that Pelagius Celestius Iulianus al of them Hereticks do see and Hilarie Gregorie Ambrose c. are blind This so worthie a Saying of S. Austin being alleaged against the Puritans by D. Bancroft he therupon inferreth (32) Suruey p. 352. 353. 351. Surely I do not perceiue why I may not without offence apply the same wordes to those men in those dayes c. Were there neuer learned men before you were taught the Principles of the Geneua Discipline c. Do you know what was in the Apostles times better then they who succeded the Apostles c. Is the light that shewed it self so manie wayes in the Ancient Fathers become such darknes that Carthwright Trauerse Fenner to whom I might as truly adde Luther Zuinglius Caluin Beza c. and such like should be thought so clearlie-sighted And shal Ireneus Tertulian Cyprian Ambrose Hierom Chrysostom Austin Gregorie Hilarie and al the rest of those whorthie men be reckned blind So cleerly doth D. Bancroft the Protestant late Primate of England acknowledge the shining light and glorie of the ancient Fathers and defend their authoritie from the imputations of Nouelists D. Morton ioyfully acknowledgeth (33) Prot. Appeal p. 33. That the ancient Fathers c. did obtayne in the Church of Christ honourable Titles as Augustin the great Mall or hammer against Hereticks Basil the light of the world Chrysostome The Doctour of the whole world Athanasius the Pillar as it were of the Church Nazianzene by a phrase of excellencie the Diuine Origen the Maister of the churches Cyprian the President of the whole world And lastly Ambrose A man called by God vnto an Apostolical Presidencie Now as for the Confidence which Catholicks place in the ancient Fathers D. Morton testifyeth for vs that (34) Ib. p 348 Neuer did the ancient Iewes more boast of their original and descent from father Abraham then do the Romanists glory in their pretended consent of ancient Fathers And though it be true that the ancient Fathers were men yet (35) Eccl. Pol. p. 115. The strength of mans Authoritie in M. Hookers iudgement is affirmatiuely such that the weightiest affaires in the world depend therupon Yea (36) Ib. p. 116. whatsoeuer we beleeue concerning saluation by Christ although the Scripture be therin the ground of our beleef yet is mans Authoritie sayth he the key that openeth the doore c. The Scripture could not teach vs these things vnles we beleeued men And wheras the sacred Scriptures do foretel sundrie things to be performed by the Church of Christ in succeeding Ages the answerable accomplishment therof in particular being matter of fact can be to vs at this day no otherwise made knowne then vpon the Credit of humane Testimonie commended to vs by Ecclesiastical Histories In which respect D. Whitaker truly teacheth that (37) Cont. Duraeum l. 7. p. 472. Historie plainly testifyeth al that to be accomplished which the ancient Prophets haue foretold concerning the Propagation amplitude and glorie of the Church So that there is no doubt sayth he but that Ecclesiastical Historie doth strengthen the Predictions of the Prophets Now from the Premisses we may briefly remember that not only al Catholicks but euen the Primest ProtestaÌ„ts that euer were do thus willingly appeale for the decision of Controuersies in Faith and Religion to the Censure and Determination of the Church of Christ which for the first six hundred yeares was confessedly sincere holie and religious Acknowledging withal the integritie and puritie of the Roman Church during the sayd time and professing to beleeue and teach no other Faith and religion then that which was taught and beleeued by the ancient Fathers of the same Church This then supposed I wil now descend in particular to the chiefest articles of Faith disputed at this day between Catholicks and Protestants And wil only examine whether the Roman or Protestant Church is now more agreable with the confessed Faith and Religion of the Fathers of the Primitiue Church in the foresayd poynts And for the cleerest preuenting of the manifold shiftes and euasions vsed by ProtestaÌ„ts when they are vrged in this kind I wil only produce such proofe from the Primitiue Church and Fathers as is recorded and confessed by Protestants and by them disliked and reiected as agreeing with our Roman Faith and condemning Protestancie THAT THE FATHERS AND DOCTOVRS OF the Primitiue Church beleeued and taught that S. Peter was ordayned by Christ the Head of the Apostles and of the whole Church and that the Church was founded vpon S. Peter it is Confessed by Protestants themselues CHAPTER III. BEcause the deciding of this present Controuersie of the Churches Primacie is indeed the speediest and most certaine meanes for the final dissoluing of al doubts in Religion either already begun or hereafter to arise I wil therfore more particularly and at large set downe the manifest and confessed Doctrine and practice of the Primitiue Church concerning the same And first as al gouernment whether Politick or Ecclesiastical the more it reseÌ„bleth the gouernment of this world by the Creatour therof ONE GOD or the gouernment of the Church during our Sauiours aboad vpon earth by ONE CHRIST the more it is to be approued coÌ„mended and followed so nothing is holden more Soueraigne or more needful for the procuring or preseruing of vnitie and concord in anie Bodie or Communitie then the vnitie of one Head or gouernment Monarchical Herevpon the (1) Bel. de Rom. Pont l. 1. c. 10. l. 2. c 12. Catholick Church doth beleeue and teach That S. Peter was ordayned by Christ the Supreme Ecclesiastical Head not only ouer the rest of the Apostles but euen ouer the whole Church And that the Bishop of Rome succeedeth him in the same Power and Authoritie The direct (2) Luther l de Potestate Papae in assertione Art 25. Calu. l. 4 Instit c 6. Morton in his Appeale l. 2. c. 5. Sect. 11. Negatiue wherof is not only taught by the protestant-Protestant-Church but withal it further beleeueth maintayneth that the Bâ—shop of Rome in steed of being the true Successour of S. Peter and the Vicar of Christ is the true Antichrist or Man of Sinne wherof so much is foretold in the sacred Scriptures To discouer now the Faith and practise of the Primitiue Church and to begin with the confessed Primacie of S. Peter And first that for the preseruing of vnitie and preuenting of Schismes he was appoynted by Christ the Supreme Head of that slender Bodie or litle Church of the twelue Apostles Wheras S. Hierom l. 1. cont Iouinianum teacheth that Amongst the Twelue one is chosen that a Head appoynted the occasion of Schisme should be taken away From hence (3) In his Examination c. against the Plea of the Innocent p. 106. 107. D. Couel hauing spoken of the necessitie of One aboue the rest to suppresse the seed of dissention thus argueth most strongly If this were the Principal
conscience and true knowledge would also dedicate your further labours I doubt not but you would become a dutiful Child to your Mother-Church and a paineful labourer in Christ's Vinyeard for which I wil not cease to entreate his Infinit Goodnes and wil euer rest Yours in him N. N. THE FIRST BOOKE WHERIN IS PROVED BY THE CONFESSION OF PROTESTANTS THAT THE CATHOLICK ROMAN CHVRCH hath continued Euer most Knowne and Vniuersal euen from Christs verie Time vntil the Date hereof THE ANTIQVITIE OF THE TRVE Church and the force of the Argument drawne from the Authoritie thereof As also of the great necessitie of finding-out this true Church CHAP. I. AS we may not doubt but that the Church of God speaking in general is equal in Ancestrie with our first Parents in Paradise so in regard of her Birth-right prime Antiquitie long precedent and preferred before the Scriptures themselues so euen of the Church of Christians it may not be denyed but that as in the same instant with Christ her Head and Spouse she receaued her first being life and birth in this world according to that of (1) Ad c. 3. Lucae S. Ambrose God built his Church in the chief Corner-stone CHRIST IESVS so was this her greatest nobilitie of birth not only to cōtinue for some few generatiōs but euer to remayne for al posteritie Agreable to which the Prophet Daniel foretold of the Church (2) cap. 2.4 that it is A kingdome that shal neuer be destroyed but shal stand for euer And so shal be according to Esay as (3) cap 60.15 An eternal glorie and ioy from generation to generation So that in steed of further discussing the Ancientest Birth-right and not-interrupted continuance of Christ his Church I wil now only treat of the force of that Argumēt which is drawne from the Authoritie Determinatiō of the sayd so Noble Anciēt a Church Wherein for greater expeditiō I wil pretermit most plentiful proofes both from sacred Scriptures and learnedst Fathers in steed therof wil for the present rest satisfyed with the freest Grants and ample Acknowledgements of the learnedst Protestants who first as they euer pretend to build their whole Faith Religion vpon the Written Word so do they further aknowledge the same to be only knowne and discerned from forged and adulterat Scriptures by the sacred Authoritie and Testimonie of the Church of Christ In which respect (4) Ans to a Counterf catho pag. 5. D. Fulk auoucheth that The Church of Christ hath Iudgemēt to discerne true writings from counterfait and the Word of God from the writings of men and this Iudgemēt she hath of the Holie-Ghost With whom accordeth (5) Def. of the Apolog. p. 201. D. Iewel affirming that The Church of God hath the Spirit of wisdome whereby to discerne true Scriptures from false In like sort M. (6) Ecc. Pol. pag. 86. Hooker teacheth that of things necessarie the verie chiefest is to know what books we are bound to esteeme holie which point is confessed impossible for the Scripture itself to teach Whereof he further sayth (7) Ib pa. 102. It is not the Word of God which doth or possibly can assure vs that we do wel to think it is his word for if anie one Book of Scripture did giue testimonie of al yet stil that Scripture which giueth credit to the rest would require another Scripture to giue credit vnto it Neither could we come vnto anie pause whereon to rest vnles besides Scripture there were something which might assure vs c. which something afterwards he acknowledgeth (8) Ib. pa. 146. 116. And see Aretius his examen p. 24. And Bachmanus his Centuriae tres c. p. 267. To be the authoritie of Gods Church Agreably hereunto D. whitaker doth confesse that this weightiest controuersie concerning Canonical Scriptures is to vs determined not by (9) Cōt Staplet p. 370. 357. HooK Eccl. Pol. p. 147. Testimonie of the Spirit the which sayth he being priuat and secret is vnfit to teach and refel others but as he further teacheth (10) Ibi. p. 300. 298. 24. 25. And against Raynolds p. 44. by the Ecclestical Tradition An argument whereby may be argued and conuinced what books be Canonical and what not And another Protestant Writer (11) Auth. of the scripture and the church f. 71 72. 73. 74 75. much commended by (12) Ibid. in the Preface Bullinger affirmeth that The church is endued with the Spirit of God and that The diligence authoritie of the Church is to be acknowledged herein which hath partly giuen forth her Testimonie of the assured writings and hath partly by her Spiritual Iudgement refused the writings which are vnworthie Yea he further assureth vs with (13) Tom 6. cōt ep fund cap. 5. Tert. lib. 1 de Praescrip cap. 6. S. Augustin and Tertullian that (14) Scrip. and the church p. 72 74. 75. And see Melancthon in epist ad Rom cap. 14. pa 358 359. we could not beleeue the Ghospel were it not that the Church taught vs and witnessed that this doctrine was deliuered by the Apostles So that the authoritie of Gods true Church is so great as that by her warrāt we are only assured of the Written Word of God itself and for such by her wisedome giuen by the Holie-Ghost discerned to vs from al forged Apocryphal and counterfait writings A power and authoritie then which none stronger seing the certain knowledge of the true word of God is the chiefest foundation of our Christian Faith Now if in this question so important we may securely follow and beleeue the Sentence and Determination of the Church how much more then in other doubts of smaller respect Adde further hereunto in surest confirmation of the Churches authoritie that it is likewise granted and taught by the learnedst Protestants that the true visible Church can not wholy erre in matters of Faith Insomuch as they expresly confesse of this verie point that (15) Bertr de Loque in his discourse of the church p. 198. Phil. Act. mon. p. 1401. Bilney ibid. p. 464. Ridley 16. pag. 1361. 1286. Baynhā ib. p 493. Fox ib. pag. 999. Bancroft in his sermon preached 8. Febr. 1588. pag. 42. 43. The Diuines of Geneua in their Propositions and Principles disputed c. p. 142. Zanchius de Relig pa. 157. Rhegius in Discus The. p. 213. Hunnius in Act. Colloq Ratisb fol. 205. KecKermannus in System Theol. pag. 387. Povvel of things indifferent p. 7 The controuersie c. is not of the Catholick or vniuersall Church for we al agree say they herein that she cannot orre touching Faith c. wherefore this question is touching only a particular church Now if the true Church can not erre in matters of Faith Religion then is her Authoritie sacred her Decrees infallible her Children secured and al difficulties arising easily composed Yea from hence also may we iustly collect amongst al
ancient Fathers almost in euerie Age before that in which Gregorie liued saying The Religion cleerly taught in the Word of God brought hither first by Simon Zelotes Niceph. l. 2. c. 4. Ioseph of Arimathia Gildâ—s S. Paul the Apostle Theodoret de Curand Graec. affect l. 9. al or some of them was watred stil on in the dayes of Tertullian l. cont Iudaeos Origen in Ezech. hom 4. Athanasius Apol. 2. Hilarie l. de Synod cont Arian Chysostom hom quod Christus sit Deus Theodoret Hist l. 1. c. 10. l. 4. c. 3. Al which Ancient Fathers speak honourably of the Church Religion and Prelates of Brittanie So exceeding far were the Brittans from being changed in their Religion before the time when S. Augustin came into England Therfore to come to the second and mayne point which is the true harmonie and agreement between the Apostolick Faith of the Brittans and the Catholick Roman Faith of S. Augustin D. Morton labouring purposely to shew (51) Prot. Appeal p. 75. what and of how great importance the differences were between the Brittan Bishops and the Church of Rome at Austins comming can only instance in the difference of Ceremonies or ministring of Baptisme in keeping of Easter and in denial of Subiection vnto Austin which though he much endeauour to proue to be matters of great importance yet if they be considered in themselues and without pertinacie in the Defenders they may with M. Brierlie most truly be sayd to be few and smal points And the more if they should once be compared with our other Roman Articles of Real Presence Adoration of the Sacrament Masse Confession Freewil Merit c. In anie one wherof D. Morton was not able to giue the least Instance of difference between the foresayd Brittans and S. Austin Wherfore to proceed in this same poynt It is reported by Hollinshead out of S. Bede hist. l. 2. c. 2 that S. Austin by the help of King Edilbert obtayned a meeting with the Brittish Bishops and Doctours where he sayd vnto them (52) Beda hist l. 2. c. 2. Hollinsh vol. 1. p. 103. Godwine in his Catalogue of Bish. p. 6. If you wil obey me in these three things That you wil celebrate Easter at the due time That you wil minister Baptisme wherwith wee are borne againe to God according to the custome of the Roman and Apostolick Church That you wil preach with vs the Word of God to the Nation of the English Al other things which you doe though they be contrarie to our customes we wil peaceably suffer In like sort sayth the (53) l. 3. c. 13. p. 133. Authour of the Historie of Great Brittanie The Brittan Bishops conformed themselues to the doctrine and Ceremonies of the Church of Rome without difference in anie thing specially remembred saue only in the Celebration of the Feast of Easter c. (54) Ibid p. 219. And See CaÌ„bdens BritaÌ„ in English p. 578. And agayne when they perceaued the Saxons in some measure to approue it they began to make open Profession of it as seeming therin to agree euen with their Enemies the Saxons howsoeuer otherwise in respect of language situation or Law of Nations they were diuided Yea the (55) Beda hist l. 2. c. 2. Hollinsh vol. 1. p. 102. Brittan Bishops after conference had with S. Austin confessed that they vnderstood that it was the true way of iustice which Austin preached Wherupon as (56) Confut. of Purgat p. 335. D. Fulk acknowledgeth Saint Austin did at the last obtayne the ayde of the Brittish Bishops to the Conuersion of the Saxons (57) Catalogue of Bishops p. 11. Lastly D. Godwin writing of Theodore who was Archbishop of Canterburie some Fiftie or Sixtie yeares after S. Augustin auoucheth that vnto him al the Brittish Bishops and generally al Britanie yealded obedience and vnder him conformed themselues in al things vnto the Rites and discipline of the Church of Rome So euidently doth that Primitiue Faith of the Brittans in al most substantial poynts wholy agree with that Faith which S. Austin taught vs and which the Protestants haue fully acknowledged to be Catholick Roman or Popish And yet is the sayd Faith taught vs by S. Gregorie and S. Austin tearmed by (58) Chron. f. 161. D. Cowper the right beleefe And by (59) Act. Mon. p. 112. M. Fox the perfect Faith of Christ (60) Ibid. p. 124. and the true Faith of Christ And thus from the premisses it necessarily followeth that our present Roman Religion being so consonant or rather the same with that first Faith which the Indians Armenians Graecians and Brittans receiued from the Apostles themselues that therfore no lesse ancient or continuing is our Roman Religion then the Religion of the Apostles M. Brierly hauing produced diuers testimonies of Protestants in proof that the Indians Graecians and Armenians were conuerted to the Faith of Christ in the Apostles times as also that the remnant of Christian Religion which they yet preserue is Roman Catholick not Protestant M. Morton directing a large Reply hereto doth not so much as answer to any one of the foresayd testimonies of his Brethren Osiander excepted of whom he sayth (61) Prop. Appeal p. 79. We approue not Osianders censure c. concerning the Christians in Mount Libanus tearming them Popish for some flying speach But he may now aswel say we do not only not approue Osianders censure but neither the Censures and opinions of D. Philip Nicolai Gomarus Willamont Crispinus the Diuines of Wittemberg Cambden Harison Hollinshead Hal Clapham Fulk Marbeck Symondes Sandes Bale Foxe Midleton Godwine and Cowper al of them Protestants and yet al of them thus affording their helping hands for the proof of our agreement in Faith and Religion with the Doctrine deliuered by the Apostles themselues THE SECOND BOOKE WHERIN IS PROVED THROVGH AL THE CHIEF ARTICLES OF RELIGION AND THAT BY THE Confessions of Protestants that the same Faith Which is now taught by the Roman Church vvas anciently taught by the Primitiue Church of Christ THAT GENERAL COVNCELS DO TRVLY represent the Church of Christ And of the Credit and Authoritie giuen by Protestants to the sayd Councels CHAPTER I. AS in Politick gouernement our Parlament consisting of Prince Peeres Knights and Burgesses doth truly represent the whole Bodie of the Common-wealth and withal is endowed with ful power and authoritie to enact and establish Lawes which euerie particular Subiect is bound to obey and obserue So in gouernement Ecclesiastical a General Councel consisting of the Head of the Church the Bishops and Pastours doth truly represent vnto vs the whole Bodie of the Church itself and in like sort is enriched with plenarie power and vertue to create Decrees and Statutes which may bind the soules and consciences of euery particular member of the sayd Church To which purpose D. Whitaker confesseth expresly that (1) De Conciliis p. 1. 10. The Church is represented in a General
no period or difference of time wherin the Church of Christ hath more gloriously shined either for puritie of Faith or Sanctitie of life then during the time of her primitiue being which according to the accompt (1) Ievvel in his Sermon at Paules Crosse And in his Reply p. 1. Humfrey in vita Iuelli p. 123. 124. VvitaKer Resp ad Ranones Campiani p. 90. of the learnedst ProtestaÌ„ts extended itself to the ful tearme of the first six hundred years after Christ our Sauiour his glorious Ascension In greatest confidence wherof D. Iewel whom M. Mason (2) Consecration of English Bish. p. 267 styleth and esteemeth a Iewel made his so aduenturous a Challenge when he publickly exclaimed at Pauls Crosse O Gregorie O Austin O Hierom O Chrysostom O Leo O Denis O Anaclet O Calixt O Paul O Christ If we be deceaued you haue deceaued vs this you taught vs c. And As I sayd before so I say now againe I am content to yeald and subscribe if anie of our learned Aduersaries or if al the learned men that be aliue be able to bring anie one sufficient Sentence out of anie old Catholick Doctour or Father or out of anie old General Councel c. for the space of 600. yeares after Christ which maketh agaynst anie one of 27. Articles by him there repeated and defended And this he protested to preach not as carryed away with the heate of Zeale but as moued with the simple truth This proffer of D. Iewel was so pleasing to D. Whitaker that he most valiantly renewed it in behalf of al Protestants (3) Resp ad Rat. CaÌ„p p. 90. And see p. 9. saying to our glorious Martyr Campian Attend Campian the speach of Iewel was most true and constant when prouoking you to the Antiquitie of the first six hundred years he offered that if you could shew but anie one cleare and playne Saying out of anie one Father or Councel he would grant you the victorie It is the offer of vs al The same do we al promise and we wil performe it With like courage steppeth forth (4) Of the Church l. 5. in his Appendix therto Part. 1. p. 33. D. Field We say sayth he with Bishop Iewel in his worthie Challenge that al the learned Papists in the world can not proue that either Gregorie or Austin held anie of these twentie seauen Articles of Popish Religion mentioned by him Neither wil D. Morton yeald a foot herein stoutly auouching that (5) Prot. Appeal p. 354. It hath been the common and constant profession of al Protestants to stand vnto the Iudgement of Antiquitie for the continuance of the first foure hundred years and more in al things Yea he further publickly professeth that (6) Protest Appeale p. 573. 574. Protestants in oppugning Doctrines which they cal new and not Catholick c. are so far from suffring the limitation of the first 440. years that they giue the Romanists the scope of the first fiue hundred or six hundred years as our Aduersaries themselues do acknowledge For D. Stapleton writing of the opinion of Luther Caluin and Melancthon sayth that they did yeald vnto the tryal of truth by the testimonie of Antiquitie for the space of the first Fiue or Six hundred yeares M. Campian a Iesuit reporting the Challenge of Bishop Iewel for the mayntenance of these Articles which he then propounded for Catholik sayth that he appealed vnto the Iudgement of Antiquitie for the first six hundred years And againe (7) Ibid. p. 512 Protestants in the disquisition of truth do not absolutely bound the name of Antiquitie within the compasse of the first Centurie of years but are content to allow it a longer extent and therfore in al Doctrines which are truly Catholick c. they refuse not to be tryed by the testimonies of the ancient Fathers in the first fiue hundred years after Christ Yea (8) Ib. p. 680. we repose our securitie in those two impregnable fortresses of the Catholick Faith one is the ancient Tradition of the Primitiue Church as the Protestants are confessed to professe c. So willingly do the learned Protestants prouoke and appeale to the Primitiue Church of Christ for the certayne tryal of truth in matters of Faith and Religion Al which they pretend to do because as Luther sayth (9) Tom. 2. Germ. f. 243. Epist ad Marchionem Branâ—eburg It is dangerous and horrible to heare or beleeue anie thing which is contrarie to the vnanimous testimonie of Faith and to the doctrine of the holie and Catholick Church which she from the beginning agreably kept for aboue One thousand fiue hundred years And as Chemnitius truly obserueth (10) Exam. par 1. f. 74. No man doubteth but the Primitiue Church receaued from the Apostles and Apostolical men not only the Text of Scripture but also the right and natiue sense therof wherupon sayth he (11) Ibid. p. 64. we are greatly confirmed in the true and sound sense of Scripture by testimonie of the ancient Church Which according also to other Protestants (12) Harmonie of Confess p. 400. Is the true and best Mistresse of Posteritie and going before lâ—adeth vs the way Yea sayth D. Beard (13) Retractiue from Romish ReligioÌ„ p. 372 without al question al truth was taught by the Apostles to the Primitiue Church and no part therof was left vnreuealed c. Besides it is as certayn that that Church which next succeeded the Apostles was the most pure and absolute Church whether for doctrine or manners matter or forme that euer was in the world and therefore to degenerate from that must needs be to degenerate from the puritie and sanctitie of Religion And againe it can not be denyed that c. though the Primitiue Age of the Church after the Apostles was most pestered with Hereticks yet euermore the truth preuayled both in regard of birthright and predominance D. Morton Declareth that (14) Protestant Appeale p. 513. In the maine question of discerning the true bookes of holie Writ the Protestants do appeale c. vnto the IudgemeÌ„t of the Primitiue Church attributing vnto it the right and Authoritie of assigning and determining what is the perfect Canon of Scriptures With whom agreeth Chemnitius saying (15) Exam. part 1. p. 69. Andradius affirmeth that the testimonie of the Church is either alwayes to be reiected or alwayes to be receaued I answer c. where the Fathers set downe this Tradition of the books of Scripture they proue it by testimonies of the Primitiue Church if with the same course of certayntie they shal do the like of other Traditions wherof sometimes they make mention it is to be respected and they are to be receaued by the same law D. Sarauia confirmeth the authoritie of the Primitiue Church from her special assistance by the Holie-Ghost saying The (16) De diuersis Ministrorum Gradibus p. 8. Holie-Ghost who gouerneth the Church is the best interpreter
of the Old Testament now in question And that the foresayd Epistles of S. Peter S. Iames S. Iohn S. Iude and the Apocalyps were doubted of by some Fathers of the Primitiue Church and not generally receaued by al it is further confessed by the Deanes of Paules and Windsor who in the Towers Disputation had with that Ornament of our Nation and most victorious Martyr Edmund Campian do thus report of themselues (40) The first Dayâ—s Conf. D. 1. For proofe hereof we alleadged the testimonie of Hierom in Catal. where he thus writeth The Epistle of Iames is sayd to be published by some other vnder his name and of the 2. of Peter he sayth that it is denyed of manie to be his we also alledged Eusebius writing thus Those Bookes that be gaynsaid though they be knowne to manie be these the Epistle attributed to Iames the Epistle of Iude the latter of Peter the 2. and 3. of Iohn And D. Walker in the same Disputation affirmeth 41) 4. Dayes Confâ—r fâ—l 2. 6. that S. Hierom saith concerning that Epistle which is written to the Hebrewes manie haue doubted of it And also concerning the 2. of Peter he sayth it was doubted of by manie and so with some were the two last Epistles of Iohn c. Now if the Bookes of Machabees Tobie c. be not Canonical because as Protestants before obiected they were reiected or doubted by some ancient Writers then by the same reason Protestants must likewise reiect the Epistle to the Hebrewâ—s the Epistles of S Peter S. Iames S. Iude S. Iohn and the Apocalyps because these also were no lesse doubted reiected by sundrie ancient Writers Wherefore the weaknes and ensuing absurditie of this obiection being thus discouered we are to obserue that the Canonical Scriptures are to vs at this day discerned and made knowne not by that which some ancient Writers omit deny or doubt of but by that which most of the Fathers constantly affirme and chiefly by that which is iudged and decreed by the Catholick Church lawfully assembled in General Councel Thirdly some obiect that there are in the foresayd Bookes diuers repugnances or Contradictions and consequently that they are not inspired by the holie-Ghost But to omit that in those Scriptures which are beleeued by al to be Canonical there are manie hidden difficulties and seeming (42) See Mat. 10.10 Mar. 6.8 1. Reg. 8.9 2. Par. 5.10 Hebr. 9.4 Act. 9.7 Act 22.9 Math. 26.34 Marc 14.68 Mar. 15.25 Io. 19.14 Luc. 3.35.36 Gen. 11.12 And see Iewel Def. c. p. 361. repugnances which yet notwithstaÌ„ding we are bound to acknowledge the sayd Scriptures to be true and sacred I wil for breuitie only alledge what other Protestants think and answer themselues to the foresayd pretended Contradictions in the Bookes of Machabee Tobie c. D. Couel (43) Answ to Burges p. 85. writeth We could without violence haue afforded them the Reconcilement of other Scriptures and vndoubtedly haue proued them to be most true Yea he particularly answereth certaine of the pretended repugnances In like sort Conradus Pelican (45) Ep. Dedic Professour at Tigure writing his Commentarie vpon the foresayd Bookes sayth I easily yeelded c. especially seing those Bookes were alwayes accompted so Ecclesiastical and Biblical that euen from the Apostles times they were read in the Catholick Church with much reuerence although they were not produced in authoritie against the Iewes as Canonical who receiued not these into their Sacred Canon wheras they do not only not contradict in anie thing the writings of the Law and the Prophets (44) Ib. p. 87 88. 89. 90. but also c. for the most part they cleerly carry the right style of the holie-Ghost certain knots or difficulties intermingled which are sound more easie to be loosed then some haue thought c. Wherupon they were euer reuerenced and read by holie men yea the Sayings therof are found to be alledged by the Apostles Agreably hereto M. Hutton (46) 2. Parte of the Answ p. 238. 239. at large answereth and cleereth the common obiection against Iudith and the like in behalf of Ecclesiasticus (47) Ibid. p. 247. and (48) Ibid. p. 246. And see Bucers scripta Anglic p. 713. Daniel So weake and impertinent are the Contradictions pretended by Protestants against the foresayd Bookes Now from the premisses that by the CoÌ„fessions of our Aduersaries we may collect that the foresayd Bookes of Scripture were only not approued for truly Canonical by S. Austin Innocentius Gelasius and al the Fathers and Bishops of the 3. Carthage Councel but also were approued as partes of the Old Testament by the Apostles and for such alledged by them and so from the Apostles times were read in the Catholick Church with much reuerence Witnesses wherof are the Protestant Writers Hiperius Lubbertus Zanchius Hospiman Trelcatius Hoe Scelico Brentius Bibliander Lascicius Pelican Raynolds Parker Field Couel Bancroft Hutton Parkes D. Bilson al of them affording their helping hands in maintayning and defending the foresayd Bookes by true Antiquitie It is acknowledged by Protestants that the Fathers of the Primitiue Church beleeued and taught our now Catholick Doctrine concerning Traditions CHAPTER VI. THE Catholick Doctrine concerning (1) Bellarm. de Verb. Dei non Scripto l. 4 c 3. Traditions is that the sacred Scriptures or written Word of God do not expresly containe al poynts or matters concerning Faith and manners And therfore besides the same is necessarily required the not written Word of God that is Diuine and Apostolical Traditions To the Contrarie Protestants (2) Luth. in Comment c. 1. ad Gal. Caluin Inst l. 4. c. 8. sec 8 directly teach that al things necessarie to Saluation are set downe in the sacred Scriptures And that we are not bound to beleeue or do anie thing which is not taught and commanded thereby Now what the Primitiue Church beleeued and whether the present Roman or Protestant Church doth Symbolize and agree therewith the Sequele only taken from the free and liberal testimonies of Protestants themselues shal euidently demonstrate And to begin with S. Gregorie D. Morton confesseth that (3) Prot. Appeale l. 4. p 62. He vseth to confirme some things by Tradition S. Augustin also whom D. Field (4) Of the Church l. 3. p. 170. tearmeth Austin the greatest of al the Fathers and worthiest Diuine the Church of God euer had since the Apostles times This indeed most worthie Diuine endeauouring to proue that those who are Baptised by Hereticks should not be rebaptised freely confesseth that (5) De Bapt. cont Don. l. 5. c. 23. The Apostles commanded nothing hereof but that Custome which was opposed herein against Cyprian is to be beleeued to proceed from their Tradition as manie things be which the whole Church holdeth and are therefore wel beleeued to be commanded of the Apostles although they be not written A Saying so euident
of free Iustification was as then almost oppressed with the Comments of the Grecian Bishops c. At the same time the Inuocation of the Dead preuailed and the foolish opinion of single life which shameful errours Hierom openly defendeth the multitude also of Ceremonies then encreased c. And al for the most admired the Monks in Aegypt Syria c. no otherwise then if they had been Angels Prayers also for the Dead began then more freely to be vsed and the Platonical question risen concerning Purgatorie c. So ancient and general amongst al the holie Fathers were al the foresayd Articles of our present Roman Faith 26. So that our Catholick Roman Faith concerning the Sacraments conferring grace of Confession of Pardons of Transubstantiation of Holie-Orders of Extreme-Vnction of the Masse of S. Peter's and the Pope's Primacie of the Pope not being Antichrist of Traditions of Purgatorie and Prayer for the Dead of Limbus Patrum of Inuocation of Saints Reuerencing of Relicks Images and the Crosse Vowes of Chastitie single life of Priests Monastical life prescribed Fasts Free-wil Merit of Works and the Ceremonies of the Church was the general receaued Faith of al ancient Fathers and other Christians Witnesses wherof in our behalf are Luther Caluin Zuinglius the Centurists Rhegius Melancthon Adamus Francisci Antonie de Adamo Bucer Crastouius Philippus Nicolai Chemnitius Functius Osiander Peter Martyr Beza Brightman Field Humfrey Fulk Cartwright Whiteguift Couel Fox Gifford Iacob Parker Parkins Wotton Beard Calfhil whitaker and Iewel THAT PROTESTANTS DO NOT ONLY disclaime from al the ancient Fathers as Papists but do further reiect the authoritie of the sacred Scriptures and of the Apostles themselues as being erroneous and that therefore they do not found their Faith or Religion vpon Sacred Scriptures or Christ his Apostles CHAPTER III. I haue laboured often and long for the finding out of some ground work Argument or Principle wherupon the Protestant Church should be builded and sustained And stil obseruing al proofs whatsoeuer drawne either from Histories Fathers Councels Church or Antiquitie to be al of them contemned and despised by them as meerly Papistical I retired and tyed my thoughts at last to that surest Ancker of God's heauenlie Word proposed vnto vs in the sacred writings of his Prophets and Apostles nothing doubting but that the credit authoritie therof would in the iudgement and verie beleef of al Protestants be euer admitted acknowledged and reuerenced as Diuine infallible and inspired from God the Holie-Ghost himself And yet frustrate in this my last expectation I find the verie writings of the Prophets and Apostles to be censured and reiected and the Prophets and Apostles themselues to be scorned disgraced disallowed by the learnedst Protestant Writers And to begin first with the scriptures of the old Testament omitting also Tobie Iudith c. and the rest which Protestants generally reiect for Apocryphal wheras Moyses was confessedly the first that writ anie part of sacred Scripture yea that writ the Law of God or Ten Commandments in Tables of stone he and the sayd Commandments are al of them reiected by our new Protestants 1) Tom. 3. Germ f. 40. 41. And in Colâ—oq Mensal Gâ—rm fol. 152. 153. We wil neither heare nor see Moyses sayth D. Luther for he was giuen only to the Iewes neither doth he belong anie thing to vs. Let him be to the Iewes as the Law of the Saxons and let him not disquiet or trouble vs Gentils As France regardeth not the Law of the Saxons so the Law of Moyses doth not bind vs. If anie propose vnto thee Moyses with his Lawes and would compel thee to keep them then shalt thou say Go to the Iewes with thy Moyses I am no Iew thou shalt not enwrap me with Moyses And againe 2) In Colloq Mensal c. de Leg. Euang. I wil not receaue Moyses with his Law for he is the enemie of Christ If he shal come with me to examination I wil reiect him in the name of God and wil say Let Christ stand heer 3) Fâ—l 118. Moyses is the maister of al hangmen no man matcheth him in terrifying streightning tyranizing threatning and thundring he cruelly assaulteth the consciences he terrifyeth tormenteth and teareth the hart 4) Ad Ps 46. Away therefore with Moyses to obstinate and cruel men and prowd Saints whome he may terrifye humble 5) Tom. 3. Witemb in Ps 45. f. 423. And see 422. And in Colloq Mens Ger. f. 152. 153. Moyses indeed had lips but profunda great ones vnpleasant stopped angrie in which there is not a word of grace but of anger death and sinne Gather al the wisedomes of Moyses and of the Heathen Philosophers and you shal find them to be in God's sight either Idolatrie or hypocritical wisdome or if it be Politick yet the wisedome of wrath c. For Moyses hath his lips ful of gal and anger c. Away therefore with Moyses c. Moyses being thus discarded Away likewise say Protestants with the Law and Commandments 6) Tom. 3. Germ. fol. 121. The Law sayth Luther is a true Labyrinth which only casteth consciences into errour The iustice of the Law is the monster Minotaurus that is a meer fable not leading to saluation but to the waters of Acheron 7) In Colloq Mensal Germ. f. 152. 153. To the Iewes belongeth the Law of Moyses it doth not bind vs c. I wil not haue Moyses with his Law for he is the enemie of Christ our Lord yea 8) Tom. 3. Wittemb f. 6. 7. the Decalogue itself testifyeth that Moyses doth not oblige the Gentils And his owne Brethren alleadge him saying 9) Admonitio Christiana p. 211 And see Hospin concord discord f. 225. As France respecteth not the Law of the Saxons so let not Moyses be thrust vpon vs we in the New Testament wil neither see nor heare Moyses And as for the Ten CoÌ„mandments themselues Luther expresly teacheth that 10) Serm. de Mose the Ten Commandments pertaine not to Christians 11) In Conuiual Colloq cited by Aurifab cap. de lege And therefore saith he Let the Ten Commandments be altogether reiected and al Heresies wil presently cease For the Ten Commandments are as it were the fountain from whence al Heresies spring According to which Islebius Luther's owne scholler 12) Cent. 6. p. 311. 312. 310. taught as Osiander relateth that the Decalogue was not to be taught in the Church c. He dispersed in publick writings his Antinomian errour and drew into errour some learned Protestants He seemeth to haue taken occasion of this errour from the writings of Luther not rightly vnderstood And 13) Act. Colloq Aldeburg p. 94 being great in the Court he preached earnestly for the Antinomian libertie These Antinomians 14) Sleidan Hist l. 12. f. 262. receauing their first beginning from Islebius Luther's scholler publickly taught as other Protestants confesse 15)
Apostles withal and the Euangelists themselues euen after their receauing of the Holie-Ghost did write teach and defend seueral errours how can anie Christian build an infaillible sauing Faith vpon the Ghospels or other Apostolical writings How then can they be acerteyned of anie one true sentence of God's Word if the writers and deliuerers therof were not infallibly guided by the Holie-Ghost into al truth and so freed from al errour ignorance misprision or falshood And if some peraduenture except that these so Atheistical and Sacrilegious reproaches imposed vpon the sacred Scriptures and the Blessed Euangelists and Apostles be not the ordinarie opinions or practise of Protestants but peraduenture only of some few either ignorant or not endowed with the spirit the falshood and vanitie of this euasion is most apparent for who of forraine Protestants were euer reputed more learned or more enlightned with the spirit then Luther Caluin Beza Chemnitius Islebius Illiricus with the other Centurie-writers Castalio Zuinglius Musculus Brentius Andreas Friccius Adamus Francisci Bullinger and sundrie such others al of them highly esteemed of by their other Protestant Brethren Or who at home more honoured then Tyndal Iewel Goad Fotherbie Fulk Whitaker c. and yet al of those being indeed the primest men that euer they had do ioyntly conspire in this greatest impietie of censuring controuling correcting or reiecting some one part or other of the forenamed Canonical Scriptures or els of condemning the Euangelists and Apostles of seueral errours infirmities and sliding in matters of faith and Religion Which foule proceeding of so manie and so learned Protestants doth euidently according to D. Fulk's Rule conuince them to be perfect Hereticks For (88) Confut. of Purgatorie p. 214. whosoeuer sayth he denieth the authoritie of the Holy Scriptures thereby bewrayeth himself to be an Heretick Laus Deo B. V. Mariae FINIS A TABLE OF THE BOOKES AND CHAPTERS THE FIRST BOOKE WHERIN IS PROVED BY THE Confession of Protestants that the Catholick Roman Church hath continued Euer most Knowne and Vniuersal euen from Christs verie Time vntil the Date hereof THE antiquitie of the true Church and the force of the Argument drawne from the Authoritie thereof As also of these great necessitie of finding-out this true Church chap. 1. fol. 1. That the present Roman Church and Religion for the last thousand yeares after Christ haue stil continued most Knowne and Vniuersal throughout the Christian world chap. 2. fol. 4. A further confirmation of the vniuersal continuance of our Roman Church Religiō for these last thousand yeares is taken from the Confessed belief and profession of such Persons as liuing within the foresayd time were most Famous and Notorious in one respect or other chap. 3. fol. 8. That the faith of S. Gregorie S. Augustin and whereto England was by them conuerted was our Roman Catholick and not Protestant chap. 4. fol. 10. That the present Roman Church and Religion continued and flourished during the whole time of the Primitiue Church contayning the first six hundred yeares after Christ chap. 5. fol. 20. A further proof of the present Roman Religions Continuance from the Apostles time to these dayes is taken from the Christian belief of the Indians Armenians Grecians and Brittans al of them Conuerted in the dayes of the Apostles chap. 6. fol. 27. THE SECOND BOOKE Wherin is proued through al the chief Articles of Religion and that by the Confessions of Protestants that the same Faith which is now taught by the Roman Church was anciently taught by the Primitiue Church of Christ THat General Councels do truly represent the Church of Christ And of the Credit and Authoritie giuen by Protestants to the sayd Councels chap. 1. fol. 1. That the argument drawne from the Authoritie of the Primitiue Church of Christ and of her Doctours and Pastours is an Argument of force And for such approued by sundrie learned Protestants chap. 2. fol. 3. That the Fathers and Doctours of the Primitiue Church beleeued and taught that S. Peter was ordayned by Christ the Head of the Apostles and of the whole Church and that the Church was founded vpon S. Peter it is Confessed by Protestants themselues chap. 3. fol. 8. It is Confessed by Protestants that the Fathers of the Primitiue Church beleeued taught the Bishop of Rome to succeed S. Peter in the Primacie of the whole Church chap. 4. fol. 11. It is confessed by Protestants that the Primitiue Church of Christ beleeued the Bookes of Tobie Iudith Ester Sapientia Ecclesiasticus and two first of Machabees to be truly Canonical Scripture chap. 5. fol. 25. It is acknowledged by Protestants that the Fathers of the Primitiue Church beleeued taught our now Catholick Doctrine concerning Traditions chap. 6. fol. 30. It is Confessed by Protestants that according to the Fathers of the Primitiue Church the Sacraments do truly conferre Grace and Remission of sinnes And that they are in number seauen chap. 7. fol. 32. It is Confessed by Protestants that the Fathers of the Primitiue Church beleeued and taught the Real Presence of Christs true Bodie and Bloud in the Eucharist As also our further Catholick Doctrines of Transubstantiation Adoration Reseruation and the like chap. 8. fol. 35. Protestants confesse that the Primitiue Church of Christ beleeued taught practised the Sacrifice of the Masse as also that it is a Sacrifice according to the order of Melchisedech and truly Propitiatory for the liuing the dead chap. 9. fol. 41. It is acknowledged by Protestants that the Fathers of the Primitiue Church taught and beleeued the Power of Priests to Remission of Sinnes The necessitie of Auricular Confession The Imposition of Pennance and satisfaction to God thereby As also our Roman Doctrine of Pardons or Indulgences chap. 10. fol. 46. It is granted by Protestants that the Catholick Doctrine of Purgatorie of Prayer and Sacrifice for the dead was beleeued taught and practised by the Fathers of the Primitiue Church chap. 11. fol. 50. It is confessed by Protestants that the. Fathers of the Primitiue Church beleeued and taught our Catholick Doctrine of Christs Descending into Hel. chap. 12. fol. 55. It is confessed by Protestants that the Fathers of the Primitiue Church beleeued and practised our Catholick Doctrine of praying to Angels and Saints chap. 13. fol. 57. It is confessed by Protestants that the Fathers of the Primitiue Church allowed the vse of Christs Image and his Saincts placing them euen in churches and Reuerencing them chap. 14. fol. 60. It is acknowledged by Protestants that the Fathers of the Primitiue Church did specially honour reuerence the holie Relicks of Martyrs and other Saints carrying them in Processions and making Pilgrimages vnto them at which also manie Miracles were wrought chap. 15. fol. 63. It is confessed by Protestants that the holie Doctours of the Primitiue Church not only vsed the signe of the Crosse but likewise worshiped the same attributing great efficacie power and vertue thervnto chap.
meanes to preuent Schismes dissentions in the Primitiue Church when the Graces of God were far more abundant and eminent then now they are Nay if the Twelue were not like to agree except there had been one Chief among them for sayth Hierom among the Twelue one was therefore chosen that a Chief being appoynted occasion of dissention might be preuented How can they think that equalitie would keep al the Pastours in the world in peace and vnitie c. For in al Societies Authoritie which can not be where al are equal must procure vnitie and obedience In like sort the (4) Cen. 4. Col. 556. Centurists confesse that Optatus l. 2. cont Donat. writeth It can not be denyed but that thou knowest in the Cittie of Rome the Episcopal Chaire to haue been first bestowed vpon Peter in which Peter the Head of al the Apostles sate wherupon he is called Cephas In which one Chaire vnitie should be kept by al least the other Apostles should euerie one defend his owne So that he should be esteemed a Schismatick and sinner who should erect another against that singular Sea therfore there is one Chaire c. (5) Cent. 4. Col. 1100. They also reprehend him for that he extolleth ouermuch the Chaire of Peter and the Succession of the Roman Bishops And (6) In his Retentiue c. p. 248. D. Fulk chargeth Optatus with absurditie for saying of Peter He deserued to be preferred before al the Apostles and he alone receaued the Keyes of the kingdome of heauen to be communicated to the rest (7) Retentiue against Bristows Motiues p. 248. D. Fulk (7) Retentiue against Bristows Motiues p. 248. speaking of S. Leo and S. Gregorie Bishops of Rome confesseth that The mysterie of iniquitie hauing wrought in that Seate neer fiue or six hundred yeares before them so anciently before them did the Roman Sea in his opinion begin to be Papal and then greatly encreased they were so deceaued with long continuance of errour that they thought the dignitie of Peter was much more ouer the rest of his fellow Apostles then the holie Scriptures of God do allow Yea the (8) Cent. 3. col 85. Centurists recite and reproue Origen hom 17. in Lucam for calling Peter the Prince of the Apostles And D. Raynolds (9) In his Cōference p. 485. citeth S. Dionysius de diuinis nominibus c. 3. tearming Peter the chief and most ancient Top or Head of the Apostles (10) Apocalypsis in cap. 13. p. 343. This poynt is so euident in the Fathers that M. Brightman thinketh It hath its original from a corrupt Doctrine to wit the false boasted Authoritie of the Chaire of Peter wherof almost at euerie word the Roman Bishop braggeth and which the Ancient Saints Tertullian Cyprian and others extolled with immoderate prayses not knowing with what impietie they prepared the way c. But the Fathers further proceed teaching that the whole Church was built or founded vpon S. Peter To which purpose the Rhemists citing S. Gregorie D. Fulk answereth The (11) Ag. Rhem. Test in Math. 16.19 Authoritie of Gregorie c. being a Bishop of Rome himself and so neer the time of the open reuelation of Antichrist in the Romish Sea is partial in this case and therefore not to be heard And againe Leo (12) Ibid. vers 18. Bishop of Rome striuing for the dignitie of his Sea as his Predecessours Zosimus Boniface and Celestin had done before c. is no equal Iudge in this case The (13. Cent. 8. col 555. Centurists charge S. Hilarie that he speaketh incommodiously of Peter the Apostle that he lyeth vnder the building of the Church and is made the Foundation therof They (14) Cent. 4. col 557. see col 1250. likewise affirme that S. Hierom sayth incommodiously of Peter that our Lord built his Church vpon him And for the like Saying they (15) Cent. 4. col 558. and see col 1250. reproue Nazianzene Yea they (16) Cent. 3. col 84. charge Tertullian that not without errour he seemeth to think that the Keyes were committed only to Peter and that the Church was built vpon him And they (17) Cent. 3. col 84. confesse that Cyprian in manie places affirmeth the Church to be founded vpon Peter as l. 1. ep 3. l. 4. ep 9. c. And they (18) Cent. 3. col 85. charge Origen Tract 5. in Math. to say Peter by promise deserued to be made the foundation of the Church (19) Resp Ad Bellar. disp part 1. p. 277. Danaeus reproueth the Fathers in general for that they sayth he naughtily expounded of the Person of Peter that Saying of Christ Math. 16. Thou art Peter and vpon this Rock I wil build my Church (20) Instit l. 4. c. 6. sec 6. Caluin sayth The Church to be built vpon Peter because it is sayd vpon this Rock c. some of the Fathers haue so expounded but the whole Scripture gaynsayeth Yea the Fathers kept a yearely Festiual day in honour of S. Peters Sea or Chaire which poynt Bellarmine confirming by the testimonies of sundrie Fathers Danaeus (21) In Resp ad Bellar. Disp part 1. p. 275. 276. only answereth that the Fathers assertion therof was the Iudgements and Testimonies of the Church then corrupted and bewitched or made blind with this errour And wheras Anacletus ep 3. Leo ep 53. and Gregorie l. 6. ep 37. do al of them teach a special preheminence to be giuen euen to the Seas of Alexandria and Antioch before other Apostolical or Patriarchal Seas in respect of S. Peter who first founded them Danaeus (22) In Resp ad Bell. part 1. p 275. in his answer to Bellarmin obiecting them in steed of a better euasion barely writeth What he bringeth out of Anacletus Leo and Gregorie is in vaine seing they plead for themselues in their owne cause But D. Field (23) of the Church l. 5. c. 31. p. 162. ingenuously confesseth that There were in the beginning only Three Patriarcks to wit the Bishop of Rome Alexandria and Antioch The reason as some think why the Bishops of these Seas were preferred before others and made Patriarcks was in respect had to blessed S. Peter who was in sort before expressed in order and honour the First and Chiefest of the Apostles c. Al Churches are rightly called Apostolick but these more specially in which the Apostle Peter sate And in proof of this he alleageth Anacletus Leo and Gregorie before mentioned D. Fulk (24) In his Confut. of Papists quarrels c. p. 4. affirmeth in general that manie of the ancient Fathers were deceaued to think something more of Peters Prerogatiue and the Bishop of Romes dignitie then by the word of God was giuen to either of them Hence then we see that Catholicks defending S. Peter to haue been appoynted by Christ the Head of the Apostles and of the whole Church As also the Church
ridiculously that reason truth compelleth vs to dissent from them And agayne (55) In omnes Pauli Epist in Hebr. 7. p. 924. How much the more do I admire so manie old Doctours of the Church to be possessed with this opinion that they wil persist in the oblation of Bread wine for thus they say Christ is a Priest according to the order of Melchisedech but Melchisedech offred bread wine therefore the Sacrifice of Bread and wine agreeth to the Sacrifice of Christ D. Fulk (56) Against Hoskins c. p 100. admitteth that It is granted that Cyprian thought the bread wine brought forth by Melchisedech to be a figure of the Sacrament that herein also Melchisedech resembled the Priesthood of Christ And agayne (57) Against Heskins c. p. 99. And see against Rhem. Tâ—st in Hebr. c. 7. sec 8. f. 405. Whitak cont Dur. p. 818. 819. more in general I confesse that diuers of the old Fathers were of opinion that the bread wine which Melchisedech brought forth was sacrificed by him that it was a figure of the Sacrament which they improperly cal a Sacrifice (58) De opificio Missae l. 1. p 28. It is not lawful sayth Chrastouius for Christian Pastours to cast away the consent harmonie of Interpretation that both for the neernes of the Apostolical Age as also for the singular agreement of al which is had in al places c. Al as it were conspiring that the Sacred oblation of Melchisedech is proposed that not only it may be thought to be offred to the Souldiers of Abraham but also an vnbloudy Sacrifice to God The ancient Iewes also were so agreable with vs herein that the Protestant Bibliander doubteth not to affirme that (59) De S. Trinitate l. 2. p. 89. with the Ancient Iewes it was a most receiued opinion that at the câ—ming of the blessed Messias al Legal Sacrifices were to cease only the Sacrifice Thoda of thankes-giuing to be celebrated c. and that to be done with bread wine (60) In his Defence c. p 473. See Parker against Symbolizing part 1. c. 2. p. 103. euen as Melchisedech King of Salem Priest c. brought forth bread and wine The Fathers also likewise much vrge the necessitie of mingling water with wine in the Chalice before oblation and consecration D. Whitguift affirmeth that Cyprian was greatly ouerseen in making it a matter so necessarie in Celebration of the Lords Supper to haue water mingled with wine which was at that time no doubt Common â—o more then to him Carthwright (61) In Whitguift Def. p. 525. acknowledgeth that In the mingling of water with wine a necessitie great mysterie was placed as may appeare both by Iustin Martyr Cyprian And M Iewel (62) In his Reply p. 34. See Schultetus in Med. Theo. p. â—70 also confesseth that Indeed S. Cyprian certain old Fathers spake of it force it much wheras not one new Protestant doth either allow or practise the same But D. Morton (63) Prot. Appeal l. 2. p. 142. is content to refer this new Romish Custome vnto Pope Alexander the supposed Authour thereof sayth he But may not D. Morton blush to cal it New Romish Custome and yet referre it to Pope Alexander who liued almost within a Hundred yeares after Christ Here then we may conclude that our Sacrifice of the Masse was not only allowed and vsed by the Fathers of the Primitiue Church but withal acknowledged by them to be truly a Sacrifice Propitiatorie for the remission of sinnes As also that the same was truly represented by the Sacrifice of Melchisedech offring bread and wine Now the Fathers confessed and reproued by Protestants for our forsayd doctrine of Masse are S. Gregorie Gregorie Turonensis Pelagius Symmachus Leo Austin Ambrose Nyssene Cyril Arnobius Athanasius Cyprian Origen Tertulian Ireneus Alexander Clemens Anacletus Ignatius As also the Councels of Ephesus Antioch the Second and Fourth of Carthage of Constantinople of Arles the Fathers in general The Protestants acknowledging and reprouing the forsayd Fathers are the Centurists Caluin Melancthon Carion Szegedine Hospinian Chitraeus Musculus Marcus Pelargus Osiander Chrastouius Chemnitius Sebastianus Francus Zepperus Schultetus Fox Whitaker Symonides Ascham Fulk Field Whiteguift Iewel Morton It is acknowledged by Protestants that the Fathers of the Primitiue Church taught and beleeued the Power of Priests to Remission of Sinnes The necessitie of Auricular Confession The Imposition of Pennance and satisfaction to God thereby As also our Roman Doctrine of Pardons or Indulgences CHAPTER X. COncerning the Sacrament of Pennance the (1) Bellarm. de Paenitent l. 1. c. 10. l. 3. c. 2. l. 4. c. 5. Catholick Church teacheth First That God hath giuen truly and properly to Bishops and Priests as his instruments Power and Authoritie to forgiue sinne Secondly That sinners are bound to confesse their Sinnes in particular to Priests Thirdly That the sayd Priests are to impose Pennance or punishment vpon the Penitent after Confession of his Sinnes and that the Penitent in satisfaction is to performe the same by Prayer Fasting Almes-deeds and the like Now the Protestant Church hauing no true Subsistence but being a mere Negation or denial of true Religion directly (2) Instit l. 4 c. 19 §. 15 B za in CoÌ„f. fiâ—â—ci 7. art 11. denyeth al the foresayd Poynts taught and practised by the Roman Church What the Primitiue Church beleeued and practised herein I wholy referre to the plentiful Confe sions and testimonies euen of Protestant Writers And to begin with S. Gregorie Osiander (3) Cent. 6. p. 288. chargeth him that he teacheth vntruly of Pennance And the Centurists (4) Cent. 6. c. 10 p. 748. reprehend him for his opinion of Confession c. Pennance Satisfaction D. Morton acknowledgeth that S. Gregorie (5) Prot Appeale l. 1 sec 23. p. 26. indeed requireth that after man hath confessed his sinnes he should take reuenge of himself by penitential exercises c. S. Hierome tearming Pennance The second Table after Shipwrack Caluin (6) Inst l 4. c. 19. §. 17. reproueth him saying But it is the Saying of Hierome whose soeuer it is it can not be denyed but that it is plainly impious if it be expounded in their sense And as concerning the Power and Authoritie of Priests to remit sinne the denyal therof was reprehended in Acesius by the Emperour Constantin for the Centurists (7) Cent. â— col 653. report that Acesius his opinion was that al men should be exhorted to Pennance but the hope of remission of sinnes should be expected not from Priests but from God But when Acesius had sayd these things the Emperour added â— Acesius set a Ladder and clime alone to heauen This Historie is likewise confessed by Osiander (8) Cent. 4. p. 119. Chemnitius (9) Exam. part â— p. 188 part 2. p.
seemeth to shew in the 9. Chapter howsoeuer whether his wife dyed or he left her for the Ghospel of his owne accord it is certaine that then he liued as a widower who before was marryed Peter Martyr (47) De Coelâ—bata votis p 54. acknowledgeth that S. Ambrose and Epiphanius deriue professed chastitie from the Institution of S. Paul And D. Fulk (48) Against Rhem Test in 1. Tim. 5. fol 381. Danaeus coÌ„t Bellarm. 1. partis aleâ—ra parte p. 1811 Maior in ep 1. ad Tim. in c. 5 fol. 249. Danaeus and Georgius Maior doe al of them grant that by the first faith mentioned 1. Tim. 5 11.12 most of the ancient Fathers do expound the vow or promise of Continencie Hamelmannus (49) De Traditionious Ap st o. 460 and see col 254. Aud Bugchagius in Ionam c. 3. auoucheth that after the death of Iohn the Apostle who by the Fathers is much commended and esteemed for his Virginitie presently began reuolting from the Faith c. forbidding of Mariages and meates vowes single life c. D. Fulk speaking of our B. Ladies vowing Chastitie opposeth himself to S. Austin S. Gregorie Nyssen therein saying (50) Ag. Rhem. Test in Luc. 1. sec 13 Though S. Austin gather she vowed Virginitie yet it followeth not c. And although Gregorie Nyssen be of Austins opinion c. But D. Fulks Non sequitur wil neuer counterpoyse the contrarie Collection of so worthie Fathers But to speake of the ancientest Ages and Fathers in general Peter Martyr (53) De Caelib votis p. 477. thinketh that forthwith after the Apostles times too much was attributed to single life And Caluin (54) Instit l. 4. c. 13. sec 17. speaking hereof sayth This say they was obserued from furthest memorie that those who would dedicate themselues wholy to the Lord should bind themselues to the vow of contineÌ„cie I confesse this custome was anciently receaued but I do not grant that Age to be free from al vice In like sort answereth M. Wotton (55) In his Def. of M. Perkins p 491. saying But the Fathers are not for vs what then Is nothing true that cannot be confirmed by their testimonies c. Indeed it is one of the blemishes of the ancieÌ„t Writers that they were too highly conceited of single life c. Therefore it is not to be looked for that Antiquitie should afford vs Protestants anie testimonie herein against the practise and iudgement of those dayes And wheras Bellarmin to this purpose produceth manie Sayings of the ancient Fathers Danaeus (56) In 1. partis a t. parte p. 1034 his best answer thereto is that those Fathers thought so being blinded with the cloud and enchantment of that errour of the lawful Vow of perpetual continencie So likewise M. Iewel (57) In his Def of the Apol p 164. speaking concerning the Fathers opinion against Mariage of Priests sayth Here I grant Mr Harding is like to find some good aduantage as hauing vndoubtedly a great number of holie Fathers on his side Adde lastly that the Fathers herein were so firme and constant as that D. Fulk (58) In his Answer to a Counterf Cath p. 45. acknowledgeth that Iouinian was condemned by them for that among other things He taught that such as could not contayne though they had vowed virginitie should neuerthelesse be maryed So euident confessed it is that the vowes of Chastitie and the single life of the Clergie was allowed and practised in the purest times of the Primitiue Church Now wheras it is Law decreed and obserued by the Roman Church that Bigamus or he that hath been twice maryed is not to be admitted to holie Orders without special dispensation therin M. Bale (59) In Act. Rom p. 44. 45 46. 47. acknowledgeth that S Gregorie the Great prohibited that he that was Bigamus should be made Priest And D Fulk (60) In his Retentiue against Bristow c. p. 164. granteth that He who had had two wiues could not be a Priest in Hieroms time And the Centurists (61) Cent. 4. col 847 And see col 303. 877. 1293. And see Cent 3. col 85 86. Carthwright in his 2. Reply part 1. p. 509. speaking of that Fourth Age affirme that it was decreed that ordination to Priesthood should not be bestowed of those who were Bigami But Beza (62) De Polig p. 211. reprehendeth herein ancient Origen saying Origen were ancient then al Councels excepting that of the Apostles writeth in Luc. hom â—7 that not only fornication but also Mariage doth hinder from Ecclesiastical dignities to wit second Mariage c. But here I affirme that Origen is to be altogether reiected as contradicting the doctrine of the Apostles Yea he further (63) In nou Test in 1. Tim 5.9 p. 333. sayth of Bigamie In the case of widowes If any shal oppose to me the authoritie of certain Fathers I appeal to the Word of God For which his appeale he is reproued by (64) In his Suruey p. 220. D. Bancroft And the Centurists (65) Cent 3. col 85. 86. doe alledge both Tertullian and Origen against Bigamie in the Clergie The Particulars then concerning Vowes thus confessedly taught by the Fathers of the Primitiue Church are First that Vowes of things not coÌ„manded but indifferent as of perpetual Chastitie are lawful commendable Secondly that though for some time as then it was permitted that such as were maryed before their taking of holie Orders should continue and liue with their wiues in the state of wedlocke yet was the same afterwards euen during the precinct of those purest times prohibited and disallowed But neuer in anie time or by anie Father was it allowed to the Clergie to contract Mariage after Orders taken a thing now so ordinarie with our Protestant Ministers Thirdly it was neuer suffred that those who were Bigami or twice maryed should afterwards be admitted to holie Orders without particular dispensation therin Now the Fathers produced reproued by Protestants for these forsayd Catholick Articles are S. Gregorie Austin Ambrose Hierom Leo Innocentius Chrysostom Epiphanius Siricius Socrates Sozomene Eusebius Basil Cyprian Nyssen Origen Tertulian Clement Ignatius S. Paule the Apostle with the B. Virgin Marie S. Pauls widowes As likewise the Councels of Neece of Arles of Neocesaraea of Eliberis of Toledo of Carthage and seueral others The Protestants accusing the forsayd Fathers are Luther the Centurists Carion Chemnitius Molitor Danaus Osiander Gaunius Crispinus Hospinian Beza Schulterus Peter Martyr Maior Hamelmannus Caluin Symondes Bale Humfrey Carthwright Fulk Bancroft Wotton Parkins Morton Field Whitaker and Iewel It is confessed by Protestants that the Fathers of the Primitiue Church allowed and practised the Religious State of Monastical life And that manie Christians of those purest times both men and women did strictly obserue professe the same CHAPTER XVIII BVT now to come to that which to our Protestants
good But yet further they doubt not to affirme the argument or consequence vrged from the (22) Puricans Answ to D. Downham's ser p. 92. receiued opinion in the Church of God euen from the Apostles time vnto our Age to be lyable to iust exception So that though the Fathers of al Ages vp to the Apostles themselues do al of them ioyntly agree with our Roman faith in their Expositions and deliuerie of the sense of Scripture yet may one illuminated Protestant except contemne and reiect them al as not hauing the Spirit nor interpreting according to the Analogie of the Protestant faith But O most miserable and lamentable times O insolencie most impious and incredible What the receiued opinion in the Church of God euen from the Apostles time vnto our Age to be lyable to iust exception The Fathers of al Ages during 1600. yeares of al Countries though most distant in place and different in language and other conditions of nature and gouerment al of them to conspire in one opinion of truth doctrine and yet al of them so fowly and so grosly to erre as that a new-found Protestant is able to discouer it This this may a Protestant often declaime but no man of iudgement can possibly beleeue him Yea our Protestants are so far out of loue and liking with the Fathers as they painfully labour to make the world to think that their Cōmentaries books and beleef were directly contrarie to the Sacred Scriptures and therefore to these they wil euer appeale from the writings of men Captaine Luther 23) L. contra Henricum 8. Regem Angliae saith Against the sayings of Fathers Men Angels and Diuels I place not ancient consent nor the multitude of men but the Ghospel being the Word of One Eternal Maiestie which themselues are enforced to allow Here I stand here I sit here I abide here I glorie here I triumph here I insult ouer Papists Thomists Henricians and al the Gates of Hel much more ouer the sayings of men though neuer so holy and deceauable custome The word of God is aboue al Diuine Maiestie maketh with me so that I care not if a thousand Augustins a thousand Tertullians a thousand Henries or Papistical Churches should stand against me God can not erre and deceiue Austin and Cyprian as also al the Elect may and haue erred My Doctrines shal stand the Pope shal fal Here we haue a man of liuelie Faith but yet heare him further 24) In Comment in ep ad Gal. No other doctrine is to be deliuered or heard in the Church then the pure word of God that is the Sacred Scripture Let other Doctours and Auditours be accursed with their learning but here wanteth Charitie Neither is Luther in this alone for Zuinglius likewise declaymeth 25( In Explanat Artic. 64. Presently thou beginnest to cry Fathers Fathers the Fathers haue so deliuered But I do not ask of thee Fathers or Mothers but I require the word of God In like sort Peter Martyr 26) De Votis p. 462. As concerning the Fathers iudgement because our Aduersaries the Papists are accustomed in this and other Controuersies alwayes to prouoke to them I therfore declare that to me it seemeth not the part of a Christian to prouoke to the iudgements of men from the Scriptures of God Yea saith he 27) Ibid. p. 476. As long as we rest in Councels or Fathers we shal alwayes be conuersant in the same errours And the like is taught by Summerus saying 28) Contr. Carolum l. 1. c. 1. Antiquitie by which they affirme we are condemned is of no force for if they speak of a right beleeuing Antiquitie by which we vnderstand Christ and his Apostles the matter itself cryeth that it is for vs but if they wil vnderstand the same of the authoritie of the Fathers we do not take it il that the word of God is condemned by them Agreably heerunto writeth D. Whitaker 29) Contra Sander p. 92. If you argue from the testimonies of men be they neuer so learned and ancient we yeeld no more to their words in cause of Religion then we perceiue to be agreable to Scripture Neither think your self to haue proued any thing though you bring against vs the whole swarme of Fathers except that which they say be iustifyed not by the voice of men but by God himself And againe 30) Answ to Camp Reas 2. p. 70. And see the like in Abbots in his Answ to His. Reas 10 p. 371. We are not the Seruants of the Fathers but the Sonnes when they prescribe vs anie thing out of the Law and Diuine authoritie we obey them as our parents if they enioyne anie thing against the voice of the heauenlie truth we haue learned not to hearken to them but to God You Papists as vassals and base seruants receiue whatsoeuer the Fathers say without iudgement or reason being affrayd as I think either of the whip or the halter if euerie thing they speake be not Ghospel with you Againe 31) Against Sanders de Antichristo p. 21. We repose no such confidence in the Fathers writings that we take any certain proof of our Protestant Religion from them because we place al our Faith and Religion not in humane but in Diuine authoritie If therefore thou bring vs what some one Father hath thought or what the Fathers vniuersally altogeather haue deliuered the same except it be approued by testimonies of Scriptures it auaileth nothing it gaineth nothing it conuinceth nothing for the Fathers are such witnesses as they also haue need of the Scriptures to be their witnesses If deceiued by errour they giue forth their testimonie disagreeging from Scriptures albeit they may be pardoned erring for want of wisdome we can not be pardoned being green-witted Protestants if because they erred we also wil erre with them Thus doth this Protestant Doctour defend his reiecting the ancient Fathers as writing contrarie to the Scriptures and vpbrayd vs Catholicks for our due estimation of the same and so do Protestants stil labour in derogation of the Fathers to oppose the Sacred Scriptures and holie Fathers as contrarie one to another But al in vaine for who euer more duly reuerenced or more carefully preserued those heauenlie writings then the ancient Bishops and Doctours of the Primitiue Church Who more truly translated them to their greatest paines for the good of al succeeding Ages then those learnedst Fathers Who in searching the deepest difficulties so frequent in them did more submit and captiuate their iudgements then these holy Fathers Who euer more pressed Hereticks with the weight of God's word then those zealous Fathers Who euer writ more large or more learned Commentaries and explanations therof then the aged Fathers And is it then possible that the sayd Fathers should so directly contradict the Sacred Scriptures as our Protestants pretend But this so desperate so vnworthie dealing against the Fathers doth cleerly conuince that
is so copiously preached by vs that truly in the Apostles time it was not so cleare And seing 48) Tom 2. lib. Cont. Reg. Angliae f. 344. God's word is aboue al the Diuine Maiestie maketh for me So that I passe not if 100. Austins 1000. Cyprians 1000. King Harrie 's Churches stood against me Wherefore 49) Lib. de Seruo Arb. And see Cnoglerus his Symbolatria p. 152. Cast you off what armour the ancient Orthodoxal Fathers shal afford or the schooles of Diuines the authoritie of Councels Bishops the consent of so manie Ages of al Christian People we receiue nothing but Scriptures but yet so that the infallible authoritie of interpreting is only in vs what we expound that the Holy-Ghost thinketh what others though great though manie bring it commeth from the spirit of Sathan and a mind distracted Yea the Pope 50) L. aduersus Papatum Romae à Satana fundatum f. 1. knoweth saith Luther that by the singular guift and bountie of God I am more learned in the Scriptures then himself and al his Asses But if Luther himself doth so fully mouthe his owne prayses and deserts we may presume his disciples and followers are not sparing in the like And so indeed writeth Alberus 51) Contra Carolostadianos l. 7. I doubt not but that if Austin were now liuing he would not be ashamed to professe himself Martin Luther's Scholler But Musculus lasheth far further for 52) Praef. in Libellum Ger. de Diaboli Tyramide since the Apostles times saith he there liued not in the world a greater then Luther And it may be sayd that God powred al his guifts vpon this only man and that there is as great difference betwixt the ancient Doctours and Luther as betwixt the light of the Sunne and of the Moone Neither is it to be doubted but that the ancient Fathers euen those that are chief and best among them as Hilarie and Austin if they had liued and taught in the same time with Luther would without blushing haue carried the lanterne before him as his Schollers or Ministers And another professeth that 53) In Hos in Hist Sacra part alt f. 346. He preferreth one leaf in Luther before the writings of al Fathers So that if we beleeue either Luther or his Schollers not only Austin and Hilarie and Ambrose but euen al the Fathers since the Apostles times must giue place to Luther in regard of his profoundest knowledge and learning But not only Luther himself thus far excelleth the ancient Fathers but in his opinion the onlie 54) In Col. mensa c. de Patribus Eccl. Apologie of Philip Melancthon doth far excel al the Doctours of the Church and exceed euen Austin himself Beza in like sort affirmeth 55) Praef. in nouum Testament dicat Principi Condiensi Caluin to haue far exceeded al the ancient and later writers in interpreting of the Scriptures wth varietie of words and allegation of reasons Yea saith he 56) Epist Theol. ep 1 p. 5. I haue been accustomed to say and not without cause as I take it that whilst I compare those verie times next the Apostles with our times they had then more conscience lesse knowledge And on the other side we haue now more knowledge and lesse conscience This is my opinion c. Agreably herevnto saith D. Whiteguift in his 57) Defence c. p. 472. Brief Comparison between the Protestants Bishops of our time and the Bishops of Primitiue Church The doctrine taught and professed by our Bishops at this day is much more perfect and sound then it commonly was in anie Age after the Apostles times 58) Ibid. p. 473. Surely you are not able to reckon in anie Age since the Apostles time anie company of Bishops that taught and held so perfect and sound doctrine in al poynts as â—he Bishops of England do at this time Yea in the truth of doctrine our Bishops be not only comparable with the old Bishops but in many degrees to be preferred before them In like sort saith Zanchius 59) De Sacra Scriptura p. 411. Christ hath now giuen to vs more excellent Interpreters then euer heretofore stnce the Apostles Yea saith M. Iacob 60) Defence of Treatise of Christ's sufferings p. 146. And see the Answ to Downham's sermon p. 20. this is the profit that comes by ordinarie flanting with the Fathers c. if in this case we were to looke after anie man surely we haue more cause to regard our late faithful teachers rather then those of old who being equal with the best of them in anie of the excellent graces of God's Spirit c. By which we may see the smal account made by Protestants of ancient Doctours not blushing thus to equal yea much to preferre their owne latest Writers before al the Fathers since the Apostles times But what should I vrge thus much their dislike disclaiming and disgracing of ancient Fathers when they spare not to reiect and contemne the authoritie of al Councels though neuer so general neuer so ancient And first doth not Luther affirme in general 61) In Asser Articulorum per Leonem X. damnat Art 29. That the way is made to vs Protestants of weakning the authoritie of Councels and of freely contradicting their decrees and of iudging their Acts and of confessing confidently whatsoeuer seemeth true to Protestants whether it be approued or reproued by anie Councel Doth not Beza affirme that 62) Praef. in nouum Testam ad Princ. C ndiens euen in the best times the ambition ignorance and lewdnes of Bishops was such that the verie blind may easily perceaue how that Sathan was president in their assemblies or Councels Doth not D. Humfrey disclaime from the Councels celebrated in the first 600. years saying 63) De vita Iuelli p. 212. What concerneth it vs what the false Synods of Bishops as then shal ordayne And doth not M. Carthwright reiect as erroneous euen the first Nycene Councel saying 64) 2. Reply part 1. p. 509. We haue good cause to hould for suspect whatsoeuer either in gouernment or doctrine those times left vnto vs not confirmed by substantial proofs out of the Word c. This appeareth in the first Councel of Nyce where the most errours decreed vpon c. besides the vngodlie custome which may appeare to haue occupyed almost al the Churches touching the forbidding of the second Marriage of Ministers before that Councel And againe 65) Ibid. p. 484. In the same Councel appeareth that to those chosen to the Ministerie vnmarried it was not lawful to take anie wife afterwards c. Paphnutius sheweth that not only this was before that Councel but was an ancient Tradition in the Church in which both himself and the whole Councel rested c. If the ancient Tradition of the Church saith Cartwright cannot authorize this neither can ancient custome authorize the other to wit of Metropolitans Luther
stileth the Canons of the sayd Councel of Nyce 66) Luther l. de Cōcilijs part 1. p. 92. hay straw wood stubble and demandeth whether the the Holie-Ghost hath nothing els to do in Councels but to bind and burden his Ministers with impossible dangerous and vnnecessarie lawes So absurd was the Councel of Nyce in Luther's iudgement affirming further That more light is brought to a Christian by that Catechisme which children do learne then by al the Councels Caluin calleth the Fathers of the sayd Councel of Nyce 67) Lib. de vera Eccl. reformat opuscul p. 486. And Inst l. 4. c. 9. 3. 10. Phanaticos that is men Phanatical or deluded by the Diuel and withal giueth leaue to euerie priuate man to examin the decrees of Councels by the Scriptures saying 68) Inst l. 4. c. 9. §. 8. 9 11. Let no names or authorities of Councels Pastours Bishops hinder vs but that we may examin al Spirits of al men by the rule of the Word of God And againe 69 Ib. 3. 14. I deny that Interpretation of Scripture to be alwayes true and certain which is receaued by the consent of a Councel But I cannot heer but obserue the strange giddines of this primest protestant Caluin who directly contrarie to his former Assertions writeth thus 70) Inst l. 4. c. 9. §. 8. Those ancient Synods as Nyce Constantinople the first of Ephesus of Chalcedon and the like which were assembled for the confuting of errours we do willingly embrace and reuerence as Sacred for as much as concerneth doctrines of Faith For they containe nothing but the pure and natiue Interpretation of Scripture which the holie Fathers with spiritual wisdome applyed to the vanquishing of the Enemies of Religion which then appeared But to leaue him thus fighting with himself and to come to the Ministers of the Church of Scotland 71) In the end of the Harmonie of Coafes p. 19. And see the sayd Harmonie sect 1. p. 14. Without iust examination we do not receaue say they whatsoeuer is obtruded vnto men vnder the name of a General Councel for plaine it is that as the men assembled were men so haue some of them manifestly erred and that in matters of great weight and importance So far then as the Councel proueth the determination and commandment that it giueth by the plaine word of God so soone do we reuerence and embrace the same Heervnto also do accord our English Protestants teaching that 72) Articles of faith agreed vpon in the Conuocations of A. 1562. 1604. art 21. General Councels c. may erre and sometimes haue erred euen in things pertaining vnto God Wherefore things ordained by them as necessarie to saluation haue neither strength nor authoritie vnles it may be declared that they be taken out of holie Scriptures So vnwilling or rather truly fearful are Protestants to appeale vnto General Councels for the decision of Controuersies But D. Luther proceedeth further seriously expecting exacting that al Councels shal be subiect to his Censure determination 73) Tom. 2. wittenberg f. 375. The Rectours of Churches saith he the Pastours of Christ's sheep haue indeed power to teach but the sheep ought to iudge whether they propose the voice of Christ or of strangers c. Wherefore let the Pope Bishops Councels c. decree appoynt and ordaine what they wil we wil not hinder them but we who are the sheep of Christ and heare his voice wil haue it in our power to iudge whether they propose things true and agreable to the voice of our Pastour or no and they are to yeald subscribe and obey our Censure and Sentence Now if Councels be subiect to the Censure of Luther or anie other such rotten sheep then lesse is the authoritie of Councels then of Luther himself then the which nothing can be spoken more absurd or ridiculous In like sort saith Peter Martyr in general 74) De votis p. 476. As long as we rest in Councels Fathers we shal be euer conuersant in the same errours Yea saith M. Carthwright 75) In whiteg Tract 2. p. 95. If this be a sufficient proof to say such a Councel decreed such a Doctour sayd so there is almost nothing so true but I can impugne nothing so false but I can make true And wel assured I am that by their meanes the principal grounds of our Protestant Faith may beshabken But to conclude 76) De Concil contr Bellar. 9. 6. Fulk Answ to a Counterf Cath p. 89. 90. Will. Syno 92. D Whitaker D. Fulk D. Willet and most other Protestants teaching that General Councels may erre in Faith and manners it is no wonder though they reiect their authoritie but yet it euidently conuinceth that in matters of Faith and Religion Protestants dare not relye and submit themselues to the decrees and definitions either of ancient or moderne General Councels So that though Ministers in their Pulpits where none wil gainsay them do florish and flaunt forth the ancient Fathers prayses approue their authoritie applaud them as Protestants and appeale to those primitiue Doctours as Maisters and Patrons of their errours yet when they are pressed by Catholicks with cleerest euidence of their particular writings sayings and practise and with the answerable acknowledgements of the learned Protestants then their tone is changed bitterly exclaming that The argument drawne from Antiquitie is a Popish argument that To appeale to the Primitiue Church is to iniurie the Protestant Congregation That for Protestants to fil their books with the authorities of Fathers is dangerous and to be eschued That in al Councels Fathers and Stories since the Apostles the print of the Popes feet is to be found That the Papists strongest towers are in the testimonies of the Doctours That the Fathers were blind and ignorant in the Scriptures That they were certainly damned for their Papistical opinions vnles they repented That their interpretations of Scripture were aduantagious to Papists and preiudicial to Protestants That their books and Commentaries were contrarie to Scripture Yea that the Fathers did contradict one another and often one and the same himself That Luther and sundrie other Protestants are much to be preferred for learning before S. Austin S. Ambrose and al the other Fathers That the Doctrine now taught by the Bishops of England is much more sound then euer was taught by any Bishops since the Apostles and therefore that our Bishops are in manie degrees to be preferred before them that euen in the best times Sathan was president in Councels And lastly that al decrees of Popes Bishops and Councels are to yeeld and obey the Censure of Luther Dot not al this most strongly confirme that in the verie harts and consciences of Protestants themselues the ancient Fathers were Roman Catholicks and most aduerse to Protestants and that therefore and only therefore they are thus reiected contemned disgraced and wronged by them euen by Luther Caluin Beza
Confess Mansfelden Ministror tit de Antinomis f. 89. 90. that the Law of God is not worthie to be called the Word of God If thou beest a where a whore-mungar if an adulterer or otherwise a sinner beleeue and thou walkest in the way of saluation When thou art drowned in sinne euen to the bottom if thou beleeuest thou art in the midst of happines Al that busie themselues about Moyses that is the Ten Commandments belong to the Diuel to the gallowes with Moyses In like sort Illiricus the chief of the Centurie-writers and whom M. Bel termeth 16) Regim of the Chur. p. 28. a very famous Writer and most worthie defender of the Christian truth this so famous defender of Protestancie is accused of these Antinomian errours by his owne Brethren saying 17) Act. Colloq Aldeburg p. 94. After the death of Luther when Flaccus Illiricus and manie other factious Companions of his had begun againe those Antinomian filthinesses c. And with no litle applause of the multitude c. had dispersed them abroad c. Yea D. Hutter publick Professour at Wittenberg addeth yet further saying 18) Concord explicat Art 5. c. 1. p. 478. And see Art 6. p. 535. 536. c. But neither did that errour rest in a narrow compasse but presently getting strength crept abroad c. In so much that Melancthon in the last Edition of his CoÌ„mon Places hath plainly renewed the same errour c. And An. 59. the later Antinomians who named themselues the Schole-men of Wittemberg publikly and before the whole Church vndertook the Defence of that errour Yea that Antinomian furie encreased so much that also An. 70. in this our Wittemberg some Diuines for the obtaining of the highest degree in Diuinitie c. propounded publickly that errour and endeauoured to defend it as it appeareth by the 38 and 39. Theses of that Disputation Some Protestants also teach that 19) Act. Mon. p. 1335. And see the Parable of the wicked Mammon wherof Tindal is sayd to be Authour p. 573. 486. the Commandments were giuen vs not to do them but to know our damnation and to cal for mercie to God And D. Whitaker sayth accordingly 20) Cont. Camp par 8. p. 153. Christ proposeth to vs another more easie condition Beleeue and thou shalt be saued By this new league the old one is taken away that whosoeuer beleeueth the Ghospel is freed from the condition of the Law For those who beleeue are not vnder the Law but vnder Grace what need I say more Christians are freed from the curse of the Law not from the obedience But if Christians be deliuered from the condition curse of the Law how can they be bound to the obedience of it Or what can the breach therof be preiudicial vnto them So that if Catholicks do at anie time vrge against Protestants the authoritie of Moyses or of his Law or the Ten Commandments sundrie of the chiefest Protestants haue alreadie answered I wil not heare Moyses he is Christ's enemie he is the maister of hangmen Away with Moyses therefore to the gallowes His Law is a fable leading to Acheron or the pit of Hel. The Ten Commondments do not pertaine to Christians they are the fountain of al Heresies and are not to be taught in Churches The Law of God is not worthie to be called the Word of God Yea if thou be an adulterer or drowned in the depth of sinne do but beleeue and thou art in the midst of felicitie And so al Arguments drawne from Moyses or his writings are of no force or esteeme in the iudgement of Protestants But to proceed to other Scriptures Luther further affirmeth that 21) In Ser. Conuin tit de Patriar Prophet he doth not beleeue al things to be so done as they are related in the booke of Iob. And againe 22) Tit. de libr. Vet. Nou. Testa the booke of Iob is as it were the argument of a fable to propose the example of Patience And when Luther had read ouer the booke of Ecclesiastes his graue censure was 23) Pet. Robenstock lib. 2. Colloq Lat. Luâ—her c. de Vet. Test This Booke is not perfect manie things are taken away it wanteth bootes and spurres that is it hath no perfect sentence It rideth vpon a long reed as I when I was a Monk was wont to do in the Monasterie And as for the Canticles which our English Protestants terme the Ballet of Ballets of Salomon 24) Bible of An. 1595. Luther was of opinion that they imported no further but only a familiar 25) In Exordio fuarum Annot. in Cant. conference between Salomon and the Common-wealth of the Iewes inuiting Salomon to raigne ouer her But Castalio proceedeth further iudging this Book to be only 26) In his Laâ— Transl of the Bib. Praef. in Cant. the first Edit And see Beza in Praef. ante Comment Calu. in Iosue a loue-communication betweene Salomon and his Mistris Sulamitha for which he citeth those words Returne Sulamitha returne and let vs looke vpon thee adding also in the Margent Sulamitha the Mistris and spouse of Salomon And Beza testifyeth of Castalio that 27) In Vita Caluini And see Vvhitak poorest euasion hereof cont Dur. l. 1. p. 121. he commanded the Canticles of Salomon to be thrust out of the Canon as an impure and obscene Song reuiling with bitter reproches such Ministers as resisted him therin Yea this so impious reiecting this parcel of Canonical Scripture was so grosse in Castalio a Caluinist that now since in the later Editions of his Bible at Basil the Protestant publishers therof haue for verie shame altered it But now to passe from the Old Testament to the New and to omit that Caluin 28) Instit l. 2. c. 16. §. 18. resteth doubtful whether the Creed commonly called the Apostles Creed was made and published by the Apostles or no and consequently whether it be of infallible authoritie and beleef He further chargeth S. Mathew's Ghospel with errour saying 29) In Matth. 27. vers 9. Surely the name of Hieremie to be erroneously put for Zacharie the thing itself sheweth because no such thing is read in Hieremie but that other place vnlesse it be dexterously applyed may seeme to be drawne into a contrarie sense c. And wheras Math. 20.16 Christ sayth Manie are called but few are chosen Caluin reiecteth it saying 30) Harm in Math. 20.16 Minimè quadrat quae à quibusdam inseritur sententia Multi vocati pauci electi That sentence Manie are called few are chosen which by some is inserted doth not agree Which words doth not agree he expoundeth in French is nothing to the purpose M. Iewel likewise affirmeth 31) Def. of the Apol. p. 361. that S. Mark alleadgeth Abiathar for Abimelech and S. Mathew Hieremias for Zacharius 32) Bible of An. 1592. Our English Church Math. 6. receaues as Canonical scripture these
words for thine is the kingdome the power and the glorie which they adde at the end of our Lord's Prayer And yet Bullenger heerin reproueth them saying 33) Decad. 5. serm 5. Their rashnes was to be reproued who durst presume to peece on their owne to the Lord's Prayer Clebitius a Caluinist impugneth S. Luke's report in the Historie of our Sauiour's Passion saying 34) Victoria Veritatis Ruina Papatus Saxon. arg 5. Mark and Mathew deliuer the contrarie therefore to Mathew and Mark being two witnesses more credit is to be giuen then to one Luke who was not present at the last super as Mathew was Beza 35) Beza in his Trans And the Engl. Bib. of An. 1595. and our English Protestants seeme to confesse that S. Luke c. 3.36 in his Ghospel erred in making Arphaxad the father of Cainan and Cainan of Sale wheras in the Book of Genesis Arphaxad is sayd to haue been the Father of Sale for if S. Luke did not erre why do they notwithstanding that al Copies both Latin and Greek in this agree thrust out of the Text these words who was of Cainan and so make S. Luke to say that Arphaxad was the father of Sale And wheras Christ sayd Luke 6.40 The disciple is not aboue his maister Caluin affirmeth 36) Harm in Luc. 6.40 that Luke in the 6. Chapter relateth this sentence without connexion vttered amongst other speaches as it were of the sudden Concerning some part of S. Iohn's Ghospel Beza sayth 37) Ad c. 8. Ioan. As concerning myself I do not dissemble that to me it seemeth iustly to be suspected that which the Ancients with such consent haue either reiected or been ignorant of Besides in that he telleth Iesus to haue been left alone in the Temple with the woman I know not how probable it is And that he writeth Iesus to haue written with his fingar vpon the earth it seemeth to me a new and vnusual thing neither can I imagin how it may be fitly declared Beza further 38) See the New Test Trans by Beza of An. 1556. and 1565. And in English of An. 1580. in one Edition of his New Testament in the end of the eigth Chapter of S. Iohn's Ghospel putteth in these words Iesus passing through the midst of them c. which in another Edition with great vehemencie he reiecteth Wherefore although Beza in his Edition of the yeare 1556. leaue the sayd words out yet in Beza's Englished Testament of An. 1580. they are admitted such freedome by the Spirit hath this Caluinist in admitting and expunging of Scripture But Luther is so slenderly affected to the three Ghospels of S. Mathew S. Mark and S. Luke because they write much of the good works done by Christ our Sauiour as that he spareth not to write 39) In 2. Praef. Nou. Test primae Editionis Because Ihon writeth verie few works of Christ but manie things of his preaching of the contrarie the other three Euangelists set downe manie things of his works but few of his words the Ghospel of Ihon is the only delicate true and chiefest Ghospel and far to be preferred before the other three and more loudly to be preached So neer were those three Ghospels to be banished by Luther for recording good works though done by Christ himself But not to rest only in the Ghospel Luther in plaine tearmes accuseth S. Stephen of errour 40) In cap. 46. Genes in following the 70. Interpreters who as he saith erred concerning the number of those that went downe into Aegypt To come now to S. Paul and his Epistles Zuinglius saith 41) Tom. 2. Elench f. 10. This is your ignorance that you think the Commentaries of the Euangelists and the Epistles of the Apostles to haue been then in Authoritie when Paul did write those things as though Paul then did attribute so much to his Epistles that whatsoeuer was contained in them was sacred c. Which thing saith Zuinglius were to impute immoderate arrogancie to the Apostle In like sort saith D. Fotherbie 42) In his 4 sermons ser 2. p. 50. The Apostle twice in one Chapter professed that this he speaketh and not the Lord he is very wel content that where he lackes the warrant of the expresse Word of God that part of his writings should be esteemed but as the word of man So supposing some parcels of S. Paul's Epistles not to be sacred and diuine The Centurists likewise feare not to say 43) Cent. 1. l. 2. c. 10. col 580. Paul doth turne to Iames the Apostle and a Synode of al the Presbyters being called togeather he is perswaded by Iames and the rest that for the offended Iewes he should purify himself in the temple whervnto Paul yeeldeth which certainly was no smal sliding in so great a Doctour 44) In Act. 21. Mr. Gualter also reproueth S. Paul for shauing his head Luther telleth vs that 45) In Isay c. 64. S. Paul 1. Cor. 2.9 doth finely writh or wrest a certaine sentence of the Prophet Isay But Peter Martyr auoucheth that 46) In 1. Cor. 2. f. 46. he mistooke the Hebrew word And as for S. Paul's Epistle to the Hebrewes Luther thought that 47) In 1. Nou. Test Ger. Editione This Epistle was not written by Paul or anie of the Apostles but composed by a certain learned man out of manie Fathers And though it lay not the foundation of true faith yet it fitly buildeth vp gold siluer and pretious stones Therefore it ought not to trouble vs that wood hay straw are mingled therewith This was so certainly the iudgement of Luther herin that Oecolampadius obseruing the same saith 48) In Ep. ad Heb. in Praef. f. 4. Luther in his Preface saith thus This Epistle seemeth to me to be patched togeather of manie and not to handle the same thing in order He addeth also that it layeth not downe the foundation of faith c. The Magdeburgians also do follow their Maister Luther heerin writing 49) Cent. 1. l. 2. c. 4. It is easie to obserue that the Epistle to the Hebrewes doth not beare Paul's phrase c. It was not hard to iudge those things which in the 7. and 10. chapter are plainly to that end produced that such who are once conuerted to Christ if they fal againe cannot be recouered by serious repentance not to be the Doctrine of Paul nor of the other Apostles nor of Christ Through those and such like reasons prudent Antiquitie seemeth deseruedly to haue doubted of the Epistle to the Hebrewes 50) In Heb. c. 10 p. 963. Caluin likewise saith The Grecians haue deliuered that which the Apostle heer mentioneth which partly agreeth with the mind of the Prophet and partly impugneth the same So making the Prophet and Apostle to varie amongst themselues But indeed at some time of the Moone S. Paul is in so slender esteeme with Protestants that one of them confidently
auoucheth 51) In D. Bancrofts Suruey p. 373. that if Paul should come to Geneua and preach the same hower that Caluin did I would leaue saith he Paul and heare Caluin And 52) Ibid. p. 372. another in Basile did attribute no lesse to Farellus then to Paul Yea some of Luthers schollers 35 not the meanest among their Doctours sayd 53) Lauaterus Hist sacram p. 18. see Schlusselb Theol. Cal. l. 2. f. 146. they had rather doubt of S. Paul's doctrine theÌ„ of Luther or the Confession of Augusta And yet the doctrine of Luther is often so absurd so impure and scandalous as that some Protestants themselues as much ashamed therof haue reiected the same And the Confession of Augusta hath been often impugned by sundrie Caluinists But preaduenture S. Peter is in better credit then S. Paul And yet I find him rebuked by Protestants for his claime of Primacie 54) Catalog Testium veritatis to 1. p. 27. It cannot be denyed say they but that sometimes Peter laboured with Ambition and desire of greatnes c. Wherefore this so peruerse Ambition of Peter and ignorance and negligence of Diuine matters c. But Luther saith further 55) In Epist ad Gal. c. 1. Be it that the Church Austin and other Doctours also Peter Apollo yea and an Angel from Heauen teach otherwise yet is my doctrine such as setteth forth God's only glorie c. Peter the chief of the Apostles did liue and teach besides the Word of God And againe 56) Tom. 5. Vvittemb f. 290. Whether S. Cyprian Ambrose Austin or S. Peter S. Paul yea an Angel from Heauen teach otherwise yet I know this certainly that I do not perswade humane but Diuine things Caluin likewise affirmeth that Peter's pretended erring was 57) In omnes Pauli Epist in Gal. c. 2. p. 510. 511. 37 To the Schisme of the Church the endangering of Christian libertie and the ouerthrow of the Grace of God 38 D. Fulk chargeth S. Peter with errour of ignorance and against the truth of the Gospel And that this pretended erring of S. Peter 58) Against Rhem. Test in Gal. 2. f. 322. was euen after the descending of the Holie-Ghost vpon him D. Goad auoucheth saying 59) Tower Disp 2. Confer Arg. 6. Pâ—ter did erre in faith and that after the sending downe of the Holie-Ghost vpon him Brentius likewise affirmeth that 60) In Apol. Conf. c. de CoÌ„cilijs p. 900. S. Peter chief of the Apostles and also Barnabas after the Holie-Ghost receaued togeather with the Church of Hierusalem erred In like sort saith D. Whitaker 61) De Eccl. cont Bellar. Controu 2. q. 4. p. 223. But peraduenture they wil say Christ had not yet ascended and the Holie-Ghost was not yet giuen to the Apostles whereto he immediately thus replyeth what did they not erre afterwards Yea it is euident that after Christ's Ascension and the descension of the Holie-Ghost vpon the Apostles the whole Church not only the common sort of Christians but also euen the Apostles themselues erred concerning the calling of the Gentils c. Yea Peter also erred concerning the abrogation of the Ceremonial Law c. And this was a matter of faith and in this Peter erred He furthermore also erred in manners c. And these were great errours and yet we see these to haue been in the Apostles euen after the Holie-Ghost descending vpon them So that S. Peter is of as smal authoritie with Protestants as S. Paul before was To come now to S. Iames Andreas Friuius a Caluinist whom 62) Com. Plac. in Engl. part 4. p. 77. Peter Martyr tearmeth an excellent learned man affirmeth that 63) Ib. 2. de Eccl. c. 2. p. 411. Christ at his last supper ioyned wine with bread if therefore the Church separate these she is not to be heard The Church of Hierusalem did separate these S. Iames as some dare affirme gaue only one kind to the people of Hierusalem what then The Word of God is plaine and manifest Eate and drink This is to be heard of vs and preferred before al Iames words of the Church And 64) De Captiuit Bab. c. de Extr. vnct tom 2. wittemb f 86. further say saith Luther that if in anie place it be erred in this place especially concerning Extreame-Vnction it is erred c. But though this were the Epistle of Iames I would answer that it is not lawful for an Apostle by his authoritie to institute a Sacrament this appertaineth to Christ alone As though S. Iames would institute or publish a Sacrament without warrant from Christ And the Centurists before affirmed that S. Paul was drawne into errour by S. Iames and the rest of the Apostles Now as concerning S. Iames his Epistle Luther auoucheth that 65) Praef. in Epist Iacobi in Edit Ien. The Epistle of Iames is contentious swelling dry strawie and vnworthie an Apostolical spirit As also 66) Adc. 22. Gen. Abraham was iust by Faith before he was knowne to be so by God Therefore Iames concludeth il c. It doth not follow as Iames doateth c. Let our Aduersaries therfore be packing with their Iames whom they obiect so often vnto vs. Againe 67) In Coll. Mensal lat tom 2. de lib. nou Test Manie haue much laboured in the Epistle of Iames that they might accord it with Paul as Philip tryed in his Apologie but without successe for they are contrarie Faith iustifieth Faith iustifieth not Agreably heervnto also saith Musculus 68) Loc. com c de Iustific The Papists obiect the Epistle of Iames But he whosoeuer he was the Brother of Christ and a Pillar amongst the Apostles and a great Apostle aboue measure yet he alone cannot preiudice the truth of Faith And after the disagreement between S. Paul and S. Iames according to his imagination shewed at large he thus schooleth and correcteth S. Iames He alleadgeth the example of Abraham nothing to the purpose where he saith wilt thou know ô vaine man that Faith without works is dead c. He confoundeth the word Faith How much better had it been for him diligently and plainly to haue distinguished the true and properly Christian Faith which the Apostle euer preached from that which is common both to Iewes and Christians Turks and Diuels then to confound them both and set downe his sentence so different from the Apostolical doctrine whereby as concluding he saith you see that a man is iustified by works and not by Faith alone wheras the Apostle out of the same place disputeth thus c. where hauing made S. Paul to speak as he thinketh best he inferreth Thus saith the Apostle of whose Doctrine we doubt not Compare me now with this argument of the Apostle the Conclusion of this Iames A man therefore is iustifyed by works and not by Faith only and see how much it differeth wheras he should more rightly haue concluded thus c.
So peremptorie is Musculus the Sacramentarie against S. Iames the Apostle In like sort writeth Illiricus 69) In Pref. in Iac. Epi. Luther in his Preface vpon Iames's Epistle giueth great reasons why this Epistle ought in no case to be accounted for a writing of Apostolical authoritie 70) In Enchyr. p. 63 And see Exam. part 1. p. 55. vnto which reasons I think euerie godlie man ought to yeeld But to annexe heervnto the Epistles of S. Peter S. Ihon and S. Iude Chemnitius Luther's chief Scholler affirmeth that 76) Vpon the Apoc. Engl. c. 1. ser 1. f. 2. The second Epistle of Peter the second and third of Ihon the Epistle to the Hebrewes the Epistle of S. Iames the Epistle of Iude and the Apocalyps of Ihon are Apocryphal As 71) Exam. p. 1. p. 56. not hauing sufficient testimonie of their authoritie and that therefore 72) Ib. p. 57. Nothing in Controuersie may be proued out of these books Agreably wherunto saith also Adamus Francisci 73) Margarita Theol. p. 448. The Apocryphal Books of the new Testament are The Epistle to the Hebrewes The Epistle of Iames the second and third of Ihon the second of Peter the Epistle of Iude and the Apocalyps Concerning which last of the Apocalyps of S. Ihon Bullinger expresly auoucheth 74) In Apo. c. 19. serm 84. f. 260. 259. That S. Ihon was intangled with errour And Luther thinketh this Book 75) Pref. in Apo. prioris Edit Neither to be Apostolical nor Prophetical c. nor that it was made by the Holy Ghost c. Therin neither Christ is taught nor acknowledged saith he An errour so manifest in Luther that Bullinger testifyeth the same saying 76) Vpon the Apoc. Engl. c. 1. ser 1. f. 2. D. Martin Luther hath as it were sticked his Book by a sharp Prefac set before his first Edition of the new Testament in Dutch for which his iudgement good and learned men were offended with him 77) In Apol. Confess Wittemb c. de sacra Scriptura Being to speake saith Brentius of the authoritie of sacred Scripture we wil first run ouer the Apocryphal Books which are in the Vulgar Edition of the Bible and which the Papists obtrude vpon vs for truly Canonical Amongst which he then numbreth the Epistle to the Hebrewes of Iames of Iude the second of Peter and the Apocalyps c. and then adioyneth saying Some of these are tearmed dreames some fables Of so smal account with Protestants is this so Diuine and mystical Book of the Apocalyps written by S. Ihon the Euangelist Lastly Zuinglius being impugned for denying prayer for the dead and pressed with the authoritie of Fathers especially of S. Chrysostome and S. Augustin who deriue this custome from the Apostles answereth thus (78) Tom. 1. Epiâ—hâ—rae de Can. Mis f. 186. And see Tom 2. in Elench contra Anabap f. 10. If it be so as Augustin and Chrysostome report I think that the Apostles suffered certain to pray for the dead for no other cause then to condescend to their infirmitie So insimulating the Apostles wilfully to haue permitted others to erre according to the errours of Protestants in praying for the dead which they could not do without errour in themselues Adde only heervnto that seeing according to Brentius other Lutherans as also according to our English Protestants those Books of Scripture are only to be acknowledged Canonical (79) Brent in Confâ—ss Wittemb c. de sacra script Conuocat Lond. Anno 1562. 1604. ar 6. Whitack against Camp Reas 1. p. 28. of whose authoritie there was neuer anie doubt made in the Church then by the sayd Rule our English Protestants Church doth reiect as Apocryphal the Epistle of S. Paul to the Hebrewes the Epistle of S. Iames and S. Iude the second of S. Peter and the second and third of S. Ihon to eather with the Apocalyps sithence al these haue been doubted of formerly in the Church as is confessed by sundrie (80) Towers Disput with F. Campian in the 4. Dayes conference English Protestants amongst whom M. Rogers hauing sayd (81) Vpon the 6. Art Propos 4. p. 26. In the name of the holy Scripture we do vnderstand those Canonical Books of the Old and New Testament of whose authoritie was neuer doubt in the Church himself yet further confesseth that (82) Ib. p. 31. Some of the ancient Fathers and Doctours accepted not al the Books contayned within the volume of the New Testament for Canonical So giddie and inconstant are our Ministers in impugning the truth Now if some deny the plainest premisses notwithstanding D. Whitaker and (83) Wâ—itak Answ to Camp Reas 1. Rogers vpon the 6. Artic. p 30. M. Rogers that Luther and the Lutherans did reiect the foresayd Books of the new Testament besides their owne cleerest words particularly before cited out of their owne writings Whitaker himself saith (84) Vvhitack de sacra Sâ—ript Controu 1. q. 1. c. 6. If Luther or some that haue followed Luther haue taught or written otherwise let them answer for themselues this is nothing to vs who in this matter neither follow Luther nor defend him but are led by a better reason Rogers also alleadgeth (85) Vbi supra p. 32. two principal Lutherans Wygandus and Heshusius accusing them both of errour the one for refusing the first and second Epistles of S. Iohn with the Epistle of S. Iude the other for reiecting the Apocalyps And Caluin acknowledgeth that 86) In Argum Epist Iacobi In his time there were some Protestants that iudged the Epistle of S. Iames not Canonical Oecolampadius testifyeth the same touching the Apocalyps and affirmeth himself to (87) lib. 2. ad cap. 12. Daniel wonder that some with rash iudgement reiected S. Iohn in this Book as a dreamer a mad man and a writer vnprofitable to the Church So cleer it is against Whitakers and Rogers euen by the testimonies of themselues and their other Brethren that Luther and his brood reiected the foresayd Scriptures as not Canonical But now to recapitulate or briefly to reuiew this so strange proceeding of our new Ghospellers with the sacred Scriptures If Christians be to reiect Moses and his writings as the Books of Genesis Exodus Leuiticus c. yea the verie Ten Commandments which comprehend not only the Ceremonial but also the Moral Law as also the Book of Iob with Ecclesiastes and Canticles of Salomon and Tobie Iudith Hester Sapientia Ecclesiasticus Baruch some chapters of Daniel the first and second of Machabees how slender then is the remnant of the old Testament left behind And if al the foure Ghospels be censured as before for erroneous and the Epistles to the Hebrewes of Iames Peter Iohn Iude and the Apocalyps be al of them reiected as Apocryphal how diminutiue a volume wil our new Testament remaine Besides if not only al the foresayd Books be erroneous but the
16. f. 65. It is confessed by Protestants that the Fathers of the Primitiue Church allowed and practised the vow of Chastitie and that they neuer allowed such as were of the Clergie afterwards to marrie or such as had been twice married to be admitted to holie Orders without special dispensation chap. 17. fol. 69. It is confessed by Protestants that the Fathers of the Promitiue Church allowed practised the Religious State of Monastical life and that manie Christians of those purest times both men and women did strictly obserue and professe the same chap. 18. f. 74. It is acknowledged by Protestants that the Fathers of the Primitiue Church allowed practised prescribed fasts and abstinence from certaine meats vpon dayes and times appointed holding the same obligatorie vnder sinne condemning also our Puritan Sabboath Fasts chap. 19. fol. 80. It is admitted by Protestants that the Fathers of the Primitiue Church expresly taught our Catholick Doctrine concerning Free wil. chap. 20. fol. 84 It is granted by Protestants that the Fathers of the Primitiue Church taught not only Faith but likewise Good works truly to iustifye that the sayd works are meritorious of Grace and Glorie chap. 21. fol. 86. It is acknowledged by Protestants that the Ceremonies now vsed in the Roman Church in the ministring of seruice or Sacrifice as also of the Sacraments were formerly vsed by the Bishops Priests and Fathers of the Primitiue Church chap. 22. fol. 89 THE THIRD BOOK WHERIN is proued that the Church of Protestants was neuer knowne or in Being before the d yes of Luther And that the Articles of Religion now taught by the Protestant Congregation were Heresies condemned by the Primitiue Church of Christ IT is confessed by Protestants that from the dayes of the Apostles vntil the tyme of Luther themselues neuer had any knowne Church or Congregatiō in anie part of the vniuersal World chap. 1. fol. 1. A Further conuincing proof of the Protestant Churches not being during the first 600. yeares is taken from the Fathers Condemning in the ancient Hereticks the chiefest articles of the Protestant Religion and our Protestants Confessing the same And First Concerning the Sacraments chap. 2. fol. 6. That the Fathers condemned in ancient Hereticks the opinions of Protestants concerning the Scriptures and the Church Militant and Triumphant chap. 3. fol. 9. That the Fathers condemned in ancient Hereticks the opinions of Protestants concerning Monachisme the mariage of Priests and prescribed Fasts chap. 4. fol. 12. That the Fathers condemned in ancient Hereticks the opinions of Protestants concerning Free-wil Faith Good works the Commandments sinne and the knowledge and Death of Christ chap. 5. fol. 14. Protestants Vsual recrimination of obiecting old Heresies to the Catholick Roman Church is cleerly examined discouered confuted by their owne acknowledgements chap. 6. fol. 17. A Further trial is Made Whether Catholicks or Protestants be true Hereticks and this by sundrie knowne badges or markes of Heresie chap. 7. fol. 23. A brief Suruey of D. Whites Catalogue wherin contrary to the Confessed truth in the precedent Chapter of no knowne beginning or change of our Romane Faith in anye Age he vndertaketh according to his Title therof to shew That the present Religion of the Roman Church was obserued resisted in al Ages as it came in and increased naming withal the Persons that made the Resistance And the poynts wherin And the time when from fiftie yeares to fiftie through-out al Ages since Christ chap. 8. fol. 35. THE FOVRTH BOOK WHERIN is proued by the Confession of Protestants that according to the Sacred Scriptures the Roman Church is the true Church of Christ And so to haue euer continued from his time vntil the Date hereof And of the contrary the Protestants Church to be only a Sect Heretical and neuer to haue been before the dayes of Luther PRotestants flying to the sacred Scriptures in proof defence of their Church and Religion it is shewed the sayd flight not only in itself to be dishonourable but also to be the ordinarie flight of al moderne Hereticks chap. 1. fol. 1. That euen the Sacred Scriptures themselues do most plentifully testify our Romane Church to be the Church of of Christ and the Congregation or Church of Protestants to be no true Church but a Sect Heretical most contrarie to the said Scriptures And that first by the Churches necessarie continuance and vniuersalitie chap. 2. fol. 5. The second Proof from sacred Scriptures in cōfirmation of the Roman Church and Confutation of the Protestant is taken from the Euer visibilitie of Christ's Church chap. 3. fol. 10. The third Proof from Sacred Scriptures in Cōfirmation of the Roman Church and Confutation of the Protestant is taken from the Churches Pastours which must euer continue with lawful Calling and Succession and with Administration of Word and Sacraments chap. 4. fol. 13. The fourth Proof from sacred Scriptures in confirmation of the Roman Church and Confutation of the Protestant is taken from the Conuersion of Heathen Kings and Nations to the Faith of Christ chap. 5. fol. 24. A Discouerie or brief Examination of sundrie sleights and Euasions vsed by Protestant Writers in Excuse of the manifest confessed want of their Churches fulfilling the foresaid Scripiures concerning the continuance vniuersalitie and visibilitie of Christs true Church chap. 6. fol. 33. THE FIFT BOOK WHERIN is shewed that Protestants in the Decision of Controuersies between them and Catholicks do absolutly disclaime from Antiquitie reiecting the Ancient Fathers and Councels for Papistical and the Sacred Scriptures for erroneous THat Protestants Disclaime from al Antiquitie since the Apostles and further reiect and condemne as Papistical the Ancient Fathers and General Councels chap. 1. fol. 1. That the Protestant Church disclaimeth from the Fathers of the Primitiue Church it is further proued by the Protestants condemning al the ancient Fathers in general for beleeuing teaching and practising the seueral particular actions of our Catholick Roman Faith and Religion chap. 2. fol. 12. That Protestants do not only disclaime from al the ancient Fathers as Papists but do further reiect the authoritie of the sacred Scriptures and of the Apostles themselues as being erroneous and that therefore they do not found their Faith or Religion vpon Sacred Scriptures or Christ his Apostles chap. 3. fol. 18. A TABLE SHEWING THE particular matters handled in this Booke A. AELfricus no Protestant l. 3. c. 8. pag. 51. Albigenses taught sundrie errours lib. 1. c. 3. pag. 12. Almaricus his errours l. 3. c. 8. p. 55. Antiquitie commended Praef. to the Reader and lib. 5. c. 1. pag. 1. 2. Antiquitie reiected by Protestants as a Popish Argument l. 1. c. 5. pag. 26. Anthonie the Monk commended l. 2. c. 18. Apostles according to Protestants erred in Faith euen after the comming of the Holie-Ghost l. 5. c. 3. p. 23. 25. Apocalyps reiected by Protestants lib. 5 c. 3. p. 24. Armenia conuerted by the Apostles lib. 1. c. 6. p.