To the extent possible under law, the Text Creation Partnership has waived all copyright and related or neighboring rights to this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above, according to the terms of the CC0 1.0 Public Domain Dedication (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/). This waiver does not extend to any page images or other supplementary files associated with this work, which may be protected by copyright or other license restrictions. Please go to http://www.textcreationpartnership.org/ for more information.
THat Recusancy is a distinctive sign of a Ca∣tholique from a Protestant is most false. Which is thus proved. If Recusancie be a di∣stinctive signe, it is a signe naturall or by institu∣tion; but neither can be said. Ergo, it is no signe. The Minor is proved. Not naturall, for as Hurtado above cited well observeth. Actions
and things are not of their own nature signifi∣cant: but have naturall and politicall uses inde∣pendent of any signification. For a bush hung out at a Taverne doore doth naturally signifie no more wine to be sold, then any other crea∣ture whatsoever. Nor doth the habit of a Bi∣shop naturally signifie a Bishop more then a Judge: and so of other things. No more doe naturally the actions of men.
But admit that Recusancy were improperly said a naturall signe, yet it would naturally sig∣nifie no more a Catholique then a Brownist (for he refuseth likewise to goe to Church) or any o∣ther Sectary. Although a posteriori it might be thought by discourse to signifie some one dis∣pleased with the Protestant Church, but why, or wherefore, it would never signifie.
Not by institution: for if so, who instituted the same? God, or man? Not man; for it is out of his power, to signe the people of God, from not his people. It is only the owner of the flocke, that must signe the sheepe, and none o∣ther; unlesse, it be by speciall order from him. Hence when God would signe his people in the old Testament, from the people of other Na∣tions; he himselfe instituted Circumcision, Gen 17. as a distinctive signe betweene them and others: that whosoever had that signe, should be of his people; and who so had it not, was to be rejected. Neither was it sufficient that any man had accidentally, and by the insti∣tution of Abraham, any other signe, by which he might be knowne from others: because he was
not thought sufficiently marked, nor accounted any one of Gods people, by any other sign then Circumcision. Which was the sole marke of God, saying: All the male kinde of you shall be Circumcised. And this is consonant to reason. For one man may get a distinctive signe of ano∣ther mans institution; shall God therefore own him? Brownists (as I have said) have Recusan∣cie, doth it therefore follow, that they are like∣wise Catholiques? If a sheepe in my neighbours flocke should teare an eare in a bramble, or bush, or accidentally breake an horne; this sheepe is hereby distinct from the rest; yet the owner, doth not own it by that marke: but by a marke of his own institution and ruddle. So it is in the present.
That God did not institute the same, it is so evident, that it needs no proofe. For where may we finde his institution? Vnlesse we should run to the all-knowing spirit of hereticks. Hence it follows that Recusancie is no distin∣ctive signe.
If you aske me, what is then the signe to know a Catholique from any other Sectary? I answer. His beleefe of the Creed of the Catho∣lique Church, and his l••fe at all times in commu∣nion with the See Apostolique. So Stratford, lib. 2. de Eccles. cap. 6. pag. 188.
It may be here objected, first the common opinion of Divines (as the said R. P. saith) 2a. 2ae. q. 3. To use a distinctive signe of a false re∣ligion, that properly is such, is a deniall of faith, and evill in it selfe. But the Service said in a
Protestant Church is such. Ergo. I grant the Major. For if the signe be proper of a people re∣jected of God as (since the promulgation of the Gospel) Circumcision is to a Jew, the Ma∣jor must needs be true. But if the signe be gar∣ments or the like, used to the worship and cere∣monies of a false law, which some fondly call a proper signe, then the Major, meaning the use of such a signe to be a denyall of faith is false ac∣cording to Diana resol. 34. pag. 191. above cited, Azorius, Sanches, and many others there. Be∣cause such signes being naturall things, may be lawfully used (as I have said before) independent of any such signification; and so not properly signes (whatsoever R. P. saith to the contrary upon his own bare word). The Minor proposi∣tion I deny. For who instituted that service to be such a signe? not God, as all Catholiques will confesse; but rather the contrary, it being Catholique. Not themselves; for it would savor too much weakenesse, to thinke that they would institute to themselves, a signe of a false religi∣on. And if it be taken for a signe naturally (al∣though improperly) signifying: then I say of its own nature, it signifies no more a false Reli∣gion in a Protestant, then a pious ceremony in a Catholique. For Catholiques say the g 1.1 same ser∣vice. Catholiques preach moralitie, and each h 1.2 may if hee please, receive bread and wine once in a day, in a weeke, or a moneth, in re∣membrance
〈1 page duplicate〉〈1 page duplicate〉
〈1 page duplicate〉〈1 page duplicate〉
that Christ dyed for him; and this shall be better done, then to eate bread and wine, without such remembrance: For recei∣ving bread and wine: See that deduced out of Azorius, tom. 1. lib. 8. instit. moral. c. 11. & Navar. consil. 15. de haeret. num. 2. Which were, but to renew (in an urgent point of necessitie) the old custome in the Apostles time, as appears by the Corinthian Christians in Saint Paul, 1 Cor. 11. who did eate and drinke in the Church, besides what they received of Christs institution as his true and reall body and blood. For after the Sacrifice and Eucharist was ended, there were kept Church feasts for the reliefe of the poore,
upon the common charges and charitie of the rich. By which the charitie and unitie of all sorts were much preserved: for which cause the said feasts were called Charities of the ancient Fathers; and of Saint Paul, vers. 20. they were called Coenae i 1.3 dominicae, our Lords Suppers: be∣cause they were made in the Churches, which then were called Dominicae, that is, our Lords houses: in which feasts, because there hapned, some foule abuses (which the Apostle rebu∣king, vers. 22. Why have ye not houses to eate and drinke in? or contemne ye the house of our Lord, &c.) they were taken away. See Con. Gang. 11. Con. 3. Laod. can. 27.28. Apollorum, can. 39. Clemens Alex. S •. Iust. S •. August contra Faustum, lib. 20. cap. 20. S t. Chrysost. hom. 27. in 1 Cor. & S t. Ambrose upon this same place: by which it ap∣peares no new thing for Catholiques to take some thing with a good intention, besides, what was instituted by Christ.
Here some may aske, whether it belongs to me out of my authoritie to institute or renew this pious ceremony in taking bread and wine in remembrance of the death of Christ, generally for the prudent Catholiques of England? I an∣swer no. God forbid that I should presume to institute or renew any ceremonie in the Catho∣lique Church: but I doe onely in compassion of their miseries, present to their necessitie (if
any be in danger of death, losse of fortunes, or ruine of posteritie, and cannot expect leave from the supreame Pastor of our soules) the do∣ctrine of Claudius Carinnus de vi & pot. leg. hu∣man. c. 10: that even in lawes, every particular man hath power to interpret the same to his ad∣vantage, and to dispense with himselfe therein, if there occurre a sudden case of necessitie, and there be no open way and recourse to the Supe∣riour, much more then, said I, in a pious cere∣monie against which there is no law forbidding the same.
And if you reply that this is taken in a strange Church. I answer, That in case of necessitie, the pl••ce is impertinent to the thing. For Saint Bonaventure, that great and pious Doctor using much jaculatory prayers, and being upon the place of naturall necessitie, and there uttering some of the said prayers, the Devill asked him, Whether that were a place to pray in? to whom he answered, in opusc. Hic et ubique meum licet orare Deum. That it was lawfull to praise God in all places: and to receive bread and wine in a Protestant Church from a Minister, or to re∣ceive the same in a Taverne from a Vintners boy: the godly onely know the difference.
If you reply againe, that so we may offer In∣cense to an Idol in a temple (because we may burne perfume, and the Idol we know to be no∣thing) I deny that: and the disparity is in this, that in offering Incense, the act and shew there tends to the honour and worship of the Devill. For the place being dedicated to him, whatso∣ever
is therein done as an usuall ceremonie is taken (whatsoever the intention be) as done to his honour. Which act as it is unlawfull in it selfe to be done, because pretended Idolatrie, wherein Gods worship is given to the Devill, at least in outward shew: so it is unlawfull to faine in words the act to be done, becau••e it is dis∣sembling (the object it selfe being likewise for∣bidden by the law of God) both which are great sinnes, and apt to cause great scandall: which I shall make appeare, not to be in our case, where I co••tend, there is no sinne in the act, nor yet dissembling, nor the object forbidden.
If you reply thirdly, that there is dissembling in going to Church (as going two waies in Reli∣gion contrary to the Scripture) for thereby I seeme to be otherwise then I am: the reply is false, for I professe but one religion which is Catholique, and at Church I doe but observe the picture of true religion ill formed, which is but a humane act not hurtfull, but by a pi∣ous intention may be made good, by which all hypocrisie and dissimulation may be avoy∣ded. And if I seeme to Protestants to be a Pro∣testant; what am I the worse for that? I never yet could finde any law, to ground an action a∣gainst the censures of men. If they censure me to be a Protestant, I am not under their scourge for religion, unlesse they will on purpose make an Act of Parliament to cut off my head, which shall be no president for any other Iudges or Iustices: and then I must set up my rest with a Noble man, saying, Contra potentiam non est resi∣stentia.
There is no resistance against power. But continuing alwaies loyall both to my King and Countrey, and obedient to God and his Church, and in so doing, giving both God and Caesar their due, and that without either sinne or dissembling. I had rather they censure mee unjustly (yet according to the lawes established, for I alwaies stand pro Rege & Lege) and so misse their aime by an Ignoramus, then I loose my life by a pure might. But hence it doth not follow, for all their censure, that I am a Protestant: for to be so, I must beleeve the 39. Articles of the Church of England, which is the definition of a Protestant. Which Articles or any other te∣nents of theirs I meddle not with: for if I must doe all things contrary to Protestants, lest I should be thought so▪ when they eate, I must fast; and when they sleep, I must wake; which is ridiculous. As for their thinking me a Prote∣stant, it proceeds from want of knowledge: for they or most of them neither k 1.4 knowing what a Protestant, or Catholique indeed is (if Catho∣liques went to Church, they would not know how to distinguish, or persecute them; it being lawfull among them, for every one to beleeve l 1.5 what he pleaseth) may easily thinke amisse of
me. And for me to take benefit of their igno∣rance, and to hide my selfe in persecution, un∣till either the glory of God, or good of my neighbour shall urge me to discover my selfe: I cannot yet finde my selfe by any law forbid∣den.
It may be objected secondly, that there were divers Statutes made upon the alteration of Re∣ligion, in the 2.5. and 6. yeers of Edward the sixth; and 1. and 23. of Q••eene Elizabeth in ha∣tred of God and his Church, as that the Masse should be abrogated, and all the Kings subjects should come to Church to heare such Service as was then o••dained, to distinguish betweene Catholiques and Protestants; and that whoso∣ever should say, or heare Masse afterwards, should incurre certaine penalties, as by the said Statutes appeares. But no man could obey these commands without sinne. Ergo. I answer, that I know not much to what purpose this ob∣jection can serve R. P. that made it. For all Divines as well Catholiques as Protestants
know: that all humane lawes binde in con∣science no ••urther, then they are consonant and conformable to the divine law. And as farre as they command lawfull unitie and uniformitie to the good of the common wealth (which is the chiefe thing that States men aime at, mens consciences being left to themselves) they may be obeyed, as I h••ve said out of Azorius tom. 1o. lib. 8. instit. moral. cap. 27. puncto. 5o. And for as much as concerned the abrogation of Masse (which by the law of God was unlawfull) they did consequenter to the State government then; for having rejected the authoritie ••f the Pope, they likewise rejected the Masse; as knowing that there could be no Masse without Priests, nor Priests without the Pope. And therefore taking as much of the Masse, as would serve for their Service, and to be independent of the Pope, they left the rest. But that they did it in hatred of God and his Church: or for any di∣stinction sake, it is altogether improbable. For what would a man get, by hating of God? or the Church, of which himselfe must be a mem∣ber, to be saved? or how could they make a di∣stinction of that they knew not; for the Prote∣stant Church was not then knowne, or scarce established. And therefore without wholly granting the Major, or distinguishing the Minor. I answer, that every one ought under paine of damnation to obey his temporall Prince in matters lawfull. Yet to suffer for his religion, and (abstracting from all obedience either to Statute or Resc••ipt) not for Recusancie.
It may be objected thirdly, that of S. Paul to the Romans 10.10. With the heart we beleeve unto justice: but w••th the mouth confession is made to salvation. Ergo, No man can goe to Church. I deny the sequele, and to the Antecedent I an∣swer, that according to Divines; a man is bound to confesse his religion Semper, sed non ad sem∣per: alwaies, but not at all waies: that is, not at all times, and in all places: but as I have said before out of Saint Thomas of Aquin in the said two cases, viz. as often as the honour and glory of God requires the same, or the spirituall pro∣fit of our neighbour shall exact it, as likely to be impaired by silence: which to be requisite I have before granted. Yet hence it doth not fol∣low, that I am bound to goe into the Market place and cry out; I am a Catholike, who will punish me? or before I am called to publish my religion, to make my selfe be called; or to live and converse to the same time, as having a set∣led being, and not going to Church. I read that Saint Faelix going to martyrdome, S. Adauc••us, came to the Officers that led him thither, and said to them, that he lived in the same law with Saint Faelix, and therefore that they should likewise put him to death. Yet I conceive that he had a speciall revelation for the same; and that it is no warrant for our indiscretion.
If it be replyed, that so a man shall professe no religion. I answer the inference to be naught▪ for suppose a mans recusancie were never dis∣covered, this man professeth some religion; for he doth not live a heathen. Why then recusan∣cie
being rejected, should he not professe the same?
If it be said, that it is written, that no man can serve two masters rightly. Yet a man may serve one Master, and have a servant to serve him, or he may serve one master, and keepe or use that Masters picture, howsoever ill it be drawne.
It may be objected fourthly, that the Re∣script of Pope Paul the fifth, in which he writes to the Catholiques of England, declareth, that they ought not to goe to the Churches of He∣retiques, or heare their Sermons without de∣triment of the divine worship, and their owne salvation. To which I answer, that the said Pope wrote both piously, fatherly, and Aposto∣lically, according to the aforesaid suggestions by him received: and if he had had the truth of the state of England, I beleeve he would have written as piously the contrary. For put the case, that those zealous suggestors had pre∣sented to the consideration of the Councel of Trent, or the Pope himselfe the truth and law∣fulnesse of Catholiques going to Church, with these seven reasons following: supposing an ab∣solute necessitie.
1. First that there is no evill or harme done or said in the Protestant Churches to the pre∣judice of any Catholike soule, that may not either be hindred, or prevented very well, by the instruction of Priests; for they preach not against any notable point of doctrine held in the Catholique Church (although m 1.6 some simple
Minister for want of matter may glance at some of our tenets by halfes understood: or in these daies to please his auditorie may raile against the Pope, which he doth so irrationally, that few Protestants of any judgement do beleeve him) for if he should seriously preach controversies as insisting seriously upon the true doctrine of both sides, his Auditors (or at lest some of them) would be apt to doubt, and so to search and dive further into the truth: for as Saint Augustine saith, doubt begets science, which might be an occasion of somes falling from him, which fearing, he is silent in doctrine, and onely teacheth moralitie: which why a man may not heare in urgent extremity from any man, I cannot conceive.
2. Secondly, that their going to Church, would be a conservation and a preservation of their lands and goods, with a prevention of ruine to the family and posterity.
3. That it would be a means to obtaine and purchase the love of their neighbours; and a meanes of their conversion by an affable con∣versation; by which likewise they might beare the greatest Offices in the common wealth: and become n 1.7 Parliament men as well as others: of whom and whose power and force in matters of Religion, these dayes can somewhat declare.
4. Fourthly, that it would be a meanes, that whereas Priests leave their Colledges, and now live in private mens houses, to the benefit of one or two, and to the great danger of them∣selves and their Patrons; they might by this
meanes more freely converse with all sorts of people after an Apostolicall manner, and con∣vert many to the honour of God, the increase of his Church, and good of their owne soules. Whereas now they doe little good out of that private house, unlesse maintaine some decayed gentlewomen in good clothes to gossip up and downe; and like bels to ring their praises, that they may fish one in a yeere to the disparage∣ment of their function, and great prejudice of their Mission.
5. Fifthly, that divers Schismaticks that now goe to Church with an ill conscience, and thinke themselves in state of damnation, doe suffer spirituall detriment, and oftentimes be∣ing prevented with sudden death everlastingly perish.
6. Sixthly, many thousands that are very morall and well affected Protestants, were it not for the stop of Recusancie would become Catholiques. Which, rather then they will un∣doe themselves and Family, now will not heare of it.
7. Seventhly, that no poore Catholique that is not able to give twenty pound per annum with their children to some Colledge beyond the Seas, can bring them up, either in science or any other art or trade by reason of Recusan∣cie: and this, to the ruine of all poore people: many having a very great charge, and small revenues; and part of that likewise taken away for Recusancie.
Againe, if the aforesaid suggestions had pre∣sented
to their consideration, the meanes and wayes of Conversions of kingdomes in gene∣rall, as that they ought to be done either by miracles, warre, or policie. And have reason∣ed, that for miracles, they were not to be ex∣pected; for that those, God ordinari••y granted but to Infidels, and where by secondary causes, they were not probably fezible: that by warre they could not be done, without a great deale of blood-shed, which ought to be avoyded; and most commonly with a great deale of rebellion and treachery, which were utterly unlawfull. And that they were fezible in policie, by civil∣ly conversing, intermingling and insinuating themselves by degrees into the conversation of all sorts of people. So that in time a good ef∣fect might have been wrought: would not this discourse have been more consonant to truth and charitie, and lesse displeasing or odious to our State of England, then to suggest that they are Idolatrous hereticks, blasphemers of God and his Church, professours (as indeed they are not because they know the true and sincere pro∣fesse it) of a false religion, subverters of souls (but poore ones God wote), abominable scandalous peo∣ple, &c. and that it was a scandal for good people to converse with them in things indifferent, and therfore desire that it might be declared unlaw∣full, & cōmanded that no Catholike might con∣verse wth them, as in Christian libertie otherwise he might lawfully do? thereby to introduce for their own ends, our now goodly distinctive sign of recusancie? I appeale to any wise mans judge∣ment.
And whether the aforesaid rescript and other briefs were not gotten by meere suggesti∣on (the case being truly set down by me as it is) I appeale likewise to the Pope himselfe: who, to mine owne knowledge hath been likewise lately notably abused in the like manner. Ann. 1639. one Francis Damport, alias a Sancta Clara.o 1.8 being at London, and having written a booke (called
Deus, Natura, Gratia) which being disliked by one Day a Franciscan, and through the same dis∣like at Rome, being there called into the Inqui∣sition, was so much displeased both with his Holinesse and the said Day; that he publiquely ••eered the Pope: saying▪ that whereas before he thought him infallible (which he never thought to my knowledge) now he saw that he was fal∣lible as other men were. And indeavouring re∣venge against the said Day, substituted a most ignorant and lewd man one George Perrott (his ordinary Broker in seditious matters) to goe with the s••id a Sancta Clara his instructions to Signior Gregory Pauzana then the Popes Agent
in London; accusing the said Day with much zealous hypocrisie, that he had put forth cer∣taine pictures to the hurt of Gods Church, and infinite scandall of Protestants. After went a Sancta Clara cum tanta gravitate, seconding with an abominable deale of zeale and authoritie (having then got himself to be Provinciall) the complaint of the said Perrot. Hereupon the said Signior with the said a Sancta Clara's sollicitor, Luke Wadding an Irishman in Rome complaines to the Pope: and obtaines upon the former mens suggestions, a terrible Bull against the said Day being never cited to answer, admonished, or knowing any thing thereof. The Bull being come to the said a Sancta Clara his lodging in Fleetstreet and safe in his deske, he did me the honour to shew me the same. Which I read, and asking the said a Sacta Clara why he procured it, he told me, for the said Day his putting forth of the said pictures, who likewise said, that the said Day knew nothing of the same: and there∣fore desired me to be silent. At which, I was much astonished, and knowing very certainly the ground of the whole businesse to be false; and therefore that both the said Day, the Popes Agent, and the Pope himselfe were most hor∣ribly abused; I thought that if the said a Sancta Clara were permitted in this manner to abuse men; the best men living might be censured, excommunicated, degraded; and what not without ever being heard? Which is no pra∣ctise among Heathens. As for the setting forth of the said pictures, the matter in them con∣tained,
as being from my purpose, I omit, Yet thus much will I speake that it was a thing ap∣proved of, through the whole Catholique Church: the said pictures themselves liked, yea desired of the said Day his superiours: who to this day doe acknowledge their approbation of the same, countenanced by the said a San∣cta Clara, Perrott, and all others ever after they were put forth, for the space of above ten yeers before, to mine own knowledge. A booke at the same time (of a Sancta Clara his complaint) printed at Doway in defence of the same, never proved by oath that any of the said pictures e∣ver came to the hands of any one Protestant. Neither doe I thinke that any one Protestant (unlesse it might be such, as a Sancta Clara had suborned for his own revenge to speake against the same) ever saw any of them: and there∣fore there could be no indiscretion or scandall by them proved. Nay, the said pictures being made for some particular friends devotion, not so much as one Catholique to an hundred had or knew of them: but contrariwise some that had them from the said Perrott, were scandalized through weaknesse by the said a Sancta Clara his questioning of them in this manner, as though that should be set forth for their devotion, that in it selfe was false. Yet notwithstanding all this, the malicious suggestions of the said a Sancta Clara against this mans doings, did so farre pre∣vaile, that Dayes innocency was thought wor∣thy to be condemned by the said Bull for doing a pious and a religious act. This indeed I must
say, that the said a Sancta Clara when he had him at his mercy, through the remorse and sting of his own conscience, durst not promulgate the said Bull, but kept it dead in his deske, for feare that those who otherwise honour the Popes Bulls honestly and lawfully gotten, would have called him to the Kings Bench Barre for bring∣ing in of this. And had he not taken the bene∣fit of the Proclamation of banishment (not∣withstanding his ambitious and seditious wit) he would have been not only questioned for this Bull, but likewise for other matters of a farre fouler nature, which made it high time for him to run. Let any man now judge, whe∣ther the Popes Holinesse doth not suffer much by hypocriticall suggestions: whether he that so notoriously abused him in words, did not likewise doe it in deeds. For about the same time, when the said Bull came over, his said booke likewise came out of the Inquisition: at which newes the said a Sancta Clara again grud∣ging that his said book should be so questioned, and yet passe (although by her Majesties Ser∣vants means, if a Sancta Clara himselfe may be beleeved) unblemished; told divers persons se∣riously speaking, that there was never an able man in Rome. To which some replying, yes: The Pope, and Court of Cardinals: in faith (quoth he) no; (making a signe of contempt with his hand) they are slight and weake fellows. Here is a fellow to get Buls! here is one that got himselfe made the Popes Protonotary, and bound himselfe by oath, to reveale what∣soever
he heard or saw done evilly against the Pope! yet he is as ready as any to abuse him. I wonder what account he can give to the Pope of this his office: but it should seeme, that he did except himselfe in his oath, that he might e∣villy intreat him at his pleasure. That this is true, it will be deposed upon oath by divers wit∣nesses, whensoever his Holinesse will be plea∣sed to exact the same. And further the said a Sancta Clara added, that he was writing a booke (conceiving as it should seeme, the whole Church to be weake, and to want his helpe) wherein he would shew, what Rules generall Councels ought to observe in declaring mat∣ters of faith; which rules (as he said) not ob∣served, the Councell should not be held lawfull. Oh abominable presumption and ambition! let any man judge, whether this man be not de∣scending to Lucifer, who will presume to be co∣partner with the holy Ghost, in directing and ••eaching his Church? If this man live, we may perchance in time have broached a quaternitie in divinis; but I hope that God will prevent his hereticall humour. And thus leaving the said a Sancta Clara to him that will have him: my intent here is, only to shew upon what unjust grounds by suggestion a Bull may be gotten from Rome. And whether the aforesaid sug∣gestors for Recusancy, who lived at the Popes doores, and continually at his, or their favorites sides, might not also get their rescripts, Buls and Declarations by the like fraud, for their own ends, although questionlesse with the like
pretended zeale and pietie I leave to every mans conscience to judge. For as in Catho∣lique Countreys where Buls and Breves are di∣rected to Bishops of Diocesses there can be no thought of any sinister proceedings: so out of such countreys where particular men or Cor∣porations busie themselves in procuring such Buls, &c. there is never want of suspition and most commonly of abusive dealing. And it stands with reason: because particular men would never sue for generall Briefs concerning a whole State, or trouble themselves more then others, if it were not for their own ends, and did not concerne themselves above the rest. And therefore the ancient Pietie and Apostolicall Clemencie of Popes in such Cases hath been, patiently to heare wherein they have been mis∣informed and abused; for it is not their inten∣tion at any time to grant any thing either upon a veyled truth, or unjust (though speciously sug∣gested) grounds. Hence Alexander the third, writing to an Archbishop of Canterbury, gives a Rule of large extent; Extra de rescript. ex parte. That in these kinde of letters (that is, such as proceed upon information, as our Case is) this Condition (If the request bee upon true grounds) is ever understood, though it be not expressed. And writing to the Archbishop of Ravenna, Ibidem he saith, Siquando, If at any time we write such things to you, as exasperate your minde, you must not be troubled; but diligent∣ly considering the qualitie of the businesse, whereof we write, either reverently fulfill our
command, or pretend by your letters a reason∣able cause why you cannot: for we will endure patiently, if you forbeare to performe that, which was suggested to us, by evill information: by which appeares the worthy integritie of the See Apostolique, howsoever it be by the un∣worthinesse of flattering hypocrites oftentimes abused.
Will you call it the same wine which was pow∣red out into two cups, whereof one hath store of rats∣bane in it? See pag. 16. letter •. and pag. 33. letteru
There was never such a prophane gamster heard of as this Masse-Priest, who playeth not only with the word of God, and prayers, but with Sacraments here, and most solemne oathes hereafter? what horrible prophannesse, what dete∣stable hypocrisie is it? I will not say for a Lay Papist, but a Romish Priest, not only to be at our Service, but to stay at the Communion, to heare the Ministers exhortation out of the Apostle, to all persons that come to the holy Table, Diligently to try and examine themselves, before they presume to eate of that bread, and drinke of that cup: for as the benefit is great, if with a true penitent heart and lively faith, we receive that holy Sacrament (for then we spi∣ritually eate the flesh of Christ, and drinke his blood; then we dwell in Christ, and Christ in us; we be one with Christ and Christ with us) so is the danger great, if we receive the same unworthily; for then we be guiltie of the body and blood of Christ our Saviour, we eat and drinke our own damnation, not consider∣ing the Lords body, we kindle Gods wrath against us, when we provoke him to plague us with divers diseases, and sundry kinds of death. Nay more, if he joyne with the whole congregation in the rehearsall of the words of the in∣stitution, and the consecratory prayer, will he present himselfe on his knees (for he excepts no Ceremonies) and receive the consecrated elements, de∣livered to him with these words; The body of our Lord Iesus Christ, which was given for thee preserve thy body and soule unto eternall life; and yet all this while, never thinke of receiving the Sacrament; but only of eating a piece of bread, and drinking a draught of wine, which shall be better done with the re∣membrance of Christ then without it. He will say, that our Sacrament is no∣thing but common bread and wine, and that nought else is to be received a•• our Communion Table. The Lord rebuke thee, thou false tongue! What▪ because we beleeve not that the bread and wine is transubstantiated into Christs body and blood; must it therefore be nothing but common bread and bare wine. By the same reason he might say, that because the water in Baptisme is not transubstantiated into Christs blood, that therefore it is nothing but faire wa∣ter; and he may in a jesting manner wash a childe in remembrance of Christs washing us with his blood. It is true, we teach with Theodoret, Dial. 2. That the sacred symbols after consecration, depart not out of their own nature, but still remaine, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, in their former sub∣stance shape and figure: but withall we teach, that they remaine not the same in use, signification and supernaturall efficacie; by vertue of Christs promise to all that worthily partake of the same. Neither could this prophane scoffer be ignorant hereof, for he saith, He hath often been at our Service, where we pro∣fesse, that all, who with a lively faith receive the holy Sacrament spiritually, eate the flesh of Christ and drinke his blood. He also maketh mention in this Pamphlet of the 39. Articles, which he will have to be the definition of a Protestant, and in those Articles, he could not but reade, Art. 28. Christs body is given, received and eaten in the Supper, but only after a heavenly and spirituall manner; And in the Apologie of the Church of England, part. 2. cap. 14. The Supper of the Lord, is not only a signe of the love that Christians ought to beare amongst themselves, one to the other, but rather it is a Sacrament of our Re∣demption by Christs death, in so much, that to such as rightly, worthily, and with faith receive the same, the bread which we breake, is the partaking of the body of Christ, and likewise the cup of blessing, is a partaking of the blood of Christ. With which confession of ours, fully accordeth the Helvetian, the French, the Belgicke, the Augustane, and the Swevick: as he that hath an eare may heare in the Harmony of Confessions, Printed, 1581. cap. 21. De sacrâ coenâ Do∣mini. What should I need for further proofe hereof, either to alleadge the te∣stimonie of Calvin. Epist. 31. Non modo figuratur in coenae communio quam habemus cum Christo, sed etiam exhibetur: neque verba illic nobis dantur à Do∣mino, sed veritas ac res constat cum verbis. Haec porro communio non imagi∣naria est, sed qua in unum corpus unam{que} substantiam cum capite nostro coalesci∣mus: There is not only figured in the Supper, that communion which we have with Christ, but it is also exhibited; neither doth our Lord deceive us, but the truth of the thing is correspondent to his words; neither is the communion we speake of, an imaginarie, but such a reall one, whereby we grow into one body, and one substance with Chr••st, our head; or the testimonie of Bucer. Epist. ad Ita∣los addit, hoc est corpus meum, hic sanguis meus, id credamus nec dubitemus haec dari nobis his ipsis symbolis, & dari in cibum & potum vitae aeternae ut magis ma∣gis{que} vivamus in Christo, & habeamus illum manentem in nobis: He addeth this is my body, this is my blood; let us beleeve it and no way doubt, but that these things are given unto us by or with these very symbols, and that they are given unto us for the food and drinke of eternall life, that we may more and more live in Christ, and have him living in us. It never came into the thought of any pro∣fessour of the Gospel, to celebrate the Supper of the Lord, without the Lord, as Bucer speaketh in this Epistle, or exclude him from his owne Table. We teach he is there truly present, and is truly received by all worthy communi∣cants but spiritually by faith, not carnally with the mouth according to the grosse Capernaitical conceipt of Romanists. For first our Saviour in the sixth of Iohn, where he commandeth all, to eate his flesh, and drinke his blood, vers. 53. affirming that his flesh is meat indeed, and his blood is drinke indeed; perceiving that some were offended thereat, saying, vers. 60. this is a hard saying, who can beare it; thus he declareth his own meaning, vers. 63. The words which I speake unto you, they are spirit and they are life, that is, spiritually to be under∣stood, not carnally and grossely. Secondly, the Orthodox Fathers disclaime this carnall eating with the mouth: St. Cyril in his Anathems denyeth the Sacrament to be hominis comestionem, An Anthropophagie or man eating, St. Chrysostome saith, it is mensa aquilarum, not graculorum: and St. Austine, that it is cibus mentis, not ventris or dentis; the food of the soule, not of the tooth or belly: Tract 20. in Iohan. Vt quid paras dentes & ventrem crede & mandu∣casti: Why dost thou prepare thy teeth and thy belly, beleeve and thou hast eaten: and St. Cyprian, de coena Dom. haec quoties agimus non, dentes ad manducondum acuimus, sed fide sincera panem sanctum frangimus: As oft as we doe these things, we doe not wh••t our teeth to eate, but with sincere faith we breake that holy bread. Thirdly, Christ never instituted any Sacramentall action, but it was profitable to the soule; but the eating of Christs flesh with the mouth, and swallowing it down in the stomack, doth no way at all profit the soule. Fourthly, Christ never wrought any miracle outwardly upon the creature; but the truth therof appeared, even to sense, when he turned the water into wine, Ioh. 2. The change was discovered by the taste, vers. 9, 10. When the Ruler of the feast had tasted it, he said to the Bridegroome thou hast kept the good wine till now: In like man∣ner when Christ multiplyed the five Barley loaves and the two fishes, both the taste and the stomacke, and the eyes of all that were present gave testi∣monie to the truth of this miracle. For they did all eate and were satisfied, and saw twelve bask••ts remaining full of the fragments or broken meat which remain∣ed to them that had eaten. Neither can it be shewed, that ever Christ the Au∣thor of truth deluded the sense. If therefore the bread had been truly and re∣ally turned into the substance of flesh either the sight, or the taste, or the touch would have discerned this change, which yet as themselves confesse, disco∣ver nothing but the whitenesse, the roundnesse, the taste, and other accidents of bread. Fifthly, If the flesh of Christ may be eaten with the mouth with∣out faith, not only infidels and reprobates, but even rats and mice might some∣times through the negligence of Priests gnaw upon the consecrated Host, and eate the flesh of the Son of God, which were horrid to imagine and blasphe∣mous to utter. Sixthly, if the Romish Priests undoubtedly beleeve this do∣ctrine of transubstantiation, as they doe other Articles of their faith: why did Garnet and other Popish Priests when they were required to say these or the like words; if after I have consecrated and pronounced the words, this is my body, there be not in stead of the bread the very flesh of Christ let me have no part in heaven, they refused so to doe this profession being demanded of them, but a day or two before their deaths, when if ever, men will clearely discharge their conscience and utter whatsoever is in their very heart, it being the last time they are like ever to confesse with the mouth unto salvation. Seventh∣ly, if the bread be transubstantiated into Christs body, and his body truly really, and properly taken from the hand of the Priest put into the mouth, chawed with the teeth, and swallowed down into the stomacke of all communicants: either Christ of necessitie must have two bodies, one visible, another invisible, one with the full dimensions of a man, the other of a wafer, one passible, the other impassible, one residing in one place, the other filling a million of places: or at least the selfe same body of Christ must at the same time be visible at the right hand of his Father, and invisible in the Host: with the dimensions of a man in heaven, and of a wafer on earth: with distinction of organs in heaven, and inorganicall upon earth: resting in heaven, and moved on earth from the hand to the mouth, and from the mouth to the stomack of millions of com∣municants. Lastly, I demand of this Priest and his pew-fellows, what be∣comes of Christs body after it is conveighed into the stomack, doth it remaine there after the forme and accidents of bread are changed or doth it some wayes, remove out of the stomack, or is it there converted into any other sub∣stance: they dare not pitch upon any of these three, nothing therefore remain∣eth but an annihilation or corruption in the stomack and so the holy one of God whom God would never suffer to see corruption, no not in the grave; shall now af∣ter his glorification suffer corruption in the stomack of all Romish Capernaits.
The Apostle in that place speak∣eth not of Suppers in the plurall num∣ber, but the Lords Supper in the sin∣gular, and vers. 23. delivereth the right manner of administring it ac∣cording to Christs institution, and so St. Cyprian in his Tract. de caena Do∣mini, and the most approved inter∣preters both an∣cient and mo∣derne understand the word, and not of love feasts. As for the reason this authour alleadgeth for this his exposi∣tion, it is very fri∣volous. For if the love feasts must therfore be tearm••d coena Dominicae our Lords Suppers, because they were made in the Churches which were then called Dominicae, by the same reason the Homi∣lies and Catechisings, and Songs should be called Dominicae, because they were made said or sung in the Churches which were then called Dominicae.
He meaneth a Romane Catho∣lique or Papist, which indeed can hardly be knowne to be a true Ca∣tholique. See pag. 1. letter c. But doth he think that we know not what a Papist is? Let them remember what Polycarp did answer when Marcion accoasting him said, Nosti me? Doest thou know me? Yes saith Polycarp. Novi primogenitum diaboli. I know the first begotten of the devill. We know you qua tales, to be the naturall issue of the man of sinne, and whore of Babylon: and in this double and dissembling way it is hard to say of what religion you are, or whether of any at all?
A lewd slander, it is not lawfull among us for every one to beleeve what hee pleaseth, but this Priest thinketh it lawfull for him to speake what he pleaseth; though against common sense and his owne conscience. For within tenne lines of these words he maketh mention of the 39 Articles of the Church of England, to which we all are bound to give our assent and consent; and in case any Parson or Vi••ar doe not reade these Articles and publikely testifie his approbation of them within a moneth after his induction into his Benefice▪ he lapseth his Living. Besides it is the knowne doctrine of all Protestants that the Scripture is the sole and perfect rule of faith, and that as we may not be∣leeve any thing contrary unto it; so neither any doctrine as necessarie to sal∣vation which cannot be evidently proved out of it. Of what brasse then was the brow of this slanderer made, who affirmeth it to be lawfull among Pro∣testants, for every man to beleeve what he pleaseth.
See page 53. Letter E.
See the Adver∣tisement to the Reader.
We are as much beholding to the sti••c••er up of this Safeguard for the Relation herein closed as the Church of Rome hath little cause to con him thanke for it. For hence we learne first, what credit is to be given to the Popes briefes which may be so easily procured by false suggestions, to the wrong and prejudice of those that deserve well of the Roman cause. A cleare evidence hereof we have in Day the Franciscan who never so much as ap∣pearing before his Holinesse to answer for himselfe, is censured by the Popes Bull, and that for doing a pious and religious act. Secondly, what a silly Con∣sistory the Papall is at this day, the Pope himselfe as fallible a man as any o∣ther, and the Cardinals slight and weake fellows never a skilfull Pilot, sitting at the Sterne of Peters ship. Thirdly, what charitie there is betweene Romish Priests and Iesuits, and how they heape coales of hell fire one upon anothers head. Davenport otherwise Franciscus a Sancta Clara procures a Bull like to Phalaris his brazen Bull with fire in the belly of it, to torment Day the Fran∣ciscan without his fault, or knowledge: and this Priest here condemns Sancta Clara to black darknesse for ever: pallentes umbras erebi noct••m{que} profundam, this man saith he is descending to Lucifer who will presume to be copartn••r with the holy Ghost, and thus leaving him (the said a Sancta Clara) to him that will, have him, &c. tantaene animis caelestibus irae? are they Friers secular Priests, or Devils that thus spit fire one at another? Let Davenport have the day of Day at Rome, what hath Sancta Clara done that in the charita••le censure of this Priest Lucifer must have him? He tooke upon him to draw some Rules out of Scriptures and the writings of the ancient Fathers; For the direction of generall Councels in declaring matters of faith: A capitall crime no doubt: but what else hath this Priest against him? this Sancta Clara hath Paraphra∣sed upon the Articles of Religion established in the Church of England, and sheweth in what sense and how a good Romane Catholique may with a sa••e conscience subscribe to them all, though eighteene at least of them shoot point blancke at their Trent faith and pierce it through and through. Aggra∣vate th••s fact of his to the height, doth this Priest himselfe doe lesse? who Paraphraseth upon the Oath of Allegiance and Supremacie, and sheweth in what sense a Romane Catholique may take both, though the former directly renounce the Popes temporall, and the latter his spirituall power and juris∣diction. Now I see what the matter is — 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. there is and alwayes will be emulation be∣tweene Artificers that worke at the same Trade, this Priest and Sancta Clara are 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 of the same Craft or Trade they both deale in like Commodities, equivocations and mentall reservations and wittie devices to elude oathes, subscriptions to articles of Religion, and religious obligations. Not to dissem∣ble with either of them, they both teach, with the Helcesaites, Euseb. hist. lib. 6. cap. 31. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, dissimulation in point of Re∣ligion, and cunning fetches to deceive Chri••tian Magistrates when they are convented before them and unlesse they both repent their doome is set down, Apoc. 22.25. Without are Dogs and Idolaters and whosoever loveth and ma∣keth a lye. I know well they pretend by this doctrine to keepe men from per∣jury and lying: but they doe just as Lycurgus the Law-giver of the Lacede∣monians did who to prevent adulterie enacted communitie of wives. For equivocation is no better then an artificiall and made lye as the Bishop of Du∣resme, and Mr. Henry Mason prove in their Treatises of this Argument.