virgins by wrestling heere on earth with the allurements and pleasures of the flesh and by continuall combats ouercome the tentation of the Diuell and with singular vertue before the eyeâ— of their Creatour haue preserued their integrity equall euen vnto the purity of Angells So S. Basil But for that this point is more liuely set downe by S. Chrysostome I will with his words end this matter for he who by all these testimonyes is not conuinced will neuer be perswaded by the authority of Fathers 36. Thus then writeth this flowing Father in the prayse of virginity Bonum est virginitas Chrysost l. de virgin cap. 10. 11. ego consentio matrimonio etiam melior hoc confiteor c. You say then that virginity is a good thing and I do graunt it it is better then matrimony and this also I graunt and if you will I shall shew you how much it is better to wit by how much heauen is better then earth Angells then men yea to speake more resolutly more then this for albeit that Angells neither marry nor are marryed yet are they not made of flesh and bloud they dwell not on the earth they feele not the sting of the lust they need not meat nor drinke they are not allured with sweet songs beautifull aspects or any such like thing but as at high noone we see the cleare heauen ouercast with no cloud so their natures most cleare and lightsome must needs be free from all lust but mankind inferiour by Nature to Angells forceth it selfe and by all meanes striueth to match them and this by what meanes Angells marry no wiues nor are marryed no more doth a virgin they assist and serue alwayes before God the like doth a virgin Wherefore the Apostle putteth them from all care or sollicitude that they may be continuall and not deuided if so be that they cannot ascend into heauen as Angells do their bodyes keeping them on earth yet from hence they haue a noble recompense because they receaue the Lord himselfe of heauen because they are holy in body and mynd do you see the honour of virginity It striues to make the liues of them who liue on earth to resemble the liues of the heauenly spirits it makes them contend with Angells and not to be ouercome by these spirituall troops it makes them competitours with Angels And againe after alleadging the examples of Elias Elizaeus and S. Iohâ— Baptist he sayth Etenim qua re dic sodes ab Angelis disferebant Elias Elizaeus Ioannes germani hi virginitatâ— amatores nulla nisi quòd mortali natura erant obstrich c. For tell me I pray you in what thing did Elias Elizaeus and Iohn these sincere louers of virginity differ from Angels in nothing but that by nature they were mortall in other thinges if you consider them well you shall find then nothing inferiour and this very thing wherein they seemed inferiour doth much make to their commendation for liuing vpon the earth and vnder the necessity of mortall nature consideâ— what fortitude and industry was required to be able to reach to so great vertue Hitherto S. Chrysostome 37. Now this being the opinion of these Fathers touching this vow and vertue I woulâ— An ineuitable consequence aske of M. Hall how the obiect can be of such purity such perfection and the act that tendetâ— directly thereunto be impure and vnlawfull That is how chastity can be in it selfe Angelicall yet the vow made of obseruing the same be filthy and diabolicall Truly he may as weâ— tell me that albeit adultery be a damnable sin yet are the adulterers very honest men such as resolutly purpose to be naught in that kind to purpose nothing els but an action of vertue for if in this case he say that the obiect is bad and the intention of committing that act cannot thereby but be necessarily vnlawfull so wil I on the other side answere him that this obiect is Angelicall and consequently the vow made for that end hauing no other ill circumstances annexed must needs of his owne nature be both lawfull vertuous and commendable but these men measuring all matters by their owne manners will commend no more then themselues do practise or admit any other virgins then such as hauing knowne their husbands are now ready to be made mothers 38. If M. Hall do say that in wedlocke there Marriage much inferiour to Virginity is also chastity and that these prayses may be giuen thereunto as I graunt the former part to be true so I deny the later and he shall neuer shew me in the ancient Fathers the state of marriage to be called Angelicall but stil to be inferiour to that title as S. Chrysostome hath now declared who maketh as large a difference betweene the one and the other state as there is between heauen and earth Angells and men Virginalis integritas August de sancta Virginitate cap. 12. sayth S. Augustine per piam continentiam ab omni concubitis immunitas Angelica portio est in carne corruptibili incorruptionis perpetuae mediatio cedat huic omnis soecunditas carnis omnis pudicitia coniugalis Virginall integrity and freedome through pious continency from all carnall knowledge is an Angelicall portion and in this corruptible flesh a meditation of the euerlasting incorruption to this the fruitfull issue of the flesh and coniugall cleanes must yield or giue place So S. Austine and so far doth this holy Father proceed heerin as he sayth Sacratae verò virginitati nuptias De Eccles dogmat cap. â—8 coaequare c. to equall marriage with sacred virginity to beleeue no merit to accrew to such as for the desire of chastizing their bodyes absteyne from wiues and flesh is not the part of a Christian but of an hereticall Iouinian So he 39. S. Cyril and S. Hierome also speaking of Cyril cateches 4. Hier. Apolog ad Pamach c. 1. Lib. 2. ep 13â— the same thing say that virginity or continency in respect of marriage is like gold in respect of siluer both are good both are cleane yet the one more pure more pretious then the other and Isiderus Pelusiota addeth Bonum est matrimonium sed melior virginitas pulchra est Luna sed Sol praeclarior Matrimony is good but virginity is better the Moone is fayer but the Sunne more illustrious And S. Ambrose multò prastantius est diuini operis mysterium Epist â—1 quà m humanae fragilitatis remedium the mistery of Gods worke to wit virginity is more noble then the remedy of human frailty in marriage but because this diuersity is more fully deliuered by S. Fulgentius omitting all the rest I Fulgent ep 3. ad Probam cap. 9. will with his words alone decide this controuersy of the different dignity of marriage and virginity or single life for thus he writeth Dicimus à sanctis nuptijs vbi nubunt qui se continere non
See S. Thom 2. â— q. 88. artic 2. for so this man will haue it Englished change the determination in scanning of which I can skantly explicate or sufficiently admire his ignorance for seeing that a vow is not properly of any indifferent thing much lesse of any ill or filthy thing for it is a voluntary promise made vnto God de meliore bono there can be no such vow no exchang of decree And the words he citeth do not beare that sense which he supposeth for the word Votum is taken there improperly for a promise and so it would haue appeared had he put downe the whole sentence of S. Isidore if it be his alleadged by Gratian where Gratian. causa 22. â—uaest 4. he treateth of vnlawfull oathes and promises for thus it stands In malis promissis rescinde fidem in turpi voto muta decretum quod incautè vouisti ne facias impia est enim promissio quae scelere impletur Breake the pact in ill promises in a filthy promise change the determination do not that which you haue vnaduisedly promised for the promise is wicked which is performed with mischiefe So he Wherefore from an vnproper acception of the Latin word to inferre an argument as if it were taken in the proper sense is the property of him who intendeth to deceaue and to apply that title vnto virginity or the continency which Priests and Religious do vow is so base as it better beseemeth some Epicure Turke and Pagan if among them any can be found so beastly then any Christian or ciuill man for if virginity be filthines where will he find purity vnles perhaps in the bed of a harlot But let vs passe on to some other matter 28. Hauing included vs at he supposeth within the labyrinth of an impossible necessity he The freedome of English Ministers preacheth the freedome of English Ghospellers and prayseth it as deuoyd of all such entanglements hauing no vow or necessity in it nor any more impossibility then for a stone to tumble downeward for supposing the knowne frailty of these men I thinke it no great miracle for them to marry and out of our owne graunt and the cleare text thus he would demonstrate the same against vs. Euen moderate Papists sayth he wil grant vs free because not bound by vow no not so far as those old Germans proposse nosse Or what care we if they grannt it not While we hold vs firme to that sure rule of Basil the Great He that forbids what God enioynes or enioynes what God forbids let him be accursed I passe not what I heare men or Angels say while I heare God say Let him be the husband of one wife So he And who would not 1. Tim. 3. Answered by Bellarmin c. 20. §. argument 2. English Ministers may lawfully marry but they are not lawfull Clergy men thinke this controuersy at an end seeing that both we allow the Ministers their wiues and God himselfe not only to allow but also to appoint and enioyne them to marry 29. And truly for the first part I freely with other Catholiks graunt that our English Ministers according to their calling make no vows I graunt their marriage to be lawfull I graunt that euery one of them may be the husband of one wife yea further I graunt that he may be the husband of as many wiues as euer was King Henry the eight if he can rid his hands as fast of them as he did that he may be bigamus or trigamus thrice told if he will for there is no vow at all of single chastity or simple honesty annexed to their order this I say we graunt deny not but we deny them to be truly Clergy men or to haue any more authority in the Church then their wiues or daughters haue and this because they want all true calling and ordination for they entred not in at the dore like true pastours but stole in at the window like theeues we deny their ministery I say to be lawfull because they did runne before they were sent tooke their places by intrusion thrusting themselues into the Churches as robbers vpon the possessions of honest men expelâ—ing the true owners by force and violence hauing themselues no better claime calling authority right or title to these offices which they now vsurpe then had the Arians Macedonians Pelagians Nestorians Eutichians or any other Heretikes in former ages to teach and preach as they did Let M. Hall disproue this and I will say Tu Phyllida solus habeto Let him keep his wife and benefice togeather I wil no more contend with him But till this be proued the plea for Ministers wiues is both idle and superfluous only sheweth their posse and nosse to be wholy in carnality The text of S. Paul willing a Bishop to be the husband of one wife is discussed to sauour more of the body then of the soule of flesh then of the spirit of earth then of heauen of humane infirmity then Angelicall perfection 30. Now for the other member because the place of the Apostle concerneth true Bishops the place of S. Basil nothing at al this purpose and M. Hall misunderstandeth the one the other I will a little more discusse especially this text of S. Paul No man I thinke will deny the rule to be most true of his being accursed who forbids what God enioyns or els enioyns what God forbids but what will M. Hall inferre heereby Will he say as he seemeth to insinuate that all Clergy men are enioyned by God to marry then why did S. Paul himselfe according to the common opinion of most Fathers gathered out of his owne words 1. Cor. 7. neuer marry why did not S. Basil himselfe take a wife why did all the ancient Fathers so much commend so earnestly perswade so faythfully practise exhort to virginity was there none among them who vnderstood this iniunction yea supposing this ground S. Paul cannot be excused 1. Cor. 7. from errour in perswading the virginity and preferring it before matrimony seeing this hath the iniunction of Christ and the other as a thing impossible the prohibition But of this iniunction or prohibition for clergy men from the first of S. Matthew to the last of the Apocalyps there is no one sentence word or sillable to be found 31. And it argueth little capacity in M. Hall when he sayth after the former rule I passe not what I heare men or Angells say while I heare God 1. Tim. 3. say let him be the husband of one wife for I say that he vnderstandeth not the Apostle who in the iudgment of Luther himselfe as Bellarmine noteth Bellarm. loco citat is to be vnderstood negatiuely and the sense not to be that euery Bishop is bound to haue a wife but that he is bound not to haue other women togeather with his wife So he But to our purpose and agreable also vnto truth S. Hierom
which is yet more then I need that he hath by this example euinced his cause and will neuer any more mention his diuorce 11. But if in this passage he cog notoriously if he affirme the quite contrary to that which is in his author if as before out of Origen he cut off three wordes with an c. so heer he do add one word which quite altereth the sense then I hope his friends will bethinke them well how they trust such iugglers who with the Aegyptians looke them in the face whiles their fingers be in their purse and I wish that with his falsehood he did but picke their purses and not seduce their soules bought ransomed with the deere price of the precious bloud of the sonne of God And that there be no mistaking betweene What M. Hall doth affirme out of S. Cyprian and I do deny vs remember I pray what M. Hall doth affirme to wit that Numidicus was a marryed Priest and that S. Cyprian auoucheth so much I on the other side deny both the one and the other and say that he was neuer a marryed Priest and that S. Cyprian neuer sayd any such thing but the quite contrary that he was made priest after his wiues death Let S. Cyprian decide the doubt betweene vs. 12. This Numidicus then being a marryed man was by the persecutours carryed togeather with his wife and others to be martyred the rest When Numidicus was made Priest were put to death before him with them he cheerefully saw his wife burned making no other account but to drinke of the same cup and to follow her into the flames he dyd so was left for dead Ipse sayth S. Cyprian semiustulatus Epist 35. iuxta Pamelum alias l. 4. ep vltim lapidibus obrutus pro mortuo derelictus c. He halfe burned couered with stones and left for dead whiles his daughter out of filiall duety sought his body he was found not to be fully departed and being taken out and by carefull attendance somewhat refreshed he remayned against his will after his companions whome he had sent before him to heauen Sed remanendi vt videmus haec fuit causa vt eum Clero nostro Dominus adiungeret But this as we see was the cause why he remayned behind that God might make him of our Clergy and adorne the number of our priesthood made small by the fall of some with glorious Priests Thus far S. Cyprian whose wordes are so plaine as they need not explication for he plainely testifyeth that he was made Priest after his wiues death and for that cause to haue beene preserued aliue and he sayth not as you see Numidicus presbyter vxorem suam concrematam c. Numidicus the Priest saw his wife burned but only Numidicus saw his wife burned A foule corruption the word Priest is added both in the English text and Latin margent by M. Hall and that as you see for his aduantage cleane contrary to the mind of his authour 13. For without that word what doth this testimony auaile him what doth it proue will he reason thus Numidicus after his wife was burned was made Priest therfore he was a marryed Pbesbyter and his example proueth the marriage of all Priests to be lawfull these extremes are too far asunder to meet in one syllogisme and he shall neuer be able to find a medius terminus that can knit them togeather I wish that I were neere M. Hall when some or other would shew him this imposture to see what face he would make thereon whether he would confesse his errour or persist in his folly for I see not but turne him which way he list he must be condemned Protestāt◠neuer write against Catholikes but they corrupt Authors for a falsifyer I know not what fatall destiny followes these men that whatsoeuer they treat of in any controuersy betweene vs them they cannot but shew legier-du-mayne fraud and collusion and yet notwithstanding pretend all candour and simplicity for heer on the word Priest standeth all the force of M. Halls argument and that is foysted in by himselfe not to be found conioyned with the wordes he cyteth in S. Cyprian 14. If M. Hall say which is all he can say that in the beginning of the epistle S. Cyprian hath these wordes Numidicus presbyter ascribatur presbyterorum Carthaginensium numero nobiscum sedeat in Clero c. Let Numidicus the Priest be numbred amongst the Priests of Carthage and let him sit with vs in the Clergy then goeth on with the description of his merits of the courage he shewed in seeing his wife dye c. this plaister cannot salue the soare for this epistle S. Cyprian wrote after he had ordered him Priest and his ordination as there he declareth and you haue now heard was after his wiues death Numidicus himselfe giuing by his rare constancy his so resolutely offering himselfe to dy for Christ occasion of his promotion yea of further preferment for in the end of the same letter S. Cyprian sayth that at his returne to Carthage he meant to make him Bishop as Pamelius doth rightly interpret him So as there is no euasion left for M. Hall to escape 15. I haue purposely transposed the fact of Paphnutius in the Councell of Neece the authority The fact of Paphnutius in the Nicen Councell is discussed whereof although it be more ancient then S. Athanasius who therein albeit present was not Bishop but Deacon yet are the Authors who recount the same much more moderne and all the credit lying on their relation no writer more ancient so much as mentioning any such matter the Councell if selfe disclayming from it these Authors in other things being found vnsincere fabulous I thought it not worth the answering but seeing that M. Hall notwithstanding he saw it fully answered in Bellarmine and others will needs bring it in againe as though nothing had euer beene sayd thereunto Answered by Bellarmine l. ◠de Clericis cap. 20. §. argumentum 5. vltimum and out of his wonted folly and vanity insert heere and there his Greeke words which haue no more force and emphasis then the English with this conclusion in the end His arguments wone assent he spake and preuailed so this liberty was still continued and confirmed I will briefly deliuer what hath beene answered thereunto if first I shew what legier-du-maine is vsed by this Epistler in setting it down with aduantage to make it serue his purpose the better 16. For whereas Socrates recounteth the fact Socrates l. 1. cap. 8. S zom l. 1. cap. 22. of Paphnutius in a particuler matter touching the wiues of such Priests only as were ordered whē they were marryed men whether such should be debarred from their wiues bound to continency as the rest this man from the particuler draweth it vnto the generall from only marryed Priests to
their wiues chastity is imposed vpon them for euer to be obseued So S. Bede And his reason carryeth so great force with it and refuteth so well the idle obiection of Protestants as there needeth no commentary to explicate it no authority to confirme it or other reason to be adioyned to make it more This epistle bringeth nothing of moment but the ordinary trâ—ial obiections forcible 39. The other arguments drawne from authority or antiquity in that Rapsody are so barely alleadged so weakely followed some so impertinently applyed as will pitty any iudicious learned Reader to behold and in effect they are the same which M. Hall hath brought and my selfe haue answered and therefore in praysing this epistle he closely also seemeth to prayse himselfe for he bringeth the Text of the husband of one wife the doctrine of Diuells the Apostolicall Canon the story of Paphnutius S. Isidore of contayning or marrying of one that Saint is there stiled the writer of the rule of the Clergy from whence perhaps M. Hall tooke his errour in cyting it vnder the same title and to this is added to conclude the whole matter the imaginary reuocation of S. Gregoryes decree by occasion of more then six thousand infants heads neuer found in his mote but only in the muddy head of that tipling German who halfe drunke halfe in a dreame first deuised that fable and M. Hall as it should seeme was ashamed to mention it as seeing it out of common reason not only improbable but also impossible and set forth with such circumstances as well shew the whole thing to be incredible and a ly in print 40. One place of Scripture that epistle hath more theÌ„ is in this epistle of M. Hall which is let A strange argument but in no mood nor figure euery man haue his owne wife which that honest Man will haue the Apostle to haue meant as well of the Clergy as of the laity and the Catholikes who deny it are false hypocrits do lye and faigne and that the Priests are not afraid to abuse other mens wiues to commit outrage in the foresayd wickednes which is a Bedlam proofe that any lewd companion though neuer so base may obiect against the most innocent man aliue and the Iews against our Sauiour himselfe sayd that the was Homo vorax potator vini a glutton and drinker oâ— Matth. â—â— wine a friend to Publicans open offend ours but Catholiks poore men vnderstand not the Scripture sayth this authour and why good Syr Heare him I pray you in lesse then six lines pleading against vs and for vs and ouer throwing that which he would take vpon him out of this text to put vp These men sayth he haue not rightly vnderstood the Scripture for the saying of the Apostle let euery man haue his owne 1. Cor. 7 wife doth except none in very deed but him only which hath the gift of continency prefixing with himselfe to keep and to continue his virgin or virginity in the Lord. Be it so And then if the Priests haue this gift and haue prefixed this course to themselues in the Lord then they shall not need to marry and the Apostles words shall not concerne them or bind them to haue their own wiues â—s it doth other men And this indeed is the very case of all Clergy men who vow chastity and the obseruance of their vow resteth in themselues assisted with Gods grace to performe it as before I haue sayd so the wordes of S. Paul appertayne not vnto them but to the Laity 41. M. Hall will perchance demand what if one who hath vowed chastity find that he hath not this gift notwithstaÌ„ding he hath prefixed the same to himself in the Lord shal be then be incontinent not marry I lay that neither the one or other is allowable not the first which is neuer lawfull not the later which is vnlawfull to him and this is decyded euen in the very next words of this Epistle where the Author thus speaketh to the Pope Wherefore o reuerend Father it shall be your part to cause and ouersee M. Halls S. Hulderick pleadeth a-against him that whosoeuer either with hand or mouth hath made a vow of continency as all Clergy men in holy orders haue afterwards would forsake the same should be either compelled to keep his vow or els by lawfull authority should be deposed from his order So there in which words you see both a compulsion for the obseruance of the vow deposition from their order in the transgressours both which suppose an ability in the vowmaker of performing his vow or els the suggestion of M. Hall his S. Vdalricke had beene very iniurious vnlawfull and tyrannicall as imposing a punishment where there was no voluntary offence and the thing for which he is punished was impossible for him in our Protestants opinion to perform as that Prince should be a tyrant who should put any subiect of his to one of these extremes either to leese the office and dignity he hath in the common wealth or els to pull the Sunne downe from heauen or remoue the earth into a higher place within three miles of the concauity of the Moone 42. And seeing this doctrine deliuered in the Epistle fathered on S. Huldricke is so contrary to the doctrine of this Epistle of M. Hall who will haue such vowes to be filthy the keeping of them to include an impossible necessity it was great temerity inconsiderate dealing in him to offer to be cast in his cause if this epistle do not satisfy all Readers when as it is so far from satisfying all Readers as it doth not satisfy himselfe who wil haue all such votaryes to change their vowes as filthy and to purify themselues by marriage and make practicall tryall of Iohn Fox his note what it is to marry in the Lord contrary to this Epistle as you haue seene which being so I make this collection as euident to me as any mathematicall demonstration that M. Hall neither careth for his wife nor for his fidelity M. Hall neither careth for his wife nor for his credit nor for his cause nor for his cause Not for his wife because he offered to be punished by a diuorce if he euicted not all Clergy mens marriage which he hath not done or is able euer to do whils he liueth not for his fidelity which he pawned to leese on any decree to be shewed more ample then that of the Trullan Councell for the marriage of Ecclesiasticall men which now he hath seene that in such excesse as in respect therof the Trullan Canon was but like the positiue degree in respect of the superlatiue not for his cause which he aduentureth on this Epistle in which notwithstanding euen in the point in controuersy debated between vs he is both cast and condemned for we graunt a solemne vow of chastity to be made in taking of
question and alone necdeth no proofe which if we apply to the present matter we shall find in a different subiect the same argument We deny that euer S. Huldericke wrote any such epistle how doth M. Hall proue it thus whether you call him S. Huldericus or Volusianus the matter admits no doubt but that he wrote it to which put this Minor but he who wrote the letter is Authour thereof Ergo S. Huldericke is the Author An argument more fit for some Grillus Corebus Alogus some Patch Ioll or VVill Sommer then M. Hall 46. There resteth one more vntruth in the A foule Chronographicall errour touching the tyme when S. Hulderick liued margent which is Chronographical about the tyme when S. Huldricke liued that you may perceaue how this man in all things is rash and negligent if he dispute his arguments be loose if he cyte Authours their authorytyes are either mistaken or corrupted if he inferre one thing out of another it is by wrong illation takes quid for quo the contrary to that which doth follow of his premises if for more exactnes he go about to reduce things to their proper tyme 20. or thirty years difference is not to be regarded for to be exact is against his reputation he will not be taken for such a precision and therefore heere he telleth vs Huldericus Episcopus Argustae anno 860. which is iust thirty yeares before he was borne and yet after his birth he liued either thirty three or thirty foure before he was made Bishop so as he is heer made to be Bishop of Auspurg more then three score years before his tyme are not these men exact writers trow you on whose fidelity so many men with such assurance may rely their saluation 47. And to end all this matter as though An vntruth ioyned with a contradiction he had not hitherto giuen vs vntruths inough he addeth for the finall vpshot one more that also combyned with a contradiction when he sayth after Vdalricus so strong did he plead and so happily for two hundred yeares more this freedome still blessed these parts yet not without extreme opposition historyes are witnesse of the busy and not vnlearned combats of those tymes in this argument So he And I cannot but tell him out of the Comicke Non sat commodè diuisa sunt temporibus tibi Daue haec These tymes agree no better then did the other of S. Vdalricks letter to the first Nicholas and vntrue it is that euer he pleaded so happily so strongly who neuer opened his mouth in this controuersy vntrue it is that this carnal freedome blessed these parts for two hundred yeares more after his death for vnder Pope Gregory the seauenth he confesseth presently after that this cause was vtterly ruined and betweene the death of these two I meane S. Vdalricke Gregory the seauenth there is but one hundred and twelue years and whereas that Pope dealt in that matter some yeares before his death it will follow euen by the graunt of M. Hall himselfe that this cause so strongly so happily pleaded for in the compasse of one age was quite ouerborne and vtterly ruined so as by this account M. Hall in setting downe two hundred years reckoneth only but one hundred too much which is not much in him so subiect euery where to errour and so careles in his assertions as almost nothing cometh from him out of any learning or truth that is in Controuersy betweene vs. The imaginary pleading of S. Vdalricu◠neither strong not happy 48. Againe there is a manifest contradiction in these words for if vpon this strong and happy pleading this freedome blessed the parts of the Latin Church how had it such extreme opposition for before this tyme there was nothing els in M. Halls iudgment but full possession of this freedome and the contrary not to haue preuayled till more then a thousand yeares after Christ so as all the blessing was before S. Vdalricks pleading and all the opposition after and how is not that pleading to beheld rather weak and vnlucky then strong and happy which had no other effect then extreme opposition and quite ouerthrow of the cause defended by that plea For what successe could be more vnfortunate then to be cast in a cause so vehemētly vrged debated with such heate and that betweene the supreme Pastour for authority and a most eminent Bishop for sanctity of those tims which contradiction is made more palpable by the next ensuing words in his letter for thus he writeth 49. But now when the body of Antichristianisme A heap of vntruths began to be complet so it pleaseth this light Companion to prattle and to stand vp in his absolute shape after a thousand yeares from Christ this liberty which before wauered vnder Nicholas the first now by the handes of Leo the ninth Nicholas the second and that brand of hell Gregory the seauenth was vtterly ruined wiues debarred single life vrged So M. Hall And truely if Leo the 9. and Nicholas the second ruined this matter this plea had so short a blessing and so quicke a crosse as it remayned on foote little more then fifty yeares and that still in continuall contradiction vntill it was extinguished and so as before out of two hundred we rebated one so out of that one we must take another halfe leaue him but fifty if his owne words be true that this was ruined by Leo the ninth as heere he pretendeth and the blessing he talketh of is resolued to this that presently this marriage matter was contradicted and the contradiction so followed as it preuailed and this supposing what he sayth to be true of these men and matter which yet are so false as they conteyne in them to speake the least more lyes then lines which I will briefly touch in order 50. The first is that vnder these Popes the body of Antichristianisme began to be complete for all The first vntruth the Popes he nameth to wit Nicolas the first Leo the ninth Nicolas the second and Gregory the 7. were all very holy men all learned al excellent Gouernours of Christs Church and the second Nicolas excepted all registred in the Catalogue of Saints and our Protestants of the primitiue Church in England were wont to tell vs that this body was complete in the tyme of Bonisace the third whome idly they would haue to be that singular Antichrist descrybed in Daniels prophesy and the Apocalyps of S. Iohn some haue much laboured to draw the number of his name to agree vnto the tyme whē he was made Pope with other impertinencyes and if M. Hall make the denyall of Priests marriage the complementall perfection of this body for all the heauen and happynes which these men haue is in their wiues and whatsoeuer sauours or fauours not that is Antichristian then was it complete for some hundreds of years before any of them were borne or thought on as the authorityes of
power not to be a woman so little is it in thy power to be without a man Because this matter is not left in our owne hands but it is both necessary and naturall that euery man haue a woman and euery woman haue a man c. And this is more then a coÌ„mandement and more necessary then to eat and drinke purgare exspuere are to homely stuffe to be Englished to sleep and wake So far this Christian Epicure and some 6. pages after he counsaileth what is to be done in case the wife be froward and will not come at her husbands call and his aduise is to leaue her in her frowardnes and to take some other to seeke some Hesther and leaue Vasthy with other such beastly impertinencies 30. By this you see how Luther and M. Hall The first point is discussed to wit whether the vow of chastity be Vnlawfull or not like Pilate and Herode though at variance betwene themselues yet in this do agree against vs that the vow of castity is vnlawfull and impossible let vs now debate frendly the matter it selfe in eyther member and see if this eyther in reason or from the warrant of Scriptures or the Fathers can subsist And to begin with the vnlawfulnes if the vow of chastity be vnlawfwll it must either be in respect of the vow or of the matter vowed but from neither of these two branches can this vnlawfulnes proceed and consequently it is not vnlawfull at all Not from the first because Deuteron 23. Eccles 5. psal 21. 49. 65. 75. vows in generall are lawfull and as such are allowed in the old and new testament and of the Messias it was prophesyed that the Aegyptians should worship him in sacrifices and giftes and further Vota vouebunt Domino soluent they shall Isa 19. make vowes vnto our Lord and shall performe them and these vowes do more straytly bind vs vnto God then any promises made amongst men do bynd them to one another Quà m grauia Ambros lib. 9. in Lucam in caput 20. sunt vincula saith S. Ambroise promittere Deo non soluere c. How grieuous are the bands to promise to God and not to performe It is better not to vow then to vow and not to render what we haue vowed Maior est contractus fidei quà m pecuniae the contract or promise of Religion is greater then the contract or promise of money satisfy thy promise whiles yet thou art aliue before the Leo epist 92. cap. 15. Iudge come cast thee into prison So he The same to omit others hath S. Leo Ambigi non potest c. It caÌ„not be doubted that a great sine is coÌ„mitted where the religious purpose is forsaken vowes violated The reason whereof he yeldeth saying Si humana pacta non possunt impunè calcari quid de eis manebit qui corruperint foedera diuini Sacramenti If humane contracts are not broken without punishment what shall become of them who haue violated the coÌ„tracts of their sacred promise made vnto God So he And this was the cause why the Apostle sayd that the yong widdowes by violating their vow had incurred damnation because it was made to God and so could not be made voyd at all Quid est sayth S. Augustine August in psalm 75. primam fidem irritam â—ecerunt â— vouerunt non reddiderunt What is meant that they made voyd their first fayth they vowed and performed not their vows What more cleare And in another De virginitate cap. 33. place primam fidem irrittam fecerunt id est in eo quod primò vouerant non steterunt they made voyd their first â—ayth that is they remayned not constant in that which they had first vowed 31. And this place not only proueth a vow to be lawfull in generall but euen in this particuler matter we now speake of I meane of chastity Because these widdowes were reprehended of the Apostle for that they would marry and not liue chastly in widdowhood as they had vowed as before I haue shewed to which end and to proue the perpetuall band of these vowes it is applyed also by S. Fulgentius when Fulgentius de fide ad Petrum cap. 30. he fayth Quistatuit in corde suo firmus non habens necessitatem potestatem autem habens suae voluntatis c. He who hath determined in his hart being stedfast not hauing any necessity but hauing power ouer his owne will and hath vowed chastity to God he ought with all care and sollicitude of mynd to keep the same vntill the end of his life least he haue damnation if he shall make voyd his first fayth So he And to the same effect before him wrote S. Hierom saying Nazaraei Hierom. in caput 46. Ezechielu â— sponte se offeruÌ„t quicumque aliquid vouerit non impleuerit votireus est c. The Nazarites voluÌ„tarily offer themselues and whosoeuer hath vowed any thing not fullfilled it is guilty of his violated vow wherupon of widdowes it is sayd when they waxe wanton in Christ they will marry hauing damnation c. for it is better not at all to promise then not to fullfil what is promised Lib. 1. in Iouinian and in another place against Iouinian If Iouiniaâ— shall say that this was sayd of widdowes how much more shall it be of force in Virgins and iâ— it were not lawfull for widdowes for whomâ— shall it be lawfull So S. Hierome 32. And further to proue the lawfullnes oâ— a vow in this particuler matter to wit of chastity either virginall viduall or of single life the speciall subiect of our controuersy to omâ— other arguments I will only touch fiue â— which foure shall be taken out of such Fatherâ— writings as M. Hall doth acknowledge and â—â— whome he refers his cause The first whereâ— shall be their comparing the state of such as liuâ— a chast life with the state of Angells and exhorting thereunto Secondly their preferring ofâ— before marriage Thirdly their sharp rebukeâ— such as haue broken their vow Lastly thâ— condemning of the marriage of vow-breaken calling it worse then aduowtry c. To these will add the approuance of the Canon and punishments appointed by the Ciuill laws for such abused Religious women and then leaue it â— any to iudge whether it be turpe votum a brandâ— Antichristianism worse then aduowtry a diabolicall thiâ— or the like or whether this base assertion wâ— euer taught or belieued in the world by any â—ther then Heretikes And M. Hall if he will staâ— to the triall of antiquity shall I assure him â— this be either forced to acknowledge his errouâ— or els to recall what he hath written that the Fathers tryall it as reuerend as any vnder heauen further Hall decad 4. ep 8. to tippling Thomas of Oxford certaynely it cannot be truth that is new we would renounce our Religion if it could be ouer
lookt for time let go equity the older take both So he And we shal by this particuler see whether this franke merchaÌ„t venturer that hazards so easily his fayth and saluation vpon antiquity although erroneous will stand to his word in this doctrine of chastity for if he will maintayne his former grounds he must alleadge more ancient authenticall records then those heere produced or disproue such as we bring against him which he shall neuer be able to do Or finally deny what he hath sayd of the vow of chastity in calling it a filthy vnlawfull vow which by so great and so graue authority is taught to be both lawfull sacred and Angelicall 33. The prayses then giuen to Virgins single life by these renowned pillers of truth The state of chast liuers Angelicall August l. 6. confess cap. 3. Of S. Cyprians booke of virginity S. Hieromâ— maketh mention Epist ad Demetriad in sinâ— myrrours of learning and patrons of all purity are so plentifull as they take vp no small roome in the vast volumes of their renowned workes S. Ambrose alone whose chastity S. Augustine so much admired hath three bookes of Virgins besids one of widdowes one of the trayning vp of a virgin and another intituled a persuasion to Virginity Of this S. Cyprian S. Augustine S. Basil S. Chrysostome S. Gregory Nissen haue whole bookes of this S. Hierome to Eustochium Demetrias and many others hath very long epistles and as well these as diuers grounding themselues vpon the words of our Sauiour that in heauen there is no marrying because the Saints are equall vnto the Angells shew the life of such as vow chastity to be Angelicall S. Ambrose in the last booke aboue cited sayth Audistis quantum sit praemium Ambros tract de hortat ad Virgin post initium integritatis regnum acquirit regnum caeleste vitam Angelorum exhibet c. You haue heard how great the reward is of Chastity it purchaseth a kingdome and a heauenly kingdom it exhibits vnto vs the life of Angells this I perswade you vnto then which nothing is more beautifull that among men you become Angells who are not tyed togeather by any band of marriage Because such women as do not marry and men that take no wiues are as Angells vpon earth in so much as they feele not the tribulation of the flesh they know not the bondage they are freed from the contagion of worldly desirs they apply their mind vnto diuine matters and as it were deliuered from the infirmity of the body do not thinke of those thinges which belong vnto men but which appertaine vnto God So S. Ambrose as contrary to M. Hall as heat to cold white to blacke truth to falshood 34. S. Bernard stiled by M. Hall deuout Bernard vseth also the same similitude saying Quid castitate Bernard epist 42. decorius quae muÌ„dum de immundo conceptum semine de hoste domesticum Angelum de homine facit c. What is more beautifull then chastity which makes Hall Decad 4. ep 3. him cleane who was conceaued of vncleane seed makes a friend of an enemy an Angell of a man For albeit a chast man and an Angell do differ yet is their difference in felicity not in vertue although the chastity of an Angell be more happy yet is the chastity of man of greater fortitude only chastity it is which in this place and tyme of mortality representeth vnto vs a certayne state of the immortall glory because it alone amongst the marriages heere made followes the custome of that happy Countrey in which as our Sauiour sayd they neither marry nor are marryed exhibiting in a certayne manner vnto the earth an experiment of that conuersation which is in heauen So S. Bernard And a little after hoc itaque tantae pulchritudinis ornamentum c. This ornament of so great a beauty I may worthily say doth honour priesthood because it makes the Priest gratefull or beloued of God man although he be yet on earth makes him in glory like vnto the Saints So he With S. Ambrose and S. Bernard let vs ioyne him who is all in all heauenly S. Augustine as M. Hall tearmeth him Augustâ— serm 24â— who sayth qui in castitate viuunt Angelicam habent in terris naturam castitas hominem cum Deo coniungit Angelis facit ciuem they who liue chastly haue an Angelicall nature on earth chastity conioyneth a man with God makes him a cittizen with Angells 35. As with the same spirit so with the same tongue do the other Fathers speake both Greeke Latin Tertullian sayth that Virgins are Tertul. l. ad vxorem cap. 4. Hieron ep 22. ad Eustoc cap. 8. Athan. l. de virginit Cyril Catechesi 12â— de familia Angelica of the company or household of Angells S. Hierome that the life of Virgins is the life of Angells S. Athanasius cryeth out O continentia Angelorum vita Sanctorum corona O chastity the life of Angells the crowne of Saints yea it is also an Angelical crown as S. Cyrill of Hierusalem sayth and aboue the perfection of humane nature further he addeth that chast liuers are Angells walking vpon the earth S. Gregory Nazianzen speaking to a Virgin sayth Angelorum Nazian orat 31. tam elegisti in eorum ordinem te aggregasti Thou hâ— chosen the life of Angells thou hast put thâ— selfe into their ranke S. Ephrem O castitas quae â— Ephrem serm de castitate mines Angelis similes reddis o chastity which mâ—keth men like vnto Angells and not only like but equall sayth S. Cyprian cùm castae perseueratis â— Cypr. l. de discipl habitu virginum Basil de vera virgin longiùs à fine virgines Angelis Dei estis aequales whiles you remayâ— chast and virgins you are equall vnto Angellâ— yea most noble and eminent Angells sayth S Basil qui virginitatem seruant Angeli sunt non obscuri a qui sed sanè illustres atque nobilissimi they who preserue their virginity are Angells and not some iâ—feriour obscure Angells but eminent and moâ— noble yea in one respect as S. Bernard aboue cited did note and before him S. Cyprian S. Baâ— S. Chrysostome and others they are more nobâ— then all the Angells togeather Virginitas aequatâ— Cypr. de discipl beno pudicitiae Angelis sayth S. Cyprian si verò exquiramus etiam eâ— cedit c. Virginity equalls it selfe with Angells and if we penetrate the matter further it also eâ—ceeds them whiles in this fraile flesh whicâ— Angells haue not it getteth the victory euen against Nature So he Angeli carneis nexibus libâ— Basil l. de virginit sayth S. Basil integritatem suam in caelis seruant c The Angells free from all fleshly bands preserâ— their purity in heauen both in respect of thâ— place and their owne nature inuiolable being still with God the supreme King of al but