THE Protestant's Companion OR AN IMPARTIAL SURVEY AND COMPARISON OF THE Protestant Religion As by LAW Established With the main Doctrines of Popery Wherein is shewn That Popery is contrary to Scripture Primitive Fathers and Councils and that proved from Holy Writ the Writings of the Ancient Fathers for several Hundred Years and the Confession of the most Learned Papists themselves Whereby the Papists vain pretence to Antiquity and their reproaching the Protestant Doctrines with Novelty is wholly overthrown By a True Son of the Protestant Church of England as established by Law LONDON Printed for Richard Chiswell at the Rose and Crown in S. Paul's Church-Yard M DC LXXXV ALL Scripture is given by inspiration of God and is profitable for doctrine for reproof for correction for instruction in righteousness 2 Tim. 3. 16. In vain they do worship me teaching for doctrines the commandments of men Matth. 15. 9. But from the beginning it was not so Matth. 19. 8. Non audiatur haec dico haec dicis sed haec dicit dominus Augustin de unit Eccles. contr Petil. c. 3. Id verius quod prius id prius quod ab initio ab initio quod ab Apostolis Tertullian advers Marcion l. 4. c. 5. Id esse verum quodcunque primum id esse adulterinum quodcunque posterius Idem advers Praxeam c. 2. THE PREFACE TO THE Protestant Reader AS we have immortal Souls of infinite more value than all transient glories and sublunary advantages so ought we both in obedience to the tender and compassionate advice of our blessed Redeemer who purchased them with his own dear Blood and out of a true concern for our Eternal Welfare to live such lives here as we may be happy hereafter Pursuant to this excellent design We ought carefully attend to that Holy Religion we have so long professed which teaches no Doctrines that are not agreeable to the Holy Scriptures and to the practice of the best and purest Ages of Christianity A Religion which neither robs God of his Honour nor the King of his due a Religion whose venerable Rites keep a just medium betwixt vain Popish Pomp and Fanatical Indecency a Religion that not only teaches us how to be good but obliges us so to be that is a Religion truly Christian and a Copy of that perfect Original which our Lord and Saviour hath left us for our direction And therefore as nothing ought to be dearer to us so we cannot be sufficiently thankful to his Sacred Majesty whom God preserve for the Gracious assurance he has given that he will support it and defend us in the profession of it A King whose Royal Progenitors of Immortal Memory for above 100 years have not only been the Ornaments but the Supports too of the Protestant Religion His fam'd Grandfather King Iames Learnedly defending it by his Pen and thereby justly meriting the glorious Title of its Defender His Excellent Father dying a Glorious Martyr and his late dearly beloved Brother being a long time Exile for our Reformed Religion Let us then strive to shew that we are not unworthy of so Illustrious and Valiant a Protector by our Loyalty to him not unworthy of such a Religion by our conformity to its Principles in Holiness Sobriety and Charity and a stedfast adherence to it in opposition to any other that will destroy that which our Church hath built upon so sure a Foundation And that we may rightly understand what this Religion is and the difference betwixt that which is established in our Church and what is owned in the Church of Rome I have made the following Collection wherein is demonstrated how contrary the Popish Religion is to our Church and how inconsistent with Scripture the practice of the Primitive and best Ages of Christianity and that prov'd not only from the Writings of the Apostles and choice Records of Antiquity but even granted to be so by the most learned and no less impartial Papists themselves which as it is the testimony of one Friend against another is lookt upon as an undenyable Evidence Before I conclude I must admonish the Reader that I have not rendered the Authors at large but so quoted them that the Learned may examine them nor have I drawn Arguments as usually from them because that would have made this Book design'd for a Pocket-companion to have swell'd into a great Volume yet to make requital for that just omission I have at the conclusion of each Section directed the Reader to other Writers of our Religion which treat of that particular Controversie at large May then the All-wise God by whose Divine permission thus much hath been perform'd so bless this poor labour of his unworthy Servant that it may be instrumental to the good of his Church and the confirming of all our weak Brethren in our most Holy Faith which was the principal design of its publication THE INTRODUCTION THE Church of Rome though she talk aloud of the Antiquity of and an universal consent in her Doctrines is so far from either That therein she will be tied to no Rule nor observe any Law as if she would verifie that Remarque of Crantzius upon her in another Case Nunc ad se omnium Ecclesiarum jura traxit Romana Ecclesia That she hath engrossed to her self all the priviledges or rights of other Churches Her greatest defendants reject the Scripture though given forth by Divine Inspiration and do say it is no more to be believed in saying it is from God than Mahomet's Alcoran c. And good reason why because her Doctrines are repugnant to the Holy Scriptures What then will she trust to Tradition that she equals with the Scriptures themselves And yet her great Annalist Cardinal Baronius who was once as it were a living Library while he kept the Vatican confesseth That he despaired to find out the truth even in those matters which true Writers have recorded because there was nothing which remained sincere and incorrupted This blow given by so skilful an Artist dashes all the Characters wherein the defence of Oral Tradition should be legible And if Tradition in true Writers be so difficult to preserve how can it be expected to be safe from spurious ones or without any Writers at all However though the Papists do not grant that this ruins their Tradition I am sure it cuts off that definition of it by Cardinal Bellarmin who affirms that to be a true Tradition which all former Doctors mind that or then will the Fathers come in for a share have successively in their Ages acknowledged to come from the Apostles and by their Doctrine or Practices have approved and which the Universal Church owns as such Moreover Bellarmin's Definition of Tradition gives us this encouragement and liberty to try Antiquity by Fathers Councils and Papal Decrees For the Fathers I hope the Romanists who boast so much of their being on their party will not refuse
Reason and Argument than these Papists have done Truth will Conquer The Romish Church likewise obliges all those in its Communion to Worship Images the Idolatrous practice of the Heathen World and that with the same worship which is given to him whose Image it is and that I think is far enough so that the Worship may be terminated in the Image If this be not Idolatry I know not what can be such And yet that nothing might be wanting in their Worship to make up the measure of iniquity They deny That God alone is to be worshipped I suppose they mean he must have sharers with him in that Honour for otherwise it cannot be sence I am sure however it is Blasphemy Image Worship is Contrary to Scripture Exod 20. 4 5. Hence do the Papists often leave the Second Commandment out of their Catechisms as in Vaux's Catechism Ledesma's Catechism Officium B. Mariae Pii 5. Pont. jussu editum Antwerp A. D. 1590. That the Second Commandment was meant of and desigued against Images and Idols the following Fathers and Doctors do attest Iustin Martyr Dial. cum Tryph. p. 321. Tertullian de Idol c. 3 4. Id. c. Marcion l. 2. c. 22. despect c. 23. Clemens Alexand. stro l. 3. p. 441. Origen c. Celsum l. 4. p. 182. l. 7. p. 375. Id. in Exod. Hom. 8. Athanasius in Synops. Nazianzen in vers de decal Ambrose Ierome in Ephes. c. 6. Augustin Ep. 119. c. 11. Procopius Rupertus in Exod. c. 20. Contrary to Scripture Lev. 26. 1. Deut. 4. 15 16. 5. 7 8 9. Isa. 40. 18 19 20. Micah 5. 13. Matt. 4. 10. Ioh. 5. 21. Rev. 19. 10. Contrary to the Fathers Iustin Martyr Apol. 2. p. 65 66. Theophilus Antiochenus ad Autolycum l. 1. p. 77 110. Clemens Alexandrinus strom l. 6. in paraenetico Tertullian adv Hermogen init Minutius Felix p. 33. who saith Cruces nec colimus nec optamus Origen c. Celsum l. 7 8. The Council of Eliberis in Spain at An. D. 310. Can. 36. Lactantius lib. 2. cap. de Orig error dubium non est c. Optatus l. 3. Epiphanius Epist. ad Ioh. Hieros Augustin de morib Ecclesiae Cath. l. 1. c. 34. de side symbolo c. 7. Id. contr Adimant c. 13. Id. Tom. 3. de consens Evangel l. 1. c. 10. Id. de civit Dei l. 9. c. 15. Fulgentius ad Donatum Gregorius Mag. l. 9. Epist. 9. Imagines adorare omnibus modis devita Moreover the Church of Rome would oblige us to adore the Consecrated Host or Bread in the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper and with the same Worship which is due to the true God Which by the Confession of some of their Learned Men is an Idolatry if Transubstantiation cannot be made out which if it can we ought no more to believe our own Eyes more stupid than the sottish Heathens were guilty of Though this practice is so far from being Ancient That elevation of the Host accompanied with the ringing of a Bell at the consecration thereof that all who heard it might kneel and joyn their hands in adoring the Host was instituted but about An. Dom. 1240. The Fathers were so far from worshipping the Host that some of them are sharp in reproving those who reserved the Reliques of it as appears by Clement's Epistle to S. Iames Origen in Levit. Hom. 5. and by the 11th Council at Toledo c. 14. And in Ierusalem they us'd to burn the remainders thereof Hesychius in Levit. l. 2. c. 8. Concerning Invocation of Saints Angels c. see Archbishop Laud's excellent Book against Jesuit Fisher so much commended by King Charles I. Dr. Stillingfleet's Rational Account of the Grounds of Protestant Religion c. Part 3. Ch. 3. Dr. Stillingfl Discourse concerning the Idolatry practised in the Ch. of Rome c. 2. Bishop Taylor 's Disswasive from Popery Part. 1. Ch. 2. Sect. 9. F. White against Jesuit Fisher pag. 289. Dr. Brevent's Saul and Samuel at Endor Bishop of Lincoln's Letter to Mr. Evelyn Concerning Image-worship and the Adoration of the Host see Bishop Iewel 's Article 14 against Harding Archbishop Laud against Jesuit Fisher. Dr. Stillingfleet's Discourse concerning the Idolatry practised in the Church of Rome and his Defence of it His Rational Account of the Grounds of Protestant Religion Part. 3. Chap. 3. Bishop Taylor 's Disswasive from Popery Ed. 3. C. 1. Sect. 8 9. Ch. 2. Sect. 12. Rodon's Funeral of the Mass c. 5. Confessed By these Learned Popish Doctors hereafter mentioned That the making of Images was prohibited in the old Law and not to be found in Scripture Aquinas 3. Sent. Dist. 9. Q. 2. ad 1. Prohibitum est Alexander Hales p. 3. Q. 30. m. 3. ar 3. Albertus 3. d. 9. ar 4. Bonaventure 3. d. 9. Marsilius 3. q. 8. ar 2. Rich. media villa 3. d. 9. Q. 2. Gerson compend tr 2. d. 10. Praecept Abulensis Exod. 20. Q. 39. Et Dominic Bannes in 2a 2ae Qu. 1. art 10. That the Fathers condemn'd Image-worship is Confess'd by Polydore Virgil de Invent. l. 6. c. 13. where he saith Sed teste Hieronymo omnes ferè veteres sancti Patres speaking of Images damnabant ob metum Idololatriae For fear of Idolatry And by Cassander Consult d. Imag. Quantum veteris initio Ecclesiae ab omni imaginum adoratione abhorruêrunt declarat unus Origenes And That for the first four Ages after Christ there was little or no use of Images in the Temples or Oratories of the Christians is Confess'd By Petavius Dogmat. Theol. To. 5. l. 15. c. 13. S. 3. c. 14. S. 8. SECT IV. OUR Church contends for and embraces that faith which was once delivered to the Saints and admits and professes that same which all true Christians have made the badge of their Holy Profession which is briefly comprehended in the Apostles Creed and explain'd in those others call'd the Nicene and Athanasian which may be prov'd by the Scriptures and have been approved by the Universal Church by the Decrees of the first General Councils and Writings of the Fathers The Popish Church especially that part of it which is called the Court of Rome obtrudes and imposes new Articles of Faith making the Bishop of Rome the Infallible Judge and Arbitrator of all Doctrines enjoyning an implicit faith and blind obedience to his Dictates wherein we must renounce our very Reason so that if he call that white which we see to be black we are to say so since he hath as they say the power of making new Creeds Contrary to Scripture Gal. 1. 8 9. Contrary to S. Augustin de Unit. Eccles. contr Epist. Petil. c. 3. and all the Fathers who shew an esteem for the Scripture Confess'd By Cardinal Bellarmine That till above a thousand years after Christ the Popes Judgment was not esteemed Infallible nor his Authority above that of a
General Council much less then is it above that of the Holy Scriptures Hence must it necessarily follow That it is a new Article of the Creed to believe that the Pope can make new Creeds Consult Dr. Stillingfleet's Discourse concerning the Idolatry practised in the Church of Rome Chap. 4. SECT V. OUR Church useth the same Sacraments which our Saviour Christ left in his Church and no other to wit Baptism and the Lord's Supper which both the Laity and the Clergy in our Communion receive intire without mutilation according to our Blessed Saviour's Institution the practice of the Apostles and of the Latin Church for fourteen hundred years after our Saviour's Incarnation and of the Greek Church in the last Age if not until this day The Church of Rome doth not only clog its members with the number of seven Sacraments which precise number of Sacraments was not held for Catholick even in the Roman Church till above a thousand years after Christ and therefore far from Primitive Christianity but deprives the Laity of the Cup in the Eucharist contrary to our Saviour's Institution which is at once the highest presumption and withal not one degree remov'd from Sacriledge The number of Seven Sacraments Contrary to the Fathers Iustin Martyr Apol. 2. whom even Bellarmine himself confesses to have mentioned but two Sacraments de effect Sacram. l. 2. c. 27. Sect. venio Tertullian advers Marcion l. 4. c. 34. Id. de coronâ militis c. 3. Cyril of Ierusalem in his Catechisms S. Ambrose in his Books de Sacramentis Augustin de Doctr. Christi lib. 3. c. 9. Id. de Symbolo ad Catech. Tom. 9. Id. Epist. 118. ad Ianuar. Tom. 2. Iunilius in Genes Confess'd That Peter Lombard Master of the Sentences who liv'd Anno Dom. 1144. was the first Author that mentioned the precise number of Seven Sacraments and the Council of Florence held Anno Dom. 1438 was the first Council that determined that number By Cardinal Bellarmin de Sacram. lib. 2. c. 25. and Cassander Consult de num Sacram. Communion in one kind Contrary to Scripture Matt. 26. 26 27 28. Luk. 22. 19 20. 1 Cor. 11. 26 27 28. Contrary to the Fathers Dionysius Areopagita Eccl. Hierarch c. 3. which Author I quote in the front of the Fathers because the Papists would have him to live in the first Age though it is more probable that he liv'd later albeit not so late as Monsieur Daill'e would have him Ignatius Ep. ad Philadelph Iustin Martyr Apol. 2. in fine p. 162. Clemens Alexandrin Stromat l. 1. p. 94. Id. Paedagog l. 2. c. 2. p. 35. Tertullian de Resurrect c. 8. Id. l. 2. ad Uxorem c. 6. Origen Hom. 16. in Num. Cyprian Epist. 54. Tom. 1. l. 1. Epist. 2. Gregor Nazianzen Orat. 11. in laud. Gorgon Orat. 40. in Sanctum Baptism Tom. 1. Athanasius Apol. 2. contra Arrianos 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Ambros. in Orat. ad Theodos. apud Theodoret. Hist. Eccles. l. 5. c. 18. Hieronymus Epist. ad Rusticum Tom. 1. Id. sup Sâ—phon c. 3. Tom. 6. Chrysostom in 2 Cor. Hom. 18. Tom. 3. Edit Savil. p. 646. Augustin 4. Qu. 57. in Levit. Leo Ser. 4. de Quadrages Gelasius Decret 3. part de Consecrat dist 2. cap. Comperimus Hincmar in the Life of the Archbishop Rhemes who converted King Clovis of France to the Christian Faith reports that the Archbishop gave a Chalice or Cup for the peoples use with this Motto Hauriat hinc populus vitam de sanguine sacro Injecto aeternus quem fudit vulnere Christus Remigius domino reddit sua vota sacerdos è Cassandri Liturg. c. 31. Pamelii Liturgic p. 618. Tom. 1. Gregorius Magnus Dial. l. 1 4. c. 58. Id. Dial. l. 3. c. 36. Tom. 2. Id. in Sab. Paschae Homil. 22. Tom. 2. Confess'd That Communion in one kind is against the practice of the Apostles by Paschasius Radbertus de corp sang domini c. 19. Confess'd That it was a General Custom for the Laity to Communicate in both kinds by Salmeron Tract 35. Confess'd By Cassander That it was receiv'd in both kinds for above a thousand years after Christ by Vasquez and Thomas Aquinas for above 1200 years by Becanus for 1400 years and last of all by the Council of Constance it self It was acknowledged That Communion in both kinds had been instituted by our Blessed Saviour himself practised by the Primitive Church and to that very time and yet they had the confidence to alter it They certainly had confidence enough but neither too much Reason nor too much Religion who durst disannul what our Blessed Saviour had enjoyn'd and what carried his Seal to that very day Where was then that reverence to Antiquity which their Followers to this day so much pretend to Concerning the number of Seven Sacraments see Birkbeck's Protestant Evidence Article 4. Of Communion in both kinds see Bishop Iewel 's Article 2. against Harding Bishop Taylor 's Disswasive Part 1. Ch. 1. Sect. 6. Dr. Stillingfleet's Rational Account of the Grounds of Protestant Religion Part 3. Ch. 3. Archbishop Laud against Rodon's Funeral of the Mass Ch. 6. SECT VI. WE do not believe that the Elements of Bread and Wine after Consecration become the very Body and Blood of Christ though the worthy Receiver partakes of both in a spiritual manner by faith because we herein have all the testimony we are capable of viz. that of our Reasons and of our Senses to believe That there is not a real Transubstantiation or a change of the Elements of Bread and Wine into the Body and Blood of our Saviour which is an absurd tenet and hath occasioned many Superstitions The Church of Rome holds that there is a conversion of the whole substance of Bread and Wine into the substance of Christ's Body and Blood by Consecration Transubstantiation Contrary to Scripture Luk. 22. 17 18 19 20. Contrary to the Fathers Iustin Martyr Apol. 2. Irenaeus l. 4. adv Haer. c. 34. Tertullian cont Marcion l. 4. c. 40. Origen Comment in Matth. c. 15. Id. Homil. 3. in Matth. Eusebius de Demonst. Evangel l. 1. c. 1. c. ult Macarius Homil. 27. Gregor Nazianz. Orat. 2. in Pasch. Ambros. lib. de Bened. Patriarch c. 9. Epiphanius in Anchorat p. 6. Chrysostome Homil. 24. in Epist. ad Cor. Id. Epist. ad Caesar. Monach. Ierome Comment S. Matth. c. 26. Id. in Isa. 66. in Hos. 8. in Ierem. 22. Augustin Serm. 9. de divers Id. l. 3. de Doctr. Christ. c. 16. Id. l. 20. contr Faust. Manich. c. 21. in Psal. 98. Id. de civit Dei l. 21. c. 25. Tractat. 26. in Ioh. Gelasius in lib. de duab nat Christ. Ephrem Patriarch of Antioch apud Phot. Cod. 229. Primasius Comment in 1 Epist. ad Cor. Facundus Defens Conc. Chalced. l. 9. c. 5. Gaudentius Tract 20. Add to these that Hesychius Bishop of
were true as they are wholly the contrary they can make it appear That the Bishop of Rome was the Successor of S. Peter and not the Bishop of Antioch and whether ever he was at Rome or no 5. Whether they can make it appear That our Blessed Saviour when on Earth exercised such a temporal Monarchy as the Pope now challengeth Confessions of the Popish Doctors in this Case To the first and second Queries it is Confessed by Cardinal Cusanus That S. Peter received no more Authority and then he could not exercise any Authority over his Fellows than the rest of the Apostles To the third and fourth Queries it is Confessed by Aeneas Sylvius afterwards Pope by then ame of Pius II. That the Pope's Succession is not revealed in Scripture and then it cannot be proved jure divino positivo And by Bellarmin That neither Scripture nor Tradition habet allows then farewell Papal Supremacy That the Apostoliok Seat or Chair was so fixed at Rome which I really believe as well as he that it could not be taken from thence And then why might it not be at Antioch or Jerusalom as well as Rome Confessed by him further That as long as the Emperors were Heathen the Pope was subject to them in all civil Causes And That for above One thousand years his Judgment was not esteemed Infallible nor his Authority above that of a General Council Where was then the exercise or acknowledgment of this Supremacy and Infallibility of the Popes Was all the World a-sleep or ignorant so long of this Power which they now challenge to themselves Jure Divino No but the Pope I warrant you had not yet the opportunity to usurp and challenge it as he hath done since To four of these you see they have plainly yielded and the last they can never make good either from Scripture or Ecclesiastical History Add to these the Confession of that Learned Papist Father Barns That allowing the Bishop of Rome to have Supremacy elsewhere yet the Pope hath no Supremacy in Britain Insula autem Britanniae gavisa est olim privilegio Cyprio ut nullius Patriarchae Legibus subderetur And afterwards Videtur pacis ergô retineri debere sine dispendio Catholicismi absque Schismatis ullius notâ What can the Papists say to this so plain an acknowledgment But not designing to treat at large upon the Pope's Supremacy I have not as in the following subjects produced the Testimonies of Fathers and Councils against this Doctrine of Rome but shall advise the Reader to consult herein Bishop Jewel against Harding Article 4. Archbishop Bramhall's Schism Guarded against Will. Serjeant Dr. Barrow of the Pope's Supremacy and the Bishop of Lincoln's Brutum Fulmen who will give him full satisfaction in that point THE CONTENTS Of the following TREATISE SECT I. OF the Scriptures Sufficiency Page 1. SECT II. Of the Scripture-Canon 5. SECT III. Of Invocation of Saints and of the Blessed Virgin 7 Of Image Worship 10. Of Adoration of the Host. 11. SECT IV. Of the Three Creeds and how the Pope imposes new Articles of Faith upon his followers 13. SECT V. Of the number of Sacraments and of Communion in one kind Page 15 SECT VI. Of Transubstantiation 19 SECT VII Of Purgatory 23 Of Indulgences 25 Of the Sacrifice of the Mass. 26 Of Justification by Faith 27 Of Merits Ibid. SECT VIII Of Prayers in an unknown Tongue 30 SECT IX Of the Marriage of Priests 33 Of Auricular Confession 39 SECT X. Of Obedience to Governors 4◠THE Protestant's Companion SECTION I. THE Protestant Church of England our Holy Mother admits of no other Rule for Faith and practice than the Holy Scriptures which according to the Apostles are able to make us wise unto Salvation The Church of Rome doth equal unwritten Traditions with the Holy Scriptures whom some of that Church do call a nose of Wax Another and that no less Man than a Cardinal affirms That the Scripture is no more to be believed in saying that it comes from God than Mahomet's Alcoran because that saith so too Another Cardinal saith That the Scriptures have no authority but for the Decree of the Church they mean the Roman Church by whom it ought to be regulated and not the Church be regulated by it and the reason is because as it is confess'd that the people would easily be drawn away from observing the Church's i. e. Romish Institutions when they should perceive That they are not contained in the Law of Christ and that their i. e. Popish Doctrines are not only different from but repugnant to the Holy Scriptures Hence doth the Church of Rome under severe penalties forbid the Laity the perusal of them and thereby involves every Lay-man in the guilt of being a Traditor which in the first Ages of Christianity was a crime next door to Apostasie Which act doth not only imply That the Popish Church refuseth to be try'd by the Test of God's Word but is diametrically opposite to the practice of the Primitive Christians as appears in the following Quotations The Romish Tenet of slighting the Scriptures is contrary to the Word of God Ioh. 5. 39. 2 Tim. 3. 16 17. Contrary to the Fathers Clemens Romanus Epist. ad Corinth p. 58 61 68. Irenaeus l. 2. c. 47. Idem l. 3. c. 1. c. 2. Tertullian adv Hermogen c. 23. Clemens Alexandrinus Stromat l. 7. Origen in Esai Hom. 2. Idem in Comment in Iosh. p. 27. Id. Homil. in Leviticum 9. Comment in Matthaeum p. 220. Cyprian Epist. 74. Eusebius adv Sabellium l. 2. Constantinus Magnus apud Theodoret. Histor. lib. 1. c. 7. Athanasius in Orat. adv Gentes de Incarn Christi Hilarius ad Constant Optatus l. 5. de Schis Donat. Basil. de Sp. Sancto c. 7. Id. de verà side ac pià fide Tom. 2. Op. Graec. Lat. p. 386. Id. in Ethicis Reg. 16. Tom. 2. Id. Hom. 29. de Trinit Tom. 1. Gregor Nyss. in Dial. de animâ ac Resurrect Hieronymus in Comment in Esa. cap. 19. Id. in Epist. ad Laetam Id. adv Helvid Id. Praefat. Comment in Epist. ad Ephes. Chrysostom 13. Hom. in Gen. Id. Hom. 52. in Ioh. Id. Homil. 4. in Lazar. Id. Hom. 34. in Act. 15. Id. Praefat. in Epist. ad Rom. Id. Hom. 13. in 2 Cor. 7. Id. Hom. 9. in Coloss. 3. Id. Hom. 3. in 1 Thessal Id. Hom. 3. in 2 Thessal 2. Id. Hom. 8. in Epist. ad Hebr. c. 5. Augustin Epist. 3. Id. de Doctrinâ Christi l. 2. c. 6. 9. Id. de Unitat. Eccles. c. 3 4 5 12. Id. Epist. 157. Id. de Bapt. c. Donat. lib. 1. c. 6. l. 2. c. 3. 14. That passage in S. Augustin Ego Evangelio non crederem c. contr Ep. fundam c. 5. is interpreted by these Learned Papists following To be meant of the Primitive Church and those Men
who saw and heard our Blessed Saviour and not that the Fathers should be of more authority than the Scriptures Ioh. Gerson de vitâ Sp. Lect. 2. Hic aperitur modus c. Ioh. Driedo de Eccl. Script Dogm l. 4. c. 4. Th. Wald. Doctrinal l. 2. c. 21. Sufficiat universali Ecclesiae pro preconio potestatis suae modernae c. who is very smart upon such as held the contrary Idem Epist. 48. Tom. 2. Epist. 19. Cyril Alex. l. 7. adv Iulian Theodoret Dial. 2. Id. Qu. 45. in Genes Theophilus Alexand. in 2 Pasch. Homil. Cyril Hieros Cat. 4. Vincentius Lirinensis contra Haeres cap. 2. c. 41. Iustus Orgelitanus in c. 4. Cantic Gregorius Magnus in Ezekiel l. 1. Hom. 9. Tom. 2. Id. Moral l. 8. c. 8. Id. in Cant. c. 5. Id. Moral l. 16. c. 17. Tom. 1. Id. l. 4. Ep. 40. ad Theod. Medic. Tom. 2. Id. Epist. ad Leand. c. 4. Praefat. in Iob. Tom. 1. That the Holy Scriptures could not be corrupted but those corruptions would have been discover'd See Augustin de utilit credendi c. 3. Id. c. Faustum l. 11. c. 2. and Confess'd by Bellarmin That the Scriptures could not be corrupted but those Corruptions would be discovered by Catholicks de V. D. l. 2. c. 7. Consult in this point Bishop Iewel 's Treatise of the Holy Scriptures who in his excellent Apology handles all the main points in Controversie betwixt us and the Church of Rome and Article 15. against Harding Dr. Stillingfleet's Rational Account of the Grounds of Protestant Religion reprinted in 1681 Part 1. c. 7 8 9. Chillingworth's Religion of the Protestants a safe way to Salvation Part 1. Chap. 2. Lively Oracles by the Author as it 's said of the Whole Duty of Man SECT II. WE receive no other Books of Scripture for Canonical in the Church of England than such as of whose authority there was never any doubt in the Church The Church of Rome doth make the Books commonly call'd Apocrypha of equal authority with those of the Old and New Testament which neither the Iews to whom were committed the Oracles of God nor the Primitive Church nor any General Council nor any Doctor in the Ages succeeding till about 120 years ago in the Council of Trent nor the Greek Church to this day did ever receive as Canonical Apocrypha receiv'd as Canonical by the Papists is Contrary to the Fathers Melito apud Euseb. Histor. Eccles. l. 4. c. 25. Graec. 26. Origen in Psal. 1. Athanasius Epist. 39. in 2 Tom. Oper. Synops. Sacr. Scriptur Hilarius in Prol. Explanat in Psalmos Cyril Hierosol in Catech. 4. de Sacrâ Scripturâ Concil Laodic Canon 59. Epiphanius Haeres 8. contr Epicur Haeres 76. contra Anomaeos lib. de mens pond Basil. in Philocal c. 3. Gregor Nazianzen de veris genuinis libris S. Scripturae divinitus inspiratae in libro Carminum 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Amphilochius in Epist. ad Seleucum inter Canonicas Epistolas à Balsamone not at p. 1082. Gr. Lat. Hieronymus in Prol. Galeato sive Praefat. in lib. Regum Ruffinus in Symbol Apostol Sect. 35 36. Iunilius Africanus de part divinae legis l. 1. c. 3. Tom. 6. Bibl. patr part 2. Colon. 1618. Gregorius Magnus Moral l. 19. c. 17. Occam who liv'd above 700 after Gregory viz. about Anno Dom. 1320 explains Gregory's Judgment that Iudith Tobias the Maccabees Ecclesiasticus and the Book of Wisdom are not to be receiv'd for the confirmation of Faith Dial. part 3. Tract 1. l. 3. c. 16. Confessed By Cardinal Cajetan who liv'd but Eleven years before the Council of Trent That the Apocryphal Books are not Canonical in libro Esther sub finem Et in hoc loco terminamus c. And afterwards Nam ad Hieronymi limam scil in Prol. Galeato where he owns no Books for Canonical but such as ws receive in that sense reducenda sunt tam verba Conciliorum quà m Doctorum Confessed by Catharine who was in the Council of Trent and by Stapleton who liv'd after Catharine That the Apostles never received nor confirmed the Apocrypha And this will quite ruine their Cause when we have produced Bellarmin confessing That the Church hath no power to make a Book Canonical which was not so before Consult the Learned Bishop Cosin's Scholastical History of the Scripture-Canon upon this Subject SECT III. WE Worship the only God as we are taught to believe in him and none other The Church of Rome enjoyns those that live in its Communion to pray to their fellow Creatures who know not our thoughts and necessities to Hero's and Saints of whom they feign so many ridiculous Stories and to the Blessed Virgin to whom they use such abominable expressions Yea a great Cardinal doth not blush to say That it is not absurd that holy men be called Redeemers after a sort Invocation of Saints or Angels is Contrary to Scripture Matth. 11. 27 28. Ioh. 6. 37 14. 13. 16 23 24. Acts 10. 25 26. 14. 13 14 15. Rom. 8. 27. Ephes. 3. 20. Col. 2. 18. 1 Tim. 2. 5. 1 Ioh. 2. 1 2. And Contrary to the Fathers who tho' they might sometimes use Rhetorical Apostrophe's and Poetical flourishes are far from the Popish Tenet of Invocation Fathers against this Doctrine Ignatius in Epist. ad Philadelph Iustin Martyr Apol. 2. Theophilus Antiochenus ad Autolycum l. 1. Irenaeus l. 2. c. 57. Origen c. Celsum l. 5. p. 233 236. Concil Laodicenum Can. 35. Ambrose de obit Theodos. Id. de interpellat l. 3. c. 12. Id in Rom. 1. Tom. 5. p. 174. Ierome To. 7. in Prov. c. 2. Augustin de civit Dei l. 8. c. 27. l. 9. c. 15. c. 23. l. 10. c. 1. l. 20. c. 10. l. 22. c. 10. Id. l. 2. de visit infirm Id. Confess l. 10. c. 42. Theodoret in 2 3. Coloss. Dracontius Poetic Hexameron Confessed By some of the most Learned Papists That it is a Doctrine neither expresly nor covertly contained in the Scripture Spalatensis confesseth That Religious Invocation of Saints is Heathenism and meer civil Invocation of them tho' not so bad yet dangerous Cardinal Perron confesseth That there are no footsteps of it either in the Scriptures or in the Fathers before the first four General Councils none of which were call'd till 320 years after our Saviour's Incarnation Bellarmin confesseth That Invocation of Saints was not so much begun by any Law as by Custom This is to the purpose But yet further Wicelius saith That the Invocation of Saints is to be cast out of the Church because it ascribes God's Honour and Attributes to his Creatures and derogates from the Office and Glory of Christ by making Saints Mediators and Intercessors What Protestant could have opposed this vain Doctrine with greater strength of
Hierusalem in Leviticum l. 2. c. 8. saith It was the custom in the ancient Church to burn the remainders of the Eucharist Which place when Cheyney a Protestant in Q. Mary's days insisted upon against the Papists and demanded what it was that was burned one answered That it was either the Body of Christ or the substance of Bread put there by miracle at which he smil'd and said a Reply was needless and I think so too Chillingworth hath a pretty joking Dialogue betwixt C. and K. about Transubstantiation and the Infallibility of the Roman Church in his Protestant Religion a safe way to Salvation Part 1. Ch. 3. Edit 2. 1638. p. 158 159. Transubstantiation Confess'd Not to be in the Canon of the Bible by these Learned Papists hereafter mentioned Scotus in 4. lib. sentent dist 11. Q. 3. Occam ibid. Q. 6. Biel Lect. 40. in Can. Missae Fisher Bishop of Rochester c. 1. cont captiv Babyl Cardinal Cajetan apud Suarez Tom. 3. Disp. 46. Sect. 3. Melchior Canus Loc. com l. 3. c. 3. fund 2. That Transubstantiation was not touch'd by the Fathers was Confess'd by our English Jesuits Discurs Modest. p. 13. and by Alphonsus a Castro de Haeres l. 8. verbo Indulgentia Not own'd as an Article of Faith before the Lateran Council held Anno Dom. 1215 therefore it is no ancient Article Confess'd By Scotus apud Bellarm. l. 3. de Euchar. c. 28. And yet this was the bloody Test in Queen Mary's days by which so many Glorious Martyrs changed Earth for Heaven SECT VII OUR Church acknowledges no Purgatory or Propitiation for our sins but that which was made once for all by our Blessed Saviour and that upon the condition of Faith and Repentance We disown all Pardons and Indulgences as grounded upon no warranty of Scripture but rather repugnant to the Word of God since we are told that we have nothing but what we have received We own that good works are the fruits of Faith and follow after Justification but that they cannot put away sins and endure the severity of God's Judgment much less for the sins of others nor can we perform works over and above God's Commands call'd by the Papists works of Supererogation to say which is the highest arrogance For when we have done all we are commanded Christ enjoyns us to say We are unprofitable Servants And we look upon our selves as righteous before God for the merit of our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ by faith and not for our own works and deserts The Romish Church owns a Purgatory for sins pardoned so that there still remains a guilt of temporal punishment to be paid either in this life or hereafter in Purgatory Which upstart Doctrine of Purgatory for we shall anon shew it to be so hath prov'd the Mother of Indulgences and Pardons and thereby hath mightily enriched the Church of Rome whereby remission of sins is set upon terms in the vile market of Indulgences Murther and Incest being valued at five Grosses Perjury at six Sacriledge and Simony at seven and so on in the Tax of the Apostolick as it is pretended Chancery Hence above 60000 Marks besides all other payments to the See of Rome were yearly carried out of this Kingdom by the Italians being a greater Revenue than our King then had as appears by a fruitless complaint in a Letter from the whole Nation to the Council of Lions Anno Dom. 1245. A round summ it was in those days before the Indian Gold was discover'd and yet that was spent in maintaining the lust and ambition of the Popish Clergy Popish Purgatory Contrary to Scripture Gal. 3. 13. Heb. 1. 3 c. 9. 14. c. 10. 10. Rom. 5. 1 2 10 11 Rev. 14. 13. which last Text is a place so clear against Purgatory that Picherellus a Papist of the Sorbon College did ingeniously confess that S. Iohn had in those few words put out the fire of Purgatory de Missà pag. 156. Contrary to the Fathers Dionysius Areopagita Eccles. Hier. c. 7. Author of the Questions in Iustin Quaest. 75. Tertullian de Baptismo Cyprian's Tract ad Demetri Sect. 16. Macarius Homil. 22. Hilarius in Psal. 2. Gregon Nazianzen Orat. 5. in Plagam grandinis Orat. 42. in Pascha de Eccles. Dogmat. c. 79. Ambrose de bono mortis cap. 4. Chrysostom de poenit Serm. 3. Id. in Genes Hom. 5. Hom. 16. in Ep. ad Rom. Epiphanius Haeres 79. sub finem Augustin though he doubts in this point in Enchirid. c. 67 69. De civit Dei l. 21. c. 26. de fide op c. 16. is positive elsewhere against Purgatory scil lib. de pec mer. rem cap. 28. he saith That there is no middle place That a Man may be any where but with the Devil who is not with God Gregor Magnus in Iob. lib. 13. c. 20. Bede in Psal. 6. Otho Frisingensis in Chron. l. 8. c. 26. Anselm in 2 Cor. 5. Bernard Epist. 266. Lumbard sen. 3. dist 19. lit A. He liv'd Anno Dom. 1144. Contrary to the Doctrine of the Greek Church of the later Ages as appears from their Apology delivered to the Council of Basil about 253 years ago Hence doth Alphonsus a Castro place their not holding a Purgatory among the Errors of the Greek Church l. 12. tit Purgat Purgatory Confess'd By Petrus Picherellus to have no fewel either to kindle or maintain its fire in Scripture Picherell de Missa c. 2. Confess'd That neither the Scriptures nor the Ancient Fathers have any thing in them concerning Purgatory By Alphonsus à Castro l. 12. tit Purgat f. 258. Confess'd That few or none of the Greek Fathers ever mention it and the Latin Fathers did not at all believe it but by degrees came to entertain opinions of it and that the Catholick Church knew it lately By Roffensis Art 18. con Luther Polydore Virgil. de Invent. rerum l. 8. Confess'd By another learned Roman Catholick Father Barns That it is a thing which lies meerly in human invention and cannot be firmly deduced from Scriptures Fathers and Councils and That the opposite opinion seems more agreeable to them in Catholico-Rom Pacificus Sect. 9. Consult herein Archbishop Laud against Jesuit Fisher. Dr. Stillingfleet's Rational Account Part 3. Ch. 6. Bishop Taylor 's Disswasive Part 1. Ch. 1. Sect. 4. The Rise of In dulgences At first the Indulgences that were were but relaxations or releasements of Canonical satisfaction i. e. of the Discipline or correction of the Church In this sense are to be understood the first Council of Nice c. 11. of Arles c. 10. and of Ancyra c. 2. But their new and chief foundation was laid by Pope Clement the sixth in his Extravagant Ann. Dom. 1350. Confess'd That we have nothing in the Scripture nor in the sayings of the Ancient Fathers concerning Indulgences as satisfactions before God
Succession to the Apostles of our Saviour as fully as any other Church at this day can do so do we leave all Ecclesiasticks whether Bishops Priests or Deacons to Marry at their own discretion as they shall judge the same to serve better to godliness since Marriage is honourable in all and not forbid but permited and in Cases so requiring enjoyned by God's Law and practised as well as taught by persons of the same function i. e. Priests in the best and purest Ages of the Church as may be seen in the following Quotations The Church of Rome denies Marriage to the Clergy but permits I suppose by way of requital to them Concubines For so doth Cardinal Campegius observe and Pighius teach which doth not only give great cause of scandal to Iews and Infidels but in the Holy Apostles judgment is the Doctrine of Devils And the Reason of Concubinage may be easily inferr'd when some of their most Learned Men will scarce allow Fornication to be a Sin however preferring it in Ecclesiasticks before lawful Wedlock The forbidding of Marriage is Contrary to Scripture Levit. 21. 13. 1 Tim. 3 2. 12. Hebr. 13. 4. 1 Cor. 7. 2 9. That the Apostles were Married except S. Iohn is Confessed by these Fathers Ignatius ad Philadelph Clemens Stromat lib. 7. Euseb. Histor. Eccles. lib. 3. c. 30. who report that S. Paul was Married and S. Ambrose in 2 Cor. c. 11. who acknowledges that all the Apostles except S. Iohn were Married Fathers that were Married themselves and yet were either Bishops or Priests c. Tertullian as appears by his Two Books to his Wife and yet he was a Priest as appears from S. Ierome do Eccles. Script Gregory Nazianzen was the Son of a Bishop see Greg. Nazianz. in carmine de vitâ suâ Elias Cretensis in Orat. Greg. Nazianz. S. Hilary Bishop of Poictiers was Married as is evident from his Epistle written to his Daughter Abrae c. Fathers Voting for or acknowledging Matrimony in the Clergy Salvian de providentiâ l. 5. Ambrose Offic. l. 1. c. ult Chrysostome in Epist. ad Tit. Homil. 2. Id. in Epist. ad Hebraeos Homil. 7. Epiphanius contra Origenian Theodoret. in 1 Tim. 4. Isidore Reg. de vitâ Cleric dist 23. c. His igitur Theophylact in 1 Tim. 13. Bernard in Cant. Serm. 66. Aeneas Sylvius Epistol 308. and he lived Anno Dom. 1458. Marriage of the Clergy was not absolutely forbidden by the Greeks in the last Age as appears by the Patriarch Hieremias's Letter to the Tubing Divines dated May 15. 1576. Primum Patriar Resp. apud Chytrae de statu Eccles Orient p. 149. This Heretical Doctrine of forced Celibate in Ecclesiasticks was first established at Rome by Pope Gregory the 7th aliàs Hildebrand termed Antichrist by Ancient Historians about A. D. 1074. and was first put in practice to purpose by Anselm Archbishop of Canterbury here in England about A. D. 1105. though some will have his Predecessor Lanfranc to have imposed it upon the Prebendaries and Clergy that lived in Towns but not without great reluctancy For what complaints what Tragedies what lascivious pranks this Devillish Doctrine occasioned the Historians declare at large particularly that Comical Story of the Italian Cardinal Iohn de Crema Recorded by Ancient Popish Historians who after he had entertained the English Clergy with a fine Discourse against Marriage was the same night caught in Bed with a Harlot in London as if he would only commend Virginity to others and practise the contrary himself That the Reader may know what an Age this was wherein the Celibate of the Clergy was established let him hear Cardinal Bellarmin describing and characterizing it in his Chronology In these times saith he wherein the Roman Bishops did degenerate from the Piety of the Ancients mark that the secular Princes flourished in Holiness You therefore see that Priests Marriage was forbidden by impious Popes And about the beginning of this contention viz. about An. Dom. 860. the Pope got a round check from Udalricus or Ulric a Bishop of that time who told him That in the judgment of all wise Men it was to be accounted violence when any Man against Evangelical Institution mind that and the charge of the Holy Ghost is constrained to the execution of private Decrees The Lord in the old Law appointed Marriage to his Priest which he is never read afterwards to have forbidden But not to insist upon this clear testimony for the Doctrine and Practice of our Church nor to mention the many other ill consequences of a Celibate in the Clergy which occasion in other Countries where Popish Religion is publickly professed that Satyrical Proverb to be Fils de Prestre by some of the most eminent Men in the Roman Church and those too of a late date It is Confessed That Priesthood doth not dissolve Marriage so Cardinal Cajetan Tom. 1. Tract 27. Nor That it is of the essence or being of a Priest to keep single so Dominicus Soto l. 7. de Iure Qu. 4. Moreover that upstart practice in the Roman Church of Auricular Confession wherein every Christian is bound under pain of Damnation to confess to a Priest all his mortal Sins which after a diligent examination he can possibly remember yea even his most secret sins his very thoughts yea and all the circumstances of them which are of any moment is a slavery as great as groundless Then not to mention its ill aspect upon Government as being made an engine of State and a Picklock of the Cabinets of Princes sealing up all things from the notice of the Magistrate but in requital of that making a liberal discovery of what is against him to others A pregnant instance of which horrid consequence was that damnable Treason designed by Gunpowder against the Person of King Iames the First of blessed Memory and the two Houses of Parliament to which the Pope himself as we are credibly informed was not only privy but its director too Pursuant thereof that Pope Clement VIII a little before that time gave order that no Priest should discover any thing that came to his Knowledge in Confession to the benefit of the Secular Government I think there needs no better evidence of the Pope's good intentions towards the Secular Government nor what ill effects the practice of this sort of Confession can and may produce than this And that it still may be used as an Instrument in procuring the ruine of Princes and subversion of Kingdoms Let us hear their i. e. the Popish Doctors opinion of its virtue and use One of them then tell us That the Seal of Auricular Confession which they hold to be of Divine institution is so Sacred that it may not be broken open to save the Lives of Princes or of the whole Commonwealth Another goes further and saith That the Seal of Confession is not to be broken
no not to save all the World Here the Reader may see for this is not only the opinion of one or two private Men but runs with the stream of their Writers what may be expected from the Charity of their Popish Priests what an unlucky tool Auricular Confession is in their hands Besides to how great an awe of and respect for their Confessor to whom they are bound as I have already said to discover all their Sins under pain of Eternal Damnation To what Pride and Insolence to what Lust and Revenge to what Avarice and Rapine are not only the meanest Men but even Persons that make the greatest figure exposed unto by Auricular Confession in Popish Churches It is a slavery so great and intollerable that the Israelitish Tasks in Egypt were a pleasure or at least a divertisement in comparison of it Auricular Confession to a Priest under point of Salvation and Damnation and that People cannot be saved without it is Contrary to Scripture Isai. 55. 7. Acts 2. 38. c. 3. 19. c. 16. 30 31. Rom. 10. 3. Contrary to the Fathers who when they did speak of the necessity of Confession generally meant Confession before God only or a publick acknowledgment of some publick crimes incurring the censure of Excommunication and that in an Ecclesiastical Assembly Origen in Psal. 37. Hom. 2. Cyprian de lapsis Serm. 5. Chrysostom Hom. 4. de Lazaro Id. Hom. 2. in Psal. 50. Homil. 31. in Epist. ad Hebraeos Hom. 5. de incomprehensibili nat Dei Hom. 8. de poen Hom. de poenit Confessione Augustin Confession l. 10. c. 3. Auricular Confession acknowledged not to have been Instituted by our Saviour and that it is not of Divine Institution by these Learned Papists Cardinal Cajetan in Ioh. 20. Scotus in sent 4. dist 17. Q. 1. Maldon in summa Qu. 18. Art 4. Bell. de poenit l. 1. c. 4. Acknowledged by others That it is better to say that it was Instituted rather by the Tradition of the Universal Church than by the Authority of the Old and New Testament And yet it is denyed That this Tradition is Universal and that it is not necessary amongst the Greeks because this Custom i. e. of private Confession sprung not up among them de poenit dist 5. in principio Gloss. Again it is Confessed That the Fathers scarce speak of it as a thing commanded by Rhenanus in admonitione de Tertullian Dogmat. Lastly It is Confessed That we may obtain Pardon though our Mouths be silent then we do not confess And our Lord doth shew that a Sinner is not cleansed by the Judgment of the Priest but by the Bounty of Divine Grace Gratian dist 1. cap. Convertimini What clashing and enterfering is here Is this the pretended solid Union of the Popish Church in matters of Salvation and which she enjoyns under pain of Damnation Have they no better Grounds for their Articles of Faith than these Can Auricular Confession be of Divine Institution and yet neither be Instituted by our Blessed Saviour nor mentioned by the Fathers as a Divine Precept nor imposed by an Universal Tradition of the Church And lastly can it be necessary to Salvation and yet we can obtain pardon of Sins without the use of it Let any Papist reconcile me these erit mihi magnus Apollo Consult herein Bishop Taylor 's Disswasive Part 1. Ch. 2. Sect. 2. F. White against Jesuite Fisher p. 189. Concerning the Marriage of the Clergy see Bishop Iewel 's Defence of the Apology of the Church of England Part 2. p. 180. and Part 5. p. 456. Bishop Hall's Honour of the married Clergy SECT X. AS I have all along shewed the vast difference in Doctrines betwixt the Protestant Church of England and the Church of Rome so will I put a Period to this Discourse after I have done the like in that of Obedience Which I shall not as I have hitherto argue from the Articles and Homilies of our Church the Decrees of their Church the Writings of the Fathers and from Ancient Councils because that hath been sufficiently canvassed of late years but only subjoyn the undenyable Testimonies of King Iames I. and King Charles the Martyr of ever-blessed Memories and the Royal Grandfather and Father of our present Gracious Sovereign to determin the Case of Protestant's Loyalty and Popish Rebellion King Charles I. in his Excellent Book entituled ' 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 chap. 27. to our late Gracious King and then Prince of Wales saith The best Profession of Religion I have ever esteemed that of the Church of England in which you have been educated In this I charge you to persevere as coming nearest to God's Word for Doctrine and to the Primitive Example for Government I tell you I have tried it and after much search and many disputes have concluded it to be the best in the World keeping the middle way between the pomp of Superstitious Tyranny and the meanness of Fantastick Anarchy King Iames I. in His Works p. 504. saith As on one part many honest Men seduced with some Errors of Popery may yet remain good and faithful Subjects so on the other part none of those that truly know and believe the whole grounds and School-conclusions of their Doctrines can ever either prove good Christians or good Subjects Ibid. Scarce any one who hath been a beginner or prosecutor of this late War against the Church the Laws and Me was or is a true Lover Embracer or Practiser of the Protestant Religion established in England To which I add Solatii ergô that excellent Expression in His Majesty's first and most Gracious Speech to His Privy Council I know the Principles of the Church of England are for Monarchy and the Members of it have shewed themselves good and faithful Subjects therefore shall I always take care to defend and support it King Charles I. in his Solemn Declaration October 23. 1642. saith That there was a greater number of Papists in the Rebels Army than in His. To which may be added That then they are guilty of this mortal Sin of Obedience to a Protestant Prince when they are not strong enough to manage a Rebellion Watson's Quodlibets p. 255. These words deserve to be written in Letters of Gold however they are written in large Characters in good Protestants Hearts Now Unto Him who is able to keep us from falling and to present us faultless before the presence of his Glory with exceeding Ioy To the only Wise God our Saviour be Glory and Majesty Dominion and Power both now and ever Amen FINIS Books lately printed for Richard Chiswell A Dissertation concerning the Government of the Ancient Church more particularly of the Encroachments of the Bishops of Rome upon other See's By WILLIAM CAVE D. D. Octavo An Answer to Mr. Serjeant's Sure Footing in Christianity concerning the Rule of Faith With some other Discourses By WILLIAM FALKNER D. D. 4o. A Vindication of the Ordinations of
the Church of England in Answer to a Paper written by one of the Church of Rome to prove the Nullity of our Orders By GILBERT BURNET D. D. Octavo An Abridgment of the History of the Reformation of the Church of England By GILB BURNET D. D. Octavo The APOLOGY of the Church of England and an Epistle to one Signior Scipio a Venetian Gentleman concerning the Council of Trent Written both in Latin by the Right Reverend Father in God IOHN IEWEL Lord Bishop of Salisbury Made English by a Person of Quality To which is added The Life of the said Bishop Collected and written by the same Hand Octavo The Life of WILLIAM BEDEL D. D. Bishop of Kilmore in Ireland Together with Certain Letters which passed betwixt him and Iames Waddesworth a late Pensioner of the Holy Inquisition of Sevil in Matter of Religion concerning the General Motives to the Roman Obedience Octavo The Decree made at ROME the Second of March 1679. condemning some Opinions of the Iesuits and other Casuists Quarto A Discourse concerning the Necessity of Reformation with respect to the Errors and Corruptions of the Church of Rome Quarto A Discourse concerning the Celebration of Divine Service in an Unknown Tongue Quarto a For so doth Mons. Militere in his Epistle to His late Majesty confess b Vives de Instrumentis probab 1 Crantzius Metropol 7. 45. 2 Bellarmin de verbo dei l. 4. c. 4. Pighius Eccles. Hierarch l. 3. c. 3. Pool de primatu Romanae Ecclesiae fol. 92. * 2 Tim. 3. 16. 3 Concil de stabilienda Rom. sede p. 6. 4 Concil Trident. Sess. 4. decret 1. 5 Dr Iames his Corruption of the Fathers Part 4. p. 26. 6 Anno 44. Sect. 42. †Bellar. de Tradit cap. 9. 7 Coster Enchirid Controvers cap. 2. Constat manifeste c. Campian rat 3 Seculis omnino quindecim c. rat 10. Testes resomnes 8 Baronius ad 〈◊〉 34. 9 Bellarmin de Concil autorit l. 2 c. 12. Sect. Respondeo 10 How the Papists contemn and condemn the Fathers See Dr. Iames's Corruption of the Fathers part 4. 11 Salmeron in Ep. ad Rom. cap. 5. disp 51. p. 468. 12 Corn. Muss Episc. Bitont in Rom. 14. p. 468. 13 Apolog. adv Rufin l. 2. p. 219. tom 2. 14 Vid. Bin. not ad 2. Concil Constant. tom 1. part 1. p. 541. Item not ad Concil Chalced. tom 2. par 1. p. 410. 15 Lud. Vives in Aug. de civit Dei l. 20. c. 36. 16 See Dr. Iumes's Corruption of the Scriptures Fathers and Councils Printed 1611. Part 4. 17 Joh. 5. 31. 18 Capitul Carol. Mag. c. 88. 19 Anaclet Epist. ap Bin. Tom. 1. Part. 1. p. 43. 20 Gelas. decr de Confec dist 2. cap. 12. 21 Binius in notis Tom. 1. part 1. p. 64. 22 P. Gelas. Ep. 4. 23 Neminem velim sic 〈◊〉 mea omnia ut me sequatur nisi in eis quibus me non ertare perspexerit August de persever Sanct. cap. 21. tom 27. Solis eis Scripturarum libris qui jam Canonic appellantur didici hunc timorem honoremque de erre ut nullum eorum autorem Scribendo aliquid errasse firmissime credam August Epist. 19. 25 Cusan de Concil Cath. 2. 3. 26 Aen. Sylvius de gestis Concil Basil. 27 De Rom. Pont. l. 4 c. 4. 28 Idem de Pontif. l. 2. c. 29. 29 Id. de Rom. Pont. l. 4. c. 2. Sect. Secunda Opinio 30 Idem de Concil l. 2. cap. 13. 31 Barns's Catholico-Romanus Pacificus MS. Sect. 31. 1 Articles of the Church of England published Ann. Dom. 1562. for the avoiding of diversities of opinions and for the establishing of consent touching true Religion Article 6 20. 2d Book of Homilies Hom. 2. 2 2. Tim. 3. 15. 3 Concil Trident. Sess. 4. Decret 1. 4 Pighius Eccles. Hierarch l. 3. c. 3. 5 Bellarmine de verbo Dei l. 4. c. 4. 6 Pool de Primatu Romanae Ecclesiae sol 92. 7 Caranza Controvers 1. And no marvel when another affirmeth that the Scripture hath no more authority than Aesop's Fables V. Bailly Tract 1. 9. 17. 8 Peter Sutor Translat Bibl. c. 22. 9 Consul de Stabilienda Rom. sede p. 6. And though the Papists do cashier the publick use of the Holy Scriptures and fly to as they pretend an Infallible Judge yet are they not agreed among themselves who that should be These Learned Romanists following contend that the priviledge of Infallibility belongs only to the whole Church militant and neither to the Pope nor General Council nor to the Body of the Clergy Occam Dial. p. 1. l. 5. c. 25 29 3. 10 Cusanus Concord Cathol l. 2. c. 3. Antoninus Sum. Summarum p. 3. Tit. 23. c. 2. §. 6. Panormitan Decret p. 1. l. 1. Tit. de Elect. Cap. significasti Mirandula de fide ordine credend Theor. 4. 11 In fine Concil Trident. Reg. 4. 12 Hence comes it to pass that not only the Popish Laity but even the Priests themselves are very ignorant in the Holy Scriptures so that once a Schoolman in the last Age being to preach at Paris where the famous Melancthon was his Auditor took a Text for want I suppose of a better Book out of Aristotle's Ethicks Sixtinus Amama Orat. de Barbarie ex Melancth 13 Artic. 6. 14 Concil Trident. Sâ—ss 4. 15 Witness the two Learned Iews Philo Iudaeus apud Euseb. de Praeparat Evangel l. 8. and Iosephus apud Euseb. Histor. Eccles. l. 3. c. 9. alias 10. and this is fully confessed by Bellarmine de Verbo Dei l. 1. c. 10. 16 Rom. 3. 2. 17 As for the third pretended Council of Carthage alledged by some Papists S. Austin who was one of the chief therein votes in this point for the Doctrine of our Church de Civitate Dei l. 17. c. ult alibi And though they pretend that the Book of Baruch held by us as Apocryphal was declared Canonical in the Council of Florence yet did Driedo afterwards deny it to be so De Dogm Eccles. l. 1. c. 4. which neither would have done if the Church Catholick had declared the Apocrypha Canonical 18 Rycaut's Present State of the Greek Church pag. 372. 19 Catharin Opâ—sc de Script Canonicis Quod autem Apostoli c. 20 Stapleton de autoritat S. Script l. 2. c. 4. § 14. Sapientiam Ecclesiasticum c. 21 Bellarmin de Verbo Dei c. 10. Itaque fatemur Ecclesiam nullo modo posse 〈…〉 non Canonico nec contra 22 Article 1 -2 Book of Homilies Hom. 2. 23 Artic. 22. 24 Concil Trid. Sess. 25. Bulla Pii 4. 25 1 Cor. 2. 11. compared with Isai. 63. 16. S. Augustin saith That the Souls of the dead are there where they see not all things which are done or happen to people in this life Augustin de cura pro mortuis c. 13. 26 Brev. Rom. Antw. 1663. p. 984. 27 Bellarmin de Indulgentiis c. 4. sub finem