21. The other is no less false, that this book de Mortalitate, here cited, is no book, nor written by Cyprian; for that it is a book, appeareth by the common citation thereof under that name, which may be seen also in the edition of Pamelius, which is the last and most exact edition of St. Cyprian's works; and that it was written by St. Cyprian (in time of a great plague, when he desired to encourage good Christians against the fear of death and mortality), doth testify not only Pontius, St. Cyprian's deacon, that wrote his life, but also St. Augustine, in his book against Julian the Pelagian, and elsewhere. And I marvel that Mr. Sutcliffe will call it not only a sermon, but a poor sermon; being as excellent a thing, for the greatness thereof, as any commonly you shall find in St. Cyprian. And whereas, further, he addeth that Father Persons belieth not only Augustine and Cyprian, but also Possidius or Possidonius (for both names are ascribed to one man), it seemeth a strange boldness, ready to deny or affirm any thing; for that of St. Cyprian, we have now seen that he hath the words alleged; and as for St. Augustine, Possidius, in his life, writeth expressly that he used, among other examples of like argument, to recount this history; and he setteth it down in the very same words of St. Cyprian which we have now recounted; neither is there any place left for evasion or tergiversation to Mr. Sutcliffe in this matter, but that, in going about to charge his adversary with one falsity, he is convinced to have uttered divers himself, and those inexcusable.

tions to men

22. There followeth, in the eighth place of Eighth charge, his particular charges, where he accuseth Fa- about appari ther Persons of forgery and lying, for that he that lay a-dpallegeth divers examples of apparitions of ing.

Christ and his angels to men that lay a-dying, citing divers testimonies for the same (besides the former of St. Cyprian and Possidius, out of St. Augustine); as St. Gre

* [And subsequent ones; as that by Bishop Fell, at Oxford, in 1682. Librum hunc anno 252 conscriptum, idque ante redintegratam persecutionem, adstipulante tractatus totius tenore, pronunciamus, &c.—Fell, p. 156.] + Pontius, in Vita Cypr.; Aug. lib. 2 advers. Julian., and 1. 4 contra Duas Epist. Pelag. c. 8, and de Præelect. Sanct. cap. 17.

Possid, de Vita Aug. cap. 27.

gory and Venerable Bede; and for that out of St. Augustine he quoteth, besides his book de Vanitate Sæculi, a sermon also, ad Fratres in Eremo, which is the fiftieth sermon in his tenth tome, written, no doubt, by some ancient author, if not by St. Augustine himself. Mr. Sutcliffe exclaimeth in these words: "He allegeth ridiculously certain sermons ad Fratres in Eremo, which he fathereth most falsely upon St. Augustine. He telleth certain fables of apparitions of good and bad angels, and layeth them upon Gregory the Dialogist and Bede, whose books are much corrupted by monks and such like falsaries.”* So Mr. Sutcliffe. Wherein, first, I marvel what forgery or lie it could be in Father Persons to cite St. Augustine's sermons ad Fratres in Eremo, which so long have passed in his name, and have been usually so cited by learned men of former times. And yet, in the last edition of the said "Directory," I find that testimony left out + by Father Persons, and only that other of St. Augustine, de Vanitate Sæculi, remaining, which here Mr. Sutcliffe concealeth, as not alleged at all.

23. And as for the place of St. Gregory, in his fourth book of "Dialogues," and tenth, eleventh, twelfth, thirteenth, fifteenth, and thirty-eighth chapters, where the like apparitions are recounted by him to that which St. Cyprian and St. Augustine related before, and Venerable Bede, in his fifth book of our English History, in the fourteenth and fifteenth chapters, if this rejection used by Mr. Sutcliffe were sufficient to say they were corrupted by monks and such like falsaries, themselves also being monks, I see not what may not be rejected, by like kind of answering. Sure I am that the Magdeburgians, as judicious Protestants as Mr. Sutcliffe, in their sixth and eighth "Centuries," do not use any such accusations of any corruptions or falsifications used by others upon these men's works. And it seemeth that Mr. Bunny used more discretion, in that he thrust out wholly from the text of

* Sutcliffe, p. 182.

[And justly; for the work is not St. Augustine's. As to the book De Vanitate Sæculi, Natalis Alexander rejects it, as "unworthy of St. Augustine." The censure is equally applicable to the greater part of the former.]

the "Directory" (which he published and trimmed up to his own fashion) these testimonies of St. Cyprian, St. Augustine, St. Gregory, and Venerable Bede, according to the note in the margin, which saith: Note here, that Mr. Bunny rejecteth not only this authority of St. Cyprian and Possidius, but also the whole discourses following of St. Augustine, St. Gregory, and Venerable Bede, for that they talk of apparitions. So there. But Mr. Sutcliffe striketh out all this very marginal note, and saith not one word thereof; and further also feigneth, that the works of St. Gregory and Venerable Bede are falsified by monks. So as all things here are called into question, as you see, and nothing is certain, but Mr. Sutcliffe's word alone, though he bring neither author, nor reason, nor argument for his proof. And then I thought with myself who, think you, might not answer all books that come in this manner, and with this facility of rejection?

358

CHAPTER V.

Of other Eight of Mr. Sutcliffe's Charges against Father Persons, as they lie together in the end of his battery.

AND albeit these might suffice to take a taste of Mr. Sutcliffe's objecting forgeries and lies of Father Persons in this place, yet as we have examined the former eight several charges as they lie, without choice, in the beginning of his whole rank, that amount in his book to the number of sixty-two, so will we peruse also the like number of others that stand last in his book ;* and these, as before hath been noted, to the end he may not say we have chosen or picked out the weakest of his objections. And for that the first and last places are wont to be furnished with his strongest arguments, let us see whether it be so in Mr. Sutcliffe, or no.

First charge, about presence

of angels at the

sacrifice.

2. Wherefore, his first charge of these last eight, being of his whole number the fifty-fifth, is set down thus; charging Father Persons that, in his "Reasons of Refusal," he saith That angels are present at the elevation of the sacrament of the Lord's body, as all holy fathers teach; and yet can he not bring (quoth he) one holy father that alloweth this elevation that he prateth of, or that affirmeth this of the substantial presence of angels. Thus Mr. Sutcliffe. But when I went to the said treatise, to behold what Father Persons writeth of this matter, I could not but wonder at Mr. Sutcliffe's manner of charging his adversary, without any respect to truth at all, as to me it seemed; for that Father Persons, talkEighth reason ing in that place of the dignity of the external of refusal. sacrifice offered by the priest upon the altar, doth, instead of one holy father, required here by Mr. Sut* Defence of his Challenge, p. 204.

cliffe, allege two, in name of the rest, setting down also their very words, which Mr. Sutcliffe dissembleth egregiously, thereby to avoid, as it seemeth, the obligation to answer them. And yet is not ashamed to say, Shew me but one; yea, and to accuse his adversary of lying, for shewing none, who sheweth two, and that in sundry places of their works; and for better proof, I shall pray you to have patience to let me set down Father Persons's own words in that place; which are these that ensue, treating of the spiritual losses which those of his religion did receive in going to churches of different religions, whereby they are debarred (saith he), among other things, from the participation of mass and public sacrifice used in the Catholic Church; which loss, how highly he holdeth to be esteemed, he sheweth, among other arguments, by the said presence of angels affirmed to be at the consecration and sacrifice of the mass. His words be these:

The loss of participation how great a

of the sacrifice,

loss.

3. "First, then (saith he), a Catholic man, by going to the Protestant churches,* loseth all participation of that blessed sacrifice of the body and blood of our Saviour, appointed by the said Saviour (as I have shewed before) to be offered up daily in the oblation of the mass for the commodity of the whole world, quick and dead, and for that cause (as the godly and learned St. John Chrysostom† saith) called the common sacrifice of the whole world. The which action of offering of this sacred host (the Son of God to his Father) is of such dignity, excellency, and merit, not only to the priest, but also to the standers-by assisting him, as all the other good works which a man doth in his life are not to be compared with it, seeing that the very angels of heaven do come down at that time to adore (after the consecration) that sacred body, and elevation. to offer the same up with us to God the Father for the whole world, as all the holy fathers of the primitive church did both believe and teach: of the which, it shall be enough at this time to allege one or two. St. Gregory, therefore, first, saith thus: What faithful man can doubt but that

*Reasons of Refusal, fol. 45, 46.

† Chrysos. Hom. 47, in Ep. 1 ad Corinth.

The angels

present at the

Greg. 1. 4, Dialog. c. 58.