A Case for the Spectacles, Response to text · Chapter 1 · Response to chapter (1 of 2)

A Case for the Spectacles · Response to text · Chapter 1 · Response to chapter (1 of 2)

p. 21The Reply to M^r. Lloyd.

FIrst, touching your Trent Creed, you complaine that according to the common fashion of our p. 22Ministers, by way of derision, I divide it into twelve points, as it were into twelve Articles, which (say you) he and they might with as much reason divide it into foure and twentie.

Here you begin to quarrell at your first entrance, but I hope you will gladly forgive us this wrong; for if wee accuse your Trent Fathers, for coyning twelve Articles in stead of foure and twentie, they and you are more beholding to us, for laying the lesser number to your charge: and yet if you please to review them, you shall finde they fall most naturally within the number of twelve.

But you would know what difference there is betwixt the Councell of Nice, and the Councell of Trent, and their two Creeds.

Let mee tell you, if ever the proverb held true (Comparisons are odious) it holds betwixt the two Councels, and their two Creeds: the Councell of Trent is not worthy to be named the day wherein the Councell of Nice is mentioned. That famous Councell of Nice was the first, and best generall Assembly, after the Apostles time, that was summoned in the Christian world: it had in it 318. Bishops, Totius orbis terrarum lumina, (saith Victorinus) amongst whom were the foure Patriarchs of the Easterne and Westerne Churches. It was called by the first and best Christian Emperour,Quasi servator & medicus animarum. Euseb. in vita Constant. orat. 3. c. 10. Constantine the Great, who was Vocalissimus Dei praeco, and (as it were) the Preserver and Physitian of our soules, (saith Eusebius.) This Emperour exhorted p. 23the Fathers and Bishops of that Councell,Omni igitur seditiosâ contentione depulsâ, literarum divinitùs inspiratarum testimoniis res in quaestionem adductas dissolvamus. Theod. Hist. Eccl. l. 1. c. 7. p. 208.Sir 50:1 to lay aside seditious contention, and resolve all doubts and questions by the testimonies of divine Scriptures: and accordingly they framed their Creed out of the doctrine of the Apostles, and all who were not of the Arrian faction did assent and agree to it (saith Theodoret.)

Now take a view of your Trent Councell, and compare them together. Your Councell of Trent, like Demetrius Assembly, was summoned by Pope Paul the third, without a lawfull calling; the three Patriarchs of Constantinople, of Antioch, of Alexandria, refused to be present; the Legates of the Kingdome of Denmark, of Suetia, and the Dukedome of Prusia, were all absent, and returned their answer, that the aaGravamina opposita, Concil. Trid. Causa. 1. pag. 21.Pope had no right to call a Councell. Our QueenebbEpit. rerum in orbe gest. sub Ferd. 1. ann. 1561. apud Scard. tom. 3. p. 2171. E Belgio in Insulam trajicere prohibuit. ibid. Elizabeth of blessed memory, disavowed the Councell, in so much that when the Pope sent Hieronymus Martinengus, as Legate into England, to summon our Bishops, shee would not suffer him to land, or set his foot on her Dominions. The French King signifieth by his Legate James Amiot, that hee for his part, neither held it for a generall, not yet for a lawfull Councell; but for a private Conventicle: and accordingly hee wrote, Conventui Tridentino. The Emperour,Innoc Gentil. sess. 12. and Hist. of Trent, l 4. p. 319. Illyric. in Protest. contr. Concil. Trid. Charles the fifth, declared by his Embassadour, Hurtado Mendoza, in the name of the whole Empire, that the Bishops wholly hanging at the Popes b…cke, had no authoritie to make lawes, in causes of reformation of religion and manners. Andreas Dudithius, p. 24the Bishop of five Churches,Dudith. in Ep. ad Maximil. 2. de Calice, & Sacerdotum conjugio. told the Emperours Maximilian and Ferdinand, that the Trent Fathers were like a paire of countrey Bag-pipes; which unlesse they were still blowne into, could make no musick. The Holy Ghost had nothing to doe with that Councell, and therefore they could create no new Articles of faith. Your historie of Trent tels us,The historie of Trent. the Spirit was sent in a Carriers cloakbag from Rome to Trent; but when there fell store of raine, the Holy Ghost could not come before the flouds were abated, and so it fell out, that the Spirit was not carried upon the waters (as wee read in Genesis) but besides them. Looke upon your Bishops, they were but fortie and two at the first meeting, and two of them titular; the rest, for the most part (saith Dudithius) were but hirelings, Andr. Dudith. ut suprà.young men, and beardlesse, hired and procured by the Pope, to speake as hee would have them. To say nothing of those Emperours (who called the first and best Councels) and were present in person, when as the Popes send but their Legates:Euseb. in vitâ Constant. orat. 3. c. 16. Ego intereram Concilio (saith Constantine) I was present at the Councell amongst you, as one of you. Touching his Imperiall seat in the Councell,Ibid. c. 10. his throne was very great and passed all the rest (saith Eusebius:) whereas there is no greater distance in the time,Advertendum, quod locus ubi sedet Imperator, non sit altior loco ubi tenet pedes Pontifex. Liber. Ceremon. l. 2. c. 2. than there is now difference in the places; for the Emperour is allowed but to sit at the Popes foot-stoole; and it is (specially) to bee noted (saith your booke of ceremonies) that the place whereupon the Emperour sitteth, may bee no higher than the place where the Pope setteth his feet. p. 25Your Councell of Trent hath made many decrees for reformation of manners, but did they ever reforme this abuse, and restore the ancient custome?

You then that are so confident in equalling those two Councels, doe you thinke there is no difference betwixt a conventicle and a generall Councell? betwixt a Councell lawfully called, and one summoned by usurpation? betwixt a late Councell, held in a corner of the world, in the worst age, and an ancient Councell, in a most famous citie, held in the most flourishing age? betwixt a Councell that layes her sole foundation in the Scriptures, and one that builds her first Article of faith upon Traditions?Bulla Pii 4. Art. 1. betwixt a Councell approved by the whole Christian world, and one that is disclaimed by most Christian Kings and Bishops, and the major part of Christendome?

But you would further know a difference betwixt their two Creeds.

Let me tell you in briefe. When a Romanist, like your selfe, would needs know of a Protestant, the difference betwixt his religion and ours,Subesse Romano Pontifici omni humanae creaturae declaramus, dicimus, definimus & pronunciamus omninò esse de necessitate salutis. Bonifac. 8. in Extr. de Major. & Obed. cap. Unam sanctam. because both beleeved the Catholike Church in the Creed; the Protestant made answer, that wee beleeve the Catholike faith contained in the Creed, but doe not beleeve the thirteenth Article which the Pope put to it: when the Romanist was desirous to see that Article, the Extravagant of Pope Boniface was brought, wherein it was declared to be altogether of necessitie of salvation, for everie humane creature to be subject to the Bishop of Rome. This thirteenth p. 26Article in your Trent Creed (besides the newnesse of the rest) makes a great difference (M^r. Lloyd) betwixt the two Creeds; and the rather, because it is flat contrarie to the decree of the Nicene Councell, besides many other differences, as shall appeare hereafter.

But (say you) they agree in this, that as the Arrians of those times cryed out against that Creed, as being new, and having words not found in Scripture; for example, Consubstantiation: so our Protestants cry out against the Trent profession of faith, for the same reasons of noveltie, and words not found in Scripture; as for example, Transubstantiation.

It is true, the Arrians at the time of the Councell cryed out against the Nicene Creed, for defining the word Consubstantiall, or Coessentiall, as being new: but it is as true they complained without a cause; for long before that time the word was used by Origen, and other ancient Fathers, as appeares by Socrates: Doctos quosdam ex veteribus & illustres Episcopos Homousii dictione usos esse cognovimus, Socrat. l. 1. c. 8. August. contr. Maxim. l. 3. c. 14.Wee know (saith he) that of the old writers, certaine learned men, and famous Bishops have used the word foreign: and accordingly it was resolved by S. Austin, that the name was not invented, but confirmed and established in the Councell of Nice.

The word therefore Consubstantiall was not new, which they complained of, but the word Transubstantiation is so new, that it was altogether unknowne till the Councell of Lateran, Concil. Lateranense, Anno 1215. Bellarm.1200. yeeres after Christ; & therefore your comparison holds not in the first place. But admit the Councell p. 27had first devised the word,Quomodo dicis in Scripturis divinis foreign, non inveniri? quasi aliud sit foreign, quàm quod dicit, Ego de Deo patre exivi, &, Ego & Pater unum sumus. Ambros. de fide contra Arrian. Tom. 2. c. 5. p. 223. in initio. August. Ep. 174. foreign. Athanas. Ep. quod decret. Synod. Nic. Congruis verbis sunt exposita. Nihil resert hanc vocem non esse in Scripturâ, si vex id significat quod Scriptura docet. Vas…. in 1. Thom. Tom. 2. Disp. 110. c. 1. sect. 4. yet it is agreed on all hands, that the meaning of the word is contained in Scripture. S. Ambrose writing against the Arrians, puts to them this very question: How doe you say the word Consubstantiall is not in divine Scriptures, as if Consubstantiall were any thing else, but I went out from the Father, and, the Father and I are one: the word therefore was a pregnant word, agreeable to the sacred word of God. And albeit (saith S. Austin) the word perhaps be not found there, yet the thing it selfe is found: and what more frivolous quarrell is it, than to contend about the word, when there is certaintie of the thing it selfe? In like manner Athanasius answered the Arrians in those dayes, as I must answer you: Touching the word foreign, albeit it be not found in Scriptures, yet it hath the same meaning that the Scriptures intend, and imports the same with them whose eares are entirely affected towards religion.

We cry not out against you simply, because your word Transubstantiation is not found in the Scriptures, but because the true sense and meaning of the word is not contained in them; for the words Unbegotten, Increate, the word Sacrament, the word Trinitie, and the like, are not found in Scripture; yet wee teach them, wee beleeve them, because their true sense and meaning may bee deduced from the Scripture: and we professe with your Jesuite Vasques, Nihil refert, &c. It mattereth not whether the word be in Scripture or no, so as that which it signifieth be in the Scripture.

p. 28To come neerer to you: doe you but prove that the words, This is my body, imply Transubstantiation, and let me be branded for an Arrian, if I refuse to subscribe to it: but that the world may know we condemne you justly, both for the newnesse of the word, and your doctrine also; hearken to the learned Doctors of your owne Church.

Your Schoole-man Scotus tels us, that before the Councell of Lateran, Bellarm. l. 3. de Euchar. c. 23.Transubstantiation was not beleeved as a point of faith. It is true, your fellow Jesuites are ashamed of this confession, and thereupon Bellarmine answers:Ibid. This opinion of his is no way to bee allowed: Suarez in 3. Tom. in Euch. disp. 70. sect. 2.and Suarez, not content with such a sober reckoning, proclaimes that for his lowd speaking hee ought to be corrected: and as touching the words of consecration, from whence you would inferre both the name & nature of Transubstantiation, Mont. in Luk. 22.Luke 22your Arias Montanus saith, This is my body, that is, my body is sacramentally contained in the Sacrament of bread: and (hee addes withall) the secret and most mysticall manner hereof, God will once vouchsafe more clearely to unfold to his Christian Church. The doctrine therefore of your carnall and corporall presence is not so cleerely derived from the Scriptures: nay on the contrarie hee protesteth, that the body of our Saviour is but sacramentally contained in the Sacramen (as the Protestants hold) and therefore not bodily.

It is more than evident, that the word Consubstantiation (used by the Fathers) was derived from the Scriptures, but you have not that infallible assurance p. 29for your word Transubstantiation, witnes your Cardinall Cajetan, Ca…et. in Thom. part. 3. q. 75. art. 1.he assures us that there appeareth nothing out of the Gospel, that may inforce us to understand Christs words properly: yea nothing in the text hindereth, but that these words [This is my body] may as well be taken in a metaphoricall sense, as those words of the Apostle, The Rocke was Christ: that the words of either proposition may well bee true, though the things there spoken be not understood in a proper sense, but in a metaphoricall sense onelyonly. Nay more, your Jesuite Suarez confesseth,Suarez Tom. 3. disp. 46. that this Cardinall (in his Commentary upon this Article) doth affirme, that those words of Christ [This is my body] doe not of themselves sufficiently prove Transubstantiation, without the authoritie of the Church: and therefore by the command of Pope Pius the fifth, that part of his Commentary is sponged out of the Romish Edition. Thus one while you correct your Authors, another while you purge them for delivering the truth in our behalfe.

Look upon your Cardinall Bellarmine; although he will not allow that sense which the Lutherans give,Bell. de Euch. l. 3. c. 19. yet hee granteth that those words [This is my body] may imply either such a reall change of the bread, as the Catholiques hold; or such a figurative change, as the Calvinists hold. And although hee would seeme to prove that the words of Scripture are so plaine, that they may compell a refractorie man to beleeve them, yet having well weighed the reasons and allegations of other Schoole-men, at last concludes: It may justly be doubted, Bell. de Euch. l. 3. c. 23.whether the p. 30text be cleere enough to inforce it, seeing men sharp and learned (such as Scotus was) have thought the contrary. How therefore your Church should ground a point of faith upon a doubtfull opinion, or on such words as by the testimonies of your best learned Divines may receive a double construction, I leave it to be judged.

But farther in proofe of Pope Pius Creed, I could urge S^r. Humfrey (say you) with the 39. Articles appointed by the authoritie of the Church of England, to be uniformely taught by all Ministers, which they are to sweare unto; which Articles, though they be indeed new coyned, as the foundation of a new Church, yet S^r. Humfrey being his mothers Champion, will not (I suppose) yeeld her, or her doctrine to bee new. Thus you.

It is true as you say, there are 39. Articles appointed by our Church, to bee uniformely taught by all Ministers: and it is as true that they are published and received with unitie and consent (which your men acknowledge for a proper marke of the true Church.) And withall, let me adde this one thing for your observation (and indeed it is a thing remarkable) whereas all your Trent Articles have beene questioned, and confuted by Chemnitius, Chamierus, Gentilletus, and other Protestant writers, yet there was never any Papist could goe farther, than to tell us, as you doe, I could urge you with the novelty of the 39. Articles. I say, never as yet did any Romanist attempt, much lesse was able to confute and overthrow our Articles, which stand p. 31like a house built upon a rocke, immoveable, and cannot be shaken.

Let me tell you further, your comparisons betwixt our Articles and yours doe not hold; for all your Articles are fundamentall points to your Trent beleevers, and the deniall of any of them makes them heretiques, and damned persons, as your Popes Bull expressely declareth. On the other side,Bulla Pii quarti. some of our Articles concerne the discipline of the Church, and are not essentiall to salvation; others concerne the ancient and latter heresies, wherein we teach the negative, and those are not properly Articles of faith which we beleeve, but points of doctrine which wee condemne, and beleeve not. And that you may know our Articles are not new, nor newly coyned by our men; if you will put on your spectacles, you shall finde that most of our prime Articles are taught and received by your owne Church, as well as ours; and therefore I hope you will confesse they are not coyned, and built upon the foundation of a new Church.

Briefly touching our 39. Articles. The first sort are in the Affirmative, both ours and yours; and all those are uniformely received by both Churches. The second sort are ours onelyonly, which we affirme, and you deny: and those are very few in number, and are evidently deduced from the Scripture. The third sort are yours, which we deny, and you affirme; and for that cause you terme our religion negative; and those remaine for you to make good. Joyne therefore those negative Articles, p. 32which are wholly yours, to those positive Articles which you hold with us, and you shall easily discerne (if the denomination followeth the greater part) those Articles may most properly bee termed Articles of your faith; for I dare confidently avow that of the 39. Articles, there are above 35. yours, that is, either such which you hold with us, which are at least twentie, or such wherein the affirmative is yours, and not ours, which are at least fifteene: take therefore your owne libertie, either confute ours, or make good your owne, & herbam porrigemus, and I will give you the bucklers.

You proceed, and upon a false supposall, that our Church hath created new Articles, you proclaime in the name of your owne Church these words: We teach that for Articles of faith, the Church can make none, as she cannot write a Canonicall booke of Scripture. Thus you.

When Diogenes saw a supposed Bastard casting stones in a presse of much people, he gave the boy this caveat: Take heed lest thou hit thy father. This is like to bee your case; for by this Tenet you will wound the Church your Mother, and amongst others you will surely hit your holy Father the Pope.

It appeares first, that you endevoured to shew, that your Church hath created no new Articles of faith, but for want of solid proofes you begin to faint, and thinke it the safest way to turne Protestant in this point, and say, the Church can create none: but I wonder how you dare pronounce in p. 33the name of the Church (we teach) whereas in truth your Church teacheth it not. This is therefore but a cunning device of yours, to dazle the eyes of the ignorant with your false glasses, and to make them beleeve it is the generall Tenet of your Church; and then you thinke they will conclude according to your Assertion: Ergo, The Church hath created none; when as your saying makes more strongly against you, if either your Articles prove new, or the Pope and his Agents professe the contrarie.

M^r. Heigham, who first answered my Book,Mr. Heigham in his answer called Via verè tuta, pag. 199. & 200. was a member of your Church, and he cries aluod, that the Church hath power to decree, and promulgate new articles of faith: But your third Replyer, Tom Tell-troth, in his Whetstone of Reproofe, thought it the wisest way to decline the question; for hee knew well when you were both at odds, and taught flat contrarie doctrine each to other, the Whetstone of necessitie would belong to one of his fellow writers. But to let passe such differences amongst your selves; bee it spoken to your comfort, Friar Walden, about two hundred yeares agoe, affirmed the same that you doe,Waldens doct. Fidei. Tom. 1. l. 2. Art. 2. c. 22. p. 203. viz. that the Church could not create a new article of faith: How can any such article (saith he) framed after many yeares, be catholique and universall, when as it was unknowne to our fore-fathers for foureteen hundred yeares before? It was not beleeved, because not heard of, when the Apostle tels us, faith commeth by hearing. Such an article therefore, although it be of faith, yet it cannot be p. 34catholique: and this hee proves directly from Fathers and Councels. And whereas you affirme, that your Church can no more make an article of faith, than shee can make a Canonicall Booke of Scripture;Canus loc. Theol. l. 2. c. 7. p. 38. Canus, your Bishop of Canaries, will joyne with you, That the Church of the faithfull now living cannot write a Canonicall Booke of Scripture: and hee gives the reason for it; There are not now any new revelations to be expected, ither from the Pope, or from a Councell, or from the universall Church: and from hence it will follow of consequence by your owne Logick; Therefore the Church can create no new article of faith.

Thus farre I have waded in your behalfe, that you may the better justifie your owne Assertion; for you wil find your Church is like a house divided against it selfe (and therefore cannot stand long). I say that Quere which was made in Waldens dayes, was resolved above two hundred yeares before by your profound Schoole-man Thomas Aquinas, in your Churches behalfe, that the Pope had power Condere articulos fidei, to create new articles of faith; to remove therefore these fig-leaves with which you would cover the naked truth: This learned Doctour well understood that there were many new articles of religion crept into the Church in his dayes; he knew well, that (albeit he were the prime Schoole-man of his time) yet with all his sophistrie hee could not make them comply with the ancient Catholique faith: and thereupon p. 35he thought it the surest way, to give the Pope an absolute and independant power over faith and religion, and accordingly resolved,Ad solam authoritatem summi Pontificis pertinet nova Editio Symboli, sicut & alia omnia quae pertinent ad totam Ecclesiam. Thom 2.2. q. 1. Art. 10. It belongs onelyonly to the authoritie of the Soveraigne Pope, to make a new Edition of the Creed, and all things else that concerne the universall Church: Then he concludes the question, and gives this reason for it; The publishing of a new Creed belongs to his power who hath authoritie finally to determine matters of faith: and this (saith he) belongs unto the Pope. Upon which passages Andradius, a chiefe pillar of your Trent Councell, confesseth, that the Bishops of Rome, Romanos Pontifices, multa definiendo quae anteà latitabant, Symbolum Fidei augere consue visse. Andrad. Def. Concil. Trid. lib. 2.in defining many things which had beene formerly hidden, have been accustomed to increase their Creed. Now what thinke you of your Aquinas position, and your Andradius confession? I hope you perceive that your learned Schoole-men are of another opinion: And that you may know that your Church doth not approve your pretended Tenet for Catholique doctrine; hearken and consider, what your holy Father the Pope declareth, touching this question, and then consider in what case you stand. Pope Leo the tenth sent out his Bull against Luther, Certum est in manu Ecclesiae aut Papae prorsus non esse statuere articulos fidei. Tom. 4. Conc. Par. 2. in Bulla Leon. 10. in f…ne Lateran. Conc. novissimi. p. 135.and amongst other articles, he chargeth him in particular with this, that Luther should say, It is certaine that it is no way in the power of the Church or Pope to ordaine articles of faith. This you see is Luthers Tenet, and this is yours. Now what exception (think you) might the Pope take at this your Assertion? Behold, for this and the like Tenets, he thundereth Anathema against him; hee declareth this with the p. 36rest of his Articles to be a pestiferous, pernicious, scandalous, and seducing errour to well-minded men; he protesteth, it was contrarie to all charitie, contrarie to the reverence of the holy Church, and mysteries of faith, and in conclusion condemnes all his Articles as hereticall, Inhibentes in virtute sanctae obedientiae, ac sub majoris excommunicationis latae sententiae. Ibid. p. 136.forbids them to be received by vertue of holy obedience, and under paine of the graund Excommunication.

You have heard the sentence of your Lord Paramount, and by it you may know your owne doome. If you hold with Luther, you are in danger of Excommunication, and stand as a condemned heretique by his Holinesse with the Lutherans: If you forsake your hold, you have lost your faith: And thus you have a wolfe by the eares, you stand in danger whether you hold him, or let him goe. I wonder that you, having taken so long a time to answer so poore a Work, and having many Assistants for the composing of it, they and you could be all ignorant of the Popes infallible Bull. Your Cardinall Bellarmine, Quasi Ecclesia posterioris temporis aut deserit esse Ecclesia, aut facultatem non habeat explicandi, & declarandi, constituendi etiam & jubendi quae ad fidem & mores Christianos pertinent. Bell. in Barcl.who in these latter times hath laboured more than any other, to uphold your new Articles of faith; yet in obedience to the Pope, and saving all advantages to his cause, when (in the question of deposing Kings) he failed of antiquitie and proofe out of Scriptures and Fathers, at last returnes this peremptorie answer; As if the Church of these latter times had ceased to be a Church, or had not power to explaine and declare, yea to ordaine and command those things, which appertaine to faith and Christian manners: and that you p. 37may know that you and your Co-adjutors stand single in opinion against the Pope and his Cardinals, your Jesuite Salmeron will shew you, that it stands with great reason to make additions in essentiall points of faith: Doctrina fidei admittit additionem in essentialibus. Salm. Tom. 13. Disp 6. Par. 3. §. Est ergo. Idem Disp. 8.and hee gives this answer for it: Because nature is not capable of all truths at one time: and from this and the like reasons he concludes, therefore there may be new traditions concerning faith and manners, though they were never created, or declared by the Apostles.

Thus you see the unitie amongst your selves: and howsoever these positions may seeme strange to you and others of your opinions, yet your School-men and Lawyers have played the Popes Midwives: yea, Pope Leo the tenth hath put to his helping hand, to deliver your Pope Pius the fourth of that issue, I meane, those new borne Articles, of which your Church hath so long time before travailed. Briefly let mee tell you, your Articles are detected by your owne men to be grandement suspicious of new coynage; and if for no other cause, yet for this alone, they give a just occasion and jealousie, when such poore shifts and evasions are devised by your Pope and his adherents, to make them good: for it is a true saying of a renowned Bishop, and it is the faith of all reformed Catholiques:B. Morton, Grand Impost. cap. 2. sect. 2. He can onelyonly make an article of faith who can create a soule, and after make a Gospel to save that soule, and then give unto that soule the gift of faith to beleeve that Gospel.

I proceed to your doctrine: That is onelyonly to bee p. 38called a new faith (say you) which is cleane of another kind, that is differing or disagreeing from that was taught before. Thus you.

I will not take advantage of your first Assertion, that your faith is grounded upon the foundation of the Prophets and Apostles (which you can never prove;) but wil joyne issue with you upon your last Assumpsit, That is only to be called a new faith, which is cleane of another kind, and is different & disagreeing from what was taught before: but such are many of the Articles of Pope Pius the fourth, extracted from the Councell of Trent, as shall appeare by proofes at large in their proper places. In the meane time let me tell you, your Church teacheth not onelyonly Novè, but Nova, not onelyonly Praeter, but Contra, even besides, and contrarie to that which she first received from the ancient Church: so that howsoever you seeke to darken truth by faire and specious pretences, yet in truth your Trent Additions are forraine to the faith, as neither principles nor conclusions of it. And that you may know and acknowledge with us, that your Trent faith is differing and disagreeing from what was taught before; I pray call to mind your owne confessions touching these particular Articles of your Roman Church.

Your doctrine touching Lay-peoples communicating under one kind (namely in bread onelyonly) is an Article of the Roman faith, and now generally taught and practised in the Roman Church: but this practice, by your owne confession, is different and p. 39disagreeing from what was taught before: for you say, pag. 253. touching the Authors which you bring for proofe, That it was the common practice of the Church, for the Laytie to communicate in both kinds. I allow of their authoritie.

Your Prayer and Service in an unknown tongue, as it is now used in the Roman Church, by your owne confession is different and disagreeing from what was taught before; for, say you pag. 270. It is true, that Prayer and Service in the vulgar tongue was used in the first and best ages, according to the precept of the Apostles, and practice of the Fathers. In the beginning it was so.

Your doctrine of Transubstantiation, which at this day is generally received, de substantia fidei, for an Article of Faith, yet by your owne confession is different and disagreeing from what was taught before; for, say you pag. 167. Transubstantiation might well be said not to have beene, de substantia fidei, in the Primitive Church, (as Yribarne speaketh) because it had not beene so plainly delivered nor determined in any Councell, till Gregorie the seventh his time: and this was above a thousand yeares after Christ.

Your private or solitarie Masse, wherein the Priests doe daily communicate without the people, is by your own confession different and disagreeing from what was taught before and practised; for, say you pag. 191. They say (speaking of divers Authors) it was the practice of the Primitive Church to communicate everie day with the Priest. I grant it.

p. 40These points of controversie, which are so eagerly pursued by your men against the members of our Church, the strength and force of truth hath extorted from you, and therefore I may truly conclude Ex ore tuo, from your owne confession, that your Trent faith is new, because it is different and disagreeing from what was taught before.

You that have taken an oath to maintaine the Papacie, and are so ready to teach others, you (I say) have either violated your oath, or at leastwise have forgot your old lesson, Oportet esse memorem, &c. for verily it behoves him that speakes lyes and contradictions to have a good memorie. But it seemes you did conceive the Reader might easily passe by many such contradictions, being in severall passages, and farre distant pages. For otherwise it would seeme strange, that you, which so bitterly inveigh against our reformed religion, should confesse the antiquitie of our Articles, and the noveltie of your owne, with flat contradictions to your owne Assertions. I will say to you therefore, as sometimes S^t. Hierome spake in his Epistle to Pamachius and Oceanus; Hieronym. ad Pamach. & Oceanum, Tom. 2.Thou who art a maintainer of new doctrine, whatsoever thou be, I pray thee spare the Romane eares, spare the faith that is commanded by the Apostles mouth, why goest thou about now after foure hundred yeares (I may say foureteen hundred yeares) to teach us that faith which we before never knew? why bringest thou forth that thing that Peter and Paul never uttered? Evermore untill this day the Christiam world hath beene without this doctrine.

p. 41To pursue the rest of your Allegations: The Church of England (say you) admitteth of divers Books of the New Testament for Canonicall, whereof there was doubt of three or foure hundred yeares together in the Church of God, as the Epistle to the Hebrewes, the second Epistle of St. Peter, the Epistle of St. Jude, the Apocalyps of St. John, and some others, which were after admitted for Canonicall; I would know of him whether upon the admittance of them, there were any change of faith in the Church, or whether ever those books have received any change in themselves. Thus you.

It seemes you begin to feare that your Trent faith would be discovered to be different and disagreeing from what was taught before, and thereupon you would seemingly illustrate the antiquitie of your new Articles by the authoritie of the ancient Books of Canonicall Scripture. But, I pray, where doe you find that the Books of the New Testament, as namely, the Epistle to the Hebrewes, the Epistle of St. Peter, and St. Jude, and the Apocalyps, were not received (for three or foure hundred yeares) for Canonicall? It is true there was some doubt who were the right Authors of those Books, but their divine authoritie was ever generally approved by all Christian Churches, and allowed for Canonicall. The Epistle to the Hebrewes was therefore doubted of by some, because the difference & diversity of the stile made them think it not to be St. Pauls; and by others, because the Author of it seemed to them to favour the error of the Novatian p. 42heretikes, in denying the reconciliation of such as fall after Baptisme: The second Epistle of St. Peter (which you speake of) some doubted of, because of the diversitie of the style: The Epistle of St. Jude was doubted, because the Author of it hath borrowed both the matter and manner of writing from St. Peter, and therfore he was thought some scholar of theirs, but no Apostle. Others said he brought in a profane Author, concerning the strife of the Arch-angell and the Devill about the body of Moses, which cannot be found in Canonicall Scripture. Lastly, the Revelation of St. John was likewise doubted of; first, because of the noveltie of the title of John the Divine: secondly, because of the difficultie and obscuritie of his Prophecies. These and the like reasons were motives to some in the Church, to question the Authors of those Books: but it was never generally impeached. For further proofe of this Assertion, let antiquitie be heard, and it will appeare, that all those Bookes were cited for doctrine of faith, by the writers of the first ages, and consequently were approved from, and after the dayes of the Apostles.Hieronym. … Dardan…, de terra repromissionis, Ep. 129. p. 1105. Looke upon St. Hierome, he proclaimes it to the Church, Illud nostris dicendum est. Be it known to our men, that the Epistle to the Hebrewes is not only received by all the Churches of the East, that now presently are, but by all Ecclesiasticall writers of the Greek Churches, that have beene heretofore; as the Epistle of Paul, (though many thinke it rather to be written by Barnabas, or Clemens,) and p. 43that it skilleth not who wrote it, seeing it was writ-by an Author approved in the Church of God, and is daily read in the same. This ancient Father shewes plainly, that howsoever some doubt was made of the Author of that Epistle, yet it was received both by the Easterne & Westerne Churches. And howsoever some of the Ancients did attribute it to St. Luke; others (as namely Tertullian) did attribute it to Barnabas: yet all agreed in this, that it had an Apostolike spirit; and accordingly Cardinall Bellarmine tels you in your eare,Ineptè dici vetustatem de hac Epistola dubitâsse. Bell. de verbo Dei, lib. 1. cap. 17. It is foolishly spoken, in saying Antiquitie did doubt of this Epistle, when there is but one Caius a Grecian, and two or three Romanists, in respect of all the rest, that speake against it: and if we respect not the multitude, but the antiquitie of the cause, the Roman Clemens is more ancient than Caius; and Clemens Alexandrinus than Tertullian; and Dionysius Areopagita than both, who cites this Epistle of Paul by name.

Touching the second Epistle of St. Peter, it was cited by Higinus Bishop of Rome, within an hundred and fiftie yeares after Christ, and that by the name of Peter. The Epistle of St. Jude was cited by Dionysius Areopagita by the name of Jude the Apostle, within seventie yeares after Christ;Dionys. de divinis nominibus, cap. 4. Tertull. de habitu muliebri. Orig. l. 5. in c 5. ad Romanos. Cypr. in lib. ad Novatianum. by Tertullian within two hundred yeares after Christ; by Origen and Cyprian within two hundred and fiftie yeares after Christ.

Lastly, touching the Revelation of St. John, it was received for Canonicall in the first and best ages: Dionysius Areopagita cals the Revelation, The p. 44secret and mysticall vision of Christs beloved Disciple; Arcanam & mysticam visionem dilecti discipuli. Dionys Eccles. Hier. cap. 3. In Dial. cum Tryphone. Iren. lib. 1. cap. ult.and this was seventie yeares after Christ. Justin Martyr doth attribute this Booke to St. John, and doth account it for a divine Revelation; and this was an hundred and sixtie yeares after Christ. Irenaeus saith, this Revelation was manifested unto St. John, and seene of him but a little before his time; and this was an hundred and eightie yeares after Christ.Tertull. de praescript. l. 4. Tertullian, amongst other things, accuseth Cerdon and Marcion of heresies, for rejecting the Revelation; and this was two hundred yeares after Christ. Origen, in his Preface before the Gospel of St. John, sayth, that John the sonne of Zebedee saw in the Revelation an Angel flying thorow the middest of Heaven, having the eternall Gospel; and hee flourished two hundred and thirtie yeares after Christ.

Thus you see the Catholique Christians, and most ancient Fathers in the first ages received both the Epistle to the Hebrewes, the second Epistle of St. Peter, the Epistle of St. Jude, and the Revelation of St. John, with one consent, accounting them no better than Hereticks, which either doubted of them, or denyed them: and yet you, to outface the truth, would make the world beleeve, that it was three or foure hundred yeares before they were received into the Church, and made canonicall; and upon this vaine supposall you would know of me, Whether there were any change of faith in the Church when they were admitted, or whether those Books received any change in themselves.

p. 45To answer you in a word, your proposition is foolish, and your question is frivolous; for those Books were alwayes received, even from the first times: and no more could that word of God bee changed, than God himselfe, who is immutable; and yet we see your faith is daily altered, for want of that foundation, and thereupon it behoves you to get more, and better proofes, for the confirmation of your new Creed.

From your justification of your Trent faith, you begin to looke asquint thorow your Spectacles at the reformed Churches, and after your wonted manner you crie out, They have no certaine rule of faith wherewith wee may urge them; authoritie of Church they have none: Scripture they have indeed, but so mangled, corrupted, perverted by translation, and mis-interpreted according to their owne fancies, that as they have it it is as good as nothing. Thus you.

Have we no certaine rule of faith? What thinke you of the Scriptures? Doe not we make them the sole rule of our faith? and is not that rule by your own Cardinals confession,Bell. de verbo Deo. l. 1. c. 2. Regula credendi certissima, tutissimaque, the most certaine and safest rule of faith? And as touching the authority of the Church, it is an Article of our Religion,Art. 20. That the Church hath power to decree rites, or ceremonies, & authoritie in controversies of faith; and yet it is not lawfull for the Church to ordaine any thing that is contrarie to Gods word written, neither may it so expound one place of Scripture, that it be repugnant to another: p. 46This Article shewes our obedience to the Scriptures, it declares the authoritie of our Church, and it vindicates our Ministers from perverting and mis-interpreting of the Scriptures, wherewith you charge us in the next place.

It is true (say you) Scripture you have indeed, but mangled, corrupted, perverted by translation. Here your charge is generall, and your accusation capitall; therefore you must give me leave, for the better discoverie of the truth, to send out a Melius inquirendum, that your Translation and ours being compared in particulars, the truth may better appeare.

First then it cannot be denyed, that the Protestants in all their Translations have a recourse still to the Originall of Hebrew and Greek, which was inspired by the Holy Ghost; and these they preferre before all Latine and Vulgar Translations whatsoever:Bibl. Complut. in Proefat. on the other side, your Translation (as your Interpreters fancie) hangeth betweene the Greek and Hebrew, as Christ hung betweene two theeves. Nay more, your men esteeme the Vulgar Latine before the Originall:Bell. de verbo Dei, lib. 2. c. 11. Not (saith Bellarmine) that the rivers of Translations should be preferred before the fountaines of Hebrew and Greeke of the Prophets and Apostles, but because the fountaine is muddie in many places, which otherwise should runne cleare; for without doubt, as the Latine Church hath beene more constant in keeping the faith than the Greeke, so likewise it hath beene more vigilant in preserving her bookes from corruption.

p. 47These Paradoxes doe open a gap to Atheisme; for if the originall Scripture be corrupted, what assurance, what certaintie can wee have of true faith and religion? (and if wee doubt, wee are condemned already.) Neither can it enter into my thoughts, that profane Writers should bee preserved in their simple purenesse from their first ages, and that their Translations should remaine in subjection to their copies, from whence they are derived, to be examined by them; and yet the Watchman of Israel, who neither slumbers nor sleepes, for want of providence, should suffer his sacred Word become a Tributarie to a Translation. But by this the world may see the guiltinesse of a bad cause; you will rather charge the word of God it selfe with corruption, than faile to make good the corruptions of your owne Church.

Your learned Andradius condemnes them that preferred the Latine before the Hebrew of the Old Testament, (as pretending it was corrupted by the Jewes.Andrad. def. fidei Trident. l. 4.) It was very inconsiderately conceived (saith he) by some, that there was more credit to bee given to the Latine Edition than to the Hebrew, because the Latine ever remained entire & uncorrupt in the Catholique Church, and the Hebrew was falsified & depraved by the perfidiousnesse of the Jewes. And your owne Sixtus Senensis doth witnesse of the Greeke Text likewise,Sixt. Senens. Biblioth. l. 7. that it is the same which was used in the dayes of S. Hierome, and long before him in the Apostles times, and is free from hereticall corruptions, as by the continuall writings of the Greeke Fathers p. 48(as namely) Dionysius, Justinus, Irenaeus, Melito, Origen, Affricanus, Apolinarius, Athanasius, Eusebius, Basil, Chrysostome, Theophylact, doth most plainly appeare; and yet your Gregory Martin, and the Rhemists, are not ashamed to professe that the Translation which they follow, is not onelyonly better then all other Latine, but even than the Greeke Text it selfe, Preface to the Rhem. Testam.in those places where they disagree.

To examine your Translation in generall, and so descend into the particulars of yours and ours. First, it is decreed by the Councell of Trent, that amongst divers Translations then in use, the old and vulgar Translation should be declared to be authenticall in all publike Lectures, Concil. Trid. Sess. 4. Decretam de editione librorum.Disputations, Sermons, and Expositions, and that no man should dare or presume to reject it upon any pretext whatsoever. What Translation was understood by the old vulgar, was not expressed in the Councell: It is pretended to be, and is called at this day St. Hieromes Translation, and, which is remarkable, the Translation was decreed but by 42. Bishops at the first beginning of the Councell.

From hence ariseth the first Quere, which of St. Hieromes Translations your Church doth follow (for St. Hierome confesseth that the first was corrupt, and accordingly he did correct many things in his first Translation.) To this Objection your Cardinall makes this faire and free confession;Bell. de verbo Dei, l. 2. c. 9. Although Hierome did perceive some things fit to be changed, and afterwards did change them, yet the Church did adjudge the first translation for true, and p. 49chose rather to keep that for the vulgar Edition. And then he concludes: Although the greatest part of the vulgar Translation be Hieromes, yet it is not that pure Edition which he translated out of the Hebrew, but in a manner mixt.

Habemus confitentem reum. Now heare your owne Sixtus Senensis: Albeit he pretends that the different readings in the Bible be no prejudice to the Faith,Sixt. Senens. Bibl. l. 8. p. 664. yet (saith he) wee ingenuously confesse that many errours were corrected by Hierome in the old Translation, and likewise there are found in our new Editions some falsifications, solecismes, barbarismes, and many things ambiguous, not well expressed in the Latine; some things changed, other things omitted; and the like. Here both confesse that Hieromes first Translation was erroneous, (and the one saith that your Church hath chosen that which is not pure nor agreeable to the Hebrew, the other confesseth it hath Barbarismes and untruths.) To speake ingeniously, the Sunne never saw any thing more defective and maimed than the vulgar Latine. Your Bishop Lyndan cryes aloud,Lynd. de opt. genere Interpret. l. 3. c. 1, 2, 4.6. and protesteth it hath monstrous corruptions of all sorts, scarce one coppie can be found that hath one booke of Scripture undefiled, many points are translated so intricately and darkly, some impertinently and abusively, some not so fully nor so well and truly, sundry places thrust out of their plaine and naturall sense: the Translatour possibly was no Latinist, but a smattering Grecian.

I proceed to the examination of more witnesses. p. 50About forty yeares after Pope Paul the third had decreed the vulgar Latin in your Councel of Trent, Sixtus Quintus by his Breve prefixed to his Bible, gives us to understand, that certaine Roman Catholikes were of such an humour of translating the Scripture into Latin,Breve Sixti 5. that Sathan, taking occasion by them (though they thought no such matter) did strive what he could out of uncertaine and great variety of Translation, so to mingle all things, that nothing might seeme to be left certaine and firme in them: and thereupon hee takes occasion to publish a Latine Translation of his owne perusall, and withall makes his Declaration of it in this manner: We of our certaine knowledge and fulnesse of Apostolicall power, Sixt. 5. in Bulla praefix. Bibliis, An. 1588.doe ordaine and declare that the Edition of the vulgar Bible of the Old and New Testament, which was received by the Councell of Trent as authenticall without any doubt or Controversie, is to be reputed or taken for this onelyonly Edition; which being as well as was possible reformed and printed in our Vatican, our will and pleasure is, and we doe decree it to be read throughout the whole Christian World in all Churches; with this our determination and satisfaction for all men, That first it was allowed by a generall and joynt consent of the whole Catholike Church and Holy Fathers; secondly, by a Decree made in the late Councell holden at Trent; and now lastly by that Apostolicall Authority and Power which God hath given us: and therefore is to be received and accompted for a true, lawfull, authenticall and undoubted Copie, to be read, and no other, in all p. 51publike and private Disputations, Lectures, Sermons, or Expositions.

This Translation was published by Sixtus with great care and paines, professing that he printed it in the Vatican at Rome, Nostra nos ipsi manu correximus, siqua prelo vitia obrepserunt. Idem in Praefat.and corrected the Errours of it with his owne hands: he professeth it was approved by the generall consent of the whole Catholike Church: he professeth it was received for the best and most vulgar Latine Edition, excluding all other Translations private or publike whatsoever; and thereupon concludes,Ibid. Let no man attempt to violate this our Decree, our will and declaration herein, or by rash boldnesse contradict it: for if any shall presume so to doe, let him know that he shall incurre the indignation of Almighty God, and his blessed Apostles Peter and Paul.

From hence will arise a second Quere, whether this Translation of Sixtus were that Hieromes Translation formerly confirmed, and ratified by the Trent Councell. If it were his, and confirmed by a Generall Councell, how came it to be corrected by Sixtus? If it were not the same, how could Sixtus Bible be allowed by a Decree made in the Councell of Trent, (for so are the words of his Bull) whereas the Councell was called Anno 1545. and Sixtus published his Bible Anno 1592. which was above 40. yeares after the Councell was called? But observe the sequell; The Decree of Sixtus was kept inviolable for a short time, and approved by Urban the 7^th, Gregory the 14^th, and Innocent the 9^th his immediate Successors: But p. 52Pope Clement the eight, about seaven yeares after the death of Sixtus, called in question that Translation, and published another of his owne, Ad perpetuam rei memoriam, and corrects Sixtus Bible, under this pretence;Clem. in praef. Sixti Bibl. that his Predecessor perceived not a few things to have crept into the Bible through default of the Presse, and that it needed a second care, and that certainly he himselfe had intended to bring the whole worke to the Presse againe, had he not beene prevented by death.

These two Editions were published by two severall Popes, and both commanded to be read and followed in their severall Breves: Pope Sixtus disclaimes all Bibles whatsoever, both Manuscripts and printed, of the vulgar Edition, which did not agree with his Edition Ad literam, to a letter. Pope Clement professeth that his Translation, although it be not absolutely perfect in all points, yet without doubt it is more pure, and better corrected than any other that was published before it. In conclusion, both agree that the Forme of each must be inviolably observed without the least particle of the Text added, Ne minima quidem particula mutata. Sixt. in Praef.changed, or detracted.

Now take your choyce of which Translation you please; if you allow Sixtus, it was corrected in many places by Pope Clement; if Clements, you must incurre the curse of his Predecessor Pope Sixtus: if you will receive the vulgar Translation, which you terme St. Hieromes, your Cardinall tels you it is not of his purest Edition. Lastly, if you approve the vulgar Edition, decreed by the Councell p. 53of Trent, I say neither you, nor all the Papists living, can resolve which is that vulgar Edition.

For a Conclusion, either your vulgar Translation before Clements time was corrupt, or in vaine did Clement command a Correctorium to passe upon it, and to be read according to that correction. The worke of Lucas Brugensis, who was living at that time, hath sufficiently discovered your corruptions in the Bible of Sixtus, which in his time was reputed for that onelyonly Edition confirmed by the Trent Councell, commanded to be read throughout all Churches, and allowed by the consent of the whole Catholike Church: this Bible (I say) which for many ages was reputed the onelyonly authenticall Edition in your Church, is purged and corrected (I speake within compasse) in above 3000 severall places. And as it hath beene observed by a painfull labourer in that Vineyard,Dr. Iames in his Bellum Papale. your Translations in many places are flat contradictory each to other, (and he that beleeves contradictions, beleeves nothing at all.)

From the charge in generall, I will descend into particulars. And first, I will give you an Instance in the Old Testament.

We reade in the 34. of Exodus and the last verse, The Children of Israel saw the face, that the skinne of Moses face shone: Videbant faciem egredientis Moisi esse Cornutā. Sixt. Bibl. Ibid. v. 29, and 35.your Sixtus Bible in the vulgar Translation twice renders it, They saw his face horned; but your Sixtus Senensis complaines of Hierome, that contrary to the Originall he so translated it. Thus one while you leave Hieromes Translation when it savours not to your Palate, another p. 54while you excuse your owne by condemning of St. Hierome: (Now whether it were a part of that corrupt Translation which your men use, and Hierome himselfe corrected,Rident ita que nos, & execrantur Judaei quoties Mosen in nostris Tēplis cornutâ facie depictum aspiciunt, quasi nos eum Diabolum quendam, ut ipsi stultè interpretantur, esse putemus. Sixt. Senens. l. 5. Annot. 116. p. 368. foreign. I dispute not) but (saith he) therefore the Jewes doe scoffe and hate us Christians, whensoever they happen to see the picture of Moses painted with hornes, as though, according to their Imagination, we thought him to have beene a Devill.

Looke upon the particulars in the new Testament. In the third of Matthew for Repentance you translate Penance, and by Penance you understand satisfaction for sinnes. So that when the Evangelist saith, according to the Greeke Originall (Repent) you follow the Latine Translation, which hath an ambiguous construction, and say, Paenitentiam agite, which your Rhemists translate, Doe Penance. And in the 9^th of St. Matthew, Math. 9.13. foreign.Matt 9:13where he saith, I am not come to call the Righteous, but sinners to repentance, you translate, I am not come to call the Just, but sinners, and leave out the word Repentance (which is in the Originall.) And lastly, as if you were guilty of a false Translation in both, in the first of St. Marke, Mark. 1.15.Mark 1:15you translate the words according to the Originall, and in stead of Doe Penance, you rightly interpret, Be penitent, and beleeve the Gospel.

In the 11 of St. Luke you have maymed and falsified the Lords Prayer: you say in this manner; Father sanctified be thy name, thy Kingdome come, our dayly bread give us this day, and forgive us our sinnes, for because our selves also doe forgive every p. 55one that is in debt to us: And lead us not into temptation. In this absolute forme of Prayer, you have omitted all these words; Our— which art in heaven, thy will be done in earth as it is in heaven, but deliver us from evill. Thus Christ taught his Disciples to pray in one manner, and you in that place teach your Disciples in another; and this is agreeable to your vulgar Translation, but not to the Originall.

In the 11 to the Romans we reade, according to the Originall; If it be of grace, Rom. 11.6.Rom 11:6then it is not now of works, for then grace is no more grace: but if it be of works, then it is now no grace, for then worke is no more worke: your Rhemists according to their vulgar Edition render it; And if by grace, not now of works, otherwise grace now is not grace: and leave out all the latter part of the verse, in these words, But if it be of workes, then it is now no grace, foreign. Graec. Orig.for then worke is no more workes; for what end let the Reader judge.

In the first Epistle to the Corinthians we reade according to the Originall, Let a man so accompt of us, as of the Ministers of Christ, and Stewards of the Mysteries of God; foreign. 1 Cor. 4.1.1 Cor 4:1your Rhemists following the Latine Translation reade, Dispensers of the Mysteries of God: and howsoever these words might be dispensed withall in some sense, yet by no meanes as you force it. For when your Proselites doe question your Priests why they take away the Cup from the Lay people, with these words so translated you answer them, We are the Ministers of Christ, p. 56and Dispensers of the mysteries of God: and so by consequence we may dispence with the Sacramentall Cup, by the authority of Scripture. Witnesse your Councell of Trent touching the Churches power of dispensing with the Sacrament,Id autem Apostolus non obscurè visus est innuisse, &c. Concil. Trid. Sess. 21. c. 2. which professeth that the Apostle doth plainly intimate unto us a dispensation with the Sacrament in those words mentioned.

In the 15. of the Corinthians we translate according to the Originall,1 Cor. 15.21.1 Cor 15:21 Behold I shew you a mysterie, we shall not all sleepe, but we shall all be changed: your Rhemists translate it according to the vulgar Latin, Rhem. Test. ib.flat contrary to the Originall, and the meaning of the Holy Ghost; Behold I tell you a mysterie, we shall all indeed rise againe, but we shall not bee changed.

In the second Epistle to the Corinthians wee reade according to the Originall, Wherefore henceforth know we no more after the flesh, yea though we have knowne Christ after the flesh, yet henceforth know wee him no more: Rhem. Test. printed at Antwerp An. 1621. in 2 Cor. 5.16.2 Cor 5:16your Rhemists, doubting these words may trench too farre upon your naturall and carnall presence, have quite perverted the sense by their last Edition in these words, Therefore wee from henceforth know no man according to the flesh, and if we have knowne according to the flesh, but now know him no more. Here is no mention at all of Christ, but the chiefe words (yea) and (Christ) which are emphatically delivered by the Apostle, are quite left out; and I cannot conceive but it is done wittingly, because you have carefully observed p. 57the Errata upon the Annotations, but none upon the Text it selfe.

In the second of the Ephesians we reade according to the Originall,Ephes. 2.10. foreign.Eph 2:10 We are his workmanship created in Christ Jesus unto good workes: your Rhemists following the Latine Translation deprave the Text, saying;Non satis commodè vertit vulg. Interpret. &c. Vega opusc. de Mer. & Justif. q. 6. Wee are created in Christ Jesus in good works: Which is no fit interpretation (saith your owne Vega) because we must beware lest that some take occasion from the Latine, to attribute the cause of their creation in Christ, unto his foreseene good works; than which nothing can be more contrarie to St. Pauls doctrine.

In the fift to the Ephesians according to the Originall we reade,foreign. Eph. 5, 32.Eph 5:32 This is a great mysterie (speaking of Christs marriage to his Church) your Rhemists, to prove Matrimony one of their seven Sacraments, follow the Latin Translation, and say, This is a great Sacrament; Cajet. Coment. in hunc locum.whereas your Cardinall Cajetan tells us, The learned cannot inferre from hence that Mariage is a Sacrament, for St. Paul said not, It is a Sacrament, but a Mysterie.

Lastly, to maintaine your Image-worship, whereas we reade in the Hebrewes according to the Greek, Jacob blessed both the Sonnes of Joseph,foreign. Hebr. 11.21.Heb 11:21 and worshipped leaning upon the top of his staffe: your Rhemists according to the vulgar Latine reade it, Jacob dying, blessed every one of the sonnes of Joseph, and adored the top of his rod.

Thus I have given you a taste of the differences betwixt our Translations, and your vulgar p. 58Latin; now let the Reader judge which of those readings are most agreeable to the Originall. If we enquire of your Rhemists, they tell us that we have no cause to complaine of their Translation, unlesse we complaine of the Greeke also. Nay more, they have not onelyonly proclaimed it to the Reader, but they have outfaced the world in their Preface, that their Translation is so exact and precise, Preface to the Rhem. Testam.according to the Greeke, both the phrase and the word, that delicate Heretikes (for so they terme us) therefore reprehend us of rudenesse, and that it followeth the Greeke farre more exactly then the Protestants Translations.

It is true indeed, that sometimes you would seeme to affect the Greeke, sometimes the Latine tongue in your Translation; but withall you have cunningly devised uncouth words and phrases, and for this purpose onelyonly, that the Scripture may seeme hard and obscure to the common people, that they might eyther take no pleasure in the reading them, or reape no benefit for want of understanding them:Rom. 13.13. Galat. 1.14.24 Galat. 4.17. 1 Pet. 2.5. Phil. 4.10. Ephes. 6.12. 1 Cor. 10.11. Hebr. 2.17. John 6.54. John 19.14.Rom 13:13Gal 1:14Gal 1:24Gal 4:171 Pet 2:5Phil 4:10Eph 6:121 Cor 10:11Heb 2:17John 6:54John 19:14 as for instance; Not in chambering and Impudicities. I expugned the faith. They emulate you not well, that you might emulate them. Be also your selves superedified. Once at length you have reflourished to care for me. Against the spirituals of wickednesse in the celestials. But they are written to our correption. That he might repropitiate the sinnes of the people. All shall be docible of God. It was the Parasceve of Pasche. These and such like are the exact and precise Translations which you so bragge p. 59of, and for which we condemne you.

Now doe you joyne to these English phrases, your falsifying and corrupting the genuine sense of the Holy Ghost by your Latine Translations, and tell me if I may not truly retort your Assertion into your owne bosome: Scripture you have indeed, but so mangled, corrupted, perverted by Translation, that as (you) have it, it is as good as nothing.

But you have misinterpreted the Scriptures (say you) according to your owne fancies.

Your bolt is soone shot, and if all your words were Oracles, and that Ipse dixit were sufficient, your bare word (for other proofes you have none) would easily conclude us; but I will shew you so plainly, that without Spectacles you may see that these Aspersions likewise reflect upon your selves.

It was a question amongst your fellow Jesuits, whether Jacob Clemens the Dominican might by Authority of the Scripture kill Henry the third, B. Barloes defence of the Articles, in his Preface, p. 7.King of France; and one of your Jesuits reasoned thus with himselfe: Ehud killed Eglon, and therefore I may kill Henry; for Eglon was a King, and so is Henry; Eglon signifies a Calfe, and Henry is a Calvinist; and therefore assuredly I may murther him by Scripture. I hope you will confesse that this Jesuite, although he were of your Society, did interpret the Scripture according to his owne fancie. In like manner, your Patriarke of Venice concludes seven Sacraments from the words of Scripture, and I conceive, it is according to his owne fancie: That p. 60(saith he) which Andrew spake, Inn. Gentil. exam. Concil. Trid. l. 4. n. 26. Sess.There is a Boy which hath five loaves and two fishes, must be understood of the ranke of St. Peters successors; and that which is added, Make the people sit downe; signifieth, that salvation must be offered them, by teaching them the seven Sacraments. And whereas the Prophet David saith; Thou hast put all things under his feet: Antoninus your Archbishop of Florence, Anton. in Sum. part. 3. tit. 22 c. 5.about two hundred years since, expounded those words in this manner: Thou hast made all things subject to the Pope; the Cattle of the field, that is to say, men living in the Earth: the fishes of the sea, that is to say, the soules in Purgatory: the fowles of the Ayre, that is to say, the soules of the Blessed in heaven: whether this Exposition be according to the sense which the Catholike Church holdeth, or according to his owne fancy, let the Reader judge.

Whitak. & Camp. Rat. 9.To come nearer to you: Moses saith, God made man after his Image: Pope Adrian inferreth, Therefore Images must be set up in Churches. St. Peter saith, Behold here are two swords: Pope Boniface concludes,Extra. de Major. & Obed. Therefore the Pope hath power over the spirituall and the temporall. St. Mathew saith, Give not that which is holy unto dogges: M^r. Harding expounds it,Juels Def. p. 52. Therefore it is not lawfull for the vulgar people to reade the Scriptures. It was sayd to St. Peter in a vision, Arise, kill, and eate: your Cardinall Baronius hence infers,In voto Baronii contra venetos. The Pope is Peter, and the Venetians are the meat which must be killed and devoured. To let passe those farre fetched and extravagant senses of Scriptures, which your learned p. 61men wyer-draw for your Romish Doctrine. It is the word of God, Goe to my servant Job, and he will pray for thee: therefore there is an Invocation of Saints in Scripture. Give us this day our daily bread: Bellar. de Sāct. Beat. l. 1. c. 10.therefore the bread must bee given to the Common people, and not the Cup.Roffens. adver. Luther. Art. 16. Our Saviour opened the Booke of the Prophet Esay, and afterwards closed it: Ledis. de divinis Script. Quâ vis linguâ non legendâ. cap. 22.therefore Prayer and Service in an unknowne tongue is commanded by the Scripture. These and such like false glasses you temper for your Spectacles, to deceive your poore ignorant Proselites with the name of Scripture; and for feare they should make any doubt of the right interpretation of them,Si quis habet interpretationē Ecclesiae Romanae, de loco aliquo Scripturae, etiamsi—tamen habet ipsissimū verbum Dei. Hosius de expresso verbo Dei. your Cardinall Hosius protesteth to all Romanists, If a man have the Interpretation of the Church of Rome of any place of Scripture, he hath the very words of God; though he neither know, nor understand, whether, nor how it agreeth with the words of Scripture. This puts me in minde of that excellent passage of St. Hilary, who speaking of the errours and Heresies crept into the Church in the dayes of Constantius, makes this generall complaint, which in these dayes is truly verified in the Roman Church;Hilar. l. 3. ad Constant. & l. 1. ad Const. defunctum. Faith is now come to depend rather on time, than on the Gospel, your state is dangerous and miserable: you have as many faiths as wills, and as many doctrines as manners; whilst faiths are either so written as you list, or so vnderstood as you will.

I come now to your forbidden Bookes, wherein the mysterie of iniquitie: will manifestly appeare: p. 62and first touching the sacred Bible which is forbidden in the first place.

The Bible (say you) is not so forbidden, but that it is in the Bishops power to grant leave, if upon Conference with the Parish Priest or Confessor of the partie that desireth leave, he finde him to be such a one as may not incurre danger of faith, &c. which with any reasonable man may be counted sufficient liberty.

It is true that by the fourth Rule of Pope Pius the fourth, the Bible may be licensed by the Bishop, but the party must have the license in writing: and withall it is decreed,Regula 4. in indice libr. prohibit. p. 16. If any presume without such license either to reade or have it, unlesse he come in first and give up his Bible to his Ordinary, let him not have the pardon of his sinnes. It is not lawfull then to reade the Bible without a dispensation, but with a license any man may reade it: and this (say you) is sufficient liberty for any reasonable man. If I should grant you that which you say, yet you are never able to make good that license: for Pope Clement the eight about thirty yeares after, upon this dispensation so granted, gives us to understand, That upon the Rule of Pius the fourth, Observatio circae 4. Regulam Ibid. p. 22. in fine Concil. Trident.no new power was granted to the Bishops, or Inquisitors, or Superiors, to license the buying, reading, or keeping the Bible in the vulgar tongue; seeing hitherto by the command and practise of the holy Inquisition, the power of granting such licenses, to reade or keepe Bibles in the vulgar Language, or any part of Scripture, as well of the New as the Old Testament, or any sums or Hystoricall Abridgement of the same in any vulgar p. 63Language hath beene taken from them: Quod quidem inviolatè servandum est; and this is inviolably to be observed. You see then, that howsoever your Pius Pope gave a dispensation for the reading of the Scriptures: yet Pope Clement his Successor, declared that license to be void and of none effect; and that which concludes your Assertion for an untruth, it was by him decreed, to bee kept without any dispensation or violation.Inviolatè servandum.

Thus touching the sacred Bible you have severall Translations, upon severall paines to be received, and both different each from other in many hundred places: you have ranked the sacred Bible amongst the Bookes prohibited; and lastly, you seemingly grant a license for the Ignorant to reade the Scripture: and by another decree you abridge that license so granted. I proceed from the forbidding of Scriptures, to your purging and falsifying of the ancient Fathers.

As for Fathers (say you) it is most grossely false which the Knight after the ordinary Ministeriall tune, stands canting, that we blot out and raze them at our pleasures. What is it then that these men would have? What is it they can carpe at? Nothing but that they themselves are stung, in that hereby they are kept either from publishing their owne wicked workes, or corrupting the Fathers at their pleasure; and to wipe away this blemish from themselves, would lay it upon us. Thus you.

It seemes you have beene well acquainted with Rogues and sturdy Beggers, who have taught you p. 64the Terme of (Canting) a word proper for such kinde of people: but whereas you say it is grossely false that you blot and raze the Fathers, and that therein we seeke to wipe away the blemish from our selves, and lay it upon you; for the better manifestation of the truth, first, looke I pray upon the place where the corrupted Fathers were printed, & see by whom they were licensed; then heare your owne men witnessing their owne confession, of purging them; and lastly, peruse the places which I shall produce razed and corrupted, and then tell me if the Mysterie of Iniquity doth not closely worke in your Roman Church, and that the ancient Fathers are grossely falsified, and notoriously corrupted by your owne men, even in the principall points of Doctrine controverted betwixt us.

First then wee must observe, that corruptions and abuse of ancient Fathers may be of three sorts; either by foisting into the Editions bastard Treatises, and intitling them to the Fathers; or by falsifying their undoubted Treatises by additions, detractions, or mutations; or lastly, by alledging passages, and places out of them, which are not extant in their workes: and of all these three kindes your men are guilty,Expurgari & emaculari curâsti omnium Catholicorū scriptorū, praecipuè veterum Patrum scripta. Sixt. Senens. in Ep. Pio 5. as it shall appeare by instances in their severall Ages, for the first 800. yeares.

First, concerning the purging of Fathers; your Sixtus Senensis, in his Epistle dedicated to Pope Pius the fifth, amongst his many and famous deeds, recounts this for one of the greatest, That he caused the writings of all Catholike Authours, but p. 65especially those of the ancient Fathers, to bee purged. And Gretzerus your Jesuit proclaimes it by way of justification;Gretz. l. 2. c. 10 If it be lawfull to suppresse or inhibite whole Bookes, as namely Tertullian and Origen, then it is lawfull likewise to suppresse a greater or lesser part of one, by cutting out, razing, blotting out, or by omitting the same simply for the benefit of the Reader. And Possevine your Jesuit tells us,Ad istos enim quoque purgatio pertinet. Possev. l. 1. Biblioth. select. c. 12. that Manuscript Books are also to be purged, as well as printed; which shewes your good intention to the ancient Writers. I may adde to these, that you doe not onelyonly purge, and corrupt the Fathers (as shall appeare in matter of fact in severall Ages) but you forge Bastard Epistles in the names of ancient Bishops, and you thrust counterfeits into the Chayre of the true and Catholike Doctors. Peter Warbeck is taken for Richard Duke of Yorke, and obscure Authors, as namely Dorotheus, Hormisda, Hermes, Hypolitus, Martialis, and other counterfeits, for famous Writers, and all to supply your defects of doctrine in the Orthodox Fathers. Severinus Binius hath published certaine decretall Epistles in the names of Clemens, Anacletus, Evaristus, Sixtus, and many others, to the number of thirty one, all Bishops of Rome: Insomuch, as their Epistles are cited by Bellarmine, by Peresius, by Coccius, by Baronius, by your Rhemists, for severall proofes of your Trent Doctrine. Gratian saith,Grat. Dist. 20. Decretales. they are of equall Authority with Councels: nay more, he labours to prove out of St. Austin, Distinct. 19. in Canonicis.that those decretall Epistles were reckoned by him amongst the Canonicall p. 66Scriptures; and yet by the severall Confessions of your learned Writers, are adjudged to be all counterfeit: and without doubt, their leaden-stile, the… deepe silence of Antiquity concerning them, the Scriptures alledged by them after St. Hieroms Translation (being long before his time) doe easily convince them of falshood. Antoninus Contius, the Kings Professor of Law in the Universitie of Bruges, tells us that he brought many reasons in his Preface, and notes upon your Canon Law, which was printed at Antwerp, An. 1570.by which hee proved, and shewed manifestly, that the Epistles of the Popes,Silvester An. 314. who were before Silvester, were all false and counterfeit. The Preface, with the reasons alledged against it, is now razed and purged; and Plantin the Printer gives this answer for it,Raynold. & Hart. Cap. 8. Divis. 3. p. 451. The Censor who was to oversee the printed Bookes, would not suffer it to passe, and what became of it he remembred not, nor knew how to procure it. Thus your men are not onelyonly ashamed to publish their Bastard Epistles, and equall them to the Word of God, in behalfe of your new doctrine, but you censure also and purge your owne men for condemning such lying inventions.

Whether to forge a false deed, or to raze a true one, be the greater fault, it is not greatly materiall: for your owne men are guilty of both. And lastly, when neither purging, nor falsifying will serve the turne (which you have practised in Bookes set out the first 800. yeares) you bring a Prohibition against all Authors, Priests, and Professors in the p. 67bosome of your owne Church, which testifie the truth of our doctrine, and injoyne them silence by your Index Expurgatorius, by cutting out their tongues, and refining them with a new impression; and this hath beene your ordinarie practice, for the last 800. yeares. I will give you instances in both, and so I come to the second Age.

In the second Age, Ignatius Bishop of Antioch witnesseth the antiquity of our Doctrine: he shews that our Communion in both kindes was practised in his dayes:foreign. Ignat. Ep. ad Philadelph. There is one Bread (saith he) broken for all, and one Cup distributed to all. In your Edition printed at Colein, you have quite altered the sense by a corrupt Translation, saying: One Cup is distributed for all: and in the Margent,Unus Calix, qui pro omninibus nobis distributus est. Bibl. Pp. Tom. 1. Colon. Agripp. An. 1618. p. 85. Bell. de Euch. l. 4. c. 26. Una Eucharistia utendum. And that your corruption may not want an Advocate, your Cardinall Bellarmine tells us; There is not much credit to be given to the Greek Copies, for the Latine reades it otherwise: by which reason, a man may appeale from the Originall to a Translation; which is a thing unheard of.

Again, whereas he saith in the same Epistle, Oh yee Virgins in your prayers set Christ (onelyonly) before your eyes, and his Father, being enlightened by his spirit: Ignat. ibid. ut suprà.hereby teaching, that we ought to directour prayers to the Trinity only, and not to Saints & Angels: your men in their late Edition printed at Lyons, by their corrupt translation have left out the word Precibus, Ignat. Lugdun. impres. An. 1572.and thrust in Animabus, soules for prayers; by which change of words, the sense & meaning of the Father is cleane perverted. It followeth further in the same p. 68Page, in speaking of Peter and Paul, and other Apostles, who betooke themselves to a married life; Severinus Binius, in his Annotations upon this place, tells us that those words (viz. Peter and Paul, and other Apostles, betook themselves to a married life) ought to be razed out;The third age. An. 200. to 300. because (saith he) it is probable the Grecians in honour of Marriage, corrupted the Text: A faire warning for us to take notice, that in after Editions that passage may also be cleane left out.

In the third Age, Tertullian paraphrasing upon the words of Christ,aaCaro nihil prodest, ad vivificandum scilicet. Tert. de Resurrect. carnis, c. 37. Caro nihil prodest sed ad vivificandum. Tertul. Parisiis apud Michaelem Julianum. An. 1580. p. (Mihi) 47. The flesh profiteth nothing: (saith) It is the Spirit that quickeneth, the flesh profiteth nothing, (namely) to quicken: your Tertullian printed at Paris, hath quite perverted the meaning of the Father, and causeth him to speake fl…t contrary both to himselfe, and to the sense of Christ, in these words: The flesh profiteth nothing (but) to quicken.

St. Cyprian Bishop of Carthage is falsified and corrupted, for the circumgestation of your Sacrament, and the Popes Supremacie. In his Tract of patience he tells us,bbNec post gustatam Eucharistiam, manus gladio & cruore maculentur. Sic Cypr. Parisiis apud Petrū Drovart. in vico Jacobaeo. An. 1541. fol. 89. Nec post gestatam Eucharistiam, &c. Cypr. de bono Patientiae. Impress. Parisiis apud Claudium Chapelet Via Jacobaea An. 1616. p. (Mihi) 316. Post gustatam Eucharistiam, &c. After the eating of the Eucharist, the hands are not, or ought not to be defiled with bloud: In your Cyprian printed at Paris and Colein, your men have wittingly altered the words, saying, Post gestatam Eucharistiam; and so by transmutation of one letter, doe cite this place for the circumgestation of the Sacrament: whereas the Ceremonie of carrying about the Eucharist, was not knowne in many hundred p. 69yeares after Cyprians time. But Pamelius, a Canon of the Church of Bruges, and Licentiate in Divinity, returnes this answer in defence of it:Cum manu non gustetur Eucharistia, sed olim gestari consueta sit, prorsus illud ex Cambrensi Codice substituendum duxi, pro eo quod erat gustatam. Annot. in lib. de bono Patient. pag. (Mihi) 321 Forasmuch as the Eucharist cannot be tasted with the hand, but was wont anciently to be carried with the hand, I thought it best to change the word Tasting, into Carrying; which I borrowed from an ancient Copie in Cambron Abbey. The word then we see was changed by his owne Confession, and the Cambron Copie is brought for the defence of this forgerie: which differing from all other Copies may be justly suspected. For his reason, that we taste not with our hand, it is frivolous: For St. Cyprian saith not, gustatam manu, but simply gustatam; which taste yet was not without taking the Sacrament into the hand.

You have heard Pamelius confession: Now let us heare what Manutius hath done in publishing of St. Cyprian; for Pamelius tells us, that St. Cyprian printed at Rome by Paulus Manutius, Indiculus Codicum in Cypriano.in the yeare 1563. is a much more bettered and corrected Edition, than any other: and accordingly your learned Priest M^r. Hart assures us, that Pope Pius the 4^th,Hart & Raynolds, c. 5. Divis. 2. p. 167. being desirous that the Fathers should be set forth and corrected perfectly, sent to Venice for Manutius a famous Printer, that he should come to Rome to doe it; and to furnish them the better with all things necessary, be put foure Cardinals, wise and vertuous, in trust with the worke; and for the correcting of Cyprian especially above the rest, singular care was taken; by Cardinal Baromaeus, a Copie was gotten of p. 70great antiquity from Verona, and the exquisite diligence of learned men was used in it.

These Testimonies make a faire shew of sincere and plaine dealing: and no doubt if there were not double diligence used by them, the Roman Cyprian doth exceed all the rest, and is freest from corruption: That the truth thereof may appeare, let us looke into St. Cyprian in his booke touching the Unity of the Church. De Veritate Ecclesiae.Whereas the ancient and true Cyprian sayth, The rest of the Apostles were equall unto Peter both in honour and power; the Roman Cyprian, printed by Manutius, and your late Paris Cyprian, Cypr. Parisiis apud Clau…ium Chapelet. An. 1616.hath added these words, The Primacie is given to Peter. And whereas the ancient Cyprian saith, Christ did dispose the Originall of unitie beginning from one; the Roman and Paris have added,Unam Cathedrā constituit. p. 254. He appointed one Chayre. And whereas the ancient Cyprian sayth, The Church of Christ may be shewed to be one; the Roman and Paris have added,Cathedra una. constituitur ib. and the Chayre to bee one. And because the Chayre may bee as well applyed to the Bishop of Carthage, as to the Bishop of Rome, the Paris Cyprian hath added Peters chayre. Cathedram Petri. Ibid.And whereas it was in Cyprian, even in the Roman print too, Hee who withstandeth and resisteth the Church, doth he trust himselfe to be in the Church? the Paris Cyprian addeth;Qui Cathedram Petri, supra quam fundata est Ecclesia, deserit, in Ecclesia se esse confidit? ibid. He who forsaketh Peters chayre, in which the Church was founded, doth he trust himselfe to bee in the Church?

Now as you have heard that Manutius hath added, and forged much in his Roman Edition, for p. 71the Popes Supremacie, so likewise you shall observe, that he hath rased and purged an ancient Record and speciall Evidence, against the universality and supremacie of the Bishops of Rome; It is an Epistle written by Firmilianus Bishop of Caesarea to St. Cyprian (which St. Cyprian translated into Latin, as your Pamelius doth confesse) wherein he professeth, that he is justly moved with indignation, at the manifest folly of Stephanus (then Bishop of Rome) that boasting so much of his Bishoprick, Atque ego hāc in parte justè indignor, ad hanc tam apertam & manifestam Stephani stultitiam. Firmilian. Cyp. S. Ep. 75. p. 203 Noli te fallere, siquidem ille est verè schismaticus, &c. p. 204. Insuper & Cyprianum Pseudo-Christum, & Pseudo-Apostolum, & dolosum operarium dicere, qui omnia in se conscius praevenit, &c. p. 205.and that he hath the succession of Peter, upon whom the foundation of the Church was set; brings in many other Rockes, &c. He bids him not deceive himselfe, he hath made himselfe a Schismaticke by separating himselfe from the Communion of the Ecclesiasticall unitie; for while he thinkes he can separate all from his Communion, he hath separated himselfe onelyonly from all. He taxeth him for calling St. Cyprian a false Christ, a false Apostle, and a deceitfull workeman; which he himselfe being guilty of, and privie to himselfe, that those termes of right belong to himselfe; by way of prevention, he objected them to another.

Touching these severall Additions and Extractions, Pamelius (by whom the Antwerp and Paris Cyprian were set forth) first excuseth Manutius for adding the words in his Roman print; and tells us, they were found in a written Copie of the Cambron Abbey in Hannonia, which was the best of all the Copies he had; and therefore, saith …e, we were not afraid to insert that Reading into the Text. Non sumus veriti in textum inserere.Yet Manutius himselfe professeth, he perused five and p. 72twenty printed and Manuscript Copies, which had none of those Additions; and as touching the Epistle to, or from Firmilianns (which proves a resistance anciently made against the usurped power of the Pope) Pamelius thinkes it was left out purposely by Manutius; and, saith he, Perhaps it had beene more wisedome it had never been set out at all: Argumentum Ep. 75. p. 198.(but withall he addeth) because Morelius did publish it before me, I thought it not fit to let it passe, but print it.

Now let us looke backe, and examine the reason of these several Editions and falsifications. M^r. Hart sayth, that the Additions were taken from a very ancient Copie gotten from Verona; Pamelius saith, they were borrowed from a Manuscript in the Cambron Abbey in Hannonia: but in 25. Copies the Additions were not to be found. Mr. Hart saith, the true Copie was printed at Rome, by the Popes command, and with the advise of vertuous and wise men, to be perfectly corrected, and free from all spots. Pamelius saith, it was better than any other; but withall, it was not so exact, but that the old Proverbe might take place, the latter is commonly the better. Lastly, touching the razing out the Epistle of Firmilianus, Pamelius concludeth that his Copie (which doth cite it) is so perfect, Indiculus Codicum in initio Cypriani.that, be it spoken without envie, there will need no further recognition; yet happely (saith he) it had beene better it had never come forth.

Thus you may discerne, what forgeries are used by your men, to support the circumgestation p. 73of your Sacrament, and the Popes Supremacie; which is a maine Pillar of your Faith: And this may serve to shew your falsifications and forgeries in the third Age.

In the fourth Age.The fourth age. An. 300. to 400. The first Generall Councell of Nice is forged by Zozimus Bishop of Rome, in behalfe of his owne supremacie. The pretended Canon is this;In Concil. Carthag. c. 1. Binius Those who in the Nicene Synod gave their sentence concerning Appeales of Bishops, said in this manner: If a Bishop shall be accused, and the Bishops of his owne Province shall thereupon condemne and degrade him, if he thinke fit to appeale, and thereupon flye to the most holy Bishop of Rome, if he be pleased to have the hearing of it, the Bishop is to write to the Bishops adjoyning, and let it be at his pleasure to doe what he will, and as he in his judgement shall thinke fittest to be done. This Canon is not to be found either in the Greeke or Latine Copies of the Nicene Councell; and those Canons in all were but 20. It is true that you pretend, that there were in all 60. Canons, whereof 40. were burned by the Arabians, (amongst which this Canon was one:) But if they were extant, how were they burned? And if they were burned, how came you to the knowledge of them? The truth is, their Bastardie (saith Contius your Lawyer) is proved even by this, that no man, no not Gratian himselfe, Raynold. chap. 9. Divis. 2. pag. 575.durst alledge them.

Eusebius Caesariensis Bishop of Caesarea is corrupted, to prove the Popes supremacie: In the Basil print translated by Ruffinus, he sayth, Peter, p. 74James, Euseb. impr. Basiliae ex Officinâ Henr. Petrina, Ruffino Aquiliensi Interprete. Sed Jacobum, qui dicebatur Justus, Apostolorum Episcopū statuerat. Eus. l. 2. Eccl. Hist. c. 1…677. Petrum, Jacobum, & Johannem, non de gloriâ & honore contendisse inter se, sed uno consensu Jacobum Justū Hierosolymonum Episcopū designâsse. Coloniae Allobrogum, excudebat Petrus de la Roviere. An. 1612.and John, after the Assumption of our Saviour, although they were preferred by him before all the rest of the Apostles, yet did they not challenge the honor of Primacie to themselves, but appointed James, which is called Justus, to be Bishop of the Apostles: In your Coleine Edition, you have altered the sense, in this manner: Peter, James, and John, when they had obtained of our Lord a high degree of dignity, they did not contend about glory and honor amongst themselves, but with one consent made James Bishop of Jerusalem: Thus the true and ancient Eusebius saith Peter and the rest did not challenge the honor of primacie; the latter saith, they did not strive about glory and honour: the ancient saith, they appointed James, which is called Justus, to be Bishop of the Apostles; the other saith they nominated Justus Bishop of Jerusalē.

This Authority is so pregnant against the Popes Jurisdiction, claimed from Peter, that Bellarmine hath nothing to answer, but this: Although those words be found in the Basil print, translated by Ruffinus, yet in a Colein print, translated and published by a Roman Catholike, Bellar. de Rom. Pont. l. 1. c. 26.the word Primacie is not to bee found; and in stead of the words [Bishop of the Apostles] are inserted, Bishop of Jerusalem. The Cardinall doth not complaine, that Ruffinus Translation was false and corrupt (for they are the words in the Originall of the ancient Eusebius) neither could he say truly, that the Colein was translated by a Catholike, for indeed it is the property of an Hereticke to falsifie and corrupt the Text. And thus you have done in your Colein Edition, where you have altered the sense in that manner.

p. 75Eusebius Emissenus Bishop of Emesa in Syria is forged by Gratian for the doctrine of Transubstantiation:Grat. Dist. 2. de Consecrat. Quia corpus, fol. (Mihi) 432. his words are these; Christ the invisible Priest, turned the visible creature into the substance of his body and bloud, with his word and secret power, saying; Take, eate, this is my Body: whereas there are no such words to be found in all his Works.

The Councell of Laodicea is falsified in favour of your Invocation of Angels. The words of the Originall are these:aaforeign. &. c. Conc. Laod. Can. 35. Bin. Tom. 1. p. 245. Christians ought not to forsake the Church of God, and depart aside and invocate Angels, and make meetings, which are things forbidden: If any man therefore be found to give himselfe to this privie Idolatrie, let him be accursed. Now in the same Councell published by James Merlyn, and Fryer Crab, by transmutation of a letter, you are taught a lesson contrary to sense and reason, saying,bbQuod non oporteat Ecclesiā Dei relinquere, & abire, atque angelos nominare, & congregationes facere. Merlin Tom. 1. Concil. edit. Col. An. 1530. f. 68. Crab. edit. An. 1538. Colon. fol. 226. Veritas non quaerit Angulos. It is not lawfull for Christians to forsake the Church of God, and goe and nominate or invocate Angels, or corners, and make meetings; and thus Angell are become Anguli, Angels are become Angles, or Corners, as if truth did seeke Corners, when so faire an Evidence is brought against Invocation of Angels.

St. Basil, the great Archbishop of Caesarea, was forged by Pope Adrian the first, at the second Councell of Nice, for the worship of Images; his words are these:ccPro quo & figuras Imaginū eorum honoro, & adoro, & veneror specialitèr, hoc enim traditum est à Sanctis Apostolis, nec est prohibendum: ac ideò in omnibus Ecclesiis nostris eorum designamus Historias. Citat. ab Adriano. in Synod. Nic. 2. Act. 2. p. (Mihi) 504.Acts 2 For which cause I honor and openly adore the figures of the Images (speaking of the Apostles, Prophets, and Martyrs) and this being delivered us by the Apostles, is not prohibited; but in all p. 76Churches we set forth their Histories. This Authority was cited by Pope Adrian, in the name of Basil the Great in his Epistles; when as in all his Epistles, of which are extant 180. there are no such words to be found.

St. Hierome is likewise forged for the same doctrine, and by the same Pope: the words in the Epistle are these;Sicut permisit Deus adorare omnem gentem manufacta &c. Citatur ibid. Ep. Adr. p. (Mihi) 506. As God gave leave to the Gentiles, to worship things made with hands, and to the Jewes to worship the carved workes, and two golden Cherubins which Moses made; so hath he given to us Christians the crosse, and permitted us to paint and reverence the Images of Gods workes, and so to procure him to like of our labour. These words (you see) are cited by your owne Pope, at a generall Councell, as you pretend, for a point of your Romish faith; and yet there are no such words, nor the meaning of of them, to be found in either of those Fathers; and without doubt there was great scarcity of true ancient Fathers to bee found at that time, to prove your adoration of Images, when your Pope was driven to shifts and forgeries: especially, when your owne Polydore tells you,Polyd. de Rerū Invent. that the worship of Images, not onelyonly Basil, but almost all the ancient holy Fathers condemned, for feare of Idolatrie; as S. Hierome himselfe witnesseth. This puts me in mind of Erasmus complaint, that the same measure was afforded to Basil,Eras. in Praefat. lib. de Spirit. Sanct. Bas. which hee had otherwise observed in Athanasius, Chrysostome, Hierome, that in the middle of Treatises, many things were stuffed and forced in by others, in the name of the Fathers.

p. 77St. Ambrose Bishop of Millaine is falsified and corrupted. Franciscus Junius as an eye witnesse,Junius Praefat. in Ind. Expurg. Belg. tells us, that at Leyden in the yeare 1559. being familiarly acquainted with Ludovicus Saurius Corrector of the Printing house, and going to visit him, hee found him revising of St. Ambrose workes which then Frelonius was printing: after some conference had betwixt them, Ludovicus shewed him some printed leaves, partly cancelled and partly razed; saying, this is the first Impression, which wee printed most faithfully, according to the best Copies; but two Franciscan Fryers by command have blotted out those passages, and caused this alteration, to my great losse and astonishment.

It may be the discoverie of it by Junius might stay their further printing of it, or else might be an occasion to call it in after the printing; for otherwise if that Impression may be had, it were worthy the examination.Bolscus dicit se in manibus Secretarii hoc testimonium vidisse, & inspexisse. In disp. de Antichristo in Apend. Nu. 49. &. 53. Laurent. Rever. Rom. Eccl. p. 190. Non habent Petri haereditatem qui Petri sedem non habent. Grat de Paenit. Dist. 1. c. Potest fieri. But for a proofe of this falsified Ambrose, Lessius the Jesuit tells us, that Bolseck doth confesse he saw the Copie in the hands of a Secretary: howsoever their later Editions are sufficient proofe of your manifold falsifications. But I will speak of Impressions (onelyonly) that have been within my view. First, to prove your succession in doctrine in your owne Church, Gratian tells us from St. Ambrose, They have not the succession of Peter, who have not the Chayre of Peter; and thus he hath changed Fidem into Sedem, Faith into Chaire. This forgery in time may creepe into the Body of Ambrose; but as yet the words of Ambrose are agreeable p. 76to our doctrine; that is,aaNon habent Petri haereditatem qui Petri fidem non habent. Ambr. de Paenit. c. 6. Tom. 1. p. 156. Basil. apud Joh. Frob. An. 1527. Ambr. de Sacr. l. 4. c. 5. Tom. 4. p. 393. Basil. ut suprà. they have not the succession of Peter, which want the faith of Peter. These be the words of true and ancient Ambrose, hereby declaring unto us, and them, that they may have the See of Peter, and yet want the faith of Peter.

Againe, in his Booke of the Sacrament St. Ambrose saith,bbFac nobis hāc oblationem ascriptam, &c. quod fit in figuram corporis & sanguinis Jesu Christi. Amb. Colon. Agripp. An. 1616 Tom. 4. p. 173. Make this Oblation to be a reasonable & acceptable one (quod est figura) which is a figure of the Body of our Lord Jesus Christ: Your Ambrose printed at Colein, doth mince those words, and sayth, (quod fit in figuram) as if it might stand for a figure, but were no figure; and more particularly in the Canon of your Masse, you cite all those former words of Ambrose to prove the Antiquity of your Masse, but you leave out the latter (which is a figure of the Body) and say;ccUt nobis corp{us} & sanguis fiat dilectissimi filii tui Domini nostri Jesu Christi. Missale Parv. An. 1626 p. (Mihi) 82. Grant that it may be to us the body and bloud of our Lord Jesus Christ. And lastly, that Ambrose might seemingly appeare to be yours, in the point of Transubstantiation, whereas he sheweth the power and wonders of God in creating all things of nothing by his word only, and from thence concludeth,ddSi ergo tanta vis est in sermone Domini Jesu, ut inciperent esse quae non erant; quantò magis operatorius est, ut sint quae erant & in aliud commutentur? Idem de sacr. l. 4. c. 4. Basil ut suprà, p. 392. If therfore there be so great force in the speech of our Lord Jesus, that the things which were not begun to be (namely, at the first creation of all things) how much more is the same powerful, to make that those things may still be the same they were, and yet be changed into another thing? Here St. Ambrose sheweth plainly, that the Elements of Bread and Wine are the same in substance as they were before, although they are changed into another nature. Your Inquisitours knowing well that such Doctrine is flat contrary p. 77to their Tenet, which teach that the Elements are not the things in substance they were before Consecration, have wisely left out in their late Edition two poore words, (Sint) and (et) and accordingly the sense runneth after this manner; How much more is the speech of our Lord powerfull to make that those things which were, Ut quae erant in aliud commutentur. Paris. An. 1603. & Colon. Agripp. An. 1616. Tom. 4. p. 173.should bee changed into another thing. And by this meanes St. Ambrose a Protestant, is become a Masse Priest; and with a clipped tongue lispeth Transubstantiation. Fryer Walden in writing against Wickliffe, cites this place by the halves (ut sint et in aliud commutentur) he would have the Elements one thing,Wald. de sacr. Euch. Tom. 2. c. 82 p. (Mihi) 138. b. and changed into another, but excludes the principall words (quae erant) shewing that they should be the same, which they were before; and Lanfranck long before him stormed at Berengarius, for citing this place out of St. Ambrose in behalfe of our Doctrine, and cryes out against him, O mentem amentem! &c. O mad mind! O impudent lyar! now truly there is no such words to be found in all St. Ambrose his workes, Ed. Parisiis 1632. Ex editione Romanâ: In quâ quae vel vitio vel incuriâ erant adjecta, sunt rejecta; quae sublata, restituta; quae transposita, reposita; quae depravata, emendata, &c. In the fift age. An. 400. to 500.&c. But there is an Ambrose lately printed at Paris, which makes a great promise of integrity and purity, and yet the words are corruptly printed, according to your other of Paris and Colein print.

In the fift age, St. Chrysostome Archbishop of Constantinople is razed and purged, touching the doctrine of the Sacrament: his words bee these; 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 p. 80conteyned.) These latter words comprehended in the Parenthesis, Chrys. Antwerpiae apud Johannem Steelsium, An. 1537. Paris. apud Johannem Roigny. An. 1543. & Paris. apud Audoenum Parvū. Anno 1557.in the Editions of Antwerpe and Paris are wholly left out, there is not a syllable of them to bee seene: for indeed the Author of that worke saith negatively, that (the true body of Christ is not) there, which overthrowes the very ground of your Popish presence: and although your men make great brags of Antiquity, to prove your reall Sacrifice of the Altar out of St. Chrysostome; yet in the 19. Homily upon St. Matthew, where hee termes it the Sacrifice of bread and wine, Sacrificium panis & vini.they being also privie to this evidence, as against their owne doctrine,Sacrificium corporis & sāguinis Christi. Paris. apud Audoenum Parvū. An. 1557. in. c. 7. Matt. Hō. 19. Nunc autem nullo modo cognoscere quae sit Ecclesia Christi, nisi (tantummodò) per scripturas. Idem Homil. 49. Tom. 2 p. mihi. 858. in their Edition at Paris have taught him to speake the Trent language, in these words; It is the Sacrifice of the body and bloud of Christ.

Touching the Testimony of divine Scriptures, St. Chrysostome is purged; he tells us in his 49. Homily, That from the time that Heresies invaded the Church, there can be no triall of Christianity, nor refuge for Christians, who are willing to know the true faith, but to the divine Scriptures; for at that time there is no way to know which is the true Church, but by the Scriptures onelyonly: This authority is wholly agreeable to our doctrine, and thereupon these times of Controversies and Heresies, that have overspread the face of the Church, wee say with St. Chrysostome, those that be in Judaea, let them flye to the Mountaines of the Scriptures. But what answer can be made, thinke you, to the razing of so faire an Evidence? BeholdaaTotus hic locus, tanquam ab Arrianis insertus, è quibusdam Godicibus nuper emendatis sublatus est. Bell de verbo Dei l. 4. c. 11. Bellarmine tells us, that this whole passage (as if it had beene inserted into p. 81St. Chrysostome by the Arrians) is blotted out of the late corrected Editions: and, as our learned Doctor Crakenthorpe in his answer to Spalatto observed, there is above 70. lines in the Antwerpe Edition,Crakenth. in Spalat. p. (mihi) 59. published 1537. purged in this Homily. It seemes then it is hereticall doctrine, to have recourse to the Scriptures onelyonly for finding of the truth; But sure I am, it is the part of Heretikes to raze ancient Records, and to avoyd the triall of their cause by the sacred Scriptures.

The fourth Councell of Carthage (where St. Austin was present) is in part forged, in part razed: In the 100. Canon it was thus decreed:Mulier baptizare non praesumat. Concil. Carthag. c. 100. Let no woman presume to baptize. What answer therefore may we expect to this Canon? Binius the publisher of the Councels, expounds the meaning of it thus; The Councell (saith he) doth decree that a woman should not presume to baptize, that is, Binius ibid. in his Annot.when the Priest is present: on the other side, Peter Lombard and Gratian, Pet. Lomb. l. 4. Sent. Dist. 6. Grat. Can. Mulier de Consecr. Dist. 4.they have put in their exception, (nisi necessitate cogente) except it be in case of necessitie: so that in the absence of the Priest, and in case of necessitie, women may baptize by the authority of your Church, notwithstanding the Councels decree. And this is according to Bellarmines confession: Although (saith he) those words of exception (nisi necessitate cogente) be not found in the Tomes of Councels, Bell. de Baptis. l. 1. c. 7.yet Peter Lombard and Gratian cite the Canon in that manner. And thus by your owne Cardinals profession, your Priests have added that exception to the Canon, to dispense with women for Administration p. 82of the Sacrament, which is not found in the Councell.

Againe, the same Councell is razed both by the compiler of the decrees, and publisher of the Councels: for the Councell saith in the 44. Canon,aaClericus nec comam nutriat, nec barbam radat. Concil. Carth. Can. 44. Let no Clerke weare long hayre, nor shave his Beard: The decretals, and your late Councels published by Binius, have left out the word (Radat) and have quite altered the sense of the decree, and so you… Church hath gone directly against the meaning of the Councell in shaving of Priests.

S. Austin Bishop of Hippo is both purged, and falsified in favor of your doctrine. First, for the purging of him your own men make this declaration:bbAugustinus nuper Venetiis excusus, in quo, praeter multorum locorum restitutionem secundum collationem veterum exemplarium, curavimus removeri illa omnia quae fideliū mentes haereticâ pravitate possent inficere, aut a Catholica orthodoxa fide deviare. Praefat. Ind. lib. prohibit. ad Lectorē, Genevae impress. an. 1629. St. Austin was lately printed at Venice, in which Edition, as we have restored many places according to the ancient Copies; so likewise we have taken care to remove all those things, which might either infect the mindes of the faithfull with Heresies, or cause them to wander from the Catholike faith. This publike profession your men have made, and accordingly theccIn hunc modū est repurgatus, ut in libri inscripsione testātur qui editioni praefuerunt. Ibid. p. 6. Booke was purged, as those who were present at that Edition doe witnesse in the Inscription of the Booke: but let us returne to the corrupted Editions in our view.

St.ddDe Civitate Dei lib. 22. c. 24. Austin in his 22. booke of the Citie of God and 24. Chapter, is cyted byeeBell. de Purg. l. 1. c. 4. Bellarmine for the proofe of Purgatory: yet in that Chapter (saithffLud. Vives in lib. de Civit. Dei. c. 8. Vives) in the ancient Manuscript Copies, which are at Bruges and Colein, those ten or twelve printed lines are not to be found: And in the 22. booke and 8. p. 83Chapter he tells us, there are many additions in that Chapter, without question, foysted in by such as make practise of depraving Authors of great Authority.

Touching forgeries and falsifications in particular: The humane nature of Christ is destroyed, if there be not given it, after the manner of other bodies, a certaine space wherein it may be contained. In your Edition of Paris, printed by Sebastian Nivelle, An. 1571.this passage is wholly left out: This is observed by Dr. Moulin, but the Authour so printed I have not seene. But when neither adding nor detracting could make good your Transubstantiation, Fryer Walden thought it the surest way to forge a whole passage in the name of St. Austin, which indeed strongly proves the very name and nature of it: The words are these;Wald. Tom. 2. de Sacram. c. 83. p. (mihi) 141. No man ought to doubt when Bread and Wine are consecrated into the substance of Christ, so as the substance of bread and wine doe not remaine, whereas we see many things in the workes of God no lesse marvellous. A woman God changeth substantially into a stone, as Lots wife; and in the small workemanship of man, hay and ferne into glasse. Neither must we beleeve that the substance of bread and wine remaineth, but the bread is turned into the Body of Christ, and the wine into his bloud, the qualities or accidents of bread and wine onelyonly remaining. This forgery was judicially allowed by Pope Martin the fift, and his Cardinals, in their Consistorie, and yet it savours rather of a Glasse-maker, than an ancient Father: but what answer maketh Walden to this invention?**Ego enim reperi & trāscripsi de vetustissimo exemplari scripto antiquâ valdè manu formatâ. Idem Ibid. I found it (saith he) and transcribed p. 84it out of a very ancient Copie written with a set hand. Thus one while you adde, another while you detract, another while you falsifie the ancient Fathers, if either they make for us or against you; and yet you tell us, that we are guiltie of corrupting the Fathers. But above all, Gratian hath most shamefully and lewdly falsified St. Austin, whom he hath made to say;Inter Canonicas Scripturas decretales Epistolae connumerantur. Dist. 29. In Canonicis. fol. 19. A. The decretall Epistles of the Popes are accounted in the number of Canonicall Scriptures.

The truth is, St. Austin in his booke of Christian doctrine, informes a Christian what Scripture hee should hold for Canonicall; and thereupon bids him follow the greater part of the Catholike Church: Amongst which those Churches are, which had the happinesse to injoy the seates of the Apostles, and to receive Epistles from them. Gratian in the Canon Law altereth the words thus: Amongst which Canonicall Scriptures, those Epistles are which the Apostolicke See of Rome hath, and which others have deserved to receive from her; and accordingly the title of the Canon is, Inter Canonicas Scripturas, &c. The decretall Epistles of Popes are counted by St. Austin for Canonicall Scriptures. Now judge you what greater forgerie, nay what greater blasphemie can be devised, or uttered against Christ and his Spirit, than that the Popes Epistles should bee termed canonicall Scriptures, and held of equall authority with the Word of God; especially since by your owne men they are censured as Apocryphall and counterfeit Epistles. Your owne Bellarmine, as p. 85a man ashamed of such grosse forgeries, would seeme to excuse it;Bell. de Concil. Author. l. 2. c. 12. Primo. That Gratian was deceived by a corrupt copie of St. Austin, which he had besides him, and that the true and corrected copies have not the words, as himselfe reporteth. Thus Walden excuseth his forgerie by an ancient Manuscript, the Cardinall by a corrupt copie; and yet, by your Cardinals leave, this and many other such like forgeries stand printed in the Canon Law, no Index Expurgatorius layes hold on them, notwithstanding hee professeth the worke was purged and restored to his integrity, by most learned men, Idem de script Eccles. An. 1100 de Gratiano. Alph. advers. haereses, l. 1. c. 2. in fine. Ad transmarina qui putaverint appellandum, a nullo infra Africam in Communione suscipiatur. Bin. in Concil. Milevit. Cā. 22 & Codex Can. Eccl. Afric. Can. 28. v. Nisi forte ad Apostolicam sedem appellaverint. Grat. causa 2. quest. 6. Placuit. fol. (Mihi) 153. Haec exceptio non videtur quadrare. Bell. de Pont. l. 2. c. 24.by the command of Gregory the 13. in the yeare 1580. Your Alphonsus â Castro tells us, that this shamefull errour ought to be made knowne to all men, lest others by this abuse, take occasion to erre in like manner; as namely, Johannes de Turrecremata, and Cardinall Cajetan, who both cited this place out of Gratian for the Romish faith, and the Popes Supremacie, and yet no such thing is to be found in St. Austin.