« ПредишнаНапред »
all this, shall the Holy Ghost, with turning of a hand, knock at his breast, and even whether he will or noyea, wholly against his will, kindle him a light, so as he may not err ?p Shall he straightway be the headspring
tatasse a fide.' 'Hereby it appeareth that the Church standeth not upon men, in consideration either of their power, or of their dignity, either ecclesiastical or temporal.'”—Defence, p. 537.
NICOLAS DE LYRA (i. e. of Lyra, or Lires, in Normandy, his native place,) is among the most eminent of the commentators on the Bible preceding the Reformation. He flourished in the fourteenth century, and left a bulky exposition of the Old and New Testament, in a series of elaborate glosses, called Postils. He possessed the qualification in his day so rare, of a knowledge of the original languages of the Scriptures; and his free and generally literal expositions were thought to have contributed so greatly towards the rise of the Reformation, that the monkish distich
“Si Lyra non lyrasset, Luther non saltasset," in punning allusion to his name, gained very general currency and assent. Yet his commentary was once of great weight in the Romish Church, and is still quoted as possessing considerable authority.]
p ["STANISLAUS Hosius, the greatest stickler of that side, blusheth not to say thus : 'Numerentur omnes,' &c. 'Reckon all the Popes that ever were, from Peter until this Julius (the Third] that now is : there never sat in this chair any Arian, any Donatist, any Pelagian, or any other that professed any manner of heresy. (In Conf. Petricoviens. c. 29.)—Howbeit, that your unlearned reader may the better consider, how safely he may give credit to your bare word; whether the Pope may be deceived in faith or no, it may easily appear by these few examples." —He goes on to adduce Pope Marcellinus, who sacrificed to idols; another bishop of Rome said by TERTULLIAN to have patronized the Montanists; Pope Liberius, an Arian; Pope Honorius, condemned as a heretic by two General Councils; Pope Anastasius, a favourer of the Nestorians: Pope Hildebrand, whose decrees were condemned as heretical by a Roman synod; Pope Sylvester, suspected of necromancy; Pope Eugenius, condemned by the Council of Basle; and Pope John XXII. who maintained erroneous sentiments relative to the departed soul. For all these instances he brings vouchers of authority acknowledged by the Papists themselves. Thence he draws his conclusions :“Now, if idolaters, Montanists, Arians, Monothelites, Nestorians, deniers of the immortality, simonists, sorcerers, maintainers of filthiness, and other obstinate and wilful heretics may err; then it is easily seen that the Pope may err. Verily, the Council of Basle saith thus : * Multi ex summis,' &c. It is reported and read, that many Popes have fallen into errors and heresies :-it is certain, that the Pope may err:-the Council hath oftentimes condemned and removed the Pope, in respect as well of his heresy in faith, as of his lewdness in life. (Conc. Bas. inter Epist. Synodales.)”—He proceeds in the citation of passages to the same effect from several authorities of high standing in the Romish Church ; concluding: “Your own doctor, ALPHONSO DE
If Lyra had never piped, Luther would never have danced
of all right; and shall all the treasures of wisdom and understanding be found in him, as it were laid up in store ?-Or, if these things be not in him, can he give a right and apt judgment of so weighty matters? Or, if he be not able to judge, would he have that those matters should be brought before him alone?
Sect. 9. What will ye say, if the Pope's advocates, abbots and bishops, dissemble not the matter, but show themselves open enemies to the gospel ; and though they see, yet will not see but wry [pervert] the Scriptures, and wittingly and knowingly corrupt and counterfeit the word of God; and foully and wickedly apply to the Pope all the same things which evidently and properly be spoken of the person of Christ only, nor by no means can be applied to any other? And what though they say, “The Pope is all, and above all ?”?r Or, " that the Pope can do as much as Christ can do ?”, And, “ that one judgment place, and one council house, serveth for the Pope, and for Christ, both together ?" Or, " that the Pope is the same light which should come into the world ?” which words Christ spake of himself alone. And, “ that whoso is an evil doer, hateth and
CASTRO, saith : 'Non credo aliquem esse,' &c. 'I do not believe that any one can be so shameless a flatterer of the Pope, as to grant him the prerogative, that he can never err, nor be deceived in expounding of the Scriptures." (Cont. Hæres. Lib. I. c. iv.)"— Defence, p. 537.
This point is deserving of more attention than its evident clearness seems to require, because the infallibility which is claimed by the Church of Rome, must ultimately be lodged in the Pope : if proved to be wanting in his case, it is shown to be a nonentity.]
9 ["But,' you say, 'Christ hath prayed for Péter, and made sure promise that his faith should never fail.' Therefore the Pope is wise ! the Pope is learned ! the Pope is Catholic ! the Pope cannot err! All this, and a great deal more, the Pope may claim only by virtue of CHRIST's prayer! Now, therefore, if the Pope should err, or be in heresy, he might sue Christ in an action of covenant, and require him to perform his promise! So saith the prophet Micah: "The priests thereof teach for hire, and the prophets thereof divine for money: yet will they lean upon the Lord, and say, Is not the LORD among us?" (Mic. iii. 11.)-But the prophet saith: 'All men are liars,'(Ps.cxvi. 11.) and Cursed be the man that trusteth in man.' (Jerem. xvii. 5.)". Defence, p. 536.]
F HOSTIENSIS. Cap. Quanto.
flieth from that light?" u Or, that “all the other bishops have received of the Pope's fulness ?" "—Shortly, what though they make decrees expressly against God's word, and that not in hucker mucker, or covertly, but openly, and in the face of all the world : must it needs yet be gospel straight, whatsoever they say? Shall these be God's holy army? Or will CHRIST be at hand among them there ? Shall the Holy Ghost flow in their tongues; or can they with truth say, We and the Holy Ghost have thought so ?'"
Sect. 10. Indeed Peter a Soto, and his companion Hosius, stick not to affirm that the same Council wherein our Saviour Jesus Christ was condemned to die, had both the spirit of prophesying, and the Holy Ghost, and the Spirit of truth; and that it was neither a false nor a trifling saying, when those bishops said, “We have a law, and by our law he ought to die ;'s and that they, so saying, did light upon the "very truth of judgment;" (for so be Hosius' words ;) and that the same plainly was à just decree whereby they pronounced, that CHRIST was worthy to die ! This, methinketh, is strange-that
“Quis erit tam injustus rerum æstimator, qui non dicat, Papa Lux venit in mundum ; sed dilexerunt homines tenebras magis quam lucem. Omnis qui male agit odit lucem, et non venit ad lucem, ut non arguontur opera ejus, quia mala sunt ?” CORNELIUS Episc. Bitont. in Oratione coram Conc. Trident.-Compare John viii. 12. ix. 5. iji. 19. ss.
[It is worth while to hear JEWELL's further exposition of this matter, that we may learn the strange lengths to which prejudice and partyspirit can drive men not destitute of sense and judgment.
“Good Christian reader, this whole matter concerneth only the credit and certainty of General Councils. Sotus and Hosius say, whatsoever is determined in Council, must be taken as the undoubted judga ment and word of God. Hereunto the godly learned father JOHN BRENTIUS* replieth thus : 'Councils sometimes have erred, and have utterly wanted the Spirit of God, as it may appear by that in a Council the Son of God was condemned, and adjudged to die the death.' Hosius answereth : 'When Annas and Caiaphas sat as presidents in the Council, and Christ the Son of God was by them con
(A Lutheran divine, and prominent eader of the Protestants, born 1499, died 1570.]
these men are not able to speak for themselves, and to defend their own cause, but they must also take part with Annas and Caiaphas against CHRIST! For if they will call that a lawful and a good Council, wherein the Son of God was most shạmefully condemned to die the death ; what Council will they then allow for false and naught? And yet (as all their Councils, to say truth, commonly be,) necessity compelled them to pronounce these things of the Council holden by Annas and Caiaphas. Sect. 11. But will these
say, reform us the Church, being themselves both the persons guilty, and the judges too? Will they abate their own ambition and their pride? Will they overthrow their own causes, and give sentence against themselves—that they must leave off to be unlearned bishops, slowbellies, heapers together of benefices, takers upon them as princes and
demned to die, yet nevertheless the same Council had the assistance of the Holy Ghost, and the undoubted Spirit of truth. Again he saith: 'Ex quo tempore,' &c. 'From the time that our first father tasted of the forbidden fruit, CHRIST the Son of God became guilty of death: neither was it false, that the Jews said, We have a law, and according to that law he ought to die.' (Pag. 62 b.) With this spirit, I trow, he was inspired that wrote this marginal note upon your Decrees : 'Judæi mortaliter peccassent, nisi CHRISTUM crucifixissent.' "The Jews would have committed mortal sin, if they had not crucified CHRIST.
“But for excuse hereof, somewhat to salve a festery matter, ye tell us a long tedious tale :--The acts of the Council, where CHRIST was condemned, were lewd and wicked; but the sentence of death pronounced by the bishops against CHRIST, was just and true.'Ye should plainly have told us, what were these sentences, and what these acts ; and what great difference ye can espy between act and sentence ; or when ever ye heard of sentence in judgment without act, or of perfect act without sentence ; or how then the sentence of the judge may be true, if the act be false ; or how the act may be right, if the sentence
“ Indeed, I can easily believe that neither Sotus, nor Hosius, was ever so wicked to say, that'CHRIST was rightly and worthily done to death. Howbeit, he that saith, "The sentence of death pronounced in Council against Christ, was just and true,' seemeth indeed to say no less. For if the sentence of Christ's death were just, then had CHRIST undoubtedly deserved to die. The very case and course of your doctrine undoubtedly force them thus to say. For if all Councils be good and holy, without exception, then must that also be a good and a holy Council
, that was assembled against God and against his CHRIST," Defence, p. 547.]
men of war? Will the Abbots, the Pope's dear darlings, judge the monk for a thief, which laboureth not for his living ? and that it is against all law to suffer such a one to live, and to be found, either in city or in country, all of other men's charges ? or else, that a monk ought to lie on the ground; to live hardly, with herbs and pease; to study earnestly, to argue, to pray, to work with hand, and fully to bend himself to come to the ministry of the Church? In faith, as soon will the Pharisees and Scribes repair again the temple of God, and restore it unto us a • house of prayer' instead of a den of thieves.'
Sect. 12. There have been, I know, certain of their own companions, which have found fault with many errors in the Church, as Pope ADRIAN,' ÆNEAS Sylvius," Cardinal POLE, Pighius, and others, as is aforesaid. They held afterwards their Council at Trent, in the self
? [Adrian VI., who succeeded Leo X. in the Pontificate in 1522, was a native of Utrecht in Holland, born in 1459. He attained his high elevation in consequence of his connexion with the Emperor Charles V. to whom he had been tutor. Adrian was a man of honest piety, and good intentions, but weak-minded, and imbued with all the prejudices of a scholastic education. He was favourable to a reform in the articles of manners and discipline, and therefore hated by the clergy and court of Rome ; but his bigotted attachment to all the Řomish corruptions of faith precluded any hopes of his sanction of the Reformation. He died in the midst of plans for the amelioration of his corrupt court, after a reign of only eighteen months.]
a [See Note 4, page 47.]
b (REGINALD POLE, famous for his share in the restoration of Popery under Queen Mary, with whom he was connected by blood, has left on history a character which it is not easy to fix, or pourtray in a single paragraph. His worst enemies allow him the possession of
many tues; yet it is impossible to clear him from the disgrace of many crimes. His learning, probity, and disinterestedness, scarcely admit of doubt. He had the glory of refusing the Papal tiara; while he submitted with cheerfulness to disgrace and exile for his attachment to the ancient faith. Yet the corruptions which he had condemned while a simple divine, he tacitly allowed when Cardinal legate of England; persecution which he had felt, though he never urged it, he get sanctioned, on his return to power.
Pole was made Cardinal by Pope Paul III. and when Henry VIII. set a price upon his head, received a body guard from that Pontiff. He was one of the Presidents in the Council of Trent. When Mary assumed the crown of England, he was created Archbishop of Canterbury, and invested with the supreme ecclesiastical power in that king, dom. He died, very shortly after his royal relative, in 1558, aged fifty-nine.)