math. against his Church Math. 16. v. 18. which promises are limited to no certaine tyme but are extended as he saith Math. vlt. euen to the end of the worlde Likewise Christs commaund of hearing his Church Math. S. Math. v. 17. S. Luc. 18. of hearing preachers sent by him Luc. 10. of obeying our Prelates and being subiect to them Hebr. 13. v. 17. bindeth as wel S. Paul in our dayes as before tymes wherfore either the Church Preachers and Prelates teaching in a general Councel in our dayes can not erre or Christ in our daies commaundeth vs to beleeue heresy and lyes 2. Secondly the present Church of our daies hath authority to decyde controuersies in faith Ergo we be bound to obey her decision Ergo it is no lye The Antecedent is an article of Protestants faith Article 39. Art 20. The first consequence I proue because who resisteth power in matters belonging to the power refisteth Gods ordinance and purchaseth damnation to him selfe Roman 13. vers 2. 3. which being true of temporal power and concerning wordly matters much more true it is of spiritual power and in matters of faith and saluation The second consequence is euident For God who is truth it selfe and can not lye can not binde vs especially See S. Gregory lib. 1. epist 24. vnder paine of damnation to beleeue and follow lyes Thirdly as Protestants except
against the Councels in their tymes al hereticks may except against the Councels of their tymes and so none shal See l. Marciani C. de sum Trinit be condemned as Hereticks no Councel certaine but al things remaine as vncertaine as if there had neuer been any Councel at al which is to take away the end of calling Councels For if they can not make things certaine to what purpose are they gathered Finally Bel can giue no sufficient reason whie general Councels be not as certaine now as euer as shal appeare by the answer to this his obiection 3. He obiecteth that Bellarmin lib. 2. de Concil cap. 11. writeth that is the true decree of the counsel which is made of the greater part But Canus saith lib. 5. de locis Canus cap. 4. q. 2. That voices preuaile not with vs as in humane assemblies Againe these matters of faith are iudged not by number but by waight And the grauity and authority of the Pope is it which giueth waight to Councels Ergo saith Bel there can be no certainty in Bel p. 121. 122. Councels A goodly reason sutely Two Catholique writers agree not whether should be accompted the decree of a councel if the greater number of Bishops should define against the Pope and the lesser number of Bishops Ergo no councel in our dayes is certaine As if nothing were certaine if two Catholiques disagree about it Wil Bel allowe mee to argue soe against Protestants I beleeue I should finde scarce any one pointe of faith certaine amongst them But he should rather hane inferred Bellarmin Canus and al Catholique writers agree that it is the decree of the Councel and certaine truth which the greater part of Bishops defineth and the Pope confirmeth Ergo general councels in our dayes are certaine Namely that of Trent in which the most yea al as appeareth by their subscriptions defyned the Pope confirmed 4. I might omit a friuolcus obiection which he maketh against Bellarmin of contradiction Because Bellarmin saith that Bellarm. lib. 2. de concil c. 18. the assemblie of Bishops in lawful councels is an assembly of Iudges and their decrees lâ—ws necessarily to be followed And yet affirmeth that it is al one for Councels to be reproued by the Pope and Cap. 11. to doe against his sentence For though Bellarmin affirme Bishops to be Iudges and their iudgement to be necessarily followed as law Yet as himselfe explicateth cap. 11. it is not necessarily to be followed antequam accedat sententia Summi Pontificis before it be confirmed by the Pope As the Peeres in parliament are Iudges and their acts necessary to be followed but not before they be confirmed by the Prince who in not confirming them disannulleth them 5. And because Bellarmin writeth that Bellarm. lib. 2. de concil c. 19. one cause whie the Pope was neuer personally in any Councel of the East was least he being then the Emperours temporal subiect should be placed vnder the Emperour Bel inferreth both that the Pope is prowd pag. 122. and that the East Church neuer acknowledged his supremacy But as for pride it is none to honour as S. Paule did his ministery Rom. 11. v. 14. to challendge the place due to his dignity and authority For as S. Gregory a S. Gregor lib. 4. epist 36. ad Eulagium most humble man said Let vs keep humility in mynde and yet conserue the dignity of our order in honour No maruaile then if Popes being head and presidents of Councels where matters of Church and faith are handled and Emperours as S. Gregory Nazianzâ— S. Gregor Nazianz. orat 14. ad sub speaketh but sheep of his flocke and subiect to his power and tribunal did looke to sit there aboue Emperours Yet the great Emperour Theodosius highly commended Theodoret. lib. 5. c. 18. S. Ambrose for putting him out of the Chauncel And in the Nicene Counsel Euseb lib. 3. de vit Constant Constantine that worthie Emperour entred last and after al the Bishops were sett nor did not sit in a great throne beseeming his estate but in a low chaire and that not before he had craued pardon and asked leaue of the Bishops as Theodoret whom Bel Theodoret. lib. 1. c 7. Nicephor l. 1. c. 19. calleth a Saint Nicephorus and others doe testify Albeit the Nouatian hereticke Sozomene who lyeth much as writeth S. Sozome lib. 1. c. 19. â—regor l. 6. epist 31. Nouel 9. C. de summ Trinit lib. vltImo Concil Calced act 1. Athanas apol 2. Socrates lib. 2. cap. 13. Sext. Sinod act 18. Theodoret. lib. 5. c. 9. Euap lib. 1. c. 4. Martian ep ad Leonem Gelas ep ad Episcopum Dordon Concil Nicen epist ad â—â—â—â—est Gregory doe seeme to say that he sate at the toppe of the Councel in a most great throane 6. As for the Easterne churches acknowledging the Popes primacy it is so manifest as Iustinian Emperour of the East writeth No man doubteth but that at Rome is Summi Pontificatus apex the toppe of the priesthood And if more witnesses need in so euident a matter certaine it is that the general councels in the East were called and their decrees confirmed by the Pope And the Councel of Calcedon professeth in plaine tearms that omnis primatus al primacy belonged to the Archbishoppe of Rome the same acknowledge the Grecians in the seauenth synode in the Councels of Lateran Lyons and Florence Likewise some Patriarches Leo epist 59. 60. 61. Conc. Constant ep ad Damas Concil Calced act 16. 7. Sinod act 2. Conc. Lateran 13. c. 15. Concil Florent in lit vnionis Concil Lugdun in 6. tit de election cap. vbi periculum Baron 536. Concil Calced act 3. Gelas ep ad Faustum Sozom. lib. 3. c. 7. Baron Ann. 372. Baron 342. Chrysost epist ad Innocent Ex lit Leon. Valent. ad Theodos Athanas ep ad Felicem Basil ep 52. ad Athan. Chrisost ep ad Innocen Theodoret. epist ad Renatum Gregor l. 7. epist 63. of the East to omit Bishops were by the Popes authority created as Anatholius of Constantinople by Pope Leo epist 53. ad Pulcheriam others deposed as Anthimus of Constant Dioscorus and Timothie of Alexandria and Peeter of Antioche Other being deposed or vexed appealed to Popes as S. Athanasius and Peter of Alexandria S. Paul S. Chrisostom and S. Flauian of Constantinople Paulin of Antioch which euidently proueth the Popes Primacy ouer them Finally to omit the testimony of S. Athanasius S Basil S. Chrisostom Theodoret and other Doctors and saints of the East church both the Emperour and Patriarche of Constantinople did in S. Gregories time as he witnesseth daily professe the church of Constantinople to be vnder the Romane Sea 7. Now to his reason Bellarmin saith The Emperour of the East would haue sate in Councel aboue the Pope Ergo the East church neuer acknowledged his primacy Who seeth not the manifolde weaknes
conuinceth that we can doe it without deadly breaking it As for our confession we doe not confesse that our daylie offences are most great faults but daily confesse our most great fault whether it were done then or before Besides that humble and penitent mindes accompt themselues greatest sinners and their offences greatest faults So S. Paul 1. Timoth 1. v. 15. accounted S. Paul himselfe the chiefest sinner Yea good souls as S. Gregory saith acknowledge sinne where S. Gregor epist ad August Cant. cap. 10. Iob cap. 9. S. Gregor in Psalm 4. Paenitent none is and with Iob feare al their works And as the same holy Doctour noteth the reprobate accompt great sinns litle and the elect litle sinns grear and which before they thought were light straight they abhor as heauy and deadly And S. Hierom S. Hieron epist ad â—â—lant obserueth that it increaseth warines to take heed of litle sinnes as if they were great For with so much the more facility we abstaine from any sinne by how much more we feare it 6. And hence Bel may see why we in dayly confessions confesse our most great fault which I would God he would imitate and both confesse and amend his heynous fault of sinning against the holy Ghost and impugning the Catholique Church which he knoweth to be Gods Church Otherwise let him assure himselfe that shame wil be his end in this life and endles punishment his reward in the next Wel he may beat against this rocke but like the waues he shal without hurting it beat himselfe in pieces and be resolued into froth and foame Let him write books let him spend himselfe and make nets with the Spider of his owne guts they wil proue only spider webbes apt to cath or holde none but such as like inconstant and fleshly flyes are carrayed about with euery mynde of new doctrine and following their carnal appetites and licentiousnes seaze vpon fleshly baite And so Bel though he could become an other God Bel he should but be Beel zebub the God of flies Be myndful therfore Bel from whence thou art fallen and do penance Apocalip 2. FINIS Al praise to Almightie God A TABLE Of the things coÌ„teined in this booke vvherin a signifyeth article c. chapter and parag paragraph ADDITION of one tradition as much forbidden as of many ar 7. c. 2. parag 1. Addition to Scripture which forbidden which not ar 7. c. 2. pareg Anomia how it may signify transgression of the law ar 6. c. 2. parag 2. Antichrists true hinderance meant by S. Paul ar 1. c. 9. parag 4. Antichrists hinderance not taken away in Pipius tyme a. 1. c. 9. parag 3. Angles falsly charged by Bel art 5. c. 5. parag 6. S. Antonin falsly charged by Bel art 3. c. 1. parag 1. and 13. Apostataes may teach true doctrine art 7. c. 10 parag 9. Apostles Creed conserued by Tradition art 7. c. 9. parag 4. S. Athanasius explicated and his reuerence of Traditions art 7. c. 4. parag 9. S. Austin as a Christian said he wold not beleeue the Ghospel without the Church art 7. c. 9. parag 22. Sainct Austin wold not beleeue Maniche though he had had expresse Scripture ar 7. c. 9. parag 24. S. Austin how he compared Concupiscence with blindnes of hart art 4. c. 3. parag 1. S. Austins opinion of habitual Concupiscence art 4. c. 1. parag 18. S. Austins opinioÌ„ of inuoluntary motions art 4. c. 1. parag 13. S. Austin preuented Bels obiections art 4. c. 1. parag 18. S. Austin how he meant that we loue not God altogether art 8. c. 4. parag 2. S. Austin how he called our keeping the commaundements defectuous art 8. c. 1. parag 9. S. Austins teuerence and rule to know Traditions art 7. c. 4. parag 3. S. Austin said the Apostles eat bread our lord art 2. c. 5. parag 8. S. Austin said Iudas eat our price art 2. c. 5. paragr 8. S. Austin why he said Iudas eat bread of our lord art 2. c. 5. parag 8. S. Austin wold not credit the Scripture if the Catholiques were discredited art 7. c. 9. parag 22. S. Austin and S. Prosper Papists out of Bel. art 2. c. 4. parag 13. B. S. Basil explicated and his reuerence of Traditions art 7. c. 4. parag 13. S. Bede a Papist art 4. c. 4. parag 4. Bellarmins doctrin of merit the common doctrin of Catholiques a. 5. c. 6 parag 9. Beleefe in al points not prescribed at once art 7. c. 2. parag 7. Bel a right Apostata from Preisthood art 1. c. 9. parag 31. Bel against Caluin art 5. c. 2. parag 3. Bel admitteth Tradition a. 7. c. 9. parag 811. Bels answer about Tradition of the bible refuted art 7. c. 9. parag 5. Bel admitteth venial sinns art 6. c. 1. parag 1. Bels beleefe of venial sinne beside Gods booke art 6. c. 1. parag 2. Bel a Papist by his owne iudgement art 4. c. 1. parag 10. Bel against al Gods Church which liued in the first 200. years art 7. c. 10. parag 2. Bel alleadgeth authority against him selfe a. 7. c. 10. parag 5. Bel answereth not to the purpose art 7. c. 9. parag 7. Bels argument returned vpon him self art 2. c 6. parag 3. Bels blasphemy against God art 8. c. 2. parag 1. against his Church a. 7. c. 9. par 5. against iustification a. 4. c. 2. parag 1. Bels blasphemy accursed by S. Hierom art 8. c. 2. parag 1. Bels blindnes discouered art 1. c. 9. parag 6. Bel bound to recant art 3. c. 1. parag 13 a. 2. c 5. parag 9. Bels buckler the Princes sword art 1. c 1. parag 10. Bels challeng is Bellarmins obiections art 4. c. 3 parag 2. Bels complaint against Catholiques art 5. c 1 parag 1 Bel condemneth as blasphemy in the Pope which he iudgeth treason to deny to Princes art 1. c. 9. parag 23 Bels contradictions arâ— 1. c. 5. parag 4. c. 8. parag 5 a. 2. c 2. parag 4. a. 4 c 1. parag 12. 13. c. 2. parag 6. art 5. c. 3 parag 3. c. 5. parag 7. art 7. c. 7 parag 19 art 8. c. 1. parag 5 7. c. 2. par 4. Bâ—l câ—rrupted Scripture art 7. c. 2. parag 8 c. 7. parag 3. 12. corrupteth S. Ambros art 7 c. 4. parag 1â— Bel cursed of S. Paul by his owne iudgement art 7. c. 9 parag 8. Bel discredited him selfe art 1. chap. 9. parag 10. Bels dissimulation art 1. c. 1. parag 1. a 2. c 1. par 5 art 3. c. 1 parag 2. Bâ—l denyeth deuine faith to proceed from mans teaching art 7. c. 9 parag 20. Bel disproueth him self art 5. c. 6. parag 6. art 4. c. 1. parag 17. Bel exceedeth Pelagius art 7. c. 7. parag 1. Bels faith grownded vpon reason art 2. c. 1. parag 7. Bel slenderly grownded in faith art 2. c. 5. parag 6. Bels false translation art 2. c. 3. parag 8. c. 4. parag 13 a. 4 c. 2. parag 4. 7. 10. c. 5.