THE SUM OF DOCTOR LEYBURNES ANSWER TO A LETTER PRINTED AGAINST HIM BY M. R BLACLOE.  
By The Widow of MARK WYON, 1657.  
SUPERIORUM PERMISSV.   

THE SUM OF DOCTOR LEYBURNES ANSWER TO A LETTER PRINTED AGAINST HIM BY M. R BLACLOE.  
MOST HONOURED SIR.  
Some few days ago, having received a copy of a very bitter, and (in my judgement) most scandalous Letter, published in Print by Mr. Blacloe, against Dr. Leyburne, I was impatient, until I had fished from him, what he could answer to the uncharitable, and injurious contents of the said Letter, that accordingly I might acquaint you, in regard of your eminent place amongst our Brethren. Wherefore, be pleased to know the sum of what I heard from his own mouth.  
1.ᵒ Doctor Leyburne doth own the Letter, from which Mr. Blacloes quarrel taketh its rise, but ingeniously professeth, that in communicating the scandalous reports spread of his profane Novelties, to the great prejudice of your Clergy, and his own family, his only pure design was, thereby to awaken Mr. Blacloe out of his long, and deep lethargy, and to put before his opened eyes the considerable inconveniences, that unfortunately he had procured to himself, and to all his Brethren, piously hoping, that so deplorable a spectacle might have drawn from him reason, compunction, and amendment, and consequently some heroical exterior act, in satisfaction of his former proceed, at least might have invited him to exercise a laudable act of Charity, either after the example of the Apostle S. Paul: si esca scandalizat fratrem meum, non manducabo carnem in aeternum, ne fratrem meum scandalizem: or in imitation of the holy Prophet jonas, tollite me, & mittite in mare, quoniam propter me tempestas haec grandis venit super vos: casting himself into the sea of an humble submission to Authority.  
2. ᵒ To the unbeseeming, and reproachful language uttered by Mr. Blacloe in the said printed Letter, to wit, mad man, sycophant, etc. Dr. Leyburne only replied with gratias ago Deo meo, quod sim dignus quem oderint homines, quoniam illi magis quam his studeo placere.  
3. ᵒ As concerning the Regulars report, viz. that the doctrine of Mr. Blacloe was destructive of Religion, and of Morality, teaching that a man, for example, fornicating every day, may be saved, if he reserve in that, or any other sin a love to God. Also as concerning the proposition that Mr. Blacloe doth pick out of the said doctrine, and acknowledgeth for his own assertion, to wit, that one who should commit an exterior sin still remaining in charity, should nevertheless go to heaven, which he styleth the substance of the spread doctrine, or body, without the vesture, which he calleth a calumny forged and fostered in the breast of Doctor Leyburne. As concerning I say these particulars, Doctor Leyburne replied, saying, that he could not but extremely admire the distemper of Mr. Blacloes conscience, quae semper praesumit saeva, Sap. 17. imitating therein the spider, that whatsoever it suck's turns into poison, whereas it were more for his own advantage to resemble the be, that converteth the bitter juice of the worst flowers into sweet, and odoriferous honey: cave (saith S. Bernard) esse curiosus alienae vitae explorator, & iudex temerarius: and protested withal, that he had not made the least addition to the Regulars report, and consequently that Mr. Blacloe did somnia fingere, imagining that the Regular would have been so irregular, as to have spit in his face, for venting a report, that the Regular himself had spread. And Doctor Leyburne added, saying, but to show you now the distemper of Mr. Blacloes understanding, as well as the disorder of his conscience, it shall clearly appear, that the assertion above mentioned, and acknowledged for his own (viz if one should commit an external sin still remaining in charity, nevertheless might go to heaven, which assertion he calleth the body of the report) doth necessarily require the circumstances (destructive of Religion and morality, which he calleth the vesture to the said body, forged and fostered in the breast of Doctor Leyburne) which is proved thus. The said assertion imports so sweet an agreement betwixt charity, and exterior sin, that exterior sin doth not exclude charity from the soul, nor the soul is excluded from the Kingdom of heaven by exterior sin, and therefore the said vesture (destructive of Religion and morality) is essentially included in the body, as Mr. Blacloe hath moulded it: for that excellent harmony, betwixt charity, and exterior sin, shall infallibly invite frail nature to sin exteriorly, presuming, that, notwithstanding the exterior sin, for example drunkenness, fornication, adultery, the love retained towards God shall bring him to heaven; which unchristned doctrine contradicts Christ's Apostle, who says, quod neque ebrij, neque fornicatores neque adulteri regnum Dei possidebunt.  
Doctor Leyburne added, that Mr. Blacloe would never undo this argument, unless first he should undo his body (I mean his above mentioned assertion) and mould it anew, at which play he is so dexterous, that he may rightly be styled coluber Britannicus, or lubricus anguis, propter sinuosos flexus, quos in singulis suis scriptis exercet.  
Here I put Doctor Leyburne in mind, that Mr. Blacloe had made use of the Scripture to prove his said assertion, instancing in Lot, and his daughters, for a confirmation of it: to which Doctor Leyburne answered, that the holy Scripture would afford him no protection in its Sanctuary, to wit, in no one place affirming, that if one should commit an exterior sin still remaining in charity, nevertheless might go to heaven. And that, as for his instance, it did not avail him a button. For Lot lost his charity in his exterior sin of drunkenness, at least, at the second bout, according to the whole current of Doctors in the Catholic Church, to say nothing of his daughters, concerning whose incest Doctores alij, & alij, aliter, & aliter sentiunt. However, the holy Scripture doth not say that Lot had charity with his exterior sin, and Mr. Blacloe goes fond about to prove it, because God did bless the progeny, that proceeded from him and his daughters. For God did bless the issue of judas and Thamar, and in a fare higher nature (Christ as man descending from it) notwithstanding, that in their incestuous copula, neither had the virtue of charity: judas committing voluntarily the sin of simple fornication, and Thamar the flagitium of incest. Moreover S. Austin says that God did extend the territories of the Roman Empire, for the moral virtues practised by the ancient Romans, who notwithstanding were not endued with divine charity. To conclude God built the Obstetrices Hebraearum houses, who made use of a lie to save the male children of the Hebrews, contrary to the command of the King of Egypt. Of whom S. Austin speaketh thus: Deus remuneravit benignitatem mentis, non iniquitatem mentientis. Doctor Leyburne ended with an Epiphonema, is this sapere ad aedificationem?  
4. ᵒ Doctor Leyburne said, that Mr. Blacloe in his Answer to the second accusation, useth much Club-law, employing all his Clubs against him, viz Club-sycophant, Club-calumniator, Club-hissing serpent, etc. and gloriously acteth Thomas Albionum Trinobantum, a bragging captain, indeavoring to possess the world, that he hath subdued the Doctor, and brought him under the lash of his sacred Institutions, (for so he Christnes his profane Novelties) and that he holds him fast condemned therein, which he proves thus. The Doctor saith, that Mr. Blacloe teacheth, that the happiness of the Damned doth surpass the happiness of the happiest Emperors that ever were, and that he is sure, that those words are verbatim in his writings. But there are no such words in his writings. Ergo the Doctor is condemned. The minor Mr. Blacloe shows out of the second tome of his Institutions, Lect. 16. where as followeth, Sequitur aeternitatis status, beatis animae, corporisque bonis refertissimus, damnatis ex sua ipsorum perversitate infaelix. Summa enim bona temporaria non possunt comparari minimis bonis cuiusuis damnati, à Deo in ipsos pene invitos, ipsa causarum à Deo institutarum serie collatis. Illi puta eminentiae aenimae, & plenitudini scientiae, & immortalitati corporis, & immutabilitati; quibus, si frui, ipsis ab illorum perversitate copia daretur, etsi non statui beatorum comparandus, tamen respectu huius mundi faelicissimus foret eorum status.  
Doctor Leyburne, before he would engage in the solution of this Mr. Blacloes Achilles, thought fitting to inculcate one observation, to wit, that he knew not how faithfully Mr. Blacloe had recited his words in the Mayor proposition, because he is assured, that in another place there is corruption in the citation. However, he could not mean by the particle verbatim, that his words, written in English, were to be found in Mr. Blacloes Latin writings, but only, that the sense of the words was therein expressed. This presupposed, the Doctor admitted the mayor, and denied the minor, saying, that Lectio 16. of the said Institutions contained the express sense of the words, with which he had charged Mr. Blacloe. For the same Lectio saith thus, summa bona temporaria non possunt comparari minimis bonis cuiusuis damnati, à Deo in ipsos pene invitos, ipsa causarum à Deo institutarum serie collatis. And the Doctor said, that he never fathered more on Mr. Blacloe, than the express sense of the foresaid words, they importing, that the happiness of the damned doth surpass the happiness of the happiest Emperors that ever were. But perhaps Mr. Blacloe will object, that the Doctor should have considered the precedent and subsequent words of what is above cited out of Lect. 16. To which objection it is answered, that albeit, both the precedent, and subsequent words include a restriction, or limitation; yet it is sufficient to preserve the Doctor's reputation, and to defend him from Mr. Blacloes Club. law, that the middle words betwixt the precedent, and subsequent, did bear the express sense, especially Mr. Blacloe having made punctums betwixt the precedent, and the middle words, and betwixt the middle, and subsequent words.  
Doctor Leyburne added, that the foresaid restriction contained in the precedent, and subsequent words, would bring prejudice to Mr. Blacloe, giving an occasion to the Doctor to club his opinion into an heresy, as also to elevate the happiness of the damned, above the happiness of this world, if Mr Blacloe shall stand to his principles. The latter the Doctor proved thus. Diogenes, and his fellow Philosophers were happy in respect of this world, upon the score of knowledge, in which they did excel. Or thus, to use his own words again, the greatest temporal goods cannot be compared to the least goods of any one of the damned: as for example, to the fullness of knowledged, if permitted to use it. But the damned, notwithstanding their perverseness, enjoy a full knowledge, that fare surpasseth the knowledge of Diogenes, and all his fellow Philosophers. Ergo the damned, notwithstanding their perverseness, are happy. The mayor, according to Mr. Blacloes' grounds, is warrantable, and the minor demonstrable thus. A full knowledge of all natural things is natural to all the damned, men, and Angels, their understanding not being diminished in its entity, and force, in order to speculation of natural things. Ergo the damned, notwithstanding their perverseness, enjoy, etc. The consequence is evident, and the antecedent is asserted by S. Dion. lib. de diu. nom. cap. 4. to whom S. Thomas, and all schoolmen do subscribe, teaching, omnia naturalia mansisse integra in daemonibus, and even in this age, divines call the damned Angels, daemons that is, scientes, derined from that excellent science, and knowledge, which they enjoy of all natural things, and the same may be said of the other natural proprieties appertaining to the damned. Wherefore, according to Mr. Blacloes' principles, that ascribes no other infelicity to the damned, than their pure perverseness, the naturalia manentia integra, notwithstanding the said perverseness, it followeth evidently, that their happiness is elevated above all the happiness, that is to be found in the goods of this world, still remaining in their perverseness. However, Mr. Blacloe shall never make it appear to any understanding man, that purely perverseness doth render the damned unhappy, especially he teaching in the third book of his Institutions, Lec. 9 damnatos suas ipsorum paenas diligere, & ijs carere nolle. Where is observable, that, in this assertion, he contradicts the holy Scripture. For Apoc. 6. the damned say to the mountains, and the rocks, cadite super nos. And again he says in the said book Lect. 16. damnatos posse, etiamnum, si vellent, esse beatos. And it is little to the present purpose, or to his advantage, the example he brings of Antiochus, who (as it is reported in the Macchabees, said to his friends, in quantam tribulationem deveni, & in quos fluctus tristitiae, in qua nunc sum: who (says Mr. Blacloe) iucundus erat & dilectus in potestare. For in 2. Macchab. cap. 9 it is related, that Dominus Deus Israel percusserat eum insanabili plaga, quodque apprehendit eum dolor viscerum, & amara internorum tormenta. Which clearly shows, that his tristitiae was no more, than an effect of his unhappiness, proceeding ab extrinseco, to wit dolour viscerum, & amara internorum tormenta. But Mr. Blacloe doth constitute the unhappiness of the damned in a pure perverseness in their will, expressly teaching in Lec. 6. of his Institutions above mentioned, damnatorum paenas non esse extrinsecus inflictas, sed & voluntarias, & puras volitiones esse: and the same and no other pains he acknowledgeth in the afflictions of the faithful souls in Purgatory, as appears in his book de medio animarum statu, Demenso. 11.  
The Doctor added, that Mr. Blacloes doctrine should here be clubbed into an heresy, which he demonstrated out of holy Scripture, Mat. 25. Ite maledicti in ignem aeternum: & Luc. 16. diues epulo cries out crucior in haec fiamma. And therefore Mr. Blacloe is in an heresy, ascribing the affliction of the damned to pure volitions, that is, to intentional acts of the will, which holy Scripture attributes to the efficiency of fire.  
The Doctor added again, that perhaps Mr. Blacloe will answer, that by fire, expressed in holy Scripture, are understood his intentional acts of a perverse will, and that, ite in ignem aeternum, and, ite in puras volitiones perversas, are synonimas; and consequently, seeing that the perverse volitions of the damned be sins, Christ by saying, ite in ignem aeternum, shall be made author of sin, which is a greater blasphemy, than the heresy is a flagitium.  
Moreover the Doctor said, it is here observable, that contrary to Mr. Blacloes learning, all the Fathers in the Council of Florence did maintain against the Grecians, the fire of Purgatory (and the same is to be understood of the fire of hell) to be true material fire. To whose doctrine, in this age, doth subscribe the whole current of Doctors in the Catholic Church, unanimously teaching, the contrary to be temerarious, or next to heresy, if not heretical, interpreting the holy Scripture above mentioned, according to the rule of S. Austin, that is, literally, cum fieri possit sine fidei & morum praeiudicio, and consequently understanding the said place of Scripture of true material fire, conceiving no such prejudice to arise from that interpretation. And therefore it is great impudence, and madness in Mr. Blacloe to explicate the said Scripture as expressly he doth 3. Instit. lect. 11. contrary to the unanimous sense of the holy, and learned Fathers in the Council of Florence, and the now current of Doctors in the Catholic Church.  
However, it seems that Mr. Blacloes ambition is to teach the holy Church of God, and all learned schoolmen, a doctrine they knew not before. And, in this respect, the Doctor made an apostrophe to Mr. Blacloe, as S. Hierome did to Ruffinus, in the like case of ambition: Deus bone, caelesti numini profectò gratulamur, quod post tot annos & Doctorum series, unus advenerit, (Thomas Albiorum Trinobantum) qui scholasticos excitet tantae veritati indormientes. Doctor Leyburne ended with an epiphonema, is this sapere ad sobrietatem?  
After that Doctor Leyburne had thus finished his second encounter, I was transported with à curiosity, to know of him, if Mr. Blacloes' Institutions did contain any more dangerous, and disedifying doctrines: and he answered, that they had within their bowels, a whole Army of profane novelties, and withal did instance in these following.  
The first lect. 16. pag. 357. Mr. Blacloe teacheth ex vi, & serie naturae non potuisse damnatis melius contingere, neque omnibus, neque singulis: sed & natura, & Deus futuri fuissent deteriores, si aliter cum ijs actum foret. The sense in English is, that, considering the force, and series of nature (he means connexion of natural causes) the damned could not have been better provided for either in general, or in particular; nay, both God and nature would have been worse, (that is, would have suffered prejudice) if the damned had not been damned. Which is adeo aperta blasphemia, ut eam prodere sit confutare. But I should be glad to know of M. r Blacloe, whither before the creation of nature's force, and series, the Eminency of God's perfection was not in itself complete, and independent of the existence, the said series enjoys. He dares not answer negatiuè, wherefore he is obliged to answer affirmatiuè, and consequently to confess, that it is yet within the reach of the divine Omnipotency, to annihilate the said series of nature, and all the damned in hell, without preiudicing himself in the divine eminency of his perfection. However this doctrine maintained by Mr. Blacloe imports à great impiety, to wit, that God never had a will, or desire to save the damned, for otherwise the fulfilling of the said will could never have brought prejudice to God's excellent goodness, and perfection. And, that God had an antecedent will to save the very damned, is an undoubted verity, revealed in the holy Scriptures S. Paul 1. ad Tim. 2. Deus, (inquit) vult omnes homines saluos fieri: and the Prophet Ezechiel, who expresseth God's will, or desire to save all sinners in these words, vivo ego, dicit Dominus Deus, nolo mortem impij, sed ut convertatur impius à via sua, & vivat. And Tertullian in his commentary upon that place, iurat Deus (says he) ut sibi credatur: O beatos nos, quorum causa Deus iurat, sed ô miseros nos, si Deo iuranti non credamus. Wherefore it is evident, that God had a will, notwithstanding that series, or connexion of nature, to have saved those who are damned, and consequently God would not be now in a worse condition, if his said will had been fulfilled. Doctor Leyburne ended with an Epiphonema, is this sapere ad Christianismum?  
The second profane Novelty pag. 328. where he affirmeth Christum non esse mortuum pro re, vel persona non concessa: the sense in English is that, Christ did not die for all, which is the doctrine of Calvin 4. Instit. 24. and condemned by Pope Innocent the 10.th for temerarious, scandalous, impious, derogating to the divine piety, and heretical. And, how contrary this doctrine is to holy Scriptures, I leave to the judgement of those, who shall piously consider the sacred texts. 1. Cor. 8. peribie infirmus in tua scientia frater, pro quo Christus mortuus est: in English, through thy knowledge (or Learning) shall perish thy weak brother, for whom Christ died. Rom. 14. noli cibo tuo illum perdere, pro quo Christus mortuus est: destroy not him with thy meat, for whom Christ died. Out of which Authorities may be argued thus. One can perish, and be destroyed for whom Christ died: but the concessi or, electi, or praedestinati do never perish, or are destroyed: ergo Christ did not only die pro re, vel persona concessa. Moreover 1. Tim. 4. the Apostle calleth Christ Saluator omnium hominum, maxim fidelium: the saviour of all men, chiefly of the faithful. Where is observable that Christ is not named absolute & simpliciter the saviour of the faithful, but with this restriction maxim, chiefly, or principally. And S. john in his first Epistle, cap. 2. ipse est (Christus) propitiatio pro peccatis nostris, non pro nostris tantum, sed & pro peccatis totius mundi. In which place are not meant only the elect, but also the reprobate, according to the interpretation of the Council of Trent, sess. 6. cap. 3. which from thence gathereth, that not all those for whom Christ died have received the benefit of his death. But omnes personae concessae (to use Mr. Blacloes own words) have or will receive the benefit of Christ's death. And therefore Christ died pro persona non concessa. Doctor Leyburne ended with an Epiphonema, is this sapere ad veram & germanam sacrae Scripturae intelligentiam?  
The third profane Novelty Lec. 9 pag. 81. Mr. Blacloe averreth sententiam asserentem Sacramenta novae legis causare gratiam, ex opere operato, vitam, & perfectionem Christianam, quae in cultura animae, & in bonis actibus consistit, transfer in ritus, & superstitionem Paganam, qua credantur certa opera externa placere Deo, & efficere (vi quasi magica) bonitatem, non nisi violentia intensi affectus capiendam: ' quare evidens est hanc sententiam magis facibus abolendam esse, quam argumentis confutandam. Thus he. the meaning is, that outward works, as are the Sacraments, exercise no efficiency in the production of sanctifying Grace, which is the opinion of Luther, lib. de Captiu. Babylon. And of all the sectaries in this age. But seeing that Mr. Blacloe doth brand the common doctrine mantained by the current of learned men in God's Church, and audaciously affirms nullum esse istius profanitatis (so he styleth the said common doctrine) verbulum, vel similitudinem in Concilio Tridentino (as is evident out of his own words of the same lection pag. 78.) it will be expedient to allege the words of the said Council, thereby to come to a iudgement. The Council sess. 7. can. 6. defineth thus, si quis dixerit Sacramenta novae legis non continere gratiam quam significant, aut gratiam ipsam non ponentibus obicem non confer, quasi signa tantum externa sint, etc. anathema sit. Et can. 8. si quis dixerit per ipsa novae legis Sacrementa ex opere operato non conferri gratiam, etc. anathema sit. But Mr. Blacloe answers, that albeit the Council doth define, that the Sacraments of the new law do contain, and confer grace, yet it means not, that Sacraments, which are outward works, exercise any causalltie, or efficiency, as schoolmen unanimously teach; for that were, saith he, to transfer life, and Christian perfection, into a Pagan superstition: and to begert a belief, that outward works (as it were by a magic force) do effect goodness, or sanctity. And thence concludes, that the opinion of Doctors teaching that Sacraments do confer Grace ex opere operato, est facibus abolenda. And upon the same score he must condemn to the fire S Austin saying, unde tanta virtus aquae, ut corpus rangat, cor vero abluat, to wit, ascribing the purgation, or sanctification of the soul to the outward, or extrinsecall water of Baptism. The Doctor ended with an Epiphonema Quam imprudenter noster Thomas Albiorum Trinobantum Diruit, aedificat, mutat quadrata rotundis?  
5. ᵒ Whereas Mr. Blacloe in his answer to the third objection pretends, that his whole scope, in writing rules of Government, was to heighten, and commend the exemptions from any written Law, or custom of the Common wealth, which the dignity of a supreme Prince, or Magistrate gives him: and immediately after subject's the said supreme Magistrate to a rational law, or law of reason (figmentum antea inauditum) by virtue of which his whole scope is, to unhighten the dignity of the said supreme Magistrate, and to bring him to judgement, and punishment, as often as the law of reason shall require, from which no supreme Magistrate is exempt more then from Club law. only according to Mr. Blacloe the punishing of an offending supreme Magistrate by the law of reason is a rational action proceeding from a rational nature: and the punishing of him by Club-law is an unreasonable act proceeding from an irrational and brutish nature. The Doctor only answered with an Epiphonema, is this sapere ad discretionem?  
6. ᵒ Mr. Blacloe having liberally bestowed on Doctor Leyburne the Characters of sycophant, madman, calumniator, hissing serpent etc. proceeded farther to prove him an ignorant man, which he performs thus. 1. (says he) his letter shows him ignorant. 2. his life may prove the same, he having spent his time generally in a practical way: true it is, he studied some time before his suing for his Doctorship, but with such success, as I am assured he understood not his Theses after he had defended them; and being brought under the glorious name of a Doctor to confer with some of a different Religion he came of with the shame of those who brought him to it.  
Doctor Leyburne answered, that albeit he hath hitherto endeavoured to free himself, from the Characters of sycophant, Calumniator, hissing serpent, etc. yet he takes to the title of ignorant man, and professeth ingeniously that he never had the ambition to be esteemed learned: however he vowed, that Mr. Blacloe had done him wrong in the proofs of his ignorance. For 1. (said he) only two days after he had defended the said Theses in the University of Rheims, the Chief Doctor, and Chaire-man of the said University came unto him, in the name of their whole body, desiring him to compose new Theses, and to prepare himself to defend them, in the name of the said University, before a Provincial Council, which, by Order of their Archbishop, was to assemble in the said City of Rheims, within fifteen days, which is a considerable argument, that the said University was persuaded, that the Doctor understood his Theses. 2. The Doctor composed his Theses himself, which was a sign that he understood them. Moreover they contained neither false Latin, or dangerous opinion, as did the Theses, made by Mr. Blacloe, for his friend the Doctor at Paris, some eighteen years ago. 3. Doctor Leyburne said, that he had moderated, and defended more Theses in Divinity, than ever Mr. Blacloe had. 4. Doctor Leyburnes Theses, which he composed, and defended three years ago, in the University of Douai, were honoured with the title of pulchrae Theses, and presented by some of the said University to the Pope's Nuncio at brussels, with a request, that they might be exhibited to the Pope, to acquaint his Holiness, with the sound, and sober doctrine, professed in the said Vnivesitie. But Mr. Blacloe teaching Divinity at Lisbo, no sooner had printed his first Theses, than they were put into the Inquisition, as containing dangerous opinions: in so much that, he terrifi'de at the proceeding, suddenly quitted Portugal, returning into England. By which is apparent, that although, as Mr. Blacloe saith, the Doctor hath spent little time in studies, yet it seems, that the divine providence hath been more favourable to the Doctor, than to Mr. Blacloe, who hath employed the whole course of his life, for the purchase of knowledge, that hath brought prejudice to himself, and to all his Brethren. As Concerning the Doctors being brought to confer with some of a different Religion, etc. it is one of Mr. Blacloes' dreams, without any ground of verity. But the Doctor doth well remember Mr. Blacloes conference with Chillingworth, who triumphed over him, to the great disadvantage of his Cause. The Doctor ended with an Epiphonema, is this sapere ad veritatem?  
7.ᵒ After that Mr. Blacloe had finished his charge of calumnies against Doctor Leyburne, and their goodly proofs, it seems his great Counsellor and secretary Mr. Holland (according to their contrived plot) thought it now a fit time (presuming that the precedent Calumnies would have sufficiently lessened the Doctor's esteem, in the opinion of the Clergy) to inculcate, and insinuate into the hearts of our Brethren, and lay-catholics, the two chief opinions amongst Mr. Blacloes profane Novelties, to wit, concerning the Pope's infallibility, and the imprisonment of souls in Purgatory until the day of judgement. And as touching the first, Mr. Blacloe openeth his breast thus to his said Secretary. I told you, said he, I heard it (his book written against the Pope's infallibility) would not be meddled with at Rome; nay there want not those who say it will be well accepted, it bringing the Pope's infallibility into a rational Thesis, whereas the contrary was not defensible, but by force of command, and power, and scandalised Catholics who sought for reason, and averted those, who otherwise were near conversion, until they met with Catholics of another opinion. Doctor Leyburne answered with a zealous exclamation, saying, o God how this poor man acts the serpent, that hissed poison to Eve in Paradise! how he is blown up with the dreams of his own troubled fancy! how ambitious he is to execute his law of reason, that is his Club-law, for the knocking down of the Pope's infallibility, pretending that it is a mutherer of souls, hindering their conversion: and (to use his own words) a greater sin, them to destoure a virgin upon an altar. Doctor Leyburne added, can any man, though only half witted, conceive, that Alexander 7.th now Pope of Rome is well satisfied with Mr. Blacloe, for impugning his infallibility, which Catholic Doctors, in all ages, have ascribed unto him: or can it be rationally conceived, that any one that is compos mentis should be averted from the Catholic Religion, upon that score of Infallibility, which rather should be a motive to embrace it? For who would not sooner adhere to that Church, whose Chief Pastor is esteemed infallible, and cannot tell a lie for a truth defining as chief Pastor, then to a Church, whose chief Pastor is subject to fallibility? therefore he cannot believe but that Mr. Blacloe did dream this frivolous pretence, that the Pope's infallibility should dissuade from the Catholic faith. But this poor man hath the ambition, to be esteemed, amongst all Christians, the Christian rational, imitating in that piece of pride the Donatists, who made clear reason to march before their belief, against whom S. Austin writeth thus, credimus ut cognoscamus, non cognoscimus ut credamus: and again, saith he, Christianus fidelis, non rationalis nominatur, Doctor Leyburne ended, with an Epiphonema. is this sapere ad fidem Christianam?  
As touching the second, his durance of Purgatory, Mr. Blacloe thus hisseth poisoned words to his Brethren. My friend Macedo, saith he, would not touch it, averring it to be the opinion of divers Fathers, particularly S. Austin; others of my Adversaries, that it was hard to answer, what I had said. Further consider, how contrary it is to piety, charging God with an irrational justice taking away the privilege of charity, by affirming that soul's perfect in charity are yet deprived of the sight of God, and exposing heaven to auction, that who can give most shall soon come thither. Add what slight grounds they go upon, certain visions, etc. The Doctor said that with horror and indignation he read the impious and blasphemous doctrine contained in the recited words. Withal answered.  
1.ᵒ That Mr. Blacloe was to be commended for styling Macedo his friend, for he procured at Rome the condemning of one of his books: and it was the part of a true friend, to seek his conversion to pure doctrine, and to the obedience of the Church. But how happened it, that his said friend Macedo, averring S. Austin particulary to hold with Mr. Blacloe in the detention of souls in Purgatory, until the day of judgement, hath not mentioned the Book, and Page, where the said S. Austin teacheth that opinion. And how happens it now, that our all-knowing Thomas Albiorum Trinobantum. etc. (so vainly he subscribes his name to his printed writings) doth not supply that defect of his friend Macedo. However I myself shall help in this business, and cite S. Austin for him lib. 15. de Trin. cap. 25. constituuntur autem purgati, ab omni cogitatione corruptionis, in placidis sedibus, donec recipiant corpora sua. See, how favourable S. Austin is to Mr. Blacloes opinion, who placeth souls in heaven, to expect their bodies after their purgation in the next life: as will clearly appear to him, that shall peruse the cited chapter. Again S. Austin hom. 16. writeth thus, quanta fuerit peccati materia, tanta & pertranseundi mura. Where see again, how favourable S. Austin is to Mr. Blacloes opinion, speaking of souls passing the river of fire (Purgatory) says, by how much more the matter of sin is, so much longer the souls shall stay in their passage, whence is clearly inferred, that some souls do pass sooner than others.  
2. ᵒ Doctor Leyburne answered, that Mr. Blacloe in condemning the doctrine, that teacheth the deliverance of souls out of Purgatory before the day of judgement, as contrary to Piety, commit's an impiety, adversus Spiritum sanctum, which S. Matthew calls impardonable in hoc seculo, & in futuro: in condemning the said doctrine, as charging God with an irrational justice commit's blasphemy, quod est peccatum ad mortem, & non habet remissionem in aeternum: and in condemning the said doctrine as exposing heaven to auction, or open sale, that who can give most shall soon come thither, comit's flagitium profanitatis. But, at what a height of impudency and impiety is this poor man arrived, affirming an orthodox verity, defined by Pope Engenius in the general Councell of Floremce, as also by Pope Benedict the 12.th auered by ancient Fathers, approved by the universal practice of God's Church, and confirmed and taught by the whole current of Catholic Doctors, to be contrary to piety, to charge God with an irrational justice, and to expose heaven to open sale, that who shall give most money shall carry it! Blasphema dicit Blaclous, profana dicit, falsa dicit: blasphema stupemus, profana cavemus, falsa convincimus.  
3. ᵒ Doctor Leyburne answered, that Mr. Blacloe in averring that the said Catholic Tenet relieth on certain visions, which he calleth old wife's tales, commits an injurious falsity seeing that the said doctrine is protected with the authority of an infallible Council, fortified with an universal practice of the Church, and armed with an unanimous consent of all Catholic Doctors. Yet albeit our Catholic doctrine of the durance of Purgatory doth not rely on visions: however our unus Doctor Mr. Blacloe profanely calleth apparitions of holy souls old owives tales, seeing that they have always been numbered amongst divine miracles, and besides they are grounded on authority of holy Scripture, Samuel 1. Reg. 2. Sauli vere apparuit, according to the common opinion: and it is an undoubted truth, that Moses appeared in Christ's Transfiguration: and S. Matthew cap. 17. & 27. mentioneth divers apparitions in Christ his Resurrection: and S. Austin lib. de cura pro more. cap. 10. affirms the souls of the departed to have oftentimes appeared, si falsa esse, inquit, responderimus (to wit, that souls have often appeared) contra quorundam scripta fidelium, & contra eorum sensus, qui talia sibi accidisse confirmant, impudenter venire videbimur. Whence is inferred that according to S. Austin's judgement, Mr. Blacloes opinion is branded with impudence.  
Here Doctor Leyburne gave over the conflict, expressing only a zealous desire to imprint in the hearts of his Brethren, what S. Austin did inculcate to all Christian people, who in his second book written against julian, who had broached profane novelties, to the prejudice of souls, useth these words: hos (the holy Fathers, who flourished in the precedent ages) oportet, ut Christiani populi vestris profanis novitatibus anteponant, cisque potius, quam vobis, eligant adhaerere. And wished, that our Brethren, at the example of this great Doctor, would prefer the holy Fathers in a general Council assembled, before Mr. Blacloes profane novelties, and to adhere rather to the universal practice of the Catholic Church, then to his singularity.   

AN ADVERTISEMENT.  
WHereas a certain Decree hath been made by the Holy Congregation, de propaganda fide, prohibiting all Apostolical Missionaries to print an Opus, without the express leave of the said Congregation, Doctor Leyburne did confer with some Professors of Divinity, whither the printing of an Epistle were comprehended in that Decree, and it was judged negative. However, seeing that through the dispersing of Mr. Blacloes printed Letter, by Order from a Consult, Doctor Leyburne had just ground to apprehend prejudice to his own reputation, and ruin to many souls, if not prevented by some present remedy, it was thought lawful for him, in so urgent a necessity, to use interpretation per epikiam, in case his Epistle had been comprehended in the said Decree. Thus much Doctor Leyburne judged fitting to signify, lest some weak brother might esteem him disobedient to the said Decree. Moreover Doctor Leyburne will use expedition to acquaint both the Cardinal Protector, and the said Holy Congregation with his proceeding, to whom he submit's his present writings. In the interim he desires his Brethren to excuse what they find defective either in this Answer or his declaratory Epistle, having in a manner been constrained to finish both, in the space of two Posts out of England.  
FIN.