A Case for the Spectacles, Response to text · Chapter 8
CHAP. VIII. The summe of his Answer to Sect. 8.
1. That I allege but three Authors, Adrian, Coster, and Harding; and them falsly, or impertinently, for three severall points of the Protestant Faith, none for the universality of it in generall, as the title promiseth.
2. That it is not sufficient to name some in the Roman Church, who held some of our opinions, but that I must shew a distinct companie from the Roman, making a Church.
3. That it is not to purpose, to shew the Antiquitie and Vniversality of those points wherin we agree with you, but in those other points wherein wee disagree.
4. That if it were granted, the Protestant Church in former ages lay hid in the bosome of the Roman Church, that proveth it to have been invisible, rather than visible.
The Reply.
IN the eighth Section, I assumed to prove the Antiquitie, and Vniversalitie of our Religion, by and with the consenting testimonies of the Romane Church: you tell mee, It is a bold and unlikely adventure, and it is shamelesse and impudent.
These words be like a house full of smoake without fire: but what is the occasion of all this heinous complaint? Forsooth, the Knight bringeth not one Author, I say, not one for the Vniversalitie and Antiquitie of his Church. And is this so grievous an accusation? Surely, I thou…ht there was none so ignorant or impudent, as to denie both the Vniversalitie and Antiquitie of three Creeds; two Sacraments instituted by Christ; the two and twentie books of Canonicall Scriptures; of the first foure Generall Councels; of the Apostolike Traditions; of the Ancient Liturgies; of the Ordination of Priests and Deacons. These are our Tenets, and these were the particular Instances which I made: and to bring Authors for the proofe of these, as if we made a doubt of that which all true Christians did generally receive and beleeve, I say with St. Austin, Insolentissimae dementiae. Aug.It were a signe of most insolent madnesse.
But admit I should produce some Authors for proofe of this generall beleefe, would their Authoritie free me from your termes of Shamelesse, and impudent adventure? Certainly no: for (say you) If hee should have one, two, or three, or ten men, it would not be sufficient for him, unlesse hee have the Authoritie of the Catholike Church, or Church of Rome.
To cite many Authors, or to bring none, then is all alike to you; for in your doome, nothing will free mee from the name, and punishment due to Heresie, but the authoritie of the Church: and yet in this, you have granted mee more than I could expect; for you have given mee liberty to take my authoritie from the Church, so it be from the Catholike, or the Roman. And hereby you have made your Roman Church distinct from the Catholike, which is most true; which, both you your selfe, and most of your fellow Jesuits have made all one, and confirmed by the title of (Roman Catholike) in all your writings.
This being granted, I proceed to the rest of your exceptions. In this Section (say you) he bringeth onelyonly three Catholike Authors, Adrian, Costerus, and Harding, but no word for Antiquitie, or universalitie. Thus you.
Hee that shall reade my Section in Via tuta, with this your Answer, must needs confesse that you deale not fairly, nor ingeniously with mee: for sometimes you leape from the beginning of a Chapter to the end, then you returne againe to the beginning, being willing to conceale or confound the truth of my Assertions. You so mingle my words with your own in the same Character, that a prudent Reader can hardly discerne mine from yours: but most usuall it is with you to cry down my words with bitter passages, and decline the question in all. As for Instance, in this Section, whereas I said, the Church of Rome doth confesse the Antiquitie, and Vniversalitie of our Religion long before Luther, I instanced in our three Creeds, and the rest before named. One while you cry out of my impudencie, that I cite no Authors; another while, that if I did cite them, they would not serve my turne: but you never mention either the Creeds, or Scriptures, or Councels, or any of the points which you well knew had Antiquitie, and Vniversalitie in the name and opinion of all Christians. After that, you flie to the later end of my Section, and there you tell mee, I cite but three Authors, and yet none prove the Antiquitie or Vniversalitie of our Faith. Then you goe backe againe, and you tell the Reader, I say nothing here of the mans notable cunning and falshood, in making him beleeve, as if we did excuse our selves in those things whereof they accuse us.
If such extravagant excursions and reproches you call a Reply, or a Catholike Answer, I will lay my finger on my mouth, and say with your Cardinall, Qui decipi vult, decipiatur.
Briefely, the substance of my Assertion was this: The three Creeds, the Canonicall Scriptures, the Apostolike Traditions, the foure first generall Councels, and the rest were so generally received in the bosome of the Roman Church, that for that reas n i… might seeme a senselesse question, to demand where our Church was before Luther.
Next I shewed that the positive Doctrines of our Church (mentioned in our (39.) Articles) were contained in a very few points, and those also had Antiquity and Vniversality; then I shewed that those doctrines which they obtruded upon us, were but Additions and Negative Tenets in our Articles, and that many of those additions were condemned, or at least excused, by their owne men: And I instanced in three Authors before mentioned, for three severall points of their Doctrine; and this is the substance and true meaning of that Section; and thus much by way of advertisement to the mod…rate Reader. Now to answer you distinctly to that you have produced confusedly.
Your first exception is touching Pope Adrian the sixth: you say, It is not as Sr. Humphry putteth it, to wit, if t…e consecrated Bread be Christ, but if it be rightly consecrated.
And doe not you still by Adrians confession excuse your adoration, by implying a condition? and is it not all one according to your doctrine? For if it be rightly consecrated, it is Christ, if not, it is a Crust, and no man amongst your Communicants knoweth what it is, because he knoweth not the Priests intention. Take it therefore which way you will, yet my assertion stands true; we condemne you for adoring the Elements, for ought you know, of bread and wine, because it doth depend upon the intention of the Priest, whether Christ be there or no; but yet you cannot condemne us for adoring Christs rent body in the Heavens: and however the Priests doe consecrate, yet (saith Gerson) when the host is adored, Gers. compend. Theol. Tit. de tribus virtut. p. 111.that condition is ever at lest to be supposed (if it be rightly consecrated) that is, if it be truely the body of Christ; And this is that Pope Adrian hath delivered by your owne confession, and therefore they are not to be cleered from Idolatry, because they intended to worship one God, (as indeede there was but one God) but because they adored him there where he was not, and in that manner as they supposed him to be. The case (saith Catharinus) is like in the host not consecrated: Cather. Annot. in Caiet p. mihi 134.For God and Christ is not adored simply, but as he is existing under the formes of bread and wine: If therefore he be not there, but it be found that Divine worship is given to a creature insteede of Christ, there is Idolatry also: For even in this regard they were Idolaters who adored Heaven, or any other thing, supposing with themselves that they adored in it the Divinity, whom they called the soule of the world. Compare then the certainty of your faith, with ours (which is the point in question) and tell me if in …his we are not more certaine and safe then you can be. First, your owne Bellarmine tels us,Bell. de Iustific. l. 3. c. 8. that none can be certaine by the certainety of faith that he doth receive a true Sacrament. No man (saith And…eas Vega) can beleeve assuredly, Vega l 9 de Iustific. c. 17.that he receiveth the least part of the Sacrament, and this is so surely to be credited, as it is apparant that we live; And both give one and the same reason for it: For there is no way, except it be by Revelation, that we can know the intention of the Minister, either by outward appearance, or by certainty of faith. From this dangerous consequence, we condemne your adoration, and resolve to let you know from your owne men,Th… Saliflur. de arte Praedicandi. c. 25. that No man, be he never so simple, or never so wise, ought precisely to believe that this is the body of our Lord that the Priest hath consecrated, but onelyonly under this condition, if all things concerning the consecration be done as appertaineth; for otherwise he shall avouch a creature to be the Creator, which were Idolatry.
Now as this way in the generall is uncertaine and dangerous; so likewise there are many other wayes, which may easily occasion this Idolatry; and therefore you cannot deny us to be in the more certaine and safe way. As for instance Iohannes de Burgo, who was Chancellor of Cambridge about (200.) yeares since, gives us to understand that a Priest may faile in his intention many wayes. As for example, If the Bread be made of any other then wheaten flower, Pupilla Oculi c. 3. & 5. &c.which may possibly happen, or if there be too much water in quantity, that it overcomes and alters the nature of wine; if the wine be changed into vinegar, and therefore cannot serve for consecration; If there be thirteene cakes upon the Table, and the Priest for his consecration determine onelyonly upon twelve, in that case not one of them all is Consecrated: Lastly, if the Priest dissemble, or leave out the words of Consecration, or if he forget it, or minde it not, in all and every of these wayes, there is nothing Consecrated, and consequently the people giving divine honour to the Sacrament all Bread or Cup, commit flat Idolatry.
When I heare the Apostle proclaime to all Christians, that he which doubteth is condemned already; I cannot chuse but pitty the state and condition of that miserable man, who hath a doubtfull, perplexed, and uncertaine faith, who taketh all upon trust, and upon the report, sometimes of an Hypocrite, sometimes of a malitious Priest, who hath no intention at all to administer the true Sacrament. For (saith your Trent history) if a Priest having charge of foure or five hundred soules were an Infidell, but a formall Hyppocrite, History of Trent.and in absolving the Penitent, baptizing of children, and Consecrating the Eucharist, had an intention not to doe that which the Church doth, it must be said that the children are damned, the penitent not absolved, and that all remaine without the fruite of the Communion.
Now let the Reader judge which doctrine is most certaine and safe, either that of your Church which may occasion flat Idolatry in the worshiper, or our sursum corda, with hearts and eyes lifted up to Heaven, where we adore our Saviour Christ in his bodily presence according to the Article of your Faith and ours; and this is agreed on both sides to be without feare or perill of Idolatry.
Lastly, as if you were guilty of false accusations, you say, suppose Adrian hath erred in this, or in any other point, doth it follow that he agreeeth with you in all other? Then you tell a story of the Popes Bull against Luther.
You quarrell with your owne shadow, for I had no relation at all to your Pope, nor made any instance of him more then in a Marginall Note; but since you stand so much upon the justification of his Doctrine, hearken I pray wherein he maketh for you, and wherein he is wholly against you. Your Agrippa tells us, that in these latter times Pope Adrian erected a most famous Stewes at Rome. Agrippa de v… nit. scient. c. 64. p. mihi. cap. de Lenonia.I confesse in this particular you may challenge him wholly for your owne; But whereas you say he detested Luthers doctrine as most wicked and damnable, you might have added likewise, he wished a reformation of his owne, and withall taught that doctrine for which you condemne both Luther and all his adherents for Haeretikes.History of Trent. l. 1. pag. 25. 26. & 30. First, witnesse his Nu…tio Francisco Chiericato, who had Commission from his Holinesse, To ackowledge that the confusion of the Church, was caused especially by the sinnes of Priests and Prelats, confessing that some abhominations, some yeares since, were committed even in the Holy See, that there were many abuses in spirituall things, so that it may be said, that the infirmity is passed from the head, to the members, from the Popes, to the inferiour Pelates; And lastly, he resolves himselfe that he would use all diligence that the Church of Rome should be first reformed; and the rather, because hee saw all the world did earnestly desire it. And that you may know the Church of Rome, as well as the Court of Rome was fallen into errors and heresies, hee himselfe publisheth, that he heard it related of his Predecessor, Pope Iohn the 22th. That hee would have induced the Vniversitie of Paris to beleeve, that the soules of the righteous doe not see God face to face; and that no man should take his degree in Divinitie, unlesse hee should first sweare to maintaine that perstiferous Heresie, and perpetually to cleave unto it. And that you may be assured hee was not wholly yours, hee affirmeth for certaine, one Position which would confound all Poperie,Adrian in 4. de Sacram. Confir. sub finem. (viz.) That the Pope may erre, even in things touching the Faith, and avouch that which is Heresie by his determination, or decree. And thus your Pope Adrian complaines of many abominable things in his owne Church: he tels us, his Predecessor was reputed a Heretike: he confesseth, that both himselfe, and all his Successors after him, were in possibilitie of erring, even in matters of Faith: and it is very probable in his erring opinion, hee began to erect that most noble Brothell-house in his owne See. And thus much touching the Marginall note of Pope Adrian.
Your second exception is touching Costerus, occasioned by these words, Wee accuse them for taking away the Cup from the Lay people; they excuse it, that it was not taken up by the commandment of the Bishops, but is crept in, the Bishops winking thereat (saith Costerus.) In answer to this, say you, I would know what excuse you can find for such a notorious lye.
Let the Reader judge, whether this modestie of yours deserve an Answer, or whether this saying of Costerus may not be termed, an Excuse. Howbeit (say you) this custome came in, not so much by the commandement of the Bishop, as by the peoples use and practise.] Well, take it as you would have it; yet, I say, his meaning must bee understood not at all by the Commandement of the Bishops, for that which is done by Command cannot bee said to have crept in. But the truth is, under colour of quarrelling with words, and giving me the lye, you seeke to dazle the eyes of your Reader, and when you omit the weightier things of your Church, then you question, Where is Costerus testimony for Antiquitie, Vniversalitie, Certaintie, and Safetie, when as you know well this testimony was not cited for that ende; And thus you straine at a Gnat, and swallow a Camell. Let us heare the rest of your verball discourse.
Since you are so shamelesse as to say, That we doe not condemne you for receiving in both kinds, Looke into the Councell of Trent, and see whether you doe not finde a heavy curse, &c. Thus you.
And are you sure that your Councell hath sufficiently cursed us, For following Christs example, and receiving in both kinds; for those were my very words, Following Christs example: (which you altogether omitted.) If therefore we have altered any part of Christs Institution, I say againe, Curse on in Gods name, and let your curses take effect: but if the celebration of our Mysteries be answerable to his will and word, that first ordained them, you curse not us whom you would hurt, but him that your cursed tongues cannot hurt, which is, God to be blessed for ever. But let us heare your Councels? The Councell of Trent (say you) layes a heavie curse against any that shall say, that all and every of the Faithfull ought, by the precept of God, or necessitie of salvation, to receive both kinds.
This cursing Councell toucheth not my Assertion: for this Canon speaketh of the Precept of Christ, whereas I spake of his Example onelyonly. And for proofe of this,Bell. de Euch. lib. 4. cap. 7. wee have Bellarmines testimony as well as ours: It is not to be doubted, but that is best, and fittest to be practised, which Christ himselfe hath done. And therefore my Assertion still stands good, (viz) You doe not condemne us for following Christs example.
Touching the Councell of Constance, it condemnes not our receiving in both kinds, but prevents the condemnation of her owne. They decreed their halfe Communion with this Caution, that If any should obstinately maintaine that it was unlawfull, Concil. Constant. Sess. 13.or erronious, to receive in one kind, hee ought to be punished, and driven out as an Heretike. And howsoever you would seeme to condemne our Assertion, yet you condemne not our practise as unlawfull; for the Councell of Basil, not twentie yeares after your Decree in the Councell of Constance, granted the use of the Cup to the Bohemians.
Your third exception is touching Mr. Harding, who in the question betwixt him and Bishop Iuel, of Private Masse, stands not to justifie his solitary, or private Masse, but rather excuseth it in this manner;Iuels Articles of Private Masse. pag. That it is through their owne default and negligence, whereof the godly and faithfull people, have sithence the time of the Primitive Church much complained. This (say you) hath no sense, for here is a Relative (Their) without an Antecedent. And let me tell you, this is a poore Pedanticall observation; for to spend many lines about such toyes and trifling words, and to passe by the maine sinew & strength of the Citation; this is to confesse in plaine termes, that you cannot justifie your doctrine: and the rather it appeares in this particular point, wherein Master Harding doth not onelyonly condemne the people for their neglect, but excuseth hereby your Churches ordinance in generall, as being not guilty of the coldnesse of the people. Nay more, hee plainly intimates the An…iquitie, and Vniversalitie of our Doctrine in these words;Iuel. Divis. 7. p. mihi, 11. In case the people might be stirred to such devotion, as to dispose themselves worthily to receive their Howsel every day with the Priest, as they did in the Primitive Church, what would these m…n have to say? And as touching Safety, and Certainty of our Doctrine, hee freely expresseth his thoughts, and liking of our Communion of Priest and People, saying; It were to be wished, Iuel in Art. 1. Divis. 9 p. 17.as oftentimes as the Priest doth celebrate the high Sacrifice, that there were some, who worthily disposed, might receive their Rites with him, and be partakers Sacramentally, of the Body and Blood of Christ with him: and hee gives a reason for it,Idem, Divis. 25. p. mihi, 45. Because it would be more commendable, and more godly on the Churches part. And thus much touching your three Authors, whom (say you) I have so egregiously belyed.
Touching your worshipping of Images, I referre it to his proper Section. And whereas wee charge you with flat Idolatrie in the adoration of the Sacrament, of Reliques, of Images, and the like, howsoever I say, you excuse your selves with the manner of your adoration, yet (to our endlesse comfort be it spoken) you cannot charge us in the Positive Doctrine of our Church; no, not with the least suspition of Idolatrie. This I told you before, and (blessed be God) you have not wherewith to charge us in your Reply. But you say, It is far greater evill for you to be truly charged with Heresie, than for us to be charged with Idolatrie: yet neither you, nor all your fellow-Jesuits could ever prove us guilty of either. But what may wee thinke of your Church, which is justly charged, and highly guilty of both? Your Popes (which the Jesuits resolve to be the Church) are condemned for Heretikes by your Councels, acknowledged Heretikes by the Popes themselves, and condemned of Heresie by your best learned Divines. Your worship of Images and Saints, concludes in flat Idolatrie; and in particular (by the Doctrine of your owne Church) the adoration of the Sacramentall Bread and Cup, (for want of a right intention) becomes an Idoll in the Temple. These things I have in part proved, which in place convenient, shall be more fully handled hereafter.
But it is observable, after I had ended my Section with this point of Idolatrie, I say, after this conclusion, you flye backe to the middle of the chapter, and now question me where our Church was before Luther: but when I answered that from your addition, and Articles of Faith, The question doth truly result upon your selves; Where was your Church? that is, where was your Trent Doctrine, and Articles of the Roman Creed, received de fide before Luther? You are so farre from shewing it, that you cunningly suppressed these words, and not so much as mentioned them: and thus, one while suppressing the point in question; other whiles, by declining the true state of the question, you shew your wit is better than your cause, and declare your Sophistrie to be better than your Divinitie.
But to follow you backe againe, you say, Wee must shew you a companie of men in former times distinct from yours.
It were no difficult matter, to shew you many that did seperate both from you, and the errours of your Church in former Ages. The Waldenses were a distinct companie of Beleevers, and separate from your Church above 500. yeares since: Reinerius the Inquisitor confesseth upon their examination,B. Pp. Tom. 13. Reiner. contrà Wald. cap. 3. p. mihi, 299. that hee found they had in one Diocese, one and forty Schooles, in another, ten; and withall, reckons up forty Churches by name in Lombardy, in Province in France, and other Kingdomes; he protesteth that amongst all Sects, There was none more pernitious to the Church of Rome, than it, and that for three causes: First, Ibid.because it is of longer continuance; for some say it hath continued from the time of Sylvester, (which is three hundred yeares after Christ) others say, from the time of the Apostles. Secondly, because it is more Vniversall, for there is scarse any Country, wherein this Sect hath not crept. Thirdly, whereas all other sorts blaspheme God, this Sect hath a great shew of godlinesse: for they live justly before men, they beleeve all rightly concerning God, and the Articles of the Creed; onelyonly they speake evill of the Church of Rome, and hate it; and by this meanes draw multitudes to their beliefe after them. Thus if you require Antiquity for their Doctrine, they derive it either from Christ, or from Sylvester, 300. yeares after Christ, if Vniversality, all Countries were filled with their Doctrine; if good life, they lived well before men, and beleeved all rightly concerning God, and the Articles of their Faith; and this the force of truth hath extorted from your grand Inquisitor.
Augustus Thuanus President of the Parliament of Paris, Thuan. hist. Tom 1. 1550. p. 457. & 465.tells us, that those who are commonly called Waldenses, Picards, Albigenses, Cathari, Lollards, though by their difference of place they had divers names, yet they held the same faith, which Wicliffe held in England, and Husse in Bohemia, and gathered strength at the comming of Luther, especially in the Caparienses, who professed a Religion agreeing almost in all things with Martin Luther: But withall he ingeniously professeth that Cardinall Sadolet did examine them, and found many things malitiously fained against them.
Poplinerius saith, that about the yeare 1100. these men did publish their doctrine differing but a little from the Protestants, Poplin. Hist. Franc. l. 1. Bb. Vsher de statu. Eccl. c. 8. p. 209.not onelyonly through France, but also through all the coasts of Europe: For both French, Spaniards, English, Scots, Italians, Germans, Bohemians, Saxons, Polonians, Lituanians, and oth…r nations doe peremptorily defend it to this very day; And by reason they separated from the doctrines of the Roman Church, Pope Innocent the third, about the yeare 1198. authorised certaine Monkes, who had the full power of the Inquisition in their hands, to deliver the people by thousands into the Magistrats hands, and the Magistrats to the Executioners.Histor. of the Wald. c. 3. St. Dominick who instituted the order of the begging Monkes, called Dominicans was a great persecutor of them and their doctrine. The Mother of this Monke saith your Martyrologe, Martyrologe in the life of St. Dominick p. (mihi) 556.before he was yet borne, dreamed that shee was delivered of a whelpe, with a firebrand in his mouth, with which he set the whole world on fire; and your learned Doctors have interpreted this dreame, that Dominick should be that dogge that should vomit out the fire which should consume the Haeretikes. your infallible Pope likewise tells us, that he saw in his sleepe the Church of St. John Lateran, to totter and ready to fall, Ibid. p. 562.and that St. Dominick supported it, and held it up with his shoulders, signifying thereby, that he, and those of his order should doe great good to the Catholike faith. And howsoever these reports may passe for dreames, yet this dog behaved himselfe so worthily in the persecution of those Christians, that from that time forward, the Monkes of his Order have bin alwayes imployed in the Inquisition.Histor. Wald. c. 2. But herein we may admire the great mercy and goodnesse of God unto this separate Church, that notwithstanding this grievous persecution, it was record…d by George Morell, at that time a Pastor amongst the Waldenses, that there were then remaining according to common report, above eight hundred thousand persons that made profession of the same faith. And thus breefely I have given you one company of men in former times distinct from yours. If we tooke beyond those times; the Greeke Church was likewise separate from yours above eight hundred yeares agoe, and differed in the points of Transubstantiation, of Purgatory, of private Masse, of Prayer in an unknowne tongue, of Marriage of Priests, of the Communion in both kindes, and the Popes Supremacy, I say in all these they separated from your Church; and this Church, if you require Antiquity, is before Rome in time; if Vniversality, she hath larger bounds, and multitudes of people, most of the Patriarchs, seven universall Councels, the Greeke tongue wherein the New Testament was written, insomuch as your Bishop of Bitonto was not ashamed publikely to professe, It is our Mother Graecia,Concil. Trid. Episc. Bitont. unto whom the Latin Church is beholding for all that ever she hath. And as touching the procession of the Holy Ghost, which your men say they deny (and therefore charge their Church with a knowne haeresie) it may seeme rather that this is an aspersion laid upon them then any just exception;Concil. Florent. Sess. 35. For at the Councell of Florence, about 200. yeares sithence, your Pope Eugenius answered the Graecians, that he was well satisfied by them touching the procession of the Holy Ghost; and that you may know they agreed with us in the principall points of our doctrine, the Greeke Patriarch congratulates with the reformed Churches in this manner. We give thanks to God, the Author of all grace, Patr. resp. 2. in init, & resp. 1. pag. 148.and we rejoyce with many others, but especially in this, that in many things your doctrine is agreeable to our Church. For a conclusion, the Muscovites, Armenians, Aegyptians, Aethiopians, and divers other countries and Nations (all members of the Greeke Church) taught our doctrine from the Apostles time to ours. This is so true an evidence in our behalfe, that Bellarmine, Bellarm. de ver. Dei. l. 2. …. ult. in fine.as it were in disdain of the Churches, makes this answer; We are no more moved with the examples of Muscovites, Armenians, Egyptians, and Aethiopians, then with the examples of Lutherans, or Anabaptists, and Calvinists, for they are either Haeretikes or Schismatikes. So that all Churches (be they never so Catholike and Ancient) if they subscribe not to the now Roman faith, are either Schismaticall or Haereticall.
Thus I have briefely shewed you two sorts of Christians, who were distinct from you, and yet lived in the Communion of the Catholike Church. I shewed you others also which lived and died in the bosome of the Roman Church, but as farre different in opinion from your now professed Faith, as those that went out from you. The first sort separated themselves from your Church and Doctrine, the latter continued in communion with you, but separated themselves from the errors of prevayling faction in your Church: the one sort you persecuted unto death, for the other you cut out their tongues for speaking truth.
But you are not of it (say you) since the time you have begun to be against it. And this you would inferre from Tertullian, That as out of the mild, fat, and profitable Olive, Tertull. de praescrip. c. 36.the sower bastard Olive groweth; so have errors fructified out of the true Church, but became wild by untruth and lying, degenerating from the graine of truth, and so not yours; and this doth fully answer the matter (say you.) Surely if you compare the true and fruitfull Olive to your selves, and us unto the bastard, and wild Olive, the matter (as you say) will be easily answered; but this is to beg the point in question, neither indeede can it be granted to you, without a sinne against the Holy Ghost. For the Spirit of God hath spoken it in particular to the Roman Church, that, Thou wert cut out of the Olive tree, which is wild by nature, Rom. 11.24.and wert grafted contrary to nature into a good Olive tree. Now if the haeresies and errors (which are compared to the wild Olive) have sprung out of that good Olive tree, into which you were first grafted, or if the wild Olive is now returned to its owne nature, I will say to you, as sometimes Diogenes said to the Philosopher, A me incipias, & erit verus sillogismus, let the wild Olive be applied to your Church (as it ought to be) and the comparison will redound upon your selves, and returne into your owne bosome.
From the Communion with your Church, you question the Antiquity and Vniversality of those points wherein you differ from us; and you would have me shew the deniall of them to have beene antiently and universally taught.Pag. 121.
Your demand to the first is unreasonable; For it is sufficient for us, that we professe that Faith which was once given to the Saints; besides, those new Articles which you thrust upon the Church, are wholly yours, and the proofe lies on your part to make good, as being properly your owne: on the other side, to shew the deniall of them to have bin anciently taught is unsensible; for the explicite deniall of them could not be taught till such Articles were offered and obtruded to us, but the implicite deniall we prove by the positive doctrines of the Ancient Fathers, which is incompatible with your new additions and corruptions.
From the Doctrine in generall, you descend into the particulars; and you say, one of our Sacraments is an empty piece of Bread, and a sup of wine. Pag. 123.Hannibal of Carthage, Cicero de Oratore lib. 2.when he heard Phormio the Orator talke pleasantly a long while together, being afterwards demanded what he thought of his Eloquence, made answer in this homely sort; Multos se vidisse deliros senes, sed qui magis quàm Phormio deliraret, vidisse neminem. I will leave the application to your selfe, and the interpretation to the Reader, because you say I cannot translate Latin.
Some truth or modesty I should gladly heare from you; but this is such an impudent Calumny, as Bellarmine himselfe would have beene ashamed to have heard it fall from the Pen of any learned Papalin; heare therefore what your owne men confesse of Calvin and others, and what we professe in the name of our Church. Your F. Kellison saith of Calvin, Kellis. Surney. lib. 4. cap. 5. p. mihi, 229.That if hee did meane as hee speaketh, hee would not dispute with him, but would shake hands with him, as with a Catholike. And then hee repeats Calvins words; I say that in the Mysterie of the Supper, by the signe of Bread and Wine, is Christ truly delivered, yea, and his Body and his Blood. And a little before those words, hee giveth the reason; Because, saith he, Christs words, [This is my Body] are so plaine, that unlesse a man will call God a deceiver, hee can never be so bold as to say, that hee setteth before us an emptie Signe. This is likewise Bellarmines confession of him;Bell. de Euch. lib. 1. cap. 1. Non ergo vacuum & inane signum, It is no vaine and empty signe. Thus you see your fellowes and you agree like Harpe and Harrow; you say it is an empty peece of Bread, they answer in Calvins behalfe and ours, that it is not an empty signe: Idem ibid. c. 8.Nay, saith Bellarmine, both Calvin and Oecolampadius, and Peter Martyr, doe teach the Bread is called Christs Body figuratively, as being a signe or figure of his body, but they adde withall, it is no bare (and empty) figure, but such as doth truely convey unto them the things signified thereby; Bilson in the difference betwixt Subjection, and Christistian Rebellion. Part 4. p. mihi, 779.for which truthes sake, Christ said not this Bread is a figure of my body, but it is my body.
To give you an instance in some of our Church; God forbid (saith our learned Bilson) wee should deny that the flesh and blood of Christ are truly present, and truly received of the Faithfull, at the Lords Table. It is the Doctrine that wee teach others, and wherewith wee comfort our selves. Wee never doubted but the Truth was present with the Signe, and the Spirit with the Sacrament, (as Cyprian saith) Wee knew there could not follow an operation, if there were not a presence before.
Neither doe I thinke you are ignorant of this, but that you have inured your selfe to falsities and reproaches. For it is apparently true, that the question in these dayes, is not of the truth of the presence, but of the manner: that is, whether it be to the Teeth and the Belly, or Soule and Faith of the Receiver. And therupon our learned and Reverend B. Andrews returned his Answer to Bellarmine; Wee beleeve the presence, Wee beleeve, B. Andrew. ad Bell. Apol. Resp. c. 1. p. mihi 11.I say, the presence as well as you: concerning the manner of the presence, we doe not unadvisedly define; nay more, wee doe not scrupulously inquire, no more than wee doe in Baptisme, how the blood of Christ cleanseth us.
From the Sacraments; you procceed to our two and twentie Bookes of Canonicall Scripture, and indeed wee allow but two and twentie. But will any Catholike (say you) allow this to have been Catholike Doctrine?
Yes, without doubt, many good Catholikes did follow the Hebrew Canon of the Iewes, Orig sitwhich (saith Origen) compriseth but two and twentie bookes of the old Testament, according to the number of the letters among them.
Melito, Bishop of Sardis, was a Catholike, and (saith Bellarmine) hee did follow the Hebrew Canon of the Iewes.Bellar. de verbo Dei. l. 1 c. 20.
Hilar. in Prolog. in Psal. explanat.Hilary, Bishop of Poictiers, was a Catholike, and he told us, The old Testament was contained in two and twentie bookes, according to the number of the Hebrew letters.
Cyril. Catechis. 4.St. Cyril, Bishop of Hierusalem, was a Catholike, and hee gave us the like Lesson; Peruse the two and twentie books of the old Testament, but meddle not with the Apochrypha.
Anthanas. in Synops.Athanasius, Bishop of Alexandria, was a Catholike, and affirmes, that the Christians had a definite number of books comprehended in the Canon, which were two and twentie, equall to the number of the Hebrew letters.
Bellar. de verbo Dei. l. 1. c. 20.Ruffinus was a Catholike, and Bellarmine confesseth hee did follow the Hebrew Canon, which conteined our two and twentie books.
Naz. Carm. lamb. ad Seleucum. lamb. 3.Gregory Nazianzen was a Catholike, and hee shewed to Seleucus, a Catalogue of the Canonicall bookes, and hee cites the bookes in order from Genesis to Malachie, the last of the Prophets; and leaveth out all the Apochrypha.
Concil. Laod. cap. 59.The Fathers of the Councell of Laodicea were Catholikes: and in the 59th Canon, they allow onelyonly those two and twenty bookes for Canonicall, which wee receive.
There are others whom you terme Catholikes; as namely, Damascene, Hugo de Sancto Victore, Lyranus, Hugo Cardinalis, Tostatus, Waldensis, Driedo, and Cajetan: all which differ from your Tenet of the Apochryphall bookes which are canonized by your Trent Councell (such agreement is there amongst your best learned, touching the greatest point of your Beleefe) and yet forsooth your Church cannot be depraved.
But here is one thing (say you) which giveth mee much cause of wonder; which is, that you talke of Traditions, as distinct from Scripture. I ever tooke you to be so fallen out with them, that you made the deniall of them a fundamentall point of your Religion, that you would not indure the word Tradit…on; but alwaies translated, or rather falsified it into Ordinances. Thus you.
It is a true saying of the Heathen Orator;Cicero. Hee who once goeth beyond the bounds of Modestie, had need to be lustily impudent. I protest, I onelyonly termed your Additions, Traditions; and you question our Church, for false translating of the word. And cannot wee indure the word Traditions? Doe not we allow of all the Apostolicall Traditions, which agree unto the Scriptures? Nay more, doe wee not translate the word Traditions in the Scriptu…e, when the Text will beare it according to the Greeke originall? Looke upon the fifteenth of Matthew, Matth. 15. v. 2, 3, 6.and in three severall verses, 2, 3, 6. wee use the word Tradition. Looke upon the seventh of Marke, Marke 7. v. 3, 8, 9, 13.and in foure severall places of that chapter, y…u shall find likewise, wee translate Traditions. Looke upon Saint Paul to the Colossians, Galatians, and upon Saint Peter; Colos. 2.8. Galat. 1.14. 1 Pet. 1.18.and in all these, in the Translation joyned with your Rhemish Testament, you shall find the word Traditions. How may your Proselytes beleeve you another time, when you say, Wee alwaies translate it, or rather falsifie it into Ordinances?
For a conclusion of this Section; you say, that the three Creeds, the two Sacraments, the foure Generall Councels, the two and twenty books of Canonicall Scripture, We had them from you. Let it be your comfort then, that you had something in your Church which was worth the gleaning, after the devill had sowed the Tares amongst the good Corne. But I would not have you overmuch confident of that neither; for originally wee had them from the Church Catholike, before there was a Roman. For, the Gospell was preached in England before it was in Rome; and we had in England, a Christian Church and King, before Rome had a Christian Emperor, yea long before Poperie, or the name of Pope was heard of in the Christian world; (in the sense you now take it.) And in after Ages, when the Gospell of Christ was rooted out by Heathen persecutors (where it was first planted) it was afterwards replanted by Preachers, partly sent from Rome, partly by the Greeke Church, but by neither was the Faith preached and restored; which your present Church now teacheth, and maintaineth at this day.
And lastly, if wee had the three Creeds, the two Sacraments, the 22. bookes of Canonicall Scripture, and the first foure Generall Councels from you, then you cannot deny that we teach the Ancient Faith, first given to the Saints; and that we had a Church visible long before Luthers dayes, (for those Tenents were sufficient of themselves to make a glorious, and a visible Church in the first and best ages) they were received by succeeding Christians in all the later Ages, and are now become the Positive, and Affirmative Articles of our Beleefe, which for the greater part, were ever taught and received in the bosom of your owne Church. To shut up all your bitter Aspersions, of Corrupting, of Falsifying, of Lying, of Lynding, and I know not what reproches, cast upon me in these first (8) Sections; I will shut up all, I say, which hitherto hath beene delivered by you, with that answer of Socrates to his accusers, before the Judges:Plato in Apologia Socratis. My Lords (saith hee) in what sort your affections have been stirred with mine accusers eloquence which you heard them speake, I cannot tell. But well I wot, for mine owne part, I my selfe, whom it toucheth most, was almost perswaded to beleeve, that what they said was true, yea although it were against my selfe; so handsomly they can tell their tale, and so likely, and so smoothly they convey their maters: every word they spake, had appearance of Truth, and yet in good sooth, they have scarsely uttered one word of Truth.
STRICTVRAE IN LYNDOMASTIGEM: OR, An Answere by way of Supplement to the Chapters remaining in the Booke Intituled, A CASE FOR THE SPECTACLES.
Together With a Funerall Sermon preached at Cobham, June 14th. 1636.
By DANIEL FEATLEY, D. D.
LONDON, Printed by M. P. for Robert Milbourne, at the signe of the Vnicorne in Fleet-street, neere Fleet-Bridge. 1638.