Answer to a Jesuit in Ireland, Treatise
AN ANSVVER TO THE FORMER CHALLENGE.
TO uphold the Religion, which at this day is maintained in the Church of Rome, and to discredit the truth which we professe: three things are here urged, by one who hath vndertaken to make good the Papists cause against all gainesayers. The first concerneth the originall of the errors wherwith that part standeth charged: the Author and time whereof, he requireth us to shew. The other two respect the testimonie, both of the Primitive Church, & of the sacred Scriptures: which, in the points wherein we varie, if this man may be believed, maketh wholly for them, and against us.
First then would he faine know, what Bishop of Rome did first alter that Religion, which wee commend in them of the first 400 yeares? In what Popes dayes was the true Religion overthrowne in Rome? To which I answere, First, that wee doe not hold that Rome was built in a day; or that the great dung-hill of errors, which now wee see in it, was raised in an age: and therefore it is a vaine demand, to require from us the name of anie one Bishop of Rome, by whom or under whom this Babylonish confusion was brought in. Secondly, that a great difference is to be put betwixt Heresies which openly oppose the foundations of our Faith; and that Apostasie which the Spirit hath evidently foretold should bee brought in by such as speake lyes in hypocrisie. (1. Tim. 4.1, 2.) The impietie of the one is so notorious, that at the verie first appearance it is manifestly discerned: the other is a mysterie of iniquitie (as the Apostle termeth it, 2. Thes. 2.7.) iniquitas, sed mystica, id est, pietatis nomine palliata, (so the ordinarie Glosse expoundeth the place) an iniquitie indeed, but mysticall, that is, cloked vvith the name of pietie. And therefore they who kept continuall watch and ward against the one, might sleepe while the seeds of the other were a sowing; yea peradventure might at unawares themselves have some hand in bringing in of this Trojan horse, commended thus unto them under the name of Religion, and semblance of devotion. Thirdly, that the originall of errors is oftentimes so obscure, and their breede so base, that howsoever it might be easily observed by such as lived in the same age, yet no wise man will mervaile, if in tract of time the beginnings of manie of them should be forgotten, and no register of the time of their birth found extant. Wee aAct. 23.8.reade that the Sadducees taught, there were no Angels: is any man able to declare unto us, under what high Priest they first broached this error? The Grecians, Circassians, Georgians, Syrians, Egyptians, Habassines, Muscovites and Russians, dissent at this day from the Church of Rome in many particulars: will you take upon you to shew in what Bishops dayes these severall differences did first arise? When the point hath been well skanned, it will be found, that many errors have crept into their profession, the time of the entrance whereof you are not able to designe: and some things also are maintained by you against them, which have not been delivered for Catholick doctrine in the primitive times, but brought in afterwards, your selves know not when.
Such, for example, is that sacrilege of yours, whereby you withhold from the people the use of the Cuppe in the Lords Supper; as also your doctrine of Indulgences and Purgatorie: which they reject, and you defend. For touching the first, bValent. de legit. usu Euchar. cap. 10.Gregorius de Valentia, one of your principall Champions, confesseth that the use of receiving the Sacrament in one kinde, began first in some Churches, and grew to be a generall custome in the Latin Church not much before the Councell of Constance, in which at last (to wit, 200 yeres ago) this custome was made a law. But if you put the question to him, as you doe to us, What Bishop of Rome did first bring in this custome? he giveth you this answer, that it began to be used, not by the decree of any Bishop, but by the very use of the Churches, and the consent of the faithfull. If you further question with him, quando primum vigere coepit ea consuetudo in aliquibus Ecclesijs? When first did that custome get footing in some Churches? he returneth you for answer, Minimé constat: it is more then he can tell.
The like doth cRoffens. Assert. Lutheran. confutat. artic. 18.Fisher Bishop of Rochester, & dCaietan. Opusc. tom. 1. tract 15. de Indulgent. cap 1.Cardinall Caietan give us to understand of Indulgences; that no certaintie can be had, what their originall was, or by whom they were first brought in. Fisher also further addeth concerning Purgatorie: that in the ancient Fathers, there is either none at all, or very rare mention of it; that by the Grecians it is not beleeved even to this day; that the Latins also, not all at once, but by little and little received it: and that, Purgatorie being so lately knowen, it is not to be mervailed, that in the first times of the Church there was no use of Indulgences; seeing these had their beginning, after that men for a while had been affrighted with the torments of Purgatorie. Out of which confession of the adverse part, you may observe: 1. What little reason these men have, to require us to set down the precise time wherin all their profane novelties were first brought in: seeing that this is more then they themselves are able to doe. 2. That some of them may come in pedetentim (as Fisher acknowledgeth Purgatory did) by little and little, and by very slow steps, which are not so easie to be discerned, as fooles be borne in hand they are. 3. That it is a fond imagination, to suppose that all such changes must be made by some Bishop, or any one certaine author: whereas it is confessed, that some may come in by the tacite consent of manie, and grow after into a generall custome, the beginning whereof is past mans memorie.
And as some superstitious usages may draw their originall from the undiscreet devotion of the multitude: so some also may be derived from want of devotion in the people; and some alterations likewise must be attributed to the verie change of time it selfe. Of the one we cannot give a fitter instance, then in your private Masse, wherein the Priest receiveth the Sacrament alone: which cHard. answer to the first Article of Iuels challenge, fol. 26. b. Edit. Ant…erp. Ann. 1565.Harding fetdheth from no other ground, then lacke of devotion of the peoples part. When you therefore can tell us, in what Popes dayes the people fell from their devotion; wee may chance tell you, in what Popes dayes your private Masse began. An experiment of the other wee may see in the use of the Latin Service, in the Churches of Italy, France, and Spaine. For if wee be questioned, When that use first beganne there? and further demanded, fAllen. artic. 11. demand. 9.Whether the language formerly used in their Liturgie, was changed upon a suddaine? our answer must be, That Latin Service was used in those countries from the beginning: but that the Latin tongue at that time was commonly understood of all, which afterward by little and little degenerated into those vulgar languages which now are used. When you therefore shall be pleased to certifie us, in what Popes dayes the Latin tongue was changed into the Italian, French, and Spanish (which we pray you doe for our learning:) wee will then give you to understand, that from that time forward the language, not of the Service, but of the people, was altered. Nec enim lingua vulgaris populo subtracta est, sed populus ab eà recessit (saith gErasm. in declarationib. ad censuras Parisiens. tit. 12. sect. 41.Erasmus:) The vulgar tongue vvas not taken away from the people; but the people departed from it.
If this which I have said, will not satisfie you; I would wish you call unto your remembrance, the answer which Arnobius sometimes gave to a foolish question, propounded by the enimies of the Christian faith: hArnob lib. 2. contra Gentes.Nec si nequivero causas vobis exponere, cur aliquid fiat illo, vel hoc modo, continuo sequitur, ut infecta fiant, quae facta sunt. And consider, whether I may not returne the like answer unto you. If I be not able to declare unto you, by what Bishop of Rome, and in what Popes daies, the simplicitie of the ancient faith was first corrupted; it will not presently follow, that vvhat vvas done, must needs by undone. Or rather, if you please, call to mind the Parable in the Gospel, where iMatth. 13.24, 25.the kingdome of heaven is likened unto a man, vvhichwhich sowed good seede in his field; but vvhile men slept, his enemy came and sowed Tares among the Wheat, and went his vvay. These that slept, tooke no notice, when or by whom the Tares were scattered among the Wheat; neither at the first rising, did they discerne betwixt the one and the other, though they were awake. But kIbid. v.26, 27.vvhen the blade vvas sprung up, and brought forth fruit, then appeared the Tares: and then they put the question unto their Master; Sir, didst not thou sow good seed in thy field? from whence then hath it tares? Their Master indeed telleth them, it was the enemies doing: but you could tell them otherwise, and come upon them thus. You yourselves graunt, that the seed which was first sowen in this field, was good seed, and such as was put there by your Master himselfe. If this which you call Tares, be no good graine, and hath sprung from some other seed then that which was sowen here at first: I would faine knowe that mans name, who was the sower of it; and likewise the time in which it was sowen. Now you being not able to shew either the one, or the other: it must needes be, that your eyes here deceive you; or if these be tares, they are of no enemies, but of your Masters owne sowing.
To let passe the slumbrings of former times, wee could tell you of an age, wherein men not only slept, but also snorted: it was (if you know it not) the tenth from Christ, the next neighbour to that wherein lApoc. 20.7.Hell broke loose. That mInfelix dicitur hoc seculum, exhaustum hominibus ingenio & doctrinâ claris, sive etiam claris principibus & pontificibus. Genebrard. Chro…. libr. 4.Vnhappie age (as Genebrard, and other of your owne Writers terme it,) exhausted both of men of account for vvit and learning, and of vvorthy Princes and Bishops: In which there were nBellarm. in Chronol. an. 970no famous Writers, nor Councells; then which (if wee will credite Bellarmine) there was never age oIdem, de Rom. Pon…if lib. 4. cap. 12.more unlearned and unhappy. If I bee not able to discover what feates the Divell wrought in that time of darkenesse, wherin men were not so vigilant in marking his conveyances; and such as might see somewhat, were not so forward in writing bookes of their Observations: must the infelicitie of that age, wherein there was little learning, and lesse writing, yea, which for want of Writers (as Cardinal pBaron. Annal. tom. 10. an. 900. sect. 1.Baronius acknowledgeth) hath been usually named the Obscure age; must this (I say) inforce me to yeeld, that the Divell brought in no tares all that while, but let slip the opportunitie of so darke a night, and slept himselfe for company? There are other meanes left unto us, whereby we may discerne the Tares brought in by the instruments of Satan; from the good seed which was sowen by the Apostles of Christ; beside this observation of times and seasons, which will often faile vsus. Ipsa doctrina eorum (saith qTertull. Praescript. advers. Haeret. cap. 32.Tertullian) cum Apostolicâ comparata, ex diversitate & contrarietate suâ pronuntiabit, neque Apostoti alicujus auctoris esse, ne que Apostolici. Their very doctrine it selfe, being compared with the Apostolick, by the diversitie and contrariety thereof, will pronounce, that it had for author, neyther any Apostle, nor any man Apostolicall. For there cannot be a better prescription against Hereticall novelties, then that which our Saviour Christ useth against the Pharisees; rMatth. 19.8.From the beginning it vvas not so: nor a better preservative against the infection of seducers that are crept in unawares, then that which is prescribed by the Apostle sIude, v. 3, 4.Iude; earnestly to contend for the faith vvhichwhich vvas once delivered unto the Saints.
Now to the end we tLuke 1.4.might know the certaintie of those things, wherein the Saints were at the first instructed; God hath provided, that the memoriall thereof should be recorded in his owne Booke, that it might remaine uEsai. 30.8.for the time to come, for ever and ever. He then who out of that Booke is able to demonstrate, that the doctrine or practice now prevailing, swarveth from that which was at first established in the Church by the Apostles of Christ; doth as strongly prove, that a change hath beene made in the middle times, as if hee were able to nominate the place where, the time when, and the person by whom any such corruption was first brought in. In the Apostles dayes, when a man had examined himselfe, hee was admitted unto the Lords Table, there to eate of that bread, and drinke of that cup: as appeareth plainly, 1. Cor. 11.28. In the Church of Rome at this day, the people are indeed permitted to eate of the bread (if bread they may call it) but not allowed to drinke of the cup. Must all of us now shut our eyes, and sing, *As it was in the beginning, …o now.Sicut erat in principio, & nunc: unlesse we be able to tell by whom, and when this first institution was altered? By S. Pauls order, who would have all things done to edification, Christians should pray with understanding, and not in an unknowne language: as may be seene in the fourteenth chapter of the same Epistle to the Corinthians. The case is now so altered, that the bringing in of a tongue not understood (which hindred the edifying of Babel it selfe, and scattered the builders thereof) is accounted a good meanes to further the edifying of your Babel, and to xLedesim. de Scriptur. quâvis lingud non legendis, cap. 17. Bellarm. lib. 2. de Verbo Dei, cap. 15hold her followers together. Is not this then a good ground to resolve a mans judgement, that things are not now kept in that order, wherin they were set at first by the Apostles: although he be not able to point unto the first author of the disorder?
And as wee may thus discover innovations, by having recourse unto the first and best times: so may wee doe the like, by comparing the state of things present with the middle times of the Church. Thus I finde by the constant and approved practice of the auncient Church; that all sorts of people, men, women, and children, had free libertic to reade the holy Scriptures. I finde now the contrary among the Papists: and shall I say for all this, that they have not removed the bounds which were set by the Fathers, because perhaps I cannot name the Pope, that ventured to make the first inclosure of these commons of Gods people? I heare S. yHieronym. Praefat in libros Salomon. Epist. 115.Hier…me say: Iudith, & Tobiae, & Macchabaeorum libros legit quidem Ecclesia, sed eos inter Canonicas Scripturas non recipit. The Church doth reade indeed the books of Iudith, and Toby, and the Macchabees; but doth not receive them for Canonicall Scripture. I see that at this day, the Church of Rome receiveth them for such. May not I then conclude, that betwixt S. Hieromes time and ours, there hath beene a change; and that the Church of Rome now, is not of the same judgement with the Church of God the…: howsoever I cannot precisely lay downe the time, wherein shee first thought her selfe to be wiser herein then her Forefathers?
But here our Adversary closeth with us, and layeth downe a number of points, held by them, and denied by us: which he undertaketh to make good, as well by the expresse testimonies of the Fathers of the Primitive Church of Rome; as also by good and certaine grounds out of the sacred Scriptures, if the Fathers authoritie will not suffice. Where if hee would change his order, and give the sacred Scriptures the precedency; hee should therein do more right to God the author of them, who well deserveth to have audience in the first place: and withall ease both himselfe and us of a needlesse labour, in seeking any further authority to compose our differences. For if he can produce (as he beareth us in hand he can) good and certaine grounds o…t of the sacred Scriptures, for the points in controversie, the matter is at an end: he that will not rest satisfied with such evidences as these, may (if he please) travaile further, and speed worse. Therefore as S. Aug. de Pastorib. cap. 14.Augustine heretofore provoked the Donatists, so provoke I him: Auferantur chartae humanae, sonent voces divinae: ede mihi unam Scripturae vocem pro parte Donati. Let humane vvritings be removed, let Gods voyce sound: bring mee on…e voyce of the Scripture for the part of Donatus. Produce but one cleere testimony of the sacred Scripture, for the Popes part, and it shall suffice: alledge what authority you list, without Scripture, and it cannot suffice. Wee reverence indeed the ancient Fathers, as it is fit we should; and hold it our duety to rise up before the hoare head, and to honour the person of the aged: Levit. 19.32.but still with reservation of the respect we owe to their Father and ours, that Ancient of dayes, Dan. 7.6.the hayre of vvhose head is like the pure vvooll. We may not forget the lesson, which our great Master hath taught us: aMatth. 23.9.Call no man your Father upon the earth; for one is your Father which is in heaven. Him therefore alone doe wee acknowledge for the Father of our Faith: no other Father doe we know; upon whose bare credite we may ground our consciences, in things that are to be beleeved.
And this wee say, not as if wee feared that these men were able to produce better proofes out of the writings of the Fathers, for the part of the Pope, then we can do for the Catholick cause (when we come to joine in the particulars, they shall finde it otherwise:) but partly to bring the matter unto a shorter triall, partly to give the word of God his due, and to declare what that rocke is upon which alone we build our faith,Ephes. 2 20. even the foundation of the Apostles and Prophets; from which no sleight that they can devise, shall ever draw us.
The same course did S. Augustine take with the Pelagians: against whom he wanted not the authority of the Fathers of the Church. bQuos si colligere, & eorū testimoniis uti velim, & nimis longum erit, & de canonicis authoritatibus, à quibus non debemus averti, minùs fortasse videbor praesumpsisse quàm debui. Aug. de nupt. & concupiscent. lib. 2. cap 29.Which if I vvould collect (saith he) and use their testimonies, it would be too long a worke, and I might peradventure seeme to hauehave lesse confidence then I ought in the Canonicall authorities, from which we ought not to be withdrawen. Yet was the Pelagian Heresie then but newly budded: which is the time wherein the pressing of the Fathers testimonies is thought to be best in season. With how much better warrant may we follow this president, having to deale with such as have had time and leisure enough to falsifie the Fathers writings, and to teach them the learning and the tongue of the Chaldeans? The method of confuting heresies by the consent of holy Fathers, is by none commended more then by Vincentius Lirinensis who is carefull notwithstanding, herein to give us this caveat. cSed neque semper, neque omnes haereses hoc modo impugnandae sunt, sed novitiae recētes que tantummodo, cùm primùm scilicet exoriū tur; antequàm infalsare vetustae fidei regulas, …p…us temporis vetantur angustiis, ae priusquàm manante latiùs veneno majorū volumina vitiare cone…tur Caeterùm dilatatae & inveteratae haereses nequaquā hâ… viâ adgrediēdae sunt, eò quòd proli…o temporum tractu longa his furandae veritatis patu…rit occasio. V…ncent. de Heres. cap. 39.But neither alwayes, nor all kindes of heresies are to be impugned after this manner, but such only as are new, and lately sprung: namely, when they doe first arise, while by the straitnesse of the time it selfe they be hindred from falsifying the rules of the ancient faith; and before the time that, their poyson spreading farther, they attempt to corrupt the writings of the ancient. But farre-spred and inveterate heresies are not to bee dealt vvithall this way; for as much as by long continuance of time, a long occasion hath lyen open unto them to steale away the truth. The heresies with which wee have to deale, have spred so farre, and continued so long, that the defenders of them are bold to make Vniversality and Duration the speciall markes of their Church: they had opportunity enough of time and place, to put in ure all deceiveablenesse of unrighteousnesse; neither will they have it to say, that in coyning and clipping, and washing the monuments of Antiquitie, they have beene wanting to themselves.
Before the Councell of Nice (as hath beene observed by dAeneas Sylvius, Epist. 288.one, who sometime was Pope himselfe) little respect, to speake of, was had to the Church of Rome. If this may be thought to prejudice the dignity of that Church, which would be held, to have sate as Queene among the Nations, from the very beginning of Christianity: you shall have a craftie merchant (Isidorus Mercator, I trow, they call him) that will helpe the matter, by counterfeiting Decretall Epistles in the name of the primitive Bishops of Rome, and bringing in thirty of them in a row, as so many Knights of the Poste, to beare witnesse of that great authority, which the Church of Rome enjoyed before the Nicene Fathers were assembled. If the Nicene Fathers have not amplified the bounds of her jurisdiction, in so large a maner as shee desired: shee hath had her well-willers, that have supplied the Councels negligence in that behalfe, and made Canons for the purpose, in the name of the good Fathers, that never dreamed of such a businesse. If the power of judging all others will not content the Pope, unlesse he himselfe may be exempted from being judged by any other: another eCon…il. Roman. sub Syl…estr. cap. 20. Nem… enim judicabi… primam sedem.Councell, as ancient at least as that of Nice, shall be suborned, wherein it shall be concluded, by the consent of 284 imaginarie Bishops, that No man may judge the first seat. and for fayling, in an elder fConcil. Sinuessan. circa fin.Councell then that, consisting of 300 buckram Bishops of the very selfe same making, the like note shall be sung: quoniam prima sedes non judicabitur à quoquam; The first seat must not be judged by any man. Lastly, if the Pope do not thinke that the fulnesse of spirituall power is sufficient for his greatnesse, unlesse hee may be also Lord paramount in temporalibus: hee hath his followers ready at hand, to frame a faire donation, in the name of Constantine the Emperour, whereby his Holinesse shall be estated, not only in the Citie of Rome, but also in the seigniory of the whole West. It would require a Volume, to rehearse the names of those severall Tractates, which have beene basely bred in the former dayes of darknesse, and fathered upon the ancient Doctors of the Church, who, if they were now alive, would be deposed that they were never privie to their begetting.
Neither hath this corrupting humour stayed it selfe in forging of whole Councels, and intire Treatises of the ancient writers: but hath, like a canker, fretted away diverse of their sound parts, and so altered their complexions, that they appear not to be the same men they were. To instance in the great question of Transubstantiation: we were wont to reade in the books attributed unto S. Ambrose, De Sacramentis, libr. 4. cap. 4. Si ergo tanta vis est in sermone Domini Iesu, ut inciperent esse quae non erant: quanto magis operatorius est, ut sint quae erant, & in aliud commutentur? If therefore there be so great force in the speech of our Lord Iesus, that the things which were not begun to bee (namely at the first creation:) how much more is the same powerfull to make, that things may still be that which they were, and yet be changed into another thing? It is not unknowne, how much those words, ut sint quae erant, have troubled their braines, who maintaine, that after the words of consecration, the elements of bread and wine be not that thing which they were: and what devises they have found, to make the bread and wine in the Sacrament to be like unto the Beast in the Revelation,gApoc. 17.8. that was, and is not, and yet is. But that Gordian knot, which they with their skill could not so readily untye, their masters at Rome (Alexander-like) have now cut asunder; paring cleane away in their Romane Edition (which is also followed in that set out at Paris, Anno 1603.) those words that so much troubled them, and letting the rest run smoothly after this maner: quanto magis operatorius est, ut quae erant, in aliud cōmutentur? how much more is the speech of our Lord powerfull to make, that those things which were, should be changed into another thing?
The author of the imperfect work upon Matthew, homil. 11. writeth thus: Si ergo haec vasa sanctificata ad privatos usus transferre sic periculosum est, in quibus non est verum corpus Christi, sed mysterium corporis ejus continetur: quanto magis vasa corporis nostri, quae sibi Deus ad habitaculum praeparavit, non debemus locum dare Diabolo agendi in eis quod vult? If therefore it be so dangerous a matter, to transferre unto private uses those holy vessels, in which the true body of Christ is not, but the mysterie of his body is contained: how much more for the vessels of our body, which God hath prepared for himselfe to dwell in, ought not wee to give way unto the Divell, to doe in them what he pleaseth? Those words (in quibus non est verum corpus Christi, sed mysterium corporis ejus continetur: in which the true body of Christ is not, but the mysterie of his body is contained) did threaten to cut the very throat of the Papists real presence; and therefore in good policie they thought it fit to cut their throat first, for doing any further hurt. Whereupon, in the Editions of this Worke printed at Antwerpe, apud Ioannem Steelsium, anno 1537: at Paris, apud Ioannem Roigny, anno 1543: and at Paris again, apud Audoenum Parvum, anno 1557. not one syllable of them is to be seene; though extant in the ancienter editions, one whereof is as olde as the yere 1487. And to the same purpose, in the 19 Homily, in stead of Sacrificium panis & vini, the sacrifice of bread and vvine, (which we find in the old impressions) these latter editions have chopt in, Sacrificium corporis & sanguinis Christi, the sacrifice of the body and blood of Christ.
In the yeare 1608. there were published at Paris certaine workes of Fulbertus Bishop of Chartres, *Quae tam ad refutandas haereses huius temporis, quàm ad Gallorum Hist. pertinent.pertayning as well to the refuting of the heresies of this time, (for so saith the inscription) as to the cleering of the History of the French. Among those things that appertaine to the confutation of the Heresies of this time, there is one especially, fol. 168. laid downe in these words. Nisi manducaveritis, inquit, carnem filij hominis, & sanguinem biberitis, non habebitis vitam in vobis. Facinus vel flagitium videtur jubere. Figura ergo est, dicet haereticus, praecipiens Passioni Domini esse cōmunicandum tantùm, & suaviter atque utiliter recondendum in memoria, quòd pro nobis caro ejus crucifixa & vulnerata sit. Vnlesse (saith Christ) ye eate the flesh of the Sonne of man, and drinke his blood, yee shall not hauehave life in you. He seemeth to command an outrage or wickednesse. It is therefore a figure, will the hereticke say, requiring us only to communicate with the Lords Passion, and sweetly and profitably to lay up in our memory, that his flesh was crucified and wounded for us. He that put in those words, (dicet haereticus) thought hee had notably met with the heretickes of this time: but was not aware that thereby he made S. Augustine an Hereticke for company. For the Hereticke that speaketh thus, is even S. Augustine himselfe: whose very words these are, in his third booke de Doctrinâ Christianâ, the 16. chapter. Which some belike having put the publisher in minde of: he was glad to put this among his Errata, and to confesse that these two words were not to be found in the Manuscript copie which hee had from Petavius;Vide Tom. 11. Bibliothecae Patrum, edit. Colon. pag. 44. b. but telleth us not what we are to thinke of him, that for the countenancing of the Popish cause, ventured so shamefully to abuse S. Augustine.
In the yeare 1616. a Tome of ancient Writers, that never saw the light before, was set forth at Ingolstad by Petrus Steuartius: where, among other Tractates, a certaine Penitentiall, written by Rabanus that famous Archbishop of Mentz, is to be seene. In rhe 33. chapter of that booke, Rabanus making answer unto an idle question moved by Bishop Heribaldus concerning the Eucharist, (what should become of it, after it was consumed, and sent into the draught, after the maner of other meats:) hath these words. (initio pag. 669.) Nam quidam nuper de ipso sacramento corporís & sanguinis Domini non ritè sentientes dixerunt: hoc ipsum corpus, & sanguinem Domini, quod de Mariâ Virgine natum est, &, in quo ipse Dominus passus est in cruce, & resurrexit de sepulcro*—cui errori quantum potuimus, ad Egilum Abbatem scribentes, de corpore ipso quid veré credendum sit aperuimus. For some of late, not holding rightly of the Sacrament of the body and blood of our Lord, have said; that the very body and blood of our Lord, which was borne of the Virgin Mary, and, in which our Lord himselfe suffered on the Crosse, and rose againe from the grave*—Against which error, writing unto Abbot Egilus, according to our ability, we have declared, what is truly to be beleeved cōcerning Christs body. You see Rabanus tongue is clipt here for telling tales: but how this came to passe, were worth the learning. Steuartius freeth himselfe from the fact, telling us in his margent, *Lacuna hîc est in MS exemplari.that here there was a blanke in the manuscript copy, and we doe easily beleeve him: for Possevine the Iesuite hath given us to understand, that hAd istos enim quoque purgatio pertinet. Possevi…. lib. 1. Bibliothec… select. cap. 12.Manuscript bookes also are to be purged, as well as printed. But whence was this Manuscript fetcht, thinke you? Out of iEx MS. Cod. celeberrimi Monasterii Weingartensis.the famous Monastery of Weingart; saith Steuartius. The Monkes of Weingart then belike must answer the matter: and they (I dare say) upon examination will take their oathes, that it was no part of their intention to give any furtherance unto the cause of the Protestants hereby. If hereunto we adde, that Heribaldus and Rabanus both, are kWald. tom. 1. Doctrinal. in Prolog. ad Martinum V.ranked among heretickes by Thomas Walden, lId. tom. 2. cap. 19. & 61.for holding the Eucharist to be subject to digestion and voidance, like other meates; the suspition will be more vehement: whereunto yet I will adjoine one evidence more, that shall leave the matter past suspition.
In the Libraries of my worthy friends, Sr. Rob. Cotton, (that noble Baronett, so renowmed for his great care in collecting & preserving all antiquities) & Dr. Ward, the learned Mastr of Sidney Colledge in Cambridge; I met with an ancient Treatise of the Sacrament (beginning thus: Sicut ante nos quidam sapiens dixit, cujus sententiam probamus, licèt nomen ignoremus.) which is the same with that in the Iesuites Colledge at Lovaine, blindely *Ant. Possevin. Apparat. sac. in Berengario Turon.fathered upon Berengarius. The author of this Treatise, having first twited Heribaldus for propounding, & Rabanus for resolving this question of the voidance of the Eucharist: layeth downe afterward the opinion of Paschasius Ratbertus, (whose writing is yet extant) quòd non alia plané sit caro quae sumitur de altari, quàm quae nata est de Mariâ Virgine, & passa in cruce, & quae resurrexit de sepulcro, quaeqúe & pro mundi vitâ adhuc hodie offeratur. That the flesh which is received at the altar, is no other then that which was borne of the Virgin Mary, suffered on the Crosse, rose again from the grave, and as yet is daily offered for the life of the vvorld. Contra quem (saith he) satis argumentatur, & Rabanus in Epistolâ ad *al. Elgionem, &, Helgimonem.Egilonem Abbatem, & Ratrannus quidam libro composito ad Karolum regem; dicentes aliam esse. Against whom both Rabanus in his Epistle to Abbot Egilo, and one Ratrannus in a booke which he made to King Charles, argue largely; saying that it is another kind of flesh. Whereby, what Rabanus his opinion was of this point in his Epistle to Abbot Egilo or Egilus, & consequently what that was which the Monkes of Weingart could not indure in his Penitentiall, I trust is plaine enough.
I omit other corruptions of antiquitie in this same question, which I have touched mDe Christian. Eccles. success. & statu, Edit. ann. 1613. pag. 45. & 198.elsewhere: only that of Bertram I may not passe over, wherein the dishonesty of these men, in handling the writings of the ancient, is laid open, even by the confession of their owne mouthes. Thus the case standeth. That Ratrannus who joined with Rabanus in refuting the error of the carnall presence, at the first bringing in thereof by Paschasius Ratbertus; is he who commonly is knowen by the name of Bertramus. The booke which he wrote of this argument to Carolus Calvus the Emperour, was forbidden to be read, by order from the Roman Inquisition, confirmed afterwards by the Councell of Trent. The Divines of Doway, perceiving that the forbidding of the booke did not keepe men from reading it, but gave them rather occasion to seeke more earnestly after it: thought it better policy, that Bertram should be permitted to goe abroad, but handled in such sort, as other ancient writers, that made against them, were wont to be. Seeing therefore (say nQuum igitur in Catholicis veteribus aliis plurimos feramus errores, & extenuemus, excusemus, excogitato cōmento persaepe negemus, & commodū iis sensū affingamus, dū opponuntur in disputationibus, aut in conflictionibus cū adversariis: non videmus cur non eandē aequitatem & diligentem recognitionem mereatur Bertramus. ne haeretici ogganniant, nos antiquitatem pro ipsis facientem exurere & prohibere. Index Expurg. Belg…c. pag. 5. edit. Antuerp. ann. 1571.they) we beare with very many errors in other of the old Catholike vvriters, and extenuate them, excuse them, by inventing some device oftentimes deny them, and fayne some commodious sense for them, when they are objected in disputations or conflicts with our adversaries: wee doe not see, why Bertram may not deserve the same equitie, and diligent reviseall. Least the heretickes cry out, that we burne and forbid such antiquity as maketh for them. Marke this dealing well. The world must be borne in hand, that all the Fathers make for the Church of Rome against us, in all our controversies. When we bring forth expresse testimonies of the Fathers to the contrary; what must then be done? A good face must be put upō the matter, one device or other must be invented to elude the testimonies objected, and still it must be denied that the Fathers make against the doctrine of the Papists. Bertram, for example, writeth thus. oQuae á se differunt, idem non sunt. Corpus Christi quod mortuū est & resurrexit, & immortale factū jam non moritur, & mors illi ultrà nō dominabitur, aeternū est, nec jā passibile. Hoc autē quod in Ecclesiâ celebratur, tēporale est, non aeternum; corruptibile est, non in corruptum. B…rtram. de corp. & sang. Dom.The things which differ one from another, are not the same. The body of Christ which was dead and rose again, and being made immortall now dyeth not, (death no more having dominion over it) is everlasting, and now not subject to suffering. But this which is celebrated in the Church, is temporall, not everlasting; it is corruptible, not free from corruption. What device must they finde out here? They must say this is meant of the accidents or pSecundùm species Sacramenti corruptibiles: aut de re ipsâ & usu sacramenti, qui non contingit, nisi praesenti in saeculo. Index expurg. pag. 7.formes of the Sacrament, which are corruptible; or of the use of the Sacrament, which continueth only in this present world. But how will this shift serve the turne, when as the whole drift of the discourse tendeth to prove, that that which is received by the mouth of the faithfull in the Sacrament, is not that very bodie of Christ which dyed upon the Crosse, and rose againe from death? Non malé aut inconsulté omittantur igitur omnia haec; It were not amisse therefore (say our Popish Censurers) nor unadvisedly done, that all these things should be left out.
If this be your maner of dealing with antiquity, let all men judge whether it be not high time for us to listen unto the advice of Vincentius Lirinensis, and not be so forward to commit the triall of our controversies to the writings of the Fathers, who have had the ill hap to fall into such hucksters handling. Yet that you may see, how confident we are in the goodnesse of our cause: we will not now stand upon our right, nor refuse to enter with you into this field; but give you leave for this time both to be the Challenger, and the appointer of your owne weapons. Let us then heare your challenge, wherin you would so faine be answered. I would faine know (say you) how can your Religion be true, which disalloweth of many chiefe articles, which the Saints and Fathers of that primitive Church of Rome did generally hold to be true? For they of your side, that have read the Fathers of that unspotted Church, can well testifie (and if any deny it, it shall be presently shewen) that the Doctors, Pastors, and Fathers of that Church doe allow of Traditions, &c. And againe: Now would I faine know, whether of both have the true Religion; they that hold all these abovesaid points with the primitive Church, or they that do most vehemently contradict, and gainsay them? they that doe not disagree with that holy Church, in any point of Religion; or they that agree with it but in very few, and disagree in almost all? And the third time too, for fayling: Now would I willingly see, what reasonable answer may be made to this. For the Protestants graunt that the Church of Rome, for 400 or 500 yeares, held the true Religion of Christ: yet do they exclaime against the abovesaid articles, which the same Church did maintaine and uphold; as may be shewen by the expresse testimonies of the Fathers of the same Church, and shall be largely layd downe, if any learned Protestant will deny it.
If Albertus Pighius had now beene alive, as great a Scholer as he was, he might have learned that he never knew before. Who did ever yet (saith qQuis per Romanā Ecclesiam unquam intellexit aut universalem Ecclesiam, aut generale Concilium? Pigh. Eccles. Hierarch. lib. 6. cap. 3.he) by the Church of Rome understand the Vniversall Church? That doth this man (say I) who styleth all the ancient Doctors and Martyrs of the Church Vniversall, with the name of the Saints and Fathers of the primitive Church of Rome. But it seemeth a small matter unto him, for the magnifying of that Church, to confound Vrbem & Orbem: unlesse he mingle also Heaven and Earth together, by giving the title of that unspotted Church, which is the speciall priviledge of the Church triumphant in heaven, unto the Church of Rome here militant upon earth. S. Augustine surely would not have himselfe otherwise understood, whensoever hee speaketh of the unspotted Church: and therefore, to prevent all mistaking, hee thus expoundeth himselfe in his Retractations. rVbicunque in his libris cō memoravi Ecclesiam non habentem maculam aut rugam; non sic accipiendum est quasi jam sit, sed quae praeparatur ut sit quando apparebit etiam gloriosa. Nunc enim propter quasdam ignorantias & infirmitates membrorum suorū habet unde quotidie tota dicat: Dimitte nobis debita nostra. August. Retractat. lib. 2. cap. 18.Wheresoever in these bookes I have made mention of the Church not having spot or wrinkle; it is not so to be taken, as if she were so now, but that she is prepared to bee so, when she shall appeare glorious. For now, by reason of certaine ignorances and infirmities of her members, the whole Church hath cause to say every day: Forgive us our trespasses. Now as long as the Church is subject to these ignorances and infirmities, it cannot be otherwise, but there must be differences betwixt the members thereof: one part may understand that whereof an other is ignorant; and ignorance being the mother of error, one particular Church may wrongly conceive of some points, wherein others may be rightly informed. Neyther will it follow thereupon, that these Churches must be of different Religions, because they fully agree not in all things: or that therefore the Reformed Churches in our dayes must disclaime all kindred with those in ancient times, because they have washed away some spots from themselves, which they discerned to have been in them.
It is not every spot that taketh away the beautie of a Church, not every sicknesse that taketh away the life thereof: and therefore though wee should admit that the ancient Church of Rome was somewhat impaired both in beautie and in health too, (wherein we have no reason to be sorie, that we are unlike unto her) there is no necessitie that hereupon presently she must cease to be our sister. S. Cyprian and the rest of the African Bishops that joined with him, held that such as were baptized by heretickes, should be rebaptized: the African Bishops in the time of Aurelius were of another minde. Doth the diversitie of their judgements in this point, make them to have been of a diverse Religion? It was the use of the ancient Church to minister the Communion unto Infants: which is yet also practised by the Christians in Egypt and Ethiopia. The Church of Rome, upon better consideration, hath thought fit to doe otherwise: and yet for all that will not yeeld, that either she her selfe hath forsaken the Religion of her ancestors, because she followeth them not in this; or that they were of the same religion with the Cophtites and Habassines, because they agree together in this particular. So put case the Church of Rome now did use prayer for the dead in the same maner that the ancient Church did: (which we will shew to be otherwise:) the reformed Churches that upon better advice have altered that usage, need not therefore graunt that eyther themselves hold a different Religion from that of the Fathers, because they doe not precisely follow them in this, nor yet that the Fathers were therefore Papists, because in this point they thus concurred. For as two may be discerned to be sisters by the likenesse of their faces, although the one have some spottes or blemishes which the other hath not: so a third may bee brought in, which may shew like spots and blemishes, and yet have no such likenesse of visage as may bewray her to be the others sister.
But our Challenger having first conceited in his minde an Idea of an unspotted Church upon earth; then being farre in love with the painted face of the present Church of Rome, and out of love with us, because we like not as he liketh: he taketh a view of both our faces in the false glasses of affection, and findeth her on whom he doteth to answer his unspotted Church in all points, but us to agree with it in almost nothing. And thereupon he would faine know, whether of both have the true Religion? they that doe not disagree with that holy Church in any point of Religion; or they that agree with it but in very few, and disagree in almost all? Indeed, if that which he assumeth for granted, could as easily bee proved, as it is boldly avouched: the question would quickly be resolved, whether of us both have the true Religion? But he is to understand, that strong conceits are but weake proofes: and that the Iesuites have not been the first, from whom such bragges as these have beene heard. Dioscorus the hereticke was as peart, when hee uttered these speeches in the Councell of Chalcedon: sforeign. Concil. Chalced. Act. 1. pag. 97. edit. Rom.I am cast out with the Fathers. I defend the doctrines of the Fathers, I transgresse them not in any point: and I have their testimonies, not barely, but in their very bookes. Neither need we wonder, that he should beare us down, that the Church of Rome at this day doth not disagree from the primitive Church in any point of Religion; who sticketh not so confidently to affirme, that we agree with it but in very few, and disagree in almost all. For those few points, wherein hee confesseth wee doe agree with the ancient Church, must either be meant of such articles onelyonly, wherein wee disagree from the now Church of Rome; or else of the whole bodie of that Religion which we professe. If in the former he yeeld that wee doe agree with the primitive Church: what credite doth he leave unto himselfe, who with the same breath hath givē out, that the present Church of Rome doth not disagree with that holy Church in any point? If he meanethe latter: with what face can he say, that wee agree with that holy Church but in very few points of religion, and disagree in almost all? Irenaeus, who was the Disciple of those which heard S. Iohn the Apostle, tIrenae. lib. 1. cap 2.3. Epiphan. haeres. 31.layeth downe the articles of that faith, in the unitie whereof the Churches that were founded in Germany, Spaine, France, the East, Egypt, Lybia, and all the world, did sweetly accord: as if they had all dwelt in one house, all had but one soule, and one heart, and one mouth. Is he able to shew one point, wherein we have broken that harmony, which Irenaeus commendeth in the Catholick Church of his time? But that Rule of faith so much commended by him and Tertullian, and the rest of the Fathers; and all the articles of the severall Creedes that were ever received in the ancient Church, as badges of the Catholicke profession (to which we willingly subscribe) is with this man almost nothing: none must now be counted a Catholicke, but he that can conforme his beliefe unto the uForma professionis fidei, in Bullâ Pij IV. edit. ann. 1564.Creed of the new fashion, compiled by Pope Pius the fourth some foure and fiftie yeares ago.
As for the particular differences, wherein he thinketh he hath the advantage of us; when we come unto the sifting of them, it shall appeare how farre he was deceived in his imagination. In the meane time, having as yet not strucken one stroake, but threatned only to doe wonders, if any would be so hardy to accept his Challenge; he might have done very well, to have deferred his triumph, untill such time as he had obtayned the victory. For as if he had borne us downe with the weight of the authority of the Fathers, and so astonished us therwith, that we could not tell what to say for our selves; he thus bestirreth himselfe, in a most ridiculous maner, fighting with his owne shadow. Will you say that these Fathers (saith he, who hath not hitherto layd downe so much as the name of any one Father) maintained these opinions contrary to the vvord of God? Why you know that they were the pillers of Christianitie, the champions of Christ his Church, and of the true Catholick Religion, which they most learnedly defended against diverse heresies, and therefore spent all their time in a most serious studie of the holy Scripture. Or will you say that, although they knew the Scriptures to repugne, yet they brought in the aforesaid opinions by malice and corrupt intentions? Why your selves cannot deny but that they lived most holy and vertuous lives, free from all malitious corrupting or perverting of Gods holy word, and by their holy lives are now made worthy to raigne with God in his glory. Insomuch as their admirable learning may sufficiently crosse out all suspition of ignorant errour; and their innocent sanctity freeth us from all mistrust of malitious corruption.
But, by his leave, hee is a little too hastie. Hee were best to bethink himselfe more advisedly of that which he hath undertaken to performe: and to remember the saying of the King of Israel unto Benhadad; x1. King. 20.11.Let not him that girdeth on his harnesse, boast himselfe, as he that putteth it off. Hee hath taken upon him to prove, that our Religon cannot be true, because it disalloweth of many chiefe articles, which the Saints and Fathers of that primitive Church of Rome did generally hold to be true. For performance hereof, it wil not be sufficient for him to shew that some of these Fathers maintained some of these opinions: he must prove (if hee will be as good as his word, and deale any thing to the purpose) that they held them generally, and held them too, not as opinions, but tanquam de fide, as appertayning to the substance of faith and religion. For (as Vincentius Lirinensis well observeth) yAntiqua sanctorum patrū consensio, non in omnibus divinae legis quaestiunculis, sed solùm, certé praecipué, in fidei regulâ magno nobis studio & investiganda est, & sequenda. Vinc…n… ▪ contra haer…s. cap. 39.the auncient consent of the holy Fathers is with great care to be sought and followed by us, not in every petty question belonging to the Law of God, but only, or at least principally, in the Rule of faith. But all the points propounded by our Challenger, be not chiefe articles: and therefore if in some of them the Fathers have held some opinions, that will not beare waight in the ballance of the Sanctuary (as some conceits they had herein, which the Papists themselves must confesse to be erroneous) their defects in that kinde doe abate nothing of that reverend estimation which we have them in, for their great paines taken in the defence of the true Catholick Religion, and the serious studie of the holy Scripture. Neither doe I thinke that he who thus commendeth them for the pillers of Christianitie, and the champions of Christs Church; will therefore hold himselfe tyed to stand unto every thing that they have said: sure he will not, if he follow the steppes of the great ones of his owne Societie.
For what doth hee thinke of Iustin Martyr, Irenaeus, and Epiphanius? Doth he not account them among those pillers and champions hee speaketh of? Yet, saith Cardinall Bellarmine, zIustini, Irenaei, Epiphani… atque Oecumenii sententiā non video, quo pacto ab errore possimus defendere. Bellarmin. lib. 1. de Sanctor. Beatit. cap. 6.I doe not see, how we may defend their opinion from error. When others object, that they have two or three hundred testimonies of the Doctors to prove that the Virgin Mary was conceived in sinne: aPrimó quid… agunt multitudine Doctorū, quos errare in re tanti momenti non est facilè admittendum. Respondemus tamen ex Augustini libro 1. de Morib. Eccles c. 2. tùm ex B. Thomae doctrinâ, locum ab authoritate esse infirmum. Salmer. in Epist. ad Rom. libr. 2. disput. 51.Salmeron the Iesuite steps forth, and answereth them, first, out of the doctrine of Augustine and Thomas, that the argument drawne from authoritie is weake: then, out of the word of God, Exod. 23. In judicio, plurimorum non acquiesces sententiae, ut á vero devies. In judgement, thou shalt not be ledde with the sentence of the most, to decline from the truth. And lastly telleth them, bCúm Donatistae in autorū multitudine gloriarentur; respondit Augustinus, signū esse causae á veritatis nervo destitutae, quae soli multorum autoritati, qui errare possunt, innititur. Ibid.that when the Donatists gloried in the multitude of authors, S. Augustin did answer them, that it was a signe their cause was destitute of the strength of truth, which was onelyonly supported by the authority of many, who were subject to error. And when his Adversaries presse him, not onelyonly with the multitude, but also with the cTertio argumenta petunt á Doctorum antiquitate, cui semper major honor est habitus, quàm novitatibus. Respondetur, quamlibet aetatem antiquitati semper detulisse: & quilibet senex, ut quidam Poëta dixit, laudator tēporis acti. Sed illud asserimus: quo juniores, eo perspicaciores esse Doctores. Ibid.antiquitie of the Doctors alledged, unto which more honour alwayes hath beene given, then unto novelties: he answereth, that indeed every age hath alwayes attributed much unto antiquity; and every old man, as the Poët saith, is a commender of the time past: but this (saith he) vvee averre, that the yonger the Doctors are, the more sharpe-sighted they be. And therefore for his part he yeeldeth rather to the judgement of the yonger Doctors of Paris: dNam in celeberrimâ Parisiorum Academiâ nullus Magistri in Theologiâ titulo dignus habetur, qui priùs etiam iuris iurandi religione non se adstrinxerit ad hoc Virginis privilegium tuendum, & propugnandum. Ibid. Vid. & Laur. Sur. commentar. rer. in orbe gestar. ann. 1501.among whom none is held worthy of the title of a Master in Divinitie, who hath not first bound himselfe with a religious oath, to defend and maintaine the priviledge of the B. Virgin. Only he forgot to tell, how they which take that oath, might dispense with another oath which the Pope requireth them to take; that eNec eam unquam nisi juxta unanimem consensum Patrum accipiam, & interpretabor. Bulla Pij IV. pag. 478. Bullarij á Petro Matthaeo edit. Lugdun. ann. 1588.they will never understand and interprete the holy Scripture, but according to the uniforme consent of the Fathers.
Pererius in his disputations upon the Epistle to the Romans, confesseth that fGraeci Patres, nec pauci etiam Latinorum Doctorum arbitrati sunt, idqúe in scriptis suis prodiderunt; causam praedestinationis hominum ad vitam aeternam, esse praescientiā quam Deus ab aeterno habuit, vel bonorum operum quae facturi erant cooperando ipsius gratiae, vel fidei quâ credituri erant verbo Dei & obedituri vocationi ejus. Perer. in Rom. 8. sect. 106.the Greeke Fathers, and not a few of the Latine Doctors too, have delivered in their writings, that the cause of the predestination of men unto everlasting life is the foreknowledge which God had from eternitie, either of the good workes which they were to doe by cooperating with his grace, or of the faith wherby they were to beleeve the word of God, & to obey his calling. And yet he for his part notwithstanding thinketh, that gSed hoc videtur contrariū divinae Scripturae, praecipué autē doctrinae B. Pauli. Jdem ibid. sect. 111. At enimveró praesciētiā fidei non esse rationem praedestinationis hominum, nullius est negotii multis & apertis Scripturae testimoniis ostendere. Ibid. sect. 109.this is contrary to the holy Scripture, but especially to the doctrine of S. Paul. If our Questionist had beene by him, hee would have pluckt his fellow by the sleeve, and taken him up in this maner. Will you say that these Fathers maintained this opinion contrary to the word of God? Why you know that they were the pillers of Christianity, the Champions of Christ his Church, and of the true Catholick religion, which they most learnedly defended against diverse heresies, and therefore spent all their time in a most serious studie of the holy Scripture. He would also perhaps further challenge him, as he doth us: Will you say that, although they knew the Scriptures to repugne, yet they brought in the aforesaid opinion by malice & corrupt intentions? For sure hee might have asked this wise question of any of his owne fellowes, as well as of us, who doe allow and esteeme so much of these blessed Doctors and Martyrs of the ancient Church (as he himselfe in the end of his Challenge doth acknowledge:) which verily we should have little reason to doe, if wee did imagine that they brought in opinions which they knew to be repugnant to the Scriptures, for any malice, or corrupt intentions. Indeed men they were, compassed with the common infirmities of our nature, and therefore subject unto error: but godly men, and therefore free from all malicious error.
Howsoever then we yeeld unto you, that their innocent sanctitie freeth us from all mistrust of malitious corruption: yet you must pardon us if wee make question, whether their admirable learning may sufficiently crosse out all suspicion of error, which may arise either of affection, or want of due consideration, or such ignorance as the very best are subject unto in this life. For it is not admirable learning that is sufficient to crosse out that suspicion: but such an immediate guidance of the holy Ghost, as the Prophets and Apostles were led by, who were the penners of the Canocicall Scripture. But this is your old wont, to blinde the eyes of the simple with setting forth the sanctitie and the learning of the Fathers: much after the maner of your grandfather Pelagius; who in the third of his bookes which hee writ in defence of Free-will, thought he had struck all dead by his commending of S. Ambrose. Blessed Ambrose the Bishop (saith hBeatus Ambrosius Episcopus, in cuius praecipué libris Romana …lucet fides, qui scriptorum inter Latinos flos quidam speciosus enituit, cuius fidē & purissimum in Scripturis sensum▪ ne inimicus quidem ausus est reprehendere.he) in whose bookes the Romane faith doth especially appeare, who like a beautifull flowre shined among the Latin writers, whose faith and most pure understanding in the Scriptures the enemy himselfe durst not reprehend. VntoUnto whom S. Augustine: iEcce qualibus & quantis praedicat laudibus, quamlibet sanctum & doctum virum, nequaquam tamē authoritati Scripturae canonicae comparandum. August. de gratiâ Christi▪ cont. Pelag. l…b. 1. cap. 43.Behold with what and how great prayses he extolleth a man, though holy and learned, yet not to be compared unto the authoritie of the Canonicall Scripture. And therefore advance the learning and holinesse of these worthy men, as much as you list: other answer you are not like to have from us, then that which the same S. Augustine maketh unto S. Hierome. kSolis eis Scripturarum libris, qui iam Canonici appellantur, didici hunc timorē honoremqúe deserre, ut nullum eorum authorem scribē do aliquid errâsse firmissimé credam &c. Alios autem ita lego, ut quantalibet sanctitate doctrinaqúe praepolleant, non ideò verū putē, quia ipsi ita senserunt: sed quia mihi vel per illos authore… canonicos, vel probabili ratione, quòd á vero nō abhorreat, persuad…e potuerūt. Aug. ep. 19.This reverence and honour have I learned to give to those bookes of Scripture only, which now are called Canonical, that I most firmely beleeve none of their authors could any whit erre in writing. But others I so reade, that with how great sanctitie and learning soever they doe excell, I therefore thinke not any thing to be true, because they so thought it: but because they were able to perswade mee, either by those Canonicall authors, or by some probable reason, that it did not swarve from truth.
Yet even to this field also doe our challengers provoke us; and if the Fathers authority will not suffice, they offer to produce good and certaine grounds out of the sacred Scriptures, for confirmation of all the points of their religion which they have mentioned: yea, further, they challenge any Protestant to alledge any one text out of the said Scripture which condemneth any of the above written points. At which boldnesse of theirs wee should much wonder, but that wee consider that Bankrupts commonly doe then most brag of their ability, when their estate is at the lowest: perhaps also, that Ignorance might be it, that did beget in them this Boldnesse. For if they had been pleased to take the advice of their learned Counsell: their Canonists would have told them touching Confession, (which is one of their points;) that lGloss. in Gratian. de Poeniten. dist. 5. cap. 1. In poenitentia.it were better to hold, that it was ordained by a certaine tradition of the universall Church, then by the authority of the New or Old Testament. Melchior Canus mCan. lib. 3. loc. Theolog. cap. 4.could have put them in minde, that it is no where expressed in Scripture, that Christ descended into Hell, to deliver the soules of Adam, and the rest of the Fathers which were detayned there. And Dominicus Bannes, nBannes, in 2.2 qu. 1. artic. 10. col. 302.that the holy Scriptures teach, neither expressé, nor yet impressé & involuté, that prayers are to be made unto Saints, or that their Images are to be worshipped. Or, if the testimony of a lesuite will more prevayle with them: that Images should be vvorshipped, Saints prayed unto, Auricular Confession frequented, Sacrifices celebrated both for the quicke and the dead, and other things of this kind; oCoster in compendiosâ orthodoxae fidei Demonstrat. propos. 5. cap. 2 pag. 162 edit. Colon. ann. 1607.Fr. Coster would have to be reckoned among divine Traditions, which be not laid downe in the Scriptures.
Howsoever yet the matter standeth, we have no reason but willingly to accept of their challenge: and to require them to bring forth those good and certaine grounds out of the sacred Scriptures, for confirmation of all the articles by them propounded: as also to let them see, whether we be able to alledge any Text of Scripture, which condemneth any of those points. Although I must confesse it will be a hard matter, to make them see any thing, which before hand have resolved to close their eyes; having their mindes so preoccupied with prejudice, that they professe before ever we begin, they hold for certaine that wee shall never be able to produce any such Text. And why, thinke you? because, forsooth, we are neither more learned, more pious, nor more holy, then the blessed Doctors and Martyrs of that first Church of Rome. As who should say, we yeelded at the first word, that all those blessed Doctors and Martyrs expounded the Scriptures every where to our disadvantage: or were so well perswaded of the tendernesse of a Iesuites conscience, that because he hath taken an oath never to interpret the Scripture, but according to the uniforme consent of the Fathers, he could not therefore have the forehead to say: pNon nego me huius interpretationis authorem neminē habere: sed hanc eò magis probo quàm illam alteram Augustini, caeterarum alioqui probabilissimam; quòd haec cum Calvinistarū sensu magis pugnet: quod mihi magnum est probabilitatis argumentum. Maldonat. in Io…an. 6.62.I doe not deny, that I have no author of this interpretation: yet doe I so much the rather approve it, then that other of Augustines, though the most probable of all the rest; because it is more contrary to the sense of the Calvinists: which to mee is a great argument of probabilitie. Or as if lastly a man might not dissent from the ancient Doctors, so much as in an exposition of a Text of Scripture, but hee must presently make himselfe more learned, more pious, and more holy, then they were.
Yet their great Tostatus might have taught them, qSed nec ista argumentatio valet, se. Iste homo s…it aliquam conclusionem, quam nescivit Aug. e…go est sapientior Aug. Et sicut quidam peritus medicus dixit, homines nostri temporis ad antiquos comparantur, sicut pusillus homo positus collo Gigantis ad ipsum Gigantē Nam pusillus ibi positus videt quicquid vidit Gigas, & insuper plus; & tamen si deponatur de collo Gigantis, parùm aut nihil videbit ad Gigantem collatus. Ita & no… firmati super ingenia antiquorum & opera eorum, non esset admirandum, immo foret valde rationabile, si videremus quidquid illi viderunt, & insuper plus: licèt hoc adhuc non profitemur. Abulens. 2. part. D…fensor. cap. 18.that this argument holdeth not: Such a one knoweth some conclusion, that Augustine did not know; therefore he is wiser then Augustine. Because, as a certaine skilfull Physician said, the men of our time being compared vvith the ancient, are like unto a little man set upon a Giants neck, compared with the Giant himselfe. For as that little man placed there, seeth whatsoever the Giant seeth, and somewhat more; and yet if he be taken downe from the Giants neck, would see little or nothing in comparison of the Giant: even so we being setled upon the wits and workes of the ancient, it were not to be wondred, nay it should be very agreeable unto reason, that we should see whatsoever they saw, and somewhat more. Though yet (saith he) wee doe not professe so much. And even to the same effect speaketh Friar Stella: that though it be farre from him to condemne the common exposition given by the ancient holy Doctors; rBene tamen sci…us, Pygmaeos Gigantum humeris impositos, plusquam ipsos Gigantes videre. Stella, enarrat. in Luc. cap. 10.yet he knoweth full well, that Pygmeis being put upon Gyants shoulders, doe see further then the Gyants themselves. Salmeron addeth, sPer incrementa temporum nota facta sunt divina mysteria, quae tamen anteà multos latuerunt: ita ut hoc loco nôsse, beneficium sit temporis, non quòd nos meliores simus, quàm Patres nostri. Salmeron. in epist. ad Roman. lib. 2. disput. …1.that by the increase of time, divine mysteries have beene made knowen, which before were hid from many: so that to know them now, is to be attributed unto the benefite of the time, not that we are better then our Fathers were. Bishop Fisher, tNe que cuīquā obscurum est, quin posterioribus ingeniis multa sint, tam ex evangeliis, quàm ex scripturis caeteris, nunc excussa luculentiùs, & intellecta perspicaciùs, quàm fuerant olim. Nimirum, aut quia veteribus adhuc non erat perfracta glacies, neque sufficiebat illorum aetas, totū illud scripturarū pelagus ad amussim expendere: aut quia semper in amplissimo scripturarū cāpo post messores quantumvis exquisitissimos, spicas adhuc intactas licebit colligere. Rossens confutat. Assert. Lutheran. artic. 18.that it cannot be obscure unto any, that many things, as well in the Gospels as in the rest of the Scriptures, are now more exquisitely discussed by latter wits, and more clearely understood, then they have beene heretofore. Either by reason that the yce was not as yet broken unto the ancient, neither did their age suffice to weigh exactly that vvhole sea of the Scriptures: or because in this most large field of the Scriptures, even after the most diligent reapers, some eares will remaine to be gathered, as yet untouched. Hereupon Cardinall Caietan, in the beginning of his Commentaries upon Moses, adviseth his Reader, uNullus ita que detestetur novū sacrae scripturae sensum ex hoc quod dissonat á priscis doctoribus; sed scrutetur perspicaciùs textum ac contextum scripturae: & si quadrare invenerit, laudet Deum, qui non alligavit expositionem scriptura…um sacrarum priscorum doctorum sensibus. Caietan. in Genes. 1.not to loath the new sense of the holy Scripture for this, that it dissenteth from the ancient Doctors: but to search more exactly the text and context of the Scripture; and if he find it agree, to praise God, that hath not tyed the exposition of the Scriptures to the senses of the ancient Doctors.
But leaving comparisons, which, you know, are odious (the envie whereof notwithstanding your owne Doctors and Masters, you see, helpe us to beare off, and teach us how to decline:) I now come to the examination of the particular points by you propounded. It should indeed be your part by right, to be the Assailant, who first did make the Challenge: and I, who sustaine the person of the Defendant, might here wel stay, accepting only your challenge, & expecting your encounter. Yet do not I meane at this time to answer your Bill of Challenge as Bills are usually answered in the Chancerie, with saving all advantages to the Defendant: I am content in this also to abbridge my selfe of the libertie wch I might lawfully take, & make a further demōstration of my forwardnes in undertaking the maintenāce of so good a cause, by giving the first onset my selfe.