Some few daies agoe, hau­ing receiued a copie of a verie bitter, and (in my iudgment) most scan­dalous Letter, published in Print by M. ^r Blacloe, against D. ^r Leyburne, I was im­patient, vntill I had fish't from him, what he could answere to the vncharitable, and iniurious contents of the said Letter, that accordingly I might acquaint you, in regard of your eminent place amongst [Page 4]our Brethren. Wherefore, be pleas'd to knowe the summe of what I heard from his owne mouth.

1. ^o Doctor Leyburne doth owne the Letter, from which M. ^r Blacloes quarrell taketh its rise, but ingeniously professeth, that in communicating the scandalous re­ports spread of his profane Novelties, to the great preiudice of your Clergie, and his owne family, his onely pure designe was, therebie to awaken M. ^r Blacloe out of his long, and deepe lethargie, and to put before his opened eyes the conside­rable inconveniences, that vnfortunately he had procured to himselfe, and to all his Brethren, piously hoping, that so deplo­rable a spectacle might haue drawne frō him reason, compunction, and amend­ment, and consequently some heroicall exteriour act, in satisfaction of his for­mer proceedings, at least might haue in­vited him to exercise a laudable act of Charitie, either after the example of the Apostle S. Paul: si esca scandalizat fratrem [Page 5]meum, non manducabo carnem in aeternum, ne fratrem meum scandalizem: or in imi­tation of the holie Prophet Ionas, tollite me, & mittite in mare, quoniam propter me tempestas haec grandis venit super vos: ca­sting himselfe into the sea of an humble submission to Authoritie.

2. ^o To the vnbeseeming, and reproa­chfull language vttered by M. ^r Blacloe in the said printed Letter, to wit, mad man, sycophant, &c. D. ^r Leyburne onely 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 M. ^r Blacloe was destructiue of Religion, and of Moralitie, teaching that a man, for example, forni­cating every day, may be saued, if he re­serue in that, or anie other sinne a love to God. Also as concerning the proposi­tion that M. ^r Blacloe doth pick out of the said doctrine, and acknowledgeth for his owne assertion, to wit, that one who should [Page 6]committ an exteriour sinne still remaining in charitie, should neuertheles goe to heauen, which he stileth the substance of the spread doctrine, or bodie, without the vesture, which he calleth a calumnie forged and fostered in the breast of Doctor Leyburne. As concerning I say these particulars, Doctor Leyburne replied, saying, that he could not but extreamely admire the distem­per of M. ^r Blacloes conscience, quae semper praesumit saeua, Sap. 17. imitating therein the spider, that whatsoeuer it suck's tur­nes into poison, whereas it were more for his owne advantage to resemble the bee, that cōverteth the bitter iuyce of the worst flowers into sweete, and odorife­rous honie: caue (saith S. Bernard) esse cu­riosus alienae vitae explorator, & iudex te­merarius: and protested withall, that he had not made the least addition to the Regulars report, and consequently that M. ^r Blacloe did somnia fingere, imagining that the Regular would haue beene so ir­regular, as to haue spit in his face, for [Page 7]venting a report, that the Regular him­selfe had spread. And Doctor Leyburne added, saying, but to shew you now the distemper of M. ^r Blacloes vnderstan­ding, as well as the disorder of his con­science, it shall clearly appeare, that the assertion aboue mention'd, and acknow­ledged for his owne (viz if one should committ an externall sinne still remaining in charitie, neuertheles might goe to heauen, which assertion he calleth the bodie of the report) doth necessarily require the circumstances ( destructiue of Religion and moralitie, which he calleth the vesture to the said bodie, forg'd and fostered in the breast of Doctor Leyburne) which is prou'd thus. The said assertion imports so sweete an agreement betwixt charitie, and exteriour sinne, that exteriour sinne doth not exclude charitie from the soule, nor the soule is excluded from the King­dome of heauen by exteriour sinne, and therefore the said vesture (destructiue of Religion and moralitie) is essentially in­cluded [Page 8]in the bodie, as M. ^r Blacloe hath moulded it: for that excellent harmonie, betwixt charitie, and exteriour sinne, shall infallibly inuite fraile nature to sinne exteriorly, presuming, that, notwith­standing the exteriour sinne, for exam­ple drunkennesse, fornication, adulterie, the loue retained towards God shall bring him to heauen; which vnchristned doctrine contradicts Christs Apostle, who says, quod neque ebrij, neque fornica­tores neque adulteri regnum Dei possidebunt.

Doctor Leyburne added, that M. ^r Bla­cloe would never vndoe this argument, vnles first he should vndoe his bodie (I meane his aboue mention'd assertion) and mould it anew, at which play he is so dexterous, that he may rightly be stil'd coluber Britannicus, or lubricus an­guis, propter sinuosos flexus, quos in singulis suis scriptis exercet.

Here I put Doctor Leyburne in mind, that M. ^r Blacloe had made vse of the Scripture to proue his said assertion, in­stancing [Page 9]in Lot, and his daughters, for a confirmation of it: to which Doctor Ley­burne answered, that the holie Scripture would afford him no protection in its Sanctuarie, to wit, in no one place af­firming, that if one should commit an ex­teriour sinne still remaining in charitie, ne­uertheles might goe to heauen. And that, as for his instance, it did not auaile him a button. For Lot lost his charitie in his ex­teriour sinne of drunkennesse, at least, at the second boute, according to the whole current of Doctors in the Catholick Church, to say nothing of his daughters, concerning whose incest Doctores alij, & alij, aliter, & aliter sentiunt. Howeuer, the holie Scripture doth not say that Lot had charitie with his exteriour sinne, and M. ^r Blacloe goes fondly about to proue it, because God did blesse the progenie, that proceeded from him and his daugh­ters. For God did blesse the issue of Iu­das and Thamar, and in a farre higher nature (Christ as man descending from it) [Page 10]notwithstanding, that in their ince­stuous copula, neither had the vertue of charitie: Iudas committing voluntarily the sinne of simple fornication, and Tha­mar the flagitium of incest. Moreover S. Austine says that God did extend the ter­ritories of the Romane Empire, for the morall vertues practic'd by the ancient Romanes, who notwithstanding were not indued with divine charitie. To con­clude God built the Obstetrices Hebraea­rum houses, who made vse of a lie to saue the male children of the Hebrews, con­trary to the command of the King of E­gypt. Of whom S. Austin speaketh thus: Deus remunerauit benignitatem mentis, non iniquitatem mentientis. Doctor Leyburne ended with an Epiphonema, is this sapere ad aedificationem?

4. ^o Doctor Leyburne said, that M. ^r Blacloe in his Answere to the second ac­cusation, vseth much Club-law, imploying all his Clubs against him, viz Club-syco­phant, Club-calumniator, Club-hissing ser­pent, [Page 11]&c. and gloriously acteth Thomas Albionum Trinobantum, a bragging cap­taine, indeavoring to possesse the world, that he hath subdued the Doctor, and brought him vnder the lash of his sacred Institutions, (for soe he Christnes his pro­fane Nouelties) and that he holds him fast condemned therein, which he proves thus. The Doctor saith, that M. ^r Blacloe teacheth, that the happines of the Damned doth surpasse the happines of the happiest Emperours that euer 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 M. ^r Blacloe shews out of the secōd tome of his Institutions, Lect. 16. where as followeth, Sequitur aeternitatis status, beatis animae, corporisque bonis refertissimus, damnatis ex sua ipsorum peruersitate infaelix. Summa enim bona temporaria non possunt comparari minimis bonis cuiusuis damnati, à Deo in ipsos pene inuitos, ipsa causarum à Deo institutarum serie collatis. Illi puta emi­nentiae [Page 12]aenimae, & plenitudini scientiae, & immortalitati corporis, & immutabilitati; quibus, si frui, ipsis ab illorum peruersitate 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 M. ^r Bla­cloes Achilles, thought fitting to inculca­te one obseruation, to wit, that he knew not how faithfully M. ^r Blacloe had reci­ted his words in the Maior proposition, because he is assured, that in another pla­ce there is corruption in the citation. Howeuer, he could not meane by the particle verbatim, that his words, written in English, were to be found in M. ^r Bla­cloes Latine writings, but onely, that the sence of the words was therein expres­sed. This presuppos'd, the Doctor ad­mitted the maior, and denied the mi­nor, saying, that Lectio 16. of the said In­stitutions conteyned the expresse sence of the words, with which he had char­g'd [Page 13]M. ^r Blacloe. For the same Lectio saith thus, summa bona temporaria non possunt comparari minimis bonis cuiusuis damnati, à Deo in ipsos pene inuitos, ipsa causarum à Deo institutarum serie collatis. And the Doctor said, that he neuer fathered more on M. ^r Blacloe, then the expresse sence of the foresaid words, they importing, that the happines of the damned doth surpasse the happines of the happiest Em­perours that euer were. But perhaps M. ^r Blacloe will obiect, that the Doctor should haue considered the precedent and subsequent words of what is aboue cited out of Lect. 16. To which obiection it is answered, that albeit, both the prece­dent, and subsequent words include a re­striction, or limitation; yet it is sufficient to preserue the Doctors reputation, and to defend him from M. ^r Blacloes Club. law, that the middle words betwixt the pre­cedent, and subsequent, did beare the ex­presse sence, especially M. ^r Blacloe ha­uing made punctums betwixt the prece­dent, [Page 14]and the middle words, and betwixt the middle, and subsequent words.

Doctor Leyburne added, that the fore­said restriction conteyned in the prece­dent, and subsequent words, would bring preiudice to M. ^r Blacloe, giuing an oc­casion to the Doctor to club his opinion into an heresie, as also to eleuate the hap­pines of the damned, aboue the happines of this world, if M ^r Blacloe shall stand to his principles. The latter the Doctor prou'd thus. Diogenes, and his fellow Philosophers were happie in respect of this world, vpon the score of knowled­ge, in which they did excell. Or thus, to vse his owne words againe, the grea­test temporall goods cannot be compared to the least goods of anie one of the damned: as for example, to the fulnes of know­legde, if permitted to vse it. But the damned, notwithstanding their pervers­nesse, enioy a full knowledge, that farre surpasseth the knowledge of Diogenes, and all his fellow Philosophers. Ergo the [Page 15]damned, notwithstanding their pervers­nesse, are happie. The maior, according to M. ^r Blacloes grounds, is warrantable, and the minor demonstrable thus. A full knowledge of all naturall things is natu­rall to all the damned, men, and Angells, their vnderstanding not being dimi­nish'd in its entitie, and force, in order to speculation of naturall things. Ergo the damned, notwithstanding their pervers­nesse, enioy, &c. The consequence is evi­dent, and the antecedent is asserted by S. Dion. lib. de diu. nom. cap. 4. to whom S. Thomas, and all schoolemen doe sub­scribe, teaching, omnia naturalia mansisse integra in daemonibus, and euen in this age, divines call the damned Angells, daemo­nes that is, scientes, derin'd from that ex­cellent science, and knowledge, which they enioy of all naturall things, and the same may be said of the other naturall proprieties appertaining to the damned. Wherefore, according to M. ^r Blacloes principles, that ascribes no other infeli­citie [Page 16]to the damned, then their pure per­uersnesse, the naturalia manentia integra, notwithstanding the said peruersnesse, it followeth euidently, that their happines is eleuated aboue all the happines, that is to be found in the goods of this world, still remaining in their peruersnesse. Howeuer, M. ^r Blacloe shall neuer make it appeare to anie vnderstanding man, that purely peruersnesse doth render the damned vnhappie, especially he teaching in the third booke of his Institutions, Lec. 9. damnatos suas ipsorum paenas dili­gere, & ijs carere nolle. Where is obser­uable, that, in this assertion, he contra­dicts the holie Scripture. For Apoc. 6. the damned say to the mountaines, and the rocks, cadite super nos. And againe he says in the said booke Lect. 16. damnatos posse, etiamnum, si vellent, esse beatos. And it is little to the present purpose, or to his ad­uantage, the example he brings of An­tiochus, who (as it is reported in the Mac­chabees, said to his friends, in quantam tri­bulationem [Page 17]deueni, & in quos fluctus tristi­tiae, in qua nunc sum: who (says M. ^r 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 shews, that his tristitiae was no more, then an effect of his vn­happines, proceding ab extrinseco, to wit dolor viscerum, & amara internorum tor­menta. But M. ^r Blacloe doth constitute the vnhappines of the damned in a pure perversnesse in their will, expressely teaching in Lec. 6. of his Institutions aboue mention'd, damnatorum paenas non esse extrinsecus inflictas, sed & voluntarias, & puras volitiones esse: and the same and no other paines he acknowledgeth in the afflictions of the faithfull soules in Purga­torie, as appeares in his booke de medio animarum statu, Demenso. 11.

The Doctor added, that M. ^r Blacloes doctrine should here be club'd into an he­resie, [Page 18]which he demonstrated out of ho­lie Scripture, Mat. 25. Ite maledicti in ig­nem aeternum: & Luc. 16. diues epulo cries out crucior in haec fiamma. And there­fore M. ^r Blacloe is in an heresie, ascribing the affliction of the damned to pure voli­tions, that is, to intentionall acts of the will, which holie Scripture attributes to the efficiencie of fier.

The Doctor added againe, that perhaps M. ^r Blacloe will answere, that by fier, ex­pressed in holie Scripture, are vnderstood his intentionall acts of a peruerse will, and that, ite in ignem aeternum, and, ite in puras volitiones peruersas, are synonima; and consequently, seing that the perverse vo­litions of the damned be sinnes, Christ by saying, ite in ignem aeternum, shall be ma­de author of sinne, which is a greater blas­phemie, then the heresie is a flagitium.

Moreover the Doctor said, it is here obseruable, that contrarie to M. ^r Blacloes learning, all the Fathers in the Councell of Florence did maintaine against the [Page 19]Grecians, the fier of Purgatorie (and the same is to be vnderstood of the fier of hell) to be true materiall fier. To whose doctrine, in this age, doth subscribe the whole current of Doctors in the Catho­lick Church, vnanimously teaching, the contrarie to be temerarious, or next to he­resie, if not hereticall, interpreting the ho­lie Scripture aboue mention'd, according to the rule of S. Austine, that is, litterally, cum fieri possit sine fidei & morum praeiudi­cio, and consequently vnderstanding the said place of Scripture of true materiall fier, conceiuing no such preiudice to ari­se from that interpretation. And therfore it is great impudence, and madnes in M. ^r Blacloe to explicate the said Scriptu­re as expressely he doth 3. Instit. lect. 11. contrarie to the vnanimous sence of the holie, and learned Fathers in the Coun­cell of Florence, and the now current of Doctors in the Catholick Church.

Howeuer, it seemes that M. ^r Blacloes ambition is to teach the holie Church of [Page 20]God, and all learned schoolemen, a do­ctrine they knew not before. And, in this respect, the Doctor made an apo­strophe to M. ^r 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, vnus aduenerit, (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 finish'd his second encounter, I was trans­ported with à curiositie, to knowe of him, if M. ^r Blacloes Institutions did con­teyne anie more daungerous, and disedi­fying doctrines: and he answer'd, that they had within their bowells, a whole Armie of profane nouelties, and withall did instance in these following.

The first lect. 16. pag. 357. M. ^r Blacloe teacheth ex vi, & serie naturae non potuisse damnatis melius contingere, neque omnibus, [Page 21]neque singulis: sed & natura, & Deus futuri fuissent deteriores, si aliter cum ijs actum fo­ret. The sence in English is, that, conside­ring the force, and series of nature (he mea­nes connexion of naturall causes) the damned could not haue beene better prouided for either in generall, or in particular; nay, both God and nature would haue beene wor­se, (that is, would haue suffer'd preiudice) if the damned had not beene damned. Which is adeo aperta blasphemia, vt eam prodere sit confutare. But I should be glad to knowe of M.r Blacloe, whither before the crea­tion of natures force, and series, the Emi­nencie of Gods perfection was not in it selfe complete, and independent of the existence, the said series enioys. He dares not answere negatiuè, wherefore he is oblig'd to answere affirmatiuè, and con­sequently to confesse, that it is yet within the reach of the divine Omnipotencie, to annihilate the said series of nature, and all the damned in hell, without preiudicing himselfe in the diuine eminencie of his [Page 22]perfection. Howeuer this doctrine main­tained by M. ^r Blacloe imports à great im­pietie, to wit, that God neuer had a will, or desire to saue the damned, for other­wise the fulfilling of the said will could neuer haue brought preiudice to Gods excellent goodnes, and perfection. And, that God had an antecedent will to saue the verie damned, is an vndoubted veri­tie, reuealed in the holie Scriptures S. Paul 1. ad Tim. 2. Deus, (inquit) vult om­nes homines saluos fieri: and the Prophet Ezechiel, who expresseth Gods will, or desire to saue all sinners in these words, viuo ego, dicit Dominus Deus, nolo mortem impij, sed vt conuertatur impius à via sua, & viuat. And Tertullian in his commen­tarie vpon that place, iurat Deus (says he) vt sibi credatur: O beatos nos, quorum causa Deus iurat, sed ô miseros nos, si Deo iuranti non credamus. Wherefore it is euident, that God had a will, notwithstanding that series, or connexion of nature, to haue sa­ued those who are damned, and conse­quently [Page 23]God would not be now in a worse condition, if his said will had beene fulfilled. Doctor Leyburne ended with an Epiphonema, is this sapere ad Christianismum?

The second profane Noueltie pag. 328. where he affirmeth Christum non esse mor­tuum pro re, vel persona non concessa: the sence in English is that, Christ did not dye 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 diuine pietie, and hereticall. And, how contrarie this do­ctrine is to holy Scriptures, I leaue to the iudgment of those, who shall piously consider the sacred texts. 1. Cor. 8. peribie infirmus in tua sciētia frater, pro quo Christus mortuus est: in English, through thy know­ledge (or Learning) shall perish thy weake brother, for whom Christ died. Rom. 14. noli cibo tuo illum perdere, pro quo Chri­stus mortuus est: destroy not him with thy meate, for whom Christ died. Out of which [Page 24]Authorities may be argued thus. One can perish, and be destroy'd for whom Christ died: but the concessi or, electi, or praedesti­nati doe neuer perish, or are destroy'd: ergo Christ did not onely dye pro re, vel persona concessa. Moreouer 1. Tim. 4. the Apostle calleth Christ Saluator omnium hominum, maxime fidelium: the sauiour of all men, cheifly of the faithfull. Where is obser­uable that Christ is not named absolute & simpliciter the sauiour of the faithfull, but with this restriction maxime, cheifly, or principally. And S. Iohn 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 onely the elect, but also the reprobate, according to the interpretation of the Councell of Trent, sess. 6. cap. 3. which from thence gathereth, that not all those for whom Christ died haue receiued the benefit of his death. But omnes personae concessae (to vse M. ^r Blacloes owne words) haue or will receiue the benefit of Christs [Page 25]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 Noueltie Lec. 9. pag. 81. M. ^r Blacloe auerreth sententiam asse­rentem Sacramenta nouae legis causare gra­tiam, ex opere operato, vitam, & perfectio­nem Christianam, quae in cultura animae, & in bonis actibus consistit, transferre in ritus, & superstitionem Paganam, qua credantur certa opera externa placere Deo, & efficere (vi quasi magica) bonitatem, non nisi vio­lentia intensi affectus capiendam: 'quare eui­dens est hanc sententiam magis facibus abo­lendam esse, quam argumentis confutandam. Thus he. the meaning is, that outward works, as are the Sacraments, exercise no efficiencie in the production of sanctifying Grace, which is the opinion of Luther, lib. de Captiu. Babilon. And of all the se­ctaries in this age. But seing that M. ^r Bla­cloe doth brand the common doctrine [Page 26]mantained by the current of learned men in Gods Church, and audaciously affir­mes nullum esse istius profanitatis (so he stileth the said common doctrine) verbu­lum, vel similitudinem in Concilio Triden­tino (as is evident out of his owne words of the same lection pag. 78.) it will be ex­pedient to alleage the words of the said Councell, thereby to come to a iudgemēt. The Councell sess. 7. can. 6. defineth thus, si quis dixerit Sacramenta nouae legis non continere gratiam quam significant, aut gratiam ipsam non ponentibus obicem non conferre, quasi signa tantum externa sint, &c. anathema sit. Et can. 8. si quis dixerit per ipsa nouae legis Sacrementa ex opere ope­rato non conferri gratiam, &c. anathema sit. But M. ^r Blacloe answers, that albeit the Councell doth define, that the Sacra­ments of the new law doe conteyne, and conferre grace, yet it means not, that Sacraments, which are outward works, exercise anie causalltie, or efficiencie, as schoolemen vnanimously teach; for that [Page 27]were, saith he, to transferre life, and Christian perfection, into a Pagan superstition: and to begert a beleife, that outward works (as it were by a magick force) doe effect goodnes, or sanctitie. And thence concludes, that the opinion of Doctors teaching that Sacra­ments doe conferre Grace ex opere opera­to, est facibus abolenda. And vpon the same score he must condemne to the fier S Au­stine saying, vnde tanta virtus aquae, vt cor­pus rangat, cor vero abluat, to wit, ascribing the purgation, or sanctification of the sou­le to the outward, or extrinsecall water of Baptisme. The Doctor ended with an Epiphonema Quam imprudenter noster Tho­mas Albiorum Trinobantum Diruit, aedificat, mutat quadrata rotundis?

5. ^o Whereas M. ^r Blacloe in his answere to the third obiection pretend's, that his whole scope, in writing rules of Go­vernment, was to highten, and commend the exemptions from anie written Law, or custome of the Common wealth, which the dignitie of a supreme Prince, [Page 28]or Magistrate giues him: and imediately after subiect's the said supreme Magistra­te to a rationall law, or law of reason (fig­mentum antea inauditum) by vertue of which his whole scope is, to vnhighten the dignitie of the said supreme Magistra­te, and to bring him to Iudgment, and punishment, as often as the law of reason shall require, from which no supreme Magistrate is exempt more then from Club law. onely according to M. ^r Blacloe the punnishing of an offending supreme Magistrate by the law of reason is a ra­tionall action proceeding from a rationall nature: and the punnishing of him by Club-law is an vnreasonable act procee­ding from an irrationall and brutish na­ture. The Doctor onely answer'd with an Epiphonema, is this sapere ad discretio­nem?

6. ^o M. ^r Blacloe hauing liberally bes­towed on Doctor Leyburne the Chara­cters of sycophant, madman, calumniator, hissing serpent &c. proceeded farther to [Page 29]proue him an ignorant man, which he performes thus. 1. (says he) his letter shews him ignorant. 2. his life may proue the same, he hauing spent his time generally in a pra­cticall way: true it is, he studied some time be­fore his suing for his Doctorship, but with such successe, as I am assured he vnderstood not his Theses after he had defended them; and being brought vnder 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 endeuored to free him­selfe, from the Characters of sycophant, Ca­lumniator, hissing serpent, &c. yet he takes to the title of ignorant man, and professeth ingeniously that he neuer had the ambi­tion to be esteemed learned: howeuer he vowed, that M. ^r Blacloe had done him wrong in the proofes of his ignorance. For 1. (said he) onely two dayes after he had defended the said Theses in the Vni­uersitie of Rhemes, the Cheife Doctor, [Page 30]and Chaire-man of the said Vniuersitie came vnto him, in the name of their whole bodie, desiring him to compose new Theses, and to prepare himselfe to de­fend them, in the name of the said Vni­uersitie, before a Prouinciall Councell, which, by Order of their Archbishop, was to assemble in the said Cittie of Rhe­mes, within fifteene daies, which is a considerable argument, that the said Vni­uersitie was perswaded, that the Doctor vnderstood his Theses. 2. The Doctor composed his Theses himselfe, which was a signe that he vnderstood them. Moreover they conteyned neither false Latine, or dangerous opinion, as did the Theses, made by M. ^r Blacloe, for his friend the Doctor at Paris, some eigh­teene yeeres agoe. 3. Doctor Leyburne said, that he had moderated, and defen­ded more Theses in Divinitie, then euer M. ^r Blacloe had. 4. Doctor Leyburnes Theses, which he composed, and defended three yeeres agoe, in the Vniuersitie of [Page 31]Doway, were honored with the title of pulchrae Theses, and presented by some of the said Vniuersitie to the Popes Nuncio at Brussells, with a request, that they might be exhibited to the Pope, to ac­quaint his Holines, with the sound, and sober doctrine, professed in the said Vni­uesitie. But M. ^r Blacloe teaching Diuini­tie at Lisbo, no sooner had printed his first Theses, then they were put into the In­quisition, as conteyning daungerous opi­nions: in so much that, he terrifi'de at the proceeding, sodeinly quitted Portugall, returning into England. By which is ap­parent, that although, as M. ^r Blacloe saith, the Doctor hath spent little time in studies, yet it seemes, that the diuine pro­uidence hath beene more fauorable to the Doctor, than to M. ^r Blacloe, who hath employ'd the whole course of his li­fe, for the purchase of knowledge, that hath brought preiudice to himselfe, and to all his Brethren. As Concerning the Doctors being brought to conferre with [Page 32]some of a different Religion, &c. it is one of M. ^r Blacloes dreames, without anie ground of veritie. But the Doctor doth well remember M. ^r Blacloes conference with Chillingworth, who triumphed ouer him, to the great disaduantage of his Cause. The Doctor ended with an Epi­phonema, is this sapere ad veritatem?

7. ^o After that M. ^r Blacloe had finish'd his charge of calumnies against Doctor Leyburne, and their goodlie proofes, it seemes his great Councellour and secre­tarie M. ^r Holland (according to their con­triued plot) thought it now a fit time (presuming that the precedent Calum­nies would haue sufficiently lessen'd the Doctors esteeme, in the opinion of the Clergie) to inculcate, and insinuate into the hearts of our Brethren, and Lay-Ca­tholicks, the two cheife opiniōs amongst M. ^r Blacloes profane Nouelties, to wit, concerning the Popes infallibilitie, and the imprisonment of soules in Purgatorie vntill the day of iudgment. And as tou­ching [Page 33]the first, M. ^r Blacloe openeth his breast thus to his said Secretarie. I told you, said he, I heard it (his booke written against the Popes infallibilitie) would not be meddled with at Rome; nay there want not those who say it will be well accepted, it brin­ging the Popes infallibilitie into a rationall Thesis, whereas the contrarie was not de­fensible, but by force of command, and power, and scandalized Catholicks who sought for reason, and auerted those, who otherwise were neere conuersion, vntill they met with Ca­tholicks of another opinion. Doctor Ley­burne answered with a zealous excla­mation, saying, ô God how this poore man acts the serpent, that hissed poison to Eue in Paradise! how he is blowne vp with the dreames of his owne troubled fancie! how ambitious he is to execute his law of reason, that is his Club-law, for the knocking downe of the Popes infallibili­tie, pretending that it is a mutherer of soules, hindring their conuersion: and (to vse his owne words) a greater sinne, them to destoure a virgin vpon an altar. Doctor [Page 34]Leyburne added, can any man, though onely halfe witted, conceiue, that Ale­xander 7. ^th now Pope of Rome is well satisfied with M. ^r Blacloe, for impugning his infallibilitie, which Catholick Do­ctors, in all ages, haue ascribed vnto him: or can it be rationally conceiu'd, that anie one that is compos mentis should be auer­ted from the Catholick Religion, vpon that score of Infallibilitie, which rather should be a motiue to embrace it? For who would not sooner adhere to that Church, whose Cheife Pastor is estee­m'd infallible, and cannot tell a lie for a truth defining as cheife Pastor, then to a Church, whose cheife Pastor is subiect to fallibilitie? therefore he cannot beleiue but that M. ^r Blacloe did dreame this fri­volous pretence, that the Popes infallibi­litie should disswade from the Catholick faith. But this poore man hath the ambi­tion, to be esteemed, amongst all Chri­stians, the Christian rationall, imitating in that peece of pride the Donatists, who made cleare reason to march before their [Page 35]beleife, against whom S. Austine writeth thus, credimus vt cognoscamus, non cognosci­mus vt credamus: and againe, saith he, Christianus fidelis, non rationalis nominatur, Doctor Leyburne ended, with an Epi­phonema. is this sapere ad fidē Christianam?

As touching the second, his durance of Purgatorie, M. ^r Blacloe thus hisseth poi­soned words to his Brethren. My friend Macedo, saith he, would not touch it, auerring it to be the opinion of diuers Fathers, parti­cularly S. Austine; others of my Aduersaries, that it was hard to answere, what I had said. Further consider, how contrarie it is to pietie, charging God with an irrationall iustice ta­king away the priuilege of charitie, by affir­ming that soules perfect in charitie are yet de­priued of the sight of God, and exposing hea­uen to auction, that who can giue most shall soonest come thither. Adde what slight gro­unds they goe vpon, certaine visions, &c. The Doctor said that with horror and in­dignation he read the impious and blas­phemous doctrine conteyned in the reci­ted [Page 36]words. Withall answered.

1. ^o That M. ^r Blacloe was to be com­mended for stiling Macedo his freind, for he procured at Rome the condemning of one of his books: and it was the part of a true freind, to seeke his conuersion to pu­re doctrine, and to the obedience of the Church. But how happen'd it, that his said friend Macedo, auerring S. Austine particulary to hold with M. ^r Blacloe in the detention of soules in Purgatorie, vn­till the day of Iudgment, hath not men­tioned the Booke, and Page, where the said S. Austine teacheth that opinion. And how happens it now, that our all-know­ing Thomas Albiorum Trinobantum. &c. (soe vainly he subscribes his name to his printed writings) doth not supplie that defect of his friend Macedo. Howeuer I my selfe shall helpe in this buisnesse, and cite S. Austine for him lib. 15. de Trin. cap. 25. constituuntur autem purgati, ab omni co­gitatione corruptionis, in placidis sedibus, do­nec recipiant corpora sua. See, how fauora­ble [Page 37]S. Austine is to M. ^r Blacloes opinion, who placeth soules in heauen, to expect their bodies after their purgation in the next life: as will clearly appeare to him, that shall peruse the cited chapter. Againe S. Au­stine hom. 16. writeth thus, quanta fuerit peccati materia, tanta & pertranseundi mu­ra. Where see againe, how fauorable S. Austine is to M. ^r Blacloes opinion, spea­king of soules passing the riuer of fire (Purgatorie) says, by how much more the matter of sinne is, soe much longer the soules shall stay in their passage, whence is clearly inferr'd, that some soules doe passe soo­ner then others.

2. ^o Doctor Leyburne answered, that M. ^r Blacloe in condemning the doctri­ne, that teacheth the deliuerance of sou­les out of Purgatorie before the day of Iudgment, as contrarie to Pietie, commit's an impietie, aduersus Spiritum sanctum, which S. Matthew calls impardonable in hoc seculo, & in futuro: in condemning the said doctrine, as charging God with an [Page 38]irrationall iustice commit's blasphemie, quod est peccatum ad mortem, & non habet re­missionem in aeternum: and in condemning the said doctrine as exposing heauen to au­ction, or open sale, that who can giue most shall soonest come thither, comit's flagitium profanitatis. But, at what a hight of impu­dencie and impietie is this poore man ar­riu'd, affirming an orthodoxe veritie, defi­ned by Pope Engenius in the generall Coūcell of Florēce, as also by Pope Bene­dict the 12. ^th auer'd by anciēt Fathers, ap­prou'd by the vniuersall practice of Gods Church, and cōfirmed and taught by the whole current of Catholick Doctors, to be contrarie to pietie, to charge God with an ir­rationall iustice, and to expose heauen to open sale, that who shall giue most monie shall carrie it! Blasphema dicit Blaclous, profana dicit, falsa dicit: blasphema stupemus, pro­fana cauemus, falsa conuincimus.

3. ^o Doctor Leyburne answered, that M. ^r Blacloe in auerring that the said Catholick Tenet relieth on certaine [Page 39]visions, which he calleth old wiues tales, commits an iniurious falsitie seing that the said doctrine is protected with the au­thoritie of an infallible Councell, forti­fied with an vniuersall practice of the Church, and arm'd with an vnanimous consent of all Catholick Doctors. Yet al­beit our Catholick doctrine of the du­rance of Purgatorie doth not relie on vi­sions: howeuer our vnus Doctor M. ^r Bla­cloe profanely calleth apparitions of holy soules old owiues tales, seing that they ha­ue alwayes beene number'd amongst di­uine miracles, and besides they are groūded on authoritie of holie Scripture, Samuel 1. Reg. 2. Sauli vere apparuit, ac­cording to the common opinion: and it is an vndoubted truth, that Moyses ap­peared in Christs Transfiguration: and S. Matthew cap. 17. & 27. mentioneth di­uers apparitions in Christ his Resurre­ction: and S. Austine lib. de cura pro more. cap. 10. affirmes the soules of the departed to haue oftētimes appeared, si falsa esse, in­quit, [Page 40] responderimus (to wit, that soules ha­ue often appeared) contra quorundam scri­pta fidelium, & contra eorum sensus, qui ta­lia sibi accidisse confirmant, impudenter ve­nire videbimur. Whence is infer'd that ac­cording to S. Austines iudgment, M. ^r Bla­cloes opinion is branded with impu­dency.

Here Doctor Leyburne gaue ouer the conflict, expressing onely a zealous de­sire to imprint in the hearts of his Bre­thren, what S. Austine did inculcate to all Christian people, who in his second booke written against Iulian, who had broach't profane nouelties, to the preiu­dice of soules, vseth these words: hos (the holy Fathers, who flourish'd in the pre­cedent ages) oportet, vt Christiani populi vestris profanis nouitatibus anteponant, cis­que potius, quam vobis, eligant adhaerere. And wish'd, that our Brethren, at the example of this great Doctor, would pre­ferre the holie Fathers in a generall Councell assembled, before M. ^r Blacloes [Page 41] profane nouelties, and to adhere rather to the vniuersall practice of the Catholick Church, then to his singularitie.