VNto how great and va­rious iniuries the names of well-deseruing men are subiect after their death, I would it had been my hap to haue learned any other where, then to haue had such neere ex­perience of it at home. I was in good hope my care had been at an end, in an­swering their sundrie calumnies, that be­ing of a contrary part, set vpon my Fa­thers name like open enemies; yet these, [Page 2] inasmuch as they professed themselues his aduersaries, and were cleane oppo­site against him in the case it selfe, see­med to bee the lesse dangerous, and not so much to be feared. But now I must haue to doe with other manner of men, that pretending nothing lesse then any malice or hatred against him, haue vn­der faire shews of good-will, most grossely abused his estimation & credit. But the lessesuspicion there is of an iniury, the greater is the iniury done to a man, and the more hainously to be accounted of.

Not many weekes since there was a Booke published vnder the name of Isaac Casaubon: Which for the Argument was not altogether vnlike those workes of his, that he had partly published already, and partly vndertaken to write, as I shall shew hereafter. And for the place; who would imagine that any thing should come foorth in Print at London to Ca­saubon's disgrace; where, as long as he li­ued, hee was so much esteemed of by his Maiestie, and the chiefest of the land; [Page 3] and now hee is dead, I hope I may say his memory is precious to all honest men? And besides, for him that procu­red the booke to be set foorth, hee is so profuse in his praise, that a man would thinke hee meant him no small addition of glory by his large commendations. But if you once reade the booke it selfe, you shall soone see it is such kinde of stuffe, as cannot bee imagined to haue been my Fathers, without his great shame and infamie, being a Pamphlet full of such grosse ignorance, malignity, and most insolent desire of nouitie in Reli­gion. Surely the Author of it deserues the name of a Schismatike, (that I may say no worse) and whosoeuer hee was, is worthy to bee punished for such a one, as being no lesser enemy to the Church of England, then hee is iniurious to my Fathers good name.

But that the Reader may wonder the lesse at it, it is no new thing for bookes of nouell and vnsound doctrine to bee fa­thered vpon such men that be free from [Page 4] error, and sound in their opinions. Eue­ry one of the worst and vilest Heretikes were wont to vse this craft long agoe, to maske vnder other mens names of esteem and authority, that so they might the better insinuate their pernicious do­ctrines into them that little vnderstood what they were, and seduce the simpler sort of people from the right way. And thereupon it came, that so many bookes fraught with pestilent doctrine were a [...] ­tributed of old, to the holy and ortho­dox Fathers, and at this day goe a great number of them vnder their names; ma­ny whereof at the first perhaps might be their owne, but afterwards came to bee so corrupted and adulterated by other mens impurities, that like bastards their owne reputed parents would not ac­knowledge them. Of which thing euen Origen alone may bee a sufficient exam­ple; who was long since numbred a­mong the Arch-heretikes themselues, and yet both by ancient and moderne writers is most strongly defended to [Page 5] haue been an Orthodoxe Father, many things being falsely imputed vnto him by Heretikes, and his Bookes otherwise pure and sound, by them corrupted and plaistered ouer with their owne daw­bings; as S. Ierome and Vincentius Lirinen­fis with others haue written of his old Apologists. But, to be short, whether wee exemplifie this kinde of imposture by old or new times, I dare say, that there was neuer any bastard-booke fathe­red vpon a man with more notable im­pudence and fraud, then this was vpon Casaubon.

What purpose they had that were the contriuers of such cousenage, and what should chiefly mooue them to doe [...]o vnworthy an act, many probable con­iectures may be made. It is not vnlike­ly that some sculking crafty Puritan came stealing out with it, to trie if hee could doe the Church of England a mis­chiefe. Peraduenture one that bare some priuate grudge against my Father, thought this way to wound his reputation. [Page 6] Or rather it is most likely that some vnletter'd fellow, some sharking companion, lighting vpon an old moth­eaten Pamphlet, which hee thought to be some great treasure, and hard to be come by; and agreeing with a Sordid Bookeseller to get it reprinted; thought it best to put some mans name of note before it, that so their gaines, which they gaped for, might come in the faster by the sale. And this last (howsoeuer the other two coniectures goe, for there may be more in it then this alone) they that haue had to doe, and enquire into the matter, haue found to bee most cer­taine and true.

In the meane, who would not lament to see what a miserable case we are now adayes brought vnto, when such base fellowes as these, that neuer had any thing to doe with learning, nor hone­stie neither, shall take vpon them to iudge what Bookes may benefite the people, and deserue to bee published? Vnhappy Theologie! which must be [Page 7] made a refuge for Runagates; and, whe­ther shee will or no, be forced to patro­nize the base seruice of such dishonest Mountebankes, that doe so shamefully prostitute her to their gaine and filthie lucre. The fault whereof, it is a griefe to see, how in a maner it comes from the very people themselues, who hauing once got it by the end, that there is no smal religion in making long discourses, and in ostentation of much reading, gape after such nouell Pamphlets as fast as euer the Athenians did after newes. And so no maru [...]ile if wee haue euery day such dry kickses & abortiue broods sent vs into the world, when there are so many to buy them vp [...] as children doe babies and toyes. But to make it no wonder, that these Impostors were in such hope to cousen and deceiue the vn­skilfull multitude at ease; is it not be­yond all the degrees of impudence, that they should goe about to make Them Patrons and witnesses of their fraud, whom they should much rather haue [Page 8] feared to be the Reuengers & inst Puni­shers of it? Lord! what a licentious age doe wee liue in! that such a lurking ob­scure fellow (for hee is famous and knowen for nothing but villany) should dare to inscribe his Booke, which hee knew to be but forg'd and counterfeit, to our most Noble and Pious Prince, be­sides many other great Lords, and all in hope of reward and gaine! But to let passe this iuggling knaue, that sets vs foorth his wares and toyes with such a vaunting kind of language, and to come vnto the Booke it selfe.

Certainly I suppose there is no lear­ned man, specially to whom Casaubon or his Writings were not altogether vn­knowen, that can bee so sencelesse or grosse, but vpon the first reading of this Booke, hee will presently both perceiue and detest the fraud of these cheating companions. And therefore had the Booke come into their hands onely that were able to iudge of such matters, and to discerne trueth frō falshood, I might [Page 9] haue saued all this labour. But inasmuch as the Booke came forth in English, and was snatched vp so fast by the vnlearned multitude, and is now by their rash iudgement so much commended and approoued; I haue heere briefly vnder­taken the examination thereof, both to rectifie the ignorant, and to vindicate my Father from suspicion of impietie; that so at last the vizard being pulled off the Pamphlet, it may appeare to all, as it is, in its owne naturall likenesse.

And first I must seriously confesse, that for the originall Author of the Booke, I neither know him, nor euer heard the least rumour of him, what hee was, [...]t [...]r an albus, French or English, or whether he be yet aboue ground or no; lest haply some might suspect, that I ven­ted any priuate malice of mine owne, while in defending of my Father, I seeme to write something sharpely against one whom I know not.

For his Religion, I thinke it will satis­fie a great many, and be enough for his [Page 10] commendation too, to say, hee was no Papist, but rather a fierce enemy to them all. Indeed this may be enough for them, that thinke a man presently right and or­thodoxe enough, if hee doeth but once professe himselfe an Aduersarie to Pope­rie; it being their custome to measure the integritie and soundnesse of a mans Religion by his hatred against Papists onely. And it is to bee feared, lest that the Booke, being written against the Sa­crifice of the Masse, as the Title of it pre­tends, because I neither approoue the Booke, nor acknowledoe it to be my Fa­thers, both Father and Sonne, as men ta­ken napping, be by some Pu [...]itans repu­ted for errant Papists. But howsoeuer it were a fault, to giue any occasion of scandall vnto the weakest members in the Church, yet the loue of trueth must more preuaile with me to vndertake her defence, then the prauitie of other mens iudgements to deterre me from it. In my opinion he defined vertue well, that said it was the meane betweene two extreme [Page 11] vices, which is not onely true in Morall and Practicall, but in some In­tellectuall vertues also; of which kinde the right apprehension of Trueth is. And therefore it is no marueile, if they, which take that way in matters of Reli­gion, doe oppose themselues against two extremes, and haue two extremes opposed against them. Yet hee that keepes this middle course, howsoeuer he may perhaps differ in opinion from either side, yet in charitie he may be v­nited vnto both. And for no other cause is hee more maligned by the hot-spurres on either part, then for seeking to pro­cure peace and concord betwixt them, and for doing his best endeauour to make vp the great schisme and rent of the Church, that againe wee might come to be all one body. Which misery an olde Father was wont long agoe to lament in these words, that may be very well applied to our times. [...] (sayth Nazianz. Orat. 3. Nazianzen after hee had done speaking of mens maintaining their sides and factions) [Page 12] [...] That is, Whosoeuer keepe a middle [...]ourse, and fol­low after peace, are ill used on both sides, being either contemned, or fiercely opposed; of which number we being, &c.

For the Papists, I haue nothing to say to them now. But I haue heere to doe with such kind of men, who striuing to runne as farre from Papists as they can, haue also vnaduisedly runne withall be­yond the bounds of Truth. These are the Men, that with incredible pride and ar­rogancy despise all Antiquity; that most superciliously contemne the ancient and holy Fathers, that studie all they can how to abrogate and abandon all the ancient Constitutions of the Church; and in the meane while, that arrogate to themselues a power of making what Lawes they list, of appointing Ceremo­nies at their pleasure, and of bringing in such a discipline, which the Christians of olde neuer heard of, as if they had be [...]ne created the only perpetuall Dictators [Page 13] and Gouernours of the Church of Christ. And though they haue no re­gard at all of any publique tranquillitie, refusing to giue way but to the least thing that may make for the peace and vnitie of Christians, yet neuertheles they would faine beare vp their credit, and for a colour of their bad intents, make vs beleeue they are wondrous zealous men. Of which sort of men that he was one, whosoeuer was the Author of this Booke, which these Impostors haue published vnder Is. Casa [...]bons name, and that he was no meane one neither, but a chiefe champion among them, I thinke no body will make question, that will but runne ouer the booke, and of those infinite places which prooue the same most plainely, will but a little more nar­rowly marke a few. There being I sup­pose scarce any writing extant in this kind, which doeth more clearely and e­uidently argue, what an insolent, per­uerse, and rash Author it had. A man would verely thinke that hee was one, [Page 14] who [...] had proclaimed open warre and defiance to all Antiquitie, or one that being starke-staring mad with noueltie and fury, would abandon all the ancient Customes and Constitutions of our Forefathers.

The Booke indeed by the Title is pre­tended to be written against Papists, but in effect it prooues as aduerse to the Pri­mitiue, as to the Popish Church. And whereas the Church of England, cut­ting off such corruptions as crept in vp­on her in declining ages, hath retained many of the Sacred Rites and Ceremo­nies which the ancient Church had, yet she is also cunningly stricken at through the Papists sides, with so much the more danger, by how much the more craft and close subtiltie it is done.

Therefore let this be the first Argu­ment of all the rest, to prooue, that Ca­saubon neither was, nor could be the Au­thor of this Booke. For who was it that euer reuerenced the gray haires of Anti­quitie more then hee? Who euer, without [Page 15] iniuring the holy Scriptures, [...]stee­med more highly of the ancient Fathers? And for the Church of England, what should I neede to speake of i [...]? whose Doctrine and Discipline, Rites and Ce­remonies hee did so much approoue and embrace, that hee could neuer seeme to himselfe to haue commended and mag­nified it enough. Though there were none of his workes and writings left be­hind him, out of which it might be ga­thered and demonstrated what his mind was herein, yet there be many graue and religious men still liuing, whom I could call to witnesse, how often they haue heard him professe and declare at large, that he was thus affected. But there will be no neede of that, seeing his owne Bookes are euery where extant to con­firme it. For howsoeuer hee had neuer any occasion offered him purposely and ex professo to handle this Argument, yet seeing all his Workes that belong to matters Ecclesiasticall and Diuine, haue nothing in them, not onely contrary, or [Page 16] auerse from the vse and customes of this Church, but what is altogether agreea­ble to the Canons and Constitutions of the sam [...] and which, as occasion is offe­red, doe euer and anon defend them; the intelligent Reader will easily perceiue, how willingly hee submitted himselfe vnto the Forme thereof, & rested whol­ly content with it.

And for this purpose there are not wanting most certaine proofes and te­stimonies occurring in many places of his writings, which will be enough to stop vp the mouthes of the most impu­dent gain-sayers. As when in his Pre­face to his Ecclesiasticall Exercitations, written to his Sacred Maiestie, he saith, Qui Ecclesiam habeas in tuis Regnis, partim iam olim ità institutam, partim magnis tuis laboribus ità instauratam, vt ad florētis quon­dam Ecclesiae formam nulla hodiè propius ac­cedat, quàm tua, inter uel excessu, vel defe­ctu peccantes mediam uiam secuta. Quâ mo­deratione [...]oc primum assecuta est Ecclesi [...] Anglicana, ut illi ipsi qui suam ei foelicitatem [Page 17] inuident, saepe tamen ex aliarum comparatio­ne illam cogantur laudare: deinde &c. that is, Who haue in your Dominions a Church so esta­blished by former ages, and so setled by your Maiesties Royal paines and care, as no Church this day under heauen comes neerer to the flourishing estate and face of the Ancient then yours, which hath taken the middle way be­tweene them that went astray on both handes by excesse or defect. By which modera­tion the Church of ENGLAND hath got this speciall aduantage, that euen such as enuy her happinesse, are neuerthelesse of­tentimes constrained to magnifie her in compa­rison of others. Besides &c. Whereunto these words agree in his Epistle to Car­dinall Perron, written, though in his Ma­iesties name, yet according to his owne sence and meaning; Certò, clarè ac liqui­dò sibi constare, si notae [...] quaerantur, & uerè necessaria ad salutem spectentur, aut e­tiam ad decorum Ecclesiae, nullam in orbe ter­rarum (Deo vni sit laus & gloria) inuentum iri quae propius ad fidem, aut speciem antiquae Catholicae accedat &c. That it was most [Page 18] plaine and manifest unto him, how for mat­ters essentiall, and truly necessary to saluation, or belonging also to the beauty and decency of the Church, there was (God be thanked) none in all the world to be found, which came neerer to the faith and face of the ancient Catholike Church, &c.

It wil not be amisse here to set downe his iudgement about some certain Rites and Ceremonies, which as occasion ser­ued, he wrote and inserted into his Ephe­merides, from whence what hee thought of all others in that kinde, may be easily coniectured.

Octob. 31. An. 1610. Diem sacram non malè posui Dei beneficio: sum enim inuitatus bodiè, ut interessem sacris, quae factasunt ad consecrandos Episcopos duos Scotos, & Ar­chiepiscopum Scotiae. Vidi illos Ritus, & Im­positionem manuum, & Preces in eam rem. O Deus, quanta fuit mea uoluptas! Tu Domine Iesu serua hanc Ecclesiam, & Catharis, qui ista rident, da bonam mentem. God be than­ked, I haue spent this Holy day well. For I was this day inuited to be present at the sacred [Page 19] s [...]lemnities of the Consecration of the Arch [...]i­shop, and two other Bishops of Scotland. I saw the Cerem [...]nies, the Imposition of hands, and the Prayers made for that purpose. O God, what apleasure it was to me, to behold it! Preserue thou this Church, O Lord Iesu, and turne the hearts of the Puritans, that deride such things as these.

Ian. 4. An. 1611. Gratias tibi, Domine, quod hodi [...] ad sacram mensam sum admissus, & Corporis Christi, sanguinis [...] factus sum particeps in Ecclesiâ Anglicanâ, cuius For­mulam heri diligenter meditatus admodum probaui, & ordinem agendi mir [...] laudaui prae receptâ apud alios consuetudine. Thankes bee to thee, O Lord, that I was this day admitted vnto thy Holy Table, and made partaker of the Body and Blood of Christ in the Church of England, the Forme of which Administra­tion, hauing read it ouer yesterday, I did high­ly approoue and commend aboue that custome which others vse.

And not onely these things which concerne the Church of England, but those also wherein hee had to doe with [Page 20] our Aduersaries alone doe sufficiently argue for his defence. Euen by his whole manner and genius of writing euery bo­dy may knowe that the booke is none of his. For who cannot tell, with what great moderation and mildnesse Casaubon was euer wont to treat of Controuersies in Religion? insomuch that many pre­posterous Puritanes, out of their igno­rant and mad zeale, did blame him for it, and from thence tooke occasion to suspect him more then they had reaso [...] to doe. But this was the way that hee tooke; and hee perswaded himselfe it was the best and safest way that could bee taken, both for the finding out of trueth, and the redresse of error; to fol­low that path which meeknesse and mo­deration either led him, or went along with him in, without all affection or partiality either way; supposing that such as tooke any other course, did put pace in a dangerous and slippery path, and put others further out of their way that were gone astray one from another. [Page 21] Now if a man should run through the whole rout of Nouellers, and diligently make inquiry into their writings, I think there could not one bee found for furie, and malice, and b [...]tternesse against his Aduersaries, to bee compared with this Counterfeit-Casaubon; then whom neuer was any man more childishly and fond­ly in loue with his owne fancie, or more bent to his faction. It is but a small mat­ter, that he hath rail'd a little more bit­terly then became a modest man, against such things as were worthy of blame; but so infinitely to bely his Aduersaries, and to put such forged crimes and ca­lumnies vpon them, was vnsufferable, specially in such an vndertaker for the Trueth of Christ. Such manner of dea­ling with Aduersaries, though it may be pleasing to some hotte fiery Zelotes, whom learning neuer taught any mo­desty, yet wiser men cannot but con­demne it, as being fitter to spoyle, then to helpe or defend a good cause. For if there be [...] strict Lawes prouided against [Page 22] such colluding pleaders, that pretending to helpe a man, do of purpose leaue out that which should most make for his cause, and bring nothing but false alle­gations for his defence, so to betray his right to his Aduersaries [...] what is to bee done with such vndertakers of Contro­uersi [...]s in Religion, that either of pur­pose, or through grosse ignorance let passe those Arguments that be solid, and of greatest moment, and come in with such idle poore reasons, as euery childe may answer and blow away? Ought not the same Law (when the case is the same) to be made against these men, as betray­ers of an honest and good cause? What readier way then theirs can be imagined wholly to alienate our Aduersaries mindes from vs, that being ouercome with the truth on our parts, began some­what to incline vnto vs? Caius Fabritius is highly commended vnto vs by the writers of old times, for his vertue and magnanimity, in scorning to accept of that victory in a doubtfull battell, which [Page 23] was offered him by the perfidie of a trecherous fellow. And is it not a shame now adayes, that Christians conten­ding with Christians about the Trueth of Faith, should vse lesse faith and con­science one towards another, then the Pagans themselues were wont to doe, who regarded nothing but their owne wordly praise and honour?

Can there then be any body so iniu­rious to Casaubon, or so quite bereaued of his owne iudgement, as to thinke these things, that smell only of a furious Sycophant, and a most impudent Ca­lumniator, could come from him? Frō him, I say, Whose mildnesse and mode­ration in matters of Religion is so eui­dent in all his writings, that to take any paines to prooue it, were but to waste time, and to light a candle in the Sunne.

And howsoeuer it befits not the mo­destie of a sonne to contend about the learning of his Father; yet I hope I may haue leaue, without the breach of good manners, to say that hee was no meere [Page 24] Blocke, or such a one as had no good learning at all [...]n him; which, let but be once granted mee, and I doubt not of the good successe I shall haue, in vindi­cating his name and estimation from these Hucksters handes, that put this booke vpon him. A booke which is so full of excessiue ignorance and stupidi­tie, that whereas euery thing in it (ex­cept a few scraps taken from others) ar­gue a most vnlearned writer; there are many things besides, which I wonder how they could come from a man that was sound in his senses: if yet he is to be thought sound in his senses, whom this pestilent madde puritanisme hath once possessed.

But I suppose the Reader expects, that for the better confirmation of what we say, we should produce some Examples out of the Booke it s [...]lfe, concerning these things, wherewith we haue all this while charged the Author of it. It re­maines therefore, that we briefly runne the Booke ouer, rather pointing at the [Page 25] places, then vndertaking any refutation of them.

IN the first part of his Booke hee rec­kons Pag. 2, 3, &c. 8, 9, 21. vp all such things, which either happened by occasion, or were directly ordained by God in the olde Law, ha­uing some mysticall or typicall signifi­cation in them; as the Trees of Life and Death, of Knowledge of Good & Euill; the Rainebow; the Feast of vnleauened Bread; the cloudie Pillar that went be­fore the Israelites in the day; the flame of Fire that guided them in the night; the diuision of the Red Sea; the heauen­ly Manna; the water that gushed out of the Rocke; Oblations and Sacrifices of diuers sorts; the Temple of Ierusalem; the Priests vestments; the water of clen­sing, &c. And all these he will haue to been no lesse truely and properly called Sacraments of the olde Testament, then Circumcision and the Passeouer were; in place whereof were instituted those two Sacraments of the new Testament, Baptisme, and the Supper of the Lord. [Page 26] I am not ignorant what a large signifi­cation the word Sacrament hath; but neuer (that I could learne) were all these promiscuously accounted, and reckoned vp among the number of Sacraments by the Fathers; and while I weigh this mans words a little better, I finde by most certaine confequence, that his meaning and purpose was, in making all Sacred Signes to be true Sacraments, with­all to make vs beleeue, that the Sacra­ments of the New Testament are no­thing else but meere naked Signes and Figures. Neither is there any other mea­ning to be collected from him in all his passages about the holy Sacrament of the Eucharist. For howsoeuer he would sometimes seeme to be farre of another minde, when hee vseth the words, really and truely; yet he applies them no other­wise to the Sacred Symboles of the Sup­per, then hee doeth to any of those Sha­dowes and Figures of the olde Law; ac­knowledging no power in them of re­ally exhibiting, but of signifying onely, as [Page 27] pag. 36. or really signifying, at most, as pag. 81. vpon which ground, that is to say, that there is no more vertue in the Eu­charist, then in those Signes, he thinkes hee hath most learnedly and strongly confuted the new opinion of Transub­stantiation, (a conceit otherwise most absurd and grosse,) because forsooth there was no Transubstantiation in the Pag. 85, 86. Tree of knowledge of Good and Euill, none in the Manna, or in the Rocke that flowed with water, or in the brazen Serpent, &c. As if it were not easie to answere our Aduersaries truely out of S. Augustines owne wordes. Prima Sa­cramenta S. Aug. con­tra Fa [...]st [...]. l [...]b. 19 [...] c. 13. cum suo aduentu Christus imple­uisset, ablata sunt; & alia sunt instituta, uirtute maiora, utilitate meliora, actu fa­ciliora, numero pauciora. The Sacraments of the olde Law being accomplished by the comming of Christ, are taken away; and o­thers ordained in their place, which be grea­ter in power and efficacie, better for our pro­fit, easier for performance, and fewer in number.

[Page 28] But to make an end with him in this point: His onely doctrine is, That by faith wee doe really participate of the bodie and blood of Christ, and be made one with him [...] and that the signes and symboles of this our coniunction and fellowship are in the Eucharist: where­as wee doe not call them Signes onely, but beleeue them further to be the very Instruments and Meanes of our Commu­nion with Christ; which is the same that the Primitiue Church teacheth, the do­ctrine of the Church of England, and the Beliefe of Is. Casaubon, as may be seene in his Exe [...]c. 16. Exercitations, and his Num. 47. Epistle to Card. Perron. For them that haue such base and abiect thoughts of this diuine Sacrament, it is no maruell if they can finde nothing to wonder at in it, as this Scribler elsewhere doth grant, and some do much more impudently a [...]irme; but the godly Fathers, being wont to call it tremend [...] Mysterium, a Mystery ful of hor­ror and dread, would not haue vs once to thinke vpon so great a matter without a holv and sacred feare.

[Page 29] In his third Chapter, going about to Pag. 10. 11, &c. shew, how from time to time, the Signes & Sacrifices ofthe old Law were depra­ued, and subiect to corruption, without any iudgement, or discretion at all, hee reckons vs vp a number of sins and of­fences, of a farre different nature; which neuerthelesse he will needs haue proper­ly to belong vnto the Sacraments; as the Loathing of Manna, and the Peoples murmurring that followed; the sinne of Achan; the impiety of the sonnes of Heli; the rash attempt of Uzzah, and o­thers the like; among which Iephte's vow, and Gedeon's garment are numbred for corruptions of Sacraments. And hi­ther hee referres that of 2. Kings 17. 17. Pag. 15. Where the Israelites made their children to passe through the fire, which this fellow calls Purgatorie Fire, and saith, that from it was deriued the opinion of the Alco­ranists and Mahumetans at this day for Purgatory: meaning by his Alcoranists, the Papists of our times. For so hee calls them else-where, them and their Ritualls [Page 30] Pag. 63. 65. 66. 70, &c. Durand's Alcoran, Titelman's Alco­ran, &c.

In his Seuenth Chapter, hee cites vs his Ecclesiasticall Commentaries, and Pag. 50. hee sends vs vnto them againe. Tis very well. Still haue wee the ad­uantage, & euery where matter enough to detect the fraud of these Impostors. For whose soeuer these same Commen­taries be, sure I am, they bee none of Ca­saubon's. Hee neuer published, neuer wrote any Ecclesiastical Commentaries. But I am afraid lest these Commentaries In his Epistle to the Rea­der. and those of Elasopolitanus, bee twinnes, out of which the Author of this booke himselfe confesseth, he had euery thing to make vs vp this Pamphlet, such as it is. What these Commentaries of Elaso­politan are, I thinke no body yet euer knew, or is like to know, being at least so vnknowne and vnheard of, as the ve­ry name of the man seemed strange and monstrous to all learned mens eares that I could meete withall.

In the same Chapter, among the superstitious [Page 31] Ceremonies of Baptisme heretofore brought into the Church, he Pag. 27. 28. numbreth vp Chrisme, Exsufflation, and Exorcismes; which though they were not vndeseruedly taken away by the Church of England, when they began to bee abu­sed vnto ridiculous superstition; yet in­asmuch as they be knowne to haue been of very great Antiquity, it was not the part of a modest man to raile vpon them for abominable things, specially as they were vsed in the Primitiue Church. Cer­tainely the old godly Fathers, S. Cyrill, S. Ba [...]il, S. Ambrose, S. Augustine and others (a little better Doctors of Religion and Piety, I trow, then our new vpstart Ze­lotes) would neuer haue admitted or al­lowed them, if, as this man affirmes, they had been first inuented to adulterate the true vse and prime Institution of Bap­tisme. And for Casaubon it is not likely that hee would euer haue giuen any such censure of these Ceremonies against the manner and custome of the ancient Fa­thers, whom how much he reuerenced, [Page 32] hee hath elsewhere made knowne in matters of greater moment.

But wee must not here let passe this one most notorious example of the sencelesse stupidity and malignitie both of this lewd and idle writer. Wherefore Pag. 28.O you Missalians (saith the man) haue you foisted in oyles into the holy Sacrament of Baptisme, imitating herein the here [...]ie of Marcus and Marcosus, who commanded that Infants to bee baptized should bee anoin­ted? In his Margin hee sends vs to Epi­phanius. [...]. There was one Marcus (saith Epiphanius) of whom the Marcosians were so called. Now who would not wonder what a monstrous blinde bayard this fellow is, to make vs proper names of denominatiues? as if a man should say, there were two certaine famous Heretikes called Arrius and Ar­rianus. But what is the madnesse of the Marcosians to the ancient custome of the Orthodoxe Fathers? The Marcosian He­retikes vsed not their oyle for an indif­ferent Ceremony in Baptisme, but made [Page 33] the vertue and efficacy of the Sacrament to depend vpon it, insomuch, that some of them neuer baptized their yong be­ginners, if they were once anointed after their owne fashion with oyle. [...], saith Epiphanius there, Some of them thinke Baptisme super­fluous.

A little after hee doth malapertly in­ueigh Pag. 29. against the ancient Bishops, as if they had permitted women to baptize: which is a meere false tale. Tertul. de vel. virg. Nonpermittitur mulieri in Ecclesiâ lo­qui, sednec docere, nec tingere, &c. It is not permitted to a woman for to speake in the Church, or to teach, or to Baptize, &c. In a case of extreme necessitie the very same Father saith, that Laymen might doe it. Wherupon the Church of England, how­soeuer it alloweth not women or Lay­men to baptize, yet the last being once done, when necessity so requireth, it doth not beleeue it to be void, or to haue no account mad [...] of it [...] In the meane while, what a wicked and vngracious [Page 34] companion is this same Pseudo Casaubon of ours, so impudently to bespot the in­tegrity of the ancient Church, with the foule imitation of the Montanists, Mar­cionists, Cataphrigians, and such other rabble of Heretikes, who permitted their women, and [...]he [...] their whores too, to doe any thing whatsoeuer?

Pag. 30. Then in his Eighth Chapter, as if hee had all this while thought himselfe too modest, he begins with open face, as they say, and a tongue past all shame to flie vpon the venerable face of Antiquity. And first of all, see how brauely he giues the onset. Wherefore when errors came in and preuailed euen in the Apostles times, Let no man hereafter thinke it strange, that the A­postles Successors frō time to time adulterated the true vse, and rites of the holy Sacraments. As if it were all one, that there were some Heretikes in the Apostles times, and that the Apostles Successors were Heretikes themselues. No body will deny but that there haue beene Heresies from the be­ginning of the Church, or at least haue [Page 35] sprung vp not long after: But if the heads of the Church, immediatly succee­ding the Apostles were tainted, what hope is there, that the rest of the body, specially in after ages may bee sound? Wherefore that which hee repeates by Pag. 32. and by againe, w [...] will not care to grant him, that there were from the beginning of the Church many and infinite cor­ruptions crept in [...] but, by his leaue, none of them were receiued by the Church, or approoued by the godly Bishops, and sound members of the same. It is the open profession of the Church of Eng­land, that shee doth wholly assent, and firmely adhere to the doctrine of the first foure hundred yeeres, and more. That which the holy Fathers of those times deliuered, and taught with com­mon consent, shee willingly imbracet [...] That which they did not teach, shee forbids to be now taught vnto the peo­ple, as necessary for them to beleeue; which is apparant by that goldē Canon ofhers (as Casaubon was wont to call it) [Page 36] made in a Synode Anno 1571. and set forth together with the Articles of Reli­gion, and confirmed by subscription of all: whereby all Preachers and Pastours In the Chap­ter of Prea­chers. are bound, That they should neuer teach any thing, as matter of Faith religiously to be ob­serued, but that which is agreeable to the do­ctrine of the Olde and New Testament, and is collected out of the same doctrine by the An­cient Fathers, and Catholike Bishops of the Church.

But a Gods name, what are these so great corruptions of the Primitiue Church, which this same swinger of An­tiquitie hath made such a stirre withall? Pag. 31. Next and immediatly (so hee sayes) after the Apostles times there was a contention a­bout a certaine Compromission of dayes, when this holy Sacrament was to be celebrated, and then they began to make Holy-dayes, and ap­point dayes of fasting, &c. That there were any dayes appointed for the cele­bration of the Eucharist in the Primi­tiue Church, or that there arose any con­tention among the Bishops about it, I [Page 37] thinke is this idle mans fancie onely, and that no sufficient testimonie can be brought to prooue it. For the innocen­cie and puritie of these first ages was such, that as the ancient Fathers and o­ther writers doe witnesse, not onely any day, but euery day was appropriated to this Sacred Celebration; the Christians then for the most part neuer missing a day, but they did communicate. A long while after, when deuotion began to waxe cold, there grew a necessitie of ma­king Lawes, to meet with the peoples contempt of so great a blessing. Then were times appointed, chiefly to tie those that were so negligent and auerse of themselues. But this dull Asse, liuing perhaps among such as thought it reli­gion enough to communicate once a yeere, whatsoeuer he had read about the Feast of Easter, which was a long time variously obserued, hee applied most fondly vnto the time of receiuing the Lords Supper, as if that had beene the onely appointed day for the celebration [Page 38] of that Sacrament. But (so hee goeth on) the Apostles left us nothing in writing about Fasting, and Feast dayes. But so would Casaubon neuer haue written in a matter not meerely belonging to Faith, who hath often admired and approoued of that Rule which S. Augustine giueth vs. S. Aug. de bapt. contra Donat. l. 4. cap. 24. Quod universa tenet Ecclesia, nec Concilijs institutum, sed semper retentum est, non nisi Apostolicâ authoritate traditum rectissimè creditur. That which the uniuersall Church holdeth, which is not defined by Councels, but hath beene alwayes retained and used, we doe rightly beleeue to be a Tradition of Apostoli­call authoritie. And for the obseruation of the Hebdomadasancta, that Great and Holy weeke before Easter, hee freely professeth his mind in his Exercitations. Exerc. pag. [...]71. Ego sanctissimam illam consuetudinem iam inde ab Apostolorum temporibus initia habu­isse, aut non multò post facilè crediderim. I doe easily beleeue, that either in the Apostles times, or not long after, this most holy Cu­stome had its beginning.

In the same Chapter, hee tells vs that [Page 39] Pope Alexander the first of that name, who was the fifth from S. Peter, (as Eusebius writes in his Ecclesiasticall Hi­story, lib. 4. c. 1.) and one that was crow­ned with Martyrdom, as other Authors testifie, that this Alexander going about Pag. 33. to reforme the Gospel of Christ, was the first that inuented the mingling of wa­ter and wine in the Eucharist. Concer­ning which custome, what the practise of the ancient Church was, and what S. Cyprian, and S. Augustine say of it, they that know any Antiquitie cannot be ig­norant.

Againe hee tells vs that from this Cu­stome their Abuse sprung vp, who steeped Pag. 35. the bread of the holy Supper in the blood of young infants, and so celebrated the Sacra­ment. What a most detestable wicked­nes of a man is this, to ioyne the mon­strous impietie of lewd miscreants, (that went for Christians indeede among the vnskilfull multitude, but were nothing lesse) & the vniuersall practise of Christs Church together! and to ascribe the [Page 40] wickednesse of heretickes, to innocent and harmelesse men! So the Pagans of olde, what villanie soeuer any base fel­low, that was but thought to be a Chri­stian, had done, they were wont to lay it vpon the true Christians themselues, as the Writers of those elder ages haue so often complained. But so true is it, that this wicked bloodshed of infants sprang from the Custome of the Churches min­gling water with wine, whereof hee makes Alexander to haue beene the first Inuenter, as that many of better autho­ritie then hee, fetch the beginning of it from Simon Magus, who was a whole hundred yeeres elder then Alexander. And it was this Alexander also, whom he makes to be the Reuiuer of Iewish Cere­monies in the Church, and the first In­uenter of unleauened bread to be vsed in the Eucharist. A wonder the man should be no more afraid of the Allo­brogicall Consistory, the Tribunall seat at Geneua, where the same bread, accor­ding as the olde custome was, is vsed at this day.

[Page 41] In his ninth Chapter, to mak [...] [...] way for that which was to follow, like a wise fore-caster, hee begins to treat of the Religion and Rites of the ancient Romane people: which Argument hee handleth iust like himselfe, hauing no more knowledge in Antiquitie, then what he could get from B [...]ond [...] and A­lexander, and such other late Writers, whom he cites euery where for antiqui­tie, as witnesses beyond all excep [...]on: yet for this hee is to bee commended, though for nothing else, that he doeth so ingenuously acknowledge his good Be­nefactors. But how well this kinde of writing agrees with Casaubon, to depend wholly vpon new Writers, and neglect the olde, let them say, that are fit iudges in these matters.

But it made altogether for his pur­pose, to explicate the Paynim Rites and Ceremonies of the Romans, frō whence hee vndertaketh to deduce the whole Masse, and to conuince it of Paganisme. For his vndertaking, let honest and moderate [Page 42] men iudge how laudable it is. I know hee is not the first, or at least the onely man that hath attempted it; there haue beene those that would needes fetch the whole Religion of the Papists, both in Faith and Ceremonies, from Turks & Pagans. But sure I am, that any such thought was very odious to Casau­bon, who was neither so inept to beleeue any such thing himselfe, nor so malig­nant to perswade other men to it. Which I speake not, as if I meant to excuse the many and detestable superstitions of Po­pery: no such matter. But it is one thing, faithfully to reduce errors and corrupti­ons vnto their prime beginnings, which many excellent men haue with great fe­licitie vndertaken; and another, shame­fully to detort, and bitterly to exagge­rate all things, for the bringing of them into hatred; which the Author of this Booke hath most impudently done, a­boue all others that euer belaboured themselues in this kind. And seeing the Church of England hath retained many [Page 43] things in her publike Liturgie, that were before in the Romane Missall, the one cannot altogether be accused of Paga­nisme, without the opprobrious iniury of the other.

But wee said euen now, and it is too manifest, that this Pamphlet is in most things repugnant to the Church of En­gland. We will briefly point at some of them.

In the eighth Chapter, The keeping of Lent is reckoned vp among those ordi­nances that be contrary to Christs precept. Pag. 41. Temples that beare the names of Saints, are scorned, and taunted at, as if they were built to the honour of men, and not to the worship of God. Pag. 61. Praying towards the East, and the situation of Churches that way, are condemned for inuentions of su­perstitious heretickes. Pag. [...]1. The Titles of Fa­ther, and Reuerend Father, which we vse to giue vnto Ecclesiasticall persons, are traduced, as being deriued from the custom of the Gentiles. Pag. 41. Confirmation of children is ho [...]ted at, as the fond deuice of idle men [Page 44] that had nothing el [...]e to doe. Pag. 46. Through the Popes sides all distinction of Order in the Church is pulled apieces; and a paritie of E [...]a [...]gelicall Ministers set vp, and main­tained as Ius Diuinum. Pag. 59. The vse of a Surplice in performance of Diuine Ser­uice, hee deriueth from the idolatrous E­gyptians: and Pag. 73. againe, those that brought it first into the Church, hee sayth plainely were men inspired with the spirit of Numa Pompilius, whom hee is eue [...] and anon calling the Magician [...] Pag. 40. All the Furni­ture and Ornaments of the Church, as ves­sels of siluer, Hangings and Tapisteries are condemned and scorned. Pag. 64. The vse of Musicke, as well uocall, as instrumentall in the time of Diuine Seruice [...] hee doeth most reprochfully raile at; & affirmes, that Numa the Magician, and not the Bishops of Rome, was the first bringer of it into Churches. Pag. 68. Dispensations for pl [...] ­ralities of Benefices are but an old renew­ed custome of the Romane Idolaters with him, and no Constitution of Christians.

And these, with such other like monstrous [Page 45] absurdities, he is not onely so im­pudent to affirme, but he will needs be­tray and shew such great ignorance al [...]o to confirme them with reasons; that a man cannot tell, at what he should won­der most, his ignorance, or his impu­dence. As for example, first Pag. 67. bringing that which wee alledged last of all con­cerning Dispensations, and auouching them to haue come from the Romans, he saith, Ouer these Benefices the high Pon­tife had usurped a power to giue dispensa­tion to whom he would, for the holding of two together, as in I itus Liuius it is related of Fabius Maximus, who by a dispensation helde two Benefices, when hee was created Pontife, more then 200. before the Incarna­tion of [...]esus Christ. These things to be spoken by a Pagan after the manner of our own times, who would not marueile at? But in Liuie there is no such matter. Hee speakes not one word of a Dispensa­tion. That Fab. Maximus of whom Liuie here writes, was neuer any Pontife nei­ther, but died when he was young. Indeed [Page 46] his Father, Q. Fab. the elder was said to haue had two Priesthoods, as they call'd them, of two kinds nothing like one another [...] but not two places, or two preferments in the same kinde of Priesthood. Forsooth, the same man was Augur and Pontife too. And not to tell you what Plutarch saith, that the name Augur was no title of Magistracie or dignity, but of Art and knowledge one­ly, Liui's words are; Eodem anno Quin. Fabius moritur, &c. Augur in eius locum inauguratus est Quin. Fabius Max filius; in eiusdem locum P [...]ntifex [...] (nam duo Sa­cerdotia habuit,) Ser. Sulpitius Galba: that is, Quin. Fab. died the same yeere, &c. Into his roome of Augurship, was Q. Fab. Max. his sonne consecrated, and Ser. Sulp. Galba (for he had two diuers Priesthoods) into his place of Pontife.

But this is nothing to the rest of his absurdities: whereof that wee may giue some taste, let vs see a little how he deri­ueth the Masse from Numa Pompilius.

Pag. 48. 49. For the name of the Masse, hee likes [Page 47] not of them, that deriue it from Dani­el's [...] Maozim, and thinkes it may be much better deduced from the He­brue Messa, which word, hee saith, wee haue in 4. King. cap. 11. signifying Concul­cation. Indeed in the 11. Chap. uer. 6. wee haue [...] Massah, which the Septuagint tooke for a proper name, and interpre­ted [...], which the French Translation also following, hath retained the word Mese in the Text; and yet noted the di­uerse interpretation of Irruption and ua­station in the Margin: from whence this Asse tooke his Conculcation. But if the word be taken in that sence of Irruption or Conculcation, as hee speakes, the Root will not be [...] Masah, but [...] Nasah: neither will the word Massah signifie ir­ruption, but, from irruption, the praepositi­on being ioyned with the Noune, as the manner of the Hebrues is.

With the like frenzie doth he deriue vs Missel from Misseol [...], which doth not signifie Hell, but, out of Hell.

Yet these E [...]ymologies of the Masse, [Page 48] otherwise good enough, he thinkes not therefore fit to be admitted, because the Author of the Masse, Numa Pompilius, vnderstood no Hebrew at all: and there­upon he concludeth, that it is a Latine word made by Numa himselfe, who first of all, forsooth, appointed, those words, Pag. 49. & 72. Ite Missa est, to bee proclaimed vnto the people, when their Sacrifices were at an end. Reader, canst thou imagine, that this fellow had either any shame or con­science in him to write such things as these? Hee should haue produced one of the Ancient Heathen Authors, at least, that had euer vsed the word Missa for a Substantiue, a name vsuall in their Sacrifices.

And with as little shame is that writ­ten of him, when to prooue that the Turkes doe so much esteem of the Masse, hee deduceth the Arabicke wordes of Mecca, which is a Townes name, and Mesulmanos, which is, Peacemakers, or faithfull and Orthodoxe, and Mesgid, which is as much to say as the place of adoration, [Page 49] that is, a Temple, being all corruptly cal­led Messa, Meselman, and Messites, all these from the word Masse.

Such kinde of stuffe it is that he saith, the old Christians borrowed their Title of Pop [...] from the Heathen Idolaters, who were wont to call Iupiter their Pope Iupiter. A maruell S. Cyprian and S. Au­gustine were not Idoles with him too, whom by S. Ierome that so stiled the lat­ter, and by the Clergie of Rom [...] that so called the first, we find intituled, most ho­ly Fathers and Popes.

In his next page hee learnes vs from whence the name of Curat [...] and Curio came, forsooth, [...] from cutting the haire, which wee euer thought yet had come from Curiae, (certaine distributions of the people, answerable to our Wards) which had euery one their seuerall Curi­ones or Curates, to performe their religi­ous paynim solemnities. In the same place hee dreames how the Priests were called [...] [...] from the round shauing or crowning of their heads, whom Dionysius [Page 50] Halicar. interprets to be the Flamines, and saith they were so called from the fashi­on of their Bonnets, or the Crownes them­selues that they vsed to weare.

ibid. With the like liberty of lying hee af­firmes, that the Romans were wont to call that white garment, which they v­sed in their Pagan solemnities an Albe; and this most absurd and shamefull fan­cie of his owne he ascribes to that lear­ned Author Alexander ab Alexandro, in whose worke there is no such matter to bee found. And among other Rituall Pag. 52. writers, he brings vs in Philo the Iew to speake of this Albe of the Papists. For after hee hath done with the mysticall interpretations, that Titleman, and Gabr. Biel giue of it, he addeth, That Philo in his booke of Dreames, subtilly deuiseth, how the Albe signifies the most resplendent light of the Deity, which hee calls Ens. Philo allego­rizing, as his vse is, vpon those words of Genesis, Chap. 31. uer. 12. [...]. Lift up [Page 51] thine eyes, and behold the hee Goates, and the Rammes leaping vpon the shee-goats, and the Ewes, white, and parti-coloured, and spread here and there with ash-coloured spots, (as the Septuagint translated it;) after he had al­ready treated of the two kindes, parti­coloured, and ash-coloured, hee addeth, [...] [...] that is, as the interpreter renders it, Wee will now explaine the third and most perfect colour that is called Alba, or white; which hee doth allegorically expound of the Linnen Garment, that was made of the purest fine threed, and vsed to be put vp­on the High-Priest. Now because all this seemed to agree somewhat with the Papists Albe, the man, being not well in his wits, tooke those words of the Inter­preter, Quae Alba nominatur; which is cal­led the white colour, as if Philo had spoken it of the Priests garment. But that you might not maruell how Philo should come to talke of a Popish vestment, you shall presently heare, how hee was ac­quainted with the Missalia [...]s themselues. [Page 52] For hauing reckoned vs vp most of the vestments which the Papists vse in their solemne performance of diuine Rites, Pag. 54. To these (saies he) Philo the Iew addes a Mi­tre to declare the Missalians Royall Diadem. In the place which is cited, Philo treateth of the High Priests Mytre among the Iewes: so that with this fellow the Priests of the Iewes & the Missalists are all one: and then, inasmuch as he doth el [...] where euer confound the Missalians & the Pa­gan Priests together, & brings them both from the same origen, it must necessarily follow according to him, that there is no difference betweene the Priests of Pa­gans, and the Priests of the Iewes whom God himselfe ordained.

Pag. 59. Labarum, the name of a Banner, made famous by Constantine, but before Christ's time (as farre as wee can finde by the bookes of ancient Authors yet extant) neuer heard of, hee tells vs, was knowne by that name to the old Romans, yea, and as it were older then Rome it selfe, he fetcheth it from Antenor of Troy.

[Page 53] I am ashamed of these follies, where­of the Author himselfe is not ashamed: who though hee were some vnlearned Sot, which is as cleere as the light at noone day, yet hee could neuer haue growne to that height of insolent mad­nes, but that he came so minded to write, as if hee intended not to seeke out the Trueth, but to oppresse his Aduersaries with criminatio [...]s, true or false, no mat­ter what. For who was euer so mad to say, that Numa Pompilius celebrated Masse 700. yeeres before Christ was borne? and yet this Scribler affirmes it almost in euery page. And therefore when hee speakes of the Priests which Numa constituted, hee calls them Masse-Priests; Pag. 55. and in his 13. Chap. alleadging the place of Blondus, concerning the ma­ner of the Pagan Rites in their Sacrifi­ces, that which Blondus speakes of the Gentiles, Dijs superis sacra facturi, about to sacrifice vnto the Gods, this man turnes, who were about to say Masse.

In his 15. Chapter he saith, that Priests Pag. 62. [Page 54] learnd to say their Con [...]iteor before Mass [...] of Numa the Magician; for that it was the custome of the heathen Idolaters also, to looke heauily, and confesse themselues before their offering of Sacrifice. In the custome of Confessing, which otherwise no body, that is in his right minde, can find fault withall, if the Papists haue admitted any thing worthy of blame, I am not hee that will excuse it. But if that bee their fault onely, that the Heathens vsed some such matter, what shall be free from reprehen­sion, euen in the most pure and vncor­rupt Religion? For it is well knowne also, that the Priests vnder the old Lawe did first offer Sacrifice for their owne sinnes; which I thinke no body will say the Israelites tooke from the heathen Idolaters. And let but a man now denie this fellow, that whatsoeuer matters in Religion are common to vs with the Gentiles, bee in all haste to be cast away, the whole frame of his booke will pre­sently fall asunder: for this is the onely foundation whereon so many vnsauory [Page 55] disputes, so many foolish, vniust, and false accusations doe rest. What the minde of the Fathers in this behalfe was, may be showne by many of their owne testi­monies. Quoniam idol [...] colebamus, nun [...] Deum colere non debemus, ne [...]imili eum ui­deamur cum Idolis honor [...] uenerari? Be­cause we once worshipped Idoles, shall wee not now worship God, lest we should seeme to giue him the same honor that Idols bad? saith S. Ie­rome, crying out against Vigilantius. And S. Augustine against Faustus the Maniche; Sicut, non ideò contemnenda uel detestan­da uirginitas Sanctimonialium, quia & ue­stales uirgines fuerunt, &c. As we are not (saith hee) to despise or detest the virginity of holy Nunnes because there haue beene ue­stall uirgins also, &c. To that purpose Tertullian de praescr. aduers. haeret. doth a­bundantly demonstrate, that the Gen­tiles had some things of neere affinitie with the Ceremonies that wee vse in the chiefe mysteries of our Religion. And so farre were the old Christians from refusing all the Rites and customes of [Page 56] the heathen, that as far as pietie would suffer them, they did prudently conde­scend and apply themselues thereunto, the more easily to winne them in mat­ters of greater moment; as by learned men it hath beene obserued, and may be by many examples made good. But this mans owne words are sufficient to con­found him, and to conuince him also of manifest impietie.

For he that elsewhere so bit [...]rly con­demneth whatsoeuer seemes among the Papists to haue any agreement with the customes of the heathen, and for no o­ther reason, but because they be answe­rable one to the other; yet hee tells vs [...]g. 25, 25. more then once, that Christ himselfe did choose these Symbols to institute the Sacra­ments of the new Testament withall, which as well the Iewes as the Gentiles were accu­stomed to use in their Sacrifices and Cere­monious worship, that so all nations might the more facily admit of these Rites, which were already familiar unto them. As for the Gentiles, whether Christ had any reference [Page 57] to their Ceremonies, or no, I will not rashly say: but that hee did so ac­commodate himselfe to the Iewes, as to institute nothing in Rites and Ceremo­nies, which was not common and vsuall with them before, many learned men haue made it good by most certaine Te­stimonies of the Talmud, and other wri­tings of the Iewes. They therefore that without breach of pietie haue followed Christs example in things indifferent, are they to bee esteemed as impious and profane? or are not they much rather to be so accounted, who the more freely to deride their Aduersaries, spare not Gods owne sacred word, nor abstaine from horrible blasphemies? wherein how no­torious this Hell-bound hath beene, it will be enough to declare by this one ex­ample.

Psal. 43. v. 4. Dauid breakes forth with ioy into these wordes [...] which the Septuagint render after this manner, [...] and the vulgar Latine following them, [Page 58] hath translated, Introibo ad altare Dei, ad Deum qui laetificat iuuentutem meam. I will goe unto the Altar of God, euen unto the God that is the ioy of my youth. Vpon which speech of the Prophet, thus doeth this Pag. 63. wicked Idiot make his descant. Numa the Magician helde opinion, that there was great sanctitie in these wheelings, wreathings and turnings about of the Sacrificer; which, as may be coniectured, was an occasion of ad­ding this pleasant Song to the Missall Intro­duction, I will goe vp (sayth hee) to the Altar of God, which reioyceth my youth. Hath hee not iust cause to reioyc [...], when h [...] sees the cloth laid, the table set, the banquet prepared, the musicke of Organs and other Instruments to sound, odours and In­censes, the Chalice full of wine, the Collation prepared, and chinke offertories ready to fill his purse? Are not all these meanes to exhi­lerate the Sacrificers youth, when he goes up to the Altar to say Masse, to daunce and turne about, in forme to him prescribed by the Ma­gician Numa Pompilius? A godly Father long since complaining of a certaine Citie, [Page 59] said, [...]. Which Greg. Naz. orat. 3. de pace. sets her selfe to iest and play with things Di­uine, as well as with any other common mat­ter; and rather will shee laugh at such things as be good and honest, then passe ouer without laughter such things as be ridiculous. This is the fault of many now adayes, that make themselues sport with iesting vpon sa­cred Actions, and affect the name of Wittie men in things that are so serious.

I should here haue made an end, but that I cannot with a good conscience si­lently passe ouer that most heinous iniu­rie which is done heere to the holy Em­perours, and ancient Bishops of Rome. For thus this furious man writes. The Pag. 40. 41. Bishops of Rome, who termed themselues Christians, for three or foure hundred yeeres after the Incarnation of Christ, did nothing else, but labour to corrupt the use of the holy Sacraments, to restore the Iewish Ceremonies, and the Idolatries of the ancient heathen Romanes. And of S. Gregory hee Pag. 73. 74. sayth expresly, that, being instructed in Pythagoricall [Page 60] Magicke, and hauing studied the Lawes of King Tull. Hostilius, successour to Numa, hee enriched the Masse with new Magicall additions. With what counte­nance, may it bee thought, with what eyes will those blessed soules (if there be any sense in them) looke downe from heauen vpon this base mushrum, that calls their faith in question, which ma­ny of them, as glori [...]us martyrs, haue sealed with their blood, and accuseth them of the same impietie, which their most cruell persecutors professed?

But for Casaubon, how much hee is a­bused, to haue such abominable dottrel­lismes of a franticke fellow put vpon him, though I hope there bee fewe but conceiue it, yet it will not be amisse for their behoofe that know it not, to let it be seene in his owne wordes. Thus therefore he writes in his Exercitations: Pag. 434. Nemo peritus rerum Ecclesiae ignorat operâ Romanorum Ponti [...]icum per multa saecul [...] Deum esse usum in conseruandâ sartâ tectâ rectae fidei doctrinâ, &c. No man that is [Page 61] seene in Church story can be ignorant, how that many ages together God used the helpe of the Rom [...]ne Bishops in preseruing whole and sound the doctrine of true Religion, &c. In the same place. Uentum est ad Leo­nem Magnum, de quo Pontifice quàm ho­nori [...]icè sentiamus, ipsi iam ostendimus: Non enim ignoramus, quantus hic fuerit syncerae fidei defensor, [...] pro rectâ fide quantos la­bores sustinuerit, quàm [...]cclesiae Dei utiles, &c. Wee are come to Leo the Great; of which Pope how honourably wee co [...]ceiu [...], we shewed euen now; for I am not ignorant, how great a defender hee was of the right faith, and how many labours he underwent for the true Religion, how profitable to the Church of God, &c. And in another place of S. Gregorie. Fuit Gregorius, non so­lùm cognomine, sed rebus ipsis Magnus & Sanctus, ac uerè sui saeculi propè iam fer­rei, Phoenix. Nos quidem ita censemus, & cur ita censeamus, causas parati sumus red­dere, &c. Gregory was not onely Great in name, but a Saint, and Great indeed, the true Phoenix of his almost yron-growen age. Truely [Page 62] so wee thinke, and why wee thinke so, wee are ready to giue account, &c. Without doubt many more passages might bee brought to the same purpose, if any man will take the paines to turne his bookes. But I hope, these which did now ac­curre, will bee enough to satisfie the Reader.

Now for the Emperours of Rom [...], wee are to say a little of them; because this Author do [...]th so confidently auerre them to haue euer beene all most deadly enemies unto Christian Religion, and most stiffe persisters in the superstitions of their Ancestors. For so in his tenth Chapter hee doeth expressely, and in so many words affirme, that for the space of Pag. 43. 400. yeeres, the Romane Church of Empe­rours and Senators, were alwayes Opposites and Enemies unto the Law of Iesus Christ. But in the next page, that, for the space of 700. yeeres, or thereabouts, after the In­carnation of Christ, there was no Emperour, King nor Prince at Rome, that would em­brac [...] the Law of Iesus Christ. Perhaps [Page 63] (saith hee) there may be some that will ob­ [...]ect against us one Philip, which some vaunt was conuerted to holy Baptisme, whose de­praued manners gaue occasion to the most an­cient Historiographers to esteem [...] him un­worthy of the name of a Christian. Where­unto they adde Constantine the Great, that assembled the Councell of Nice, but his Resi­dence was in Gre [...]ce, called the Empire of the East, and yet hee would neuer embrace the Character of Baptisme, to be regenerated by the blood of Christ, till he was threescore and fiue yeeres olde, when hee was baptized by an Arrian Bishop of Nicomedia, named Euse­bius, when the same Constantine was at the point of death. Wherefore Syluester Bi­shop of Rome need not vaunt of conuerting the Emperour to the Faith.

Good God! what a prodigious liber­tie of lying is here? What fountaines of waters, what seas shall be able to wash away the blacke poison of this most im­pure Calumniator? What, was not Con­stantine therefore, nor Iouinian, nor Va­lentinian, Gratian, not hee, whom so many [Page 64] actions, so many glorious praises of the Christians made famous, Theodosius the Great, was not Hee a Christian? But whereas hee denieth Constantine to haue beene a Christian, because hee deferred his baptisme, it is well knowen that the most godly Emperour did that after the manner of his time then in vse. For we finde that many in those ages, who had sincerely taken vpon them the name of Christ, deferred and put off their bap­tisme a long while; who beleeuing all their former sinnes to be washed away in this sacred Lauer, did suppose that time to be the fittest for it, (as Eusebius writes in the life of Constantine lib. 4. c. 61.) when their life drew neerest to an end; that by this meanes they might goe out of the world with a cleane and pure conscience: against which custome not­withstanding, as being too full of dan­ger and hazard, the F [...]thers both Greeke and Latine that then flourished, did mainely oppose themselues. But there was a peculiar reason for Constantine besides; [Page 65] because (as he professeth himselfe in Euseb.) if God had giuen him a longer life, his desire and purpose was to haue beene baptized in Iordan, which Christ himselfe had sanctified with his owne baptisme.

And if he must therefore be thought to be auerse from Christianitie, because he was baptized so late, what shall wee say of Valentinian, who hauing deferd his baptisme farre longer, was ouertaken by suddaine death? whom neuerthe­lesse S. Ambrose vndoubtedly beleeued to haue beene receiued into heauen when he was dead, much lesse made a­ny question of his liuing or dying a Christian. Let vs heare S. Ambrose him­selfe, S. Ambros. de obitu Va­lent. how he comforts the Sisters of this deceased Emperour. Sed audio vos do­lere, quod non acceperit Sacramentum Bap­tismatis. Dicite mihi, quid aliud in nobis est, nisi uoluntas? nisi petitio? Atqui etiam dudùm hoc uotum habuit, ut cum in Italiam uenisset, initiaretur, & proximè baptizari se à me velle significauit; & ideò prae caeteris causis me accersendū pu [...]auit. Non habet ergò [Page 66] gratiam, quam desiderauit? non habet, quam poposcit? Certe quia poposcit, accepit. But I heare how it grieueth you, that [...]e receiued not the Sacrament of Baptisme. Tell mee, what haue we in us else, but our will? what, but our desire? But this desire he had euen a long while since; that after his comming into Ita­ly he might be initiated; and hee signified his mind, that he would presently vpon it be bap­tized by me; For which cause more then any other, hee thought good to haue me sent for. Hath he not therefore that grace which hee desired? not that which he [...]o earnestly pray­ed for? Certainly because hee did desire it, he did receiue it. And a little after: Qui habuit spiritum tuum, quomodo non accepit gratiam tuam? Aut [...]i quia solenniter non su [...]t celebrata mysteria, hoc mouet; ergo ne­que Martyres, si Catechumeni fuerint, coro­nentur. Non enim coronatur, si non initiatur. Quod si suo abluuntu [...] sanguine, & hunc sua pietas abluit & uoluntas. He that had thy Spirit, how had hee not thy grace also? Or if that be a hinderance, because the Sacrament was not solemnly celebrated, why, then th [...] [Page 67] Martyrs themselues if they were still in the number of the [...]at [...] humeni, (Christians instructed, but n [...] yet baptized) shall receiue no crowne of their Martyrdome [...] for hee that is not initiated, is not r [...]iu [...]d neither. But if their owne blood did baptize them, then did his pietie and desire also baptize him.

Now that Constantine was baptized by an Arrian Bishop, howsoeuer this opinion be fauoured by S. Ierome, yet the contrary is maintained by others. The Emperours that succeeded next after Theodosius the Great, whether they were Romane, or Barbarous, though they were many of them infected with the Arrian heresie, yet Christians they were all, and, which is most to the pur­pose, they were euery one farre from a­ny suspicion of Paganisme.

For Symmachus his Relation (which this frantike Zelote falsly calle [...]h his Answere, because hee would not bee brought to cōfesse, that euen the chiefest men in au­thoritie and office were faine to beg for their Religion) the matter must bee a [Page 68] little more fully thought on, inasmuch as he makes it against strengthening of his cause, to prooue that the Senate and Senators of Rome (for so hee writes) could not any of them bee euer brought to im­brace the faith of Christ. The case was this. Symmachus was sent Ambassadour by the Heathens to Ualentinian, to get them their Altar of Uictory restored, &c. but could not obtaine it. Therefore the Em­perour was a Christian at least. But who were they that desired this? Absit (saith Idem lib. 1. cont. Relation [...]m Symmachi. S. Ambrose, in his first booke against the Relation of Symmachus) ut hoc Senatus pe­tijsse dicatur; pauci Gentiles communi utun­tur nomine. Nam & ante biennium ferme, c [...]m hoc petere tentarent, misit ad me S. Damasus Romanae Ecclesiae Sacerdos, iudicio Dei electus, Libellum, quem Christiani Se­natores dederunt, & quidem innumeri, expo­stulantes nihil se tale mandâsse, non congrue­re Gentilium huiusmodi petitionibus vos praebere consensum. Questi etiam publicè, pri­uatim [...] se non conuentur [...]s ad Curiam, si tale aliquid d [...]rn [...]r [...]tur. Dignum est temporibu [...] [Page 69] vestris, hoc est, Christianis temporibus, ut dignitas Christianis Senatoribus abro­getur, quò Gentilibus Senatoribus propha­nae deferatur voluntatis effectus? Hunc li­bellum ego fratri Clementiae vestrae direxi. Vnde c [...]nstitit non Senatum aliquid de super­stitionis impensis mandasse Legatis, &c. God defend that the Senate should be said to haue desir [...]d it; a few heathen men usurp [...] the name of all the rest. For well nigh two yeeres since, when they attempted it, S. Damasus, the Bishop of Rome, elect of God, sent mee a booke, that the Christian Senators, a ve­ry great number of them, had giuen vp [...] expo­stulating the matter, how that they had giuen no such thing in charge, and that it was not meete You should giue way to any such p [...]titi­on of the Heathen. And further they com­plain'd both in publike and priuate, that they would not come at the Senate-hous [...], if any such thing were granted, or decreed. Is it fit for Your times, that is, for Christian times, to haue the Christian Senators put by their honour, that the profane Heathen Senators may haue their will? This Booke I directed to [Page 70] Your Brother, by which it appeareth that the Senate gaue no order to those Ambassa­dours for the vpholding of Superstitious Pa­ganism [...]. Let the Reader now iudge, whome wee should beleeue of the two, this most holy Prelate, that was an eye­witnesse of those things in his owne time; or this impudent knaue, that hath no knowledge at all in Ecclesiasticall Antiquitie.

It remaines now last of all, that as we promised at first, wee should say a little of that booke, which my Father under­tooke in the like Argument with this. Wee will dispatch it in his owne words. Casa [...]bon to the Reader, in his Exercit. v [...]on Baronius. Quaedam breuiter attigi, quaedam paulò ube­riùs tractaui; vt doctrinam de sacro sanctâ Eucharistiâ, de quâ dum uestigi [...] Baronij premo, Tres scripsi Disputationes; unam de uarijs huius Sacramenti apud ueteres Ap­pellationibus; alteram de Transubstantia­ [...]ione; tertiam de gener [...] Sacrificij Christia­norum; conatus primorum saeculorum doctri­nam, non minus candide & [...], quam accu­rate exponere. That is, I haue touched some [Page 71] things briefly, and other things I haue han­dled more at large, as the doctrine of the Ho­ly Eucharist; whereof, treading in Baronius his owne steppes, I haue wrote Three Treati­ses; One, of the various appellations of this Sacrament, among the Ancient. Another of Transubstantiation. A third, concerning the nature & kind of the Christians Sacrifice. And I haue done my indeuour in them to set forth the doctrine of th primitiue times, no lesse accurately then candid [...]ly, and without guile or fraud. The first of these you haue in his Exercitations already published. Of the rest thus hee writes himselfe. At­que Exercit. Pag. 587. haec de Appellationibus huius diuini Sa­cramenti impraesentiarum satis. Restabat vt ad secundam partem Baronianae digressi­onis de Eucharistia, quae est de Transub­stantiatione, accederemus; & quae fuit ue­teris Ecclesiae [...]ides super eo articulo accura­te expenderemus. Sed cum nostra ad eam partem responsio, itemque ad tertiam de sa­crificio Christianae Ecclesiae in molem multò maiorem quam initio putaremus excreuerit: satius fore uisum est, ut illae disputationes [Page 72] separatim ederentur, neque huius operis edi­tionem morarentur. And this shall su [...]ice for the present concerning the Appellations of this Holy Sacrament. It remained, that wee should come to the second part of Baronius his digression about the Eucharist, which is of Transubstantiation; and that wee should dili­gently examine what the faith of the Ancient Church was concerning that Article. But forasmuch as our answere both to that, and to the Third part about the Sacrifice of the Church, groweth to a far greater bignesse, then wee thought it would haue done at first [...] I thought good to let those Tractats rather bee published by themselues, then that they should let, or stay the Edition of this worke. But what hee here promiseth being pre­uented by an vntimely death, he neuer published. And whether he began them onely, or brought them to any perfecti­on, and left them ready for the Presse, I cannot tell, hauing neuer had any thing of them come into my hands; but sure I am, that in this Pamplet besides the ve­ry name of Casaubon, there is nothing of [Page 73] them at all. None of that candor which he vsed, none of that simplicitie, none of that accurate diligence is here to bee seene; nor any signe of that Method which hee had proposed. Besides that which my Father promised, he had ga­thered it all out of the Fathers, and other old Writers; here is no mention of Fa­thers, no testimonies produced from them, except three or foure at the most, which are brought in by the By at the latterend of the booke. That which we cited euen now from his exercitations, he wrote in the yeere of our Lord 1614. The French Edition of this Booke, out of which this English Copie was transla­ted an [...] re-printed, is pretended to ha [...]e been [...]et foorth (as I remember, for I could get the sight of it but once) in the yeere 1607, at what time Casaubon liued in Paris, beeing sent for thither by the most Christian King Henry IIII. of France, to bee Professor of Humani [...]ie. Who then desiring leaue of his Maiesty, modestly to re [...]u [...]e Baronius his Annals, [Page 74] was denied it. And at that time, that is to say, in the yeere 1607. was his Booke De Ecclesiasticâ Libertate vpon publish­ing; howsoeuer his name was suppres­sed; and yet that would doe no good, for when there was but a very little part of it printed, the Booke was called in by the Kings authority, and so Casaubon forced to breake off that which he had vndertaken to write. Was it likely there­fore that hee durst venture to set foorth such a virulent Booke as this, and one that was so vniustly written against the Papists? Or if he had ventured it, could hee haue escaped vnpunished? Where were his Aduersaries at that time, who, after his comming into England, and his first beginning to write about matters of Religion, oppo­sed themselues against him, in such number, and such bitternesse as they did? I haue a Catalogue by me of all the Books which my Father euer published, written with his owne hand, which else­where I haue set foorth to the world. [Page 75] How came it to passe, that hee should leaue out this? But what need wee any more, seeing the Imposture of these de­ceitfull men is already detected? who had cunningly printed, and prefixed the name of Isaac Casaubon before a French Booke, which was put forth without any name at all, (as in France many are, spe­cially if they be Diuinitie Books;) and so by an artificiall immutation of the A­rithmeticall figures for the yeere, put a new face vpon an old moth-eaten Pam­phlet; supposing themselues to be safe enough, if they could but any way trans­ferre their imposture vpon others. It con­cerned after ages, that at no time there should be want of such, as might both deprehend, and reuenge the fraudu­lent dealings of these wretch­lesse and wicked men.