the famous Councells and Fathers forenamed who opposed the same as not to adhere to their sense of that place of Mathew or to their judgement of papall supremacie were now a-dayes damnable and rank heresie 2. Next to come to that proud doctrine of merite against which is that cleare Text of scripture Rom. 6. 23. where it is said The wages of sinne is death but Life Eternall is the gift of GOD. Which by the unanimous judgement of the ancient fathers Church is acknowledged to be against merits therefore sayeth their owne Cassander consult art 6. with a full consent all the ancient Fathers deliver that our whole confidence and hope both of pardon and eternall life is to be placed in the onely mercie of GOD and merite of Christ As we see particularly in ORGEN l. 4. in Rom. cap. 4. Hilare in Math. can 20. Ambrose in psal 118. Octon 20. Et in exhortatione ad virgines Basil in psal 52. 114. Jerom lib. 17. in Isaiam cap. 64. Chrisostom in Coloss hom 2. Augustin in psal 36. con 2. psal 32 con 1. psal 83. circa fineÌ„ As also psal 109 â—irca iâ—itiuÌ„ Cyril also of Alexandria hom 4. paschas Gregorie the first in psal 7. poenit Fulgentius ad Moninum lib. 1. cap. 10. and Haymo in psal 132. 1. Bernard ser 1. in annunc Mariae and many more And yet the present Roman Church differeth so farre froÌ„ Scripture the streame of Antiquitie expounding the same in this point That the Councell of Trent in the decree of the sixt Session thereof can 32. hath accursed all those that hold not the doctrine of mans meriting of eternall life by his owne good works and the Rhemists declare on Heb. 6. 10. That they are so fully worthie of eternall life and are the cause of salvation that God should be unjust if he rendred not heaven for them 3. For perfectioÌ„ of scripture against doctrinall traditions that place Gal. 1. 8. Though wee or an Angell from heaven preach any other beside that which wee haue preached unto you let him be accursed by the constaÌ„t unanimous judgement of the Church all ancient Fathers that ever write on that place the same is expounded to be the scriptures of the old new Testament onely beside which no other thing ought to be taught under paine of a curse as Basil in his summe of his Moralls 72. expoundeth so likewise Augustin in his third book against Petilian cap. 6. saying If an Angell from heaven preach to you any thing besids that which is in the scriptures of the Law and Gospell which yee haue received let him be accursed sayth the Apostle so also Vincen. Lyrinen adv haeres c. 35. 10. Neither sayeth the Apostle if they teach any thing contrar or repugnant sayeth Chrisostome Theophylact. on that place but if they teach never so small a point beside that that is add never so little more then that let him bee accursed And yet so farre doth the present Roman Church disagree from the true meaning of this Text of scripture which is given thereon by the whole streame of antiquitie in this point that shee hath decreed contrar thereunto in the Councell of Trent for doctrinall unwritten traditions 1. decreto sess 4. 4. Against that idolatrous worshiping and prayer to Angels that Text Coloss 2. 18. Let no man beguile you of your reward in a voluntare humilitie and worshiping of Angels is expounded not onely by the ancient Fathers singly writing thereon as condemning all prayer to be made to them as we see in Chrisostom in Coloss 2. hom 9. and in Origen l. 7. 8. contra Celsum others but likewise by a whole Councell conveened together as Theodoret testifieth on Coloss 2. saying The Councell which conveened at Laodicea the cheif citie of Phrygia by a law did forbid prayer to Angels condemning the same as Idolatry wherby the communion both of Christ â—nd his Church was forsaken and therefore accursing the practisers thereof Can. 35. saying if any man be found to giue himself to this private idolatrie let him be accursed And yet the present RomaÌ„ Church doth so farr disagree froÌ„ this Apostolicall precept expounded by an unanimous coÌ„sent of ancient Fathers conveened in Councell that she will haue prayers put up to Angels and consequentlie shee is declared Idolatrous and accursed 5. I could instance many more places in points coÌ„troverted wherin they admitt not that sense which the streame of ancient Fathers giveth theron as Coloss 3. where it is said Let the word of Christ dwell in you richlie Which by the constant and unanimous exposition of Fathers is for peoples reading and knowledge of scripture as wee see in Chrisostome hom 9. â—n Coloss 10. in Iohan Augustin serm 55. de tempore Theodoret lib. 5. de Cur. graec affect and others which made their late Bishope Espenceus on Tit. 2. to say By the doctrine of the Apostle and conforme practise of of the primitive Church it is manifest that of old the reading of scripture was permitted to people and as venerable Beda showeth in his third book of the English ecclesiasticall historie cap. 5. but the forenamed shal suffice to show that in the points controverted they admitt not that to be the rule of faith which they pretend to be the rule but when it maketh against them they disdainfullie or impudentlie doth reject the same Lastly As for his Thrasonick brags wherein hee exceedeth all moderation and trueth I passe by theÌ„ as not worthy of any answere but that which in realitie and a solid way shall bee seene God willing in this ensueing reply to discover his frothy emptines fraud to any who is but indifferent judicious howsoever to others the blinded and imbrutished proselyts of such every thing that commeth from them is counted as of old the Oracles of Delphos were or as Diana was cryed up by the confused multitude Act. 19. 34. saying Great is Diana of the Ephesians AN ANSVVERE To the Touch-Stone of the Reformed Gospell 1. That there is not in the Church one and that an infallable rule for understanding the holy Scriptures and conserving of Vnitie in matters of saith THis assertion of our's as hee calleth it is contrary sayth hee to the expresse words of our own Bible which he nameth therafter To whom I answere 1. In generall that he beginneth with a grosse calâ—mny affirming that to be our assertion which is not for wee deny not to be in the Church an infallable rule of faith or for understanding the Scriptures and conserving unitie in the matters of faith as our Confession of faith showeth anno 1581. art 18. but affirmeth this rule of faith to bee the Scripture it self which is therfore called the Canon or rule of Scripture that the right understanding thereof in all matters of faith is to be had froÌ„ the scripture it self and that analogie of faith clearlie set downe therein or deryved
upon this place And that Christ spake not of their owne doctrine but of Moses doctrine and the Law which they were to deliver The publication onlie being theirs but the doctrine the Lords as we see Math. 28. 19. The next place which hee bringeth is Luke 10. 16. where our Saviour sayeth to his Apostles Hee that heareth you heareth me To which my former answer may suffice Therefore also sayeth Ferus It is heerby evident that the Apostles themselves were to be heard in so farre only as they were Apostles that is Did Christs message and preached and taught what he commanded them but if they should teach otherwise or any doctrine contrarie to Christs then they were not Apostles but seducers sayeth he and therefore not to bee heard His third place is Math. 16. 19. where our Saviour sayeth to Peter What soever thou shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven c. giving us to understand sayeth he that not onlie the bands of sinnes but all other knots difficulties in matters of faith are to be loosed by S. Peter and his successours To whom I answere 1. Their own Cardinall Cusanus speaketh thus de concord Cathol lib. 2. cap. 13. There was nothing said to Peter which was not said to all the rest Likewise for as it was said to Peter whatsoever thou shall bind on earth c. was it not said also to all the rest whatsoever yee bind on earth ◠sayeth he whence it will follow that all knots and difficulties in matters of faith are to be loosed by the successours of all the rest of the Apostles wheresoever aswell as by S. Peter's pretended successours Next if by loosing the solving of all doubts and difficulties in matters of faith bee meaned then by binding which is cōtrar to loosing the making of knots difficulties in matters of faith must be meaned whernone were before which is absurd to affirme And which when Peter's successours doth on earth God must also do the same in heaven As Cardinall Cusanus sayth Epist 2. ad Bohemos p 838. That when the Church changeth her judgement God also changeth his Which is open blasphemy 3 THat the Scriptures ar easie to be understood and therefore none ought to be restrained from reading them VVHich sayeth hee is contrary to the expresse words of 2. Pet. 3. 16. Where Peter speaking of Pauls Epistles sayeth In which are some thinges hard to bee understood To which I answere 1. That by saying some thinges ar hard to bee understood it followeth that the rest which is the greater part are not hard but easie to bee understood For the exception of some onlie cleareth the rest from obscuritie therfore from the greater part of the Scripture easie to be understood which concerne faith manners necessary to salvation wee rather conclude the plainnesse of Scripture◠that people should reade the same then because some thinges are hard to be understood to put obscuritie upon the whole Scripture and therefore to debarre people frō reading thereof Cheiflie seing not onely Augustin lib. 2. de doctr Christ cap. 9. But Bellarmin also consenting to Augustins words lib. 4. de verbo cap. 11. § ultimo testifieth That all doctrines which are simplie necessary for all men to salvation are plainlie set downe in scripture wher upon speaking to the people in his 55. sermon de tempore hee sayeth Neither let it suffice you that yee heare the holie Scriptures read in the Church but also in your own houses either reade thē your selves or desire others to reade them And so likewise sayth Chrisostome con 32. de Lazaro hom 2. in Math. The next place which he bringes is Act. 8. 30. where Philip sayeth to the Eunuch Vnderstandeth thou what thou readeth who said how can I without a guide Whereunto I answere 1. This place was a prophecie and such are hard to be understood till they be fulfilled and the Eunuch was a Proselyte and a Novice onelie in religion therefore from one place which was propheticall and dark to a Novice in religion to conclude that the Scriptures in whole are dark obscure and therefore not to bee read by people is an absurd consequence Yea this place rather maketh against papists seing the Eunuchs practise heere was reading of the Scripture which Philip did not reprehend in him as popish Priests would haue done but only explaineth unto him the Prophesie of whom it was meaned and that it was fulfilled by Christs suffering and so maketh him thereby to bee a Christian convert the occasion of which benefit the reading of the Scripture did afford unto him Wherupon sayeth their owne Carthusian Great was the care of that Heathen man sayeth hee and his diligence condemneth our negligence in learning holie Scriptures Therefore also Chrisostome giveth this directiō to people in reading holy scriptures saying in his 10. homilie on Iohn That which is easie to be understood get by heart and these things that are obscure reade thē over often and if by doing so you cannot findout the meaning go to thy teacher The third place which he brings is Luke 24. 25. where Christ expoundeth to his Disciples al things concerning himselfe To which I answere that this maketh nothing against peoples reading of scripture commanded by Christ himselse Iohn 5. 39. injoyned by the Apostle Eph. 6. 17. Coloss 3. 16. and for which Timothy was commended 2. Tim. 3 15. That from a childe he had knowne the scriptures but only showeth that hard places specially such as prophecies are to be expouned to people as Christ did heere to his disciples as the former place Act. 8. 30. and that speach of Chrisostome showeth The fourth place which he adduceth is Revel 5. 1. concerning the sealed booke which none was able to open and which this pamphleter would have to be the booke of scripture whereunto I will onely answere in the Iesuit Ribera's words on that place saying The prophecie of these things which shall fall out in the last times is here only meaned as Andrew Archbishope of Caesarea expoundeth it sayeth hee proveth that hereby the book of the scripture cannot be meaned because evē then Iohn saw this book sealed whē this revelation was made unto him before which time most of the Apostles were dead So that if by this sealed booke the scripture were understood then it would follow sayeth he that the rery Apostles upon whom the holie ghost descended in their time understood not the scripture but it was sealed even to Peter and Paull and to the rest who died before this revelation was made unto Iohn which were absurd to say But I cannot but marvell that he should bring so manyplaces of scripture to prove that people should not be permitted to reade the scripture because of the obscurity thereof seing that their late and famous Bishope Espenseus on Titus 2. testifieth that the with-holding of the scripture from the people was neither in the Apostles times or
doctrin but let us staÌ„d to the decisioÌ„ of divine inspyred scripture Yet to convince him I will instance 9. points of popery to show how farr they reject the Churches ancient customes as 1. Against the Popes universall Supremacy in matters ecclesiastical that first and famous Councell of Nice convocat by Constantine the first ChristiaÌ„ Emperour anno 325. in the six canon thereof it was decreed That the Bishope of AlexaÌ„dria should brook the like jurisdiction within his province as the Bishope of Rome had in his which limitatioÌ„ of every ones jurisdiction within their own precincts without subordination is ther called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or the ancieÌ„t customs froÌ„ which ancieÌ„t custome coÌ„firmed by so famous a general CouÌ„cel how far the pope hath swerved since let any one judge 2. For the Popes usurpation of jurisdiction over Princes in temporall thinges what was the old custome of the Bishops of Rome Bellarmin telleth us lib. 1. de Concil cap. 13. who speaking of that time which was many houndrehs of years after the Apostles sayth That at that time the Bishope of Rome in temporall things was subject to the Emperour sayeth hee and because hee acknowledged the Emperour to be his temporall Lord therefore he made supplication to him that he would conveene a Councell but therafter their owne charter monck authour of Fasciculus temporum telleth us That in the time of Boniface the 2. this ancient custome was rejected for remarke sayth he that about this time the Popes began to oppose theÌ„selves to the Emperors even in temporall things farr otherwise theÌ„ they wer wont of old And after the 1200 year of god the same authour tells us That Boniface the 8. rose up to that hight of pride sayeth hee that he called himself Lord of the whol world aswel in temporall as in spirituall things Which thing their Sigebert in anno 1088. in his Chronicle calleth not onelie a noveltie but little farre from Heresie 3. For praiers in an unknown tongue LYRA and AQUINAS on 1. Cor. 14. as also Cassander consult arâ— 14 freely acknowledge what was the ancient custome of the primitive Church saying In the primitive church Thanks givings and all other coÌ„mon service was performed in the vulgare tongue but how farre the Roman Church hath swerved froÌ„ this now every one knoweth 4. If wee ask also concerning paepall indulgences depending on purgatorie what was the ancient custome their owne Alfonsus à castro will tell us lib. 8. adv Heres tit indulgentia That their use is onelie of late in the Church sayeth hee if wee ask what was the ancient custome then used of indulgences lar will tell us lib. 1. de indulg c. 8. saying I confesse that the forme of dispensing with a number of years or dayes appointed for pennance which was of old in use is now cleane left off 5. Concerning invocation of saints Their owne Eckius in his Enchrid cap. 15. confesseth That there is no warrant for the same in the scriptures and that the Apostles neither by word nor write left any such thing behind theÌ„ to be done so that it was not the Churches custome in the Apostles times But next to the Apostles tymes if we ask what was the ancient custome of the church herin Augustin wil tell us lib. 21 de civit Dei cap. 10 That at the celebration of the holie Mysteries the names of the Martyrs and saints in their owne order place are named but nowise invocated sayth he 6. For having Images in Churches what was the ancient custome is to be seene in that epistle of Epiphaniê° to the patriarch of Ierusalem translated by Ierome and insert in his works where it is said that this was against the custome of Christian religion and therefore prohibited also in that famous Councell of Eliberis 36. canon thereof which made their owne Nicolaus Clemangis lib. de non celeb non instit to say Of old the whole universall Church did decree for their cause who were converted from gentilsme to the faith that no images should be set up in Churches but how farre the now Roman Church hath swerved froÌ„ this Ancient Custome everie one knoweth 7. Concerning adoration of images what was the ancient custome in the primitive yea in the westerne and Roman Church Pope Gregorie in his Epistle to Serenus Bishope of Marsils showeth lib. 9. epistle 9. forbidding any adoratioÌ„ of such As also that decree of that Councel of Frankford convocat by Charles the great at which the Legats of the Bishope of Rome were present Wherein all sort of religious adoration of images was condemned and forbiddeÌ„ as not onlie contrary to Scripture but also to the doctrine of the ancient Fathers and custome of the then Roman Church as Cassander relateth consult art 21. and may be seene in Baronius his annals Tom. 9. in anno 794 but how farre contrary to this ancient custome the doctrine and practise of the Roman Church now is is notour to all 8. Concerning the giving of the Cup to the people what was the ancient custome of the Church the verie Act of the Councell of Constance which decreed the contrary doth clearelie confesse to wit That as Christ instituted this venerable sacrament in both kinds of bread wine and gaue it to his Disciples so also say they in the primitive Church the same was received by the faithfull in both kinds and it is sufficiently certaine sayeth their Cassander consult art 22. that the universall Church of Christ to this day did celebráte the sacrament in both kinds and the Westerne or Roman Church more then a thousand years after CHRIST sayeth hee gaue the same in both kinds of bread wine to all the members of the Church of Christ as is manifest out of the innumerable testimonies both of Greeke latine Fathers But how farre the now Roman Church hath swerved froÌ„ this ancieÌ„t custom and her owne ancient practise is likewise more thaÌ„ clear evident 9. lastly Concerning their solitary Masses wherein the Priest onlie communicateth if we ask if this was the Ancient Custome of the Church their very canon of the Masse will tell us the contrary as their Cassander observeth consuit art 24. wherein the Priest praieth not only for himself but also for all theÌ„ who do communicate with him saying Be mercifull to as many of us as baue beene partakers of this Altar And chieflie in his prayer after communicating saying That which wee have receaved with our mouth grant Lord that we may haue received the same with a pure mynd And of a temporall benefite it may bee unto us an everlasting remedie Thus in nine maine points of Popery we see how they haue swerved wyde from the ancient custome of the Catholick Church 5. THat a man by his owne private spirit may rightly understand and interpret Scripture VVHich he sayeth is contrary to 1. Cor. 11. 8. Wher the Apostle speaking of the diversitie of gifts sayeth That to
another is given the gift of prophecie or interpretation of scripture as also which is contrary to 2. Pet. 1. 20. wher its said That no prophecie of Scripture is of private interpretation as also is contrary to 1. Iohn 4. 1. where the Apostle biddeth Try the spirits whether they bee of God For answere to whom 1. We disclaime any such Assertion as the harmonie of confessions witnesseth and ours in particulare 1581. art 20. And so the places which hee adduceth maketh no wise against us For we put a distinction between a private man a private spirit and of a private man we say that somtimes such a maÌ„ may haue more knowledge of the true meaning of scripture that publick persons as ignorant Bishops such as their owne Stella on Luke 6. p. 184 telleth wer at the late Councell of Trent yea then Popes themselves who pretend infallibilitie of whom their owne Alfonsus à Castro speaketh thus lib. 1. adv heres cap. 4. Seing it is certain that many of them were so unlearned sayeth hee that they were altogether ignorant of the graÌ„mer how could thy then interpret Scripture sayth he But wee say that such knowledge private men haue not from their owne private spirit but from the spirit of God speaking in his word comparing Scripture with Scripture obscurer places with playner and with David psal 119. â—8 using prayer for illumination and such other meanes as conduce to that end and that this is not onely our doctrine but the doctrine also of most famous Romanists wee may see in Panormitan cap. Significasti de electione and in Gerson parte 1. de examinatione doctrinarum who say That one private mans opinion is to be preferred even to the Popes a whole Councell if that private man be moved by better authoritie of the old new Testament the practise wherof Gratian showeth 36. q. 2. c. ultimo That Ierome by authority of the scripture withstood a whole Councell and had his judgement preferred before them as Paphuntius also had done before in the Councell of Nice in the matter of Priests marriage 6. THat Peter's Faith failled VVHich is contrary sayeth hee to Luke 22. 32. where Christ sayeth to PETER I prayed for thee that thy faith faill not To whom I answere first That wee hold no such Assertion contrary to this Text which speaketh of Peters owne particulare saving grace of faith which never failed and not of his infallibilitie of professioÌ„ wherein he failed when after this he denyed his Master 2. If hee would haue Peters infallibilitie to be grounded on these words There is no doubt sayeth their owne Carthusian But he prayed there for all other his Apostles having also said Satan hath desired to vinnow you 3. The exposition of the parisian Doctors as Gerson Almain Alfonsus also à Castro and Pope Adrian the 6. is That in the person of Peter as a figure the Lord prayed for his universall Church as Bellarmin acknowledgeth lib. 4. de pont cap. 3. and therefore it inferreth no more infallibilitie of Peter in particular than it doth of the whole Church in generall and the members therof And giving that it inferreth onlie Peters infallibilitie who was an Apostle and Pen-man of scripture yet it inferres nothing of the popes infallibilitie as his pretended Successour this being personal to him but not transmitted to others His next Testimony that he bringeth is Math. 16. 18. where our Saviour sayeth Thou art Peter and upon this rock I wil build my Church To which I shall answere in their owne Cardinall Cusanus words lib. 2. de coÌ„cord Cath. cap. 13. whoÌ„ Ferus also on this place followeth and both of theÌ„ the streame of ancient Fathers who speaketh thus Tho it was said to Peter upon this rock I will build my Church yet by the rock sayeth he wee understand Christ himself whom he confesseth if Peter were to be understood by this rock as a groundstone of the Church are not the other Apostles according to S. Ierome groundstones sayeth hee His third place of scripture which he bringeth is Math. 23. 2. to which I haue already answered in the second Assertion but cannot passe by this that he matcheth the Pope sitting in Peters Chayre with the Scribes and Pharisees Christs greatest enemies sitting in Moses Chayre and indeed heerein they fitly agree The last place which he bringeth is Iohn 11. 49. where speaking of Caiphas words it is said That hee spake not this of himself but being High-Priest that yeare he prophecied that Jesus should die for the Nation which hee sayeth the High Priest spake-truly-speaking out of Moses Chayre which Christ commanded to be heard and obeyed touching matters of faith To whom I answere first That his alleadged speaking trulie in this point cannot be attribute to the Chaire of Moses nor to him as High-Priest who sate therin for then he had not erred so groslie there-after in it when he pronunced Christ to be a blasphemer But 2. Cardinal Tolet answeres for us clearly saying Remarke that Caiphas sentence in that sense which he conceived it was both wicked and false False because it was neither lawfull nor expedient to kill an innocent maÌ„ for the teÌ„porall safety of a Republick And Wiked because it was against justice to kil an innoceÌ„t thersore Caiphas sayth he sinned most grievouslie therein and all who consented with him Let any then consider how this maketh for the Popes infallibilitie 7 THat the Church can erre and hath erred VVHich he sayeth is expreslie contrary to Isai 59. 21. To which before I answer I will state the question and showe what is trulie to be held of the Churches infallibilitie to wit as their owne Cardinall Turrecremata in his summa de Ecclesia lib. 2. cap. 91. declareth saying That the Church cannot erre is so to be taken that GOD doth so assist her even to the the end of the World that there are ever some albeit not all who haue true faith which worketh by charitie and who holdeth the true profession thereof As were the 7000. in Israel who had not bowed their knee to Baal and the few orthodox when as Lyrnensis speakeh The whole world groaned and wondred that it was become Arrian But when the papists speak of the Churches infallibilitie they understand not the universal church but the Roman and westerne part thereof Next they distinguish the Roman Church into the Collective Church which is the whole number of Teachers and professours And into the Representative which is Bishops and others assembled in a generall Councell And thirdlie into the Virtuall Church which they call the Pope and to whom onlie in end they ascribe infallibilitie as Bellarmin teacheth lib. 4. de pont cap. 2. and 3. And with him Suarez Valentia and others Now to come to the places of scripture which he adduces First I answere to them generallie that none of them proveth the Popes infallibilitie to whom only they ascribe the same 2. I answere to
agreable to their doctrine nor yet was it in the tyme of the primitive Church his words are these It is manifest sayeth he by the doctrine of the Apostle Col. 3. 16. and by the practise of the primitive church that of old the reading of the scripture was permitted to people As for the testimonies of fathers which he bringeth none of them doeth prove his point for 1. in Irenus there is no speach at all to his point or purpose nor tels he in what booke of Origen any such thing is to be found and as to Ambrose testimony which calleth the scripture a sea and depth of propheticall ridles I answer that no man denyeth but that as Gregorie also speaketh in his epistle to Leander it is as a sea and deepe wherein an Elephant may swime as also so shallow wherein a Lamb sayeth he may wade containing both high mysteries for exercising the most learned as also most easie instructions as David speaketh psal 119. 130 To give understanding to the simple Next to Augustins testimony where he sayeth that the things in scripture which he knew not were much more then these which he knew I answer that this showeth onely his humility as the Apostle also professeth that in this life he knew but in part but this neither maketh for proving the obscurity of scripture the contrary whereof he affirmeth in the place forecited de doct Christ lib. 2. cap. 9. not yet maketh it against the peoples reading of scripture whereunto so earnestly he exhorts them Serm. 55. de tempore and as for Gregorie we differ no wayes from him in the place forecited As for S. Dennis testimony as he calleth him where he sayeth that the matter of the scriptures was farre more profound then his wit could reach unto I answere that by nature it is true of all except as David prayes psal 119. 18. The Lord open mens eies that they may understand the wonders of his Law But this proveth not that therefore the scriptures are not to be read or are every where obscure 4. THat apostolicall traditions and ancient customes of the Church not found written in the word are not to be received nor do obleidge us VVHich he sayeth is expresly contrary to 2. Thess 21. 5. where the Apostle biddeth them Hold fast the traditions which they had beene taught whether by word or Epistle and which traditions by word he sayeth are of equall authoritie with what was written if not more because first named I answere Nicephorus and Theodoret on that place showeth that the Apostle speaketh not of divers doctrines of faith some written by him others not written but left to verball tradition but he speaketh of the same doctrines diverslie onely delivered to wit first by word when he was present with them the same thereafter by Epistle being absent from them even as he speaketh Philip. 31. saying To writ the same things to you to wit which he had preached before To me indeed is not greevous but for you it is safe which Bellarmin also confirmeth lib. 4. de verbo cap. 11. while he grants That al things were writen by the Apostles which they preached to the people or which was necessar sayeth he to salvation whence it followeth that what was not written by the Apostle thereafter to the Thessalonians was not taught to them before by word as also what was not written by the Apostles that the same is not necessar to salvation and consequently that uuwritten doctrinall traditions are not necessary to salvation for of such onely is the question and not of any other sort of traditions rituall historicall or explicatory which doeth not derogate from the perfection of scripture The second place which he bringeth is 2. Thess 3. 6. Where the Apostle commands TheÌ„ to withdraw themselves from every brother that walks disorderly and not after the tratradition which they received of him to which I answer that Cardinall Cajetan on the 14. verse showeth that what he calleth tradition in the 6. verse he calleth the same his word by Epistle in the 14. verse and therfore written Aquinas likewise on this 6. verse showeth that the same is meaned by tradition which is meaned 2 Thess 2. 15. which we have already cleared to wit that doctrine which was delyvered both by word and writ by word first and by writ after but the most simple exposition is this sayeth their Estius that the Apostle speaketh in generall of the institution of a Christian life The derection whereof no man can say but is set downe in scripture The third place which he bringeth is 1. Cor. 11. 2. where the Apostle praiseth them that they keeped the traditions which hee had delivered them whereunto I answere that in that text ther is not a word of tradition but as their owne vulgare and Rhemes Translation hath is that they keeped his Precepts where the deceatfulnes of this PaÌ„pleter is to be noted that to seduce the simple when hee pleaseth hee departeth from the vulgare Translation which at other times hee so magnifieth as onlie authentick and doeth idolize As for the testimonie which hee bringeth out of Basil where hee sayeth Some things we have froÌ„ scripture other things from the Apostles both which haue alike force unto godlinessis I answer First that the most learned except against this Booke as corrupted as B. Andrewes showeth opose conâ— Peron p. 9. 2. he speaketh of these that were received froÌ„ the Apostles and not of such as the Romanists theÌ„selves acknowledge not to haue ben taught by the Apostles neither by word nor write as the invocatioÌ„ of saynts is coÌ„fessed to be by their owne Ecksê° Enchird c. 15. many more such 3 he speaketh not of doctrines of faith necessary to salvatioÌ„ all which Bellaer himself granteth to be written l. de verbo c. 11 but of things relating to order decencie in celebration of holy mysteries according to that general rule 1. Cor. 14. 40. the Apostles speech cap. 11. 34. wher he sayth The rest I will set in order wheÌ„ I come wherby he understandeth sayth Estiê° such things as belong to a worthie honest and orderlie celebratioÌ„ of holy mysteries so speaketh also Lombard Aquinas Cajetan and the Iesuite A lapide OF ANCIENT CUSTOMES Next to traditions he would haue the ancieÌ„t customes of the Church equally to be received though hee bringes no proofe froÌ„ scripture or fathers for the same Wherin tho I might answere with Cyprian epist 63. saying we must not taek heed what any hath done before us or hath thought meete to be done but what Christ hath done who is before all men for we must not follow the custome of men sayeth he but the truth of God For as in his 74. ep to Pompeius he sayth Custom without truth is nothing else but inveterate errour As also sayth Basil ep 80. We think it not just that custome which hath prevailed be held for a law or rule of true
An ANSWER To a Popish Pamphlet called The TOUCH-STONE of the Reformed Gospell made speciallie out of themselves MATH 15 13. Everie Plant which my heavenlie Father hath not planted shall be rooted up By WILLIAM GUILD D. D. and Preacher of GODS WORD ABERDENE Printed by IAMES BROWN 1656 To the Right Honourable SIR Thomas Mudie PROVESâ— of DUNDIE Iohn Scrimgeor William Duncan Alexander Watson and David Yeoman Baylies AND To the Remnant of the Honourable COUNCELL of that Burgh Grace and peace Right Honourable THe sedulitie of that Apostatick Church of Rome who like these Locusts Revel 9. swarme everie wher in our Countrey and neighbour Nation like Pharisees of old to make proselyts to themselves and misleade simple soules should move the Ministers of Christ and Sions Watch-men to be ashamed to be lesse diligent in a better cause and for a better Master These are dispersing their popish Pamphlets and everie where and everie way sowing secretlie and subdolouslie their pople and Tares in the Lords Field to seduce And should not wee then be much more seduloâ—s and solicitous every way by word and write to discover their fraud to arme against Errour and labour to reduce The conscience of which dutie for my part hath moved me to answere a late Pamphlet called The Touch-stone of the reformed Gospell Which is in everie Papists hands and almost whereof they vainly brag as being unanswerable which answer I have framed with as great brevitie perspicuitie as I could and the better to stop the adversaries mouthes detect their Wresting of Scripture as PETER speaketh 2. Pet. 3. 16. to their owne destruction I have answered such scripturall places as hee objecteth against us either by the exposition of Fathers for most part orelse of their own Doctours Neither of which without impudence they can reject and so cannot alleadge as he doeth in his Preface That wee chop and change the Text of Scripture by some interpretation or other of our owne These paines then which I have beene pressed by sundry Reverend Brethren and others for the publick good to put to the Press I haue Right Honourable Dedicate to you as a Testimonie of my inteere affection both to your selves personally whose kindnesse and courtesie to my self I have ever at all occasions found as also to that Place wherein you governe in regard of my relation therto which moved me as I did Dedicate the first Fruits of my Studies in my youth long agoe to the Magistracie and Councill of Aberdene the place of my owne Birth and breeding so now to Dedicate the latter and ryper Fruits of my old Age to the Magistracie and Councill of the Birth-place and breeding of my deceased Father of Godlie Memorie For whose care of my Education in Letters as I did owe him all filiall dutie and gratitude while he lived so do I still in Remembrance of him carry all affectionat respect to that place where he had his first being and upbringing and whose prosperitie I shall ever heartlie wish and that the Lord who hath showne it hard things that it might have said call me Marah may so sanctifie to it that sad visitation and prosper that Place hereafter that it may bee Naomi or as the Prophet speakes Isai 61. 3. He may give it Beautie for Ashes the oyle of ioy for mourning and the garment of prayse for the spirit of heaviness Which shal be the heartie prayer of Your most affectionat in Christ to honour serve you WILLIAM GUILD To the Reader Courteous Reader IN answering this TOUCH-STON of the reformed Gospell I thought good to advertise thee of some things First That the Impudencie and malice of this Pamphleter beside his Ignorance is such that to make the Protestant profession the more odious to his Proselyts hee would charge our Profession with such Doctrines and Tenets which we never taught nor owned So that whil he fights against such he beats the wind and fights onelie with his owne shaddow A few Instances in place of many are these First § 5. That we say That a man by his own private spirit may rightly judge and interpret Scripture Next § 6. That PETERS Fayth failled 3. § 9. That the Church was not ever to remaine Catholick 4. § 10. That the Churches unitie is not necessary in all points of Fayth 5. § 17. That the actions and sufferings of the Saynts serve for nothing to the Church 6. § 21. That good works are not necessary to Salvation 7. § 29. That Angels cannot help us 8. § 39. That the bread in the Supper of the LORD is but a figure 9. § 45. That Fasting is nos grounded on Scripture nor causeth any spirituall good Thus heseeks not only unnecessarlie to multiply feigned Controversies to deceive the simple but also to make our Profession the more odious to such as will beleeve him imitating herin Satan who by like lyeing would made God odious to our first Parents 2 As if to name onelie and by a false Master to multiplie the citations of Scripture Fathers were enough without the setting down the words of either he laboureth to seduce simple soules and make them beleeve that both Scriptures and Fathers were on their side onlie whil as these who are judicious and impartiall may see that if the maine places of Scripture and Fathers whose words he sets downe be proven in this my ensueing Answere to be either altogether impertinent and wrested or to make against himself Then much more may any judge the like of such places as he only pointeth at but neither seteth downe nor dare set downe their words Wherefore 1. As for his references to places of Scripture First They are such that if I should particularly discuss their impertinencie not only should his grosse ignorace and deceat be seen the more which is clearly enough discovered I hope by my answer to such places whose words he sets downe but my Answere should also grow to a hudge volume wheras I strive to as great brevitie with perspicuitie as I can and that to make my Answere onely to bee a pocket and portable Book 2. His references for ostentation onely and delusion of the simple are so numerous as Pag. 20. for the Churches infallibilitie where hee bringeth but foure places of Scripture whose words he sets down he maketh reference to 22. places most impertineÌ„t wrested Like wise pag. 59 To prove good works to be meritorious he bringeth but four places of Scripture in likemanner but relats to 21. more which aâ— to no such purpose the like he does p. 27. 51. 54. 63. 67. 72. elswher Next as for his references to the testimonies of Fathers mentioning oftimes neither Book Chapter noâ— words It wer an infinitly laborious task to answere a man knoweth not what and would likewise accrease to a voluminous bulk especiallie seing either ignorantlie or I may justlie fay deceatfully and impudentlie hee citeth places in Fathers 1. whom themselves rejects as spurious and
therefra as Pope Clement speaketh dist 37. cap. 14. saying that we should Ex ipsis Scripturis sensâ—m capere veritatis that is Take the meaning of the Trueth out of the Scriptures themselves which he calleth there integram firmam regulam veritatis or The full and firme rule of Trueth Next for answere to him in particulare he adduceth foure places of Scripture most impertinent which nowise maketh against any assertion of ours but whereby he only beats the wind These are 1. RoÌ„ 12. 2. where it is said Having then gifts according to the grace that is given to us whether Prophesie according to the proportion of faith the second is Phil. 3. 16 which sayeth Nevertheless whereunto wee haue alreadie attayned let us minde the same thing the third is Gal. 6. 16. which sayeth And as many as walk according to this rule peace be on them mercie the fourth is 1. Cor. 11. 16. which sayth We haue no such custom nor the Churches of God The First proving only as their owne Estius Professour at Duay showeth that all the doctrine of Teachers should be squared according to the rule and analogie of faith which wee also mayntaine and is contayned in Scripture the second as the same Estius showeth exhorteth onelie to Christian Unitie and concord The third as the same Estius likewise out of Chrisostome and Theophylact proveth that the Apostle speaketh not there of the rule of doctrine but of life which verse 15. hee calleth the new creature or holinesse to which he exhorteth them and as to that which he subjoyneth 2. Cor. 10. 15. as Cardinal Cajetan Catharinus and the ordinary gloss expoundeth The Apostle taking the Metaphor from workmeÌ„ to whom severally as by rule oâ— line their task is measured out doeth understand the limits onely of his Apostolicall mission and jurisdiction which was to the Gentiles of whom the Corinthians were a part as PETER was to the Jewes speciallie and as wee see Gal. 2. 7. And the fourth as Estius also showeth speaketh onely that the custome of the Church is not to bee contentious As for the testimonies of Fathers which hee bringeth heere and alongst this whole Pamphlet First I may answere to them in generall not in my words but in their own Gabriel Biels on the Canon of the Masse lect 41. saying Their authority coÌ„pelleth no maÌ„ to assent to their sayings except sayth he they be grounded on holy Scripture divine reveltion Therfore before this be manifest it is lawfull to controll their sayings sayeth hee and to bee of a contrary judgement wherefore sayeth S. Jerom If I say any thing which I shall not prove by one of the two Testaments let mee not bee believed no word then of traditions and S. Augustin sayeth hee in his 8. Epistle to Jerom speaketh thus saying This honour is onelie to be given to the holie canonick Scriptures that whatsoever they say therefore it must bee believed to bee true but as for others I reade them onelie upon this condition that however famous theâ— be for holines or learning I think it not true therefore because they haue thought so untill I bee otherwise perswaded by canonick Scriptures or probable reasons that they haue not erred from the Trueth and which is more sayeth hee we see that one holie father somtimes contradicteth another as holy Cyprian contradicteth Augustin concerning the rebaptising of Hereticks Scismaticks as likewise hee contradicteth Ierome concerning Pauls reprehending of Peter and so of many other like examples I might speake sayth he These are all their owne Bâ—eâ—s words and what little reckning Iesuits make of Fathers or their exposition of Scripture when they disagree with them and jump with those whom they call Calvinists I will showe by this one instance Maldonat on Ioh. 6. 62. bringeth Augustins exposition of that place which is also Beda and Ruperts exposition and with it another exposition whereof hee sayeth Hee will not deny that hee hath no other man as Authour thereof but yet sayth he I wil rather approve it than Augustins which of all other is the most probable because that this is more repugnant to the meaning of the Calvinists But not taking advantage either of Biels words or of these I come in particulare to Vincentius Lyrinensis words which he bringeth saying That the line of Propheticall Apostolicall expositioÌ„ should be directed according to the rule of the Ecclesiasticall Catholick sense but he forgets the words of that ancient Authour both before and after cap. 2. 35. wher he sayth before these words That the Scripture is a perfect rule full and more than sufficient for decision of al controversies in points of faith with which therefore all Ecclesiasticall and Catholick sense must agree and that onelie must be held which hath beene believed ever every where and by all And so this testimony maketh nothing against us and to which rule and words of Vincentius if wee will apply the points of Poperie as I haue showne by five particulars in answere to the Preface wee shall find them quyte contrary and disagreeable yea and to bee onelie meere novelties And albeit with Vincentiê° Bellar. lib. 4. de verbo c. 7. § ad hunc as also the Iesuit Sâ—lmeron in 1. Iohan 3. disp 25. § 30 affirme That wheÌ„ he Fathers all of theÌ„ or almost all agree in one judge-ment or in the exposition of any place of the scripture that then they giâ—e a sure and inevitable argument of Catholick veritie and of a sure and sound exposition of Scripture yet according to this rule let tryall be beside the former five but in this one point of poperie to wit The Virgin Mari's conception without sinne decreed in the Councell of Trent decreto 5. Sess 5. whether it bee of Catholick veritie or not and I hope it shall be found but a lurd errour and a blafphemous noveltie And that they go closs and crosse against the unanimous expositioÌ„ of Scripture which all the Fathers give and agree therin For example Rom. 5. 12. It is said of Adam In whoÌ„ all have sinned from which text all the holie fathers with one mouth sayeth their Bishop Canus loc theol lib. 7. cap. 1. affirmeth the blessed virgin to have been conceived in originall sinne of whome he citeth 18. their words in particular The like doth Cardinall cajetan in his treatise concerning this matter which he wrote to Pope Ieo the tenth â—om 2. opusc tract 1. cap. 5. The like also doeth the master of sentences witnesse lib. 3. dist 3. saying It may be truely said we must believe according to the unanimous testimonies of the holy fathers that the flesh which Christ tooke was formerly subject to sinne as the rest of the Virgins flesh but was sanctified made pure by the operation of the Holy Ghost therefore Bernard in his 174. Epistle to the channons of Lions having disputed that point Learnedly Concludes that Christ onely being excepted of all others
that have been borne of Adam it may be said which humbly and truly sayeth he David sayeth of himselfe I was shapen in iniquity and in sinne did my mother conceive me and therefore in the same place he calleth the feast of her conception without sin a presumptious noveltie the mother of rashnes the sister of superstition and daughter of inconstancie whosoever denyeth that all others without exception except Christ are conceived in sin he is found sayeth Augustin lib. 5. conâ— Iulian. cap. 9. to be a detestable heretick because herby as Salmeron testifies in Rom. 5. disp 49. Aquinas sayeth that this were to equal the virgin Mary with Christ himselfe And yet notwithstanding of so cleare a place of scripture so unanimously expounded by all the ancient fathers which Billarmin Salmeron calleth a sure inevitable argument of catholick verity and soundexposition of scripture Yet for al this sayeth Bellarmin coÌ„tradicting himselfe lib. 4. de amissa gratia cap. 15. § ab hac seing the Councell of Trent hath decreed the contrary as likewise Pope Sextus 4. and Pius 5. they are not to be accounted catholicks that esteemes this an errour and consequently all the ancient fathers are not to be accounted Catholicks nor Cardinal Cajetan bishop Canus nor ther master of sentences and canonized Aquinas and many more besides VVee see then howsoever they pretend traditioÌ„ or the unanimous consent of fathers to be the rule of faith or exposition of the scripture yet when they please and findeth the same displeasing to them they vilyfie and rejects the same therefore thus sayeth the Iesuit Valentia in the last chapter of the 5. booke of his analysis that any by gone tradition without the authority of the present Church is not a sufficient â—udge â—f controversies of faith So also speakes Cardinall Cajetan in the begining of his comentars on Genesis as also Baronius tom 1. annal anno 34. num 213. And if we will consider what certainty or rather what fluctuating uncertantie is in the moderne sense or exposition that the present Roman Church now puts upon scripture whereon to build their faith Let Cardinall Cusanus words testyfie epist 2. ad Bohemos pag. 833. and 838. who sayeth That one time the Church iuterprets the Scripture one way and at another tyme another way and that the understanding of the scripture must follow her practise when she changeth her judgement God also changeth his then which I know not what can be grearer blasphemy Next for answere to that testimonie which he brings out of Tertullian where he sayth we admit not our Adversaries to dispute out of scripture till thy can show who their ancessors were and from whom they received thâ— scriptures These words of Tertullian makes no wayes against us whereby he denieth not that the scripture is the rule of faith or of disputes concerning the same as he showeth against hermogenes cap. 22. saying let these of Hermogenes shop show that it is written and if it be not written let them feare that woe which is allotted to such as adde or take away but he showeth only that Apostolicall churches not Rome only which were founded by them and to that time had keeped the truth which they had delivered in the scriptures committed to them could only lay best claym to them which hereticks who dissented from these scriptures and apostolical churches of these primitive times could not do As for Ireneus whom only he citeth but not his words he hath nothing in that place that favoureth tradition as an unwritten rule of faith for so he should not agree with himselfe who sayeth lib. 3. cap. 2. that these things which are to be shown in the scriptures can not be made manifest but by the scriptures themselves and lib. 3. cap. 1. That the scriptures is that which is the foundation and pillar of our faith and not tradition or any unwritten rule Tertullian also that he is of the same mynd I have shown out of the forâ—cited testimonie concerning Hermogenes and who in that same 22. Chapter sayeth that he adoreth the fullnes of scripture Chrisostome also hom 3. in 2. cor calles it a most exact rule and ballance which it could not be if either it wer A partiall rule onely as Bellarmin calleth it or that tradition were the rule of faith Aâ—gustin also de bono viduitatis cap 1. calleth it a fixed and sure rule in opposition as it were to unsure tradition Yea Bellarmin himselfe lib. 1. de verbo cap. 2. haveing showne that the rule of our faith should have these two properties first that it should be most sure which tradition can not be luke 1. 4. 2. pet 1. 19. and 2. most known he concludeth that the scripture is the most sure and best knowne rule both of faith and manners But what shall I speake of a Cardinall when a Pope to wit Clement in his first booke of recognitions cited dist 37. cap. relatum calleth the scripture a firm and sound rule of faith Basill also hom 13. in Genesis sayeth thes things which may seem to be ambiguous and obscure in some places of the holy scripture must be explained by these which elswhere are more plaine and manifest Augustin likewise cont Crescon Lib. 2. cap. 31. speaking of an epistle of Ciprians I am not bound sayeth he to the authority of this epistle because I account not Ciprians writting as canonicall but I examine them by these that are canonicall and that which is agreable in them to the authority of divine scriptures I receive and that which is not agreeable I refuse Heer then we see that Augustin would have the scriptures only to be the rule of faith and of divine authoritie 2 THat in matters of faith we must not relye on the judge-ment of the Church or her Pastours VVHich he sayeth is contrary to Math. 23. 2. Where the jewish people are commanded by Christ To obserue all whatsoever the Scribes and Pharisees did bidd theÌ„ obserue not only sayeth hee in some principall matters but in all whatsoever without distinction or limitation For answere to whom I can not admire enough the mans impudencie or ignorance seing First our Saviour himself showeth the contrary where Math. 16. 6. 12. lie biddeth his disciples and others Beware of their leaven which be expoundeth to be their false doctrine 2. The Authour of the ordinarie gloss with whom agreeth Lyra on Deut. 17. 10 sayeth Note that the Lord requireth that whatsoever the Priest doth teach thee according to the Law do thou because otherwise thou art not to obey them Ferus also a spanish Frier and Preacher at Mentz on this place speaketh thus Christ would not that they should receive all the doctrines of the Pharisees sayeth hee but so farre only as they agreed with Gods Law else they should haue admitted all the false glosses which our Saviour refuteth Math. 5. from verse 21. to the end To this also agreeth the Iesuite Maldonat
furth under the little Hostie Than which what can be grosser blasphemie let any man judge 1. In this point theÌ„ let us see what is their catholick unitie in the ground wheron they build this their transsubstantiation Which is commonlie alleadged to bee expresse scripture and in particular these words Math. 26. 26. this is my Bodie but concerning this Gabriel Biel on the canon of the Masse lect 40. sayeth Whether Christs Bodie in the Sacrament be by conversion or without any conversion the substance and accidents of bread still remaining is not found expreslie in the canon of the Bible nor can it be proven by any scripture sayeth bishope Fisher cont Captiv Babyl num 8. Cardinall Cajetan likewise affirmeth as witnesseth Suarez tom 3. disp 46. That these words of Christ are not able to prove Transsubstantiation but that they may be taken in a figurative sense as these 1. Cor. 10. 4. Cajet 3. q. 78. art 1. yea Cardinall Bellarmin speaketh thus lib. 3. de Euch. c 23. It is not altogether improbable that there is no expresse place of scripture which without the Churches determination can evidentlie inforce a maÌ„ to admitt of Transsubstantiation for albeit the scripture seem to us that they may compell any that is not refractarie to believe the same yet it may be justly doubted whether the Text bee cleare enough to inforce the same sayeth he seing the most sharp witted learned men such as Scotus was haue thought the contrarie 2. Wee haue sundrie Roman Catholicks who haue denyed Transsubstantiation upon any ground whatsoever as 1. Bertram a priest in his learned treatise of the Bodie and Blood of Christ written to Charles the bald King of France about the yeare 880. 2. Rabanus Maurus aâ— Abbot in his treatise of the Eucharist which is also extant 3. Aelfricus Archbishope of Canterburie in his saxon sermon on the sacrament or housell as he calleth it anno 996. and yet to ascend higher Gelasius a Pope in his treatise against Eutyches of the two natures of Christ where he sayeth Tho in the Sacrament we receiue a divine thing to wit the Bodie blood of Christ yet the substance and nature of the bread and wine ceasseth not to remaine sayeth he and Biel on the canon of the Masse telleth us that in his time concerning the sacrament or any conversion therein amongst Catholicks there were four opinions wherof the first was That the substance of bread remained still sayeth hee 3. In the manner or sort of conversioÌ„ which they pretend to be in the sacrament Papists they varie and disagree mightilie For 1. Bellarmin telleth us lib 3. de Euch. cap. 11. that Durand holdeth That one essentiall part of the bread namlie the forme is turned but that the other part which is the matter or substance is not turned and so did pope Innocent the 3. teach sayeth Durand Rational Divin lib. 4. f. 63. but others haue taught the contrarie sayth Bellarmin That the matter of the bread is turned into Christs Bodie but that the essentiall forme remaineth but as for Lombard their great Master of senteÌ„ces his words are these lib. 4. sent d. 11 If it it be asked what sort of conversion it is whether formal or substantiall or what other sort it is definire non sufficio saieth hee that is I am not able to define it and so he quyteth the matter Biel againe on the canon of the Masse lect 40. he sayeth that ther are four opinions concerning this conversion The First That the substance of the bread remaineth still together with Christs Bodie The 2. is That the substance of the bread remaineth not still but after consecration becometh the body of Christ The 3. is That tho the bread remains not yet the accidents of bread as weight colour taste remaineth and that Christs Bodie begineth to be under these accidents And the fourth opinion is contradicting all the former That neither doeth the substance of bread remaine nor yet is it converted into Christs bodie for the absurdities that follow theron but is annihilat or redacted to nothing or else resolved into that which they call materia prima Bellarmin also in the forecited place sayeth that Abbot Rupertus maintayned an opinion diverse from all the former to wit That the bread is personallie assumed by Christ in the same manner that the humane nature was assumed by him and of this also Cardinall Aliaco in 4. sent q 6 sayeth That this is possible and more agreable to reason and easier to bee understood But thereafter in the same place hee positivlie sayeth That the conversion of the bread according to his judgement into the bodie of Christ is successive as the night is turned into the day because as after the night the day commeth so sayeth he after the breads departing there is Christs Bodie But Bellarmin lib. 3. de Euch. cap. 18. § ex his will not haue this coÌ„version productive nor successiue but adductive as hee calleth it that is whereby Christs Bodie preexistent before this conversion in heaven beginneth to be sayeth hee under the accidents of bread wher it was not before which indeed is no conversion at all but onlie a meere translocation Moreover sayeth Bellarmin lib. 3. de Euch. cap. 5. There hath been two opinions devysed in the Scholes for unfolding the greatnes of this mysterie one of DuraÌ„ds on 4. sent d. 10. who holdeth it probable that the substaÌ„ce of the bodie of Christ is in the Eucharist without greatnes or quantitie another is of some ancient Divines whom Ockam followeth who say that there is in the sacrament the very magnitude and quantitie of Christs bodie which notwithstanding they think cannot bee distinguished from the substance therof but that all parts do so runne one in another that ther is no shape in Christs bodie nor any distinction or order in the parts thereof But the common opinion of the Schooles and of the Church sayeth hee is contrarie to this and that in the Eucharist or little hostie there is whole Christ with his magnitude and bigness all other accidents hath both order shape agreable to a humane bodie Which is the eight miracle of the eleaveÌ„ that Durand maketh the priest daylie to work in the Masse lib. 4. ration divin f. 63. which miracles notwithstanding are not seene whereas Cardinall Cameracensis in 4. sent q. 5. saâ—eth I ought not to believe that he worketh any miracle sayeth hee except I see the same And indeed these are such as are foreprophecied 2. Thess 2. 9. and are called lieing signes and wonders 4. They agree no better in this point to wit Wherby did Christ produce in his last supper Transsubstantiation Concerning which their Biel on the canon of the masse lect 36. sayeth There are four opinions The 1. That Christ did make this conversion not by any words which hee uttered but by his divine power without any words and that Pope Innocent 3. was of this minde
Hezekiah was 2. Chron. 29. 15. 31 and Iosiah 2. Chron. 35. 2. 3. and 6. and as Nehemiah was 13. 7. 8. and 28. acting in matters ecclesiastical civilie but not usurping any power or practise as Vzziah did 2. Chron. 26. which belonged to the Priests office or of a Pastourall charge in doctrine discipline or administration of sacraments but as Princes should to cause and see that God be worshipped aright discipline be exercised as it ought within their Dominions that so as their power is from God so it may be imployed chieflie for God as nursing Fathers and mothers to his Church and as no scripture debarreth Princes and Magistrats froÌ„ medling with such causes in the manner forenamed but admitteth them to be Governours therein so likewise doth antiquitie as we may see in the person of Constantine the first Christian Emperour as Eusebius in his third book of his life c. 13. reporteth and of his carriage in the first Councell of Nice and decision of matters of faith whâ—â— medling the Emperours also â—ad in such causes Socrates likewise declareth in the pâ—oeme of his fifth book of ecclesiasticall historie Augustin also contra Cresconium lib. 3. cap. 51. and de Civit. Dei lib. 5. c. 24. Athanasius in his second Apologie p. 797. Graecolat appealing to the Emperour Constantine against the unjust proceedings of the Councell of Tyre in his behalf As Flavianus in the like case did to the Emperours Theodosius and Valentinian But I cannot marvell enough that this pamphleter should so touch upon a womans government of a particulare nationall Church in a civill way within her Dominion whil as a craftie vile Strumpet named Pope Iohn the eight did governe the whole Roman Church which they cal Catholick as Christs vicar and head thereof two years a moneth and foure dayes till going in procession and surprysed by paines of child-birth being upon the publick street delivered Shee thereafter died for which cause in detestation of the fact as Platina the Popes Secretarie all ancient Romanist histriographers speake No Pope ever since went that way in publick procession as Martinus Polonus Sigebert Fasciculus temporum Marianus Scotus and many others ancient Records do testifie whom I can produce And as for any testimonies of Fathers which he bringeth as Damascen's where he sayeth I consent not that the Church of God be governed by Kings and in Theodorets historie that one Eulogius said concerning the Emperour Valens coÌ„manding by his officer what did belong to a Bishop What was hee made Bishope sayeth he that day when he was crowned Emperour and Ignatius who commandeth all men even the Emperour himself to be obedient to the Bishope all these I say makes nothing against that which I haue said before but onlie against civill Princes their usurpation of what belongeth properlie and onlie to the Ecclesiasticall office and persons vested therwith in doctrin and discipline And if we will look to Antiquity we shall find that in this point popish doctrine debarring princes or the civill Magistrat from any medling in Ecclesiasticall effaires as Bellar. teaches lib. 1. de clericis c. 28. 29. joyneth hands with the ancieÌ„t hereticks the Donatists who did contend in likemanner that the cognition tryall and medling with Ecclesiasticall effaires belongeth nowise to the Magistrat And therfore this was the speech of Donatê° Quid est Imperatori cum Ecclesia or What hath the Emperour adoe with the Church as Optatus Milevitanê° declareth in his third book against Parmenian and Augustin likewise lib. 1. contra epist Parmeniani c. 7. epist 166. Whereas the harmonie of confessions of faith and ours in particulare 1581. art 24. sayeth Moreover to Kings Princes Rulers aâ—d Magistrats we affirme that chieflie and most principallie the conservation and purging of Religion appertaineth so that not onlie they are appointed for civill policie but also for maintainance of the true religion and for supressing of idolatrie and superstition as in David Iosaphat Ezekias Iosias and others highlie commended for their zeale in that case may be espyed in our later confession 1647. cap. 23. That for the better effecting wherof they haue power to call Synods to be present at them and to provyde that whatsoever is transacted in them bee according to the minde of God 13. THat Antichrist shall not be a particulare man and that the Pope is Antichrist VVHich he sayeth is contrary to 2. Thess 2. 3. where he is called That man of sinne c. and therefore a particulare man onlie Whereunto I answere in the Iesuit Ribera's words on Revel 17. 10. That it is not unusuall in Scripture that by one man many the like and of the same incorporation are signified sayeth hee which he proveth out of Math. 22. 11. where by One man that wanted the wedding garment many such are signified and out of Dan. 7. where by the King of the Medes and Persians not any individuall and one onlie person is signified but the whole succession of these Kings one after another likewise by the coÌ„sent of all Romanists that speech 2. Thess 2. 7. wher it is said Onlie he who now letteth will let till he be taken out of the way is to be understood not of an individuall Roman Emperour onelie but of the whole succession of the old Roman Emperours then resident at Rome in their full integrity Yea the papists even now when they say that the Pope is Christs vicar they meane not this or that Pope onlie but the whole succession of such one after another The second place is Revel 13. 18. Where the number 666. is called the number of a man whence hee concludeth That Antichrist shall be one onlie individuall man To which I answere that from the number of a man 666. to argue to the singularitie of a person is a bad consequence but by this number the Iesuite Ribera teacheth us better that Ireneus who lived neare to the Apostles times according to the coÌ„putation by the greek letters found it out to be Lateinos or Roman as their Church is called at this day Ecclesia latina seu Romana and the Pope Papa Romanus c. The third place is 1. Iohn 2. 22. That Antichrist denyeth the Father the Sonne which the Pope doeth not Whereunto I answere 1. That the word Antichrist is somtimes taken generallie for all these who openlie avowedly oppose Christ and his trueth and of such the Apostle Iohn speaketh verse 18. That even in his time there were many Antichrists And somtimes it is taken more strictlie as 2. Thess 2. for that great Antichrist to come wherby is signified the succession of such who under the profession of the Christian name shall notwithstanding oppose Christs trueth by all deceavablnesse of unrighteousnes and in deepest hypocrisie working in a mysterie and therefore is said to bee herned like the lamb but to speake like the dragon And in this sense we say that the Pope is Antichrist 2.
and the like necessitie of conformitie in all other Pastours as they would eschewe the danger here mentioned And this to be the true meaning of the place both Aquinas and Lombard doeth showe The second and third places are Rom. 11. 20. Of not being high minded but feare and Philip. 2. 12. Work out your owne salvation in feare and trembling To which I answere That there is a twofold feare the one which is called Timor incertitudinis or a distrustfull feare condemned Isai 35. 4. Luke â— 74. 12. 32. and Revel 21. 8. And another which is called Timor solicitudinis or a feare of holie carefullnes suspecting their owne infirmitie and corruption and causing godlie watchfulnes which is therefore called Godlie feare Heb. 12. 28. and they are pronounced blessed who haue it psal 128. 1. and this is that feare which is commanded in both these forcited places as Cardinall Cajetan showeth on Philip 2. 12. As also Estius saying With feare and trembling to work out our eternall salvation is to work it out magna cum solicitudine that is with great carefulnes As for the testimonies of fathers he citeth Ambrose in psal 118 Ser. 5. wher nothing makes against us nor in Basil or Jerome whose book he only nameth but no chapter whereas there are 11. long chapters therein nor yet in Chrisostome and as for Augustins words on psal 40. which should be 41 where he sayeth Whether his owne justice remaineth or not hee knoweth not for the Apostle terrifieth me sayeth he saying he that standeth let him take heed lest he fall To which I answere with Bernard who citeth this same place ser 2. de Septuagesima That this is the feare of an holy solicitude which everie one should haue to keepe him humble sayeth he as Augustin likewise showeth in the words that followeth the former that he speaketh not against assurance of salvation which the godlie may haue but against self confidence and presumption The second Testimonie that hee bringeth is Bernards words in the same sermon saying Who can say I am one of the Elect but he forgetteth to bring the following words which are these Yet the confidence of hope comforteth us that we be not altogether tormented with the anxietie of doubting sayeth hee for this cause are given to us signes and evident marks of our salvation that it may be put out of doubt sayeth he that hee is of the number of the Elect in whom these signes remaine Even as against such anxioê° doubting that excelleÌ„t speech of Cyprian is remarkable Ser. 4. de mortalitate pag. 317. That if wee do believe an hoâ—est mans promise much more should wee the Lord who hath promised life and immortalitie 26. THat every man hath not an Angel guardian or keeper VVHich he sayeth is contrary to Math. 18. 10. wher it is said That Children haue their Angels that behold the face of God And psal 91. 11. Hee shall giue his Angels charge over thee c. To which I answere That these places speak not of one onlie Angell guardian appointed for everie one but of Angels in the plurall which wee deny not to to be sent furth as the Apostle showeth Heb. 1. 14. As Ministring spirits for the good of the Elect somtimes many as Gen. 28. 32. to attend Jacob. and 2. King 6. 17. to protect Elisha and somtimes fewer or one as Act. 12. 7. As it pleaseth God to direct dispose So that I know not any great controversie betweene Romanists and us heerin Which Bellar. therfore never toucheth in all his book of Controversies 27 THat the holie Angels pray not for us nor knoweth our thoughts and desires on earth AS for the Angels their knowledge of our thoughts he bringeth no place of scripture neither indeed can he this being the Lords onelie prerogative as wee see 1. King 3. 36. and Rom. 8. 27. And as Theophilact showeth on Luke 5. 22. And their owne Jansenius acknowledgeth concord cap. 32. Neither is this the Controversie what Angels do in heaven in praying for the Church in generall but what we should do on earth in relation to them in particular as whether we should pray to them and give to them that which Bellarmin calleth That most excellent sort of worship which is praier pref de sanctis but because he wresteth some Texts of scripture to prove that the Angels pray for us in particular therfore we shall free these from the wrong sense which hee would put upon them First then he bringeth Zach. 1. 9. which should be verse 12. wher the Angell sayeth to God How long will thou not haue mercie on JerusaleÌ„ To which I answere 1. That this Angell was Christ as Remigius Altisioderensis expoundeth so called frequentlie in scripture as Gen. 48. 16. Exod. 32. 34. Hos 12. 4. and Mal. 3. 1. Who is the onlie Mediator for his Church 1. Tim. 2. 5. And 2. Though this wer a created Angell yet he prayeth for mercie onlie to the Church in generall The next place of Canonicall scripture which he bringeth is Revel 8. 4. And the smoake of the incense of the prayers of the saints ascended from the hand of the Angell before God To which I answere in like-manner That Andreas Caesarensis many others sayeth the Iesuite Ribera expoundeth this Angell to bee Christ as Ambrose and Beda likewise expound Lyra also Carthusian who affirmeth moreover That this is the exposition of all Catholicke As for the testimonies of Fathers he bringeth one of Hilaries saying That God needeth not the intercession of Angels but our infirmitie needeth The first part whereof maketh against him And in the last howsoever he sayeth that our infirmity needeth yet this doth not positivelie prove that they do interced especiallie for particular persons and in particular cases As for other fathers whom he onlie citeth to wit Ambrose and Victor Vticensis they speake nothing which is contrarie to our doctrine or for him 28 THat wee may not pray to them VVHich he sayeth is contrarie to Gen. 48. 16. The Angell who redeemed me from all evill bless the Lad's To which I answere That by the Angell sayth Cyrill of Alexandria lib. 3. Thesaur cap. 1. Hee understandeth the word of the Father for Hee was not ignorant that he was called the Angell of the great Counsell sayeth he Likewise sayeth Athanasius cont Arrian ora 4. As also Procopius It is cleare that the patriarch Iacob coupled no other in his prayers with God but his word which he therfore calleth the Angell because sayth he he onlie revealeth his Fathers will The next place of canonical scripture which he bringes is Hosea 12. 4. Wher Iacob is said to haue had power with the angell made supplication to him To which I answere That by this Angell the text showeth clearlie that God is understood 1. seing it is said of Iacob verse 3. That by his strength he had power with God 2. He telleth us v. 5. that this Angell was The
infants as their own famous histories record The third place is 1. Tim. 5. 15. For some are alreadie turned aside after satan To marrie then after the vow of chastitie once made is here tearmed by the Apostle a turning aside after satan sayeth he To which I answere 1. That Primasius expoundeth this That they are turned after satan either by denying the faith of God or by committing fornication sayeth he 2 Their own late Estius sayeth also thus But wherein they are turned after satan the Apostle telleth not some expound it because they married after their vow others because they committed Fornication which is the more probable sayth he for heereby a greater occasion of speaking evill against the profession was furnished to enemies as v. 14. As also sayeth he it may be referred to their deserting of the religion As the experience therefore of some younger widows that had turned aside after satan by incontinencie was a sufficient reason to the Apostle for refusing such so like wise should the wofull experience of so many whorish Priests Friers Nuns and others teach that no young person should bee forced in their admission to holie orders to vow and make profession of perpetual continencie which moved Cardinall Cajetan to say on 1. Tim. 5. 12. As Paull had learned by experience the forenamed inconvenients by admitting young widows under 60. years to a profession of continencie so would God sayeth he that we would learne by such experience whither the solemne vowes of persons oâ— both sexes in their youth that haue entered into holie religious orders hath done good iâ— the Church or not But it seemeth strange to me that against the marriage of religious persons hee should alleadge scripture seing in the Popes canon law causa 28. q. 2. and by Bellarmin himself lib. de clericis cap. 18. it is acknowledged That the marriage of Priests is not forbidden by Law or gospell nor any Apostolicall authoritie but by a later Church constitution for repealing whereof Pope Pius the second as Platina reports used to say that ther was greater reason cause to repeale it than ther was for making the same The fruit of which decree their owne Cassander setteth down consult art 23 saying Wee see by this decree that chastitie is so farre from being established that a window is seene to be opened to all lust villanie Therfore also did Gerson Chancellour of the universitie of Paris deplore de vita spirituali animae lect 4. coroll 14 That the places of the holie Ministrie were possessed by Adulterers whoremasters Sodomits and such like Monsters and that the number of this kind was so great that there was no proceeding against them yea Whoredome was of so little account amongst them authorised that it is said in the glosse on the canon Law dist 81. cap. Maximianus That for simple fornication a Priest is not to be deposed Seing as hath beene said Few were to bee found who were free of that vyce So likewise to the very same purpose causa 2. quest 7. cap. Lator it is againe said That single fornication is not worthie of deposition So that as Bernard speaketh serm 66 in cantica Take from the Church honourable marriage and the Bed undefiled you shall fill the same with whoredomes incests filthie issues effeminat and Sodomiticall Monsters and in a word with all sort of uncleannesse And what opposition was made against this decree of forced single life made by Pope Gregorie 7. alias Hildebrand aÌ„no 1074. by the whol Clergie almost Their own Sigebert declareth in his Chronicle saying Pope Gregorie having convocated a synod removed from their office all married Priests and inhibit all Laicks to heare their Masse by a new example whereupon did arise so great a scandal that in the time of no heresie the church was rent with a more grievous scisme many therby joyning also with incontinencie perjurie and manifold Adulteries Which made that noble poet in his time Chaucer Esq of woodstock anno 1341. to say in his plowmans tale They liue not in lecherie but haunt Wenches Widows wives and punisheth the poore for poultrie Themselves using it all their lives 45 THat fasting and abstinence from certaine meates is not grounded on holie scripture nor causeth any spirituall good FOr answere 1. That fasting is not grounded on scripture nor causeth any spirituall good we disowne for our Confession of faith 1647. cap. 21. art 5. testifieth the the contrarie where solemne fasts in their severall times and seasons used in an holie religious manner are declared to bee a part of Gods religious worship according to the scriptures there alleadged So that we admitt both private publick fasting for humiliation as the same is joyned with prayer and fitteth us the better for devotion as also tendeth to spiritâ—all good many wayes as we see Act. 13. 3. Math. 17. 21. c. But as for enjoyning abstinence from certaine sorts of meate at set times for coÌ„science sake joyned with opinion of merit or satisfaction This we oppose as a doctrine of devils so called 1. Tim. 4. 3. contrarie to Christian liberty and to Gods word 1. Tim. 4. 4. As for the example of the Rechabits which he bringeth Ierm 35. 5. of forbearing the drinking of wyne for ever It was a singular case and a particular humane injunction onlie of their father binding no others in that time or ever thereafter as the like was that of the Nazarits Luke 1. 15. to wit temporarie onlie relating to some onlie as also meerlie ceremoniall 46 THat Iesus Christ descended not into hell nor delivered â—hence the soules of the Patriarch's out of the same VVHich he sayeth is contrarie to Ephes 4. 8. where it is said That when Christ ascended on high he led captivitie captive which Captives sayth he were the soules of the fathers which Christ delivered out of Limbus To whom I answere 1. we deny that ever he shall find in scripture any such place as he calleth Limbus or that the word Hell as it relateth to the soule signifieth any place appointed for the godlie but for the wicked onlie damned for ever 2. By Captivity led captive Christs enemies ours are onlie meant not his freinds or the fathers which is clear first by the alike speech Judg. 5. 12. where Deborah after the victorie over Israels enemies sayeth to Barack Arise Barack and lead thy Captivitie captive That is thy vanquished enemies 2. The fathers also so expound these words therfore sayeth Tertullian lib. 5. contra Marcion Hee led Captivitie captive that is death that slaverie under which man was Haymo also Theophy lact on Ephes 4. 9. sayeth That this captivitie was the Devill death the curse of the Law sinne And so also speaketh Augustin on psal 67. 3. So also do their own Doctours expound these words as Lyra on psal 67. Lombard likewise and Arboreus on Ephes 4. 9. The second place is Act. 2. 27. Thou
will not leaue my soul in hel To which I answere 1. Their Arias Montanus in his interlineall Bible approven by the Universitie of Lovan and printed at Antuerp 1572. translates that place of the 16. psalout of which this of the Act. is taken thus Non derelinques animam meam in sepulâ—hro And Isidorus clarius on this place speaketh thus according to the Hebrew phrase the soule is put for the bodie which he was not to leaue in the grave And Bellarmin lib. 4. de Christo cap. 12. grantes that the hebrew word nephesh or anima is a generall word which somtimes signifieth the bodie as is cleare sayth he by many parts of scripture Wherof he instances one Gen. 37. 21. where Ruben sayth to his brehren concerning Joseph Non interficiamê° animaÌ„ ejus where the word anima is not taken for the soule properlie so called nor by a Trope for the man himself but properlie for his flesh or bodie sayeth he and as Nephesh somtimes signifieth the bodie so in the same sense is the greek word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 used by the septuagint Levit. 21. 1. 11. 2. The hebrew word Sheol also is taken two wayes in scripture to wit either for the receptacle of the corporall part of man after death and so it signifieth the graue which is not onlie called in the greek 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as 1. Cor. 15. 55. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 O graue where is thy victorie orelse it is taken for the receptacle of the spirituall part or soule of man after death and thus being taken it is translated Hell and then onlie and ever it signifieth the place of the damned out of which there is no deliverie as Augustin showeth at length in his 99. Epistle to Evodius and for probation that the word Sheol is taken for both these forenamed receptacles Their own Lyra's words on psal 114. are these In the hebrew sayth he for INFERNUS is put SHEOL which doth not onlie signifie Hell but also the graue as wee also see Gen. 42. 38. Job â—7 13. and psal 141. 7. A third exposition Romanists give of the word Sheol or Infernus signifying there by the estate of the dead in generall under the power of death whereof Peter speaketh Act. 2. 24. and thus doth their Jansenius expound in Prov. 15. 11. and Genebrard in psal 88. 48. Thus the words being cleared by Romanists theÌ„selves 1. then whither the meaning be this Thou will not leaue my bodie in the graue according to Arias Montanus translation of psal 16. 10. relating so to Christs resurrection which is the Apostles purpose to prove or 2. whither the meaning be Thou will not leaue mee under the power of death as Jansenius expoundeth or 3. whither 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or soule be taken for the spirituall part of man and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or hell for the place of the damned yet howsoever I say the words be taken in any of the three former senses they shall never prove any popish Limbê° or any desceÌ„se of Christs soul thither because the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Infernus when it is taken for the grave or that which is in place thereof as Gen. 43. 38. and Ionah 2. 2. It ever signifieth the place of the damned as both scripture showeth and Augustin forecited and I hope that papists themselves will never say that the soules of the Patriarchs went down thither Moreover coÌ„cerning the descense of Christs soule to hell Romanists themselves disagree thus 1. Scotus in 1. sent dist 11. q. 1. disclaimeth any warrant in the gospell for it 2. Bellarmin lib. 4. de Christo c. affirmeth that Christs soul descended locally to the place of the damned 3. Aquinas denyeth this as Bellar. showeth in the same place and sayeth that he onlie descended locallie to that part of hell which is called Limbus 4. Durand mantaineth that Christs soule descended to no part of hell locallie but virtualie onlie and by effect seing the scripture sayeth he distinguisheth nowise the hell of the damned froÌ„ any other place otherwise saith Durand in 3. sent dist 22. q. 3. his soule had beene in two places together seing he said to the theef on the Crosse this day thou shall be with me in Paradise And which virtuall descending of Christ into hell ProtestaÌ„ts likewise acknowledge Chamier speaking thus lib. 5. de Christo cap. 3. Moreover sayeth hee when we say Hee descended into hell we signifie therby the efficacie of Christs death wherby he overcame hell The fruit of which victorie not only appertaineth to them who were to come after but also to them who had long gone before sayeth hee The third place is 1. Pet. 3. 18. Being put to death in the flesh but quickned by the spirit by which also hee went preached to the spirits in prison Which he sayth wer the Fathers in Limbê° To which I answer That this place proveth no descending of Christs soule to Limbus for delivering of the fathers therefra Which shall be made clear by considdering 1. By what spirit Christ went and preached in the dayes of Noab 2. who were these spirits in prison to whom he went 3. The time when hee went First then the spirit by which Christ went and preached was not his humane soul but his divine spirit for so sayeth Augustin epist 99. ad Evodium as also Beda on this place O Ecumeniê° likewise and Athanasius which exposition Estius sayeth agreeth well with 2. Cor. 13. 4. Aquinas likewise part 3. q. 52. art 2. saith that it was by the spirit of his divinitie that he went preached sayth he by the mouth of just Noah Lyra in like-manner sayth That it was by the holie Ghost in Noah and in other good men So also speaketh Hugo Cardinalis the Iesuite Salmeron on this place Next Scripture it self testifieth in the same place That it was by that spirit by which he was quickned and raised from the dead and that this spirit was his divine spirit is witnessed Rom. 8. 11. by which also our mortall bodies shall bee quickned and which dwelleth in the Elect. And this is not Christs soule but his holie spirit as v. 9. Next the spirits to whom hee went are descrived 1. That they wer disobedient who abused the long suffering patience of God that waited for their repentance in the dayes of Noah which the patriarchs did not who ar praised so much for the contrary to wit their faith and obedience Heb. 11. 2. They ar said to be such spirits who wer in prison even then when Peter wrote this epistle as their own Andradius notes def coÌ„cil Trid. lib. 2. p. 17. 2 the Text it self declareth therefore wer not fred therfra at Christs Resurrection which was long before 3. The time when Christ by his spirit preached to these spirits in prison was as the text showeth In the dayes of Noah and not after his
Moses did sayeth he and make no image against the Law unlesse God coÌ„mand thee as he did Moses Whose word is a Law Next where he saieth that S. Jerome witnesses that the Iewes worshiped these images of the Cherubims I answere 1. That they wer not seene by them seing they were placed in the holie of holies into which the High-Priest onlie entered once in the year onlie 2. Their owne Estius on Heb. 9. 5. testifieth the contrarie saying Neither were the Cherubims placed in the Sanctuary to be worshiped sayeth he but both for the signification of things to come as also for augmenting the majestie of the place His next place is Hebr. 9. 1. 5. Where the images of the Cherubims ar called divine ordinances To which I answere That this confirmeth what hath beene said to wit that those were made by Gods speciall command and what God coÌ„manded under the law to be done as typicall and significative of more spirituall things under the gospell as the Apostle showeth v. 8. 9. 10. was a sufficieÌ„t warraÌ„t the like wher of papists haue not for their unwarrantable making of the images of the Trinitie others abused to idolatrie 49 THat it is not lawfull to reverence images or to give any honour to dead insensible things VVHich he sayeth is contrarie to Exod. 3. 5. Where Moses is commanded to put off his shoes before he drew neare to the burning bush because the place whereon he stood was holie ground To which I answere 1. That it seemeth strange to me that for adoration of images hee should bring any scripture seing their bishop Melchior Canus ingenouslie acknowledgeth lib. 3. de Trad. cap. 3. fund 3. That the worship of images is not contained in scripture neither clearlie nor obscurelie 2. As their Cassander testifieth consult 21. the adoration of images was condemned in the Councell of Frankfoord as contrarie to scripture 3. This reverence that was done by Moses by putting off his shoes was not to the sensâ—es ground called holy because of Gods holie presence at that time there but to the Lord himself who was manifesting himself ther both by voice vision as Hugo de S. victore showeth and as their bishop also Lipomanus in his catena upon Exod. and Cajetan whom he citeth doth there also teach The second place which he bringeth is psal 99. 5. Adore ye his footstoole for it is holie By which literallie is understood the Ark which was worshiped by the Iewes saith he in regard of the images that were set on it To which I answer 1. That he perverteth the Text for the words are as the originall and their own interlinear hath Adore yee at his footstoole for he is holie so that it is God not his footstoole that was to bee adored 2. In the same psalme v. 9. It is said worship yee at his holie hill for the Lord our God is holie which justifieth the former exposition and not worship ye his holy hill 3. his reason is both naughty false First naughtie because the Iewes saith he worshiped the Ark because of the images that wer set on it whence it would follow that not only images theÌ„selves were to bee worshiped but also the places wherein or wheron they are set 2. False because as their Estius on Heb. 9. 5. testifieth That these images of the Cherubims were placed in the sanctuarie or Ark not to be worshiped sayeth he but for the signification of things to come and wer not to be seene by the people And 4. suppose it were Adore ye his footstoole yet Augustin on that place â—elleth us that thereby is meaned Christs humanitie which being â—nited to his Deitie in a personall union is therefore to be adored this exposition doth Lyra follow as also Lombard Carthusian Durand in his rationale divin lib. 4. p. 60. and the Doctours of Duay in their notes on this place likewise The third place is Philip. 2. 10. At the Name of Iesus everie knee shal â—owe whence he inferres that seing words are representing signes or images to the eare as other images are to the eye therefore also they are to be worshiped aswell as the former To which I answere that beside O Ecumenius Theophylect Sedulius and Haymo also their owne Aquinas all of them testifie that the name is put for himself who is named and so likewise sayth their late Estius And that by bowing the knee is signified by a metonomie subjection sayeth he therefore the meaning is that all who are in any place knowing that man who is called Iesus to be the sonne of God and God himself trulie they shall submitt themselves to him sayeth hee as God and Lord over all The fourth place is Numb 21. 8. Where the Lord sayeth to Moses Make thee a firie serpent and set it on a pole and it shall some to pass that every one that is bitt or stinged when he looketh on it shall liue Whence hee gathereth that an image may not onlie be made and set up to be looked upon but also reverenced or adored To whom I answer 1. with Tertullian before cited that for making and setting up that serpent to be looked upon for a miraculous cure Moses had an expresse divine precept with a promise which papists haue not for making their Idolatrous images of the Trinitie and such like but a precept in the contrarie 2. For reverence or adoration there is no such thing in the Text but on the contrarie wee see the unlawfulnes therof by that practise of godly Hezekiah in breaking the same when it became to be adored 2. King 18. because as their owne Biel showeth on the canon of the Masse lect 47. This was grosse idolatrie and that this godly king by breaking the same removed the occasion thereof sayeth hee 3. In his answere to the objection of this place 2. King 18. he granteth that this worshiping of that serpent was the abuse thereof and so contradicteth himself And as for fathers whom he cites I cannot admire enough his impudencie beside his wresting of scripture seing their own Cassander coÌ„sult art 21. fayth How much the ancieÌ„t fathers of the primitive Church did abhore all veneration of images Origen as one declareth against Celsus lib. 7. sayeth he Whence also it was that in the second Councell of Nice under Constantine and Irene when some decrees were made concerning the adoration of images and that a copy thereof was brought to the Emperour Charles he indicted a Councell at Frank foord anno 794. at which the Popes legats were present wherein by the unanimous consent of all the westerne Bishops the decree of that Nicen Councell was condemned as being contrarie remarke both to scripture and to the doctrine of the ancient Fathers as also to the custome of the RomaÌ„ Church sayeth he neither did that subterfuge then prevaile which used to be alleadged by some that they giue not the honour to the images theÌ„selves but to them whom they
represent for this excuse saith he was also given by pagans for their adoration of their Images as wee may see in Arnobius as also in Augustin on psal 113. 4. Or as wee reckon psal 115. And yet he citeth Augustin Gregorie who in his epistle to Serenus lib. 9. epist 9. coÌ„demnes all worship of images as Ambrose doeth likewise in his oration on the death of Theodosius calling such worship an heathnish errour Neither is any such thing in Basil or Chrisostome whom hee citeth that maketh for the worship of images and as for Damascen alleadging it to bee an Apostolicall tradition onelie This maketh against him who cited for image worship testimonies of scripture beside that Damascen is but late â—ainted with grosse errours as the denying of the procession of the holie Ghost lib. 1. orthod fidei And to what hight of grosse idolatrie their worship of images is come shall be evidenced both by their doctrine as likewise their practise and both these onlie out of themselves And 1. for their doctrine all the schoolmen sayth their Bishop Peresius de trad p. 3. Dâ—teach that the images themselves are to be worshiped with that same worship as these whom they represent therfore that the Images of God and of Christ are to bee worshiped with that highest sort which they call Latria as Bellarmin also witnesseth lib. 2. de imag cap. 20. § 2. likewise sayeth he cap. 21 That the images of Christ and of the saints are to be worshiped not onlie by accident or improperlie but also for themselves properlie so that themselves terminateth the worship as they are considered in themselves and not onlie as they supplie the place of them whom they represent for if the image sayth he were to be worshiped but improperlie to wit because before it or in it or by it that which it representeth is adored then certainlie sayeth he it might be denyed that images were to be worshiped at all So that for defeÌ„ce of this their doctrine they ar forced to use most subtile distinctions which scarce themselves understand let be the unlearned people sayeth Bellarmin lib. 2. de imag cap. 22. § quarto Next for their practise It is more manifest than it can be by many words exprest sayth their Cassander consult art 21. that the worship of Images is come to that hight as ever that adoration was which was by Pagans given to their Idâ—ls And they so dote upon them sayeth their Gabriel Biel in canone Missae lect 49â— That they belieue a certaine Deitie grace or holinesse to be in them whereby they are able to work miracles restore health and deliver from dangers out of the confidence of the forenamed being moâ—ed to worship them that they may obtaine some of the former things froÌ„ them whence it is also sayth hee that they vowe and obliege themselves to undergo pilgramages some to this some to that Church according as they respect the images believing that this Image in such a place is of greater vertue than that in another and to be more famous for miracles of greater power And if at any time miracles bee wrought upon men sayeth he who haue recourse unto them this is not by the vertue of the image but somtimes by the operation of the devill to deceiue such idolatroê° worshippers God so permitting and their infidelitie so deserving sayeth he And which idolatrous adoration of images sayeth that learned knight and great traveller sir Edmund Sandys in his speculum Europae p 228. and 230. is the greatest scandall of al others for which both Iewes Turks calleth us idolatrous Christians and therfore the Iewes say when they come to the Christians sermoÌ„s that as long as they see the Preacher direct his speeeh prayer to the little wooden Crucifix which standeth on the pulpit by him to call it his Lord Saviour to kneell to it to embrace and kisse it to weepe upon it as the fashion of Italie is this is preaching sufficient for them say they perswadeth theÌ„ more with the verie sight thereof to hate Christian religion than any reasone that the world can alleadge to loue it 50. THat no man hath seen God in any forme therefore that his image and picture cannot bee made VVHich is contrarie sayeth he to Gen. 3. 8. Wher God appeared to Adam walking in the garden in a corporall forme and to Gen. 28. 12. where hee appeared to Iacob standing aboue the ladder which hee saw To which I answere That he shameleslie belieth Scripture for there is no such thing that Adam saw God in any corporall forme but onlie heard his voyce as it is said likewise that at the giving of the Law Deut. 4. 15. 16. The people heard a voice onlie but saw no shape lest they should corrupt themselves make them any graven image Likewise it is said Gen. 28. 13. That the Lord stood aboue the ladder and that Lacob onlie heard a voice but not that he saw any shape Therefore sayes the Prophet Isai 40. 18. To whom will ye liken God or what liknes will yee compare to him whereupon saieth Perusin an augustin Frier and professour of divinity by these words is refuted and rejected the rashnes of men yea their madnes and ignorance sayeth he who dare be bold to represent God by any image therefore also their owne Vasques lib. 2. de ador cap. 3. disp 4. As also Catharinus bishop of Minori in his opuscula de imag declareth that the representing of God by any image is expresslie against the second commandement As also Bellarmin himself witnesseth lib. 2. de sanct cap. 3. that Abulensis Durand Peresius do teach plainlie That the image of God is nowise lawfull to be made And speciallie to represent him by a three headed Monster as they do the image of the Trinitie as I haue to showe in their owne Missall The third place which he bringes is Exod. 33. 11. where it is said That Ged appeared to Moses face to faee whereunto their owne bishop Lipomanus answereth out of Augustin l. 4. de symbolo ad Catechumenos cap. 3. Moses did see God sayeth he not with his bodilie eyes but with the eyes of his minde because that perpetuall light which God is had in lightned him more than others therfore it is said that he spake to him face to fate as if it had beene said that he manifested himself more clearly to him nor to all others for in that it is said cap. 10. no man can see my face and live is showne that none can see God with his bodilie eies sayth he Therfore also sayth Cajetan he sayeth not that God was seen face to face but that hee spake to him face to face for God manifesteth himself onlie by speech nor is he perceived but by hearing onelie sayeth he The fourth and fifth testimonies which he bringeth are coincident with Isai 6. 1. 5. and 1. King 22. 19. wherein it is said
That God was sitting on a Throne and Dan. 7. 9. whose garments were whyte as snowe the haire of his head like pure wool Whence hee gathereth that as hee was seene therefore he may be â—o pictured To which I answer That it followeth not for before that time he appeared to Moses in the bush in the forme of fire and yet their own Richeom tract 3. c. 9. saith To picture him so wer to favour the pagaÌ„s who worshiped the fire so may we say that to picture God as an old man as the papists do is to favour hereticks called the Anthropomorphits who made him to haue the shape and members of a man Therfore Augustin de fide symbolo cap. 7. giveth this reasone why it is not lawful to any Christian to make any such image Lest we fall into the same sacrileâ—ge saieth he whereby the Apostle maketh them execrable who turne the glorie of the incorruptible God into the similitude of a corruptible man Rom. 1. 23. 51 THat blessing or signing with the signe of the Crosse is not founded on holie scripture VVHich he saieth is contrarie to Revel 7. 3. Where it is said Hurt not the earth nor the sea nor the trees till I haue sealed the servants of GOD in the foreheads To which I answere 1. That there is no word heere of signing farre lesse with the signe of the Crosse but as the originall hath of sealing and what this sealing is is exprest 2. Tim. 2. 19. The foundation of the Lord standeth sure having this seale the Lord knoweth them that are his let every one that nameth the Name of Christ depart from iniquitie So that it is sanctification departing from iniquititie which manifesteth their election that such ar the Lords 2. If this were the signing with the signe of the Crosse then none that did signe themselves so would perish for none of these that were sealed heere did perish The other two places Mark 10. 16. Luke 24. 50. which speaketh onlie of Christ and his disciples their blessing of Children maketh no mention of any signing them with the signe of the Crosse but onlie of blessing them And so are alleadged unto no purpose As for Fathers he setteth downe none of their words Therfore wee passe by theÌ„ yet with this answer that none of them proves his point 52 THat the publick service of the Church ought to be said a language that al the people may unstand VVHich he sayeth is contrarie to Luke 1. 8. where it is said That Zacharte was burning incense in the temple the whole people were praying without where sayeth he hee being within and the people without then how did they understand him To which I answer 1. There is no word of his speaking words to be understood but of burning incense for he was strickeÌ„ dumb 2. He being within and the people without it was not marvell that they did not understand in what language he had spokeÌ„ wheras the question is Whither that divine service which is performed in the sight audience of the people which should be to edification according to 1. Cor. 14. should be in a language unknown to the people which is against the Apostles directioÌ„ for saith CajetaÌ„ on that place out of this doctrine of Paul it is gathered sayeth he That it is better for edifying of the Church that publick prayers which are said in the peoples hearing be said in the vulgar tongue known to the people Clergie nor in latine or an unknoweÌ„ language And that this was the practise of the primtive Church Aquinas on 1. cor 14. granteth as also saith their own Lyra. In the primitive church thanksgivings and all other common service was performed sayth he in the vulgar tongue The second place is Levit. 16. 17. wher it is said That there shall be no man in the tabernicle of the Congregation when he goeth in to make an attoniment in the holie place till he to wit the High-priest come out again Which maketh no more to prove that publick divine service before the people should be done in an unknowne tongue to them then it proveth Rome to be in Vtopia For 1. This place speaketh onlie of the High-priests entrie into the most holie place with blood to make attoniment once onlie a yeare which was an action betweene God and him and no mention of speech in whatsoever language 2. Which was to be performed in that place when ther should be no man in the Tabernacle of the Congregation and therefore private without any assistance or presence of any who might either heare or see him 3. This was a jewish and typicall service abrogat froÌ„ whence to draw this consequence Ergo the publick service of the Church under the gospell ought to be said now in a language that people understands not is as coherent as fire and yâ—e or followeth aswell in Logick as to say that the Authour of this Touch-stone is an Animal Ergo Bos cornutus You may see likewise how impudent and ignorant this man is to alleadge as he doth in his preface and whole Tenour of this Touch-stone To convince us that our doctrine is against the expresse words of our own Bible whereas let any indifferent man judge beside a number of the like impertinencies if these two alleadged places of Luke 1. 8. and Levit. 16. 17. be contradicted any wise by this our assertion That the publick service of the Church ought to be said in a language which all the people may understand FINIS AN Advertisment to the READER IN Respect of that craftie cruell practise even to the dead let be to deceive the living which our Adversaries haue used of late in purging both out of fathers and others their own moderne writters what they find to be against themselves or for witnessing the Truth as their Index expurgatorius showes Lest that the Reader of this my answere to that popish PAMPHLET should light on such purged books as I cite and not finding the words at all orelse far changed as I can instance should think that I had cited them at randon Therefore having the uncorrupted copyes beside me I haue set down with their Names the place where and the time when they wer printed That if the Reader find not the words cited by me or find them altered in a later impression he may know that they haue passed thorow that popish firie purgatorie of bookes ordained at Trent and which indeed is no new trick of the Devill and his supposts but hath ben used by Hereticks of old as Vincentius Lyrinensis testifieth who lived in the yeare 430. And examplifieth the same in Origens works that so by his authoritie hereticks might perswade men of their errours which Origen never knew AND therefore he showeth us that for old and farre spread heresies such as these of poperie are they ar not to be confuted so much by the authoritie of fathers ancient writters in respect by vitiating their bookes they haue stollen out of them what was for trueth what they found to bee against themselves or to use his owne words Eo quod prolixo temporum tractu longae his furandae veritatis patuerit occasio and therefore for confuting such hee sayeth wee must use aut sola scripturarum authoritate orelse with the same the authority of the most ancient and general Councels such as wee see that of the first of Nice for peoples reading of Scripture the lawfululnes of churchmeÌ„s marriage for which that famous Paphnutius so much stood the paritie of patriarchall jurisdiction against papall supremacie which in the three succeeding Councels was also decreed against beside the coÌ„demning of prayer to Angels decreed against in the Councell of Laodicea can 35. and the having of images in Churches let be their adoration condeÌ„ned in the Councell of Eliberis Can. 36. and the like THE NAMES of the Authours whom I cite are A Augustin printed at Paris 1541. Ambrose at Paris 1529. Aquinas at Paris 1529. Alfonsê° a CastrÌ„o at Paris 1534. Arboreus at Paris 1551. B Basil Basileae 1540. Bernard at Paris 1527. Bellarmin Coloniae 1615. C Chrisostome at Paris 1554. Cyprian Lugduni 1537. Carthusian at paris 1536. Cajetan at Paris 1532. Cusanus Basileae 1565. Catharinus Venetiis 1551. D Decretalia Lugduni 1517. DuraÌ„di rationale Lugduni 1515. E Estius at Paris 1616. Erasmê° Antuerpiae 1538 F Fulgentius NuruÌ„bergae 1520. Fasciculus Temporum Coloniae 1479. Ferus at Paris 1559 G Gabr. Biel Lugduni 1517. Gregorius 1. at Paris 1518. Gratian. Lugduni 1517. Georgiê° CassaÌ„der at Paris 1616. H Hieronimus at Paris 1546. Hilarius Basileae 1570. Haymo at Paris 1538. Hugo Cardinalis at Paris 1532. I Ireneus Basileae 1548. Ignatius at Paris 1540. Ianseâ—iê° Muguntiae 1624. L Lyra at Paris 1501. Lombard at paris 1528. Lipomani Catena at Paris 1550. M Mâ—lchiâ—r Canus Coloniae 1605 Missale RomanuÌ„ at Paris 1532. Mercerus at Paris 1563. Maldonat Moguntiae 1624. O Origenes at Paris 1537. P Platina Nurimbergae 1481. Peresius at Paris 1605. Petrus de Aliaco Coloniae 1500. Perusin Perusiae 1608. R Roffensis Londini 1533. Ribera Antuerpiae 1603. S. Sigebert at Paris 1513. Stella Antuerpiae 1608. T Theophylact aâ— Paris 1515. V Vincentius Lyrinensis at Paris 1560. Errata In the Epistle Dedicatory pag. 2. linea ult hands almost for hands almost And To the Reader p. 6. l. 11. Nicen for Nissen p. 13. â—2 Ecuminicall for O Ecumenicall p. 24. l. 11. Doway for Duay p. 33. l. 20. nf for in p. 74. l. 2. Lyrin for Jerome p. 103. l. antepenult Gelasuis for Gelasius p. 220. l. 3. a whol line in the copy omitted the words are these because it feemes to be broken to whoÌ„ it is objected what Ambrose saies that no falshood should be thought to bee in the sacrifice of truth p. 128. l. 3. after the words amongst us is omitted whoÌ„ they call Calvinists l. 19. de ecclesia for de notis ecclesiae p. 132. l. 20. donation for domination p. 272. l. 14. young for youngmaÌ„ p. 180. l. 6. virginitie for virgin p. 191. l. 19. one of for of one p. 353. l. 17. circuÌ„sion for circumcision p. 299. l. 9. wheÌ„ it is taken for when it is not taken