agener all Councell may erre the Church may erne if the Church may erre the faith which that Church teacheth may faile and consequently there can bee no certaintie How easily are these leaves plucked away and torne in pieces 1. Though such a Councell as the Councell of Trent consisting of a few Bishops swaied by the Italian faction may erre it would not from thence follow that the whole representative Church might erre 2. Though the whole representative Church in a free and generall Councell lawfully called might erre yet many millions in the Catholique Church may hold the orthodox beliefe and consequently the faith of the Church not totally faile Yea but saith the Iesuit take away the infallibilitie of the Church there is no rule of faith This assertion of his is open blasphemie as if God would not bee true though all men were found liars though the Roman Church and Pope erre a thousand times yet the rule of faith remaineth unvariable in the holy Scriptures Yea but S. Gregorie equalizeth the foure first generall Councels to the Gospel and saith in effect that they could as little erre as the 4. Gospels and that upon the deniall of their authoritie the Christian faith might be shaken as well as by the deniall of the Gospels and the like authoritie giveth your Parliament unto them I answer S. Gregorie equalizeth the foure first generall Councels to the foure Gospels not in respect of authoritie but in respect of the veritie of the articles defined in them he saith not they could as little erre but they did as little erre in their decisions or to speake more properly that their doctrine was as true as Gospell because the determinations in those first generall Councels against Heretiques are evidently deduced out of holy Scriptures Our Parliament alluding to the words of S. Gregorie speaketh in the same sense as hee doth Yea but saith the Iesuit your Parliament lawes acknowledge that for heresie whatsoever is condemned for such in any of those Councels which is in other words to acknowledge them for a rule of faith and consequently to bee of infallible authoritie and to joyne them in the same ranke with the Canonicall Seriptures Idem jungat Vulpes by the like reason the Iesuit might say we joyne the booke of Articles of Religion and Homilies in the same ranke with the Canonicall Scriptures because we condemne for heretiques all that obstinatly maintaine any doctrine repugnant to them which wee doe not because we hold the Decrees of a provinciall Synod to bee of in fallible authoritie but because wee are able to prove all the Articles there established to be consonant to the holy Scriptures Yea but further saith the Iesuit in the same statute P. 203. you give power to the Court of Parliament with the assent of the Clergie in their Convocation to adjudge or determine a matter to be heresie which is the very same as to give it power to declare faith or to be the rule thereof I answer the statute giveth power to the Convocation to declare faith and determine heresie out of Gods word and by the sentence thereof and no otherwise In such sort to declare faith is not to be the rule of faith but to judge and measure things by the rule There is a maine difference betweene these two which yet the Iesuit here confoundeth as if they were coincident to declare faith and to bee the rule of faith every Iudge declareth the Law yet is he not the rule of the Law The Inquisitors in their jndices expurgatorij and the Sorbonists in their censures declare what is heresie yet the y are not Itrow the Rule of popish faith every meater in the market declareth that such or such is the measure of corne and graine yet is not every or any corne-meater the Winchester standerd It is one thing to be the rule and another to measure by the rule and declare what we have measured But to retort the Iesuits phrase upon himselfe hee is not capable it seemes of this discourse which yet every market-woman or boy is Well let the authoritie of generall Councels bee great in the Church and of the foure first Councels greatest of all quid hoc ad Rombum what maketh this for the infallibilitie of the Trent conventicle much saith the Iesuit every way for what saith hee can you say more against the present Church and present Councell of Trent then against the Church and Councels of those times What can we say nay what can we not say what have we not said or what could all the Papists in the world answer to what wee have already said After hee hath taken away the legall exceptions made against this conventicle by the Authour of the historie of the Councell of Trent and of the litterae missivae and Iewel his Treatise affixed to that Historie and Chemnisius his Examen and Doctor Bowles his latine Sermon preached to the Convocation and lately printed after hee hath proved which hee will never bee able that the Assemblie at Trent was a free and generall Councell and called by lawfull authoritie and all the proceedings in it according to ancient Canons yet it will still fall as short of the Councell of Nice in authoritie as in antiquitie that consisted of most eminent learned and holy Bishops and Confessors this for the most part of hungrie animals depending on the Popes trencher as Dudithius a Bishop present at that Councell declareth at large in his letter set before the Historie of the Councell of Trent to which I referre the reader To the second The testimonies alledged by the Knight for the sufficiencie of holy Scriptures are ponderous and weightie and the Iesuits exceptions to them are sleight vaine and frivolous To the testimonie out of the Acts I have kept backe nothing that was profitable unto you and I am pure from the bloud of all men Act. 20.20.27 for I have not shunned to declare unto you all the Councell of God hee saith that S. Paul speaketh of the doctrine by him preached not of the written word of God as in like manner our Saviour saith that what hee heard from his Father hee made knowne unto them Iohn 15.15 and yet delivered not one word in writing It is true S. Paul speaketh of the doctrine which he preached but it is as true that the doctrine which he preached hee confirmed unto them by testimonie of Scripture For S. Luke saith Acts 17.2 that S. Paul as his manner was reasoned with them out of the Scriptures opening and alledging that Iesus whom hee preached unto them was Christ and they that received the word with all readinesse of mind searched the Scriptures daily whether those things were so Act. 24.14 and again I confesse that after that way which they call heresie so worship I the God of my fathers beleeving all things which are written in the Law and the Prophets If the Iesuit had read the verse immediatly following testifying
integritie of corporall refection and the example of Christ it were more convenient to have the Communion under both kindes the Knight hearkeneth to him but where hee lispeth in the language of Ashdod saying that in consideration of the reverence due to this Sacrament it is ill and inconvenient to communicate in both kindes the Knight had reason to turne a deafe eare to him for it is cosin germane to blasphemie to say that is ill and inconvenient which Christ and his Apostles and the whole Church in all places for more then a thousand yeares practised the Knight might well say to Tapperus in the words of him in the Poet 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I will be sober with you but I will not runne madde with you To the twelfth For the statute made in the dayes of that Phoenix of his age King Edward the sixt the meaning is unlesse among the people there bee some that either by a naturall antipathie to wine or other infirmitie cannot receive the Sacraments in both kindes it is ordained that it be delivered to every one in both kindes cessante ferreâ necessitate obtinet haec aurea regula that all receive the whole Sacrament in which the Statute and the articles of Religion published first in the reigne of this blessed Prince fully accord For so wee reade Article the thirtieth both parts of the Lords Sacrament by Christs ordinance and command ought to bee ministred to all Christian people alike To the thirteenth That every article of faith ought to have sufficient proofe out of Scripture is proved by innumerable testimonies of antiquitie produced by Philip Morney in his Preface to his booke De Eucharistia Bilson of Supremacie part the fourth Abbot against Bishop chapter the seventh and Laurentius de disp Theolog Neither doth S. Ierome any way contradict them or us for wee beleeve that the consent of the whole Christian Church is an infallible argument of truth Albeit wee teach that any particular Church as namely the Roman or the French or the Dutch or the Greeke Church may erre yet we denie that the catholique Church universally hath ever erred or can erre in matter of faith necessarie to salvation and further I adde for conclusion that as the words of S. Ierome alledged by the Iesuit make nothing against us so if they bee applied to our present subject they make most strongly against him being propounded after this manner Although the authoritie of holy Scripture were wanting for the Communion in both kindes which is not so yet the consent of the whole world on this side testified by their uniforme practise confessed by Papists themselves ought to have the force of a divine Precept and so there would bee an end not only of this Section as the Iesuit speaketh but of this whole Controversie Concerning Prayer in an unknowne tongue Spectacles Sect. 6. a pag. 259. usque ad 283. THe Knight falsly chargeth the Councell of Trent with approving prayer in the vulgar tongue for though the Councell saith that the Masse containeth great instruction yet it doth not say that it ought to bee in the vulgar tongue nay contrarily it pronounceth an anathema against any whosoever shall say that the Masse ought to bee celebrated in the vulgar tongue It hath beene the generall practise and custome in the Church of God of having the Masse and the publike office in Latine all over the Latine and Westerne Church both in Italie Spaine France Germanie England Africa and all other places and so likewise in Greeke in the Graecian or Easterne Church though it were as large in extent and had as much varietie of languages in it as the Latine Church hath Vniformitie which is fit to be used in such things and unitie of the Catholique Church is excellently declared and also much maintained by this unitie of language in the Church office The use of vulgar tongues in the Masse or Church office would cause not only great confusion but breed an infinite number of errours by many severall translations The use of vulgar language in such things would breed a great contempt of sacred things with prophanenesse and irreligiositie besides the danger of heresie which commeth no way sooner then by misunderstanding of holy Scripture The place of Scripture alledged by the Knight concerning announcing our Lords death is not understood by words but by deeds as is most plaine by the circumstances The text of S. Paul where he asketh how hee that understandeth not the prayers shall say Amen is not of the publike prayers of the Church which no man can doubt of either for the truth or goodnesse and therefore he may confidently say Amen to them but of private prayers made by private and Laye men extempore in an unknowne tongue Haymo requireth not that all that are present at Divine service should understand but only that he that supplieth the place of the idiot or Laye-man in answering for the people should bee so farre able to understand as to answer Amen at the end of every prayer Iustinian the Emperour is ordinarily taxed for taking too much upon him in Ecclesiasticall matters yet all that hee saith may bee well maintained without prejudice to the present practise of the Roman Church for in the Decree alledged by the Knight hee requireth nothing more but that Bishops and Priests should pronounce distinctly and clearely that which according to the custome of the Easterne Church was to bee spoken aloud The Canon law capite quoniam in plerisque requireth only that where divers Nations are mingled that the Bishop of the Citie should substitute one in his roome to celebrate the divine Office and administer the Sacraments according to their ownerites and language for indeed it is a matter of necessitie in administration of some Sacraments to use the vulgar language as in Mariage and Penance but not so of other things Lyra Belithus Gretzer Harding Cassander and the rest of the Authours quoted by the Knight say indeed that in the beginning Prayers were in the vulgar tongue but the reason was because those three holy languages Hebrew Greeke and Latine dedicated on the crosse of Christ were then most vulgar none of them speake a word of any Precept There is no precept in the Scripture commanding prayers in a knowne tongue or forbidding in an unknowne whose authority or example can you bring for your selfe in this matter name him if you can It was more needfull in the Primitive Church that the people should understand because they were to answer the Priest which now is not so as Bellarmine noteth because that belongs only to the Clarke That the Knight contradicteth himselfe in one place saying That the alteration of the Church service was occasioned by certaine Shepheards who in the dayes of Honorius having learned the words of Consecration by heart pronounced them over their Bread and Wine in the fields and thereby Transubstantiated them into flesh and bloud and for this prophane abuse were strucken
subject unto in it selfe Lastly the Iesuit taketh himselfe by the nose in saying Heretikes in all Controversies run to the letter of the Scriptures leaving the true sense and spirituall meaning for so doe the Romanists apparantly namely in the Controversie of Supremacie Ecce duo gladii Loe here two swords therefore the Pope hath the temporall and spirituall Sword at command Peter rise up kill and eate therefore the Pope hath power to put Princes to death In the question about the number of Sacraments they alleage the letter of that text in the vulgar translation Hoc est magnum Sacramentum to prove marriage a Sacrament whereas the Apostle in the same place saith that hee speaketh not of corporall marriage of a man and his wife but of the spirituall marriage of Christ and his Church Likewise in the Controversie about the reall presence they run to the letter Except yee eate the flesh of the Sonne of man and drinke his blood though Christ in the same place expounding himselfe saith The words which I have spoken unto you are spirit and life the like may be observed in other Controversies For answer to all which texts wee tell him out of Saint Ierome whom himselfe quoteth in the next Paragraph That the Gospell consisteth not in the words of Scripture but in the sense not in the supersicies or barke but in the pith not in the leaves of speech but in the root of reason To the tenth How neere neighbours the Romanists are to Marcion who denied or by consequence overthrew the truth of Christs humaine nature as the Papists doe in the Sacrament vailing him under the outside or accidents of a round water and what affinitie the Iesuit hath with the rest of the ancient Heretikes the Knight shewed him before in his seventh Section and if hee desire to know more of his pedegree from them I referre him to an Appendix to Whitakers answer to Sanders his Demonstration page 801. As for the aspersion of old Heresies which hee casts upon us they are washed away by Bishop Morton and Doctor Field in their Treatises of the Church Ad notam sextam But why hee denies that wee have the Spirit arrogating it onely to himselfe I see no reason but the pride of his owne spirit together with the malice of the evill spirit who suggested unto him this uncharitable censure of us To the eleventh The Scripture is a Light Psal 119. and the nature of a light is first to discover it selfe and then all things else therefore Calvin to his fond question how know you Scripture to be Scripture answereth acutely by retortion how know you the Sun to be the Sun If hee say by his bright lustre and beames wee say the same of holy Scripture that it is discerned by its owne light Which if the Papists see hot the fault ought not to be laid upon the Sun-beames but upon their Owles eyes To the twelfth That rule which needeth any thing to be added to it is imperfect but all Papists teach that to the written Word unwritten Traditions must bee added to make a compleat and perfect rule of Faith all Papists therefore teach the Scripture alone to be an imperfect Rule We on the contrary stand for the perfection of Scripture and constantly and unanimously defend that not onely the whole Scripture is perfect but that every part also hath its owne perfection but not the perfection of the whole Because the eyes have not the perfection of the whole head or the head the perfection of the whole body a man cannot conclude that the eye or the head is imperfect no more can the Iesuit conclude that the Gospell of Saint Matthew Saint Marke or Saint Iohn are therefore imperfect because they containe not in them all doctrines in particular necessary to salvation It is sufficient that they together with the rest perfectly instruct us in all points of faith by themselves they perfectly informe us so farre as the Holy Ghost intendeth that we should be informed by each of them in particular and this is their perfection that they have no defect in matter or forme and that they concurre with the rest of the bookes of Scripture to the maine end of the Holy Ghost in committing the word of God in writing for the infallible and perfect instruction of the Church and every faithfull soule in all Doctrines needfull to salvation To the thirteenth Although many Protestants have written de Scripturâ judice and they have warrant our of Scripture so to stile it the words which I have spoken they shall judge you yet in propriety of speech which especially ought to be used in stating questions the Scripture is rather to be termed a rule and law or sentence of the judge then the judge himselfe the supreame and infallible judge of all controversies we teach to be the Holy Ghost speaking to us out of Scriptures and the subordinate or inferior Judge the consencient authority of the Catholique Church To the fourteenth The Iesuit shewed no such thing nor can shew out of Tertullian De praescrip advers haeret c. 17. who convinced the greater part of Haeretikes in his time by Scripture as appeareth in his writings In the place which the Iesuit quoteth he hath no such words as he alleageth out of him viz. that there is no good to be done with Haeretikes by Scriptures He saith indeede in that place that it was but in vaine to conferre with a certaine kinde of Haeretikes by Scriptures alone quia ista haeresis non recipit quasdam Scripturas et si recipit non recipit integras et si aliquatenus integras praestat c. That is This haeresie admits not of certaine Scriptures or not intire or if in some sort in ire it perverts them by divising divers interpretations In which words he no way disparageth the holy Scriptures or derogateth from their perfection but discovereth the wicked practise of Haeretikes and their evasions and tergiversations when they are most evidently convinced by Scriptures Will you say that if a Bedlam or willfull malefactor either by puffing out the Candle or shutting his eyes or looking another way will not reade or see the evidence that is brought against him that therfore the evidence is not able to convince him To the fifteenth Though it were granted the Iesuit that the Papists have written more upon the Scriptures then Protestants it will not from thence follow that they more reverence or honour the Scripture sithence in their very Commentaries upon Scripture they derrogate from the authority sufficiency and perfection of them by refusing to referre all points of faith in controversie to their decision by resolving their faith last of all not into them but into the Church by teaching that they are obscure even in points necessary to salvation and that unwritten Traditions are equally to be reverenced with them Secondly compare men with men and oportunities with oportunities it may easily be proved that
Anselme and his words Gospell the Knight gaines nothing by it or we lose for though it bee the safest way to cast anchour at the last in the bottome of Gods mercie and put our whole confidence in Christs merits it doth not from hence follow but that men may doe workes meritorious of increase of grace and glory First why doth he lispe here and not speake plaine out the Romish tenet which is that our Workes doe merit not only increase of grace and glorie but remission of sinnes and h Concil Trid. Sess 6. c. 32. Si quis dixerit hominis justificati opera non verè mereri augmentū gratiae vitam aeternam ipfius vitae aeternae si tamen in gratià decesserit consecutionem Anathema sit eternall life Next I would faine know how mercy and merit nay sole mercy and merit can stand together Certainly as mercy excludeth merit so sole mercy all merit Can those workes which is S. Anselmes judgement will not beare scale in Gods ballance weigh downe super-excellens pondus gloriae a super-excellent weight of glorie Certainly the Spectacle-maker put in a burning glasse into his Spectacles which hath much impaired his eye-sight or else hee could not but reade S. Anselmes words in this place in which he renounceth all merit and that in most direct and expresse tearmes I beleeve that none can bee saved by his owne merits Vid loc sup cit p. 4. or by any other meanes but by the merit of Christs passion I set the death of Christ betwixt ' mee and my bad merits and I offer his merits in stead of the merits which I ought to have and have not Concerning Transubstantiation Spectacles chap. 9. Sect. 2. à pag. 132. ad 187. THE Knight and the Protestants commit a great sinne in administring the Sacrament of Baptisme without those Ceremonies which were used in the Church from the Apostles times Elfrick was not the Authour of the Homilie and Epistles the Knight citeth against Transubstantion in which notwithstanding there is nothing against Transubstantiation but much for it if the Knight had not shamefully corrupted the Text by false translating it in five severall places The difference of Catholique Authours about things not defined by the Church maketh nothing for Protestants because they vertually retract all such opinions by submitting their writings to the censure of the Catholique Church Cajetan is falsely alledged by putting in the word supposed and Transubstantiation he denied not the bread to bee transubstantiated into Christs body though hee conceived that those words This is my body doe not sufficiently prove the reall presence of our Saviours body for which he is worthily censured by Suarez and the whole schoole of Divines Biel affirmeth that it is expresly delivered in holy Scriptures that the body of Christ is contained under the species of bread c. Which former words the Knight leaveth out because they made clearely against him and in the latter set downe by the Knight he denieth not that Transubstantiation may bee proved out of Scriptures but that it may be proved expresly that is in expresse tearmes or so many words Alliaco his opinion maketh nothing for the Knight being a Calvinist though hee seeme to favour the Lutherans tenet and though hee thought the Doctrine of consubstantiation to be more possible and easie yet therein hee preferred the judgement of the Church before his owne B. Fisher denieth not that the reall presence can be proved out of Scripture for the fourth chapter of the booke cited by the Knight is employed in the proofe thereof against Luther but that laying aside the interpretation of Fathers and use of the Church no man can be able to prove that any Priest now in these times doth Consecrate the true body and bloud of Christ Durand B. of Maundy doth not deny Transubstantiation to bee wrougnt by vertue of the words This is my body For though in the first place hee saith that Christ then made the bread his body when he blessed it yet hee after addeth that wee doe blesse illâ virtute quam Christus indidit verbis Durand rat c. 41. n. 14. by that power which Christ hath giuen to the words Odo Cameracensis calleth the very forme of Consecration a benediction both because they are blessed words appointed by Christ for so holy an end and because they produce so noble an effect or because they are joyned alwayes with that benediction and thankesgiving used both by our Saviour in the institution of this holy Sacrament and now by the Priest in the Catholique Church in the Consecration of the same Christopherus de capite fontium is put in the Roman Index of prohibited bookes and in the words cited out of him by the Knight there is a grosse historicall errour in this that hee saith that in that opinion of his both the Councell of Trent and all Writers did agree till the late time of Caietan as if Caietan were since the Councell of Trent and in citing this place the Knight is against himselfe for whereas hee maketh Cardinall Caietan and the Archbishop of Caesarea his two Champions against the words of Consecration as if they did both agree in the same here this Archbishop saith quite contrary that all are for him but onely Cajetan Salmeron relateth it indeed to bee the opinions of some Graecians that Christ did not consecrate by those words This is my body but by his benediction but this opinion of theirs is condemned by him as Chamier saith expressely in the place coted by the Knight l. 6. de Eucha c. 7. Bellarmine in the place alledged saith nothing but what is granted by all Papists De Euchar. l. 3. c. 23. to wit that though the words of Consecration in the plaine connaturall and obvious sense inferre Transubstantiation yet because in the judgement of some learned men they may have another sense which proveth only the reall presence it is not altogether improbable that without the authority of the Church they cannot inforce a man to beleeve Transubstantiation out of them Alfonsus à Castro affirmeth that of Transubstantiation there is rare mention in the ancient Fathers yet of the conversion of the bread into the body of Christ there is most frequent mention and the drift of Castro in that place is to shew that though there bee not much mention in ancient Writers of a thing or plaine testimonie of Scripture that yet the use and practice of the Church is sufficient bringing in for example this point of Transubstantiation and the procession of the holy Ghost from the Son The meaning of Yribarne and Scotus saying Transubstantiation of late was determined in the Councell of Lateran is only this that whereas the words of Consecration may bee understood of the reall presence of our blessed Saviours body either by Transubstantiation or otherwise so the substance of bread doe remaine the Church hath determined the words are to be understood in the former
elements is not reall and corporall but spirituall and sacramentall as that was in the Desert of which the Apostle speaketh the c 1 Cor. 10.4 spirituall rock followed them and that rock waes Christ When Manna fell and the rock was strucken Christ was not incarnate nor many hundred yeares after how then could the Manna or the water bee really and properly turned into his flesh and bloud Moreover howsoever hee eludeth the former words of Aelfrick There is a great difference betwixt the body wherein Christ suffered and the body which is received of the faithfull the body in which Christ suffered was borne of the flesh of Mary and consisted of bloud and bone but the other is gathered of many cornes without hloud and bone by saying that the difference which Aelfrick sheweth betweene Christ on the Crosse and Christ on the Sacrament is in his manner of being not in the being it selfe not denying him to bee really in both yet the later words which containe an inference upon the former therefore there is nothing to bee understood in the Sacrament bodily but spiritually admit of no colourable evasion for if nothing bee there understood bodily but spiritually then must needs the words This is my body be understood figuratively then must we not according to the doctrine of those times understand any substantiall change of the bread into Christs very body or the Wine into his bloud really and corporally To the third The difference betweene Papists of most eminent note concerning the words by vertue whereof they teach Transubstantiation is effected maketh much against the doctrine it selfe and by consequence quite overthroweth it For thus we argue against them out of this their difference If the bread bee turned into Christs body then either by the words of benediction before hee brake the bread or gave it c. or by the very words of Consecration viz. hoc est corpus meum But hee neither changed the bread into his Body by the one nor by the other Ergo hee changed it not at all Not by the precedent benediction as Aquinas and Bellarmine prove For till the last instant of the prolation of the words This is my Body the substance of bread remaineth Not by the words of Consecration for as Durand and Odo Cameracensis and Christopherus Archbishop of Caesarea prove Christ could not have said after hee had blessed the Bread This is my body unlesse by blessing it he had made it his body before If when Christ said Take yee and eat yea at that time the Bread by benediction were not changed it would follow that Christ did command his Disciples to take and eate the substance of Bread which to say is to deny the article of Transubstantiation Neither can the Iesuite heale this sore by his vertuall salve in saying that those men above alledged who impugne the prsent tenent of the Schooles concerning the words of Consecration in which the essence of the Sacrament consisteth vertually retracted such opinions because they submitted their writings to the censure of the Catholique Church for so wee may say with better reason that what they held against us they vertually retracted by submitting their judgement to the Catholique Church which we can easily prove not to bee the particular Roman but the Universall which in all times and all places through the Christian world hath professed the common faith once given to the Saints without any of those later Articles which P. Pius the fourth Jud. 13. and the late conventicle of Trent hath pinned unto it To the fourth Cajetan is truly alledged by the Knight for though neither the words Transubstantiation nor supposed are in him yet the sence of them is to be found in him for as both Suarez and Flood himselfe acknowledgeth p. 147. Cajetan said that these words This is my body doe not sufficiently prove the reall presence of our Saviours body without the presupposed authoritie of the Church and if in his judgement they prove not so much as the reall presence of Christs body in the Sacrament much lesse prove they the presence thereof by Transubstantiation or turning the bread into it By the word supposed which the Knight addeth more fully to declare Cajetans meaning hee intended not suppositions or barely pretended authority of the Church but truly presupposed which maketh not the speech sound at all contemptibly of the Church as Flood would have it whose stomack is so bad that it turneth sweet and wholsome meate into choler Nectar cui fiet acetum vaticani perfida vappa cadi To the fifth The Knight transcribeth so much out of Biel as was pertinent to his purpose with the rest he thought not fit to trouble the reader In Can. Miss Lect. 40. notandum guod quamvis expressè tradatur in scriptur â quod corpus Christi veraciter sub speciebus panis continetur à fidelibus sumitur tamen quomodo sit ibi corpus Christi an per conversionem alicujus in ipsum an sine conversione incipiat esse corpus Christi cum pane manentibus substantiâ accidentibus panis in Canone bibliae non invenitur The whole passage in Biel standeth thus It is to bee noted that though it bee expressely delivered in Scripture that the body of Christ is truly contained under the forme or species of Bread and received by the faithfull yet it is not found in the canon of the Bible how the body of Christ is there whether by conversion of any thing into it or whether it beginneth to be there without conuersion or turning the substance and accidents of bread remaining The former words in which passage make nothing against the Knight Who in this chapter for the most part condemneth Papists out of their owne mouth and therefore taking Biel for such hee maketh use of his testimonie against the Roman Church in point of Transubstantiation Which is very direct and expresse and the Iesuites answer is very weake and unsufficient thereunto to wit that hee denieth only that Transubstantiation is found in Scripture in expresse words For first Biel saith not non invenitur expressum but non invenitur It is not found in Scripture whether Christs body be there by conversion of any thing into it Now many things are found in Scripture as the Trinity of persons the eternall generation of the Sonne the procession of the holy Ghost from the Father and the Sonne the number and nature of Sacraments which yet are not set downe in expresse words Secondly it is evident out of the former words of Biel that hee accounted those things expressely to be delivered in Scriptures which yet are not set downe in expresse words for hee saith that it is expresly delivered in Scriptures that the body of Christ is truly contained under the species of bread and yet those words are not found in Scripure If wee should admit then of Flood his glosse upon Biel Transubstantiation is not found in Scripture that is
words This is my Body did demonstrate what was contained in the bread What fault findeth hee in this allegation If the Greekes had no such opinion or Salmeron relateth no such thing the blame must light between Salmeron and Chamier howsoever the Knight is free For hee truly quoteth Chamier neither dare Flood say that Chamier misquoteth Salmeron P. 161. For saith hee though I found not this place in him yet I will not say but it may bee there Let this Spectacle-maker put on a better paire of Spectacles and hee shall plainly reade the words alledged out of Salmeron in the place quoted by Chamier Cie Orat. pro Rosc Amerino The geese in the Capitoll if they gagled without cause were to be beate for it and the dogges to have their legges broken if they barked when there was no suspition of a theefe approaching Some such like punishment they deserve in Tullies judgement who lay foule aspersions upon others without any colour of proofe or semblance of truth To the twelfth At the Knights allegation out of Bellarmine Flood here nibleth but can no where fasten his tooth hee excepteth at the changing of the singular number into the plurall and translating Scriptures for Scripture and the most learned and acute men such as Scotus for most learned and acute men It seemeth this Iesuite is descended of the race of Domitian Sueton in Domitian whose greatest exercise was all day to strike at flies with a sharpe iron bodkin reade Scriptures in the plurall or Scripture in the singular or most acute Bellar. de Euchar l. 3. c. 23. Dicit Scotus non extare locū uilum soripturae tam expressum ut sine ecclesiae declaratione evidenter cogat transubstantiationem admittere at que id non est omninò improbabile nam etiamsi scripturae nob is tam apertae videantur ut cogant hominem non protervū tamen meritò dubitari potest cùm homines doctissimi acutissimi qualis imprimis Scotus fuit aliter sentiant or the most acute the confession of Bellarmine maketh still altogether as strongly against the grounding of Transubstantiation on Scripture Scotus saith that there is no place of Scripture so expresse viz. for Transubstantiation which setting aside the declaration of the Church evidently enforceth a man to admit it For though the Scripture viz. That text of Scripture brought by him to prove Transubstantiation seemed to bee so plaine as to enforce a man not refractorie to beleeve it yet it may bee doubted whether that text viz. Hoc est corpus meum bee cleare enough to enforce it seeing most learned and acute men such as Scotus was thought otherwise If it may bee justly doubted whether the text This is my body inferre Transubstantiation why doe our Adversaries blame us for doubting of it If sharp-sighted Scotus and other most learned and acute men thought the text enforceth no such thing let our Adversaries give us leave to preferre their opinion before the judgement of Flood and others neither so learned nor so acute To the thirteenth L. 8 con haeres verb. indulg de transubslātiatione panis in corpus Chrislirara in antiquis scriptoribus mentio rara c. The Knight regarded not at what Alfonsus à Castro aimed but hee tooke up his arrow where hee found it and shooteth it against your Trent doctrine Of the Transubstantiation saith hee of the bread into Christs body there is rarely or seldome any mention made in ancient Writers What doth I. R. answer hereunto Alfonsus saith hee saith true and the Knight most false For though of Transubstantiation there bee no mention yet of the conversion of the bread into Christs body there is most frequent mention P. 164. Reade my riddle wat 's this rare mention of Transubstantiation but not rare mention of the conversion of the bread into Christs body pugnantia te loqui non vides Is not this a flat contradiction I would faine know what difference there is betweene Transubstantiation and the conversion of the substance of Bread into the substance of Christs body in the Sacrament Neither can the Iesuite free himselfe here from uttering an evident contradiction in the same sentence by saying that Alfonsus speaketh of the word Transubstantiation not of the thing it selfe For Alfonsus there speaketh of things not of words as Flood himselfe confesseth in the same page five lines after saying that Alfonsus his drift in that place is to shew that though there bee not much mention in ancient Writers of a thing or plaine testimonie of Scripture that yet the use and practice of the Church is sufficient bringing in for instance the point of Transubstantiation and procession of the holy Ghost See here Alfonsus speaketh not of the word Transubstantiation but of the point or thing it selfe and of this thing or point hee saith there is rare or seldome mention in ancient Writers To the fourteenth Neither Scotus nor Yribarne speake of the interpretation of the words This is my body Bellar. l. 3. de Euch. c. 23. unum addit Scotus c. quod ante Lateranense concilium Transubstantiatio non fuit dagma fidei Yrib in 4. dist 11. q. 3. disp 42. in primitivâ ecclesiâ de substantia fidei erat cotpus Christi sub speciebus contineri tamin non erat de fide substantiam panis in corpus Christi converti Aug. de doct Christ l. 2. c. 9. omnia quae continent fidem mores in illis inveniuntur quae apertè posita sunt in seripturâ Chrysost in 2. ad Thess hom 3. manifesla sunt in divinis Scripturis quaecunque sunt necessaria Rivet Cathol orthod q. 18.138 Gat. discourse of Tran. pag 60.61 Scotus 4. Sent. dist 11. ad hoc multùm expressè videturloqui Ambrosius nor of the manner of the deliverie of the doctrine of Transubstantiation in former times but de dogmate fidei of a doctrine of faith which they expresly denie Transubstantiation to have beene and what they say may bee confirmed by Flood his owne answer in this place For if Transubstantiation in former ages was not plainly delivered as hee confesseth p. 167. it could not bee then dogma fidei or de substantiâ fidei any doctrine of faith For all doctrines of faith are plainly and evidently set downe in holy Scriptures as S. Austine and S. Chrysostome joyntly teach As for the passage alledged by Scotus out of S. Ambrose it is fully answered retorted by Andrew Rivet Mr. Gataker and others Whereunto I thinke fit to adde nothing but that Scotus in the place alledged speaketh not confidently of S. Ambrose that hee held the doctrine of Transubstantiation but that in words he seemed to favour that opinion To the fifteenth Albeit S. Austine in the place alledged by the Knight speaketh not expresly against your carnall presence yet by consequence hee quite overthroweth it for if the unbeleeving Iewes in the Desert and Iudas in the new Testament died spiritually after
to the Iewes and Greekes repentance towards God and faith towards our Lord Iesus Christ hee could not but have seene the absurditie of his answer wherein he denieth that S. Paul speaketh of the written word For who knoweth not that repentance towards God and faith towards Iesus Christ are written almost in every Sermon of the Prophets and chapter of the Evangelists What hee addeth for confirmation of his answer from the example of our Saviour who made knowne to his Disciples whatsoever hee heard from his Father and yet delivered not one word in writing no whit at all helpeth his cause For albeit we grant that our Saviour wrote nothing except wee give credit to a relation in Eusebius of a letter written by him to King Abgarus yet hee commanded his Apostles to write those things which they had heard and seene what thou seest write it in a booke Euseb eccles hist. l. 1. Apoc. 1.11 and send it to the seven Churches and S. Peter saith 2 Ep. 8.20 that no Scripture is privatae 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is as Cal vin well rendereth the words privatae impulsionis of private impulsion or motion for the prophecie came not in old time by the will of man but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the holy Ghost and therefore Irenaeus saith expresly Advers haeres .3 c. 1. non per alios dispositionem salut is accepimus quans per quos E vangelium ad nos pervenit quod primum praeconiaverunt posted secundùm Dei voluntatem in script is reliquerunt columnam firmamentum fidei futurum Euseb hist eccl l. 2. c. 14. fideles iterat is precibus impetrârunt à Marcout monumentum illud doctrinae quod sermone verbis ill is tradidisset etiam script is mandatum apud eos relinqueret Esay 8.20 that what the Apostles preached first by word of mouth by the will of GOD they afterwards delivered in writing to bee a pillar and foundation of our faith and S. Austine affirmeth that what Christ would have knowne of his words and deeds as needfull to our salvation that hee gave in charge to his Apostles to set downe in writing If this suffice not I will stop the mouth of this Iesuit with the free confession of a greater Iesuit then hee Gregorie of Valence in his eight booke of the Analysis of faith the fift chapter minimè in ipsorum arbitrio positum fuit scribere aut alio tempore aut alijs verbis scribere the penmen of the holy Ghost were so guided by the spirit that it was not in their power or at their choyce to write or not to write or to write at another time or to write in other words then they did To the testimonie of Bellarmine the Iesuit gives as sleight an answer as to the former out of S. Luke whereunto I need to reply nothing because in a case so cleere wee need not the Cardinals confession having such expresse testimonie of Scripture and Fathers as namely of Esay to the law and to the testimonie if they speake not according to this word Deut. 4.2 Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things which are written in the booke of the law to doe them And Moses wrote this law and delivered it to the Priests which bare the Arke Gal. 1.8 2 Tim. 3.15 it is because there is no light in them of Moyses yee shall not adde unto the words which I command you which to bee spoken of the written law is apparant by comparing this text with Galathians 3.10 and Deuteronomie 31.9 And the words of Christ Iohn 5.39 search the Scriptures for in them you thinke you have eternall life And of S. Iohn his beloved Disciple Iohn 20.31 these things are written that yee might beleeve that Iesus Christ is the Sonne of God and that beleeving ye might have life through his Name And of S. Paul if we or an Angel from heaven preach unto you any other Gospel then that yee have received Advers hermog c. 22. adoro scripturae plenitudinem scriptum doceat Hermogenes Epist ad Pomp nihil innovetur in quit Stephanus quod traditum est unde est ista traditio Vtrum de Dominicâ Evangelicâ authoritate descendens an de Apostolorum mandatis epistolis veniens ea enim facienda quae scripta sunt Deus restatur siergo aut in evangelio praecipitur aut in Apostolorum epistolis aut Actibus continetur observetur haecsanctatraditio that is as S. Austine expoundeth it praeterquam quod in Scripturis legalibus Evangelicis accepist is if any preach unto you any Gospell beside that which is contained in the writings of the Law and the Gospell let him bee accursed And thou hast knowne the Scriptures from a child which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Iesus for all Scripture is given by Divine inspiration and is profitable for doctrine for reproofe for correction for instruction and righteosnesse that the man of God may bee perfect throughly furnished to all good workes And of Tertullian I adore the fulnesse of Scriptures let Hermogenes prove what hee saith out of Scriptures or otherwise let him feare the woe denounced against all such as adde any thing thereunto or take there-from And of S. Cyprian our brother Steven will have nothing to bee altered in the Church tradition Whence is this tradition is it from the Gospel or the Acts of the Apostles or their Epistles if it be so then let this holy tradition bee kept for God himselfe witnesseth that wee ought to observe those things that are written And of Athanasius Athanas. orat 1. cont Arr. Sufficiunt per se inspiratae scripturae ad veritatis instructionem Basil Serm. de side 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Hom. 3. in 2. ad Tbess 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Et in 2. ad Cor. Hom. 3 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ierom. advers Helvid c. 3. credimus quia legimus non credimus quia non legimus Augustin de doc Chris l. 2. c. 9. in ijs quae apertè posita sunt in scriptura inveniuntur illa amnia quae continent fidem mores Cyril in Evang. Iohan. l. 1.2 c. 68 ea conscripta sunt quae scribentes Sufficere put drunt ad mores dogmataque Vincen. Lyrin advers Haeres hic requirat aliquis cum sit perfectus scripturae canon sibique ad omnia sat is superque sufficiat Biel in can mis lec 71. quae agenda quae fugienda quae amanda quae contemnenda quae timenda quae audenda quae credenda speranda caetera nostrae saluti necessaria quae omnia sola docet Sacra scriptura the holy Scripturesare sufficient to instruct us in the truth And of S Basil it is a manifest falling away from faith either to refuse any thing of those that are written or to bring in any of those things which
contradict Romish doctrines not out of disobedience to man but out of obedience to him who commandeth us to contend for the true faith and to reprove and convince all gainesayers What Papists intentions are we take not upon us to judge their doctrines we put to the test of Gods word and finde them false and adulterine and all be it some points of their beliefe considered in themselves might seeme indifferent yet as they hold them they are not because they are not of faith Rom. 14.23 and what soever is not of faith is sinne Now no point of the Romish Creed as they hold it is of that faith the Apostle speaketh of that is divine faith because they ground and finally resolve all their articles not upon Gods word but upon the authority of the Pope Resp ad Archiepis Spalaten c. 47. Firmitas fundamenti â—â— firma licet implicita in aureo hoc fundamento veritatis adhaesio valebit ut in Cypriano sic in nobis ad salutem faenum stipula imbecilitas caries in tecto contignatione explicitae erroris opinio non valebit nec in Cypriano nec in nobis ad perâ—â—tiem or Church of Rome which is but the authority of man whereas on the contrary as Doctor Crakent horpe demonstrateth If any Protestant build hay or stubble upon the true foundation he may he saved because be holdeth the true foundation which is that every doctrine of faith ought to be built upon Scripture If the Iesuit wonder at this conclusion let him weigh the Authors reasons and he will be forced to confesse that the errors if there be any in Protestants in regard they sticke close to the true foundation and implicitly deny them cannot in them be damnable whereas the very true doctrines of faith in Papists because they hold them upon a wrong ground and foundation very much derogatory to God and his truth are not so safe To the third With what face can the Iesuit avow this considering that Prieras before alleaged and other writers approved by the Church of Rome mainetaine this blasphemous assertion that the authority of the Church is greater then the anthority of Scripture and all Papists of note at this day hold that the Scripture is but an imperfect and partiall rule of faith all Protestants on the contrary teach that it is an entire and perfect rule of faith Papists believe the Scripture for the Churches sake Protestants the Church for the Scripture sake Papists resolve all points of faith generally into the Popes infalibility or Churches authority Protestants into the written word of God which as Bellarmine himselfe confesseth De verbo Dei non script l. 4. c. 11. containeth all things necessary for all men to beleeve and is a most certaine and safe rule of beleeveing Yea but saith the Iesuit out of Vincentius Lerinensis De verbo Dei l. 1. c. 2. he that will avoid the deceits and snares of Haeretikes and remaine soundin the faith must strengthen his faith two wayes to wit by the authority of the divine law and the tradition of the Catholike Church This advise of Vincentius is sound and good if it be rightly understood and not in the Iesuits sense Vincentius there by tradition of the Catholike Church understandeth not unwritten verities but the Catholike expositions of holy Scriptures extant in the writings of the Doctors of the Church in all ages and we grant that this Catholike exposition of the Doctors where it can be had is of great force to confirme faith and confound Heretikes Vt Scripturae ecclesiastice intelligentiae jungatur authoritas For the stopping of whose mouth that Father saith and we deny it not that there is great neede to add to the Scripture the Churches sense or interpretation albeit as he there addeth which cutteth the throat of the Iesuits cause The Canon of Scripture is perfect and sufficient of it selfe for all things nay rather as hee correcteth himselfe Over and above sufficient cum sit perfectus scripturae canon sibique adomnia satis superque sufficiat To the fourth Here the Iesuit would make his Reader study a little and his Adversarie to muse Vero nihil verius certo nihil certius but it is indeed whether hee be in his right wits or no. For first as Seneca well resolveth one thing cannot be said truer than another one truth in Divinitie may be more evident to us than another but in it selfe it cannot be truer or surer Secondly admitting there could be degrees of certainty at least quoad nos there can be yet no comparison in regard of such certaintie betweene an Article of the Creed assented unto by all Christians and a controverted conclusion maintained onely by a late faction in the Westerne Church But the sitting of Christ at the right hand of his Father is an Article of the Creed set downe in expresse words in holy Scripture Mark 16.19 Luke 24. consented unto by all Christians in the world whereas the carnall presence of Christ in the Sacrament by Tranfubstantiation is no Article extant in any Creed save onely that of Pope Pius his coyning in the yeare of our Lord 1564. It is neither in words set downe in Scripture as the other Articles are neither can it be necssarily inforced or deduced by consequence as foure great Cardinals of the Roman Church confesse Cameracensis Cajetan Roffensis and Bellarmine Neither was this Doctrine of the Romane Church ever assented unto by the Greeke Church nor by the Latine anciently or generally as I shewed before Thirdly the Iesuit contradicteth himselfe within eight lines for having said in the eighteenth line Pag. 384. that Christ his corporall presence in the Sacrament was more sure than his presence in heaven at the right hand of his Father about seven lines after forgetting himselfe hee saith that Wee shall find as much to doe marke as much not more in expounding that Article of the Creed as they doe in expounding the words This is my Body Wherein it is well hee confesseth that Papists make much to doe in expounding the words This is my Body which is most true for by the demonstrative Hoc they understand they know not what Neither this Body nor this Bread but an Individum vagum something contained under the accidents of Bread which when the Priests saith Hoc it is Bread but when hee hath muttered out an Vm it is Christs Body Likewise by the Copula est is they understand they know not what either shall be as soone as the words are spoken or is converted unto or is by Transubstantiation Lastly by Body they understand such a body as indeed is no body without the extension of place without distinction of Organs without facultie of sense or motion and will hee make this figment so incredible so impossible as sure nay more sure than the Article of Christs ascension into heaven and his sitting at the right hand of his
before and cleered where I shewed that it maketh nothing against but strongly for the sufficiencie of Scripture to instruct in all points necessarie to salvation For though all Christs speeches and actions are not registred by the Evangelist yet as Saint Austine rightly inferreth out of the words following haec scripta sunt ut credatis credentes vitam aeternam habeatis 2 Thess 2.15 electa sunt quae saluti credentium sufficerent Such things were made choice of to be written Ver. 2. And Paul as his manner was went unto them of Thessalonica and three Sabbath dayes reasoned with them out of the Scriptures as might suffice for the salvation of all Beleevers Neither is that text of Saint Paul any whit derogatorie to the perfection of Scriptures for whatsoever hee meanes by Tradition per Sermonem taught by word of mouth it is certaine out of the seventeenth of the Acts that all Saint Pauls speech and discourse to the Thessaloinans whereunto the words have reference were out of Scripture Secondly the words themselves Tenete traditiones quas dedicistis sive per sermonem sive per Epistolam import not that the Apostle delivered divers things to them in writing by an Epistle and without writing by word of mouth but that he preached to them and taught them the Christian doctrine both wayes by Letters and by speech and that they should have as much care of his writings as of those things hee spake to them in presence Thirdly admit they were different things which hee spake to them and which hee wrote all that can be from thence inferred is but this that all points of saving Doctrine are not written in this Epistle of Saint Paul to the Thessalonians which may be granted without any prejudice to our Tenet For those things that are not written in that Epistle might be and undoubtedly are written in other of his Epistles or other bookes of holy Scripture To the fift Saint Ierome is not against the free use of Scripture in the vulgar tongue for hee himselfe translated the Scriptures into the vulgar tongue of the Dalmatians hee dedicates his Commentarie upon Scripture to Lay-persons yea many of them to women whom he exhorteth Haec monilia in pectore haec in auribus hereant to account them as their chiefe casket of Iewels let these Iewels hang upon your neckes and in your eares Epist ad Demetriad wherein hee much commendeth the Husbandmen about Bethlem for being so perfect in Scriptures that They had the Psalmes of David by heart and sang them as they followed the Plow Arator stivam tenens cantat Davidicum melos he instructeth Laeta a religious Matron how to bring up her daughter in the knowledge of the Scriptures and what method to observe in the reading thereof Progemmis serico divinos codices amet In steed of silks and precious stones let her handle the books of holy Scripture let her first learne the Psalter c. discat primo Psalterium his se Canticis avocet in Proverbiis Salomonis erudiatur ad vitam In Ecclesiaste consuescat quae mundi sunt calcare In Iob virtutis patientiae exempla sectetur Ad evangelia transeat nunquam eapositura de manibus c. Neither are the words you quote out of him against the free use of the Scripture but against the practise of some forward persons who Lapwing-like offer to flye with a piece of the shell on their head taking upon them to expound holy Scriptures to others which they understand not themselves and to teach that which they never learned docent quod nunquam didicorunt To the sixt This practise of the Iewes concludeth nothing at all but that those passages of Scripture above mentioned are very difficult and subject to misconstruction and therefore require a discreet Reader of ripe yeares and judgement Whether this their practise be commendable or no in restraining all before they arrive to thirty from reading those passages of Scripture I dispute not but this is certaine that even this custome of theirs which the Iesuit brings against us makes for us for they permitted all men before thirty to reade all other chapters of holy Scriptures and after thirty these also To the seventh The honour the Papists doe the Scriptures in prohibiting them to be read is like the favour she did her Paramour in the Poet Quae prae amore exclusit foras which out of pure love thrust him out of doores The greatest honour wee can doe Gods holy Oracles is diligently to reade them attentively to heare them humbly to obey them and daily to search them as the deeds and evidences of our salvation Ioh. 5.39 according to the Precept of our blessed Saviour Search the Scriptures for in them yee thinke yee have eternall life and they are they which testifie of mee As for the Iesuits reason drawne from the weaknesse of the Readers it is very weake and of no force at all Psal 19 7. Prov. 1.4 First because the Scriptures were written to give knowledge to the simple and wisedome to the unlearned Secondly because if this his reason were good their Church should prohibit all other bookes as well as Scriptures or rather much more than Scriptures in regard there are errours in them but none in Scriptures and God hath promised a speciall blessing to those who in obedience to his ordinance diligently reade and study the holy Scriptures which hee hath not to those that reade other books To the eight This Proverb might most rightly have beene applied to the Iesuit in the former Section when he a Iesuit produced Oliverius Manerius a Jesuit against Henry Buxhorne Deane of Tyelmond then hee said in effect Aske my brother Jesuit if I be a thiefe or rather a slanderer But it no way fitteth Cornelius Agrippa and the Knight the one being a zealous Protestant the other a professed Papist though discovering and ingeniously confessing divers abuses in the Papacie If hee were as the Iesuit sayes a Magician because hee wrote of Art-magicke what were Pope Hildebrand and Sylvester who not onely studied but also practised the black-Art as Benocardinalis Platina and others write To the ninth The Iesuit will not stand answering every one severally because hee dare not keepe that station for feare of Gun-shot For the answer hee giveth in generall it is false and absurd if not impious false because it is certaine that those similitudes cannot be applied to the letter onely without the meaning nor doe the Heretikes now a dayes nor did the Devill himselfe alleage onely the letter and syllables of Scripture but the meaning also 2 Pet. 4.16 though perverting and wresting it to an evill end and drawing false conclusions from it Hee that calleth the Scriptures Sybils Prophecies blasphemously carpeth at the obscuritie of the meaning and Pighius who compared it to a nose of wax impiously taxeth the diversitie of senses and interpretations which the Scripture is
4. Art 1. betwixt a Councell approved by the whole Christian world and one that is disclaimed by most Christian Kings and Bishops and the major part of Christendome But you would further know a difference betwixt their two Creeds Let me tell you in briefe When a Romanist like your selfe would needs know of a Protestant the difference betwixt his religion and ours Subesse Romano Pontifici omni humanae creaturae declaramus dicimus definimus pronunciamus omninò esse de necessitate salutis Bonifac. 8. in Extr. de Major Obed cap. Unam sanctam because both beleeved the Catholike Church in the Creed the Protestant made answer that wee beleeve the Catholike faith contained in the Creed but doe not beleeve the thirteenth Article which the Pope put to it when the Romanist was desirous to see that Article the Extravagant of Pope Boniface was brought wherein it was declared to be altogether of necessitie of salvation for everie humane creature to be subject to the Bishop of Rome This thirteenth Article in your Trent Creed besides the newnesse of the rest makes a great difference Mr. Lloyd betwixt the two Creeds and the rather because it is flat contrarie to the decree of the Nicene Councell besides many other differences as shall appeare hereafter But say you they agree in this that as the Arrians of those times cryed out against that Creed as being new and having words not found in Scripture for example Consubstantiation so our Protestants cry out against the Trent profession of faith for the same reasons of noveltie and words not found in Scripture as for example Transubstantiation It is true the Arrians at the time of the Councell cryed out against the Nicene Creed for defining the word Consubstantiall or Coessentiall as being new but it is as true they complained without a cause for long before that time the word was used by Origen Doctos quosdam ex veteribus illustres Episcopos Homousii dictione usos esse cognovimus Socrat. l. 1. c. 8. and other ancient Fathers as appeares by Socrates Wee know saith he that of the old writers certaine learned men and famous Bishops have used the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and accordingly it was resolved by S. Austin that the name was not invented but confirmed and established in the Councell of Nice The word therefore Consubstantiall was not new August contr Maxim l. 3. c. 14. which they complained of but the word Transubstantiation is so new that it was altogether unknowne till the Councell of Lateran Concil Lateranense Anno 1215. Bellarm. 1200. yeeres after Christ therefore your comparison holds not in the first place But ad nit the Councell had first devised the word Quomodo dicis in Scripturis divinis 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 non inveniri quasi aliud sit 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 quà m quod dicit Ego de Deo patre exivi Ego Pater unum sumus Ambros de fide contra Arrian Tom. 2. c. 5. p. 223. in initio August Ep. 174. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Athanas Ep. quod decret Synod Nic. Congruis verbis sunt exposita Nihil refert hanc vocem non esse in Scripturâ si vox id significat quod Scriptura docet Vasq in 1. Thom. Tom. 2. Disp 110. c. 1. sect 4. yet it is agreed on all hands that the meaning of the word is contained in Scripture S. Ambrose writing against the Arrians puts to them this very question How doe you say the word Consubstantiall is not in divine Scriptures as if Consubstantiall were any thing else but I went out from the Father and the Father and I are one the word therefore was a pregnant word agreeable to the sacred word of God And albeit saith S. Austin the word perhaps be not found there yet the thing it selfe is found and what more frivolous quarrell is it than to contend about the word when there is certaintie of the thing it selfe In like manner Athanasius answered the Arrians in those dayes as I must answer you Touching the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 albeit it be not found in Scriptures yet it hath the same meaning that the Scriptures intend and imports the same with them whose eares are entirely affected towards religion We cry not out against you simply because your word Transubstantiation is not found in the Scriptures but because the true sense and meaning of the word is not contained in them for the words Unbegotten Increate the word Sacrament the word Trinitie and the like are not found in Scripture yet wee teach them wee beleeve them because their true sense and meaning may bee deduced from the Scripture and we professe with your Jesuite Vasques Nihil refert c. It mattereth not whether the word be in Scripture or no so as that which it signifieth be in the Scripture To come neerer to you doe you but prove that the words This is my body imply Transubstantiation and let me be branded for an Arrian if I refuse to subscribe to it but that the world may know we condemne you justly both for the newnesse of the word and your doctrine also hearken to the learned Doctors of your owne Church Your Schoole-man Scotus tels us that before the Councell of Lateran Bellarm. l. 3. de Eucbar c. 23. Transubstantiation was not beleeved as a point of faith It is true your fellow Jesuites are ashamed of this confession and thereupon Bellarmine answers Ibid. This opinion of his is no way to bee allowed Suarez in 3. Tom. in Euch. disp 70. sect 2. and Suarez not content with such a sober reckoning proclaimes that for his lowd speaking hee ought to be corrected and as touching the words of consecration from whence you would inferre both the name nature of Transubstantiation Mont. in Luk. 22. your Arias Montanus saith This is my body that is my body is sacramentally contained in the Sacrament of bread and hee addes withall the secret and most mysticall manner hereof God will once vouchsafe more clerely to unfold to his Christian Church The doctrine therefore of your carnall and corporall presence is not so cleerely derived from the Scriptures nay on the contrarie hee protesteth that the body of our Saviour is but sacramentally contained in the Sacrament as the Protestants hold and therefore not bodyily It is more than evident that the word Consubstantiation used by the Fathers was derived from the Scriptures but you have not that infallible assurance for your word Transubstantiation witnes your Cardinall Cajetan Cajet in Thom. part 3. q. 75. art 1. he assures us that there appeareth nothing out of the Gospel that may inforce us to understand Christs words properly yea nothing in the text hindereth but that these words This is my body may as well be taken in a metaphoricall sense as those words of the Apostle The Rocke was Christ that the words of either proposition may well bee
and tell me if I may not truly retort your Assertion into your owne bosome Scripture you have indeed but so mang led corrupted perverted by Translation that as you have it it is as good as nothing But you have misinterpreted the Scriptures say you according to your owne fancies Your bolt is soone shot and if all your words were Oracles and that Ipse dixit were sufficient your bare word for other proofes you have none would easily conclude us but I will shew you so plainly that without Spectacles you may see that these Aspersions likewise reflect upon your selves It was a question amongst your fellow Jesuits whether Jacob Clemens the Dominican might by Authority of the Scripture kill Henry the third B. Barloes defence of the Articles in his Preface p. 7. King of France and one of your Jesuits reasoned thus with himselfe Ehud killed Eglon and therefore I may kill Henry for Eglon was a King and so is Henry Eglon signifies a Calfe and Henry is a Calvinist and therefore assuredly I may murther him by Scripture I hope you will confesse that this Jesuite although he were of your Society did interpret the Scripture according to his owne fancie In like manner your Patriarke of Venice concludes seven Sacraments from the words of Scripture and I conceive it is according to his owne fancie That saith he which Andrew spake Inn. Gentil exam Concil Trid. l. 4. n. 26. Sess There is a Boy which hath five loaves and two fishes must be understood of the ranke of St. Peters successors and that which is added Make the people sit downe signifieth that salvation must be offered them by teaching them the seven Sacraments And whereas the Prophet David saith Thou hast put all things under his feet Antoninus your Archbishop of Florence Anton. in Sum. part 3. tit 22. c. 5. about two hundred years since expounded those words in this manner Thou hast made all things subject to the Pope the Cattle of the field that is to say men living in the Earth the fishes of the sea that is to say the soules in Purgatory the fowles of the Ayre that is to say the soules of the Blessed in heaven whether this Exposition be according to the sense which the Catholike Church holdeth or according to his owne fancy let the Reader judge To come nearer to you Whitak Camp Rat. 9. Moses saith God made man after his Image Pope Adrian inferreth Therefore Images must be set up in Churches St. Peter saith Behold here are two swords Pope Boniface concludes Extra de Major Obed. Therefore the Pope hath power over the spirituall and the temporall St. Mathew saith Give not that which is holy unto dogges Mr. Harding expounds it Juels Def. p. 52. Therefore it is not lawfull for the vulgar people to reade the Scriptures It was sayd to St. Peter in a vision Arise kill and eate your Cardinall Baronius hence infers In voto Baronii contra venetos The Pope is Peter and the Venetians are the meat which must be killed and devoured To let passe those farre fetched and extravagant senses of Scriptures which your learned men wyer-draw for your Romish Doctrine It is the word of God Goe to my servant Job and he will pray for thee therefore there is an Invocation of Saints in Scripture Give us this day our daily bread Bellar. de Sāct Beat. l. 1. c. 10. therefore the bread must bee given to the Common people and not the Cup. Roffens adver Luther Art 16. Our Saviour opened the Booke of the Prophet Esay and afterwards closed it Ledis de divinis Script Quâvis linguâ non legendâ cap. 22. therefore Prayer and Service in an unknowne tongue is commanded by the Scripture These and such like false glasses you temper for your Spectacles to deceive your poore ignorant Proselites with the name of Scripture and for feare they should make any doubt of the right interpretation of them Si quis habet interpretationē Ecclesiae Romanae de loco aliquo Scripturae etiamsi tamen habet ipsissimū verbum Dei Hosius de expresso verbo Dei your Cardinall Hosius protesteth to all Romanists If a man have the Interpretation of the Church of Rome of any place of Scripture he hath the very words of God though he neither know nor understand whether nor how it agreeth with the words of Scripture This puts me in minde of that excellent passage of St. Hilary who speaking of the errours and Heresies crept into the Church in the dayes of Constantius makes this generall complaint which in these dayes is truly verified in the Roman Church Hilard 3. ad Constant l. 1. ad Const defunctum Faith is now come to depend rather on time than on the Gospel your state is dangerous and miserable you have as many faiths as wills and as many doctrines as manners whilst faiths are either so written as you list or so vnderstood as you will I come now to your forbidden Bookes wherein the mysterie of iniquitie will manifestly appeare and first touching the sacred Bible which is forbidden in the first place The Bible say you is not so forbidden but that it is in the Bishops power to grant leave if upon Conference with the Parish Priest or Confessor of the partie that desireth leave he finde him to be such a one as may not incurre danger of faith c. which with any reasonable man may be counted sufficient liberty It is true that by the fourth Rule of Pope Pius the fourth the Bible may be licensed by the Bishop but the party must have the license in writing and withall it is decreed Regula 4. in indice libr. prohibit p. 16. If any presume without such license either to reade or have it unlesse he come in first and give up his Bible to his Ordinary let him not have the pardon of his sinnes It is not lawfull then to reade the Bible without a dispensation but with a license any man may reade it and this say you is sufficient liberty for any reasonable man If I should grant you that which you say yet you are never able to make good that license for Pope Clement the eight about thirty yeares after upon this dispensation so granted gives us to understand That upon the Rule of Pius the fourth Observatio circa 4. Regulam Ibid. p. 22. in fine Concil Trident no new power was granted to the Bishops or Inquisitors or Superiors to license the buying reading or keeping the Bible in the vulgar tongue seeing hitherto by the command and practise of the holy Inquisition the power of granting such licenses to reade or keepe Bibles in the vulgar Language or any part of Scripture as well of the New as the Old Testament or any sums or Hystoricall Abridgement of the same in any vulgar Language hath beene taken from them Quod quidem inviolatè servandum est and
present Binius ibid. in his Annot. on the other side Peter Lombard and Gratian Pet. Lomb. l. 4. Sent. Dist 6. Grat. Can. Mulier de Consecr Dist 4. they have put in their exception nisi necessitate cogente except it be in case of necessitie so that in the absence of the Priest and in case of necessitie women may baptize by the authority of your Church notwithstanding the Councels decree And this is according to Bellarmines confession Although saith he those words of exception nisi necessitate cogente be not found in the Tomes of Councels Bell. de Baptis l. 1. c. 7. yet Peter Lombard and Gratian cite the Canon in that manner And thus by your owne Cardinals profession your Priests have added that exception to the Canon to dispense with women for Administration of the Sacrament which is not found in the Councell Againe the same Councell is razed both by the compiler of the decrees and publisher of the Councels for the Councell saith in the 44. Canon a Clericus nec comam nutriat nec barbam radat Concil Carth. Can 44. Let no Clerke weare long hayre nor shave his Beard The decretals and your late Councels published by Binius have left out the word Radat and have quite altered the sense of the decree and so your Church hath gone directly against the meaning of the Councell in shaving of Priests S. Austin Bishop of Hippo is both purged and falsified in favor of your doctrine First for the purging of him your own men make this declaration b Augustinus nuper Venetiis excusus in quo praeter multorum locorum restitutionem secundum collationem veterum exemplarium curavimus removeri illa omnia quae fideliū mentes haeretic â pravitate possent inficere aut a Catholica orthodoxa fide deviare Praefat Ind. lib. prohibit ad Lectorē Genevae impress an 1629. St. Austin was lately printed at Venice in which Edition as we have restored many places accerding to the ancient Copies so likewise we have taken care to remove all those things which might either infect the mindes of the faithfull with Heresies or cause them to wander from the Catholike faith This publike profession your men have made and accordingly the c In hunc modū est repurgatus ut in libri inscripsione testātur qui editioni praefuerunt Ibid. p. 6. Booke was purged as those who were present at that Edition doe witnesse in the Inscription of the Booke but let us returne to the corrupted Editions in our view St. d De Civitate Dci lib. 22. c. 24. Austin in his 22. booke of the Citie of God and 24. Chapter is cyted by e Bell. de Purg. l. 1. c. 4. Bellarmine for the proofe of Purgatory yet in that Chapter saith f Lud. Vives in lib de Civit. Dei c. 8. Vives in the ancient Manuscript Copies which are at Bruges and Colein those ten or twelve printed lines are not to be found And in the 22. booke and 8. Chapter he tells us there are many additions in that Chapter without question foysted in by such as make practise of depraving Authors of great Authority Touching forgeries and falsifications in particular The humane nature of Christ is destroyed if there be not given it after the manner of other bodies a certaine space wherein it may be contained In your Edition of Paris printed by Sebastian Nivelle An. 1571. this passage is wholly left out This is observed by Dr. Moulin but the Authour so printed I have not seene But when neither adding nor detracting could make good your Transubstantiation Fryer Walden thought it the surest way to forge a whole passage in the name of St. Austin which indeed strongly proves the very name and nature of it The words are these Wald. Tom. 2. de Sacram. c. 83. p. mihi 141. No man ought to doubt when Bread and Wine are consecrated into the substance of Christ so as the sabstance of bread and wine doe not remaine whereas we see many things in the workes of God no lesse marvellous A woman God changeth substantially into a stone as Lots wife and in the small workemanship of man hay and ferne into glasse Neither must we beleeve that the substance of bread and wine remaineth but the bread is turned into the Body of Christ and the wine into his bloud the qualities or accidents of bread and wine onely remaining This fo gery was judicially allowed by Pope Martin the fist and his Cardinals in their Consistorie and yet it savours rather of a Glasse-maker than an ancient Father but what answer maketh Walden to this invention * Egoenimreperi trāscripsi de vetustissimo exemplari scripto antiquā valdè manu formatâ Idem Ibid. I found it faith he and transcribed it out of a very ancient Copie written with a set hand Thus one while you adde another while you detract another while you falsifie the ancient Fathers if either they make for us or against you and yet you tell us that we are guiltie of corrupting the Fathers But above all Gratian hath most shamefully and lewdly falsified St. Austin whom he hath made to say Inter Canonicas Scriptur as decretales Epistolae connumerantur Dist 29. In Canonicis fol. 19. A. The decretall Epistles of the Popes are accounted in the number of Canonicall Scriptures The truth is St. Austin in his booke of Christian doctrine informes a Christian what Scripture hee should hold for Canonicall and thereupon bids him follow the greater part of the Catholike Church Amongst which those Churches are which had the happinesse to injoy the seates of the Apostles and to receive Epistles from them Gratian in the Canon Law altereth the words thus Amongst which Canonicall Scriptures those Epistles are which the Apostolicke See of Rome hath and which others have deserved to receive from her and accordingly the title of the Canon is Imer Canonicas Scripturas c. The decretall Epistles of Popes are counted by St. Austin for Canonicall Scriptures Now judge you what greater forgerie nay what greater blasphemie can be devised or uttered against Christ and his Spirit than that the Popes Epistles should bee termed canonicall Scriptures and held of equall authority with the Word of God especially since by your owne men they are censured as Apocryphall and counterfeit Epistles Your owne Bellarmine as a man ashamed of such grosse forgeries would seeme to excuse it Bell. de Concil Author l. 2. c. 12. Primo That Gratian was deceived by a corrupt copie of St. Austin which he had besides him and that the true and corrected copies have not the words as himselfe reporteth Thus Walden excuseth his forgerie by an ancient Manuscript the Cardinall by a corrupt copie and yet by your Cardinals leave this and many other such like forgeries stand printed in the Canon Law no Index Expurgatorius layes hold on them Idem de script Eccles An.
hands who doe not onely raze and falsifie Evidences touching the greatest mysteries of Salvation who I say not onely doe the same but have pleasure in them that doe them Thus much touching the razing and corrupting of the Fathers for the first 800. yeares Now I proceed to your Index Expurgatorius your purging and blotting out the moderne Authours for the last 800. yeares Forasmuch say you as concerneth the late Catholike Authors of this last age for this our Index of which is al the difficultie beginneth but from the yeere 1515. whatsoever needeth correction is to bee amended or blotted out yet for others going before that time it is expresly said that nothing may be changed unlesse some manifest errors through the fraud of Heretikes or carelesnesse of the Printer bee crept in Thus you From your corrupting the ancient Councels and Fathers which I have showne wee are at last come to the correcting of moderne Authors and as I have led you through an Hospitall of maimed Souldiers so now I will send you to the house of correction where I will leave you without Baile or Maine-prize till you have cleared your selfe and your associates for wounding and cutting out the tongues of your owne Authors in speaking truth against the corruptions of the Church But your correcting Index say you began but from the yeare 1515. P. 24. 144. and nothing is changed of Catholike Authors before that time I assure you I have not heard as yet one sentence nay scarce one word of truth fall from your pen wherein you dissent from us and this your assertion will prove as true as the rest Yea but fay you it is expresly declared by the Church that nothing may be changed and if this be true as true it is indeed the lesse credit is to be given you or your Church-men who make decrees and breake them at their pleasure for it shall appeare that your Index doth extend it selfe to the time of the Apostles and howsoever you pretend to purge the Fathers onely in the Index and Table of their Bookes yet I say some you have purged in the Text it selfe others you have corrected in the Index in the expresse words delivered in the bodie of those Bookes And as touching your Assertion that you purge the latter writers onely from the yeare 1515. and not beyond that time this is most false and you had said more truly if you had confessed that for 1515. yeares together your Church spared no Authours ancient or moderne if they speake not Placentia agreeable to your Popes faith and doctrine For the better manifestation of this truth looke first upon your Correctorium for so Lucas Brugensis termes it your worke of correction upon the Bible and tell me if you have not altered by your Popes command above three thousand severall places in the Scripture even in your vulgar Translation which you call St. Hieromes and although you dare not lay a Deleatur upon the sacred word of God yet upon the Commandements upon the Lords Prayer upon severall places of Scripture as I have shewed there is a Deletur a leaving out and a detracting from it Looke upon your Index Expurgatorius printed at Madrid by Cardinall Quiroga and tell me if you have not purged certain places in the Index of the Bible which are ipsissima verba the very words to a letter in the Textit selfe as for instance a Justificamur fide in Christum Galat. 2.16 We are justified by faith in Christ b Justitia nostra Christus 1. Cor. 1.30 Christ is our Righteousnesse c Fide purificantur corda Act. 15.9 By faith our hearts are purified d Justus coram Deo nemo Psal 143.2 No man is righteous before God e Uxorē habeat unusquisque 1 Cor. 7.2 Let every man have his wife c. All these passages I say are the very word of God in the Body of the Scriptures and yet they are commanded f Ind. Hisp Madr. f. mihi 15. B. tanquā propositiones suspectae for so are the words of your Index as if they were things questionable to bee blotted out Againe when your glosses or marginall notes agree not to your doctrine you cause your Index Expurgatorius to lay hold on them as for instance in the 26. of Leviticus we reade in your owne Translation You shall not make to your selves an Idoll or thing graven Deleatur illud Sculptilia prohibet fieri Idem fol. 7. when the glosse in the Margent saith God forbiddeth graven Images Let that passage say you be strucken out And whereas Samuel saith Prepare your hearts unto the Lord and serve him onely Ibid. fol. 8. b. the glosse upon the Text which is the same in substance viz. wee must serve God onely you command to be blotted out These and the like places relating to the Scriptures being contrary to your Trent doctrine you have excluded from your late printed Bibles in the places aforesaid as being too obvious to the eye of every Reader Ind. Hisp Madrid p. 6. 7. f. 138. Mihi 62. Crakenthorp adv Spal p. 66. Bell. de verbo Dei l. 4. c. 11. c. Ind. Madrid fol. 62. a. Deleantur ex Textu illa verba Sed ubi non habuerit Dei timorem in seipsis nec Jesum per fidem incolam c. Ibid. Eam verò solūmodò naturam quae increata est colere venerari didicimus Ant. Meliss serm 1. Bell. descript Eccl. p. mihi 184. Looke upon the Fathers and tell mee if your Index Expurgatorius doth not correct both St. Chrysostome and Austin and Hilarie and Hierome in their Index touching the prime points of controversie betwixt us Nay more St. Austin saith Vives is purged ten or twelve lines in the body of his workes St. Chrysostome in his 49. Homily is purged 70. lines by Bellarmines confession other places are razed out of him and other Fathers as I have shewed before Looke upon St. Cyrill Bishop of Alexandria who was living above 1200. yeares agoe and tell me if your Inquisitors have not commanded a Deleatur upon his words in the very Text it selfe Looke before his time upon Gregory Nyssen and tell me if through the sides of Antonius Abbas who was living by Bellarmines accompt neare 900. yeares agoe you doe not wound that ancient Father in the body of his workes in commanding this golden sentence to bee blotted out Ind. Belg. p. 270. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Greg. Nissen in Orat. 4. Tom. 2. Edit Graeco-lat p. 146. We have learned to worship and adore that nature onely which is uncreated * Parsōs warn-word to Sir Fran. Hastings wast-word Enc. 2. c. 9 p. 69. your F. Parsons takes great paines to little purpose to excuse it one while he tells us that the sentence is not to bee found in Gregory Nissen which is most false another while he confesseth that they cannot stand to give a particular reason
Papacie formerly prevailed yet it is more than evident by the Testimonies and Records of your owne men that we had not two Churches before Luther but that we had alwayes Testes Veritatis witnesses of Gods truth and our owne Religion in all Ages in the bosome of the Roman Church I proceed to particulars in this last age Anno 1500. Cardinall Cajetan is purged in severall and maine points of doctrine being different from your owne Church Touching the ground of Transubstantiation he denies that the words of Scripture This is my body are availeable to prove it of themselves and thereupon your Jesuit Suarez complaineth Ex Catholicis c. a Ex Catholicis solus Cajetanus in Commentario hujus Articuli qui jussu Pii 5. in Romana editione expunctus est docuit seclusâ Ecclesiae authoritateverba illa Hoc est corpus meum ad veritatem hanc confirmādam nonsufficere Suarez Tom 3. Disp 46. Sect. 3. quaest 75. Art 1. p. 515. Impress Mog An. 1509. Amongst the Catholikes Cajetan onely teacheth that the words This is my Body bee not sufficient without the authoritie of the Church to confirme the truth of it And therefore by the command of Pope Pius the 5. this passage is blotted out in the Roman Edition Touching justification by faith onely whereas hee saith b Absque exceptione aliqua cōditionis sexus qualiatis c. dicitur omni credenti sola fides exigitur ad salutem Cajet Ep. Paulï c. Parisus 1571. fol. 4. Ind. lib. prohibit p. 876. without any exception of person of any Sexe or quality or condition It is said of every Beleever faith alone is required to salvation your Index commands those latter words to bee blotted out Lastly in speaking of the Crosse and the like he saith These are altogether unlawfull and not to be embraced because they are part of an ill worship you cause these words to be strucken out and in lieu of them you subjoyne these words following which are flat contrary c Idem p. 805. These are altogether lawfull and are to be embraced because they are part of the divine worship and the better to colour these miserable shifts and falsifications you give this Caveat to the Reader Idem ibid. p. 805. Be warie if you finde any such Doctrine for it is to bee feared the Heretikes have suggested it Alphonsus à Castro wrote a large Booke against Heresies Anno 1500. and in particular he charged Luther with many Yet in his first Booke and fourth Chapter hee attributeth the same title of Heretike to the Pope and shewes the Pope as Pope is subject to Heresie but behold the record stands published against Luther but is wholly razed touching the Pope Quod autem alii dicunt eum quierraverit in fide obstinatè jam non esse Papam ac per hoc affirmant Papam non posse esse haereticum in reseria verbis velle jocari Ad hunc enim modum quis posset citra impudentiam asserere nullum fidelem posse in fide errare nam cum haereticus fuerit jam desinit esse fidelis Non enim dubitamus an haereticum esse Papam esse coire in unum possint sed id quaerimus an hominem qui aliàs in fide errare potuisset dignitas Pontificalis efficiat à fide indeviabilem Non enim credo aliquem esse adeo impudentem Papae assentatorem ut ei tribuere hoc velit ut nec errare aut in interpretatione sacrarum literarum hallucinari possit Nam cùm constet plures eorum adeo illiteratos esse ut Grammaticam penitus ignorent quî fit ut sacras literas interpretari possent Alph. à Cast advers haer l. 1. c. 4. p. mihi 6. b. Coloniae excudebat Melchior Nouesianus Anno 1543. The words in my Edition are these Whereas some say that he which erreth wilfully in the faith is now no longer Pope and thereupon concludes the Pope cannot be an Heretike they seeme in a sad matter to dally with words For saith he wee make no doubt whether the Pope and an Heretike may agree in one person but this is our question whether a man that otherwise might have erred in the Faith by vertue of the Papall dignity be made such as he cannot erre For I doe not beleeve that there is any so impudent a flatterer of the Pope that will give him this preheminence to say that he can neither be deceived nor misse in the expounding of the Scriptures for seeing it is well knowne that many Popes be so utterly void of learning that they know not the Principles of their Grammer how may it be that they should be able to expound the Scriptures These words I have cited at large out of my Edition 1543. for if you looke into Alphonsus printed within these last threescore yeares I beleeve you will finde them razed in this particular without an Index Expurgatorius which plainly shewes that as the Pope was and may be an Heretike so likewise falsifying of Records is a proper marke of Heretikes Johannes Ferus a Frier Minorite An. 1500. Usher p. 162. and prime Preacher at Mentz in Germany is purged and falsified in many points of controversie which he held with us Touching the power of Priesthood in remitting of sinnes it was the doctrine of Ferus a Non quòd homo propriè remittat peccatum sed quòd ostendat ac certificet à Deo remissum Neque enim aliud est absolutio quam ab homine accipit quà m si dicat En fili certifico te tibiremissa esse peccata annuncio tibi te habere propitium Deum quaecunque Christus in Baptismo Evangelio nobis promisir tibi nunc per me annunciat promittir Fer. Comment in Matth. l. 2. c. 9. Mogunt An 1559. Lugdun apud Johannem à S. Paulo An. 1609. Contr. Man did not properly remit sinne but did declare and certifie that it was remitted by God so that the absolution received from man is nothing else than if hee should say Behold my sonne I certifie thee that thy sinnes are forgiven thee I pronounce unto thee that thou hast God favourable unto thee and whatsoever Christ in Baptisme and in his Gospell hath promised unto us hee doth now declare and promise unto thee by me Of this thou shalt have me to be a witnesse goe in peace and in quiet of conscience This declarative power of remitting sinnes was Ferus doctrine this is ours But behold the case is altered for in Ferus printed at Lyons 1609. all those words are razed out and on the contrary saith that b Sacerdos enim Dei minister verè remittit peccata ac certificat à Deo remissa fol. mihi 160. b. In Matth. l. 2. c. 9. the Priest doth truely remit sinnes and as the Minister of God doth also certifie that they are remitted of God Touching our justification by faith onely the true Ferus
this great Fisher Peter for feare of a Girle denies his Master all the people laughing at her question and hissing at his deniall and in all these revels and ridiculous stirs Christ onely is serious and severe but seeking to move passion and sorrow in the audience he is so farre from that that he is cold even in the divinest matters to the great guilt shame and sinne both of the Priests that present it and the people that behold it These words and blasphemous actions Ind. l. expurgat p mihi 41. as being ashamed of them you doe well to command them to bee blotted out but yet they are reprinted and your men are not a shamed to continue the practice of it in your owne Religion And lastly where he sayes That those who preferre the Latin Translation before the Greeke and Hebrew fountaines Idem in Aug. l. 15. c. 13. p. 83. are men of evill mindes and corrupt judgements that passage is left out in the Antwerpe print And whereas he saith that the story of Susanna Idem l. 18. c. 31 of Bell and the Dragon are Apocryphall Scriptures and not received of the Jewes nor translated by the Septuagint Ind. l. expurg p. mihi 41. all those words are commanded to be stricken out Jacobus Faber Stapulensis a member of the Roman Church taught the Protestant doctrine in many points and therefore he is purged by your severall Indices Whereas the Rhemists translate the Greek word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Penance he defined it Repentance Jac. Fab. in Evang. Matth. c. 3. fol. mihi 13. b. Ibid. c. 5. fol. 24. in initio and makes a distinction betwixt Repentance and Penance such as the Protestants doe and therefore it is commanded to be stricken out Againe speaking of the Scribes and Pharisees who did attribute righteousnesse to themselves and their owne workes Ibid. c. 6. f. 30. a. Ind. Madr. fol. 112. The faithfull saith he which are of the Law of grace doe worke most diligently but doe attribute nothing to themselves or their owne workes but all of them doe impute their righteousnesse to the grace of God All consisteth with the one in the merit of workes with the other in grace the one respect themselves and their workes and are delighted therein the other regard not themselves but the grace of God they admire his goodnesse and therein is their chiefe delight Againe if any man shall doe good in this world hee must not doe it because it is his will but because God commandeth it For he which is perfect hath not a will peculiar to himselfe but his will must be the will of God and this is the third Petition of the Lords Prayer In the sixteenth Chapter of St. Matthew upon the words Thou art Peter c. he shewes that according to St. Pauls doctrine Ibid. fol. c. 16. mihi 74. b. the Rocke was Christ Hee shewes that Peter was so farre from being a firme rocke that Christ himselfe did intimate the contrarie when he said Get thee behinde me Sathan for thou savourest not the things of God but of men He shewes us further that our Lord Christ promised to Peter the Keyes of binding and loosing but withall testifies that those Keyes were not Peters but Christs whereby Peter doth not binde or loose by his power but by the will of Christ He addeth moreover that not onely Peter received those Keyes but also all the rest of the Apostles But saith he there be some which understand by the Keyes of binding and loosing the Popes power as Christ spake of that faith witnessing that he was the Sonne of the living God which is one of the Keyes of the heavenly Doctrine upon which the Church is founded and Peters faith as upon the true Rocke Christ was builded a Deleatur ab illis verbis Ne quis putet Petrum c. usque ad Aeterni Patris infusio Ind. Madr. fol. mihi 113. Ind. Belg. p. 51. This and much more to the same purpose for thirty lines together is commanded to be strucken out In his 20. Chapter he saith b Verum qui operibus suis aliquo modo fidunt minus Deo fidunt minusque amant Deum qui autem nullo modo sed pacto sed promissioni imo omnia Deo tribuunt plus Deo fidunt cujus ineffabili bonitate qui novissimi suerunt operando factisunt primi gratiam recipiendo qui primi operando novissimi gratiam recipiēdo Quare bonum c. deleatur usque ad Dei autem omnia Ind. ut supra Those which any wayes trust in their workes have the least affiance in God and love him the lesse but those which give all to his promise and to God himselfe they trust most in God by whose ineffable bounty those which are last in working are made first by receiving grace and those that are first in working are become last in receiving Whatsoever therefore a man doth it is good for him to trust wholly to God his goodnesse for it is the will of God and of his speciall grace that wee are saved and not of our will or workes These words and much more to the same purpose in the same chapter are commanded to be blotted out Touching his Commentaries upon Saint John your Inquisitors have pronounced this definitive sentence c Ind. Madr. fol. mihi 115. Because they cannot be handsomely purged let them all be spunged and blotted out Touching his Commentaries upon Timothy In Tim. c. 3. fol. mihi 205. hee shewes that it was lawfull for Priests to marry a Virgin till the time of Gregory the seventh which was nine hundred yeeres after Christ hee shewes likewise that the Grecians kept the Apostolicall Tradition in marrying of Wives and could not change them and that other Churches which vowed single life by their incontinencie fell into the snares of the Devill And lastly in his Commentary upon the Galathians at large he proves a Per solam fidem Christi infunditur justificatio In Gal. c. 2. fol. 154. That by the Faith of Christ alone we are justified and that he which b Idem c. 3. fol. 156. Qui autem confidit in operibus in seipso confidit baculo innititur arundineo qui frangitur in seipso supernum lumen non videt unde descendit Justificatio trusteth in his works trusteth in himselfe and leanes upon a staffe of Reed which is broken in it selfe whereby he doth not discern the heavenly light from whence our justification doth descend These and many other like passages in severall places of his Workes which are consonant to our Protestant Doctrine are commanded by the c Ind. Madr. f. mihi 118 119. Inquisitors to be strucken out d Friderici Furii Cenolani Valentini Bononia sive De libris sacris in vernaculam linguam convertendis Fridericus Furius writes a whole Book of translating the Bible into the vulgar tongue
for the benefit of the Lay people hee dedicates his Booke to Cardinall Bovadillius and he tells him that wee esteeme it an excellent thing to reade the workes of Greeke and Latine Philosophers and therefore much more ought wee to search and know the will of God out of his sacred Scriptures for the one is a matter of pleasure and the other is a matter of necessity the not knowing of the one may hurt little or nothing at all but to bee ignorant of the other brings a grievous mischiefe besides eternall destruction of the soule Againe what is it saith hee to forbid the Scriptures to bee read in the vulgar tongue than to forbid God his owne purpose and as it were to command God which doth declare himselfe to all by his Word that hee should not be manifested unto us This is the whole scope of the Author and for this cause lest the reading of the Scripture in a knowne tongue should discover Antichristian Doctrine by frequent reading a Ind. lib. proh p. mihi 36. the Book it selfe is forbidden till it bee purged in this and the like places witnessing against your Romane Doctrine Johannes Langus is numbred amongst your Heretiques in the first Classis pag. 51. Yet his Annotations upon b Permittuntur verò ejusdem in D Justinum annotatioÌ„es iteÌ„ in Nicephorum scholia si expurgentur Ind. l. proh p. mihi 51. Justin Martyr and his Commentaries upon Nicephorus are allowed if they bee purged Now let the Reader observe for what cause you would have him purged First touching his Annotations upon Justin Martyr c Multa continet parum Catholicae Religioni consona inter ea autem illud est praecipuum quòd transubstantiationem non agnoscit sed opertè contendat cum corpore sanguine Christi remanere veram panis vini substaÌ„tiaÌ„ They containe many things disagreeing to the Catholike Religion but among those that is chiefe that hee doth not acknowledge Transubstantiation but doth openly maintaine that the true substance of bread and wine doth remaine with the body and bloud of Christ. Againe d Perversè admodum interpretatur illud Malachiae In omni loco offertur sacrificium nomini meo de doxologia benedictione laudibus hymnis Sic Ind. ut upra He doth very maliciously interpret that place of Malachy In every place a sacrifice shall be offered to my name that is saith he in giving of glory blessing laud and praise to the Name of God e Gerardi Lorichii Adamarii collectio triuÌ„ libroruÌ„ c. de missa publicaproroganda Ind. l. proh p. 11. Gerardus Lorichius is prohibited till he be purged for the reproving and condemning your private Masse and Communion in one kinde his words be these There be false Catholikes that are not ashamed by all meanes to hinder the Reformation of the Church they to the intent that the other kinde of the a Dâ— Missa pub Racemationum lib. 2. Canonis pars 7. p. mihi 177. Sacrament may not be restored to the Lay people spare no kinde of blasphemy b Excusum an 1536. For they say Christ said onely to his Apostles Drinke yee all of this but the words of the Canon of the Masse are Take and eate you all of this Here I beseech them let them tell mee whether they will have this word All to pertaine onely to the Apostles Then must the Lay people abstaine from the other kinde of the bread also which thing to say is an Heresie and a pestilent and detestable blasphemie Ambrosius Catharinus Archbishop of Compsa wrote against Cajetan and saith * Bellar. de Ec. Scrip. p mihi 312. Bellarmine hee wrote likewise against Luther e Opuscula verò similiter prohibentur nisi corrigantur Ind. l. prohib p. 4. Yet something hee wrote is disallowed of the Church as namely touching the words of consecration other things are commonly refuted by the Doctours of the Church viz. the certainety of Grace of Predestination c. therefore his Workes are warily to be read Thus you have Cajetan against Luther and Catherinus against Cajetan and Luther both against the Tenets of their own Church insomuch as the Inquisitors have commanded a deleatur upon Cajetan and Catharinus in the second Classis and against f Commentaria in Lucam nisifuerint ex repurgaâ—â— impressâ—â— ab an 1581. vel nisi anteà edita expurgentur Ind. l. prohib p 26. p. 318. Ind-Belg p. 317. Ind. Hisp p. 63. Luthers whole Workes in the first Classis Didacus Stella is prohibited to bee printed before hee be purged The places which are purged are such wherein hee teacheth Protestant Doctrine as may be seen in g See Appendix to the Romish Fisher caught in his owne net Mr. Crashaw and Dr. James and D. F. Observations Andreas Masius in his Commentarie upon Josuah is purged for this Protestant doctrine Ad solam vitae benè actae imitationem non etiam ad religiosum cultum quem adorationem vocant Theologi DivoruÌ„ monumen ta conservare fas est In Comment Jos hist c. ult Ind. l. expurg p. 31. Wee ought to preserve the Monuments of Saints onely for the imitation of their godly life not for Religious worship which Divines call Adoration Againe hee saith a Idem in Jos c. 22. The Church sets before our eyes the figure of Christs Crosse not that wee should worship it which latter words are commanded to bee razed out Lastly Cardinall Bellarmine who was the first and best that ever handled all controversies indifference betwixt us b Ind. Belg. p. 269. was in danger of a prohibition or rather of an absolute suppression of all his workes Your owne Barclay witnesseth of him Barclay of the authoritie of the Pope c. 13. p. 66. Engl. That there is not one of the Popes partie who hath either gathered more diligently or propounded more sharply or concluded more briefly or subtilly than the worthy Divine Bellarmine who although he gave as much to the Popes authority in temporalties as honestly hee might and more than he ought yet could he not satisfie the ambition of the most imperious man Sixtus the 5th who affirmed that he had supreme power over Kings and Prince of the whole Earth and all People Countries and Nations committed unto him not by humane but by divine Ordinance and therefore he was very neare by his Pontificiall censure to the great hurt of the Church to have abolished all the writings of that Doctour which doe oppugne Heresies with great successe at this day as the Fathers of that order whereof Bellarmine was then did seriously report unto me How probable this may seeme his worke of Recognitions doth witnesse to the world wherein he was inforced to recant that doctrine which he had both sincerely taught and published according to the truth As for instance whereas he professed that the Pope was subject to the Emperour in temporall affaires on the
the time of which the blessed Apostle prophesied when men will not suffer wholesome doctrine is altogether fulfilled in our eares For behold there are many that pervert the holy Scriptures deny the sayings of the holy Fathers reject the Canons of the Church and civill Constitutions of the Emperors Looke into the age before him Matth. Paris p. 843. Grosthead Bishop of Lincolne complaines that there was a defection a revolt an Apostasie from the true Faith Looke into Bernards time and there you shall finde by his owne confession Bernard in Cant. Serm. 33. p. mihi 673. The wound of the Church was inward and past recoverie These former complaints and grievances in the Church did sound aloud in the eares of the later ages and she made great mourning and lamentation for her children because they were not such as she first bred them and accordingly no doubt they wished for a reformation of errors in doctrine as well as Discipline in the Church Looke after Pope Alexanders time and before the Councell of Trent and your Bishop of Bitonto will shew you the state and miserable condition of your Church as it were in a Glasse In Ep. ad Roman c. 6. Alas saith he how were the Scriptures neglected in the later Ages to the detriment of all peple Rivet Sum. Controv. p. mihi 98. There was then in request a tedious and crabbed Divinitie about Relations about quiddities and formalities and all those things were handled and wrested with Syllogismes and humane Sophistrie which without doubt by the same authority as they were received might be refelled The whole Age was spent about the decrees of men which were contradictory amongst themselves and irreconcilable and nourished perpetuall contention He was accounted the best Divine that knew best how to devise the greatest wonders for his Traditions It was a part of their honour and vaine glory to speake bigge words with great lookes among women not to be understood when they disputed of the Scriptures The Preachers of the word were all sworne to the word of their Masters and from hence sprung sixe hundred Sects as namely Thomists Scotists Occhamists Alexandrians c. O heinous wickednesse The Gosspels and Epistles of the Apostles were laid aside true Divinitie lay hid and was handled of very few but coldly I will not say unfaithfully In what state the Church remained in those dayes when Papall Traditions and cunning Sophistry prevailed against the sacred Scriptures let the Reader judge Onus Ecclesiae c. 16. p. mihi 79 Your owne St. Francis foretold that the times were at hand wherein many differences should arise in the Church when charitie should waxe cold iniquity should abound and the Divell should be let loose and that the purity of his Roman Religion should be depraved and accordingly saith my Author the Image of the Crosse in the Church of St. Damian spake unto him Vade repara domum meam quae ut cernis tota labitur Goe and repaire my house which you see is altogether decayed Thus Bishops and Friers and Images stocks and stones cried out of the falling away of your Church if we may credit your owne Authors and yet by no meanes you will assent to a reformation of doctrine or manners At Luthers first rising which was almost 30. yeares before the Councell of Trent your Guicciardine tells us Guicciard Hist lib. 13. that there were that yeare many meetings at Rome to consult what was best to be done The more wise and moderate sort wished the Pope to reforme things apparently amisse and not to persecute Luther Hieronymus Savanarola told the French King Charles the 8. he should have great prosperitie in his voyage into Italie to the end hee should reforme the state of the Church which if he did not reforme he should returne with dishonour and so saith he it fell out I come to the Councell of Trent it selfe where you may reade many decrees for reformation and yet neither doctrine nor manners reformed But let us heare your owne confession It is true the Councell indeed complaineth with great reason of the avarice of such whom the Knight calleth the Popes Collectors though the Councell speaketh not of the Pope but false it is which he saith that the Councell complaineth of Indulgences an Article of faith as his words are The Councell likewise complaineth of many things crept into the celebration of the Masse and the words of the Councell are right cited by him in Latin in the Margent but in the English he foully corrupteth them For in stead of many things hee translated many errors which is a grosse errour and corruption in the Knight These be your grand exceptions to the grosse corruptions laid unto my charge but all this while you doe not discharge the accusations laid justly to your Church And in this I must needs say you play the Hypocrite who can discerne a mote in your Brothers eye and cannot see a beame in your owne First therfore cast the beame out of your own eye and then you shall easily disccrne without Spectacles that the Collectors of Indulgences are the Popes Collectors although the Pope is not mentioned in that place and Indulgences are an Article of Faith created by that Councell although the Councell proclaime it not an Article of Faith so that multa many things might well stand for many errors and corruptions since they were errors in practise Neither would I have set the Latin in the Margent if I had meant to corrupt them in English and withall if you had taken the last edition as you ought to have done you should have found them in another Character and then all your waste words of foule corruptions had beene needlesse But in this you resemble Palladius a lewd fellow who in like manner charged St. Hierome with falsifications and false translations He preacheth and publisheth abroad saith Hierome that I am a falsarie Hieron ad Pāmach de optimo genere interpret Tom. 2. that I have not precisely translated word for word that I in stead of the word Honourable have written these words Deerely beloved These things and such trifles saith he are laid unto my charge Now heare what Answer St. Hierome makes Whereas the Epistle it selfe declareth that there is no alteration made in the sense and that there is neither matter of substance added nor any doctrine devised by me verily by their great cunning they prove themselves fooles and seeking to reprove other mens unskilfulnesse they betray their owne Let us heare therefore the rest of your Things for so you will have me terme them which are crept into your Church and need a Reformation The Councell say you seemeth to acknowledge the avarice of Priests in saying Masse for mony was not farre from Symonie It speaketh of the use of Musicke wherewith some wantonnesse was mixed as also of certaine Masses or Candles used in certaine number proceeding rather from superstition than true
deliros senes sed qui magis quà m Phormio deliraret vidisse neminem I will leave the application to your selfe and the interpretation to the Reader because you say I cannot translate Latin Some truth or modesty I should gladly heare from you but this is such an impudent Calumny as Bellarmine himselfe would have beene ashamed to have heard it fall from the Pen of any learned Papalin heare therefore what your owne men confesse of Calvin and others and what we professe in the name of our Church Your F. Kellison saith of Calvin Kellis Surney lib. 4. cap. 5. p. mihi 229. That if hee did meane as hee speaketh hee would not dispute with him but would shake hands with him as with a Catholike And then hee repeats Calvins words I say that in the Mysterie of the Supper by the signe of Bread and Wine is Christ truly delivered yea and his Body and his Blood And a little before those words hee giveth the reason Because saith he Christs words This is my Body are so plaine that unlesse a man will call God a deceiver hee can never be so bold as to say that hee setteth before us an emptie Signe This is likewise Bellarmines confession of him Bell de Euch. lib. 1. cap. 1. Non ergo vacuum inane signum It is no vaine and empty signe Thus you see your fellowes and you agree like Harpe and Harrow you say it is an empty peece of Bread they answer in Calvins behalfe and ours that it is not an empty signe Idem ibid. c. 8. Nay saith Bellarmine both Calvin and Oecolampadius and Peter Martyr doe teach the Bread is called Christs Body figuratively as being a signe or figure of his body but they adde withall it is no bare and empty figure but such as doth truely convey unto them the things signified thereby Bilson in the difference betwixt Subjection and Christistian Rebellion Part. 4. p. mihi 779. for which truthes sake Christ said not this Bread is a figure of my body but it is my body To give you an instance in some of our Church God forbid saith our learned Bilson wee should deny that the flesh and blood of Christ are truly present and truly received of the Faithfull at the Lords Table It is the Doctrine that wee teach others and wherewith wee comfort our selves Wee never doubted but the Truth was present with the Signe and the Spirit with the Sacrament as Cyprian saith Wee knew there could not follow an operation if there were not a presence before Neither doe I thinke you are ignorant of this but that you have inured your selfe to falsities and reproaches For it is apparently true that the question in these dayes is not of the truth of the presence but of the manner that is whether it be to the Teeth and the Belly or Soule and Faith of the Receiver And therupon our learned and Reverend B. Andrews returned his Answer to Bellarmine Wee beleeve the presence Wee beleeve B. Andrew ad Bell. Apol. Resp c. 1. p. mihi 11. I say the presence as well as you concerning the manner of the presence we doe not unadvisedly define nay more wee doe not scrupulously inquire no more than wee doe in Baptisme how the blood of Christ cleanseth us From the Sacraments you procceed to our two and twentie Bookes of Canonicall Scripture and indeed wee allow but two and twentie But will any Catholike say you allow this to have been Catholike Doctrine Yes without doubt Scil. Orig. in Exposit Psal 1. many good Catholikes did follow the Hebrew Canon of the Iewes which saith Origen compriseth but two and twentie bookes of the old Testament according to the number of the letters among them Melito Bellar. de verbo Dei l. 1. c. 20. Bishop of Sardis was a Catholike and saith Bellarmine hee did follow the Hebrew Canon of the Iewes Hilary Hilar. in Prolog in Psal explanat Bishop of Poictiers was a Catholike and he told us The old Testament was contained in two and twentie bookes according to the number of the Hebrew letters St. Cyril Cyril Catechis 4. Bishop of Hierusalem was a Catholike and hee gave us the like Lesson Peruse the two and twentie books of the old Testament but meddle not with the Apochrypha Athanasius Anthanas in Synops Bishop of Alexandria was a Catholike and affirmes that the Christians had a definite number of books comprehended in the Canon which were two and twentie equall to the number of the Hebrew letters Ruffinus was a Catholike Bellar. de verbo Dei l. 1. c. 20. and Bellarmine confesseth hee did follow the Hebrew Canon which conteined our two and twentie books Gregory Nazianzen was a Catholike Naz. Carm. Iamb ad Seleucum Iamb 3. and hee shewed to Seleucus a Catalogue of the Canonicall bookes and hee cites the bookes in order from Genesis to Malachie the last of the Prophets and leaveth out all the Apochrypha The Fathers of the Councell of Laodicea were Catholikes Concil Laod. cap. 59. and in the 59th Canon they allow onely those two and twenty bookes for Canonicall which wee receive There are others whom you terme Catholikes as namely Damascene Hugo de Sancto Victore Lyranus Hugo Cardinalis Tostatus Waldensis Driedo and Cajetan all which differ from your Tenet of the Apochryphall bookes which are canonized by your Trent Councell such agreement is there amongst your best learned touching the greatest point of your Beleefe and yet forsooth your Church cannot be depraved But here is one thing say you which giveth mee much cause of wonder which is that you talke of Traditions as distinct from Scripture I ever tooke you to be so fallen out with them that you made the deniall of them a fundament all point of your Religion that you would not indure the word Tradition but alwaies translated or rather falsified it into Ordinances Thus you It is a true saying of the Heathen Orator Cicero Hee who once goeth beyond the bounds of Modestie had need to be lustily impudent I protest I onely termed your Additions Traditions and you question our Church for false translating of the word And cannot wee indure the word Traditions Doe not we allow of all the Apostolicall Traditions which agree unto the Scriptures Nay more doe wee not translate the word Traditions in the Scripture when the Text will beare it according to the Greeke originall Looke upon the fifteenth of Matthew Matth. 15. v. 2 3 6. and in three severall verses 2 3 6. wee use the word Tradition Looke upon the seventh of Marke Marke 7. v. 3 8 9 13. and in foure severall places of that chapter you shall find likewise wee translate Traditions Looke upon Saint Paul to the Colossians Galatians and upon Saint Peter Colos 2.8 Galat. 1.14 1. pet 1.18 and in all these in the Translation joyned with your Rhemish Testament you shall find the word Traditions How
is not found expressely Yet our Argument from Biels testimonie is no way disabled thereby because it appeareth out of Biels owne words that hee holdeth that to bee expresly delivered in Scriptures which is either expressed in word or sence the reall presence he saith is expresse not in the letter or forme of words in the text yet in the sence but so saith he is not Transubstantiation the apparant opposition betweene the members of his sentence sheweth that what hee beleeved of the reall presence hee beleeved not of Transubstantiation but the former he beleeved could bee proved out of Scripture though not in expresse words yet in sence therefore the later hee beleeved could not be proved so much as in sense much lesse in expresse words To the sixt Although Petrus de Alliaco inclineth rather to the Lutherans opinion in the point of the Sacrament then to the doctrine of the Church of England yet the Knight upon good reason produceth him as a witnesse for hee speaketh home against Transubstantiation Cameracë in 4 sent q. 6. art 2. patet quòd ille modus sit possibilis nec repugnet rationi nec authoritati bibliae imò facilior ad intelligendum rationabilior est quum c. his words are that the conversion of bread into Christs body cannot evidently bee proved out of Scripture and that that manner or meaning which supposeth the substance of bread still to remaine in the Sacrament is possible neither is it contrary to reason or to the authoritie of the Scripture nay it is more easie to bee understood and more reasonable then that which saith the substance doth leave the accidents If this bee not as Flood will have it so much as in shew for the Knight I am sure it is both in shew and substance against the Trent faith for if it bee granted that Consubstantiation is not contrarie to Scripture nor reason it followeth necessarily that Transubstantiation is grounded upon neither but rather repugnant to both for as trans denieth con so con trans If the remaining of the substance of bread with the substance of Christs body be not repugnant to the authoritie of Scripture nor the meaning of Christs words then doe not these words This is my body signifie or make Transubstantiation which necessarily abolisheth the substance of Bread and putteth in place thereof the substance of Christs bodie If Consubstantiation bee more easily to bee understood and more agreeable to right reason in Alliacoes judgement then Transubstantiation it is evident but for feare of his Cardinalls cap hee would have simply avowed the former and renounced the latter To the seventh Take Roffensis his words at the best the Iesuite is at a great losse admit hee said no more then I.R. here confesseth that no man can bee able to prove that any priest now in these times doth consecrate the true body of Christ see what will follow hereupon that no man is able to prove that your priests and people are not grosse Idolatours adoring a piece of bread for Christ Secondly that none is able to prove that Christ is really and substantially offered in your Masse for if it cannot bee proved that he is there corporally present as Roffenfis confesseth and you be are him out in it it cannot bee proved that hee is corporally offered restat itaque ut missas missas faciatis Roff. cont Luth captiv Bab. c. 4 neque ullum posituÌ„ hic verbum est quo probetur in nostrâ missâ veram fi lci carnis sanguinis Christi praesentiam non potestigitur per ullam scripturam probari it remaineth therefore that you dismisse your misses or Masses For what can they availe the living or the dead if nothing but meere accidents and shewes of Bread and Wine bee offered which are meere nothing Wee may yet gather farther upon Roffensis his words if it cannot bee proved by any Scripture that Christs body and bloud are present in the Roman masse it cannot bee proved that they are present in any Masse unlesse it bee granted that the Roman masses are of a worser condition then others if not in any masse much lesse must Papists say in any Sacrament without the Masse What then becommeth of the maine and most reall article of the Trent faith which hath cost the reall effusion of so much Christian bloud I meane the reall and carnall presence of Christ in the Sacrament To Roffenfis I.R. should have added Cajetan and so hee might have had a parreiall of Cardinalls for the Knight alledged him and his words are most expresse not only against the proofe of Transubstantiation Caje in 3. p. Tho. g. 75. dico autem ab ecclesiâcum non appareat ex Evangelio coactivum aliuod ad intellg â—â—dum haec verba propriè quod evangelium non explicavit expressè ab ecclesia accepimus viz. conversionem panis in corpus but also of the corporall presence of Christ as out of the words hoc est corpus meum The Cardinalls words are that which the Gospell hath not expressed wee have received from the Church to wit the conversion of the bread into the body of Christ I say from the Church because there appeares nothing out of the Gospell that can enforce a man to beleeve that the words This is my body are to bee taken properly How doth this Flood swell in pride that to so great a Cardinal so profound a Schoole-man so eminent a Doctour so divine a Commentatour so golden a Writer all which titles are given by the Roman Church to Cajetan he vouchsafeth not a looke But indeed he held a Wolfe by the eares and was in a quandarie what to doe whether to keepe his holt or to let him goe if hee had taken notice of his testimonie against the Roman Church either hee must have disparaged the Cardinall or given his Trent faith a grievous wound To the eight Durand his words are plaine enough to prove that the conversion of bread into the body of Christ is wrought by the vertue of Christs benediction before hee uttered the words Benedixit benedictione caelesti virtute verbi qua convertitur panis in substantiam corporis Christi Dur. rat c. 41. This is my body hee blessed saith hee the bread by his heavenly benediction and by vertue of the Word whereby the Brend is turned into the substance of Christs body Yea but faith Flood hee addeth Wee blesse ex illa virtute quam Christus indidit verbis wee blesse by that power or vertue which Christ hath given to the words true verbis benenedictionis not consecrationis according to Durands mind by that power which Christ gave to the words of benediction going before not those words which you call the words of Consecration ensuing after viz. This is my body which words yet Durand there rehearseth not to prove the conversion to bee wrought by them but to prove Christs body to be truly there To the ninth Though
receive but the Knight must prove that S. Paul would not say Masse unlesse others would communicate with him or that he teacheth that other Priests must not Where S. Paul 1 Cor. 11. commandeth the people to tarrie one for another when they came together to cate hee speaketh to the people who made the suppers called Agape as is plaine by the text wherein bee reprehendeth the Abuses that were committed as that some did exceed others did want some were drunke some went away hungry which could not pertaine to the blessed Sacrament besides the distribution of that belonged to the Priests not to the people who are here instructed and reprehended for their manner of making their suppers The cup of blessing is called a Communion because it uniteth us to Christ our head and also among our selves as members of the same body and though it doe this most perfectly when it is also received sacramentally yet not only so but it doth the same also in some measure being spiritually received and as this union may remaine among us members though every one among us doe not receive every day so it may also remaine betweene us and the Priest though hee say Masse and wee not receive If this argument of the Knight were good it would follow that not only some but that all the people must receive together with the Priest The Catholique Doctours cited by the Knight say indeed that it was the practise of the primitive Church to communicate every day with the Priest but they say not that it was of necessitie so to doe nay some of them as Bellarmine and Durand prove manifestly that there was no such necessitie or dependence of the Priests celebrating upon the peoples communicating that they might not celebrate unlesse the people did communicate For S. Chrysostome saith of himselfe that hee celebrated every day though there were no body to participate with him The Councell of Nants forbidding Priests to celebrate alone speaketh only of not saying Masse all alone without one or two to answer to whom the Priest may seeme to speake when hee saith Dominus vobiscum and the like but what 's this to saying Masse without some body to communicate with him The Councell of Trent doth not blesse and curse out of the same mouth or approve or condemne the same thing when it commendeth sacramentall communion of the people together with the Priest and yet condemneth those who say private Masses are unlawfull For it is one thing for the Councell to wish that the people would communicate because to heare Masse and receive withall will be more profitable an other to say that if there bee no body to communicate such a Masse is unlawfull or that the Priest must not say Masse The Hammer THe Iesuits answer to this Section of the Knight wherein hee impugneth private Masse by foure texts of Scripture two Canons of Councells and twelve pregnant Confessions of Romish Doctours consisteth partly of sophismes and partly of sarcasmes to both which I purpose to returne a short and smart answer first by refuting his sophismes and after by retorting his sarcasmes To the first sophisticall answer I replie That the words of our Saviour Take eat Mat. 26.26 this is my body were spoken to all future communicants as well as to the Apostles then present for they containe in them an institution of a Sacrament to bee celebrated in all Christian Churches till the end of the world as the Apostle teacheth us from the 23. to the 28. especially at the 26 verse 1 Cor. 11. as often as yee eate this bread and drinke this cup ye shew the Lords death till he come This the Apostles in their persons alone could not fulfill for they lived not till Christs second comming they must of necessitie therefore bee extended to all that in succeeding ages should bee present at the Lords Supper who are as much bound by this precept of Christ to communicate with the Priest or dispencer of the Sacrament as the Apostles were to communicate with Christ himselfe when hee first in his owne person administred it otherwise if the precepts Take eate doe this in remembrance of mee appertained to the Apostles only what warrant hath any Priest now to consecrate the elements or administer the Sacrament nay what command have any faithfull at all to receive the Communion Yea but saith the Iesuit if not only the Apostles and their successors but all the faithfull are here enjoyned to eate it would follow that whensoever the Sacrament is administred all must communicate that are in the Church at the same time It will follow that all who are bid to the Lords table and come prepared to whom the Priest in the person of Christ saith Take eate this is my body ought to communicate De eccles observ sciendum juxta antiquos patres quod soli cōmunicantes divinis mysterijs inter esse consueverint Orat. de consecrat dist 2. peractâ consecratione omnes communicent nisi malint ecclesiasticis carere liminibus and this was the custome of the ancient Church as Micrologus teacheth Wee must know saith he according to the ancient Fathers that none but Communicants were wont to be present at the mysteries and therefore before the Communion the Catechumenie and penitents which were not prepared to communicate were commanded to depart ite Missa est and wee find an ancient Canon of the Roman Church attributed to Gelasius enjoyning all under paine of excommunication that are present after the Consecrationis finished to participate of the blessed Sacrament To the second The precept of the Apostle bee ye followers of mee as I am of Christ 1 Co. 11.1 is generall and reacheth as well to acts of pietie as charitie As non est distinguendum ubi lex non distinguit so non est restringendum ubi lex non restringit as wee may not distinguish where the law doth not distinguish so we must not restraine where the law hath no restriction The Iesuite himselfe saith that S. Pauls imitation is directed to all if to all then to Priests and againe hee saith these words come in very fitly to prove that in all things that appertaine unto salvation wee should seeke to imitate S. Paul as hee doth Christ And I hope the Iesuit holdeth the worthy receiving of the Sacrament a matter of salvation I am sure the Apostle saith 1 Cor. 11. Hee that eateth and drinketh unwerthily eateth and drinketh damnation to himselfe But what need wee dispute this point any further sith the Apostle after hee had delivered this precept in the beginning of the chapter in pursuit thereof at the 23 verse instanceth in the Sacrament it selfe saying What I received of the Lord that I delivered unto you that the Lord Iesus the same night hee was betrayed tooke bread c. Surely if wee are to follow the Apostle in the performance of morall duties much more of religious and this the Iesuit in the end is compelled
them which is in other words to acknowledge them for a Rule of faith and consequently of infallible authoritie neither can any thing be said more against the present Church and present Councell of Trent then against the Church of that time and the Councels of those times The Knight impertinently alledgeth the testimonies of S. Paul You know that I have withdrawne nothing that was profitable v. 27. I have not shrunke to declare unto you the whole counsell of God Acts 20.20 and Bellarmine l. 4. d. verb. Dei All those things are written by the Apostle which are necessarie for all men and which they preached generally unto all For S. Paul speaketh not of the written word but of the doctrine of Christ by him preached neither doth Bellarmines saying helpe any thing because though those things which are necessarie in generall for all to know which are but few bee written there bee yet many more not written which are necessarie to bee knowne by some in the Church The Knight in praying that the Anathema decreed by the Councell of Trent might fall upon his head if any Papist could shew the number of seven Sacraments to have beene the beliefe of the Church for a thousand yeares after Christ is too forward to draw malediction upon himselfe it will come fast enough to his cost It is an heavier thing then he is a ware of to have the curse of a mother and such a mother as the Church which doth not curse without cause Ecclesiasticus 3.11 nor out of passion For as the Scripture saith maledictio matris eradicat fundamenta the malediction of a mother doth roote out the foundations The Knights definition of a Sacrament to wit that it is a seale witnessing to our consciences that Gods promises are true is senselesse and without ground largely refuted by Bellarmine Bell. l. 1. de sac in genere c. 14.16 and proved to bee most absurd For how can the Sacraments bee seales to give us assurance of his words when all the assurance wee have of a Sacrament is his word this is idem per idem Besides what promises are these that are sealed or if they be sealed what need we more seales and Sacraments then one if there may bee more why not seven as well as two Againe how doe wee see the promises of God in the Sacraments these are but foolish fancies bred in hereticall braines and so to be contemned The Knights Argument against five of our Sacraments that in them the element is not joyned to the Word or they have not their institution from Christ or they bee not visible signes of invisible saving grace is frivolous For confirmation and extreame Vnction have the element and the Word to wit oyle and the forme order and penance have institution from Christ as is confessed in order the patten with an Host and Chalice with wine in it is the outward element in penance humble confession with prayer fasting and almes-deedes are the outward element in Matrimonie the bodyes of a man or woman are as much an outward element as water in baptisme and though Matrimonie might bee a naturall contract before the Gospell yet was it exalted to the dignitie of a Sacrament by Christ and though it bee an holy thing as order is yet as order is forbidden to all women so upon good reason Mariage is forbidden to all Priests because it is good but of an inferiour ranke and not so agreeable to the high estate of Priest-hood That S. Ambrose Austine Chrysostome and Bede Aug. in Iohan. tract 15 de latere in cruce pendentis lanceâ percusso sacramenta ecclesiae profluxerunt teaching that out of Christs side came the Sacraments of the Church prove no more two then seven Sacraments For they say not that they were then instituted or that there were no more Sacraments instituted or that other Sacraments did not issue from thence Saint Ambrose maketh expresse mention of the Sacrament of confirmation L. 2. de sacram c. 24. and of penance as Bellarmine sheweth who also yeeldeth a reason why S. Ambrose in his bookes de Sacramentis mentioneth no more but three Sacraments because his intent in that worke is only to instruct the catechumenie in those things which are to bee done at the time of Baptisme For hee neither writeth to the beleevers of his age but only to some beginners as is manifest by the title of one of his bookes neither doth he there speake of the Sacraments which the Church hath taught and declared but of the Sacraments which those beginners that hee spake to had newly received S. Austine in those places where hee speaketh of two Sacraments restraineth not the number to two only Respice ad munera ecclesiae munus sacramentorum in baptismo in Eucharisliâ et caeteris sanctis sacramentis For in his first Sermon upon the 103. psalme hee saith cast thine eyes upon the gifts or offices of the Church in Baptisme the Eucharist and the rest of the holy Sacraments and in his Epistle 118. having brought in the two Sacraments Baptisme and the Lords Supper he addeth this generall clause and if there bee any thing else commended in canonicall Scriptures Neither doth the place the Knight citeth out of the third booke de doctrinâ christianâ availe him any thing for it is plaine by the word sicuti that he bringeth in Baptisme and the Lords Supper for example only which doth no way restraine the number Besides his word in this place is not sacraments as the Knight citeth him but signa signes which is therefore a corruption of the Knights S. Cyprian de ablutione pedum reckoneth but five Sacraments not that hee thought there were no more Cyp. doi ablut ped propter hoc benignissime Domine pedes lavas discipulis quia post baptismum quem sui reverentia iterari non patitur aliud lavacrum procurasti quod nunquam debeat intermitti but that it pertained not to his purpose to speake of more in that place his scope being only to speake of such Sacraments as had relation to our Saviours last Supper and by ablutio pedum that Authour meaneth the sacrament of penance as appeareth by the words following for this O most benigne Lord thou didst wash thy Disciples feet because after Baptisme which may not be iterated thou hast procured another laver which must never bee intermitted S Isidore in his sixt booke of Etymologies cited by the Knight doth not so much as intend to speake of any Sacrament at all but his only intent is to treat of the names of certaine feasts as the title of the chapter sheweth to wit of feasts and their names Among which he putteth Christs Supper Moreover to shew that S. Isidore held more then the three Sacraments the Knight speaketh of in his second booke de Ecclesiast offic c. 16. l. 23. c. 19. he mentioneth two more Penance and Matrimonie Alexander hales in the place
Baptisme and the holy Eucharist of the body and bloud of Christ the double gift of the holy Ghost Paschasius the Catholique Sacraments of the Christian Church are Baptisme and the body and bloud of Christ Fulbertus the way of Christian religion is to beleeve the Trinitie and veritie of the Deitie and to know the cause of his Baptisme and in whom the two Sacraments of our life are contained Of all these arguments brought by Protestants the Iesuit could not be ignorant Yet hee glaunceth only at one of them to wit the second which he would make us beleeve to bee an absurd begging the point in question How can saith he Sacraments bee Seales to give us assurance of his Word when all the assurance we have of a Sacrament is his Word This is idem per idem or a fallacie called petitio Principij As S. Austine spake of the Pharisees Quid aliud eructarent quà m quo pleni erant What other things should these Pharisees belch out then that wherewith they were full wee may in like manner aske what could wee expect for the Iesuit to belch out against the Knight then that which he is full of himselfe sophismes and fallacies That which hee pretends to find in the Knights argument every man may see in his to wit a beggarly fallacie called homonymia For the Word may be taken either largely for the whole Scripture and in that sense wee grant the Sacraments are confirmed by the Word or particularly for the word of promise and the Word in this sense is sealed to us by the Sacrament and this wee prove out of the Apostle against whom I trust the Iesuit dare not argue what Circumcision was to Abraham and the Iewes that Baptisme succeeding in the place thereof is to vs but Circuncision was a Seale to them of the righteousnesse of faith promised to Abraham and his posteritie Rom. 4.11 therefore in like manner Baptisme is a seale unto us of the like promise What Bellarmine urgeth against our definition of a Sacrament to whom the Iesuit sendeth us is refuted at large by Molineus Daneus Rivetus Willet and Chamier to whom in like manner I remand the Iesuit who here desiring as it seemed to bee catechised asketh what promises are sealed by the Sacraments I answer of regeneration and communion with Christ His second quaere is what need more seales then one or if more why not seven as well as two I answer Christ might adde as many Seales as hee pleased but in the new Testament hee hath put but two neither need wee any more the first sealeth unto us our new birth the second our growth in Christ If I should put the like question to the Iesuit concerning the King what need he more Seales then one or if he would have more why not seven as well as two I know how hee would answer that the King might affix as many seales to his patents and other grants as hee pleaseth but quia frustra fit per plur a quod fieri potest per pauciora because two seales are sufficient the Privie seale and the broad seale therefore his Majestie useth no other Which answer of his cuts the wind-pipe of his owne objection His last question is a blind one how may wee see saith he the promises of God in the Sacraments S. Ambrose and S. Austine will tell him by the eye of faith Magis videtur saith S. Ambrose quod non videtur that is more or better seene which is not seene with bodily eyes Sacraments saith S. Austine are visible words because what words represent to the eares that Sacraments represent to their eyes which are anointed with the eye-salve of the spirit In the Word we heare the bloud of Christ clenseth us from our sinnes in the Sacrament of Baptisme we see it after a sort in the washing of our body with water in the Word wee heare Christs bloud was shed for us in the Sacrament of the Eucharist after a sort we see it by the effusion of the Wine out of the flagon into the Chalice and drinking it In the Word wee heare that Christ is the bread of life which nourisheth our soules to eternall life In the Sacrament after a sort wee see it by feeding on the Consecrated elements of Bread and Wine whereby our body is nourished and our temporall life maintained and preserved To the fift In the former Paragraph we handled those Arguments which the Logicians tearme Dicticall 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in this we are to make good our Elencticall in the former we proved positively two Sacraments in this privatively we are to exclude and casheere all that the Church of Rome hath added to these two which deviseth Sacraments upon so weake grounds and detorteth Scripture in such sort for the maintenance of them that a learned Divine wisheth that as for the remedie of other sinnes so there were a Sacrament instituted as a speciall remedie against audacious inventions in this kind and depravations of holy Scripture to convince them For of an Epiphonema this is a great mysterie Ephes 5.32 they have made a Sacrament the sacrament of Matrimonie of a promise whose sinnes yee remit Iohn 20.23 they are remitted they have made a second Sacrament the sacrament of Penance of an enumeration of the Governours and Ministers of the Church Ephes 4.11 And hee gave some Apostles some Prophets some Pastours some Evangelists some teachers a third Sacrament the sacrament of Order of a relation what the Apostles did Acts 8.17 In laying hands on them who received the gift of tongues a fourth Sacrament the sacrament of Confirmation Of a Miracle in restoring the sick to their former health by anoynting them with oyle in the name of the Lord a fift Sacrament the sacrament of Extreame Vnction A child cannot be bishopped a single partie contracted a Priest or Deacon ordained a penitent reconciled a dying man dismissed in peace without a sacrament the sacrament of Extreame Vnction If they take Sacrament in a large sense for every divine Mysterie holy Ordinance or sacred Rite they may find as well seventeene as seven Sacraments in the Scriptures if they they take the Word in the strict sense for such a sacred Rite as is instituted in the New Testament by Christ with a visible signe or element representing and applying unto us some invisible sanctifying and saving grace I wish the Iesuit might but practise one of their Sacraments that is doe penance so long till hee found in Scripture that and the other foure Sacraments which they have added to the two Instituted by Christ To begin with them in order and give Order the first place wee acknowledge the ordination of Priests and Deacons by Bishops to be de jure divino and we beleeve where they are done according to Christs Institution that grace is ordinarily given to the party ordained but not sacramentall grace not gratia gratum faciens but gratia gratis data a ghostly power
neither nameth all of them either joyntly or severally this the Iesuit knowing well enough bringeth no one testimonie for the proofe of their seven Sacraments out of him but forceth only some sentences to prove out of them that hee held more then two as namely out of his first Sermon upon the 103. Psalme Cast thine eyes upon the gifts or offices of the Church in Baptisme the Eucharist and the rest of the holy Sacraments and Epist 118. having brought in two Sacraments Baptisme and the Lords Supper hee addeth such a generall clause and if there bee any thing else commended in holy Scriptures which words of his import that hee held more sacraments then Baptisme and the Lords Supper in that very sense wherein those two by him named are called Sacraments I answer S. Austine in neither of these places taketh the word Sacrament in a strict sense but in a large for every sacred rite commended in Scripture or gift and office of the Church As for the word coeter is the Iesuit insisteth upon it importeth only a generical convenience and similitude not a specificall and so wee acknowledge that there are many sacred rites in the Church which agree with Baptisme and the Lords Supper in the genericall notion of Sacraments but not in the specificall as the word Sacrament is taken for a peculiar seale of the New Testament having thereunto annexed a promise of justifying grace Now let us weigh what the Knight alledgeth out of S. Austine for two Sacraments only De doct Chris l. 3. c. 9. Our Lord saith that Father and his Apostles have delivered unto us a few Sacraments in stead of many in performance most easie in signification most excellent as is the Sacrament of Baptisme and the Lords Supper To disappoint this testimonie the Iesuit first layeth corruption and falsification to the Knights charge because S. Austines words are signa pauca not sacramenta Which is nothing but a meere cavill for signa and sacramenta are in S. Austine no other then synonima by signa hee can meane no other then sacramenta For he instanceth there in no other neither did Christ deliver unto us any other signa or sigilla but these two Yes saith the Iesuit for it is plaine by the word sicut that hee bringeth in Baptisme and the Lords Supper for example only and doth not restraine the signa to these two It is not plaine for sicut bringeth in an example be it one or more neither can wee from thence inferre that there are more For S. Iohn speaking of our Saviour saith vidimus gloriam ejus sicut unigeniti filij Dei Wee beheld the glorie as of the only begotten Sonne of the Father Will the Iesuit from thence inferre that God had more only begotten sonnes but to expound S. Austine out of himselfe those signes or Sacraments which here hee calls a few in his 118. Epistle hee tearmes most few Sacrament is numero paucissimis surely seven Sacraments are not numero paucissima fewest in number but two are so and therefore in his booke De symbolo ad catechumenos he tearmeth them gemina Ecclesiae sacramenta which passage the Iesuit taketh no notice of because hee could give no answer at all unto it yet hee setteth a good face upon the matter saying this may suffice for such testimonies as were alledged out of S. Austine Of all the Roman Captaines I cannot liken him fitter to any then to Terentius Varro who though hee fought so unhappily against Hanniball at Cannae that hee lost 40000. men upon the place yet hee seemed to bee little daunted therewith and the Roman Senat sent him publike thankes quòd de republicâ non desperâsset that hee despaired not of the Common-wealth To the ninth The authour of the treatise De ablutione pedum who was farre later then S. Cyprian mentioneth indeed five sacraments which are more then two yet lesse then seven and for those five hee nameth it is evident hee intended not that they were Sacraments in a strict sense For one of them is ablutio pedum which if it bee a Sacrament in the proper sense then hath the Iesuit an eighth sacrament as himselfe is sapientum octavus Not so saith hee for ablutio pedum which that Authour meaneth is the sacrament of Penance Then belike Peter and the Apostles did Penance whilest Christ washed their feet Although there may lie hid some mysterie in that ablution L. 2. de sac c. 24. and therefore it may bee tearmed a Sacrament in a large sense as Bellarmine expoundeth that authour Yet our Lord himselfe revealeth unto us no other mysterie nor maketh any other inference from it then a patterne of humilitie Ioh. 13 14. If I your Lord and Master have washed your feet ye also ought to wash one anothers feet Yea but saith Flood the authour speaketh of another Laver after Baptisme and what can that bee other then Penance He speaketh of another laver not of another Sacrament which laver is no other then the laver of penitent teares But dicis causa let ablutio pedum be Penance yet wee have but foure Sacraments mentioned by this Author what becommeth of the other three To this hee answereth that the Authour mentioned not them because his scope was in that place to speake of such Sacraments as had relation to our Saviours last Supper A ridiculous evasion for what relation hath Baptisme or Penance or Confirmation or order to our Lords Supper But the Iesuit like a Lawyer that hath taken his fee of his Client thought himselfe bound in conscience to speake something in behalfe of this Authour though nothing at all to the purpose like Erucius in Tully Ego quid acceperim scio quid dicam nescio Cic. pro. Rosc Amer. To the tenth The Iesuit in his answer to S. Isidore bewrayes extreame negligence For the Knight quoting S. Isidore at large in his sixt book and not naming any chapter this Desultorius Miles posting through one chapter and finding not the words there chargeth the Knight with falsification whereas in the chapter immediatly following to wit the 19. according to the later edition of S. Isidore but in the 18. according to the former the testimonie alledged by the Knight is found in expresse words and Baptisme Chrisme and the Lords Supper reckoned by him for the Sacraments of the Church there without addition of any other If hee had held seven sacraments questionlesse in that place hee would have named all or at least the major part of them The Iesuit applieth a plaister to this sore to wit that else-where the same Father mentioneth Penance and Matrimonie But the plaister is too narrow and the salve of no vertue at all First it is too narrow for though Penance and Matrimonie be added to Baptisme Chrisme and the Lords Supper we have yet but foure or if we take Chrisme not for a Ceremonie used in Baptisme but a distinct Sacrament from it at the most but five
Iesuit who holdeth both may by his beliefe merit their holy sacrament of Penance for egregiously abusing Hugo de Sancto Victore and S. Ierome and his reader by making a Sacrament of a metaphor and out of them arguing thus wooddenly against the Knight Hugo hath a particular chapter wherein hee calleth Penance as wee doe with S. Ierome the second boord after shipwracke Ergo Penance is a Sacrament of the new Law doth he not deserve for concluding so absurdly to have the character of his owne sacrament indelebly imprinted upon his flesh To the thirteenth The Knight alledgeth not Bellarmine nor Hugo nor Peter Lombard nor Bonaventure nor Hallensis nor Altisiodorensis nor Suarez himselfe as if they expresly and in direct tearmes denied Extreame Unction to bee a sacrament this they doe not neither as things stood with some of them might doe safely the Roman Church having defined the contrarie Yet so great is the force of truth that what in words they affirme they consequently deny and thus much Suarez ingenuously confesseth some Suar. tom disp 39 sect 2. nonnulli negârunt hoci sacramentum fuisse à Christo institutum ex quo planè sequebatur non esse verum sacramentum saith hee have denied that this Sacrament was instituted by Christ whence it followeth by plaine consequence that it is no true Sacrament Yea but saith Flood if those Schoole-men had lived in this age they would have said that Christ did institute it Whereunto I answer that all Iudgements proceed ex allegatis probatis not allegandis probandis upon things alledged and proved not upon things to be alledged and proved in future times neither is it likely that they would have altered their opinion upon notice of the Trent decision for if the Church of France and divers other Romish Catholiques as they tearme them submit not at this day to all the Decrees of that Councell much lesse may it bee thought that those ancient and acute schoole Divines who bare the greatest sway in their times would have suffered themselves to baffled by the pretence of a pettie Councell charging her canons with nothing but paper-shot every Sacrament of the New Testament is supported with two pillars institution by Christ and a promise of justifying grace annexed to the due receivers thereof set downe in Scripture the former pillar the ancient Schoolemen take from Extreame Unction the later Bellarmine and Cajetan how then can it stand The Iesuit answereth upon a third pillar unwritten tradition But this I have proved before to be a weak and rotten one and to speake the truth it serveth Papists as pons Asinorum did the ancient Logicians to which they fly for shelter when all other helpe faileth them Albeit they bragge much of Scripture yet upon examination of particulars it will appeare that their new Trent Creed consisting of twelve supernumerarie Articles hath no foundation at all in Scripture and therefore they are forced for their support to fly to verbum Dei non scriptum an unwritten word of God which I would faine know of them how they prove to be Gods word Whether by Scripture or by unwritten tradition by Scripture they cannot say for it implies a flat contradiction that verbum non scriptum should be scriptum that unwritten traditions should be found in or founded on Scripture if they say they prove it to bee Gods word by tradition then they prove idem per idem the same thing by it selfe and build their faith upon a sillie sophisme called petitio prÃncipij the begging the maine point in question To the fourteenth In the allegation of Cardinal Bessario the Iesuit chargeth the Knight with ambiguous translation P. 225. and so placing the words that they may have a double sence the one to deceive the simple and the other to excuse himselfe against the objections of the learned and for this he pronounceth a woe against him vae peccatori terraâ— ingredienti duabus vijs Woe to the sinner going on the earth two wayes But the truth is as Pentheus after he was distracted imagined duplices se ostendere Phoebos Oresles apud Euripidem Electram sororem appellat Furiam quòd eam ne fureret in lectlo constringeret that hee saw two Sunnes when yet there was but one in the skie so the Iesuit in a fit of frantick malice imagined the Knight to goe two wayes whereas hee goeth but one and that a faire and streight way for he setteth the Latine words of the Cardinall without any adition or detraction in the margent haec duo sola sacramenta in Evangelijs manifestè tradita legimus and hee translateth them faithfully wee reade that these two Sacraments only were delivered us plainly in Scriptures hee rendereth not the words we reade plainly in Scriptures that there were two only Sacraments delivered unto us which had beene a misplacing of Bessarions words and mis-interpretation of his meaning bu wee reade that these two only were plainly delivered in the Gospell there is no more ambiguitie in the translation then in the originall which though it denieth not that other Sacraments may bee delivered in the Gospell yet it affirmeth that these two only are plainly delivered there and consequently that these two only are de fide matter of faith and upon paine of damnation to be beleeved for as I proved before out of S. Austine and S. Chrysostome all things that concerne faith and manners and are necessarie to salvation are plainly delivered in holy Scriptures To the fifteenth Some Papistsas Flood confesseth denie the foure inferiour Orders to be Sacraments P. 234. and Soto denieth the superiour what a confusion is here in your sacrament of order If the ordination of Bishops be not truly and properly a Sacrament as Dominicus Soto acknowledgeth neither is the ordination of Priests a Sacrament for what can be alledged more for the one then the other and if the ordination of Priests be no sacrament much lesse Deacons or subdeacons or Acolytes or Exorcists Whether there be the same character imprinted in the ordination of Bishops and Priests it is not materiall to our present question for if it be the same then it followeth according to the doctrine of the Schooles that they are one and the selfe-same Sacrament if a diverse character bee imptinted by the one and by the other then are they two distinct Sacraments If they are the same Sacraments then Soto denying the one consequently denieth the other to bee a Sacrament if they are distinct Sacraments then there are eight Sacraments Yea but saith the Iesuit Whither there bee a new character in a Bishop or the same extended is no matter of faith and therefore wee are not to dispute with you of it but keepe you off at the staffes end or rather out of doores when you are once admitted into the Catholique Church wee may admit you to speake of a Schoole-point or else not Wee know well that yee are loath that
we should heare of your differences among your selves but the fire of contention cannot bee kept within the walls of your Schooles quis enim celaverit ignem Lumine qui semper proditur ipse suo it breaketh out and if ye looke not to it it will set on fire the whole fabrick of your Romish Babel Meane while the Iesuit giveth us great incouragement to desire to bee admitted into the Roman Church because then forsooth wee shall have leave to tread the endlesse mazes of scholasticall disputes To the sixteenth If Soto come short Durand commeth home to the point in question for hee affirmeth that which is alledged by the Knight and confessed by the Iesuit that Matrimonie is not a Sacrament univocally if not univocally not truly and properly but equivocally or analogically Yea but saith the Iesuit all acknowledge it for anerror in Durand hee saith all but hee names none Surely the Divines of the reformed Church acknowledge it for no error in Durand but defend it for a truth and for such Romish Divines that adhere to the Councell of Trent they are but a faction in the Church nor is their authoritie more to be urged against the Doctours of the reformed Churches then the authoritie of the Doctours of the reformed Churches against them which yet if any should produce against any of the Articles of their new Creed they would not vouchsafe them so much as a looke For the definition of the Church in the Councel of Florence which the Iesuit toucheth upon it is of little or no authoritie because that Councell was not general nor called by lawfull authoritie but by the schismaticall Pope Eugenius the fourth who was deposed by a generall Councell held at Basil To the seventeenth Because the Iesuit is forbidden by the Popes law to tast of the fruits of Matrimonie at which it seemes his mouth waters hee is content to let the tree fall to the ground for want of support To Cardinal Cajetan who gave a strong push at it by denying that it can be proved to bee a Sacrament Out of the words of S. Paul Ephesians the fift hee answereth nothing but with ifs if it be not proved out of that place it may be out of others if out of no other yet out of tradition to his ifs I returne fies fie for shame that they should bind all their followers under paine of a heavie curse to beleeve this Sacrament of Matrimonie and yet know not where to ground this their beliefe upon Scripture or tradition If it may be proved to bee a sacrament out of S. Paul Ephes 5. their most learned Cardinal Cajetan is out if it may not be proved out of those words Cardinal Bellarmine and almost all Papists that wrote since Cajetan are in an errour The Iesuit holdeth a Wolfe by the eare hee dares neither hold with Cajetan nor against him but puts the matter off with an iff If it cannot be proved to bee a Sacrament out of that passage as Cajetan affirmeth yet it may bee out of other texts What texts why doth he not name them it is a signe hee feareth his coyne is counterfeit that hee dare not bring it to the test If that place which seemeth to make most for his Romish tenet make nothing at all as the acute Schooleman and most learned Cardinal Cajetan confesseth there is no likelihood that other texts which have lesse appearance will stand them in any stead and therefore for his last refuge he flyeth to unwritten traditions as the old Dunces as I noted before ad pontem asinorum To the eighteenth Canus puts a strong sharpe weapon in our hands to wound your Trent doctrine concerning Matrimonie Canus loc Theol l. 8. c. 5. in materiâ formâ hujus Sacramenti viz. Matrimonij statuendâ adeò sunt inconstantes varij aà eò incerti ambigui ut ineptus juturus sit quis in tantâ illorum varietate discrepantiâ rem aliquam certam constantem exploratam conetur afferre but withall forbiddeth us to strike with it as the Iesuit Flood telleth us as if we were at his beck and might not use our weapons as wee list But let him know though he be so foolish as to give advantage wee will not bee so childish as to leave it If that bee true which he writeth that the Divines of Rome write so uncertainly of the matter and forme of Matrimonie that it were folly in any to goe about to reconcile these differences and determine any thing certaine in the point we will inferre upon him that it is likewise folly to define Matrimonie to be a Sacrament for if the matter and forme of Matrimonie bee so unknowne as hee saith the genus of it must needs be unknowne For the genus as Porphyrie teacheth is taken from the matter L. de praedicab c. de genere and answereth thereunto as the difference is taken from the forme If the genus be uncertaine how can it bee an article of faith that matrimonium is species sacramenti The whole nature of a thing consisteth of matter and forme which if it bee unknowne the specificall essence is unknowne and if the specificall essence be unknowne how can it be ranked in his predicament under its proper genus What Papist soever therefore defineth Matrimonie and putteth it under a Sacrament as the proper genus Canus putteth the foole upon him take it off when you can To the nineteenth Vasquez giveth the Iesuits cause not so light a blow as hee imagineth in saying that where S. Austine calleth Matrimonie a sacrament hee taketh the word Sacrament in a large sense and not in the strict and proper for if S. Austine bee so to be understood he held not Matrimonie a sacrament properly so called but in a large sence onely and if that were his judgement we have a great advantage of our Adversaries in the cause for S. Austine carrieth a great stroake not only because hee is held the acutest of all the ancient Fathers and father of all the Schoolemen but especially because the Pope in the Canon law professeth Augustinum sequimur in disputationibus Wee follow for the most part saith Pope Gelasius S. Ierome in the interpretation of Scripture S. Gregorie in matter of moralitie but S. Austine in point of controversie Yea but saith Flood this is but Vasquez his private and singular opinion concerning S. Austine Neither doth the Knight otherwayes urge it then as the singular opinion of a singularly learned Iesuit enforced by evidence of truth to give over their chiefest hold of antiquitie in this point the authoritie of S. Austine Well be it so saith Flood Vasquez is so farre for you yet we have an Oliver for a Rowland Bellarmine for Vasquez for this opinion of Vasquez is contradicted by other Catholique Divines and by Bellarmine in particular Where is then the unitie our Adversaries so much bragge of two of the greatest Champions of the Pope Vasquez and
against the Communion in one kind leaveth out the principall verbe and one halfe of the sentence answering the former which of it selfe was imperfect which was the Authours absolute judgement and determination for the whole sentence of Tapper art 16. is this it were more convenient if wee regard the Sacrament and the perfection thereof to have the Communion under both kindes then under one for this were more agreeable to the Institution thereof and to the integritie of a corporall refection and the example of Christ but in another consideration to wit of the reverence which is due to the Sacrament and to the end wee may avoide all irreverence it is lesse convenient and no way expedient for the Church that the Christian people should communicate in both kindes In the lawes of King Edward the sixt revived and confirmed by Queene Elizabeth it is ordained that the Communion bee delivered to the people under both kindes with this exception unlesse necessitie otherwise require That it is not requisite that every article of faith have sufficient and expresse proofe of Scripture Dial. 2. cont Lucifer etiamsi sacrae scripturae authoritas non subesset totius orbis in hanc partem consensus instar praecepei obtinerct for as S. Ierome teacheth although the authoritie of holy Scripture were wanting the consent of the whole world on this side should have the force of a Precept The Hammer IN this Section the Iesuit beginneth merrily with a fiddle but endeth sadly and every where answereth sorily For to omit his omission of some things that pincht him shrewdly as namely first that the Councell of Constance by reason the first Sessions judged the Councell above the Pope is condemned and rejected by the Councell of Florence and last Councell of Lateran but for the last Sessions wherein the halfe Communion is established contrarie to Christs precept and holy institution it is allowed by Pope Martine the fift and rectived of all Catholiques whereby it appeares that Papists are more tender of the Popes supremacie then Christs honour Secondly De Euchars l. 4. c. 7. that Bellarmine saith that it is not to be doubted but that is best and sittest to bee practised that Christ hath done Now it is evident out of Scriptures and confessed by the Fathers in the Councell of Constance and Trent that Christ instituted and administred the Sacrament in both kindes Lastly that the Papists in this point apparantly contradict themselves for they require antiquity universality and consent as the proper markes of Catholique doctrine and yet confesse that in this the practise of their Church is contrarie to the practise of the Primitive Church nor was it ever received in the true Church till above a thousand yeares after Christ Dichotomived To let passe these his preteritions all that hee saith in replie to other passages of the Knights may be dicotomized into idle cavils and sophisticall evasions as shall appeare by the examination of each particular To the first The Iesuit as it should seeme tooke Ennius the Poet for his patterne who as Horace observeth Nunquam nisi potus ad arma prosiluit c. never undertooke the description of a warre or set himselfe to write strong lines before hee had comforted his heart with a cup of strong liquour For if the French wine had not assaulted his Capitoll as the Frenchmen did sometimes the Roman if a strong fume had not made his head so dizzie that he thought all things before him went round hee would never in so serious a subject as is the Sacrament of Christs blood use such light and comicall saracasmes as he doth against this saith he hee bringeth two places of Scripture P. 243. and the practise of the Primitive Church and so concludeth the antiquitie and universalitie of his Church this goeth round with a fiddle Sir Humfrey if hee had a purpose to make sport to his reader in the merrie pin hee was set on hee should rather have said you Creed Sir Humfrey goeth round with a crowd But crowde or fiddle whether hee please to tearme the learned discourse of the Knight I hope it will prove like Davids Harpe and conjure the evill spirit out of the Iesuit To fall upon the particulars in order whereas in the first place hee chargeth the Knight with false and absurd translation of the Decree of the Councell rendering totus Christus all Christ not whole Christ and would make us beleeve that all can in no sense bee attributed to Christ hee forgot that text of the Apostle that Christ is all in all Surely it should seeme this Iesuit is descended from Pope Adrian who was choaked with a fly for what a silly fly choaketh him here The Knight to avoid a tautologie in translating totus integer Christus whole and whole Christ rendereth the word all and whole Christ and what falsitie or absurditie is there in this doth not every punie know that omnis in Latine and all in English is often taken collectivè as when wee say Lazarus was covered all over with sores doe not the Papists themselves sometimes so render the word totus as namely in those places I have stretched my armes all the day long to a rebellious people and all the day long have I beene punished and all Scripture is given by divine inspiration and is profitable for doctrine for reproofe for correction for instruction in righteonsnesse that the man of God may bee perfect throughly furnished to all good workes In which passages it is most evident that all is taken for whole and so the best interpreters render 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 tota scriptura that is the whole Scripture To the second The Knight in bringing the Decree of the Councell of Constance hath not brought in a staffe to beate himselfe withall but to beate all such Romish curres as barke at the light of the Sunne I meane the cleare words of Christs institution Sess 13. Drinke you all of this Yet saith that Councell to the Laitie none of you drinke of this If Christ had said in like manner receive you the Communion after supper we would never receive it fasting It is true that he instituted it the night he was betrayed after supper which circumstance yet bindeth us not now to receive it at that time but the argument no wayes followes from the change of a circumstance to the change of a substantiall act the Church may dispence with the one not with the other Wee argue not barely from the practise of Christ and his Apostles but from their doctrine and practise What Christ did and taught as S. Cyprian soundly collects must bee perpetually observed in the Church but he taught and practised the Communion in both kindes fecit docuit hee both did so and taught us so to doe but for the circumstances of time number of Communicants gesture sitting or leaning though at that time he used such circumstances yet he cōmanded not us to
our Adversaries when Christ saith This is the cup of the New Testament which is shed for many for the remission of sinnes who are those many will they say Priests only have the Laytie no sinnes or no remission of sinnes by Christ bloud if they have as all professe they have why do they forbid them that which Christ expresly commandeth them saying Drinke ye all of this for it is shed for you and for many All worthy communicants are to drinke Christs bloud for whom it was shed thus much Christs reason importeth but it was shed for the Laytie as well as the Clergie they therefore are alike to drinke it If the Laytie expect life from Christ they must drinke his bloud as well as eate his flesh Iohn 6.53 for except a man eate the flesh of the Sonne of man and drinke his bloud hee hath no life in him Lastly 1 Cor. 11.28 when the Apostle enjoyneth all to examine themselves before they receive the holy Communion I desire to bee informed by our Adversaries whether this Precept of examination concerneth not the Laytie especially I know they will say it doth because the people most need examination that they may confesse their sinnes and receive absolution for them before they presume to communicate let them then reade what followeth in the same verse and so let them eate of that bread and drinke of that Cup let a man examine himselfe and so let him eate of that Bread and drinke of that Cup the coherence of the members in this sentence inferreth that as none are to be admitted without precedent examination so that all who have examined themselves are to be admitted to the Lords table both to eate of that Bread and drinke of that Cup. To the seventh There is no force at all in the inference which the Iesuit would make from Christ his breaking of bread with the two Disciples at Emmaus to prove the Communion in one kind for neither is it likely Christ instituted any supperafter his last Supper neither was the place fit for a Communion being a common Inne neither reade wee of any preparation on the Apostles part nor of any words of institution used then by Christ neither could the Iesuit alledge any one Father who saith that Christ at that time administred the Communion to those two Disciples in bread only For it is well knowne to all that are acquainted with the language of Canaan that breaking of bread in Scripture by a Syneodoche is taken for making a meale and it is very unlikely that the disciples travelling at that time of the yeare in so hot a countrey as Iudaea is when they came to their Inne for a repast should call for bread only and no drinke To the eighth Though the Iesuit make many a bravado here and else-where yet upon the matter in granting to the Knight that the generall practise of the primitive Church was to communicate in both kindes he yeeldeth up the bucklers For the maine scope of the Knight in this and other Sections is to prove the visibilitie of our reformed Church in former ages by the confession of our Romish adversaries this hee doth in the point of the Communion in both kindes abundantly in this Section and the Iesuit cannot denie it it followeth therefore that in this maine point of controversie betweene us and the Church of Rome wee have antiquitie universalitie and eminent visibilitie and the Roman Church none of all whereby any understanding reader may see that the Knight hath already wonne the day Yet for the greater confusion of the Iesuit I adde that what the primitive Church did uniformly they received it from the Apostles and what the Apostles did joyntly no doubt they did by the direction of the holy Ghost according to our Lords will and so their example amounteth to a Precept Againe the practise of the Catholique Church is the best expositour of Scripture therefore the question being concerning the meaning of that text of Scripture Drinke you all of this whether they concerne the Laytie or Clergie only that must bee taken for the true exposition which the Catholique Church by a constant and vniforme practise hath allowed Lastly either this practise of the Catholique Church was grounded upon some divine Precept or it is a meere will-worship which the Iesuit dare not say if it be grounded upon any divine precept undoubtedly upon this Drinke yee all of this that is as well Ministers as Laye people as Paschasius commenteth upon the words To the ninth The arguments of Bellarmine drawne from six ancient Rites to prove the frequent use of Communion in one kind are answered at large by Philip Morney and Chamierus in the places above mentioned and they are every one of them retorted against Bellarmine himselfe by D. F. in his booke intituled the Grand sacriledge cap. 14. accipe quomode das si tibi machera est nobis vervina est if it be sufficient for him to object by proxe why may not we answer by proxe To the tenth To the instance in the Nazarites I answer first that I read of no other Nazarites since Christs time in the writings of the ancient Fathers then certaine Heretiques so tearmed of the sect of Ebionites who went about to cloath the Gospell with the beggarly rudiments of the Law upon whom S. Austine passeth this verdict L. De haeres ad quod vult Deum dum volunt Iudaei esse Christiani nec Iudaeisunt nec Christiani that whilest they laboured to bee both Iewes and Christians they became neither Iewes nor Christians but a sect of heretiques partly judaizing partly Christianizing Secondly if there were any Nazarites that sincerely imbraced the Gospell questionlesse they communicated in both kindes for though they had vowed against drinking of wine yet either their Vow was to be understood of drinking it civilly not sacramentally for their corporall refection not for their spirituall repast or if their vow were absolutely against wine yet Christs command Drinke yee all of this implied a dispensation for their Vow in that case A private vow of any man must give place to a publike command of God even now a dayes those who upon any great distemper of body or mind by wine vow to abstaine from it yet make no scruple of conscience to take a small quantitie of it physically for the recoverie of their health how much more ought they to doe so notwithstanding their vow if it bee prescribed by the heavenly physician for the cure and salvation of their soules To the eleventh Concerning Tapperus the Knight no way misquoteth him though hee leave out some passges in him for the truth is Tapperus halteth betweene two opinions he speaketh some words plainly in the language of Canaan and others hee lispeth in the language of Ashdod where he speaketh in the language of Canaan as hee doth most plainly in those his words if wee regard the Sacrament and perfection thereof and the
Service they thought to be fittest and most agreeable to Gods commandement If wee had nothing but their practise for us it alone would prove the visibilitie of our Church in this maine point wherein wee stand at a bay with the Roman Church but the truth is though the Iesuit would bee loath to heare it his owne witnesses Cassander Belithus Waldensis and Aquinas speake home to the point even of a Precept the words of Cassander are the Canonicall prayers and especially the words of Consecration of the body and blood of our Lord the Ancients did so read that all the people might understand it and say Amen according to the precept intimated by the Apostle 1 Cor. 14. 16. The words of Belithus are that in the Primitive Church it was forbidden that any should speake with tongues unlesse there were some to interpret for what saith hee should speaking availe without understanding Waldensis saith more then that in the Apostles time the giving of thankes was in a knowne tongue he confirmeth the practise with a reason saying There was reason it should bee so because in those times not only the Priests but the people also were wont to answer Amen Aquinas goeth a step farther that it was madnesse in the Primitive Church for a man to have prayed in an unknowne tongue because then the people were rude and ignorant in Ecclesiasticall rites Now if the Iesuit thinke that it was not prohibited in the Apostles time to doe any madde act in time of divine Service he himselfe is bound for the Anticyrae Now for that the Iesuit addeth for the imbellishing of his former answer that none of the vulgar languages but the three learned to wit the Hebrew Greeke and Latine were Dedicated on the crosse of Christ and consequently that they being the best and perfectest of all languages were fittest for divine Service to be said in them it is more plausible then substantiall For though I grant that every devout soule so affecteth the person of our Lord and Saviour that shee loveth the very ground hee trod upon and honoureth those languages above all other in which his titles were proclaimed for the greater advancement of his kingdome yet the reason holdeth not in our present case For though a golden key bee simply better then a key of iron yet a key of iron which will open to us a casket of most pretious Iewells is better for that use then a key of gold which will not open the lock Admit the originall languages of Greeke and Hebrew are simply perfecter and better then any other which are derivatives from them yet the Mother-tongue or vulgar language is better and fitter for the congregation in time of divine Service because it answereth the wards of their understanding and openeth to their capacity the Divine mysteries then celebrated which the learned languages cannot doe As for Pilats writing over the Crosse it is certaine he had no end therein to honour the three Languages with this title but to dishonour our Saviour thereby and put a scorne upon him and therefore that inscription in the three languages was rather a pollution then a Dedication of those tongues If Pilats action herein bee of any force it maketh rather against then for our Adversaries For Pilat therefore commanded the title to be written in those three languages that it might be understood of all or the greater part of those that then were at Ierusalem By which reason people of divers languages ought to have their mysteries for so the Iesuit calleth this title celebrated in their owne severall langurges Praef. in psal his maximè tribus linguis sacramentum voluntatis Dei beati regni expectatio praedicatur ex eoque illud Pilati fuit ut in his tribus linguis regem Iudaeorum Dominum nostrum Iesum Christum esse praescriberet S. Hilarie who is alledged by Baylie the Iesuit for the consecration of these tongues neither saith that these tongues were consecrated by that inscription not that Christs kingdome is to be proclaimed in them only His words are in these three languages especially the mysterie of Gods will and the expectation of his blessed kingdome is preached and hence it was that Pilat wrote our Lord Iesus Christ King of the Iewes in those three tongues This testimonie cutteth the throate of our Adversaries for the adverbe maximè or chiefly implieth that the mysteries of Christs kingdome were to be preached in other tongues though in these especially because these were then and are some of them at this day most generally knowne and understood Inc. 15 Marc. Deus voluit ut causa mortis Christi varijs linguis scriberetur quo ab omnibus intelligeretur Et Hieron ib. hae tres linguae in crucis titulo conjunctae ut omnis lingua commemoraret perfidiam Iudaeorum Baron tom 10 Anno Chris 880. ep 147. liter as Slavonicas à Constantino philosopho repertas quibus Deo laudes debitas resonent jure laudamus ut in cadem lingua Christi Dei nostri praeconia opera enarrentur jubemus neque enim trilus tantùm linguis sed omnibus Dominum laudare authoritate sacrâ monemur quae praecepit dicens laudate Dominum omnes gentes nec sanè fidei vel doctrinae allquid obstat five missas in eadem Slavonica lingua canere sive sacrum evangelium vel lectiones divinas N. V. Testamenti benè translatas interpretatas legere out alia horarum officia psallere quoniam qui fecit tres linguas principales Hebraeam scilicet Graecaem Latinam ipse creavit alias omnes ad laudem gloriam suam Lyra and S. Ierome harpe upon this string God would have saith Lyra that the cause of Christs death should bee written in divers tongues that every tongue might declare the trecherie of the Iewes and which marreth all the Iesuits musick the Popes Diapason soundeth out the same note for so wee reade in Bope Iohns Epistle to the King of Moravia we commend the Slavonian letters found out by Constantine the Philosopher whereby those of that countrey set forth the due prayses of God and we command that the preaching and workes of Christ our God bee declared in them for we are admonished by the Divine authoritie which commandeth saying Prayse the Lord all yee Gentiles to prayse the Lord not in three tongues only but in all for hee who made the three principall languages Hebrew Greeke and Latine hee created also all other for his glorie To the twelfth To this insolent interrogation of the Iesuit wee answer that in generall prayer in an unknowne tongue is commanded in all those texts of Scripture which require us to come neere unto God and pray unto him with our heart For by the heart the understanding as well as the will and affections are meants as appeareth by that prayer of Solomon Da mihi cor intelligens in particular and expresse words it is commanded in the 1
all the Iesuit beareth us in hand that the Masse being the same continually the people understand it sufficiently for the exercise of their devotion though not to satisfie vaine curiositie which speech of his is partly sencelesse and partly blasphemous it is sencelesse to imagine that a man who never learned his Grammar nor ever was taught Greek or Latine by hearing onely the Masse read over though a thousand times should come to understand it secondly it is blasphemous to say that to desire to understand the particular contents of the Epistles and Gospels read in the Masse or the psalmes of David sung in the Church is vaine curiofitie or hereticall pride Loe here Flood his channell falleth againe into the Stygian lake To the fourteenth There is no contradiction at all in the Knights observations For though this story of the shepheards abusing the words of Consecration and strucke dead for it might peradventure occasion some alteration in those Churches where it was beleeved yet there was no generall command for the practise of the Latine Service in all Christian Churches before Vitalians time who in the yeare 666. verified the number of the name of the beast in himselfe which according to the interpretation of S. Irenaeus who flourished within two hundred yeares after Christ is lateinos as before I noted But for mine owne part I have no faith at all in that legendarie fable of the Sheepheards First because those that coyned it agree not in their tale for some say that the Bread and Wine were transubstantiated into flesh and bloud and the sheepeheards for their prophane abuse strucke dead others tell it otherwise Cassand liturg c. 28. Honorius in Gem. animae Bellar. l. 2. de Mis c. 22. that neither the Bread nor the Wine were transubstantiated but consumed by fire from heaven nor the sheepheards strucken dead but onely laid for dead As for the Authour of the booke called Pratum spirituale hee is of no credit at all For in his Spirituall meadow as hee tearmeth his worke there are many such Eutopian flowers as this is where I leave the Iesuit to gather him a nosegay till I have leisure to meete with him in the next Section Concerning worshiping of Images Spectacles Sect. 7. a pag. 283. usque ad 319. THe text of Scripture which the Knight quoteth maketh not any mention of Image-worship but Idoll-worship which hee could not but know to bee a different thing having beene so often told it It followeth not the Iewes might not adore Images Ergo wee may not for the Iewes might not eate bloud nor swines flesh nor many other things which wee may If the second Commandement were morall and now in force the Knight could not have his wives picture nor shee his without breach of that Commandement therefore in that sence hee cannot urge it more against our pictures then wee against his Cornelius Agrippa was a Magician and therefore no heed to be given to what he testifieth against the Roman Church Philo Iudaeus saith nothing but that the Iewes admitted no image into the Temple which is true for God cannot bee painted neither could they have the Image of any Saint for there was none as yet which might have that honour to have their images or pictures in the Temple themselves being not yet admitted into the heavenly Temple of God It is no marvaile that the Iewes hate crucifixes sith they could not indure Christ himselfe Notwithstanding the prohibition in the second Commandement were it Morall or Ceremoniall men did adore the Cherubins in the Temple and the Arke and the Temple it selfe There may in the New Testament bee some precept or example both of our Saviour and his Apopostles for the adoration of images though not written in Scripture because as S. Iohn saith that all is not written or rather a very small part is written as his words import Wee have the example of our Saviour and his Apostles testified by good authenticall histories many great and grave Authours make mention of two severall images made miraculously by our blessed Saviour himselfe one was that which hee sent to Abgarus King of Edessa who had a desire to see him the other was that of Veronica which hee made with wiping his face as hee was carrying his Crosse a third was one which Nicodemus gave to Gamaliel all which are testified not only by grave and learned Authours but by God himselfe though not in Scripture yet by great and wonderfull miracles S. Austine taketh not Simulachrum for an image as the Knight falsly translateth him but for an idoll and so commendeth Varro for comming neerer to the knowledge of the true God and going further from idolatrie then other Gentiles Eusebius saith not that images sprang from an heathenish custome but hee meaneth by mos gentilis the fashion of their owne people and kindred who were wont to honour such that had done them any benefit or helpe by erecting statues in memorie of them Moreover Eusebius relateth this storie of the womans statua with approbation upon the basis or foot thereof there grew a certaine strange and unusuall kind of herbe which as soone as it grew up so high as to touch the hemme of the brazen garment it had vertue to cure diseases of every kind The Councell of Elliberis was an obscure provinciall Synod of 19. Bishops onely without any certaintie of the time when it was held to which we oppose one of Constantinople another at Rome under Gregorie the third and a third at Nice of 350. Bishops Moreover this Councell forbiddeth not pictures absolutely but painting on walls and soleaving them to the furie and scorne of the Gentiles and it is plaine that the Councell made the Decree out of honour to images because they thought not the walls a place convenient because the plaster breaking off in some places they might become deformed and so contemptible Valens and Theodosius whom the Knight joyneth in making a law against images were not alive together Valens being killed 23. yeares before Theodofius was borne besides Valens was a wicked Arrian heretique upon whom God did shew his judgement by a disasterous end and the law made by him cited by the Knight is fowly corrupted and the meaning wholly perverted for the law was made in honour of the Crosse towit thus wee command that it shall not bee lawfull for any to carve or paint the signe of our Saviour Christ either on the ground or in any stone or marble lying on it Nicolaus Clemanges was himselfe a Wiclefian heretique Cassander Erasmus and Wicelius are of no account in the Roman Church The Councell of Nice held under Constantine and Irene was not condemned at Frankford Nay in that very Councell an Anathema is said to all such as deface Images Polidore Virgill in saying the ancient Fathers condemned the worship of images for feare of Idolatrie speaketh not of the Fathers of the New Testament but those of the Old particularly naming Moses
image-worship which is so directly and expresly forbidden by God in the law That the Iewes are thus scandalized at the idolatrous practice of the Roman Church the Knight proveth by an eye-witnesse Sir Edwine Sands who in his description of the religion in the West parts observeth that the worship of images as it is at this day practised by the Roman Church is such a stumbling block to the Iewes and hinderance to their conversion that when they come to Christian Sermons as in Rome they are enjoyned at least once a yeare so long as they see the Preacher direct his speech to a little woodden crucifix that standeth on the Pulpit by him to call it his Lord and Saviour kneele to it embrace it and kisse it to weepe upon it as it is their fashion in Italie it is preaching sufficient for them and perswadeth them more with the very sight of it to hate Christian religion then any reason the world can alledge to love it To the seventh The argument drawne from the Cherubins is refelled professedly by Tertullian De idol c. 5. Apostolus affirmat omnia tunc figuratè populo accidisse addit benè quòd idem Deus quilege vetuit similitudinem fimilitudinem fieri extraordinario praecepto serpent is similitudinem fieri mandavit si eundem Deum observas habes logem ejus nefeceris similitudinem si praeceptum factae posteà similitudinis respicis tu imit are Mosen ne facias adversus legem simulacrum aliquod nisi tibi Deus jusserit the Apostle saith he affirmeth that all things happened to the Iewes in figures and hee addeth well the same God who in his generall law forbad any similitude to be made by an extraordinary precept commanded some similitude to bee made if thou dost serve the same God thou hast his law Make to thy selfe no graven image or similitude if thou regardest the Precept of making a similitude as of the Cherubins or brazen serpent e. imitate thou Moses make thou no image against the law unlesse God command thee by a Precept Whereunto wee may farther adde that the Cherubins were not made publikely to bee seene and gazed upon by the people but were kept in the holy place whither the Priests only resorted neither were they worshipped by the Priests as Lyra cited by the Iesuit who was himselfe a Iew at the first and well knew their practice professeth the Iewes saith he worshipped not the Arke nor the Cherubins nor the mercy seate but the true God which promised to helpe them neither were they set up in the Temple for adoration but for ornament L. 9. c. 6. q. 7. non ut adorarentur sed ob ornatum pulchritudinem Tabernaculi vel Templi ad majestatem Dei plenius ostendendam Lorin in Act Apost c. 17. de Cherubinis jussu Dei factis de alijs imaginibus â— Solomone dicendum fuisse duntaxat ut appendices additamenta ornatus alterius rei non verò per se propositas modo accommodato ad adorationem quam conslat quoque ab Haebreis ipsis non fuisse exhibitam quod utrumque docet Tertullianus eritque id magis verum si verumâ—est Cherubin ore manibus cruribus erectione corporis bumanam jubis à pectore cervice pendentibus Leoninam alis aquilinam ungulis pedum vitulinam figuram retulisse Vasq I de adorat 2. disp 4. c. 6. nunquam cherubinis honor aut adoratio adhibita fuit aut osculo aut genuflexione aut oblatione â—huris aut alio signo peculiari ad ipsos directo nec quisquam nisi ex suo cerebro absque ullo fundamento contrarium poterit affirmare as Azorius convinced by evidence of truth acknowledgeth saying the Cherubins were not painted or engraven on the Arke to the end they might bee adored but only to adorne and beautifie the Tabernacle and more fully to expresse the majestie of God with whom Lorinus and Vasquez accord concerning the Cherubins made by the command of God and other images in Solomons Temple wee must say that they were there as appendices and additions for the adorning of something else not set forth by themselves in a manner fit for adoration which it is manifest that the Iewes never exhibited to them both which Tertullian teacheth Vasquez commeth not behind Lorinus teaching a contrarie lesson to Flood here his words are That the Cherubins were never adored nor worshipped neither by kissing them nor with bowing of the knee or by offering Frankinsence or by any other meanes neither can any man affirm the contrarie except it be out of his owne braine without any foundation or ground at all To the eighth In this allegation the Iesuit sheweth from whence he and his fellowes are descended L. 3. cont haeres c. 2. cum ex scripturis arguuntur in accusationem convertuntur ipsarum scripturarum quasi non rectè haheant neque sint ex auiboritate quia variè sint dictae juia non possit ex his inveniri veritas ab his qui nesciunt traditionem non enim perliter as traditam illam sed pervivam vocem Aug. in 10. tract 49. Sanctus Evangelifia testatur multa Dominum Christum dixisse fecisse quae scripta non sunt electa sunt autem quae scriberentur quae saluti credentium sufficere videbantur Cyr. in 10.12 c. 68. non omnia quae Dominus fecit conscripta sunt sed quae scribentes sufficere put ârunt tam admores quà m ad dogmata ut rect â fide operibus virtute rutilantes ad regnum caelorum perveniamus viz. from the ancient Gnosticks and Valentinians who as Irenaeus testifieth against them When they are convinced of their heresies out of Scripture they fall on accusing the Scriptures themselves impeaching their authoritie and charging them with ambiguity and saying that the truth cannot be found out of them by those who know not tradition for that it was not delivered by letters but by word of mouth But because I have beate the Iesuit heretofore out of this dodge and have proved abundantly the sufficiencie and perfection of Scriptures I will spare farther labour herein and only shew how shamefully he depraveth one text to the derogation of the whole Scripture S. Iohn in the place alledged by him speaketh not of points of faith or manners precepts or examples for our imitation but of miracles 10.20 30. Many things truly did Iesus in the presence of his Disciples which are not written in this booke Upon which words S. Austine and S. Cyrill thus glosse full in the Protestant language the holy Evangelist testifieth that Christ did and said many things that are not written but those things were chosen to bee written which seemed sufficient for the salvation of them that beleeve and S. Cyrill all things which Christ did are not written but what the writers thought to bee sufficient as well for our conversation as doctrine
our Saviour and much tending both to the confirmation of the Gospell in generall and that particular miracle of Christ for who would not beleeve that the woman was cured of her bloudy issue by touching the hemme of Christs garment when hee saw an unusuall kind of herbe growing at the foot of that Statua which as soone as it grew up so high as to touch the hemme of the brazen garment received a miraculous vertue from it to cure diseases of every kind notwithstanding all this faire weather Eusebius falleth fowle upon the Originall of this erecting statuaes to the memorie of the dead attributing it to a heathenish rite or custome Neither doth the Knight any way wrong Eusebius in the relation or translation of this passage For certaine it is that the people of God began not first to set up images or erect statuaes The first which wee ever read of was consecrated to Belus the successour of Ninus by the Assyrians who were Paynims and the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ethnicus or gentilis signifieth Gentile or Heathen whatsoevr the Iesuit alledgeth out of Thomasius Dictionarie to the contrarie saying Looke in your Dictionarie of Thomas Thomasius whether amongst all the Englishes of Gentilis which are there set downe P. 300. you can find heathenish which I dare say you cannot The Greeke word in Eusebius text is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and the Latine gentilis signifieth the same thing to wit belonging to a countrey people stocke or family had the Iesuits and Seminarie Priests at Doway and Rhemes better studied Thomas Thomasius Dictionarie they would not have fraught their English translation of the Bible with so many affected harsh-sounding and uncoth words to English eares as announce archisynagogue azymes commessations depositum didrachme euroclydon exinanited holocaust hosts victimes paraclete pasche resuscitate neophyte superedified and the like Againe though Thomasius render not the word Heathenish yet he rendereth it gentile which is all one and let the Iesuit turne over all his Thomasius and Eliots and Riders and Coopers and Calepines and see whether hee can find any other proper Latine word answering to the English Heathen or heathenish then gentilis or ethnicus a word derived of the Greeke 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the very word used by Eusebius in this place When so often in the holy Scriptures of the old Testament the word gentes occurreth as in the 2 Psal v. 1. the 9. v. 5. and the 10. v. 16. and the 44. v. 2. and the 98. v. 1. and the 135. v. 15. and else-where what can the Iesuit meane by it but Gentile Orat. de obit Theodos regem adoravit non lignum utique quia bic gentilis error est vanit as impiorum or how can he translate it in pure and proper English but heathen or heathenish nations according to the meaning of the holy Ghost in those texts What will hee say to the words of S. Ambrose When Helena read the title upon the Crosse then newly found shee fell downe and worshipped what or whom The King saith that Father to wit Christ there entitled the King of the Iewes not verily the wood for that is a heathenish errour and a vanity of ungodly men Doth not gentilis here signifie prophane Pagan and heathenish therefore the Knights credit is salved in that his translation of Eusebius and the Iesuits credit and cause also lyeth a bleeding For though the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Greeke and gentilis in Latine sometimes in good authours signifieth no more then belonging to a countrie or nation Verisimile est quod majores nostri ad gentilis consuetudins similitudinem quà mprimùm accedentes eos qui tanquam servatores illis fuissent apud se honore ad hunc modum afficere consueverunt be it Christian or heathenish yet in this place of Eusebius it cannot be other wayes taken then for heathen for Eusebius a little before saith it is not to be wondered that those who are sprung of the Gentiles or came of heathenish parents and received benefits of our Saviour where he lived did thus unto him adding it is very likely that our ancestours herein followed the custome of the heathen who honoured all such with Statuaes who had been as saviours unto them preserving their lives To the twelfth The Councell of Eliberis is as a thorne in the Iesuits eyes and therefore he hath many plucks at it yet he plucks it not out but pricketh his owne fingerse First he saith it was an obscure Councell Vid suprà verba Agobardi without any certainty of the time when it was held As obscure as he maketh it it is a Councell of reverend antiquity cited by S. Agobardus and approved by him and honourably mentioned by all Writers who impugne idolatrous innovations corruptions in the Church As for the time Baronius and the best Chronologers affirme that it was held in the yeare of our Lord 305. in the time of Marcellus the first and was consequently more ancient then the first most famous Councell at Nice if to this Councell the Iesuit oppose one of Constantinople the other at Rome under Gregory the third and the third at Nice in favour of images we in like manner oppose to those idolatrous and hereticall many Councels of better note condemning image-worship as namely the Councell of Constantinople held in the yeare 754. and another celebrated there in the yeare 814. and a third at Frankford in the yeare 794. and a fourth at Paris under Ludovicus in the yeare 824. together with the book of Charles the great and the Epistle of the English Bishops penned by Alcuinus and mentioned by Houeden in his storie of England and many other tractates of famous writers of England France who professedly impugned and refuted the Decrees of the second Councel at Nice establishing image-worship Yea but saith the Iesuit the Canon of Eliberis shooteth not home to the point in question for it forbiddeth not pictures absolutely in Churches but only painting them on the walls I reply first that the Councell forbiddeth pictures in Churches absolutely the expresse words of the Canon are placuit in ecclesiâ pictur as esse non debere it seemed good to the Councell that pictures should not be in Churches Whereof the 19. Fathers present at that Synod render this reason ne quod collitur in parietibus depingatur lest that which is worshipped should be painted on the walls Secondly I reply if the Councell of Elliberis as the Iesuit granteth forbiddeth any image to be painted on the Church-walls why doe Papists every where in their Churches at this day paint images on the walls Yea but the Iesuit addeth who is best at a dead lift that we are besides the matter in producing the Canon of this Councell against images which was made in honour of them si crederefas est For the Councell saith the Iesuit forbad painting images on
fiery Serpent yet perinutile vitiabatur it was corrupted and made scandalous and unprofitable by the peoples abusing it to idolatrie and if that Image being a type of Christ and set up by Gods speciall command was yet broken in pieces by good King Ezekiah after the people began to worship it how much more ought those images to bee knocked downe and stamped to powder which are set up in popish Churches against GODS commandement and have beene abused to idolatrie above eight hundred yeares in such a grosse manner especially by the vulgar that as Polydore Virgill ingenuously confesseth many of the ruder sort of them magis ijs fidunt quà m Christo put more confidence in the image then Christ himselfe Concerning Indulgences Spectacles paragraph 8. a page 319. usque ad 345. THE Knight himselfe granteth the use of giving Indulgences to have been in the ancient Church and that Bishops had power to grant them Christs Merits lying in store for the need of all men may be fitly compared to a common Treasure and be called by that name So farre forth then as those Pardons were grounded on Christs merits or granted by application of them to the penitent there is no difference betweene theirs and ours Saint Paul forgave the incestuous Corinthian not onely in the person of Christ but for their sake also which importeth the prayer and deserts of Saints to have some place in the bestowing of that Indulgence and so likewise it was the practise of the Primitive Church and what was this but by applying the superabundant merits in the one to supply the want in the other That the merits of Martyrs were applied to others appeareth by Tertullian who being become now an Heretike did reprehend that custome saying that a Martyrs merits were little enough for himselfe without having any surplussage to helpe others withall Many a man continueth his great austerity of Fasting Watching Praying and other exercises of all vertues after hee hath obtained pardon for the fault it selfe by hearty contrition and by humble confession obtained also remission of the temporall punishment within the space of 1 2 3 7 10 or 12 yeares for example sake hee then leading the same life for 20 30 40 50 or 60 yeares as many have done what shall become of all that satisfaction which is over and above for that sinne or sinnes which hee committed before It doth not perish or passe without fruit though not of him yet of others and if they be not applied presently why may they not then be said to lye in deposito as money in a Treasurie Sith all grant Indulgences for the living why not for the dead so long as they pertaine to the Communion of Saints and have need thereof The authority which the Knight citeth to make Indulgences applyed to the soules in Purgatorie to be ridiculous out of the old Sarum booke of the houres of our Lady doth not mention Purgatorie but onely saith That whosoever shall say these and these prayers shall gaine so many thousand yeares of pardon which is no more for the dead than for the living It is false which the Knight averreth that wee give Pardons for thousands of yeares in Purgatory after death For wee doe not so neither doe wee understand those Pardons wherein are mentioned such number of yeares so as if men were without those Pardons to remaine so long in Purgatorie but wee understand those yeares according to the penitentiall Canons by which many yeares penance were due for one sinne and many mens sinnes being both very grievous and as a man may say without number according to the account of the ancient penitentiall Canons they may soone amount to thousands of yeares which though a man cannot live to performe here in this world nor even in Purgatory for the length of time yet hee may in Purgatorie in few yeares space nay few months or few weekes space suffer so much punishment as is answerable to all that penance of many thousand of yeares which a man should have performed here if hee could have lived so long The Authours alleaged by the Knight against Indulgences prove no more than wee grant that there is not so expresse mention in Scriptures or ancient Fathers of them as of many other points because there was not so much use of them in those dayes Though some Fathers mention them not wee prove the use of them out of others more ancient to wit out of Saint Cyprian and Tertullian as you may see in Bellarmine lib. de indul c. 3. and besides them the authority of certaine Councels as that of Nice Ancyra and Laodicea Though wee had not either the testimonie of these Fathers nor of those Councells yet would not that follow which the Knight groundeth thereon to wit that wee want antiquitie and consent of Fathers for them for it is a most strong argument of antiquitie that it is the practise of the Catholike Church time out of mind and of consent that no man is found to have spoken against them but onely knowne Heretikes In contrariuÌ„ est generalis consuetudo doctrina ecclesiae quae contineret falsitatem nisi per indulgentias dimitteretur aliquid de paenâ peccatori debitâ such as the Waldenses who were the first impugners of Indulgences Durand whom the Knight alleageth in the first place having propounded the question in 4. sent dis 20. q. 5. an aliquid valeant indulgentiae after the manner of the Schooles putteth two arguments against them in the first place and then commeth with his arguments Sed contra agreeing expresly with his conclusion On the contrarie saith he is the generall custome and doctrine of the Church which should containe falshood 13. De here sibus l. 8. tit indulg verum â—tsi pro indulgentiarum approbatione sacrae scripturae testimonium apertum de sit non tamen ideo contemnend e erunt quoniam ecclesiae catho licae usus a multis annoruÌ„ centuriis tantae est autboritatis ut qui illam contemnat haereticus merito cen seatur if something of the punishment due to a Sinner should not be forgiven by Indulgences and presently after hee nameth Saint Gregory and saith of him that hee did institute Indulgences at the stations in Rome Alfonsus a Castro though hee confesse the use of Indulgences not to have beene so much in those ancient times as since yet hee alloweth them so farre as to condemne any man for an Haeretike that shall deny them 14. The Knight prateth very freely of the Popes selling of Indulgences and bringing money to his owne coffers by them but to that I need to make no other answer but that it is such riff-raff-stuffe as their Ministers are wont to eeke out their bookes Sermons without being able to shew any Bull of Pope or testimony of good authour of any Indulgence so granted For the Knights prophane jeast out of Guicciardine of playing a game at Tables for an indulgence suppose that
were true might not a man thinke you tell as good a tale of some Protestants who in their pots have made so bold with Almighty God himselfe as to drinke a health to him and were not this a fine argument to prove that there is no God It is intollerable presiemption in the Knight to take upon him to censure so great a Councell as that of Trent Wherein the whole flower of the Catholique Church for learning and sanctity was gathered together the splendour of which Councell was so great that your night owle Heretiques durst not once appeare though they were invited to goe and come freely with all the security they could wish Whoreas the Knight saith that it is a senselesse and weake faith that giveth assent to doctrine as necessary to be believed which wanteth authority out of Scriptures and consent of Fathers I answer he knoweth not what he saith for all the Fathers agree that there are many things which men are bound to believe upon unwritten traditions whose authority you may see in great number in Bellarmine De verbo Dei l. 4. c 7. The consent of Doctours of the Catholique Church cannot more erre in one time then another the authority of the Church and assistance of the Holy Ghost being alwayes the same no lesse in one time then another Tertull. de prescript cap. 28. quod apud multos unum invenitur non est erratū sed traditum and Tertullians rule having still place as well in one age as another that which is the same amongst many is not errour but a tradition St. Paul thought he answered sufficiently for the defence of himselfe and offence of his contentious enemy when he said 1 Cor. 11. If any man seeme to be contentious we have no such custome nor the Churches of God It is false which the Knight againe repeateth that an article of faith cannot be warantable without authority of Scriptures for faith is more ancient then Scripture to say nothing of the times before Christ faith was taught by Christ himselfe without writing as also by the Apostles after him for many yeares without any word written As no lesse credite is to be given to the Apostolicall preaching then writing so no lesse credit is still to be given to their words delivered us by tradition then by their writings the credite and sense of the writings depending upon the same tradition St. Austine defendeth many points of faith De baptisme l. 2 c. 7. l. 5 c. 25. cont Maximin l. 3. c. 3. et Epist 174. de Genesi ad litteram l. 10. c. 23. l. de cura pro mortuis et Epist 118. de unit eccles c. 22. et tract 98. in Iohan. either onely or chiefely by tradition and the practise of the Catholique Church as single Baptisme against the Donatists consubstantiality of the Sonne the divinity of the Holy Ghost and even unbegottennesse of the Father against the Arrians and the Baptisme of children against the Pelagians to say nothing of prayer for the dead observation of the feasts of Easter Ascention Whitsontide and the like Nay this truth was so grounded with him that he accounted it most insolent madnesse to dispute against the common opinion and practise of the Catholique Church In his booke of the unity of the Church he saith that Christ beareth witnesse of his Church and in his Tractates upon John having occasion to handle those words of St. Paul If we or an Angell from Heaven c. wherewith the Knight almost concludeth every Section he thus commenteth upon them the Apostles did not say if any man preach more then yee have received but besides that which you have received for if he should say that he should prejudicate that is goe against himselfe who coveted to come to the Thessalonians that he might supply that which was wanting to their faith but he that supplieth addeth that which was lacking taketh not away that which was before these are the Saints very words in that place by which it is plaine that he taketh the word praeter besides not in that sense as to signifie more then is written as you would understand it but to signifie the same that contra St. Paul himselfe useth the same word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 para besides Rom. 16.17 for contra and you in your owne Bibles translate it so I beseech you brethren marke them which cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which you have learned and avoid them The Hammer AS Erucius the accuser of Roscius Amerinus having little to say against him Cic. pro Rosc Amer. to fill up the time rehearsed a great part of an invective which he had penned in former time against another defendant so the Iesuit here failing in his proofes for indulgences for which little or nothing can be said to fill up the Section transcribeth a discourse of his which he had formerly penned concerning the necessity of unwritten traditions which hath no affinity at all with the title of this Chapter de Indulgentiis In other paragraphs we finde him distracted and raving but in this he turneth Vagrant and therefore I am to follow him with a whip as the law in this case provideth Touching the point it selfe of Indulgences which Rivet fitly termeth Emulgences but the Iesuit the Churches Treasury whosoever relieth upon the superabundant merits and satisfaction of Saints for his absolution for his temporall punishment of sinne after this life shall finde according to the Greeke proverbe 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 instead of treasure Eras Adag Thesauri Carbones glowing coales heaped upon his head in hell For neither are there any merits or superabundant satisfactions of Saints Luk. 17.10 Christ saying when you have done all you are unprofitable servants nor were there any could they be applied or imputed to any other men 2 Cor. 5.10 the Apostle teaching that every man shall receive according to that which himselfe hath done in his body whether it be good or evill 2 Cor. 11.15 nor hath the Pope any more power to dispose of this treasury for the remission of sinnes our Saviour Matth. 18. v. 18. and Iohn 20.23 conferring the same power of remitting sinnes upon all the Apostles which he promised to S. Peter Matth. 16. Neither if the Pope had any speciall power of granting Indulgences could it extend to the soules in Purgatory quia non sunt de foro Papae because they are not subject to the Popes court Serm 2. de defunct 9 9. as Gerson rightly concludeth Neither lastly can it be proved that there is any Purgatory fire for soules after this life St. Iohn expresly affirming that the blood of Christ purgeth us from all our sinnes 1 Iohn 1.7 the fire therefore of Purgatory is rightly termed chymerica and chymica chymericall and chymicall chymericall because a meere fiction and chymicall because by meanes of this fire they extract much gold The Apostle saith there is
the bad Popes To the thirteenth The Knight after Alfonsus quoted Antoninus Cajetan and Bellarmine to prove the noveltie of Indulgences and that there is no ground for them in Scriptures or the writings of the ancient Fathers to whom the Iesuit answereth not a word and here the second time hee is Gravelled in this Section To Alfonsus hee seemeth to say something but upon due examination as good as nothing first hee falsifieth his words saying page 334. that Alfonsus confesseth the use of Indulgences to be most ancient and of many hundred yeares standing whereas his words are not that the use of Indulgences was most ancient but that it was said by some to be most ancient among the Romanes Apud Romanos vetustissimus praedicatur illarum usus this praedicatur is of no more credit than Plinie his fertur or Solinus his aiunt For notwithstanding this report Alfonsus resolves in that very place It seemes that the use of Indulgences came but lately into the Church Secondly the Iesuit forceth a wrong Inference from Alfonsus his words For albeit hee affirmeth that Indulgences are not to be contemned because they have beene in use in the Church for some hundreds of yeares yet hee condemneth not a man for an Haeretique that shall deny them but any one that shall contemne the Church or despise her autority his words are Quoniam ecclesiâ Catholicâ tantae est authoritatis ut qui illam contemnat Haereticus meritò censeatur we say the same also Matth. 18.17 and the Scripture beareth us out in it tell the Church and if he refuse to heare the Church let him be unto thee as a Heathen or a Publican but what if Alphonsus out of feare blowes hot and cold with one breath what 's that to us He lived and died a professed Papist and therefore what he writeth against Protestants is little to be set by but what he writeth against the Church of Rome whom he had a minde to defend in all things and whose feed advocate he was must be thougt to be drawne from him by evidence of truth howsoever let it be noted that Alphonsus calleth not him an Haereticke who denieth Indulgences as the Knight doth Vid. Rain Thes Romana ecclefia nec est Catholica nec sanum membrum Catholicae ecclesie but who contemneth the Catholike Church which neither the Knight nor any Protestant doth we deny not much lesse doe we contemne the authority of the Catholike Church But we deny that the Roman Church is the Catholike or a sound member thereof To the fourteenth Our Ministers doe not like Flood and other Iesuits bring muddy stuffe in their sermons out of Petrus de Voragine and the like fabulous Authors but what they produce in this kinde against the Pope for his base sale of Indulgences and making merchandize of his ghostly power they proove out of good Authors grave Historians Canonists and Schoolemen such as are the author of the lives of Popes and the booke called Taxa camerae Apostolicae Centum granamina together with Wescelius Croningensis Guicciardine Henricus de Gandavo Altisiodorensis If Altisiodorensis words are not plaine enough Summ l. 4. d. relap Dicunt quidam quod relaxatio non valeat quantum ecclesia permittit sed facit ut excitentur fideles ad dandum et decipit eos ecclesia some say that the Popes Indulgence prevailes not so much as the Church promiseth but that thereby men are stirred up to give more freely and that therein the Church deceaveth them what say they to that note in Taxa camerae Apostolicae Nota diligenter quod hujusmodi gratiae non consceduÌ„tur pauperibus quia non sunt nec possunt consolari Matth. par in Hen. 3. Romanorum loculos impregnare note diligently that such favours to wit Indulgences are not graunted to poorâ— folke because they have not wherewithall they cannot be comforted or that pregnant phrase of Matthew Paris that Christs blood alone though it be all sufficient to save soules yet the same without saintly satisfaction applied by the Pope is not sufficient to impregnate his holinesse Coffers If the Iesuit smell not in thâ—se sentences the fat steame of the Popes Kitchin he hath no nose To the fifteenth It is well the Iesuit termeth the drinking of a health to Almighty God a tale and by his quoting no authouâ— or it sheweth that it was a signal lye of his owne inventing when he was betweene hawke and buzzard Never any but himselfe who can blush at nothing affirmed any such thing of any Protestant that ever came to that height of impiety and prophannes as to drinke a health to his Maker Historia Ital. l. 13. Leo nullo temporum et locorum habito delectu per universam orbem amplissima privilegia quibus non modo vinis delictorum veniam consequendi sed defunctorum animus ejus ignis in quo delicta expiari dicuntur paenis eximendi facultatem pollicebatur promulgavit quae quia pecuniae tantum a mortalibus extorquendae gratia concedi notum erat a questoribus huiâ— negotio praefectis impudenter administrabantur magnam plerisque locis indignationem offensionemque concitarant presertim in Germania ubi a multis ex ejus ministris hujusmodi mortuos penis liberandi facultas parvo pretio vendi vel in canponum tabernis aleae subiici cernebantur but Luitprandus and Polonus telleth us of one Iohn the twelfth a Pope of Rome and consequently no Protestant who made so bold with Almighty God as to give Orders in a Stable and so familiar with the Divell as to drinke a health to him As for the Knights prophane jeast as he calleth it it is no jeast but a serious testimony out of a grave historian convincing the Popes agents of Atheisme and prophannes and the Popes themselves of sordid covetousnesse his words are Leo published large privileges through the whole world without any distinction of times and places by which he promised not onely pardon to the living but also power to deliver soules of the dead out of Purgatory paines which because it was knowne that they were granted onely to fill the Popes coffers and because his farmers carried themselves lewdly in the sale of them great offence was taken at them especeally in Germanie where such Indulgences were set at a low price and seene to be staked in Tavernes and Ale-houses at games of Tables To the sixteenth The Trent Synod was not a Councell but a Conventicle wholly swayed by the Italian faction wherein not the flower of the Catholique Church for learning but the bran of the Romish boulted by the Pope was gathered together Let Andreas Dudithius the Bishop of Quinque eccles Ep. ad Maximil who was present at this Councell speake his minde of it the matter came to that passe through the wickednesse of those hungry Bishops that hung upon the Popes sleeve and were created on the suddaine by the Pope for
the purpose that that Councell seemed to be an assembly not of Bishops but of Hobgoblins not of men but of Images moved like the statues of Daedalus by the sinewes of others What the Iesuit addeth of night owles not daring to appeare in the splendour of that Councell hath no colour of truth For it is no newes for owles to appeare at popish Councells At a Councell held at Rome by Pope Heldebrand Fascic rerum expetend sugiend Ortwhinus Gratius writeth there appeared an huge great Owle which could not be frayed away but scared all the Bishops As for Protestants whom this Blacke-bird of Antichrist termeth night Owles if they had flocked to that Councell they had shewed themselves not Owles by appearing in that twi-light at Trent but very Wood-cocks to trust any security offerd them by those who after publike faith given to Iohn Huz and Ierome of Prage notwithstanding the safe conduct of Sigismond the Emperour for their going to and comming from the Councell at Constance most cruelly burned them at a stake to ashes To the seventeenth Divine faith must be grounded upon divine authority and that cannot be the Catholike faith which wanteth consent of Fathers As for those Fathers whose authority Bellarmine draweth ob torto collo to testifie for unwritten traditions de verbo Dei lib. 4. cap. 7. the Iesuit may see them fully answered in Iunius Whitaker Daniel Chamierus and Dr. Davenant Bishop of Sarum and a farre greater number of Fathers alleaged to the contrary by Robert Abbot in his answer to William Bishop cap. 7. Phillip Morney in his preface to his booke de sacrâ Eucharistiâ and Iacobus Laurentius in his singular tractate de Disputationibus and others To the eighteenth The assistance of the Holy ghost was more speciall in the times of the Apostles then in latter ages they could not erre in their writings others might yet we charge not the Catholike Church of Christ in any age with any fundamentall errour though we may the Roman Tertullian his rule may have still place and as well in one age as another if it be rightly taken and not misconstrued and misapplied for if it be taken generally that whatsoever is the same amongst many is no errour but tradition it is it selfe a great errour For the same opinion concerning the inequality of the Father and the Sonne is found amongst many to wit the Arrian Churches the same doctrine concerning the procession of the Sonne from the Father onely is found amongst many namely all the Greeke Churches at this day the same practise of administring the Eucharist to children was found amongst many namely all the Churches of Affrica in St. Austines time yea and in all Churches subject to the Bishop of Rome for many ages as Maldonat the Iesuit confesseth yet the above named Positions and this latter practise are confessed on all sides to be erroneous But Tertullian by many understandeth not the practise of some particular Churches Tertul. de prescrip Age nunc omnes ecclesiae erraverint verisimile est ut tot et tante in unam fidem erraverint much lesse of factious persons of one Sect but the generall and uniforme doctrine and practise of the whole Church as his words in the same Chapter quoted by the Iesuit declare Goe too now admit that all Churches have erred is it likely so many so great Churches should erringly conspire in one faith To the nineteenth We derogate nothing from any generall custome of the Catholike Church let the Iesuit produce out of good Authors any such custome for Indulgences to redeeme soules out of Purgatory flames by Papall Indulgences and this controversie will soone be at an end howsoever let me tell the Iesuit the way that this text of St. Paul is impertinently alleaged to prove this or any other article of the Trent faith For St. Paul in this place speaketh not of any Article of faith nor matter of manners necessary to salvation but of habits gestures fashions and indifferent rites in matter of which nature there is no question at all but that the custome of the Churches of God ought to sway as is abundantly proved by Dr. Andrewes late Bishop of Winchester in his printed Sermon upon that text To the twentieth Disputabamus de alliis respondet Iesuita de cepis we dispute of Indulgences the Iesuit answereth of Traditions in matter of Faith These are very distinct questions and so handled by all that deale Work-man-like in points of difference betweene the Reformed and the Romane Churches but the Jesuits common place of Indulgences was drawne drie and therefore hee setteth his cocke of Traditions on running which yeeldeth nothing but muddy water What though Faith be ancienter than Scriptures the Argument is inconsequent Ergo Scripture is not now the perfect rule of Faith Faith neither is nor can be more ancient than the Word of God upon which it is built this Word of God is now written and since the consigning and confirming the whole Canon of the written Word by Saint Iohn in the Apocalypse is become the perfect and as the Schooles speaketh the adequate rule of Faith It is true Christ and his Apostles first taught the Church by word of mouth Lib. 3. advers heres cap. 1. Non enim per alios dispositionem salutis nostrae cognovimus quam per eos per quos Evangelium pervenit ad nos quod quidem tunc praeconiaverunt postea per dei voluntatem in scripturis nobis tradiderunt fundamentum columnam fidei nostrae futuram but afterwards that which they preached was by the commandment of God committed to writing to be the foundation and pillar of Faith as Irenaus testifieth in expresse words To the twentie one If the Iesuit could prove as undoubtedly any words of the Apostles that are not set downe in Scriptures to be their owne words as wee can prove the writings we have to be theirs wee would yeeld no lesse credit to them then to these but that neither can hee nor so much as undertaketh to doe And whereas he further faith that the credit of the Scripture depends upon Tradition unlesse hee qualifie the speech some way it is not onely erroneous but also blasphemous for it is all one as if hee should say that man gives credit and authority to God as Tertullian jeareth the Heathen In Apolloget not receiving Christ for God because the Romane Senate would not give their consent and approbation to make him one Iam homo deo propitius esse debet or that the credit and authority of Gods Word dependeth upon mans receiving it Whereas in truth Gods Word is not therefore of divine and infallible authoritie because the Church delivereth it to be so but on the contrary the Church delivereth it to be so because in it selfe it is so and the Church should erre damnably if shee should otherwise conceive of these inspired Writings then as of the undoubted Oracles of God
to which we owe absolute consent and beliefe Vid. August supr cit without any question or contradiction To the two and twentieth Saint Austine defends no point of Faith against Heretikes either onely or chiefly by the Tradition and practise of the Catholike Church but either onely or chiefly by the Scriptures For example in his booke of Baptisme against the Donatists after hee had debated the point by Scriptures hee mentioneth the custome of the Church and relateth Stephanus his proceeding against such as went about to overthrow the ancient custome of the Catholike Church in that point But hee no where grounds his Doctrine upon that custome though hee doth well approve of it as wee doe Againe in his booke against Maximinus and his 174 Epist to Pascentius hee confirmeth the faith of the Trinity by the written Word against those Heretikes his words Ep. 175 Haec siplacet audire quemadmodum è Scripturis sacris asserantur to the same Pascentius are Here thou maist heare if thou wilt how these points of our Faith are maintained by Scripture So farre is hee from founding those or any other points of faith only or chiefly upon unwritten Traditions What the Iesuit alleageth out of his tenth booke De Genes ad literam cap. 23. Consuetudo matris Ecclesiae in baptizandis parvulis nequaquam spernendus est neque ullo modo superflua deputanda no whit advantageth his cause for there Saint Austine saith no more but The custome of the Church in baptizing Infants is no way to be despised or to be accounted superfluous Wee all say the same and condemne the Pelagians of old and Anabaptists of late who deny Baptisme to be administred to children or any way derogate from the necessitie of that Sacrament The Iesuit saith hee will say nothing of Prayer for the dead yet hee quoteth Saint Austine de curâ pro mortuis as if in that booke hee taught Prayer for the dead and grounded it upon unwritten Tradition Whereas in that booke hee neither maintaineth Prayer for the dead nor maketh mention of any unwritten Tradition for it but on the contrarie solidly out of Scriptures proveth Esaias Propheta dicit Abraham nos nescivit et Israel non cognovit nos si tanti patriarchae quid erga populum ex his procreatur ageretur ignoraverunt quomodo mortui vivorum rebus atque actibus cog noscendis adjuvandisque miscentur et paulo post ibi ergo sunt spiritus defunctorum ubi non vident quecunque aguntur aut eveniunt in istâ vitâ hominibus Ep. 118. Si quid hocum sic faciendum divinae Scripturae praescribat authoritas non est dubitandum quin ita facere debeamus similiter si quid per orbem tota frequentat Ecclesia that the Saints departed have no knowledge of our affaires upon earth the Prophet Esay saith Abraham knoweth us not and Israel is ignorant of us If so great Patriarchs knew not what befell their posteritie after their death how can it be defended that the dead intermeddle with the actions or affaires of the living to helpe them onward or so much as to take notice of them A little after he concludes flat upon the Negative The Spirits therefore of the dead there remaine where they knowe not what befalleth to men in this life To what end therefore should wee call upon them in our troubles and distresse here Neither hath this Father any thing in his 118 Epistle for the Iesuit or against us for there hee speaketh of Ecclesiasticall Rites and Customes as appeares in the very title of that Epistle not of Doctrines of Faith and yet even in these hee giveth a preheminence to the Scriptures If saith hee the authoritie of divine Scripture prescribe any Rite or Custome to be kept there is no question to be made of such a Rite or Custome and in like manner if the whole Church throughout the world constantly useth such a Rite or Custome The Iesuites next allegation out of this Fathers booke De unitate Eccles cap. 22. falleth short of his marke hee saith there that Christ beareth witnesse to his Church that it should be Catholike that is spread over the face of the Earth and not to be confined to any certaine place as the Province of Affrica Wee say the same and adde that the bounds of it are no more the territories of the Bishop of Rome than the Provinces of Affrica Wee grant that Whosoever refuseth to follow the practise of the Church to wit the Catholike or universall Church resisteth or goeth against our Saviour who promised by his spirit to leade her into all truth and to be with her to the end of the World Which promise may yet stand good and firme though any particular Church erre in Faith or manners as did the Churches of Asia planted by the Apostles themselves and the Church of Rome doth at this day Cont. lit Petil. l. 3. c. 6. Now because that testimonie of Saint Austine wherewith the Knight concludes almost every Section If wee or an Angell from heaven preach unto you any thing whether it be of Christ or of his Church or any thing which concerneth Faith or manners besides that which you have received in the Legall and Evangelicall Scriptures let him be accursed is as a beame in all Papists eyes therefore they use all possible meanes to take it out but all in vaine for the words of the Apostle on which Saint Paul commenteth are not as the Iesuit would have them If any man preach unto you Contra against but if any preach unto you Praeter besides Ep. ad Galat. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Neque enim inquit si contraria solum predicaverint intulit anathema esto sed si evangelizaverint preter id quod ipsi evangelisavimus hoc est si plusculum quidpiam adjecerent as Saint Chrysostome and Theophylact accutely observe The Apostle saith not if Chrysostome rightly understand him if they should preach any thing contrary but if they shall in their preaching adde any thing be it never so little besides that which wee have preached unto you let him be accursed And Theophylact is altogether as plaine as Chrysostome in his Glosse upon the words The Apostle inferreth not if any man preach contrarie to that yee have received but if any preach besides that which wee have preached unto you that is if they shall presume to adde any thing though never so little let them be accursed Neither doth Saint Austine in his tractate upon Saint Iohn upon which Bellarmine and after him Flood so much beare themselves any whit contradict the former interpretations of Saint Chrysostome and Theophylact. For his words in that place carry this sense The Apostle saith not if any man preach more unto you than you have already received that is perfectly conceived and apprehended for then hee should goe against himselfe who saith that hee desired to come to the Thessalonians to supply
that which was lacking to their Faith to supply I say that which was lacking to their Faith not to the Gospell which Saint Paul preached hee saith not let him be accursed who further informeth you in the Doctrine of the Scriptures or delivereth you more out of them than yee have yet received within that Rule but hee that delivereth you any thing besides that Rule And that this is his meaning appeareth by the words immediately following which the Iesuit cunningly suppresseth to wit these Qui praetergreditur regulam fidei non accedit in viâ sed recedit de viâ Hee that goeth besides the Rule of Faith doth not goe on in the way but departeth out of the way Yea but the word in the Greeke translation 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 here used is the same with that Rom. 16.17 which wee in our Bibles translate against not Praeter besides Yea but the Jesuits in their owne Latine vulgar translation to which they are all sworne as wee are not to ours render this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Praeter besides and not Contra against and that this translation is most agreeable to the Apostles meaning appeareth by comparing this text Rom. 16.17 with a parralell'd text 2 Thes 3.6 Withdraw your selves from every brother that walketh disorderly and not after the Tradition which you have received of us There is no necessity therefore of expounding 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in that text to the Romans by Contra against wee may as well or better expound it by Praeter that is besides yet if in one place 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 might signifie Contra it doth not follow that it must be so taken Galathians 1.8 for it is well knowne that the naturall and most usuall signification of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Greeke is Praeter besides not Contra against and words are to be taken in their most proper and usuall signification unlesse some necessarie reason drawne from the circumstances of the text or analogie of faith inforceth us to leave it which here it doth not As for Saint Austines judgement in the point it selfe to wit that Scripture is the perfect rule of Faith hee plainely delivereth it both in his 49 tractate upon Iohn and in the ninth chapter of the second booke De doctrinâ christianâ and in the last chapter of his second booke De peccatorum meritis remissione and in his booke De bono viduitatis cap. 11. What words can be more expresse and direct for the sufficiencie of Scripture than those in his 49 tractate upon Iohn The Lord Iesus did Quae saluti credentium sufficere videbuntur In iis quae aperte posita sunt in Scriptura inveniuntur illa omnia quae continent fidem moresque vivendi G. ult Credo etiam hâ—ic divinoruÌ„ eloquioruÌ„ clarissima authoritas esset si homo illud sine dispendio salutis ignorare non posset Sancta Scriptura nostrae doctrinae regulam sixit ne auderemus sapere ultra quam oportet and spake many things which are not written as the Evangelist testifieth but those things were chosen to be written which seemed to suffice for the salvation of Beleevers unlesse those in his second booke De doctrina christiana Among those things which are openly or plainly set downe in Scriptures all things are found which concerne or containe Faith or manners or those in his second booke of the remission of sinnes I beleeve that the authoritie of divine Scriptures would have beene most cleere and evident in this point if a man could not have beene ignorant of it without perill of his salvation or lastly those in his booke in the commendation of Widowhood What should I teach thee more than that which thou readest in the Apostle for the holy Scripture setleth the rule of our Doctrine lest wee should presume to be wise above that wee ought Concerning the infallible certainty of the Protestant faith and the uncertainty of the Romish Spectacles Chapter the 10. a page 346. usque ad 380. THE Knights failing in his proofes of our novelty is a sufficient proofe of our antiquity and his owne novelty The Jesuits may not be ashamed of the oath they take to defend the Papacy nay they may glory in it as an heroicall act whereby they binde themselves to the defence of that authority whereon the weight and frame of the whole Catholike Church and salvation of all soules from Christ his owne time to the very end of the world hath doth and still shall depend Catholike Doctors whom the Knight chargeth with division among themselves may indeede differ in opinion so long as a thing is undefined for so long it is not faith but when it is once defined then they must be silent and concurre all in one because then it is matter of faith The Knight can have no certainty of his Christianity because that dependeth upon his Baptisme or the faith of his parents which he cannot know He can have no certainty of his Marriage or the legitimation of his children because the validity of the contract dependeth upon the intention of the parties which marry and no man can have any certaine knowledge of anothers intention and so the Knight is in no better case then his adversaries in this respect It is cleane a different thing to dispute of the certainty of the Catholique faith which we maintaine and of every mans private and particular beliefe of his owne justification or salvation which we deny to be so certaine the one being grounded upon the authority of Gods divine truth and revelation the other upon humane knowledge or rather conjecture Howscever though we be not certaine by certainty of divine faith that this or that man in particular is truely baptized or ordained a Priest yet we are certaine by the certainty of divine faith that not onely there be such Sacraments but that they are also truly administred in the Catholike Church It might be good and profitable as Bellarmine noteth to invoke the Saints though they themselves should not heare us as the Knight would prove out of Peter Lumbard and Gabriel Biel who though they doubt of the manner yet they doubt not of the thing it selfe Gabriel saith the Saints are invocated not as givers of the good things for which we pray but as intercessours to God the giver of all good And Peter Lumbard saith that our prayers become knowne to the Angells in the word of God which they behold so also doe Saints that stand before God Though it be true which Caietan saith that it cannot be knowne infallibly that the miracles whereon the Church groundeth the Canonization of Saints be true yet it followeth not that we are uncertaine whether the Canonized Saints be in Heaven or no because the certainty of Canonization dependeth upon more certaine ground to wit the authority of the See Apostolique and continuall assistance and direction of the Holy-ghost the spirit of truth to whom it belongeth not to suffer Christs
Spiridion that famous Bishop of Cyprus Eccles Hist l. 1. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 they lived in wedlocke and had many children without any disparagement at all to their Sacred function As the Rod of Aaron in these brought forth fruit in Holy Matrimony so it budded also in others in our Church who followed virginall chastity and lead a single life as Iewell Reinolds Andrewes Lakes and many other reverend Prelates and Doctors who for eminent learning and examplary life may compare with any of the Romish Mitred Prelates or late Canonized Saints Neither can they pretend that any Eve gave these an Apple whereby their eyes were opened but on the contrary we can produce many a Lucretia who have given Apples to their Popes Lucretia nomine sed re Thais Alexandri filia sponsa nurus whereby their eyes have beene blinded and their reputation for ever blasted See Picus Mirandula his oration extant in Fasciculus rerum expetendum fugiendum and Mantuan his Poem Sanctus ager scurris venerabilis ara cinaedis Servit honorandae Divûm Ganymedibus aedes As for Olivereus Manareus his Legend of Buxhorne if the Reader will be pleased to peruse an apologie for this Buxhorne written to the Chancellor of Lovan wherein the true cause is related for which this licentiate Divine abandoned the Papacy he shall finde in that treatise printed in the yeare of our Lord 1625 a Rowland for his Oliver or Oliverius Manareus the Iesuit to whose relation as much credit is to be given as to Cocleus his History of Luther and Bolsecs of Calvin The Devill the grand Calumniator hath suborned in all ages men of prostituted consciences and corrupt mindes and mouthes to staine with their impure breath the golden and the silver vessells of the Sanctuarie but Illi linguarum nos aurium dominsumus their tongues are their owne they may speake what malice dictateth our eares are our owne and we will hearken unto and assent onely to what truth confirmeth As for their Lutheran baits he mentioneth aurum gloria dilitiae veneres gold glory delights and Venus if these things abound any where it is in the Roman Church where the Pope who pretends himselfe to be the successor of Peter the fisher fisheth with a golden hooke and baits it with fleshly lusts what so pompeous and glorious as his Holinesse triple Crowne and his Cardinals Hats and his Bishops Miters and Croziours for what sence hath not the Romish Religion baits for the eyes they have gawdie shewes for the eares most melodious musicke for the smell sweetest incense and perfumes for the taste feasts without number for the touch whole streets of Curtezans not onely in Rome it selfe but in all the Popes Townes which are commonly knowne by this fowle Cognizance Concerning our adversaries their blasphemous exceptions against the Scripture Spectacles Chap. 14. à page 447. usque ad 463. THough Catholikes hold for most certaine that the Scripture is not the sole rule of faith nor that out of it alone all controversies can be decided as for example in particular which bookes be Canonicall Scripture which not yet for most things now a dayes in controversie many Catholikes have offered to trie the matter onely by Scripture Though Catholikes ground many points upon tradition and practice of the Church yet they ground others upon plaine and expresse authority of Scripture from which Protestants are faine to flie running to this or that corner of I know not what figurative or tropicall interpretation Though the Pope question not much lesse condemne Scriptures of obscurity and insufficiency yet his Apostles and Evangelists have left some things in writing of which some are hard even by the judgment of Scripture it selfe for so saith Saint Peter of the Epistle of Saint Paul which saith he the unlearned and unconstant doe abuse as they doe other Scriptures to their owne perdition If any condemne the Scripture of insufficiency it is St. John in saying that all things are not written and St. Paul in willing the Thessalonians to hold the traditions which they had learned whether by speech or letter Whereas the Knight chargeth us with ranking the Bible in the first place of prohibited bookes wee say it is false for it is not in the Catalogue of such bookes onely in the rules which concernes the Index there is mentioned how the free use of vulgar translations is not to be permitted but for the Latine vulgar translation there is no manner of restraint though if there had beene we might very well have warranted it by the authority of St. Jerome who did no way admit such free use even of the Latine Bibles It is no such crime to forbid the reading of Scripture to some sort of people as may appeare by the testimony of this holy Father who in the same place saith moreover that the beginning of Genesis and the beginning and end of Ezekiel were not to be read by the Iewes till they came to thirties yeare of age A kinde of forbidding of reading the Scripture is no derogation but a great commendation of it for they are forbidden to be read out of reverence and honour due unto them and in regard of the danger which may come by them not of themselves but in regard of the weakenesse of the Reader for want of necessary learning and humility For Cornelius Agrippa it maketh no more matter what he saith then what the Knight saith for it is but aske my brother if I be a theefe Not to answer the places objected by the Knight out of Lindan Lessius Turrian and Pighius I say in generall that those things are spoken not of the Scripture as it is in it selfe that is consisting of both words and meaning but of bare words and letters only which Haeretikes still do and ever have abused as the Devill himselfe did to our Saviour and in this sense it is a wood of theeves Our Authors say no more then St. Jerome doth in effect Marcion Basilides and other plagues of Haeretikes have not the Gospell of God Comment in 1. ad Gal. because they have not the Holy Ghost without whom it becommeth the Gospell of man which is taught nor let us thinke that the Gospell consisteth in the words of Scripture but in the sense not in the superficies or barke but in the pith not in the leaves of speech but in the roote of reason so that if the Knight will say any more of this matter he must undertake the quarrell against St. Ierome Lessius in particular whom the Knight most up braideth to us is farre from saying that the Scripture is uncertaine in it selfe that is that the doctrine thereof is doubtfull but onely that our rule will be uncertaine or rather wee uncertaine of the rule because wee cannot know the Scripture by it selfe It is not all one to say that Scripture alone is no sufficient Rule and to say it is imperfect For although the Knight imagineth that the
All-sufficiencie or containing of all things expressely is a necessarie point of perfection hee is deceived for then would it follow that the Gospell of Saint Matthew Saint Marke and other particular Bookes should be imperfect and especially that of Saint John wherein hee saith expressely that all things are not written Were the Scripture perfect in the Knights sense yet would it not then be a sufficient rule of Faith of it selfe alone for it would still be a booke or writing the very nature whereof doth not suffer it to be the sole rule of Faith or judge of Controversies for a Iudge must be able to speake to heare and to answer whereas the nature of a Booke is as it were to leave it selfe to be read and expounded by men No Catholike declineth the triall of Scripture in regard of imperfection but onely in regard that it being a written Word no Heretike can be convinced by it as I shewed you even now out of Tertullian who saith It is lost labour to dispute with an Heretike out of Scripture Let any man by the effects judge who reverence the Scripture most Catholikes or Protestants let him compare the labours of the one in translating and expounding Scriptures with the labour of the other and hee shall find the truth of this matter In admitting any triall with Protestants by Scriptures De praescript c. 15. Non esse admittendos haereticos ad ineundam de scripturis provocationem quos sine scripturis probamus ad scripturas non pertinere Vos qui estis quando unde venistis quid in meo agitis non mei Quo denique Marcion jure sylvaâ—â— meas caedis wee condescend more to their infirmitie than wee need or they can of right challenge For wee acknowledge that saying of Tertullian most true that Heretikes are not to be admitted to the Scriptures to whom the Scripture in no wise belongeth who are you when and whence are you come What do you in my ground you that are not mine By what right ô Marcion dost thou fell my wood By what leave ô Valentine dost thou turne my fountaines By what authoritie ô Apelles dost thou remove my bounds c. This is Tertullians discourse and words where it is but changing the names of Marcion Valentine and Apelles into Luther Calvin and Beza and it will fit as well as if it were made for them You must first shew your selves owners of the Land before you can claime the writings and evidences belonging to it and which make good the Title The Hammer VVHereas many other things argue that our Adversaries maintaine a desperate cause so especially their excepting against the holy Scriptures of God and refusing to be tried by them in the points of difference betweene us and them For what was the reason why the Manichees called in question the authoritie of the Gospell of Saint Matthew Aug. l. 28. cont Faust cap. 2. and the Acts of the Apostles Desperation because by those writings they were convinced of blasphemous Errour What was the reason why the Ebionites rejected all Saint Pauls Epistles Desperation Irenaeus l. 8. cap. 26. because by them their heresie was most apparantly confuted Iren. l. 3. c. 2. Cum ex scriptur is arguuntur in accusationem convertuntur ipsarum scripturarum quasi non recte habeant nec sint ex authoritate nec possit ex iis inveniri veritas ab his qui ignorunt traditionem Tertul. praesc advers haeret What was the reason why the Gnosticks and Valentinians disparage the Scriptures saying that They were not of authoritie and the truth could not be found out of them by those who were ignorant of Tradition Desperation What was the cause why Papias and the Millenaries preferred word of mouth before Scriptures and pretended 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 unwritten tradition for many of their fables Desperation What was the reason why the Heretikes in Tertullians daies refused to examine their Doctrines by the touchstone of the Scriptures saying More things were required than the Apostles had left in writing for that either the Apostles knew not all or delivered not all to all In like manner wee can impute it to nothing else but diffidence and distrust of their cause that Lyndan Turrian Lessius and Pighius speake so disgracefully of holy Scriptures as they doe terming them dead Characters a dead and killing Letter a shell without a kirnell a leaden rule a boot for any foot a nose of wax Sybils Prophesies Sphinx his riddles a wood of Thieves a shop of Heretikes imperfect doubtfull obscure full of perplexities If they should bestow the like scandalous Epithets upon the Kings Letters patents or the Popes Buls or Briefes they would bee soone put into the Inquisition or brought into some Court of Judicature and there have either their tongues or their eares cut or their fore-heads branded yet the Iesuit is so farre from condemning these blasphemous speeches in his fellow-Jesuits and Romanists that hee deviseth excuses for them and sowes fig-leaves together to cover these their Pudenda which I will plucke off one after another in my answer to his particular exceptions against the Knight To the first It is true that some Roman writers of late have made an assay to prove some of their Popish doctrines out of Scripture but with no better successe than Horantius had in undertaking to refute Calvin his Institutions as appeareth by Pilkington his Parallels If the Scriptures were so firme for our Adversaries why are not they as firm for them why doth the Iessuit in the fore-front of this Section bid as it were defiance to them professing in plaine termes that The Scripture is not the sole rule of Faith nor that out of it alone all Controversies can be decided Doubtlesse any indifferent Reader will conceive that the Scriptures make most for them who stand most for their authoritie and perfection as all the reformed Divines doe not onely affirming but also confirming that the Scripture is not only a most perfect but the only infallible rule of faith Ep. 112. Si divinarum Scripturarum earum scilicet quae in Ecclesiâ Cano. nicae nominantur perspicuâ firmatur authoritate siâ—e ullâ dubitatione credendum est aliis verò testibus vel testimoniis quibus aliquid credendum esse suadetur tibi credere vel non credere liceat quantum ei momenti ad faciendam fidem vel habere vel non habere perpenderis Ep. 97 Solis iis Scripturarum libris qui jam Canoniti appellantur didici hunc timorem honoremque deferre ut nullum earum authorem scribendo aliquid errasse firmissimè credam lib. de Nat. Grat c. 61. Me in hujusmodi quorumlibet Scriptis hominum liberum quia solis Canonicis debeo sine recusatione consensum l. 11. c. 5. Ep. 48. every article of divine faith must be grounded upon a certaine and infallible ground to us but there is no certaine and infallible ground to
us of supernaturall truth but Scripture as is abundantly proved by Saint Austine If any thing be confirmed by perspicuous authority of Canonicall Scriptures we must without any doubt or haesitation beleeve it but to other witnesses or testimonies we may give credit as we see cause and in his 97. Epistle to St. Ierome I have learned to yeeld that honour and reverence onely to the Canonicall Scriptures that I most firmely beleeve that no Author of them could erre in any thing he wrot and in his booke de natura gratia I professe my selfe free in all such writings of men because I owe absolute consent without any demurre or staggering onely to the Canonicall bookes of Scripture To the same purpose he writeth against Faustus the Manichee l. 11. c. 5. and ep 48. But what neede I presse St. Austine when the evident letter of Scripture is for this truth Titus 1.2 Rom. 3.4 God cannot lie and let God be true and every man a lier that is subject to error and falsehood Againe the Scriptures are sufficient to instruct us in all points necessary to salvation therefore every article of divine faith is evidently grounded upon Scripture The Antecedent I thus prove 2 Tim. 3.15.16 whatsoever is profitable for doctrine for reproofe for correction for instruction in righteousnesse in such sort that it is able to make a man wise unto salvation and perfect to every good worke is sufficient to instruct in all points of salvation but the Scripture is so profitable that it is able to make wise unto salvation and perfect to every good worke Ergo It is sufficient to instruct in all points necessary to salvation The major is evident ex terminis the minor is the letter of the text and that the adversary may not except that this is my collection onely L. 3. Advers haer c. 1. Non per alios dispo sitionem salutis nostrae cognovimus quam per cos per quos evangelium ad nos pervenit quod quidem tunc preconiaverunt postea per Dei volun tatem nobis in Scripturis tradiderunt fundamentum columnam fidei nostrae futuram Aug. l. 3. cont Lit. Petil. c. 6. Sive de Chrlsto sive de ejus ecclesia sive de quacunque re quae pertinet ad fidem vitamque nostram non dicom si nos nequaquam comparandi ei quid dixit si nos sed omnino quod seturus adjecit si Angelus de Coelo vobis annunciaverit praeterquam quod in Scripturis Legalibus Evangelicis accepistis anathema sit I will produce to him impregnable testimonies of the ancient Fathers Irenaeus We have not knowne by others the meanes which God hath appointed for our salvation then by those by whom the Gospell came unto us which at the first the Apostles preached by word of mouth but afterwards by the will of God delivered in writing to be the foundation and pillar of our faith The second is Saint Austine Whether concerning Christ or concerning his Church or concerning any thing that pertaineth to our faith and life I will not say if we but even as he going forward addeth if an Angell from Heaven shall preach unto you any thing but what you have received in the Scriptures of the law and the Gospell accursed be hee Yea but the Iesuit objecteth against us and these Holy Fathers that by the Scriptures we cannot prove which bookes of Scripture are Canonicall and which are not I answere first our question here is not of the principles of Divinity but of Theologicall conclusions Now that Scripture is the word of God and that these bookes are Canonicall Scriptures are principles in Divinity and therefore not to be proved according to the rule of the great Philosopher in the same science It is sufficient to make good our Tenet that the Canonicall Scriptures being presupposed as principles every conclusion de fide may be deduced out of them Secondly that such bookes of Holy Scriptures are Canonicall and the rest which are knowne by the name of Apochrypha are not Canonicall is proved by arguments and testimonies drawne out of Scripture it selfe by Whitaker Disputatione de sacrâ Scripturâ controversiâ primâ by Reynolds most copiously in his Censura librorum Apochryphorum Thirdly I retorte the Iesuits argument against himselfe when they teach tradition is part of Gods word how prove they it to be so by Scripture or Tradition by Scripture they cannot prove that unwritten traditions are Gods word if they prove it by Tradition then they begge the point in question and prove idem per idem To the second The Romanists ground some doctrines of their faith upon the letter of Scripture but it is that letter which killeth as for example they ground their carnall presence of Christ in the Sacrament upon those words in the sixt of St. Iohn unlesse yee eate the flesh of the Sonne of God and drinke his blood you have no life in you which words if you take according to the letter this letter killeth saith Origen but it is the spirit saith our Saviour that quickeneth the flesh profiteth nothing the words which I speake unto you they are spirit and they are life Iohn 6.63 He that pierceth the barke and commeth to the sap runneth not from the tree of life but rather runneth to it so doe we when we leave the barke of the letter upon necessary occasions and pierce into the heart and draw out the sap of the spirituall meaning To presse the letter of Scripture against the spirituall meaning and analogie of faith is not onely Iewish but Haereticall For example The Anthropomorphites ground their haeresie upon plaine and expresse words of Scripture from which to use the Iesuits owne words All Orthodox Divines are faine to flie to figurative and tropicall interpretations To the third First Saint Peter saith not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not in which Epistles of St. Paul but in which points and heads of doctrine many things are hard to be understood Secondly though some points be hard to be understood in themselves or are obscurely set downe in Scripture it followeth not from thence that all things necessary to salvation are not plainely delivered therein For as before I proved out of Saint Austine and Saint Chrysostome Among thuse things which are plainly delivered in Scriptures all such points are found as containe faith and manners all things that are necessarie are manifest Thirdly those things which are obscurely set downe in Saint Pauls Epistles may be and are elsewhere in holy Scriptures more perspicuously delivered Lastly Saint Peter saith not that those things are hard to be understood simply and to all men but to the ignorant and unstable who wrest all Scripture to their owne destruction Among which number the Iesuit must reckon himselfe and his associates before they can fit this text to their purpose To the fourth First this passage out of Saint Iohn hath beene discussed
may be saved in one Religion yet so as he must die in another This is a new conceite never heard of before that a man may be saved in a Religion but so as not to die of it To conclude since Protestant Doctors make no doubt but we may be saved in our faith and no Doctour of ours saith so of your faith it is out of doubt the safer way to embrace ours The force of which argument the Knight goeth not about to avoid otherwise then by denying that to be the opinion of learned Potestants which being proved to be so manifestly the argument still hath his force and the more because he cannot answer it The Hammer IN the former Chapters the Knight brandished his sword but in this he holdeth up his Buckler to beare off a blow wherewith some Professors especially of the Female Sex are said to have beene wounded to death For thus they whet their sword and shape it on the Protestant anvile Protestants confesse at least many of them that there may be salvation in the Roman Church but Papists absolutely deny that there may be any salvation in our Churches Fisher relation of a 3. conference therefore it is safer to come to theirs then to stay in ours to be where almost all grant salvation then where the greatest part of the world deny it Hereunto the Knight truely and solidly answers First that our Protestant Tenents are of that nature that the Papists themselves cannot pretend with any probability that there is any danger in them but rather in the contrary as he maketh it evident by eight remarkeable instances Secondly that our Religion is not to be accounted the worse but rather the better for our charitable opinion of our Adversaries for true piety is ever joyned with compassionate charity Thirdly Rom. 14.4 What have I to doe to judge another mans servant seeing he standeth or falleth to his owne master that though we leave the persons of Papists to their and our judge not pronouncing damnation on them as they doe on us yet we proclaime confidently to all the world that their doctrine is not safe Fourthly he distinguisheth also the persons of Papists some are invincibly ignorant who are compelled to resigne up their own eye-sight and to look through such Spectacles as their Priests and Pastors have tempered for them for these poore soules if they make as good use as they can of the publike and private means afforded them for saving knowledge and hold fast the Articles of the Apostles Creed without opposition to any ground of Christian Religion and furthermore have a minde and purpose to obay God and keepe his Commandements according to that measure of knowledge and grace which they have received and live for outward things in the unity of the Church where they dwell much may be said other live under Princes and States who as Gods true Watchmen and Shepherds desire they should be better informed and take care that they may have meanes to be instructed in the true saving knowledge of Christ such Papists shutting their eyes against Gods light and persisting in their ignorance and saying in effect Wee will not the knowledge of thy wayes Iob 21.14 goe not safely out of the world How the Iesuit refuteth these answers wee shall see in the examination of his particular exceptions To the first That cannot be farre from the Knights purpose which agreeth with the title of his whole Booke Via tuta The safe Way this safe way hee proves to be the Protestants way by divers instances in which the Papists affirmation is dangerous but our Negation cannot but be safe For example there is apparant danger in maintaining the adoration of Images and the creatures of Bread and Wine in the Sacrament because it is expressely forbidden under many fearfull curses to offer Sacrifice burne Incense or exhibit any Divine Worship to any save God onely Psalm 97.7 Confounded be all they that worship graven Images and boast themselves of Idolls but there can be no danger in not Worshipping the Creature insteed of the Creatour who is blessed for ever Rom. 1.25 They are in danger of a curse that forbid Marriage and hold it in some persons to be unlawfull and uncleane which Saint Paul calleth The Doctrine of Devils 1 Tim. 4.1 3. But there can be no danger in not prohibiting Marriage in any which is Honorable in all and the bed undefiled Heb. 13.4 They are in danger who equall Traditions with Scripture because it is written Cursed be hee that addeth or taketh away from the words of the Law or the Gospell Deut. 4.2 Apoc. 22.18 There is danger in confidence in our owne merits because Cursed is hee that putteth his trust in man or maketh flesh his arme Ier. 17.5 but there can be no danger in not relying upon our owne merits for Blessed are they that trust in Christ and him onely Psalm 2.12 for that the Cardinall himselfe confesseth to be Tutissimum There is danger in taking away the Cup from the Laity for it is a violation of Christs institution for Jesus said unto them Iohn 6.53 Except yee eate the flesh of the Son of man and drinke his blood yee have no life in you but there can be no danger in not taking away the Cup from the Laity but reaching it to them for Whosoever eateth Christs flesh and drinketh his blood hath eternall life vers 54. There is danger in keeping the Scriptures from the Laity for The people perish for want of knowledge Hos 4.6 and God powreth his wrath upon the people that know not his name Psal 79.6 but there can be no danger in permitting them to Search the Scriptures for in them they have eternall life Ioh. 5.39 and Blessed are they whose delight is in the Law of the Lord and that exercise themselves in that Law both day and night Psal 1.2 There is danger in praying in an unknowne tongue for they which doe so Worship they know not what draw neere to God with their lips but their hearts is farre from him but there can be no danger in Service in a knowne tongue for the Apostle saith I will pray with the spirit I will pray with understanding also I will sing with the spirit I will sing with understanding also 1 Cor. 14.15 It was a curse inflicted upon the builders of Babel that they understood not what was spoken and the gift of tongues hath beene ever esteem'd a singular blessing conferred upon the Church whereby the people of all Nations and Countries understood the Apostles and their Successors preaching to them and praying for them To the second I reply that all his answers are refuted in my Animadversions upon the former Chapters onely some Cavils hee addeth which I will answer in a word Flood I presume his Father had some Apprentise bound not to marry during his Apprentiship I would then know of him whether his Father in that case did forbid marriage