The Ancient Doctrine of the Church of England, Part 1 · Response to body of book · Chapter 4 – Chapter 5

The Ancient Doctrine of the Church of England · Part 1 · Response to body of book · Chapter 4 – Chapter 5

p. 177CHAP. IV. The ſumme of his Anſwer to my Fourth Section.

TO this Section, the title whereof is, That many learned Romaniſts have falne from the Catholike Faith to be Proteſtants, he ſaith, the Catholike Faith is indiviſible, and they that renounce it in part, renounce it in all: Hee affirmeth that in Prieſts, who cannot conteine, to marry, it is a greater ſinne than to keepe a concubine. This is the ſubſtance of his fourth Chapter, in anſwer to my fourth Section.

The Reply. I ſhewed in my fourth Section, that many learned Romaniſts, convicted by evidence of truth, either in part, or in whole, renounced Poperie before their death.Pag. 58. That ſome have renounced the ſame inpart (ſay you) is fooliſhly ſaid, for no man can renounce the Catholike Faith in part, it being indiviſible.

If I ſhall prove your aſſertion to bee a ſtrange Paradoxe, the fooliſhneſſe will returne into your owne boſome. For the better illuſtration therefore of your Tenet,Oratio in laudem Athanaſii. heare what diviſion Gregory Nazianzen makes upon that ground: When one taketh p. 178up water in his hand (ſaith he) not onelyonly that which he taketh not up, but that alſo which runneth forth, and findeth paſſage betweene his fingers, is divided and ſeparated from that which he holdeth and incloſeth in his hand: ſo not onelyonly the open and profeſſed enemies of the Catholike Faith, but they alſo that ſeeme to be her beſt and greateſt friends, are ſometimes divided one from another. What thinke you of this ancient Father? Is your Faith indiviſible by his Doctrine? or will you ſay it is fooliſhly ſpoken of him? But (ſay you) he that ceaſeth to beleeve one point, ceaſeth to beleeve any one as he ſhould: And is this wiſely ſpoken thinke you? Is not this your latter error greater than the firſt? For proofe therefore of your aſſertion, ſhew mee that man, who before the Councell of Trent held all the points of your Faith, as they are now taught and received in your Church; I ſay, give me but one ſince the Apoſtles time, who within the compaſſe of fifteene hundred yeares beleeved all your doctrines of Faith, entirely in all points, and for that one mans ſake, I will confeſſe your Faith is indiviſible, and ſubmit my obedience to your Church.

Your Index Expurgatorius diſcovers the weakneſſe of your opinion: I ſpeake not of Authors which were condemned in your firſt and third Claſsis for Heretikes,Propter ſuſpectam doctrinam Ind. lib prohibit. but of thoſe Romaniſts who in the ſecond Claſsis are purged for their ſuſpected doctrine (as you terme it) and yet never forſooke your Church; I dare confidently avow, that there are above foure hundred of thoſe Claſsicall Authors, p. 179all members of the Roman Church, never excommunicated, never condemned for hereſie in your Church, and yet are commanded by your Inquiſitors to be blotted out in ſome particular points of doctrine, which make againſt your Trent Faith. If theſe men therefore have renounced your Faith in part, how is your Faith indiviſible? Or if they ceaſe to beleeve one point, why doth your Church cite their teſtimonies, and allow their opinions in other doctrines conſonant to your Church, when as (by your Tenet) he that ceaſeth to beleeve one point, ceaſeth to beleeve any one as he ſhould? If you ſhould forſake all Authors that forſake your doctrine in part (or in ſome particular points) you will generally ſuffer a Recoverie againſt your owne Church. I will give you but one inſtance. It is the common Tenet of the Roman Church at this day, that the bleſſed Virgin was conceived without originall ſinne: yet the contrarie Tenet is likewiſe maintained by the members of your owne Church. Ludovicus Vives tells us, that two orders of Friers, Ludov Vives in lib. 20. de Civit. Dei. cap. 26. p. 828.both fierce, and both led with undaunted Generals, ſet this queſtion a foote; the Dominicans by Thomas Aquinas, and the Franciſcans by Duns Scotus: the Councell of Baſill decreed, that ſhee was wholly pure without all touch of ſinne, but the Dominicans objected that it was no lawfull Councell, and the Minorites of the other ſide avowed that it was true and holy, and called the Dominicans Heretikes for ſlandering the power of the Church; ſo that the matter had come to a ſhrewd paſſe, but that Pope Sixtus forbad p. 180this Theame to be any more diſputed.

To proceed to the reſt of your obſervations. I produced for a witneſſe Paulus Vergerius, who renounced Poperie, being a Romiſh Biſhop, by the teſtimonies of Sleidan, and Oſiander; I cited the Councell of Baſil, for diſpenſing with the cup to the Lay people; Aeneas Sylvius for Mariage of Prieſts; Mr. Harding againſt your private Maſſe; Mr. Caſaubon for your tranſlating of the Scriptures; Lord Cooke for the Papiſts frequenting our Churches, till the 11^th. of Qu. Eliſabeth: Now let the Reader judge of your moderate and learned confutation: Firſt,Pag. 59. Sleidan and Oſiander (ſay you) are notorious fellowes both for lying and hereſie; Paulus Vergerius, when he dyed, caſt forth a horrible ſtench, and roared moſt fearefully like an Oxe; The Councell of Baſile (you know) is of little or no authoritie with Catholikes, as being reproved by the Sea Apoſtolicke; Aeneas Sylvius, what hee wrote in the time of that Councell, is revoked by him in his Bull of Retractations; Touching Caſaubon, you ſay there is ſhame enough in ſtore for us both; Touching the Lord Cooke, he was ſoundly anſwered by a Catholicke Divine, and ſo expoſed to the ſcorne of the world for his notorious falſhoods.

Theſe be your ſeverall anſwers, and this is a confutation of their authorities: but I ſay to you, if theſe men have ſpoken untruth, beare witneſſe of their falſhood, if otherwiſe they delivered the truth, why do you reproach them? Either let their proofs bee plainly and moderately confuted, or let the p. 181lying lips (ſaith David) be put to ſilence, Pſalm. 31.20.Ps 31:20which cruelly, diſdainfully, and deſpightfully ſpeake againſt the righteous.

Such as is your charitie, ſuch is your chaſtitie: for when I cite your Jeſuite Coſterus for a witneſſe,Coſter. Enchir. cap. 17. propo. 9. Pag. 64. that a Prieſt doth ſinne more grievouſly in marrying a wife, than keeping a concubine, you ſcoffingly returne me this anſwere: You ſeeme to take this for a great error, but in Prieſts who cannot marrie, it is a greater ſinne to marrie, for it is not marriage. Thus you.

And is the marriage of Prieſts no marriage? Was there no marriage in all the Tribe of Levi? What will become of all the ſonnes of Aaron? were they all baſtards?Ignatius ad Philadelph. I wiſh (ſaith Ignatius) that I may be found meet before God to follow their ſteps which raigne in his Kingdome; as namely, Abraham, Iſaac, Jacob, Joſeph, and Eſay, and other Prophets; of Peter and Paul, and other Apoſtles, who lived in matrimonie, and uſed conjugall rites. And in concluſion hee anſweres your aſſertion in theſe words; If any man call lawfull copulation and procreation of children, Idem, ibid.corruption and uncleanneſſe, that man hath a ſerpent, the Devill (that fell from God) dwelling in him.Grat. Par. 1. diſt. 56. fol. 67. Oſius Palea.

Againe, your owne Gratian tells us from Pope Damaſus, that many Biſhops of Rome were Prieſts ſonnes, as namely Pope Hoſius, Bonifacius, Agapetus, Theodorus, Silverius, Deusdedit, Faelix, Gelaſius, all theſe were Popes, and Prieſts ſonnes: and then he concludes;aaCōplures etiam alii inveniantur, qui de ſacerdotibus nati, Apoſtolicae ſedi praeſuerūt. Ibid. There were many others alſo to p. 182be found, who were begotten of Prieſts, and governed in the Apoſtolike See. Athanaſ. ad Dracontium. p. (mihi) 518.And Athanaſius writing to Biſhop Dracontius, tells him, that in his dayes many Monkes were Parents of children, and Biſhops likewiſe were Fathers of Sonnes; and this was 340. yeares after Chriſt.

But I preſume you will not ſay, that the marriage of thoſe Prieſts was no marriage, and their brood was ſpurious and illegitimate. Thoſe who account it a Capitall offence for a Prieſt to marrie, and a veniall ſinne to keepe a concubine, doe rightly reſemble the old Heretike Aërius, who uſed to ſay,Epiph. haereſ. 76. To have the company of a woman out of marriage, is no more ſinne, De bono Matrim. diſt. 27. Quoniam.than for a man to claw his eare. St. Auſtin puts the queſtion, and reſolves it in this manner; Some ſay they be adulterous that marrie after they have made a vow; but I tell you (ſaith he) they ſin grievouſly that put ſuch aſunder. And elſewhere more particularly hee concludes againſt your Tenet;Auguſtinus de bono viduitatis cap. 10. They that ſay the marriage of ſuch men or women as have vowed continencie, is no marriage, but rather adulterie, ſeeme unto mee not to conſider diſcreetly and adviſedly what they ſay. And in his Tract of holy virginitie he plainly ſhewes the Antiquitie of your error,Auguſt. de ſancta Virgin. c. 34. and refutes it, where ſpeaking of vowed perſons, he tells us; that many of them are kept from marriage, not for love of their godly purpoſe of Virginitie, but for feare of open ſhame; which ſhame proceedeth of Pride, for that they are more afraid to diſpleaſe men than God: they will not marry, becauſe they cannot without rebuke, yet better p. 183were it for them to marrie, than to burne, that is to ſay, with the flame of their concupiſcence to be waſted; they are ſorrie for their profeſsion, and yet it grieveth them to confeſſe it. Chryſ. contra Judaios Gentil. & haeret. ſerm. de nuptiis Cana in Galil.In like manner Chryſoſtome in the ſame age doth elegantly illuſtrate the honour of marriage in Spirituall perſons. Our Lord honoured Marriage with his preſence, and ſayeſt thou that Marriage is a hindrance unto godlineſſe? I tell thee Marriage is no hinderance. Had not Moſes a wife and children? Helias, was not hee a virgin? Moſes brought downe Manna from Heaven, ſo did Helias fire: Moſes cauſed Quailes to flie in the heaven, and Helias ſhut it with a word. What hurt did virginity to the one? what impediment was wife and children to the other? See Helias coached in the ayre, and Moſes travelling through the Sea. Behold Peter a Pillar of the Church, he had a wife, therefore finde no fault with Marriage.

Looke into the Ages following; your Angelicall Doctor Thomas Aquinas reſolves the queſtion flatly againſt you & your fellow Jeſuits.The Acolothytes were thoſe that lighted the Tapers at the reading of the Goſpel in the Maſſe. If an Acolothyte (ſaith he) doe confeſſe to a diſcreet Prieſt, that by no meanes he can containe, the Prieſt doth not much offend in giving him this counſell, that he ſhould marry privately, and cloſely blinde the eyes of the Biſhop. And if afterwards he be willing to take Orders, we hold it leſſe ſinne for him to uſe his wife, than to commit fornication; for it is a leſſe offence to accompany with his wife, than to commit fornication againſt the Divine Precept. They who pretend chaſtitie, and make a vow to keepe it, when they enter into holy Orders, p. 184doe breake it even in this, when they allow a concubine. Aeneas Sylvius was conſcious to himſelfe of the danger of that ſinne, and therefore he wiſhed that marriage were reſtored to Prieſts; yea, whilſt he was a Cardinall he had his concubine, to whom at laſt he gave threeſcore Florens for her Dowrie: and it ſeemes when he was well in yeares, in or about the time of his Popedome, he confeſſed; I cannot boaſt of any merit in my chaſtity, Magis me Venus Jugitat, quam ego illā horreo. Ep. 92.for to tell the truth, venerie doth rather flie from me, than I from it. Neither was it his particular caſe alone; for the Booke called Taxae Camerae Apoſtolicae, which your Biſhop Eſpencaeus complained of, doth ſufficiently witneſſe the damnable effects of ſuch divelliſh doctrine. The graveſt Cardinals in Rome, who were appointed by ſpeciall Commiſſion, and preſented their information to Pope Paul the third, doe ſufficiently witneſſe the forbidden fruits of ſuch an evill tree: The words are theſe; In this City of Rome the Curtezans paſſe through the ſtreets, Wolph. Lect. Memor. Anno 1535 p. 403.or ride on their mules, like honeſt Matrons, and in the midſt of the day, Noblemen and Cardinals deare friends attend upon them. We never ſaw ſuch corruption, but onelyonly in this Citie, which is the example and patterne of all other: moreover, they dwell in faire and goodly houſes.

On the other ſide, you would make us beleeve, that your Curtezans goe altogether on foote; that they have a ſpeciall badge of diſhoneſtie, whereby they may be knowne; that they are deſpiſed and reviled of the people, but eſpecially by Cardinals p. 185and the Nobles; that they dwelt in out-houſes and back lanes: but to ride on horſebacke, to be attyred as honeſt Matrons and Noble Ladies, to be attended by Prieſts and Cardinals friends, and to dwell in faire and beautifull houſes, this ſhewes that your diſpenſation for ſtewes is occaſioned chiefly by the forbidding of marriage; and by this meanes marriage, which is honourable in all, Heb. 13.4.Heb 13:4and the bed undeſiled, by the Apoſtles doctrine, is now become a ſinne, and your Apoſtolike See the Mother of Fornications. This occaſioned your owne Agrippa to complaine of your caſting up of the Bawds rents with the revenew of your Church.Agrip. de vanit. ſcient. c. 64. de Lenonia. I have heard (ſaith he) the accompts caſt up in this ſort; he hath two Benefices, one cure of twenty Ducats, a Priorie of forty Ducats, and three whores in a brothell houſe.

I liſt not any longer to ſtirre this filthie puddle,Camerinam movere. Eraſ. Adag. which ſtinkes in the noſthrils of God and good men; the counſell of your Canoniſt is ſafe and good in this particular.Panor. dè Cler. Conjug. Cap. Cū Olim. The Church (ſaith he) ſhould diſcharge the part of a good Phyſitian, who when by experience he findes one medicine rather hurt than helpe, he removeth it, and applieth another: and there hee gives the reaſon, Becauſe we finde by experience, that the Law of ſingle life hath brought forth contrarie effects: and the rather, becauſe it is reſolved by your learned Cardinall:Cajet. in quodlibet contra Lutherum. It cannot bee proved either by reaſon, nor yet by authority, to ſpeake abſolutely, that a Prieſt doth ſinne in marrying a wife; for neither the Order of Prieſthood, in that it is Order, nor the p. 186ſame Order, in that it is holy, is any hindrance to matrimonie; for Prieſthood doth not diſſolve matrimonie, whether it be contracted before Prieſthood or afterwards, if we (ſetting apart all other Eccleſiaſticall Lawes) ſtand onelyonly to thoſe things which we have received of Christ and his Apoſtles.

Againe,Panorm. l. extr. de Elect. C. Licet. de Vit. Ab. your owne Panormitan tells us, that the Prieſts of Grecia, being within Orders, doe marrie wives; and we ſee they doe it (ſaith he) ſine peccato, without ſinne, or breach of Law, either of God or man: And thus by your owne Tenet you ſtand with the poſitive law of man againſt the law of God; you ſtand in oppoſition againſt the Greeke Church, which ever uſed it; and laſtly, you are at difference among your ſelves,Eſpencaeus de Continentia. l. 1. c. 11. p. 116. when many prime members of your owne Church utterly condemne it. The doctrine of St. Paul is evident and plaine, It is better marrie than burne. This Law is cleane perverted by your Jeſuits doctrine;Utrumque eſt malum, nubere & uri, imo pejus eſt nubere, quicquid exclamant adver (arii: praeſertim ei qui habet votum ſolenne. Bell. de Monach. l. 2. c. 30. Hiſt. of Trent. l. 5. fol. 400. & 680. for (ſaith Bellarmine) Let our adverſaries ſay what they will, it is worſe to marrie than burne, eſpecially for him that hath made a ſolemne vow: So that the Law of God muſt give way to the Law of man, and chiefly for reaſon of ſtate and policie. For (ſaith Cardinall Rodolpho) if the marriage of Prieſts were tolerated, this inconvenience would follow, the Prieſts having houſe, wife, and children, would not depend upon the Pope but on the Prince, and their love to their children would make them yeeld to any prejudice of the Church: they will ſeeke alſo to make their Benefice hereditarie, and in a ſhort ſpace the authoritie of the Apoſtolike See will be p. 187confined within the walles of Rome. And to theſe reaſons you may truly adde this, as appendant to the reſt; the diſpenſation of Stewes would be neglected, and conſequently the great Revenue of the Roman See would be utterly loſt; and therefore the Index Expurgatorius will not lay hold of any ſuch doctrine.

For a concluſion of this point. If you ſay marriage of Prieſts be malum in ſe, evill in it ſelfe, you comply with the Devilliſh doctrine of Tatianus; If it be evill quia prohibetur, becauſe it is forbidden onelyonly, then fornication, which is evill of it ſelfe, and in it ſelfe, muſt needs bee the greater ſinne.

CHAP. V. The ſumme of his Anſwer to my Fifth Section.

OF this Section (ſaith he) there is not much to be ſaid, for there is nothing in it, but a litle of the Knights own raving. Maldonat approveth and commendeth St. Auſtins explicacation, but addeth another of his owne. After this, the Knight hath a great deale of fooliſh ſtuffe, which needs no anſwer.

The Reply. Your anſwer is ſhort, but your words be ſomewhat p. 188ſharpe: and you can finde nothing in that Section but raving and fooliſhneſſe? If it be raving to cite Texts of Scripture againſt your maimed Commandements, your Invocation of Saints, your Prayer in an unknowne tongue, your worſhip of Images, and the like: If it be raving to ſay Purgatorie is created a point of Faith, & that Faith is confirmed by Councels, meerely for the benefit of the Pope and Clergie; that you doe not exerciſe the power of your Prieſthood in binding as well as looſing, by reaſon no man will give monie to be bound, but to be looſed in Purgatorie: If it be raving to ſay your Jeſuite Maldonat preferres his owne explication of Scripture before St. Auſtins, onelyonly becauſe it more croſſeth the ſenſe of the Calviniſts; and withall confeſſeth that St. Auſtins opinion is more probable; If this I ſay may bee deemed raving, then will I confeſſe your railing is a good anſwer. But he deſpaires (ſay you) of his cauſe, who ſeeth Maldonats ſaying practiſed by the Church of Rome againſt his Church and doctrine.

I confeſſe with the bleſſed Apoſtle,Acts 5.38, 39.Acts 5:38Acts 5:39 If our counſell or worke be of men, it will come to nought, and then I might deſpaire of it, but if it be of God, yee cannot overthrow it, leſt happely yee be found even to fight againſt God. We have no cauſe (bleſſed be God) to deſpaire of our Religion, which in one Age hath ſpread over the better part of Chriſtendome. But I conceive there is little hope of you or your cauſe, who have ſold your ſelves either with Ahab to worke wickedneſſe, and maintaine p. 189Idolatrous worſhip for your owne advantage; or like Maldonat, See Maldonat. Col. 1536. Unum è duobus intelligatur neceſſe eſt, aut tunc non ſcandaliz abimini, cùm videritis filium hominis aſcendentē ubi erat prius: aut (contra) tunc magis ſcandaliz abimini: prioremſenſum plerique ſequātur, Chryſoſt. Auguſtin. &c. Yet Maldonat followeth the latter.openly to profeſſe greater hatred to Proteſtants, than love to the truth it ſelfe. For it is apparent, ex profeſſo, he preferreth his owne opinion without any authoritie, before St. Auſtin, nay contrarie to St. Austin, and hee gives this reaſon for it; Becauſe this ſenſe of mine doth more croſſe the ſenſe of the Calviniſts. But I may ſay to you, as ſometimesaaLudov. Viv. de Civ. Dei. l. 13. c. 24. Ludovicus Vives ſpake upon the like occaſion: St. Austin is now ſafe, becauſe of his age, but if he were alive againe, he ſhould be ſhaken off as a bad Rhetoritian, or a poore Grammarian. And yet this good Saint was ſo farre from defending any opinion againſt the knowne truth, that on the contrarie, he preferreth the interpretation ofbbAuguſt. contr. Creſc. Grammat. l. 1. c. 32. & l. 2. c. 32. p. (mihi) 218. & 241. Creſconius a Grammarian, before St. Cyprian the Martyr, becauſe it ſeemed to him more probable and agreeable to the truth.