Works of Joseph Hall, Book 1 · Section 27 – Section 28
SECT. XXVII.
BVt what Boyes-play is this, To giuegive and take? Our doughty Champion hath granted vsus Clemens of Alexandria, and now he puls him backe againe; Clemens (ſaith he) grants the Apoſtles to hauehave had wiues, Refut. p. 116.but hee denyes that they vſed them as wiues; cunningly diſſembling that which Clemens ſaid in the beginning of the ſame period; For Peter and Philip (ſaith hee) did beget children, &c. How did Peter beget them, if he were not Peter when he begot them? In the time of their painfull Euangelicall peregrination they forbore perhaps: doth it therefore follow that they did alwaies forget to be husbands? Whence, in all likelihood, had S. Peter his Petronella, if ſhe …ere not borne after he was Peter? Whence was that inſcription on Pilagiaes Tombe, (if we may beleeuezCit. ad Eſpen. loco citato. Here lyes the Wife of Biſhop Dionyſius, Daughter to Thomas the Apoſtle. Perionius) Hic ſita eſt ſponſa Dionyſij, Thomae Apoſtoli filia? There is not (I grant) neceſſity in this proofe, there is probability. It is therefore too boldly affirmed by my Detector, that the Apoſtles, after that publike calling vndertaken, vſed not their Wiues. Is that of Saint Ignatius, nothing againſt him? Op to Deo dignus, &c. I deſire to be found worthy of God, as Peter and Paul, and the reſt of the Apoſtles which were maried men, and aIgnat. Ep. ad Philadelph. non libidinis cauſa, ſed poſteritatis ſurrogandae gratia coniuges habuerunt.not for luſts ſake, but for propagation of poſterity inioyed their Wiues. Thus he. So much againſt C. E. that C. E. is no leſſe againſt him. The teſtimony of S. Ignatius (ſaith he) is a meer forgery, eaſily anſwered. If Ignatius had either denyed or diſliked theſe Mariages, no mans word had been more authentike; now, this clauſe hath made him falſified: He cannot (I hope) ſay, that the ſentence came out of our Forge; we take him as we finde him; neither doth B. Eſpencaeus, or any other ingenuous Writer, take ſuch exception, but findes the authority weighty. That more vnliked Epiſtle which Ignatius wrote to Saint Iohn, and the bleſſed Virgin (though palpably reiected by their owne) is claſſicall enough, when it may ſerue a Coccius, orbBell. T…m. 1. pag. 837. a Bellarmine, or a Pierre Cotton; But here the Epiſtle it ſelfe is not queſtioned, onelyonly this clauſe is bored in the Eare. And why ſo? Forſooth the ancient Greeke Copies hauehave it not. Doubtleſſe the man hath vexed the old Greek Manuſcripts; but when he hath done, his owne Fellow ſhall giuegive him the lye; who confeſſes it to be in all Copies both Greeke and Latine, old and new, whiles he ſaith, that thoſe words (bThoſe words (And the other Apoſtles) are to be …azed out o… the text. Margar. de la Bigne. Not. in Epiſt. ad Philadelph. Et alij Apoſtoli) ex textu abradenda. Or if that will not ſerue, there is yet to be ſeene in Baliol Colledge in Oxford, an old Copy of the age of ſeuen hundred or eight hundred yeeres, wherein the words are found; OnelyOnly the words (Saint Paul, and the other Apoſtles) blurred; yet ſo, as they are ſtill to be well diſcerned: If the Greeke ſhould want the clauſe, what were this? The firſt Edition of Ignatius in Greeke was (1558.) as the Centuriſts hauehave noted; and how eaſie was it to leaue out one ſentence that ſeemed preiudiciall? Let him neuer caſt this vponupon the Grecians: they neuer ſo excelled in this Faculty of counterfeiting as the Romans: Greece in this muſt yeeld to Italie, how-euer it pleaſescErat conſuetudo Graecorum fere ordin ria corrumpendi libros. Bell. l. 4. de Pont. c. 11. Quoniam Romani ſicut non acumina, ita nec impoſturas habent, Gre. l. 5. Ep. 14. ad Noorſen. Pope Gregorie, and Cardinall Bellarmine herein onelyonly to giuegive it ſuperiority.
Amongſt the reſt, this very place puts me in mind of a memorable iugling Tricke of his Fellowes. The old Platina printed at Paris by Francis Regnault, Anno 1500. (which I hauehave ſeene) and all other old Copies, read thus of Saint Luke; Vixit annos 84.dPlatin. in Cleto ad finem. Luke liued 84. yeeres, hauing a Wi…e in Bithynia. Hauing not a Wife in Bithinia. Vxorem habens in Bithynia. Now comes the Onuphrian Edition ſet forth at Coleine, An. 1600. from the ſhop of Materuus Colinus, and reads, Vxorē non habens in Bithynia; with which authority Eſpencaeus himſelfe was deceiued, citing Hierom for it, as the Fountaine, whence perhaps Platina might fetch it: but if my Reader pleaſe to turne to thateHer. Catol. ſcript. Illuſtr. Catalogue of famous Writers, aſcribed (not vniuſtly) to Hierome, there ſhall he find the very ſame coozenage; the words runne ſo indeed, in the Latine printed Copies; but not acknowledged, not mentioned by Sophronius in the Greeke Tranſlation; and Eraſmus, reading it either, Hauing, or not hauing, at laſt ſhuts vp; Haec verba videntur adiecta; quandoquidem nec adduntur apud Sophronium, nec in exemplaribus emendatioribus. Theſe words (ſaith Eraſmus) ſeeme patched to the reſt; ſince they neither are added in Sophronius, nor in the better Copies. Thus he. It was fit my Reader ſhould hauehave a taſte of the Romane integritie.
I alleaged the learned Cardinall Caietan for the likelihood of Saint Pauls Mariage; Can my Refuter deny this? The words are plaine:fCaiet. Com. in Phil. c. 4. Quia omnes Apoſtoſi, exceptis Ioanne & Paulo, vxores babuerunt. Amb. &c. Refut. p. 117. Locus cogere videtur; The place ſeemes to inforce it, not by demonſtratiue reaſon, but in all reaſonable ſenſe, that Paul had a Wife. So he. Which is all I contended for. If now he ſhall thinke to choake me with a croſſe Teſtimonie of the ſame Author, concerning Saint Pauls not conuerſing with his Wife after his Apoſtleſhip, he may vnderſtand, that I well remember Caietan to hauehave beene a Roman Cardinall; and therefore in ſome points neceſſarily vnſound; whoſe ingenuity yet in this buſineſſe I hauehave formerly ſhewed.
SECT. XXVIII.
Refut. p. 118.FRom the practice of the Apoſtles (which is yet cleare for vsus) we deſcended to their Canons. It troubles my Refuter, that I ſay, the Romiſh Church fathers theſe vponupon the Apoſtles, and that their Ieſuit Turrian ſweats to defend it (inſinuating my contrary opinion) and yet that I cite them for my ſelfe; whereas his wiſdome might hauehave conſidered, that their force is no whit leſſe ſtrong againſt them, notwithſtanding our doubt or denyall. For example, The Trent Canons rore terribly to them: to vsus, or the French, they are but as the Pot-guns of Boyes: wee may cite theſe to them as Goſpell, they may cite them to vsus as Alchoran.
By this it appeares how farre not onelyonly Schoole-learning, but euen Logicke tranſcends this poore Refuters capacity, who could not diſtinguiſh betweene diſputing ad rem, and ad hominem.
What I ſayd in my Epiſtle to my reuerend and worthy friend Maſter Doctor Iames, the incomparably induſtrious and learned Bibliothecary of Oxford (a man whom their Poſſeuine thought ſo well of, that he hath handſomely ſtolne a booke of his, and clapt it out for his owne, a man whom ſo baſe a Tongue as my Detectors cannot diſgrace) I profeſſe ſtill, that I hold thoſe Canons of the Apoſtles vncanonicall; And doe I hold this alone? Doth not his Pope Gelaſius ſo? Doth not Iſidore, Biſhop of Hiſpalis ſo? Doth not Leo the Ninth ſo? Are not ſome of them at pleaſure reiected by Poſſeuine, Baronius, Bellarmine? Or, in a word, if they be the true iſſue of the Apoſtles,Can. 65, 67, &c. are they accordingly reſpected, and obſerued of the Roman Church? Doth not hisgMic. Med. de ſacr. hom. Contin l 5. Vix ſex …ut octo Lati… a Eccleſia nunc obſeruat. Medina grant to their ſhame, that the Latine Church ſcarce obſerues ſix or eight of them? Theſe Canons then I doe not hold Apoſtolicall; I doe hold ancient, and not vnworthy of reſpect; and ſuch as I wonder they hauehave eſcaped the Roman Purgations. As for thoſe other nine or ten noted Counterfeits, which I ioyned herewith for company, in that Epiſtle, his ſhame would ſerue him to iuſtifie, if his leaſure would, whereas there is ſcarce one of them whom his owne Authors hauehave not branded.
My Refuter muſt hauehave a fling;Ref. p. 120, 121. vſque ad 125. In an idle excurſion therefore he iuſtly rayles on the Proteſtant practice, in reiecting thoſe Fathers for Baſtardie one while, whom otherwhiles they cite for currāt; when his own eminent impudency in the very paſſage next going before, and in the next following (to goe no further) offends in the ſame kind. The truth is, The Proteſtants take libertie to refuſe thoſe Fathers, whom euen ingenuous Papiſts hauehave cenſured as baſe; The Papiſts take libertie, when they liſt, to reiect the authority of thoſe Fathers, whoſe truth they cannot deny. The inſtances hereof would be endleſſe. But with what face can any Papiſt taxe vsus for this, when all the World may ſee aboue three hundred and twenty of their Authors, whom after the firſt allowance they hauehave either ſuppreſſed, or cenſured? To their eternall and open conuiction, Doctor Iames, (whom they may reuile, but ſhall neuer anſwer) hath collected and publiſhed the names and pages.