The Ancient Doctrine of the Church of England, Part 1 · Section 13
Concerning Razing of Records and clipping Authors tongues; Spectacles, Chap. 13. a page 435. uſ que ad 446.
BECAVSE there have beene many bookes publiſhed this laſt age, by occaſion of Haereſie, and liberty which came therewith to the great prejudice of the Catholike faith: there hath beene a courſe taken for the reſtraint of all ſuch, not onelyonly writings of Haeretikes, but even of Catholikes which have any tang of haereſie: and this kinde of care hath beene ever uſed in the Catholike Church. So wee ſee in Scripture it ſelfe ſome that followed curioſities becomming Chriſtians, confeſſed their deedes and burnt their bookes.
Gelaſius in the yeare 490. maketh a Catalogue of haereticall bookes, which he forbiddeth: and I would know of the Knight, or any man elſe that cryeth ſo bitterly againſt our Index Expurgatorius, what he can ſay againſt it, that he may not ſay againſt this Decree, and Councell of Gelaſius, and againſt which we may not defend our ſelves by oppoſing it as a buckler againſt all their darts?
Sith all ſwarving from the rule of faith is a declining to haereſie, it appertaineth to the Catholike Roman Church, which as Gelaſius ſaith, hath neither ſpot, nor wrinkle, to prevent the danger that may come by ſuch bookes forbidding the uſe of them.
It were a more dangerous and unnaturall part in the Church not to uſe this care, then it were in a mother that ſhould ſee ſugar and ratſ-bane lie together, and ſeeing her child going to taſte thereof, ſhould forbeare to warne it.
I will not ſtand particularly to examine every Author, and juſtifie the inquiſition: onelyonly I cannot omit one Author called Bertram, whom of all men living me thinkes the Knight ſhould never ſo much as have named, conſidering how much diſgrace he hath ſuſtained by tranſlating that booke, and ventring his owne credit, and the credit of his Church, upon the faith thereof.
Another thing I am to note concerning his quoting the Canon of the Councell of Laodicea, wherein firſt is to be noted his error in Chronologie concerning the time of this Councell, which he maketh to be in the yeare 368. forty three yeares after the firſt Councell at Nice; whereas it was celebrated before that Councell. Secondly his corruption in the tranſlation and cutting off the Canon, which is thus; non oportet relictâ eccleſiâ ad angelos abominandae idolatriae congregationes facere, quicunque autem inventus fuerit occulte huic idololatriae vacans anathema ſit. Now where in this Canon doth the Knight finde the word invocation of Angells, which is the thing he pretendeth, to be forbidden.
Whereas the Knight objecteth to us the recantation of Henry Buxhorne, who was ſometime appointed to put in execution the tyrannicall Decree of the inquiſitors, and had noted 600. ſeverall paſſages to be ſpunged and blotted out; which animadverſions of his he wiſhed he could have waſhed away with his teares and blood, his heart being ſmitten, and his eyes open by the mercy of God: I anſwere, if ſuch matter will ſerve the Knights turne he may have enough: neither neede I ſearch corners to finde out ſuch obſcure fellowes, as this Buxhorne; he might bring the Fathers of the Knights religion: for example, Luther, Calvine, Zuinglius, Beza, Carolſtadius, and who not? for though they might pretend ſeverall cauſes, yet there was one principall one, which conſiſted indeede in the ſmiting of their hearts with a fiery dart of carnall love, and when they found an Eve to give them an Apple, then their eyes were opened, and ſo it proved alſo with their friend Buxhorne, as I ſhall ſhew by a briefe ſtory of his life, moſt authentically related by that grave and Holy man Oliverius, of the ſociety of Jeſus. Henry Buxhorne, a licentiate of Divinity, &c. It was not the razing then of evidences that made Buxhorne fall from his faith, but there were certaine Lutheran baites wherewith many of them were catched, which were aurum, gloria, delitiae, veneres, gold, glory, delights and Venus, of which ſome are catched with one, and ſome with another.
The Hammer.
IN the former Section, the Ieſuit ſhewed himſelfe a prevaricatour, but in this a cowardly runnagate. For to the mangling of authors, and razing out of Records objected againſt him, namely, this marginall note out of Stephanus his Bible, Deus prohibet ſculptilia fieri. This Gloſse upon Gratian the Prieſt, cannot ſay ſignificatively of the bread, This is my Body, without telling a lie, Caſſanders obſervation upon the ſame words, that ſetting aſide the authoritie of the Church, they prove not ſufficiently Tranſubſtantiation, Caſſanders whole Tract concerning the Communion in both kinds, Vdalricus his Epiſtle touching the lawfulneſſe of Prieſts marriage, Anſelmes Treatiſe concerning the viſitation of the ſicke, together with divers paſſages in Caſſander againſt merit, in Polydor Virgil againſt Images, in Langus againſt Tranſubſtantiation, in Ferus againſt the Popes ſupremacie. The Ieſuit anſwereth nothing at all in particular, but onelyonly applies Salves in generall, which no way heale the wounds given by the Knight to the Inquiſitors, as the Reader ſhall ſee by taking them off one after another, and viewing the Sores.
To the firſt. The Ieſuits inſtance is wide from the purpoſe. For thoſe Books were not burnt by any decree of the Church, much leſſe the Church of Rome, which was not then in being: but by the owners of them, to teſtifie their unfeined Repentance; for ſo wee reade, Acts 19.19. Many alſo of them, brought their Bookes together, and burned them before all men: and they counted the price of them, and found it 50000 pieces of ſilver. Secondly, theſe Bookes which the owners burnt of their owne accord, were Bookes of ſuch as uſed curious Arts; that is, Books of Art-magick, Necromancie, Sorcerie, and the like. Whereas, the Bookes which the Romiſh Inquiſitours either mangle or utterly deface are Chriſtian Treatiſes, written for the moſt part by them, that lived and died in the boſome and peace of the Church of Rome.
To the ſecond. This Decree of Gelaſius which the Ieſuit oppoſeth, as a Buckler againſt all our darts, is not altogether approved by the preſent Romane Church; for in reckoning the Canonicall bookes of Scripture, the Pope there excludeth the booke of Baruch, and the ſecond booke of the Macchabees, and the booke of Nehemiah, which the preſent Romane Church receiveth for Canonicall. Secondly, Gelaſius with his Roman Councell, freely give their cenſure of all Theologicall bookes then extant, but they clip not the tongues of any Authors, nor burne their bookes. If the Romiſh Inquiſitors had done no more, if they had let the Records and Evidences remaine, and onelyonly cenſured them at their pleaſure; wee would not ſo much have blamed them, for uſing the freedome of their judgements: wee would only freely have cenſured their Cenſures, Lipſ. Epiſt. Critica noſtra non effugêre foreign.and left all to the judicious and intelligent Readers judgement. An errour in Criticiſme is pardonable, but the making away of the evidence of Truth,Adverſ. Gentes, l. 3. Intercipere ſcripta, & publicatam velle ſubmergere lectionem, non eſt Deos defendere ſed veritatis teſtificationem timere. and defacing authenticall Records, is a damnable practiſe, and an undoubted Argument, both of an evill conſcience, and a deſperate cauſe; as Arnobius layeth the Law to the Gentiles.
To the third. Gelaſius his teſtimonie of the Romane Church, whereof hee was then Biſhop, can be of no great moment. It ſeemeth at that time, the Church of Rome wanted good neighbours, that the Pope was faine to blazon his owne armes, and guild his owne Dioceſe; not thinking of the old Proverbe, Laus propria ſordet in ore. Howbeit, wee grant in Gelaſius his time, the Romane Church had not many ſpots and wrinkles, for then ſhee was young in compariſon; now ſhe is old and decrepit, and all full of wrinkles: and after the manner of crooked old age, boweth downe, to wit, to rood-lofts, Images, and Pictures. But neither then nor now, hath ſhee any power to forbid the uſe of any Books through the whole Church: but onelyonly within her owne juriſdiction.
To the fourth. This Plaiſter is a great deale too narrow for the Sore of the Romane Church, to which the Ieſuit applieth it. For it is not their admonitions to the Children of their owne Church, which we here complaine of; but their cutting out of the tongues of learned Authors, when they witneſſe the truth: not the cenſuring their own Writers, but the mangling of ſome of them, and utterly aboliſhing others. VnderUnder colour of taking away Rats-bane out of the way, they take away Sugar from their Children; and which is worſe, debarre them from the ſincere Milke of the Word, I meane, the Scriptures in the vulgar language. Yet were there Rats-bane, in ſome of the Writers with whom the Inquiſitours have to deale, they ſhould have onelyonly given notice thereof, or preſcribed ſome Antidote againſt it, conſidering that Phyſitians, and Apothecaries, and Houſholders alſo, make good uſe of Rats-bane ſometimes.
To the fift. The Ieſuit doth well, not to undertake juſtifying of the Inquiſition, which hee well knoweth hee is not able: onelyonly here and there hee nibleth at ſome Author or other that hath falne into their hands, as Bertram in this place: whom the Knight long agoe reſcued, and gave unto him the wings of the Preſſe to flie abroad; whereby hee hath received no diſgrace, but many thankes from all that love the Truth in ſinceritie. For the tranſlation thereof, which the Ieſuit imputeth to the Knight, as a great diſparagement to him; the truth is, the Knight tranſlated not Bertram, but publiſhed the tranſlation of another, by re-printing it, and gracing it with a learned and elegant Preface of his owne. Which, I marvell not that the Ieſuit kicketh at, becauſe hee and his fellow Ieſuits are ſore Galled with it. When the Ieſuit ſhall prove any falſification in the tranſlated Copie, or any errour inſerted into it, hee ſhall receive a further anſwer. Till then, let the brand remaine upon the Romane Index, for damning the originall; and upon the Ieſuit, for defaming the true tranſlated Copie of ſo learned and orthodox a Writer as Bertram was.
To the ſixt. In citing the Councell of Laodicea, and detecting the Inquiſitours foule dealing with it, by turning Angels into Angles, to gaine a ſtarting hole for their Idolatrie: the Ieſuit by recrimination objecteth to the Knight, errour in Chronology, and corruption of the Councell. To the firſt I anſwer, that the Primate of Armath, and other learned Antiquaries have ſet this Councell about the yeare mentioned by the Knight; your Binius ingeniouſly confeſſeth, quo anno celebratum fuit incertum eſt; It is uncertaine in what yeare of our Lord this Councell was held; hee ſaith, it was celebrated before the Councell of Nice, but hee brings no proofe of it. If wee ſhould grant him that this Councell were elder by 40 or 50 yeares, than the Knight accounteth it, it would be more for our advantage, and againſt him; ſith Councels, the more ancient they are, caeteris paribus, the more authority they carrie with them. To the ſecond I anſwer, that the tranſlation which the Knight followed, agreeth verbatim with the originall, foreign: which words, two of the Romiſh Tranſlators ſet in Columnes one againſt the other by Binius, render, as followeth. The firſt thus, Quod non oporteat Chriſtianos relictâ dei eccleſiâ abire, & Angelos nominare. The other thus, Quod non oporteat eccleſiam dei relinquere atque Angelos nominare. That is, that Chriſtians ought not to leave the Church of God, and goe their wayes, and name Angels: that is, mention them in our Prayers, or take their names in our lips, as the Pſalmiſt ſpeaketh of Idoll-worſhippers;Pſal. 16.4. Their drink-offerings of blood will I not offer, nor take their name in my lips. And thus Theodoret in his Comment upon the ſecond Chapter of St. Paul to the Coloſsians, verſ. 18. alleageth the Canon of this Councell: Becauſe, ſaith hee, they commanded men to worſhip Angels; Saint Paul enjoyneth on the contrarie, that they ſhould ſend up Thankſgiving to God the Father by him that is Chriſt, and not by the Angels. The Synod of Laodicea alſo following this rule (of the Apostle) and deſiring to heale that old diſeaſe, made a Law, that they ſhould not pray unto Angels, foreign. Here the Ieſuit hath both the Canon, and the Report; the Canon of the ancient Councell held at Laodicea, thundring againſt their Invocation of Angels: and the learned and ancient Father Theodoret his Report of it.
To the ſeventh. Thoſe men whom the Ieſuit nameth, were not Fathers of our Religion, but Brethren onelyonly of our profeſſion; neither was their motive for the change of their Religion carnall love as the Ieſuit, like impure Nero, judging others by himſelfe, conceiveth; but a voyce from Heaven ſaying unto them, goe out of Babylon my people, Apoc. 18.4.leſt you partake of her Plagues. It is true, thoſe inſtruments of Gods glory were married as the Apoſtles St. Peter and St. Phillip, and many of the chiefe Biſhops and Paſtours in the Primitive Church were, of whom it may be ſaid as Sozomen ſpake of Spiridion that famous Biſhop of Cyprus: Eccleſ. Hiſt. l. 1. foreign.they lived in wedlocke, and had many children without any diſparagement at all to their Sacred function. As the Rod of Aaron in theſe brought forth fruit in Holy Matrimony: ſo it budded alſo in others in our Church, who followed virginall chaſtity, and lead a ſingle life, as Iewell, Reinolds, Andrewes, Lakes, and many other reverend Prelates and Doctors, who for eminent learning and examplary life, may compare with any of the Romiſh Mitred Prelates, or late Canonized Saints. Neither can they pretend that any Eve gave theſe an Apple, whereby their eyes were opened: but on the contrary we can produce many a Lucretia who have given Apples to their Popes, Lucretia nomine, ſed re Thais, Alexandri filia, ſponſa nurus.whereby their eyes have beene blinded, and their reputation for ever blaſted. See Picus Mirandula his oration extant in Faſciculus rerum expetendum & fugiendum, and Mantuan his Poem.
Sanctus ager ſcurris, venerabilis ara cinaedis
Servit honorandae Divûm Ganymedibus aedes.
As for Olivereus Manareus his Legend of Buxhorne, if the Reader will be pleaſed to peruſe an apologie for this Buxhorne, written to the Chancellor of Lovan, wherein the true cauſe is related, for which this licentiate Divine abandoned the Papacy, he ſhall finde in that treatiſe printed in the yeare of our Lord, 1625, a Rowland for his Oliver, or Oliverius Manareus the Ieſuit, to whoſe relation as much credit is to be given as to Cocleus his Hiſtory of Luther, and Bolſecs of Calvin. The Devill, the grand Calumniator hath ſuborned in all ages men of proſtituted conſciences, and corrupt mindes and mouthes, to ſtaine with their impure breath, the golden and the ſilver veſſells of the Sanctuarie: but Illi linguarum, nos aurium dominſumus, their tongues are their owne, they may ſpeake what malice dictateth; our eares are our owne, and we will hearken unto, and aſſent onelyonly to what truth confirmeth. As for their Lutheran baits, he mentioneth, aurum, gloria, dilitiae, veneres; gold, glory, delights and Venus, if theſe things abound any where, it is in the Roman Church, where the Pope who pretends himſelfe to be the ſucceſſor of Peter the fiſher; fiſheth with a golden hooke, and baits it with fleſhly luſts; what ſo pompeous and glorious as his Holineſſe triple Crowne, and his Cardinals Hats, and his Biſhops Miters and Croziours; for what ſence hath not the Romiſh Religion baits? for the eyes they have gawdie ſhewes; for the eares, moſt melodious muſicke; for the ſmell, ſweeteſt incenſe and perfumes; for the taſte, feaſts without number; for the touch, whole ſtreets of Curtezans, not onelyonly in Rome it ſelfe, but in all the Popes Townes which are commonly knowne by this fowle Cognizance.