After a sincere protesta­tion, that I as much loue and honour your person, as I hate what Catho­like beleife oblidges me to iudge errour in you; let me vse freedome, without of­fence, to tell you in all Christian Chari­tie, that of 14. obiections which you haue made out of the holy Fathers against worship and prayer to Angels and Saints, There are sixe corrupted, the words, or sentences, most important and euen decisiue of the controuersie, being absolutely left out, though they were in the verie midst of the passages cited or immediatly following, as

• 1. That of the Councell of Laodi­cea.
• 2. That of S. Augustine Conf. 10. c. 42.
• 3. That of the same Saint contra [Page 2]epist. Parmeniani.
• 4. That of Irenaeus.
• 5. That of S. Ambrose.
• 6. That of S. Bede.

Fiue either forced to speake against themselues, or els nothing at al for you: as

• 1. That of Theodoret twice.
• 2. That of Origene against Celsus.
• 3. That of Athanasius.
• 4. That of Epiphanius.

And finally three brought in for wit­nesses which speake not of the worship, or prayer to Angels or Saints at all, and therefore not to the present purpose; as

• 1. That of S. Austine.
• 2. That of Tertullian twice.
• 3. That of S Chrysostome.

Now that I may not onely say this, but make it appeare in effect, I will obserue this order, fairely to put downe your seue­rall obiections, seuerally, and in as many, and the same words without changing or omitting one syllable produced by you, and attend each of them in particular with my answers, apprehending that the most perspicuous, and satisfactorie way, to [Page 3]the readers or hearers, and least subiect to be misconstrued or misconceaued.

Of the worshipping and praying to Angels.

COSENS THat this was forbidden by S. Paul, and condem­ned by the ancient fathers of the Church is manifest, both from the testimonie of Theodoret and others, and from the Ca­non made against it in the Councell of Laodicea.

CARRE. That the worship and prayer to Angells, as it is practised in the Catholike Apostolike and Ro­mane Church (which is the thing in question) is not forbidden by S. Paul, or condemned by the ancient Fa­thers, &c. which you pretend to make good by sundrie passages of the Fa­thers here puttdowne, I hope to make as cleare, as the said Fathers owne plaine words can make it.

COS. Let no man seduce you through hu­militie and the Religion or worshiping [Page 4]of Angels. They that maintaynd the law, induced the Colossians to worship An­gels, telling them, that the law was giuen by Angells and therfore that they ought to be worshipped. And this vice continued a great while among them both in Phry­gia and Pisidia. Therfore the Councell which was gathered together at Laodicea, which is the Metropolitan Citie of Phry­gia, forbad it by a law, and commanded them, that they should not pray to An­gels. To this day are to be seene the ora­tories which they and their neighbours made, to the Angel S. Michael. And this they did (praying to them) out of humilitie, saying that the God of Heauen and earth was inuisible and incomprehen­sible, to whom they could not come; and that therfore it behoued them to procure his fauour by the Angels. And this was it which S. Paul meant when he said, Let no man seduce you through humilitie, and the worshipping of Angels.

CAR. We answere that that passage of S. Paul is to be vnderstood of such as are so seduced as that they giue away to creatures, soueraigne worship [Page 5]which is due to God alone. And in this sense we with S. Paul crye out Let no man seduce you, &c. And that this is not said gratis, but is indeed the true sense of S. Paul, appeares first out of S. Chrysostome vpon the same place saying. There are some who say that we are to be brought to God by Angels and not by Christ. 2. by the cōtext or sequell of words in the verie next verse, and not holding the head, to witt Christ, but in lieu of Christ sub­stituting Angels, as saith the said Theodoret and S. Anselme. 3. by the Councell of Laodicea it selfe, to which wee haue Theodoret wholly alluding and referring to it, and therfore is to be interpreted by it. Let vs heare then what it saith, and consequently what Theodoret would and must say.

COS. The words of the Canon made by the Councell of Laodicea about 1300. yeares since be these.

CAnon 35. That Christians ought not to forsake the Church of God and goe to the Angels, ma­keing priuate meetings for that pur­pose which are wholly forbidden: therfore if any one shall be found, to follow this secret and priuate Ido­latrie let him be accursed.

Car. Here is somewhat not rightly putt downe, some thing quite left out. Take it as followes.

That we ought not to relinquish the Church of God, and depart thence, and nominate Angels, and to make assem­blies which are knowen to be forbidden. Therfore if any shall be found, to follow this secret Idolatrie, Let him be accur­sed. Because he forsooke our Lord Iesus Christ the son of God, and abandoned himselfe to Idolatrie, or went to Idols. These words (because he forsooke our Lord Iesus Christ the son of God and [Page 7]abandoned himselfe to Idolatrie, or went to Idols) are quite left out, being yet the most important to decide the dif­ficultie betwixt vs, though imme­diatly following, and clearely deli­uering the reason, or cause of what preceeded.

Is there now any need of further answere? Doe Catholikes hold that they ought to forsake the Church of God and to depart thence to name, call, or (if you please) inuocate Angells? Doe they to that purpose, make any secret assem­blies which are publikely forbidden? Doe they finally forsaking our Lord Iesus Christ the son of God giue themselues ouer to Idolatrie, and thereby draw the cur­se vpō their shoulders, it being impo­sed for no other cause, as the Coun­cell it selse expounds it selfe, desi­gning the particular reason of the curse saying Because he forsooke our Lord, &c. why did you then deale so spareingly with your friends, as by leauing out what was most important, to leaue them with some apparent doubt quaking vnder the feare of a [Page 8]curse if they should worship or pray to a Saint, wheras the words, being produced, made most cleare, that there was indeed no cause of feare at all.

In a word that this Canon cannot be meant of the Religious worship which the Catholike Church payes to Angels and Saints, is further mani­fest both by the Canon 34. imme­diatly preceeding in the same Coun­cell where the Religious worship of a true Martir is approued in these words. A Christian ought not to forsake the Martirs of Christ, and goe to false Martirs. And also by the 51. art. fol­lowing. We ought not to celebrate the birthdayes of Martirs in Lent, but onely to make a memorie. (which we call now a cōmemoration) of them vpon satur­day and sonday. Iudge then whether it were likely that the holy Councel would with one breath, both establish and destroye the worship due to Angels or Saints, the difficultie equal­ly vrgeing against them both.

Againe the phrase of the Councell [Page 9]being nominare Angelos I would fayne know by what rule it is rather en­glished to goe to the Angells, then as the words vsually signifie by the cō ­mon consent of men, to nominate or name the Angels, which is wont to be done in coniurations and enchante­ments, &c. which sense the canon 36. immediately following seemes parti­cularly to fauour and cōfirme, as ren­dring the reason of the precedent ca­non: because (saith it) the ministers of the Altar or Clarkes, ought not to be Magicians or enchanters, or to make cer­taine scrolls (Phylacteria) wherin things are written, &c. in such were the Pharisies accustomed to write the Commandements, and to weare them about their heads or armes in a superstitious manner as appeares by Hierome Oleaster vpon Deut. c 6.

Nor doth this passage of Theodo­ret any whit preiudice the Catholike cause, all things being well ballan­ced. First, because his sense herein is the sense of the Councell, which you see toucheth vs not. Secondly his [Page 10]words being duely considered, they figh not with a Catholike procee­ding; for he imputes onely the wor­ship of Angels as a vice to those who did it vpon this motiue, that they deliuered the law (telling them that the law was giuen by Angels, and ther­fore they ought to be worshipped) which is no Catholike ground of that wor­ship: and againe in that they said the God of heauen and earth was inuisible and in­comprehensible, to whom they could not come, and therfore they ought to procure his fauour by the Angels. As though, forsouth, Gods inuisibil­tie and incomprehensibilitie were the true reason concluding that man can­not approach him, and that therfore we were necessitated to procure ac­cesse by the Angells fauour: which is a dreame falling into no Catholike heart: For though we willingly pro­fesse that the mediation of Angels and Saints is good, holy, vsefull, and alwayes vsuall in the Church of God, yet is it not vpon a mistaken ground, that there is no other way to gett ac­cesse [Page 11]to him. We know that by the feete of heauenly Loue we are able to walke home to that inuisible and incomprehensible Deitie; which Loue is heard, though the Angels were euen silent, and is not refused entrie. So that the mediation of Angels is neither necessarie for that reason, nor indeed (for any thing I haue yet bene taught) necessarie at all, by an abso­lute necessitie obliging euery one in particular. The words of the Coun­cell of Trent being these: that it is good and profitable humbly to call vpon them, &c. and to flie to their prayers helpe and assistance, &c. not that that is the onely meanes to approach vnto God, &c.

COS. Againe; Theodorets words (vpon the 3. Coloss.) are these and to the same purpose.

FOr in as much as they willed men to worship Angels, the Apostle forbid­deth it, and commandeth the contrarie, that so all their words and workes might [Page 12]beset forth by the remembrance of Christ. And giue thankes (saith S. Paul) to God the Father by Christ not by the An­gels. Which rule the Councell of Laodicea held. and for a salue to that old sore, made alaw, that Angels should not be prayd to.

Car. This place requires no new answere. The solution of the former cleares this too. for in as much as they willed men to worship Angels, in the manner about declared, the A postle most iustly orbiddeth it, and so doth the Councell of Laodicea af­ter him, and all Catholikes say A­men. Whether according to the said Councell,Vbisupra, because they forsooke our Lord Iesus Christ the son of God, and abando­ned themselues to I dolatrie. Or accor­ding to S. Paul in the same place, be­cause they held not the Head, which is Christ, Non tenens caput. Or following S. Chrysostome for that the Colos­sians which made their approaches to God by the Angels,Vpon the firstch to the Coless Vpon he 2 th to the Co loss. had many Iudai­call, Grecian or Ethnicall obseruations. Or following Theophylact, because by [Page 13]the apparances and shadow of humilitie you (the Colossians) were sett vpon, tempted and deceaued: for these seducers affirmed it a thing vnworthy the Mate­stte of the onelybegotten (Christ) that you (Colossians) should be brought to God by his guidance, and that this is a worke, farre outstriping man's po­uertie (litlenes) whence they also say it is more aggreeable to reason, to auerre that this office, of conducting to God, is performed by the Angels: Whervpon doubtlesly they introduced a worship, pro­fessed a Religion, and persuaded the vn­learned, that they should applye them­selues to them, and, in their accesse to God, vse them (who had brought vs saluatiō) for their Guides. And againe in the same Chapter ver. 10. Why therfore, saith he, he (Christ) being omitted or left (omisso) Doe you betake your selues to the Angels, as Guides to conduct to the Father. Finally the same Theop in the beginning, or argumēt of the said Epistle, in discouering the scope of it, or the reason mouing S. Paul to write to them, discouers also [Page 14]what kind of worship of Angels he reprehends in them And this did in­duce him (S. Paul) to write to the Colos­sians because a wicked tenet was of late receaued among them: for they apprehen­ded that there was no accesse to God and the Father by the son, but by the Angels; esteeming it an absurd thing to beleeue that the son of God should come in these last ages, since in the old Testament all things were done by the Ministerie of the Angels. They further obserued diuers Iudaicall institutions, and customes of the Gentils, &c. And had M. Cos. read on one lyne further (for it immediately followed in the same place) he had found the solution. Nor ought our Lord Iesius Christ to be relinquished. Behold how all of them concurre in this, to condemne the worship. inuo­cation, or religion of Angels, which excludes the Mediatiō of Iesus Christ, which Catholikes doe as much de­test as any, and consequently heere is nothing against Catholike doctrine.

Cos. Cardinal Bellarmine and some others answere, That the old Heretikes [Page 15]said, no man could come to God by Christ, but by the Angels; and therefore that they ought to be prnyed to, and worshipped, not Christ.

Car. Card. Bellarmine, for as much as I am able to discouer, hath neither the words, nor the sense heero put downe for his owne replie: how beit such an an swere had not bene without good ground: for he brings in S. Chry so­stome saying no lesse, in his 7. Hom. vpon the Epist. to the Colossians, who affirme that we are not to be reconci­led and come vnto God by Christ; but by the Angels. And hath not Theophy­lacte the same in tearmes, as I haue newly cited him in his argument vpon the Epistle to the Collossians. They thought, saith he, there was no coming to God the Father, by the son (Christ) but by the Angels? Yea doth not euen Theodoret himselfe say as much too in effect, about, where he is alleadged against vs, when he affir­mes they said that the God of heauen and earth was inuisible and incomprehensible to whom they could not come, and there­fore [Page 16]they ought toprocure his fauour by the Angels? How doe you then M. Co­sens forgett your selfe, and goe on saying?

Cos. But neither doth the Councell of Laodicea, nor Theodoret, nor S. Paul, at­tribute any such opinion to them.

Car. Yes Sir, Theodoret you haue newly heard speake; and the Councell and S. Paul aboue, both which doe in formall wordes repre­hend and accurse such abominable Religion to Angels, as causeth vsto forsake the onely begotten son of God, &c. so the Councell: & not to hold the head: so S. Paul. How vnduely there­fore doe you thence affitme that they (the Councell, Theoph. S. Paul) con­demned them onely for giuing religious worship to Angels, in praying to them, that they would become Mediatours for them to God. And with all, forsouth, that that should be it, which they call a secret kind of Idolatrie, and a forsaking of Christ and his Church.

For further satisfaction, and the absolute clearing of the place, and [Page 17]discouering Theodorets sense in point of honoring and praying to the Saints or Angels let himselfe be heard speake, where he discourses more plainely and fully vpon that subiect.

Is it possible that this Authours te­stimonie should euer be vsed against honour and prayer to Saints? Did euer [Page 21]or could euer any Catholike speake more aduantagiously in his owne be­halfe? Could the Authour euer more clearely expresse himselfe a Catho­like, or euen more fully, and freely and euidently deliuer Catholike dutie, and practise in this behalfe? Which he himselfe also obserued in his Religious Historie c. 3. of Maca­rius his life, saying in the end of the same. I making an end of this narration, pray and beseech that by the intercession of all these (of whom he spake) I may ob­tayne the diuine assistance. And c. 18 of Eusebius, And I pray that I may obtayne that intercession, which hitherto I haue enioyed while he was yet aliue, &c. And finally in c. 27. of Baradatus. Grant that by the assistance of their prayers I may approach to that Mountaine, &c.

COSENS.Saint Augustin in his 10. booke of Confessions chap. 42. hath these words. Whom should I find, that might reconcile me to thee ô my God? Must [Page 22]I goe to the Angels? With what prayer? with what Sacrament should I doe it? I heare that many desireing to re­turne to thee, and being not able to doe it by themselues haue made tryall of this way, and haue bene very deseruedly delu­ded by it.

CARRE. There is some thing in that Passage, which is most materiall, omitted, some what also false transla­ted. Take therfore the passage word for word as it lyes.

Whom could I find, that might recon­cile me to thee? Was I to goe to Angels? With what prayer? with what Sacra­mēts? (was I to doe it, is not in the text, howbeit that much imports not) Many desiring to returne to thee, and not being able to doe it by themselues, as I heare, haue tryed these things (haec) can not, at least be referred to the An­gels alone) and haue fallen into a desire of curious visions (this clause of curious visions is quite left out, though most materiall (and were held worthy of illu­sions or to be illuded by it, these words, byit, are added to the text, because [Page 23]they may seeme to referre to the going to the Angels, as though that were the cause of their being illuded, which serues the better to patch up the Doctors sense wheras indeed their being illuded, might either be imputed to their going to the Angels: Prayer: Sa­cramēts: or els more immediately and apparently, to the desire they had to haue curious visions, which can neuer be deuoyd of fault. But if he will needs haue all the mischeife be putt vpon their going to the Angels, Let him please either to looke vpon the marginall notes in what impression so euer of his whole workes where he will find remedia vitiorum à Daemo­nibus: the remedies of vices from the Diuells: or els take the paynes to read on fiue or sixe lynes further, and he will discouer what Angels S. Augu­stine spake of, who saith. For they being highminded, sought thee in the pride of their learning, and did rather exalt their hearts then kenecke their breasts. And so they drew the Princes of the ayre towards them, who conspired and [Page 24]were companions with them in the same pride, and by them they were deluded through magicall powers, &c. For the diuell was transforming himselfe into an Angell of light. Behold how, and by what Angell they were deluded; and consequently how this apparent difficultie falls all in pieces. If any desire a clearer prospect vpō S. Augustins mynde herein, by knowing of whom he had heard this opinion of being purged and reconciled to God by the mediation of the Angels, &c. Les him take the paynes to read what the same Saint saith in his 9. and tenth booke of the citie of God all ouer, and he will plainely discouer to what he there alludes, to witt, to the opinions of Trismegistus, the Platoniques (and after them, it may be, to the Symo­neans who were sicke of the same disease) as saith Tertullian in these tearmes. The discipline of the Magi­calart of the Symoneans ser uing the Angels, is counted among the idola­tries. Who held that men were to goe to the supreme God by the lesser [Page 25]Gods or Angells, hauing first vsed holy purifications or purgations As l. 10. c. 9. speaking against Porphy­rius a Platonique. For Forphyrius doth promise a certaine purgation, as it were of the soule, by him called Theurgia, yet he doth it with a certaine hesitation and (as one would say) with a blushing kind of dis­putation and denyes that any by this Art is helped to returne to God: so that one may discouer him wauering betwixt the vice of sacrilegious curiositie, and a Philosophicall profession now putting one opinton, now another. For now he warnes vs to beware of this Art as deceiptfull, and dangerous in the deed doing, and prohibited by the law. And soone after, as giuing way to such as prayse it, affirmes it conducible to the cleansing a part of the soule, not the intellectuall part, where­in the Truth of intelligible things which haue no corporeall similitudes are disco­uered, but the spirituall part capable of corporeall images (or resemblances) for this part saith he, is adapted and fitted by certaine Theurgicall consecrations, which are called (Teletae) to the receipt [Page 26]of spirits and Angels, wherby to see the Gods.

‘And ibid. ch. 16. wheras therfore some Angells doe excite men to wor­ship this one (God) and some againe excite them by working wonders to honor themselues with soueraigne worship (Latriâ) and so too, that those, forbid that these should be wor­shipped, let the Platonique say to whom we should rather giue credit, yea let what Philosophers soeuer say, let the Theurgi or rather the Perurgi, &c. Nay lastly let euen men say, if there be yet any sense of humane nature, wherby they are created reasonable creatures, in any measure left in them, whether we ought rather to sacrifice to those Gods, or Angells who com­mand that sacrifice should be offe­red to them, or to him alone, to whom these command it, who for­bidd that sacrifice be offered either to themselues or to those others.’

If then saint Augustins mynde be made good by so many and so mani­fest places; To what end should the D. come yet coldly dropping another seeming place out of the said saint? or to what purpose should I answere it? Howbeit lets yet heare him speake for euery ones full satisfaction.

S. Augustin. l. 2. contra Ep. Parm. chap. 8.

Cos. IF the Apostle had said, you shall haue one for your Aduocate, and I will pray the Father for your sinnes, what good or faithfull Christian would haue endured it, or accompted him one of Christs Apostles? and not rather haue looked vpon him, as vpon an Anti­christ.

Car. I answer first that by Aduocate (which is indeed in the text Media­tour) the D. will either haue S. Augu­stine after the Apostle to meane the Principall and immediate Media­tour,Mediatour. which if the Apostle had assumed to himselfe, he had iustly bene looked vpon by all good Christians, not as an Apostle of Christ, but rather as an Antichrist: or els the mediate, lesse principall, and impropre Mediatour (which he must meane if he would haue the pla­ce to make any thing against a Catho­like and to his purpose.) And such certainly the Apostle both might be [Page 34]and was, and yet is farre from incur­ring the censure of an Antichrist, sith S. Iohn was doubtlessy a Bishop, and euery Bishop if we beleeue S. Paul Heb. 5. is taken from among men and is ordayned for men in things pertayning to God that he may offer both guifts and sacrifices for sinne, which is to be some kind of Mediatour or Aduocate re­presenting their miseries, pleading their cause, and mediating their re­concilement to God by Christ the onely properly true Mediatour of Redemptiō. In this kind of Mediation are the Priests employed saith Ioel c. 2. Betweene the porch and the Altar, shall the Priests, the Ministers of our Lord weepe, and shall say, spare ô Lord, spare thy people, and giue not thyne inhe­ritance into reproach, that the heathens should rule ouer them, and thus finally (concludes S. Aug. in this place) doe all Christiā men commend themselues mu­tually to one anothers prayers. So farre is he from speaking against mediating in this second sense, or consequently from apprehending that derogatorie [Page 35]to Christ our prime Mediatour.

I answere secondly that here againe is a whole clause left out, whence the clearing of the difficultie was to be demanded to witt, (As Parmenianus in a certaine place put a Bishop Media­tour betwixt the people and God.) And how did Parmenianus put Bishops Mediatours &c? marrie, as purifiers and iustifiers of men by their owne vertue and iustice, since they (the Do­natists) allowed vertue and effect to the Sacraments and Sacrifice onely according to the qualitie of the Mi­nister or offerer, which was indeed to assume to themselues the proper Me­diation of Christ Iesus who onely of himselfe is able to appease Gods wrath against sinne, as being our principal, immediate, primarie Mediatour and indeed our onely Mediatour of Re­demption, who by the right of his owne merits obtaynes grace forvs: the others onely by him and by his me­rits. Such a Mediatour it is manifest S. Aug. spake of in this place (and such we admitt none but Christ alone) who [Page 36]spake against the pride of the Dona­tists, which forsoothe would haue no spott or vice to be amongst them or their fellowes, as saith S. Augustine in the chap. immediately before, which was a prerogatiue due to Christ alone, who was that one and true Mediatour for whō none prayed, & he prayed for all, as saith the said St. in this 8. chap. In fine one of S. Augustines principall designes in this place was to proue against the Donatists that they iniustly se­parated themselues from the Ca­tholike Church vpon pretence of the wickednes of the Bishops and priests in the Church: for, dato that it were so indeed, yet were that no iust cause of a diuision or schisme; since (be the Bishops and priests what they will) we ought alwayes to be secure of one Mediatour, Iesus Christ the iust, whom we haue an Aduocate with the Fa­ther, and he is the propitiation for our sinnes. Hence I beleeue the weakest may obserue, that it is not fairely done of M^r. Cos. to make vse of the mistaken sense of an obscure passage [Page 37]in an Authour, to stagger the vnlet­tered, who are not able to examine him, while being examined he beares no shew of difficultie along with him.

COSENS.S. Irenaeus against Heresies 2. booke chap. 57.

THe Church Catholike doth not in­uocate Angels, bnt purely calleth vpon God and Christ.

CARRE. Still something is left out most important to the clearing of the difficultie. S. Irenaeus his words are these. Neither doth it (to witt the vni­uersall Church) doc any thing by Angeli­call inuocations nor by incantations, nor by any other wicked curiositie, (these words by incantations nor by any other wicked curiositie, are omitted) but cleanely, purely, and manifestly directing prayers to God, &c. Now what doe these words incantations, and wicked curiosi­ties, lead vs to, but the old heretiques to witt the Symonians, the Marcites, Meandriās, and Carpocratiās, against whom he had spoken, shewing here [Page 38]that the Catholike Church in wor­king her true miracles did not vse their proceeding in working false ones (which they did by the inuoca­tion and superstitious naming of An­gels, to whom they ascribed the crea­tion of the world) by incantations and spells whereby they deluded ma­ny, especially poore women, robbing them of fortunes and honour, with the exercise of innumerable villanies (as is to be seene in the 9. 20. 22. and and 24. chapters of his first booke) but by fasting and prayer performed chastely, purely, openly, and without hope of lucre. His words are: That vniuerfall Church which is in euery place, demanding by fasting and much prayer, the spirit os life returned to the dead man, who was giuen to the Saints prayers. What is here yet I pray, against the in­uocation of Saints?

Cos. Origene against Celsus l. 5.

ALl prayers are to be sent and offered vp vnto God by our Angel and high [Page 39]Priest, who is the Prince and Lord of all Angels. Nor will our Religion permitt vs, to supplicate or pray to any other whom so euer.

Car. Answer. First your choyce here­in is not verie happie, if you should make him stand vp alone against all antiquitie, ingenous men would not esteeme his word were sufficient cau­tion after his so many errours, yea euen in this place where he destroyes Christs Diuinitie making him infe­riour to his heauenly Father. How­beit if you admitt his authoritie vpon this matter, so doe I: and thus I pro­duce him speaking of the Angels in the same place. O Angels receiue man cō ­uerted from his old errour againe: they (the Angels, holy soules, and blessed spirits) endeauour, saith he, to recon­cile God to such as shall serue him, and pray iointly with vs, contra Cel­sum l. 8. pag. 432. Againe infinite mil­lions of Angels make intercession for maukind. Againe, who doubts but all the holy Fathers assiste vs with their prayers in Num. c. 32. hom. 26. [Page 40]Now make him blow hot and cold with the same breath, and speake for you saying, all prayers are to be offered to God, &c. nor will our religion permitt vs to supplicate or pray to any other whom­soeuer. Loe you haue made him quar­rell with himselfe, but what haue you gotten? saue onely by contradicting himselfe you haue destroyed the cre­dit of the Authour you depend vpon, while you hurt not vs who want not a number of others to relye vpon. Were it not better to saue his credit saying with S. Hierome, Origene, Me­thodius, Euscbius, and Apollinaris write against Celsus and Porphyrius. Consider with what arguments and with how many gliding problemes they dissolue the things which were wouen by the spirit of the Diuel, and because sometymes they are compelled to speake, they speake not what they thinke, but what they are forced by necessitie to oppose to the Doctrine of the Gentils. For saith he not in the same booke that had he discourered that Celsus had by Angells vnder­stood true Angells as Gab. Mich. &c. he [Page 41]would then according to his abilitie haue said something to the matter by reiecting the word Adoration, and the actions of the Adorer, that is offerings and Sacrifices, and the giuing of the worship of Latria, so that it is manifest that he denies not the prayer to the Saints absolutely, but onely in the sense in which they held their false Gods were to be prayed to and ado­red, which according to Plato they tearmed Angells, and gaue them so­ueraigne honour, as is cleare from S. Aug. in his 10. booke of the Gitty and is partly cited aboue, where they are tear­med lesser Gods. For saith he of the Angells in the same place, though they doe descend, &c. and offer the prayers of men, yet are they not at all so called Gods as that we are commanded to adore them, or to worship them with di­uine honour. And to this we all say; so be it, contenting our selues to afford them an inferiour honour, sortable to seruants, which beares no propor­tion to that soueraigne and diuine honour, which we reserue for the Great Master alone.

Cos. Tertullian in his booke of Prayer chap. 12.

THese prayers are vaine, and deser­uedly farelted, which are made without the authoritie and precept of Christ or his Apostles. For such prayers be not for religion, but superstition.

Car. Sinceritie is still desired: The authours words are still either so indi­rectly, or sparingly put downe, that it is impossible they should beare out his sense and make it intelligible to the Reader. Tertull. in this place speakes not one word of Prayer to Angels or Saints, either in expresse tearmes, or can the exigencie or scope of his meaning be wrested to it. He speakes onely of certaine friuolous formes (which he points out in parti­cular leauing no place to mistake what he meant) or obseruations in prayer, which he saith rather conduce to superstition then to religion, as is, saith he, the custome of some to put of their cloakes to pray, &c. Marke his [Page 43]owne words as they lye, and then indge what reason you haue to make vse of them. Hauing described some manner of praying, he goes on saying. But sith we haue touched one cer­taine point (or part) of an idle obserua­tion, I will not fayle to marke out the rest (caetera) to which vanitie is deseruedly exprobrated, because they are done with­out the authoritie of any precept either of our Lord, or his Apostles. What was it then which was reputed vaine, as being done without authoritie, &c. what but the rest (caetera.) And what was the rest? was it happily prayer to Saints? No, not any syllable intima­ting that; but the rest was such as was the vnum aliquod, to witt emptie ob­seruation, such then, (and not prayer to Saints) must the rest be in good consequence, nor dare any deny it, since not I but the Authour himselfe a lyne after concludes it saying: as is that of certaine persons putting of their cloakes to pray (this clause cleares the doubt and yet is left out and not loo­ked vpon.) Let vs now examine whe­ther [Page 44]any fairer dealing, or more sin­ceritie be vsed in the next allegation out of the same Authour.

In his Apologet. ch. 30. Cos. THese things I can aske and pray for of no other, but of him who I know is able alone to giue them to me, and whom alone I serue.

Car. Nor here againe is there any mention made of Angels in tearmes, nor doth the subiect oblige to any thought of them. Nor are indeed the Authours words putt downe fairely as they lye, though the sense is almost the same. These things (saith he) I can pray for of no other, then of whom I know I shall obtayne them, because euen he it is who alone doth giue, and I am he whose part it is to impetrate, being his ser­uant who obserue him alone. Marke one­ly what these things were which he prayed for, in whose person he spake, and to whom; and you will easily dis­couer this place conteynes no diffi­culty at all. The things he prays for [Page 45]are (as himselfe declares in the prece­dent lyne.) Long life to all Emperours, asecure raigne, a safe Pallace, stronge ar­mies, a faithfull Senate, an honest people, a peaceable world, &c. He speakes it in the person of Christians, who were accused by the Ethnicks that they prayed not to their Gods for the Em­perour. Where vpō he makes an Apo­logie for them to the Emperour, shewing that though they pray not to their false Gods, who were but indeed dead men, and therfore lesse powerfull then himselfe, yet he retorts vpon the Ethnicks in these tearmes, but you are irreligious who seeke safetie (to witt by the meanes of false Gods) where it is not; you demand it of those that are not able to giue it, ouerpassing him in whose power it is, and so con­cludes that Christians haue not re­course to their Gods as they haue, but to the true God, in these words. But we call vpon the eternall God, the true God, the liuing God, because he alone is able to giue it. He, I say, not the false Gods, whom alone he excludes from [Page 46]that power of helping the Emperour, without hauing any thought, or ma­king any relation to the Angels or Saints at all, which yet he should haue done to haue made this place vsefull for your purpose, as you must needs confesse.

Cos. S. Athanasius l. 4. against the Arrians.

NO man should pray to God and the Angels to receaue any thing, but ought to petition the Father and the sonne, &c.

Car. Still is the Authour surprised, as it were, and forced to speake what he meanes not, and what the subiect doth not [...]acte, as shall be showne by the context and the scope of the Authour In the interim take his words as they lye. For neuer would any pray to receiue any thing of God, and the Angels, or of any created things: nor did any conceiue this forme of words, GOD AND THE AN­GELS GIVE it THEE, but contrarily of the Father and the sonne, for their [Page 47]vnitie, and vniforme reason of giuing. Nor doth the Cathol. Church vse any such forme of prayer, as ioyning the Angells with God, by reason of their vnitie and vniforme reason of giuing, which is the holy Fathers sense. Which that it may plainely appeare to be so indeed, let vs onely reflect against whom he speakes, and what argument he vseth. He is here dispu­ting against the Arrians, vpon this passage of S. Iohn, Ego & Pater vnum sumus. The Arrians would haue that place to be vnderstood of one in will; S. Athanas. of one in substance: and thus he argues a litle before the place in question. If, saith he, for that rea­son (to witt because they will and nill the same) the Father and the sonne were to be held to be the same thing, and by that meanes the Word were esteemed to be like the Father: then were it necessarie too that Angels, and other things more ex­cellent then wee, the Principalities, Powers, Thrones, Dominations, and the rest which appeare in heauen, the sun moone and starrs should be so esteemed the [Page 48]sonnes of God as Christ is his sonne, and this speech also should be pronounced of them, they and the Father are one, sith what God wills they also will. Which if it were true, they also would be ad­mitted into the same power of giuing with the sōne: but that is false, therfore and that too which preceeded. That that is false, he goes on prouing out of S. Paul, grace and peace be to you from God our F. and from Iesus Christ, &c. admitting none of the creatures into his fellowship, in the power of giuing (ratione, in that behalfe or respect.) Now, saith he, the verie manner of giuing, doth conuince the vnitie of the Fa­ther and the sonne; for neuer doth any pray to receaue any thing in this forme of words, God and the Angells giue me such a thing, as we say, God the father and the sōne giue me, &c. with S. Paul [...] that this passage doth not at all speaake of prayer to Angels in the sense we defend it in, that is, as they make intercession to God for vs in qualitie of faithfull seruants of his; as being his creatures, infinitely infe­riour [Page 49]to him, &c. not by reason of their vnitie with him, and vniforme power of giuing, as aboue, which alone is the sense reiected by S. Athanasius: not the honour and prayer to the Angels and Saints, which was the practise of that Age, as may partly appeare by these few passages.

In a Sermon of our Blessed Lady, to­wards the end which is among his workes, and verie ancient, if not his owne.

ANd now giue eare, ô thou daughter of Dauid and Abraham, and in­cline thine eares to our prayers, forgett not thy people, nor vs, who are of thy fa­milie and of thy Fathers house.

Againe in the same place. Where vpon all the rich among the people pray to thee, as being enriched with these goods and spirituall contemplations. We cry vnto thee, be myndfull of vs, Most holy Vir­gin, &c.

A litle after. We exalte thee with shrill and resounding voyces, saying: [Page 50]I salute thee Lady full of grace, our Lord is with thee, make intercession for vs, ô Mistresse, Lady, Queene, and Mother of God.

And the same is made good more fully by the Fathers of the same Age. First by

S. Hilarie. The Angels of the litle ones are ouer the prayers of the faithfull.In Mattheū 18. And againe. The Angels doe dayly offer vp to God, the prayers of those which are saued through Christ.

S. Ephraem. O my most clement God, haue mercy on thy creature,In fine ora­tionis de laudibus sanctae Dei matris. by the inter­cession of the mother of God alwayes a Virgin; and of the Hostes of Heauenly spirits, and companies of Angels, of Che­rubim, Seraphim, Prophets, Martyrs, &c.

S. Basile. By the intercession of the Holy Mother of God and all these who haue fore [...] glorifyed thee,Basil. in his Litur­gie. sanctifie our soules and bodies, and grant that we may serue thee in sanctitie all the dayes of our life.

Againe. Who is in tribulation flies to the fortie Martyrs:In Homilia in 40. Mar­tyres. prope finem. such as are in pros­peritie [Page 51]betake themselues to them too: the one to be deliuered from his affliction: the other to be continued in his prosperous condition. This good woman is heard to pray for children: and to sue for a safe re­turne to her husband abroade; and for his health while he is infirme.

S. Gregorie Nyssene. He (to witt Meletius deceased) makes intercession for vs, and for the sinnes of the people.In oratione De obitu Meletij Episcopi.

Againe. We stand in need of many benefits: interceede,In oratione de Theodoro Martyre. and make earnest en­treatie for our countrie to our common king and Lord.

Againe. As a soldier pray for vs; as a Martyr vse the libertie of speech for thy fellow seruants, &c. Begge for peace that these publike assemblies may not be inter­rupted;Ibidē paulo post. least the cruell and wicked Bar­barian may rage and make violence against the temples and Altars; least the profane and impious tread [...]ly things vnder their feete: for euen we who are conserued fafe and sound, aseribe that be­nefit to thee: and petition for safe guarde and securitie for the tyme to come, &c.

S. Gregorie Nazianzene. But thou [Page 52]ô sacred and dinine man, looke downe vpon vs from aboue,In fine ora­tionis in l [...]d [...]m S. Basilij. and either stoppe the sting of the flesh which God hath giuen vs for our exercise, or preuayle that we may en­dure it with courage, &c.

Saint Ambrose also followed in in this age, and gaue restimonie to this Truth, as you will see in my answer to the ensuing obiection.

COSENS.S. Ambrose in 1. cap. ad Rom.

THey that neglect to come vnto God himselfe, and goe to him by others, vse to make this miserable excuse, that by the helpe of others they can come to God, as by the helpe of noble men they can come to the king. Goe to, It is treason to take the honour or Maiestie of a king, and to giue it to a Lord. And doe these men thinke to escape, if they giue the honour of God to a creature and worship it? For therfore doe men goe to a king by great and noble personages, because the king is no more then a man himselfe. But to come to God (who knowes euery thing) and to procure his fauour there is no such need of a helper or suffragator. For where euer any one will speake (or pray) vnto him, [Page 53]he will himselfe be readie to heare and answere him.

CARRE. This place vpon the first sight may seeme both liuely to ex­presse, and at once to improue the Ca­tholike custome of making vse of the Saints intercession to God. But truely were S. Ambrose the Authour of it, as he is not by any scholler beleeued to be, euen Caluin himselfe affir­ming of those Commentaries, that they haue nothing worthy of S. Am­brose, yet if I make it not appeare to any scholler that it was neither spokē nor meant to that purpose, I will be content to loose the small credit I owne. The Authours discourse then, (be he who he will) was vpō this verse of S. Paul. Saying they were wise men they were made fooles. Vpon which he. For they thinke themselues wise men, be­cause they thinke to finde out Philosophicall reasons, searching the courses [...] the starrs, and the qualities of the elements, but des­pising the Lord of them; therfore they are made fooles, seeing if these things ought to be praysed, how much more their Crea­tour? [Page 54]yet being ashamed of their neglect of God, they are wont to vse this misera­ble excuse, saying, that by those, (to witt, fellow seruants or creatures whereof the speech was before, and are after named conserui) they are able to goe to God, as by the Countes they come to the king. Goe to, is any one so madd, or so vnmyndfull of his saluation, as that he would chalenge the honour of a king to a Count, sith if euen any be but found to treate of his matter, they are iustly con­demned guiltie of treason? And these thinke not themselues guiltie, who giue away the honour of Gods name to a crea­ture, and forsaking the Lord and Master adore their fellow seruants, as though there were yet some further thing reserued for God. For euen therfore it is that we goe to the king by the meanes of the Tri­bunes or Counts, because indeed the king himselfe is a man, and he knowes not in whose hands to intrust the Cōmon wealth. But to procure fauour with God from vhom nothing lyes hid (for he knowes all mens merits) there is no neede of a saf­fragator but a deuoute mynde. For where [Page 55]euer such a one shall speake vnto him, he will answere him.

Obserue hereupon, that M^r. Cos. in his translation of this passage,

• 1. In steed of (ipsos those) which must needs haue relation to some persons or things goeing before wherby the sense is cleared, he puts, others, which quite obscures and changes the sense.
• 2. He leaues out this clause most im­portant and decisiue, Forsaking the Lord, adore their fellow seruants.
• 3. He puts any one where as indeed it is such an one (talis) referring to one mentioned before, deuoute in mynde: such an one indeed will be heard without a suffragator, that is without needing any to suggest their merits, as though God were ignorant of them: wherevpon he saith, for he knowes all mens merits.

In a word, this Authour is here re­prehending the pagan Philosophers, who knowing God did not worship him accordingly, but gaue away the honour due to him alone, to crea­tures, to stockes, stones, and statuaes, whō they called and honored as their [Page 56]gods, as is euident all through the chapter. In particular, where he saith. So was their heart blinded, that they changed the Maiestie of the inuisible God, whō by these his workes they did acknow­ledge, not into men, but (which is worse, and euen a crime not to be excused) into the similitude of men, that the forme of a corruptible man, that is the picture of man is by them tearmed their God, that so they may receaue the pictures of them being dead into the glorie of a God, to whom being aliue they durst not ascribe Deitie.

And a little after. Changing the trueth of God into a lye, that they gaue the name of the true God, to those wuich are not Gods: for taking from stones, wood, and other mettall, what they are indeed; they attribute to them what they are not, &c. for they are not now called wood or stone, but God, and this is rather to serue the creature, (which is called aboue, their fellow seruant, and in that name con­demned) then the Creatour. So that it is manifest, that the Authour doth not at all in this passage, touch or point at, much lesse reprehend or con­dēne [Page 57]the Catholike practise of giuing an inferiour honour to the Saints; and praying to them to become interces­sours for vs: which will yet more clearely appeare to such as will take the paynes to reade his booke de vi­duis after the middest, where he saith. Peter and Andrew therfore prayed for the widow, I wish to God there were any so readie to pray for vs, at least he who prayed for his mother in law, Peter, and Andrew his brother, They could then im­petrate for affinities sake, now they are able to doe it for vs and all men. You see that one subiect to a great sinne, is lesse fitt to pray, at least to obtuyne for her selfe: Let her therfore imploye others to pray to the Physitian. For the sicke are not able to pray for themselues, vnles the Physitian by the intreatie of others be inuited to come to them. Flesh is infirme, the myned is sicke, and hindred with the chaynes of sinnes. It is not able to make one weake stepp towards the seate of that Physitiā. We must therfore heartely beseech the Angels in our behalfe, who are giuen for our helpe, we must pray to the Martyrs, of whom we [Page 58]seeme to chalenge à certaine kind of patro­nage by the priuiledge of flesh and bloud. They haue abilitie to pray for our sinnes, who if they had any sinnes of their owne, washed them with their bloud; For they are Gods Martyrs, our Prelates, the ouer­seers of our life and actions: Let vs not blush to make vse of them for interces­sours of our infirmitie; since they them­selues experienced the infirmitie of flesh and bloud, euen while they were victo­rious.

As for that sentence, to witt: To pro­cure fauour with God, there is no need of a suffragator, which may seeme most to vrge against a Catholike sense. I answere first;Psal. 129. according to that of S. Hilarie. The nature of God hath no neede of their intercession (to witt of the An­gels) but our infirmitie. And this in case a suffragator signified a helper or intercessour, which yet is neuer in proper speech but onely by metaphore, much lesse here the true sense of the word. For suffragator will be found another thing if we take Tullie for our Master in finding out the true [Page 59]sense of a latine word: suffragatio, saith he, est ipsa voluntatum & animorum de­claratio quae fit suffragiis, the act of suffra­gating is the verie declaration of mens wills and mynds which is done by suffrage: (he calls it not a helping or praying for) so that it truly imports as much as informer, giuer of aduise, or one hauing a deliberatiue voyce, the word suffrage haueing bene primarily instituted to signifie the voyce which the Citizens of Rome gaue in the election of any Magistrate, or in the resolution of any other import̄at affaire of the Cōmon wealth, put to the peoples delibera­tion. Whence we are wont to say that Bishops onely haue right of suffrage, or deliberatiue voyces in the Coun­cells, &c. Hence, such towards the Emperours, as had the credit to giue their voyces, aduice or opinion tou­ching the capacities or incapacities of persons pretending preferments, were called suffragators, that is informers, helping to supplie the Emperours want of knowledge, of the merits or demerits of particular persons ay­ming [Page 60]to beare office in the common wealth. And such suffragators, saith the Authour and we with him, God needs none, sith as is said in the same place, For be knowes all mens merits: from whom nothing lyes hid, and so needs not any to informe him of the worth and abilities of his subiects, as the Em­perours needed the aduice of the Tri­bunes or Gouernours of Prouinces, of the sufficiencie of persons within their precincts, and was inabled ther­by to discerne who, were fitt to be im­ployed.

Now that it is not a meere imagina­tion of myne, for the clearing of this place but a certaine trueth that it was conceaued by some heathen Philoso­phers, that the greater God or Gods stood in need of aduice from the lesser Gods, Angels, or deuils let S. Aug. speake:Cittie of God l 8. c. 28. Some heathē Philosophers thinke (saith he that the celestiall Gods who haue care of humane affaires, would not know what men doe, if the deuils of the ayre did not announce it to them, be­cause heauen is farre distant from earth, [Page 61]and suspended on high, In his book [...] de Mundo. wheras the ayre is contiguous (or toucheth) to Heauen and earth. And Aristotle seemes to say no lesse, where he compares God with the great king of Persia, &c.

S. Chrysostome Hom. de Profectu Euang.

Cos. We are more preualent with God, when we pray to him by our selues, then when others pray for vs, You haue no need of a Patron with God.

Car. Here are two things affirmed, and both true being well vnderstood, and make nothing at all against vs, The first that a man is more preualent praying alone for him selfe, thē whē others pray for him. That is, it is a surer way to be heard, for a man to pray for himselfe, then onely to depend vpon another mans prayers, he not praying himselfe. The second. That a man hath no need of a Patron with [...]od. Absolute­ly, as that God would not heare him without a Patron, I grant [...], And what is this against a Catholike, And thus or to this effect, must as well the [Page 62]D. as we, interpret him, vnlesse we will haue him to make head against common sense, S. Paul, and himselfe, where he speakes, (and that more plainly) of the intercession of Saints, for here indeed despeakes not of it at all, (vnlesse in cōsequence) and ther­fore, this is not the fittest place to de­cide a controuersie.

That he Should oppose common sense, it is euident; because at least if anothers prayers helpe not, no rea­son can be suggested, why they should hurt, and therfore we should be more preualent praying alone.

That he should contradict S. Pauls counsell is no lesse manifest, who in the 5. Thess. 25. verse saith, Brethren pray for vs. Heb. 13. ver. 18. Pray for vs, and the 5. of S. lames ver. 16. Pray for one another that you may be saued.

And that he should quarrell with himselfe. is as cleare if we reade what he saith, in his 28. Homilie to the people of Antioche, touching the intercession of the Angels in the tyme of the Sacrifice. The Angels doe [Page 63]then in lieu of olie branches propose the verie body of our Lord, pray for mankind, as though they should say, We pray ô Lord for these whom thou hast loued in so large measure, that for their loue thou incurredst death, and gauest vp thy spirit vpon the Crosse, we beseech thee for these, for whom thou freely gauest thy blood, we pray to thee for those, for whom thou diddest Sacrifice this body.

Giue therfore this flood of elo­quence leaue to speake for himselfe, and he will sweepe away all hints for cauills to catch hold on. If we be ne­gligent saith he, and slouthfull, we cannot be saued euen by the merits of others, &c. But these things we say, not to deny that one may pray to the Saints for sinners,In Math. Hom. 8.but least we our selues might fall into slouth and idlenes, and leaue the care of our owne affaires to others while we our selues sleepe.

Againe. The prayers and supplications of Saints, haue force for vs, in Matt. Hom 5. yea and that most great: Marry then it is, when we our selues too demande the same thing by Pennance.

Againe. Wherfore let vs frequently [Page 64]visite them, lets touch their shrines, and with great faith embrace their reliques, to the end we may re­ceiue some benediction: for as soldiers shew the wounds which they receiue in battell to the king speaking with confi­dence; so these bearing their heads which were cutt of, Hom. 40. to the people of Antioche. and proposing them; are able to obtayne of the king of heauen what ere they please

S: Epiphanius haer. 79.

Cos. LEt no body worship the Virgin Marie, nor any man or woman besides. To God is this holines or religion due.

Car. Let no man worship her as à Goddesse, by giuing her soueraigne honour testified by sacrifice: I grant it. Let no man worship her by ascri­bing to her inferiour honour, I deny it. And that both the parts of this di­stinction is saint Epiphan. not my ne, and consequently that it was his true sense, is euident to any, who will please to looke vpon the place. For first the [Page 65]title is against the Collyridians, wo­mē who sacrificed a loafe, a bunne, or cake (whence they take their name) to our B. Lady, and the whole dis­course is spent vpon the same subiect all through, distinguishing betwixt so­ueraigne worship, expressed by ado­ration, and subordinate worship, by the word honour. As let Marie be hono­red, but let the Father, Sonne and holy Gh. be adored. And againe, Though Marie be most beautifull, holy and bonored, yet not so farre forth as to be adored. In fine, he concludes in these words. Let Marie be honoured. Let Christ be adored. fiat, fiat.

Bede in Prouerb.

Cos. We ought to inuocate (that is by prayer to call vpon) none for helpe but God alone:

Car. The answer is easie, adde onely two litle monosyllables which you haue left out (to witt in nos, into vs, and leaue out as many for helpe) and read, We ought to inuocate, that is, by prayer to call into vs, none but God [Page 66]alone, and you will perceiue the diffi­cultie insensibly and without force vanished away.

For the rest, if you desire indeed to know S. Bedes sense vpon this subiect, be pleased to read him vpō the 4^th. of S. Luke, where writing vpon these words, It is written, thou shalt adore the Lord thy God and serue him alone; he speakes both exactly and amply with all: some (saith he) perad­uenture will demand, how these two be re­conciled together, to wit what is here commanded to sErue God alone; and that of the Apostle, scrue one another mu­tually out of Charitie. But this findes an easie solution out of the originall Greeke text, whence the Scripture was trans­lated, where the seruice is named in two different manners, bearing withall a di­uers signification, for it is called both La­tria and Dulia: true it is that Dulia is taken for a common seruice, that is à ser­uice which of its owne nature, is indiffe­rently exhibited to God, or any other thing whatsoeuer. Whence also we haue the word seruant which the Grecians call [Page 67] [...]. Latria contrarily is taken for that seruice alone which belongs to the worship of the Diuinitie; which is communicable to noe creature at all. Wherevpon they are pronounced Idolaters who offer vowes prayers and Sacrifices to Idols, which they owe to God alone. Wherfore we are commanded to serue one another through Charitie; which the Grecians call [...]. And we are commanded to serue God alone: with that worship which the Grecians call [...].

Againe. Let vs alwayes serue such a Queene, who forsakes them not who hope in her. Iesus Christ, being pleased in, and hearing the prayers of the Saints, doth much more heare his mother, when she prayes for sinners. In one of his Ser­mons of our Blessed Lady in his 7. Tome.

Againe. Let vs demand for vs the frequent intercessions of the Saints be they Angels or men, to the mercy of our gracious Creatour. Vpon the Cant. l. 4. c. 24.

Againe. Let vs pray to all the Saints to make intercession for vs to God. In a [Page 68]Serm. vpon the great Litanics, To­me 7.

Hauing now giuen full satisfaction, as I presume, to any impartiall reader, not onely that all these specious pas­sages alleadged out of the Holy Fa­thers against vs, conclude nothing at all (many of them being manifestly corrupted: others forced, others mi­staken (but contrarily, hauing eui­dently made good by positiue and plaine allegations out of the said Fa­thers, (others I would not in this short discourse, though with great fa­cilitie I could haue alleadged) that they are wholly for vs: I will passe on to another of his assertions spoken, and put downe vnder his hand, with an admirable confidence against Purgatorie, in these tearmes.

Obserue the contrariety betwixt the Greeke, and English Protestant Church.

Origene.

Sinners are tormented in a purgation made by fire.

The Prot. Church of England.

It is a fond thing. Article 22.

Eusebius Alexand.

By the meanes of prayers great rest is procured to the dead.

The Prot. Church of England.

It is a thing vainely inuented. Art. 22.

S. Athanasius.

The soules of sinners haue benefit by the vnbloudie Sacrifice, and good workes done for them.

The Prot. Church of Eng.

The Sacrifices of Masses in the which it was comonly said, Art. 31. that the Priests did offer Christ for the quicke and the dead, to haue remission of payne or guilt were blasphe­mous fables, and dangerous deceipts.

Cyrillus Hier.

A dreadfull Sacrifice put vpon the Al­tar, [Page 94]and offered for our sinnes.

The Prot. Church of Eng.

Blasphemous fables, dangerous deceipts.

Cyrillus Hier.

He beleeued that it (to witt prayer for the dead) was a great helpe to their soules.

The Prot.Art. 22. Church of Eng.

A fond thing vainely inuented.

S. Greg. Nyssenus.

Expiation after death by purging fire.

The Prot. Church of Eng.

There is no other satisfaction for sinne but that alone, Art. 31. (to witt the bloudie obla­tion finished once vpon the Crosse.)

S. Chrysostome.

A Doctrine of the diuine mercy.

The Prot. Church of Eng.

A fond thing. Art. 22.

S. Chrys.

A thing not rashly inuented.

The Prot. Church of Eng.

A thing Vainely inuented.

S. Chrys.

Disposed by the Holy Ghost.

The Prot.Art. 31. Church of Eng.

A dangerous deceipt.

S. Chrys.

An Apostolicall Constitution that me­morie should be made of the soules depar­ted in the diuine mysteries.

The Prot. Church of Eng.Art. 22.

Grounded vpon no warranty of Scripture, but rather repugnant to the word of God.

In fine. S. Damascene

Deliuers it for an vndoubted custome in the Catholike and Apostolike Church to make memorie of the Dead in the vn­dloudie Sacrifice.

But the Prot. Church of England, will haue it to be a fond thing, vaine­ly inuented; and the Sacrifice of the Masse ablasphemous fable, a dāgerous de­ceipt, rather repugnant to the word of God.

See what a goodly accord there is betweene the ancient Greeke Fathers and our new Reformers! or rather behold their apparently iarring and irreconcileable discord which the smoothest witt is not able, euen spe­ciously to appease, or to tune it vp to any their least aduantage. Their [Page 96]stale and cold replies drawen from the diuersitie which they pretend to be amongst Catholikes themselues vpon this subiect, gaine no credit, nor are of any moment with rationall men; As,

That they agree not about the place where Purgatorie should be.

Nor about the Tormentors, whe­ther Angels or Deuills.

Nor about the torments; whether by fire or water, or neither.

Nor about the causes of the tor­ments of Purgatorie; whether veniall sinnes onely; or mortall sinnes also, for which full satisfaction hath not bene made in this life.

Nor about the tyme which the soules tormented may remayne in Purgatorie &c.

Nor about their state &c.

For all these things swarue from the purpose, as not coming home to the state of the question betwixt vs and the English Protestants: which is, Whether there be a Purgatorie; not where the place of Purgatorie is; who [Page 97]are the Tormenters; what torments there be: whether pure and true fire, or some other thing equiualent &c. of all which we pronounce with S. Basile, Superua­cua in Ecclesia sileant, Let not super­fluous and vnnecessarie questions be heard of in the Church: especially so farre as to confound matter of Faith with matter of opinion. Now these things, touching the place of Pur­gatorie &c. passe among Catholikes for matters of opinion, not of Faith; and are with amitie, humilitie, and submission disputed in our schooles, but haue not yet bene defined in our Councells, whence the beleife or not beleife of them, are of free choyce amongst vs; we being neither made of the number of the faithfull by that, nor miscreants by this. We are not of those presumptuous soules who thinke to haue accesse to all the di­uine secrets, while we know by Saint Paul that we are none of his Counsel­lours. We are willingly persuaded by S. Basile to prayse what we haue receiued vpon the accompt of faith, and what hath [Page 98]bene deliuered ouer in trust to vs, but doe not curiously sound hidden mysteries. We finally receiue of the Catholique Ro­mane Church, that there is A Purga­torie; and of that we dare not doubt: but where and what it is &c. (she hauing of that deliuered no Decree) in all humilitie we dispute; nor doe our doubts therin, violate, touch or call in question the beleife of Purga­torie, that stands still vndoubted and inuiolable.

Since therefore all the Easterne Bishops and Fathers, as we haue seene, deliuer the same doctrine with one heart, one mouth, one faith, tou­ching purging fire &c. Prayer, Almes, Sacrifice for the dead &c. wherby great rest is procured to their soules: may not I iustly admire to heare one man stand vp, and affirme the cōtrarie and that with so much confidence as that he feared not to passe his word to yeald himselfe à Catholike vpon the proof of it;Contra Iu­lianum l. 2. s. 2. and may I not with iust offence speake to him in S. Aug. words saying, To what purpose doc these your words [Page 99]serue, but to make euident to the world, either how negligent you haue bene to ac­quaint your selfe with the words and sence of Catholike Doctors in this behalfe; or hauing vsed diligence to know them, with what fraude you goe about to circumuent the ignorant &c.? Si nesciens hoc fecisti cur non miseram respuis imperitiam? si sciens, cur non sacrilegam deponis auda­ciam? si cernis cerne, & tandem tace. Pe­lagianam (Lutheranam) linguam tot linguis Catholicis deprime; tot veneran­dis oribus, proterua ora submitte.

Hitherto I haue insisted vpon the productions of the Greeke Fathers authoritie onely, because the chal­lenge called thither alone, though I could haue vsed a more sure and satis­factorie way (the Scriptures as they are vnderstood both by the Greeke and Latine Fathers together with the prac­tice of the whole Church of God) and haue said with S. Augustine;Vbisupra. I con­ceiue that part of the world ought to suffice you, in which it pleased our Lord to crowne the first of his Apostles with a most glo­rious Martyrdome: if you would haue giuen [Page 100]care to Blessed Innocentius, presiding ouer that Church, you had forthwith freed your perilous youth from the Pelagian (Luthe­ran) snares. For what could that holy man haue answered to the African Coun­cells (Anglicanis conuicijs) but what the Apostolicall and Romane sea holds with the rest of the Churches &c. There is no reason therefore to prouoke to the Bishops of the East, because they two are Christians, and that faith of both the parts of the world, is one and the same, be­cause faith it selfe is Christian; and certes the Westerne part brought you out, the westerne Church did regenerate you &c.) It rest that I make the great Saint Augustine alone speake for the prac­tice of the Latine Church and him­selfe, because I perceiued by a paper which M [...] Cosens himselfe presented me with, that he had vsed some en­deauour to drawe him to his side, or at least, if he could preuayle no fur­ther, to render his testimonie doubt­full: to the end that he or others might build wood, hay, stubble or worse (vpon that mistaken foundation) which he doth most clearely in these ensuing passages.

S. AVGVSTIN. CONF. lib. 9. cap. 12.

The Sacrifice of our price is offered for her. Sacrifice of­fered for her soule.

And. c. 13. booke the same.

Now I beseech thee heare me for the sinnes of my Mother. He prayes for her sinnes.

Againe a little after.

She desired onlie that à Memorie should be made of her at thy Altar, She desired to be re­membred at the Altar. at which she serued without intermitting any day, where she knew the holie victime was dispensed, wherby the hand-writing was blotted out, which was contrarie to vs.

To these passages some haue made answer, that they doe admitt prayer for the Dead; a Commemoration to be made for them at the Altar; yea, and Sacrifice to be offered also. Howbeit not as we meane, to deliuer them from their paines, but for diuers other ef­fects. And that thereby, we cannot enforce a Purgatorie; nor did S. Au­gustine speake of purging fire. Let the [Page 102]holy Father therefore answere for himselfe.

S. Augustine li. 2. c. 20. de Genesi against the Manichees.

After this life he shall haue either pur­ging fire, Purging fire or eternall punishment: So farre are anie from escaping this sen­tence.

Againe vpon the 37. Psalme.

They would be secure, &c. not onlie from that eternall fire which shall tor­ment the wicked for euer; but also from that too, wich shall purge (emendabit) those, who shall be safe by fire. And a little aster. That fire shall be more grieuous, then any thing a man can suffer in this life.

Now we haue found in the Fathers formall tearmes, (not in our owne forced consequences, which were not in question) Prayer made at the Altar; Sacrisice for the Dead; yea, and Fire too, wherein their soules are tormen­ted: and yet some will not be satisfied, but will haue that fire to be vnder­stood of the Fire of Conflagration at the day of Doome. Let vs therefore [Page 103]yet heare saint Augustine wipe awaie this scruple.

De Ciu. Dei, l. 21. c. 23.Paines suf­fered before the day of Iudgement.

And it is manifest that such are pur­ged by temporall paines (which their spirits suffer) before the day of iudgement.

Againe in the same booke, chap. 13.

Some suffer temporall paines in this life onlie; others after death; some both now and then; yet before that most seuere, and last Iudgement. And the same againe the 21 booke, chapter the first.

So that now out of S. Augustine, we haue found Prayer, Memorie at the Altar, Sacrifice, Fire which is tem­porall, and that too punishing the spirit, or ghost of the dead, euen be­fore the day of Generall Conslagra­tion at the day of Doome.

To thinke to answer all that hath benesaid, by opposing some few obscure places cull'd out of the same Father: and so, (were it possible) to force him to contradict himselfe, were in my iudgment, but verie bad payment. For first, this is not to [Page 104]produce euidences; but doubts; not to cleare, but to obscure difficulties; and consequently, ought to haue no force at all to thrust a man out of his pos­session. Possideo, quia possideo, still dasheth such weake opposition vpon the head. Secondly, it is but a poore shift, to make a Father seeme to stand up against himselfe, to the end he may stand with them. Thirdly it is to treate a holy Father vnworthily, to endeauour to draw his sense from his words,In his booke de Doctrina Christiana against his owne rule, and the Rule of Reason, which is, that clearer places should illustrate obscure pla­ces; not that obscure places should be industriously employed to clowde cleare places. That is but to put out the light, to see better; or rather to hate and flye the light, least it might lay them naked, and they be disco­uered by it. The worst of arguments was wōt to be, to ayme to proue an ob­scure thing, by a thing more obscure; and yet it is farre worse to darken a cleare thing by an obscure, and yet (forsooth) thinke to haue so prepo­sterous [Page 105]a proceeding passe for an ar­gument.

Our proceeding is not such: our Catholike custome is to pray for; to make Commemoration of; to Sacrifice at the Altar for the soules departed that they may be releeued, or freed from their paines which are caused by fire, before the day of iudgement. And we bring in our iudge saint Augustine, to whom we haue both appealed, pronouncing sentence for vs in tearmes, in the verie same wordes the Church doth beleeue and practise it. We doe not make his sentence for him, but take from him, such as he pleaseth to de­liuer it. We vse no violence to him to make him speake what we please, but we are well pleased with what he speakes. we goe not about to surprise him, and wrest a word from him, and then force it to our purpose, which was spoken only by the bye, while he was treating vpon another subiect. But wee take his iudgement from places, where, on sett purpose, he is handling that subiect which is in [Page 106]question betwixt vs.

In fine, wee take it not from one or a fewe (which is another Rule of reason, to vnderstand a fewe places by many places) but from abundance of places, all cleare and consonant, and to the life expressing the present prac­tice of the Catholike Church. Heare him againe and againe in these en­suing passages, which I will here pro­miscuously putt downe as they shall occurre; omitting yet a manie more.

S. Aug. de Ciu. Dei, l. 21. c. 16.

He speakes of Children soone after their infancie, and saies: If he haue receiued the Sacraments of our Media­tour, though he end his life euen in these yeares, that is, being translated out of the power of darknes, into the kingdome of Christ, he is not only not prepared for paines eternall, but shall not euen suffer anie purging torments after this life.

De Ciu. Dei, l. 21. c. 24.

The prayer of the Church, or of certaine pious people, are heard for those, who being regenerated in Christ, neither ledd se verie ill a life in this mortalitie, as they [Page 107]should be iudged vnworthie of such mer­cie; nor yet so verie well, as that they should be found not to neede such mer­cie.

De verb. Apost. Ser. 32.

It is not to be doubted, but the Dead are helped by the prayers of the holy Church, and the sauing Sacrifice, and almes, which are employed for their soules, that our Lord may deale more mercifully with them then their sinnes deserued; for the Vniuersall Church obserues this, de­liuered by their forefathers, that prayers should be made for those who died in the communion of the bodie and bloud of Christ, when at the Sacrifice they are re­membred in their place, and memorie is made that it is offered euen for them too.

And againe in the same place.

But let them employ these things (to witt) Oblations, Prayers, and guifts, or Almes-deeds, which helpe the soules de­parted, more obseruantly, instanly, and abundantly for them, to witt. the dead.

Enchir. c. 110.

It ought not to be denied that the soules of the dead are releeued by the pietie of their suruiuing friends, when the Sacri­fice of our Mediatour is offered for them, or almes are giuen in the Church.

And againe, in the same place.

When therefore the sacrifices, either of the altar, or what almes-deedes soeuer, are offered for all the dead which are bap­tised; they are thankesguings for such as are verie good: they are propitations for those who are not verie euill: and though to such as are verie euill, they be no helpes to the dead, yet are they some kind of com­forts to the liuing.

De verbis Apostoli, Serm. 17.

Therefore doth ecclesiasticall discipline obserue that which the faithfull know, when the Martyrs in that place are reci­ted at the Altar of God, where we pray not for them, (the Martyrs) but we pray for the rest of the departed, whereof comme­moration is made. For it is an iniurie to pray for a martyr, to whose prayers we our-selues ought to be commended.

De cura pro mortuis. Cap. 18.

Which being so, let vs not esteeme that the dead haue anie aduantage (by being buried in this or that part of the Church whereof he had spoken) saue only by the solemne supplications which we make for them, either in the Sacrifices of the Altar, or of praier, or almes-deedes. Though yet they profit not euerie one they are made for, but those alone who obtaine in their life time, that they may profit them.

De Haeresibus: haer. 53.

The Aerians tooke their names for à certaine Aerius, who being Priest, was said to be troubled he could not be made Bishop, and falling into the Arrians heresie, added some of his owne tenets, affirming that it was not lawfull to pray or offer Sacrifice for the Dead.

De cura pro mortuis c. 1.

In the bookes of the Machabees we reade that a sacrifice was offered for the dead. Howbeit though it were not at all read in the ancient Scriptures, the autho­ritie [Page 110]of the vniuersall Church which is euident in point of this custome, is uo small matter; where the commendation of the dead hath its proper place in the prayers of the priest, which are powred out to God at his Altar.

Here you will marke two things. The first is that saint Augustine es­teemed the Machabees to be Scrip­ture, since he argues for Purgatorie from it: and indeed he confirmes the same both in his seconde booke of Christian Doctrine, the eight Chap­ter; and also in his 18. booke of the Cittie of God 36. Chap. in these words. The bookes (to witt two) of the Macha­bees are held to be Canonicall, not by the Iewes, but by the Church. The seconde, that though there were no scripture for it, yet ought the authoritie of the vniuersall Church to preuayle, at it doth in many other things of greater cō se­sequence. Witnesse the said Saint in di­uers passages, which both the Catho­like and Protestant doe admitt of.

For first,Epist fun­damen. moued by the authoritie of the Church we beleeue the Gos­pell [Page 111]it selfe, which without it we should not beleeue. I would not, saith he beleeue the Gospell vnlesse the autho­ritie of the Catholike Church did moue me to it.

Secondly, we beleeue many things which are not in the Scripture, as that the sonne is consubstantiall with the Father: It is not found written in holy writt, saith he, and yet that it is said, is defended in the assertion of faith. That the Father is vnbegotten. We read not in those bookes (the scrip­tures) that the Father is vnbegotten: Epist. 174. and yet we make good that we ought to say so: in the same place. That the Holy Ghost is to be adored: Giue me say you (he meanes Maximinus an Arrian) some testimonies where the Holy Ghost is adored: as though, forsooth, (replyes saint Augustine) out of these things which we reade, we vnderstoode not also some things which we reade not. That it was written when the Apostle saint Paul was baptised, no mention being made of the rest of the Apostles: It is written when the Apostle saint Paul [Page 112]was baptised: and it is not written when the rest of the Apostles were baptised: and yet we must vnderstand that they also were baptised. Finally, that a child which cannot yet speake, is said to beleeue, and may be baptised. Be it farre from me to affirme that children beleeue not &c. he beleeues in another, who offended in another. It is answered (dicitur) he beleeues: and it is of force: and he is numbred among the faithfull baptised.

See what a necessitie is imposed vpon all Christians to haue some other infallible ground besides Scrip­ture, to stand vpon, both to make good Scripture it selfe (to witt that it is the true word of God: that there are so many bookes of it and no more: that we haue the true sense of it &c.) and many other maine grounds of Christianitie, which, you see, we dare not denye, while yet we can produce no formall scripture for them. Now what ground that is, let the same Saint Augustine deliuer. Saint Cyprian, faith he, doth admonish [Page 113]vs that we should run backe to the foun­taine, that is to the Apostolicall Tradi­tion, and so bring downe the chanells to our tymes. It is the best way, l 5. cap 26. contra Do­natistas. and to be done, without doubt. And againe it is manifest, that in a thing doubtfull, the authoritie of the Catholike Church confir­med by the order of Bishops succeeding one another, and the consent of people, Ex libro cō ­tra Mani­chaos Dist. 11.6. Palam. from the verie foundation of the seas of the Apostles, till this present tyme, is of force to faith (valet ad fidem.) And to know which is an Apostolicall Tradi­tion, which not,De Bap. con. Don. l. 4. c. 24. and l. 2. c 7. and Epist. 118. c. 1. the same saint Augus­tine leaues vs another Rule thrice ouer for fayling. What the VNIVER­SALL CHVRCH holds, and is not yet established in Councells, but is alwayes obserued, is most rightly beleeued to haue bene deliuered by no other then by Apos­tolicall authoritie. Whence he con­cludes that it is a most insolent madnesse to dispute whether that ought to be done, which the whole Church frequents all ouer the world. But the whole Church all ouer the world, in the yeare 1517. frequented (as all our ad­uersaries [Page 114]confesse, and condemne in vs) an vnblouddy sacrifice, prayer, almes, &c. for the dead, that they might be freed from their sinnes, &c. therfore it was (following saint Au­gustins phrase) and is, a most inso­lent madnesse to deny it.

In conclusion, either hath the pro­position and practice of the VNIVER­SALL CHVRCH auhoritie, to conuince the beleife of a thing not otherwise written, yea or no? If not: It were but meete that the simpler sorte should be instructed clearely and fairely vpon what infallible warranty they beleeue these ensuing points, which they meete not with in their Bible.

• 1. That Christians haue indeed the whole reuealed word of God.
• 2. That it is contayned in so many bookes, neither more nor fewer.
• 3. That the Epistle to the Hebrewes is a part of it, how euer it was some tymes doubted of.
• 4. That there is a certaine number of Sacraments, &c. as aboue out of saint Augustine.

BVt if you graunt me that the vni­versall Church hath such an in­fallible authoritie, and that vpon it you depend for the certaintie of the precedent articles, I may say with S. Augustine, you obserue by this of what importance the authoritie of the Cathol. Church is: but you must also answer me, why Catholikes may not with equall confidence depend vpon the same authoritie, in point of assurance of purgatorie? I am not able to discouer a disparitie, or apprehend how being held credible in the deli­uerie of those, she should not also be credible in this, since both are e­qually proposed: both relye vpon the same veracitie or credit. Be pleased to ponder this part well, and afford the world a cleare and satisfactorie answer. The grounds of Christianitie seeme to me to be shaken, if the Churches veracitie herein beviolated, and great pittie it were, that the animo­sitie to make good our priuate opi­nions, [Page 116]should betray Gods knowen truthes. An erring Disputant, saith saint Augustine, is pardonable in other questions, which are not yet maturely di­gested, De verbis Apost. Serm. 14. nor confirmed by the full authori­tie of the Church, their errour is to be borne with: but it must not aduance so farre, as to endeauour to shake the verie foundation of the Church.

THE FIRST TITLE BY WHICH Saint Gregorie makes good the Supremacie, is his owne words.

FIRST,l. 11.6.54. by his owne formall words in many places of his wor­kes: As in the 11^th booke 54. Chapt. where he saith, If answer be made that there was neither Metropolitane nor Pa­triarch, one must reply that the cause ought to be heard and iudged by the Sea Apostolike, which is the head of all the Churches.

2.l. 7. Ep. 63. Whereas he (to witt the Primate of Bizacium in Afrique) saith, he is subiect to the Sea Apostolique; if any fault be found in a Bishop, I know not what Bishop is not subiect to it. Marry when faults exact it not, all are equall in the way of humility.

3.Hom. 21. vpon the Gospell. Why God all mighty permitted him (Peter) whom he had appointed to be ouer all the Church, to be affrayd at the word of à maide, & to deny himselfe.

[Page 128]4.5. Pauit. Psalm. v. 9. And the temerity of his madnesse (he speakes of a certain Heretique) goes so farre, that he does challenge to himselfe the Roman Church, the head of all the Churches.

5.l. 6. Ep. 48. When I knew that Maximus was made Bishop, against reason & custome, I dispatched away letters that he should not presume to celebrate the solemnity of Masses. Which letters of mine being pub­lished in the Citty, &c. he caused pub­likely to be torne, & did publikely insult in contempt of the Sea Apostolike; which how I endure you know, who am readyer to dye then that the Church of Blessed Peter the Apostle, should degenerate in my dayes.

6.l. 6. Ep. 48. I earnestly beseech & exhort you with the affection of a Father, that eue­ry one would suspend himselfe from an vnlawfull communion; and that he would vtterly auoid such as the Sea Apostolique admitts not into the fellowship of her Communion, least that he thence stand guiltie in the sight of the eternall iudge, whence he might haue been saued.

7.l. 4. Ep. 34. Though Gregory's sinnes (saith he [Page 129]himselfe to Constantina Augusta) be so great as to deserue to suffer such things; yet the sinnes of Peter the Apostle are none, that he should merit to endure them in your reigne. Therfore I beseech you again & again, for God Allmighty's sake, that as the precedent Princes your Parents, sought for the fauour of saint Peter the Apostle, so also you would endeauour to seeke & conserue the same, not permitting that his honour may in any sort be dimi­nished with you (by reason of our Sinnes who serue him vnworthily) who may both now be a helper to you in all things, & hereafter may be able to absolue your sinnes.

8.l 7. Ep. 64 Whence haue they (the Grecians) till this day, that the subdeacons goe in Linnen-Coates (tunicis) but that they receiued it from their mother the Roman Church?

9.Ibid. As for that which they say of the Church of Constantinople, who doubts but it is subiect to the Sea Aposto­lique.

10.l. 7 Ep 54 Peruerse men &c. will not be subiect to the precepts of the Sea Apostolique; [Page 130]& they reprehend vs, as it were, in point of faith, l. 4. Ep. 32. which they know not.

Lastly, in his Epistle to Mauritius the Emperour, (being the very place, which is worthy to be obserued, where he exclaimes against that pompous title of vniuersall) saying: It is euident to all who know the Gospell that the care of the whole Church is committed by our Lords voyce to S. Peter the Apostle the Prince of all the Apostles: for to him it was said, Peter doest thou loue me? feede my sheepe, &c. beholde he receiues the keyes of the kingdome of heauen: the power of binding ad loosing is giuen to him: the care and principalitie (prin­cipatus, soueraigntie or dominion) of the whole Church is committed to him, and yet he is not called vniuersall Apostle.

OBSERVATION.

Receiue from saint Gregories owne mouth then, that the Sea Apostolique is the head of all the Churches: That all Bishops found in fault, are subiect to it: [Page 131]That Peter was placed ouer all the Churches: That the Roman Church is the head of all the Churches: That it is knowne to all that know the Gospell, that the Care of the whole Church is com­mitted by our Lord himselfe to Peter the Prince of all the Apostles: and that yet, he is not called vniuersall Apostle. What other thing is this, I pray, then to crye out with a lowde voyce, and to make open demon­stration to all the world, that while he exclaymes against the title of vniuer­sall Bishop; he refuses not the head­ship of all the Churches, but professeth to haue iurisdiction, and superinten­dencie ouer all the other Bishops. Archbishops, and Patriarkes; as doth partly appeare by what I haue alrea­die cited out of him: and more fully shall yet appeare in my ensuing dis­course.

THE II. TITLE WHEREBY saint Gregorie makes good the supre­macie, is, The exercice of such power all ouer the Christian world.

FIRST ouer the Bishops of Eu­rope;l. 12. Ep. 15. to s. Aug. in particular, ouer the Bi­shops of England, Let the Bishop of Yorke order 12. Bishops, and enioy the honour of a Metropolitane: but let all the Bishops of England be subiect to thy bro­therhood.

Secondly,l. 7. Ep. 112. ouer the Bishops of France. Granting the vse of the Pall to the Bishop of Auston, he saith: And withall we perceiued we were to grant, that the Church of the cittie of Auston should be after the Church of Lions, and to challenge to it selfe this place and rancke, by the fauour (indulgentia) of our Authoritie.

Thirdly ouer the Bishops of Spayne, saying. Let him, who presumed, while the innocent Bishop was yet aliue, to be or­dered [Page 133]in his Church against the Canons, being depriued of priesthood, be cast out of all Church-ministerie: and withall let him be kept in safe custodie, or els be sent vnto vs. Let the Bishops who ordered him, being depriued of the Communion of the body and bloud of our Lord for the space of six monthes, be appointed to doe pennance in a Monasterie.

Fourthly.l. 7. Ep. 32. Ouer the Bishops of Africa. In particular, thus to the Bi­shop of Carthage. By louing the Sea Apostolique, you baue recourse to the source of your office or dignitie, knowing whence priestly ordination had its be­ginning in Africa.

Againe.l. 10. Ep. 2. Writing to Columbus a Bishop of Numidie &c. he saith: You are diligently to examine all the contents of his Petition (to witt Donadeus Dea­con degraded by Victor a Bishop of Numidie) and if his complaint be ac­companied with truth, let canonicall ri­gour be vsed against his Bishop Vic­tor.

Fiftly.l. 2. Ep. 6. Ouer the Bishops of Greece. In particular, ouer Iohn Bi­shop [Page 134]of Iustiniana prima, in these words. As for the present, hauing first disannulled, and made of no effect the Decrees of thy sentence, we decree, by the authoritie of Blessed Peter Prince of the Apostles, that for thirtie dayes space thou shalt be depriued of the holy Communion, that with verie great pen­nance and teares, thou mayst preuayle with Almightie God to pardon thy so great an excesse. And if we shall come to perceiue that thou doest coldly performe our sentence, know that then, not barely thy iniustice, but the contumacie also of thy brotherhood, shall be more seuerely punished.

Againe.l. 5. Ep. 7. Writing to the Bishops of Epirus, he saith: Know that we haue sent a Pall to Andrew our brother and fellow-Bishop; and haue graunted (or confirmed) him all the priuiledges, which our predecessours conferred vpon his.

Againe. Writing to Iohn Bishop of Corinth,l. 4. Ep. 51. touching Secūdinus a Bishop whom he had deputed to examine and depose one Anastasius Bishop, quam (causam) ei examinandam iniunxi­mus, [Page 135]he saith: And because, in that sentence (whereby it is euident that the fore named Anastasius was iustly condem­ned, and deposed) our fore-mentioned brother and fellow Bishop so punished cer­taine persons, that he reserued them to our arbitrimēet. And a litle after speaking of another, we pardō him this fault, and we appoint that he should be receiued in his rancke and place. Againe. We will haue them, to witt, Euphemius and Thomas, to remayne deposed as they are: and we decree that they shall neuer more be recei­ued into holy orders, vnder what pretext of excuse soeuer.

Sixtly.l. 5. Ep. 14. Writing to Marinianus Bishop of Rauenna vpō the difference which was betweene his Church and Clau­dius the Abbot, he saith: And doe not you your selfe know, that in the cause which was agitated by Iohn Priest, a­gainst Iohn of Constantinople (our brother and fellow Bishop) recourse was made to the Sea Apostolique, following the Ca­nons, and the cause was ended (definita) by our Sentence. And thence saint Gre­gorie frames an argument a fortiori [Page 136]in these words which immediatly follow: If therfore the cause be deuolued to our knowledge euen from the Cittie where the Prince (to witt the Emperour) resides; how much more is the busines which is against you, to be determined, or iudged here, the trueth being knowne. The like speeches bearing a face of authoritie with them, are all his Epis­tles so full of (as may with ease be seene in D^r. Sander's visible Monar­chie) that who would take the paines, could hardly light vpon an Epistle, where he should not meete with thē. If he should looke vpon the 11. booke and 10. Epistle he would finde him instile the kings his sonnes, saying: according to the writing of our sonnes the most excellent kings &c. And in the end of the same Ep. And we command that all these things shall be obserued for euer, which are contayned in this our Decree, as well by thy selfe (he speakes to a cer­taine Abbot) as by all those who shall succeede in thy place and rancke, or whom it may otherwise concerne. And if any king, Priest, Iudge or secular person, [Page 137]hauing knowledge of this our Constitu­tion, shall offer to oppose it, let him be depriued of his honour and dignitie, and acknowledge that he stands guiltie of the iniquitie committed in the sight of the diuine iudgement. And vnlesse he doe either restore the things which he wickedly tooke away, or expiate his ini­quitie with the teares of worthy repen­tance; let him be kept from the most sacred body and bloud of our Lord God, Iesus Christ our Redeemer, and be lyable to a strict punishment at the day of Doome,

If vpon the 4. booke, 34. Chap. there he excommunicates or suspends from Masse the Bishop of Salonitane, who was made without his knowledge against custome as he complaynes: The Bishop of the Cittie of Salonitane was ordered without my owne, or my Nuncius his knowledge, wherein a thing was done, which neuer happened vnder the reigne of any the preceeding Princes. And concludes with a couered reflec­tion, or reprehension against the Em­perours themselues. And, saith he, if [Page 138]the causes of Bishops who are committed to me, are carried with my most pious Lords, by syding and the supportation of others, what doe I, vnhappie man, in this Church? But, I giue thankes to God, and impute it to myne owne sinnes, that my Bishops should contemne me, and flie to secular Iudges for refuge a­gainst me.

In conclusion, fearing to trespasse vpon the patience of my gentle Rea­der, I omitt a number of other cleare passages, and appeale to euery Chris­tian heart, whether it be not euen in­dustriously to endeauour ones owne losse, to dwell vpon the words of an Authour, which manifestly contayne some doubtfull and odious sense, and thence force the conclusion to what our passion aymes at, without going on with the same Authour to heare him out, and to take along with vs what he plainely, positiuely and fre­quently deliuers vpon the same sub­iect. It is true sainct Gregorie cryes out against the proud title of vniuer­sall Bishop, yet speakes he not in a [Page 139]limited sense, and points he not par­ticularly at what he feares in it? say­ing: Least all priests should be thereby depriued of due honour: Least he should endeauour to be called Bishop alone &c. as I haue intimated from himselfe aboue. pag. 123. But is it not also true, that he more then any (such is God's prouidence) preaches, proclaimes, practises the power of supreme Head of the vniuersall Church? Tearming the Sea of Rome, THE HEAD OF ALL THE CHVRCHES. NOT KNOWING WHAT BISHOP IS NOT SVBIECT TO IT. WHERE PETER WAS APPOINTED BY ALMIGHTY GOD TO BE OVER ALL THE CHVRCH: THAT NO COMMVNION IS LAW­FVLL WHICH THAT CHVRCH ADMITTS NOT. THAT IT IS THE MOTHER CHVRCH: THAT THEY ARE PERVERSE MEN WHO WILL NOT BE SVBIECT TO IT. Will you heare these propositions secōded and confirmed by his publique prac­tices, [Page 140]which suffer no glosse? Is it not he who gouernes and giues lawes to Europe, Afrique and Asia?

Doth he not order all the Bishops of England to be vnder saint Augustine? Doth he not sende the Pall to Auston in France, and by the fauour of his autho­ritie rancke it next to Lions?

Doth he not in Spayne, depriue a Bishop (ordered against the Canons) of Priesthoode and all Ecclesiasticall mi­nisterie, depriuing the Bishops too who consecrated him of the body and blood of Christ, &c.

Doth he not in Afrique command Columbus to vse canonicall rigour against Bishop Victor, if Donadeus Deacon whom he (Victor) had degraded, had right on his side.

Doth he not in Greece, by the autho­ritie of Blessed Peter prince of the Apostles, disannulle what the Bishop of Iustiniana Prima had done, and depriue him of the holy Communion for thirtie dayes?

Doth he not professe openly, that the cause of the Patriarch of Constantinople (though the Emperour resided there) was, according to the Canons, deuolued to [Page 141]the Sea of Rome, and was ended by his SENTENCE?

If we will then heare Gregorie, lets heare him throughly: If we fly to his authoritie, let vs stand to his verdict. Let not his word be taken where it pleases you, and reiected where it displeases you, for so I shall haue cause to make vse of a passage of saint Augustine against the Manichees in in Ep. Fundam. and say: Doe you con­ceiue me a foole in such a measure, that without giuing any reason at all, I should beleeue what you please, and what you please not, I should not beleeue? Noe, that were not to deale fairely and inge­nuously: If Gregorie must be our vmpire, LET ROME BE TEAR­MED THE HEAD OF ALL THE CHVRCHES, as he stiles it: and exercise iurisdiction ouer all the Churches, as we haue seene him prac­tise, and let not VNIVERSALL BISHOP which we cannot, or will not vnderstand aright, stand betwixt vs as a wall of diuision, a seed-plott of irreconcileable discorde: The [Page 142]fortunes of Greece depend not vpon it; nor Christian Beatitude. If it signi­fie head or chiefe-bishop of the VNIVERSALL CHVRCH, it is but ROMES DVE: if it would entayle the whole right, power, and dignitie of Bishop vpon Rome alone, Rome reiects it as sacrilegious and blasphemous, and so doe we.

M^r Cosens his third Mediū or argu­ment was, that appeales to Rome were prohibited in the Mileuitane and 6^th. Carthaginean Councell; and that vnder paine of excommunication. Ergo the Africans did not acknow­ledge the Supremacie of Rome.

Carre. My answer was, that for mi­nor or lesser persons, or minor and lesser causes, appeales were prohibited; I granted it: That Appeales were for­bidden for Maior or greater persons, at least in maior or greater Causes, I de­nyed it. And consequently I denyed the Conclusion intended, to witt, Ergo the Africans did not acknowledge the Supremacie of Rome. And the rea­son is; because the Supremacie of [Page 143]Rome is discerned, and exercised in greater causes, as in matter of faith, or the generall gouernment of the vni­uersall Church.

For such they precisely are which Rome did alwayes challenge, as pro­perly belonging to her owne iuris­diction. Heare in confirmation of this, what saint Gregorie writes to the Bishop of Iustiniana prima l. 2. ep. 46. If any cause of faith, or crime, or Money-matter, be commenced against our fellow-Bishop Adrian Bishop of Thebes, if it be a thing of little impor­tance, let it be iudged by our Nuncio'es (Responsales) who are, or shall be in the Royall Cittie (Constantinople) but if it be a matter of weight, let it be referred hither, to the Sea Apostolique. And such Africa neuer denyed to Rome, to witt, aknowledgment of iurisdic­tion, and subiection in GREATER CAVSES, but contrarily, had fre­quent recourse to the Popes of Rome with due submission and aknowledg­ment. Yea the verie Fathers (to the nūber of 61.) of the Mileuitane Coun­cell [Page 144]wrote to Pope Innocētius in these tearmes. Wheras God by his speciall grace hath placed thee in the Sea Apostolique, and hath giuen vs thee such an one (talē, one so qualified, or so good) in our dayes, that it would rather be imputed to our negligence, if we should conceale from thy veneration, what we iudge ought to be represented for the Churches aduantage; then that we neede to apprehend, that thou wouldst esteeme it importune or otherwise slight the same: we beseech thee daigne to employe thy pastorall care in the great dangers of the infirme members of Christ: for a new and most pernicious heresie, &c. Againe in the same place; while we intimate these things to thy Apostolicall heart, we neede not vse ma­ny words to exaggerate so great an im­pietie, which we doubt not thou wilt so deeply resent, that thou wilt not be able to contayne thy selfe from correcting them &c. Againe, But we conceiue (by the mercy of our Lord God Christ Iesus, who daignes both to direct thy counsells, and to heare thy prayers) that they who hold those peruerse and pernicious tenets, [Page 145]will easily yeeld to the authoritie of thy Holinesse which is drawne from the au­thoritie of the holy Scriptures. And in the end of the same Epistle, We addressed these writings to your Holinesse from the Councell of Numidia (to witt from Mileui) imitating our fellow-Bi­shops of the Prouince of Carthage, who we perceiue haue written vpon this subiect to the sea Apostolike, which (sea Apostolike) thou a blessed man dost illu­strate, (or which your holinesse doth gouerne, quam Beatus illustras.)

Thus did the whole Councell de­ferre to the Sea Apostolike. Heare now how this respect is receiued by Pope Innocentius. With care, saith he, and congruitie did you exhibite respect to the Apostolicall honour, (to his honour, I say, who besides what was without, had the solicitude of all the Churches) in see­king what sentence you are to hold in points of great difficultie, following there­in the forme of the ancient rule, which you know the whole world obserues with me. Behold how Pope Innocentius as­cribes the honour done to himselfe, [Page 146]to S. Peter: as to one who had the care of all the Churches, and declares, that in hauing recourse to him, to know what they should hold in points of GREAT DIFFICVLTIE, they doe but follow the ancient forme of proceeding, which (as he saith they knew) all the world obserues. Heare againe, S. Augustine confirming the same: What answer could that holy man returne to the Africane Councells, but that which the Apostolicall Sea and Ro­mane Church holds of old perseuerantly with the rest? And what forme of pro­ceeding did they (amongst the rest) expresse? Marrie that they were to betake themselues to his Pastorall care in the great dangers of the infirme mem­bers of Christ, as to condemne Heresie, &c. That they were to intimate such things to his Apostolicall heart to haue them corrected: That the authoritie of his Holinesse, is drawne out of the autho­ritie of holy Scripture. Is this to misac­knowledge or deny the supremacie of Rome? No: let onely this forme of proceeding be obserued; this cor­rection [Page 147]endured; this authoritie be acknowledged, and we shall thus farre most willingly ioyne hands, and make the verie Councells which are alleadged against vs, the modell of our practice. So farre falls M^r. C. short in his proofes drawen from the Councell of Mileui: Will you heare how much better he speeds in the 6. Councell of Carthage, where it is pretended, that appeales to Rome were prohibited, yea euen in Maior persons too, as in Bishops, Metropo­litans &c? Certes, if that Councell be well looked into, and with an indiffe­rent eye, it will be found so farre from concluding against the supremacie, that it doth absolutely conuince the truth of it. for

First, what was there said, was said against the manner, and frequencie, not against the right of Appeales; as manifestly appeares by the Epist. of the Africane Bishops to Pope Cele­stine in these tearmes.Conc. A [...]ri [...] c. 15. The office of a due salutation being premised, we beseech you with our whole affection, that you doe [Page 148]not easily admitt such as come from hence to your eares, and that you would no more receiue to Communion such as we may haue excommunicated, &c. let not then those who were barred from Communion in their owne Prouinces, appeare to be restored to Communion by your Holinesse, with precipitation, and otherwise then is meete.

Behold the companie of the Bi­shops of Afrike become humble suitors to the Bishop of Rome (and consequently acknowledge his iuris­diction, otherwise it were a most sillie part to sue to him in those tearmes) not that he would not admitt any ap­peales at all, but not easily admitt them &c? Not that he would restore none at all to Communion &c. (which yet they should haue done, and haue de­nyed he had any such authoritie, had they opposed the supremacie) but onely that it should not appeare that they were reslored with preoipitation, and otherwise then was meete, alwayes pre­supposing such a power.

Secondly, what was said, was said in [Page 149]point of Minor causes, as in ciuill, pecu­niarie, scandalous and criminall mat­ters &c. (such as was that of Apiarius an Africane Priest, and that of An­thonie Bishop of Fussal: both which appealed to Rome, and their Ap­peales were there admitted) to proue or disproue which, productions of witnesses would often be necessa­rie, to witt, people of diuers sexes and ages, litle fitt to vndergoe the difficulties of such a voyage: to say nothing of the charges, or other im­pediments, as is expressed in the Epist 105. of the Africane Councell to the Pope of Rome, Celestine.

Thirdly, whatsoeuer was said, no­thing was done; what euer was pro­posed, nothing was enacted or de­creed against the right of Maior per­sons, to witt Bishops, in their appeales to Rome, who kept their priuileges, according to that of S. Augustin, speaking of Ceoilianus Archbishop of Carthage deposed by a Councell of seauentie Bishops, saying: He might haue contemned the conspiring multitude [Page 150]of his enemyes, because he saw himselfe in communion with the Church of Rome by Communicatory letters, wherin the Principality (or soueraigntie) of the Sea Apost. did alwayes flourish, where he was prepared to pleade his cause. Nay what was euen proposed too, was done dependently of what should be dis­couered in the Councell of Nice, which they had sent for to the Patri­archall Churches in the East; and that with all possible submission to the Church of Rome the while: wit­nesse their owne words as they are put downe in the said 6. Councell,In Ep. ab omni Con­cilio Afri­cano ad Bo­nifacium Vrbis Ro­mae Episco­pum. in answer to the propositions contay­ned in the Monitorie sent to them frō Pope Zozimus, by Faustinus Bishop his Legate &c. Wherein he recom­mended to them the obseruance of the 7. canon of the Councell of Sar­dis indeede,Conc. Sar­dis. cap. 7. but vnder the name of the Councell of Nice, it being estee­med an appendix of this, touching Appeales to Rome, as followes. But if he (to witt a Bishop iudged and de­posed by the Assemblie of Bishops of [Page 151]the same Countrie) who demands to haue a new hearing of his cause, haue by petition moued the Bishop of Rome, to send a Priest (è latere suo, commonly called Legatus à latere) it shall be in the Bishops power to doe what he will and what he iudges fitt: And if he decree to send some, endowed with his authoritie from whom they are sent, who being pre­sent with the Bishops, should iudge, it is in his free disposition. And if he beleeue the Bishops sufficient to put a period to the affaire, he shall doe what in his owne most wise counsell, he iudges behoofull.

Now the Africane Bishops, not finding this in the Councell of Nice, and not otherwise being acquainted with the Councell of Sardis, saue onely whith a spurious one, (made neere Sardis by the Arrians) as S. Aug. giues testimonie, and fauoured by the Donatists: And on the other side, being wearied out with frequent, costly and disorderly appeales (as in the present with that of Apiarius a simple priest) for the second tyme, were willing doubtlesse to haue ligh­ted [Page 152]vpon some lawfull redresse in that behalfe: yet marke, I beseech you, with what humilitie and respect to the Sea of Rome, it is sought for. They sue, they supplicate, they protest in the in­terim, to obserue what was enjoyned them by the Popes Legates, which certainly they had had no reason to doe, had they apprehended no autho­ritie in the Pope to command.

We professe (saith Alypius Bishop of Tagaste) that we are willing to ob­serue what is established in the Councell of Nice, In the 6. Councell of Carthage. and a little after, but we finde it not as our brother Faustinus brought it. And therevpon he applyes himselfe to Aurelius Bishop of Carthage, that the Acts of the Councell of Nice should be sent for into Greece, that all ambiguitie might be remoued, saith he, and concludes, Howbeit We professe, as I said before, that in the meane while we will obserue these things, till the entire Coppies (exemplaria concilij Niceni) shall come.

With which the Popes Legate Fau­stinus was so fully satisfied, that he [Page 153]pronounced vpō it, Nor doth your sanc­titie fore-iudge or doe a preiudice to the Church of Rome &c. in that our brother and fellow-Bishop Alypius daigned to say the Canons were doubtfull: but onely please to write these verie things to our holy and most Blessed Pope &c.

To which Aurelius Archb. of Carth. replyed. Besides these things which we haue promised in the Acts, we must of ne­cessitie withall, most fully intimate by the letters of our Townes, euery thing we treate of, to our holy brother, and fellow Priest Boniface. Which the whole Councell seconded with, Placet.

And we professe, adds Aug. Bishop of Hippon, we will obserue this, sauing a more diligent inquisition about the Coun­cell of Nice.

Finally, the whole Councell re­solues to expect the Actes of the Councell of Nice, authenticated vn­der the three Patriarches hands whereby, say they, the chapters (which are contayned in the present instru­ctions (commonitorio) of Faustinus &c.) being there found, shall be streng­thened [Page 154]by vs, or not being found, shall be more fully handled in a subsequent Synode collected to that effect.

Let now indifferent persons iudge what could euer be spoken with more submission and indifferencie, and lesse entrench vpon the Popes knowen au­thoritie, which euen by this their pro­ceeding, clearely discouers it selfe, and shines, as it were, through this seeming miste of the Africane oppo­sition. Otherwise

• 1.
  In Ep ad Cel [...]st. Gone. Afric. c. 15.
  Why is a Councell expressely called in obedience to Pope Cele­stine.
• 2. And why doth the same Pope giue this honorable testimonie of S. Aug. who was one of the cheife supposed Antiappellants, that for his life and merits they alwayes had him in their communion, and that he was neuer tou­hed with so much as a rumour of any sinister suspition?
• 3. Why did the same S. August. in cause of an Appeale made by Bishop Anthonie of Fussal, to Pope Cele­stine, haue free recourse to him as to [Page 155]caompetent Iudge, instructing and commending the cause vnto him, ac­knowledging that some for certaine faults, the verie Sea Apostolike (as he saith ep. 261.) iudging, or confirming the iudgements (or sentences) of others, were neither depriued of Episcopall digni­tie, nor yet left altogether vnpunished: desiring him to command all the things directed to him (to wit the Processe) to be read before &c. It was neither for want of witt, vertue nor learning sure, for in that qualitie what Pope might not rather haue had recourse to him?
• 4. Why is Faustinus admitted into their Councell, and permitted to pro­pose the Popes pleasure which they promise to obserue till farther inqui­rie be made in a matter ministring iust cause of doubt?
• 5. Why is Apiarius (a turbulent and wicked priest) in vertue of the Popes release, (by prouision as it is called) and by his order, admitted to a second hearing in Afrike, after he had bene twice cast out by the votes of the Bi­shops there?
• [Page 156]6. Why doth Faustinus himselfe pronounce in the full assembly, that by this their proceeding no preiudice was done to the Sea of Rome?
• 7. Why did Aurelius esteeme it a point of necessitie to impart all the particulars of their treatie to Pope Boniface?
• 8. Finally, why is it concluded by the vnanimous consent of the whole Councell, that if the things which Faustinus had in his instructions, be found in the Actes of Nice, they will confirme it, If not (they doe not say they will forthwith cast of obedience to the Church of Rome) they will call another Councell, and treate the busines more fully?

But I will yet goe on and say, Fourthly, put case I would giue what can neuer be proued, nay what is con­trarie to the knowen truth of the Fact: That the Africans opposition had bene against the right of Ap­peales to Rome, not against the māner onely: and that in maior persons, and causes too; in a word, that what they [Page 157]proposed onely, had bene decreed also: and that conciliariter too, yet how would this conclusion be made good by M^r. C. Ergo the Pope of Rome is not supreame head of the Church? Certainely in a Protestant sense it could not, sith they affirme that euen Generall Coun­cells &c. both may erre, and haue somtymes erred, in the 21. article of the 39. Ergo a fortiori, this of Africa which was but a Prouinciall Councell, may haue erred, and consequently one should be conuinced of rashnes, to conclude any thing out of it (especially in mat­ter of faith) till mens consciences were assured, that though it might, yet indeede it did not erre here in which how it should he made good I am not wise enough to guesse. Nor yet can it be made an argument ad hominem, and conclude against a Catholike, for he doth not place the infallibilitie of the Church in the decree of a prouinciall, but in the Definition of a Generall Councell. Ergo nothing followes hence neither. Ergo (to be short) I will conclude this part with these fewe tes­timonies [Page 158]of the African Fathers, as well before as after this 6. Councell of Carth. in point of the Popes Supre­macie; omitting a number of most pregnant places out of other Fathers: partly for breuities sake, and pratly because the Africans are most concer­ned herein.

Tertull. l. de Pudicitia c. 1. n. 5.

He styles the Pope of Rome the High priest and Bishop of Bishops, and tearmes the Church of Rome,In Praesc. [...]. 36. n. 212. Happie Church, to whom the Apostles powred out all their doctrine together with their bloud.

S. Cyprian.

The Primacie (or chiefe place, rule and authoritie,In l de vni­tate Eccle­siae. the word Primatus being so Englished by the best Gram­marians) is giuen to Peter &c.

They dare sayle to the Chaire of Peter and to the Principall or chiefe Church. Epis. 55. ad Cornelium Papam.

And writing to Stephen Pope of Rome, he saith, Let thy letters be dis­patched into the Prouince of Arles, and to the people there residing, whereby Mar­ciane (who being Bishop of Arles fa­uoured the Nouatian heresie) being [Page 159]excommunicated, another may be substi­tuted in his place and the flocke of Christ may be gathered together, which to this day is contemned, being dispersed and wounded by him.

Optatus Mileuitanus.

A Bishops chaire was first conferred vpon Peter in the Cittie of Rome: In l. 2. cont. Parmenia­num. wherein the HEAD of all the Apostles, Peter, sate &c.

Victor Vticensis.

And especially the Romane Church which is the HEAD of all the Churches. In l. 2. de Persec. Van.

S. Augustine l. 2. de Bap. contra

Donat.

Peter the Apostle, in whom the Pri­macie of the Apostles, had the preemi­nencie, with so exceellent a grace, (or ad­uantage.)

Againe. Like as all the causes of Mas­tership were in our Sauiour, In quaest. Noui Test. q. 75. so after our Sauiour they are all conteyned in Peter; for he constituted him to be the HEAD of them (the Apostles) that he might be the Pastor of our Lords flocke, [Page 160]Eugenius who was one of Aurelius his Successours in the Archbisho­pricke of Carthage.

The Roman Church is the HEAD of all the Churches.

Fulgentius de Incarn. & Gratia c. 11.

That which the Roman Church (which is the HEAD or toppe of the world, holds) and teaches, and which the whole Christian world, together with it, both beleeues without hesitation to Iustice, and doubts not to confesse to faluation.

I conclude then, that since it is most euident, that the Africans were for vs Catholikes both in their words and practices, as well before and in the fore said Councells, as after the same, it is altogether in vaine for the Pro­testants, thence to hope for any helpe or support to their Cause.

Now M^r. C. hauing returned you a faire, full, and satisfactorie answer to each of your obiectiōs: permit me the fauour of one of your setled answers, to that one onely demand which I then made, and often iterated, and still iterate, as being the verie summe [Page 161]and abridgement of all controuersies to witt, where was your Church in the yeare 1500. &c. till the yeare 1517. when Luther began to storme?

This is the rule I haue bene taught by the ancient Fathers First by Ire­naeus, who had the happinesse to haue seene Policarpe S Iohns scholler. We, saith he, can number those, who were in­stituted Bishops in the Churches by the Apostles, and their success [...]urs euen vnto vs, who taught, or knew noe such thing as these doe madly fancie to themselues. And a little after, But whereas it is too long to nūber the successions of all the Churches in such a volume as this, we cōfound all those who by any meanes gather more then they ought, either by their wicked self-compla­cencie, or vaine glorie, or els by their owne blindnes, and erroneous sense, by pointing out that tradition which that greatest, most ancient and most knowne Church to all men, founded and established at Rome by the two most glorious Apostles Peter and Paul, and by faith announced to men, brought downe euen vnto vs, by the suc­cessions of Bishops; for vnto this Church [Page 162]by reason of its more powerfull principa­litie, euery Church ought to resort, that is, all the faithfull all ouer the world, wherein that Traditiō which is from the Apostles, is conserued by those which are all ouer (vndique.) And so names the Popes from Linus who succeeded S. Peter &c. till Eleutherius, who was in his tyme of whome he saith, Now Eleutherius in the twelueth place hath the Bishopricke from the Apostles, and he adds: By this ordination and succession the TRADITION which is in the Church from the Apostles and the pro­clamation of Truth is brought downe vnto vs: And this is a most absolute demon­stration (plenissima ostensio) that it is conserued in the Church from the Apostles till this day, and is deliuered ouer in truth.

Behold the succession of Bishops, is esteemed by him, and deliuered vnto vs, for a certaine demonstration, that those who haue it on their side, haue the same liuely faith conserued euen from the Apostles tyme till this day.

Secondly, by the learned Tertul­lian in the same age, saying:In Prae­scri p. c. 32. Let them produce the origin's of their Churches; let them declare the row or processe of their Bishops, so running downe from the be­ginning by successiōs, that that first Bishop may haue had some one of the Apostles, or Apostolicall men, which yet perseuered with the Apostles, for his Authour and Predecessour. Let the Heretikes, saith he a little after, euen forge any such thing if they can. And he counts, Peter, Linus, Cletus, Clemens, Anacetus, Auarestus, Alexander, Sixtus &c.

Thirdly, Optatus Mileuitanus,In 4 Tom. carm contra Marcion. saying: In that singular (vnica) Chaire, Peter first sate, to whom Linus did succeede &c. to Iulius Liberius, to Liberius Da­masus, to Damasus Siricius at this day, who is our fellow; with whom (or in whom) all the world agrees with vs in one societie of Communion, by the com­merce of letters formed (to witt a kind of circular or communicatorie letters vsed in those tymes to discouer them to be of the same cōmanion) Produce the origine of your chaire, you who will [Page 164]needs challenge the Holy Church to your selues.

Fourthly S. Augustine,In his Ep. 165. thus: If the order or processe of Bishops who succeede one another be considerable, how much more certainly, and indeed sauingly, doe we count from Peter himselfe &c. For Linus succeeded Peter &c. and so coun­ting downe to Anastasius, who then was Pope, he cōcludes in these words: in this ranke or lyne of succession, no Do­natist (Protestant) Bishop is found &c.

Now to know of what considera­tion and weight the succession is with the same S. Augustine, lets take it from himselfe in his Ep. Fundamenti cap 4. where he professeth, that the succession of priests, from the verie Sea of Peter the Apostle till this present Bishop-pricke, most iustly retaynes him in the bo­some of the Catholike Church.

That this is a reasonable demand in it selfe, I am most confident, be­cause Fathers so learned and able, prouoked to it in their tymes, with so much confidence, and taught others to doe the same. It is necessarie, saith [Page 165]Tertullian,Praescrip. c. 20. that euery familie should be brought backe and reduced to its origine. And that it is reasonable in particular from vs, it seemes no lesse euident, because what we demand we are rea­die to exhibite: to discerne whether you or we are true successours to S. Peter, we name our men immediatly from him, who haue succeeded one another till this day, till this present Popedome of Innocentius: and we desire you, fairely to produce the like euidence, or els cease vniustly to pre­tende the succession which you can shew no right to. Finally that it is the onely short and sure way to discerne trueth from falshood which is the onely thing we ought to ayme at, the great Tertull. testifies and makes ma­nifest. What the Apostles preached, saith he, that is, what Iesus Christ re­uealed vnto them, ought not to be tryed, Praescrip. c. 21. nor proued, saue onely by the same Churches which the Apostles founded, by preaching vnto them by word of mouth, or after­wards by their Epistles. Which things being so, it is euident thence, that all [Page 166]doctrine which doth conspire or agree with those Apostolicall Churches which are the Mothers (matrices) and sources of faith, is to be esteemed true, as holding without all controuersie, what the Churches receiued of the Apostles, the Apostles of Christ, Christ of God. Marrie all other doctrine ought to be preiudged of falsitie, which sauours against the Truth of the Churches, Apostles, Christ, and God &c. But we Catholikes (miscalled Papists) communicate for the present and did communicate with the Apostolicall Church of Rome in her Pastour Alexander the VI. in the yeere 1500. as holding no doctrine contrarie to it, but conspiring with it; therefore our Doctrine is to be iudged true, the contrarie to be preiudged false: This (concludes Tertullian) is an EVIDENCE of Truth: or accor­din to Irenaeus, plenissima ostensio, a most full DEMONSTRATION.

Such a Demonstration it is which we demand of you in the hehalfe of your Protestant Church from the yeere 1500. downeward: of your Church, I [Page 167]say, whether you define it as in the 39. Art. The visible Church of Christ is a congregation of faithfull men, Art. 19. in which the pure word of God is preached, and the Sacraments be duely ministred &c. Or as you describe it by oppositiō to ours, tearming it a Congregation of men &c. which opposeth Masses vnbloudie Sacrifice, adoration of the consecrated hoste, worship of Angels and Saints, and prayer to them, Purgatorie, the Supremacie, the infallibilitie of the Church &c.

Assigne the place where this Con­gregation appeared, giue vp the names, at least of some of their chiefe Bishops, or Pastours, or Doctors, or Elders.

Verifie that they preached against the Masse, vnbloudie Sacrifice &c.

Rationall and modest men, will iudge I am spareing enough in these my demands, sith it is to goe no fur­ther then a Definitione ad definitum, to know where this Cōgregation &c. then was, yea euen your owne men con­fesse it: For will notFulke against Fulke say that Pastors and Doctors haue alwayes [Page 168]bene in the Church,Heskins and Sanders p. 69 and that they haue continually from Christ to Luthers tyme, resisted false doctrine? will not others maintaineBācroft in Recognitio­ne pag. 441.: That the administration of the word and Sacraments, is absolutely necessarie to saluation. Willet in his synopsis pag. 71. That the Church continues no longer then it hath these markes Hiper in his common places l 3. p. 548.. That these markes ought to be externall and visible, to the end men may know where the Church is, and to what societie euery one of the faithfull ought to ioyne himselfe. FinallyWhitgift in Def. p. 465., that the Church of God is not to be shut vp in one king­dome &c.

My demand is sparing enough then, I say, for I might well require further (according to the Ancient Fathers Rules aboue) to haue it euidently proued, that such a Church or Con­gregation had alwayes bene, in all tymes and places, one and the same, and that too made good by continuall, and vninterrupted, succession: that so it might appeare to haue descended from some of the Apostles, and con­sequētly be indeed, as the true Church is defined in the Nicene Creede [Page 169]one, holy, Catholike, Apostolique. Howbeit knowing well that neuer yet any Protestant hath returned a faire answer, euen to these few demands, I will presume you will find it worke enough for the present, to point vs out, within the tyme prefixed,

The place where the Congrega­tion was assembled.

The names of the Preachers, or Preacher at least, with euidence that he preached or held the Doctrine of the thirtienyne Art. or what els may be meant by the pure word of God: or, op­posed that which is contayned in the Councell of Trent.

And that they, or he, duely admi­nistred the Sacraments, (and that but two onely) according to Christs ordi­nance &c.

Doe not, I beseech you, as you some­tymes did, name S. Ignatius. That is too prodigious a leape, at once to skippe aboue 1400. yeares back­wards, and yet not proue your affir­mation neither, to which euery dis­putant is lyable. I could with like faci­litie [Page 170]name him too, and yet you would not admitt that for good payment. You will please to remem­ber, the thing I demand is, that you would acquaint vs with the names of some of your Bishops, or Pastours &c. in the beginning of the 16. Age not in the end of the first. As S. Igna­tius passed too tymely for our present purpose, so Bishop Tunstall and B. Gardner came too sate (though you made no bones to name them too) but sure you were not serious with your friends in a subiect which exacted it; or els your poore answer is a plaine conuiction how desperate your cause is. They haue both left learned workes behind them which will euer speake them Roman Catholikes.Tunstall. pag 47. de verit. Corp. Christi. Ed. Parisianae 1554. The Transubstantiation, and theIdem in codem lib. pag. 93. Sacrifice of the Masse, are not tenets of the Protestant Church, to name no more.Et Gard. in Confu­tatione &c. pag. 73. Nor did Bishop Tunstall sure dye a Prisoner in Lambeth, in Queene Elisabeths tyme, for being a Protestant.Idem in codem lib. p. 5. If this assertion then (to witt, that Bishop Tunstall and [Page 171]Bishop Gardner helped to continue the succession of the Protestant Church) which came accompanied with noe countenance or apparence of Truth, were tearmed impudent, what wrong were done to it? since it could not fall from a man, as hauing any thing of satisfaction, any face of reason, but as a Mercurie of euery wood, to stand in the light, and to stoppe the course of Truth; which S. Augustine might haue haply tear­med inanissimam vocem temeritatisque plenissimam l. de moribus Ecclesiae Cath. c. 29. For was it euer written, euer affirmed, euer called in question by any? By any! I doe not say by Catho­likes, but euen by Protestants them­selues? Nay doe not euenIn l. de Praesulibus Anglia in vita Tun­stalli Good man andIn Elisa­betha pag. 37. Camden deliuer the contrarie and put it out of all doubt?

Doe not flie to the Catholike Ro­mane Church neither: that were too poore a shift, to begge a succession of her, against whose Idolatrie you dayly crye out. Nor is it that Church we enquire after, we know that that [Page 172] Cittie placed vpon a hill neuer lay hidd: that Tabernacle seated in the sunne, was alwayes illustrious, constant, perma­nent: we can bring in, reum confitentem vpon that subiect, we haue conui­ctions from our Aduersaries owne mouthes.The sur­ueyer of the pretended discipline 6.8. Priests of all sorts, together with the people, frō the topp to the toe were drowned in the puddles (or dregges) of poperie, saith one. Euen 1260. yeares the Pope and his Clergie possessed the out­ward and visible Church of Christians raygning without any debatable contradi­ction, saith another.Luther de Capt. Bab. de Bap. The Popes tyrānie for many ages hath extinguished Faith &c. saith a third. This Idolatrous Ro­mane Harlot then, this chaire of pes­tilence, this whore of Babylon (for thus yours please to qualifie the Spouse of Christ, his wholly faire, in whom there is found no spott or blemish) was easily found, by such as euen sought her not; she liued, she raigned, soueraignely too, without contradiction; entirely without limita­tion or reserue, ouer priest and people; perseuerantly, euen for the space of 1260. [Page 173] yeares. But we desire (Remember I pray) to haue the obligation to be ledd to the Protestants Church within the tyme prefixed: to heare their ser­mons: to see the administration of their two Sacraments onely: let this be shewen and we are readie to com­municate with them vnder what kinde or kinds they please. But if, as it in­deed neuer was, so it be impossible it should be proued; nay if the same be publikely professed by your owne Au­thours, saying, In the ages past there was no face of a true Church: for some ages the pure preaching of the word vanished,Inst. l. 4. c. 1. § 11. so Caluin. From 400. yeares and more the Religion of Christ was wholly turned into Idolatrie, addsin his Acts pag. 767. Fox. The Church was at that tyme inuisible and could not be shewen, confesseth Regiuslib. Apol. pag. 176.: The Truth was then vn­knowne and vnheard of, when Martin Luther, &c. openly pronouncethIn Apo. p. 4. c. 4. Diuis. 2. I uell: We say that for many ages before Luthers tyme, a generall Apostasie ouer­spred the face of the earth, nor was our Church in that tyme conspicuous (or vi­sible) [Page 174]to the world, concludesIn exposit. symb. p. 400. Perkins) permitt me to aske by what iniqui­tie are poore soules fedd, or rather starued, with falsitie? and to conclude with that strongly reasoning Tertul­lian, in the person of the Catholike Church, saying: who are you? when, and whence came you? what doe you doe in my possession, being none of myne? By what right dost thou (ô Marcion, ô Protestant) cutt downe my wood? By what preroga­tiue dost thou (ô Valentine) diuerte my fountaines? By what authoritie dost thou, ô Apelles, transport my bounds? THIS POSSESSION IS MYNE, why presume you being strangers, to feede and sowe herein at your pleasure? THE POSSESSION IS MYNE. I POSSESSE IT OF OLD. I POSSESSE IT FIRST. I HAVE SVRE RECORDS (OR EVI­DENCES) FROM THE OWNERS, TO WHOM THE THINGS BELONG. I AM THE HEIRE OF THE A­POSTLES. And this, by best right; (may the Catholike Ro­mane [Page 175]Church affirme) because she alone is able, by her neuer interrup­ted succession of her Bishops, to de­riue her pedigree from the same Apostles. Counting confidently (without fearing to be contradicted by any, though her verie enemyes)

In the first Age.

• Petrus, Linus,
• Cletus, Clemens.

The 2 Age.

• Anacletus, Euaristus.
• Alexander, sixtus I.
• Ye'esphorus,
• Hyginus, Pius,
• Anicetus, Soter,
• Ileutherius, Victor.

The 3. Age.

• Zephyrinus, Calistus,
• Vrbanus, Pontianus,
• Anterus, Fabianus,
• Cornelius, Lucius,
• Stephanus, Sixtus II.
• Dionysius, Felix,
• Eutychianus, Caius.
• Marcellinus

The 4. Age.

• Marcellus, Eusebius,
• Miltiades, Syluester,
• Marcus, Iulius,
• Liberius, Felix II.
• Damasus, Siricius,
• Anastasins.

The 5. Age

• Innocentius I.
• Zozymus,
• Bonifacius,
• Celestinus I.
• Sixtus III.
• Leo magnus,
• Hilarius, Simplicius,
• Felix III. Celasius I.
• Anastafius II.
• Symmachus.

The 6. Age.

• Hormisdas,
• Ioan. I. Felix IV.
• Bonifacius II.
• Ioannes II.
• Agapitus, Syluer. us,
• Vigilius, Pelagius,
• Ioanues III.
• Benedictus I.
• Pelagius II.
• Gregorius magnus.

The 7. Age.

• Sabinianus,
• Bonifacius III.
• Bonifacius IV.
• Deusdedit.
• Bonifacius V.
• Honorius I.
• Seuerinus. Ioan. IV.
• Theodorus,
• Martinus I. Eugenius,
• Vitatianus,
• Adeodatus, Donatus,
• Agatho, Leo,
• Benedictus II.
• Ioan. V. Conon,
• Sergius.

The 8. Age.

• Ioannes VI.
• Ioannes VII.
• Sisinnius,
• Constantinus,
• Gregorius II.
• Gregorius III.
• Zacharias.
• Stephanus II.
• Stephanus III.
• Paulus I.
• Stephanus IV.
• Adrianus, Leo III.

The 9. Age.

• Steph. V. paschalis,
• Eugenius II.
• Valentinus,
• Gregorius IV.
• Sergius II. Leo IV.
• Benedictus III.
• Nicol. I. Hadrian. II.
• Ioan. VIII. Martinus,
• Hadrianus III.
• Stephanus VI.
• Formosus,
• Bonifacius VI.
• Stephanus VII.

The 10. Age.

• Ioan IX. Benedict
• Leo, Christoph.
• [Page 176]Sergius,
• Anast. Lando,
• Ioan X Leo VI.
• Stephanus, Ioannes,
• Leo VII. Stephanus,
• Martinus, Agapitus,
• Ioannes, Leo, Bene­dictus, Ioannes,
• Donus, Benedictus,
• Benedictus, Ioannes,
• Ioannes, Ioannes,
• Gregorius V.
• Syluester II.

The 11. Age.

• Ioannes XVII.
• Ioannes XVIII.
• Sergius. V.
• Benedictus VIII.
• Ioannes XX.
• Benedictus IX.
• Gregorius VII.
• Clem. Damas. Leo,
• Vict. Steph. IX.
• Nicol. Alexand.
• Greg VII. Vict.
• Vrban. Paschas.

The 12. Age.

• Gelas, Calixtus,
• Honorius II.
• Innocentius II.
• Gelestinus II.
• Lucius, Eugenius,
• Anastasius IV.
• Hadrlanus, Alexand.
• Lucius, Vrbanus,
• Gregorius VIII.
• Clemens III.
• Celestinus III.
• Innocentius III.

The 13. Age.

• Honorius III.
• Gregorius IX
• Celestinus IV.
• Innocentius IV.
• Alexander IV.
• Vrbanus IV.
• Clemens, Gregorius,
• Innocent. Hadrian.
• Nicol. Martinus,
• Honorius IV.
• Nicol. Celestinus,
• Bonifacius VIII.

The 14. Age.

• Benedictus X
• Clemens V.
• Ioannes XXI.
• Benedictus XI.
• Clemens VI.
• Innocentius VI.
• Vrbanus V.
• Gregorius XI.
• Vrbanus VI.
• Bonifacius IX.

The 15. Age.

• Innocentius VII.
• Gregorius XI.
• Alexander V.
• Ioannes XXII.
• Martinus III.
• Eugenius IV.
• Nicolaus V.
• Cailistus III.
• Pius II. Paulus II.
• Sixtus, Innocēt. VII.
• Alexander VI.

The 16. Age.

• Pius III. Iulius, Leo,
• Hadrianus, Clemens,
• Paulus, Iulius, Mar­cellus, Paulus IV.
• Pius IV. Pius V.
• Gregorius. XIII.
• Sixtus V. Vrban. VII.
• Gregorius XIV.
• Innocentius IX.
• Clemens VIII.

The 17. Age.

• Leo XI. Paulus V.
• Gregorius XV.
• Vrbanus VIII.
• Innocentius X.

Thus did S. Irenaeus bring downe the suc­cessiō of the Church, by naming the Bi­shops of Rome, who immediatly succee­ded one another, from S. Peter to his tyme. And he iudges it a most ABSO­LVTE DEMONSRATION.

Thus did Tertullian &c. And he puts [Page]it downe for an EVIDENCE of TRVTH.

Thus did Optatus, &c. And he con­cludes, that in Pope Siricius, who then sate, all the world agreed with them (Africans) in one Communion.

Thus did S. Augustine &c. And he cōfesses it retaynes him in the bosome of the CATHOLIKE CHVRCH.

Thus finally doe we Catholikes to this day. And we instantly demand,

• 1. Why the like proceeding should not be held an absolute Demonstration; an Euidence of Truth, as well from vs, as from them.
• 2. Why we English Catholikes may not by as good right be said to agree with all the world in one Communion in Pope INNOCENTIVS, who sitts at this day, as the Africans in Si­ricius who then sate?
• 3. Why it should not retayne vs without all he sitation or staggerring, as it did Saint Augustine, in the bo­some of the CATHOLIKE CHVRCH?

Et hic murus aheneus esto.