THE HONOUR of the Married CLERGY, Maintained Against the malicious Challenges of C. E. Masse-Priest: OR, The Apology written some year, since for the marriage of persons Ecclesiastical, made good against the Cavils of C. E. Pseudo-Catholik Priest.  
In three Books. By Ios. Hall, D. of Diuin. Deane of Worcest.  
LONDON, Printed by W. S. for H. Fether. 1620.   

TO THE MOST REVEREND FATHER IN GOD, AND MY MOST HONOURED Lord, GEORGE, Lord Archbishop of CANTERBURY, Primate of all England, and Metropolitan, one of his Majesty's most Honourable Privy Counsel.  
MOST REVEREND FATHER, and no less honoured Lord,  
IT was my desire and hope to spend the residue of my Time and thoughts in sweet and sacred Contemplation. Satan envying me this happiness, interrupts me by the malice of an importune Adversary. Twelve years ago I wrote a little Apologetical Letter for the Marriage of persons Ecclesiastical; and now thus late, when I had almost forgot that I had written it, a moody Mass-priest drops out a tedious and virulent Refutation; thorough my sides striking at the most Honourable, and flourishing Clergy of the whole Christian World; labouring not so much for my disgrace (what would that avail him?) as the dishonour and scorn of our holy Profession, in the eyes of our people. I could contemn it in silence, if the Quarrel were only mine; Now my wrong cannot be distinguished from thousands: God and his Church are engaged in this cause, which in my foil could not but sustain loss; neither may I be now silent with safety, without misconstruction. Let this hand and Tongue be no longer mine, than they may serve my Master in Heaven, and his Spouse on Earth. That which I wrote in some three hours, he hath answered in three quaternions of years; and what I wrote in three leaves, he hath answered in no fewer Pages than 380. Should I follow him in this proportion, he might after some Centuries of years expect an answer in Tostatus-hydes; whose first word should be, Quis leget haec? Or if my patience would delay my reply to the just paces of his answer, this Volume of his would perhaps▪ be vanished into Gross shops for waste Paper in thuris piperisue cucullos; and would no more need answer then now it deserveth one. But hearing of the insultation of some Popishly affected, who gloried and triumphed in this ACHILLES pro Catholicis, I addressed myself to the Work, with no little indignation, and no less speed: That my selfe-conceited Adversary, and his seduced abettors may see how little a well-ordered Marriage is guilty of deadding our spirits, or slacking our hands; at the beginning of this Summer's Progress, when it pleased his sacred Majesty to take notice of this sorry Libel, and to question with me concerning it, I had not so much as read it over; so newly was it come to my hands, ere his happy return, (be it spoken to the only glory of him that enabled me) I had not only finished this Answer, but twice written it over with my own hand; and yet made this but the recreation of the weightier businesses of my Calling, which now did more than ordinarily urge me.  
It was my purpose to have answered (as beseemeth the person à quo, not ad quem) mildly, according to my known disposition, but upon better deliberation, I found the insolency of my Refuter such, that I could not favour him, and not be cruel to my cause. If therefore for many (it is his own art and word) railative Pages, he receive from my unwilling and enforced Pen now and then, though not a Relative to such an Antecedent, yet perhaps some drop of sharper Vinegar, than my Ink useth to be tempered withal, he may forgive me, and must thank himself: What needed this cause so furious an Inuective? As if the Kingdom of Heaven, and all Religion consisted in nothing but Maidenhead, or Marriage? Cardinal Bellarmine, when he speaks of the Greek Church, wherein a married Clergy is both allowed and required, shuts up moderately; That if this were all the difference betwixt them, and the Roman Church, 
Si errorem alium non haberent, ●acilè pax concederetur, Bell. de Cleric. l. 1. c. 21.  they should soon be at peace. If my Refuter had so thought, this had not been his first Controversy: Both estates meet in Heaven. john the Virgin rests in the bosom of married Abraham; This inordinate heat therefore of prosecution rises from faction, not from holy Zeal: Hence it was that my Adversary cunningly singled out this point from many others, ranged in my poor Discourses, as that wherein (by Bishop jewels confession) he might promise to himself the likeliest advantage of Antiquity; and how gloriously doth he vaunt himself in the ostentation of Fathers and Counsels! which vain flourish how little it avails him, the process shall show; where it shall appear upon what grounds no small piece of Antiquity was partial to Virginity, and over-harsh to Marriage, 
B. Rhenan. Arg. lib. de exhort. Castit. Tertull.  as Beatus Rhenanus, a learned and ingenuous Papist confesseth. But this we may boldly say, that if those holy men had outlived the bloody Times, and scene the fearful inconveniences which would (after a settled peace) ensue upon the ambition, or constraint of a denied Continency, they had doubtless changed their note; 
Aeneas' Silvius. Panormitan. Disrandus. Peresius. Mantuanus. Erasmus, etc.  and with the moderate and wisest spirits of the later times, pleaded for that liberty which the Reformed Church now enjoyeth. The universal concession whereof (after the private Suffrages of worthy Authors) came to a public treaty in the Roman Church, 
Che Coll' introduction del matrimonio d'ye Preti si farelle, che tutti voltassetto l' affetto & am●r loro alle-moglie, a'figli, & per consequenz● alla cansa, & alla patria: onde cesserebbe la depen denza stretta che l' Ordine Clericale ha con la sede Apostolica, & tanto sarelbe. Conceder ill matrimonio a Preti, quanto distrugger la Hierarchia Ecclesiastica, & ridur il Pont. che non f●sse piu che Vescovo di Roma▪ Histor. Concil. Trid. pag. 662. Troppo feast, troppo teste, troppo tempeste. Vid. Dallingt. obseru. upon Guieciard. Doctor Mart. against Pr. M●●r.  amids the throng of their late Tridentine Council, and it is worth the while to observe on what grounds it received a repulse. If Priests should be allowed Marriage (say those wily Italians) it would follow that they would cast their affections on their Wives and Children, and consequently on their Families, & Countries, whereupon would cease that straight dependence, which the Clergy hath upon the See Apostolic; In so much as to grant their Marriages, were as much as to destroy the Hierarchy of the Church, and to reduce the Pope within the mere bounds of the Roman Bishopric. This was the plea of the Clergy; their thrifty Laity, (together with them) enemies to the blessing, (or, as they construe it, the curse) of fruitfulness, are wont to plead, Troppo teste: our Gregory Martin of old computes the prejudicial increase that might arise from these Marriages to the Commonwealth. It is not Religion, but wit that now lies in our way. Fond men that dare thus offer to control the wisdom of their Maker, and will be tying the GOD of Heaven to their rules of state. As it is, no Church in the whole World (except the Roman) stands upon this restraint, whereof the consequences have been so notoriously shameful, that we might well hope, experience would have wrought, if not redress of their courses, yet silence of ours. And surely, if this man had not presumed that (by reason of the long discontinuance of Popery) time had worn out of men's minds the memory of their odious filthinesses, he durst not thus boldly have pleaded for their abominable Celibate; The question whereof, after all busy discussions, and pretences of age, must be resolved into no other than this, How far the Tradition of a particular Church is worthy to prevail against Scripture: yea, and against other Churches. A point, which a very weak judgement will be able to determine.  
In this return of my Defence, I do neither answer every idle clause, nor omit any essential: This length of mine is no less forced than my Adversary's continency: wherein yet my Reader shall not sigh under an irksome loquacity. I presume to dedicate this unworthy labour to your Grace, whom this famous Church daily blesseth, as her wise, faithful, and vigilant Overseer, as a renowned Pattern of holy Virginity, and Patron of holy Marriage. The GOD of Heaven (whose watch you carefully keep) preserve you long to his Church; and make us long happy in your Grace, and you ever happy in his plentiful blessings. Such shall ever be the Prayers of  
Your Grace's most humbly devoted, IOS. HALL..   

THE ANSWER TO the Advertisement.  
THE man begins with a threat, I may not but tremble; He frights me with an universal Detection of my errors. It is almost as easy to find faults, as to make them. Perhaps the Time had been as well spent in tossing of his Beads: How happy a man am I that shall see all my oversights? My comfort is, that if my Tree were fruitless, there would be no stone thrown at it. In the mean while, how well doth the title of a Detector become him that hides himself? If he be not afraid or ashamed of his cause, let his name be known that his victories may be recorded. It is an injurious and base advantage to strike and hide; and after a pitched Duel to gall a fixed Adversary out of loopholes. If his person be upon some treasonable act obnoxius, it is hard if some of his names be not free: But if I must needs be matched with the shadow of a Libeler, I will so take him, as he deciphers himself: C. E. Cavillator Egregius; and under this true style of his, am ready to encounter him, and do here bid Defiance to an insolent, and unjust Adversary: And first let me tell my Caviller, this order is preposterous. If all my errors be at the mouth of the Press, how is it that two or three of them are thus suffered to outrun their fellows? Was his malice so big with these, that it could not stay the time of the common delivery? Needs must they be notorious falsehoods, that are thus singled out from the rest. Let them appear in their own shapes, ugly, (doubtless) and prodigious. 
Ex Decad. Ep. 3. Epist. 5. Reckoned out of Pappus his Enumeration; My Peace of Rome makes up 103.  The first is, That most shameless assertion that Bellarmine under his own hand acknowledges, 237. Contrarieties of Doctrine amongst his Catholics. Could the man but have patience, he should find above three hundred: What says my Detector to this? He hath not seen the severals, yet (like a brave man at Arms) he professes to kill his enemy ere he can appear; and tells us those 237. Contrarieties, are nothing but 237. lies in one assertion. That there are in them so many untruths I easily grant; for in Contradictions one part must needs be false; and Truth is but single: They are untruths then, (lies are too broad a word) but their own. My assertion shall only justify that they are told; let him take care for the rest: But they are not in points belonging to Faith and Religion, 
Object.  only in matters undecided, and disputable; The sequel shall try that shift; 
Sol.  Why do we forestall our Reader? Who knows not that there cannot be so many points fundamental? Let him take them as they are, I aggravate nothing; It is but only in such light chaff, as this; In the number and extent of Books Canonical, wherein DRIEDO, ERASMUS, GENEBRARD, CAIETAN, SIXTUS SENENSIS are acknowledged to oppose the rest; In the Pope's infallibility of judgement, wherein GERSON, ALMAIGNE, Pope ADRIAN, ECKIUS, HOSIUS, PIGHIUS, WALDENSIS are at quarrel; In the reach and original, of spiritual jurisdiction, wherein ABULENSIS, TURRECREMATA, FRAN. A VICTORIA, ALPHONSUS DE CASTRO, etc. proclaim to differ: what should I instance in more? It is but in the Pope's power in Temporalties, in the inerrablenesse of Counsels, whether particular confirmed by the Pope or General; in the authority of Counsels above Popes, in the force of Vows, in the worship due to Images, and the like. These and such other are the slight Trifles (since all cannot be weighty) impertinent to faith, wherein the Romish Doctors vary.  
Neither doth my assertion of their discord gall him more, then of our Unity: O the forehead of Heretics! I said that we in our Church differ only in Ceremonies, they in substance. Let him give leave to the contra-division of these two, and I will take leave to maintain the indivision of the Church of England, in the dogmatic points of Faith.  
This boldness, together with my eminent ignorance, makes him admire the scarcity of learned men in our Country, that could find no better Doctors to send to Dort-Conference then Master HALL.. To your grief, Sir, it was a Synod, and that noble and celebrious; Neither was it out of want that your silly Adversary was sent thither. This happy Island (which hath no blemish but that it yields such Vipers as yourself) abounds (as you too well know) with store of incomparable Divines; such as may set your Rome to school. So, as the Messengers of PYRRHUS long since called your Italy, a Country of Kings, 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  and Egypt was wont to be called the Country of Physicians, so may this blessed Island of ours justly merit the title of The Region of DIVINES. For me, I can be content to be base enough in mine own eyes, but if my disparagement shall redound to my betters, I dare tell him it is my comfort, that I was sent thither by a judgement no less infallible, then of PAUL the fifth. Let himself or any of his Eaves-dropping companions (to whom that place stood open) say wherein I shamed those that sent me. It was my just grief, that the necessity of my health, 
Necessitate propellente, proditio est ea lacere quae quis stu●ios● perfecerit. Chrysost. in i●la: utinam tolerassetis, etc.  yea of my life, called me off immaturely; but since either death or departure must be yielded to, others shall judge whether I went away more laden with infirmity, than (however unworthy) with approbation.  
But that second lie of mine is so loud, that all my Brethren of Dort must hear it, and they which were lately the Witnesses of my sincerity (gracing me with the dear Testimony of their approof) are now made the judges of my impudency. What Monster of falsehood will come forth? In my censure of Travel glancing at the jesuitical brag of their Indian Miracles (whereat their very friends make sport) I charge Cardinal Bellarmine for an avoucher of these Coozenages, who dares aver that his fellow Xavier, not only healed the Deaf, Dumb, and Blind, but raised the Dead, to which I add (whiles his Brother Acosta, after many years spent in those parts, can pull him by the sleeve, and tell him in his ear, so loud that all the World may hear, Prodigia nulla producimus.) This is my Indictment; Let me come to my Trial: Cast me, if ye can, ye reverend heads; I crave no favour. Where lies this so lewd lie, and malicious abuse? That BELLARMINE says thus of the jesuit XAVIER is not denied; That ACOSTA says thus of himself, and his fellow Jesuits, is granted; The first lie yet is, ACOSTA was never in the East-Indies at all, nor XAVIER in the West; and how then could ACOSTA spend many years in those parts? A perilous Plea! Who ever, I beseech you, mentioned either East or West? I spoke of the Indies in common; so did his BELLARMINE, from whom I cited this, 
Bell. de notis Eccles. l. 4. c. 14.  Claruit etiam in Indijs omni genere miraculorum, etc. Here is not one of the Indies mentioned, but both or either; If both lived in the Indies, though not in one Town, in one Country, in one Indie; wherein have I offended; whiles speaking of the Indies in general, I said that XAVIER and ACOSTA lived there? Yet this is one lie (he saith) and that so long a one, as that it reacheth as far as it is from the East to the West, from the Arctic to the Antarctick Pole; wherein I doubt not but your reverences will easily mark the skill of this learned Cosmographer. Some parts of those instanced Indieses differ not so far; not to speak of the small strait of Anian; the mentioned Region of Mexico is not above fourscore degrees from japan: Either your construction must favour him, or else this must go into the Book of oversights.  
The second lie is, that ACOSTA pulled BELLARMINE by the sleeve in this assertion, as if he denied those Eastern Miracles, which he elsewhere confesseth. Indeed, this sauciness were dangerous. The red Hat (you say) is fellow to a Crown. But shall I confess where I erred? My dull head could not conceive that God should be the God of the Mountains; and not of the Valleys; Of the East-Indies, not of the West; and yet be the jesuits' God in both: Especially, 
Ios. Acosta l. 2. de sal. Ind. c. 9  since the reason that JOSEPH ACOSTA fetches from the persons (which should be the subject of those Wonders) holds as equally for both Indies, as an Almanac made for the Meridian of one City, serveth the Neighbours.  
Hitherto than the Prologue of my infamous falsehoods, such, as if all my Writings could have afforded any equally heinous, these had never been chosen out to grace the front of his Detection; There must needs be much terror in the sequel.  
The rest of this storm falls upon our learned Professor, Doctor COLLINS; one of the prime ornaments of our Cambridge; the partnership of whose unjust disgraces doth not a little hearten my unworthiness. The World knows the eminency of that man's Learning, Wit, judgement, Eloquence; His Works praise him enough in the Gate; Yet this Malapert Corner-creeper doth so basely vilify him, for ignorance, silliness, prattling, rusticity, lying, as if in these only he were matchless. Indeed whom doth the aspersion of that foul hand forbear? Vilium est hominum alios viles facere? I appeal to all the Tribunals of Learning thorough the World, whether all Douai have yielded aught comparable to that man's Pen: whether he have not so 
* This Book of Doctor Coll. C.E. falsely insinuateth to have been suppressed. All Stationer's shops can convince him of a lie: Nothing ever fell from that learned hand, without applause.  conjured down his CACO-DaeMON JOANNES, that he never dares to look back into the light again; whether his EPHATHA be not so powerful, that if his Adversary were any otherwise deaf then the block which he worships, it might open his ear to the Truth: It angers C. E. to hear that Kings should not dye, or perhaps, that they whose heads are anointed, should dye by any other then anointed fingers; The sentence of his Cardinal and Jesuits both de facto, and de iure, of deposing and murdering Kings, is now beside our way; Only we may read afar off in capital Letters, Arise Peter, kill and eat: He knows the word, with shame enough. I will not so much wrong that worthy Provost, as to anticipate his quarrel; rather I leave the superfluity of this malice to the scourge of that abler hand; from whom I doubt not but C. E. shall smart and bleed so well, that he may spare the labour of making himself his own Whipping-stock on Good-Fryday.   

By reason of my necessary absence from the Press, many Errata have passed, whereof these are more obvious to my Reader, which I desire him to correct.  
Errata.  
PAge 29. Marg. Beatit. tit for filij. p. 31. l. 13. Ad, redundat. p. 35. l. 21. And, redundat. p. 49. l. 20. for Scholar read School. p. 52. Marg. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. r. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. p. 53. l. 9 affectly r. affectedly. p. 54. l. ult. pacem r. parem. p. 70. l. 18. Theu r. the. p. 76. l. ●. was r. uses. p. 81. l. penult. there r. thee. p. 85. Marg. prius r. p●ius. p. 97. l. 16. vigilantius, r. vigilantius: p. 101. l. 2. dare r. clear▪ p. 103. l. 17. now r. ●ow. p. 107. l. 21. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 r. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. p. 138. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 r. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. p. 1●9. l. 10. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. r. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. ibid. l. 2●. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 r. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. p. 150. l. 11. justly r. unjustly. p. 157. l. ult. prosecuted r. persecuted. p. 160 l. 12. somewhat r. somewhere. p. 164 l. 21. the redundat. p. 165 l. 2. Ochius r. Ochi●s. Ibid. l. ult. holy water r. hot water. p. 170 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 r. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. p. 184. l. 27. not redundat. p. 204. l. 10. ●●tting r. sitting. p. 243. l. 16. Missa r. Missam. p. 246. l. 5. Moreover, r. However. p. 277. l. 4. apostare, r. apostatare. p. 309. peremptore r. peremptory. p. 325. F rendundat. p. 335. interpraetabuitur r. interpretabitur.   

THE HONOUR OF THE MARRIED CLERGY maintained, etc. The first Book.  

SECT. I.  
Neither▪ my Charity, nor my Leisure, nor my Readers Patience, will allow me to follow my Detector in all his Extravagancies, nor to change idle words of Contumely with a Babbler. 
Declamationes ambitiosorum opera, otiosorum cibi sunt. Scal. Exer. 307.  His twelve first Pages, are but the light froth of an impotent Anger; wherein he accuseth my bitterness, and professeth his own. For me, I appeal unto all Eyes; if my Pen have been sometimes zealous, it was never intemperate: Neither can he make me believe, that my Passions need to appear to my shame, in calling Rome Prostitute, 
Prostituta illa Civitas.  or himself shameless; or in citing from the Quodlibet of his own Catholic Priests, the Art of his Jesuits, in 
a The particulars of this History he shall receive in due place.  Drurying of young Heirs. There is neither Slander, nor Shame in Truth. For himself, he confesseth to have sharpened his Pen, and to have dipped it (perhaps too deep) in Gall: But where his Ink is too thick, he shall give me leave to put a little Vinegar to it, that it may flow the better. In the mean time he shall go away with this glory, That a fouler Mouth hath seldom ever wiped itself upon clean Paper.  
After those waste flourishes, his thirteenth Page begins to strike; 
Refut. p. 13.  wherein he chargeth me with odious baseness, and insufficiency, in borrowing all my proofs from Bellarmine's Objections, dissembling their Solutions. The Man were hard driven, that would go to borrow of an Enemy. If all my Proofs be forealleged and fore-answered by his Bellarmine; to what purpose hath this Trifler blurred so much Paper? There (he saith) shall the Reader see all my Scriptures answered, the Doctrine of Devils explicated; there, that other, Let him be the Husband of one Wife, and, Marriage is honourable: Answered indeed; but as he said (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) answerlessely. Such clear Beams of Truth shine in the face of these Scriptures, that all the Cobweb Vayles of a Jesuits subtlety cannot obscure them.  
Their very Citation confutes their Answer. And where had we this Law, That if a jesuit have once meddled with a Scripture, all Pens, all Tongues are barred from ever alleging it? If Satan have mis-cited the Psalm (He shall give his Angels charge over thee) for Temptation, may not we make use of it, for the comfort of Protection? Briefly, let my Caviller know, that it is not the frivolous illusion of any shuffling jesuit, that can drive us from the firm Bulwark of the holy Scriptures. In this, they are clearly ours, after all pretences of Solution (as he shall well feel in the Sequel) and shall secure us against all humane Opposition. Before the disquisition whereof, somewhat must of force be premised, concerning the state of our Question.   

SECT. II.  
WHere, that all Readers may see, how learnedly my wise Adversary hath mistaken me, and himself; I must tell my Detector, That all his tedious Discourse sits beside the Cushion: 
Refut. p. 12.  For thus he writes of my Epistle (so as his whole Scope is to disprove the single life of Catholic Priests, and thereby to impugn our Doctrine in that behalf) upon which conceit, he runs into a large proof of the strong Obligation of Vows, the necessity of their Observation, the penalty and danger of their Violation, the praise of Virginity, the possibility of keeping it; and upon this very ground builds he the tottering Wall of his whole ensuing Confutation: insomuch, as (Pag. 130.) he says, That Marriage all times, without contrary Injunction, was lawful, is not denied; nor will it be proved in haste, That Priests, or such as had vowed the contrary, might use that liberty: and we say not, that Virginity is violently to be imposed on any, for it cometh by free election; but where the Vow is free, the Transgression is damnable. Thus he.  
Now let all indifferent Eyes see, whether the only drift of mine Epistle be, not to justify our Marriages, not to improve their Singleness; to defend the lawfulness of the Marriage of our Clergy, not to justify the Marriages of the Romish; to plead for the Marriage of our ecclesiastics, not of Popish Votaries.  
In express terms, I dis-avowed it. The intervention of a Vow makes a new state. Let Baal plead for himself. What is it to me, if the Romish Clergy may not be Husbands? or if, according to the French Proverb, They have a Law not to marry, and a Custom not to live chaste? Let it be their care whom it concerns; only I will have leave to speak for our own. Neither did I ever derogate aught from sacred Virginity, or lay it level (whether absolutely, or in all circumstances) with holy Matrimony; neither did I ever conceive of an impossibility of Continence in some persons: Take away these three Grounds, (which I utterly disclaim before God and Men) together with his petulant Rail, and idle Excursions; and what is become of the Volume of my great Adversary? Those three vast Paragraphes are shrunk into so few sheets of Paper, that a Mouse may as soon run away with his Book, as with his God.  
My Masters of Douai, if ye be the Superiors, under whose permission this worthy Work sees the light; for shame keep up your lavish Unthrifts of good time, and send us such Antagonists, as may not sane Occasions to empty their Note-Bookes. One dash of a Pen might thus justly answer the most part of this bloughtie Volume; wherein, like a Drunken Man, he makes a Fray with his own shadow, and like an idle Whelp, runs about after his own Stern. But, that he may not complain to be cast off too contemptuously, he shall receive a fair account or Particulars.   

SECT. III.  
THe Theme of my Epistle is plainly no other, than our Marriage censured; he answers, of Theirs. I would there were such cause of familiarity and entireness, that what is said of one, might agree to both: But the World knows we are two. If I say our Clergy is heartily loyal to their King; will he strait take it, of theirs? If, that our Clergy is willingly subject to more than the directive Power of their Sovereign, will he challenge this to theirs? The very Point which I purposely declined, he follows in hot chase. Even moderate Papists (they are the words of my Epistle) will grant us free, because not bound by Vow, not so far as those old Germans, pró posse & nosse: And yet all my Detectors' refutation still drives at the supposition of a Vow. What have we to do with Votaries? Our Clergy is free, whether as Clergy, or as ours: First, as persons Ecclesiastical (qua tales) For, Holy Orders, whether as Orders, or as Holy, are no hindrances of Matrimony, as Cardinal Caietan truly, and with him, the whole School. That which may be pretended for Impediment, is either a Vow annexed, or an Ecclesiastical Statute.  

b Ordini sacro debitum Continentiae non est essentialiter annexun. Dom. Soto. l. 7. q. 4. de jure & Instit.  As for the Vow, it is so far from being essential to holy Orders, as that it is made by 
c Vide Caietan. Opus●. de Castit. Act. Conc. Trid. Alia est causa Monachi, alia Clerici. Extr. de Voto, etc. Plura profitendo promittit Monachus, quam recipiendo sacrum Ordinem Clericus.  some learned Papists a difference betwixt the Obligation of their Religious, and their Priests, That their Religious are bound by a solemn Vow to single life in the very intrinsical nature of their Profession; their Priests only by a Church-Constitution, without Vow. And those that go further with their famous Cardinal, and teach, That it is expressly forbidden to Bishops, to ordain any, without the promise of single life, ground this but upon an Epistle of Pope Gregory 
d Dist. 28. Greg. Petr. Diacon. l. 1. ep. 42. Caiet. ubi supra. Polyd. Virg. etc. , a late and weak foundation; and besides hold, that their Vow is but semi-solemne, and accidentally incident into this Profession: for so much as here is neither a direct Exhibition of the Body to this purpose in the Offerer, nor a direct Consecration to this end in the Admitter; both which make up the solemnity of the Vow: upon which reason, according to them, a Religious Order, because it yields over the Body unto an estate repugnant to Matrimony, doth of itself, in it own nature, both hinder Marriage, and nullify it; not so the Ecclesiastical. To which we may add, That according to their own 
e Maldonat. sum. q. 15. art. 17. Iten Voti solennitas ex sola constitutione Ecclesiae est inventa, Matrimonij vero vinculum ab ipso Ecclesiae capite, rerum omnium condit●re, etc. Extra. Item, vinculum voti solennis, & solutio eius est ex statuto Ecclesiae. Antonin. Simplex votum apud Deum non minùs obligat quam solemn. Celestina. extr. qui Clerici, etc.  Doctors, Solemnity and Simplicity make no difference of the Vow before God, though before the Church. A distinction too slight, too newly upstart, to overturn an ancient and well-grounded Institution. Neither need we any better, or other proof of the inconnexion of this Vow with holy Orders, then that of their own Dominicus à Soto, 
f Non est de essentia Sacerdotis seruare castitatem quandoquidem. Graeci etiam ab Ecclesia Latina permittuntur in coniugij foedere permanere. Dom. Sot. l. 7. de jure. q. 4.  Non est de essentia Sacerdotis, etc. It is not of the essence of a Priest (saith he) to keep single; for that the Grecian Clergy are permitted even by the Roman Church to continue in the estate of Marriage. What can be more clear? If there were a necessary and inseparable connexion of a vowed Continency, with holy Orders, than would not, neither could the Roman Church acknowledge a true Priesthood, where it finds conjugal Society? Their act of allowance to the Greek Church, implies a fair independency of these two, which some of their clamorous Clients plead to have indivisibly coupled. So as now all the strength of this necessary Celibate is resolved into the power of a Church-Statute; and of what Church, but the Roman? All other Churches in the World, 
P. Venetus. Brocard. Lud. Vertomannus. jos. Indus. of the Christians in India and Cathaia, etc.  as of Armenia, Grecia, Syria, Ethiopia, Russia, the Georgians, etc. allow the conjunction of Ministry, and Marriage; and are so far from requiring a Vow of necessary Continency, that they rather erroneously prerequire a necessity of Marriage in the persons to be ordained.  

Non si quid Turbida Roma elevet, accedas. Pers.  It is only the Church of 
g Ecclesia statuto, nec universalis, sed Latinae. Espenc. l. 1. de Cont. c. 13.  Rome, the great and imperious Mistress of the World, that imposes the yoke of this Vow upon her Vassals. Imposes it, but ad libitum; so as her great Paramour (in whose vast Bosom that whole Church lies) may dipense with it as he lists. Hear that irrefutable discourse of Cardinal Caietan: His words bear weight, and are not unworthy the eyes of my Reader. 
Idcirco cum summus Pontifex possit ad libitum, etc. Caiet. Opusc. de Castitate.  Therefore (saith he) since the Pope may at his pleasure lose the Bond of that Statute, it follows necessarily, that if a Priest of the Western Church shall marry by the Pope's leave, without any reasonable cause, that such Marriage of his is a true Marriage, and the parties married are true Husband and Wife, and their Issue truly legitimate; although in so marrying, both the parties should sin mortally, in doing this act against the Vow of Chastity, without a reasonable, 
Dubia causa.  or at least a probable cause of their so licensing; and consequently, neither should the Pope himself be excused from mortal sin: But if there be any reasonable cause of dispensing with this Vow of Chastity; then the party thus marrying, and dispensed with, may both safely marry, and live in Marriage. And hereupon it appears, That since a reasonable cause of dispensing with this Vow of Chastity, may be not only the public Utility, whether Civil or Ecclesiastical, but any other greater good than the observing of that Chastity; it justly follows, that the Pope not only may, but with a safe Conscience may dispense with a Priest of the Western (or Roman) Church, that he may marry; even besides the cause of a public benefit. And therefore the determination of some hath been too presumptuous, in affirming, That absolutely, and without such cause, the Pope cannot dispense: whereas (as we have showed) the Pope may do it without any cause, though in so doing he should sin; and with any reasonable cause, without sin: and in both, the Matrimony stands firm. Thus he.  
Words that need neither Paraphrase, nor Enforcement. And how 
h Sedes clementissima quae nulli deesse consuevit dummodo albi aliquid vel rubei intercedat. Matth. Paris. Alius abusus est in Dispensationibus cum Constitutis in Sacr. Ord. etc.  usual the practice of this Dispensation hath been (that we may not rest only in Speculation) appears enough by the ingenuous complaint of their 
i Concil. Selector. Card. Si Sacerdotes non maturâ deliberatione se astrinxerunt videat Rom. Pont. qui circa haec solet dispensare quid sit agendum in particularius. Mart. Peresius, etc.  selected Cardinals, to Paul the third: Who cry down the abuse of these over-frequent Grants, which they would not have yielded, but upon public and weighty Causes; especially (say they) in these Times, wherein the Lutherans urge this matter with so much vehemence. Neither is it long since our kind Apostate M. Carier gave us here in England (from bigger Men than himself) an overture of the likelihood of this liberal Dispensation, from his holy Father of Rome, upon the conditions of our re-subiection. Would we therefore but stoop to kiss the Carbuncle of that sacred Toe, our Clergy might as well consist with holy Wedlock, as the Grecian. Oh, the gross mockery of Souls, not more ignorant, then credulous! Will his Holiness dispense with us for our sin? We can be dispensed with at home for his Dispensation. It is their Sorrow, that the World is grown wiser, and finds Heaven no less near to Dover-cliffe, then to the Seven-hills.  
And ere we leave this Point, it is very considerable, what may be a reasonable cause of this Dispensation: For those very 
k His votis astrictus, non potest Matrimonium absque Dispensatione i●ire, quam vis vehementissimis carnis stimulis urgeatur, etc. Sanc●. l. 7. de Matr. Imped. Disp. 11.  Jesuits, which hold the power of this Vow such, That the vehementest tentations and foils of the flesh may not be relieved with an arbitrary Matrimony, since the matter of this Vow is so important, and carries so much danger in the violation, as that it is not to be left to the power of a private judgement (though morally certain) whether Matrimony (all things considered) be in this particular expedient (for that may be fit for a man as a singular person, 
Authoritas superioris dispensantis expectanda est.  which is not fit for him as part of the community) yet they grant, 
Communis illa regula Doctorum & nominatim Caietani, nimirum quando ei q●i vovit, constat aliquid esse melius praeteritâ voti materia posse propriâ authoritate recedere. Sanch. de Matr. l. 7. de Impedim. Disp.  that this extreme perplexedness and violence of carnal motions, is a just cause of dispensation. What need we more? Though some 
l Angel. Matr. 3. Imped. 5. in fine vera cruz. 1. part. spec. art. 15.  Casuists be more favourable, and grant that in such cases, we may not only allow, but persuade Matrimony to the perplexed Votary: As Cardinal 
m Aen. Syl. Epist. 307. So Benedict. 12. gave Dispensation to Petrarch, Archdeacon of Parma, to marry, his Laura (too near him in blood, as it is thought) and, ex uberiore gratia, that he should keep all his Promotions, and receive yet more, on condition, that the said Benedict might have the use of Petrarchs' Sister, Matth. Parker. Defence. of Pr. Marr. ex Fasciculo Temp. & Platina, & vita Petrarchae, etc.  Aeneas Silvius (who was never less Pius, then when he was Pius) gives this hearty advice to his friend john Freiind, a Roman Priest, that he should (notwithstanding his Orders) help himself by Marriage; yet the former will serve our turn. If therefore those Superiors, which have all lawful and spiritual authority over us, shall have thought good, upon this reasonable cause, to give a generality of dispensation to all such of our Clergy, as shall not after all careful and serious endeavours, find themselves able to contain; allowing them by these lawful remedies to quench those impure flames: What can any jesuit or Devil except against this? This is simply the clear case of them whose cause I maintain.  
And yet further, Put case this had not been; if without the thought of any Romish Dispensation, the 
n Occidentalis (non Orientalis) Ecclesia castitatis obtulit votum, in Dist. 31.  Eastern Church never held it needful to require the Vow of single Life in the Ministers of the Altar, (they know the words of their own Gloss) why should not our Church challenge the same immunity; for (that from the general consideration of ecclesiastics, as such, we may turn our eyes to our Ecclesiastiques, in special) no Church under Heaven kept itself more free from the bondage of those tyrannous Impositions.  
The 
o Vid. postea. Epist. Girard. Eboracens. Arch. ad Anselm.  Clergy of this Island from the beginning, never offered any such vow, the Bishops never required it, for more (if any credit be due to Histories) than a thousand years after Christ. The great Champion of Rome, 
Huntingd. Fabian. Polydor. Virgil. vid. post. lib. 3.  Master Harding, was driven to say, They did it by a Beck, if not by a Dieu-gard, but could never prove it done by either. Neither is it more worth my Readers note, than my Adversary's indignation, that the wise Providence of God so pleased to contrive it of old, as that from the beginning of the first Conversion of this happy Island, it rather conspired with the Greek Church, then with the Roman; After the Grecian account we kept our Easter, in so much, as Beda tells us, that Pope john the fourth (about the year 637.) was fain to require of the English, that they would keep their Pasch after the Roman fashion; a difference (as it was then taken) of no small importance. The story of Saint Aidanus and Colmannus, may be herein an abundant witness: And for the Britons, Beda left them in the Close, both of his Life and History; fast to Greece, lose from Rome.  
After the Grecian form we celebrated the Sacrament of Baptism. After the Grecian Liberty we continued the Marriages of persons Ecclesiastical (through so many Centuries of years) without the scandal, without the contradiction of the Christian World; so as now we are but repossessed of the ancient right of our Forefathers, which the interposition of the Romish tyranny, for a while, injuriously debarred. Our Adversaries have wont to brand us for the uncharitable censures of our Forefathers, and can they think the successions of many Generations so faithless, that they made solemn Vows, for no other purpose, but only to break them? It was the question of the rich and precious jewel of England, to which his hardy Adversary had never the face to reply. My Refuters' forehead is stronger, with a weaker wit; Let him try here the power of his audacity. And if the Church of this Island, in the days of her forced servitude to the Roman See, maintained this liberty (as we prove in the sequel) and derived it to Posterity, how much more free shall it be for us to renew and enjoy it, after the just excussion of that servile yoke?  
Let now C. E. go waste good hours, and mar clean Paper in disproving the Marriage of Romish Votaries; and in the mean time come as near my Question, as Thames is to Tiber: What is this but to mock the Reader, and abuse himself? How much wiser is he grown in the process of his discourse, where he grants our Marriage, and denies our Clergy? from which weak and witless Hold, if we beat him not, in the due place, we suffer not enough from that rude Hand.   

SECT. FOUR  
Having then hitherto detected no error, 
Refut. p. 17.  no ignorance but his own; he now descends to untruths, and finds here so many mistake, lies, falsifications, that a Reader would wonder, by what Art I could couch so many of them in so small a room; and might verily think that I could outlie the Legends, and out-iuggle a jesuit. But ere I have done, these shall appear to be but the fictions of a passionate fugitive, the Man shall be cooler, I shall be innocent, and my Reader shall say, that if that forehead had not been so oft crossed, it could not have had so little shame.  
My first untruth is, that I avouch Saint Paul to call the single life of Priests, A Doctrine of Devils. Reader, Is my Detector awake? I said, That to maintain the unlawfulness of the Marriage of the Ministers of God, is, according to Saint Paul, A Doctrine or Devils; and now he would persuade the World, I said thus of the single life of his Priests. What can we make of this? That single life is a Doctrine? If not truth, yet let him learn to speak sense. But, that he may not always refute what I never affirmed; I must guess at what he meant: He would elude this charge, with that stale shift, worn out with the Pens of his Predecessors, that Saint Paul is to be understood according to Theodoret, of those which call Marriage execrable: 
Nuptias execrabiles, etc.  according to Saint Austin, that say, Marriage is evil, and of the Devils making: according to Clemens Alexandrinus, Of those that abhor Marriage: Of Manichees, and other Heretics, as Ambrose and Epiphanius, from which Catholics are so far, that they approve it for a Sacrament.  
First, the words of Saint Paul are (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) forbidding to marry, not condemning Marriage. Then, we know well, what the Tacians, Ebionites, Encratites, Montanists, Marcionites, Manichees, Adamites, and apostolics held of Matrimony. The Apostle brands them here: But what? Them only? Whiles he condemns them, doth he free those that partake with them? The Act is one, Forbiddance of Marriage; whether to some, or to more, or to all, S. Paul expresses not: The number doth not vary the quality. And if one be a part of all, then to condemn Marriage in some one kind of Men, can it be other than the partaking of an universal condemnation of it? This then only he hath gained, that some others have been deeper in this evil, than themselves. 
Object.   
But our Apostle speaks of them which condemn Marriage as evil in itself.  
We take what he gives: 
Answ.  No man's mouth shall condemn my Refuter, but his own. What was he that accused Marriage of Vnholynesse, out of Sancti estote; 
Be ye Holy. All things are clean to the clean.  of Uncleanness, out of Omnia munda mundis; of Contamination with carnal concupiscence: Was it not his own Pope 
p Innoc. Exuperio Tolos. Episc. Epist. 3. c. 1. Dist. 82. Proposuisti.  Innocentius? Who was he that interpreteth of Marriage, the Text Rom. 8.8. Those that are in the flesh cannot please God, that called the married Man no less than the Whoremonger, Sectatorem libidinum, Praeceptorem vitiorum; A follower of Lust, a teacher of Vice; that said, Marriage was a losing the reynes to Luxury, an inhiation after obscene lusts, was it not his Pope 
q Ead. Dist. c. Plurimos ad Himersun Tarraca, Ep. 1. Semove namque differentiam perversi nominis Connubij, unam candemque rem effecisti Adulterij & coniugi●, Laur. Valla, Canon. Eccl. Later. l. 1. de Volupt.  Siricius, the first Founder (if we may believe their now defaced Gloss) of forced Continency?  
Who was it that called Marriage a defiling with unclean society, and execrable contagion? Was it not his Council of 
r Vxorum aut quarumcunque foeminarum immanda societate, & execrabi●i contagione turpari, Couc. Tol. S. c. 5. cit. à C. E. p. ●31.  Toledo?  
Who was it that called Marriage (Spurcitias immundas) filthy beastliness? Was it not his 
s Vide Regist. Eccl. Wigo●niensis, postea. l. 3.  Saint Dunstan and Oswald? Let him construe this, and then tell me, what it is (if this be not) to condemn Marriage as 
t Essendo il matrimonio un stato Carnale: Pleaded in the Council of Trent, Histor. Concil. p. 662.  evil. Yet more, his own example shall convince him: He pleads out of Saint Austin, that this Text amongst others, intends to strike at the Manichees; Now, the Manichees allowed Marriage to their Auditors, that is (Analogically) their Laity, forbade it to their Electi, that is, their Clergy; So far approving it in their Layick-Clients, that no modest Pen may write 
u August. de Haeres. ad Quod-vult-Deum.  whence they fetch't their Sacramental Bread: Either then the Manichees must be excluded, or Papists must be taken in for company into this Doctrine of Devils. It is true, they miscall Marriage a Sacrament; So as we may well wonder at these two extremes in one Doctrine: and study in vain how the same thing should be Sacred in a Ceremonious inchoation, and in the real consummation morally impure, how a Sacrament should be incompatible with a sacred Person: These Sphyngian Riddles are for better Heads: With what Brow then can my Detector add, 
Refut. p. 19  That with Saint CHRYSOSTOME and Saint AUSTEN, they do but compare marriage, they do not condemn it; Only teaching Marriage to be good, Virginity better; with Fulgentius not so comparing Virginity to Corn, that they count Marriage Cockle? In this where should they find an adversary? But, if Luxury, Filthiness, Uncleanness, Contagion, Beastliness, Vice, Obscenity, be the styles of good, we can well allow them to the honour of Es. Virginity, and are content our Marriages should pass; for evil.   

SECT. V.  
MY second untruth (he saith) is, That I make the single Life of Priests the brand of Antichristianisme. Shameless Mouth! Where did I ever say so? My words are; 
Refut. p. 19, 20.  Were it not for this opinion, the Church of Rome would want one evident brand of her Antichristianisme. The life is one thing, the opinion another. Single life is good, the opinion of the necessity of single life, and the unlawfulness of the Married, is Antichristian. What can be more plain; yet this wilful Slanderer tells the World, that I make the profession of Continence, Antichristian: Whereas we do willingly profess, that true profession of true Continency is truly laudable; that the forceable imposition of it, as necessary to some state of men, savours strongly of that Man of sin: Now, let my Reader judge, whose untruths my Adversary hath hitherto detected.  
Neither can I eat that word of mine, unless I would renounce the Apostle; who seems purposely to decipher our Romanists by these lines. For, having immediately before described the condition of Bishops, and Deacons, with their Wives & Children (allowing them indifferently with others a married estate) he presently (as foreseeing that Point which would be most subject to contradiction) foretelleth, that the seducing spirits of Antichristianisme would forbid marriage; and this he fore-prophesies shall be done in the latter, or (as their Vulgar and Rhemists turn it) in the last Times; 
And if 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 may agree to all the Ages of the Church after Christ, yet most to the last, and that other addition seems to strengthen this sense.  and that by them, which shall speak lies in hypocrisy. Neither of which can so exactly agree to those first Heretics; who, as they were early in time, so also gross in their Doctrine; wherein there was more open impiety, then secret dissimulation.   

SECT. VI  
IN vain therefore doth my Refuter bring in Saint Paul, as an a-better of his forced Continence; whiles he saith of younger Widows, that, 
Refut. p. 21.  When they have begun to wax wanton against Christ, they will marry, having damnation, because they have forsaken their first faith. In which place (bolted before to the Bran by many Controversers) mine Adversary hath learned of his Bellarmine, to triumph above measure. This first faith (saith he) all the Fathers, without exception, understand to be a Vow, or Promise, made to God of Continence, in the state of Widowhood. It is a wide word (All the Fathers.) I had thought I had read in holy 
x L. 6. de Trinitate de Beat. tit. Dei ad Theophilum. Et instrumenta libertatis semel concessa per iterationem infirmatis.  ATHANASIUS, Vae vobis qui primam fidem baptismi coelitus institutam irritant facitis; Woe to you that make void the first faith of Baptism ordained from heaven. I had thought 
y Non sunt digni fide qui primam fidem Baptismi irritam fecerunt, Marcionem loquor & Basilidem. Hier. Prooem. in Epist. ad Tit.  Hierome had somewhere said, They are not worthy of belief, which have voided their first belief, MARTION I mean and BASILIDES; whom yet I never found condemned for the breach of any Vow of Continence. I had thought, the Author of the Interlinear Gloss, would not have crossed all the Fathers, in expounding it, Fidem baptismi; The faith of Baptism, which is indeed the first Faith; and the Apostle saith (The first) not (the former;) as for that other, which he imagines, a Vow of continued Viduitie, it was neither Faith nor First; let him instance (if he can) where our Apostle takes Faith for a Vow. Rather, as if he meant to expound his own word in this very Scripture, and this occasion, he clears this doubt, whiles he speaks of the wilfully improvident Man, that he hath denied the Faith, and is worse than an Infidel; and now in the same Context, he speaks of these perverted Widows, that they have forsaken the Faith.  
Much less is it the First, whether in Time, or Dignity: For, they could not have been Church-widdowes, if not Christians; and they could not be Christians, if they should have valued the Vow of their Widowhood above the vow of their Christendom; yea, so far was this from the first Vow, (if it had been one) as that it was the last of all; for according to them; their first Faith must be to their Husband, their second to Christ, in their initiation to Religion; their last in the vow of Widowhood; So as here is a feigned vow made Faith, and last made first; and all to uphold a crazy conceit of our Romanists, which hath no other ground but this one ambiguity. 
Refut. p. 20.  Chrysostome indeed calls it (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) ad Pactum; a covenant; but what covenant, or with whom, he expresses not; whether of Christianity, or of Widowhood, or of Ministration; Some of the others that followed him, spoke according to the Gloss which the corrupt conceit of the Times had set upon him.  
But what need my Refuter stand upon particular Authors (he says) when he may bring 214. 
Refut. p. 21.  Bishops all sitting in Council at Carthage, all agreeing in this exposition, pointing us to the fourth Council of Carthage (Canone ult.) His Gratian had wont to tell us (for the more Grace) that it was in the third Council of Carthage, Can. 4. Now he is taught to change his note; So doth C. E. with his Binius, tell us it was the fourth Council and the last Canon. We have reason to suspect it was in neither; The very style and manner of discourse so different from the rest of those brief Canons, and the fashion of those Times, carry in it open likelihood of Bastardy: It was an easy fraud to patch it to the end of those Canons; neither (which learned junius taught me first to observe) is it found among the Greek; than which there cannot be a worse sign.  
But that I may at once answer this vaunt of Actiquitie, and stop the mouth of this Caviller; Let me ask him whether those Fathers, whom he cities for this sense, do not take those young Widows for Votaries? If they do (as he cannot deny) how can these two stand together, That they should have damnation because against their vow, they would marry; and yet that the Apostle should wish them to marry? Can he imagine that Saint Paul would advise them to incur wilful Damnation?  
And if in this I should have dissented from the interpretation of much Antiquity, I should but take to myself the liberty of his Masters the Jesuits, with whom this is no novelty; for instance, his not unlearned, and bold 
z Maldonat. in Matth. 19.11.  Maldonate (as we shall see afterwards) upon a Text of this very Question, confessing the current of the stream of Antiquity, can come in, at last, with a Doctorly wipe of Adduci non possum ut sequar; I cannot go with them: This privilege is for none but the Fathers of the Society, 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  to control the Fathers of the Church.  
The state then of these Widows was shortly this: They being for their poverty sustained by Church-alms, upon 
* De his agit quae ad Ecclesiae stipem, vel ministerium recipiebantur eius sumptibus alendae, Espenc. de Cont. l. 4. c. 1.  condition of attendance on the Saints, whether sick or travelling, were to dedicate themselves to this service; but, some of the younger sort being inveigled by Infidell-lovers, were drawn to leave, not their Station only of their ministration, but their profession of Christianity: These had damnation most justly, for casting off their first Faith. Their marriage was accidentally faulty, because it forced them from their holy employment; Their Apostasy was absolutely and damnably sinful, in that they left Christ, and followed after Satan.  

Refut. p. 21, 22.  The inextricable Dilemma then of my Detector is easily answered; (I demand now of Master Hall, whether these young Widows, in breaking their Vows, did sin, or not; If they did not; why shall they have damnation; If they did sin (as indeed they did) then how is the Vow unlawful? how the brand of Antichristianisme?) Nothing can be more base then to beg the Question; What do we dispute, but whether any Vow were made? and if any, whether of Continence, or of Service? But why then shall they have damnation? for waxing wanton against Christ, not merely for marrying. If to marry, were to wax wanton against Christ, why would the Apostle have advised it them? in a word, for abandoning both their Office and Religion.  
Lastly, Who can but wonder at the face of our Adversaries, that dare bring forth so plain a witness against themselves? For; if the Vow of Continence be the first faith here spoken of, then may not any Woman by the Apostles charge make this Vow, till she be threescore years old; which, how is it at this day practised in the Romish Church? since, 
Bellar. de M●nachis, l. 2. c. 35. Can. 13.  and as the Caesar-Augustane Council, and the Agathense abated it to forty years, and the third Council of Carthage yet lower to five and twenty; so Pope Gregory fell yet lower to eighteen; 
Greg. l. 1. Epist. 48.  and some other Counsels yet lower to twelve; Although the Trent-Conference very liberally rise up to whole sixteen: 
Sess. 25. c. 15.  Either therefore let them grant that our Apostle speaks not of Votaries, or else let them follow his rule of the age of Votaries, that the World may think they have honest Nunneries; and let them confess their change presumptuous.  
Thus, I hope, This Gordian knot, that requires more strength than Master HAL●S learning, and a sharper edge than ALEXANDER'S sword to dissolved, or cut, is proved more easy than the knot of a Friar's girdle, which a very dull Whittle may cut asunder; and Es. appeal to all Scholars, proclaims him ignorantly confident.   

SECT. VII.  

Impossible. Unlawful.  IF it had not been for two poor words of mine (both yet misse-understood) I wonder how C. E. 
Refut. p. 23, 24.  could have discovered to the World his dexterity, in serving out his oftsodden Coleworts; the refuse of his Bellarmine, and Coccius. 
a From pag. 26. usque ad 90.  Threescore and four Pages, or more, hath he bravely spent in the vindication of Virginity, which never honest and wise man opposed. Let their Shavelings (I said) speak for themselves, upon whom their unlawful Vow hath forced a wilful and impossible necessity. The man is angry that I meddled with his crown; but if his hair had not been longer than his wit, this deep offence had never been; For, if he had taken my words, Cum grano salis, in the sense which they will only well bear: (Let such of their Shavelings, as upon whom an unlawful Vow hath forced an impossible necessity, speak for themselves) (none other need speaking for) he had found the sentence so particular, that it might have spared him both much spleen and work; since, neither was it in my heart ever to affirm the observation of this Vow impossible to any man, neither will he (I hope) hold that it is kept by all: It is not in the power of the Razor, together with the Hairs, to cut off inordinate affections; some Vow which cannot contain: Upon this supposition only, I called this necessity impossible, and this Vow unlawful; I cannot therefore but pity my passionate Detector, that he hath set himself all on a froth, in running this Wild-Goose chase alone, following nothing but his own fancy, whiles he pursues a certain chimerical Monster, that holds Continence utterly & universally impossible. And that he may the better repent him of this witless waste, and prevent the spoil of good Paper hereafter, let him know at once (which perhaps hath not hitherto been allowed him) what we hold concerning this Point. We do therefore from our hearts honour true Virginity, as the most excellent estate of life, which is incident to frail Humanity; Gerson hath taught us not to call it a Virtue, but it is Cousin-German to a Virtue; Neither do we think that the Earth affords any thing more glorious, than Eunuchisme for the Kingdom of Heaven; which is therefore commended by our Saviour, not as a thing merely arbitrary, by way of advice, but of charge to the able. Qui potest capere, capiat; In this we can gladly subscribe to Saint CHRYSOSTOME, Bonum est Virginitas, etc. Virginity is good, I yield it; and better than Marriage, I confess it. Secondly, every man therefore (not ecclesiastics only) should labour, and strive to aspire unto this estate, as the better, using all holy means both to attain, and to continue it: Neither do we think it any other then unblamable, that young Persons (not so much as advising with their own abilities) without all endeavour and ambition of so worthy a condition, leap rashly into the bands of Wedlock. Thirdly, though every man must reach for it, yet every man cannot catch it; since it hath pleased God to reserve this as a peculiar gift for some persons, not intending it as a common favour to all Suitors. Fourthly, those then, which are upon good trial conscious to themselves of Gods call to this estate, and his gift enabling them unto it, may lawfully make profession thereof to the glory of the Giver, and (if need be) may vow (God continuing the same grace unto them) an holy perpetuation thereof to their end; the observation whereof, if they through their own neglect shall let fall, they cannot be excused from 
b 
Qui statuit firmus in cord suo non habens necessitatem, potestatem habens suae voluntatis, & voverit continentiam Deo, debet eam usque ad finem totâ mentis solicitudine custodire, Aug. de sid. ad Pe●r.  
Solutio voti mala, Coniugium tamen bonum.   sin, or freed from censure: But those, which after all serious endeavours find nothing but weakness and uncertaynties in this behalf, shall sin, if they absolutely vow; shall not sin if they marry, in what condition of life soever; not sin in marrying, how ever their marriage may have faulty circumstances.  
Now, my Detector by this time in our assertions sees his own folly; if against this he can except aught, he knows where to find an adversary: In the mean time, he needed not to take it so highly, that in the Romish use of vows, I made mention of unlawfulness, of impossibility; unlawfulness in the making, impossibility in keeping; I am ready to maintain both, in respect of the indisposition, yea incapacity of the Votaries.   

SECT. VIII.  
But in speaking of the impossibility of some men's continency, it was not possible for my Refuter to contain himself from a scurrile invective against Luther, Pelican, Bucer; and it becomes him well. His Fathers, 
Refutat. p. 25▪ 26, 27.  like sepulchral dogs, tore up the graves of God's Saints, and gnawed upon their dead bones, and now this Whelp of theirs commingit cineros, Bedribbles their ashes.  
The heroical Spirit of Luther (for I cannot be flouted out of that word) hated the brothelry of their Cloisters; and chose rather (which galls them to the heart) to be an honest Husband, than a fornicating Friar. What did he other in this, than the holy Fathers have advised him, yea then he learned in their own School? for casting, perhaps, his eye upon the Index of their Aquinas, 
Votum Vergens in periculum personae, debet frangi securè, si dispensatio non possit haberi. lnd. 3. in Ag. voce votum.  he found there, Votum Vergens, etc. A vow tending to the danger of the person, may be securely broken, if a dispensation cannot be had: What other than all their more ingenuous Casuists would think fit to give way unto. If Luther would have still kept on his Cowle, & but have paid the fees of a Concubine, he had lived & died an holy Augustinian: but now all his crimes sink down out of sight, una uxor supernatat (as that Father said) his wife only floateth: and poor honest Katherine Bora hath made more noise in their Papers, 
Plus habet hie luxuria quam castitas. Gloss. extrau. de Bigam. c. Hieron. ad Ocean. Et Lupanaria thalamis praeferentur. Beatus vi● cui non imput●uit dominus uxorem. Refut. p. 28.29.  than ten thousand of their Courtesans. Neither needs this man any other Inscription on his grave to make him odious, than this, Here lies the man that held marriage better than fornication. If now Doctor Luther in a vehement detestation of the impurity of their holy Stews, after the homely plainness of a blunt Germane liberty, used some over-broad speeches to express his own freedom, and their abominations; what is this to us? If we honour the man, must we hold his pen impeccable? This is enough to maintain in their Vicegod of the Seven hills. For us, we have sworn into the words of no Master, but that One in heaven, the eternal Word of his Father. But this we dare say, that this Adversary's Truth is no more in fathering all these reports upon Luther, then in fathering Luther upon an Incubus.  
One of them tells us, that a Devil begot him: 
Cocbleus.  Another tells us, that (by his own confession) a conference with the Devil begot his opposition to the Mass: Another, 
d Peter Frarin. Lovan. out of Stoltius in Somn. Luth.  that he was in league and favour with Solyman the great Turk, who by his instigation was drawn to war upon Christendom: Another, 
e Io. Fowler in the Translat. of Frarines' Inuective. Marg.  that Luther would have been a King alone, and that from him sprang the rebellion of Muntzer: Another, 
f Vide Fulk. ag. Frar. 16.  that Leonard Knoppen was his Bawd, and that his Katherine, for two years together after her stealing away, was debauched by the Scholars of Wittenberg: And now lastly, comes in that malicious Apostate (which should rather have changed the false name of justus, 
g justus Baronius, formerly called Caluinus.  than the over-worthy name of Caluinus) and avouches, forsooth, that LUTHER was yesterday a Monk, to day contracted, to morrow an Husband, the next day a Father. Go on, ye brazenfaced Parasites of Rome, Lies and Blood may bring you into the Calendar.  
But this last, my Detector countenances by the testimony of Erasmus, who, in a Letter of his to his friend Daniel Mauchius of ulme's, delivers the same Story in more words. Reader, be entreated to look over that large Volume of Erasmus his Epistles, and if there be no such man found there (as there is not) no such Letter, judge what to think of these men's fidelity. Yea to the plain contrary, 
Tom. 2. Lat. Colloq. Tit. de morbis Lutheri.  my Detector (having not memory enough for a true Liar) in the Page 173. Upon another occasion, contemptuously citing Luther's brood out of his own Works, confutes this spiteful Fiction. Anno 1525. junij 12. uxorem duxi, etc. In the year, saith he, 1525. on the 12. of june, I married; In the year 1526. my eldest Son JOHN was borne: In the year 27. my daughter ELIZABETH, and so the rest. Either then my man hath a new Calendar of his own, which contrary to the Gregorian begins the year on june 13. or else Luther was not a Father the next day after he was an Husband. But what do I trouble my Reader with this idle Scoganisme? Scolds or jesters are only fit for this combat.  
As for those excessive speeches of comparison, 
Refut. p. 28.29.  whereby Luther points forth the necessity of carnal actions, they are spoken only of such persons, as have not the gift of continency; 
Lib. 3. contr. Gent c. 126. Omnibus animalibus per●ectis in●st naturalis inclinatio ad coniuncti n●m carnalem. Item, Cum muliere semper esse, & illam non cognoscere, maius est quam mortuum suscitare. joan. de sanct. Geminiano. Simil. l. 2.10.27.  whom natural inclination (by which they are led) carries (without an higher restraint) importunately unto these desires: wherein he says not much other than their own Saint, AQVINAS, Omnibus animalibus, etc. In all perfect living creatures there is a natural inclination to carnal conjunction.  
But when Luther speaks of men blessed from above with this gift, C. E. might have heard him in another strain; pleading both the possibility and worthiness of this condition. As in his Commentary upon the 
h Luth. in Ps. 128. vers. 3. Vnus idemque spir. etc.  Psalm 128. vers. 3. (to give one for all) thus he saith, For one and the same spirit hath distributed his gifts to some after one manner, and to some after another, etc. Let them therefore, to whom it is given to receive this, abide in their single life, and let them glory in the Lord: On the other side, let them that are not so strong, but know and feel their infirmity, that they cannot live both chaste, and out of Matrimony: Let these, I say, consider more their own infirmity, than the discommodities and troubles that belong unto Matrimony. Thus he gravely and holily.   

SECT. IX.  
NOw to follow my Adversary in particulars: Whereas all the world sees, that the unlawfulness of their vow depends upon the inability of performance; 
Refut. p. 29.  he, like a true Artist, begins first with the unlawfulness. It is well that all these sheets of Paper which he hath spent in this point, may serve for some necessary use; this which he hath put them to, is foolishly superfluous.  

Refut. p. 30.  If the vow of Chastity be unlawful (he saith) it must be either in respect of the vow, or the matter vowed; Not the first, because vows in general are lawful; which he will prove out of Scripture, and Fathers. Idle head! Who ever denied it, but the exploded Lampetians? His own Cardinal could have taught him, 
Bell. l. 2. de Monachis c. 15. Ad negotia buius vitae expeditius peragenda aut ad vitanda peccata, aut ad alios bonos fines. Refut. p. 32, 33, 34, usque ad 42.  that Luther and Calvin approve the vowing of things commanded, first; and then of things not commanded too, to the avoiding of Sin, or other good purposes; Not the second, which he will prove by many arguments; some of them from the Fathers, extolling virginity, and comparing it with the state of Angels, and preferring it before marriage: And who eever thought otherwise, except jovinian? and perhaps not he: And at last, after some severe examples of penance enjoined to fornicating vowbreakers, by Chrysostome and Basil, to incontinency and rape, 
Refut. p. 43. usque ad 48. & pag. 54. usque ad finem Parag. 1. Refut. p. 45.  by the civil Laws (as if these concerned us so much as themselves) he descends to this challenge; Let Mr Hall (if he be able) produce us some proof, although but one classical authority of any one ancient Writer, where he hath ever persuaded such as have solemnly vowed chastity, to use Marriage as a means to overcome temptations, and he shall have some excuse for calling it a filthy vow; and his heroical LUTHER for terming it a diabolical thing: So he. I take him at his word; only let him not fly forth upon the shift of solemnity, which their Scholar lately hatched; That were to seek grey hairs in infancy; First, I bring forth that famous place of Saint Cyprian in his Epistle written both in his own name, and his fellow-Bishops to Pomponius, concerning some vowed Virgins which were found in bed with men, whereof one was a Deacon; of which Virgins he with his Brethren pass this sentence, 
k Epist. l. 1. Epist. 11.  Quod si se ex fide Christo dicaverunt, etc. If they (saith he) have faithfully dedicated themselves unto Christ, let them without all deceit persevere in the course of Chastity, 
Pudicè & castè sine ulla fabula perseverent.  and so courageously and constantly expect the reward of their Virginity; Si autem perseverare nolunt, vel non possunt, etc. But if either they will not, or cannot persevere, it is better that they marry, 
Melius est ut nubant, quam in ignem delicijs suis cadunt.  then by their wantonness fall into the fire; Let them give no scandal to their Brethren and Sisters. What could Luther or Calvin write more directly? So that Erasmus notes in the Margin, Etiam virginibus sacris permitit nubere; Here CYPRIAN permits even holy Virgins to marry. 
l Lib. 2. de Monach. c. 34.  BELLARMINE'S shift hereof is ridiculous, That Cyprian, by occasion of some Virgins which after their vow behaved themselves dishonestly, advised others, that if they had not a firm purpose of persevering, they should not vow, but marry; whom we remit to the check of his own Pamelius, of his conscience; Indeed, what is this but to mock both the Author, and the Reader? For doth Cyprian at all vary the persons of whom he speaks? Doth he not speak plainly of Virgin's devoted to Christ? And what persevering could there be but in that which they had undertaken? And what had they undertaken, but a dedication of themselves to Christ? What is this, Reader, but willingly to try his oars against the stream of Truth?  
To the same purpose is that noted sentence of Hierome, (
m Hieronymus impendio semper virgini●ati favens, & ob id nuptijs, iniquior. Erasm.  though otherwise none of the best friends to marriage) who speaking of Virgins, ascribed by their vow into the celestial Family, adds, Quibus apertè dicendum, etc. 
See the Scholia of Erasmus upon the place.  Whom we must openly charge that either they would marry, if they cannot contain, or, that they would contain, if they will not marry. We know the elusion of this place also; That Hierome speaks of Virgins in purpose, not in vow; But whose name, I beseech you, was defamed by their lewdness? or, what was the heavenly and Angelical Family, whose glory was blemished herewith? Was it of any other then professed Virgins? Or could the act of a purposed Virgin only, shame Virgins professed? To the same purpose is the advice of 
n Basil. l. de virg.  Basil and 
o Epiphan. Heres. 61. Melius est 〈◊〉 pe●ca● habere qu●a 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 〈…〉 I would have the ve●g●r Widows to marry. Refut. p. 51.  Epiphanius.  
Add to these an elder than they all, Tertullian, & with him all those Fathers, which interpret Saint Paul's (vo●o iuniores nubere) of vowed widows; All which must needs hold, that our Apostle allows marriage for the lawful remedy of unable Votaries.  
Let not this malicious Masse-Priest then turn us over to his Tyberianus, or jovinian, for the first founders of our opinion, and practice, which we received from no other than that divine Archheretic, that sat at the feet of Gamaliel; from no other, than the holily-hereticall Fathers and Martyrs of the Church; As for those two misalleged Authors, to whom he ascribes us, his skill doth palpably fail him in both: For Tyberianus, he being suspected of Priscillianisme, wrote affectly against that heresy, at last foully fell to that, which he disclaimed; whereon it was that Hierome says, Canis ad vomitum, not upon the marriage of his daughter. And for that particular fact, it is no less mistaken. Hierome says only, 
He married his daughter, being a Virgin dedicated to Christ.  Filiam virginem Christo devotam, matrimonio copulavit; but Sophronius (who it seems well know the Story) turns it (
o Coegit ut nuberet. Vide Erasm. Scholar in Hier. Catalogue. Scriptor. Eccle. So Syagria in Greg. Epist. mar●to violenter sociata.  〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉;) compelled his daughter (a consecrated Virgin) to marry. A foul fact, which we detest no less, than the contrary practice of those Romanists, who compel their daughters (which would marry) to be consecrated Virgins. It is then no less false that Tyberian gave beginning to us, than it is true that Tyburn hath given a just end to some of them. For jovinian, what is he to us? when neither our practice was his, nor his opinion ours. Not our practice; for he lived and died a single Monk. Not his opinion; How can we be said to admit marriage to an equal share of merit with virginity, when we deny merit in either? Again, that Eunuchisme (not in itself, but) for the Kingdom of Heaven, is better than it we doubt not; But when 
p Quamuis universaliter dicatur hamini melius esse continentiam seruare quam matrimonio v●i, tamen alicui hoc melius est. Thum. l. 4. Contr. Gent.  these two are reduced to their subjects; their value is according to their use. Chrysostome could say 
r 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Chrys. ad Hebr. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, etc. Use marriage with meet moderation, and thou shalt be the first in the Kingdom; And Gregory Nazianzen (besides that he saith of his Sister Gorgonia) when he commends the children of Bazil the elder, 
s Greg. Naz. Orat. In laudem Basilij Or. 22.  tells us, some of them so used their marriage, that it was no hindrance to them, quo minùs ad pacem virtutis gloriam aspirarent; that they might not aspire to an equal glory of virtue with the Virgins; and made these two rather different kinds of life, than manners of living. Saint Chrysostome then, and Nazianzen, shall usher us into the School of jovinian. 
Hier. l. 2. in jovin.  And if jovinian were Formosus monachus, crassus, nitidus, etc. A fair, fat, spruce Monk (as he saith;) Me thinks he should rather have hoped to match him in their Sybariticall Cloisters, where they abound with meat, and drink, and ease, then in our laborious Clergy; 
Resut. p. 52.  It is happy for us, and for that reverend Archbishop Marcus Anton. de Dominis, that this railer can object nothing to him but an harmless load of corpulency. It moves their spleen enough, that this learned Prelate hath honoured our Island with a Dalmatian Pall; Their cause feels that he can (notwithstanding) pass into the Pulpit: What speak they of this? when, to their sorrow, they see he could pass over the Alps to leave Rome. This Beagle, and his bawling Beyerlinck, and the kennel of Sorbon, may bay at him, but not one of their Bandogs dare fasten.  
But why do I suffer this babbler to lead me out of my way? 
The residue of this Paragraph is spent in the Canon and Civil Laws against vow breakers. Quid ad Rhombum? Refut. p. 54, 55, 56.  What is all this sleeveless discourse to a man that never said, never thought every vow of this kind unlawful, nor every breach of such vow sinless? When he takes me with this Tenet, let him load me with authorities; Till then, his now-frivolous papers may serve for any honest use.   

SECT. X.  
NO less wise and proper is that other discourse of Impossibility: For, to make short work; 
Refut. p. 57, 58, 59  That no man can contain (though it be given him) I never said; That any man may contain (though it be not given him) either he will not say, or if he do, he hath Christ for his Adversary. Why do we blot Paper? How the performance of this Vow is not possible only for all, but 
p Maius miraculum est de propria carne fomitem eradicare luxuriae, quam expellere immundos spiritus de corporibus alienis, joan. Brom. sum. Praedic. cap. Castit.  facile also, (which he contendeth) the issue proves too well, and the World blushes to see it. Let it not be too much burden to his patience, that I said, Some of their Shavelings cannot hold; He knows what their Gloss upon Gratian said of old (though now they have pulled out that tongue for blabbing) 
q Distinct. 81. Maximianus.  Communiter dicitur, etc. It is commonly said that a Clerk ought not to be deposed for simple fornication, cum pauci sine illo vitio inveniantur; Since there are but a few found without that vice. This they have wiped out of the Book, but the Margarita Decreti (as happy is) holds it still: And their honest 
r Consult. Art. 23. And Bellarm. Qui continent quos notum est non esse multos, de Monach. l. 2. c. 3.  Cassander▪ yet more plainly, Vix centesimum invenias, you shall scarce find one of an hundred free: And, if need were, I could tell him out of our old 
s Io. Bromiard. sum praedic. voce Luxuria.  Bromiard, what the voice of a Ghost said to a Priest of theirs, but I will not; only thus he shut up; That there came daily such store of Priests to Hell for their Luxury, in plain English, Lechery, that he had not thought there had been any left upon earth. And to these I could add the jerks of their zealous Preacher, 
Zelantissimus Praedicator. Tit. Contion.  Friar Menot, who fetches the threefold shame of their Clergy out of the Aue Mary; The second whereof (though the first in mischief) is, In Mulieribus. But what should I fill Carts with such stuff, as I easily might, when the salacitie of the Romish Clergy, 
Cauda salax sacripculorum in proverbium abyt.  is grown to be the Proverb, and scorn of the World? Let not my Refuter scare us with the threat of recriminations, we know that in all Professions, there may be found lewdness enough. But, when all is done, we shall justify that which worthy B. jewel said long ago, Scortum apud nos modestiùs vivit, quam apud vos PENELOPE; Our Strumpet is their Penelope. What needed he therefore to upbraid us with that frump of ERASMUS (Que malùm est ista tanta salacitas, & c? 
Refut. p. 61. ) when he knows how easily we can over-pay him in this Coin? Was it not Erasmus, whose word it was (which Master Doctor Collet, Deane of Paul's, was wont to have familiarly in his mouth.) 
t 
Erasm. Apolog. pro declam. Matrimonij. Ibidem Erasm. Englished thus,  
And I would they were gelded indeed; which hide their vicious courses with the glorious name of Eunuchisme; more freely following their filthy lusts, under the shadow of chastity. Neither will my modesty suffer me to report, into what shameful courses they fall many times, which resist nature, etc.  
Ex vita Sacerdotum palàm dedecorosa, palàm contemnitur eorum doctrina; & inde perit fructus verbi Dei. Quod si iis qui non continent concederetur matrimonium, & ipsi vi●erent quietiùs, & populo cum authoritate praedicarent verbum Dei, Ad Christoph. Epis. Basil.   Nunc is est rerum ac temporum status, ut nusquam reperias minus inquinatam morum integritatem, quam inter coniugatos?  
Now such is the state of the times, that you shall never find less corruption of manners & life, then amongst the married. Was it not Erasmus that said▪ Atque utinam verè castrati sint, quicunque suis vitijs magnificum castrationis praetexunt titulum, sub umbra castitatis turpiùs libidinantes, etc. Neque enim mei pudoris esse puto commemorare, in quae dedecora saepe prolabantur qui naturae repugnant, etc. This is enough to let my Detector see, we need not die in his debt for Erasmus.   

SECT. XI.  
But it is no arguing from the Act to the possibility. These did not contain, but they might. What? whether it were given them or no? So seems mine Adversary to hold, whiles he censures Luther, for saying, that this is God's gift; 
Refut. p. 60.  and that here we can only take, and not give. Yea, but if they had asked, it would have been given them. Ask, and it shall be given: so says my Refuter, 
Refut. p. 74.  out of Origen, none of the best Interpreters; so his Masters the Jesuits; Sufficit promissio generalis, saith 
* Bell. l. 2. de Mon. c. 31.  Bellarmine. By this Rule, if the Cardinal should but pray for the Popedom, the three Crowns must come tumbling upon his Head; and if C. E. should but pray for a red Hat, it would have Mercurial wings and come flying to Douai; I would he had but prayed for Wit, he had then perhaps been silent: Not considering, that Virginity, and Honour, and degrees of Wit (though excellent in their kinds) yet are such things, as without which we may enjoy God, and go to Heaven, and therefore that perhaps God sees it best for us to ask them, and go without. What can be more plain than that of 
* Hieron. adverse. jovin. l. 1.  Hierome; If all might be Virgins, Christ would never have said, Qui potest capere, capiat; Neither would the Apostle so timorously have persuaded to Virginity; Could he ever suppose that Virginity might be had without prayers: and yet he says, If all might be Virgins, etc.  
Who would not have thought, that this one Text of our Saviour, should have stopped all mouths? His Disciples had said; If thus, it is good not to marry: He replies; All men cannot receive this Word, save they to whom it is given; and concludes, He that is able to receive it, let him receive it. Yet here, see the forehead of a jesuit: Maldonate upon the place dares say thus: 
* Mald●n Mat. 19.11. Omnes ferè, etc.  That he saith, all men do not receive this Word, all Interpreters (almost) do so expound it, as if the sense were; All men cannot perform this which you say, that is, Want a Wife, because all have not the gift of Chastity, but only those to whom it is given; for which he cities only Origen, Gregory Nazianzen, Ambrose, concealing the rest of his, Almost all; yet after, in the same Page (forgetting himself) solus D. Augustinus, etc. Only Saint Austin uses (saith he) to teach, that this gift of Continency is not given to all, but to some only. It is happy yet that herein we are granted to err with Saint Austin; and yet, ere long, we take in Origen, Nazianzen, Ambrose, Hierome, and at last, overtake, Ferè omnes; so as we need not fear solitariness in this error. But what says the jesuit to this good company? Adduci non possum ut sequar; 
I cannot be persuaded to follow them.  No marvel: Mark, how well the Jesuits follow JESUS himself: JESUS says, All men cannot receive this: The Jesuits say, 
* Omnes continere posse si velint, Bellar. l. 2. de Mon. c. 31.  All men may receive it. JESUS says, It must be given from God; The Jesuits say, 
a Et donum Dei esse & tamen in potestate, & arbitrio hominis positum, ibid. Qui potest habeat secum aurum hoc Virginitatis; Qui minùs nuptiarum argentum excipiat, Chrysost. in 1. Tim. 4.  It is so the gift of God, that it is in the power of Man. How can we look to escape their Opposition, when they dare thus contradict their Saviour? For me, I shall be still in this Heresy, That all their Priests, and Monks, and Nuns cannot contain: And his 
b Bonaven. in Opusc. de processu Relig. p. 120. Sumptuosa Turris est, & verbum grande quod non omnes capere possunt, Bern. de Contempt. Mun. Nam si generale esset, quod ●o●est unus, & omnes possunt, Primas.  Bonaventure shall bear me out, who teaches me, that to the third degree of Chastity (requiri privilegium singular) there is a singular privilege required; for that it seems to be above the pitch of natural possibility, to live in the Flesh, and not to feel the faults of Flesh.   

SECT. XII.  
AS for his holy Sisters at Brussels, the touch of whom hath so much enfired his Ghostly zeal; I intended no quarrel to them in particular; 
Refut. p. 60, 61.  They may be as honest, as their Champion is malicious. What I said, was out of the supposition of the common frailty; And if he have been so much in their bosom, as to know they never repented them, it is well known, that others have; whose Song hath been in the hearing of those I know: What shall I do, shall I die, and never married be? Like unto those Vestals, Faelices' nuptae, moriar nisi nubere dulceest. As for the mischief following hence, the visible monuments of so many murdered Infants (if not in Gregory's Ponds) in the very place where I now live and 
c Vid. Histor. Radulphi Bourne Augusta●ensis Eccl. Abbatis, qui testatur se vidi●e, in quadam ●n● in Mo●iali● Ab●tia, quae Pro●nes d●c●batur, mul●a ●a●rum ossa, i saque corpo●a integra ibi reper●ebantur, Antiq. Brit. Reu●c. Clem. 5. Papae, ex ●dam. Murim.  elsewhere, convinces it too much. But 
d Refut. p. 61.  my example (iwis) shall clear his Vestals of Brussels, and all other Votaries. Master HALL. was absent (some three Months) in France; Flesh is frail, Temptations frequent (add to these his body sickly, and well-near to death) yet both then, and before his marriage, he would take it in great scorn (as well he might) to be suspected for dishonest. True, and might defy Men and Devils in that challenge. What of this? It follows then: If Master HALL. could for so long together live a chaste life, why no more? Why not always? Demonstratively concluded: As if a man should say, C. E. doth speak some wise words, how can he at any time write thus foolishly? A Christian hath sometimes grace to avoid a Temptation, why not always? Why doth he not keep himself ever from sinning? A good Swimmer may hold his breath under the Water for some portion of a Minute, why not for an Hour? why not for more? A devout Papist may fast after his Breakfast, till his Dinner in the afternoon, therefore why not a Week? why not a Month? why not so long as Eve the Maid of Meurs?  
The Spirit of God (if at least he may be allowed for the Author of Continency) breatheth where, and when he listeth; and that God which makes marriages in Heaven, either averts the hart from these thoughts, or inclines it at his pleasure. Shortly, The great Doctor of the Gentiles had never learned this Divinity of Douai, whose charge is, 
e 1. Cor. 7.5.  Defraud not one another, except with consent for a season, that ye may give yourselves to Fasting and Prayer: And again, Come together, that Satan tempt you not through your incontinency: He only wanted my Monitor, to jog him on the Elbow, as here: What needs all this fleshliness? if they can safely contain, whiles they give themselves to extraordinary devotion, why not more? Why not always? It is pity, that no man would advise the Apostle, how great a gap this Doctrine of his opens to all lasciviousness. 
Refut. p. 65.  Let me but have leave to put Saint Paul's Name in stead of mine, into this challenge of my Refuter, and thus he argues.  
If Saint PAUL say that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, 
Refut. p. 65.  for a while they are able to live chaste, but not for any long while; I ask again, How long that while shall endure? and what warrant they have therein for not falling? seeing it may so fall out, that in the while appointed, they may be more tempted than they shall be again in all their lives after: How saucy would this Sophistry be? how shameless? The words are his; only the Name is changed; what the elect Vessel would answer in such a case for himself, let C. E. suppose returned by me.   

SECT. XIII.  
THe Refuter hath borrowed some Weapons of his Master Bellarmine, and knows not how to wear them. It would move any man's disdain to see, how absurdly those poor Arguments are blundred together; We must distinguish them as we may.  

Refut. p. 63.  First, Saint Paul condemns the Young Widows mentioned; therefore he overthrows this impossibility of containing. I answer: Saint Paul advices the young Widows to marry, and admits none into the Church-book, under threescore years▪ therefore he establishes in some, this impossibility.  

Refut. p. 63, 64.  Secondly, Saint Paul advices Timothy to live chaste. Reader, tell him the word is (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) which their own vulgar, 1. Tit. 8. turns, Sober; and in 2. Tit. 5. Prudent; But, to grant him his own Phrase; Can my Detector descry no difference betwixt Chaste and Single? Did he and his Fellows never hear of a conjugal Chastity? So they have still wont to speak, as if Chastity were only opposite to Marriage, as if no Single life could be unchaste. His Espencaeus might have taught him that Verse in VIRGIL, Casta pudicitiam seruat domus: and he might have heard of that Roman law of Vestals, Castae ex castis, purae ex puris sunto; yea, his Erasmus might have taught him yet further, 
f Eras. Apol. pro declam. Matr. Secundas gradus Virginitatis est Matrimonij casta dilectio, Opus Imperf. in Matth. Refut. p. 64. Ab his duabus Columnis crede mihi difficile duellor. Ibid ex Bernardo C. E.  E diverso nihil prohibet in coniugio Virginitati locum esse; that even in Marriage there may be Virginity.  
Thirdly, The Fathers exhort to Virginity; especially Saint Ambrose and Saint Austin. Let him tell this to them that know it not, to them that dislike true chastity in Virgins, not to them that condemn unchasteness in a pretended Virginity.  
To what Virtue do not the Fathers exhort? yet never supposing them to be within our lure. Lastly, where is the shame of my Refuter, that cities Austin as the Man on whom he depends for this universal possibility of Continency: when his own Maldonate professes that Saint Austin is the only enemy to this Doctrine?  
Fourthly, 
Refut. p. 64.  Where there is impossibility or necessity, there is no sin, no counsel; as no man sins in not making new Stars, in not doing Miracles. A stale shift, that oft sounded in the ears of Austin and Prosper from their Pelagians; The natural man in this depravedness of estate cannot but offend God, therefore he sins not in sinning: Counsel given shows what we should do, not what we can. 
g Aug. l. de Nat. & Grat. c. 43.  jubendo admonet, etc. saith Austin; In commanding, he admonisheth us both to do what we can, and to ask that which we cannot do. In Continency then our endeavour is required for the attaining of that which God will give us; God never employed us in making of Stars; Though my Refuter is every day set on greater Work, then making of him that made Stars. Lastly, it is true, there is no sin in marrying, there may be sin (after a vow) in not using all lawful means of Chastity: The Fathers therefore supposing a 
h Post multam deliberationem & considerationem, etc. Basil.  prerequired assurance of the gift, and calling of God in those, whom mature deliberation, and long proof had covered with the veil of Virginity, do justly both call for their continuance, and censure their Lapses.  
Fiftly, 
Refut. pag. 65.  Upon this ground the Father cannot blame his Child for incontinence; To contain implies impossibility. Ask him wherefore serves Marriage? Yea, but to provide an Husband or a Wife, is not a work of an hour's warning; in the mean time what shall they do? Sure, the man thinks of those hot Regions of his Religion, where they are so sharp set, that they must have Stews allowed of one Sex at least; Else what strange violence is this that he conceives? As our junius answered his Bellarmine, in the like, Hic homo sibi videtur agere de equis admissarijs ruentibus in venerem, & de hippomane, non de hominibus ratione praeditis; he speaks as if he had to do with Stallions, not with Men, not with Christians, amongst whom is to be supposed a decent order, and due regard of seasonableness, and expediency: A doughty Argument, wherewith Master HALL. is sore pressed. 
Marg. of the Refut. p. 65.  (They may contain till they marry, and therefore they may ever contain and not marry.) How easy is it for me to take up this load, and lay it upon my Saviour, which said, All Men cannot receive it; and upon his great Apostle of the Gentiles, who hath taught us an (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) a proper gift, 
1. Cor. 7.7.  which God hath bestowed on some, not on others, and supposes a necessity, that may be, of giving a Virgin in Marriage?  

Refut. p. 65.  Sixtly, The Husband and Wife are separated upon discord, or disease: What shall they do? To live continent with this man is impossible. I answer; If only their will sunder them, that must yield to necessity; Dissension may not abridge them of the necessary remedy of sin. If necessity, that finds relief in their prayers; If they call on him who calls them to continency by this Hand of his, he will hear them, and enable them to persist. And why not then in the necessity of our Vows? This is a necessity of our own making; that is of his; He hath bound himself to keep his own promises, not ours.   

SECT. XIIII.  
WHiles his Fellow, 
Refut. p. 66.  or Master, Maldonate, talks of confuting Austin in this very point, by Austin himself, this man will confute us by him; whom he no otherwise cities for himself, than his Ancestor Pelagius cities Lactantius, Hilary, Ambrose, Hierome, and Austin in this case. The thing (saith he) is in our power, and though it require the assistance of God's grace, which still preventeth our will, yet that hinders not, but that we may (if we list) live chaste all the days of our life, as we may upon the same terms believe in God, and love him. What impudence is this, to make him the Patron of the power of our freewill to God, whom all the World knows to have been Malleus Pelagianorum? and who in so many Volumes damns this conceit to the Pit of Hell; evermore so establishing the natural faculty and use of the Will against Stoical necessity, as that he abandons any power of the act, or exercise of it unto good (without grace) against humane presumption. When he speaks of this, here is not a cold & feeble prevention, but an effectual inoperation, yea a powerful creation.  
Since my Refuter then will needs be paralleling our ability of containing, and of believing, let him hear that holy Father say, 
i Aug. de Nat. & Grat. 25.  Non solùm Deus posse nostrum, etc. God doth not only give, and help our power to good, but works in us both our will and working of good.  
And elsewhere; 
k Cont. duas Epist. Pelag.  He is drawn to Christ, to whom it is given to believe in Christ: Power is therefore given unto them to be made the sons of God, which believe in him, when this is given them to believe in him. And so far is he from saying with my Detector and his Bellarmine, that who lists may believe when he lists, that he reasons thus? Quid mihi ostendis, & c? 
l Aug. l. 4. cont. ●ul. c. 6. Qui igitur facit oves bomines, ipse ad obedientiam pietatis humanas liberat voluntates: sed quare istos homines oves facit, & istos non facit, apud quem non est acceptio personarum? Respondet Apost. O homo.  What dost thou tell me of thy freewill; which can never be free to do good, except thou be a Sheep of God? He therefore that makes men to be his sheep, frees the wills of men to the obedience of Piety: But why doth he make these men sheep, and those not, since with him is no respect of persons? The Apostle answers, O homo! etc. Thus he. Either therefore let him never cite S. Austin against us in this point, or else we must be forced to countercite him once more than we meant. 
m Ibid.  Planè possumus dicere frontem haereticorum non esse frontem: And if there could be any more on that holy Father's score, Father Maldonate hath paid it for us. To conclude therefore for him; Arbitrium humanae voluntatis nequaquam destruimus: We know no man doth well against his will; God was not to make Virgins by force; and the same goodness that gives Chastity to the married, continues Virginity to the single: 
Refut. p. 69.  What of all this? Therefore (saith he) it is as well in the power of all single persons to be always continent, as of the married to keep conjugal Chastity: An illation and conclusion worthy of my Refuters Logic and Divinity; As if he argued thus for himself; The same God that disposes of Orders, disposes of the Popedom: therefore I may as well look to wear three Crowns, as one shaved. Or the same God gives both Life, and Grace, and Glory. Therefore all those that live the natural life, may also live the spiritual, and glorious. Who sees not the reason of these unlike? Conjugal honesty is absolutely commanded of God to all married persons; perpetuation of Virginity (he grants) was never commanded; The breach of conjugal honesty, is of itself, a sin to all; Marriage is not so. Against the one therefore, we may absolutely pray in 
n Christi erit si fides aderit qua impetrat à iwente quod iusserit, Aug. de adult. con. l. 2. c. 19 Refut. p. 71.72.73.  faith, against the other but with condition; God hath promised to deliver us from our sins, not from our Marriage.  
As for Saint Ambrose, we easily grant him large in the praise of Virginity: But no one word of all his cited authorities toucheth our Assertion: The helps of the Church, the service of Angels, the merit of the Prayers of our Saviour we yield to be good means of continence, where it is intended; but that it is meant to all comers, we deny; Let the success speak.  
Neither do we tax the Vow for any improbity in itself, but for the incapacity of the persons: The Vow were good, if the men were not either evil, or unfit. And here 
o Refut p. 71.  by the way; whereas C. E. like a masterly Monitor wishes Master HALL. to read the divine Works of AMBROSE, concerning this subject; Master Hall is bold (in requital) to tell C. E. that he knows not Ambrose; and to teach him (since he hath not learned it of other Masters) that the Book which he so oft, & so solemnly cities for AMBROSES', 
p Cited four times by C. E. upon weighty occasions. Refut. p. 3●. 43.48.50.  Ad Virginem lapsam, is a noted Counterfeit, a true Novatian; which his grave ignorance might have heard from his Bellarmine and Possevine.  
And how much better is that other Tract which he 
q P. 41. Refut.  cities from AMBROSE, Epist. 82. wherein mention is made of 
* Vide Censur. Rob. Coci. p. 129.  Venice; which was not extant till Ambrose was not? And the comentary of Ambrose, upon 1. Tim. 3. whence he fetches his forceablest 
r P. 94. Refut.  Testimony for forced Continency; slit in the Nose, and bored in the Ear long-since by 
s Censur. Coci. p. 133.  Salmeron, Baronius, Bellarmine, and Francis Lucas. Of the same stamp (that the Reader may here see once for all how he is gulled by this false Priest with foisted Authorities) is his AUGUSTINE, De bono Viduatis, 
t Refut. p. 20.49.68.  thrice by him here quoted, not without great Triumph; branded by Erasmus, Hosius, Lindanus: as likewise 
u Refut. p. 40.  his AUGUSTINE, de Eccles. dogmat. confessed counterfeit by Bellarmine, and his Friends of Louvain: and 
x P. 80. Refut.  the Sermons, de Tempore; cashiered by Erasmus, Mart. Lypsius, the Lovanians: Whereto let us add the Book of Great ATHANASIUS, de Virginitate, 
y Refut. p. 35.  produced in great state by C. E. not without great wrong & shame fathered upon that Saint, as (if Erasmus and Nannius did not show) the ridiculous precepts therein contained would speak enough. To follow all were endless: Of this kind, lastly, is his CYPRIAN. de Discipline. & bono Pudicitiae, not more magnificently 
z Refut. p. 36.  brought forth by C. E. then fairly ejected by Erasmus, and Espencaeus. These are the glorious Testimonies which grace the swelling Pages of mine Adversary; These are the pious frauds wherewith honest Readers are shamefully cozened. It shall suffice thus in a word to have thanked my Reverend Monitor for his sage advice, & to advise my Reader to know whom he trusts.  

Vid. supra.  For Origen; we have already answered; My Detector could not have chosen a better man for the proof of the facility of this Work, then him, who (according to the broad Tralation of his rude Rhemists) gelded himself, and made himself no man for it.  

Refut. p. 74.75.  That all graces are derived to us from the Fountain, or rather the full Ocean of Christ's Merits and Mercies (which he shows from Saint HIEROME) we willingly teach against them; so far are we from being injurious to the Passion of our Dear Redeemer; But if he will therefore infer, that every man may be a perpetual Virgin, he may as well hope, that therefore every Scribbler may write all true. Our Saviour himself, which said I will draw all men unto me, yet said, All men cannot receive this; not, I cannot give it, but they cannot take it.  
As for that practice which he cities from Saint Austin, 
Refut. p. 78.  of forcing men both into Orders, & Continency, it shows rather the Fact than the Equity; what was done in a particular Church, rather than what should be; The Refuter himself renounceth it in the precedent Page; (For the Church forceth none thereunto) neither is it any other than a direct restraint of that, which the Council of Nice determined to be left free.  
Lastly, 
Pag. 79.  that there may appear to be no less impossibility of honest Truth in some men, then true Chastity, he cities one place for all, out of Saint AUSTIN: 
* Lib. 2. c. 19 de Adulter. Coniug. vid. sup.  Let not the burden of Continency affright us, it will be light if it be of Christ, it will be of Christ if there be Faith, that obtains of him which commands the thing which he doth command. See Reader, with what fidelity, and by this esteem the rest; Saint Austin speaks thee of persons divorced each from other, whom necessity (as he supposes the case) calls to Continency; The Detector cities him for the power of voluntary Votaries; The very place confutes him. It will be Christ's Yoke (saith AUSTIN) if there be faith that obtains of him which commands the thing which he doth command: There can be no Faith where is no command. Now C. E. will grant there is no 
o Neque enim sicut non maec●aueris, non occides ita ●●ci potest, non nubes Aug. de Virg. Sanct. l. sing. c. 30  command of single life to all; Therefore all cannot ask it in Faith, therefore all cannot think it the Yoke of Christ, all cannot bear it.   

SECT. XV.  

Refut p. 80. usque ad 87.  NOw at last (like some sorry Squib that after a little hissing and sparkling ends in an unsavoury crack) my Refuter, after all these Flourishes of their possibility, shuts up in a scurrilous Declamation against our Ministry; granting it indeed impossible, amongst us, to live chaste; and telling his Reader that we blush not to blaze in Pulpits, and printed Books, this brutish Paradox, that Chastity is a virtue impossible to all, because so it is to such lascivious 
p Illud dixerim tantùm abfuisse, ut ista coacta castitas illam coniugalem vicerit, etc. (saith Polydore Virg.) This I may say that it is so far off, that this compelled Chast●tie excelled the Conjugal Chastity, that no crime of any offence could bring more hatred to the state of Priesthood, or more disgrace to Religion, or more sorrow to all good men, than the blemish of the unchaste life of Priests, etc. Polyd. l. 5. c. 4.  Libertines, sensual and sinful people, as Heretics are, and here are sordes, dedecora, scabies libidinum: the brutish spirit of Heresy, fleshly and sensual. Impure mouth! How well doth it become the son of that Babylonian Strumpet, to call the Spouse of Christ Harlot? How well doth it become lips drenched in the Cup of those Fornications; to utter blasphemous Slanders (Spumam CERBERI) against Innocence? By how much more brutish that Paradox is, so much more Devilish is the unjust imputation of it to us; Which of us ever blazed it? Which of us doth hate it less, than the lie that charges it upon us? How many Reverend Fathers have we in the highest Chairs of our Church; how many aged Divines in our Universities, how many grave Prebendaries in our Cathedral Churches, how many worthy Ministers in their rural stations, that shine with this virtue in the eyes of the World? If therefore the proper place of Chastity be the Church of God, (as this Caviller pleads) it is ours in right, 
q Hier. l. 2. in Use. Quicunque amare pud●citiam se simulant, ut Manichaeus, Martion, Arrius, Tatianus, & instauratores veteris haereseos venena●o ore mella promittunt caeterum iuxta Apostolum quae secre●o agunt, turpe ●st dicere. Minut. Fael. Octau.  theirs in pretence: And so much more noble is this in ours, for that in ours it is 
r Inuiolati corporis virginitate fruuntur potius, quam gloriantur.  free, in them, 
s Talis castitas quia non est spo●ta●ea, non ●ab●● magnam ret●ibutionem. ●ran. Carthus. O mysieria, O mo●es, ubi necessitas imponitur castitati, authoritas datur l●bidini: Itaque 〈◊〉 casta est quae metu cogitur, n●c, etc. Illa pudica quae these tenetur. Ambros. ●. 1. de virg.  forced; Infida custos castitatis necessitas, as that Father said; Neque opus passeri fugere ad montem; in them, as CHRYSOSTOME said long since 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉; The grace of Virginity is lost: 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉: The world makes sport with such Maidenhead. For the rest; The God of heaven judge betwixt us and our enemies; To him we appeal how we desire to serve him in chaste Wedlock, whom they dishonour with unclean and false Virginity.  
Not to put my Detector in mind how honourably he now speaks of marriage, how dares he talk of our fleshliness, and their chastity? as if he had to do with a world that were both deaf and blind. Do not their own Records fly in their faces? and tell him there are but a few of them honest? Did not their own 
t Council. Delect. Cardin. Paul. 3. Exhib. Alius abusus turbat populum Christianum in Monialibus, etc. Vbi in plaerisque monasterijs fiunt publica sacrilegia cum maximo omnium scandalo.  select Cardinals complain, that the most of their Nunneries were justly scandalised with sacrilegious incontinencies?  
Do not our 
u Mat. Paris Hist. Angl. Hen. 3 p. 1085. Et quod indignum est scribi, ad domos religiosarum veni●ns, facit exprim mammillas earundem, ut sic phyfice, etc.  Histories tell us that in the reign of Henry the third, Robert Grosthead the famous Bishop of Lincoln, in his Visitation, was fain to explore the virginity of their Nuns by nipping of their dugs, indignum scribi, as Matth. Paris? Do not the 
x 
In hac etiam urbe meretrices, etc. Concil. del Card.  
Prius est quam maecha●i continentiam, ducere criminosam. de singul. cler.   forenamed Cardinals find it a common grievance, that their Courtesans rode in state thorough Rome itself, attended even at noonday with the retinue of their Cardinals, and with their Clergymen? Doth he find the Church of England to maintain Stews? and to raise rents from professed filthiness? Can he deny the unnatural beastliness that reigns in his Italy? But what do I stir this puddle? Let me hear no more brags of their chastity, no more exprobrations of our lasciviousness.   

SECT. XVI.  

Refut. p. 88  AS if my Refuter had vowed to write no true word, he challenges me for translating Isidores Turpe votum, a filthy vow: I turn to my Epistle, and find it not englished by me at all. His own conscience, belike, so construes it; or if some former Impression of mine (which I believe not) had so turned it, here is neither ignorance, nor unfaithfulness. Whersoever is sin, there is filthiness: And if a lawful vow be property de meliore bono, can there not therefore be an unlawful vow? What was that of jepthaes', or that of Saint Paul's forty Conspirators? But the word there (saith he) signifies a promise; As if every vow were not a promise; and if Isidore take votum for promissum, 
y Dist. 28. ●reg. Petro diac. l. 1. Ep. 42.  Gregory takes (by his construction) promissum, for votum, in this very case we have in hand.  
This vow of theirs therefore is metonymically filthy, because it makes them such. In one word, (that he may rave no more of Epicures, Turks, Pagans) Their vow is in profession glorious, filthy in effect. And now for a conclusion of this point, I must out of all these gross and ignorant passages of his (though unproperly, yet) truly vow to the world, that a truer Bayard did never stumble forth into the Press.   

SECT. XVII.  
HE hath done with their own vows, and now descends to us, whom he confesses vowlesse; 
Refut. p. 89.  His scorn cannot strip us of the benefit of that Truth, which he confesseth; Thus than he writes; I freely with other Catholics grant, that our English Ministers, according to their calling, make no vows; I grant their marriage to be lawful; I grant that every one of them may be the husband of one wife, etc. And why did not this liberality of my wise Detector tie up his Tongue in his purse all this while? No more was required, no less is yielded; whereto is all this jangling? But, that his grant may prove worse than a denial, thus he proceeds: But we deny them to be truly Clergymen, or to have any more authority in the Church, than their wives or daughters have, and this, because they want all true calling and Ordination; For, they entered not in at the door, like true Pastors, but stole in at the window like thieves; We deny their ministry (I say) to be lawful, because they did run before they were sent, took their places by intrusion, etc. Let Master HALL. disprove this, and I will say, Tu Phyllida solus habeto. Thus he.  
A deep crimination, and such, as if it could be proved, would rob our question of the State, and us of our duely-challenged honour. Reader, this vehemence shows thee where his shoe wrings him: It is the gall of Romish hearts that we prosper, and are not theirs; Where they have presumed upon credulity, they have not stuck to say, we are not men like others, but more frequently and boldly, that we are no Christian men; and here most peremptorily, that we are no Clergymen: There is no Church, no Christianity, no Clergy not theirs; Neither can we be in Orders, whiles we are out of Babylon.  
The man dreams of the Nagges-head in Cheapside, where his lying Oracle Tradition hath not shamed to report, jewel, Sands, Horn, Scory, Grindall, and others in the beginning of Queen Elizabeth's time (being disappointed of the Catholic Bishop of Landaff) to have laid hands mutually on each other; and that from hence have flowed our pretended Orders. This our shameless, 
* Alias, Halywell the jesuit.  Sacrobosco heard of some good old folks, and they had it of one Neale, Professor Ebrius in Oxford; Kellison took it of Sacrobosco, and C.E. of him. Concordat cum Originali; Diabolus est mendax & pater eius. And is not this a worthy engine to batter down the walls of a whole Church, to blow up all our Ordination? Is it possible that any Christian face should be so graceless, as to bear out such an apparent and ridiculous falsehood, against so many thousands of witnesses, against the evidence of authentical Records; against reason, and sense itself? For can they hope to persuade any living man, that these having at that time a lawful Archbishop of their own Religion, legally established in the Metropolitical Chair, by an acknowledged authority, the sway of the times openly favouring them, when all Churches, all Chapels gladly opened to them, that they would be so mad as to go and Ordain themselves in a Tavern? He that would believe this, may be persuaded that their adored blocks can weep, and speak, and move; that their Cake is his God; Never truth could be cleared, if not this; No less than the whole Kingdom knew, that Queen Mary died in the year 1558, November 17; and her Cardinal (than Archbishop of Canterbury) accompanied her soul in death, the same day. The same day was Queen Elizabeth's Initium Regni; her Coronation january 15. following. That leisure enough might be taken in these great affairs, the See of Canterbury continued void above a year. At last, in the second year of Queen Elizabeth 1559. December 17. was Matthew Parker legally consecrated Archbishop of Canterbury, by four Bishops: William Barlow formerly Bishop of bath, then elect of Chichester. john Scory before of Chichester, now elect of Hereford. Miles Coverdale Bishop of Exeter. john Hodgeskins Suffragan of Bedford. Matthew Parker thus irrefragably settled in the archiepiscopal See, with three other Bishops, in the same Month of December, solemnly consecrated Edmund Grindall, and Edwin Sands; The public Records are evident and particular, relating the Time, Sunday morning after Prayers; The place, Lambeth-Chappell; The manner, Imposition of hands; The consecrators; Matthew Cant. William Chichester, john Hereford, john Bedford; The Preacher at the Consecration, Alexander Nowell, afterwards the worthy Dean of Paul's; The Text, Take heed to yourselves, and to all the flock, etc. The Communion, lastly administered by the Archbishop.  
For Bishop jewel, he was consecrated the Month following in the same form by Matthew Cant. Edmund London, Richard Ely, john Bedford.  
Lastly, for Bishop Horn, he was consecrated a whole year after this, by Matthew Cant. Thomas S. David's, Edmund London, Thomas Coventry and Lichfield; The Circumstances, Time, Place, Form, Preacher, Text, severally recorded. The particulars whereof, I refer to the faithful and clear relation of Master Francis Mason; whose learned and full discourse of this subject, might have satisfied all eyes, and stopped all mouths. What incredible impudency is this then, for those which pretend not Christianity only, but the Consecration of God, wilfully to raise such shameful slanders from the pit of Hell, to the disgrace of truth, to the disparagement of our holy calling?  
Let me therefore challenge my Detector in this so important a point, wherein his zeal hath so far outrun his wit, and with him all the Brats of that proud Harlot, that no Church under Heaven can show a more clear, eeuen, uncontrollable, untroubled line of the just succession of her sacred Orders, than this of ours; If his Rome, for her tyrannous Primacy, could bring forth but such Cards, the World would be too straight for her. He shall (maugre) be forced to confess, that either there were never true Orders in the Church of England (which he dares not say) or else that they are still Ours. The Bishops in the time of King Henry the eight, were undoubted; If they left Rome in some corrected opinions, their Character was yet, by confession 
a Quis ignorat Cathol. etc. & similiten Ordinatos verè e●e Ordinatos, quando Ordinator verè Episcopus fuerat & adhuc erat, saltem quantum ad characterem, Bellar. de Rom. Pont. l. 4. c. 10. , indelible. They laid their hands according to Ecclesiastical constitution, upon the Bishops in King Edward's days; And they both, upon the Bishops in the beginning of Queen Elizabeth; They again, upon the succeeding Inheritors of their holy Sees, and they lastly upon us; so as never man could show a more certain and exquisite Pedigree from his great Grandfather, than we can from the acknowledged Bishops of King Henry's time, and thence upwards to hundreds of Generations. I confess indeed, our Archbishops and Bishops have wanted some aaronical accoutrements, Gloves, Rings, Sandals, Mitres, and Pall, and such other trash; and our inferior Orders have wanted Greasing and Shaving, and some other pelting Ceremonies. But let C. E. prove these essential which we want, or those Acts and Forms not essential, which we have, Et Phyllida solus habeto. In the mean time, the Church of England is blessed with a true Clergy, and glorious; and such a one, as his Italian Generation may impotently envy, and snarl at, shall never presume to compete with, in worthiness and honour; And (as Doctor Taylor, that courageous Martyr, said at his parting) Blessed be God for holy Matrimony.   

SECT. XVIII.  

Refut. p. 90, 91.  MY Caviller purposely mistakes my rule of Basil the Great, and my Text of the Great Apostle; whiles from both I resolve thus; I pass not what I hear Men or Angels say, while I hear God say, Let him be the Husband of one Wife; he will needs so construe it, as if I took this of Saint Paul's for a command, not for an allowance; As if I meant to imply from hence, that every Bishop is bound to have a Wife: Who is so blind as the wilful? Their Leo 
b Leo. ep. 87. ahas. 85. Tan sacra semper est habita ista Praeceptio.  calls these words a Preception, I did not: If he knew any thing, he could not be ignorant that this sense is against the stream of our Church, and no less than a Grecian error. Who knows not the extremes of Greece and Rome; and the Track of Truth betwixt them both? The Greek Church faith, He cannot be in holy Orders that is not married: The Romish Church faith, He cannot be in holy Orders that is married: The Church Reform says, He may be in holy Orders that is married, and convertibly; Some good friends would needs fetch us into this idle Grecisme, and to the society of the old Frisons 
c Espenc. lib. 1. de Contin. c. 1. , and (if Saint Jerome take it aright) of Vigilantius, Espenceus, and Bellarmine and our Rhemists free us. There is no less difference betwixt them and us, then betwixt May and Must; Liberty and Necessity. If then (Let him be the Husband of one Wife) argue that a Bishop may be a married man, I have what I would, and pass not for the contrary from Men and Angels. We willingly grant with Luther, 
Refut. p. 91, 92.  that this charge is negative: Non velut sanciens dicit, saith Chrysostome; But this negative charge implies an affirmative allowance; we seek for no more: As for the authorities which my Detector hath borrowed of his Uncles of Rheims, they might have been well spared; He tells us, Saint Jerome says, Qui unam habuerit, non habeat; He who hath had one Wife, not he that hath one; I tell him Saint Paul saith 
d Tit. 1.6.  (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) If any man be the Husband of one Wife, not, If he have been: Let 
e Chrysost. in 1. Tit. homil. 2.  Saint Chrysostome therein answer Hierome, and Epiphanius, and all other pretended opposites: Obstruere pro●sus intendit haereticorum ora, qui nuptias damnant, etc. He purposed in this to stop the mouths of Heretics, that condemned marriage, showing that that estate is faultless, yea, so precious, that with it a man might be advanced to the holy Episcopal Chair. Thus he; Whom their learned 
f Esp. ubi supra.  Bishop Espencaeus seconds; and by the true force of the Text cleareth this sense, against all contradiction. Nec enim Paulini de Episcopis, etc. For (saith he) those places of Saint PAUL concerning Bishops, Priests, and Deacons cannot be so eluded, as that they do only belong to men that have been sometimes married, and are now Widowers and single; but the Text doth plainly note out Husbands; and those that are now found in the present estate of marriage; which is employed, both by the word esse, and by unius uxoris vir; that is, having one Wife, not (as some have understood it) which hath had one; for (as CHRYSOSTOME hath noted) the Apostle would by the society of Marriage and Priesthood stop the mouths of Heretics that condemned Marriage; whereto add, That the Apostle amongst the virtues of a Bishop reckons up this, That he doth govern his own house well, not, that he did govern it. Thus he. Unto which let me yet adjoin this other consideration, that the Apostle describes what manner of Wife a Bishop should have; which as in other professions he hath not done, so in this would have been useless, if he had only aimed at an estate past, and not present.  
Where it is a cunning trick of the Rhemists, and their Vulgar, in stead of Their Wives, to read, The Women, quite beside the Scope and Context of the Apostle: As to the same purpose; Whereas their Leo in the forecited Epistle says, that this Precept of a Bishop to be the Husband of one Wife, was always so sacred, 
* That the same condition is to be understood of her that is to be chosen for the wife of the Priest.  ut etiam de muliere Sacerdotis eligenda, eadem intelligatur seruanda conditio; BELLARMINE, and his Mates would needs face us out, that the Copies are corrupted, and contends to have it read Sacerdotis Eligendi; of the Priest to be chosen, not, of the Wife; Whom our industrious and worthy Doctor james hath refelled both by the Press, and the Pen; by the Coleine Edition, and Manuscript authority.  

Refut. p. 92, 93.  As for that he cities from Hierome against Vigilantius, he might have found the Salve together her with the Wound; Our Rhemists dare us from the imputation of his opinion. For the rest. Nothing is more plain, then that our Apostle (according to the just interpretation of Chrysostome, Theodoret, Theophylact, and others) alludes to the loose fashion, as of the Greeks, so especially of the jews, with whom Polygamy and re-marriages, after unjust divorces, were in ordinary use; These the Apostolical Spirit finds unfit for the Man of God, whom he therefore charges to be only, The Husband of one Wife.  
Neither doth it argue too much wit in my Refuter, 
Refut. p. 94, 95.  to bring two Fathers upon the Stage for his purpose, and then to set them together by the ears with each other, Ambrose (I mean) and Hierome; who in this which he cities them for, confute one another; Hierome (though otherwise a backfriend to Wedlock) censuring the opinion of Ambrose, as savouring too strongly of Cainisme, and superstition: However, even the more vehement of the two, out of this place doth hold Marriage compatible with holy Orders, which is the only thing I required: 
Refut. p. 95.  So as still, This one word shall confirm me against all impure mouths; Impure, Not for preferring Continency, as my Caviller will take it, but for depraving of Marriage, by the foul titles of Fleshliness, and Sensuality; such as his own; a worse we need not: Neither doth S. Ambrose at all control me herein, 
Ibid.  whiles he teacheth that the Apostle doth not here invite us to beget children in the Priesthood; Habentem enim dixit filios, non facientem; we did not challenge hence any command, we challenge an allowance, which we have and proclaim: That I may not say, some Copies of Ambrose run (according as I have learned of our eminent Doctor Fulke) Habentem filios, aut facientem; Having children, or begetting them: The difference is not worth standing for; Let it pass after his own reading. I could stop his mouth with the ingenuous answer of his ESPENCaeVS: Habentem enim, etc. 
Espenc. l. Praecit.  For he said, Having children, not begetting them; Debellatum hic esset, etc. This Field were won, if either this were the Text and not the Gloss, or they that thus interpret it were Apostles, as they are not. Thus their own Bishop. But I need not call for any aid. The words of Ambrose do plainly drive against an invitation, or command, which we do willingly disclaim.   

SECT. XIX.  
NOw unhappy is this man that still shoots his Arrows quite besides the Butt? 
Refut p. 96.  He proves, forsooth, with great zeal, that the Fathers never understood a positive command in our Apostles words, which I never thought so much as in dream: and then he bends his Forces against Bigamy, which I no where avouched. The Man of valour loves to play his prizes alone.  
Here is no command then (saith he) but a permission; How much are we bound to him for this favour? Permission? Thus much he, with his holy Father, yields to their Stews. No, here is a direct allowance. Let him be the Husband of one Wife; Not, He may be so: But this was only for a time, he saith, because of the paucity of single Clergymen: Let him show me the Apostles limitation, and I am satisfied; otherwise, this misse-grounded conceit (what countenance soever it may find in a private humane authority) shall pass with us as a Gloss of Bordeaux, 
Refut. p. 96.  that mars the Text. But how shamelessly, how fraudulently, how like himself, doth my Refuter cite CHRYSOSTOM'S Castigat impudicos, 
Chrysost. in Tit. Hom. 2.  & c? He checketh the incontinent (saith that Father) whiles he permitteth them not after their second marriages, to be preferred to the government of the Church, and dignity of Pastors; and there my Refuter stops, with, So he; whereas, if he had gone forward, the place had answered him, and itself: For (saith CHRYSOSTOME) he which is found not to have kept his benevolence towards his wife, which is 
c The word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, by them translated falsely, Defunctum.  gone from him, how should he be a good Teacher to the Church? Plainly showing us, that he intends this to those unchaste Husbands, which after an unjust divorce of their former wives, have married also a second; not after the death of the first.  
The like Priestly fidelity he useth in the place of Chrysostome, Hom. 2. upon job; the poor man had taken up some scraps of quotations upon trust, having never seen the Authors; For, Chrysostome never wrote any Homilies upon the Book of job; only he hath five Homilies of the Patience of job; whereof this cited, is the second; wherein his errori ignoscebat, hath reference rather to, sine crimine, which he opposeth to irreprehensibiles, then, to vir unius uxoris, as the sequel plainly shows.  

Refut. p. 97.  As for Bigamy, it is out of our way; but since his loquacity will needs rove thither, let him show that before Montanus infected the World with a prejudice against second Marriages after decease, they were held unlawful for any calling, or person, and we will grant him clamorous to some purpose.  

Refut.. p 98.  To prove this opinion and practice of the Church, like a wise Master, he brings in 
* Tert. Exhort. ad castit. c. 7.  Tertullians' authority, in his Book which he wrote in the time of his Heresy; whiles he was over the ears in Montanisme; where he tells us he hath known some ejected for second Marriages. But if he had ever read the Book following, of monogamy, he might have found his Tertullian (then Montanizing) to upbraid the true & Catholic Church, which he calls Psychicos, with the usual practice & allowance of the second Marriages of their Bishops. 
* Tert. De Monogamia, c. 12. Quot enim & digamipraesident apud vos, insultantes utique Apostolo, & c? Miror te unum protraxisse in medium, cum omnis mundus bis ordinationibus plenus sit, non dico de presbyteris, ad Episcopos venio, quos si sigillatim voluero enumerare, tantus numerus congregabitur, ut Ariminensis Synodi multitudo superetur, Her. ad Ocean. de Carterio Hisp. Ep. digamo, etc. Refut. p. 99  Quot enim & digami, etc. For how many Bishops are there amongst you twice married? But whoever was matched with so vain a Babbler? I proved from S. Paul, that a Bishop might have one Wife: he proves by Counsels and Fathers, that he may not have two. It is pity that his Masters the Jesuits have no more Trees for him to set with the Roots upward: Any thing rather than to weary the World with this foolish clacking.  
Out of this indiscreet and odious verbosity (lest he should want noise) he stumbles upon the Council of Constantinople before it come in his way, and spends a whole leaf only to tell us, that he will talk of it hereafter. Hereafter he shall receive answer enough; What needs this disorderly anticipation? To conclude then, this place of our Apostle stands for us vnshaken, by any the impotent blasts of his frivolous Elusions, and shall warrant us against Earth and Hell, that a Bishop may be the Husband of one Wife.   

SECT. XX.  

Refut. p. 100.101.  MY next place, of the honourableness of Marriage amongst all, he smooths over with a pretended concession; professing with Fulgentius, and Hierome, to give all high Titles to that state, only preferring the rule of a better life; praising Marriage, but more extolling Virginity: But who ever made the comparison? These are fair Nets to catch Fools; Whiles he heaps up all the reproachful terms that spite can devose, against the very state of Marriage, in some callings, not so much as prejudiced by Vow; how doth he grant Marriage honourable amongst all? If the comparison be the matter he stands upon, let him say, Marriage is good, and lawful for all conditions; Virginity is better; he shall have no Adversary. And whereas (to call him to reckoning for arrearages) he turned off this place (when it was) with a scoff out of Bellarmine, That Marriage is honourable amongst all, 
Refut. p. 13.  yet not between Father and Daughter, etc. the man alluded sure to their great and good Alexander the sixth, and his chaste Lucrece, of whom he knows the Riddle, 
d here lies Lucrece in name, Thais in life, The same Pope's Daughter, Leman, and his own Son's Wife.  Filia, Sponsa, Nurus.  
For us, that it is honourable in all estates of men by Apostolical warrant, is sufficient assurance, that to no calling, or estate it can be dishonourable and unlawful. But to untie Bellarmine's trifling knot: I say, Marriage is honourable, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, but not, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉: in all, but not between all: That is, every man may marry with a woman, but not with any woman whatsoever: as with his Mother, or Sister. So Father and Daughter may marry, but not one the other. See now what a worthy Mess of Sophistry is laid in Saint Paul's dish by these Carvers, and how easily over-turned: So as I might very well proclaim to all the World (which I do now confidently second) that if God might be judge of this Controversy, it were soon at an end. 
Refut. p. 102.  If my Refuter make faces at this, their whole School shall bear me out in it. Et 
e Espenc. l. 1. de Cont. c. 3. Caiet. Opus. de Castit.  sane communis est scholae resolutio, etc. And in truth it is (saith their ESPENCAEUS) the common resolution of the School, that if we insist only in those things, which were spoken by Christ, and written by the Apostles, in the Canon of the New Testament, (secluding the Laws of the Church) holy Orders, neither as Orders, nor as holy, are any hindrances of Matrimony. Thus he. And said I any more? any other?  

Ibid. p. 102.103.  By their confession then, GOD never imposed this Law. My proof was, that even in the time of that legal strictness, he allowed Wedlock to the Ministers of his Sanctuary. Herein, how am I refuted? If he mean (saith my Detector) that for purity and perfection of life, the Law of MOSES was more strict than the Gospel, the untruth is notorious; To which he adds out of Hierome, that the greater perfection of the evangelical Sacrifice exacteth greater Holiness; and concludes, that the permission of Wives in the aaronical Priesthood, argues evidently the imperfection of that Law. So he. Surely, God wanted this Counsellor upon Mount Sinai; he could have advised him better Rules of his mis-contrived Priesthood.  
Would my Refuter make himself so ignorant, as not to know; that notwithstanding the rather greater perfection of Morality required under the Gospel, yet that Leviticall Law placed impurity in many of those creatures and actions, wherein the evangelical findeth none? Did not the touch of some. Vessels or Garments make a man legally unclean? Did not the lawful act of Conjugal Benevolence? Did not the accidents of the holiest Childbed carry in them an expiable impurity? If he be not a jew, he will not say it is still thus under the Gospel. How justly therefore might I infer, that if our holy God, unto whose Wisdom it seemed good to stand of old, upon such points of outward uncleannesses, did notwithstanding allow Wedlock to his Priesthood, much more (at lest no less) under the Gospel, doth he allow it, when as all those imputations of impurity are vanished.   

SECT. XXI.  

Ref. p. 103.104.  I Produced the Testimony of their Pope, their Cardinal, their Doctor. Basils' Rule is a sure one, that the Witnesses of Enemies are most convictive. Their Cardinal was Panormitan, Their Pope Pius the second. Their Doctor, Gratian. For Panormitan; My Refuter likes his words so well, that like a saucy Fellow he dare pull off his red Hat, and trample it in the Floor; denying his Cardinallship, and charging him With participation of the Schism.  
But first, he cannot (I hope) deny him to have been their Abbot, than their Archbishop; As for his red Hat, it never came from Wittenberg nor Geneva; it was of their own dying; FOELIX the false Pope (he says) gave it him. Reader, the famous Council of Basil, consisting of no less than four hundred reverend Persons; Cardinals, Archbishops, Bishops, Doctors, gathered and allowed at first, by Pope Martin, then by his Successor Eugenius the fourth, afterwards was upon some Politic considerations called off by Eugenius; The Fathers of the Council finding their own strength, stood upon the right of their Superiority, and (as they well might) censured the Pope; he proceeded to obstinacy; those brave spirits (upon ripe consideration) justly deposed him. In the room of this Eugenius, (otherwise called Gabriel Condulmarius) was by just number of voices elected Amadeus the Devout Duke of Savoy, and named Foelix the fifth, a man too good for that See; neither had he ever any so great blemish in all his life, as the name of a Pope: Volateran can tell us, what a Kennel of Hounds he shoved to the Ambassadors, namely, whole Tables of poor souls daily fed by him; All Histories speak of his Devotion, and Piety; This man called from his intended retiredness, must carry the Keys. He makes choice of Archbishop Panormitan for one of his Cardinals: What offence is here? But he was a false Pope. If the Council of Basil were a true Council, than was Foelix a true Pope. It is in my Readers choice whether he will believe four hundred Divines representing the whole Church, or a Pope's Parasite. But Panormitan died in the Schism against Eugenius. The World knows that the greatest blot Panormitan ever had, was his violent plea for Eugenius; against the Bishop of Argens, against eloquent Segovius, against the whole stream of that Council; This is the thank he now carries away, FOELIX scelus virtus vocatur; If Eugenius had not dealt underhand with the Dolphin of France, and Frederick of Austria, (than ambitious of the Empire) and tried all his wits, both to make new Cardinals, and to divert the Neutrals, Eugenius had not been foelix; and Foelix had been still Eugenius, the true and undoubted Successor of Peter: However, if th●se points should be strictly stood upon, Rome would be at a loss, which many a time hath been to seek for her head. But what though it were granted that Panormitan was Cardinalated by an intruding Pope? Can this call down the authority of his judgement and Writings? especially those which he wrote before he was Cardinal or Archbishop, being only Abbot: And yet may be cited by us under the name of Cardinal: as Bellarmine's Dictates and Composures elder than his red Hat, yet are fathered upon that Title.  
Once, this I am sure of, that 
f Bell. de Cleric. lib. 1 c 19 Cat●olicum al●oquia & doctum authorem.  Cardinal Bellarmine doubts not to style Panormitan a Catholic and learned Doctor. This is the man that stands with his Hat off to this worshipful Clerk of Douai, and tells him that Continency is not of the substance of Order, nor by Divine Law annexed to it; whereto, he shuffles out a miserable & desperate answer, as we shall see in the sequel.  
But in the mean time, see the cunning of my Catholic Caviller; This is not the sentence I stood upon, of Panormitan; it was not this, whereto I proclaimed mine Oyez, but another, which he slily smothers, not daring so much as to repeat it, lest his Romanizing popular ignorant Readers should hear and see and smell, that the sacred Celibate of Priests did stink an hundreth years before Luther's time. I will therefore here supply for him, and, hoping he will in his next take notice of the sentence, will represent it here again.  
The words are these: Melius foret, 
Abb. Panorm. de Cleric. coniugat. Cap. cum olim.  et pro bono & salute animarum salubrius, si & uniuscuiusque voluntati relinqueretur, it a ut non valentes aut non volentes continere, possint contrahere; Quia experientia docente experimus contrarium effectum sequi ex illa lege continentiae, cum hodie plerique non vivant spiritualiter, nec sine mundi, sed emaculentur illicito coitu cum ipsorum gravissimo peccato, ubi cum propria uxore esset castitas. That is, It were better, and more wholesome for the good and salvation of souls, if it were left to every man's will; so as they which either cannot, or will not contain, might marry. For we find by experience a contrary effect to follow upon that Law of Continency; since the greatest part of (our Priests) at this day live not spiritually, neither are chaste, but are defiled with unlawful copulations, not without their most heinous sin; whereas, with their own Wives it should be Chastity. Thus he. A sentence worthy of that Epiphonema of mine, (Is this a Cardinal think you or an Huguenot?) With this, my Detector deals, as their Inquisition doth with a misnamed Heretic; he chokes it up in secret, or, if he bring it forth, it is not without a gag in the mouth: All his answer is, 
Refut. p. 107.  We tie not ourselves to every man's opinion; and, This sentence is censured by BELLARMINE as erroneous; As if Panormitan were every body, and Bellarmine an Oracle. It is enough for us, that one of their own greatest, learnedest, zealousest Prelates justifieth our Marriages, and wisheth them in use rather than their Continency.  
To that other Testimony of Panormitan, he answers by a grant, yielding us freely, that if we take divine Law for that which is expressly determined in Scripture, it must needs be said, that there is no evident proof set down of continency in Ecclesiastical men by the Apostles; yet, that it is so insinuated, and the observation of it hath been so ancient, 
Refut. p. 105.  as BELLARMINE noteth, that it may be truly termed Apostolical; Thus he. And even for this are we beholden to him; All his friends would not have been so liberal. His joannes Maior, his Clictovaeus, his Torrensis, and all their rigorous Clients would not have said so: As, on the other side, the old Gloss was not so wise, that could only say (which is now expunged) Apostoli docuerunt exemplo, The Apostles taught this by their example. But what are these so pregnant insinuations? Good wits have found them out; One was, that of 
g Decret. p. 1. dist. 28.  INNOCENTIUS 2. That these men are the vessels and Temples of God, therefore they may not Cubilibus & immunditijs seruire, serve for chambering and wantonness. Iwis, no Layman is such; Therefore he may be allowed to be filthy. Another was, of Franc. 
Luk. 21.  Torrensis, Take heed lest your hearts be oppressed with surfeiting and drunkenness, and cares of this life: Whereof Bishop 
h Esp●nc. de cont. l. 1.  Espencaeus is so ashamed, that he answers it with an Absit; God forbid (saith he) that we should think that the Lord, which is the author and Sanctifier of Marriage, should hold it in the same rank with surfeiting and drunkenness. Another was of the same Author (
i Tit. 2. Si quis legilimam commixtionem & filiorum recreation●m, corruptionem & ●●tiaquinationem vocat, ille habet cohab●tatorem d●monem Apostatam. ●gnat Epist ad Philadelph.  teaching us to deny ungodliness and worldly Lusts:) us, of the Clergy; belike the rest need not; And who knows not the witty and learned insinuations of their good Siricius, Those that are in the flesh, cannot please God? These, and such like are the forceable insinuations of this imposed continency, which even very boys and Idiots can hiss out of the Schools.   

SECT. XXII.  
FRom Panormitan, he descends to my alleged Gratian, 
Refut. p. 105.  who because he speaks these words (by way of explication) in a continued tenor with a sentence of Austin, is (to my mortal sin) cited by me as speaking from Austin. The position and the inference of the words is such, as might deceive any eye that would trust a Gratian; What might the price be (trow we) of such a crime in the Apostolic chamber? In my next Shrift, he shall hear, meâ culpà; The words are Gratians, that Copula Sacerdotalis vel consanguincorum, The marriage or (as this Clerkly Grammarian translates it) the carnal copulation of Priests, or kinsfolks is not forbidden by any Legal, evangelical, or Apostolical authority, but by Ecclesiastical Law it is forbidden. We could not hire a Proctor to say more. But herein C. E. hath detected two foul faults of the citation; The one, that I trusted his Gratian so far, as to make him speak out of Austin, which (I trust) a little Holywater may wash off; The other, 
Refut. p. 106.  That I concealed the marriage of kinsfolk, within the prohibited degrees; which (saith he) although only forbidden by Ecclesiastical Law, yet dares not Master HALL. (I think) transgress it; so as this Law hath greater force than he supposeth it to have. So he▪ Plainly, my Refuter knows not what he saith, else he would never thus palpably plead against himself; For what ever thing was there in all the constitutions of his Church, more subject to variation, than the legal supputation of the forbidden degrees? which was a long time confined to the third degree inclusively; another while extended to the fourth; and sometime to the seventh. Let him herein reconcile his Pope Nicholas and Gregory, with Pope Innocent; Whereof the one left all free that were without the pale of the fourth degree, the other restrained all to the seventh; And when he finds an unalterablenesse in the determination of these degrees, let him plead for an equally-fatall necessity of his Ecclesiastical continence; in the mean time, let him take it patiently to be beaten with his own rod.  
No divine Law then (he grants) hath enjoined this Celibate, but an Ecclesiastical. What is this other than I said? God never imposed this Law of continency; Who then? 
k Espencae. ex Test. Abb. l.. 1. c. 3. Facerat igitur Ecclesia Boni medici instar, medicinam quae obsit magis quam prosit tollentis. The Church should therefore do like a good Physician in removing the medicine which it sees to do more harm then good. Refut. p. 107.  The Church. And why may not I go on, to ask, Whether a good wife would gainsay what her husband willeth? Flourishing will not answer this. All the praises of beauty and fidelity which are given to the true Church, argue Rome to be the false. Whereas therefore the Priest shuts up thus bravely; (And this Minister who would make the one to gainsay the other, should bring some place or sentence to show the same, (which he may chance to do the next morning after the Greek Calends) or else never avouch so unchristian a Paradox. He shall understand that his Greek Calends are past. The Spirit of God saith, A Bishop may be the Husband of one wife: The Church of Rome says, A Bishop may not be the Husband of any wife at all: Whether is this a contradiction? The Spirit of God says, Marriage is honourable amongst all men: The Church of Rome says, Marriage is dishonourable to some. The Spirit of God says, To avoid Fornication, let every man have his wife: The Church of Rome, like a quick-huswife, says, Some order of men shall not have a wife, though to avoid Fornication. Let my Masse-Priest show these to be no contradictions (which he may chance to do at the Greek Calends) or else grant this to be neither Paradox, nor unchristian.   

SECT. XXIII.  
FRom Cardinal Panormitan I ascended to Pope Pius the Second, 
Refut.. p 108.  whom I ushered in, with this Preface, Let a Pope himself speak out of PETER'S Chair, PIUS the second; as learned as hath sit in that room this thousand years. Two things my Caviller snarls at in the Preface, two in the authority itself.  
My first manifest untruth is, that PIUS the Second spoke this as out of the Chair. A witless misprision. I hope he sat in PETER'S Chair that spoke it; if he spoke it not as from the Chair, I care for no more. Is not this sufficient to win respect from a Catholic Priest? Otherwise, whether it were Stool, or Chair; or if a Chair, whether the consistorial, or the Porphyrychayre, wherein he sits before his first Triumph, 
l Lib. sacr. cerem.  tanquam in stercoraria, it is all one to me. Themselves must first agree what it is to speak as from the Chair, ere I can affirm that Pius the Second so spoke this. Id Populus curet, I referred the chair to the man, not to the speech: In the mean time C. E. is not so good a Groom to the Chair, as Gregory of Valence, who attributes infallibility to a Pope's sentence, though it be 
m Vid. Rom. Irrecon.  sine curâ & study. My second wrong is the superlative lashing (so he calls it) of other Pope's learning in comparison of this. I cry him mercy; I did not know what sin it was to commend a Pope's learning; That is not it (I confess) that carries away the Crowns and the Keys: But the comparison offended; Perhaps C. E. hath known that chair more learnedly furnished: It may be, he thinks of Boniface the Ninth, called before Peter de Thomacellis, a Neapolitan, 
n Theod. Niem. lib. 1. c. 6.  who could neither write, nor sing; hardly understanding the propositions of the Advocates in the Consistory; insomuch as in his time, Inscitia ferè venalis facta fuit in ipsâ curiâ; Ignorance was grown valuable. Or it may be he thinks of those ancient ferule-fingred Boy-popes'; one of the benedict's, a grave Father of ten years old; or john the Thirteenth an aged Stripling of nineteen. Or perhaps, he alludes to those learned times (within my compass) which were acknowledged in the Council of Rheims; where when offer was made of requiring the Pope's judgement, it was publicly replied, that besides the exposednesse of that City to sale, Romae iam nullum ferè esse qui literas didicerit, There was scarce a man at Rome, that could spell his Letters.  
Heu quam perfatuae  
sunt tibi, Roma, togae!  
If I should here add out of Alphonsus de Castro, that some Popes were such great Clerks, 
o Alphons. contra heres. li. 1. cap. 4. Edit. Colon. ann. 1543.  ut Grammaticam penitùs ignorent, That they had no skill in Grammar, C. E. would tell me that my Book is not of a corrected edition, though it was printed at Coleine. Such bran hath been cast out in their later sifting and shifting of Authors.   

SECT. XXIIII.  
IN the authority itself, his Cavils are childish; Where Pius said, 
* Marriage upon g●od reason was forbidden to Priests, but upon greater reason seems fit to be restored. Refut. p. 109.  Sacerdotibus magnâ ratione sublatas nuptias, maiore restituendas videri; My first fault, is that I turn Sacerdotes, The Clergy, instead of Priests; which word is of a larger extent, including also Bishops: The silly man sees not that I translated it to his advantage, against my own; For, every Sacerdos is Clericus, not every Clericus, Sacerdos. Very frequently are Bishops comprehended under the name of Sacerdotes, as well as of Clerus; and no less usually under the name of Clerici, the superior Orders are not comprehended. He is not worthy to write himself Priest, that understands his Orders no better.  
My second error is, That I turned the last Clause of the Sentence, (Is to be restored) whereas the words are, Restituendas videri. Here could be no fraud, whiles I set the Latin words in the Margin. The Man thinks of his (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) or his, Videtur quod sic; probatur quod non; but if his Grammar had not been ill learned, he had known that (Videri) doth not always signify a doubtful probability, but sometimes a certain evidence, as, Visum est Spiritui Sancto & nobis; and, Qui videbantur columnae; Or (if his Logic had fully taught him the Distinctions of Sunt and Videntur) this quarrel had been spared. This Seeming was Being; Or, if this lawless Lurker had ever had any taste of the Civil or Canon Law, he might have been able to construe that Maxim, Quod quis per alium facit, per se facere videtur: and that judged Case, Qui nomen debitoris legatum vivens exegerit, legatum ademisse videtur. In this style spoke this learned Pope, which my unlearned Adversary cannot reach unto. For, if Pius, or Silvius, may have leave to Comment upon himself, when the Question was of suffecting Amadeus, Duke of Savoy, a married man, in the room of Eugenius; Ex quo constat (saith he) etc. It is apparent that not only he, which hath been married, but he that is married, may be assumed to the Popedom; and a little after: Fortasse peius non esset, etc. And perhaps it were not worse if more Priests had wives, for many would be saved in a married Priesthood, which now in a single Priesthood are damned; he saith directly, Damnantur, They are damned, not, They seem to be damned. And therefore to prevent this real damnation, Marriage is really to be restored to them, not that it should only seem to be restored. To conclude, take Videri, for bare Seeming, surely, it must be construed, Videtur mihi; I Pope PIUS think, or judge, that it were fit that Priests should have the liberty of marriage restored again to them; which together with sublatas implieth, that in former times Priests were married, and as the case now standeth aught again so to be. Which is the very state of this question, which we avouch.  
And in his Epistle to john Freûnd, Credimus te non insulso uti consilio; I think it is no ill counsel for thee (since thou canst not contain) to seek for a Wife; although that should have been thought of, before thou didst enter into holy Orders; but we are not all Gods, that we can foresee future things; since it is comen to this, that thou canst not resist the Law of thy Flesh, it is better for thee to marry, then to burn. Thus he. For which advice, doubtless, he found good cause in his own experience; who having been employed formerly in this Island of ours, left two Bastards behind him, the one, begotten of an English woman, the other, of a Scottish; The one whereof he commends to his Father Silvius, a Citizen of Syenna; the other he confesses to his friend P. de Noxeto: But this indeed was before his Priesthood; Afterwards, 
Whiles he was Cardinal, he had his Concubine; to whom at last he gave threescore Florins for her Dowry, Epist. 361.  it is strange what he confesses of himself in his 92. Epistle: Mihi herclè parum meriti est in castitate; I cannot boast of any merit in my chastity, for to tell the truth (Magis me Venus fugitat, quam ego illam horreo) Venus doth rather fly from me, than I abhor it. It was not therefore out of speculation, but sense, not out of seeming, but certainty, that Silvius passes his Restituendas videri.  
So now to shut up this point, the blessed Apostle Saint Paul, and (in his Attendance) Panormitan, Gratian, and Pius (in their clear suffrages for us) are fully acquitted from the vain cavils of my Detector; and God is on my side, the Church of Rome, on his. Let Sincerity judge which Scale of the Balance is heavier.   

SECT. XXV.  
FRom the lawfulness of our Marriages, 
Refut. p. 110.  I descended to the Antiquity; where my Refuter takes an ignorant exception. I said, Some things have nothing to plead for them but Time, Age hath been an old refuge for falsehood▪ Then I lay for my foundation Tertullians' Rule; 
* Rectum est quodcunque primum, adulterinum quodcunque posterius. Tert. de Praesc.  That which is first, is truest; My Detector finds here a flat contradiction, and cries out, Do these men wake or sleep when they write? There are none of his wise friends which will not be ashamed of this gross stupidity; For whether of these two Sentences can he dislike? and if both be allowable, how can they be contradictory? neither am I his Adversary herein, but Tertullian. What surer way could there be, then to control the pretences of a secondary antiquity by the first? And what contradiction is in this? The first is true, all under the first is obnoxious to error; The puisne posthumous Antiquity hath been a refuge for falsehood, the Primigenious Antiquity (which proceeded from the ancient of Days) is certain. Let this Trifler go learn to spell English, ere he presume to Divinity. This Antiquity is the touch, whereby we desire all truth to be tried; which easily finds all the gilded Coins of Romish innovations, shamefully counterfeit.  
Not to go back so far as Paradise (though I well might) where God made the first wedding in perfect innocence. I began with Moses and his Leviticall Brotherhood; to which my Refuter replies; 
Refut. p. 111.  That yet in eating their Paschall Lamb they had their loins girt. justly concluded! All the jews did eat the Paschall Lamb with their loins girt, for the expedition, or moment of their flight, therefore their Priests and Levites did not converse with their Wives. If his Superiors of Douai do not blush at this Logic, his wit and their shame are gone together.  
But, They abstained (he saith) from their Wives, whiles they did minister in the Sanctuary; What if we yield this? Their ministration was by courses, and had intermissions. There is an holy and decent modesty in all those which are worthy to serve at the Altar, which teacheth them to give God his due times, with respect even of outward purity; which is all that 
q Euseb. de praep. Euang. l. 1. c. 9 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, i. Sacra facientibus, they turn it, Sacratis, etc.  Eusebius by them misse-translated; and misse-alledged by him, requireth. But what will my Refuter say to the High Priest himself; which was bound every day to a morning and evening Sacrifice, who yet was not restrained from a conjugal society? That Bone hath troubled, blunted, and broken better Teeth than his. 
Refut. p. 112.   
But (saith he) The figure of the eternal Priesthood of Christ (to wit) MELCHISEDECK, i● not read to have had any wife at all; What of this? He, whom he prefigured was only a spiritual Husband to his Church. If this Man be not read to have had a Wife; no more is he read to have had Father or Mother. Nay, he is read to have had neither. Why do they not thence infer that Priests ought to have neither, but to be begotten and borne of Angels, not of humane kind? which is as good for an inference, as that foppery is for a Legendary fable, that Luther was begotten by an Incubus. Yet had the Literal (not mystical) Melchisedec both Father and Mother: and if Sem were Melchisedec (as wiser men than mine Adversary have upon good probabilities thought) he may pass, I hope, for a married man.  
As for the perfection of the new Law above the old, it only bars those institutions which had in them an imperfection, not those which God thought fit for Paradise itself. So as the practice of the jewish Church, founded by God himself, is an all-sufficient warrant for the marriage of his evangelical Ministers.   

SECT. XXVI.  
FRom Moses and the Prophets I descend to the Apostles. What did they? C. E. answers roundly: They did not marry; 
Refut. p. 112.  and they who were married before, did leave their Wives. I urge Saint Paul's report of the rest of the Apostles, and the Brethren of the Lord and Cephas, that they not only had Wives, but 
r 1. Cor. 9.5.  carried them along in their Travels. He answers, They were not Wives, but other devout Women, which followed them to administer maintenance to them. A likely tale, if they could all agree in it; That the Apostles would cast off their own Wives, and carry about strange Women with them, upon whatever pretence. Credat judaeus apella, Non ego. Yet my shameless Refuter cries out of my pride and ignorance in not allowing this, which he dares proclaim for the received exposition of all the Fathers, and all that ever wrote in the Greek and Latin Church. When he knows that his 
s Clem. Recognit. l. 7.  Clement in his Recognitions, and his own Pope in their Canon Law, hath expounded it contrarily, of Wives, not of strange Women. 
t Dist. 31. Omnino.  Leo the ninth, against the Epistle of Nicetas the Abbot; where he directly affirms that the Apostles did carry about their Wives, Vt de mercede praedicationis sustentarentur ab iis; That they might be maintained by the reward of their preaching; making the force of the word to lie in circumducendi, non amplectendi: Either therefore his Pope errs in a deliberate exposition of Scripture, or else I have not erred; And either his Popes are no Fathers, or C. E. hath no forehead.  

Refut. p. 113.  Nothing can make the Rhemists (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, a Sister, a Woman) not ridiculous; not that Visor of Age, which my Refuter pleases to fasten upon it. There wants an Article (he saith.) Our Apostle should have comen to Cardinal Bellarmine and him, to learn when, and where to use it.  
That our last accurate Translation of the English Bible, hath Woman in the Margin, is a poor advantage; who seeth not that it is the manner of that exquisite Edition, to set all the Idiotismes of either Language, and diverse readings in the Margin? Every Schole-Boy knows that the word signifies both; but whether of them is fit to be received into the Text, our Text itself shows; How wittily is Saint PAUL'S, A Woman, a Sister, paralleled with Saint PETER, Viri Fratres; 
Men and Brethren.  Ye Men which are Brethren, is a meet predication, but, Ye Sisters which are Women, is absurd; Neither doth Saint Peter say (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) Brethren men, as Saint Paul says, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, A Sister Woman. As for the authority of Hierome, well may we appeal from his judgement as incompetent, whom his own Doctors accuse as partial, and censure as 
* A Title given to Gregory, also in Apolog. Tumultuaria.  〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, (if not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.) Yet even he against Heluidius translates it, Vxores circumducendi.  

Refut. p. 115.  For the rest, it is worth my Readers note, how the Plagiary Priest having stolen this whole passage (as most of the rest) verbatim out of Bellarmine, yet over-reaches his Master; for where Bellarmine says, Ita ferè omnes Graeci & Latini; So almost all the Greek and Latin; this Bayard dares say, All (saving Clemens) as well Greek, as Latin; and when he hath done, names some that say nothing of it at all, as Chrysostome; Another that in Heresy speaks for him one where, another where against him, as Tertullian▪ who being also himself a married Priest, could say in his exhortation, Licebat & Apostolis nubere, & v●ores circumducere; Another tha● grounds upon an evident mis-reading, as Ambrose; and to make up the Bulk, puts in Saint Bede, and Saint Thomas parties to the cause, & and then sings, jon paean. It is well y● that he grants Clemens of Alexandria, and Saint Ignatius to be on our side, for this interpretation; and when he hath done, he must be forced to yield us his Pope Clement, Pope Leo seconded by his Gratian, and Laurentius Valla, and others cited by Erasmus; in so much as Espencaeus himself grants herein, 
x Esp. l. 1. de Cont.  〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 veterum, a difference amongst the Ancient. And if these had never been, the Text clears itself, for, not to enforce the word (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) which implies a power over the party carried▪ 
To lead about.  The Apostle speaks of a matter of charge to the Church, by this circumduction; Now that rich Matrons should follow the Apostles, and minister to them of their substance, was a matter of ease to the Church. Neither was this attendance for ministration, so much an act of Cephas, and the other Apostles, as a voluntary act of the women themselves. To conclude, in this the Apostles practice should have crossed their doctrine. For if Saint Paul gave that charge (of being the Husband of one Wife) on purpose 
y Chrys. Hom. in Tit. praecitat.  (as Chrysostome saith) to stop the mouth of the Enemies to Marriage; how must this needs open them again, and breed a conceit of that impurity, which Saint Paul meant to oppose, that the Apostles themselves as ashamed of their wives, forsook them, and chose rather to be attended by Strangers?  
So as I must take leave to be ever in this Heresy, that the Apostles had Wives, and carried them about.   

SECT. XXVII.  

Refut. p. 116.  But what Boyes-play is this, To give and take? Our doughty Champion hath granted us Clement of Alexandria, and now he pulls him back again; Clemens (saith he) grants the Apostles to have had wives, but he denies that they used them as wives; cunningly dissembling that which Clemens said in the beginning of the same period; For Peter and Philip (saith he) did beget children, etc. How did Peter beget them, if he were not Peter when he begot them? In the time of their painful evangelical peregrination they forbore perhaps: doth it therefore follow that they did always forget to be Husbands? Whence, in all likelihood, had S. Peter his Petronella? if she were not borne after he was Peter? Whence was that inscription on Pilagiaes' Tomb, (if we may believe 
z Cit ab Espen. loco citat●. Here lies the Wife of Bishop Dionysius, Daughter to Thomas the Apostle.  PERIONIUS) Hic sita est sponsa DIONYSII, THOMae Apostoli filia. There is not (I grant) necessity in this proof there is probability. It is therefore too boldly affirmed by my Detector, that the Apostles, after that public calling undertaken, used not their Wives. Is that of Saint Ignatius nothing against him? Opto Deo dignus, etc. I desire to be found worthy of God, as PETER and PAUL, and the rest of the Apostles which were married men, and 
a Ignat. Ep. ad Philadelph. non libidinis causa, sed posteritatis surroganda gratia coniuges habuerunt.  not for lust's sake, but for propagation of Posterity enjoyed their Wives. Thus he. So much against C. E. that C. E. is no less against him. The Testimony of Saint Ignatius (saith he) is a mere forgery; easily answered. If Ignatius had either denied or disliked these Marriages, no man's word had been more authentic; now, this clause hath made him falsified: He cannot (I hope) say that the sentence came out of our Forge; we take him as we find him; neither doth B. Espenceus, or any other ingenuous Writer, take such exception, but finds the authority weighty. That more unlikely Epistle which Ignatius wrote to Saint john, and the blessed Virgin (though palpably rejected by their own) is classical enough, when it may serve a Coccius, or 
a Bell. Tom. 1. pag. 837.  Bellarmine, or a Pierre Cotton; But, here the Epistle itself is not questioned; only this clause is bored in the Eare. And why so? Forsooth the ancient Greek Copies have it not. Doubtless, the man hath vexed the old Greek Manuscripts; but when he hath done, his one Fellow shall give him the lie; who confesses it to be in all Copies both Greek and Latin, old and new, whiles he saith, that those words (
b Those wo●ds (And the other Apostles) are to be razed out of the Text. Marga●. de la Big●e. Not. in Epist ad Philadelph.  Et alij Apostoli) ex textu abradenda. Or if that will not serve; there is yet to be seen in Balliol College in Oxford, an old Copy of the age of seven hundred, or eight hundred years, wherein the words are found; Only the words (S. Paul, & the other Apostles) blurred; yet so, as they are still to be well discerned: If the Greek should want the clause, what were this? The first Edition of Ignatius in Greek was (1558.) as the Centurists have noted; and how easy was it to leave out one sentence, that seemed prejudicial? Let him never cast this upon the Grecians: they never so excelled in this Faculty of counterfeiting as the Romans: Greece in this must yield to Italy, however it pleases 
c Erat consuetudo Gracorum fere ordinaria corrumpendi libros, Bell. li. 4. de Pont. c. 11. Quoniam Romani sicut non acumina, ita nec imposturas habent, Greg. l. 5. Ep. 14. add Noorsen.  Pope Gregory and Cardinal Bellarmine herein only to give it superiority.  
Amongst the rest, this very place puts me in mind of a memorable juggling Trick of his Fellows. The old Platina printed at Paris by Francis Regnault. An. 1500. (which I have seen) and all other old Copies, read thus of Saint Luke; Vixit annos 84. 
d Platin. in Cleto. ad finem. Luke lived 84. years, having a Wife in Bythinia. Having not a Wife in Bythinia.  Vxorem habens in Bythinia. Now comes the Onuphrian Edition set forth at Coleine. An. 1600. from the shop of Materuus Colinus, and reads, Vxorem non habens in Bythinia; with which authority Espencaeus himself was deceived, citing Hierome for it as the Fountain, whence perhaps Platina might fetch it; but if my Reader please to turn to that 
c Her. Catol. script. Illustr.  Catalogue of famous Writers, ascribed (not unjustly) to Hierome, there shall he find the very same cozenage; the words run so indeed, in the Latin printed Copies; but not acknowledged, not mentioned by Sophronius in the Greek Translation; and Erasmus, reading it either, Having, or not having, at last shuts up; Haec verba videntur adiecta; quandoquidem nec adduntur apud SOPHRONIUM, nec in exemplaribus emendatioribus. These words (saith ERASMUS) seem patched to the rest; since they neither are added in SOPHRONIUS, nor in the better Copies. Thus he. It was fit my READER should have a taste of the Roman integrity.  
I alleged the learned Cardinal Caietan for the likelihood of S. Paul's Marriage; Can my Refuter deny this? The words are plain: 
f Caiet. Com. in Phil. c. 4. Quia omnes Apostoli exceptis joanne & Paul●▪ uxores babuerunt, Amb. etc. Refut. p. 117.  Locus cogere videtur; The place seems to enforce it, not by demonstrative reason but in all reasonable sense, that PAUL had a Wife, So he. Which is all I contended for. If now he shall think to choke me with a cross Testimony of the same Author, concerning Saint Paul's not conversing with his Wife after his Apostle-ship, he may understand, that I well remember Caietan to have been a Roman Cardinal; and therefore in some points necessarily unsound; whose ingenuity yet in this business I have formerly showed.   

SECT. XXVIII.  

Refut. p. 118.  FRom the practice of the Apostles (which is yet clear for us) we descended to their Canons. It troubles my Refuter, that I say, the Romish Church fathers these upon the Apostles, and that their jesuit TURRIAN sweats to defend it (insinuating my contrary opinion) and yet that I cite them for myself; whereas his wisdom might have considered that their force is no whit less strong against them, notwithstanding our doubt, or denial. For example, The Trent Canons roar terribly to them: to us, or the French, they are but as the Potguns of Boys: we may cite these to them as Gospel, they may cite them to us as Koran.  
By this it appears how far not only School-learning, but even Logic transcends this poor Refuters capacity, who could not distinguish between disputing adrem, & ad hominem.  
What I said in my Epistle to my reverend and worthy Friend Master Doctor james, the incomparably-industrious and learned Bibliothecary of Oxford (a man whom their Possevine thought so well of, that he hath handsomely stolen a Book of his, and clapped it out for his own, a man whom so base a Tongue as my Detectors cannot disgrace) I profess still, that I hold those Canons of the Apostles uncanonical; And do I hold this alone? Doth not his Pope Gelasius so? Doth not Isidore Bishop of Hispalis so? Doth not Leo the Ninth so? Are not some of them at pleasure rejected by Possevine, 
Can. 65.67. etc.  Baronius, Bellarmine? Or, in a word, if they be the true issue of the Apostles, are they accordingly respected, and observed of the Roman Church? Doth not his 
g Mic. Med. de sacr. hom. Contin. l. 5. Vix. sex autocto Latina Ecclesia nunc obseruat.  Medina grant to their shame, that the Latin Church scarce observes six, or eight of them? These Canons than I do not hold Apostolical; I do hold ancient, and not unworthy of respect; and such as I wonder they have escaped the Roman Purgations. As for those other nine or ten noted Counterfeits, which I joined herewith for company, in that Epistle, his shame would serve him to justify, if his leisure would; whereas there is scarce one of them whom his own Authors have not branded.  

Ref. p. 120.121. usque ad 125.  My Refuter must have a fling; In an idle excursion therefore he justly rails on the Protestant practice, in rejecting those Fathers for Bastardy one while, whom otherwhiles they cite for currant; when his own eminent impudency in the very passage next going before, and in the next following (to go no further) offends in the same kind. The truth is; The Protestants take liberty to refuse those Fathers, whom even ingenuous Papists have censured as base; The Papists take liberty, when they lift, to reject the authority of those Fathers, whose Truth they cannot deny. The instances hereof would be endless. But with what face can any Papist tax us for this, when all the World may see above three hundred and twenty of their Authors, whom after the first allowance they have either suppressed, or censured? To their eternal and open conviction, Doctor james (whom they may revile, but shall never answer) hath collected and published the names, and pages.   

SECT. XXIX.  
NOt to follow therefore this babbling vagary of my Adversary against Zuinglius, 
Ref. p. 126.127. Apost. Can. 5.  Luther, Musculus, whitaker's, (what Puppy cannot bark at a dead Lion?) we come close to the Canon. That no Bishop, Presbyter, or Deacon shall forsake or cast off his Wife in pretence of Religion, or Piety, upon pain of deposition. Wherewith how much my Refuter is pressed, appears in that he is fain with Baronius to avoid it, with, Apocryphorum non est tanta authoritas; There is no so great authority in Apocryphal Canons.  
Where is the man that even now vpbrayded us with the lawless rejection of ancient Records; and by name would undertake to justify those whom my Epistle taxed for adulterine, whereof these Canons of the Apostles were a part? now he is fain to change his note, Apocryphorum non est tanta authoritas. He hath cast off Ignatius already, anon you shall find him rejecting Socrates, Sozomen, Nicephorus, Gratian, Sigebert, H. Huntingdon, and whom not? upon every occasion shamelessly practising that which he censures.  
If I allege the sixth general Council, that of Constantinople, proclaiming this sense truly Apostolical, even the sixth general Council is rejected as neither sixth, nor general, nor Council; That this Apostolical Canon is bend against the denial of Matrimonial conversation, is apparently expressed in those Canons of Constantinople, however the extent of it in regard of some persons is restrained. There is no way therefore to untie this knot, but by cutting it; and my cavilling Priest with his Jesuits may gnaw long enough upon this bone, ere they suck in any thing from hence, but the blood of their own jaws.  
Any of those words single might be avoided, but so set together, will abide no elusion, Let him not upon pretence of Religion eiect his Wife.  
The shift that C. E. 
Refut. p. 128.  borrows from Bellarmine, is gross, and such as his own heart cannot trust (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) saith he) that is, 
* In pretence of heediness.  praetextu cautionis. Look over all the Copies; all interpretations of these Canons; that of Dionysius Exiguus; that of Gentianus Heruetus; that of Caranza; that which Gratian, (whom my either graceless or ignorant Adversary dares name against me) citeth from hence; all of them run praetextu religionis. How clear is that of their own 
h Dist. 28. Sub obtentu religionis propriam uxorem contemnere.  Law? Si quis docuerit Sacerdotem, etc. If any man shall teach that a Priest, under pretence of Religion, may contemn his own Wife, let him be accursed.  
And Zonaras, whom both our junius, and their Espencaeus cite out of Quintinus his Exposition, is most clear; Hoc enim videtur in calumniam fieri nuptiarum, etc. For this eiection (saith he) would seem to be done in reproach of marriage, as if the Matrimonial knowledge of man and wife caused any uncleanness. Thus he. Where it is plain, that he takes it not of maintenance, but (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) of the Conjugal act. The necessity of which sense also is evicted by their own 
* Espenc. l. 1. de Cont. c. 4.  Espencaeus out of Saint Chrysostome in his second Homily upon Titus. And 
i In Canon. Apost. in P●ot. in neno Can.  Balsamon no less directly; Because (saith he) before that Law of JUSTINIAN, it was lawful for a man upon any cause to divorce his Wife: therefore the present Canon gives charge, that it shall not be lawful for a Bishop, Priest, or Deacon, upon pretence of Piety, to put away his Wife. Thus he.  
From all which it is not hard to see, that in those young days of the Church, the mystery of iniquity began in this point to work; so as Marriage, according to the Apostles prediction, began to be in an ill name, though the clear Light of that Primitive Truth would not endure the disgrace.  
So as in all this I have both by Moses, and the Examples of that Leviticall Priesthood; by the Testimony of the Apostles, by their practice, by their anciently-reputed Canons, & by the testimony of the agedest Fathers, so made good the lawfulness and antiquity of the Marriages of persons Ecclesiastical, that I shall not need to fear a Divorce either from my Wife, or from the Truth, in that my Confident and just Assertion.    

THE HONOUR OF THE MARRIED CLERGY maintained, etc. The second Book.  

SECT. I.  
ANd now, 
Refut. p. 130.  since in this point we have happily won the day, less labour needs in the other. It is safe erring with Moses and the Prophets, with CHRIST and his Apostles; Soon after (according to S. Paul's prophecy) Spirits of Errors were abroad; and whether out of the necessary exigence of those prosecuted times, or out of an affectation to win favour and admiration in the eyes of Gentilism, Virginity began to raise up itself in some private conceits, upon the ruins of honest Wedlock; neither is it hard to discern by what degrees; yet, never with such absolute success, as to proceed to any Law of restraint. I do not therefore fain to myself (as mine idle Refuter) golden ages of mirth and 
k Though Amram the Levite, father to Moses, married in the heat of Pharaohs persecution: and David did the like in Saul's.  marrying, under those tyrannous persecutions, but in those bloody ages, I do avouch to him, and the World, an immunity from the Tyrannous yoke of forced continency. This if he could have disproved by any just instances, he had not given us words.  

Refut. p. 131.  If he be angry that I said, some of the pretended Epistles of his ancient Popes to this purpose are palpably foisted; Let him fasten where he lists, if he have not an answer, let me have the shame; in the mean time, it is enough to snarl where he dares not bite.  
That which I cited from Origen, 
Refut. p. 131, 132, 133.  advising the sons of Clergymen not to be proud of their parentage, he cannot deny, he can cavil at. The same persuasion (saith he) might be made to S. PETER'S daughter (as many are of opinion that he had one) yet will it not follow that he knew his wife, after he was an Apostle. So he. But what needs this parenthesis, if the man be true to his own Authors? Did we devose the Story of Petronilla? Did we invent the passage of her Suitor Flaccus; Of her Fever, the cure whereof her father denied? Of her Epitaph engraven in Marble, by her fathers own hand; Aureae Petronillae, dilectissimae filiae, To my dear and precious PETRONILLA, my most beloved daughter, found by Paul the First? Are not these things reported by their own Volateranus, Petr. Natalis, 
l Esp. 1. c. 8. Volat. 1 18. Petr. Nat. l. 5. c. 69. Plat. vit. Pauli. 1. Sigeb. 757.  Beda, Vssuardus, Sygebertus, Platina? Still where is the man that cries out of rejecting authorities in other cases allowed? Either then let him give the lie to his Histories, or else let him compute the Time when Flaccus, the Roman Count, was a Suitor to her, and see if he be not forced to grant that she was begotten of S. Peter after his Apostleship: And so (for aught he knows) might those sons be whom Origen thus dehorteth; This man was not their Midwife. The place of Origen which he 
m Orig. Homil. 13. in Numer.  cities to the contrary, he took up somewhat on trust: let him go and inquire better of his Creditor; by the same token, that in the Homily of Origen, whither he sends us, he shall find nothing but Balaams' Ass; an object fit for his meditation. As for that parcel of the Testimony, which he saith my chincough caused me to suppress (in ipsa Christianitate) it is as Herbe-Iohn in the Pot, 
Refut. p. 133.  to the purpose of my allegation. Origen speaks of that Text, Many that are first, shall be last, etc. Which he applies as a calling-card to the children of Christian parents, especially Si fuerint ex patribus Sacerdotali sede dignificatis, If they be the sons of them which are dignified with Sacerdotal honour; The change of the Preposition is remarkable, ex patribus, arguing that he speaks not of their education, but their descent, and therefore implying no less than I affirmed, that their parentage gives them a supposed cause of exaltation.   

SECT. II.  
HOly 
n Athanas. Epist. ad Dracont. Many Bishops, etc.  ATHANASIUS was brought by me in stead of a thousand Histories: Who tells us that it was no rare thing to find married Bishops in his time. 
Refut. p. 134.  My wise Refuter, after he hath idly gone about the bush a little, comes out with this dry verdict, What will Master HALL. hence infer? That Bishops and Priests may lawfully marry? Saint ATHANASIUS saith it not, but only recounteth the fact, that some married of both sorts, but whether they did well or ill, or whether himself did approve or condemn the same, there is no word in this sentence. Thus he. We take what he gives, and seek for no more; We cited Athanasius in stead of many Histories, not of many Arguments, Histories de facto, not discourses de iure; The lawfulness was discussed before, the practice and use is now inquired of. This Athanasius witnesses, and C. E. yields; Wherein yet I may not forget to put my Refuter in mind, how brittle his memory is; who in the same leaf contradicts himself; For when he had before confessed that ATHANASIUS doth neither approve nor condemn the practice, either as good or evil, 
Refut. p. 136.  now he plainly tells us, that the words were not spoken by way of simple narration, but of mislike and reprehension. He would be a good liar if he could agree with himself. Why of dislike? For (saith he) it was never lawful for Monks or Bishops to beget children. Ipse dixit, we must believe him; 
o Chrys. ad Hebr. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  Not to tell him that Chrysostome teaches us 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) it is possible with marriage to do the acts of Monks: nor to convince him with counter-testimonies, let him tell me what fault it is, to do or not to do miracles? These in this sentence of 
* Athanas. ibid. We have known Bishops working miracles, and Monks working none; Many Bishops not to have married, etc. As likewise you may find Bishops to have been fatherr of Children, and Monks not to have sought for marriage.  ATHANASIUS, go in the same rank with Marriage. But, to clear Athanasius, he brings Hierom against Vigilantius, (impudently called by him, The father of the Protestants, who would have all Clergymen to marry; when his very Rhemists have checked him for this slander) pleading against that necessity, from which we have oft washed our hands; when as the same Author against jovinian affirms de facto, the same with Athanasius, and us.  
To say then that Athanasius spoke this only of lewd licentious Monks or Bishops, is but the lewd liberty of a licentious tongue that hath overrun both Truth and itself.  
From hence this Orator, this parcel of wit, flies out into a pleasant frump, as he thinks, but indeed an ugly, inhuman, loathsome ribaldry, ill-beseeming the mouth of any that was borne of a woman, I will not say whether ill or well beseeming the pen of a Virgine-Priest, forsooth so pure and Angelical, that marriage would un-saint him. His unmanly unnatural Style belcheth thus: 
Pag. 137.  Thus LUTHER, of KATHERINE BORE his Sow, had six Pigs. Away nasty C. E. transformed by Circe! Hoy! back to her Sties, yea thine, where thou mayst freely 
Grunnire in septis  
cum foedo hoc agmine clausus.   
Then proceeds he, envying the the matrimonial fruitfulness of Bucer: who surely, had he under the veil of maidenly Priesthood been far more fruitful in a whole swarm of Bastards, should never have heard of it, unless perhaps he had denied to pay, Taxam Camerae. As for Ochius, allowing Polygamy, and perhaps other worse obliquities in his opinions, what are they to us? For the marriage of P. Martyr Occolampadius, Pelican, etc. Let him take for an acquittance that which hath been paid them thus, Nobis nostrae sunt lunones, vobis vestrae Veneres. And then I ask, Vivat uter nostrum cruce dignior. If this will not serve for repayment, I must eke it out with a small, yet currant, commodity of two poor verses, which I learned of his Mantuan at the Grammar School: 

Sanctus ager scurris,  
venerabilis ara Cynaedis   

Seruit, honorandae  
Diuûm Ganymedibus aedes.    
Let him take this spoonful of Holywater to digest his Hogges-flesh.   

SECT. III.  
HItherto my Refuters' 
p job 41 27. Refut. p. 138, 139.  Iron hath been as Straw, his Brass as rotten Wood, his Sling-stones as Stubble; but now he hath found that will kill me dead; and says no less than Hoc habet. 
q Cypr. l. 4. Epist. 10.  CYPRIAN is by me alleged for the History of Numidicus; whom I avouched a married Presbyter, by the same token that he saw his wife burning (besides him) with the flames of Martyrdom. And Lord, what outcries are here of fraud and corruption! and how could this Masse-Priest wish himself near me when I should be urged with this imposture, to see what face I would make thereon? Even such a one (good sir Shorne) as is framed by the confidence of honest innocence. God deal so with my soul, as it means nothing but ingenuous sincerity; neither hath my pen swerved one letter from the Text: My margin said, Numidicus Presbyter; 
Numideus Priest.  so doth Cyprian himself, two or three lines before this report of his wife; so (besides the Text) doth the margin of Erasmus. And what treachery could it be to add the word of CYPRIANS own explication? But Numidicus was not then Priest when his wife was martyred; rather upon that constancy was honoured with holy Orders. How appears that, when Cyprian only says, 
Let Numid. the Priest be received into the number of the Priests of Carthage, etc.  Numidicus Presbyter ascribatur Presbyterorum Carthaginensium numero & nobiscum sedeat in clero. He was before a Priest, for aught this Libeler, or any mortal man knows, and now was ascribed into the honoured Clergy of Carthage, soon after to be promoted to Episcopal dignity. Before the report therefore of his wife's martyrdom, he is named a Priest. What have I offended in seconding Saint Cyprian? Let this peremptory babbler prove this ordination to be after that noble proof of his faith. I shall confess myself mistaken in the time, never false in mine intentions.  
Till then, he shall give me leave to style the man as I find him, Numidicus Presbyter.  

Numid. Presbyter Presbyterorum Carth. numero a●●r.  If Cyprian had said, Numidicus, Praesbyterorum numero ascribatur, the case had been clear; but now doubling the word, he implies him a Priest before; and how long before, and whether not before his Confession, it will trouble my learned Adversary to determine. How fain would this man crow, if he could but get the colour of an advantage?  
In the mean while, this impotent insultation betrays nothing but malice and ignorance.   

SECT. FOUR  
MY Refuter may transpose the History of Paphnutius, 
Refut. p. 142.  but he shall never answer it. After his old guise therefore he falls to his Hatchet, and when he hath tried to bow it a little and finds it stiff, he cuts it up by the roots. What one word can he control in the Relation of 
r Socr. l. 1. c. 8. Sozom. l. 1. c. 22.  Socrates, or mine Illation? The Bishops went about to bring in a new Law of Continency to be imposed upon their Clergy, saith Socrates and Sozomen; therefore, before it was not. Paphnutius reclaimed, and called that yoke heavy and unsupportable, the use of the Marriagebed, Chastity. The issue was, Potestas permissa cuique pro arbitratu; Every man left to his own liberty. The story is plain, there is no place for cavils. The only comfort that my Detector and his Tutors find in the History, is, 
Refut. p 143.  that Paphnutius is not all ours: He calls for the use of Marriage to the wedded Clergy, not for wedlock of the un-married. True; therein I must retort the answer of Sotus, that the good Martyr gave way to the corruption of the Times; wherein the wicked mystery had begun with Saint Paul's (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.) But in the mean time, let him know, that if Paphnutius plead but by halves for us, he pleads against them altogether; yea, this he knows already, else he would never be so audacious as to condemn the authors for unsincere, and fabulous, yea heretical; and to bring the clamours of his Bellarmine, to discredit Socrates in three gross untruths, and Sozomen with Multa mentitur. 
Refut. p. 146.  O impudence without measure, without example! Cassiodorus, and Epiphanius, Socrates, Sozomen, Nicephorus, grave and approved Authors of our Ecclesiastical Story, for but reporting one piece of an History, in favour of clergymen's marriages, are spit upon, and discarded with disgrace. This is no new Song; my Refuter hath learned it of Copus, Torrensis, Bellarmine, Baronius, and others. All whose mouths together with his, in these particular exceptions, let me stop with that ingenuous answer of 
* Espenc. l. 1. de Contin.  B. Espencaeus, there needs no other Advocate; Excipit Torrensis, etc. But TORRENSIS excepts against SOCRATES and SOZOMEN, as though they had lewdly, and shamefully belied this story of PAPHNUTIUS, and says, the one was a friend of the Novatians, the other an abettor of THEODORUS the Heretic; that both their Histories are in this void of credit, authority, probability. As if they could not at once be bad Men, and yet good Historians; or, if they lie in any other place, they must needs lie in this; For SOZOMEN, TRITEMIUS commends him for a worthy furtherer of secular learning, & well versed in the Scriptures. And for SOCRATES, he extols him for a learned and eloquent man, for a very excellent, and greatly experienced Historian. Thus he, and much more, to which (for brevity) I refer my peremptory Refuter; 
Refut. p. 144, 145.  who shall there find satisfaction to his Objections of the silence of other Authors, and the Canon alleged against the subintroduction of (Mulieres extraneae) strange Women into the houses of Clergy men: His Clictovaeus telling him, 
That Wives cannot be comprehended under the name of Strange Women.  uxores dici non posse extranaeas, and the Law made afterwards by Honorius and Theodosius, plainly commenting upon this Constitution.   

SECT. V.  
AS for his Testimony of Leo the great, living in the time of Socrates, I answer it by the testimony of 
* Socrat. l. 5. c. 22. Refut. p. 148.  Socrates, living in the time of Leo the great. Multi enim, etc. For many (saith he) in this Episcopal dignity, in their Episcopal houses, in the time of their being Bishops, do beget children of their Wives, whom they had before lawfully married. Thus he. A place that answers for itself, and many others. Wherein yet my Refuter finds some of my faulty concealments. First, that the more, and more famous Bishops and Priests did the contrary. True, they did so, but voluntarily as with us some of the Heads of our Clergy, and others of the Body, do contain, not forced, 
c Socr. ubi supr. They contain of their own accord, and at their own choice.  Continent sponte ac pro arbitrio; This I think is not the Roman fashion. Secondly, They conversed with the Wives which they married before their Ordination, they did not marry after. Let his wisdom show me upon what reason the act of marrying should be unlawful, where the act of Marriage is lawful, and we will yield him justly to stick at this difference. And when he hath done. let him bite upon their old 
d Dist. 84. cum in pr●terito They say that of old, before Siricius, Priests might contract Matrimony. Et quòd Gregorius introduxit continentiam Subdiaconis, sed Presbyteris & Diaconis, Siricius, Dist. 82.  Gloss (though now by them defaced.) Dicunt quod olim, Ante Siricium sacerdotes poterant contrahere.   

SECT. VI  

Refut. p. 150.  IN the rest, he falls not upon me, but the received Historians, Socrates and Nicephorus; They have done him a spite, and he will revenge it. These he will convince of a double lie. The one, that HELIODORUS was the first author of the law of Continency in Thessalia, the other, that this Continency was arbitrary. His reason for the former is weighty; It is not likely (saith he) that HELIODORUS, which would rather lose his Bishopric then recall his lascivious book, would be so eager above the rest for the continency of his Clergy. As if ever any men had been more luxurious than the greatest enemies to Marriage; as if it were impossible for Pope john the thirteenth (from whom Dunstan received his rigorous Commission) to be unnaturally incestuous; as if it were impossible for his great Prelate of Crema, when he came to oppose the Marriage of our English Clergy, to be 
e Vid. Pos. l. 3.  found that night in bed with an Harlot?  
And here my childish Adversary will needs make sport for Boys; I cited in my Margin Heliodorus, the author of the Aethhiopic History; As if (saith he) HELIODORUS had written some History of Aethiopia, whereas he only entitled his work, Aethiopia. Ridiculous head! What Schole-boy, what apprentice knows not HELIODORUS? Nosque manum ferulae, etc. If this learned Critic had but ever opened the Book, he had found 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉; Neither doth any Englishman know it by any other name, then, as it is translated (ere I was borne) The Aethiopicke History; yea, if a man were not resolute to shut his eyes, in the very place of Socrates, which he cities, the Book is called Aethiopica, whereto what construction can be given, but this of mine? Such folly is for the Rod or Ferule; This is (I confess) a Trifle; yet such as may give my Reader a taste of the bold blindness of my impudent Detector.   

SECT. VII.  

Refut. p. 151.  THe other stings yet more, that this Episcopal and Priestly Continency was upon no other terms, then 
f Socrat. l. 5. c. 21. If themselves will; Forced by no Law. The custom hath been.  Modò ipsi voluerint, and, Nuliâ lege coacti; and consuetudo invaluit. And now all in a rage my Refuter will prove against Socrates, that there was a Law for this; and to this purpose, he brings in two Canons of the Canstantinopolitane Council in Trullo: Mark, Reader, with what judgement. The Trullan Council was above two hundred years after: Socrates ended his History in the year 
g Histor. Sacr. ad finem.  443. The Trullan Council was held (as their Binius computes it) in the year 692. and yet the Canon of the Trullan Council, in a matter of fact, disproves Socrates. The other Counsels of Ancyra, Caesarea, and Nice, are either Provincial, or against him. As for the plea of Synesius, that he might not be a Bishop, because he would not leave his Wife, it is answered by the fact of Synesius, that he was made a Bishop, and left not his Wife. But what an idle and insolent boldness is this, for an obscure Libeler, to go about now almost 1200. years after, to control a grave approved Historian of the Church, in a matter of ordinary practice, which his own eyes and the worlds did daily witness; As if he durst have published such a report of the common use of his time, wherein all the Age he lived in, could have convinced him?  
The witlesly-malicious Prosopopey, 
Refut p. 153.  wherein my Refuter brings in the Reverend and Peerless Bishop of London, pleading for his wife to his Metropolitan, becomes well the mouth of a scurrile Masse-Priest, and is worthy of nothing but a scorn. Those two incomparable Prelates are the chief objects of these evil eyes; whom God hath raised happily above the reach of their envy. It galls this Romish Rabble, that these two Ringleaders of the English Clergy (besides their busy employments in their careful, prudent, and zealous government) preach more Sermons in a year, then, perhaps, all the Bishops under the Papacy. Rumpantur & ilia.   

SECT. VIII.  

Refut. 154.  IT pleaseth his discretion to marshal my Epistle as he lists, and then to complain of disorder, and my leaping over hundreds of years from the Nicen Council to Gratian the Canonist; My Readers eyes can confute him, which cannot but witness, that I name diverse in all Ages recorded for married Bishops, and Presbyters. This Beadrole (he saith) is idle, because I show not that they then used their Wines when they were Bishops. An hard condition; That I must bring witnesses from their Bedsides. Is it not enough that we show they had wives, that they had children? No (saith my Refuter) It must be proved that they had these children by these wives after Ordination. We were neither their Midwives nor their Gossips, to keep so strict an account. But what means, 
* They sleep with their wives, and in the time of being Bishops, beget children of their own wives, Socr. ubi supr.  Cum uxoribus dormiunt? and, Tempore Episcopatus filios gignunt ex proprijs uxoribus? This we have showed out of Socrates. What was that which Dionysius, the ancient B. of Corinth, (before ever Paphnutius was) wrote to Pinytus, charging him, 
x That he do not necessarily impose the heavy burden of continency upon his Brethren, Euseb. l. 4. hist. c. 22.  Ne grave seruandae castitatis onus necessariò fratribus imponat.  
What was that, for which Eustathius, B. of Sebastia, the unworthy son of Eulanius B. of Caesarea was censured? was not this one of the Articles, 
y Socrat. l. 2. c. 33.  Benedictionem, & c? That he taught men to decline the blessing and communion of married Priests? Away then with this either ignorant, or impudent facing of so evident a falsehood.  

Refut. p. 155.  The testimony of Hierome, the example of Vrbicus B. of Claramont, and of Genebaldus B. of Laudune, show what was the conceit and practice of those particular places wherein they lived; And yet Hierome in the same Book can say; 
z Higher l. 1. aduers●ouin. As if now a-dayes many Priests also were not married.  Quasi non hodie quoque plurimi sacerdotes habeant matrimonia. In that story of Vrbicus, related by Gregor. Turonensis, I can but wonder how far men may be transported by superstition; so as to make the Apostles charge give way to an humane opinion. The Wife of 
a Greg. Tur. l. 1. c 44. Cur coniugem spernis, cur obturatis auribus Pauli praecepta non audis? Scripsit enim Revertimini ad alterutrum, etc. Ecce ego ad ●e reuer●or, ●e● ad extraneum, 〈◊〉 ad proprium vas recu●ro, etc. Why desp●sest thou thy Wife? why dost thou shut thine ears against the Precept of S. Paul? For he hath written, Meet together again, lest, etc.  Vrbicus comes to his door, and alleges S. Paul's charge; (Meet together again, lest Satan tempt you, etc.) Cur coniugem spernis, & c? he yields to do the duty of an Husband, and now in remorse, enjoins himself a perpetual penance. What penance do we think Saint Paul was worthy of, for giving this charge which she alleged? Let my Reader judge, whether of the two was the better Divine. How insolent is Tradition, thus to trample upon Scripture? But since it pleased my Refuter to lend me this one example of Gregor. Turonensis, I am ready to give him use for it. In the second Book of Turonensis he shall find 
b Gregor. Turon. l. 2. c 21. Nat. Theodos. jun. & Valent. 3. Imperat. uxor Papi●illa, cum qua concerditer vixit, liberosque ex ea suscepit utriusque sexus, Ad Apoll●n. epist. 16. l 5.  Sidonius a married Bishop, and his Wife, a Noble Matron, in all likelihood living with him, for (nesciente coniuge) without his wife's knowledge he gave silver plate to the Poor. 
c Turon. 4. c. 12.  In the fourth Book he shall find Anastasius a married Presbyter, feoffed in some Temporalties which he would rather die then not leave to his issue. 
d Tur. l. 8. c. 39  In the eight Book he shall find Badegisitus, the cruel Bishop of the Cenomans, matched with ●n ill wife; who yet lived with him (as it seems) all his time, and had altercations with Bertram, Archdeacon of Paris, for his goods, deceased. In these there is strength of ●egall presumption, though no necessity of inference. But what do I instance in these, or any other, when Balsamon tells us clearly, that before the sixth Synod 
e After their Episcopal dignity, Balsam. in Can. Apost. 5.  it was lawful for Bishops to have wives, Etiam post dignitatem Episcopalem? And his own Canon Law can tell him, that in the East Church, their Priests, Matrimonio copulantur; 

Are joined in Marriage, vid. supr.  
Use, Marriage contracted.   which his wariest Masters expounding, would interpret by copulato utuntur. judge then, Reader, what to think of the mettle of this man's forehead, who would bear us down, that no one Bishop or Priest was allowed, after Orders, to have any Wife. Yea, even for the very contraction of Marriage itself, after Orders, 
f Espenc. l. 1. c. 11.  honest Espencaeus can cite one 
g Io. Maior. & comptuar. Concil.  joannes Marius, a Dutchman by birth, but a French Historian, to whom he allows the title of (non indiligeris) who writes, that he knows that in the times of Pope Formosus, and Ludovicus Balbus, Priests were married, Et iis lievisse sponsam legitimam ducere modo Virginem, non verò Viduam; and that it was lawful for them to marry a Wife, so she were a Virgin, not a Widow.  
As for that base slander wherewith this venomous Pen besprinkles the now-glorious face of our renowned Archbishop and Martyr Doctor Cranmer, 
Refut. p. 159.  whom he most lewdly charges with lasciviousness and incontinent living with I know not what Dutch Fraw, it is worthy of no other answer then, Increpet te Dominus. It is true that the holy man wisely declining the danger & malignity of the times, made not at the first any public profession of his Marriage; as, what needed to invite mischief? But that he ever had any dishonest conversation with her or any other, it is no other than the accent of the mouth of Blasphemy.  
And if any one of our Clergy, after a legal and just Divorce long since, have taken to himself that liberty which other Reformed Churches publicly allow (as granting in some case a full release, both à thoro and à vinculo) what ground is this for an impure wretch to cast dirt in the eyes of our Clergy, and in the teeth of our Church? Malicious Mass-priest, cast back those emissitious eyes to your own infamous Chair of Rome; and if even in that thou canst discern no spectacles of abominable uncleanness, spend thy spiteful censures upon ours.  

Refut. p. 160.  I reckoned diverse Examples of married Bishops and Priests out of Eusebius, Ruffinus, others; amongst the rest Domnus Bishop of Antioch, which succeeded Samosatenus, for which my margin cited Eusebius, in his seventh Book and nine and twentieth Chapter. My Detector taxes me for citing Authors at random; as Eusebius lib. 7. cap. 29. when as there are (he saith) but six and twenty Chapters; and for things which are not found in him; As if the man had desperately sworn to write nothing but false. Trust not me, Reader; Trust thine own eyes; Thou shalt not find that Book of 
h Vid. Euseb. Edit. Basil. Anno 1587.  Eusebius, to have one and thirty Chapters; and in the cited place thou shalt duly find the History of Domnus. Whose patience would not this impudency move?  
If I reckoned not Examples enough, or such as he likes not, (as unjustly seeming litigious, there is choice enough of more; Tertullian, Prosper, Hilary, Eupsychus, Polycrates, and his seven Ancestors; To which let him add four and twenty Dioceses at once in Germany, France, Spain, Anno 1057. of married Clergymen, recorded by their own 
i Fox Act & Mon. in hac quest.  Gebuilerus, and make up his mouth, with that honest confession of Aventine, 
k Auent. hist. Eoior. l. 5. Their Wives called, presbyterisse, ibid. etc. honesto vocabulo, as he there speaks.  Sacerdotes illa tempestate publicè uxores, sicut caeteri Christiani habebant, filios procreabant; Priests in those days publicly had Wives, as other Christians had, and begat children; which the old Verse (if he had rather) expresses in almost the same terms. Quondam praesbyteri poterant uxoribus uti: which his Mantuan hath yet spun in a finer thread, as we shall show in this Section.  
What 
l Hodie apud Graecos Sacerdotes post susceptum ordinem ducere uxorem, sed unicam ac virginem, à Graecis didici. Proposit. Erasmicorum. censur. cum declaratione. c. de caelibatu.  danger is there now therefore either of the breach of my promise to my worthy Friend Master Doctor Whiteing, or of my divorce, or of his victory? If the man and his modesty had not been long since parted, these idle cracks had never been.  
But whereas this mighty Champion challenges me with great insultation in many passages of his braving Discourse, to name but one Bishop or Priest of note, which after holy Orders conversed coniugally with his Wife; without the scandal of the Church, branding such (if any were) for infamous; and daring to pawn his cause upon this trial; I do here accept his offer, and am ready to produce him such an Example, as if all the Jesuits heads in the world stood upon his shoulders, they could not tell how to wrangle against. I do not urge to him that Prosper of Aquitaine, a Bishop and a Saint, whose Verses to his Wife are famous, and imply their inseparable conversation.  
Age iam precor mearum,  
Comes irremotarerum, etc.  
Nor yet the forenamed Hilary, 
T● vero siquid minus per atatem in hymno, & Epistola intelligis.  Bishop of Poitiers, who in his old age (if that Epistle be worthy of any credit) writing to his Daughter, confesses her years so few, that through the incapacity of her age, she might perhaps not understand the Hymn or Epistle; of whom the honest Carmelite MANTVANUS could ingenuously confess: 
Non nocuit tibi progenies, 
His children hurt him not, nor his Wife lawfully conjoined in Wedlock. In those day's God misliked not the Marriagebed, nor the cradle, etc.  non obstitit uxor  
Legitimo coniuncta thoro. Non horruit illa  
Tempestate Deus thalamos, cunabula, taedas.   
Nor Bishop Simplicius, of whom 
m Sidon. Apol. Conc adjunct. Ep. 9 l. 7.  Sidonius gives this praise, that his Parents were eminent either in Cathedris, or Tribunalibus, and that his Pedigree was famous either Episcopis, or Praefectis: and for his Wife, that she was of the Stock of the PALLUDII, qui aut literarum, aut altarium cathedras cum sui ordinis laude tenuerunt; of whom also Sidonius can say, she did respondere Sacerdotijs utriusque familiae, answer the Priesthoods of either Family.  
Nor Alcimus 
n Alcim. Auit. Vien. Gal. Arch. l. ad sororem, circa An. 492.  Auitus the French Archbishop, who writing to his Sister, of her Parentage, hath thus, 
— Stemma Parentum,  
Quos licet antiquo mundus donârit honore,  
Et titulis à primaevo insigniverit ortu,  
Plus tamen ornantur sacris insignibus illi, etc.  

I will not, dear Sister, make report of the Pedigree of thy great Grandfathers, etc. whom the renowned life of Priests made famous to the World.  Nec iam atavos soror alma tibi proavosque retexam,  
Vita Sacerdotum quos reddidit inclyta claros.   
Nor Paulinus Bishop of Nola in Campania: to whom Ausonius writes, Tanaquil tua nesciat istud; And Formidatamque iugatam obijcis, etc.  
These and such like might suffice reasonable men; but since we have to do with those Adversaries, whom Saint Paul calls 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉; who, if we urge hundreds of such evident examples, turn us off with bold shifts; and will needs put us to prove those acts which seek secrecy; Let him and all his complices whet their wits upon that clear and irrefragable place of Gregory Nazianzen, a man beyond all exception; who brings in his Father Gregory, whom the world knows to have been Bishop of the same See, speaking thus of him, 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 
Greg. Naz. Car. de vita sua, Edit. Morel. Paris. To. 2. p. 9   
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. etc.   
Nondum tot annisunt tui, quot iam in sacris mihi sunt peracti victimis, etc. That is, The years of thy age are not so many as of my Priesthood.  
Words that will convince the most importunate gain-sayer, that GREGORY NAZIANZEN was borne to his worthy father, after the time of his holy Orders. And lest any man should suspect that this (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 nondum) may reach only to the birth, not to the begetting of Gregory Nazianzen; so as perhaps he might be borne after his father's Orders, begotten before them: Let him know (to make all sure and plain) that Gorgonia and Caesarius the sister and brother of this Gregory, were by the same father begotten afterwards; as is evident both by that Verse of Nazianzen; who speaking of his mother, as then childless when she begged him of God, says, 

Ibid. de vita sua, etc. Iamb.  Cupiebat illa masculum  
foetum domi  
Spectare, magna ut pars  
cupit mortalium.   

Elias Cretens. In Orat. Greg. Naz. 19  And the clear Testimony of ELIAS CRETENSIS, Quamuis enim si nativitatem spectes, etc. Although (saith he) if you regard his birth, he was not the only child of his Parents, forasmuch as after him both GORGONIA and CaeSARIVS were borne. Thus he.  
O infamous Gregory's, the scum of the Clergy! O irregular Father, that durst defile his sacred function with so carnal an act! O shameless son, that blushes not to proclaim his own sinful generation! Go now petulant Refuter, and see whether you can either yield, or answer.  
As for that glorious show of Antiquity wherewith C. E. hopes to blear his Readers eyes, gracing himself herein with the astipulation of our Reverend jewel; I need not return any other answer then of his Beatus Rhenanus: Quanquam veteres omnes, etc. 
Arg. lib. Tert. Exhort. cast. matrimonio parum aequi fuerint, etc.  Although all the Ancient, and HIEROME himself were no whit equal or indifferent to Marriage; esteeming virginity and chastity very high; both because they thought the Last-day was near at hand, as remembering that sentence of S. PAUL, Tempus in collecto est; 
The time is short.  and because they saw many impediments grow from marriage, which marred the purity of Christianity, in those days, especially, when Christians lived amongst Heathens, and matched in marriage with them: Surely it is evident, that for this cause HIEROME was in an ill name at Rome, etc. Thus he. We durst not have said so much, for ourselves. The highest Antiquity is ours, the later had been ours, if it had not been upon these grounds which were then their own, proper to the time, place, occasion.   

SECT. IX.  
I Descend to the Testimony of Gratian; Champion E. calls this, Picking of Straws. If picking of Straws be boyes-play, and argue that they which use it are foiled, and have lost all, as our Refuter merrily pipeth, let him acknowledge how beggarly the proofs are grown of the martyrdom of their Saintly Jesuits and Priests amongst us, did they not stoop to pick straws, to thresh out a miracle (when it was) for translating Father Garnet from a Traitor to a Martyr; yea and that Chaff, the gullery whereof themselves smile at here, is devoutly transported beyond the Seas, and enshrined for a sacred relic, and proclaimed by their Kornmamnus for one of the great Wonders of the Dead; Ridet aruspex ubi aruspicem viderit.  
It is well that the great Compiler of the Canon Law of Rome is grown so base with Catholic Priests. He witnesss plainly, that some Bishops of Rome were the sons of Priests not spurious, but begot in lawful Wedlock; 
m Dist. 56. Cenomanens' 'em. etc.  Which was (according to Gratian) everywhere lawful to the Clergy, before the prohibition. C. E. bites the lip at this authority, and first he tells us, it is the Palea, 
Refut. p. 161.  not Gratian. But if this be chaff, there is no Corne. Reader, try by this the egregious impudence of this fellow. Turn to the place, thou shalt find the words to be none but Gratians; and the notes allowed by public authority, openly to confirm it: Hic apertè ostendit Gratianus se in ea fuisse opinion, etc. Here GRATIAN openly shows that he was in that opinion, that heretofore the Priests of the Latin Church might be married.  

Refut. p. 162.  Secondly, my parenthesis displeases him (As now, a days) But what needs this quarrel? He must grant, if the Romish Priests have sons, they can be no other than spurious. It is his best not to press this point too far. This idle jealousy of his can argue no good. I touched not the continency of his Paulus Quintus, so much as in my thought, I only wish that his Holiness would bestow some of the offals of his Nephew's great Benefices, upon this Masse-Priest for the reward of his superflovos Oleum peccatorum.  
My third untruth, 
Refut. p. 163, 164, 105.  (and that a gross one) is, that I say many Bishops of Rome followed their Fathers in the Pontifical Chair: whereas in this Chaff of Gratian, he finds but one: Syluerius Pope, son of Syluerius Bishop of Rome. And what if in his chaff he find but one, whiles I in my Corne-heape can find more? Did I tie myself in this clause only to Gratian? Was not Pope john the Eleventh, or, in some accounts, the Tenth, son to Pope Sergius? And is there no Chair Pontifical but the Roman? Was not Theodorus Pope, son to Theodorus Bishop of jerusalem? Faelix the Third, son to Bishop Valerius? Pope Adrian the Second, son to Bishop Taralus? His Platina can supply his Gratian in these.  
What have I to do with his quarrels about Hosius, Faelix, 
Refut. p. 166.  Agapetus, Steven? They are their owns; Let him wring Gratian by the ear, till I feel: And surely, the poor Canonist bleeds on all hands. Bellarmine, Baronius, Possevine, and this stout Beagle, have every one a snatch at him; and he must be content to go away with this gash, (We are not bound, to follow him as an infallible Writer, but may with free liberty reject him.) Yea, how merry doth my Refuter make himself with his despised Gratian? Like a Philistim he hath pulled out the eyes of this Samson, and now makes sport with him; If Douai like it well, it shall not be displeasing to us. The man (as ill as he loves marriage) will needs make a match betwixt his Gratians Pope Steven, and his Pope joan. Iö Hymen! Was ever man so mad, to make himself pastime with his own shame? Was the History of that their monstrous Papesse of our making? Do not 
n Sigebert M●rtin. Polon. Platin Mart. Minorit. Oth. Fri●. Flores Temp. Petrarcha, etc.  the whole stream of their Writers of Chronicles, their own Bishops, Monks, Recluses, Registers, record it openly to all posterity, without the contradiction of the next ages, yea of any, till this last? Let them take to themselves therefore, this fruitful Successor in the infallible Chair; she is their own, they may dispose of her where they list; and since my Refuter will find out a match for her out of the Chair of exploration, why should not we dance at the wedding? Why do not we help him to a piece of an Epithamium?  
Papa pater patrum,  
Papissae pandito partum.  

o Flor. Temp. Impr. ult. 1486.  A flower that never came out of Luther's Poesy.   

SECT. X.  
I See, that whiles I follow this Wrangler by the foot, I am become insensibly tedious. The residue of his longsome Traatise is spent upon the Council of Constantinople. GREGORY'S charge, Isidores rule, Hulderick, Hildebrand, Dunstan, and Anselm, and the estate of our forefathers in the English Clergy. The discussion of all which, as not being essential to our business, (except only the last) will admit more brevity of dispatch. The vital parts of our cause being secured, there will be less danger in the remoter limbs; which yet, if our Target guard not▪ our sword shall. In all these, it shall be best to reduce his Cavils unto heads, that we may crop them with more speed and ease; Only I must crave leave to dwell somewhile in the last.  

Concil. 6. Constantin. in Trulio.  Concerning the Council of Constantinople (after some idle mistaken discourse of the occasion thereof) he insists upon these four points: First, 
Refut. p. 168, usque ad 174.  That it was not general: Secondly, Not the sixth: Thirdly, Not peremptorily ours: Fourthly, Not by them defaced, or torn out.  
First, it is no trusting what a Roman Priest says in choler of a Graecian Council. The Greek Church is equally in their Books with ours; and this Council, with the Synod of Dort. It is an eternal quarrel, which all the vassals of Rome have against this Council, that it equalled the Bishop of Constantinople, with the Roman: A crime that cannot be forgiven.  
The invectives of our Popish Divines, especially Pighius, 
p Vid. Bell. de Rom. Pont. l. 2. cap. 18.  Bellarmine, Baronius, have made good that note of 
q Balsam. in Phot. Nomoc.  Balsamon, Occidentales Episcopi, etc. The Western Bishops (saith he) that is, the Italian or Latin (Ab huius Synodi Canonibus oportunè icti) finding themselves galled with the Canons of this Synod, have given it out not to be General: Thus he. And why was it not general? It had no form of a Council (saith my Refuter) No Legates of the Pope, 
Refut. p. 174.  no invitation of the Latin Bishops, neither were any of the other patriarchs present, or consenting. Every word a shameless untruth; Basilius Bishop of Gortyna the Metropolis of Crete, 
Balsam. ibid.  (which was then under the Archbishop of Rome) and the Bishop of Ravenna (saith Balsasamon) were there to represent the Roman Church; The Bishops of Thessalonica, Sardinia, Heraclea, Corinth, were there and then the Pope's Legates. And for the patriarchs; Basilius (saith the same Balsamon) Bishop of Gortyna, which was present in the name of the Roman Church, is found to have subscribed after the four patriarchs, and certain other Metropolitans. What can be more plain? But S. Bede (saith C. E. 
Refut. p. 171. ) tells us that JUSTINIAN the Younger commanded SERGIUS Bishop of Rome, to be carried to Constantinople, because he would not subscribe huic erraticae Synodo. Still mistaking and ignorance. His Surius and Turrian could have taught him out of Theophanes, this was another, a Pseudo-Synode, which the same justinian had in his first government called in favour of the Monothelites; which was some years after the true Synod under CONSTANTINE the Bearded. 
Constantinus Pogon●tus.  This man's wit wanders with his erratical Synod.   

SECT. XI.  
FOr the number of, sixth, 
Quini▪ sextam.  we need not be scrupulous; Whether it were the fifth, or sixth, or both (as Balsomon calls it, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) or neither. It is enough for me, that Gratian, Caranza, Espencaeus, and other his own great Masters call it familiarly both sixth, and General; In this I cannot but be safe enough. I grant, that (to speak precisely) the sixth Synod under Constantine published no Canons, but afterwards many of the same Fathers, which had formerly met in the sixth Synod, and others, to the number of 227. being called together by the then penitent and restored justinian (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) gathered up, 
Slit-nose.  and set forth with universal consent, the Canons formerly made, and by them reinforced. But what need I trouble myself with any other answer to all these windy cavils of my Adversary, then that which Tharasius himself, the Patriarch of Constantinople, hath most fully given; 
r Gratian. dist. 16. Habeo librum.  Quae est haec ignorantia, & c? What ignorance (saith he) is this, wherewith many men are tainted, about these Canons? For it is a scandal to doubt whether they were the Canons of the sixth Synod. Let these men therefore know, that the sixth Synod was gathered in the time of CONSTANTINE, against those which ascribe one only action and will to Christ; The Fathers then condemning those Heretics, and confirming the Oxthodoxe Faith about the fourteenth year of CONSTANTINE, returned home: After four or five years, the same Fathers (being met under JUSTINIAN the son of CONSTANTINE) set forth the foresaid Canons; Neither let any man doubt of this; For those very same Fathers which in the time of CONSTANTIN subscribed, did also under JUSTINIAN subsigne this present Paper; which thing is evident enough by the unchangeable likeness of their own hands. So he. Whether therefore the computation of Tharasius or Theophanes, be followed, we have what we desired; The same acts are set forth if not by altogether the same person, and 
s Dist. 16. ubi supr.  Gratians judgement is herein ours.   

SECT. XII.  
FOr the third point. 
Refut. p. 175. usque ad 182.  To prove that this Synod is not peremptorily for us; H●e urgeth diverse other Canons of it, which in other things sound against us. Then, he shows the instanced thirteenth Canon, not to be so absolutely and fully ours, as is pretended.  
First, where finds he this Law, that no man may allege one testimony of a Father, or a Council, but he must be tied to justify all the rest? Himself would be the first that would shrink at this condition. This challenge is unreasonable, and might turn off all allegation. For example, If a man should allege the Nicene Council, Canon. 1. against any superstitious Fool that hath made himself a corporal Eunuch, might he strait for his justification fly upon the last Canon of that Council, unnecessarily enjoining us to stand at our Sundays Prayers. 
Synod. La●dic. Can. 20. Can. 35. Can. 60. Can. 37.  Or if a man should cite the Synod of Laodicea against a Deacon (though a Cardinal) sitting before a Priest, or against the worshipping of Angels; were it meet to choke him with a return of the last Canon of that Council, forbidding the Apocryphal books; or the 37. Canon, forbidding his Holiness to take so much as a Bible in his solemnity, from the hands of jews: If a man shall allege a testimony of Cyprian, were it fit to upbraid him with the error of rebaptisation? Or if of Augustine, with the error of the necessity of Infants communicating? This is clawm clavo. For me, I have undertaken no such task to warrant them that once said true, from ever erring: I do therefore herein scorn my silly Refuters compassion, 
Refut. p. 181.  who is so far from crushing me in this, that he hurts none but his own fists, in beating them about his own hard head. For, if the pressing us with the authority of some of these Canons, be to justify the rest, than the 36. Canon of that Council bears him and his Rome down before it, whiles it sets Constantinople cheek by jowl with it▪ maugre. A point, which rather than they will yield, they will be glad to abate us all the rest: This we are sure of, that the alleged Canon is peremptorily, fully, cautelously ours: For this, my credit is at the stake, 
Refut. p. 182. usque ad 192.  which my Refuter pleases himself with the hope to impair, insulting in the idle fancy of a just advantage, whiles he shows the Canon to come short in some points of our requisition and practice; For there, Bishops are excepted, and the freedom of Marriage after Ordination.  
Reader, compare the Canon with the words of my engagement, I undertook thou shouldest find no decree could be made more peremptory, more cautelous, more full and absolute for the lawfulness of the marriage of Ecclesiastical persons.  
For first; The Fathers profess herein to cross the practice and decree of the Roman Church. Secondly, They profess the conjugal cohabitations of sacred persons to stand by the Apostolic Canons, and to be a sincere, exquisite, and orderly constitution. What could be said more? They (thirdly) ratify this liberty for ever. They (fourthly) give charge that no man by the cohabitation with his lawful wife, be hindered from ascending to the highest degree of holy Orders. (Fiftly) That in the time of their Ordination. it be not so much as required of them, to abstain from the lawful companying with their Wives; which were (say they) to offer injury to marriage ordained by God, and blessed by his presence; and to cross him that said, Those whom God hath joined together, let no man separate▪ and, Marriage is honourable Amongst all, etc. (Sixtly) That if any man shall presume so far, as to offer to debar any Priest, Deacon, or Subdeacon, from the conjunction and society with his lawful Wife, he shall be deposed; Or if any Priest or Deacon shall voluntarily cast off his wife, upon pretence of Religion, that he shall be suspended, and (if he go on) deposed. judge now whether herein my protestation have erred; Not that there can be no circumstance devised, as of the extent of the persons, or time, or manner, wherein curiosity might enlarge the scope of this liberty (so I never meant:) but if this one point (That the marriage of persons Ecclesiastical is lawful) can be more fully and warily set down, let me lie open to censure; if not, hate the vanity of this idle Mountebank, and confess with Aristophanes, 
There is no salve for the sting of a Sycophant. Refut. p. 192.193.194.  Aduersus ictum Sycophantae non inesse pharmacum. The Parlamentall Law in the time of King Edward, was (I grant) more full in extending the liberty, could not be more full in avouching the lawfulness of our Marriages. Where I must take leave to tell my Refuter, that the comparison he presumes to make of King Edward's Parliament, with the proceedings of jack Straw, Wat Tiler, etc. is, like himself, seditious and traitorous. And what marvel if such repyners' blow out the foggy vaporous blast of seditious words, against our highest Court of Parliament, which some of their Companions have attempted to blow up with a blast of fire? This Constitution was not civil only, but Synodical: And may not a lawful Synod or Convocation, with the concurrence of the three States, and the sway of Royal authority, make or re-establish a Law agreeable to the Word of GOD, and the received practice of their Progenitors, but every jacke-sawce of Rome shall thus odiously dare to control and disgrace it? One of his Capitoline gods of Rome called England his Ass; 
Etiam Asinus meus recalcitrat?  So it was whiles it might bear nothing but his Trumpery, and go but where his Grooms would either lead, or drive it: now that it hath taken heart, and (with Cardinal Campegius his Sumpter) cast off this base load; and hath haply overrun this servitude; they are ready, with the Keeper of metamorphosed Apuleius, to seek a desperate remedy from the next Tree.   

SECT. XIII.  

Refut. p. 195. usque ad 198.  Such than is the Canon of Constantinople, which therefore (I said) because they cannot blemish enough, they have indignly torn out of the Counsels: And here is much vehement and braving Rhetorik spent upon me as a shameless Writer; and this passage as the grossest lie, that ever was published by Protestant, and now I am conjured, how blemished? how torn? what? where? how? when? Because innocence is bold, the man will be bold, that he may seem innocent; but he shall well find that facing will not serve his turn. Is he so ignorant as not to know that all his great 
t Baron. An. 58 nu. 18. & Bell. l. 1. de verbo Dei, c. 2. & 2. de Ro. Pont. c. 17. l. 1. de Conc. c. 7. l. 1. de Cleric. c. 21. Bin. Tom. 1. p. 14. &c  Masters discard this whole Council as spurious? Doth he not knew that it is (if not torn) yet left out in diverse of their Editions of the Counsels? Let him learn, if he know not, that their ancient collection of Canons, which was called Codex, or Corpus Canonum, which was in use in Leo the Fourths time, mentioned by Gratian, dist. 20 c. de libellis, and printed Anno 1526 at Mentz, and reprinted at Paris, in o lavo, Anno 1609. omits it. The other Collection of Counsels by Isidorus Mercator, which began to be received about Charles the Great his Time, wherein, besides the forged Decretal Epistles of diverse Popes, are the Canons of many Provincial Counsels of Africa, France, Spain, etc. set forth by jac. Merlin at Coleine, 1530. and which hath been usually received in the Western Church, in the times of the Schoolmen, who usually (as do also Iuo & Burchardus) allege them, likewise omits it. The two Editions of the Counsels by P. Crabbe, likewise omit it; and if it had not been for stark shame, so would the rest also. Doth he not know what his Anastatius & Numbertus protest of some particular Canons, and this for one, 
u Dist. 16. In No●s. These Chapters we do altogether reject. Let them by no means be received.  Haec capitula, omnino refutamus, &, nullatenùs recipiantur. And for this very particular Canon; If he know not, There is first an attempt of a double blemish to be cast upon it, The one, in that they read it so, as if the Roman Clergy professed quòd copulentur uxoribus non suis, 
That they are joined with Wives not their own.  as by way of scorn; whereas the words run, se d●inceps cum uxoribus suis non congressuros.  
The other, in that some of their Authors would refer Sacrorum virorum to Constitutiones, not to Nuptias▪ marring quite the sense of the Canon. This for the blemish. For the wiping out of this very Canon, and denying it place with the rest; Let him hear his own 
x ●sp. l. 1. de Conti●.  Espencaeus, telling him, that even they which allowed this Synod rejected by Pighius, 
Vt totum scilicet profanum, error●●, ●nsolentiae, impudicitiae plenum, manifestae falsitatis Apocryphum, & corruptissimum.  and others, yet hunc Canonem duriter tractant, etc. Use this Canon somewhat hardly, as altogether profane, full of error, insolence, immodesty, manifest falsehood, Apocryphal, and most corrupted; and his ingenuity is fain to plead, in conclusion, Canonem hunc legitimum esse non gratis, sed necessario donemus▪ That they must (not upon courtesy, but of necessity) yield this Canon for legitimate, not suppositicious. And what is this in my Detectors' Construction, but a cashiering of this Canon out of the Counsels, against the authority of Gratian, and the Greek Copies? Lastly, the eyes of learned Chemnitius, are undoubted witnesses to us, what credit soever they find with this Italianate generation; In ●omis Conciliorum prorsus expunxerunt, & omiserunt hunc Canonem: 
y Chemnit hist. de Caelib. Sacerd. p. 65.  In the Tomes of the Counsels they have altogether wiped out, and omitted this Canon: So as if we had those blurred Copies which he saw bleeding from the hand of the Inquisitors, there could be no fence for this charge, but that which serves for all, impudent denials.  
Neither needed my Refuter to take it so highly, 
Refut. p. 196.  that I objected to them the tearing, blemishing, and defacing of this, and other Records against them; Ere long the World shall see, 
Erasm. ●ang. in N●ceph 〈…〉. Sigebert. ●.  to the foul shame of these selfe-condemned Impostors, that in the Writings both of ancient and later Authors, they have blotted out more than an hundred places (some of them containing above two sheets apiece) concerning this very point, which we have in hand.  
This is no news therefore; Neither needed my Detector to make it so dainty.   

SECT. XIIII.  

 I Cited from Gratian the free Confession of Pope Steven the Second, acknowledging the open liberty of Marriage to the Clergy of the Lasterne Church; Matrimonio copulantur. 
Th●y are ioyne● in Marriage.  A place truly irretragable; My Refuter first excepts against the number, telling us that Steven the Second lived but three or four days at the most, and therefore he could not be the man; what spirit of Cavillation possesses this Mass-priest? He cannot but know that his own Sigibertus ascribes five years to this Steven, and Hermannus, six: But five is the least: 
So also Funccius in his C●onol.  And his Binius tells him that the Steven he speaks of (sitting but two days exclusively) 
z ●in. Steph. 2. A pluribus è Serie Rom. Pontificum dim●ttitur.  is by the most omitted in the Catalogue of the Roman Bishops: whence it is that the Chronicle names not two Stevens betwixt the first and the fourth. But this man (he saith) called no Council; what is that to me? Gratian affirms it, I do not. Let him fall out, for this, with his friends. And now according to the old wont, (after he hath tried to shift off, Matrimonio copulantur, with the sleeulesse evasion of a false gloss (i. utuntur) which Caietan hath sufficiently confuted for us) he falls to a flat rejection of Gratian, and tells us, out of BELLARMINE, 
Caiet. Opus. Castit. Refut. p. 203.  That Canon to be perhaps of no authority, but an error of the Collectors. Good God what face have these men? That none of their received Authors can be produced against them, but they are strait counterfeit; and yet the very same, where they speak for them, canonical? Their Clients, if they might but know these tricks, would be ashamed of their Patroness.  

Refut. p. 204.  That the Clergy not only of the East might Matrimonio copulari, but of the West also might Matrimonium contrahere (which are the words they are unwilling to know in their own Canon Law) show sufficiently that they not only were married of old, but might marry; But for the Eastern Clergy, it is freely granted by all ingenuous spirits; in so much as Espencaeus tells us, that never Author, either old or new imputed this for a fault unto the Greek Church, that their Clergy was married.  

Refut. p. 206.207.  What shall we say then to this bold Bayard, that compares this toleration of Marriage in the Greek Church, with MOSESES permission of the Bill of Divorce unto the jews? As if Marriage had been only tolerated, not allowed; as if unjust Divorce were a fit match for lawful Wedlock; whiles he here talks of Duritia cordis, well may we talk of his Duritia frontis. It is true, every Church, every Country, hath their Customs and Fashions; which joannes Mayor pleads against Bedaes' Censure of the English and Scottish and British observation of Easter,) and may be as justly in this case pleaded for us; This was of old no less ours, than the greeks; And if any Church will be prescribing against God, we have no such Custom, nor the Church of God; 
Refut. p. 207.208.  But what a ridiculous insinuation it is, that the Greek Priests are dispensed with by supreme authority Ecclesiastical? Forsooth, by the Pope of Rome. fain would I learn wher● upon what terms, at what rate the Grecians purchased in the Court of Rome Dispensation for their Marriages.  
I would my Refuter had the Office appointed him to shuffle over all the Records of the Apostolic Chamber, till he find such a grant made propter duritiem cordis; then should a great deal of good Paper escape the misery of being besmeared by his Pen.  
What strange fantastic Dreams are put upon the World? Where the Papacy cannot prevail, there forsooth his Holiness dispenseth. The Greek Church admitteth married Priests, the Pope dispenseth with them; They deny and defy the Pope's Supremacies; I trow he dispenseth with them for that too: and why not with the Church of England? We pay no Peter-pences; we run not to Rome-market to buy trash, I hope his Holiness dispenseth with us for these Peccadillo's; we take liberty here to marry rather than to burn, why should we not hope to receive that Dispensation whereof we heard the news of late from a poor Bankrupt Carrier? Ad populum phaleras.   

SECT. XV.  
AS for the Contradiction, 
Refut. p. 209. usque ad 214.  which his sagacity finds (not without much scorn) in the two Parlamentall Laws of the Father, and the Son King Henry the Eighth, and King Edward the sixth; whereof the one forbids, the other allows the Marriage of ecclesiastics, it needed not have been any wonder to a learned Priest, which might have known Counsels enough, diametrally opposite to each other: what fault was it in the recovered blind man, that he first saw men walk like Trees, and after like men? Even the best man may correct himself. Neither was there here any contradiction. King Henry spoke with the Roman Church, (whose one half of him than was) King Edward spoke with the Scriptures, and purer antiquity: King Henry never said, God disallowed these Marriages, King Edward never said, they were allowed by the Romish Church.  
And why may not we draw out the like absurdity out of Queen Mary's Parliaments; wherein she reversed many things established by King Edward; as in this very Case concerning Marriage of Priests? May not we hereupon ask, What will you say to such Parliaments wherein the Brother is thwarted by the Sister, and that with the consent of the most of the same Parliament-men enacting in a few years contrarily?  
Or as if it were any news with Pope's rescindere acta praedecessorum; even of those which immediately preceded them? Who knows not the Story of Pope Formosus, and Stephanus, and the many and strong contradictions of decrees in the frequent, long, and desperate Schisms of the Romish Church?  
This lash is indifferently fit for all backs; let him that hath no cause to smart, complain.  
What needed this foul mouth then to break forth into so palpable slanders of that holy Archbishop and Martyr Doctor Cranmer, 
Refut. p. 212.  charging him with deep dissimulation, in soothing up both these Kings in their contrary Decrees? When it is most manifest, that this worthy Metropolitan was the only man, which durst for three days together, openly in Parliament oppose those wickedly projected Articles of King Henry; and this in special. In so much, as he was willed out of the house, till the act might pass; which (notwithstanding he well knew King Henry) he stoutly refused. Would this man (think we) care to belie all the Saints in Heaven for an advantage? What will not he dare to say, that will object inconstancy to him who sealed God's Truth with his blood?  
The contradictions and weaknesses that he finds in this Synod of Constantinople, 
Refut. p. 216.218.  do no whit move us; If he can allow and commend, and cite against us the seven and thirtieth Canon, of the Council, for the worship of the Cross, or the fourscore and fifteenth for the holy Chrism, and yet disallow the thirteenth; why, may not we by the same Law cite and approve the thirteenth Canon against them, and yet disavow those other?   

SECT. XVI.  

Refut. p. 220.  NEither was it for want that I mentioned only this Council of Constantinople; The more ancient Constitutions of Ancyra, and Gangra; and the first and fourth of Toledo, besides the Apostolical and Nicene, might have been urged by me. It was not mine intent (with this babbler) to say more than all; but only to take an handful out of the Sacks mouth for a taste to the buyer; That fair flourish therefore of Counsels which he musters up against me herein, will be but, Arma armis contraria: 
Refut. p. 225.  Wherein since my Refuter will needs make himself so busy, let me entreat him by the way to compare the Council of 
a About Ann. 324.  Gangra, with the Decree of his Pope Hildebrand; The Council says flatly, Si quis discernit Presbyterum coniugatum, etc. If any man make difference of a married Priest, so as that by occasion of his marriage he ought not to offer, and doth therefore abstain from his oblation, let him be accursed; But, his Hildebrand uxoratos Sacerdotes à divino removit officio, & laicis missá eorum audire inter dixit, novo exemplo, etc. that is, removed married Priests from their divine office, and forbade Laymen to hear their Masses, saith 
b Sigeb. de Gregor. Pap▪ An. 1074. Idem & Math. Paris.  SIGEBERT; Therefore by the sentence of the Council, Pope Hildebrand is accursed; And accursed for that very point which made him a Romish Saint. When my Refuter hath gnawed awhile upon this bone, he may hope to be rewarded with a crust.  

Refut. p. 225. usque ad 234.  And now for his Counsels, to make up the number he names for the foreman of the quest, the Council of Ancyra (somewhat before the Nicene) one who hath passed a direct verdict against him, allowing Deacons, upon their profession, to marry. The miserable evasions of his 
c Vid. ●in. ibid.  Binius, and Baronius, in this point, argue both a mind & a cause desperate; whiles (without all colour of warrant) they imperiously turn down these married Deacons to a lay-communion, and fain this liberty only in a forced Ordination, not in a voluntary.  

Refut. p. 226.  As for that first Canon which he citeth of the Council of Arles, That a man cannot be made Priest in the band of Wedlock, unless he promise conversion: It is a gross counterfeit: And, that the world may see we use not to pass these censures without evident reason; It mentions the Arians which were not yet hatched; It mentions Bonosus, which lived long after in the time of Innocent 1. It mentions the Concilium Vasense, which was yet later, in the time of Leo the First. When his Authors can agree of the time, and make good the Synod, he shall receive an answer to it: In the mean time, it was either before the Council of Nice, or after it; if before, it was corrected by the Nicene; a Provincial must yield to a General; if after, it was presumptuous, in decreeing that peremptorily which the general determinately left free.  
The Council of Arausica is cited by him in direct terms opposite to the Ancyran. 
Refut. p. 227.  He must make them friends, ere he can bring it forth against an enemy. As for the main stay of this cause of his, 
carthaginian. 5. African. Can. 3. sub Coelest. Can. 37.  which is the two Counsels of Africa, lent him by his Bellarmine, 

Secundum proprios terminos, vel propria statura.  
Where they read it, Secundum priora statuta.   it is grounded (as our learned junius hath probably answered) upon mere corruption, and mistaking; the Latin Copies taking propria, for priora: The charge of the Council being only, that Deacons, Priests, Bishops (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) according to their turns of ministration, should abstain from their Wives, which no modest Divine will not willingly subscribe unto. Moreover, I am sure, if the one word be not corrupted, the other is ambiguous, and may as well signify Balsamons' 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. And if these Canons were first Latin, and after translated into the Greek; yet the Greek shows what was the first Latin, and may well correct the mistaken Original. But to discuss the several Counsels, which he only thinks fit to name, and utter by wholesale against us, were a work for a Volume apart. The old word is, Dolosus versatur in generalibus, There is deceit in generalities; It were easy to show that some of these are impertinent, others plainly against them; others corrupted to speak against us, as that of Mentz, and Worms, whereof in the sequel; others partial to the faction of Rome. So then, here Obruimur numero; He thinks to carry it by number, not by weight; where with us, one piece of Gold is worth a whole bag of Counters. But, if after the Tyrannical impositions of his Siricius and Innocentius took place in the Church, he could name for every one of his provincial Synods, an hundred, it were all one to us; we are not the worse, his cause no whit the better. This tradition, after that in an emulation of the montanistical vaunt of Virginity, it had gotten head in the Church, ran like fire in a train; Those provinces that held correspondence at Rome, according to the charge of 
d Ad similitudinem sedis Apostolicae, eos cuncta obseruare constituat. Greg. Epist. l. b. 3.34.  Gregory, spoke as she did prompt them; What should they do but follow their Mistress? The Greek Church, and those that either had dependence upon it, or which had continued in the succession of this custom of marriage, still maintaining the lawfulness and use of it inviolable. So then, in sum. This he hath gained, which I am ready ever to avow; The ancientest Counsels are against him; The later are against us; and God with us against 6then; Of which we have 
e Gnapheus Orat. in desens. Io. Pistorij. Woe to you rebellious Children, that you should hold your Council, and not of me.  learned to say, Vae vobis filij desertores, ut saceretis Concilium & non ex me. And if his Mistress of Rome have elsewhere found vassals, it follows not that we may not be free. Yea, it is more than manifest, by those evidences we have already produced from their own records, that notwithstanding this cogged number of his provincial Synods, 
Privata decreta.  & Private decrees (as Volusian terms them) all the time of the first 700. years, the freedom of this practice continued in many parts of the Christian world; Insomuch as amongst the rest, the Church of Armenia, for the time of the years mentioned, upheld a Tradition, 
f Concil. Constant. 6. Can. 33. Quoniam Cog●uimus in Armeniorum regione eos solùm in Cleri Ordinem referri, qui sunt ex genere Sacerdotali.  not to admit of any Clergy man, but those which descended ex genere Sacerdotali, descended from Priests; Witness the Fathers of Constantinople, in their three and thirtieth Canon. Where my Detector should do well to inquire what Balsamons' Clerici Chryso-bullati means; Sure I am, that this example sufficiently proves the practical liberty of those Churches in the questioned limits of the seven first Centuries. To which we may add the Church of Bulgaria, out of his 
f Dist. 28.  Gratian; The Church of Germany out of 
g Annal. Boyorum, supra.  Aventine; The Church of Ireland out of 
i Vita s. Malach. Lib. Synod. Wigorn. Eccles. Canon. Concil. Hybern. sub Patricio, Auxilio Isernino. Quicunque Clericus ab ostiario usque ad Sacerdotem sine tunica visus fuerit, etc. & uxor eius sine velato capite ambulaverit, pariter à laicis contemnantur, etc. Matth. Park. Def. of Pr. Mar.  Bernard, who confesses the Episcopal See of Armach to have been furnished with a lineal descent of Bishops for eight generations, before the time of his Malachias; which were still both uxorati and literati. How those men were Bishops, and yet sine ordinibus, is a riddle which (I confess) I cannot aread. Perhaps, they were without Roman Orders, but if they were not Clerks after the than Irish fashion, what needed they be Literati, that they might be Bishops? The Church of our Britain (as we shall see in the Process) and others. These are more then enough to let the World see this restraint, for all this pretence of Provincial and partial Counsels never universally obtained.   

Sect. XVII.  

Refut. p. 235.  YEt the man having unmercifully crushed me in pieces with this empty bladder of windy and worthless authority, crows over me, thus, in conclusion, And truly to me he seemeth not to be more mad, then blind; for otherwise he would never have proclaimed this freedom of seven hundred years, seeing the very form of words used by his own sacred Council, doth so strongly withstand his fond collection; For there it is decreed, Qui sunt in sacris, etc. We will that the marriages of such as be in holy Orders, from this time forward be firm and valid; For in case this freedom had been common before: why did they say, Deinceps, from this time forward? Thus he. Wherein I would his Superiors did but see how kindly he buffets himself. For if this be the force of Deinceps, or A modò, 
From this time forward.  I thus argue against him; He hath pleaded before, that neither this nor any other Church ever allowed or ever practised the celebration of marriage after Ordination; Now, if he turn to the sixth Canon of this Council of Constantinople, he shall find Decernimus▪ ut nulli deinceps hypodiacono, etc. We decree that from henceforward no Sub-Deacon, Deacon, or Priest may marry after his Ordination; Therefore by the force of his inference before this time (for almost seven hundred years) this was commonly practised. And now to answer my Refuters Deinceps: If his wit had been any way matchable with his malice, he might have seen that this Deinceps had relation to the Roman Church, not to the Greek; For, (if he know not) this Synod meant to prescribe Laws to his Mistress, and to correct that their injurious Tradition of restraint, and to enlarge this liberty through all the Territories of the Universal Church; For this purpose is the, Deinceps, of the Constantinopolitan Fathers, who well knew, how much it needed in the Western Church, which had enthralled their Clergy in the bondage or that unlawful prohibition. So as the Refuter, whiles he plays upon my want of Logic, in not descrying the dangerous necessity of this inference upon me, plainly betrays his own want of brains, in not descrying the Folly of his objection; 
Refut. p. 236.  and where he tells me (like a dull jester) That all the Walls and Windows, from the Hall to the Kitchen, may mourn to see an Vniversitie-man have so little wit, I must tell him that all the Doors of Douai may leap off their hinges, to see their Champion so childishly absurd.  

Refut. p. 237.  Now then to answer his idle Epilogue; If it appear that his own Pope and Canonist, and the received Histories of the Church, and the examples of several nations and persons acknowledge this ancient liberty both in the Eastern and (some) Western Churches de facto; And Moses and the Prophets, Christ and his Apostles, the ancient Counsels, with this sixth of Constantinople, approve it de iure; it follows that the necessary imposition of professed continency, is but a part of that sour milk wherewith the She-wolf of the Seven-hils feeds the faction of her Romulists and Rhemists, and none of that wholesome sustenance which God and his purer Church have provided for their Children.    

THE HONOUR OF THE MARRIED CLERGY maintained, etc. The third Book.  

SECT. I.  
THe Marriage of ecclesiastics which had the common allowance of the first Times, had in some parts but the connivance of the subsequent, and the Prohibition of the last. Those Churches that were not parties to the faction of Rome, could not but be much moved with so peremptory a decree of a famous Council, reducing them, in this point, to the exactness of Apostolic institution, and professing to rectify that Roman deviation; No marvel therefore, if not long after, there ensued a collision of opposite parts, and much scuffling betwixt the abettors of Antichristian servitude, 
Refut. p. 241.  and evangelical liberty; whom this Hedge-creeper dare term incontinent Grecians, Schismatics, Heretics; His Pen is no slander: The multitude of his Synods, wherein was such reiteration of the same Law, shows the opposition which it still found in the Church, and the prevailing use of the contrary practice.  

Refut. p. 243.  The Epistle of Pope Gregory the third, to the Clergy of Bavaria, which gives that disiunct charge, Of either living chastely, or marrying a wife whom they may not divorce, is no where (forsooth) extant, because he finds it not in his Binius, or Baronius; as if no water had gone beside their Mill; and here I am threatened with the Cornelian Law for forgery; no less crime: To avoid the peril whereof, let my far-seene Detector turn to the Bavarian Annals of 
* Auent. Boyorum Annot. l. 3.  Aventine, in the third Book, there he shall find it; An Epistle sent to Vivilus, and the other Clergy of Bavaria, by the hands of Martinian, George, Dorotheus, a Bishop, Priest, Deacon, with this express disjunction, Aut castè vivat, aut uxorem ducat, etc. 
Refut. p. 244.  That which he brings from the successor of this Gregory, Zacharias, shows what his Pope wished, when he had gotten better footing in Germany, 2but the success makes for us; for B. Boniface either never durst, or at least never did urge these Rules to his Germans. So, I hope, his mouth is stopped for my forged Testimony of his Gregory, which could not in his conceit be other, because he never saw it peep forth before this in other men's books. Iwis nothing ever looked forth of the Press, that escaped that bookish eye: witness the next passage, which if his Superiors could have had the leisure to have viewed, they had blushed at their Champion. 
Refut. p. 245.  This charge of GREGORY (I said) was according to that rule of Clerks, cited from ISIDORE, and renewed in the Council of Mentz; but by our juggling Adversaries clipped in the recital: Here the man cries out, as before, of forgery, so now of ignorance, telling his Readers, that I have only taken this upon trust from another's notebook. Reader, by this judge of the spirit of my Detractor. It is true; Isidore wrote no Book of this title: But in the second Book of his Ecclesiastical Offices, he makes the title of his second Chapter, De Regulis Clericorum; Of the Rules of Clerks. From this Chapter, I cite a confessed passage, and am thus censured; whereas the Council of Mentz cities it by this very style, Sicut in Regulâ Clericorum dictum est; As it is said in the Rule of Clerks. Is it simplicity that he knows not this title of Isidore? or maliciousness, that he conceals it? One of them is unavoidable. It is clear then, to his shame (if he have any) that the testimony is aright cited; and is it less clear that it is maimed, and cut off by the hams in their Moguntine Council? Compare the places, 
Cont. Mogunt. 1.  the fraud shall be manifest. That Council in the tenth Chapter professes to transcribe (verbatim) the words of Isidore in the forecited Tract; and where Isidore saith, Castimoniam inviolati 2corporis perpetuò conseruare studcant, aut certè unius matrimony vinculo foederentur; Let them live chaste, or marry but one. Their good Clerks have utterly left out the latter clause, and make Isidore charge his Clerks with perpetual continency; Let them live chaste. He that denies this, let him deny that there is a Sun in the heaven, or light in that Sun; what need I say more? Let the Books speak.  
Here my Refuter doth so shuffle & cut, that any man may see he speaks against his own heart; for (to omit his strained misse-interpretation of Isidore, since we now contend not of the sense, but of the citation) how poorly doth he salve up the credit of his Moguntine Fathers, whiles he saith, 
Refut. p. 246, & 249.  ISIDORE spoke in general, the Fathers in that Council more strictly; when he that hath but one half of an eye may see, that both speak in one latitude of the same persons? Those Father's giving the same title to that Chapter, and professing to follow the Letters and Syllables of Isidore; both name only Clericos in that rule without distinction. Away then with this graceless facing of wilful frauds in your faithless Secretaries, which have also fetched two Canons out of Carthage to Worms; and learn to be ashamed of your gross falsifications, and injurious expurgations; else doubtless the World will be ashamed of you.   

SECT. II.  
I Did but name Huldericus his Epistle in mine, as a witness, 
Refut. p. 252, to 282.  not as the foundation of my cause; my Refuter spends but one and thirty whole Pages upon him: How else should he have made a Volume? In all this what says he? Little in many words; and the same words thrice over for failing.  
And first, he wonders at my extreme prodigality of credit, and fearednesse of conscience, in citing an Epistle so convicted by Bellarmine, Baronius, Eckius, Faber, Fitz-Simons the jesuit, and others. Why doth he not wonder that the Moon will keep her pace in the sky, whiles so many Dogs bark at her below? When these Proctors of Rome have said their worst, there is more true authority in the very face of this Letter, and better Arguments in the body of it, then in an hundred Decretal Epistles which he adoreth. Let the World wonder rather at his shamelessness, who relating the occasion of this fable (as he terms it) feigns it to be only a Lutheran fiction to cover their incestuous marriages, whereas their own Cardinal Aeneas Silvius, almost two hundred years ago, mentions it, and reports the argument of it; whereas it is yet extant (as Illyricus) in the Libraries of Germany; whereas Hedio found an ancient Copy of it in Holland; and our john Bale; Archbishop Parker, B. jewel, Io. Fox, had a Copy of it, remarkable for reverend Antiquity, in aged Parchment here in England; which, I hope to have the means to produce. Whereas, last, the very style importeth age. As well may he question all the Records of their Vatican, all report of Histories, all Histories of Times: He that would doubt whether such an Epistle were written, may as well doubt whether Pope Zachary wrote to B. Boniface in Germany a direction when to eat Bacon: may doubt whether Paul the fifth wrote to his English Catholics to persuade them not to swear they would be good Subjects; may doubt whether Spider-catcher corner-creeper C.E. Pseudo-Catholike Priest, wrote a scurrilous Letter of above two choir of Paper, in a twelue-yeers-answer to three leaves of I.H. It is not more sure that there is a Rome, or that Gregory and Nicholas sat there, then that such an Epistle was written thither above seven hundred years ago. It was extant of old, before ever those Lutheran quarrels were hatched. Let him therefore go fish for Frogs in the Pond of his Gregory, whiles he derives thence the vain pleas of improbability. If there were differences in relating the circumstances of that story (as, I know none) must it needs thereupon be false? Which of their Histories is not liable to variety of report? To begin with the first: The succession of Linus, and Cletus, and Clemens, is diversely reported; is there no truth in it? To end with the last: The Title of Paul the fifth to the Chane of Peter in the lawfulness of his Election, is diversely reported; hath he therefore no true claim to his Seat? But who ever placed Gregory's Pond in Sicily? This is one of the fittens of his Fitz-Simons. If other Authors have mentioned this narration, than all the strength of this History lieth not on Huldericke; If none besides him, his words vary not; These are but Tricks to out-●ace Truth.  
The Epistle, in spite of Contradiction, is so ancient; and what c● we then for names? Whether ● were Saint Vdalrike, or Hulderick, or Volusianus, we labour not much▪ 〈◊〉 it be the task of idle Criticks● dispute who was Hecuba●s Mother, and what was her age; No less vain is my Refuter, that spends many waste words about his Saint V●●rick, in showing the difference of time, betwixt him, and Pope Nic●las; The one dying, Anno 869. ● other being horn, 890. and proving out of his obscure Sorbonist M●nchiacenus, that there were five Bishops of Auspurge, betwixt the times of the one, and the other; whereby a simple Reader might easily be deluded, and drawn to think, there is nothing but impossibility and untruth in our reports whereas there is nothing in all this peremptory and colourable flourish of his, but mere ●ogging or misprision: For both Illyricus apart, and the Centurists, and Che●nitius (all Germans that should be best acquainted with the state of their own) have long since told him, that his Saint Vdalrick was not the man, whom they held the Author of this Epistle, but, ●lderick, another, not much different in name, but differing in time, above seventy years▪ Ne nominis equivocatio lectorem ●urbet, and lest the equivocation of the name (faith CHEMN●●IVS) should trouble the Reader; There is another VDALRICK of Augusta, 
Chem. hist▪ de Caelibatu.  whom AVENTINE writes to have died, Anno 973. But this HULDERICK, AENaeAS SILVIUS writes to have died, Anno 900. and in the year of his age, 83. Thus he; from the authority of two their famousest Historians; from whose account Onuphrius differs not much: But (that my Refuter may hereafter save the labour of scanning their discordant Computations) whether it were either, or neither of them, it is not worth to us one hair of his Crown: since with our faithful and learned Fox, we rather from the authority of ancient English Copies, ascribe it to Volusianus, whose second Epistle also in the same style, 
Act. & M●n. p. 1055.  to the same purpose, is extant from the same Records, not inferior to the former; What matters it for the name, when it appears that the Epistle itself is truly ancient, ponderous, reverend, Theological, convictive; and such as the best Romans heads cannot after seven hundred years shape a just answer unto? Even in some Canonical Books, though there be difference in the names of the Penmen, there is full assent to their divine authority; And why is it not so in humane? Thus than we have easily blown away these light bubbles of Discourse, which our Adversary hath raised out of the Nutshell of his computation; from the Age, Person, Writings of his Saint Vdalrick; and return his impuram nescio cuius nebulonis Epistolam, with his ferrei oris, and plumbei cordis, back whence it came; to the Writer cited by my Adversary, not named: But by better due to the next hand; whereto I am no whit beholding for leaving it unenglished: In that C. E. spared not me but himself: who is nescio quis, but he that leapeth into the Press without a name? Who Nebulo, rather than he that masketh and marcheth sub nebulâ, hoping to pass in the Conflict for a doughty Knight or Champion Sconosciuto, not daring to lift up his Beaver? Who writes impuram Epistolam, but he that hath scribbled a Voluminous Epistle, to cry down pure and Honourable Marriage for the enhancing of impure Celibate? not that, in Thesi, Celibate is impure, but in Hypothesi, theirs, forced and hypocritical.   

SECT. III.  
AS for the difference that he finds in our number of Pope Nicolas, whether first, or second, or third, we may thank his Gratian; whose fashion it is (as likewise Sigeberts') to name the Popes without the note of their number; we are sure it was not Nicolas Nemo which wrote to Odo, Bishop of Vienna, reprooving him for giving leave to Aluericus a Deacon to marry: thereupon sending his contrary Decree to the German Churches; which it seems, (or the like imposition) gave occasion to this noble Epistle.  
But can there be any Game amongst our English Popish Pamphleteers, where the Fox is not in chase? Where is the shame of this Roman Priest, whiles he so manifestly belies our holy, reverend, worthy Master Fox, whom this Scoganly Pen dare say plays the Goose in the inconstancy of his Relation of this Nicolas, first reporting him the first, than the second; when it is most manifest in the during Monuments of that industrious, and excellent Author, that he still insists upon Nicolas the Second; rejecting by many Arguments, the opinion of them which have referred it ●o the first? Such truth there is in shorn crowns.  
john Husse was a Goose by name, and now john Fox is a Goose by reproach; Two such Geese are more worth than all the fawning Curs of the Roman Capitol.  
And how much more wit than fidelity is there in my Detector, whiles he would prove that Pope Gregory had then no Pond; because there are now no Ponds at Rome? As if Rome were now in any thing as it was; as if twelve hundred years had made no alteration; As if the streets of Troy were not now Champain; 
Nunc seges est ubi Troia suit.  As if his Lipsius could now find Rome in Rome: As if lastly that man were uncapable of a large Pond, wh●se Se● is universal.  
As for the number of children's heads, I can say no more for it then he can against it; this History shall be more worth to us then his denial; 
Vid. qua supra, ● l. 1. S. 12. Histor. Radulphi Bourn, etc.  But this I dare say, that I know persons both of credit and honour, that saw betwixt fifty, and threescore, cast up out of the little Mote of an Abbey where I now live: Let who list cast up the proportion.  
After the refusal of this worthy Epistle, according to his fashion he tries to disgrace it with us; telling us, that therein the Bishop of Rome is styled Supreme Head and Governor of the whole Church. If it were thus, so much more powerful is the Testimony against them, by how much more the witness was theirs. There must needs be much cause, when he that so humbly over-titles the person, resists the Doctrine so vehemently. But the truth is, that the Epistle styles Pope Nicolas no otherwise in the superscription, then Sanctae Romanae Ecclesiae provisorem: Overseer of the holy Roman Church. And in the body of the letter, Summae sedis Pontificem; Bishop of the chief See; to whom the examination of the common affairs of the Church doth appertain; which is far other, then in the now Roman sense, the Supreme Head of the Church. Secondly, he tells us that this Epistle both grants and allows a Vow of Continency; 
He excepts none, but a professor of Continence.  Nullum excipit nisi professorem continentiae; wherein we are no other than friends; we yield no less; where there is good evidence of the gift and calling of God. But whiles our Volusian grants the professor of Continency bound, and pleads the Clergy to be free, how plainly doth he show us that there was no such Vow, then required of, no such made by the Clergy.  

Pag. 272.  But what needs the man to be so furiously angry with the good old Epistler▪ for saying, that the Apostles charge (Let every one have his own Wife) is general to all; reaching to the Clergy as well as the Laity? excepting none but those which have the gift of Continency. What Logic, (the want whereof he sometimes causelessly objecteth to me) ever taught him that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, 
Eueryone.  vn●squisque, was any other then universal? Or what other sense can be put upon the words of the Apostle? Could I as truly upbraid Sir Refuter with reading the Logic Lesson, as he doth me with the Rhetoric, surely I should not now be put to the pains to teach this Novice, that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 (unusquisque) is a term of collective universality and must be extended to all, where kind is excepted tacitly; ex natura re●, as this case must needs be acknowledged to be; fore-prizing none but such as have the gift of Continency; which Saint Paul toucheth upon in that Chapter.  
judge then, Reader, whether the Catholic Bishop that wrote this, or the Mis-Catholike Mass-priest that reproves it, be more worthy of Bedleem.   

SECT. FOUR  
LAstly yet, 
Refut. p. 273.  as if in the loose he would shake hands and be friends with him, whom he had so long defied; he thus closes up: Then if Priests have this gift, and have prefixed this course to themselves in the Lord, they shall not need to marry. And this is the case of all Clergymen who vow Chastity. Thus he. Believe him, Readers▪ if ye can: All the Romish Clergy, all Votaries have the gift of Continency, Witness our foresaid Volusianus in the same Periods; Multos eiusdem consilij assentatores hominibus non Deo pro falsâ specie continentiae placere volentes, graviora vides committere, patrum scilicet uxores subagitare, masculorum ac pecudum amplexus non abhorrere. I will not english it for shame. Would God the World did not too well find still these proofs of Romish Chastity.  
Propert.  Nunc etiam Romae quidlibet audet Amor. 

Refut. 274.  But as one that thinks no man can be his friend, except also he be our enemy; like a true makebate, he will tell us a Tale in our ear, that shall set a perpetual jar betwixt us and our Hulderick. Iwis, says my Refuter, your Vdalricke is not the man you take him for; For thus he there writes to the Pope; Wherefore, O reverend Father, it shall be your part to cause and oversee, that whosoever either with hand or mouth hath made a Vow of Continency (as all Clergy men in holy Orders have) and afterwards would forsake the same, should be either compelled to keep his Vow, or else by lawful authority should be deposed from his Order. So he. But we are not so light of belief to lose a friend thus easily. Know then, Reader, that the 
* (As all Clergy men in holy Orders have.)  Parenthesis (which is the harshest piece of this clause) is foisted into the Text, and forged by this Caviller; the quite contrary whereof is affirmed in the former Period of our Vldaricke, where thus he writes: Non parùm quip, etc. From this holy discretion thou hast not a little swerved, when as thou wouldst have those Clergymen, whom thou oughtest only to advise to Abstinence from Marriage, compelled unto it by a certain imperious violence; For is not this justly in the judgement of all wise men to be accounted violence, when as against the evangelical Institution, and the charge of the Holy Ghost, any man is constrained to the execution of private Decrees? The Lord in the old Law appointed Marriage to his Priest which he is never read afterwards to have forbidden; So he. Let my Refuter then reconcile his false Parenthesis, with the true Text, (which he can never do, since it directly crosseth the whole scope of Huldericks' Epistle) and then he shall see us easily reconcile Huldericks' proposition with ours.  
But, not so long to delay my Readers satisfaction; the Truth is; The Author pleads for an indifferent immunity of Clergy men from the necessity of this Vow, else the Epistle were contradictory to itself: for if he suppose that all the Clergy had vowed, and all that had vowed should be compelled to keep their Vow, how could he plead that the Clergy should not be compelled to Continence? The drift of Vldericke or Volusian, then, is, that it may be equally lawful, equally free for Priests either to vow, or not to vow Continency; which granted, if any one having liberty not to have vowed, or observed it, shall notwithstanding prefix this course to himself in the Lord, 
Praefixit hoc sibi in Domino, ibid.  out of a long-settled experience and assurance of this calling and gift of God, and now, when he hath thus engaged himself to the expectation of the Church, voluerit apostare, shall be froward wantonly to abandon this Vow, willingly neglecting all good means for the continued observation thereof, such a one shall be liable either to compulsion, or deposition; As now, if any one of ours should in the midst of freedom bind himself by a voluntary Vow, it were pity and shame that he should play fast and loose at pleasure with impunity.  
What Wool then is here worthy of this cry? Or wherein hath our Author offended us? whiles we neither make this Vow, nor can therefore ever break it, nor ever allowed the breakers of so▪ made Vows, guiltless?  
One quarrel yet, 
Refut. 276.  he cannot remit to Master Fox, and me; that for this forenamed Hulderick, we cite Aeneas Silvius in his Germania; a Book that never was.  
This great helluo librorum hath wearied all Libraries; and consulted with his Tritemius & Possevine; neither of them mention any such work of Aeneas Silvius; whereas, if he had but taken the Book next the door, GESNERS' Bibliotheca, he had found (if at least he could have seen the Wood for Trees) Silvius his Germania; which (for failing) he might have heard of in a double Edition; The one larger, the other more contracted. 
There is extant the same Authors Germania, wherein are contained the grievances of the German-nation, and a confutation of the same with a reply.  The first, Gesner expresses thus Extat eiusdem Germania, quâ continentur gravamina nationis Germanicae, & confutatio eorundem, cum replicâ. The latter is, AENEae SYLVII GERMANIA excerpta, etc. The GERMANIA of AENaeAS SILVIUS gathered out of that Book, wherein the grievances of the German Nation objected to the See of Rome, by MARTIN MERE a Lawyer of Mentz, are refelled.  
See now, Reader, whether my Refuter can blush. In the one of these, which (after denial) he confesseth to have seen, he finds somewhat that likes him not. 
In sua Germ. Illyr. Catal. Test. lib. 19 Aeneas.  Silvius speaking of Auspurge, Sanctus VDALRICUS huic praesidet (saith he) qui Papam arguit de Concubinis: VDALRICK is the Saint of that City, who reproved the Pope concerning Concubines. The bone lies before him, let him pick out the marrow as he can; which because he finds hard to break, he casts it from him in a chafe, and tells us for the last refuge; He hath seen a printed Copy, and two manuscripts without these words. In verbo Sacerdotis. And so just have we found him of his word, all this while, that he were hardhearted that would not believe him.   

SECT. V.  

Refut. 280.  But still I am taken tardy in my Time, or rather do overtake. I reckon this liberty to have continued in Germany after Hulderick, for some 200. years; Whereas, betwixt S. VDALRICK and GREGORY the Seventh, were but 112. years.  
But still his Saint deceives him, and (if I should have erred) his own Chronologers should have deceived me. For his Onuphrius in his Ecclesiastical Chronicle, makes our Hulderick Bishop of Auspurge in the beginning of Pope Nicholas, Ann. 859. And his Sigebert, and other Chroniclers cast Gregory the Seventh his opposition to Priest's marriage, upon the year 1074. Where now is my error? Where is my overreaching? Count it, Reader, and see whether I cannot make my word good, and give him fifteen years in to the bargain: and now judge whether of us may say, Non sat commodè divisa sunt temporibus tibi, Daue, haec; and whether of us it is, from whom nothing cometh, savouring of any learning or Truth: & if thou thinkst it fit, blush for him.  
The like (I fear) willing error upon the same ground is the mis-calculation of the Times of Leo the Ninth, and Nicholas the Second, 
Refut. p. 28.  betwixt whose times, and Vdalrick, he makes but fifty years; abating one other half of the hundred, to expose me to the laughter of his credulous Clients, which may now say, Lo the man which in a reckoning of 200. years did out-lash but 150. When-as both their Sigebert, and Hermannus Contractus, (and who not?) make Leo the Ninth, Pope. An. 1049. and Nicholas the Second, some ten years after him; The very elder whereof, if we reckon to Hulderick, An. 859. will be in no less than 190. years' distance. The man wanted either counters, or wit, or honesty; Truth I am sure he wants.   

SECT. VI  

Refut. p. 283.  ANtichrist, which was conceived in the Primitive times, saw the light in Boniface the Third, and was grown to his stature and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Gregory the Seventh. So as I might well say, that the body of Antichristianisme, together with the prohibition of marriage, began to be complete in that Hildebrand. The times accord better than our Papists would have them. After a thousand years Satan was loosed; at that very time did this HILDEBRAND (otherwise Gregore) by the instigation of the Devil (as himself confessed at his death) (witness Cardinal BENNO, and SIGEBERT) trouble the Church: belike with the violent obtrusion of this doctrine of Devils (prohibition of marriage) and insolent detrusion of imperial authority. It is then but a Sardonian laughter that my Refuter takes up at our complete Antichrist; whose supparasitation may one day cost him tears and gnashing.  
But (good God) what Saints hath the Roman Church? Hildebrand is one of their Calendar; The Legend of whose Holiness shall anon make any man save C. E. ashamed.  
Since it will be no better; 
Refut. p. 284.  Perge mentiri; I am now charged with a fair contradiction, whiles I am accused to say, That the liberty of Priests marriages was universal for a thousand years, and yet had before granted, that in STEVEN the Second his time (which was two hundred and forty years before) the Western Clergy was restrained. In all which he persuades his friends that I would fain lie grossly, if my memory would let me. Reader, do but review my words. These they are: After him (that is, Hulderick) so strongly did he plead and so happily, that for two hundred years more, this freedom still blessed those parts. I speak of Germany, he of Italy; I speak of those parts, he of all. Is not this a Logical and faithful refutation? Yet more, this bold and false hand dares write, that Leo the Ninth, 
Refut. p. 285.  and Nicholas the Second, never meddled with the prohibition of these marriages; Only the one made a Decree against Harlots, the other against Concubines: neither of which (he hopes) we will apply to ourselves. We are so used to these impudent assertions, that now we cease to wonder at them. Let him tell me what was that Epistle which Leo the Ninth wrote to Peter the Hermit? 
He detests the incontinency of Clerks, and writes to have it punished. App●ud. Epist. L●. 9 Binius.  Whose very title is Incontinentiam Clericorum detestatur, & puniendam describit. The Epistle is bitter, like my Libelers. And lest he should say we guiltily take to ourselves the imputation of Incontinency, it is bend against quadrimodam carnalis contagionis pollutionem, a fourfold pollution of Clergymen: Whereof one he will not sure deny to be marriage.  
Let him tell me what was done under Leo in the Council of Mentz, (about the year 1049.) of which, Adam Bremensis (who was there present) writes, Simoniaca haeresis & nefanda Sacerdotum coniugia holographa Synodi manu perpetuò damnata est, That is, 
a Adam. Brem. l. 3. c. 11. Bin. not. in Synod. Mogunt.  The heresy of Simony, and the wicked marriages of Priests, by the consent of the Synod was condemned. Is this nothing done by his Leo; the Leo rugiens of that time?  
As for his Nicholas the Second; 
Refut. p. 286.  Good man, he did nothing, neither; Only he stained women as honest as himself, with the name of Concubines, and men more holy than himself, with the name of Nicolaitans, (whom he must needs love for the names sake) and an estate of life, as holy as his own, with the name of Filthy copulation. Let his Pope's shameful Decrees, and his shameless lies, go both together for company whence they came.   

SECT. VII.  

Refut. p. 287.  YEt still the further we go, the worse. My Refuter surpasses himself in the prizes that he plays for his Pope Gregory the seventh, who first (he saith) did not ruin this liberty of Marriages: Let Vincentius, and Radulphus de Diceto and Sigibert speak for us both; 
b Chron. Sigebert. Ann. 1074. Polydor. Virg. Exemple post homines natos imp●rtunissimo. Ex qua re tam graue oritur scandalum, ut nullius haeresis tempore sancta Ecclesia graviore schismate scissa sit, Sigeb. ibid.  Vxoratos Sacerdotes à divino, etc. He removed married Priests from their function, and forbade the people to hear their Masses; a new example, and as many thought, inconsiderately prejudicial, against the judgement of the holy fathers, etc. But he fully prevailed not (saith my Refuter.) What thank is that to him? he did his best, and kindled those coals that could never yet be quenched. He led the way to his urban the second, and Paschall the second. They followed him, and prevailed; The broils were his, if not the victory. Gratum opus scortatoribus (saith Aventine. 
Refut. p. 2●8. ) Aventine (saith my Refuter) a late Gospelling brother. For us, we are glad of the fraternity of so worthy an Author, whom Beatus Rhenanus gratulates to his Germany, and calls 
c Most learned Aventine.  Eruditissimum Auentinum, and 
d Excelling in the knowledge of all variety of learning.  Variarum cognitione disciplinarum praestantem; and Erasmus, 
e A man of unweariable pains, and deep reading.  Hominem studio indefatigabili, ac reconditae lectionis. Lastly, whom his just Epitaph styles, 
f A most diligent and accurate searcher of antiquities.  Rerum antiquarum indagat●rem sagacissimum: But the truth is; no man by his History can tell his Religion: The Canons of Augusta praise him for the light he gives to the institutions of their Monasteries; And when he speaks of the Shrines of Berg, Valentia, and Halle, I am sure he mentions them with too Popish devotion; and when of Io. Husse and Jerome of Prage, he taxes them with crimen irreligiositatis; Yet this man (borne Anno 1466.) when he but speaks a famous truth of Hildebrand, and the Germane Clergy, he is become a late Gospelling brother. Still let us have Brethren that care more for their honesty, than their faction.  

Refut. p. 289.  Neither yet (to give the Devil his due) do we think so ill of those enemies of married chastity, that they did purposely enact Laws of unmarried looseness; but that all abominable filthiness did follow upon the restraint of lawful remedies, who sees not? 
g Pono conti●entiam pautis tenentibus, aliquibus eam modò causa quaestus ac iactantiae simulantibus▪ multis inconti●entiam periurio aut multiplicum adulterio cumulantibus, etc. Sigeb. An. 1074.  Sigibert himself (their own Monk) freely acknowledges it. john Haywood our old Epigrammatist told Queen Mary, Her Clergy was saucy; if they had not Wives, they would have leman's. Where there is not the gift of holy Continency, how could it be otherwise? Where the water is dammed up, and yet the stream runs full, how can it choose but rise over the banks? There is purity therefore out of Wedlock, but not out of Continence. 
Refut. p. 291.  And what needed my Detector to travel so far as England for an example of incontinency in a King Henry, or any wife of his, whether falsely or truly objected, when he might have looked nearer the centre of their Church, and have found his own Pope john (in the very time now questioned for this prohibition) 
h Io. autem Pap● se cum uxore ●uiusdam oblectans, à Diabolo in tempore percutitur, Sigeb. An. 963.  killed by the Devil in the act of adultery with another man's wife? This end of the Wallet hangs behind him.   

SECT. VIII.  
HIldebrand (as I learned of Aventine) is as much as Titio Amoris. 
The brand of Love..  But how little he differed in name or nature from Hellebrand, 
Brand of Hell.  Titio infernalis (as Chemnitius calls him) his History shows too well. 
Refut. p. 293.  And is it possible that any man should rise up after so many hundred years, to Canonize Saint Hildebrand, even in that for which h● condemned himself? My Reader must know the man a little from the witness of his own Conclave, his Cardinal Benno, Archpriest of the Roman Church, then living: Others beside, tell of his beginnings in wicked Necromancy, and murderous undermine, and tyrannical swaying of the Keys, ere he had them: Benno tells how he got them, how he used them gotten: He got them by fraud, money, violence; used them with tyranny. There was a knot, and a succession of Necromancers in those days. Gerberius, which was Sylvester the second, was the Master of the school: His chief Schoilers in the black Art, were Theophylactus (afterwards changed into Pope Benedict) and Laurentius, and Gratianus. These were the Tutors of Hildebrands' younger times, of whom he learned both Magic and Policy. It is a world to see what work these Magicians made (like the ill spirits they raised) in Church and Commonwealth; opposing Emperors, setting up what Popes they pleased, poisoning whom they disliked: At last, it came to Hildebrands' turn to take the Chair: 
i Ben●o Cardin. vita Hildebr.  To which purpose he separated first the Bishops from the Cardinal's averse from him: when he had done, he compelled them by terror and force to swear unto his part; which done, he was elected in spite of the Canons, only by Lay persons, by Soldiers; he expelled the Cardinals, ●ashly excommunicated the Emperor, of his own head, without any Canonical accusation, without subscription of any Cardinal; hired a bloody Villain to murder the Emperor; consulted with the Oracle of his breaden God, which, because it answered not, he cast it into the fire; he exercised most horrible cruelties upon many, hanging up men at his pleasure unconuicted; in a word, quantis haeresibus mundum corruperit, & c? saith Benno, in his conclusion, His heresies, his perjuries, can scarce be described by many Pens; Clamat tamen altiùs, etc. But the Christian blood shed by his instigation and command (saith he) cries yet louder to God, yea, the blood of the Church, which the sword of his tongue in a miserable prodition hath shed, cries out against him; for which things, the Church did most justly depart from all communion with him. Thus Benno; who yet (to make amends) 
k So our Rogerus Cestr●ns. l. ●. Papa Hildebradus labora●s in extr●mis, ●ocauit ad se Cardinalem quem plus dilexerat, & confessus est se suscitasse odium & schisma inter Imperatorem, & alios Christianos, unde dissoluit vincula bannorum & obijt. Refut. p. 295. usque ad 306.  tells us, that Hildebrand upon his deathbed repent of these lewd courses, and sent to the Emperor and the Church to cry them mercy: confessing (as Sigibert reports) that he had by the suasion of the Devil raised these wicked tumults.  
Yet this is the man whom Bellarmine will justify by seven and twenty Authors, and C. E. can add two more to the heap; yea, in those very things for which he condemned himself.  
Reader, if one of his evil spirits should have stepped into Peter's chair, do ye think he could have wanted Proctors? But how good an account we were like to have of seven and twenty Authors (if it would requite the cost to examine them) appears, in that 
l Lamb. Schafnab. Hist. rerum German.  Lambertus Schafnaburgensis (which is cited for the man that magnifies the miracles of this Gregory) says not one such word of him; but speaks indeed the like of one Anno Archbishop of Coleine, who lived and died in the time of Gregory: As for Gregory's miracles, Benno the Cardinal tells us what they were; that he raised Devils familiarly, that he shaked sparks of fire out of his sleeve by his magic. A trick that well beseemed an Hellebrand, who set all the world on fire by his wicked impetuosity. We will not envy Rome this Saint, let them enjoy him, let them celebrate him, and cry down Henry the Emperor, and all that opposed him. Still may such as these be the Tutelar gods of that holy City; For us, it is comfort enough to us, that our marriages had such a persecutor.  
That the Churches did hereupon ring of him for Antichrist, 
Refut. p. 306, usque ad 309.  Aventine is my author: Pro concione, etc. In their sermons (saith he) they did curse HILDEBRAND, they cried out on him as a man transported with hatred and ambition, Antichristum esse praedicant, They declared him to be Antichrist; They said that under the colourable title of Christ he did the service of Antichrist; 
Antichristi negotium agitat.  That he sits in Babylon in the Temple of God, and is advanced above all that is called God. So he. And little better is that which his 
m Lamb. Schafn●burg. l. de Rebus German.  Schafnaburgensis (so much extolled by C. E.) recordeth: Aduersus hoc decretum infremuit tota factio Clericorum, etc. Against this Decree (saith he) all the whole faction of Clergy men fretted and mutined; accusing him as an Heretic▪ and a man of perverse opinion, who forgetting the Word of Christ, which said, All men cannot receive this▪ did by a violent exaction compel men to live in the fashion of Angels.  
To which if I should add the sentence of the Synod of Worms, and that of Brixia, my Reader would easily see, that it is not the applause of some devoted Pen, that can free him from these foul imputations of deserved infamy.  
That untruth then cleared, another belike hangs upon the score; 
Refut. p. 307.  My Refuter charges me with falsehood, in saying, That GREGORY the seventh was deposed by the French and Germane Bishops. Only the Germans (he saith) were Actors in that Tragedy. But if not at Worms, yet let him tell me what was done at Brixia, and by whom: Quamobrem Italiae, Germaniae, Galliae Pontifices, etc. Wherefore (saith AVENTINUS) the Bishops of Italy, Germany, and France, the seventh of the Kalends of july, met at Brixia in Bavaria, and sentenced HILDEBRAND to have spoken and done against Christian piety, etc. and condemned him of heresy, impiety, sacrilege, etc. 
Ref. p. 310, 311.  And that my Refuter may find himself answered at once to the last of his Cavils, wherein he pleads that this deposition was not so much as pretended for the inhibition of these marriages, but for other causes, let him see the Copy of the judgement passed against him in the said Council; wherein, after the accusation of his Simoniacal climbing into the Chair (the vice which he pretended most to persecute in others) his forceable possession, 
The virtues of C. Is. Saint.  his heresy, his machinations against the Emperor, his perverting of the Laws both of God and Men, his false doctrines, sacrileges, perjuries, lies, murders, by him suborned and commended, his tyranny, his setting of discord betwixt Brethren, Friends, Cousins; It follows, Inter coniuges divortia facit; suavis homo sacerdotes qui uxores habent legitimos sacrificos esse pernegat; interim tamen scortatores, adulteros, incestuosoes aris admovet, etc. He causes divorces betwixt Man and Wife; The fine man denies those Priests, which have lawful wives, to be Priests at all; in the mean time he admits to the Altar whore-mongers, adulterers, incestuous persons, etc. Nos ergo. We therefore by the authority of Almighty God, pronounce him deposed from his Popedom. Thus Aventine specifies the Decree; which alone without Commentary, without enforcement, answers all the frivolous exceptions of my wordy Adversary. So as now, to return his Epilogue, 
Refut. p. 316.  he hath sent back my ten pretended lies, with the unreasonable and inverted usury of well-near an hundred. Pauperis est numerare.   

SECT. IX.  
FRom foreign parts, I return at last to our own; so I fear hath C. E. done long since; 
Refut. p. 317.  lurking somewhere in England for no good. These Fugitives love not home more, than their home hath cause to hate them. His Cavils of the wondrous contradiction betwixt my Margin and my Text, are too childish to be honoured with an answer. My Text was; The bicker of our English Clergy with their DUNSTANS, about this time, are memorable. My Margin cities Henry of Huntingdon, affirming Anselm to be the first that forbade marriage: Betwixt these two, saith my Refuter, was an hundred years' difference. I grant it: But (had my words been thus) if my Detector were not disposed to seek a knot in a Rush, he had easily noted that in a general survey of all Ages, the phrase (About that time) admits much latitude; and will easily stretch without any strain to one whole Centurie of years. Had the Quotation been as he pleadeth, this answer were sufficient. But my words need no such reconciliation; I stand to the censure, and disclaim the mercy of any Reader: For that citation of Anselm hath plain reference to the following words; Our Histories testify how late, how repiningly our Clergy stooped under this yoke: it is for this that my Margin points to Henry Huntingdon, and Fabian, reporting Anselm the first man that prohibited these marriages. What contradiction now can his acuteness detect in these two? The English Clergy had bicker with their Dunstan's; and stooped late and repiningly to this yoke under Anselm. See, Reader, and admire the equal Truth and Logic of a Catholic Priest, and judge how well he bestoweth his Pages.   

SECT. X.  
IT is true, 
Refut. p. 318.  Dunstan was the man who first with his other 
* Oswald and Ethelwold.  two Cousins and Partners in Canonization, opposed any appendance of the married Clergy; He wrought it with good K. Edgar, by dreams, and visions, and miracles. He, who when the Devil came to tempt him to lust, 
a Gul. Malmesb. It. Legend, etc.  caught him by the Nose with an hot pair of Tongues, and made him roar out for mercy, supposed that every Clergy man had the same Irons in the fire; and therefore blew the Coals to that good King, of the dislike of these clerical marriages; and with the same breath enkindled the zeal of Monkery. The Church wherein I am now interessed, and wherein I do (by the providence of God, and the bounty of my gracious Master) succeed their Saint Oswald's Priors, yields me sufficient records hereof; which because they are both worthy of public light, and give no small light to the business in hand, I have thought good here to insert.  

* The names of the Founders of the Church of Worcester. In the time of King Ethelred was Worcester made an Episcopal See; Bosel was the first bishop. The 17. was Saint Oswald; in whose time King Edgar gave, etc. And by the mediation of Saint Oswald was this Cathedral Church translated from married Clerks unto Monks.  Nomina Fundatorum Ecclesiae Wigorniensis, Tempore Ethelredi Regis, etc.— constituta est sedes Episcopalis Wigorn: Bosel Episcopus primus— Septimus decimus, Sanctus Oswaldus, tempore cuius Edgarus Rex dedit— Mediante verò Beato Oswaldo, à Clericis in Monachos translata est sedes Pontificalis honoris.  
Then follows the Charter of King Edgar founding the Monks with this Title, Carta Regis EADGARI, de OSWALDES LAW.  

ALTITONANTIS Dei largifluâ Clementiâ, qui est Rex Regum & Dominus Dominantium. Ego EADGARVS Anglorum Basileus omnium Regum Insularum Oceani quae Britanniam circumiacent, cunctarumque Nationum quae infra eam includuntur, Imperator & Dominus, gratias ago ipsi Deo Omnipotenti Regi meo, qui meum Imperium sic ampliavit, & exaltavit super regnum Patrum meorum.—  
Quapropter & ego Christi gloriam & laudem in regno meo exaltare, & eius seruitium amplificare devotus disposui, & per meos fideles fautores DUNSTANUM videlicet, Archiepiscopum, & ATHELWOLDUM, ac OSWALDUM Episcopos, quos mihi Patres spirituales, & consiliarios elegi, magna ex parte secundum quod disposui perfeci.—  
Et ipsis supradictis meis cooperatoribus strenuè annitentibus, iam XL. & VII. Monasteria cum Monachis & Sanctimonialibus constitui; & si Christus vitam mihi tam diu concesserit, usque ad quinquagessimum remissionis numerum meae devotae Deo munificentiae oblationem protendere decrevi. Vnde nunc in praesenti Monasterium, quod praedictus reverendus Episcopus OSWALDVS in sede Episcopali Wereceastre, in honorem Sanctae Dei genitricis MARIae amplificavit, & eliminatis Clericorum nenijs, & spurcis lascivijs, religiosis Dei seruis Monachis, meo consensu & favore suffultus locavit, Ego ipsis Monasticae religionis viris Regali authoritate confirmo, & consilio, & astipulatione Principum & Optimatum meorum corroboro, & consigno, ita ut iam amplius non sit fas, neque ius Clericis reclamandi quicquam ind●, quippe qui magis elegerunt cum sui ordinis periculo, & Ecclesiastici beneficij dispendi suis uxoribus adhaerere, quam Deo castè & canonicè seruire. Et ideo cuncta quae illi de Ecclesia possederant, cum ipsâ Ecclesiâ, sive Ecclesiastica, sive Secularia, tam mobilia, quam immobilia, ipsis Dei seruis Monachis ab hac die perpetualiter Regiae munificentiae iure deinceps possidenda trado, & consigno, ita firmiter, ut nulli Principum, nec etiam ulli Episcopo succedenti fas sit, aut licitum quicquam inde subtrahere, aut peruadere, aut ab eorum potestate surripere, & in Clericorum ius iterum traducere, quamdiu fides Christiana in Angliâ perduraverit. Sed & dimidium Centuriatum, etc.—  
In the end dated thus, Facta sunt haec Anno Dominicae Nativitatis, D. CCCC.LXIIII. Indictione VIII. Regni EADGARI Anglorum Regis, 6. in Regia urbe quae ab incolis Glouceastre nominatur in Natale Domini.   

In English thus.  
BY the bountiful mercy of Almighty GOD●, which is King of Kings, and Lord of Lords, I Edgar King of England; and of all the Kings of the Lands of the Ocean lying about Brittany, and of all the Nations that are included within it, Emperor and Lord; do give thanks to Almighty God my King, which hath enlarged my Empire, and exalted it above the Kingdom of my Fathers.—  
Wherefore I also having devoted myself to exalt the glory & praise of Christ in my Kingdom, and to enlarge his Service, have intended; and by my faithful Well-willers, Dunstan Archbishop, Athelwold, and Oswald Bishops, (whom I have chosen for my spiritual Fathers, and Counselors) I have for the greatest part already performed what I intended, etc.—  
And by the diligent endeavours of my foresaid Helpers, I have now constituted and made seven and forty MONASTERIES with Monks and Nuns; and if Christ shall give me to live so long, I have decreed to draw forth the Oblation of this my devout Munificence unto God, to the full number of fifty, which is the number of my remission. 
* So as it appears, this number was set to King Edg●r by Dunstan for his penance.  Whereupon, now for the present, I do by my Royal Authority confirm to persons of Monastical Religion, and by the consent and astipulation of my Princes and Peers, do establish and consign to them, that Monastery which the foresaid reverend Bishop OSWALD (to the honour of the Blessed Mother of GOD) hath amplified in the Episcopal See of Wereceastre, and expelling the wanton and filthy lasciviousness of Clerks, hath, by my consent and favour, bestowed it upon the religious Servants of God, the Monks; (so as from henceforth it shall not be lawful for the said Clerks, to challenge any thing therein, as those which have rather chosen (with the danger of their Order, and the loss of their Ecclesiastical 
* That is, their Prebend.  Benefice) to stick unto their Wives, then chastely and canonically to serve God. And therefore all that ever they possessed of the said Church, whether Ecclesiastical or Secular, movable or unmoveable, together with the Church itself, I do from this day forward for ever, give and consign to the said Monks, to be possessed of them in the right of my Royal Munificence; so firmly, that it shall not be lawful for any Prince or any Bishop succeeding to subtract aught from them, or to withdraw any of the Premises from their power, and to deliver it back again to the right and possession of Clerks, so long as the Christian Faith shall remain in England, etc.—  
Facta sunt haec, etc. These things were done in the year of Christ's Nativity, D. CCCC.LXIIII. Indiction VIII. In the sixth year of the Reign of Edgar King of England; in the Royal City which by the Inhabitants is named Glouceastre, in the Feast of the Nativity of our Lord, etc.—   
That Dunstan did this, none ever doubted; but withal it is considerable, who himself was; an Abbot; and therefore partial to the Cloisters; and who put him into this Commission; Pope john the thirteenth: a Monster of men, yea, of Popes; one, who (as was articled against him in a general Council) had committed incest with two of his own Sisters, who called to the Devil for his help, at dice, who deflowered Virgins, who lay with Stephana his Father's Concubine; who drank to the Devil, besides many other horrible criminations; A man fit to set a Saint on work against lawful Marriages. And thirdly, what the state of the Times were; wherein liberty was degenerate into strange licentiousness; Even change of Wives (if we may believe Histories) was then no wonder; For the correcting whereof, the Reformers (according to the Philosopher's advice) laboured towards the other extreme; as those which to straighten a stick, bow it as much the contrary way: And lastly, how far this act and endeavour extended: For Dunstan sought not to thrust married men out of the Clergy, but to thrust 
* Expulit malos Praesbyteros, introduxit pe●ores Monachos, Polyd.  married Clergy men out of Cathedral Churches, which required a quotidian attendance, which is evident both by the sentence of Dunstan (Aut Canonicè vivendum, aut ab Ecclesia excundum) either that they must live Canonically, or get out of the Church; that is, 
From the greater Churches.  ex Ecclesijs maioribus, as Historians relate it; And by the sentence of the Rood for DUNSTAN; Mutaretis non benè; How much difference there was in these two, appears in the Decree of Bishop Lanfranc, Anselme's Predecessor; which tolerating married Seculars, drives directly against married Canons. 
Refut. p. 321.  Little needed my Refuter then (but that he must have something to say) to fall upon our right Reverend and Learned Bishop of Hereford (whose worthy labours have justly endeared him to all Posterity) for that true comparison he makes betwixt these three Saints of theirs, and Anselm: They by action, he by Synodical Decree persecuted the Clergy; They bent their endeavours against Cathedral Clerks, he against Priests; Their project was particular, his universal.  
That a peremptore sentence passed generally against the Marriage of Eccleisastics in a public Synod under Dunstan, 
Refut. p. 319.  he refers us to Binius, which at random talks of Concilium Anglicanum; without all particulars of place, or persons; and refers us to Surius; as if he had bidden us ask his Fellow if he lie: Why did he not send us to Father Parsons, or his Gabriel Gifford? Sure, it was in some obscure hole of the Peake, or some blind dormitory of a Covent; neither can we say of it with the Apostle, These things were not done in a Corner; The Canons, whereto the fore-alleaged Charter, and the sentence of Dunstan have reference, were no other than Romish; which these Monkish Prelates had persuaded King Edgar to receive, and in part to urge upon his married Prebendaries. The success of his Synod at READING, or WINCHESTER he knows well enough: And is he ashamed of the miraculous sentence of his Holy-Rood (which jornalensis reports) who there openly spoke for the Monks against the Clergy? Absit ut hoc fiat; that he passes over to that of Calne, 
Refut. 321.  where the falling of an overcharged floor, crushed the Marriage of Clergy men. Idle Monks, who for their own turn set such a Superstitious gloss upon that accident, which (as 
* H. Hunt. l. 5.  Henry Huntingdon more probably interprete it) was Signum excelsi Dei, quod proditione & interfectione Regis sui ab amore Dei casuri essent, & à diversis gentibus digna contritione conterendi: A sign from the high God, that by their Treason and Murder of their King (who was slain the year after) they should fall from the favour of God, and be worthily crushed by other Nations. Thus he. Such was the event; For the construction of it, the Reader may choose, whether he will believe an Archdeacon of Huntingdon, or a Monk of Malmesbury. 
Gul. Malmes.  Iwis these rotten ioysts are foundation enough whereon to build the prohibition of our marriages.   

SECT. XI.  
Under these late Romish Saints, 
Refut. p. 332.  Dunstan and Anselm, I might safely say our English Clergy found the first machinations against their marriage, and at last stooped perforce to this yoke of constrained continency. Neither doth my wit, or my Logic fail me in this collection. If these were the men that made the first opposition to the marriage of Clergy men in England, than it formerly obtained here, without contradiction. The bare word of my Refuter, is a hot shot to batter this necessary illation; and to assure the Reader that the forced Celibate of the English Clergy is of greater Antiquity than these his Saints; To which he adds (in an ignorant begging of the question) A thing so filthy, after a solemn vow to God, to take a Wife, as it never appeared without the brand of infamy. As if our Predecessors in the English Clergy had been ever charged with a vow; As if the solemnity of this vow had never had beginning? chimerical fancies fit for a shorn head. 
q D. Martin's arg. is, Priests crowns signify their vow; No other proof can be brought worth talking 〈◊〉, but from the Barber's shop.  When as his Master Harding could not produce so much as a probability of any vow anciently required, or undertaken; whether by beck, or Dieu-gard. When as the ancient Saxon Pontifical makes not the least mention of any such profession; yea, when Girardus (who was the second Bishop of York after the conquest) writes flatly to Anselm concerning his own Canons, 
Antiquit. Britan. Def. of Pr. Marr. p. 282.  Professiones verò mihi penitus abnegant Canonici, etc. My Canons (saith he) utterly deny to give me profession of continency, which without this profession have been disorderly advanced to holy Orders; cum verò ad ordines aliquos invito, durâ ceruice renituntur, ne in ordinando castitatem profiteantur; And when I do invite any to take Orders, they do resist me very stubbornly, that they will make no profession of chastity in their Ordination. Thus he. Showing us plainly that the Clergy in those times challenged no other than the liberty of their Predecessors. But well may he face us down in this more obscure (though certain) truth, when he dares to say that Greece itself never tolerated this estate in their Clergy, till by bad life it fell to Schism, and from Schism to open Heresy; whiles their own Canon Law (besides all Histories) give him the lie; and what 
r Latinorum nomo vel veterium, vel recentiorum, inter Graecorum erreres, aut haereses, aut schismata, hanc coniugalis usus retentionem supputavit, non Hugo Eterianus, non Tho. Aquinas, non Guido Carmelita, ad 26. licet hic numeraverit, non alius qui vel obiter, vel peculiariter de iis egerit▪ Espens. lib. 1. cap. 4.  Espencaeus hath ingeniously spoken concerning this point, we have formerly showed. If he did not presume upon Readers that never saw Books, he durst not be thus impudent.  
This argument therefore shall ever stand good, and shall scornfully trample upon all his vain cavils; Ethelwold was the first, which by the command of King EDGAR expelled married Priests out of 
s Apud Winton. & Monachos loco Clericorum primus instituit. De Edgaro. Rogerus Cestrens. l●b. 6.  the old erection of Winchester; Anno 963. DUNSTAN and OSWALD together with him were the men, who (two years after) first expelled married Clergymen out of the greater houses of Merceland; As 1177. in the days of King Henry the Second, the secular Prebendaries of Waltham, were first turned out, to give way to their Irregulars; therefore until these times, these places were interruptedly possessed by married Clergymen. If now he shall except; that this possession of theirs was not of long continuance, but upon usurpation; whereby the married Incumbents had injuriously encroached upon the right of Monks; Our Monks of Worcester shall herein fully convince him; who write under their Oswaldus Archiepiscopus; 
Oswald Archbishop of York.  Per me fundatus fuit ex clericis monachatus, That is, By me were Monks first founded out of Clerks; Which was also the fashion of all other erections of this nature; so as it is manifest, that originally these Churches were founded in married Clergymen; afterwards wrongfully translated, from them to Monks; And if the first possessors had been 
t A Clericis in Monachos translata est sedes Pontif hon. vid. supr.  Monks, how could Monks have been there first founded by Oswald, when as Ethelred had long before both founded, and furnished it? and how out of Clerks, if Monks had been there before? Let my Refuter show me but a Verse of equal antiquity in a contrary rhyme, 
Per me fundatus fuit ex  
Monachis Clericatus.  and I yield him my argument: Otherwise let the world judge, if he be not shamelessly obstinate in not yielding.   


Refut. p. 324.  But to strike it dead, my Adversary will prove the English Clergy ever to have been continent. Reader, look now for Demonstrations; His first proof is, That in all the pursuit of this business, 
Non est scriptum, ergo non est factum, etc.  we never read of any that did stand upon the former custom of the Church. A proper argument, ab authoritate negatiuè. And what other arguments doth my Detector find used by the then-persecuted Clergy? Histories record them not; therefore doubtless they said nothing for themselves; and if they urged other proofs, which are not now descended to us by any relation, why not this for one? Who can but hiss out so silly sophistry? But to stop that clamorous mouth in this poor cavil; doth not his own 
u Gul. Malmes. de gest. Augl. l. 2. c. 9  Monk of Malmesbury tell him, that the Clergy urged this plea for themselves, Ingens esse & miserabile dedecus, ut nonus advena veteres colonos migrare compellerit, etc. That it was a great and miserable shame, that these upstarts, the Monks, should thrust out the ancient possessors of those places; that this was neither pleasing to God, which had given them that long-continued habitation, nor yet to any good man, who might justly fear the same hard measure which was offered to them: Thus they, whose plea and complaint seemed so just, that Alfgina the Queen, Prince Alfere, and others of the nobility overthrew many of those new-founded monasteries, and reinstalled the Priests in their former right.  
His next proof is from the Letters of Pope Gregory, 
Ref. p. 325.  which he wrote to Austin the Monk here in England. Risum teneatis? Did ever any man doubt, but that Pope Gregory was desirous to establish Romish Laws, and orders, amongst the English. Where yet his Legate found many as good Christians as himself under another rule, conform to the Greek Church? But how follows this? This Pope was willing to in-romanize the English; therefore the staff stands in the corner: And yet even Pope Gregory allowed marriage to those of the 
x Greg. resp. ad quaest. 2. Aug.  English Clergy, which were not within the higher Orders; appointing them to receive their stipends apart; a favour which he saw necessarily to be yielded to our nation, whiles he abridged others.  

Ref. p. 326.  From Gregory, he descends to Beda, a man doubtless venerable for his learning, and virtue; but (as it is in his Epitaph) Monachorum nobile sydus. 
The noble Star of Monks.  Whether a neighbour at least to Italy, by birth (as they contend) I am sure a Disciple of Abbot Benedict, and so great a fautor of the Roman faction, that he censures S. Aidanus and Colmannus, for adhering to those Greek forms, which the Churches of this Island had anciently followed; whose part joannes Maior justly takes against him. This Beda in a general speculation speaks his conceit of the voluntary continency which he holds requisite in the Priesthood; says nothing of the particular custom of the English Clergy; rather in diverse passages insinuating the contrary. Amongst the rest, he tells us that in the 
y Bed. Eccles. hist. Aug. l. 4.  Synod holden by Archbishop Theodorus, and the other Bishops (at Hereford) in the third year of King Egfride (which was about Anno 673.) their Tenth and last Canon was pro coniugijs; ut nulli liceat nisi legitimum habere connubium; For Marriages; That no man should marry unlawfully, no man should commit incest, no man should leave his own wife, unless (as the Gospel teacheth) for fornication only, etc. I know, my Refuter will plead the universality of this Canon, and will contend, that a Law generally made for all Christians, is not without injury restrained to Ecclesiastiques; But let my Reader well consider, both the Prologue and Epilogue of that Synod, he shall see, that they who are required to keep these Laws, are Consacerdotes omnes; and that whosoever shall violate them, Noverit se ab omni officio Sacerdotali & nostra societate separatum; must know himself separate from all sacerdotal office and society: so as it will necessarily follow, that this Law did (at least) concern the Clergy with others, though not apart; Neither is there any other of those Canons, which concerns not the Clergy only; except the first, concerning the observation of Easter, which principally also belonged to them. Whereto it makes not a little, 
I forbear the Saxon word, for lack of their Characters. The Reader shall find them cited in Saxon by Mat. Parker. Def. of Pr. Mar.  that in the Book of Saxon Canons set out for the governing of the secular Priests, the rule is, Let them also do their endeavour, that they hold with perpetual diligence their chastity, in an unspotted body, or else let them be coupled with the bond of one Matrimony. Words, wherein our Clergy meant to regulate themselves (as it seems) by the holy prescript of Isidore, whereof we have spoken. Lastly, my Adversary cannot deny, that this Synod gives order for many accidental matters, concerning the Clergy, for their fixed station, for their maintenance, etc. but except in this Canon, there is no one word of their state of life; neither is there in all those Canons, one syllable of this pretended Celibate, as that, which the contrary received custom of our Church would never have endured; My Refuter da●es not say that these marriages were so quite out of use, that it was needless to ordain aught against them; he knows that his DUNSTAN found here this course so inveterate, that the very age and deep rooting of it hindered his designs.   

SECT. XIII.  

Ref. p. 328.  FRom Bede he comes down to his three premised Saints, Dunstan, Oswald, and Ethelwold; and, to make sure work, cities an obscure 
z Vulstan. in vita Ethelwoldi.  Scholar of Ethelwold, for an authentic Witness against eight honest Priests, and the lawfulness of all Priests marriages. And lastly, he makes up the mouth of his discourse with the full Decree of Archbishop Anselm Richard in the Synods of London; 
p. 329, 330, 331.  and why not King Henry's six Article? and why not the Council of Trent? Sic conclusum est contra haereticos; Now, because his heart told him, how light these proofs were, he lays in the scales with them certain grave ponderations, which all put together, will prove almost at weighty as the Feather he wrote withal.  
The first is, That there cannot be a greater national proof then to have the Bishops and the King, and his Nobility to define, and deliver this point with joint consent. Take this, 
Ref. p. 332.  Reader, of King Edward the sixth, and his Parliament, and Convocation, and all is well. King Edgar's Vtopicall decree was hatched in a Monk's cowl: and to his two King Henries, he might have added Philip and Mary. And why might not we oppose King Edmund to Edgar, and Osulphus his Bishop to Dunstan? And the Clergy before Anselm to the Clergy after him? This match were made with some indifferency; But how idly hath my Refuter mislaid the comparison betwixt Henry of Huntingdon, and Fabian on our part, and all the Clergy and Laity of theirs? Since those two Authors (if we had no more) report only de facto, that Priest's marriages were not before forbidden; and the cited Clergy and Laity do now thus late-ward discuss de iure; Neither have the Clergy and Laity by him alleged, ever contradicted that which Huntingdon and Fabian have out of the course of all Story affirmed; Unto which, let me add 
a Polyd. Hist. Aug. l. 6. Anno ●70. De Inuentorib. l. 5.  Polydore Virgil, seconding this their assertion; who plainly tells us, that for 970. years, the restraint of marriage was never in use amongst the English Clergy. Search not for this, Reader, in the later editions, lest thou complain of lost labour; Poor Polydore may cry out of his grave with that other Polydore in Virgil: Fas omne abrumpit Polydorum obtruncat. Let him then (to answer this vain challenge) produce but any one Author of equal authority to any of these, which doth avouch the contrary to that, which these three have thus confidently delivered, and I shall confess myself herein sufficiently answered; In the mean time, let him, and the world know, that all the ancient Clergy, and Laity of this Island, was for this liberty, altogether ours: Whereto if he yield not, let him name the man, before his Dunstan, that ever in this I'll opened his mouth against it; Till then, the Reader cannot but see; that whereas our proof is, Ex ●re duorum, aut trium, his side is mute; that for our Something, be can show Nothing at all; and that our Huntingdon, F. Fabian and Polydore, are better than C. E. and his Man in the Moon.   

SECT. XIIII.  
HIs second ponderation of the sanctity of the persons, 
Refut. p. 335.  i● no truer auoir-de-poi●. That B. Dunstan was an holy man, we may easily grant; but taken from the Covent of Glastenbury. Neither would the Nobility of his time be so liberal as to the King, 
To King Ath●sta●, who first brought him from his Cell.  De●libidinibus & pra●tigijs; for (two remarkable qualities in his Saintship) lechery and sorcery; whereupon he was cast out from the Court; and that he was received again, he might thank the King's horse, whose sudden stop on the Verge of a steep downfall, restored Dunstan to the good opinion of the superstitious Prince; who yet was so far from being guilty of this deliverance, that he did not so much as know of the danger; An acquittal at least as causeless as the accusation.  
That Bishop Anselm was devout & learned, we willingly grant, but withal an Italian, and taken from a Norman 
* The Clergy of England did so well approve these Monkish Archbishops, that after Anselm, and Rodulph, the Bishops of the Land, became Suitors to the King, that they might never have any Archbishop of Canterb. chosen from the Monkish profession, Sax. Chron. Ann. 1123.  Covent; He was holy, but how impetuously addicted to his own will; and how refractory to authority, I had rather Histories should speak then myself. Neither is it any wonder if both these Prelates (how holy soever) savoured somewhat too strong of the Cloisters, and of Rome. Something must be yielded to Times and Places; we will not think but a well-meant zeal carried them into these resolutions; but a zeal misguided with the sway of the Times. The name of Saints, the truth of their sanctity did not privilege them from errors; we know how to sever their chaff from their wheat, and to send one of them to the Winds, the other to the Granary. 
Refut. p. 338.  As for the married Clergy, That they were ever accounted the scum and refuse of their Order, it is but the scurrilous scummy blur of an intemperate pen; what was Spiridion? what was Hilary? what were both Gregory's? what was Sidonius? what was Tertullian, Prosper, Simplicius, Eupsychius? In a word, what were all those whom his Damasus recounteth? what was the father of the Archdeacon of Huntingdon, whom within two leaves he recordeth (from his Epitaph) for 
t Stella cadit cleri, splendour marcet Nicolai: Stella cadens cleri, splendeat arce Dei, Huntingd. l. 7.  the star of the Clergy. This scum is better than their broth: which though it send forth a fume, seemingly delicious, yet many times being nearer tasted, proveth but cock-crowne pottage. These Saints he ignorantly ballanceth again with our Huntingdon, and Fabian; as if their present decree did contradict the history of things passed; as if we had no more histories on our side, because my margin cited them not. In the mean time, he finds this Testimony of Huntingdon so too much, that he would fain strip us of it; denying peremptorily, that Huntingdon affirms Anselm to be the first that forbade marriage to the Clergy.  
Reader, in stead of all other ponderations weigh the words, 
u Henr. Huntingd. edit. Savil. p. 378.  Eodem anno ad festum S. Michaelis tenuit Anselmus Archiepiscopus Concilium, apud Londoniam, in qou prohibuit uxores sacerdotibus Anglorum, antea non prohibitas, i. The same year, on the Feast of S. MICHAEL, Archbishop Anselm held a Synod at London, wherein he forbade wives to the Priests of England, before not forbidden; and tell me whether my Detector be true.  
The words are too plain; he will wrangle yet with the sense, and tells us that the word, Before, may signify, perhaps, Immediately before, in the reign of the Williams, and not all succession of times. It were well if he could escape so: But this starting hole will not hide him. For (not to send him to School to learn the difference betwixt Antea and Dudum, or Pridem). The same Author, in the following words, shows us the censures and conceits that passed upon this Act, as an absolute and unheard-off novelty; like as in Germany, the Historians brand this same Act in Hildebrand, with a novo exemplo, and inconsiderato praeiudicio. And for the times preceding, Polydore Virgil gives the very same witness. Neither let him fly for succour to his Dunstan, who never can be proved to have prohibited the marriage of Priests, though he disliked that Monasteries and Cathedral Churches should be possessed by married Clerks.  
Lastly, 
Refut. p. 343.  where the testimony is displeasing, the witness himself must be disgraced. Curiosity led my Detector to search who this H. Huntingdon might be; with one inquiry he might find him to be a Canon Regular of Augustine's Order, and for dignity an Archdeacon; a person past exception: But for his Parentage, he went no further than to the next Leaf, to find that he was the son of a noted, and, in those days, eminent Clergy man: 
Vid. supra.  His Epitaph at Lincoln shows him to have been the Star of the Clergy, no whit dimmed in his acknowledged light, or hindered in his influence, by his conjunction in lawful wedlock: What better instance could my Refuter have given against himself? If he think to insinuate that his birth made him partial; The Reader will easily consider, that if such Parentage had been then accounted shameful, the Historian would have had the wit to have suppressed it; And withal that he durst not, writing in the times when this thing was so familiarly and universally known, have offered such a Proposition to the light, out of a vain partiality, to incur the controlment of all eyes.   

SECT. XV.  
AS for our Fabian, if C.E. 
Ref. p. 333.  find him a Merchant, I find him to have been Sheriff of the Honourable City of London; A man whose credit would scorn to to be poised with an hundred nameless Fugitives, parasitical pettie-chapmen of the late small-wares of Rome. Neither can the name of a Citizen disparage him to any wise judge. How many have our times yielded of that rank, whom both Academical education, and experience and travel, and study have wrought to an eminent perfection in all Arts, especially in Mathematics, and History! Such was Fabian, whose fidelity (besides his other worths) was never (that I find) taxed but by this insolent Pen that hath learned to forbear no man; He was too old for us to bribe, and too credible for C. E. to disgrace. If he would have lent Rome but this one lie, no man had been more authentical; now his truth makes him fabulous Fabian. That one fault hath marred our Archdeacon of Huntingdon also.  

Ref. p. 348.  The Story which he tells of the Cardinal of Crema the Popes Legate taken in bed (after his busy endeavours, against the married Clergy) the same day with an Harlot, hath undone his reputation. Why will C.E. stir this sink? No man provoked him: If he did not long to blazon the shame of his friends, he had rather smothered this foul occurrence; but since he will be meddling, Res apertissima negari non potuit, celari non debuit, saith HUNTINGDON. The thing was most openly known, it could not be denied, it might not be concealed. Yet now comes an Vpstart-novice, and dares tell us from Baronius, that this was a mere Fable; how public and notorious soever, Huntingdon makes it: with these men this rule is universal, whatsoever may tend to the dishonour of the Church of Rome, is false and fabulous.  
Indeed, I remember what their Gloss said of old, 
x Dist. 96. In script.  Clericus amplectens mulierem, prasumitur bene agere, si ergo Clericus amplectitur mulierem, interpratabuitur quòd causa benedicendi eam, hoc faciat: That is; A Clergy man embracing a woman, must be presumed to do well; If therefore a Clerk take a woman by the middle, it must be interpreted that he doth it to give her his blessing. 
* So the Chronicle tells us of Adelme, Abbot of Malmesbury, who when he was stirred to the vice of the flesh, had wont to despite the Devil, and torment himself with holding a fair young Virgin in his bed, so long as he might say over the whole Psalter, Vid. Pask. Def. Polyd. suppressing the name, telleth the History.  Perhaps, the good Legate was but bestowing his ghostly blessing on so needful a subject, but that he was found in bed with her, if C. E. were not as shameless as that Cardinal, or his bedfellow, he durst not deny; For what impudency is this, to cast this relation only upon H. Huntingdon, when so many uncontrollable Pens have recorded it to the World? Men of their own stamp, for Religion, for Devotion. Matthew Paris, Ranulfus Cestrensis Roger Hoveden, Polydore Virgil, Fabian, Matthaeus Westmonasteriensis, otherwise called Florilegus; Dictus JOANNES, qui in Concilio, etc. saith he; The said JOHN which in the open Council had grievously condemned all the 
y Viz. the married: so did the enemies of Marriage disgracefully term the married Clergy; and so are the words of the Legate to be understood, de latere meretricis; he then railing against Marriage (not whoredom properly) was deprehended in whoredom.  Concubinary Priests, was taken himself in the same crime. Now let my Reader judge, whether this Priest's Truth, or that Cardinal's honesty were greater.   

SECT. XVI.  
HIs third Ponderation is the same with the first; Every thing eekes. His Saint Dunstan and Anselm, Gregory and Bede are again laid in our dish; we cannot feed on these over-oft-sod Coleworts. I am challenged here, to produce any Priest or Deacon that lived in Wedlock before the times of Dunstan; The man presumes upon the suppression of Records. For one, I name him hundreds. Who were they that Dunstan and his fellow-Saints found seated in the Cathedral Churches of this Land? whom did they eiect? Were they not married Priests? What did the ejected Clergy plead but ancient possession? After that; in the Synod which Archbishop 
a Ex Act. Concil. Wint. sub. Lanfr.  Lanfranck held at Winchester (which I wonder my Detectour would oversee: This neglect is not for nothing;) was it not decreed, that the Canons should not have Wives, but that the Priests which dwelled in Towns and Villages, should not be compelled to put away their Wives; though caution is put in for the future?  
What doth this imply, but that in those ancient Times the English Clergy were inoffensively married? To which add that old Record from an ancient martyrologue of the Church of Canterbury: 
Martyrol. Cant.  LANFRANCUS Archiepiscopus reddidit Ecclesiae Sancti ANDREae, etc. LANFRANCK Archbishop hath restored to Saint ANDREW'S Church; the Monastery of Saint MARIE with the Lands and Houses which LIVINGUS Priest, and his Wife had in London, etc. And before him, or Dustan either, in King Edmund's time, 
b Fox. Act. & Mon.  Bishop Osulphus with Athelme and Vlrick, Laics, thrust out of the Monks of Euesham, and placed Canons (married Priests) in their room.  

If he be the Son of a Bishop, etc.  Lastly, jornalensis records it as King Ina's Law, long before these times; Si Episcopi filiolus sit, sitdimidium hoc, etc. as supposing this no other than ordinary in those times.  
Now let my Refuter comfort himself and his Catholics, with the weak defence of Heresy, and the strong Bulwarks of Roman Truth; who in the mean time must be put in mind, that he puts on me the burden which should lie upon his own shoulders; I have produced Histories which affirm peremptorily, that the English Clergy were never forbidden to marry until Anselmes' time; it is now his task to disprove this assertion of theirs by equal authority to the contrary, which till he have done, the day is ours.   

SECT. XVII.  
HIs fourth Ponderation, 
Refut. p. 347.  is the difficulty of this grant in King Edward's Parliament. And is it possible the man should not see the greater difficulty that was found in the enforcement of this glorious Celibate? How Alfere and the Nobles dispossessed the Monks of Dunstan; justly restoring the married Priests to their ancient right? How Lanfranck durst not speak it out; Anselm did, but prevailed little: Let 
c Vid. supra. Epist. ad Ansel. Neubr. l. 3. c. 5.  Girardus then Archbishop of York witness. After whom Roger Archbishop of that See (as Neubrigensis, records) thrust out 
d Pope Paschalis writing to Anselm, saith, that there was at this time so great a number of Priests Sons in England, that the greater part of the Clergy consisted of them.  Anselmes' Monks, and stood for the liberty of Marriage: in somuch as in the succession of Times, even by Royal leave also, Marriage of spiritual persons yet continued; Neither could Anselmes' Successors, Radulphus, Gulielmus de Turbine and the rest, (notwithstanding all their Canons and practices) prevail against it. How plain is that of the 
e Chron. Saxon. Anno 1129.  Saxon Chronicle? Thus did the Archbishop of Canterbury and the Bishops, which were in England; And yet all these Decrees and bid stood not; All held their Wives by the King's leave, even as they did. Insomuch as Archbishop WILLIAM referred it to the King. The King decreed, that the Priests should continue with their Wives still. Neither were any thing more easy then to give store of instances in this kind. What need I give more than that of Galfride B. of Ely, 
Chron. jornal.  who was avouched before the Pope himself to have married a wife? which 
f Habet excusationem Euangelicam resp. est ab Epis. Arelat. Alexandro Papae  Euangelical excuse (uxorem duxit) was made for his not appearing at Rome with the rest. Of Richard Bishop of Chichester. ROBERT Bishop of Lincoln married men, after these Decrees; yea, good Evidences of Ancient Charts are ready in our hands, to show the use and legal allowance of these Marriages for no less than two hundred years after.  
As for those idle words which his sauciness throws after our reverend Martyr, Archbishop Cranmer, (whom he falsely affirms to have been the first married Archbishop of this Kingdom, 
Anno 1250.  when as Archbishop Boniface sat married in that See three hundred years before him) and King Edward's Parliament, we answer them, with silence and scorn. Let leesers have leave to talk.  
The approbation, and better expedience of single life in capable subjects, we do willingly subscribe unto; The lawfulness, yea, necessity of Marriage where the gift of Continence is denied, our Saviour, and his chosen vessel justify with us. So as I still conclude, He that made marriage, saith it is honourable, what care we for the dishonour of those that corrupt it?   

SECT. XVIII.  

Ref. 351.  HIs last ponderation is leaden indeed; That from the bicker of our English Clergy with their DUNSTANS, it will not follow that continency was not ancient, but was repiningly, lately, unjustly imposed. 
C. E. writes in the Margin, Master Hall's loose manner of disputing.  By this reason, he will prove there was never Thief or Malefactor in our Country, before the time of King JAMES; since all judges have yearly bicker with such people. Thus he. But did ever such loose Bosom sweep the press before?  
Reader, vouchsafe yet once more to cast thine eye upon the close of my Epistle; Doth my argument run thus wildly as he makes it? The English Clergy had bicker with their DUNSTANS, therefore continency was repiningly and unjustly imposed? Canst thou think I have met with a sober Adversary? My words are; That our Histories teach us how late, how repiningly, how unjustly our English Clergy stooped under this yoke. And what can his sophistry make of this? Are ye not ashamed (ye Superiors of Douai?) are ye not ashamed of such a Champion; fitter for a troop of Pigmees to trail a reed in their bicker with Cranes, then to be committed with any reasonable or Scholarlike Antagonist? In the bicker with his Dunstan's, the Patients pleaded prescription (as we have showed out of Malmesbury) and taxed his Saints with novelty; In my bicker with him, I plead Antiquity, Scripture, Reason; and tax him most justly with impudence, & absurdity. How well is that man, that is matched but with an honest Adversary?  

The Conclusion.  

Ref. p. 353. etc.  THe Conclusion follows, a fit cover for such a dish; The Reader was not weary enough, but he must be tired out with a tedious recapitulation; wherein my Refuter recollects all his dispersed folly, that it may show the fairer: Telling his Protestant friend, what I have bragged, what I have undertaken, what I have not performed, how I have satisfied, how I have mistaken; what himself hath in all passages performed against me, how he hath answered, how he hath conquered; The best is, the Conclusion can show no more than the Premises. By them, let me be judged: Those have made good to my Reader that C. E. hath accused much; and proved nothing, vaunted much, and done nothing; railed much, and hurt nothing, laboured much, and gained nothing, talked much, and said nothing.  
It is a large and bold word: but if any one clause of mine be unproved if any one clause of mine be disproved, any one exception against my defence proved just, any one charge of his proved true, any one falsehood of mine detected, any one argument of mine refeled, any one argument or proposition of his not refelled, Let me go away convicted with shame. But if I have answered every Challenge, vindicated every 
* I only except that one slip of my pen, that I said Gratian cited a sentence out of Austin, which was indeed his own.  authority, justified every proof, wiped away every cavil, affirmed no proposition untruely, censured nothing unjustly; satisfied all his malicious objections, and warranted every sentence of my poor Epistle: Let my Apology live and pass; and let my Refuter go as he is, C. F. Cavillator Egregius: Let my cause be no more victorious than just; and let honest Marriages ever hold up their heads, in despite of Rome and Hell: With this Farewell, I leave my Refuter, either to the acting of his unbloody executions of the Son of God; or the plotting of the bloody executions of the deputies of God, or (as it were his best) to the knocking of his Beads; But if he will needs be meddling with his pen, and will have me, after some jubilies, to expect an answer to my sixe-weekes labour, I shall in the mean time pray, that God would give him the grace to give way to the known Truth, and sometimes to say true.  
Yet to gratify my Reader at the parting, I may not conceal from him, an ancient and worthy monument, which I had the favour and happiness to see in the Inner Library of Corpus Christi College in Cambridge; An excellent Treatise, written (amongst seventeen other) in a fair set hand, by an Author of great learning and Antiquity; He would needs (suppress his name, 
Of Roan in France.  but describes himself to be Rotomagensis: The Time wherein it was written, appears to be amids the heat of contention, which was betwixt the Archbishop of Canterbury and York, for precedency; 
* As also the contention betwixt the Church of Roan and Vienna. R●g. Houed.  which quarrel fell betwixt Rodulph of Canterbury and Thurstin of York, in the year (1114.) at which time Pope PASCHALIS wrote to King HENRY concerning it; and was renewed after about the year 1175. The Discourse shall speak enough for itself.     

ROTOMAGENSIS. ANONYMUS.  
An liceat Sacerdotibus inire Matrimonia.  
SCire volui quis primus instituit ne Sacerdotes Christiani inire deberent matrimonia. Deus an homo? Si enim Deus, eius certe sententia & tenenda & obseruanda est cum omni veneratione & reverentia. Si vero homo & non Deus, de corde hominis & non ex ore Dei talis egressa est traditio: Ideoque nec per eam salus adquiritus si obseruetur, nec amittitur si non obseruetur. Non enim est hominis saluare vel perdere aliquem pro meritis, sed Dei proprium unius est, scilicet, quod Deus hoc instituerit, nec in veteri Testamento nec in Euangelio, ncc in Apostolorum Epistolis scriptum reperitur, in quibus quicquid Deus hominibus praecepit insertum describitur. Traditio ergo hominis est & non Dei, non Apostolorum institutio. Quemadmodum & Apostolus instituit, ut oportet Episcopum esse unius uxoris virum. Quod minime instituisset, si adulterium esset quod Episcopus haberet simul & uxorem, & Ecclesiam quaesi duas uxores, ut quidam asserunt. Quodque de Scripturis sanctis non habet authoritatem eadem facilitate contemnitur qua dicitur. Sancta enim Ecclesia non Sacerdotis uxor, non sponsa, sed Christi est, sicut Ioannes dicit, Qui habet sponsam, sponsus est: huius inquam sponsi Ecclesia sponsa est, & tamen huic sponsae licet in parte inire matrimonia ex Apostolica traditione. Dicit enim Apostolus ad Cor. Propter fornicationes inquit unusquisque uxorem suam habeat, & caetera usque volo omnes homines esse sicut me ipsum, sed unusquisque proprium donum habet a Deo, alius quidem sic, alius vero sic. Non enim omnes habent unum donum virginitatis scilicet, & continentiae, sed quidam virgines sunt & continentes, quidam vero incontinentes, quibus concidit nuptias ne tentet eos Sathanas propter incontinentiam suam & in ruinam turpitudinis corruant. Sed & sacerdotes quoque alij quidem continentes sunt, alij vero incontinentes, & qui continentes sunt, continentiae suae donum a Deo consecuti sunt, sine eius dono & gratia continentes esse non possunt. Incontinentes vero hoc donum gratiae minime percipiunt, qui cum intemperantia suae conspersionis, tum etiam animi infirmitate per carnis desideria diffluunt. Quod nullo modo facerent, si continentiae gratiam & virtutem a Deo percepissent. Sentiunt anim & ipsi alia● legem in membris suis repugnantem legi mentis sua, & captinantem eos in lege peccati, et quod nolunt agere cogentem, qui de corpore mortis huius liberantur gratia Dei. Hac itaque eos lege captivante, & carnis concupiscentia stimulante, aut fornicari coguntur aut nubere. Quarum quid melius sit Apostolica docemur authoritate, qua dicitur, melius nubere quam uri. Quod melius est, id certe eligendum & tenendum est. Melius est inquam nubere, quia peius est uri. Quia melius est nubere quam uri, Conueniens est incontiventibus ut nubant, non ut urantur. Bonae etenim sunt nuptia, sicut Augustinus ait in libro super Genesin ad litera●, in ipsi● commendatur bonum naturae quo incontinentiae regitur pranitas, & naturae decoratu● foecunditas. N● utriusque senus infirmitas propendens in ruinam turpitudinis, recte excipitur honastate nuptiarum, ut quod sanis possit esse officium, s●grotis remedium. Neque enim quia incontinentia malum est ideo connubium, vel quo incontinentes copulantur non est bonum. I more vero non propter illud malum culpabile est bonum, sed propter hoc bonum veniale est illud malum: quoniam id quod bonum habent nuptiae, & quod bonae sunt nuptiae, peccatum esse nunquam potest. Hoc autem tripartitum est, fides, proles, Sacramentum. In fide attenditur, ne praeter vinculum coniugale, cum altera vel cum altero concubatur. In prole, ut amanter suscipiatur, benigne suscipiatur, religiose educetur. In Sacramento, ut coniugium non separetur, & demissus aut demissa ne causa prolis alteri coniugatur. Haec est tanquam regula nuptiarum, qua vel naturae decoratur foecunditas, vel incontinentiae regitur pravitas. Hanc autem regulam nuptiarum, & hoc tripartitum bonum instituit aeterna veritas ordine decenti & lege aeterna, contra quam quicquid fit, vel dicitur, vel concupiscitur, peccatum est. Quod in libro contra Faustum Manichaeum Augustinus testatur, dicens, Peccatum est factum, vel dictum, vel concupitum contrae aeternam legem. Aeterna lex est divina voluntas, sive ratio ordinem naturalem perturbari vetans, conseruari iubens. Quicquid igitur ordinem naturalem perturbari iubet, conseruari vetat, exercere nuptias & earum tripartitum bonum, fidem, scilicet, prolem & Sacramentum eos habere prohibet, & regulam illam aeternae veritatis qua naturae decoratur foecunditas, vel incontinentiae regitur pravitas, eos soluere praecipit, etc. quibus naturalis ordo peragitur, abhomi●ari iubet. Hoc inquam mandatum naturalem ordinem conseruari vetat, perturbari iubet, & ideo contra aeternam legem fit, et peccatum est: peccant enim qui mandatum tale instituunt, quo naturalis ordo destruitur. Nam etiam ut videtur, minime credunt quod de Sacerdotum filijs assumat Deus ad aedificandam supernam Civitatem, & ad restaurandum Angelorum numerum. Si enim crederent, nunquam tale mandatum instituerent, quia scienter & nimia temeritate id efficere conarentur, ut superna Civitas numquam proficiatur, & Angelorum numerus nunquam reperaretur: si enim superna Civitas de filijs etiam Sacerdotum perficienda est, & si Angelorum numerus de ipsis etiam reperandus est, qui hoc efficere conatur ut nulli sint, quantum in ipso est, & supernam civitatem destruit, & Angelorum numerus ne perficiatur efficit. Quo quod perversius potest fieri? Hoc enim fit contra voluntatem & praedestinationem illius, qui quae futura sint fecit. Fecit enim praedestinatione quae futura sunt in opere. Quicunque ergo id efficere conatur at non faciat Deus in opere quae fecit in Praedestinatione, ipsam Praedestinationem Dei conatur evacuere. Si ergo Deus fecit in Praedestinatione ut filij Sacerdotum futuri sint in opere, qui hoc efficere conatur ut non futuri sint, in opere destruere molitur facta Dei quod fecit praedestinatione, & ita praedestinationem Dei nititur evertere, & voluntatem Dei contraire quae aeterna est. Voluit enim Deus ab aeterna, & ante saeculum omnes homines creare in saeculo, certo quidem ordine quo praecogitavit & praedestinavit eos se creaturum. Nihil enim inordinate facit, nihil in saeculo creat, quod non ante in praedestinatione suae mentis procedente omnia saeculo disponendo praeordinauerit. Quaecunque ergo in hoc saeculo ab ipso creantur, Praedestinationem mentis praedisponentem ac praeordinantem omni● necessario sequuntur, quod impossibile est non fieri quod Deus ab aeterno voluit & praeordinavit fieri. Necesse est igitur omnes homines eo ordine creari, quo voluit ab aeterno & praeordinavit. Alioquin non sicut voluit Deus, neque sicut praeordinavit omnes homines sunt crea●i, sed quod hoc inconueniens est necesse est illos creari, sicut voluit ab aeterno & praecogitavit atque praeordinavit, quod omnia quae voluit fecit, & nihil unquam fecit quae non voluit ab aeterno & praecogitavit decreto certo & incommutabili. Quia nec eius voluntas irrite potest fieri, nec praecogitatio falli, nec praeordinationes commutari. Quae cum ita sint, necesse est ut sicut Laici, ita etiam Sacerdotes de quibus homines creantur, ad ipsos creandos Ministerium exhibeant divinae voluntati & Praeordinationi. Parentes non sunt authores creationis filiorum, sed Ministri. Qui si Ministerium non exhiberent, voluntatem Dei & praecogitationem si possibile esset irritam facerent, ordinationique resisterent. Quod si scienter facerent gravius utique delinquerent, si nescienter minus non solum in Deum Patrem, sed & in coelestem jerusalem sanctorum omnium matrem, quod quantum in ipsis esset illos creari non permitterens, ex quibus ea aedificanda & coelestis patriae dantia sunt praeparanda. Sed ab hoc delicto defendit eos in potentia, quod non possunt voluntati Dei resistere & praeordinationi contraire. Voluntas enim Dei & Praedestinatio Lex aeterna est, in qua omnium rerum cursus d●cretus est, & paradigma est, in quo omnium saeculorum forma depicta est, quod nulla ratione aboleri potest. Huic igitur Ministerium non exhibere malum est, quod exhibire bonum est & maxime cum bona fit voluntate. Quod tum fit, cum parentes conveniunt causa giguendae prolis, non appetitu exercendae libidinis. Gignendae prolis dico, quia & praesens Ecclesia multiplicatur, & coelestis Civitas fabricetur, & electorum numerus compleatur, quorum nihil potest fieri sine conuentione tali. Si enim primi parentes Sanctorum omnes aut continentes permansissent aut virgines, nullus Sanctorum ex eis esset natus in saeculo, nullus gloria & honore coronatus in coelo, nullus adscitu● in Angelorum numero. Sed quia inestimabile bonum est, quod Sancti natisunt in saeculo, quod gloria & honore coronantur in coelo, & quod adsciti sunt in Angelorum numero, ex eo parentum foecunditas beatior praedicatur, & conventus sanctior. Sic ergo melius fuit eye tales filios genuisse quam non genuisse, talemque fructum nuptiarum protulisse, quam si●e fructu continentes, aut virgines extitisse. Quamuis bonum fit quibusdam continentes esse, vel virgines, illis viz. quos Deus v●luit ab aeterno, & praeordinavit ita creandos esse in saeculo, ut continentia vel virginitate permaneant: sicut enim voluit ab aeterno, & praeordinavit quosdam, ita creandos esse in saeculo, ut fructum nuptiarum faciant & filios generent, ita etiam voluit & praeordinavit ab aeterno, quosdam ita creandos esse, ut in continentia vel virginitate permaneant. Et sicut illi ad creandos filios voluntati Dei & praeordinationi ministerium exhibent, ita & isti ad conseruandam & continentiam & virginitatem voluntati Dei est praeordinationi ministrant. Ac per hoc & illorum foecunditas & istorum virginitas bona est atque laudabilis, quae si non ministerium exhiberet voluntati Dei et praeordinationi, nec bona esset nec laudabilis. Omne enim quod voluntati Dei & praeordinationi contrarium est, nec bonum est nec laudabile. Si ergo voluit Deus & praedestinavit alios futuros virgines, ali●s nuptiarum fructum facientes. Si enim omnes essent virgines, nullus Sanctorum qui vel nascitur vel nasciturus sit, in hoc saeculo natus esset, vel nasciturus. Nec ipsi etiam virgines essent, quia nati non essent. Ex foecunditate enim illorum orta est istorum virginitas. Magnum igitur bonum est foecunditas, de qua sancta praecessit virginitas. Quia autem virgines esse debeant, & qui nuptiarum fructus facientes, docet eos verbum quod Deus seminat in cordibus illorum. In aliorum enim cordibus se●●at verbum bonae foecunditatis nuptiarum fructum facientis, in aliorum vero cordibus seminat verbum virginitatis, 
* Deest (opinor) pars clausulae; Illi ergo in quibus seminat verbum virginitatis, etc.  ipsi virginitatem seruare desiderant: In quibus vero verbum nuptiarum seminat, ipsi facere nuptiarum fructum appetunt.   

Which, for my Countrimens' sake I have thus Englished.  
I Would fain know who it was that first ordained, that Christian Priests might not marry, GOD, or Man? For, if it were GOD, surely, his determination is to be held and observed with all veneration and reverence; But, if it were Man, and not GOD; and this Tradition came out of the heart of Man, not out of the Mouth of GOD, than neither is salvation got by it, if it be observed; nor lost, if it be not observed: For it doth not belong to Man either to save or destroy any man for his merits, but it is proper only unto GOD. That GOD hath ordained this, it is neither found written in the Old Testament, nor in the Gospel, nor in the Epistles of the Apostles, in all which is set down whatsoever GOD hath enjoined unto men. It is therefore a Tradition of Man, and not an institution of GOD, nor of his Apostles: As the Apostle instituted (rather) that a Bishop should be the Husband of one Wife; which he would never have appointed, if it had been adultery for a bishop to have at once a Wife, and a Church, as it were two Wives, like as some affirm: Now, that which hath not authority from the holy Scriptures, is with the same facility contemned, that it is spoken: For, the holy Church is not the Wife, not the Spouse of the Priest, but of Christ, as Saint john saith, He that hath the Bride, he is the Bridegroom. Of this Bridegroom, I say, is the Church the Spouse; and yet it is lawful even for this Spouse in part, to marry, by Apostolic Tradition; For the Apostle speaks thus to the Corinthians, Because of fornications, let every man have his own wife. And I would that all men were as I am, but every man hath his proper gift of GOD, one thus, another otherwise. For, all men have not one gift, namely, of Virginity, and Continency: But some are Virgins, and contain; others contain not; to whom he granteth marriage, lest Satan tempt them through their incontinency, and they should miscarry in the ruin of their uncleanness. So also of Priests, some are continent, others are incontinent; and those which are continent, have received the gift of their continence from GOD, without whose Gift and Grace, they cannot be continent. But those which are incontinent, have not received this gift of grace, but, whether by the intemperance of their humour, or the weakness of their mind run out into fleshly desires; which they would in no wise do, if they had received from GOD the Grace and Virtue of Continence. For they also which are delivered by the grace of GOD from the body of this death, feel another Law in their members rebelling against the Law of their mind, and captivating them to the Law of sin, and compelling them to do that which they would not. This Law therefore, holding them captive, and this Concupiscence of the flesh provoking them, they are com●lled either to fornicate, or marry: whereof whether is the better, we are taught by the authority of the Apostle, who tells us it is better to marry then to burn. Surely, that which is the better, is to be chosen and held; now it is better to marry, because it is worse to burn; and because it is better to marry then to burn, it is convenient for those which contain not, to marry, not to burn. For marriage is good, as Augustine speaks in his Book (super Genesin ad Literam) in it is commended the good of nature, whereby the pravity of incontinence is ruled, and the fruitfulness of Nature graced; For the weakness of either Sex declining towards the ruin of filthiness, is well relieved by the honesty of marriage, so as the same thing, which may be the office of the sound, is also the remedy unto the sick: Neither yet, because Incontinence is evil, is therefore Marriage (even that wherewith the Incontinent are joined) to be reputed not good; yea rather not for that evil, is the good faulty, but for this good, is that evil pardonable, since that good which marriage hath, yea which marriage is, can never be sin. Now, this good is threefold, the Fidelity, th●●ruit, the Sacrament of that estate; I● the Fidelity, is regarded: That besides this bond of Marriage, there be not carnal society with any other. In the Fruit of it, That it be lovingly raised and religiously bred. In the Sacrament of it, That the marriage be not separated, and that the dismissed party of either Sex, be not joined to any other, no not for issue's sake. This is as it were the Rule of Marriage, whereby the fruitfulness of Nature is graced, or the pravity of Incontinence ruled. And this Rule of Marriage, and this threefold good, the eternal Truth hath appointed in the order of his Decree, and that eternal Law of his, against which whatsoever is done, spoken, or willed, is sin; which Augustine in his Book against Faustus the Manichee witnesseth, saying, Sin is either Deed, Word, or Desire against the Law Eternal. This Eternal Law is the divine Will or Decree, forbidding the disturbance, and commanding the preservation of due natural order; whatsoever therefore commands natural Order to be disturbed, forbids it to be conserved, prohibits men to use Marriage, and to attain to the threefold good thereof, Fidelity, Issue, Sacrament; and commands them to break that Rule of Eternal Truth, whereby the fruitfulness of Nature is graced, or the pravity of Incontinency ruled, commands men to abhor those things whereby natural Order is held and maintained. This Commandment, I say, forbids natural Order to be observed, commands it to be disturbed, and therefore is against the Law of GOD, and by consequence, is sin: For, they sin that ordain such a command by which natural Order is destroyed.  
These men do not (it seems) believe, that of the children of Priests, GOD takes for the building of his City above, and for the restoring of the number of Angels: For, if they did believe it, they would never ordain such a Mandate, because they should wittingly and over-rashly go about to effect, that the supernal City should never be perfited, and the number of Angels never repaired. For if the supernal City be to be perfited even of the sons of Priests, and if the number of Angels be of them to be repaired, those that endeavour to procure that they should not be, do (what in them lies) destroy the supernal City, and labour that the number of Angels may not be perfited; Then which, what can be more perversely done? For this is done against the will and predestination of him which hath done those things, which shall be; for he hath done in his predestination those things which shall be in effect; whosoever therefore goes about to procure that GOD may not in effect do those things, which he hath done in his predestination, goes about to make void the very predestination of GOD. If then GOD have already in his Predestination decreed, that the sons of Priests shall once be in effect, he that goes about to procure that they may not be in effect, endeavours to destroy the work of GOD, because he hath already done it in predestination; and so strives to overthrow GOD'S predestination, and to gainstand that Will of GOD which is Eternal: For GOD would from Eternity, and before all Worlds, create all men in the World, in that certain Order wherein he preconceived, and predestinated, to create them; He doth nothing disorderly, He createth nothing in the World which He hath not foreordained, by disposing it in the Predestination of His mind that went before all Worlds. Whatsoever therefore is by Him created in this world, doth necessarily follow the Predestination of His mind predisposing, and preordayning all things; because it is impossible that should not be done, which GOD from Eternity hath willed and foreordained to be done; It is therefore necessary that all men should be created in that very Order, wherein He willed, and from Eternity foreordained; Or else, all men are not created as GOD would have them, nor as he foreordained them; But because this is inconvenient, it must needs be that they are created as He willed from Eternity, and forethought, and foreordained; because He hath done all things that He would, and never did any thing which He willed not from everlasting, and hath fore-conceived in His certain and unchangeable Decree. For neither can his Will be frustrated, nor his forethought deceived, nor His fore-ordinations altered: Which, since it is so; need must it be, that as Laics, so Priests also, of whom men are created, should yield their service to the divine Will and Preordination to the creating of them. For Parents are not the Authors of the Creation of their Children, but the servants; who if they should not yield their service, they should (if it w●re possible) make void the forethought of GOD, and resist his Ordination; which if they should wittingly do, they should offend the more, if ignorantly, the less; not only against GOD the Father, but also against the Heavenly jerusalem, the Mother of all Saints, because (what in them were) they should not suffer those to be created of whom it is to be builded, and those things to be prepared, whereby that Celestial Country is bestowed. But from this offence their impotence frees them, because they cannot resist the Will of GOD, and cross his Preordination. For the Will and Predestination of GOD is that eternal Law, in which the course of all things is decreed, and the pattern wherein the form of all Ages is set forth, which can by no means be defaced; Not to yield our service then hereunto, is evil, because to yield it, is good, and especially if it be done with a good intent; which is then done, when as Parents meet together in a desire of propagation of issue, not in an appetite of exercising their lust. Of propagation, I say, that both the present Church may be multiplied, and the Celestial City built, and the number of the Elect made up, none of which could be done▪ without such conjugal meeting. For if the first Parents of the Saints had continued all either Continent, or Virgins, no Saint had been borne of them in the World, none of them had been crowned with glory and honour in Heaven, none of them ascribed into the number of Angels. But since it is an inestimable good, that Saints are borne in the World, that they are crowned with glory and honour in heaven, and that they are ascribed into the number of Angels: thereupon the fruitfulness of Parents is more blessed, and their meeting holier. So than it is better for them to have begotten such Children, than not to have begotten them, and to have brought forth such fruit of marriage, then to have been continent, or Virgins, without fruit. Although it is good for some to be continent, or Virgins, namely, for them whom GOD eternally willed and preordained to be so created in the world, that they should remain either in Continence, or Virginity: For as he hath eternally willed and fore-ordained that some should be so created in the world, as that they should yield the fruit of Marriage, and beget Children, so also hath he willed, and from eternity foreordained, some to be so created, that they should continue in Continency or Virginity: And as those other yield their service to the Will and Preordination of GOD, in the creation of children, so these also serve the Will and Preordination of GOD in conserving their Continence, and Virginity; and hereupon is both the fruitfulness of the one, and the Virginity of the other good, and laudable; which if it did not yield service to the Will and Preordination of GOD, would be neither good nor laudable: For whatsoever is contrary to the Will and Preordination of GOD, is neither good, nor laudable. If therefore GOD willed and predestinated some to be Virgins, others to yield the fruit of Marriage (for if all were Virgins, no Saint that now is, or shall be borne, should either be now or hereafter borne in the World, neither should those Virgins be at all, because they should not be born; for of the fruitfulness of the one arises the others Virginity) therefore is fruitfulness a great Good, from which holy Virginity hath proceeded: Now that there should be some Virgins, and others that should bear the fruits of Marriage, the Word which GOD soweth in their hearts, teacheth us. For in the heart's 〈◊〉 some he soweth the Word of good fruitfulness, yielding the increase of Marriage, and in the hearts of others he sows the Word of Virginity; Those then in whom he sows the Word of Virginity, they desire to keep Virginity, but those in whom he sows the Word of Marriage, they desire to yield the fruit of Marriage.   

WHERETO I WILL add for Conclusion the wise and ingenuous judgement of Erasmus Roterodamus; The rather, because it pleased my Refuter to lay this worthy Author in our dish.  

Habetur Tomo nono Op. Eras. pag. 982.  In his Epistle to Christopher, Bishop of Basill, concerning humane Constitutions, Thus he writes.  

Name in totum quae sunt humani iuris, quemadmodum in morbis remedia, etc.  FOr those things which are altogether of humane constitution, must (like to remedies in diseases) be attempered to the present estate of matters, and times. Those things which were once religiously instituted, afterwards according to occasion, and the changed quality of manners and times, may be with more Religion and Piety abrogated; which yet is not to be done by the temereity of the people, but by the authority of Governors; that tumult may be avoided; and that the public custom may be so altered, that concord may not be broken: the very same is perhaps to be thought concerning the Marriage of Priests of old, as there was great paucity of Priests, so great Piety also; They, that they might more freely attend those holy Services, made themselves chaste of their own accord. And so much were those Ancients affected to Chastity, that they would hardly permit Marriage unto that Christian, whom his Baptism found single, but a second Marriage yet more hardly: And now that which seemed plausible in Bishops and Priests, was translated to Deacons, and at last to Subdeacons: which voluntarily received custom was confirmed by the authority of Popes. In the meantime▪ the number of Priests increased, and their Piety decreased; How many swarms of Priests are maintained in Monasteries and Colleges? 

Inter bos quanta raritas corum qui castè viwnt?  
Nec enim attingo nunc secretiorum libidinum mysteria, etc.   and amongst them how few are there that live chastely? I speak of them which do publicly keep Concubines in their houses, instead of their Wives. I do not now meddle with the mysteries of their more secret lusts; I only speak of those things which are most notoriously known to the World: And yet, when we know these things, how easy are we to admit men into holy Orders, and how difficult in releasing this constitution of single life? when as contrarily S. PAUL teaches that hands must not be rashly laid upon any; and more than once hath prescribed 2what manner of men Priests and Deacons ought to be, but of their single life, neither Christ, nor his Apostles have ever given any Law in the holy Scriptures. Long since hath the Church abrogated the nightly Vigils at the Tombs of Martyrs, which yet had been received by the public custom of Christians, and that for diverse Ages; Those Fasts, which were wont to continue till the evening, it hath transferred to noon; and many other things hath it changed according to the occasions arising: 
Cur hic humanam constitutionem urgemus tam obstinatè, prasertim cum tot causae suadeant mutationem? Primùm enim magna pars Sacerdotum vivit cum mala famâ; parumque requieta conscientia tractat illa sacrosancta mysteria, etc.  And why then do we so obstinatley urge this humane constitution, especially when so many causes persuade us to an alteration? For first a great part of our Priests lives with an ill name; and with an unquiet conscience handleth those holy Mysteries; And then the fruit of their labours (for the most part) is utterly lost, because their doctrine is contemned of their people by reason of their shameful life. Whereas, if Marriage might be yielded to those which do not contain, both they would live more quietly, and should preach God's Word to the people with authority, and might honestly bring up their children, neither should the one of them be a mutual shame to other, etc.   

Postscript to a second Libel.  
THe answer to one Libeler draws on another. These kind of Creatures do best in couples: He is cruel that neglects his own Fame; and though in time a false rumour would die alone, yet it is best to prevent the Day, and to dispatch it at once by a just Apology; especially, where the calumniation is grown universal; I have therefore easily hearkened to my wisest Friends, in stopping the mouth of an idle clamour. There is a base Paper that 〈◊〉 through all hands, 〈◊〉 rep●h of one Doctor Hall, whom the Libeler (in the person of his Curate) taxeth for incompetence of all ●ante▪ pitifully complaining to his Majesty (whom that presumptuous wretch dares to name in his lewd Scroll) that so small a Thong is out out to him of so large an Hide▪ intimating the rich Master whom he serves, guilty of a miserable parsimony, and unworthy neglect of his meritorious service; and 〈◊〉 the more envy upon the Ma● 〈◊〉 Name he traduceth, he sets out 〈◊〉 large proportion of his supp● Master's Revenues. When 〈…〉 the Libel, I could not but imagine it intended to some other of ●y (not infrequent) Name; so unce ●y unappliable 〈◊〉 I find al● those particulars to myself: But ●o●is●e my answer to this Popish Ad●ersarie was on foot, that malicious 〈◊〉 will need● appropriate the 〈…〉 with incredible 〈…〉 too well 〈…〉 Kingdo● 〈…〉 the Place, and I am the Man, whereto they have also added (after their manner) an unwritten fiction, that his Majesty taking notice of so wit● Complaynant, hath sharply rebuked 〈◊〉 for so disproportionable 〈…〉 and hath raised me, by 〈◊〉, unto an higher rare; The matter objected were not much 〈◊〉 in another (twelve pounds ●y the year were too much for a Libeler;) the words imply more ●hen they express; the Heart of them is worse than the Face, and my public Vows have turned my 〈◊〉 into Beams. Thus must we (with our Apostle) pass through good as poland evil; Yet let me 〈…〉 and the World) say this for myself (if I must 〈…〉 subject of this foolish 〈…〉 this 〈…〉 never 〈…〉 of any 〈…〉 ●esse a 〈…〉 never 〈…〉 years' 〈…〉 of Souls. In the Place where I now live (which my Libeler upbraids me with) I receive only a free and liberal Annuity from my Right Honourable Patron, the Lord Denny; upon whose only charges also my Assistant in these holy Labours hath been ever both provided and maintained; A truth which the Town and Country can witness with me: How could I therefore ever make here any such agreement, how could that agreement offend, how could that offence be reproved? Many encouragements have I had from my gracious Master, never yet any rebukes.  
For my estate (blessed be GOD and the King) it is such as affords me no cause of complaint, much of thankfulness; yet more transcending my merits, than the exigence of my charge: And is this Fellow's eye evil, because my Masters is good?  
The Arithmetic and Po● of my Libeler are much alike; his sums are as false as himself. For my Sheep and Beasts, they might soon have been counted: I was never the Master of one Sheep in all my life; they are Flocks of another nature, whereto I have devoted my thoughts: As for Beasts, if this good piece had been ever mine, I should perhaps have had four; whereas now (since the World must needs know my store) I have but three. judge now, Reader, whether thou findest in the whole Clergy of this Kingdom, yea, in thine own skin, a man to whom a Libel of this nature may with less colour, yea possibility of truth be applied▪ Is not this then a worthy scrap of wit and honesty for some grave Benchers to strive for Copies of for some Gentlemen that should be not unwise, not irreligious▪ to make themselves merry with ●ter all the venom of 〈…〉 what I was, perhaps 〈…〉 should I doubt th● 〈…〉 me for the 〈…〉 In the mean time I cannot but be sorry to see, that some Professors of Religion, should so lightly be won to the belief of idle slanders against those, which are ready both with Hand and Tongue to maintain the causes of GOD, and sincerely desirous to live that Gospel which they preach. If there be any one of them whose good-name is Libell-proofe, let him make sport at my wrong; but if the greatest innocence and holiness of Earth, or Heaven, be no protection against misreport, let him not without indignation entertain those unjust reproaches of another, which may, perhaps, ere to morrow, be his own: Had this Libeler written Him, or Me, Traitor, or Murderer, or whatever other Malefactor, I know no defence but Head and Shoulders, and the Conscience of innocence: Neither can I promise myself security, that hereafter the worst crimes shall not be laid upon me; But, far be it from honest Ears and Eyes to encourage villainy. For me, my heart can accuse itself of many sins before my GOD, but for Covetousness, I ever detested it as a most sordid and unschollerlike vice, and such, as if I could think it lurked any where within me, I should hate myself. If then some malicious Papist, finding no just quarrel to be picked at my life, have thought good to cast upon me this pleasant and false disgrace, let not the Favourers of the Gospel second him in my causeless Persecution. For my Libeler, whosoever he is he may secretly please himself with this poor flash of spiteful wit, but the GOD of Heaven (my just Avenger) shall one day find him out, and pay my arrearages to his cost▪ Unto that righteous judgement I appeal, and since the Author cannot be known● expect with patience to be righted in the Star-chamber of Heaven▪   

In the former sheets which came late to my view, I found also these Errata.  
In the Epist. Dedicat. for Gregory Martin, read Doctor Martin. pag. 2●2. l. 4. for kind, r. no kind. pag. 342. l. 11. for satisfied, r. falsified.  
Besides, the Reader must pardon diverse errors and mistake of the Press in the Latin, as  
Viduatis pag. 78. mach●neris p. 82. m●rg. sine, for sin● p. 117. ●ran, ●or Br● p. 84. marg. These ibid. Epithamium p. ●9●. Pall●dij p. 1●8. P●n● for P●rr● p. 2●●. Praesbyteris p. 308. marg.