OF WILFVLL falshoods obiected by M. Morton in sundry Catholi [...]k [...] writers: and namely his abuse offered to Franciscus Costerus. §. I.

NOW then to come to the matter it selfe: the oc­casion o [...] this labour of M. Morton to seeke out some errours, or shewes of falsities in Catholick [...] Authors, was, for that I hauing pressed him very sore in the last Chapter of my booke of Mitigation, with great multiplicity of vntruthes vttered by him, A signe distin­ctiue be­tweene Protestant & Catho­licke writers. and his consortes, which seemed to me both witting and willfull, I said that it might well be assigned for a signe distinctiue betweene vs and thē to haue the spirit of vttering wil [...]ull vntruthes, and therby also might be determined the differēce of our causes, which is good, and which is bad. For as in a good cause there is no need of lying, and a bad cause cannot be defended but by lying: so no man willingly of any good nature will choose to lye, [Page 119] but vpon some necessity. The wordes of my former discourse in the book of Mitigation, are these.

‘6. And for that (say I) this matter is of great importance for the reader well to conceyue in these dayes of controuersies betweene vs, Mitig. p. 488.489. I meane to stay my selfe somwhat in this Chapter vpon this point [...]nd to shew, that indeed it is a substantiall signe di­ [...]tinctiue betweene all sectaryes and vs, at this tyme, [...]nd that in matters of controuersy, our writers shall [...]euer be found guylty in these kindes of false lying [...]nd malitious equiuocations, where not only vn­ [...]uth is vttered, but it is wittingly also vttered, the [...]riter knowing that he writeth vntruth, as often [...]ow hath beene said: which manner of dealing in­ [...]rreth two pointes; the one that such a writer or [...]eaker hath no conscience, that vttereth thinges [...]gainst his owne knowledge, and which God seeth [...] be false, and falsely meant in his heart; and the [...]her, that his cause hath no ground of substantiall [...]uth, which cannot be defended without such [...]ilfull lyes.’

‘ [...] In this then if you please let vs insist a while, & [...] Tho. Morton bring forth any Catholicke Authors [...]hatsoeuer, A very iust de­maund & reasona­ble offer. that wrote against Protestants since [...]ese heresyes began, that hath bene taken in this [...]piety; I meane, that hath set downe in print any [...]h falsity, as cannot be excused, eyther by igno­ [...]nce, ouersight, negligence, error of print, transla­ [...]n, diuersity of editions, or the like; but that it [...]ust needs be presumed that he knew the vntruth, [...]d yet would set it forth: of this kynd (I say) let [...]im shew me but one example among all Catho­ [...]cke writers of our tyme, and I will in my consci­ [...]ce greatly mistrust, and discredit the Author, [...]hether it be an other, or my selfe. But if he shew [...]e two or three in any writer of this kynd, I shall [Page 120] hardly be able euer afterward to belieue him more. And wheras the number and variety of Catholicke writers is so great as the world seeth, it were no great [...]abour to shew it in some, if that spirit did raigne among them, as it doth in Protestant writers.’

8. To this speach of mine doth M. Morton now in this his last Preamble frame a rhetoricall answere in these wordes. Preamb. pag. 50. ‘Doth the man (who maketh men­tion of his interruption by sicknesse) know what he hath now said? Whet [...]er he spake this being in his feauer-fit, or in temper? Whether in a dreame or a wake? Whether in his right mynd, or in distra­ction? For sure I am, that this ostentation will prooue in the issue as vnfortunate vnto P. R as euer was boast either by Thraso on the stage, or by Goliah in the Campe, or by Gorgias in the schooles: A strange māner of boasting where no substance is at a [...]l. by the which he must be driuen vnto so miserable and shamefull a palino­dy, as euer herafter vtterly to discredit his owne frends, and worke a perpetuall discontent within himselfe, as presently will appeare. So he.’

9. And to this appearāce I am contēt to remit me [...] only I desire the reader to stand attent to the condi­tiō he [...]re put downe, that the fa [...]shood obiected must be willfull, and not excusable either by error, igno­rāce, ouersight or the like, as many of those were not, nor could possibly be defended which in my booke I brought against M. Morton and his, and more shall I do in this his Reply. And surely it is worth the no­ting, that he being to begin a list of falsities against Roman writers, as he pretendeth, should in the very first lynes s [...]t downe a notorious wil [...]ull vntruth of his owne, against that graue and learned man Franciscus Costerus, as pr [...]sently will appeare. For wheras I had said in m [...] former alleadged discourse, Let Thomas Morton bring forth any Catholicke Aut [...]ours [Page 121] whatsoeuer that wrote against Protestants since these heresies be­gan that hath bene taken in this impiety, he maketh this an­ [...]were: Preamb. pag. 51. ‘I m [...]y not deny euen this my Aduersary his due com [...]endation of modesty, who being ashamed (we may thinke) of the Romish fraudes, and falsi­fications of former times, will insist only vpon such mens examples, as haue professedly written of late against Protestants. It were to be wished, that his f [...]llow Iesuite Costerus had kept himselfe with­in the same precincts, but he maketh a more gene­rall challeng thus: Coster. Ies. En [...]hi [...]id. c. desumm [...] Pontif. §. Constat.’ Nemo hactenu [...] vel Princeps, vel Praesul, vel Scriptor fuit, qui mendacij, vel malae fidei Romanos arguerit: that is, Neuer yet (saith he) did any Prince, or Pre­late, or writer accuse the Romanists of falshood. So he.

10. And heere now I must demand of the Rea­der what he vnderstandeth M. Morton his purpose to be in this place? Is it not to shew that Costerus was lesse modest then I, for so much as I said, if in any one Catholicke writer of controuersies of our age, there might be found but two or three examples of wilfull lying, I would neuer trust him more, but that Costerus went further saying, that no Prince, Prelate, [...]r writer had euer hitherto accused any Romanists o [...] falshood? Is not this M. Mortons plaine meaning (thinke you) as both his words and drift do shew? Yes truly. Which being so, I would aske him first, why he did clippe the latin words of Costerus (being so few as [...]hey are) for that he saith, Atqui verò nemo hact [...]nus fuit Catholicus, vel Princeps, vel Praesul, vel Scriptor &c. Costerus notably abused. but ne­uerthelesse there was no Catholicke man hitherto (to wit, vnto the time assigned whē Bishops of Rome were Saints and Martyrs) eyther Prince, Bishop, or writer &c. why did he cut of the words, but [...]euerthelesse & Catholicke man, and those both in latin and English, wheras they be in Costerus?

[Page 122]11. Why was this paring think you, but that they being s [...]t down truly as they stād in the Author, they would haue b [...]wrayed his falshood; for that the words ( but neuerthelesse) do shew a referēce to somwhat going before, and the words ( no Catholicke Prince or Pre­late) do demōstrate that Costerus spake not of Catholick or Romā writers, for it had byn ridiculous [...]or him in that sense to say, that no Catholicke of the Ro­man Religion did euer hitherto accuse any Roma­nists (that is, Roman writers) of falshood, for it had byn most absurd: & therfore if we imagin Costerus to be a man of common sense, we could neuer thinke that he would write so absurdly, and therfore this word (Catholicke) was guilfully left out by M. Mort.

12. Well then what was Costerus his meaning? truly himselfe doth set it down both at large, and perspi­cuously in the very place, and Paragraph by M. Morton cyted, so a as ignorance or error can not be plea­ded: for that he treating of the Authority and suc­cession of the Bishops of Rome, and prouing the same out of the ancient Fathers, and historiographers of the primitiue Church, Costerus vbi supra [...]ap. 3. S. Iren [...]us, Eusebius, Augustinus, Optatus, and others, he in the next Paragraph, cited heere by M. Morton, proueth the same in like manner out of the Acts, Gests, Decrees, and letters yet extant of the ancient Popes themselues, euen in time of per­secution, when in human power they were weake, and expected nothing but affliction, death [...] & mar­tyrdome, and yet did they take vpon them the care of the whole world (saith Costerus) confirming Bi­shops, depriuing Patriarches of cōmuniō when need required: as restoring also others to their Seas when by violence they were i [...]iustly oppressed, and so for this he citeth many examples, euen before the time of Constantine the great, vpon which enumeration he maketh this argument.

[Page 123]13. Hi sanè qui vitam cum sanguine pro Christi confessione profuderunt, nihil sibi arrogasse [...]t alienum &c. The argu­ment or inference of Coste­rus. ‘These godly Bishops of Rome that spent their liues and bloud for the confessiō of Christ, would neuer (of liklihood) haue arrogated to themselues that which was not theirs, nor would they haue vsurped any thing con­trary to the will of Christ, except they had well knowne, and byn sure that such an office was left, and commended to them by Christ. And if any man will imagin that they had byn of such impudency, as not to feare to do it: yet would there not haue wanted some others, eyther Bishops, Princes, or Doctors, who by their authority, power, and wri­tings, would haue repressed this attempt of those Roman Bishops. And yet neuerthelesse hitherto there was n [...] Catholicke, eyther Prince, Prelate, or writer, that euer argu­ [...]d those Roman Bishops of lying, or false dealing, but rather Bishops, and Patriarchs of the first and principall churches when they were oppressed by their aduer­s [...]ries, did flye vnto them.’

14 Thus farre Costerus. And now let vs consider how faithfully M. Morton hath dealt heere, euen thē when he principally pretendeth to deliuer himself [...] from vnfaithful [...]es, like as he that being arraigned at the sessions for stealing, doth not abstayne to steale [...]uen in that place and presence of the Iudges themselues: who can excuse M. Morton heere? he saw the whole drift of Costerus to be, to shew that if those ancient Popes before Constantine, who were Saints and Martyrs had presumed any thing beyōd their lawfull authority, some Catholicke Prince, Prelate, or writer of that tyme would haue resisted, or reprehended them of false dealing: but no such Prince, Prelat, or writer was found vnto that day, but rather Bishops and chiefe Patriarches did make their refuge vnto thē: therfore it is a signe that they [Page 124] were held for lawfull Superiours.

15. And what now is there heere in Costerus his speach about the lying of Romanists or Roman VVriters? Can there be any defence of this so apparent abuse? will M. Morton say that he saw not Costerus his mea­ning, M. Mort. conuinced of egregi­ous fraud or that he had not a [...]alse meaning himselfe to deceaue his Reader? Why then did he suppresse all the precedent clauses that do declare Costerus his pur­pose? why did he cut of the other words immedi­atly following, of Bishops, and Patriarches recourse vnto [...]opes, which did properly appertaine and cohere to the said former words and meaning of Costerus, and no way to M. Morton? why did he trāslate ( Romanos) Ro­manists, as though it pertained to Roman writers euen at this day, wheras the whole contex and im­mediate precedent wordes do manifestly shew that Costerus meant Romanos Pontifices, ancient Roman Bi­shops in tyme of persecution, and not Roman wryters? And if all these inexcusable fraudes dis­couered in the allegation of this one litle sentence of Costerus be not sufficient to proue M. Morton not to meane sincerely, nor out of a good conscience (not­withstanding all his protestations to the contrary) I am greatly deceyued: let him produce but one such against vs, & I will say he doth somwhat indeed: & now whether he be able to do it or no, we shall pre­sently take the view, for his list of obiections against our writers doth immediatly follow out of this his fraudulent Preamble, as full stuffed notwithstā ­ding with protestations and vaunts of vpright dea­ling, and sincere proceeding, euen then, when he falsifieth egregiously, as euer perhaps you haue read before.

HIS FIRST EXAMPLE of voluntary falshood falsely obiected against three ancient Popes. §. II.

I hope the reader will remember what M. Morton is bound to bring forth, if he will bring any [...]hing to the purpose, and true state of the question: [...]o wit, he must let vs see some 2. or 3. examples of [...]itting and wilfull falshood in any one Catholicke [...]riter of our time, that hath written against Pro­ [...]estants, which presently afterward hee will at­ [...]empt to doe against Cardinall Bellarmine, and some o­ [...]hers. But now hee beginneth with three ancient [...]opes, Zozimus, Bonifacius, and Celestinus, that lyued in [...]he tyme of S. Augustine, August. l. 2. de gratia Christi c. 2. & 6. & cō ­tra duas epistolas Pelag. cap. 4. Concil. African. epistola ad B [...]nifaciū. See Baro­nius tom. 5. in vitis e [...]m Pō [...]tificum. and were much commended [...]y him for holy men, but are accused by M. Morton [...]r falsaryes, as though they had forged a Canon of [...]he first Councel of Nice, in fauour of their owne Su­ [...]remacy, to proue therby the lawfulnes of appea­ [...]es to be made to them, and to their Sea from the Bishops [...]o Africa, which Canon was not found in [...]he ordinarie copies then extant of that Councell.

[...]. But first of all, howsoeuer this matter passed, [...]t appertayneth litle or nothing at all to our purpose [...]or to the question now in hand of moderne Catho­ [...]icke writers, nor doth it proue wilfull falshood in [...]hose three ancient Popes, if they cyted the Canon of one Councell for another of equall authority (as indeed they did,) for that it might be ascribed ey­ther to variety of copyes (when no print was yet extant) or to ouersight, forgetfulnes, or to some other such defect, rather then to malice, and volun­tary errour. So as for M. Morton to begin his impug­nation [Page 126] with an example, that hath so many dispari­tyes from the case it selfe, and state of the question, sheweth that he hath litle indeed to say against vs to the purpose, notwithstanding his dreadfull threat before set down [...] against me, that I should be dryuen vnto a miserable, and shamefull palynode &c. for if he had had wares of any importance, it is likly that wee should haue seene some part therof now in this beginning of his onset.

18. Especially for that vpon want of better matter, as may be presumed, he was content to haue a snatch at Gratian, Gratian 2. q. 6. §. Pla­cuit. the compiler or gatherer together of the Canons of old Councels, who cyting the 22. Canon of the Councell of Meliuet in Africa, in which S. Augustine was present, and where it was decreed in these wordes, Placuit, vt Presbyteri, Diaconi, vel inferiores Clerici &c. It is decreed that Priests, Deacons and other inferiour Clergy men, if they will appeale from their Bishops, they shall not appeale but vnto the Councells of Africa &c. Gratian after the whole Canon set downe, The que­stiō about Appeales in the Councell of Meli­uet. doth by way of commentary ad­ioyne this exception, in a differēt distinct letter, say­ing, except they do appeale to the Sea of Rome, which ex­ception Cardinall Bellarmine in that matter alloweth not, for that the Councel of Meliuet did principally intēd to restrayne the Appeales of inferiour Cleargy men, frō going to Rome against their owne Bishops, though not the appeales of Bishops themselues, a [...] presently shall be shewed.

19. But now what hath M. Morton eyther against vs, or for himselfe out of this case? You shal heare him speake. Preamb. pag. 52. ‘What can be said (saith he) for the de­fence of Gratian their publicke Compiler of the De­crees of Popes, who as Cardinall Bellarmine witnesseth citing a Canon of a Councell of Meliuet, wherin it was decreed that none should appeale beyond the [Page 127] sea, did adde of himselfe this exception, Except it be [...]nto the Apostolike Sea of Rome: when as that Councell in forbidding appeales beyond the sea, did especi­ [...]lly intend to forbid appeales to Rome? Many such [...]ike falshoods might be alleadged.’ So saith he.

20. Wherto I answere, that if they be no bet­ter then this, they are not worth the alleaging, but only to intertaine time, & to shew your fraud in dea­ [...]ing. For first Gratian did liue dyuers hundred yeares gone; Diuers false shifts in accu­sing of Gratian. but we talke of writers of our tyme, and of [...]uch only is our question & cōtrouersy; wherin you [...]inding your selfe barren, would now extend your [...]ōmission to all Catholicke wryters of all ages past, which is a miserable shift. Secōdly there be so many other shifts & trickes in cyting these few words, [...]s do make demonstration that you can cyte no­ [...]hing in simplicity of truth, without some wil [...]ull corruption, as heere where you say, it was decreed (in the Councel of Meliuet) that none should appeale beyond the sea, you cut of craftily the first words before cyted of the said Canon, inferiores Clerici, the inferiour Cleargy men, as though the prohibition had byn for all (as well Bishops, as inferiour Cler­gie men) which presently we shall shew to be false.

21. Thirdly where you say that Gratian did adde o [...] himselfe this exception to the Canon, you would make [...]our Reader thinke that he had added these words [...]s the words of the Canō it selfe; Bellarmin. lib. 2. de R [...] man. Po [...] c. 24. §. 3. which he did not, but as a commentary or explication of the Canon in a separate place, and so is now extant in a distinct letter: and consequently your note in the margent that Gratian is a falsificator, falls vpon your selfe, which do falsifie his meaning. For that the most that can be obiected to Gratian in this place, is, that which Cardinall Bellarmine saith, he mistooke the true mea­ning and intent of that Canon of Meliuet, as though [Page] it had beene meant of Bishops, as well as of in [...]eriou [...] Clergy-men, which is farre [...]rō the proofe of will­full [...]a [...]se meaning, which may very probably be ob­iected to M. Morton in this and many other places. For that it cannot be well thought, but that he must know that he dealt in [...]uriously & ca [...]ūniously with Gratian in this place.

22. But now to the former old, idle, and worne-out obiection against the foresaid three Popes, for counterfaiting not one only (as M. Morton accuseth) but three Canons of the said Councell of Nice, not only the Madgeburgians, but Caluin also in his Instituti­ons, and a [...]ter them both [...] Iewell at large in his fourth article, and after him euery Protestant haue imploy­ed their pennes and tongues to exaggerate the same, Caluin. l. 4. Instit. c. 7. Mag [...]ebur­gens [...]s C [...]n [...]. 5. c. 9. Iew­ell in his 4. article of Reply. vpon no other ground, so much as it seemeth, as vpon stomake, and exacerbation of hatred against the Roman Sea, seeking to slaunder and defame three so notable & ancient Bishops of Rome, that sate within the cōpasse of 7. or 8. yeares, vpon the point of a thousand and two hundred yeares past, which is farre without the compasse of moderne Catholick [...] writers, as you see, and consequently from the state of our question. And albeit the matter hath byn an­swered both largely, M. Mort. cauil about 3. Popes six times [...]nswered [...]lready and clearly by diuers learned men, as well of our nation as others, and shewed to be a meere cauillation: yet nothing will serue these men, but still is it brought againe, as though it had neuer beene answered before. Which false dissimu­lation is here also vsed by M. Morton, Hardings detection. l. 4. fol. 249. who saith not a word of any answere that euer he saw thereunto, and yet could he not but haue seene fiue or six at least (and foure very famous of our owne nation) if he be but meanly conuersant in the writers of our time. As that first of D. Harding, in his detection against M. Iewell, shewing among other arguments, that no [Page 129] [...]riter of all antiquity from that time, wherin these [...]oly Popes liued vnto this age (these Protestants ex­ [...]epted) was so shameles as euer to call them falsaryes, [...]r that they had corrupted, or forged any Canon of [...]he Councell of Nice, though the Canons by them [...]yted, were not found in some Copies, as they were in theirs of Rome, by the reason that presently shall be shewed.

[...]3. The Second is of D. Sanders, D. Sanders de visib. mon. l. 7. p. 356. & de­inceps in Zozimo. in his Visible Mo­ [...]archy of the Church, who much more largely discus­ [...]eth the point, and finally concludeth the whole matter by fiue seuerall arguments, that no such thing was euer meant by the African Fathers to forbid all [...]ppeales of the Bishops to Rome, as Illyricus, Caluin, M. Iewell & other Protestant writers haue deuised & published

24. The third answerer is Doctor Stapleton, Stapl. Re­turne of vntruthes. art. 4. p. 29. who refuteth the whole tale, and calumniation of the Protestants in this affayre, in his Retu [...]ne o [...] Vn­ [...]ruthes, and fourth article, throughout twenty whole leaues together against M. Iewell, and conuinceth him of 38. seuerall vntruthes vttered in that one matter, which in reason M. Morton should eyther haue acknowledged or confuted: but the one he would not, and the other he could not. The fourth answerer is Alanus Copus otherwise Doctor Harpsfield, Harpsfield Dialog. 1. cap. 6. & 7. very large, exact, & le [...]rned, in his Dialogues, who handleth euery member therof with like obseruance of multitude of lyes vsed by the Protestants in that matter.

25. The fifth is Cardinall Bellarmine, Bellar. l. 2. de Rom. Pont. cap. 24. & 25. who in his bookes of the Bishop of Rome, hath largely, & learnedly discussed the same, and answered all ob­iections brought to the cōtrary with great diligēce, conuincing both Illyrcius, and the rest of his fellow- Centuriators, togeather with Caluin, for so many fal­shoods, [Page 130] shiftes, errors of history, malicious fictions, and other like abuses, as is a shame to read. And fi­nally not to name more authors for this poynt, Car­dinall Baronius as last of all, Baron. tom. 5. ann [...] 419. non lōgè à fine. so with more exact exami­nation historicall the [...] any of the rest, hath cleared the whole matter in his fifth Tome of his Ecclesiasti­call History, vpon the yeare 419. to whome I remit the studious Reader.

26. Well then, in all these six Authors at least I do suppose, that M. Mortō as a learned man had seene this obiection discussed, and answered, though not perhaps to his contentment, why then if he had meant playnly, as often he protesteth, had not he eyther mentioned these Authors, or refuted them, or at leastwise told his Reader, A simile well shew­ing M. Mortons vnsincere dealing. that there had bene some such answers before, though not sufficient to ouerthrow the obiection, wherby the said Reader might haue sought to haue a view therof? For if a Marchant that professeth much sincerity, and vp­right dealing, should offer coyne for good and cu [...] ­rant that himselfe had knowne to haue bene six times at least reiected for coūterfait by skilfull men, and yet he should obtrude the same againe the 7. time, without saying any one word that it had bene called into question, and refused before; none would say that this mans sincerity is worth a rush. The application I leaue to M. Morton himselfe.

27. Wherfore in a word or two, to answere the substance of the matter, The true state of the que­stion. thus it passed. A certayne Priest of Sicca in A [...]rick named Appiarius hauing a con­trouersy with his owne Bishop Vrbanus, after diuers disagreements passed betweene them, wherin he thought himselfe hardly dealt with all, he appealed to Rome to Pope Zozimus, bringing with him cōmen­datory letters from the Primate of all Africk. Zozimus hauing heard his cause, thought best to send him [Page 131] [...]acke againe into Africk, and with him two Legates, [...]ith instructiōs that they should see & procure not [...]nly this man to be restored to his right, but more­ [...]uer that 3. Canons of the Councell of Nice, the [...]rst about Appeales of Bishops, the second of Priests, [...]e third of Bishops following the Court, to be ob­ [...]rued. Whereupon the African Bishops gathered a [...]ationall Cōncell at Carthage of 217. Bishops about [...]e satisfying of the Order of Pope Zozimus.

[...]8. But when this Councell had examined their [...]pyes of the Councell of Nice, they found not those [...] Canons therin. Wherupon they sending into the [...]ast partes to seeke other Copies, they receyued both [...]om S. Cyrill Patriarch of Alexandria, and Atticus of [...]onstantinople other Copies, which in like manner [...]anted these 3. Canons, as also they did want diuers [...]ther Canons cyted by sundry ancient Fathers to [...]aue bene made in the Councell of Nice, as by Praef. in Iudi [...]h. S. [...]ierome, Epistol [...] 110. S. Augustine, Epist. 82. S. Ambrose, and diuers later [...]ouncels: which Canons notwithstanding were [...]ade & decreed in the first Councell of Nice, though [...]ot extant in the Copies, that were in Africa; which [...]oth D. Harpsfeild, & Bellarmine do particulerly proue [...]t large, and it appeareth playnly that these cop­ [...]ies sent out of the East, had 20. Canons only of [...]he said Councell of Nice, which Ruffinus in his story [...]oth recount: Ruff. l. [...]. Histor. Athan. Epistola ad Marcū. wheras both S. Athanasius and many [...]ther Fathers that were presēt in the same Councell of Nice, do testify, that there were more, which are [...]et downe in the first tome of Councells, as transla­ [...]ed out of the Arabian language, though not found in the Greeke.

29. But indeed [...]ll the errour or mistaking was this, that there begin a generall Councell gathered togeather at Sardica very soone after that of Nice, which Sardicense Conciliū conteyned more Bishops in [Page 132] number then were in that of Nice (for that in thi [...] there were 3OO. out of the West only, and 70. fr [...] the East, as both Athanasius, Athan. Epist. ad [...]olitariam vitam agē ­tes & A­pol. 2. So­crat. 2. hist. cap. 15. Socrates, Zozomonus, Zozo. l. 3. cap. 11. & o­ther Authors do affi [...]me) & for that the most of these Fathers were the selfe same, that had bene in the Councell of Nice, and had determined nothing con­cerning faith, differing from the Nicene Councell, but only seem [...]d to be called [...]or better manifestation and confirmation of the said Nicene Councell, it was held (especially in the West Church) for a part, or appendix of the said first Nicene Councell: in which regard S. Gregorie, and other Fathers, when they do mention the first 4. Generall Coun­cells, do leaue out this of Sardica, The ge­nerall Councell of Sardi­ca. though it were as Generall and more great then the first Nicene, as hath bene said.

30. Wherefore this Councell of Sardica hauing set downe the foresaid three Canons, as conforme to the decrees of the first late Councell of Nice, and going vnder the name of the said Nicene Councell as a member therof in those copyes that Pope Zozimu [...] in the West Church had, he did name them Canōs of the Nicene Councell, as made by the authority of the selfe same Fathers that sate at Nice, and the na­ming of one for the other was no greater an errour in effect, Matt. 27. then when S. Matthew doth name Hieremy the Prophet for Zachary, for so much as the thing it selfe was true: and so was the allegation of Pope Zo­zimus, for that in the Councell of Sardica these three Canons are extant: The mali­ [...]ious cla­mours of Protestāts against three an­cient re­nowed Bishops of Rome. nor euer was there any least su­spition or speach of forging vsed in the Church by eyther Catholicks or Hereticks for so many ages, before the Lutheranes and Caluinists vpon meere ha­tred and gall of stomake began those clamours in this our age, against so holy ācient Fathers as those 3. Bishops of Rome were (to wit, Zozimus, Boni [...]a­cius, [Page 133] and Celestinus) by the testimony of Saint Au­gustine, and other Fathers that lyued with them, who also (I meane S. Augustine) at that very tyme when the controuersy was in treating about the Copyes of the Councell of Nice, August. [...]pist. 26 [...]. and matter of ap­pellation, did appeale himselfe to the later of these three Popes, to wit to Celestinus in the cause of Anto­nius Bishop of Fessala, as appeareth out of his owne Epistle, about that matter. And so this shalbe suffici­ent, and more then was necessary, to answere vnto [...]his stale impertinent obiectiō of counterfaiting the Canons of the first Nicene Councell, which is nothing [...]o our purpose in hand as hath bene seene, and yet [...]ncōbred with so many vntruthes, as would require [...] seuerall Treatise to display them. Let vs come then [...]o his second instance.

HIS SEC0ND EXAMPLE of wilfull fraud falsely obiected against sundry mo­derne Catholicke writers, about the Councell of Eliberis in Spayne. §. III.

BEFORE he cōmeth to set downe this instance about the Councell of Eliberis, Premb. p. 53. he falleth agayne to boast and bragge exceedingly, saying: ‘P. R. is more merci [...]ull, requiring three sensible instāces, as it were 3. witnesses against any one of his writers ( before he be condemned:) & yet this also is horribly vnmerci [...]ull on their part. I wish he had but named any one, whose credit he valueth most, that I might haue answered his challenge in that one. Howso­euer, it wilbe no more easie a taske for me to find one falshood in many, then many in one. So he. And [Page 134] [...]aue you heard this craking?’ We may say with Horace,

What strang effect will so great words bring forth? But heere I must agayne, What this brag­ger is bound to do. and in euery place aduer­tise the Reader, what this Boaster should and ought to proue, if indeed he can proue any thing at all: to wit, that he lay forth cleerly and perspicuously some two or three plaine instāces out of any one Catho­licke writer of our time (as I haue done many a­gainst him and his, wherby he and they are conuin­ced of witting and wilfull falshood,) and this so manifest and apparent, as the Author himselfe must needes know that it was false when he wrote it. Well then, what can M. Morton bring forth in this kynd against our writers, out of this his second ex­ample or instance, about the Councell of Eliberis in Spaine?

32. In the controuersy about Images (saith he) the Pro­testants appeale vnto antiquity both of Councells, and Fathers. The first Councell is that of Eliberis about the yeare of Grace 305. which Protestants vrge, Preamb. pag. 53. as forbidding that there should be any Images in the Church. Now let vs try the spirits of the an­swerers. Well Syr. And what triall will you make of their spirits heere? The state of your question in controuersy requireth that you should try them for willfull lying spirits, and that they lyed voluntari­ly, as hath byn proued against you and yours. What haue you to say against them in this kind out of this place? You do accuse them that they haue diuers, & different expositions vpon the said Canon of the Councell of Eliberis? some thinking it to be vnderstood one way, and others another: and for this you alleadg the differēt expositions of Card. Bel­larmine, D. Payua, Alanus Copus, Sanders, Turrian, Vasquez, Six [...]us Senensis, and others; and you play merily vpon [Page 135] [...]heir diu [...]rsityes of expositions about the decree of [...]he Councell: but how proueth this your principall [...]roposition, that they did erre wilfully, yea wit­ [...]ingly also, themselues knowing that they did erre [...]or this is the only true question? And if you proue [...]ot this, you proue nothing. And now I would aske [...]ou, When diuers ancient Fathers in their Cōmen­ [...]aryes vpon the holy Sciptures, do set downe diffe­ [...]ent expositions of hard places, M. Mor­ton taken in a great absurdity. euery one thinking [...]hat he goeth neerest to the truth, may you by this [...]ondemne them of wilfull falshood, and make try­ [...]ll of their spirits as of lying spirits for this respect? [...]s not this absurd and impious? Are you not asha­ [...]ed to come forth with these ridiculous proofes [...]fter so great ostentation of words, that it is as easie [...]r you to find out many wil [...]ull falshoods in one, as one in many? [...]hy had you not alleadged one at least? But let vs [...]xamine in a word or two the reason of diuersity of [...]xpositions of our Doctours about the Canon, and [...]ith this you will be wholy downe-dagger.

[...]3. The Councell it selfe of Eliberis in Spayne was a [...]rouinciall Councell of 19. Bishops, held somwhat [...]efore, or about the time of the first generall Coun­ [...]ell of Nice, and some Controuersy there is among [...]iuers Authors of what authority this Eliberian Coū ­ [...]ell is, The story of the E­liberian Councell in Spaine. or may be held; and whether euer it were re­ [...]yued by the Church or not, in respect of some Canons therin found, that are obscure & hard to be [...]ightly vnderstood: as namly those which seeme to deny reconciliation to some persons euen at the houre of death. But howsoeuer this be, certaine it is, that there be sundry Canōs in that Coūcell, which Protestants may not admit, as namly the 13. which saith, Virgines quae se Deo dedicauerunt, si pactum perdiderint virginitatis &c. Virgins that haue dedicated thēselues to God, if they breake their promise of virginity, if [Page 136] they repent, and that they fell by infirmity of body and do pennance all the time of their lyfe &c. they ought to be admitted to communion in the end. A hard case for Protestant-Nunnes.

34. Those other two also, viz. 23. and 26. which are about set fastings vpon Saturday, and other dayes may not be admitted by Protestants, & much lesse the 33. which forbiddeth all Priests, Bishops, Deacons, and Subdeacons to haue the vse of wiues, or generare filios, to beget children, vnder paine, vt ab honore Clericatus exterminētur, The Eli­berian Councell contrary to Prote­stants. that they be cast out from the Clergy. And yet further Can. 38. that Bigamu [...], or he that hath bene twice married, may not bap­tize any, no not in time of necessity, which infer­reth à fortiore, that such a one could not be Priest in those ancient dayes. And heere then, how can M. Morton say so confidently as he doth of this Councell of Eliberis, VVe Protestants appeale to the antiquity of Coun­cells, and first to that of Eliberis &c? And do you thinke that he will stand to these Canons now alleadged? If he do, it must needs be very preiudiciall vnto him, and marre his marriage at least, if he haue any intē ­tion to marry, and yet to lead the life of a Clergy­man, according to the prescript of the Councell of Eliberis: as also to be some other punishment vnto his body to be bound to so much fasting, as those Canons of the Councell of Eliberis doe ordaine and prescribe.

35. But to returne to the reason why he allead­geth this Councell. M. Mort. art in an­swering. Preamb. p. 53. VVe Protestants (saith he) do vrge this Councell, as forbidding, that there should be any images in the Church. Wherunto he bringeth in D. Payua to answere one way, Bellarmine another, Sanders & Alanus Copus a third, others a fourth, fifth, or sixth (a thing very vsuall among learned men to haue diuers expositiōs euen vpon the Scriptures thēselues,) & then by way [Page 137] [...]f scoffing (though very insulse) to make sport vnto [...]imselfe and his Reader, he frameth, as it were, a Comedie or enterlude, one saying one thing, & an­ [...]ther another (though all against him:) and in this [...]onsisteth a great part of his manner of answering, [...]s by frequent examples you will see, if you consider [...]t.

[...]6. But let vs examine, what the Canon it selfe [...]ath: The words are these: ‘ Placuit, in Ecclesia picturas [...]sse non debere, ne quòd colitur, aut adoratur, in parietibus de­ [...]ingatur. It is decreed by vs, that pictures ought not [...]o be in the Church, least that which is worshipped or adored, be paynted vpon the walles. Which Ca­non for that it conteineth not onelie a decree, The de­cree of the Eliberian Councell examined as you [...]ee, but also a reason of the decree, and seemeth con­ [...]rarie both to the vse of the generall Church at that time, and afterwards, as is prooued out of other an­cient Fathers, Councells, and Historiographers, & seemeth to be opposite to the determination and pu­blike decree of a famous Generall Councell, that en­sued some yeares afterward, to wit, the second of Nice, diuers authors doe alleadge diuers reasons for the right vnderstanding, & verifying of this Canō:’ so as it may agree with the truth of the Councells meaning, and with the reason it selfe alledged by the Canon: which variety of answers or expositions in a coniecturall matter, as hath bene sayd, are no wil­full contradictiōs, as M. Morton fondlie supposeth, but multiplicity of expositions. The most generall is, that the true meaning of the Councell was, that for more reuerence of holie images, and to the end the thing which was proposed to be worshipped & adored in them should not suffer indecency, they should not be painted vpon walles of the Church where by the corruption and moysture therof, they might come to be corrupted and defaced, but rather [Page 138] that they should be made vpon tables, veiles, & such other moueable matter, wherby they might both the better be preserued, and remoued also more con­ueniently from the iniury of Infidells in tyme of persecutiō: which in effect was the verie same reasō that mooued the ancient and Christian Emperour Theodosius to prohibite, Lib. 1. Cod. tit. 8. leg. Cùm no­bis sit. that the image of Christs Crosse, which he carryed in his banner, should not be engrauen vpon the ground, or pauement, and so trodden vpon by mens feete.

37. And heere also the consideration of learned Vasquez is worth the obseruing, A weigh­ty consi­deration. who being a Spa­nyard, writeth, that this decre of his Country-Coū ­cell of Eliberis maketh so litle against the Catholick moderne vse of Images, as that the greatest enemy, that euer they had one of them in the world, Claudius Taurinensis, Vasquez l. 2. de cultu & ador. disp. 5. n. [...]26. & 135. a Spanyard in like manner, and a chief head of the Iconoclasts, or Image-breakers, almost 800. yeares agone, seeking all the arguments that he could any way scrape togeather against thē, and the pious vse therof; yet did he neuer alleage this Canō of his owne Countrey-Councell (which now Cal­uin and Caluinists doe so much vrge,) well foreseeing that it made nothing at all to his purpose, or a­gainst the Catholicke vse of Images. For yf it had bene otherwise, either he, or some other of that sect after him, would haue cyted the same before the Protestants of our tyme.

38. I doe willingly pretermitt the pageants and childish playes, which M. Morton doth make to him self in comparing, and opposing the variety of our writers answers, and interpretations togeather, and the one against the other (as before hath bene said) proposing them as poppetts to make himselfe pa­stime, which he may do also vpon the grauest Cō ­mentaries that euer were written vpon Aristotle, or [Page 139] [...]ther author, yea & vpon the Scriptures themselues: [...]ut I can not lett passe the last assertion of all sett [...]owne by M. Morton in a different letter, Preamb. pag. 55. Sixt. Senē. l. 5. Bibl. annot. 247. that whatso­ [...]uer the occasion of forbidding might haue bene (in the Ca­non) this is a confessed conclusion of Senensis, that the Coun­ [...]ell of Eliberis, did An ab­solute lye [...] absolutely forbidd the worshipp of Images. And so he maketh the Latin text of Senen­ [...]is to speake in like manner, Omnino vetuit Synodus Eli­ [...]ertina imaginum cultum. But in Senensis you shall not find the word omnino or absolutely, wherin standeth all the force of the matter. And the fraud cannot seeme but willfull, nor can it any way stand with the in­tention of Senensis, who saith and affirmeth only (according to the interpretation, which he best al­loweth of among manie other) that the meaning of the Councell was this, to forbid the vse of images for a time, least the new conuerted Spanyardes, not being well instructed, seing images vpon the walls, should thinke there were no difference betweene them, and the heathen Idols. For auoyding wher­of it seemed good to the Councell for a while to re­moue the vse of images, M. Mor [...] taken in a manifest false trippe. which of it selfe they held for lawfull and pious. This is the opinion of Senen­sis. And now let the discreet reader iudge, whether this were his confessed Conclusion, that the Councell of Eliberis did absolutely, or not rather secundum quid, for­bid the worship of images. Surely I am ashamed of such shifting in M. Morton, euen then, when he pretē ­deth to charge his aduersarie with that crime, and cannot proue it. Let vs passe to another instance of his, noe better then this.

HIS THIRD EXAMPLE OF like deceipt obiected against the same Catholicke Authors, about the Councell of Frank­ford in Germany. §. IIII.

AFTER the former variety of expositiōs about the Canon of the Councell of Eliberis, M. Morton passeth to another difference in iudgement among our Catholicke writers, concerning the Prouinciall Councell of Franckeford, which being held about 800. yeares past, presently after the second generall Councell of Nice, wherin the Catholicke vse of ima­ges was defended and established against the fore­said heresy of Iconoclasts, Cent. 8. c. 9. citātur Ado in Chron. an. 795. Vr­sperg. in chron. an­no. 793. Hin [...]mar. l. cōtra E­pisc. Ian­dun. c 20. & alij. sundry Authors, alleaged by the Magdeburgians, do write, that the said Synode of Frankeford did condemne as well the said doctryne of images, as also the Authority of the Councell of Nice that had allowed the same: which if it were true, yet were not the matter of any great doubt, whether a Prouinciall Councell (such as was that of Frankeford) were rather to be obeyed then a gene­rall, as was the other of Nice. But for that there is great obscurity, and many contradictions in the history it selfe, therfore diuers Catholicke writers do answere, and expound the matter diuersly, allead­ging sundry excellent coniecturall reasons, proofes, and probabilityes ech one for themselues, as may be seene in the places of their workes heere quoted, but yet all agreeing in the principall poynt against the Protestants, that the Councell of Frankeford indeed did not cōdemne eyther the Councel of Nice, or the doctryne of Images in the sense (at least) and mea­ning [Page 141] that the said Nicene Councell had approued the same. And what is this to the purpose then, to proue that th [...]se Authors did erre wittingly a­gainst their conscience? Do you not see, that still the poore man runneth quite from the purpose, All from the pur­pose. and hath nothing to say to the effect he should say?

40. But let vs stay our selues a little vpon the matter it selfe, and giue some briefe notice to the Reader of the diuersity of opinions in our Catho­ [...]icke Authors about this matter, that is so obscure [...]y relation of others; for that no Canon or Decree [...]f that Councell was euer extant about the same to 1 my knowledge. Three o­pinions a­bout the Councell of Franck­ford The whole controuersy is reduced [...]o three opinions, the first is of Surius in praefat. ad Concil. Francof. Surius, Dialo. 4. & 5. Alanus Co­ [...]us, in l. de I­magin. Sanders, and others, who thinke probably, [...]hat albeit diuers Historiographers, vpon the cre­dit of certain bookes, called falsely Carolini, or of Charles the great, refuted by Pope Adrian the first then [...]yuing, haue left recorded that the Councell of Frankeford did reproue the seauenth Generall Coun­ [...]ell about images (which is knowne to be the 2. of Nice:) yet was it not so indeed, but another false Councell of Constantinople was condemned by them of Frankeford as held by the hereticall Image-breakers a litle before, and was called the 2. of Constantinople, [...]nd by themselues that held it, the 7. Generall Councell. So as according to this opiniō the error was in mistaking the second Councell of Nice, to haue bene condemned by the Councell of Frank [...]ord, insteed of the second Councell of Constantinople.

41 The second opiniō is of Cardinall Bellarmine, Gene [...]ard, & some others, who thinke that the errour was 2 not so much in mistaking Councell for Councell, Bellar. l. 2. de imagin. 14. as fact for fact, for that some Iconoclastes, and espe­cialy those that wrote the forsaid forged bookes, named Carolini, in Franckeford, during the tyme of [Page 142] the said Councell, had falsely informed the Coun­cell in two poynts of fact, against the Councell of Nice. The [...]irst, that it was not gathered, nor con­firmed by the Bishop of Rome: the second that it had decreed, Images to be worshipped with di [...]ine honor, and the same that was due vnto the blessed Trinity: vpon which two false suppositions the Councell of Nice being farre of, and the Treatises and Decrees therof written only as yet in Greeke, and not much published to the world and latin Church, the Councell of Franckeford condemned the doctrine, as also the Authority of the Councell vp­on the foresayd two misinformations: which was errour of fact, as hath byn said, and not of faith. And M. Morton doth fondly insult, when he biddeth his aduersary P. R. to tell him in good earnest, Preamble pag. 58. if the Fa­thers of the Councell of Frankeford, iudging that the second Councell of Nice, confirmed by the Pope, did erre in de­fending the vse of Images, did they erre in faith or no? Wherunto I answere, that they erred in fact & not in faith, as hath beene said, being informed that the Councell of Nice had determined that, which it had not indeed: to wit, diuine honour to be giuen to image [...]. For if they of Frankeford had knowne the truth as also bene certaine that the other of Nice had decreed, and established only due and reuerent worship, such as had bene vsed in the Church, the Councell of Frāk­ford would not haue contradicted it: as neither, if they had knowne that the Pope had confirmed that Councell, A willfull vntrruth. would they euer haue doubted of the Au­thority therof, as is euident by the Caroline bookes thēselues. And it is witting errour heere in M. Mort. to say, that they of Frankeford knew that the Coun­cell of Nice was confirmed by the Pope, for that the Caroline Bookes themselues, euen as they are set out by the Centurians do vse that for a principall argumēt [Page 143] [...]n the behalfe of the Councell of Frankeford, to im­ [...]ugne the Nicene Councell: for that they supposed [...]hat said Nicene Coūcell was not cōfirmed by Adrian [...]he Pope, wherin they were deceaued by false infor­ [...]ation, I meane those of Franckeford: but M. Morton [...]ould deceaue vs by craft and subtility.

[...]2. The third opinion is of Vasquez and other 3 [...]earned men, Lib. 2. de cultu im [...] ­gin. that this determination against the [...]se of Images, was not at all made by the Councell [...]f Franckeford, but by some other Conciliabulum of Ico­ [...]clastes, that at the same time were at Franckeford, or [...]e [...]re about: especially the Authors of the foresaid [...]ookes Carolini, which being craftily dispersed came [...] the hands of Pope Adrian, who sent them backe [...]gaine confuted to Charles, that was not yet Empe­ [...]ur, but made within few yeares after by Pope Le [...] [...]e third, who would neuer haue yealded (saith [...]asquez) to that aduancement of his, if he had [...]hought him any way spotted with the heresie of I­ [...]oclastes, condemned by his predecessour, and the [...]ouncell of Nice so lately before.

[...]3. These three coniecturall opinions then being [...]eld by sundry Catholicke writers vpon different [...]rounds; how doth M. Morton out of such variety of [...]udgments inferre, that they speake wilfull vntruth [...] their owne consciences, or are guilty of witting, [...]d voluntary falshood, as he is bound to inferre, [...]r els he saith nothing to the purpose. Can there be [...]ny greater absurdity then this, to promise wilfull falshood, and then to alleadge only diuersity of o­pinions? Surely if his Reader blush not for him, I do, and so will passe to an other example.

HIS FOVRTH example of like falshoodes vainely obiected against the same Authors: about the Epistle of S. Epiphanius, touching Images. §. V.

FROM these two shaddowes of some scrappes out of two Prouinciall Councels, he leapeth to a place of S. Epiphanius in a certayne Epistle of his, where he writeth of himself, Preamble pag. 59. That entring into a Church at a place called Anablath to pray, and perceyuing a cur­taine wherin was a picture, as if it had byn the Image of Christ or some Saint, he tooke the Curtaine, and rent it, as being a thing contrary to the authority of the Scriptures. This is the story as M. Morton setteth it downe: M. Mor­tons man­ner of stick­ling be­twene our Authors. and then pre­sently for answering therof, he putteth all our wri­ters into a great warre among themselues, bringing them in, forth, and backe, this way, and that way, the one opposing, the other answering, the third moderating, the fourth crossing: and himselfe stick­ling betwene them by interlacing some wordes heere and there, will needs make himselfe the head of the fray.

45. And this is so fond a thing as euery Grāmer­scholler might do it: for he needeth but to go to Bellarmines works, & especially to Vasquez, who wrote after him of the controuersy of Images, and there shall he fynd all variety of opinions set downe with their Authours and places quoted. And from these hath M. Morton furnished himselfe to make the mu­ster that heere he doth, without any further studdy or labour, then to go to our foresaid Authors, & of [Page 145] their obiections make affirmatiue assertions, and of their assertions for vs, make objections against vs.

46. But heere againe is to be noted as before, that whatsoeuer difference of opinions there be, or may be among Catholicke writers of controuersy, about the true meaning of S. Epiphanius in this place: yet is it nothing at all to M. Mortons purpose, who is bound to proue that they wrote against their owne know­ledge, and conscience, which I suppose were hard to do, for that euery man must be presumed to haue written according as his iudgement gaue him, and consequently that all this which M. Morton hath so studiously gathered togeather, is nihil ad rhombum, nothing to the purpose [...] and therfore I could not but laugh, when I read his conclusiō of this instance saying, Preamb. pag. 61. That if P. R. shall desyre [...]yue hundreth (instances) of this kind, I bynd my selfe (saith he) vnto him by a faith­full protestation, in a moneths warning to satisfy him. Which I beleeue, A fond offer of M. Mort [...] yea if it were fiue thousand in a weekes warning, for he needeth no more but to go to the foresaid bookes of our Catholicke authors, opening them & laying them before his aduersarie, and they will furnish him at large, when the state of the que­stion is such, as it admitteth variety of opinions, or diuersity of iudgements about any poynt, or circū ­stance therof.

47. As for the controuersy in hand about S. Epi­phanius fact and meaning, related in the end of his E­pistle to Iohn of Hierusalem, that seemeth to make a­gainst Images, though diuers learned men do ex­pound the matter diuersly, some thinking that it was a clause added by some heretikes amongst the Iconoclastes, wherof both Bellarmine, Valentia, Suarez and last of all Baronius do yeald most euident probabili­tyes, and others that admitting it for the speach of [Page 146] Epiphanius, do very sufficiently answere the same o­therwise: yet that in deed it maketh nothing at all against the Catholicke vse of sacred Images, is so euident by conferring their answeres togeather, as nothing can be more.

1 48. As namely first for that Baronius and others do proue abundantly out of Paulinus, Baron. tom. 4. anno. 392. in fine. Venantius Fortunatus, Euodius & other ancient authors, that the vse of ima­ges was ordinary & frequent in the tyme of S. Epi­phanius: & Suarez confirmeth the same out of old holy Fathers & Doctors of the Greeke Church his equals to wit, Suar. tom. 1. in 3. par. disp. 54. sect. 1. §. ad 3. S. Chrysostome, S. Basill, S. Gregory Nanianzē, Gregory Nissen & others, wherof is inferred that it is not pro­bable that S. Epiphanius would set downe a thing so cōtrary to the cōmon receaued doctrine, & practice of his tyme, or yf he had, it would haue byn noted & contradicted by some.

49 Secondly it is proued out of the second Nicene Councell, that the disciples of S. Epiphanius did set vp his picture publiquely in his Church of Cyprus soone after his death, which they would neuer haue done, 2 if S. Epiphanius in his life tyme had held it for an a­buse, Synod. Nic. 2. act. 6. contrary to the authority of Scriptures to haue the picture of any man set vp in the Church.

50. Thirdly S. Iohn Damascenus that liued very 3 neere 900. yeares gone, testifyeth in his first Orati­on of Images, Damas [...]. Orat. 1. de Imagin. that the said Church of S. Epiphanius in Cyprus had continued from that tyme to his ima­ginibus exornata, adorned with images, and therupon inferreth, that whatsoeuer is found in him soun­ding against the pious vse of Images is counterfaite & thrust into his workes by the Iconoclast Heretiks. And in the foresaid Councell of Nice it selfe, which was held in his tyme, one Epiphanius a Deacon did shew two other like places to haue bene thurst into his bookes by the same Hereticks.

[Page 147]51. Fourthly it appeareth by the sayd Councell, 4 & by S. Iohn Damascen in his forsaid Oration, that this place of S. Epiphanius in his Epistle to Iohn of Hierusalem was neuer obiected against Images, eyther in the Councell it selfe, or by Claudius Taurinensis, or any o­ther Iconoclast at that tyme, which they would not haue omitted to do, if in those dayes such a testimo­ny had byn extant in so graue an author, as was S. Epiphanius.

52. Fifthly S. Gregory the Great obiecting to a 5 certayne Bishop of Massiles, Greg. l. 9. Epist. 9. called Serenus, somewhat the like fact of breaking Images, saith vnto him (as is extant in his owne Epistle:) Dic, Frater, à quo factū Sacerdote aliquando est quod fecisti? Tell me, brother, of what Priest was it euer heard, that he attempted a fact like vnto this of yours? Which he would neuer haue said, if the other might haue answered, I haue heard and read the same done by the great, and holy Archbishop S. Epiphanius.

53. Lastly, to omit diuers proofes which our 6 men do alleage, if S. Epiphanius had held for an errour and abuse against the Authority of Scriptures to haue Images in the Church, A very strong ar­gument, that S. E­piphanius impugned not the doctrine of image [...]. as our moderne Prote­stants will needes force it vpon him; then is it likly that he writing so large a worke against all the he­resyes, and erroneous doctryne, & perilous abuses that had sprong vp in the Church of God, from Christ vntill his tyme, he would not haue omitted to warne men also of this, that was so dangerous & preiudiciall to the honour and seruice of Almighty God: but no word is to be found of this amongst all his heape of heresyes, and consequently we may for certayne inferre, that he did not thinke this do­ctryne or practice or setting vp Christian Images in Christiā Churches to be vnlawfull, or against the authority of Scriptures.

[Page 148]54. And this for the matter it self [...] which is more then was necessary for me to say, considering that whatsoeuer diuersity of Iudgements there was, or is about the exposition, answere, defence, or im­pugnation of this place of Epiphanius: New In­terludes brought in by M. Morton. yet is there no one iote to be inferred therof that any of them did wittingly or willingly write false against their owne conscience, which is the question in hand, & which we are ready to proue against our aduersa­ryes. Nor yet do I meane to stand vpon the examen of the Interlude brought in by M. Morton of our Ca­tholicke writers differences of opinions, wherein againe he delighteth him selfe: only I wish the Reader, that wheras Cardinall Bellarmine is heere ca­lūniated about Epiphanius Epistle translated by S. Hie­rome for denying the last clause therof to be his, he repayre for the solution therof vnto Cardinall Baronius, Baron. tom. 4. an­no 392. fin [...]. who more largly detecteth the fraud, then is expe­dient for me at this present to relate: especially for so much as I am to passe to other particuler calūniatiōs against Cardinall Bellarmine, in his very next example or instance.

OF INSTANCES AGAINST CARDINALL Bellarmine in particuler, touching imputa­tion of old heresies. §. VI.

IF you haue seene how litle able M. Morton hath byn to performe his pro­mise before, for wilfull falsityes com­mitted by any of our writers hitherto, much more shall you see it now, when leauing the multitude of other Authors, he sin­gleth out Cardinall Bellarmine alone to deale withall: who as he hath written much, so were it not great maruaile, if in so many bookes he should haue left some things, whereupon his aduersaryes might pro­bably wrangle: M. Mor­tons intē ­tion by singling out Bell­armine. but as for wilfull vntruth, it is so farre from his knowne, and confessed integrity, as M. Morton could neuer haue made choice of an vnfit­ter match for that poynt. Nor can it be thought that he chose him vpon hope to find any such aduan­tage in him in deed, but only to honour himselfe somwhat by contending with such an aduersary, [Page 150] and to cast some cloudes, at least in the mindes of the simpler sort, vpon the shining beames of Car­dinall Bellarmines estimation, by obiecting the name of wilfull falsityes vnto him. But as when the said cloudes are driuen away from the ayre, the force of the sunne is more sensibly felt: so Card. Bellarmines workes being cleared heere from M. Mortōs calum­niatiōs, will be more highly esteemed by euery iu­dicious Reader, as not lending any least true aduā ­tage vnto any impugnatiō of the aduersarie: & this is al the hurt that he is like to receaue by this assault.

‘ Preamb. pag. 62.56. And yet, as if M Morton had some great mat­ters in deed to lay against him, and that the proofes were prompt, certaine, & euidēt, he according to his former excessiue vaine of vaunting, falleth into the s [...]me againe, writing thus: P. R. requireth an exam­ple of any one, who hath byn found so grosly false, that in the eie of man he may not be acquitted either by ignorance of translation &c. which demand if it proceed frō vnfeynednesse, Strange craking and boa­sting. it seemeth vnto me so in­tollerably reasonable, that now I am driuen to a two fold trouble in yeelding satisfaction. The one is that I know not with what one to begin first, the falsifi­cators be so many. The second is, when I shall begin with any choice of one, how to make an end, so ma­nifold are their falsificatiōs. Therfore in respect of the falsifyers, I would require of P. R. to propound vnto me any one of his Doctours, in whome he hath best assurance of integrity, whether Greg. de Va­lentia, Stapleton, Bellarmine, Coccius, Suarez, Turrian, Campian, Gretzer, Feuerdentius, the Rhemish Translation in their annotations, or any (I say) of those which haue beene publikly authorized of their Church, & I will not doubt but to giue him thrice three exam­ples of their fraud. In the meane tyme I thinke it re­quisite to single out of all, such an one, as is cōmen­ded [Page 151] of all, to wit, Cardinall Bellarmine, that P. R. [...]ay not repyne, saying: he hath chosen a Dauid, the [...]ast in his Fathers house: but confesse that I haue [...]referred a Saul, one higher by the head & shoulders [...]hen any of the rest: not a dead man, who cannot [...]terprete his owne meaning whether he had falsi­ [...]ed vpon ignorance, negligence &c. but one which now [...]uing is able to answere for himselfe, whose credit [...]. R. doth tender, and with whome he may con­ [...]lt to know, whether I doe him iniury, or no.’ [...] he.

[...]. And haue you euer heard more confident [...]each? This now may be called present desperate in­ [...]ed, if presently it be to be prooued, The true ground of my mo­derate Chalēge. that he hath [...] one instance of any one falsity against Cardinall [...]ellarmine, throughout all his works, as heere is re­ [...]ired. And may not then his owne wordes be re­ [...]rned vpon him, that neither Thraso on the stage, nor [...]oliath in the field, nor Gorgias in the scholes, did euer vse such [...]asting? My boasting, if any were, was out of the [...]ctitude of a good conscience, este [...]ming no good [...]hristian man to be so wicked, as to lie so willfully [...] before hath bene set downe: and therfore estee­ [...]ing all our writers to be free thereof, I sayd, and [...]ust say still, that if in any one of them there should [...] foūd that deplored & inexcusable fraud, I should [...]uer beleiue him afterward, as a man, not regar­ [...]ng truth, nor speaking out of conscience, but of [...]ilfull fraud: which speach M. Morton calleth pro­ [...]gall and prodigious, as you haue heard. And thus he [...]ust do, either in regard that he esteemeth it not [...]or so great a crime to lye wilfully (as Catholicks do [...]steeme it) or that he can proue it to be vsed also by [...]ur men. The first I suppose he will be ashamed to [...]onfesse: the second I expect how he will be able to [...]roue; and so I passe to the examen it selfe. And by [Page 152] the triall of his successe with this one Antagonist, that he hath chosen out, the Reader may make a ghesse, what he were able to do, if he should enter combat with so many of our writers, as heere he hath named. And for better vnderstanding of the matter, it is to be obserued, that he endeauoureth to condemne Cardinall Bellarmine of wilfull [...]alsities in two points. His pre­tences a­gainst Cardinall Bellar­mine. First in imputing certaine heresies to Protestants, which (he saith) they do not hould: the second in falsifying other mens testimonies, al­ledged by him. Both of them were grieuous, if either of them by any one example could be proued in Bellarmine. Now then to the tryall.

THE FIRST Obiection against Cardinall Bellarmine, of fals [...] imputation of the Pelagian-heresy to Protestants. §. VII.

Preamb. p. 63 [...]LET P. R. (saith [...]e) for a while take Cardinall Bellarmine into secret confession, and first aske him, Bellarmin. l. 4. de Ec­cles. mili­tant. c. 9. §. Pelagiani. with what conscience he hath charged Caluin with the heresy of the Pelagiās, who denyed that there was any originall sinne in Infants, especially in the children of faith­full Christians? For he could not be ignorant, that this doctrine of denying originall sinne was (as their owne Greg. de Valent. l. de orig. peccat. c. 2. initio. &c. 8. & in tō. 2. disp. 6. q. [...]. punct. 1. L. Iesuite confesseth) the proper heresie of the Pelagians. And not so only, but saith furthermore, that Caluin and all other Protestants are so farre from denying originall sinne, that they do monstrously extend the nature therof, euen vnto persons regenerate. This is the charge, which he pre­tendeth (as you see) to proue, that Gregorius de Valentia (whome it pleaseth him to stile heere L. [Page 153] [...]esuite, though I know not why) disagreeth from [...]ellarmine in ascribing the Pelagian heresie, about ori­ [...]inal sin, to Calui [...]. Wherto I answere, first, that it is well, that M. Morton permitteth Cardinall Bellarmine to [...]e demaunded his faults in secret confession: but [...]imselfe, who I presume scarce goeth to any se­ [...]ret con [...]ession at all, must be driuen to confesse his [...]aults in publike, with greater worldly shame, as in [...]his place. Who would not thinke, that after the [...]ate of the question so often set downe, M. Mort. perpetuall wandring from the purpose. and so ma­ [...]y bragging promises made on his part to produce [...]reat matters against Bellarmine, he would not haue [...]ene ashamed to come forth now with this poore & idle obiection in the very first front of his charge, wherin if all should be granted to him, that he [...]biecteth, to wit, that Bellarmine and Valentia had not [...]ully agreed in charging Caluin with the Pelagian he­ [...]esy about originall sinne; yet doth not this inferre willfull vntruth in either of them. For it might haue bene onely difference of iudgments, in vnder­standing differently the doctrine of Caluin, ech man persuading himselfe, that he had vnderstood him rightly, and so still nothing had bene brought to his purpose of witting and willfull vntruthes knowne to the vtterer to be such. And is not this then mere trifling?

[...]9. But now the matter standeth not so well: for that there is no contradiction at all betweene Bellarmine and Valentia, Shifts to make Bellarmin and Valē ­tia seeme contrary. as presently shalbe shewed. And M. Morton doth guil [...]ully corrupt them both to make them seeme cōtrary. And l [...]t the Reader looke vpon it, and know him and his cause by these tricks; who to frame some shew of fa [...]shod in others, where none is, vseth the same intolerably himselfe.

60. The Reader then must know, that Cardinall Bellarmine in the 9. Chapter of his fourth Booke de [Page 154] Ecclesia, The true opinion & discourse of Card. Bellarmin about Pe­lagianisme in Prote­stants. handling the notes of the Church (which booke and Chapter are heere cyted by M. Morton) ta­king vpon him to shew, that one principall note of the Church is, to agree in doctrine with the an­cient Fathers from time to time, and of the con­trary false Church, to participate with heretikes; he recounteth twenty seuerall heads of heresies held by twenty different Heresiarches, with sundry bran­ches therunto belongi [...]g, condemned by the anci­ent Christian Church, which also are defended by the Protestāts of our time, some more and some lesse.

61. And this h [...] proueth so substātially, as nothing in effect can be said against it: which M. Morton ha­uing perused, and desirous to picke some matter a­gainst him, that might seeme to haue some shew of probability, he beginneth with the Pelagians, as you haue heard, which is the fourtenth old condemned heresy, shewed by Bellarmine to be reuiued againe in diuers points by Protestants, thinking best to ouer­skip thirteene at on leap. As for example, Bellarm. l. 4. de Eccles. c. 9. §. Pela­giani. wheras the Pelagians did hold two principall heresies among o­ther, saith Bellarmine, the one, That euery sinne though ne­uer so little is mortall, & depriueth vs of Gods grace: That there is no originall sinne in man, especially in Infants of faith­full parents, Zuing. l. de baptism. Bucer. in c. 3. in Matt. Calu. l. 4. Instit. c. 15. §. 20. he auerreth that the Protestants of our dayes do concurre in both points. In the first all ge­nerally, that there is no sinne Veniall of his owne nature: in the second with some distinction, for that Zuinglius ( [...]aith he) denieth Originall sinne in all, Caluin and Bucer in Christian Infants only. This is Cardinall Bellarmines assertion, his latin words be these.

62. Zuinglius negat simpliciter peccatum originale in quo­libet homine, Bucerus autem & Caluinus solùm in filijs [...]i­delium, quos dicunt sanctos nasci, & saluari etiam sine baptismo. Zuinglius doth absolutly deny originall sinne to be [Page 155] in any man, but Bucer and Caluin do only deny the same in the children of the faithfull, whome they say to be borne Saints, and to be saued also with­out baptisme. So as Bellarmine is guilfully abu­sed by M. Morton, in setting downe his opinion, as though he had said that Caluin had denyed with the Pelagians, that there is any originall synne at all in Infants, though lesse in the children of the faithfull, citing his latin wordes in the margent peruersely [...]hus: Pelagiani docebant non esse in hominibus peccatum ori­ [...]inale, & praecipuè in filijs fidelium, idem docent Caluinus & Bucerus. Iniurious dealing. The Pelagians did teach that there was not originall synne in men, and especially in the chil­ [...]ren of the faithfull, the same do teach Caluin & Bu­ [...]er. Thus he. Whereas he saith differently, as you [...]aue heard, that Caluin & Bucer denyed it only in the [...]hildren of the faithfull, granting it in the rest: and [...]his could not M. Mortō but see & know, & conse­ [...]uently is taken in a witting formall lye that know­ [...]th one thing & yet writeth the contary.

63. And herupon, wheras he willed me to aske of Cardinall Bellarmine in secret Confession with what consci­ence he had charged Caluin with the heresy of the Pelagians, [...]hat denyed originall synne in all men, I must aske him in open confession, with what conscience he could so [...]alsify Bellarmine in making him to say that which he [...]id not: for that he doth not say also absolutly, that Caluin denieth all originall sinne in all Infants, Valēt. tom. 2. disp. 6. pun. 2. Zuing. lib. de bapt. Calu. l. 4. Inst. c. 16 [...] but only in the childrin of the faithfull, & this doth not the L. Iesuite Valentia any way contradict, as false­ly heere is insinuated, that he doth; but rather to the contrary he expresly auouch [...]th the same, & this in the very place heere cited by M. Morton, saying: Zuinglio & Caluino visum est filios [...]idelium non contrahere peccatum originale; It seemed to Zuinglius and Caluin that the children of the faithfull do not cōtract originall [Page 156] synne, and he quoteth the places where it is to be found in their workes: and the same he doth in his 4. Tome vpon S. Thomas, Tom. 4. disp. 4. §. 3. Caluinus. ci [...]ing other places of Calui [...] where he houldeth the [...]ame doctrine. So as in this point Bellarmine and Valentia haue no more contradi­ction betweene them, then it pleaseth M. Morton to deuise of his owne head, and to publish in their names, contrary to their owne apparent wordes & meaning.

64. But he citeth a place of Valentia that may seeme to make to the contrary, where he saith: Preamb. p. 63. Caluin and other Protestants are so farre o [...] from denying Originall sinne, that they do monstrously extend the nature therof, euen vnto per­sons regenerate, Valen de peccat. O­rig. c. 2. in­itio. &c. 8. & tom. 2. disp. 6. q. 11. punc. 1. §. Quā quae­stionem. and for this he quoteth certayne pla­ces o [...] Valen [...]ia (as he might also haue done diuers of Bellarmine [...]or he relateth of Caluin the very same) and setteth downe the latin according to his owne En­glish, though not a litle differing from the wordes of the Author: but that which most importeth, is, that he wittingly and deceiptfully abuseth the Rea­der with this citation, as though Valentia did con­tradict both himselfe and Bellarmine, Bellarm. l. 5. de a­miss. gratiae c. 5. &c. and said, That Caluin and Bucer were [...]arre of from denying Originall sinne in the children of the faithfull: Wheras he saith not so, but that, they do not absolutly deny all originall synne, as the Pela­gians did, and as Zuinglius before is charged to haue done, togeather with the Anabaptistes, as Melancthon witnesseth, and before them agayne the Armenians, Albanenses, and others, but only denyed the same in the children of the faithfull, as hath beene said, and in the rest they graunted it: and not this only, but monstrously also do the said Caluin, Luther, and other Protestants extend the nature and guylt of originall synne, euē vnto such as are regenerate & christened, which is to be vnders [...]ood in that they hold, that the very motions of concupiscence called ( fo­ [...]es) [Page 157] are synnes in themselues, euen without the con­ [...]ent of our mindes, which is an other extreme op­ [...]osition to Catholicke doctryne, that teacheth these [...]otiōs not to be synnes at all, without some cōsent [...]ealded vnto them: but yet this assertion of Valentia [...]s not contrary, nor contradictory to that which [...]ardinall Bellarmine, and himselfe affirmed before of [...]aluin; to wit, that with the Pelagians he holdeth [...]hat the Infāts of faithfull people are deuoyd of ori­ [...]nall synne, for that those motions of concupiscēce [...]hich he calleth originall synnes in Christians a­ [...]lt, are not in infants and therby he denyeth origi­ [...]all sinne in Christian Infants, and granteth it in [...]em that be of age, in both which he is oppo­ [...]te to the Catholicke Church. Let M. Mort. see how [...] can defend him from contradiction to himselfe, [...] I haue defended Cardinall Bellarmine, and Gregorius de [...]alentia.

[...]5. There remaineth then only to examine the [...]eason alleaged by M. Morton why Bellarmines charge [...]f Pelagianisme against Caluin could not be true, Preamb. pag. 63. for that [...]saith he) this doctrine o [...] denying originall sinne was the pro­ [...]er heresy of the Pelagians, out of which confession of [...]he L. Iesuite Valentia, Valen. l. de Orig. pec [...]. cap. 2. M. Morton would inferre, that [...]or so much as this was the proper heresy of the Pe­ [...]gians, therfore it could not be of the Protestants: [...]hich reason is so wise, as it can serue to nothing, [...]ut to make the reader laugh. For alb [...]it the Pela­ [...]ans were the peculiar Authors of this heresy; yet [...]ight the [...]ame be made cōmon by participation, & [...]o doth Valentia expresly say, that this heresy was [...]aken vp afterward both by the Arm [...]nians, Albanenses, Anabaptists, citing Castro and Melancthon for the same. So as to cite this reason or a proofe, that Caluin did not deny orgina [...]l synne in Infants, [...]or that our owne L. Iesuite Valentia doth say, that it was the [Page 158] proper errours of the Pelagians (which yet are not his words but S. Augustines cited by him for the same) is as ridiculous an inference, Aug. l. 6. contra Iu­lian. c. 2. & 3. & l. 4. ad Bonif. c. 2. & 4. as if a man should say, it was the proper errour of Arius, and his fellowes in old time to deny the equality of the Sonne of God with his Father, ergo, it cannot be that the moderne Arians of Transiluania, and other places, do hould the same now: and it was the peculier doctrine of Be­rengarius, and his adherents to deny the Reall Presence, ergo, the Protestants of England at this day cannot be charged with that doctrine. And doth not euery body see the vanity of this inference? Wherfore his conclusion is to be noted, I let passe (saith he) a doze [...] such criminations, cast by him vpon Protestants, which by the testimonies of his owne Doctors may be proued to haue byn lewd and intollerable slaunders. Wherto I answere, that hi­therto he hath not beene able to shew any one: we shall see what he will say afterward. But in the meane space I leaue it to the modest Reader, to iudge where the lewdnesse doth remayne, if any be.

66. And to this consideration I add another, that wheras Cardinall Bellarmine did charge Caluin, and Cal­uinists with two principall errors of the Pelagians, the one, that which now hath bene handled, of denying Originall sinne in children, and Infants of the faith [...]ull, Hierom. l. 2. contra Pelagian. and the second, of denying the difference of Veniall and Mortall sinnes, and holding that by euery least sinne we leese our iustice, and consequently that all sinne is mortall, Bellarmine citing for the same the testimony of S. Hie­rome, who ascribeth that for heresy vnto the Pelagi­ans: and wheras in like manner he proueth the same heresy, not only to be held by Luther, and Melancthon, but also by Caluin in diuers parts of his workes, as lib. 2. Instit. cap. 8. §. 85. lib. 3. cap. 4. §. 28. &c. M. Morton taking vpō him to cleare Caluin in the former charge [Page 159] [...]out originall sinne, though so vnluckely as you [...]ue heard, saith neuer a word against this second [...]out the distinction of veniall and mortall sinnes; Caluin graunted vnderhād to hold one point of Pelagi­anisme. [...]herby is [...]uident in all probability, that he admit­ [...]ed that for true, and consequently yealded secretly, [...]at Caluinists do agree with the Pelagians in this he­ [...]sy, though he storme sharply as you haue heard a­ [...]inst Bellarmine for charging Caluin with any point [...] Pelagianisme at all. And this fraud or frailty he cō ­ [...]itteth commonly in all the rest of the heresies [...]iected, denying the one weakly, and by his silence [...]anting the other, as now by experience you shall [...].

THE SECOND INIVRIOVS [...]i [...]ction, against Cardinall Bellarmine, for false imputation of the Nouatian-heresy. §. VIII.

FROM the fourteenth heresy, wherin Cardinall Bellarmine sheweth the Protestants to participate [...]ith the Pelagians, as you haue heard, M. Morton star­ [...]th backe to the sixt, Preamb. pag. 63. of participation with the No­ [...]tians in these words. He ( that is Bellarmine) maketh [...]rotestāts guilty (saith he) of the heresy of the Nouati­ [...]s in taking frō the Church all power of reconciliating men vn­ [...] God, when as his owne Castro de haeres. l. 12. haer. 3 tit. de poenit. Ve­ga l. 13. de Instit. c. 2. pag. 486. Maldon. cōm. in Ioan. Authors do note, that the [...]eresy of the Nouatians was this: videlicet, to deny [...]ny man, that should sinne after Baptisme, all hope of remission [...] sinnes, although he should repent. Yea, and also Bellar­ [...]ine himselfe in behalfe of Protestants confesseth [...]lse where, that they require repentance and faith in Chri­ [...]tians, that they may be iustified, and obtaine remission of sinnes. Nor this only, but there is no difference betweene vs (saith [Page 160] he) and Protestants about repentance, as it is a conuersion vnto God, Bellar. l. 3. de Iustif. c. 6. Bellar. de poenit. l. [...]. c. 1. §. Vt igitur. wi [...]h detestation of sinne, or as it consisteth in outward sig­nes of sorrow, weeping, conf [...]ss [...]on, and outward chasticements [...] yea and almost all o [...] them allow an outward rite of absolution. But the only cōtrouersy betweene vs is, whether Pennance be pro­perly a Sacrament. ‘ [...]he contradiction is this, to impute vnto Protestants an heresy, which taketh away all māner o [...] repentance & hope of remissiō for sin past, & yet to acknowledge in thē a contrary orthodoxall truth, which is to pro [...]es [...]e a necessity of repentance, & reconciliation, & remis [...]iō of [...]nnes.’ Thus far he.

68. And if we stand attent in this place, we shall see no lesse fraudulent dealing then in the former, if not more, to make apperance of contrariety & diffe­rence betwene Cardinall Bellarmine & other Catholick Authors, Nec [...]ssitie of lying in M. Morton. about the heresy of the Nouatians: which though it could be proued, yet doth it not inferre as euery man may see, the principall conclusion o [...] the question, that there were willfull malice. But all is full of fraud, as you will perceaue, and the reason is not so much, I suppose, for that he delighteth him­selfe in lying wilfully, as before hath byn touched, as the necessity of his cause, which driueth him to vse the helpe of these shifts, or els to say no­thing. And this am I forced often to note to the Reader, for that it is lightly a perpetuall obseruati­on in him.

69. His dri [...]t then is, if you marke it well, to ar­gue Cardinall Bellamine of falsity, in that, he affirmeth the Protestants of our dayes to ioyne with the old heretickes the Nouatians, Lib. 12. de haer. [...]erb. Paenitēti­a §. [...]ertia haeresis. in taking from the Church all power of reconciling men vnto God, for those are Bellar­mines words, though curtally rec [...]ted by M. Morton out of his latin text, as presently you shall see: and to con [...]radict the Cardinall in this, he cyteth the wordes of Alphonsus de Castro, that saith, that the heresy of the [Page 161] [...]uatiās, was to deny any man, who should sinne aft [...]r Baptisme [...] hope of remission of synnes, although he should repent. Ep. 52. ad Antonia­num. But [...]ow these two are neyther contradictory, nor con­ [...]ary, if they be well considered. For that the Noua­ [...]ns are held to teach both these poynts, Lib. 1. c. 1. & 2. S. Chri­sost. de re­parat. lapsi first & prin­ [...]pally that there was no power left in the Church [...]to Priests to reconcile and remit sinnes, to such as [...]ll after Baptisme, especially into grieuous sinnes [...] testifieth S. Cyprian in a speciall Epistle against No­ [...]tianus, and S. Ambrose in his booke de Poenitentia, and [...]thers. And this first part of their errour was contra [...]ues Ecclesiae, against the keys of the Church, or power [...] Priests to remit sinnes: and heerin all authors do [...]ree. But the second part of their errour went fur­ [...]er, as some do gather out of the ancient Fathers, [...] testifyeth Suar. disp. 16. de poen. sect. 1. Suarez (though Bellar. l. 1. de poen. c. 9. initio. Valent. in 3. par. disp. 7. de poen. q. 9. pū. 2. sect. 2. §. respōdeo, esto. Idem Has­selius Ru­ardus & alij. others be of differēt [...]inions) which was to deny furthermore besydes [...]e Sacramēt, all vertue of Pēnance whatsoeuer, whe­ [...]er priuate, or Sacramentall, especially in great sin­ [...]es, as by the words of Alphonsus de Castro heere recited [...]ay seeme to appeare.

[...]0. Of these two errors then, the first and not [...]e second is ascribed by Bellarmine to the Protestāts, [...]o witt, that they deny the power of Pennance, as [...] is a Sacrament, that is to say, as it conteineth not [...]nly a priuate detestation of sinne in the synner, but [...]so the absolution or remission therof by the Priest [...] the publicke Minister of the Church. The other [...]rour of denying all vse of priuate repentance, ey­ [...]er inwardly, or outwardly by sor [...]ow, sighes, tears [...]nd the like, is not ascribed to Prot [...]st [...]nts by Bellar­ [...]ine: so as for M. Mortō to bring in the one as contra­ [...]ictory to the other, that for as much as Alphonsus de Castro saith, that the Nouatians did deny all power of [...]ēnance, therfore Bellarmine saith not truly that they denyed the Sacramentall vse therof: Or for so much [Page] [...] [Page] [...] [Page] [...] [Page] [...] [Page] [...] [Page] [...] [Page] [...] [Page] [...] [Page] [...] [Page] [...] [Page] [...] [Page] [...] [Page] [...] [Page] [...] [Page] [...] [Page] [...] [Page] [...] [Page] [...] [Page] [...] [Page] [...] [Page 162] as Protestants do not concurre with the Noua [...]ians in the one, they do not in the other, is a most absu [...]d kynd of reasoning called by Logitians à dispara [...]i [...], fo [...] that both may be true, and one excludeth not the o­ther. For it is most true which Bellarmin saith, that No­uatianorū error praecipuus erat &c. The principall errour of the Nouatians (which word [ principall] importing that they had other errors besids, is craftily cut o [...] by M. Mort.) was, that there is not power in the Church to recō [...]le men to God, but only by Baptisme: which last words also bu [...] only by Baptisme) were by M. Mort. and by the same art shifted ou [...] of the text, for that they haue relation to the Priests of the Church, to whom it appertayneth by publicke, & ordinary office to baptize: and in this the Protestants are accused by Bellarmine to concur [...] with them in denyall of pēnance, as it is a Sacramēt.

71. And togeather with this it may be true, that besides this praecipuus error, A strained and coun­terfait cō ­tradictiō. the principall errour, the Nouatians, some, or all denyed the fruit of all kynd of priuate, and particuler pennance, as sorrow, teares, punishment of the body, and th [...] like, wherin di­uers Protestants do not agree with them, nor yet are accused therof. Wherby it appeareth that all this counterfait contradiction which M. Morton hath so much laboured to establish heere betweene Bellar­mine on the one syde, and Castro, Vega, & Maldona [...]e on the other, commeth to be right nothing at all, for that Bellarmine speaketh expresly of Pennance, as it is a Sacrament, and in that sense only saith, that the Pro­testants deny it, togeather with the Nouatians, as they do also the vse of Chrisme in the Sacrament of Con­ [...]irmation, which was an other errour of theirs obie­cted by Bellarmine to Protestants, as much as the for­m [...]r, but wholy dissembled by M. Morton. The other three Authors, as they do not exclude but rather in­clude the Sacrament of Pennance: yet do they m [...]ke [Page 163] [...]ention of the other part of the Nouatian error, [...]at seemed to deny all pennance in generall, whe­ [...]er Sacramentall or not Sacramentall: and of this [...]e not Protestants accused by Bellarmine, Bel. 3. de Iu­stisic. c. 6. but expre­ [...]y rather exempted by the words, which heere M. [...]orton setteth downe of his. So as for him to play [...]on his owne voluntary Equiuocation, and mista­ [...]ng of the word Pēnance, & Nouatian heresy about the [...]me, is toto grosse an illusion. Wherfore if you [...]ease, let vs briefly see how many false trickes he [...]eth in this place.

[...]2. The first of all may be, that wheras Cardinall 1 [...]llarmine to proue that our moderne Protestants do [...]mbolize and agree with the old Nouatian heresyes, Fiue seue­rall false shifts and voluntary corrupti­ons. [...]leageth two particuler instances, the one in deny­ [...]g the power of the Church to remit synnes by [...]e Sacrament of pēnance, the other in denying the [...] of holy Chrisme in the Sacrament of Confirmatiō, [...]. Morton hauing nothing to say to the second, reply­ [...]th only to the first by an Equiuocation as you haue [...]ard: and yet if the second only be true, Bellarmine [...] iustified in noting the Protestāts of Nouatianisme: [...]nd therfore to deny the one, & dissemble the other, [...]ust needs proceed of witting fraud, granting that which is chiefly in controuersy, to wit, that Pro­ [...]estants do hold in somewhat Nouatianisme.

[...]3. The second fraud is, for that in reciting Car­dinall 2 Bellarmines charge against Protestants, he cut­ [...]eth from the latin sentence of Bellarmine, being very small & short in it selfe, both the beginning & end, to wit, Praecipuus error, & post baptismum, as yow haue heard, and that for the causes which now I haue declared.

74. Thirdly he doth bring in guylfully the fore­said 3 testimonyes of Castro, Vega, & Maldonate, as con­trary to Bellarmine: whereas they speake of an other [Page 164] thing, to wit, of pēnance in another sense: & b [...]syde [...] this do all expres [...]y set downe the two errou [...]s o [...] the Nouatians, to witt, that they did deny as wel [...] the Sacrament of Pennāce, as also the priuate vse ther [...]f as it is a particuler vertue: and that the Protes [...]an [...] of our dayes do concurre with them in the fi [...]st [...] though not in the second: and that he could not bu [...] euidently see and know this, and so did write it against his conscience to deceyue the Reader.

4 75. Fourthly when M. Morton doth alleadge B [...]l­larmine lib. 3. de Iustis. cap. 6. to confesse that Prote­stants do require repentance in Christians, that they may be iu [...]tified, he well knew that this was not cō ­trary to that which he had said before in his ac­cusation lib. 4. de Notis Ecclesiae cap. 9. that Prot [...]stants did ioyne with the Nouatiās in denying all power of the Church for r [...]conciling men to God: for he knew that in the former Bellarmine meant of priuate pennance as it is a vertue which euery man may vse of himsel [...]e, but in the second he meant of the Sa­crament, and keyes of the Church, which require ab­solution of the Priest. Heere then was wil [...]ull and malicious mistaking: and so much the more, for that in the very next wordes heere set downe by him both in English & latin out of Bellarmines first booke de po [...]nit [...]ntia cap. 8. the Cardinall doth expresly de­clare, that only Controuersy betweene Catho­lickes and Protestants in this matter, is about the sa­crament of pēnance with absolutiō of the Church, & not the priuate pēnance which euery particuler man may vse of himselfe. So as vnder the cloud of priuate, and sacramentall pēnance he craftily endea­uoreth to make some shew of a contradictiō, which is none indeed.

5 76. The fifth falshood is, that M. Morton to make Cardinall Bellarmine contrary to himselfe, or very for­getfull, [Page 165] he alleadging heere his latin wordes, ma­keth him to say, first, that Protestants require faith & re­pentance to iustifica [...]ion, and then presently in another place, Luther reiec [...]eth pennance, as though Luther were no Prote [...]ant: wheras this is no contradiction in Cardinall Bellarmine, but in Luther himsel [...]e, and ano­to [...]ious fraud in M. Morton, so pa [...]pably to d [...]ceaue his Reader: for that Cardinall Bellarmines wordes are these: Bellarm. l. 4. de notis cap. 9. §. Quae sen­tentia. Lutherus lib. de Captiuitate Babylonica, tria tan [...]um agnoscit Sacramenta, Baptism [...]m, Poenitentiam & Panem; tamen infra cap. de extrema Vnctione, reij [...]it Poen [...]tentiam. Luther in his booke of Babylonicall Captiuity (in the Chapter o [...] the Eucharist) acknowledgeth only three Sacramēts, Baptis­me, Pennance, and Bread, Luthers inconstā ­cy. and yet afterward (in the same booke) and in the Chapter of Extreme Vnction he reie­cteth pēnance. These are the wordes of Bellarmine which M. Morton could not but haue seene and con­sidered [...] and yet to make some litle shew of ouersight in Bellarmine, he was content against his cōscience to set downe, Lutherus reijcit Poeni [...]entiam, and to conceale and dissemble all the rest of the sentence alleadged. When will he be able to produce one of our Au­thours with so manifest a wilfulnes.

77. Let vs conclude then, that M. Mort. is in a poore case, when he is driuen to all these shifts to seeke out contradictions amongst vs, and to fynd none: and yet let vs heare and marke his Conclusion, and see what māner of contradictiō he frameth against Bellarmine, Pream. p. 64. for it will be substantiall (I warrant you) out of these premisses. M. Mort. Conclusi­on out of false pre­misses. The contradiction is this (saith he) to impute vnto Protestants an heresy which taketh away all manner of repentance, and hope o [...] remission of sinne past: & yet to acknowledg in them a contrary orthodoxall truth, which is to professe necessity of repentance, reconciliation, and remission o [...] sinnes Wherto I answere, that heere is no contradi­ction at all, as Bellarmine setteth it downe, both [Page 166] these propositions being false in themselues. Fo [...] first Bellarmine doth not impute vnto Protestants that they do take away all māner of repentance, & hope of remission for sinnes in their sense, but only that they take away and deny the Sacrament o [...] reconci­liation by pennance, and absolution of the Church [...] and secondly Catholicks are so [...]ar o [...] from acknow­ledging an orthodoxall truth in Protestants, about repentance, reconciliatiō, & remission of sinns, that albeit they graunt that Protestāts do in words con­fesse, and prescribe vnto their followers repentance, faith, newnesse of life, and such other points, vt­tered and practized after their fashion: yet are they little auaylable, and much lesse orthodoxall, but a priuate manner and forme of their owne, reiected and condemned by the Catholick Church, for that it excludeth the Sacrament, and absolution of the Priest, without which after baptisme, either in voto, or, in re (as Deuines do distinguish) in Christian Religion, no pardon, or hope of re­mission of synnes, can orthodoxally be concea­ued. And thus much for this second obiected fal­sity to Bellarmine.

THE THIRD OBIECTION against Cardinall Bellarmine, for false imputa­tion of the Manichean heresy vnto Protestants. §. IX.

HIs third obiection against Cardinall Bellarmine, of vnlawfull dealing, cōcerning the imputatiō o [...] some points of the Manichean heresy vnto Calui­nists, he setteth downe in these words: Belarmine attri­ [...]eth [Page 167] (saith he) vnto Caluin the heresie o [...] the Manichees [...] who [...]d condemne the na [...]ure of men, depriuing them o [...] freewill, Pream. p. 64. Bellar. l. 4. de notis Eccl. c. 9. §. 8. [...] ascribing the originall and beginning o [...] sin vnto the nature [...] man, and not vnto his freewill, seeing he hath himselfe [...]serued, that Caluin Bellar. l. 1. de gra­tia primi hom. cap. 1. §. In eo­dem prin­cipio. teacheth, that man in his first crea­ [...]n had freewill, wherby in his integrity he might, i [...] he would, [...]e attained vnto eternall lyfe. This contradiction in this point [...] [...]o more then this to charge Caluin with that which he did not [...]e [...]ue. Is not this singular falshood? and yet behould a more no­ble then this. Wherunto I answere, that if it be more [...]table in folly thē this, or els in fraud, it is notable [...]deed: Let vs heere the folly. This cōtradictiō in this point [...]aith M. Mort.) is no more thē this, to charge Caluin with that [...]hich he beleeued not. So he. Wherof I inferre that it [...]as no contradictiō at all. For to accuse a man to [...]ould that which he holdeth not, hath no contradi­ [...]tion in it, but a false accusation: nor is it alwaies [...]lshood, for it may be vpon errour: and this for [...]e folly. Let vs passe to consider the fraud.

[...]9. I do suppose that M Morton would haue said, [...]r should haue said, that Cardinall Bellarmine was ther­ [...]ore noted by him of a contradiction: not so much [...]or cha [...]ging Caluin with that which he did not be­ [...]eeue, for this is no contradiction (as hath beene [...]aid,) as for that Bellarmine accusing Caluin of concur­ [...]ing with the Manichees, Three notorious f [...]audes a­bout the Manicheā heresy. in denyall of Free-will vnto [...]an, doth notwithstāding in another place cōfesse, [...]hat Caluin graunted Free-will to haue byn in man in his first creation: but neither in this is any contradicton at all. For that Caluin granting Free-will to haue byn in man at his first creation, and lost a [...]terward by the fall and synne of Adam, may con­curre with the Manichees in this, that after the fall of Adam, and as now we liue, C [...]l [...]. l. 2. In i [...]. c. 2.3. & 4. we haue no Free-will: & so doth Cardinal Bellarmine take him, & proue it out of his owne words in sundry Chapters o [...] his [Page 168] booke, that he doth hold indeed, and concurreth fully with the very sense of the Manichees therin, which authorityes of Caluin M. Morton ought to haue answered in some sort, if in earnest he had meant to haue defended him.

80. This then is one egregious fraud, and the chiefe in this place, to delude his Reader with the ambiguity, and Equiuocation of different tymes. The Manichees taught, that man after Adams fall had no free will, as both S. Hierome and S. Augustine do te­stifie in the sentence of M. Morton heere set downe (though craftily he couered their names) and Bellar­mine proueth Caluin to hold the same, out of his owne wordes and workes. What answereth M. Mor­ton? Caluin (saith he) is con [...]essed by Bellarmine to grant free-will in man before the fall of Adam in his first cr [...]io [...]: Yea but the question is, a [...]ter that fall. How then doth M. Morton answere to the purpose? And how doth he alleage Bellarmine as contradicting himselfe, in that, in one place, he saith that Caluin confess [...]th Freewill, and in another saith, that he denyeth it, for so much as it is in respect of diuers times. For I would aske M. Morton in his Logicke, is it a contra­diction to say that Caluin confesseth Freewill in man before his first fa [...]l, & denieth it afterward, seing they are distinct times, and import distinct estates? and if this be not any contradiction, as any child will confesse that it is not, why doth he seeke to abuse his Reader with such a fallacy?

81. Another fraud, though somwhat less [...] per­hap [...] then the former, The secōd [...]aud. is, that in setting downe the charge of Bellarm [...]ne against Caluin, he recounteth the same as in Bella [...]m [...]es owne wordes, thus: He attri­bueth vnto C [...]lu [...]n the heresy of the Manichees, who (saith he) d [...]d co [...]mne the nature of men, depriuing them o [...] free-will, and [...]s [...]i [...]ing the originall and beginning o [...] sinne [Page 169] [...]nto the nature of man, & not vnto Free-will. This sentence [...] say, though M. Morton put downe in a different [...]etter, as Bellarmines words, and affirmeth him to [...]peake thē; yet indeed they are not his, nor set downe [...]y him as his owne, but are the words of S. Hierome, [...]nd S. Augustine with some inserted by M. Morton him­ [...]elfe, for thus are they related by Cardinall Bellarmine: [...]anichaeorū [...]inquit Hi [...]ronymus) est hominūdamnare na­ [...]ram, & liberū auferre arbitrium. Hierom. praef. Di­al. contra Pelagia­nos. Et Augustinus: Peccato­ [...]um originem non tribuūt Manichaei libero arbitrio. S. Hierome [...]aith it is the heresy of the Manichees to cōdemne the [...]ature of men, and to take away Free-will. And S. [...]ugustine saith, August. de haeres. haer. 46. that the Manichees do ascribe the ori­ [...]en of sinne not to Free-will. And why thinke you [...]id M. Morton conceale these two Fathers names? The [...]auses are euident. First for that he was loath to [...]ublish, that the deniall of free-will in man, [...] [...]o generally taught and defended by the Prote­ [...]tants of our dayes, should be pronounced for an [...]eresy, and a Manichean heresie, by two such graue Fathers, as S. Hierome and S. Augustine are. Second­ [...]y, for that if he had vttered the matter plainly, [...]s it lieth in Bellarmine, he had marred his sleight of [...]unning to Free-will, gra [...]ted by Caluin in the first [...]reation of man: for that it is euident, by these [...]wo Fathers, that they speake of Free-will after [...]he fall of Adam: Therfore it was necessary for him [...]o conceale their names, which yet was fraudulent.

[...]2. The third fraude is, The third fraud. that wheras Cardi­ [...]all 3 Bellarmine doth alleadge two poynts wherein [...]he Protestantes of our tyme, but especially Cal­ [...]in, doe concurre with the Manichean heresie; the one, that which hath bene sayd, of the denying of Free-will, the other in reprehending and con­demning Abraham, Sampson, Sara, Rebecca, Iudas Machabaeus, Sephora &c. and other Saintes of the [Page 170] old Testament, as S. Augustine testifieth, that the Ma­ni [...]eans did, Aug l 22. cōt. Fa [...]st. & duobus lib [...]is cont [...]a ad [...]ers. l [...]gis & P [...]o [...]het. and Bellarmine sheweth that Caluin doth hold the very same, prouing by multiplicity o [...] pla­ce [...] quoted out of his C [...]l l. 3. Ins [...]. c. 2. §. 3. &c. 5. §. [...]. &c. 14. [...]. 11 &c. 20. [...]. 15. & l. 4. c. 15. §. 22. workes; M. Mort. passeth euer with silence this latter proo [...]e as vnanswerable, and yet will haue vs thinke that Bellarmine did iniure Caluin in noting him with the Manichean heresy: which is as much, as if a man hauing two writings to shew for a suite in Law, the Attorney of the ad­uerse part, should suppresse the one which is most playne and euident, and cauill about the other. And this shall suffice for this third obiection. Now let vs passe to the other more notable, which was promi­sed before.

THE FOVRTH OBIECTION against Card. Bellarmin [...], about pretēded false im­putation of Arianisme vnto Protestants. §. X.

‘BELLARMINE (saith he) accuseth M. Bullinger of Arianisme, because of the sentence ( tres s [...]nt. [...] statu, Preamb. pag. 64. sed gradu &c.) notwithsta [...]ding he knew this was the very sentence of [...]ertullian, and is therfore [...]ls where expounded as orthodoxall and iustifyable by himselfe.’ If this be so notable an obiection with M. Morton as before he vāted, it is asigne, that he hath gr [...]at penury of notable ones, for that this is so notable, as it is indeed nothing, but that only necessity and penury did driue M. Morton to produce it: and so it seemeth, that himselfe did esteeme of it, by his ob­scure propounding t [...]ero [...], as though he would not haue it well vnderstood; albeit he terme it neuer so no [...]able.

[Page 171] [...]4. For better conceauing wherof, the Reader [...]ust know, that Cardinall Bellarmine in the Preface to [...]is fiue bookes de Christo, proposing dyuers sortes of [...]duersaryes among our moderne Protestants, that [...]ther openly or secretly did impugne the diuinity [...]f Chri [...]t, or some article therunto belonging, after [...]e naming of many others, he writeth thus of [...]ullinger: Henricum Bullingerum (saith he) non puduit [...]ibere &c. ‘Henry Bullinger (that was the Successor [...] Vldericu [...] Zuinglius) was not ashamed to write in [...]is booke of the Scripture, that ther are three persons [...] the Godhead, non statu sed gradu, non substantia sed [...], non potestate sed specie di [...]erentes, di [...]ering not in [...]ate but degree, not in substance but in forme, not [...] power but in kynd: which truly (saith Bellar­ [...]ine) the Arians themselues would scarce haue durst [...] auouch.’

[...]5. Thus wrote Bellarmine: and what now saith [...]. Morton against it? He knew (saith he) that this was [...]e very sentence of Tertullian. Tertull. l. aduersus Prax. True it is, but euery [...]hing that is in Tertullian, who wrote before the Councell of Nice, wherin matters and formes of [...]peach about the persōs of the blessed Trinity were [...]ore exactly discussed, is not fit, nor secure for a [...]euyne of our times to follow. And if M. Morton had [...]onsidered well o [...] the paradoxes of Tertullian gathe­ [...]ed together by learned Pamelius in his last edition [...] wherfore this is one and the last of all and censured [...]or dangerous by the said Author and other learned men; See Pamel. in parad. 31. & an­not. 316 in Apol [...]ge­ti. & 29. in l contra Prax.) it is likely that he would not so [...]ashly haue obiected the same to Bellarmine, for reprehending it in Bullinger.

86. But M. Morton bringeth a twofould argument for ground of his challenge, the one in latin out of Gregorius de Valentia, as though he had alleadged the foresaid sentence out of Tertullian, with approuing [Page 172] or at least wise not improuing the same. For thus is the matter a [...] aged by M. Morton in his margent out of [...]alentia: Sic [...] [...]ertullianus in libro aduersus Praxe [...]m, tres sunt, non statu sed gradu, non substan [...]ia sed [...]or [...]a. non po­testate sed sp [...]cie. Gregor. Valentia Iesuita l. de Vnitate & Trinitate cap 9. And then in the English text, he saith as yow haue now heard, that Bellarmine himselfe els where in his works, expoundeth the same sentence of Tertullian, as orthodoxall and iustifyable.

87. But in both these instances are fraudes on M. Mortons behalfe, and no such sincere dealing as were requisite among men that handled good cau­ses. For that first, there is no such narration o [...] Tertul­lians sentence in Valentia, as heere is set downe, with­out reprehension therof: nor is Tertullian so much as named by him in the place alleaged, but a greiuous reprehension is vsed by him against Bullinger, for v­sing the said sentence as orthodoxall. Greg. de Val [...]nt. l. 1. de vnit. & trin. c. 9. [...]. Item Bulling. Bullingerus Sacra­mentarius (saith he) tres in Diuinitate personas differre di­cit, non statu, sed gradu &c. Bullinger the Sacramentary affir­meth that there are three persons in the Deity, which differ, n [...]t in state, but degree, not in substance, but forme, not in p [...]er, but kind: by which wordes he doth not only ouerthrow th [...] God­head of the Sonne, but euen the whole mystery of the most [...]oly Trinity. So Valentia. And this was his Iudgement of that sentence, which M. Morton would haue his Rea­der thinke, that Valentia had allowed of, as of an or­thodoxall sentēce of Tertulliā. Can there be any more wilfull & witting fraud, then this?

88. Now as for the allowance therof els where by Cardinall Bellarmine himselfe, M. Morton doth o [...]er him great abuse, for he neuer alloweth any where of that sentence, as it standeth wholy in his booke against Praxea, or as it is accepted and vsed by Bullinger, but only taken in hand in his first booke de Christo, to in­terprete in good sense certaine speaches of Tertullian, [Page 173] obiected by Arians and Trinitarians against the God­head of Christ, Valentia and Bel­larmine grosly a­bused. as though he had fauoured them ther­in, & cōming to a place cited out of the same booke, against Praxea, where he saith, Dum sili [...]m agnosco, s [...]cun­d [...]m à Patre desendo, for so much as I acknowledge the Sonne, I do defend him as second after the Father (wherby the Hereticks would proue the Sonne not to be equall to his Father,) Cardinall Bellarmine an­swering to this place, saith, that the Sonne is called second (by Tertullian) not because he is inferiour, Tert. l. [...]on [...]. Her­mog. lōgè ante me­dium. or not equall to the Father, but only according to the order of beginning or origen, for that the Sonne is origi­nally of the Father: and by this occasion he expoun­deth also the first two words of the foresaid sentēce, statu et non gradu, saying, that, per gradum intelligit ordinē personarum: Tertullian by degree in this place vnder­standeth only the order, of the three persons among themselues, but not a different degree in perfection. For that Tertulliā in another place hath these words: Diuinitas gradus non habet, vtpote vnica: the Godhead of the three persons hath no degrees, as being only one.

89. Thus then did Cardinall Bellarmine seeke to ex­pound in good sense the first two wordes of the sē ­tence, by another place of Tertullian himselfe: but the whole sentence he neuer defended, nor admit­ted, but held it rather for erroneous in Tertullian, & hereticall in Bullinger. And now yow see what nota­ble aduantage M. Morton hath gotten out of this his so notable obiection, which is nothing els, but the discouery of two or three notable shiftes, and fraudu­lent trickes of his owne. And yet do you consider how he insulteth as if he had proued somwhat a­gainst Bellarmine indeed. For thus he continueth his speach for his fifth instance.

THE FIFTH OBIECTION against Cardinall Bellarmine, for false imputati­on of heresies vnto sundry Protestants. §. XI.

THOVGH P. R. require (saith he) but three ex­amples o [...] f [...] shood, yet may I not enuie h [...]m a further choice, B [...]ll [...]r. l. 1. de Be [...]. Sanct. c. 4. p [...]l [...] post i [...]ium. because I know not the curiosity of his palate. Therfore let him againe consult with Cardinall Bella [...]mine in another taxation of Prote [...]t [...] saying in one place that, they teach that the soule of [...]aith­ful men departing this li [...]e, doe not goe directly vnto heauen. In another place he hims [...]lf [...], Bellar. l. de Purg. cap. 12 Valen. de P [...]rgat. cap. 8. togeat [...]er with his fellow Iesuite, haue publiquely recorded [...] that it is a common obiection of Protestants prouing from Scr [...]ptur [...] against the doctry [...]e of purgatory, that the soules of the [...]aith, all pre [...]e [...]ly after death goe di [...]ectly vnto heau [...]n. So he.

Bellar. l. 1. de Beat Sanct. c. 1.91. And truly it seemeth strange to me that M. Morton in this his peculiar [...]tryfe for sinceritv, can­not set downe any one thing sincerely, with [...]ut some admixture of fraud. Let him consult (saith he) with Bellarmine in another taxation of Protestants, Tert. l. 4. con [...]a Marcion. Hi [...]om [...] in Vi [...]il. [...]. Ar­meni apud G [...]idonē in sūm [...] de [...]aere [...]i [...]is. that they teach, that the soules o [...] the faithfull departed do not go directly to heauen. I haue consulted with him, at leastwise with his booke, and he answereth, that the word Protestants twice heere re [...]eated is not to be found [...]n him, in the place by you cited. For that he ascribeth not this heres [...] vnto all Protestāts in gene [...]all, but on­ly vnto three in particuler of our time, to with Luther, Cornelius Agrippa, and Iohn Caluin, a [...]ter diuers o [...]d here­sies named by him, as of [...]ertullian, Vigilantius, Ar­menians [...] and the like, that held the same; his words a [...]: Eundem errorem habet Caluinus &c. Caluin hath the s [...]me [Page 175] error, that soules of the faithfull do not enter into heauen, nor enioy the vision of Almighty God, before the day of Iudgement, but Christ only is admitted therunto, reliquos omnes residere in atrio, ib. (que) expectare vs (que) ad mundi consummationem, that all the rest besides Christ, do not enter the San­ctuary of heauen, but do expect without in a cer­tayne porch (or entry) vntill the consummation of the world. And this opinion of Caluin, Bellarmine proueth out of his owne cleare words in sundry places of his workes, as namely lib. 4. Instit. cap. 20. & §. 24. & 25. §. 6. So as in setting downe this assertion of Car­dinall Bellarmine, M. Morton hath made him to tax all Protestantes, and to say, they do teach &c. wheras he taxeth only three particuler men. Neyther haue I yet read any other that defendeth the same. Let vs see now how he maketh Bellarmine to contradict himselfe, for herin stands the principall drift of M. Morton, in this place, to seeme thereby to say some­what against him.

92. First then he bringeth in these words as of Bellarmine: It is a cōmon obiection of Protestantes prouing from Scriptures against the doctrine of Purgatory, that the soules of the faithfull presently after death, go directly vnto heauen Out of which words M. Morton inferreth it cannot be, that Protestants should hold the foresaid contrary doctrine of expecting in the porch. Caluin intangled about his atrium or porch. Wherto I answere, that for this, to frame this litle shew of contradictiō M. Morton hath concealed craftily the name of Caluin in all this obiection, and turned it into Protestants, wheras the assertion is ascribed by Bellarmine namely and chiefly vnto Caluin, and not to other Protestāts: and therfore we graunt that Caluin (supposing his former assertion to be true) cannot vse this obiectiō against Purgatorie, that soules go directly to heauen, except he would say, that his foresaid atrium or porch, and outward place of stay, is also heauen, or a peece of [Page 176] heauen different from that Sanctuarium Caeli, into which, he saith, that only Christ is admitted vntill the day of Iudgment.

93. But other Protestants that hold not this fond opinion (as few or none perhaps do) may vse their former argument still, if it were true, that soules go directly to hell, or to heauen. And it is to be noted how cūningly M. Morton hath borne himselfe in this matter, not once vttering the name of Caluin, but Pro­testantes in common; wheras Caluin chiefly is meant, yea only perhaps for the Porch: A sly Fox­like tricke about cō ­cealment. for that it seemeth to haue beene his owne particuler deuise, wherby the sly dealing of M. Morton is discouered in euery thing, and yet (forsooth) will he be still A Minister of simple truth, and conuince Cardinall Bellarmine of wilfull fal­shood. But let vs go forward, and search further in­to his simplicitie.

HIS SIXT, AND last obiection, against Cardinall Bellarmine, for false imputation of the Sarcamētary heresie to Protestants. §. XII.

BELLARMINE resteth not heere (saith he) but once againe challengeth Caluin, Pream. p. 65. Bel. l. 4. de notis Ec [...]l. cap. 9. in fine. for (as he ca [...]leth it) an ancient heresie alledged by Theodoret, affir­ming, that there is only a figure of Christs body in the Eucharist. And yet Bell. de Euchar. c. 1. in initio. ib. §. Secū ­d [...] docet in another place affirming both, that, that opinion is not ancient, nor yet now to be found in Theodo­ret; and also that the forsaid doctrine of Caluin doth teach, that in the Eucharist there is to be exhibited vnto the faithfull, not only a signe of Christs body, but also the body and bloud it selfe, by which mens soules are nourished vnto eternall [Page 177] [...]. Or as another Iesuite testifieth for Caluin, that our soles communicate with the body of Christ substantially. Greg. de Valent. tom. 4. dis. 6. q. 3. pūct 1. §. Item. Heer [...] no more oddes in this accusation, then ancient, [...]d not anciēt, heresy and not heresy. All these con­ [...]dictions do certainly euince, that Bellarmine hath [...] publike imputations slandered those whome in [...] conscience he did acquit. ‘And shall we thinke at this conscience could be sincere in alleadging her mens testimonies, & witnesses, who is found [...]us perfidiously vniust in exhibiting his owne? I [...] are to produce multitudes of this kind, which I [...]ue in store, and will be a debtour to P.R. for ma­ [...] of this sort, ready to pay my debt as soone [...] this my promise shall be exacted. Thus farre M. [...]rton,’

[...]. And heere now I answere, that it is suffici­ [...]tly seene by the payment he hath already made, [...]w ready or able he is to pay his debt for any thing [...]omised against Cardinall Bellarmine, whose estima­ [...]on is like to be highly increased, with all indiffe­ [...]nt men, by this assault, both for conscience, sincere [...]ealing, and learning, and M. Morton greatly blemi­ [...]ed in them all: for that cōmonly no one instance [...]ath he alleaged of fraud in his aduersarie, but with [...]ome fraud in himselfe, & none perhaps with more thē in this sixt & last obiectiō in that kynd, concer­ning the testimony of T [...]eodoret for the Reall Presence, [...]or that heere be so many foule faults & wilfull cor­ [...]uptions, as truly after so many admonishments, if [...] should vse the same, it would make me ashamed to [...]ooke any man in the face.

96. He indeauoureth to frame a contradiction [...]out of Bellarmine in that he chargeth Caluin with an ancient heresy recorded by Theodoret, which heresy [...] did affirme, that there is only a figure of Christes body in the Sacrament, and then will he proue out of Bellarmine [Page 178] himselfe for contradiction of this: first that the said heresy is not ancient: Three poyntes wherin M. Mort. is takē to haue falsi­fyed. then that it is not to be found at this day in Theodoret: thirdly that Caluin doth not deny the Reall Presence: and so he concludeth, as you haue heard, heere is no more oddes, then betweene an [...] and not ancient, heresy & not heresy. But if in all and euery one of these three poyntes M. Morton be conuinced wittingly to haue falsifyed, and that he could not but know that he did so, what excuse then will he make, or what will the discreete, and honest Rea­der say, or thinke of him? Novv then to the parti­culers.

The first poynt of falsitie.97. The charge which Cardinall Bellarmine maketh vpon Zuinglius & Caluin (not Caluin only as M. Mort [...] text importeth) is taken from the last of those 20. old heresies before signified to be obiected by the Car­dinall to the Protestants of our time, in his booke of the Notes of the Church, Bellar. l. 4. de Ecclesia cap. 9. and by him is set downe in these wordes: ‘The twentith old heresie (saith Bellar­mine) wherin the Protestants of our time do par­ticipate with old heretickes, is of them, that denied the Eucharist to be truly the flesh of Christ, & would haue it to be the figure or image of the body of Christ. So it is related in the seauenth Generall Coū ­cell, and sixt Action, Tom. 3. and long before that Theodoret in his Dialogue, intituled, Impatibilis, doth relate the same out of S. Ignatius Scholler to the A­postles. Card. Bel­larmine his asser­tiō about the anti­quity of the Sacra­mentarie heresie. And this heresy is taught in these our daies by Zuinglius in his Booke De verbis Coenae Domini, & by Caluin lib. 4. Instit. cap. 17. §. 12. And so we haue layd forth the heresies of 20. Archeretickes that were cō ­demned by the Church within the first seauen hun­dred yeares after Christ, which heresies being [...]l­den by vs for such, and by our Aduersaries for [...] articles of their faith, it followeth that our doctrine doth agree with the doctrine of the ancient Church [Page 179] [...]d the doctrine of our aduersaries with the anci­ [...]t heresies.’ So he.

[...]. And this is Cardinall Bellarmines charge. Let [...]e Reader now marke how brokēly it is set downe [...] M. Morton. Sundry false tric­kes. For first he mentioneth only Caluin to [...] challenged for this last heresy of the Sacramenta­ [...]es against the Reall Presence (as now I haue said) [...]auing out Zuinglius, who is equally charged by the [...]rdinall for the same thing, which is one tricke. [...]hen he omitteth wholy the mention of the 7. Ge­ [...]rall Coūcell, which so long agoe related & confu­ [...]d the said heresy, & this is another tricke. Further­ [...]ore he cōcealeth in like māner the name & autho­ [...]tie of old S. Ignatius, who in his tyme (which was [...]mediatly after the Apostles) held the denying of [...] Reall Presence to be an heresy, & this is a third [...]icke. All which poyntes could not be pretermitted [...] M. Morton (nor any one of them indeed) but by vo­ [...]ntary deliberation: and consequently he must be [...]esumed to haue done it of set purpose to deceyue. [...]ut let vs come to his two heads of contradiction, [...]hich he will needs find in Bell [...]rmine.

[...]9 The first is, that Cardinall Bellarmine is affirmed [...]y him to say that, The first false con­tradiction obiected to Bellar­mine out of Theo­doret. that hereticall opinion (cited [...]fore against the Reall Presence out of Theodoret) is [...] ancient, nor yet now to be found in Theodoret, and [...]or this he citeth Bellarmines owne wordes, as he saith [...]b. 1. de Euchar. cap. 1. initio, and that in latin, to wit, [...]uae sententia cita [...]ur à Theodoreto in Dialogo, vbi tamen nunc [...]on habetur. VVhich sentence of S. Ignatius against old [...]eretiks is cited by Theodoret in his dialogue, where [...]otwithstanding now it is not to be found. So he tel­ [...]eth vs out of Bellarmine both in Latin & English, [...]ut corrupteth him egregiously in both lauguages. First in allegation, and then in translation, as now shall be demonstrated. For first the true vvordes of [Page 180] Cardinall Bellarmine in latin are these: Quae sententia ci [...]a­tur à Theodoreto in 30. Dialogo ex epist. Ignatij ad Smy [...] ­ses, vbi tamen nunc non habetur. Bellar. l. 1. de E [...]char. cap. 1. ini­tio. That is to say: This sen­tence (concerning old heretiks denying the Reall Presence) is cyted by Theodoret in his third dialogue out of S. Ignatius his Epistle (to the Christians) of Smyrna, where notwithstanding it is not now found: meaning expresly, that it is not found at this day in that Epi [...]tle of S. Ignatius, but in Theodoret it is found, and is extant both in Greeke and latyn, as euery man may see that will read the place quoted [...] A shame­les falsifi­cation of Theodo­ret & lye against Bellar­mine. So as heere agayne M. Morton corrupteth Bellarm [...] both in Latin and English leauing out not only the mention of S. Ignatius his Epistle ad Smyrnenses, and then making his Reader belieue that the testimony of Theodoret was not to be found at this day in him: but also vpon this falsification of his owne, will needs frame a contradiction in Bellarmine. Theod. dial. 3. And can there be any more witting and wilfull falshood then this? Can this dealing stand with the solemne and extraordinary protestations which he maketh of sincerity in the end of his booke, euen against hi [...] owne infirmityes.

‘100. But let vs see yet further, how he pro­ueth that Bellarmine, Bell. ibid. hauing said before, that this heresy of denying the Reall Presence was very an­cient, contradicteth himselfe, and saith in the very same place that it is not ancient, for which he al­leadgeth these wordes of the Cardinall: Ne autem glo­rientur Caluinistae &c. And to the end, that the Cal­uinists may not glory, that their opinion (against the Reall Presence) is very ancient, it is to be noted, that those most ancient hereticks (mentioned) by S. Ig­natius) did not so much impugne the Sacramēt of the Eucharist, as the mistery of Christ his incarnation. For so much as therfore they denied the Eucharist [Page 181] [...]o be the flesh of Christ (as S. Ignatius doth signifie in [...]he same place) for that they deny Christ to haue [...]lesh &c.’

[...]01. Which testimony if you consider it well, [...]oth not proue at all that the denyall of the Reall [...]resence was no ancient heresy, The an­cient he­resy a­gainst the Reall Presence declared. but only that it was not altogeather the same with that of the Pro­ [...]estants at this day, and had an other foundation or [...]otiue: to wit, for so much as those hereticks did [...]ot belieue that Christ had taken any flesh at all, [...]hey consequētly belieued not, that he gaue it in the [...]acrament. But the Protestants though they beleeue [...]hat he tooke true flesh: yet do they not belieue, that [...]t is really giuen in the Sacrament, for that they be­ [...]ieue not these wordes, Hoc est Corpus meum, in the [...]ense that the Church doth: so as these do formally [...]mpugne the Reall Presence, and the other but by a [...]onsequence drawne from another heresy, which [...]s the cause that they cānot properly be called Sacra­ [...]entaries, as ours are, but most ancient they are: & [...]o in this he contradicteth not himselfe about their [...]ntiquity.

102. The last point of obiected contradiction in [...]his place, is, that Bellarmine confesseth Caluin to hold, The secōd point of imagined contradi­ction in Bellar­mine. that togeather with the Sacrament of the Eucharist, God doth exhibit vnto the faithful, not only a signe of Christs body, but also the body and bloud it selfe, yea, and as Valen [...]ia addeth further that Caluin confes­seth that our soules do cōmunicate with the body of Christ sub­stantially. Val [...]ntia tom. 4. dis. 6. q. 3. p. 1. § Item. Wherto I answere: true it is, that in words Caluin doth affirme as much in some partes of his workes, but denyeth it againe in others, and therup­on do both Bellarmine and Valentia conuince him of most euident and palpable contradictions in this matter, he seeking to say something different not only from Luther, but also from VVickli [...]e & Zuinglius, [Page 182] therby to make a sect of himselfe, but yet not finding indeed, wherin to subsist, or be premanent in any deuise that he could find out, for proofe wherof B [...]ll [...]r. de Eu [...]har. lib. 1. cap. 1. Cardinall Bellarmine d [...]th set downe seauen s [...]u [...]r [...]ll propositions of his about this matter, and proueth th [...] same substantially out of his owne wordes and discourses, & ech one of them different from the o­ther, and some of them so contradictory, as by no possible meanes they may be reconciled or stand to­geather: Calu. in sine. cons [...]n. [...] Pa­s [...]. Tigu­ [...]in. As first, that the flesh o [...] Christ is only in h [...]au [...]n, and that in so certaine and determinate a place, as it is as [...]i­stant from the bread, as the highest heauen is from the earth: & then, this no [...]withstanding, he saith (as heere is cyted by M. Morton) C [...]lu. i [...] 26. Mat. & [...]ib. 4. Ins [...]it. cap. 17. §. 5. that in the supper the true body of [...]h [...]ist is exhibit [...]d vnto the faithfull, & not only a signe: yea, that the very substance o [...] Christes body is giuen. Next to that againe he saith, that notwithstanding the distance b [...]tweene th [...] [...] of Christ, & the lib. 4. In [...]tit. cap. 17. §. 7.10. & 32. Sacramentall signes, yet are they ioyned [...]o [...]a­ther by so miraculous and inexplicable meanes, as neyther [...] ­gu [...] nor pen can vtter the same. And then further, tha [...] [...] must not belieue, that this coniunction is by any reall com [...]g downe of Chr [...]stes body vnto vs, but by a certaine substa [...]ial force deriued from his flesh by his spirit. Lib. 4. Ins [...]it. cap. 17. §. 5. & 31. Where he seem [...] to s [...]y, that the coniunction is made, not in the sub­stance, but in some essentiall quality. And so in the fifth place more cleerly he saith, that it is made by ap­prehensi [...]n of faith only, wherby he contradicteth all that he sayd before of reall and substantiall coniunction. Ibid. §. 33.34. And in the sixt place he confirmeth more the same by saying, that wi [...]ked men receaue not the body at all, quia corpus Christi solo ore fidei accipitur, I [...]id. §. 2.5. lib. de c [...]n [...] cap. 3. for that the body o [...] Christ is only receaued by the mouth of fayth. And in the [...]. and last place he concludeth, that this Sacrament doth not giue the body o [...] Christ, or faith vnto any that hath it not alrea­dy, but only doth testify, and confirme that now it is there, and so it is, but as a signe or seale (to vse his wordes) of that [Page 183] which is th [...]re already. And this being the variety of Caluins opinion, it proueth no contradiction in Bel­ [...]armine, but in Caluin himselfe. And so many corru­ptions hauing heere beene proued against M. Morton, do conuince that in him which he would proue in Cardinall Bellarmine, but cannot, as how see, and yet [...]e concludeth so confidently as before yow haue heard, saying: Preamble pag. 66. All these contradictions do certainly euince, [...]hat he (the Cardinall) hath by publicke imputations slaun­ [...]ered those whome in his cons [...]ience he did acquit: and shall we [...]hinke, A vaine confident conclusiō. that his conscience could be sincere in alleadging other [...]ns testimonyes, and witn [...]sses, who is sound thus persidiously [...]iust in ex [...]ibiting his owne? Thus he. And I remit me to [...]he Reader, whether he hath seene hitherto any one point of perfidious dealing proued against the Car­dinall, among so many as haue appeared on the part of M. Morton. But yet now he will go forward, as he saith to another subiect, to wit, to shew some exā ­ples o [...] falsifications out of Cardinall Bellarmine in alle­gation of other mens testimonyes. Let vs see whe­ther he performe any thing more then in the rest he hath done.

103. But first before we enter into this other ex­amen, there occurreth vnto me a consideration wor­thy to be pondered by the Reader, which is, that all these six obiectio [...]s made against Cardinall Bellarmine for imputing old heresyes to Prot [...]stants, are taken out o [...] on only chapter of his, which is the 9. of his 4. Booke Of the no [...]s of the true Church, in which 9. Chapter (as before yow haue heard) he chargeth the Protestants of our time with different heresyes of tw [...]nty seuerall condemned old Heresiarches, or chiefe Heretiks, and therof in [...]erreth, that as the v­nion and agre [...]ment in doctrine with the ancient Catholike Fathers is a note of the true Church, and of true Catholiks: so to participate with ancient he­retiks [Page 184] in any one condemned heresy, is a damnable note of the contrary: A mar­kable point. which Chapter M. Morton per­using, thought good to set vpon six only for clearing Protestants of them, to wit, the Pelagians, the Noua­tians, the Manichees, the Arrians, and other two parti­culer heresyes: Aug. lib. de heresib. ad Quod-vult-deum in fine. wheras in reason he should haue ey­ther cleered all or none, for so much as according to S. Augustines sentence, and other ancient Fathers, the holding of any one condemned heresy, is suffi­cient to euerlasting damnation. So as M. Morton pic­king out only a few, leaueth all the rest as not ex­cusable, and vnder hand by his silence granteth, th [...]t they are held by the Protestants: which how mar­kable a poynt it is, I leaue it to the Reader to iudge, and so shall passe to examine the other head of ob­iections, that he hath against Cardinall Bellarmine.

CONTEYNING [...]THER OBIECTIONS against Cardinall Bellarmine, for falsifica­tions in alleadging of oth [...]r mens au­thoriti [...]s: and first about S. Cyprian. §. XIII.

‘ MAISTER MORTON passing from Cardinall Bellarmines accusations & imputations against Protestants for he­resies, vnto his allegations of their te­stimonies (corruptly as he pretendeth) [...]andled by him; Preamb. p. 66. he beginneth his accusation with a [...]entence of S. Cyprian about traditiōs in these words: Cypr. Ep. 10. ad Pomp. S. Cyprian (saith he) hath this qu [...]stion (he going about to refute [...] tradition:) VVhence is this tradition? It is deriued from the Lords Authority, or fr [...]m the pr [...]c [...]pt of the Apostles? For God will [...]th that we [...]ho [...]d do those things which are written. From whence Protestāts conclude, that the Scriptures are [Page 186] of sufficiency for our direction in all questions of faith. Bellarmine answereth, B [...]ll [...]r. lib. 4. de v [...]b. D [...]i. cap. 11. §. pro­fert Cy­prianus. Aug. contr. Do­nat. cap. 23 [...] that Cyprian spake this, when he thought to defend an error, and therfore i [...] is no mer­uaile, i [...] he erred in so reasoning, for the which cause S. Au­gustine (saith he) did worthily re [...]ute him. The question is not, what error Cyprian held, but whether his manner of reasoning from the sufficiency of Scrip­ture were erroneous or no. Bellarmine pretendeth, that S. Augustine did worthily reproue him. But whosoeuer shall consult with S. Augustine in the Chapter specified, shall find, that this poynt by him is excellently commended, That Cyprian warneth vs (saith S. Augustine) to runne vnto t [...]e [...]ountaine, Aug l. 5. de Bapt. cap. 26. that is, vnto the tradition o [...] the Apos [...]les; from thence to deriue a con­duct to our tymes, it is chi [...]fly good and doubtlesse to be per [...]or­med.’

Preamb. p. 66. §. 16.105. This is M. Mortons whole obiection, wherin we must examine what wilfull deceipt to falsifica­tion he findeth here in Cardinall Bellarmines allegati­on of Cyprian. For if he find not this, then findeth he nothing to his purpose, he hauing intituled this his Paragraph of B [...]lla [...]mines falsi [...]ications: but if he find no falshood nor falsity at all, either wilfull or not wil­full, then is he more in the briers: but most of all if finding nothing in his aduersary, himselfe be taken in manifest falshood, both witting and wilful. Let vs examine then this poynt more particulerly.

The State [...]f the question concer­ning S. Cyprians rebapti­zing.106. And first I do note, that he proposeth this ob­iection very obscurely, & that for the cause, which will presently be se [...]ne, for he doth not explicate vpon what occasion these words of S. Cyprian were vttered by him, nor alleadged by Protestants as an obiection against vnwritten traditions. Wherfore the Reader must know, that the holy man S. Cyp [...]ian h [...]uing conceaued an infinite auersion frō hereticks and her [...]sies of his time, did vpon indiscreet zeale [Page 187] [...]all into this errour, that as their faith was not good [...] [...]o neither their baptisme, and consequently that [...]uch as left them, and were conuerted to the Catho­ [...]icke religion should be baptized againe after the Catholicke manner: and hauing found some other Bishops also of Africk, vpon the same groundes, to ioyne with him in the same opinion, for that it seemed to them to be most conforme to Scriptures, that detested euery where hereticks and heresies, he wrote therof vnto Stephen Bishop of Rome, who standing vpon the cōtrary custome alwayes vsed in the Church, not to rebaptize such as were conuer­ted from heresie, misliked S. Cyprians opinion, and wrote vnto him against the same: wherwith the good man being somwhat exasperated, wrote a letter vnto Pompeius Bishope of Sabrata in Africk, cited heere by M. Morton, wherin amongst other sharp speaches he hath this interrogation here set downe: Vnde est ista traditio &c? From whence is this tradition ( of not rebaptizing heretickes?) Is it deriued from our Lords Authority? &c. vpon which forme of argu­ing in S. Cyprian, M. Morton saith, that Protestants do lawfully argue in like manner, this or that tra­dition is not in the Scriptures, ergo, it is not to be ad­mitted.

107. But saith Cardinall Bellarmine, this was no good forme of arguing in S. Cyprian, Whether S. Cypri­ans forme of argu­ment was good, or no. nor euer vsed by him, but in this necessitie for defending his errour as Protestantes also are driuen to vse the same for de­fence of theirs, and this he proueth by two wayes. First, for that S. Augustine doth of purpose out of the sense of the vniuersall Church of his dayes refute that inference, and forme of argument: and second­ly, for that S. Cyprian himselfe in other places where he was not pressed with this necessity, doth yeald, and allow the authority of vnwritten traditions, [Page 188] which later proofe as the most conuincent, M Mor­ton do [...]h suppresse with silence, in reciting Bellar­mines answere, and saith only to the first, that S. Au­gustine is so farre of from condemning S. Cyprians man­n [...]r of reasoning from the sufficiency of Scriptures, as he doth excellently commend the same: this then is briefly to be examined out of S. Augustines ovvne wordes.

108. And first I graunt (as S. Augustine also doth) that when any Tradition, or doctryne, can cleerly be shewed out of the Scriptures, optimum est, & si [...]e dubitatione facie [...]dum, A [...]g. l. 6. co [...]tr. Do­nat. c. 26. it is the best way of all, and que­stionles to be obserued. And for that S. Cyprian in that his errour did certainly perswade himselfe to be able to prooue the same out of holy Scriptures, as appeareth by the many places alleadged by him to th [...]t effect (though wrongfully vnderstood) espe­cially in the sayd Epistle to Pompeius, and else wher [...], which places of Scripture S. Augustine doth particu­lerly ponder and refute, and shew not to be rightly applied by S. Cyprian, who seeing the generall custo­me and tradition of the Church to be contrary vn­to him, in this cause prouoked to the Scriptures alone, as the Protestants do in as bad a cause. But now let vs see what S. Augustine teacheth in this be­halfe, and how he confuteth S. Cyprians prouocatiō to only Scriptures, in this case of controuersy bet­weene them, A [...]g. l 2. d. [...]pt. [...] Do­n [...]tis [...]. [...]. 7. notwithstanding he allowed for the best way to haue recourse to the fountaynes, when things from thence may, as I sayd, cleerly be pro­ued.

109. Let vs heare (I say) S. Augustine recounting the case betweene S. Cyprian on the one side, & himselfe with [...]ll Catholike mē of his dayes on the other. ‘ Nō ­d [...]r [...]t [...]aith he diligent [...]rilla Baptismi qu [...]stio pertracta &c. The question of Baptisme (or reb [...]ptizing here­tiks [Page 189] was not in S. Cyprians tyme diligently discus­sed, albeit the Catholike Church held a most whol­some custome to correct that in Schismatiks & He­retiks which was euill, & not to iterate that which was giuen them as good: which custome I belieue to haue come downe from the Apostles tradition, as many others which are not found in their writings, S. Augu­stines lear­ned cen­sure for vnwrit­ten tradi­tions. nor yet in the later Councels of their successours, & neuerthelesse are obserued through the whole vni­uersall Church, and are belieued not to haue beene deliuered, and commended vnto vs, but from the sayd Apostles. This most wholsome custome then S. Cyprian sayth that his predecessour Agrippinus did begin to correct, but as the truth it selfe being more diligently after examined did teach, he is thought more truly to haue corrupted thē corrected the same.’ Thus S. Augustine of the state of the question, and of the authority of Customes and Traditions vnwrit­ten. Now Let vs see what he saith to S. Cyprians mā ­ner of reasoning, from the sufficiency of Scripture as M. Morton tearmeth it.

101. Ad Pompeium (saith S. Augustine) scribit Cypria­nus de hac re &c. Aug. l. 5. de Bapt. con­tra Dona­tist. cap. 23. ‘S. Cyprian doth write to the Bishop Pompeius about this matter, where he doth manifestly shew, that Stephen, whome wee vnderstand to haue beene Bishop of Rome at that tyme, did not only not consent vnto him, verùm etiam contra scripsisse at (que) prae­ [...]pisse, but also did write and gaue commandement to the contrary &c. S. Cypryan did obiect Apostoli nihil quid [...]m exinde praeceperunt, the Apostles did command nothing (in the Scriptures) about this matter. It is true, saith S. Augustine: Sed consuetudo illa, quae opponebatur Cypriano, ab eor [...]m traditione exordium sumpsisse credenda est, s [...]u [...] sunt multa quae Vniuersa tenet Ecclesia, & ob hoc ab Apo­st [...]s pr [...]c [...]pta bene creduntur quamquam scripta non reperian­tur: But that custome which was opposed to S. Cy­prian [Page 190] by the Church, is to be belieued to haue taken beginning from the tradition of the Apostles: as there are many things which the Vniuersall Church doth hold, and they are therfore rightly belieued to haue beene ordayned by the Apostles, though they be not found written.’ Thus S. Augustine.