him selfe c. Lastly Sebastianus Francus concludeth for certaine that (z) Ep. de abrogandis stat Eccles Presently after the Apostles times al thinges were turned vpside downe c. And that for certaine through the worke of Antichrist the external Church together with the faith and Sacraments vanished away presently after the Apostles departure that for these 1400. years the Church haith beene no where external and visible c. So peremptorily do they charge the auncient and holy Fathers of the Primitiue Church with Antichristian Apostacy from the faith of Christ Yea they do not forbeare to publish to the world their special booke of that argument entituled (a) His Maiesty in his declaratiâ—n concerning his proceedinges with the states in case of Voâ—stius p. 15. 19. 35. De Apostasia Sanctorum and to send the same to the Arch-bishop of Canterbury and to mantaine further by letter vnto the said Archbishop that the doctrine contained in that booke de Apostasia Sanctorum was agreeable to the doctrine of the Church of England The miserable deceiued author therof and other his complices Napier Brightman Brocard Leigh and sundry other Protestant writers not discerning that by such their pretended Apostacy them selues do in very deed as precursors prepare and make way to that fearful Apostacy which is in their opinion foretould by the (b) 2. Thes 2.3 and see Caluin vpon the same place as also Piscator Apostle to happen before the end of the world for what els is this pretended Apostacy of the Primitiue Church other then a plaine preparation and earnest perswasion to make Apostacy or departure from the doctrine of the Primitiue church and so consequently from the doctrine of Christ and his Apostles So cleare it is that not onely the ages subsequent but also precedent to S. Austin vp to the Apostles are al of them disliked and condemned by Protestants as wholly papistical and Antichristian The conclusion of the whole booke HItherto gentle Reader haue I intertained thy paines and patience in making proofe to thee of S. Austines professed religion from his owne alledged sayinges reported miracles with solution also to the contrary obiections vsually pretended from S. Austin only now in conclusion of al I offer to thy consideration how vnlike it is that I should be able to alledge to thee so many plaine and pregnant sayinges of S. Austin in behalfe of so many seueral pointes of religion and al or most of them for such by the learned aduersary confessed and yet further confirmed with like confessed consenting doctrine of the other auncient Fathers that liued next before in and after his age and al this notwithstanding no such matter as some aduersaries pretend to be by S. Austin therin intended or meant Could he not in some onely one or other but in al the cheife pointes of controuersy speake so plainly with vs and against Protestancy and so likewise acknowledged by Protestants them selues and yet himselfe in those very pointes ioyne in religion with Protestants and against vs Al which being so abundantly hertofore in this treatise examined and proued euen from the sparing and wary confession of the learned aduersaries who acknowledge no more then the racke of truth enforceth them vnto may suffice to satisfy thee studious Reader that hereby is deliuered to thee but as it were the bare out side or naked apparance of thinges in comparison of that far greater proofe and euidence which is in very deede at large abouÌ„ding in the writings of S. Austin the other auncient Fathers If therefore any shal without al forehead seeke to abuse thee with denyal of so euident premises I do therein boldly appeale to the equity of thine owne indifferent iudgement And as for those other who with more plaine dealing but no lesse offence in do ingeniously confesse and acknowledge S. Austines foresaid doctrine to make with vs yet withal contemne and reiect the same for Popish if any I say supercilious forehead of that ranke who (c) Math. 13.13.14 hauing eares to heare and wil not heare eyes to see and wil not see shal oppose against vs his owne late aduerse nouel doctrine as pretended from the Scriptures in the vnderstanding wherof he doubteth not to prefer his owne priuate interpretation before S. Austin and the other Fathers I can but yet not without commiseration pronounce of such a one (d) Apoc. 22.11 Qui sordidus est sordescat adhuc And I must needes apply vnto him those wordes of our Kinges most excellent Maiesty which he worthily deliuered against Vorstius a principal pretender of this Christian liberty As for (e) In his foresaid declaration p. 63. 64. this Christian liberty saith he which Vorstius doth vrge so much certainly he doth it with no other intention but onely vnder this faire pretext c. to abuse the world c. To abuse Christian liberty in presuming to propound a new doctrine to the world in point of the highest and holiest mysteries of God is a most audacious rashnes and impudent arrogancy And againe (f) Ibid. p. 61. 62. If one particular man may take vpon him such singularity as this how shal he be subiect to general national and synodical Councels c. Wherefore he is plainly discouered to be resolued not to be subiect in any sort to the iudgement of the Church c. for he knowes to wel that the auncient Church c. is against him And this is the reason why he wil not in these pointes submit him selfe to the iudgement of any mortal man but vpon this occasion mantaines his Christian liberty Thus far his Maiesty against Vorstius and indeede against al Protestants who being pressed with the aucthority of S. Austin the other Fathers of the Primitiue Church either for the interpretation of the Scriptures or for our knowledge of the practise of those purest times in matters of faith and religion do finally betake them selues to this desperate refuge of contemning S. Austin and al Fathers vpon pretence of this Christian liberty that al controuersies are to be decyded onely by the priuate spirit interpreting the Scriptures Now lastly as to al Catholicke Readers I conclude that seeing the faith which at this day we beleeue and professe is confessedly the same with that of S. Austines and the other holy Bishops and Doctors of the Primitiue Church that therfore amongst the other greatest blessinges of God bestowed vpon vs we euer esteeme this with highest respect of our happy vocation In due requital and gratitude wherto let vs with al exultation of minde accept and embrace what pressures punishmeÌ„ts and torments so euer inflicted vpon vs for our defence therof yea if death it selfe be vrged let vs rather make choice to dye in our Lord with S. Austin S. Ambrose S. Hierome S. Gregory and the other holy Prelates Martyrs Confessors Virgins of those purest times then to dye the death of the wicked with Aerius Iouinian Vigilantius
our times was in dislike with greater volumes as al weryed or rather offended with prolixity of discourse In which respect you moued me to vndertake as my health whould permit some such short labour as might become grateful thereupon propounding for matter fitting to be hanled the doctrine of S. Austin concerning the many now controuerted pointes of religion wherof you willed me to collect set downe for euery one some litle And albeâ—t that your thus directing me to such enioyned breuity which in case of the aduersaries answeares thereto lyeth commonly open to the inconuenience of great disaduantage be contrary to that forme of larger discourse which (a) Tom. 2. ep 23. Bonifacio post med S. Austin obserued from Nebriclius for necessary who affirmed that in a great question he hated a short answeare the more yet that I haue sithence considered of your motion the more with al did I as condescending to the necessity of the times incline so breifly as the matter wil permit and without al affected curiosity of wordes to vndertake in satisfaction therof this ensuing labour as receiuing I must confesse no smale encoragement thereto both from auncient writers and Doctors and our moderne Protestant aduersaries them selues al of theÌ„ approuing much commending S. Austin and his (b) Ep. to S. Aug. extant in Austines workes Tom. 2. ep 25. prope initium doctrine S. Hierome saith to S. Austin I haue alwaies reuerenced thy sainctity with that honor which is fitting and I haue loued our Lord and Sauiour dwelling in thee c. increase in vertue thou art famous in the world Catholickes do worship thee as the builder againe of the auncient faith c. S. (c) Extant in S. Austin Tom. 2. ep 31. paulo post initium Paulinus Bishop of Nola in his like Epistle to S. Austin tearmeth him the salt of the earth and the light worthily placed vpoÌ„ the candlestick of the Church (d) Ep. ad quosdaÌ„ Galliarum Epis extant Tom. 1. Con. cil Caelestinus saith we haue alwaies accompted Austin a man of holy memory for his life and merits of our Communion c. whom we haue long sicne remembred to haue beene of so great knowledge that by our predicessors he was alwaies esteemed amongst the best Maisters Prosper (e) Lib. 3. de vita contemp cap. 31. describeth S. Austin to be sharpe of wit c. painful in Ecclesiastical labours cleare in dayly diputations c. Catholicke in his expositioÌ„ of our faith c. yea he slyleth him (f) Ep. de gratia et de lib. arb ad Ruffinum The cheife portion of the Preistes of our Lord of that time And the like deserued prases are largely geuen to S. Austin by (g) In his epistle extant Aug. tom 2. ep 37. Possid in vita Aug. Hil. ep ad Aratum Vic. l. 1. de persec Vand. Cas in prologo super Psalterium Seuerus Sulpitius Possidonius Hillarius Victor Cassiodorus and sundry others But the splendour of his deserts is so shyning as that euen the learnedst Protestants rest in greatest admiratioÌ„ therof So D. (h) Tom. 7. Wittenberg fol. 405. Luther affirmeth that since the Apostles times the Church neuer had a better Dactor then S. Austin And (i) Loc. com clas 4. pag. 45. after the sacred Scriptures there is no doctor in the Church who is to be compared to Austin Doctor (k) Answeare to Iohn Burges pag. 3. Couel affirmeth that he was A man far beyond al that euâ—â— were before him or shal in likelihood follow after him both for diuine and humane learning those being excepted that were inspired With whom agreeth Doctor (l) Of the Church l. 3. fol. 170. Field tearming Austin the greatest of al the Fathers and worthiest diuine the Church of God euer had since the Apostles times which so high commendation made of him is not the onely priuate iudgement of these few for an other (m) Gomarus his speculum verae Ecclesiae pag. 96. Protestant writer acknowledgeth that Austin of al the Fathers is houlden most pure in the opinion of al. And M. (n) Monas Tessagraphica c. in proâ—m p. 3. Forrester styleth him That monarch of the Fathers S. Austin But not onely S. Austin personally but euen the age wherein he liued for sainctity and learning haâ—th beene euer and very specially houlden for most renowmed So D. (o) In his letter to Sir Fraucis Knowles extant in the treatise entituled informations from Scotland p. 80. Raynoldes affirmeth that The time of S. Austin was the most storishing time that euer happened since the Apostles dayes either for learning or zeale Yea saith M. (p) His tryal of the Romish Cleargy p. 293. Wootton The Church in S. Austines time by the blessing of God was so enlarged that it had the possession of many partes of the world And that in comparison of it the Arian heresy was but in corners Caluin (q) Institut l. 3. c. 3. sec 10. him selfe hereupon yet further acknowledging that Austin onely is sufficient to shew the iudgement of the auncient Church In so much as M. (r) His Retentiue p. 85. Fulke forbeareth not to beare the world in hand that to vse his wordes the Popish Church is but an heretical assembly departed from the vniuersal Church long since Augustines departure out of this life wherto D. (s) Answeare to F. Campion in English in the contents fol. a. 2. parag 28. Whitaker addeth that Austin was wholly on the Protestants side Now as it cannot vpon these premises be denyed concerning S. Austines religion ingeneral but that euen in our aduersaries iudgement it vndoubtedly was the same religion which the Apostles pubiished and deliuered to posterity so can I not but ioyne with you in resting hopeful that if I can be able though but breifly yet truly to make it appeare that the particulars of S. Austines doctrine touching the seueral points at this day in controuersy were consonant and agreeable with our now professed Catholicke religion this then wil fal out to be a matter vnto our aduersaries very perswading and to al indifferent readers no lesse then conuincing that our said religion is the very same for truth substance with that vndoubted Primitiue faith which the Apostles them selues first taught and deliuered afterwardes by their successors to S. Austin And for so much as S. Austin liuing so many ages before our times and as then ignorant of our late since vprysing and dayly encreasing controuersies could not foresee to leaue behind him direct and pnuctual resolution to euery of our now occurring particular doubtes or further to entreate of them then as was casually ministred to him by the accidental occasions of those times the due obseruation herof doth premonish the indifferent reader as discerning the sunnes great brightnes though shyning to him but through a slender creuise how to esteeme of that litle in comparison which shal so appeare
(4) Tom. 7. de vnit Eccles c. 8. initio Therefore let vs heare some few from the Psalmes song so long agoe and let vs see with great ioy that they are accmoplished And then immediatly after both there and cap. 9. he alledgeth testimonies from the Psalmes ouer many to recyte and right worthy of the readers perusal and obseruation And speaking of the (u) Ibidem c. 7. initio Prophets How many and how manifest are the testimonies saith he of the Church dispersed through al nations ouer al the world from whence I wil recite some few leauing more to the leasure of the readers fearing God And then reckning vp a number of Esaies prophecies to this purpose he affirmeth many more which saith he are so many that from Esay alone if I should gather al I should exceede the measure of fitting speach And in reguard of his so many and plaine predictions S. (w) Tom. 5. de ciuit Dei l. 18. c. 29. post init Austin affirmeth that Esay prophesyed so that by some he was tearmed rather an Euangelist then a Prophet concluding also directly to the point that as heretical conuenticles connot be called Catholicke in reguard they do but preauile for certaine times incertaine prouinces so againe the true Church is called Cath in reguard of iâ— foretold large lasting extent for thus S. (x) Tom. 9. de Symbolo l. 4. c. vlt. circa med and see Toâ— 10. de tempoâ—e ser 131. post med Austin writeth the Church possesseth the whole which she receiued of her huâ—band in dowry c. Euâ—ry congregation of what heresy so euer lurketh in corners she is a concubine not a matron O Arian heresy why dost thou insult why dost thou puf why dost thou also for a time vsurpe many thinges c. And he vrgeth the Donatists saying (y) Tom. 7. cont Gaudent l. 2. c. 2. circa med If yours be the Catholicke Church shew it to stretch out in beames ouer the whol world shew it to extend it bowes with plenty of fruict ouer the whol earth for hence by the Greeke word also it is named Catholicke And againe it is called in Greeke (z) Tom. 2. epist 170. ad Seuerinum ante med Catholicke because it is spread ouer the whol world it is lawful for none to be ignorant of her And whereas D. (a) Answeare to a counterfeare Catholicke p. 95. against Purgatory p. 14. Fulke obiecteth to the contrary that the Church is not called Catholicke because it should be euery where c. The Popish Church is not in euery part of the world for Mahomet sect is the greater part many countries are Idolaters and most of them that professe are not in the felowship of the Popish Church This very obiection S. Austin answeareth against Cresconius the Donatist in these wordes (b) Tom. 7. cont Crescon l. 3. c. 63. fine Thou disputest foolishly against the most manifest truth that therefore the world doth not communicate with vs because as yet there are many of barbarous nations who haue not beleeued in Christ because vnder the name of Christ there are many heresies different from the communion of our society c. S. Austin teacheth that the miliant Church must euer continue and that visibly SECTION 3. THough the militant Churches perpetual continuance and visibility be already sufficiently implyed in S. Austines foresaid assertions of it remaning Catholicke yet because the contrary is very daungerously taught by sundry Prorestants I wil yet further proceede therein And first concerning her continuance wheras our aduersaries teach that before Luthers time (c) Perkins vpon the Creede p. 400. an vniuersal Apostacy ouer spread the whole face of the earth and that their Church was not visible to the world Also that (d) Chamierus in ep Iesuit part 2. p. 49. error possessed not one or other litle portion of the Church but the Apostacy auerted the whol body from Christ That likewise (e) Whitak in resp ad rat Camp rat 3. p. 48. the mistery of iniquity went through al the parts of the Church and so at last possessed the whole Church In defence of which so miserable a refuge wherto our aduersaries are enforced to betake them selues vpon our prouoking them to show forth their Church for former times D. Fulke and D. Willet are not abashed to conclude that (f) Answeare to a counterfeat Catholik pag 79. the visible Church may become an Adultres and be diuorced from Christ and that the (g) Synopsis p. 52. 54. visible Church may faile vpon earth Now S. Austin directly against al this reproueth these Protestants in their forefathers the Donatistes as being erroneous saith he (h) Tom. 7. de vnit Eccles cap. 13. prope fin in that they wrested the Scriptures against the Church of God as though it might haue beene thought to haue fallen away and perished from the whole world Reprehending them â—lso yet further in their saying as Prot. now did (i) Tom. 8. in Psal 101. con 2. ante med Apostatauit et perijt Ecclesia de omnibus gentibus the Church haith fallen away and perished out of al countries And againe (k) Ibidem paulo ante That Church which was of al countries now is not but haith perished whereto he there answeareth saying This they say or obiect who ar not in the Church O impudent speach c. why dost thou say that the Church haith perished out of al countries and concludeth thus Let not heretickes brag as though the dayes of the Church were few for they are euen vnto the very end c. Now touching the Churches euer visibility S. Austin affirmeth that (l) Tom. 8. in Psal 47. prope init she is the city placed vpon a hil which cannot be hid the candle which is not hid vnder the bubel but knowen to al. And that (m) Tom. 7. cont lit Petil. l. 2. c. 32. circa med Hence it is that the true Church is hidden to none wherupon that is which Christ sayeth in the Gospel a city placed vpon a hil cannot be hid and therefore in the Psalme it is added he haith placed his tabernacle in the sunne id est in manifestatione that is clearly to be seene This inference thus made by S. Austin from the Scriptures argueth that S. Austin spoke not only as of the Church of his owne time but also as of the Church in the ensuing times which the said alledged Scriptures respected both a like Yea S. Austin is so confident in this doctrine of the Churches euer visibility as that he doubteth not to set dowen this as a special marke or as he saith (n) Tom. 6. cont Faustum l. 13. c. 13. initio A manifest signe whereby euermore to direct the ignorant which among so many pretended congregations is the true Church S. Austin teacheth that the Church was built vpon S. Peter and that S. Peter was the head of the whole Church
this bar supposed to be remoued S. Austin teacheth that (t) Tom. 7 cont duas epistolas Pelag. l. 3. c. 3. circa med Baptisme washeth away al sinnes al altogether of deedes wordes thoughtes or original And the like he hath in (u) Tom. 9. de Symbolo ad Catechum l. 3. c. 10. initio Tom. 7. de pec orig c. 40. tom 8. in Psal 50. ante med Tom. 7. contra Iulian. Pelag. l. 6. c. 5. tom 8. in Psal 118. suÌ„dry other places so expresly that the (w) Cent. 5. c. 4. col 368. 516. 1133. Centuristes and (x) Examen part 2. p. 38. Chemnitius do alledge his sayinges and confesse his iudgement in our behalfe S. Austin teacheth that concupisence remaning after Baptisme is not sinne SECTION 2. IN reguard of this plenary remission of sinne S. Austin consequently further teacheth that (a) Tom. 7. de nuptiis et concupis l. 1. c. 23. prope initium concupisence is not now sinne in the regenerate And againe (b) Tom. 7. de pec mer. et remis l. 2. c. 4. initio et cont Iulian. Pelag. l. 6. c. 5. prope fin cont duas ep Pelag. l. 1. c. 13. tom 5. de ciuit Dei l. 1. c. 24. fin concupisence in children Baptised is free from guilt it is left for the combate But this doctrine is so confessedly S. Austins and the other Fathers that Caluin saith therof (c) Institut l. 3. c. 3. parag 10 it is not needful to search much what here the auncient Fathers thought when Austin alone may suffice therto who haith gathered with fidelity and great diligence al their opinions therfore let the readers take from him if they wil haue any certanty of the sense or meaning of antiquity but betweene him and vs this difference may seeme to be that he c. dareth not cal that disease of concupisence sinne but c. teacheth it then at length to be sinne when to the first conceiuing or apprehension either deede or consent followeth with whom agreeth Chemnitius who speaking of our concupisence saith (d) Loc. com part 3. in his Theses therto annexed fol. 18. b. parag 10. Austin began to dispute that it was not properly sinne but so called by a figure c. which if we wil beleeue Chemnitius was spoken incommodiously S. Austin teacheth that children dying vnbaptised are not saued SECTION 3. THough it be now an ordinary opinion among (e) Carthwright in Whitguiftes defence p. 516. Dillingham in his disput breuis de Symbo p. 4. 5. Protestants that children borne of faithful parents dying without Beptisme may be saued whose cruel and vnchariritable practise herein is ouer frequent and answearable yet S. Austin ioyntly with our now Roman Church teacheth the very contrary saying (f) Tom. 7. de anima et eius origine l. 3. c. 9. initio tom 10. de verb. Apost ser 14. If thou wilt be a Catholicke do not beleeue do not say do not teach that children dying before they be Baptised can come to forgeuenes of original sinnes And (g) Tom. 2. ep 28. ad Hieron multo post med whosoeuer saith that children shal be reuiued in Christ who dye whithout participation of this Sacrament this man truly contradicteth the Apostolical preaching and condemneth the whole Church c. So generally receiued was the doctrine hereof in his time Lastly he teacheth that though (h) Tom. 7. de pec mer. et remis l. 1. c. 16. initio it may truly be said that children dying without Baptisme are to be in damnatione omnium mitissima in the easiest state of damnation yet he deceiueth and is deceiued who teacheth that they are not to be damned Now these sayinges are so vnanswearable in S. Austin that M. Carthwright confesseth that (i) In Whitguifts defence p. 521. Austin was of minde that children could not be saued without Baptisme for which he ouer bouldly chargeth him with (k) Ibidem p. 516. absurdity Sundry other (l) Bullinger his Decades in english dec 5. ser 8. p. 1049. Musculus loc com c. de Baptis p. 308. Dillinham de Symbo p. 4. 5. The Centuristes cent 5. c. 4. col 379. Protestants acknowledging and reprouing likewise in him the same doctrine Now in reguard of this so absolute necessity of Baptisme vnto children S. Austin is confessed to teach that in case of necessity it is lawful for the Laity to Baptise for thus writeth (m) In resp ad act colloq Mon. tisbel part 2. p. 143. and see Whitguifes defence tract 9. p. 522. 523. Beza wheras Austin writeth to Parmen l. 2. c. 13. that he knoweth not whether the Baptisme which a Lay person c. inforced vpon necessity of the child perishing doth administer is piously to be reiterated is a blemish or error in S. Austin saith Beza S. Austin teacheth sundry ceremonies of Baptisme now vsed in the Roman Church SECTION 4. FIrst then he teacheth that (n) Tom. 10. in l. 50. homil hom 27. multo ante med the water being consecrated in the name of Christ is signed with his Crosse and that (o) Tom. 10. de tempore serm 181. c. 3. prope fin ser 19. de sanctis prope finem with this signe the font of Baptisme is sanctifyed which consecratioÌ„ of the water is taught by S. (p) Lib. 1. c. vlt. ante med Ciprian saying the water ought to be clensed and sanctifyed first by the Preist And by S. (q) De mister init c. 3. post med and Aug. tom 9. in Ioan. Tract 118. prope fin Ambrose in these wordes when the water of saluation shal be consecrated with the mystery of the Crosse c. S. (r) Tom. 2. ep 105. ad SixtuÌ„ versus fin Austin also teacheth the exorcisme of Infants from the Churches auncient ryte or custome as also their Exuflation of both which speaking of Iulianus he saith (s) Tom. 7 de nup. et coÌ„cup l. 2. c. 29. fin He haith accused of greiuous crime the most ancient tradition of the Church wherby as I haue said children are exorcised and breathed vpon And speaking to Iulianus him selfe saith (t) Tom. 7. cont Iul. Pelag. l. 6. c. 5. post init Thou wert to be blowen but of the whole world if thou wouldest contradict this exufflation wherwith the prince of the world is cast out of children In like sort concerning Annoyling before Baptisme he further saith (u) Tom. 9. in Euang Ioan. tract 44. post init He is annoyled but not yet washed c. It is not sufficient for the Catechumens that they are annoyled let them hasten to washing or Baptisme Of this Carthwright confesseth that (x) 2. Reply part 2. c. 4. p. 226. Annoynting in Baptisme was as general of as long continuance as the Crosse for bâ—ing in Africke in Tertulians time it spred it selfe into the east and west Churches Concerning Abrenunciation and Godfathers to Infants
for this belongeth to Christ alone And the selfe same is defended by (g) De Sacramentis c. 7. p. 95. Hunnius Lastly the auncient practise of this Extreame vnction was so vndoubted in the Primitiue Church that M. Whitaker confesseth respectiuely therof saying (h) Contra Duraeum l. 8 p. 650. I acknowledge the superstitious custome of this annoyling to haue remained longer in the Church then was meete Concerning the Sacrament of Orders wherein S. Austin teacheth that they are properly a Sacrament geuen only by a Bishop who haith authority to excommunicate eueÌ„ the dead and that Preistes may not marry or be one that was Bigamus CHAPTER 11. SAinct Austin comparing Baptisme with Order and prouing that Orders once receiued cannot be lost no more then Baptisme geueth for the reason hereof that (i) Tom. 7. cent epist Parmen l. 2. c. 13. ante med both are Sacraments and both are geuen to man with certaine consecrition that when he is baptised this when he is ordained And againe (k) Ibidem post med and see Tom. 7. de bapt contra Don. l. 1. c. 1. circa med And Tom. 6. de bono coniugali c. 24. ante med for if both be Sacraments which no man doubteth why is not that lost and this is neither Sacrament is to be iniured But S. Austin not onely thus plainly acknowledgeth Orders to be a Sactament but withal reprehendeth and as it were pointeth at the promiscuous tumultuary parety and ordination now affected by the Puritan Cleargy saying of certaine heretickes that (l) Tom. 5. ex quaest vet et noui Testam q. 110. ante med They trouble the Order begun by Peter the Apostle and obserued euen vntil this time by the continuance of Bishops succeeding one another chalenging to them selues Order without beginning that is professing a body without a head wherupon it is meete to cal their Seathe chaire of pestilence S. Austin likewise affirmeth (m) Tom. 6. de haeresibus haer 53. de Arianis circa med the equaling of Presbiters with Bishops to be the condemned error of the Arians in so much as Danaeus confesseth that (n) De haeresibus c. 53. fol. 175. Epiphanius Austin and Isidore haue enrouled the Arians within the Catalogue of heretickes in that they made the dignity of a Preist a Bishop alike And the same is yet further confessed of Austin and Epiphanius by M. (o) In his 2. reply part 1. p. 619. Carthwright And wheras M. Whitaker affirmeth that (p) Contra Duraeum l. 9. p. 813. Presbiters are named Preistes not properly but improperly S. Austin expounding certaine wordes of the Apocalipâ— affirmeth to the contrary that (q) Tom. 5. de ciuit Dei l. 20. c. 10. post med They are not onely vnderstood of Bishops and Presbiters who now in the Church are properly called Preistes He further likewise teacheth against the Puritans the ciuil iurisdiction of Bishops wherof M. Whitguift concludeth from sundry his sayinges by him alledged that (r) In his defence tract 23. p. 771. 772. Austin heareth ciuil cases Austin a iudge in worldly matters Austin thinketh that the holy Ghost haith bound Bishops vnto ciuil cases to which purpose he also produceth other Fathers who with S. Austin are further reprehended for this very cause by (s) In omnes Pauli epistolas in 1. Cor. 6.4 p. 254. Caluin S. Austin likewise mencioneth the Bishops blessing in these wordes (t) Tom. 5. de ciuit Dei lib. 22. c. 8. ante med we rise and receiuing the Bishops blessing departed yea he reprehendeth the Pelagians for impugning the same saying (u) Tom. 2. ep 90. ad Innocent post med see Sozomen hist l. 8. c. 18. Chrisost orat 4. cont Iudaeos Conc. 3. Aurelian Can. 22. et Regiense can 4. et Agathen c. 30. Bode hist l. 5. c. 4. 6. by the contention of these Pelagians our blâ—ssing is contradicted that so we may be thought to speake in vaine ouer the people He reserueth as peculiar to Bishops the Consecration of virgins and Chrisme for in the third Councel of Carthage wherat S. Austin was present and subscribed it was decreed (x) Can. 36. that a Preist should not consecrate Virgins without the aduise of the Bishop and that he should neuer make or hallow Chrisme And the like reseruation of Orders to be geuen only by a Bishop is defyned in the fourth (y) Can. 3. 4. Carthage Councel and so confessed by D. (z) Sermon at Lambeth p. 40. Downham S. Austin attributeth the power of excommunication as appartayning not as (a) Carthwright in his 2. reply part 2. p. 77. 78. c. Puritans thinke vnto the Presbitery or Congregation but to the Bishop him selfe to such purpose excommunicating (b) Tom. 2. ep 187. ad Bonif. fine Bonifacius and therupon affirmeth (c) Tom. 7. de corrept et gratia c. 15. the Episcopal iudgement to be the greatest penalty in the Church teaching likewise that (d) Tom. 2. ep 118. ad Ianuar prope initium by the authority of the Bishop euery one offending ought to be remoued from the Altar to do penance and by the same authority reconcyled againe A point so cleare that D. Whitwhiguift proueth from S. Austin the Carthage Councels others that (e) Defence tract 18. p. 676. 677. the Bishop alone did excommunicate Yea S. Austin was so ful herin that he threatned excommunication in case of desert euen to those that were dead in these wordes (f) Tom. 2. ep 50 ad Bonif. post init If those thinges should be true which are obiected by them against Caecilianus and could at any time be showed vnto vs we would excommunicate him euen being deade wherof also report the Centuristes that (g) Cent. 5. c. 6. col 666. The seuerity of this discipline went so far that it spared not the dead So Arsacius successor to Chrisostome was Excommunicated after his death c. after the same maner Austin saith of Caecilianus that he would excommunicate him though he were deade if those thinges could be proued which were obiected against him by the authorities in ep ad Bonifacium 50. And according to this Innocentius liuing in the same age with S. Austin saith (h) In ep ad Archadium We do excomunicate Arsacius euen after his death whom you in steede of great Iohn brought into the Episcopal throne And this is so certaine that it is recorded and acknowledged by the (i) Cent. 5. c. 6. col 663. Centuristes Now answearably to this practise of S. Austin in the Primitiue Church the Catholicke Church of latter times haith proceeded to take vp burne the deade bodies of some condemned heretickes as of Wicclife Bucer and others which though by our aduersaries it be tragicaly obiected and amplifyed yet is it by them selues vpon the like ground occasion accordingly put in practise for Osiander reporteth that (k) Cent. 16. l. 2. c. 4. p.
120. l. 3. c. 32. p. 673. Dauid George dying at Basil some yeares after his death his heresy was laid open wherefore the senate of Basil commaunded that his dead carcase should be taken out of the graue and should be burned by the executioner or hangman S. Austin likewise acknowledgeth the seueral orders or degrees of Deacons Subdeacons Acolites Exorcistes c. for these are not only al (l) Can. 4.5.6.7 named in the fourth Carthage Councel but also the very ceremonies yet questionable and appertaining to these times are there apointed as namely to the (m) Can. 5. Subdeacon the Patten Chalice Cruet ful of water towel for the Preistes handes to the (n) Can. 6. Acolite a waxen candle that he may know him selfe appointed to lighten the Church lightes and (o) Can. 7. see Aug. Tom. 5. de ciuit Dei l. 10. c. 22. initio englished p. 389. for the Exorcist a booke of Exorcismes In so much as Osiander recyting the seueral Canons hereof condemneth theÌ„ for (p) Cent. 5. l. 1. c. 1. p. 4. 5. trifling and superstitious And wheras Protestants pretend Exorcisme to be a miraculous guift peculiar to the Churches beginning times S. Austin to the contrary placeth it among the other foresaid Ecclesiastical Orders decreeing yet further also to the contrary that (q) Concil 4. Carth. can 90. The Exorcistes do dayly impose handes vpon those who are possessed for which he with that Canon is reproued by Osiander saying (r) Cent. 4. l. 1. c. 1. p. 17. It haith neither commaund nor promise in the Scripture S. Austin also teacheth to the dislik of our aduersaries that who so married a widdow or had him selfe bene twise married should not be afterwardes made Preist for thus he writeth (s) Tom. 6. de bono coniug c. 18. prope init And see Tom. 3. de Eccles dog c. 92. Concilâ— 4. Carthag can 69. Dispensatorem Ecclesia non licet ordinari c. It is not lawful for a minister of the Church to be ordained vnles he be the husband of one wife which they vnderstood more subtilly who thinke that neither is he to be ordained who being a Catechumen or a Pagan haith had an other wife for here is treated of the Sacrament not of sinne seeing in Baptisme al sinnes are forgeuen c. And As the woman though a Catechumen if she be defloured cannot after Baptisme be consecrated amongst the virgins of God so it seemeth not absurd that he who haith had more wines then one haith not committed any sinne but haith lost a certaine rule of the Sacrament not necessary for the merit of good life but for the seale of Ecclesiastical ordination This saying is so recyted confessed and reprehended by (t) De Poligamia 213. 214. Beza And where the like is decreed of Bigamie being a let to Preisthood by the 4. Carthage Councel Osiander condemneth the said Councel for (u) Cent. 5. l. 1. c. 1. p. 14. superstitious herein Lastly he teacheth that Preistes may not marry and so in the 2. Councel of Carthage it was thus decreed (x) Can. 2. It haith pleased vs to decree that the sacred Bishops Preistes of God c. should be continent in al c. that so what the Apostles haue taught and antiquity it selfe haith obserued we keepe by al the Bishops it was said it pleased vs al that Bishops Preistes and Deacons or such as handle the Sacraments kepers of chastity shal coÌ„taine them selues euen from their wiues And the same is decreed in the third (y) Can. 17. 25. Carthage Councel and for such acknowledged by (z) Cent. 4. l. 4. c. 24. p. 526. Osiander As also by the 5. Carthage Councel where the African Fathers renew the decree therof (a) Can. 3. secundum propria statuta according to their owne former decrees In so much as (b) In ep ad Romanos p. 365. Melancthon specially reprehendeth this first Councel and Osiander auoucheth that (c) Cent. 5. l. 1. c. 33. p. 156. And see Aug. Tom. 6. de adulterinis coniug l. 2. c. 20. circa med Tom. 10. ad frattes in Eremo ser 37. Possidonius in vita August c. 26. It plainly fighteth with the doctrine of Paul Concerning the Sacrament of Matrimonie taught by S. Austin And that the innocent party vpon Adultery may not marry another and of the Preistes blessing after marriage CHAPTER 12. THat marriage should be a signe of the coniunction of Christ with his Church is so inducing to proue it a Sacrament that therfore such signification therof is deuyed by the Puritans as M. (a) In his 2. part of the answere c. 17. p. 112. p. 147. see the suruey of the booke of common prayer p. 132. Hutton relateth who yet alledgeth against them Chemnitius and the cenfession of Wittenberge assenting to haue marriage called a Sacrament Now S. Austin in this respect writeth (b) Tom. 7. de nupt concupis l. 1. c. 10. initio A certaine Sacrament of marriage is commended to the faithful that are married wherupon the Apostle saith husbandes loue your wiues as Christ loued the Church This doctrine is so cleare in S. Austin the other Fathers that M. Fulke granteth that (c) In Rhem. test in Ephes 5. 32. sec 5. Austin and some other of the auncient Fathers take it that Matrimony is a great mystery of the coniunction of Christ and his Church yea S. Austin expresly tearmeth the marriage of Christians a Sacrament saying (d) Tom. 7. de nupt coÌ„cupis l. 1. c. 17. initio In marriage let the good thinges therof be loued Children Faith Sacrament c. A Sacrament which the husbandes seperated and commiting adulterie do not loose And (e) Tom. 6. de bono coniug c. 24. init The good of marriage c. for as much as concerneth the people of God is in the sanctity of the Sacrament As also (f) Ibidem c. 18. post med In our marriages the sanctity of the Sacrament is of greater worth then the fruictfulnes of the wombe And againe (g) Tom. 4. de fide oper c. 7. prope initium not only the bond of mariage but also the Sacrament is so commended that it is not lawful for a husband to geue his wife to another In these sundry other such sayinges S. Austin distinguishing the marriage of Christians from the marriage of the Gentiles he maketh our marriage a Sacrament not otherwise then in respect of Christ and his Church their other marriage no Sacrament which argueth that he vsed the word Sacrament properly It is likewise the doctrine of S. Austin that in case of diuorse vpon adultery the innocent party may not marrie againe for thus he writeth (h) Tom. 10. in l. 50. homâ—l hom 49. post init By reason of onely fornication it is lawful to dismisse a wife committing adultery but it
erected a Monastery within the Church and began to liue with the seruants of God according to the manner and rule yea S. Austin further saith of him selfe (b) Tom. 10. de diuersis serm 49. de com vita Cleric I disposed my selfe to be in the Monastery with the brethren c. I sould my slender meanes gaue to the poore c. behould how we liue it is not lawful for any in our company to haue any thing proper to them selues And the Centuristes likewise report that (c) Gent. 5. c. 6. col 701. Aust in Psal 103. exhorteth rich men that they wil sel their gooddes fieldes villages gardens to geue to the seruants of God and to build Churches and Monasteries yea 〈◊〉 the 11. epistle is troubleth him not to number him selfe with the Monkes when he saith I in my litle cottage with my Monkes c. The Centuristes also say concerning Eremits (d) Cent. 5. c. 6. col 714. It is euident that there were Eremits c. but they are called Anchoretes c. Austin Tom. 1 de moribus Cathol Ecclâ—s l. 1. c. 31. expresly saith that kind of men to be dispersed cheifly through the East and Aegipt who liuing most priuate altogether from the sight of men do inhabit most desert places and do enioy the speach of God Of whom also S. Austin there affirmeth for their dyet that they were content onely with bread and water mencioning also particularly one (e) Tom. 5. de ciuit Dei l. 5. c. 26. post init And after the english translation p. 232. Iohn an Eremite and Prophet Lastly though Protestants would delude al this by barely affirming that the Monkes of those Primitiue times were much different in their profession and manner of life from ours of these yet besides the premises which do ouer clearly conuince the contrary it is euident that that very Monachisme which S. Austin haith thus described and commended is much disliked by our libertine Nouelistes so accordingly (f) Institut l. 4. c. 13. sec 16. Caluin saith In the meane time I do not dissemble but that in that very auncient forme of Monachisme there is some thing which litle pleaseth me for which also both S. Austin and S. Hierome are further confessed and reprehended herein by (g) De origine Monach. fol. 100. 106. Hospinian who tearmeth also (h) Ibidem fol. 33. Austin a great louer of monastical profession according to the custome of that age c. but this Father let it be spoken otherwise with leaue of so great a man wresteth the wordes of the Prophet saith this Protestant So litle pleasing is S. Austin and the auncient Monkes with their perfection and austerity of life to moderne Protestantes Concerning Antichrist vsury and permission of stewes CHAPTER 16. Concerning Antichrist his comming at the end of the world And of Enoch and Elias their comming as then to resist him SECTION 1 VVEreas our aduersaries do thinke the word Antichrist to signify not an open professed aduersary but Christes pretended (i) Centuristes cent 1. l. 2. col 435. Musulus loc com p. 184. Vicar the Centuristes do to the contrary confesse that S. Austin is of opinion that Antichrist shal be one who wil directly oppose him selfe to Christ for thus they write (k) Cent. 5. c. 4. col 416. Austin teacheth the Etimology of Antichrist in epist Ioannis Tract 3. Antichrist in latine he is said who is contrary to Christ c. some vnderstand Antichrist to be so called because he is to come before Christ c. it is not so said it is not so written but Antichrist that is contrary to Christ c. likewise in Tract de Antichristo desiring to know of Antichrist first you shal marke why he is so called to wit for that he wil be contrary to Christ in al thinges c. he wil dissolue the Euangelical law and wil recal into the world the worshiping of diuels S. Austin likewise affirmeth that he shal spring from the Iewes saying (l) Tom. 9. tract de Antichristo post init And see cent 5. c. 4. col 416. And see tom 3. de benedict Iacob prope fin As our authors say Antichrist shal â—e borne of the people of the Iewes of the tribe of Dan according to the Prophet saying c. The Centuristes also confesse that in S. Austines iudgement Antichrist should not come til al the subiected kingdomes were reuolted from the Roman Empyre which yet is vnaccomplished for thus they write (m) Cent. 5. c. 4. col 420. Austin in his treatise of Antichrist declareth in few wordes the time of Antichristes comming therfore the Apostle Paul from hence affirmeth Antichrist not to come before into the world vnles first a departure shal come that is vnles al kingdomes shal depart from the Roman Empyre which were before subiect vnto it And then next afterwardes they ad but this time is not yet come because though we see the Roman Empire for the greatest part to be ouerthrowen yet as long as the kinges of France shal continue who must possesse the Roman Empyre it shal not wholly perish because it shal stand in it kinges And the same continuance yet of the Roman Empyre is collected by other (n) Dresserus in Millenario 5. in his oration added to the end therof de Monarchia 4. fol. Nn. 2. fol. Nn. 3. Sonhius tom 1. continen scripta c. p. 173. Springerus de pace religionis p. 18. 20. Protestantes euen from the Scriptures them selues Now concerning the short raigne of Antichrist S. Austin according to our english translation (o) Tom. 5. de ciuit Dei l. 20. c. 23. circa med And according to the engl transl p. 823. writeth Antichristes kingdome shal be most cruel against the Church though it last but a while c. The times time and halfe a time is three yeares and a halfe a yeare two yeares and halfe a yeare and this is declared by a number of dayes afterwardes and by the number of monethes in other places of Scripture As also (p) Ibidem c. 8. p. 801. bound he is and in the last and smalest remainder of time shal he be loosed for we read that he shal rainge in his greatest malice onely three yeares six monethes And againe (q) Tom. 9. tract de Antichristo prope fin Antichrist when for three yeares and a halfe c. he shal vex the world c. afterwardes he shal kil Enoch and Elias But as touching Enoch and Elias S. Austin saith (r) Tom. 7. de pec orig c. 23. post med tom 3. de Gen. ad lit l. 9. c. 6 post med and tom 3. de mirabilibus sacrae Scripturae l. 1. c. 3. post med We doubt not Enoch and Elias to liue in the bodies wherwith they were borne which he confirmeth in sundry other places and of the same opinion are also sundry Protestantes (s) Pet. Mart.
before the seueral rytes vsed in ordaining Bishops Preistes Deacons Subdeacons Acolites Exorcistes Readers and Doorekeepers In some wherof are mentioned Chalice Paten Cruet Towel Waxen candles for Church lightes bookes of Exorcisme c. Al which is confessed and reproued by Osiander for (r) Cent. 5. l. 1. c. 1. p. 4. 5. superstitious It was likewise decreed in the 4. Carthage (s) Can. 41. Councel that the Deacon should onely weare the Albe in time of the sacrifice or reading Of which Canon Osiander also saith (t) Cent. 5. p. 10. these thinges smel of the idle Roman pontificial Ceremonies S. Austin likewise (u) Tom. 4. quaest vet et nou Test q. 46. post med mencioneth as is also confessed by M. (x) 2. part of the answ p. 194. Hutton the vestiment called Dalmatica worne by Deacons But to conclude many in one M. Parker affirmeth that (y) Against symbolising part 1. c. 1. p. 52. The Fathers wil haue the garments to be religious which are vsed in the Church Lastly concerning Matrimony S. Austin (z) See before c. 12. before mencioned the Preistes blessing of the Bride and Bridgroome S. Austin teacheth sundry Ceremonies concerning prayer now vsed in the Roman Church SECTION 2. TO forbeare the many other Ceremonies which would require a larger discourse and to recite but some few of those which are concerning prayer And first concerning euen the Rogation weeke D. Boyes auoucheth that (a) Exposition of the dominical epistles the spring part p. 219. 220. It is more then probable that rogations were in the Church before the dayes of S. Austin in proofe wherof he alledgeth diuerse of S. Austins wrytinges Concerning Canonical houres S. Austin aduiseth thus (b) Tom. 10. de temp serm 55. post init vpon the vigils ryse more early aboue al thinges assemble together at the third the sixt and the ninth houres And concerning prayer towardes the East the Centuristes confesse and say of Austin that he (c) Cent. 5. c. 6. col 677. l 2 de sermone Domini in monte testifyeth that they did pray standing and with their faces towardes the East And the like is confessed of S. Basil and the other Fathers by the same (d) Cent. 4. col 432. Centuristes In like sort S. Austin mencioneth (e) Tom. 4. de cura pro mort c. 5. post init our kneeling dowen our stretching out our handes our lying prostrate vpon the ground our (f) Tom. 10. de verbis Domini ser 8. post init and de temp ser 48. and tom 8. in Psal 31. enar 2. ante med knocking of our brestes as Ceremonies helping to better deuotion in prayer He commendeth also the signing of our foreheades with the signe of the Crosse The people saith (g) Tom. 6. cont Faust Manich. l. 12. c. 30. circa med he are marked in their foreheades with the signe of our Lords passion in preseruation of their saifty and (h) Tom. 9. in Euang Ioan. tract 3. post init he would not haue a star to be his signe in the foreheades of the faithful but a Crosse Yea speaking of him selfe and his owne practise he glorieth of the Crosse in these wordes (i) Tom. 8. in Psal 141. circa med and tom 9. in Io. tract 36. and tom 8. in Psal 46. I am so far from being ashamed of the Crosse that I do not keepe the Crosse of Christ in a hidden place but I carry it in my forehead yea further speking against the Pagan contemning the Crosse he saith (k) Tom. 8. in Psal 141. circa med Let him insult against Christ crucified let me see the Crosse of Christ in the foreheades of Kinges He likewise affirmeth that (l) Tom. 2. ep 178. mult post med and tom 7. cont lit Petil. l. 2. c. 78. and see Willet vpon the Romans in c. 16. p. 737. confessing this Al nations do sing Amen and Alleluia in the Hebrew wordes which saith he neither the Latin nor the barberous may translate And that (m) Tom. 3. de doc Christ l. 2. c. 11. prope init And see this confessed by Fulke against Rhem. Test in reuel 19. 4. sect 2. for the more sacred authority of the wordes so remaining The Centuristes also report from him concerning the practise of the Christians in those times that (n) Cent. 5. c. 6. col 692. as before Easter they spent the Lent with affliction of the body as haith beene said before so after Easter they spent the Quinquagesima or dayes betweene Easter and Whitsontide with much ioy so that c. they vsed Alleluia in their Hymnes and Canticles as Austin relateth Tract 17. in Icanet Ep. 86. 119. Of this also saith S. Austin him selfe (o) Tom. 8. in Psal 106. prope init tom 10. de temp ser 151. circa med there is Alleluia and twise Alleluia which at certaine times we are accustomed solemly to sing according to the auncient tradition of the Church Againe speaking of Easter time he saith that then (p) Tom. 2. ep 119. ad Ianuar. c. 15. prope fin fastinges are released and we pray standing c. and Alleluia is sung And according to this M. Hooker (q) Eccles pol. l. 5. sec 71. p. 199. 205. 215. And see Aug. Tom. 8. in Psal 110. post init approueth the Churches appointing of seueral times some in signification of our ioy and others of our sorrow S. Austin with the fift Carthage Councel decreeth that (r) Can. 6. as often as any doubt is had of Churches whether they be consecrated without al feare let them be consecrated Of this Canon Osiander saith (s) Cen. 5. l. 1. c. 33. p. 157. and see the Centuristes cent 5. col 644. the other part of this chapter concerning the cosecration of Churches is superstitious The Church thus consecrated S. Austin affirmeth it to be a sanctuary for persons fleeing therunto wherof he writeth thus to Bonifacius (t) Tom. 2. ep 187. prope init And see tom 5. de ciu Dei l. 1. c. 4. and the Centuristes cent 5. col 720. 721. thou hast taken violently a man out of the Church c. therefore restore him againe saife to the Church whom thou most irreligious hast taken away c. and I do excommunicate thee vntil c. And Osiander recyteth and reproueth as (u) Cent. 5. l. 2. c. 28. p. 294. and see Socrat. hist l. 6. c. 5. Concil Agath can 29. Tolet 12. can 10. and Ilerdense can 8. and Matisconense 2. can 8. wholly superstitious the 5. Canon of the Arausecau Councel in which it was decreed that such as fled to the Church ought not to be deliuered vp but defended for the reuerence and intercession of the holy place Concerning also seueral parcels of the Masse S. Austin speaking of Kyrie leison affirmeth that (x) Tom. 2. ep 178. versus fin Al Christiā Greekes
Latines barbarous do pray for mercy in the greeke tongue And the like vsage therof at Mattins Masse and Euensong is expresly affirmed (y) Can. 5. about S. Austins time in the Councel Vasense and afterwardes by S. (z) Lib. 7. ep 63. Gregory He mencioneth also (a) Tom. 7. de bono perseuer c. 13. and tom 20. de temp ser 44. versus fin and tom 8. in Psal 85. and Ciprian de orat Dom. versus fin and D. Boyes in his exposition of the Lyturgy p. 118. Aug. tom 2. ep 57. ad Dardan ante med and tom 3. de spir et lit c. 11. Sursum eorda habemus ad Dominum gratias agamus Domino Deo nostro dignum et iustum est c. which argueth the then publicke Lyturgy of the west Church to haue been for substance the same in forme and language with ours now of this age And yet in further proofe of the Latin language of publicke seruice in those auncient times of S. Austin it is made yet more certaine in that no nouel contradicted beginning therof since S. Austines time can be named wheras to the contrary Masse in Latin is confessed by the (b) Cent. 7. c. 6. col 154. Centuristes to hane beene Anno Domini 681. And the vsage therof before this in England is acknowledged by the (c) Cent. 7. c. 7. col 233. 143. Osiand Cent. 7. p. 189. Sparke against Iohn de Albinis c. 17. p. 161. Centuristes Osiander and M. Sparke In so much that Willet him selfe wryteth that (d) Sinopsis contr 4. q. 10. p. 160. 164. about the yeare of our Lord 666. the Latin seruice was commaunded to be vsed in al countries And the no lesse antiquity therof is graunted by (e) Hist sacram part 1. l. 3. p. 192. Hospinian But M White aryseth yet higher confessing that (f) Way to the true Church p. 378. Masse in Latin where the people vnderstood it not to haue beene in the time of Gregory 600. yeares after Christ And wheras al that our aduersaries do hence infer is that they do not expresly finde Masse in Latin before these times D. Sparke very pertinently confesseth and answeareth vnto the like obiection in another matter saying to the Puritans (g) Perswasion to vniformity p. 25. The most diligent searcher of auncient wryters cannot shew the first beginning original therof he may shew when first he reades it was vsed but that wil not proue that it was not vsed before but rather shewes the contrary Hereunto only yet ad the example of al ancient Lyturgies of the westerne Church wherof none be found in England French Spanish Dutch or Italian And also that the publicke Lyturgy in Latin though confessedly it was auncient is not yet knowen to haue bene contradicted vpon any first knowen nouel beginning therof sinnce S. Austines time and therupon then let the reader iudge but indifferently of the whole Lastly S. Austin mencioneth the very word Masse it selfe saying (h) Tom. 10. de temp serm 91. init And see ser 237. In the lesson which is to be read to vs at Masse we are to heare c And wheras M. (i) Against Rhem. test in 1. Cor. 20. sec 9. fol. 279. Fulke doth in euasion hereof ouer bouldly without al profe answeare those sermons of S. Austin wherin Masse is so named to be couterfeated he is refelled therin by his owne Protestant brethren Peter (k) In Crispinus of the estate of the Church p. 141. And see him selfe in his common places in English part 4. c. 12. p. 216. Martir and (l) De opificio Missae l. 1. sec 12. p. 5. Crastouius of whom thus writeth Crispinus Many doubt whether these sermons be Austines but Peter Martir saith the style and sentences seeme to be Austines I am of opinion that in the time of Austin the word Missa began to be vsurped And Crastouius confesseth that S. Austin and S. Ambrose vsed the word Masse and thereby vnderstood that sacred action of the Christian Lyturgy M. (m) Problem p. 31. Perkins also among his other exceptions against some of S. Austins sermons forbeareth yet to except against these sermons now alledged But not only S. Austin but al the Fathers of the 2. (n) Can. 3. Carthage Councel as also of the 4. (o) Can. 84. the Milleuitan (p) Can. 12. and see Osiander confessing this cent 5. l. 1. c. 1. p. 17. l. 1. c. 33. p. 149. Councel do mencion the word Missa In so much that M. Fulke confesseth that (q) Against Rhem. Test in 1. Cor. 10.21 sect 8. about S. Austines time the name of Missae began to be in vse as it seemeth by Concil Milleuitan can 12. Hereto I wil only ad that where the Apostle promiseth concerning the publicke celebration of the Eucharist saying (r) 1. Cor. 11. vers vlt. the rest I wil dispose when I come yet wrote nothing more afterwardes of that point wherby are infinuated those many thinges concerning the same which are obserued by tradition S. Austin frameth (s) Tom. 2. ep 118. ad Ianuar. c. 6. post med therupon his like answearable collection and so plainly that (t) De tradit Apost part 3. l. â— col 815. Hammelmannus reiecting him therin betaketh him selfe to the vnworthy and yet common refuge of Protestantes of pretending S. Austin to be contrary to him selfe And thus much of Ceremonies Concerning miracles reported by S. Austin and making in further proofe and confirmation of our Catholicke religion by him formerly taught CHAPTER 18. S. Austin reporteth seueral miracles in proofe of inuocation of Sainctes SECTION 1. NOw for the further and yet more cleare vnderstanding no lesse confirming of S. Austins now examined religion we wil next breifly recite or rather but abridge certaine of those miracles done in testimony therof and reported by S. Austin him selfe in his vndoubted booke de ciuitate Dei l. 22. c. 8. which in reguard of the knowen worthines of the said booke is by a Protestant tearmed by one of his owne brethren (a) Preface of the translation to the Earle of Pembrooke a famous Father now lately translated into English first then in proofe of inuocation of Sainctes S. Austin relateth as before that one (b) De ciuit Dei l 22. c. 8. in the Engl. transl p. 886. Florentius of Hippo a poore old man lost his vpper garment and being vnable to buy another he came to the shrine of the 20. martyrs and prayed aloud vnto them to helpe him to rayments c. at his departure he spyed a great fish vpon the shore c. which cutting in peeces he found in the belly therof a ring of gold He reporteth also of (c) Ibidem and in the engl trans p. 887. one Bassus a Syrian that dwelt at Hippo who praying for his sicke daughter at S. Stephens shrine and hauing her garment with him
c. 14. sec 3. Beza in ep theol ep 28. p. 174. herein the error of the auncient Fathers cannot be excused In like sort concerning the canonical Scriptures the Protestant Poliander saith (d) See before c. 3. sec 2. to come now to the error of some Councels the Councels of Carthage and Florence hauing rouled for Canonical bookes and as diuinely inspired c. the bookes of Tobie Iudith Wisdome Ecclesiasticus and the Machabees c. and the Popes Innocentius and Gelasius haue reckoned these bookes among the canonical And the like is formerly confessed by sundry other Protestants Traditions are so fully taught by the Fathers as that for teaching the same D. Raynoldes (e) Conclusions annexed to hiâ— confer conclus 1. p. 689. reproueth S. Basil and S. Epiphanius Chemnitius reprehendeth (f) Examen part 1. p. 87. 89. 90. Clemens Alexandrinus Origen Epiphanius Ambrose Hierome Maximus Theophilus Basil Damascen D. Fulke acknowledgeth as much of (g) Confut. of Purg. p. 362. 303. 397. and against Martial p 170. 178. against Bristowes motiues p. 35. 36. Chrisostome Tertulan CipriaÌ„ AustiÌ„ Hierom. D. Whitaker confesseth the like of (h) De sacra Script p. 678. 681. 683. 685. 690. 695. 696. 668. 670. and see Schrodâ—â—us in opusc theol p. 72. Chrisostome Epiphanius Tertulian Ciprian Austin Innocentius Leo Basil Eusebius Damascen The Fathers in general are confessed to teach the Primacy Ecclesiastical of of Peter and the Bishops of Rome As also to deny supreme Ecclesiastical gouernment to temporal Princes and that the Pope is not Antichrist SECTION 2. COncerning S. Peter and his then successors Bishops of Rome in the foresaid auncient times sundry of the Fathers are by Protestants reprehended for their affirming the Church to be builded vpon Peter wherof Caluin saith (i) Instit l. 4. e. 6. parag 6. Some of the Fathers haue so expounded those wordes super hanc Petram but al the Scripture cryeth the contrary Danaeus also saith of the Fathers (k) Resp ad Bellar part 1. p. â—77 the saying of Christ thou art Peter c. they haue noughtily expounded of the person of Peter And the (l) Cent. 3. col 84. 85. cent 4 col 1250. col 1141. col 555. 557. 558. Centuristes do expresly reprehend and charge many of the auncient Fathers with this opinion D. Fulke affirmeth that not some few (m) Confut of the Papistes quarrels p. 4. but many of the auncient Fathers c. were deceiued to thinke something more of Peters prerogatiue and the Bishops of Romes dignity then by the word of God was geuen to either of them In so much as in reguard of the Roman Bishops then câ—aimed and enioyed Primacy Protestantes feare not to affirme that the Roman Bishops in the time of Constantine the great were very Antichristes whereof writeth M. (n) In Apocalip p. 539. Brightman Antichrist haith raigned from the time of Constantine the great to this very day And speaking of the Pope of Rome he saith (o) Ibidem p. 477. and see p. 471. for these thousand three hundred yeares he is that Antichrist whom M. Nappier nameth (p) Vpon the reuel p. 362. 85 88. 75. 68. And see Gauuius in Palma Christiana p. 34. to be Siluester the first But Protestants forbeare not to reproue and charge with affected vsurped Primacy euen S. Peter him selfe and the other next to him succeeding bishops of Rome for of this certaine Caluinistes write thus (q) Catalogus testium veritatis tom 1. p. 27. It may not be denyed but that Peter was somtimes faulty in ambition and desire of power c. by which infirmity of Peter doubtles it was signifyed that those Bishops which bragged of Peters succession were to be faulty of the like yea with greater ambition by infinit degrees c. wherfore this so peruerse abition of Peter and ignorance of heauenly thinges and negligence withal c. did without doubt signify that the Roman Bishop because he would be cheife and heire of Peters priuiledges was to be ignorant and a contemner of heauenly thinges and one desirous of human riches power and pleasures To which purpose also auoucheth another Protestant writer that (r) Philippus Nicholai in comment de regno Christi p. 221. The affectation of Primacy was a common infirmity of the Apostles as also of the first Bishops of the Citie of Rome Hence also it is that the auncient Fathers did confessedly reproue some Emperours of their times for vsurping of Ecclesiastical gouernment of which thus write the Centuristes (s) Cent. 4. c. 7. col 54â— The Emperours also did somtimes assume to them selues vnseasonably the iudgement of matters of faith which Athanasius reprehendeth in Constantius and Ambrose in Valentinian of which latter also saith (t) Cent. 4. l. 4. c. 9. p. 477. And D. Downham in his defence l. 1. c. 8. p. 162. 163. Osiander Ambrose answeared o Emperour do not trouble thy selfe to thinke that thou hast any imperial right ouer heauenly thinges do not extol thy selfe c. with whom agreeth M. (u) 2. Reply part 2. p. 161. 162. 155. 156. Carthwright adding further Ambrose saith it was not read nor hâ—ard of before that any Emperour was iudge ouer a Bishop in a cause of faith which was not the iudgment of Ambrose onely but of other Bishops round about Of which point also Polanus alledgeth (x) Symphonica e. 22. Thes 2. p. 836. 837. 838. 839. 841. 842. 843. 844. 849. sundry testimonies of the auncient Fathers Concerning Antichrist whose comming person and continuance were no doubt plainly and faithfuly deliuered by the Apostles to their followers and from them successiuely continued in the Church of God in better forewarning and discouery of the monster when he should appeare And first as touching the time of his comming foretould not to be before the end of the Roman Empire M. Fulke confesseth saying (y) Against Rhem. test in 2. Thes 2.3 sec 4. Indeed most of the auncient Fathers did iudge that the Roman Empire should first be decayed before Antichrist were reueled wherof also saith Caluin (z) In 2. Thes 2.3 for as much as they haue expounded this place of the defection of the Roman Empire it is more friuolous then that it needeth any long confutation and I do maruel that so many writers otherwise learned and witty haue beene deceiued in so easy a thing but that when one had erred the rest without iudgment followed in troupes which their pretended error was for sooth because they did not agree in the said exposition with the (a) Fulke in his answeare to a counterf Cath. p. 27. 36. Downham of Antichrist l. 1. p. 4. Willet in synops p. 160. Perkins vpon the Creede p. 307. Danaeus resp ad Bel. part 1. p. 371. Whitak de Eccles controu 2. quaest 4. p. 144. Powel de Antichristo in praefat p. 1. Protetestants late nouel opinion concerning
the reuelation of Antichrist in Boniface the third Anno. 607. At what time as also yet to this present the Roman Empyre then was and yet is not dissolued but (b) See before c. 16. sec 1. preserued and in being As concerning the person of Antichrist M. Whitaker saith (c) Lib. de Antichristo p. 21 The Fathers for the most part thougt that Antichrist should be but one man but in that as in many other thinges they erred wherof also saith (d) 2. Repl. part 1. p. 508 Carthwright diuerse of the auncient and cheifest of them imagined fondly of Antichrist as of one singular person for which doctrine also the Fathers are charged with error by (e) Hist Antichristi p. 11. Gracerus Now as for the short time of the height of his persecution M. Foxe confesseth that (f) In Apoc. c. 12. p. 345. Almost al the holy and learned interpreters do by a time times and halfe a time vnderstand onely three yeares and a halfe Affirming further this to be (g) Ibid. p. 362. the consent and opinion of almost al the auncient Fathers In further proofe therof also saith Bullinger (h) Vpon the reuel englished in c. 11. ser 46. fol. 142. doubtles al expositors in a manner grounding them selues vpon this text haue attributed to the kingdome of Antichrist and to his most cruel persecutions no more them three yeares and a halfe The Fathers in general are confessed to teach our Catholicke doctrines concerning the Sacrament of Baptisme SECTION 3. IN proofe of the efficacy of Sacraments and of the grace geuen thereby Suinglius writeth (i) Tom. 2. de bapt fol. 70. Here most of the doctors vnderstanding by the name of water that material and external water of Baptisme haue attributed vnto it much more then was fit wherupon it afterwardes came to passe that they ascribed the clensing of soules to the element of water Of which also saith Luther (k) Tom. 2. Witâ—emberg fol. 229. I excuse the Fathers who driuen either by temptation or necessity stoutly denyed sinne to remaine after Baptisme In so much as Caluin acknowledgeth (l) See before c. 6. sec 1. the auncient Churches iudgement coneerning concupisence remaining after Baptisme not to be sinne without our consent therto And he and others also do reprehend (m) See before c. 5. sec 1. the Fathers for preferring the efficacy of our Sacraments before the other Sacraments of the old Testament In like manner concerning the necessity of Baptisme Musculus granteth that (n) Loc. com p. 308. some Fathers amongst whoÌ„ is Austin haue subiected Infantes dying without Baptisme to damnation Of the generality of which opinion we haue spoken (o) See before c. 6. sec 3. before And whereas M. (p) In his appeale p. 244. Morton insteede of answeare hereto obiecteth as from the Fathers their like supposed erroneous necessity of childrens receiuing the Eucharist that this necessity was not as in respect of saluation but by him mistaken I haue showed (q) See before c. 19. sec 7. already Yea the Fathers were so resolute herein that as Caluin testifyeth (r) Instit l. 4. c. 15. sec 20. of them it was vsual many ages since euen almost from the beginning of the Church that in daunger of death Laye people might baptise if the minister was not present in due time And (s) Conference at Hampton court p. 18. the denying of priuate persons in case of necessity to baptise were to crosse al antiquity saith D. Bilson And as for the Ceremonies of Baptisme and the Eucharist Beza saith (t) Ep. theol ep 8. p. 79. I cannot sufficiently admire al that decking wherwith the most auncient thought to adorne Baptisme and the Lords supper And hauing recyted sundry of these ceremonies he calleth them (u) Ibid. p. 80. stagelike fooleries affirming further that those who make the Apostles authors of these fooleries are not worthy of confutation how auncient writers so euer they be Zepperus also hauing mencioned holy water salt Oyle Exorcisme Spitle c. saith hereof (x) Politia Eccles l. 1. c. 12. p. 123. I confesse these superstitious ceremonies are very auncient in the Church being not many ages after the Apostles times wherof also see Echartus (y) Compend theol l. 1. c. 8. p. 204. alledging these ceremonies from the Fathers The Fathers ingeneral are confessed for our Catholicke doctrines concerning the Sacraments of Confirmation Orders and Extreme vnction SECTION 4. COncerning Confirmation it is reported how that M. (a) The conference at Hampton court p. 10. And Downhams defence l. 4. p. 23. Whitguift shewed at large the antiquity of confirmation as being vsed in the Church euer since the Apostles times And the ministers of Lincolne diocesse charge (b) Abripgment p. 41. Tertulian Ciprian Ambrose with error of vsing the Crosse in confirming those that were baptised wherto the Century writers ad the Fathers further confessed vsage of (c) Cent. 4. c. 6. col 478. Chrisme in Confirmation wherin Bucer yet further acknowledgeth that in the Primitiue Church it was done with (d) Scripta Anglicana p. 570. hand-imposing onely of a Bishop As touching Orders D. Field auoucheth that (e) Of the Church l. 5. c. 25. p. 121. and the Centuristes cent 3. c. 7. col 149. 150. there is no question but that the minor Orders of Subdeacons Acolites Exorcistes Lectors and Ostiaries are very auncient alledging further in proofe therof S. Ciprian and many other Fathers And as for Extreme vnction M. Whitaker answearing to the auncient Fathers obiected testimonies in behalfe thereof confesseth saying (f) Contra Duraeum l. 8. p. 650. I acknowledge the superstitious custome of this vnction to haue continued longer in the Church then was meete The Fathers in general are confessed for our Catholicke doctrines concerning Confession satisfaction pardons SECTION 5. THe Century writers speaking of those auncientest times of Ciprian and Tertulian affirme that (g) Cent. 3. c. 6. col 127. and cent 4. c. 6. col 425. they gaue absolution from sinnes thus if any did penance they should first confesse their sinne for so doth Tertulian in his booke de paenitentia greatly vrge confession and it appeareth by certaine places of Ciprian that priuate confession was vsual wherin they confessed their sinnes and wicked thoughtes as in serm 5. de lapsis et l. 3. epist ep 14. 16. where he expresly saith of lesser sinnes also which are not committed against God it is needful that confession be made and this also he often commandeth to be l. 1. ep 3. c. that satisfaction also was accustomed to be imposed according to the offence it appeareth serm 5. de lapsis And wheras M. Morton affirmeth against this confession of the Centuristes that (h) Appeale l. 2. c. 14. parag 2. p. 254. Ciprian mencioneth not sinnes of thought May it please him to read Ciprian serm 5. de
This passeth most rife among the Fathers who taking inferi for Abrahams bosome expound it that Christ went thither ad liberanduÌ„ liberandos to conuey the Fathers deceased before his resurrection into the place where now they are wherto might be added like further confession and testimony of D. (p) Contra DuraeuÌ„ l. 8. p. 567. Dan. ad Bellar. disput part 1. p. 176. Bilâ—on in his ful redemption p. 189. and in his suruey of Christes sufferinges p. 656. Iacob in his defence of the treatise of Christes sufferings p. 199. 200. Whitaker Danaeus and sundry others The Fathers in general are confessed for our Catholicke doctrines of inuocation of Sainctes of our reuerent vse of Images reliques and the Crosse SECTION 9. OF the Fathers beleefe concerning inuocation of Sainctes and Angels D. Fulke saith (q) Reioynder to Brist p. 5. I confesse that Ambrose Austin and Hierome held inuocation of Sainctes to be lawful And Chemnitius hauing alledged S. Austin praying to S. Ciprian being martyred before concludeth thus therof (r) Examen part 3. p. 211. Austin did this without the Scripture yealding to the times and custome And againe (s) Ibidem part 3. p. 200. Inuocation of Sainctes began to be brought into the publicke assemblies of the Church about the yeare of our Lord 370. by Basil Nyssen and Nazianzen The (t) Cent. 3. c. 4. col 83. Century writers also speaking of the more auncient times of Ciprian and Origen do confesse that they also containe manifest tokens of the inuocation of Sainctes So litle do these confessions of our learned aduersaries agree with or rather so far do they exceede D. (u) Appeale pâ— 227. Mortons euasion of Rhetorical Apostraphes In more ful confirmatioÌ„ wherof ad only that Chemnitius in this respect doth not excuse with retorical Apostraphes but flatly accuse and reiect (x) Examen part 3. p. 211. most of the Fathers as Nazianzen Nyssen Theodoret Ambrose Hierome c. who saith he did not disputâ— but auouch the soules of martyrs and Sainctes c. to heare the petitions of those that prayed and to carry them to God c. they went to the monuments of martyrs and often inuocated the martyrs by name Of which also saith M. (y) Volum 2. p. 592. Parkins The Fathers especially those after the 400. yeares haue erred in the inuocation of Sainctes As touching the publicke placing of Images in the Church which M. Fulke thinketh to be (z) Defence of the engl translat c. 3. p. 119. against the coÌ„mandement sundry examples or testimonies of the ancieÌ„t Fathers are in profe therof alleged by M. (a) Against sybolising part 1. p 32. Chem. exam part 4. p. 26. 29. 30. Cent. 4. col 409. Parker Chemnitius and the Century writers In so much that in respect of such auncient publicke allowance of images the Protestant Functius affirmeth that (b) Lib. 7. comment in praecedent Chronolog at Anno Christi 494. fol. m. câ— Anno. 494. Xenaias was the first in the Church that stirred vp warre against Images And as for reliques of Sainctes and pilgrimage therto the Century (c) Cent. 4. c. 6. col 456. writers do charge the Fathers of the 4. age with publicke translation of Sainctes reliques And Chemnitius affirmeth that (d) Examen part 4. p. 10. from translations presently were made cicumgestations of reliquâ—s as is to be seene in Hierome and Austin c. yea saith he (e) Ibidem and see cent 4. c. 6. col 457. they made pilgrimages to the places where they heard there were reliques famous by miracles so they went in pilgrimage to the holy land and to Rome to the Churches of Peter and Paul and the like hereof is testifyed by the Century writers Now in more semblable profe yet of Images M. Parkins reporteth coÌ„cerning the reuereÌ„ce in ancieÌ„t times geueÌ„ to the Crosse that (f) Volum 2. p. 596 and Fulke against Heskins p. 657. Paulinus ep 11. saith the Bishop of HierusaleÌ„ yearly at Eaester set forth the Crosse for the people to worship him selfe being the cheife of the worshipers So general and receiued was the vsage therof in the time of Paulinus who according to (g) Cent. 5. l. 3. c. 2. p. 387. Osiander was familiar with Hierome Austin and Ambrose Neither was this reuerence exhibited to the Crosse by the cleargy or vulgar people onely for Prudentius reporteth the like practise therof in the old Emperours saying (h) In Apotheâ—â— Vexillum Crucis summus dominator adorat the greatest commander the Emperour adoreth the standred of the Crosse Danaeus (i) Primae partis alt part ad Bellar. 5. controu resp p. 1415 And Parker against symbolising part 2. c. 7. p. 61. also affirmeth that S. Ciril and sundry other learned Fathers were plainly superstitious and blinded with this enchantment of the Crosses adoration Furthermore M. Burges saith concerning the Fathers opinion of the Crosse with exception onely to the point of adoration which is next heretofore already sufficiently confessed that (k) In Couels answeare to Burges p. 130. 136. there is nothing ascribed to the Crosse in or out of Baptisme by the rankest Papistes but the Fathers are as deeply engaged in the same so as if we wil vse it as the Fathers did c. we take the soule to be fenced with crossing of the body and the Crosse to haue vertue of consecrating the Sacrament driuing away deuils witchcraft c. In proofe wherof he alledgeth sundry auncient Fathers and the like is affirmed by seueral (l) Treatise of the signe of the Crosse p. 21. and see cent 4. col 3â—2 1493. Puritans and the Centuristes In so much that as to the many miracles by vs obiected in this behalfe from the Fathers D. Couel auoucheth that (m) Answeare to Burges p. 138. No man can deny but that God manifested his power to the amasement of the world in this contemptible signe as being the instrument of many miracles The Fathers in general are confessed for our Catholicke doctrines concerning freewil and merit of workes SECTION 10. COncerning the Fathers doctrine of freewil Protestants affirme that (n) Discouery of vntruthes in D. Bancrofts sermon p. 23. the error of freewil deriued from Iustin martyr and Irenaeus was at the time of the Nicene Councel in some ripenes c. we know that euer since the Apostles times in a manner it florished euery where til Martin Luther tooke the sword in hand against it The Centuristes speaking of the times next after the Apostles do thinke (o) Cent. 2. c. 4. col 58. that scarcely there is any point of doctrine which began so soone to be darkned as this of freewil As also (p) Ibidem col 59. and cent 4. col 291. Calu. instit l. 2. c. 2. parag 4. Hamelman de tradit Apost l. 2. c. 7. col 93. after the same manner Clemens euery where affirmeth freewil that it may appeare that not
onely al the Doctors of that age were in such darknes but also that the same encreased afterwardes in the later ages In like manner concerning induration Caluin affirmeth that (q) See before c. 2. sec 2. The auncient Fathers werâ— superstitious and affraid to confesse the truth therof And as for the Fathers doctrine of workes D. Humfrey is fully of opinion that (r) In Iesuit part 2. p. 530. It may not be denyed but that Ireneus Clemens and others whom they cal Apostolical in respect of the time in which they liue haue litle Apostolically inserted into their writinges the opinion of freewil and merit of workes Melancthon also thinketh that (s) In ep ad Romanos p. 391. Origen and many others following him faigned men to be iust for their workes And M. Whitaker houldeth chargable (t) Resp ad rat Camp p. 78. and in Fulkes defence of the engl transl p. 368. with error herein to vse his owne wordes not onely Ciprian but almost al the most holy Fathers of that time The Centuristes speaking of the Fathers of those auncient times say (u) â—ent 3. c. 4. col 79. It seemeth that for the most part this cheifest article of iustification to haue beene obscured for they attributed to workes iustice euen before God Againe (x) Ibidem col 78. and see cent 4. col 292. 293. The doctors of this third age haue declined from the true doctrine of Christ and the Apostles concerning good workes yea they conclude vpon recytal of sundry of the auncient Fathers sayinges thus (y) Ibidem col 293. Now let the godly reader thinke how far this age haith declined in this article from the doctrine of the Apostles Lastly Caluin writeth (z) Instit l. 3. c. â—5 parag 2. I confesse that the writers of the ancient Church haue euery where vsed the name of merit and I would to God that by the abuse of this word they had not geuen to posterity occasion of error yea the Fathers were so ful herein that we haue seene before (a) See before c. â—3 sec 3. their confessed condemning of Iouinianus for his denyal of meritâ—â— The Fathers ingeneral are confessed for our Catholicke doctrines concerning vowes the single life of Preistes Monachisme prescribed fastes and Ceremonies SECTION 11. VVE are not ignorant saith (b) Exam. part 3. p. 41. Chemnitius that the Fathers allowed the vowes of perpetual single life and that they also brought them to be obligatory or to bind in conscience Peter Martir thinketh (c) De votis p. 524. Epiphanius with many other of the Fathers to erre in that they said it was sinne to breakâ— such a vow when neede required and that they badly ascribed it to Apostolical tradittion M. Wootton censureth (d) Defence of Parkins p. 491. this to be one of the blemishes of the auncient writers wherof also saith (e) Instit l. 4. c. 13. parag 17. Caluin they say this was obserued froÌ„ longest memory that those who would dedicate them selues wholly to our Lord should bind them selues with the vow of chastity truly I confesse that this custome was aunciently receiued But I do not graunt that this age was free from al vice (g) Retentiue against Bristow p. 64. Carthw 2. Reply part 1. p. 509. cent 4. col 847. 303. 877. and Cent. 3. col 85. 86. Beza de Poligamia p. 211. 212. 213. 214. But Hospinian affirmeth yet further that (f) De orig monach fol. 102. not onely Austin but other Fathers also erred in the vowed chastity by mutual consent euen of married persons And as for the forbidding of Bigams and marriage vnto Preistes the first is so general and auncient that M. Fulke confesseth that he which haith had two wiues could not be a Preist in Hieromes time And as for the other of the vnmarried life of Preistes M. Iewel saith (h) Defence of the Apology p. 195. and cent 3. c. 6. col 148. and cent 4. col 616. 486. 303. 704 1293. Osiand cent 5. l. 1. c. 33. p. 156. Szeged loc com p. 327. Osiand cent 4. l. 2. c. 27. p. 195. cent 5. l. 1. c. 39. p. 176. p. 45. 30. 298. 395. 406. cent 4. p. 46. 167. Chem. exam part 3. p. 50. 52. 62. Here I graunt M. Harding is like to finde some good aduantage as hauing vndoubtedly a great number of holy Fathers on his side Bucer likewise acknowledgeth that (i) Gratulatio ad Eccles Anglic. p. 35. The Church of the East Aegipt and the sea Apostolicke were accustomed in S Hierom s time not to take for Preistes but either such as were not married or ceased to be by abstaining from their wiues Hereto ad that the defending of Preistes marriage was condemned in (k) Contra Vigilant c. 1. Fulke against Rhem. test in 1. Tim. 3. sec 5 p. 683. 684. and cent 4. c. 8 col 603. Vigilantius and (l) Contra Iouin l. 1. c. 19. 14. et ad Panâ—ach Apol. c. 8. Iouinian by S. Hierome wherof also saith (m) Tom. 6. haer 82. fine and Danaeus de haeresibus haer 82. fol. 230. S. Austin This heresy was quicly trodden dowen and extinguished neither could it euer preuaile so much as to the deceiuing of any Preistes But now to speake of the professed religious life of Monkes and Nunnes M. Carthwright acknowledgeth that (n) In Whiteg def p. 344. Ruffin Theodoret Sozomen Socrates do mencion monkes a most in euery page And the Centuristes do begin a whole special tract the title wherof is (o) Cent. 4. c. 10. col 294. Of the Monkes through Syria Palistine Bithinia and the other places of Asia vnder Constantine the great They do also make another like special tract the title therof being (p) Ibidem col 1306 The Affrican Monkes through Aegipt vnder Constantine the great and yet another bearing this title (q) Ibid. col 1331 Monkâ—s through Europ They also heretofore mencioned their (r) See before c. 15. sec 3. râ—ligious habit and further affirme that many of them (s) Cent. 4. col 471. neither had houses nor did eate bread nor supping meates nor drunke wine but dwelled in mountaines As also abstained (t) Ibid col 474. from al flesh fish egges and cheese Osiander and the Centuristes do also report (u) Osiand cent 4. p. 100. 440. the Centurists cent 4. col 1323. their inclosing or muring vp of them selues in litle strait Celies They affirme also (x) Ibid. col 474. that many of them slept vpon the ground others went barefooted and others weared hairecloth priuatly And as for their professed voluntary pouerty they further say (y) Ibid. col 464. 300. 301. and Osiand cent 5. l. 3. c. 13. p. 356. It is euident that those who were to professe monastical life did distribut their goodes before they entred into the Monastery In like sort concerning the vowed chastity of Monkes the
the fast of Lent the vnmarried life of Preistes Baptisme of laye persons in case of necessity the manner of sacrifycing c. Whitaker answearing therto iustifyeth the same saying (d) De Eccles controu 2. 9. 5. p. 299. wheras Bellarmine alledgeth certaine testimonies from Caluin and the Century writers as noting certaine errors of the auncient Fathers which were common to them with the Papistes as namely freewil merit Limbus Inuocation of Sainctes the vnmarried life of Preistes satisfaction and certaine other such like c. before mencioned by Bellarmine I answeare therto that it is true which Caluin and the Century writers haue written that in many thinges the auncient Church erred as in Limbus freewil merit of workes and in the residue of those other before recyted Agreeably hereunto also acknowledgeth (e) Nouum testam praefat ad Principem Condensem Beza of the times of Ciprian Austin and Chrisostome that euen then Satan did laye the first foundation in Greece of inuocation of the deade wherto some Bishops of cheifest note were so far from opposing them selues c. that they did not only not expresse the opeÌ„ superstitions arising but also nourished them c. Hence those opinions of freewil c. affirming presently after that the knowledge of prouidence freewil faith and free iustification was as then almost oppressed with the commentaries of the Grecian Bishops c. At the same time inuocation of the deade preuailed and the foolish opinion of single life which shamful errors being openly defended the multitude also of Ceremonies increased c. and the Monkes in Aegipt and Syria c. almost al admired as Angels prayers also for the deade begun then to be vsed more freely and the Platonical question concerning Purgatory fire c. This acknowledgment of Beza is so certaine that the Protestant (f) Asinus Auis sec 43. p. 60. Holderus purposly preuenteth al extenuation or excuse therof M. (g) In Apoc. in c. 14. p. 382. Brightman hauing named S. Athanasius Basil Chrisostome Ambrose Hiâ—rome Augustine c. auoucheth further that they were in words condemning Idolatry but indeed establishing it by inuocatioÌ„ of Saincts worshiping of Reliques such other like wicked superstitions affirming yet further that no more pure doctrine can be drawen out of their writinges then any profitable notion be gathered by the beating of the waues In like sort M. Napier recordeth that (h) Vpon the reuelation p. 361. The Bishops staf the Archbishos cloake or pale c. Item their holy water their Chrismes in Baptisme the shauing of their heades their golden and siluer vessels in the Church their Albes and Corporals of linnen for the Altar their consecration of the Altar the obseruation of dayes c. the fasting in Lent from flesh the choice of meates the pretended chastity of the Cleargy the celebration of Masses in memory of Martyrs the adoration of the Crosse were al instituted and deuised and arose about the 313. yeare of Christ together with the style of Primacy vsurped by the Roman Bishop The (i) Ib. p. 362. supper of the Lord was then degenerate and turned ouer to the Masse to be celebrated for deade men c. and mixed with water In the (k) Ib. p. 363. 20. Articles of the first Councel of Nice are superstitious rytes euen the obseruation of dayes to wit of peace or indulgence and superstitious penances c. Thâ—se and diuerse other abuses and superstitious rites creeped in in the outward visible face of the Church in Siluester the first his dayes The Century writers in their fift Century being that age wherin S. Austin flourished affirme that as theÌ„ (l) 〈◊〉 dedic euery where Monasteries and Celles of Eremites were builded and that they had for their praisers Austin Chrisostome and others most excellent men Hence also the cheife articles of faith of free remission of sinnes by faith in Christ began to be obscured and defyled c. The doctrine also of good workes was diuersly corrupted c. They attributed saluation to them with reproch and iniury to the merit of Christ c. The light also of true inuocation began to be obscure c. Afterwardes also because ouermuch should be challenged to the merits and worship of deade men in this age also rise vp the worship of Reliques c. running to peeces of Sainctes as they were commonly thought Therefore these cheife heades being adulterated it is easy to conceaue that in the other parts also of heauenly doctrine sincerity was many wayes corrupted c. The Roman Bishops not onely greedily but also impudently sowed the seedes of their Primacy or eminency aboue other Churches of the world c. Rome formerly the head mistres of the world is becom the seat of Antichrist c. more particularly they charg the Fathers of this age as erring in our Catholicke doctrines of (m) Cap. 4. col 500. freewil of (n) Col. 504. Iustification of good (o) Col. 506. workes of (p) Col. 510. prayer of human (q) Col. 513. Traditions of (r) Col. 513. virginity of (s) Col. 513. Penance of (t) Col. 515. Baptisme of the Lords (u) Col. 517. supper of (x) Col. 518. marriage of the (y) Col. 520. Church of the place of (z) Col. 520. soules and of the (a) Col. 523. Canonical bookes In al which they recyte and reiect their particular sayinges And the like also might be seene vnder the titles of (b) Cap. 7. col 774. Primacy of (c) c. 6. col 684. Lent of (d) Col. 697. Reliques and their translation of (e) Col. 700. Monkes of (f) Col. 714. Heremites and the Ceremonies (g) Col. 727. of Baptisme In so much that Osiander auoucheth that (h) Cent. 5. l. 1. c. 1. p. 1. Most diuines of this Century did no litle diuert from the purity of Apostolical doctrine vnto human opinions and Traditions c. In this Century Antichristianisme was conceiued in the braine of Ambitious Bishops c. So confessedly auncient are both the foresaid rites and doctrines of our Catholicke religion from the abounding testimonies of the Centuristes Osiander Caluin Beza Whitaker Brightman and Napier And here it may be wel obserued that the foresaid Protestants reiecting the Fathers thus in general for agreeing with Catholickes in al the foresaid points of faith that this preuenteth and confuteth D. Mortons vsual euasion throughout his Appeale in pretending that the Fathers held these pointes but in other manner then we Catholickes now do as though the Fathers agreed with vs in wordes tearmes and differed from vs in meaning Ad now lastly hereunto that in reguard of our foresaid sympathie with the Fathers in matters of faith and religion that D. Whitaker further auoucheth (i) â—ontra Duraeum l. 6. p. 4â—3 The Popish religion to be a patched couerlet of the Fathers errors sowed together And
SAINCT AVSTINES RELIGION COLLECTED FROM HIS owne writinges from the confessioÌ„s of the learned Protestants Whereby is sufficiently proued and made knowen the like answearable doctrine of the other more auncient Fathers of the Primitiue Church Written by IOHN BRERELEY Quod Patres credunt credo quod tenent tenâ—o quod dâ—cent doceo quod praedicant praedico c. Aquiesce istis et quiescis à me Aug. Tom. 7. contra Iulian. Pelag. l. 1. c. 5. prope finem Printed 1620. D. Augustinus Monachus Perrexit Petilianus ore maledico in vituperationem Monasteriorum et Monachorum arguens etiam me quod hoc genus vitae a me fuerit institutum Aug. Tom. 7. contra literas Petil. l. 3. c. 40. post med Disponebam esse in Monasterio cum fratribus c. capi bom propositi fratres celligere compatres meos nihil habentes sicut nihil habebam et imitantes me vt quando ego tenuem paupertatulam meam vendidi et pauperibus erogaut sic facerent et illi qui mecum esse voluissent vt de communi viueremus c. nulli licet in societate nostra habere aliquid proprium Aug. Tom. 10. de diuersis serm 49. de communi vita Clericorum post init Quantum in hac perfectionis via profecerim magis quidem noui ego quam quis quam alius homo c. Et ad hoc proposituÌ„ quantis possum viribus alios exhortor et in nomine Domini habeo consortes quibus hoc per meum ministerium persuasum est Ang. Tom. 2. epist 89. versus finem S. Austines being a Monke is coÌ„fessed by the CeÌ„tury writers cen 5. c. 6. col 701. TO THE MOS HIGH AND MIGHTY PRINCE IAMES by the grace of God King of great Britaine France Ireland defender of the faith my most gracious dread Soueraigne THe much obserued and no lesse commended care wherwith your highnes endeauoreth to enrich your Princely vnderstanding not forbearing so much as at the time of your bodily repast to haue for the then like feeding of your intellectual part your highnes table surrounded with the attendance conference of your graue and learned diuines in which respect you may not vnaptly be tearmed in the very wordes of Eunapius a liuing liberary walking study addeth a more then ordinary lustre of ornament to your royal estate and encorageth my otherwise fearful humble thoughtes more bouldly to approch and salute your highnes with this saying of S. (a) Lib. 8. indict 3. ep 37. Innocentio prope sin Gregory Si delicioso copitis pabulo saginari beati Augustini opuscula legite And although the viandes hereby thus prepared may in reguard of the Cookes plaine or rather vnskilful workmanship in confection seeme vnworthy of your royal preseÌ„ce for so much yet as they be of them selueâ— soueraigne Antidotes whereby to repel the dispersed contagioÌ„ of dangerous infection and are now placed on the table before your highnes by the attendance and seruice of men to your Maiesty not vngrateful or suspected euen the learnedst Protestantes them selues from whose frequent abounding confessioÌ„ the many hereafter ensuing particulars of S. Austines professed religion are collected I am not without hope that your highnes wil in such respect vouchsaife to esteeme them as not vnworthy either of your owne taist or the view and further tryal of your attending learned diuines And pardon great Saueraigne your meanest yet wel meaning subiect but to put your Maiesty in remembrance that seeing our knowledge in this life is but in (b) 1. Cor. 13.9 part euen by a (c) 1. Cor. 13.12 glasse in a darke sort and that the Sciptures a lone are prescribed by your learnedst diuines for the satisfying quieting of our knowlege in al doubts of religioÌ„ whatsoeuer that your Maiesty would plese to take notice that the said sacred Scriptures are not able to afford vs so much as certaine infallible proofe knowledge of them selues for as the titles of the said bookes can be no certaine proofe of their diuine authority considering that many writinges of like title were forged vnder the (d) See Eusebius hist l. 3. c. 19. et lib. 6. c. 10. S. Aug. contra aduers leg et Proph. l. 1. c. 20. Zozom hist l. 7. c. 19. Hmmelmannus de tradit Apost part 1. l. 1. col 251. et part 3. l. 3. col 841. Aâ—d see 2. Thes 2.2 Apostles names and neuer receiued by the Church for Canonical So likewise Protestant writers expresly teach (e) Hooker in Eccles pol. l. 1. sec 14. p. 86. conclude resolutly that of thinges necessary the very cheifest is to know what bookes we are to esteeme holy which point is confessed impossible for the Scripture it selfe to teach And (f) Ibid. l. 2. see 4. p. 102. 146. Couel in his defeÌ„ce of Hooker art 4. p. 31. it is not the word of God which doth or possibly can assure vs that we do wel to thinke it is his word From whence it is that yet to this present Protestantes so importantly differ in the very Canon of the Scriptures for it is wel knowen that the (g) Adamus Francisci in Margarita Theol. p. 448. Chemnit in exam part 1. p. 55. 56. 57. and in Enchirid p. 63. Hafenref in loc Theol. loc 7. p. 292. Osiand Cent. 4. l. 3. c. 38. p. 399. The Centuristes cent 1. l. 2. c. 4. col 54. Lutheran Churches do stil reiect as Apocryphal the Epistle to the Hebrewes the Epistle of S. Iames the second and third of S. Iohn the latter of S. Peter the Epistle of S. Iudas and the Apocalips of S. Iohn with whom agreeth (h) Loc. com c. de iustific parrag 5. p. 250. Wolphangus Musculus a Caluinist in reiecting the Epistle of S. Iames as erroneous in iustification by workes Now if the Scriptures be coÌ„fessedly thus vnable to afford vs but so much as certaine proofe of them selues then in al true consequence of reasoÌ„ much lesse are they able to direct exempt vs in case of al doubt or question infallibly from error And the rather cosidering that in such case as D. (i) Conference c. 2. diuis 2. p. 68. Raynoldes confesseth It is not the shew but the sense of the wordes of Scripture that must decide controuersies and that touching this questionable sense the Scripture howsoeuer infaliible and sufficient in it selfe which none denyeth yet it is not which is the onely point now pertinent and questionable infallibly sufficient as to vs in her instruction therof as not resoluing and instructing vs therein infallibly because not immediatly of it selfe but onely by certaine meanes (k) Whitaker de Scriptura controuer 1. q. 5. c. 9. p. 251. on our behalfe required as (l) Whitaker ib. p. 521. 522. 523. Reynoldes in his coÌ„fer c. 2. p. 83. 84. 92. namely Our skil in the tongues our waighing the circumstances of the text our conferring of places our
praier diligence c. Al which though endeauored by vs with al possible care are yet as being actions on our part most clearly not infallible but humane and subiect to (m) Lubbeâ—tus de princip Christian dog l. 6. c. 13. p. 442. Whitaker de Eccles controuer 2. q. 4. p. 221. error And such as the same notwithstanding Luther and many other his followers haue euen according to our aduersaries censures no lesse confessedly then greeuously (n) Whitguift in defence p. penult Bridges in def of the gouernment p. 559. Hospin hist sacram part 2. fol. 14. 44. 55. 49. 57. erred and therin persisted (o) Luther de caen a Domini tom 2. Germ. fol. 174. euenconcerning such pointes of doctrine as they from their owne careful obseruation of these foresaid meanes held for most certaine vndoubted cleare And the like might be exemplifyed in the (p) In their Apol. p. 103. Broumstes (q) Hooker Eccles pol. in pref sec 8. p. 38. Anabaptistes (r) Carrh wright in his second reply part 1. p. 18. 509. Puritanes (s) Caluin Tract theol p. 533. c. Libertines and (t) Colloq Ratisbone Lutheranes whoal of them in like manner haue no lesse carefully conferred and seriously pretended the Scriptures in defence of their so many different errors which each of them seuerally apprehended for vndoubted true and yet the same notwithstanding al of theÌ„ confessedly erred Vpon due consideratioÌ„ therefore had of these premises so necessarily inferring our owne incertanty al foresaid pretence of Scripture to the contrary notwithstanding and like further obseruation that the cheife question of the Canonical Scriptures theÌ„ selues is determined to vs not by Scripture it selfe as haith (*) See here before at e. f. beene shewed nor (u) Whitaker aduersus Stap. l. 2. c. 6. p. 370. l. 2. c. 6. p. 357. by priuate testimony of the spirit but according to the learnedst (x) The author of the treatise of the Scriptures and the Church c. 16. fol. 75. Whitaker cont Staplet l. 2. c. 4. p. 298. 300. Chemnit in examen part 1. p. 69. Lubbertus de princip Christian dog l. 1. c. 4. p. 18. Protestants by iudgement of the Church which confessedly (y) Fulke his answeare to a count Cath. p. 5. Iewel in def of the apol part 2. p. 242. Witaker contra Stap. l. 1. c. 5. p. 69. had the assistance of the holy Ghost in her infallible discerning to vs which bookes of Scripture were sacred and which not wherby also is further argued or rather conuinced her no lesse needful assistance of the same spirit in her like discerning to vs the sense (z) Chemnit in ex am part 1. p. 74. Sarâ—â—ia in defen tract cont Bezam p. 8. of the said Scripture for what auaileth it vs to be made certaine of the bookes and left incertaine of the sense What reason can our aduersaries allegde wherby to acknowledge the Churches priuiledge in the one deny it where it is no lesse needful in the other It cannot therfore I hope in these times of so great doubt question seeme either vnfitting or vnsafe that for our owne more certaine instruction in the doctrine of the Primitiue Church which both parties acknowledge for the true Church we should make humble recourse vnto the receiued and renowmed writinges of S. Austin a principal member of the said church who liuing so long before these our times and being in such respect indifferent to our late since vprisen controuersies is by our learned aduersaries professedly reuerenced as the vndoubted (a) See hereafter c. 1. h. c. best witnes since the Apostles times of Apostolicke doctrine Neither can the perswasion which is oftentimes setled and growen strong in vs by education afford any infallible certanty to your greatest Maiesty or your learned diuines whereby to secure your selues from error as might be made plaine without al further needful discourse by example not onely of sundry auncient Kinges and (b) See the Protest Apol. tract 2. c. 3. sec 6. parag 2. p. 513. at s Emperours who brought vp in Arianisme did thereupon imbrace and by their lawes establish the error therof as a truth most consonant to the Scriptures but also of diuerse moderne Lutheran Princes as of Denmarke Saxony Brunswicke c. who vpon their like education in Lutheranisme do professe as not to be questioned their monster of (c) See Whitguifâ— in his defence of the answeare p. penult Bridges in his def of the gouernement l. 7. p. 559. Hospin in hist Sacram fol. 14. 44. 55. 49. 57. And part 2. fol. 245. 282. 286. 287. vbiquity and other now dissenting opinions condemning therupon the aduerse doctrines of Caluin and Suinglius for (d) Luther Tom. 2. Wittenberg fol. 503. and tom 7. fol. 382. Fulke against the defence of the censure p. 101. 155. Hospin hist saciam part 2. fol. 183. errors most execrable In like sort the reformed Churches so are they (e) By Hooker in Eccles pol. l. 4. sec 8. p. 101. 183. styled of Transiluania Poland and hungary who being Antitrinitaries and yet otherwise (f) See Gratianus Prosper in his instrumen tum doctrinarum c. onely differing from the Caluinistes in the doctrine of the Trinity the Baptisme of infants haue together with their milke sucked the poyson of Arianisme are vpon this like ground euen to this present so carried away against our receiued doctrine of the blessed Trinity that they forbeare not to compare it to the (g) See Osiander cent 16. l. 2. c. 22. p. 209. three headed Cerberus condemning the same in their sundry (h) Gratianus Prosper Socinus Gentilis Seruetus Blandrata and other new Arians published writinges stored with plentiful alledged testimonies of Scripture for the cheifest brand of al Popish and Antichristian (i) See Osiander cent 16. l. 2. c. 22. p. 209. corruption And as we can not assure our selues but that in case of our like supposed educatioÌ„ in those opinions so once in like manner established with the current and countenance of the state our iudgements no lesse then theirs in like sort might haue beene preoccupated and transported with the same errors so their example affordeth vs iust forwarning not to rest secure vpon the appearing probability of any such like setled perswasion whatsoeuer And so much the lesse if we not onely obserue ingeneral the great reuoult of late made by so many of the learnedst Caluinistes from Caluins former receiued so much applauded (k) See Willet in Rom. c. 9. p. 442. Melancth in Con. Theol. part 2. p. 111. Hemingius de vniuersali gratia Snecanus in method de script p. 124. 430. 441. Castalio in his booke hereof de praedest Fox in Apoc. p. 473. sundry others doctrines concerning Reprobation induration vniuersality of grace (l) So did Caluin Beza and the French Protestantes and our now
by S. Bedâ— as appeareth next before the beginning of euery seueral sermon of that booke according to the edition of S. Austines workes printed Lugduni 1586. and is for such alledged and acknowledged by (d) Vbi supra p. 192. 252. 296. 399. M. Abbot whom I the rather here alledge for that of al the Protestant writers yet come to my handes he sheweth him selfe most conuersant and frequent in the reading and alledging of S. Austin As likewise I do the rather here alledge Gratian and Peter Lombard for that the Protestant writer (e) In Method aliquot locorum c. fol. 12. Simon Pauli making a Catologue of the Doctors and restorers of the heauenly doctrine therein ranketh Gratian and Peter Lombard together with Husse Luther and Melancthon and so also doth (f) Method theol in pref p. 1. 2. Hiperius But to returne to the learned aduersaries this careful preparation being by me thus made I can but here request leaue to admonish you with the Apostle (g) lac 2. 1 not â—o hold the faith of Christ in the acceptation of persons reguard not I pray you who it is that writeth but what is written and howsoeuer you thinke of me as perhaps not iniustly but weake and despicable in the presence of your owne very learned iudgemeÌ„ts for beare not yet I pray you your due respect vnto S. Austin him selfe and to so great a troupe of your owne learned writers who in reguard of their so many alledged sayinges digested into this breefe treatise are the primarie authors and my selfe but as it were the collectour or reporter thereof And let me also request further leaue without offence to premonish that in answeare hereto you would not as some of you whom I spare to name haue heretofore done in answeare to other treatises seeke to euade or to obscure the matter thus euidently proued either by prolixity of discourse as thereby to seduce or diuert the vnwary reader from the point properly issuable which in case of supposed truth might with shorter tearmes receiue direct and ful answeare vpon your confessing denying or distinguishing or by passing ouer with silence without al answeare thereto such proofes as are of greatest importance for howsoeuer this kind of omission may be houlden excusable by the preceptes of Rhetoricke yet is it in diuinity grosse and vnworthy or otherwise by vsual tergiuersation of obiecting in steede of answering certaine old obiected and often answeared obscurer sayinges of S. Austin (h) See hereafter c. 19. hereafter purposly in part preuented or other of the Fathers wherin their contrary meaning is euident and for such by learned Protestants them selues (i) See hereafter c. 20. confessed or els by digressing into allegation of certaine schoolemen dissenting somtimes froÌ„ the more common receiued doctrine concerning not the conclusions of faith but the manner of some such conclusion or some other like point not then by the Church determined Which how litle it forceth is by S. Austin him selfe in sundry (k) Tom. 7. contra Iulian. Pelag l. 1. c. 6. post init And de Baptismo contra Donat. l. 1. c. 18. init Aud l. 2. c. 4. prope init places declared and taught Or otherwise in alledging certaine Noualistes as (l) See the aduertisement set before the Protest Apol. Erasmus Valla Wicelius Cassander Agrippa Polidore Virgil Iacobus Faber and some few more such like who not confessed against them selues but as parties affirmed directly for them selues in behalfe of some one or other of your nouel opinions by them for the time defended which yet they al or most of them afterwardes (m) Ibidem retracted by their final submission to our Catholicke Church For al this whatsoeuer howsoeuer countinanced with variety of reading or other probability and ornament of discourse as heretofore it haith beene and in such elaborate sort as I haue seldome knowen so il a tale so wel told yet what was it then as to the Fathers by vs obiected and by our aduersaries confessed iudgements in the conclusions of faith Or what can it be now as to the point of S. Austines controuerted religion and so many of your learned brethren confessing thereof against both you and them selues If any shal vndertake to publish such further answeare of this kind as I nothing doubt but that the studious Reader thus premonished wil of him selfe be able easily to discerne the same to be no other then wast of time and paper so I for my part in steede of reply therto which in case of more direct ful desired answeare would not be wanting shal rather choose to spend part of my good houres in earnest prayer for the party which shal so abuse his better leasure that not depending too much vpon humane (n) 1. Cor. 8.1 knowledge which but puffeth vp and which at this present distracteth the (o) Besides common knowledge thereof see the Protest Apol. tract 2. c. 3. sec 5. sub 3. 4. 5. 6. Lutherans Caluinistes Puritans Anabaptistes Brounistes and Antâ—trinitaries into no lesse great diuersity of opinions then singular contempt each of other he may from example of these learne to become so humble wife and wisely humble as forbearing to be his owne iudge according to the direction and aduise of sundry Protestant (p) Acontius in stratagem Satan l. 4. p. 203. Hooker in Eccles pol. in praef sec 6. p. 28. Melancthon l. 1. epist ep ad RegeÌ„ Angliae p. 49. The harmony of confessions in English p. 319. Field of the Church epist dedic Bancroft in his sermon preached the 8. of Feb. pag. 42. writers to rest in others iudgement and thereupon to (q) Deut. 32.7 Iob. 8.8 Eccles 8.9 remember the auncient dayes of the Primitiue Church to consider the yeares of so many generations and (r) Hierem. 18.15 auoyding as dangerous the wayes not trâ—dden to (s) Ierem. 6.16 enquire for the old way which is the good way and to walke therein that so keeping the Churches (t) Isay 35.8 beateÌ„ path wherin euen very fooles caÌ„not erre resigning vp him selfe according to S. (u) Tom. 7. cont Crescon l. 1. c. 33. init Austines aduise in case of doubt or question to the iudgement of her who (x) 1. Tim. 3.15 is the piller ground of truth and whom (y) Math. 18.18 not to heare is to be as a Hathen or Publican he may so at last yealde not verbally but really to (z) 2. Cor. 10.5 captinate his vnderstanding to the obedience of Christ IOHN BRERELEY THE AVTHOR BEGINNETH HIS BOOKE TO HIS CATHOlicke ' friend CHAPTER 1. GOod Sir whereas at the time of our last conference had during our smale aboad together at the Spawe for both our healthes concerning the misbegotten controuersies of this age you signifyed to me how grateful to al men in this so great croud and throng of writing were litle portable treatises how much the dilicacy of
SCTION 4. COncerning the Churches being builded vpon the Rocke as S. Austin acknowledgeth the building thereof vpon Christ as being the primary Rocke or foundation so likewise doth he affirme as from the then common receiued doctrine our Sauiours building of his Church vpon Peter as being a secondary or ministerial Rocke or foundation houlding both these expositions for good and probable saying hereof expresly (a) Tom. 1. l. 1. retract c. 21. post init Let the reader choose whether of these two opinions be more probable To this purpose then he writeth (b) Ibidem in his booke contra epistolam Donati I haue said in a certaine place concerning Peter the Apostle that vpon him as vpon a Rocke the Church is builded which sense is also song by the mouthes of many in the verses of most blessed Ambrose c. but I know that since I haue often expounded that which is said by our Lord thou art Peter and vpon this Rocke I wil build my Church that it might be vnderstood vpon this which Peter confessed saying thou art Christ the sonne of God And then presently afterwardes as before he concludeth but of these two opinions let the reader choose which is the more probable And he alledgeth and approueth S. (c) Tom. 7. de Bapt. cont Don. l. 3. c. 1. ante med Ciprian saying for neither Peter whom our Lord chose first or cheifest and vpon whom he built his Church c. And him selfe saith elswhere (d) Tom. 8. in Psal 30. con 2. ante med O Church that is o Peter because vpon this Rocke I wil build my Church kil and eate And of Peters sea he denounceth that (m) Tom. 7. in Psal cont partem Donat. versus finem It is the Rocke which the proud gates of hel do not ouercome In so much that the Protestant Hammelmannus confesseth this of S. Austin saying (e) De Traditionibus Apostolicis part 2. l. 3. col 622. and see the like sayinges of the other Fathers alledged reiected fâ—r the same col 621. 623. 624. 625. Austin in his booke against the epistle of Donatus teacheth that the Church was founded vpon Peter as vpon the Rocke and he proueth this his opinion by the verses of Ambrose c. concerning the Cooke c. But S. Austin proceedeth yet more particularly saying (f) Tom. 4. quaestion ex Nouo Test quaest 75. post med Our Sauiour when he commaunded that there should be geuen for him and Peter then he seemeth to haue payed for al because as in our Sauiour there were al causes of preheminence so also after our Sauiour al are contained in Peter for he ordained him the head of them that he might be the Pastor of our Lords flocke c. It is manifest that al are contained in Peter for asking for Peter he is knowen to haue asked for al for euer in the superiour the people are either reproued or commended And againe (g) Tom. 8. in Psal 108. enarrat 1. prope initium certaine thinges are said in the Gospel which properly seeme to belong to Peter the Apostle yet they haue not a cleare sense but when they are referred to the Church whose person figuratiuely he is knowen to haue borne by reason of the primacy which he had ouer the Disciples c. S. Austin teacheth the primacy of the Roman Church SECTION 5. COncerning S. Peters successors the Bishops of Rome S. Austin acknowledgeth that in the Roman Church (a) Tom. 2. ep 162. multo ante med the principality of the Apostolical chaire euer florished And (b) Tom. 6. de vtil credendi c. 17. shal we doubt saith he to hide our selues in the bosome of that Church which c. from the Apostolical sea by successions of Bishops haith obtained the hight of authority To which not to geue the Primacy is truly either the greatest impiety or headlong arrogancy And writing to Pope Bonifacius him selfe he saith (c) Tom. 7. cont duas epist Pelag ad Bonifac l. 1. c. 1. circa med It is common to vs al wbo are Bishops although thou therein dost excel by reason of the greater height of thy pastoral watch-tower In like sort he writeth to Pope Innocentius saying (d) Tom. 2. epist 92. ad Innocent prope finem we thinke c. that by the authority of thy holines deriued from the authority of the holy Scriptures that they wil more easily yeald who beleeue such peruerse and pernicious thinges so attributing the Popes authority to the Scriptures them selues And as for Innocentius him selfe the Centuristes confesse (e) Cent. 5. col 1230. 662. and see Osiander cent 5. p. 59. that he laboured much for the primacy of the Roman Church which is euident by al his epistles c. wherupon they alledge from his epistles sundry of his sayinges which importing so much are therefore by them (f) Cent. 5. col 775. 779. reprehended And wheras Innocentius writ one epistle to the Fathers of the Carthage Councel wherein he affirmeth the Primacy of the Roman Church to be (g) In Aug. tom 2. ep 91. prope init and see cent 5. col 825. 780. decreed non humana sed diuina sententia not by humane but diuine sentence And an (h) In Aug. tom 2. ep 93. multo ante med and see cent 5. col 843. 780. other to the Milleuitane Concel wherein he chalengeth that matters of faith are to be referred to the Apostolical Sea Though the Centuristes do dislike and reproue these said epistles for the foresaid doctrines tauhgt therein by Innocencentius yet S. (i) Tom. 2. epist 106. post init Austin writing to Paulinus of the Pelagian heresy which was condemned in those two foresaid CouÌ„cels meÌ„cioning two seueral letters of those two Councels sent to the Apostolicke sea To which two letters Innocentius made seueral answeare in his two former recyted epistles from whence are alledged the testimonies of his clamed Primacy S. Austin I say of these very answeares or epistles writeth thus worthily (k) Ibidem Innocentius of blessed memory writ backe vnto vs concerning al thinges in that manner which was fit and conuenient for the Bishop of the Apostolicke sea and elswhere he further saith of the same epistles (l) Tom. 7. cont Iulian. Pelag. l. 1. c. 4. post med what could that holy man blessed Innocentius answeare to the Affrican Councels but that which aunciently the Apostolicke Sea and the Roman Church continually held with the rest Most euidently so hereby geuing his allowance of that very Primacy which Innocentius clamed in or by these two foresaid epistles But indeede S. Austin was alwaies so duly respectiue to the Roman Sea as that he greauosly reprehended the heretickes of his time for their then (m) Tom. 7. cont lit Petil. l. 2. c. 51. tearming the Roman Church as our aduersaries now do the chaire of pestileÌ„ce teaching with al against the Protestants often
where she knew the holy oblation to be geuen wherwith the band it cancelled which was against vs. He calleth it also (c) Tom. 5. de ciuit Dei l. 8. c. 27. ante med The sacrifice of Christians (d) See before here at t. which succeeded al the sacrifices of the old Testament wherof he also further writeth that (e) Tom. 7. de bapt cont Don. l. 3. c. vlt. prope fin Those whom our Lord clensed from the leper he sent backe to the same Sacraments that with the Preistes they might offer for them selues sacrifice because the sacrifice which he would haue to be celebrated in the Church for them al had not yet succeeded S. Austin also auoucheth that this sacrifice of Christes body and bloud is propitious or auailable for the soules in Purgatory his wordes are (f) Tom. 3. in Enchirid. c. 110. post med when therefore the sacrifices whether of the Altar or of the Almes are offered for al the deade that are Baptised they are thankes-geuinges for those that are very good and they are propitiations or sacrifices to apease Gods displeasure for those that are not very euil These wordes are so conuincing that (g) De sacrificio Mâ—ssatico l. 2. c. 7. p. 525. And see the Centuristes cent 5. c. 6. col 674. Hutterus excusing Ciprians obiected wordes of sacrifice for the deade as to be but meant of the sacrifice of prayer yet comming next after to answeare this place of S. Austin in steede of al euasion it is so direct and plaine for external sacrifice for the deade that as enforced he saith thereof In aeternum defendi non potest it can neuer be deâ—ended And therefore immediatly after he prouoketh to the law and testimony of Esay 8.20 hauing affirmed before that In this present question of sacrifice Austin doth not agree with him selfe But S. Austin proceedeth yet further teaching this to be a tradition of the vniuersal Church saying (h) Tom. 10. de verbis Apost serm 32. c. 2. initio It is not to be doubted but that the dead are holpen by the prayers of the holy Church and by the wholsome sacrifice and Almes which are geuen for their soules that our Lord may deale more mercifully with them then their sinnes haue deserued for the vniuersal Church obserueth this as deliuered from their forefathers that those should be prayed for and the sacrifice remembred to be offered for them who dye in the communion of the body and bloud of Christ when they are remembred in their place at the time of the sacrifice c. It is not to be doubted but that these thinges do profit the deade but such who haue so liued before their death that these things might be profitable to them after their death for suâ—h as dâ—e without faith which worketh by charity and the Sacraments in vaine are these workes of piety bestowed vpon them by their frendes c. Therefore no new mâ—rits are obâ—ayned for the deade when their frendes do any good for them but their owne merits going before these are made to follow Lastly his aduise is that as for such thinges which helpe the soules of the dead as sacrifices prayers Almes they bestow for them more diligently instantly abundantly which being deade in flesh not in spirit they loue not onely carnally but spiritually This place is so pregnant for our purpose that it is recyted confessed and reiected by (i) De origine erroris c. 9. fol. 223. Bullinger Lastly S. Austin teacheth that this sacrifice is offered vpon Altars saying (k) Tom. 10. de sanctis ser 11. prope init The body of our Lord is offered vpon the Altar And (l) Tom. 5. de ciuit Dei l. 22. c. 10. circa med we erect Altars in which we sacrifice to one God Affirming further that (m) Tom. 10. de sanctis ser 19. prope fin Altars are consecrated with the signe of the Crosse And that (n) Tom. 10. ser de tempore 255. initio The stone is hallowed or annointed vpon which the diuine sacrifices are consecrated vnto vs. Yea such reuerence he bore to Altars that saith he (o) Ibidem We celebrate this day the consecration of the Altar And rhe vse of (p) Concil Agathens can 14. Altars was such in this age of S. Austines that the Centuristes say (q) Cent. 5. col 744. Osiander cent 5. l. 4. c. 18. p. 482. l. 1. c. 30. p. 123. they begun in this age c. to consecreate Altars of stone powring vpon them Chrisme as is decreed in the 26. Canon of the Councel Eupaunense Concerning the Sacrament of penance wherin auricular confession to Preistes imposed penance and dayes of pardon are taught by S. Austin and other Fathers CHAPTER 9. AS concerning Penance S. Austin teacheth that it importeth a further penalty then onely repentance or greife of minde for sinne committed and that therefore it extendeth it selfe also to external accomplishments consisting in Almes fasting and other like workes of penance In which respect he describeth (a) Tom. 4. de vera et falsa paenit c. 8. post med Penance to be a certaine reuenge of him that sorroweth punishing in him selfe that which he is sory for hauing committed This penance according to S. Austin is diuersly imposed (b) Tom. 3. in Enchirid. c. 65. initio according to the measure or diuersity of euery ones sinne And (c) Ibidem And see concil Carthag 3. can 31. times of penance saith he are rightly appointed by them who gouerne the Church And wheras M. (d Synopsis p. 504. Calâ—in Institut l. 4. c. 15. sec 4. c. 19. sec 17. Wil. thinketh that the remissioÌ„ geueÌ„ vs in Baptisme doth suffice for al the sinnes committed after Baptisme and therfore that the Penance now intreated of should be vnnecessary S. Austin to the contrary writeth that (e) Tom. 2. ep 23. ad Bonif. multo ante med If the child with the encrease of age become euil then beginneth he to haue his owne sinnes which are not taken away by regeneration or baptisme but are cured by another medicine which in an other place he explaineth to be Penance saying (f) Tom. 6. l 2. de adulterinis coniug c. 16. prope intium If murther be committed by a Catechumen it is washed away by baptisme but if it be committed by one that is bâ—ptised it is healed by penance and reconciliation In like sort those wordes (g) Ioan. 20.23 of Châ—ist whose sinnes you forgeue thâ—y are forgeuen whose sinnes you retaine they are retained in S. Austines iudgement do extend further then to our priuate repentance for saith he (h) Tom. 10. l. 50 homil hom 49. c. 3. post med do ye such penance as is done in the Church c. Let no man say to him selfe I do it secretly I do it with God God who pardoneth me knoweth that I do it with my heart for
remission c. for in this that him selfe telleth to the Preist and ouercommeth shame with the feare of offence the sinne is pardoned And speaking of Cities besiged who ioyned Baptisme and penance together for their releefe he telleth how that in such common danger there is (d) Tom. 2. ep 180. ad Honoratum circa med and see tom 6. de adult coniug l. 1. c. 28. fine tom 10. 50. homil hom 41. concourse of people of al ages some desiring Baptisme others reconciliation others also the doing of penance it selfe c. where if the ministers be wanting what destruction followeth them who dye either not baptised or bound c. but if the ministers be present c. some are baptised others reconciled c. This absolution or reconciliation was geuen by the Preist with imposition of handes and enioyned penance for thus the 4. Councel of Carthage wherat S. Austin was present and subscribed decreed that (e) Cap. 76. he who in his sicknes desired penance c. should be reconciled by imposition of handes c. If he recouered c. he should be subiect to the appointed lawes of penance as long as the Preist who gaue him penance shal thinke good This Canon is confessed and approued by (f) Cent. 5. l. 1. c. 1. p. 15. see the Councel can 78. Osiander And the Centuristes do acknowledge for the practise of this age that (g) Cent. 5. c. 6. col 665. Penitents were absolued with imposition of handes To which purpose also S. Austin aduiseth the sinner that He (h) Tom. 4. de vera falsa paenit c. 15. prope initium put him selfe wholly in the power of the iudge in the iudgment of the Preist reâ—eruing nothing to him selfe that he may be ready to do al thinges for the recouering the life of his soule which he shal commaund And his further aduise is that (i) Tom. 10. de sanctis serm 39. post med we seeke confession with pure heart and performe our penance geuen by the Preistes Of which penance the third Councel of Carthage decreed that (k) Can. 31. by the sentence of the Bishop times of penance should be appointed to penitents according to the difference of their sinnes This Penance or temporary punishment was so enioyned as that somtimes also it was remitted by indulgence or pardon for so the 4. Carthage (l) Can. 82. Councel wherto S. Austin subscribed decreed that penitents should kneele downe euen vpon the daies of pardon And Innocentius who in reguard of the knowen corresspondents betweene him and S. Austin is no obscure interpriter of his doctrine affirmeth likwise (m) Ep. 1. ad Decentium c. 7. of penitents c. who do penance c. that the custome of the Roman Church showeth that the Thursday before Eeaster pardon was to be geuen them In which beleefe S. Chrisostome was so ful as that the Centuristes confesse that (n) Cent. 5. c. 6. col 692. Chrisostome affimeth that there are dayes of pardon and Indulgence And to omit S. (o) Lib. 3. ep 15. 16. 18. Concil Ancyran Can. 5 Concil 1. Nicen can 11. Ciprian teaching pardon of penance enioyned M. Bel acknowledgeth that (p) Suruey of Popery part 3. c. 11. p. 492. Pardons sealed with lead called the Popes Buls were graunted by Pope Adrian Anno Domini 772. S. Gregory also is most expresly reprehended and charged (q) Symonds vpon the reuelatioÌ„s p. 84. Bale in actis pontif Roman p. 46. for graunting pardons to such as frequented Churches on set dayes Pantaleon (r) Cronic p. 48. to this end alleging S. Gregories owne writinges But to conclude our doctrine of penance and confession is so clearly taught by the fathers of those Primitiue times that M. Simondes chargeth (s) Vpon the reuel p. 57. Leo the 1. with auriculer confession The (t) Cent. 3. c. 6. col 127. Centuristes confessing the same of other more auncient Fathers A doctrine also in it selfe so true that (u) In Apol. confes Augustan art 13. de numero sacram fol. 161. Melancton thinketh it easy to iudge which are properly Sacraments c. Therfore saith he Baptisme the Lords supper Absolution are truly Sacramentes c. with whom agreeth Luther saying At the first I denyed 7. Sacramets and onely placed 3. for the time Baptisme Penance bread c. And the like doctrine is taught by (x) Loc. com Tom. 1 fol. 305. Altham in Conciliat loc script pugn loc 191. fol. 211. loc 195. fol. 219. Spang in margaâ—ita theol p. 116. 117. Sarcerius Althamerus Spangburgius al of them Protestant writers Concerning the Sacrament of Extreme vnction wherin is proued the same to be a Sacrament And vsed in the Primitiue Church CHAPTER 10. THough the Sacrament of Extreme vnction be generally impugned by Protestantes yet S. Austin with vs teacheth the same saying of the sicke (a) Tom. 9. de rectitudine Cathol coÌ„uersationis post init Let him aske of the Church holy Oyle wherwith his body may be annoynted according to the Apostle Iames. 5. And againe (b) Tom. 10. ser de temp 215. circa med see tom 9. de visit Infirm l. 2. c. 4. initio Origen hom 2. in Leuit Prosper de praedict l. 2. c. 29. Chrisost de Sacerd. l. 3. c. 6. Let him annoint his body that it may be fulfilled in him which is written is any man sicke Let him bring in the Preistes and let them pray ouer him annoynting him with oyle But in further explication of S. Austines iudgement Innocentius Bishop of Rome then liuing with S. Astine vpon more casual occasion of a demaund propounded to him answeareth concerning the fore mencioned saying of (c) Ep. ad Eugubinum S. Iames c. 5.14 without doubt saith he it is to be vnderstood of the faithful being sicke who may be annoynted whth the holy oyle of Chrisme Affirming yet further concerning not the ministring but the receiuing therof that Not onely Preistes in their sicknes but also Laye-persons in theirs may haue the benefit and vse therof This is so cleare in Innocentius that Bale saith (d) Acta Romanorum Pontif. p. 31. in his pageant of Popes fol. 26. Of the annoyling of the sicke Innocentius haith made a Sacrament Agreeably to whom (e) Speculum pontif p. 33. Szegedin also writeth that Innocentius the 1. and Faelix the 4. haue made a Sacrament of the annoyling of the sicke And for this very cause the epistle of S. Iames which the Fathers and we alledge in behalfe of Extreme vnction is reiected by Luther in these wordes (f) Tom. 2. Witteberg de captiuit Babilon fol. 86. But I say if in any place it be foolishly written in this especially c. but if it were the epistle of Iames the Apostle I would say that it were not lawful for an Apostle by his owne authority to institute a Sacrament c.
of our sinnes and life not onely for Christ his sake through faith but also for the merit of our workes Melancthon writeth that (n) In colloquio Altembeâ—g fol. 307. we are iust not onely by faith but by al guiftes and vertues and this truly is Austines mind yea he preuenteth the obiection of S. Austin somtimes mencioning onely faith saying (o) Ibidem fol. 308. with Austin onely faith onely excludeth workes going before faith S. Austin teacheth that mortal and venial sinnes do differ of their owne natures SECTION 4. COncerning the distinction of mortal and venial sinne the difference wherof aryseth according to the Protestants opinion not from the diuersity of the sinnes in them selues but of the parties committing them so as to their faithful professors if we wil beleeue (o) Institut l. 3. c. 4. sec 28. Fulke against Rhem. Test in ep Iean sec 5. fol. 447. Caluin Fulke and others al sinnes are venial and vnto others as (p) Willet sinopsis p. 560. Papistes al sinnes are mortal yet S. Austin teacheth the contrary somtimes saith (q) Tom. 3. Enchirid c. 22. post med he we lye for the good of others a sinne therefore it is but venial And (r) Tom. 7. cont duas ep Pelag. l. 3. c. 3. post init Al sinnes do not make vs the sonnes of the deuil yea he recyteth (s) Tom. 10. de sanctis serm 41. post init And Tom. 3. Enchirid. c. 78. 79. quae sunt minuta peccata which are litle sinnes as for example as often as a man eateth and drinketh more then is necessary or speaketh more then is meete or is more silent then is expedient with a number more such like In so much that Peter Martir writeth that (t) Common places part 3. c. 4. sec 81. p. 153. S. Austin in his books de spir et lit c. 28. saith euen as there are certaine venial sinnes without which euery iust man cannot liue and yet they hinder vs not from saluation so are there c. And as for these venial sinnes S. Austin thinketh that the saying of our Lords prayer is expiatory for them for thus he writeth There (u) Tom. 9. de symbolo ad Catechum l. 1. c. 7. circa med are venial sinnes without which this life is not c. for litle sinnes without which we cannot be prayer is inuented what haith prayer forgeue vs our debtes c. if their sinnes were smale ones this dayly prayer would suffice to blot them out In like sort (x) Tom. 4. de vera et fal paenit c. 4. propefin There are certaine venial sinnes which are dayly loosed by our Lords prayer c. but others which are to death are not so loosed but by the fruictes of penance Againe (y) Tom. 3. Enchirid c. 71 for dayly short and light sinnes without which this life is not spent the dayly prayer of the faithful satisfyeth And he expresly maketh difference betweene (z) Tom. 5. de ciuit Dei l. 21. c. 27. in rhe Eng. trans p. 871. 872. sinne and crime betweene great sinnes and smale sinnes affirming withal that this which he speaketh of our Lords prayer concerneth smale sinnes onely To which purpose he is further alledged by the 4. Tolletane (a) Can. 9. Councel As lastly that S. Austin doubteth not to affirme that (b) Tom. 4. de vera et fal paenit c. 20. et vlt. post init venial sinnes were alwaies forgeuen by ceremonies Now this doctrine of the difference of mortal and venial sinnes is so cleare a truth that with S. Austin and vs it is likewise taught and defended by (c) Loc. com part 3. in his Thesis therto annexed fol. 24. Melancth in concil Euang p. 546. Musculus loc com p. 29. The harmony of confessions p. 81. Chemnitius Melancthon and other Protestant writers Concerning prayer for the dead Purgatory material fire in hel Lymbus Patrum inuocatioÌ„ of Sainctes their worship and Images CHAPTER 14. S. Austin teacheth that it is lawful and godly to pray for the dead that there is a place of Purgatory after this life SECTION I. COncerning prayer for the dead S. Austin was so wholly Catholicke as that without altergiuersation or staggering he spareth not to write that (a) Tom. 10. de verbis Apostoli serm 32. c. 2. initio It is not to be doubted but that the dead are holpeÌ„ by the prayers of the holy Church and by the wholsome sacrifice and almes which are geuen for their soules that our Lord may deale more mercifully with them then their sinnes haue deserued for the vniuersal Church obserueth this as deliuered from their forefathers that those should be prayed for and the sacrifice remembred to be offered for them who dye in the communion of the body and bloud of Christ when they are remembred in their place at the time of the sacrifice c. It is not to be doubted but that these thinges do profit the dead but such who haue so liued before their death that these thinges may be profitable to them after their death for such as dye without faith which worketh by charity and the Sacraments in vaine are these workes of pitty bestowed vpon them by their frendes c Therefore no new merits are obtained for the dead when their frendes do any good for them but their owne merits going before these are made to follow Yea his aduise is that as for such thinges which helpe the soules of the deade as sacrifices prayers almes they bestow vpon those more diligently instantly abundantly who being deade in flesh not in spirit they loue not onely carnally but spiritually Againe (b) Tom. 3. Enchirid c. 110. initio there is one so good that these thinges he needeth not and againe another so euil that neither can he be holpen with these when he dyeth c. therefore they profit not al men c. when then the sacrifice of the Altar or of any Almes are offered for al the deade that are baptised for those that are very good they are thanksgeuinges for those that are not very euil they are propitiatioÌ„s or sacrifices satisfying Gods iustice Also (m) Tom. 4. de cura pro mortuis c. 18. init they profit not al for whom they are done but those onely who while they liued deserued that they profit them but because we know not who those are we ought to do them for al the regenerate Now wheras D. Morton and other Protestants do vulgarly obiect that S. Austin prayed for his mother Monica whom yet he thought to be in heauen and that the like was done by other Fathers for those who vndoubtedly were also in heauen this S. Austin for him selfe and the other Fathers haith answeared and explained in the precedent wordes affirming that for such as were very good or in heauen prayers were thankesgeuinges and for those who were not very euil or in hel they were
death of holy Martyrs c. As also (k) In Psal 88. con 2. and see Concil 3. Carthag can 47. The martyrs whose birth dâ—yes we celebrate said c. yea Chemnitius alledgeth S. Austin to say (l) Examen part 2. p. 176. see Aug. tom 6. contra Faustum l. 20. c. 21. post init Christian people do celebrate together the memories of martyrs with religious solemnity Furthermore concerning the honoring of the Reliques of Sainctes the 5. Carthage Councel wherat S. Austin was present decreed thus (m) Can. 14. It pleaseth vs that Altars which are errected in the feildes high wayes as the memories of martyrs in which no body or reliques of martyrs placed are approued by the Bishops c. be cast dowen This Canon Osiander tearmeth (n) Cent. 5. l. 1. c. 33. p. 158. a foolish and grosly superstitious constitution Austin being either preseÌ„t or approuing it And the like dislike of this Canon is to be seene in the (o) Cent. 5. col 697. Century writers But S. Austin him selfe further saith (p) Tom. 2. ep 103. ad Quintianum fine They carry the reliques c. of Stephen the martyr which your holines knoweth how fitly you ought to honor as we haue done And (q) Tom. 3. de Eccles dog c. 73. initio we beleeue that the reliques of martyrs are most sincerely to be honoured as the members of Christ c. if any impugne this opinion he is not to be thought a Christian but an Eunomian and Vigilantian This point of doctrine was so receiued in that age of S. Austin as that Osiander faith of S. Hierome who was familiar with S. Austin that (r) Cent. 4. l. 4. c. 19. p. 506. He foolishly contended that the reliques of Sainctes were to be worshiped And the Centuristes recyte the very words (s) Cent. 4. c. 10. col 1250. and col 602. of S. Hierome concerning the worship of Reliques as also of Vigilantius obiecting to Catholickes their then vsual honouring of reliques The doctrine wherof S. Hierome reporteth to haue beene the receiued doctrine in his time to vse his owne (t) Lib. contra Vigil c. 3. wordes Non vnius vrbis sed totius orbis not of one Citty but of the whol world yea they were as then so religiously esteemed as that (u) Tom. 2. ep 137. multo ante med And see tom 3. de Eccles dog c. 73. Pilgrimages were made vnto the places of their abode Lastly wheras Faustus the Manithee charged Christians in their honouring of martyrs to haue made them Idols euen as (x) White in his way to the true Church p. 220. Protestants do now charge vs Catholickes for worshiping of Sainctes S. Austin thinketh so vnworthily so basely of this obiection as that he saith therof (y) Tom. 6. cont Faust Manich. l. 20. c. 21. initio And see c. 4. tom 2. ep 43. It doth not moue me so much as to answeare this calumnis c. S. Austin teacheth that it is lawful to vse and worship the Images of Christ and his Sainctes SECTION 4. ALthough occasion to intreate of Images was not so ministred to S. Austin as of other thinges yet he leaueth vs not without al testimony therof but indeede affirmeth that it was vsual frequent in his time to haue the pictures of Christ and his Sainctes for vpon occasion of certaine Pagans deuised forgeries against Christ and Peter and Paul S. Austin coniecturing why they named therin those two Apostles rather theÌ„ the other saith (a) Tom. 4. de consensu Euangelist l. 1. c. 10. circa med I thinke it was becauâ—e they had seene in many places them pictured together with him to wit Christ And which argueth him to speake of Christian countries he addeth immediatly next after as in reason of being so painted together with Christ because Rome doth more famously solemnly celebrarte the merits of Peter and Paul euen for the same day of their sufferinges And as concerning the diuision of the ten Commaundements into the first and second table S. Austin directly to the contrary of our aduersaries pretended argument against Images differeth from them therin (b) Tom. 4. quaestionum in Exod l. 2. q. 21. post init affirming this part of the coÌ„mandement Thou shalt not make to thy selfe any grauen thing not to be a seueral distinct precept of it selfe but parcel of and therefore explained by this former Thou shalt not haue strange Gods Herein he writeth so largely and his iudgement is so confessed that Musculus speaking of Catholickes saith (c) Loc. com de Decalogo p. 39. They diuide the precepts of the first table into three and of the second into seauen so they leaue out the commaundement concerning Images and grauen thinges c. following Austin who l. 2. quaest super Exodum c. 71 c. appointeth three preceptes to the first table and the other seauen to the second And then as pretending most vnworthily S. Austin to be herein contrary to him selfe he further saith But the same Austin plainly differeth from him selfe c. againe if the authority please why doth it not please in that which he writeth agreeably with the rest of the more auncient Fathers rather then in that which he write differently from others and him selfe but it agreed better to the time wherin grauen thinges Images were brought into the Church of Christ Willet likewise for this very cause reproueth S. Austin saying (d) Comment vpon Exodus in c. 20. p. 515. As for the reasons of the contrary opinion they are of no value Austin would haue but three precepts in the first table And againe (e) Ibidem p. 314. The Romanistes opinion is that there are but three commaundements in the first table putting the two first into one c of this opinion is Austin quaest 71. in Exod. And as by the premises S. Austin includeth the lawfulnes of sacred Images so withal he confessedly teacheth which in direct tearmes extendeth it selfe to the (f) Numeri 21. 8. brasen serpent and the Images of (g) Exod. 25.18 Cherubins appointed by God him selfe this our Catholicke principle that (h) Tom. 3. de doctrina Christ l. 3. c. 9. initio The honour geuen vnto profitable signes appointed by God as being in it selfe lawful passeth from them to the thing signifyed To which purpose Hospinian affirming that Sacraments may as signes be honoured saith euen as we say of (i) Hist sacram part 1. l 5. c. 8. p. 477. Images that honour stayeth not in them but passeth from them to the thinges which are signifyed In proofe of which opinion he also alledgeth S. Austin saying Those thinges which Austin writ de doctrina Christiana l. 3. c. 9. do agree with these who adoreth saith he a profitable signe apointed by God whose power and signification he vnderstandeth doth not honour that which is seene and passeth but rather
shal haue damnation This decree is so disliking to Danaeus that he chargeth the Councel and S. Austin with (x) 1. partis alt parte p. 1011. abusing manifestly the word of God and as Osiander thinketh (y) Cent. 5. l. 1. c. 1. p. 20. this Canon haith great errors in it And wheras the auncient Nouelistes did vsually obiect as Protestantes stil do that of 1. Tim. 4.3 thence to infer that the Churches forbidding of marriage in vowed persons is the doctrine of diuels S. Austin answeareth therto in these wordes (z) Tom. 6. cent Faust Manich. l. 30. c. 6. prope init He forbiddeth to marry who saith that it is euil not he who preferreth before this good an other thing better And the same answeare is made by Protestantes in the case of fasting from certaine meates as namely by M. (a) Eccles pol. l. 5. sec 72. p. 209. Iacob in his defence of the Church p. 59. quaerimonia Ecclesiae p. 106. 107. Hooker M. Iacob others Ad lastly herunto that this vowing of chastity by Preistes Virgins or Widowes was not as Protestants seeke to euade in S. Austines iudgement (b) Aug. Tom. 6. de virginit c. 13. 22. 23. And see Fulke against Rhem. Test in 1. Cor. c. 7. ad 28. in reguard of this present life neither that they should passe the time without greater troubles nor for the auoiding of greater vexations but expresly for the life to come which is promised in the kindome of heauen And according to this he reporteth Iouinians condemned error saying (c) Tom. 6. haer 82. prope fin He would not marry not for any greater merit with God in the kingdome of life euerlasting but for the present necessity lest he should suffer the troublet of marriage S. Austin teacheth that it is lawful to vow the state of monastical or religious life SECTION 3. COncerning the professed pouerty of Monkes S. Austin reprehendeth one Ianuarius for that (c) Tom. 10. de diuersis serm 49. de com vita Cleric c. 2. ante med professing a life in common he made a wil and apointed heires c wherof he further saith Proh dolor illius societatis O greefe of that community The beginning of this very sermon is aboue 900. yeares since alledged verbatim vnder S. Austines name by S. Bede in 2. Cor. c. 8. And this sermon and these very wordes now cyted are at large recyted vnder S. Austines name aboue 100. yeares since in the Councel of (d) Cap. 112. Aquisgrane vnder Lewis the first The Centuristes also say hereof (e) Cent. 5. col 710. Austin by the way reherseth certaine thinges of Monkes c. as that None of them possessed any thing proper to them selues And the same is confessed by (f) Polit. Eccles l. 2. c. 13. p. 474. Hosp de orig Monach. fol. 74. Zepperus and Hospinian as also of S. Hierome by (g) Estate of the Church p. 132. Chrispinus And that this profession of Monathisme was vnder vow S. Austin further saith (h) Tom. 8. in Psal 75. mult post med what is it they made voide their first faith they haue vowed not performed therfore let no brother placed in the Monastery say I wil leaue the Monastery c. it is answered to him they haue not vowed thou hast vowed thou hast looked backe c. remember Lots wife And yet in more ful explication of S. Austines iudgment and the doctrine of his time the Protestant Mollitor affirmeth euen of the Calcedon Councel (i) De Eccles milit p. 80. and see Concil Calced can 15. that it against the Oracles of the holy Ghost forbad the vse of marriage to Monkes and Nunnes But S. Austin yet further impugneth the hereticke Petilianus for inueighing against this profession he spake saith S. (k) Tom. 7. cont lit Petil. l. 3. c. 40. post med Austin with contumelious mouth in disprase of Monkes and Monasteries And he chargeth the Circumcelians for that (l) Tom. 8. in Psal 132. post init they were accustomed to say what meaneth this name of Monkes And againe (m) Ibidem ante med what do they say who insult against vs concerning the name of Monkes c. who say vnto vs show ye where the name of Monkes is written Now as concerning the religious habit of professed Virgins Widowes and Monkes the 4. Carthage Councel wherto S. Austin subscribed speaking of professed Widowes saith (n) Can. 104. Those who leauing their laycal habit haue vowed them selues to God vnder the testimony of the Bishop the Church in a religious habit c. The Centuristes also confesse (o) Cent. 5. c. 7. col 744. and see also Osiand cent 5. p. 155. veiled virgins to be mencioned in the 26. Canon of the Milleuitan Councel wherto also S. Austin subscribed as also to the 4. Carthage Councel wherin it was decreed that (p) Can. 11. when a Nunne is presented to the Bishop for her consecration that she be clothed with such garments as shal be fit for her profession sanctimony euer after to vse This Canon is also acknowledge by Osiander charging it (q) Cent. 5. l. 1. c. 1. p. 6. with superstitious and hipocritical habits And the like is to be seene in the 3. (r) Can. 4. Carthage Councel reported also by the same (s) Cent. 4. p. 523. Osiander The Centuristes also speaking of the Monkes of the 4. age confesse that they vsed (t) Cent. 4. c. 6. col 472. and see cent 5. c. 6 col 704. Sozom. hist l. 3. c. 13. a certaine clothing or couering vpon their heades which they called their hood a girdle also about their loynes and a garment vpon their shoulders and they mencion also the (u) Cent. 5. c. 6. col 733. habit of Nunnes In like manner as touching the abstinence of Monkes the Centuristes report from (x) Cent. 5. c. 6. col 688. and col 711. 732. S. Austin their almost incredible fastes affirming also from him that some spent very often three whol dayes and more without meate or drinke and that they abstained also from flesh and wine and that Aust in ep 86. telleth that many in the Monasteries fasted fiue dayes in the weeke during their whol life S. Austin also testifyeth him selfe to haue beene a Monk for speaking of Monachisme he saith (y) Tom. â— ep 89. ad Hilarium versus fin I who write these thinges c. do exhort others to this purpose with al my power and in the name of our Lord I haue partakers And speaking against Petilianus he affirmeth that (z) Tom. 7. cont lit Petil. l. 3. c. 40. post med he spoke with contumelious mouth in disprase of Monasteries and Monkes reprehending also me that this kind of life was instituted by me To which purpose also saith Passidonius of S. Aust that (a) In vita August c. 5. init being made Preist presently he
Chemnitius who therupon obserueth inferreth (h) Examen part 1. fol. 80. And see Snecanus in method descript p. 429. 430. 432. that In this sort Austin de natura et gratia applyeth the sentences of Hillary Ambrose Chrisostome Hierome which Pelagius had alledged in confirmation of his error according to the Analogy of faith adding a fit interpretation Now according to this obseruation and practise of S. Austin al. our aduersaries mistaken obiectionâ— from him are againe at once determined by the confessed contrary doctrine in the next Chapters alledged from the other Fathers that seuerally liued in the same age with S. Austin and in the other ages next before and after him As also according to both these foresaid rules may easily be auoyded that pretended necessity of childrens receiuing the Eucharist vnder paine of damnation wherwith S. Austin is by D. (i) Answeare to a counterf Catholicke p. 87. Fulke and many others so often and so seriously mischarged For hereto it may be answeared that in S. Austines opinion children in Baptisme receiued the effect of the other Sacrament without which vertual communicating he thought them not saued otherwise that he did not thinke their Sacramental receiuing of the Eucharist necessary appeareth first in that he taught before that in Baptisme was a plenaâ—â— remission of al sinnes Secondly in that our aduersaries cannot alledge any his saying affirming directly to to the point that a Baptised childe dying before his communicating is damned Thirdly in that S. Austin teacheth that (k) Serm. ad Infantes apud Bedam in 1. Cor. 10. And see Tom. 7. l. 1 de pec mer. et rem c. 19. and tom 5. de ciuit Dei l. 21. c. 16. and after the english transl p. 856. none ought any wayes to doubt but that euery one of the faithful is made partaker of the body bloud of our Lord when he is made in Baptisme a member of Christ and that he is not estranged from the fellowship of that bread and Chalice although before he eate that bread and drinke the Chalice he depart out of this world being in the vnity of the body of Christ This point is so cleare in S. Austin as that the (l) Cent. 5. c. â— col 604. Centuristes do in particular free him from this impution As for S. Austines communicating to Infants but without al opinion of the necessity before supposed we graunt his doctrine therof A doctrine likewise houlden good not onely by S. Ciprian who recyteth a (m) Serm. de lapsis circ med memorable miracle concurring therwith and one in his owne presence But also Musculus who maketh true and (n) Loc. com e. de caena Dom. p. 34â— direct answeare to those wordes of S. Paul Let a man proue him selfe and alledgeth (o) Ibid. p. 341. the auncient Churches iudgement and practise in proofe therof A doctrine also stil defended (p) Lib. ep Oecolam et Suing p 305. 329. by the Bohemians The third obseruation is that according to our aduersaries owne (q) Chemnitius examen part 1. fol. 80. Snecanus method de script p. 290. Bancroftes suruey p. 336. Humfrey in Iesuit part 2. rat 5. p. 501. rat 2. p. 129. and see S. Basil ep 64. rule we do discerne the Fathers sayinges by them vttered in heat or feruor of disputation from those other which they write dogmatically for that in the first kind the Fathers being more attent and busied how to conuince and ouercome then alwayes precisely obseruant or circumspect of their manner of speaking which they neuer doubted would be vnderstood otherwise then according to the Catholicke receiued sense euen as next here before S. Austin expounded and excused S. Chrisostome their meaning may the more colourably be mistaken In which respect such their obiected sayinges as namely those commonly vrged against freewil and merit of workes taken from S. Austins disputation with the Pelagians who enhabled these as auaileable without grace are not houlden so conuincing or fit for argument which few obseruations thus propounded being but duly obserued by the studious and indifferent reader wil suffice to deliuer him from the doubtful laborinth of al vprising obiected difficulties And thus much breifly in answeare to al the obiections pretended from S. Austin wherein our aduersaries most colourable endeauour is but to make him no further contrary to vs then confessedly therein he should be contrary to him selfe which is nothing he being in very deede so plaine in our behalfe and so far from Luthers new erected doctrine that one of Luthers scholers blushed not to say (r) Alberus contra Carolastadianos l. 7. And see the like in Musculus in praefat in libel Ger. de diaboli tyrannide And Hospin hist sacram part 1. fol. 346. I doubt not but if that Austin were non liuing he would not be 〈◊〉 to prâ—feâ—â—e him selfe Luthers scholler Concerning the doctrine and religiâ—a of the other Fathers in general and also of those who liued in the age of S. Austin And that it was the same with the doctrine religioÌ„ here formerly taught by S. Austin and at this day taught by the Catholicke Roman Church CHAPTER 20. The Fathers in general who liued in the age of S. Austin confessedly taught the same doctrine with him coÌ„cerning Christ being our mediator only according to his humanity concerning the sacred Scriptures traditions SECTION 1. HAuing thus hitherto entreated of the religion professed by S. Austin to whom aboue al the Fathers Protestants do vsually make their bouldest claime aâ— pretending him to make most for them and against vs Hereby I hope sufficiently appeareth what is to be expected in this kind from the other Fathers for if D. Boyes doth acknowledge that (a) Exposition of the dominic epist the winter part p. 253. and see before c. 1. the most indifferent for both parties among the Fathers is Austin who yet standeth so aduerse against them as we haue formerly seene by al the premisses much more aduerse then in al probability are the other Fathers And for so much as the further explanation of the other Fathers iudgements yealdeth a yet further strong proofe of S. Austires (b) See before in the pref to the learned aduersary professed like consenting religion and that in reguard of my enioyned and affected breuity I haue not opportunity to demonstrate the same from the other Fathers owne alledgedged sayinges at large I wil now therefore onely ad as in ful satisfaction of al reasonable readers a breife recytal of our learned aduersaries them selues charging and reprouing the Fathers indefinitly or els sundry of them at once charging also diuerse of those who liued in S. Austins age with their knowen confessed iudgements practise in particular of our Catholicke faith First then in proofe of our Sauiours office of mediatorship onely according to his haman nature Caluin him selfe denying it yet saith of the Fathers (c) Instit l. 2.
But now to speake of the Reseruation of the Sacrament vsed in al Catholicke countries for the more present helpe and comforth to the sicke and which is neglected generally by al Protestants M. Fulke confesseth and reprehendeth the Fathers saying (p) Against Heskins c. p 77. that the Sacrament of some was reserued in the elder dayes of the Church is not so great a controuersy as whether it ought to be reserued Caluin speaking of Catholickes reseruing the Sacrament for the sicke saith (q) Instit l. 4. c. 17. parag 39. I confesse that those who do so haue the example of the auncient Church but in so great a matter and wherin the error is not without great daunger nothing is more secure then to follow the truth And wheras S. Ciril speaking of the heretickes Anthropomorphits saith of them (r) Ad CalosyriuÌ„ I heare they say that the mystical blessing if any remnant therof remaine til the next day following is vnprofitable to sanctification but they are mad in so saying for Christ is not another neither shal his body be chaunged but the vertue of blessing and liuely grace do alwayes remaine in it Hereto Peter Martir answeareth (s) Aduersus Garden ob 213. col 838. wheras it is added that the remnants of the Eucharist kept til the day following do not cease from sanctification I thinke this belongeth to a certaine receiued custome c. which custome though it tasted of some superstition yet Ciril and others subscribed vnto it for forthwith from the times of the Apostles by litle and litle they began to degenerate from that auncient simplicity of Gods worship c. the Anthropomorphits heretickes beleeued that those remnants had such a coniunction with the body of Christ that what corruption happened to them they thought did also happen to the body of Christ Now how could the heretickes haue immagined thus had not the real presence beene the receiued doctrine of those auncient times And as for M. Mortons answeare (t) Appeale p. 602. 603. therto it is so impertinent and extrauagant as I deeme it vnworthy of al further reply Wherefore to proceed according to Chemnitius (u) Exam. part 2. p. 102. witnesses of this custome of priuate reseruation of the Eucharist are Tertulian Ciprian Ambrose Hierome Basil c. it is knowen how much certaine of the auncient writers haue commended this priuate reseruation as Nazianzen Ambrose c. and truly if the antiquity of a custome vniuersally dispersed or long continued might impose either necessity or prescribed to the truth by no meanes ought that priuate reseruation either be chaunged or abrogated Now whereas D. (x) Appeale l. 2â— c. 3. p. 136. Morton would diuert his reader from the point vrged under pretext that the carrying of the Sacrament vnto priuate mens houses vsed in the time of persecution in the Primitiue Church haith beene sithence abrogated the persecution being ceased what is this against the reseruation of the Sacrament in the Church for such as are sicke or in answeare to the inference made vpon the other as namely that the Fathers therefore thought it a sacrament and Christ present before our receiuing therof to the contrary wherof Protestants teach that (y) Willet in his synops p. 460 It is no Sacrament vnles it be receiued In like sort where M. Morton obiecteth the Fathers deliuering sometimes the remaines left of the Sacrament vnto (z) Appâ—â—le p. 136. Innocent children to be by them eaten or els to the pure element of the fyre to be there consumed to what purpose was al this had the Fathers but thought of the remanies of the Sacrament as Protestants now do to wit that they were but particles of bread only representing the body of Christ And lastly wheras the same M. Morton yet vrgeth that S. Ciprian saith (a) Ibidem p. 135. that that bread is receiued not shut vp what auaileth this but to proue that the Sacrament should be not onely reserued but also receiued Otherwise how plaine S. Ciprian was for reseruation appeareth by his owne (b) Serm. 5. de lapsis writinges and is formerly confessed by Chemnitius But Oecolampadius yet further hence acknowledgeth (c) Lib. epist Oecolam and Suing p. 690 the religion of the auncient Fathers who tooke it greeuously that the Eucharist should fal vpon the ground for which the said Fathers are reproued by M. Parker who tearmeth (d) Against symbolising part 1. c. 3. 10. 11. p. 148. it in them hypocrisy and the like is acknowledged by (e) Aphorism de Euchar. l. 6. fol. 230. Vadian The Fathers in general are confessed concerning our Catholicke doctrines of the sacrifice of Christes body bloud in the Eucharist As also that the same was propitiatory euen for the soules departed of mingling water with wine in the Chalice and of Altars SECTION 7. DOctor (f) Conference p. 552. Reynoldes affirmeth concerning Altars sacrifices that they are linked together by nature in relation and mutual dependance one of another So as proofe of the one is also proofe of the other Now M. Carthwright saâ—th (g) 2. Reply part 2. c. 9. p. 264. the abuse of the auncient writers herein may easily appeare in that in this so great liberty of speach they vsed to cal the supper a sacrifice and the communion table an Altar wherof also Peter Martir saith (h) Common places part 4. c. 12. p. 225. the Fathers should not with so much liberty haue seemed here and there to haue abused the name Altar In so much as in respect of this antiquity of Altars diuerse (i) See Milius in volumen 1. disput 15. fol. 254. 257. learned Protestants do retaine and defend them against their other brethren But as touching sacrifice it selfe Caluin writeth (k) In Haebr c. 7. 9. p. 924. when so many auncient doctors of the Church had forged without commaundement a sacrifice in the supper of Christ and so by adding sacrifice had adulterated the supper afterwardes they endeauored on euery side how to get colours wherwith to shodow their error And againe (l) De vera Eccles reform in tract theol p. 389. and iâ—st l. 4. c. 18. parag 11. The auncient Fathers are not to be excused for so much as it appeareth that they haue varied from the pure and proper institution of Christ for seeing the supper is to be celebrated to this end that we communicate with the sacrifice of Christ they not content herewith haue also added an oblation this addition I affirme to be faulty Crastouius a learned Caluinist confesseth that (m) Lib. 1. de opificio Missae p. 28. 58. 102. 171. And in Caluin in ep ad Haebr c. 7. 9. p. 924. The Fathers thought the Eucharist to be a sacrifice according to the order of Melchisadech Fulke also saith hereof (n) Against Heskins p. 99. I confesse that diuerse of the old Fathers were of
opinion that the bread and wine which Melchisadech brought forth was sacrificed by him and that it was a figure of the Sacrament which they improperly called a sacrifice c. CipriaÌ„ also thouhgt that herein Melchisadech resembled the Preisthood of Christ And that the Fathers taught that this sacrifice of the Eucharist was also propitiatory or satisfactory for sinne the same Crastouius acknowledgeth saying (o) Lib. 1. de opificio Missae p. 167. But the sayinges of the Fathers do not onely import impetration but also a certaine intrinsecal force of appeasing Origen hom 13. in Leuit. saith This is the onely commemoration which maketh God propitious to men Athanasius serm de defunctis cyted by Damascen saith the oblation of the vnbloudy hoast is a propitiation And he alledgeth yet further to the same purpose the like sayinges of S. Chrisostome Ambrose Austin Gregory Bede c. The Fathers also confessedly taught that this sacrifice of the Eucharist was to be offered also for the deade hereof also writeth (p) In tract theol p. 394. Caluin There remaneth another sort of the deade whom the Fathers would haue remembred at the supper that place of rest might be geuen them c. I do not deny that this was a most ancient custome which also was so general that M. Gifford confesseth that (q) DemonstratioÌ„ against Brounistes p. 38. in the Churches publicke worship to pray for the soules of the deade and to offer oblation for the deade was general in the Church long before the day s of Austin as appeareth in Ciprian and Tertulian Zepperus (r) De sacram p. 47. alledgeth S. Austin and diuerse other Fathers by whom saith he sacrifice for the quicke and the deade was made of the holy supper And according to Bullinger (s) De orig erroris fol. 223. And see Decades in english dec 5. serm 9. p. 1082. Austin maketh mencion of oblation for the deade c. in Enchirid. c. 109. c. which I therefore speake of more largely that you may vnderstand this custome of offering for the dead not to be ordained by the Apostles but by the holy Fathers M. Fulke doth not deny but plainly acknowledgeth that (t) Confut. of Purgat p. 362. 303. 393. and Osiander in his refutatio aduersus Costerum p. 73. Tertulian Ciprian Austin Hierome and a great many more do witnes that sacrifice for the deade is the tradition of the Apostles And wheras S. Ciril (u) Catech. Mistag 5. ante med tearmeth the Sacrament the hoast of propitiation and the greatest helpe for soules departed for which it is offered Hospinian hereupon saith (x) Hist sacram part 1. l. 2. c. 7. p. 167. Ciril affirmeth according to the receiued custome of his time that the sacrifice of the Altar is the greatest helpe of soules To conclude not onely the generality of Masse for the 1000. yeares last past is graunted by many Protestant (y) Bacon in his reliques of Rome fol. 344. Danaeus de Antichristo c. 20. p. 101. the Cetâ—ristes cent 6. c. 6. col 336. Hospin concord discord in prologom fol. 3. Hutterus de sacrif Missat l. 1. c. 23. p. 377. writers but they likewise further admit that (z) Ascam in Apol pro caena Dom. p. 31. It cannot be knowen at what time and by what men the super of the Lord was cast out of possession by the Masse Lastly as concerning the mingling of water with wine in the Chalice for the sacrifice by vs houlden necessary not to make the Eucharist a Sacrament wherin M. (a) Appeale l. 2. c. 4. p. 138. 139. Morton deludeth his vnwary reader but as to the bene esse of it or representation so as to omit the same were sinne wherunto D. Morton answeareth nothing M. Whitguift auoucheth that (b) Defenc. tract 8. p. 473. Ciprian was greatly ouerseene in making it a matter so necessary in celebration of the Lords supper to haue water mingled with wine which was at that time no doubt common to more then to him wherto agreeth M. (c) Ibidem p. 525. Carthwright In so much as M. Iewel confesseth of this mixture that (d) Reply to Harding p. 34. and Parker against symbolysing part 1. c. 2. p. 103. Indeede S. Ciprian and certaine old Fathers speake of it and force it much The Fathers ingeneral are confessed for our Catholicke doctrines concerning prayer for the deade Purgatory and Limbus Patrum SECTION 8. DOctor Fulke confesseth that (e) Confut. of Purgat p. 313. and see cent 4. c. 6. col 454. In the burial of Constantine our first christian Emperour is mencion of prayer for his soule according to the error of the time And againe (f) Confut. of Purgat p. 320. 326. Ambrose indeede alloweth prayer for the deade it was a common error of his time with him agreeth M. Gifford saying (g) DemonstratioÌ„ against Brounistes p. 38. this corruption of prayer for the deade was general in the Chuurch long before the dayes of Austin c. It was the practise of the Church ingeneral the corruption so auncient that Tertulian saith it was obserued by tradition from the Apostles c. the doctrine of Purgatory was crept in also wherto might be added sundry (h) Willet in Tetrast part 3. p. 97. Chemnit exam part 3. p. 107. Fulke in his retentiue against Brist p. 106. Hospin hist sacra part 1. p. 155. Caluin instit l. 3. c. 5. parag 10. other testimonies of our aduersaries so likewise reprehending and charging the Fathers with prayer for the dead But M. Carthwright forbeareth not to conâ—esse that (i) 2. Reply part 1. p. 619. Epiphanius a greeke Father esteemed Aerius to be an hereticke for his iudgement that we ought not to pray or make any oblation for the dead and Austin a Father of the Latin Church reporteth this as one of his heresies Of this also saith D. Fulke in the like wordes (k) Answeare to a counterf Cathol p. 44. 45. Aerius taught that prayer for the dead was vnprofitable as witnes both Epiphanius and Austin which they count for an error But D. Fulke saith yet further of (l) Confut. ofâ— Purgat p. 161. Purgatory The error of Purgatory was somwhat rifly budded in Austines time And againe (m) Ibidem p. 78. 194. Austin speaketh of the amending fire in the place by M. Allen alledged he doth so indeede but had no ground of that fire but in the common error of his time In like sort as touching Limbus Patrum M. Iacob for the Puritanes confesseth that (n) In Bilsons ful redemption p. 188. Al the Fathers with one consent do affirme that Christ deliuered the soules of the Patriarches and Prophets out of hel and his comming thither and sospoyled Satan of those that were then in his present possession And D. Barlow confesseth likewise for the Bishops that (o) Defence of the articles of the Prot. relig p. 173.
Councel of Calcedon is therefore reprehended by (z) Cent. 5. l. 3. p. 359. Osiander And as for Nunnes the Century writers report that there were (a) Cent. 4. c 6. col 467. Monasteries of women professing chastity And that there were virgins before Constantines time professing perpetual chastity Iustus Molitor (b) De Eccles milit 8. also saith The Councel of Câ—lcedon contrary to the oracles of the holy Ghost forbad the vse of marriage to Monkes and Nunnes And of the very name of Nunnes the Centuristes say (c) Cent. 4. c. 6. col 470. Hieronimus ad Eustochium Nonnae etiam vocabulo vsus est Hierome vsed the word Nunne And they report that (d) Ibid. col 468. They were cloathed in the Church before the Altar c. candles burning And of the consecration of their Monasteries (e) Cent. 5. l. 3â— c. 13. p. 362. Osiander cyteth the (f) Can. â—4 Calcedon Councel decreeing in these wordes we haue decreed that such Monasteries as are once consecrated c. shal euer so continue c. and that afterwardes they shal not be turned into secular habitations The Centuristes also testify (g) Cent. 5. c. 6. col 709. the obedience of Monkes to be such as that they went not out of their Cel vpon any occasion without licence of their superior whom they called (h) Ibid. col 708. the Abot By al this I hope is sufficiently discouered the extreame bouldnes or ignorance of many (i) Pet. Mart. in com places in engl part 4. c. 1. p. 7. White in his way to the true Church sec 42. parag 11. p. 307. Humfred in Iesuit part 2. rat 5. p. 587. Zepperus in polit Eccles l. 1. c. 8. p. 90. Protestant writers who beare their readers in hand that these auncient Monasteries and Monkes of the Primitiue Church were nothing lesse then Popish as being say they in very deede no other then Colledges of studeÌ„ts such as are yet in vse in CaÌ„bridge Oxford and other vniuersities But this euasion is further plainly confuted by the like confessed (k) Cent. 4. c. 6. col 467. 476. 1335. 1337. Osiand cent 4. l. 4 c. 19. p. 503. 507. Monasteries of virgins which I hope our aduersaries wil not pretend to haue beene Colledges of women students As also by M. Carthwright who in reguard of so euident premisses concludeth to the flat contrary that (l) 2. Reply part 1. p. 502. Monkes are Antichristian notwithstanding their auncienty and that (m) Ibid. p. 500. the Monkes Eremites and Anchorites in Hieromes time were very grosse To speake now of the prescribed fastes approued and vsed in the Primitiue Church wherof Caluin writing saith (n) Instit l. 4. c. 12. parag 19. 20. I cannot altogether excuse the auncient Fathers in this respect but that they laid some seedes of superstition c. the obseruation of superstitious Lent was then euery where in force Chemnitius also acknowledgeth that (o) Exam. part 1. p. 89. Ambrose Maximus Theophilus Hierome and others do affirme the fast of Lent to be an Apostolical tradition wherof also saith Scroderus (p) Opusculum theologic p. 71. almost in the same wordes Ambrose Theophilus Hierome and others do decree Lent to haue descended from Apostolical tradition The (q) Cent. 4. c. 6. col 440. Centuristes also do charge the Fathers of the fourth age with superstitious fasting vpon Wednesday and Fryday In so much as M. (r) In his true Catholicke p. 601. Trig in reguard of such their confessed antiquity professeth to defend vrge against his other Protestant brethren The fast of Lent and solemne weekely fast of Wednesday and Fryday wherto might be added the auncient Churches (s) Heretofore c. 15. sec 1. confessed condemning of Aerius and Iouinian for their contrary doctrine though they be (t) Danaeus de haeres haer 53. p. 177. Fulke in his answeare to a counter Cath. p. 44. Whitak de Eccles p. 305. defended in their errors by sundry Protestants And as for the common obiection of Montanus his condemned fastes and of Socrates reporting the indifferency and liberty of fasting The firster is explained and answeared by M. (u) Eccles pol. l. 5. sec 72. p. 209. 210. and Quaerimonia Eccles p. 110. Hooker and others his brethren and the second touching Socrates and his confessed euident vntruth in this kind it haith beene formerly (x) See Whitguift in his defence Tract 8. c. 2. p. 350. Frigiuelleus Gauius in Palma Christiana p. 103. and Protest Apol. p. 181. c. discouered both by Catholickes and Protestants Lastly as concerning Ceremonies M. Calfhil to omit others affirmeth that (y) In Fulkes Reioynder to Martials reply p. 131. 132. The Fathers declined al from the simplicity of the Gospel in Ceremonies As for D. (z) Appeale p. 53. 324. Mortons obiecting of S. Austin against Ceremonies it is euident that S. (*) Tom. 2. ep 119. Austin spoke not of the Churches ceremonies but onely of such particular (†) Ibid. paulâ— ante med customes as were taken vp of the common people as not instituted by the Church An answeare so cleare that M. Whitguift answeareth (¶) Defence tract 10. c. 2. p. 545. Carthwright agreeably in these wordes Austin ep 119. speaketh but of vnprofitable ceremonies c. neither grounded of the Scriptures determined by Councels nor confirmed by custome The Fathers ingeneral are confessed by Protestants not onely for particular pointes of faith but ioyntly at once for many or most of them together SECTION 12. TO forbeare as now al such like particular further allegation and to comprehend at once many or the most of the pointes in controuersy D. Whitguift discoursing of (a) Defence pag. 472. 473. doctrine taught in any age since the Apostles times affirmeth without any other exception either of age or father that almost al the Bishops and learned writers of the Greeke Church and Latin also for the most part were spotted with doctrines of freewil of merit of inuocation of Sainctes and such like c. Meaning thereby such other like points of our now Catholicke doctrine which his assertion is now sithence specially renewed and made good almost in the same wordes by D. Couel saying (b) Against the plea of the Innocent c. 9. p. 120. diuerse both of the Greeke and Latin Church were spotted with the errors about freewil merits inuocation of Sainctes many thinges might be alledged in this kind if it were any vertue to rip vp their faults whom we ought to honour In like manner concerning the like liberal acknowledgment of the Century writers Caluin and whitakers wheras Cardinal Bellarmine alledgeth the particular sayinges of Caluin and the Centuristes as charging the auncient Fathers with (c) De notis Ecclesiae l. 4. c. 9. nota 6. error in freewil Limbus Patrum denyal of our concupisence without consent to be sinne satisfaction prayer for the deade merit penance
our Catholicke faith but of their Protestant religion Speake now here ingeniously can you beleeue them Neither doth D. Morton his euasion any thing helpe him alledging the example of the water miraculously vanishing away from the font at such time as a dissembling Iew came hipocritically vnto a Nouatian Bishop for to be Baptised for here was no miracle wrought at the instance of the nocatian or by his agency or ministery or in any sort colourable to confirme Nouationisme but rather to the contrary for this perfideous Iew as (s) Hist lib. 7. c. 17. Socrates reporteth and the (t) Cent. 5. c. 13. col 1483. Ceturistes confesse hauing beene before baptised after the Catholicke manner by Atticus a Catholicke Bishop of Constantinople and comming now againe vnder pretence therby of begging money to be a new baptised of Paulus the nouatian Bishop God him selfe as vnwilling to haue his Catholicke baptisme formerly receiued to be so scornfully and sacrilegiously prophaned did immediatly of him selfe without al agency therin of the Nouatian miraculously hinder the said Iew from being againe baptised by the heretical Bishop A thing so far from confirming Nouationisme as it argueth rather directly the contrary And no lesse if not more disparity or rather impertinency is obserueable in D. Mortons like further obiecting of Balaam and Cayphas not working miracles but prophecying of Christ against their owne wickednes wherto but further ad concerning al these examples aswel that no one of them came to passe as did our foresaid other miracles vpon occasion or in behalfe of commending or publishing to the heathen people or others any doctrine then before there vnknowen or not receiued as also that Cayphas his obiected (u) Ioan. 11.49.50 Prophecying was but for once the Apostles then doing many (x) Math. 10.1 great miracles As likewise was (y) Numer 24.17 Balaams Prophecying for once euen in the time of Moyses whose many stupendious miracles neede no recytal And so in like manner that which is obiected to concerne the Nouatian was but for once and the fift Century when as the Church of God was most (z) Cent. 5. c. 13. from col 1478. til 1494. glorious in miracles wheras in the other foresaid examples of vndoubted miracles confessedly wrought by S. Austin in our conuersion and by our Catholicke Preistes in their late coÌ„uersions in this age of sundry heathen nations the Protestant Church was confessedly destitute of al like answearable example in that kind as is confessed by D. Fulke saying (a) Against Rhem. test in Apoc. 13. sect 3. fol. 478. It is knowen that Câ—luin and the rest whom the Papistes cal Arch-heretickes do w rke no miracles with whom agreeth D. Sutliue in these wordes (b) Examination of Kellisons suruey p. 8. neither do we practise miracles nor do we teach that the doctrine of truth is to be confirmed with miracles And of Luther inparticular his owne Prot. neighboures say (c) Diuines of the Count Palatine in their Admonitio Christiana de libro concordiae c. 6. p. 203. we haue not heard of any miracle that he did And thus much in proofe that the ages next succeeding S. Austin agreed with him in our Catholicke Roman faith But now to come to the age precedent to S. Austin that the same Catholicke faith was then also vniuersally professed and Protestancy not so much as knowen to haue beene then in being to omit much other proofe wherof this short intended treatise is not capable that learned and so excellent a man (d) Deut. vpon the reuelat p. 262. M. Napier in his treatise dedicated to the Kinges maiesty and for the supposed worth therof reprinted in London Anno. 1594. and now againe sithence reprinted in London by M. Norton Anno. 1611. cum priuilegio Regiae maiestatis Besides the further (e) In the Preface to the Christian Reader imprinting therof diuerse times in the French and Ducth tongues and yet further promised (f) Ibidem publishing the same shrotly in Latin to the publicke vtility of the whol Church this so learned and esteemed Protestant writer auocheth that betweene the yeare of Christ 300. (g) Vpon the reuelat printed Anno. 1594. p. 68. and after the later edition p. 90. 85. and 316. the Antichristian and Papistical raigne began raigning vniuersally and without any debatable contradiction 1260. yeares next ensuing the first 300. yeares after Christ And the same not as D. Morton would (h) Appeale p. 72. euade in reguard of some one or other onely point of Popery so to vse their phrase but so generally in reguard of the whole that saith M. (i) Vpon reuelat p. 161. Napier from the yeare of Christ 316. God haith withdrawen his visible Church from the outward assemblies to the hearts of particular godly men during the space of 1260. yeares (k) Ibid. p. 191. Gods true Church most certainly abyding so long latent inuisible (l) Ibid. p. 161. 156. 237. 23. 188. the Pope (m) Ib. p. 145. his Cleargie duringal tbat time posessing the outward visible Church of Christians (n) Ibid. p. 239. neuer suffering for the space of 1000. yeares after Siluester the first any to be seene vouchable or visible of the true Church c. Thus far M. Napier To whom assenteth M. Brochard affirming that (o) Vpon the reuelat fol. 110. The Pope fel from Christ in the time of Siluester and that (p) Ibidem the Church was trodden dowen and oppressed by the Papacy euen from Siluesters time to these times during (q) Ib. fo 123. the said 1260. yeares with these agreeth M. (r) In Apoc. in his Synopsis before the booke fol. a. 1. parag 11. Brightman teaching that The Church was latent from the time of Constantine for 1260. yeares and that (s) In Apoc. in c. 17. p. 462. euer since the time of Constantine the great Rome haith beene the whore of Babilon and the Roman Bishop haith beene the beast and Antichrist foretould in the Apocalips wherto M. Leigh addeth that (t) Britannies great deliuery fol. B. 2. The Popes euer since the first 300. yeares haue beene Diuels We may yet further ad hereto in behalfe of the like yet further acknowledged antiquity of our Catholicke religion that M. Napier further auoucheth (u) Vpon the reuel in c. 16. p. 191. that during euen the second and third ages next after Christ the true temple of God and light of the Gospel was obscured by the Roman Antichrist himselfe That also in the booke so (x) In ep theol ep 46 p. 232. gratful to Beza and penned by Caelius secundius Curio a Caluinist is affirmed and houlden for good (y) De amplitudine regni Dei lib. 1. p. 43. 45. 47. that The world continued in great darknes blindnes ignorance almost from the Apostles age to these very times in which aboue al expectation the Lord began to manifest
Chrisme 128. they haue authority to Excommunicate 128. euen such as are dead 129. C CAluinistes reuoult from Caluin Pref. p. 12. Ceremonies moue to deuotion 198. vsed in administration of the Sacraments 199. Obiections against them answeared 253. 312. Character imprinted by some Sacraments 62. Chrisme hallowed onely by a Bishop 77. Miracles wrought therby 223. Christ is God of God 9. denyed by some Prot. 8. but beleeued by others 10. he suffered not according to his diuine nature 16. Neither as God was Preist or mediator 17. 266. He was freed from ignorance 18. He descended into hel 19. His body may be without circumscription 19. Obiections against this answeared 241. Christian liberty taught by Prot. disliked by the Kinges Maiesty 387. Church of Christ freed from error 39. she is Catholicke or vniuersal 41. and euer visible 46. Built vpon S. Peter 50. Churches were consecrated 207. They were sanctuary 207. Commaundements of God not impossible 15. 142. Commaundements of the first table diuided by S. Austin as Catholickes now do 169. Concupiscence is not sinne without consent 69. Confession of sinnes 113. 278. c. Shamefastnes is not to hinder the same 118. Sinnes in particular are to be told 118. 278. Obiections against confession answeared 279. Confirmation a Sacrament 76. 276. Geuen by impsition of handes 78. 277. Councels of good authority 40. Obiections against them answeared 232. Crosse vsed in administration of the Sacraments 66. 200. 276. worshiped 300. It shal be carried before Christ at the day of iudgement 191. It was vsed in prayer 205. Miracles wrought therby 218. Ciprians sermon de abâ—â—lutione pedum proued to be auncient 66. D DIuorce in case of Adultery doth not warrant the Innocent party to marry againe 136. E EDucation no warrant for the truth of religion Pref. p. 10. England conuerted by Austin to Popery 323. Enoch and Elias yet aliue and to come at the time of Antichrist 190. Eremites and their austere life 185. Eucharist Real presence proued 81. 283. The wicked receiue the body of Christ 85. Great care is vsed that no particle fal vpon the ground 87. 289. It is to be receiued fasting 88. 285. It is adored 90. 97. Inuocated 94. 95. AdoratioÌ„ was not first brought in by Honorius 99. Obiections against Real presence answeared 225. How it was reciued by Infantes 260. Transubstantiation aunciently taught 106. 284. It was receiued chast 284. 89. It was aunciently reserued for the sicke 285. Extreame vnction a Sacrament 123. Aunciently vsed 122. 277. S. Iames his epistle reiected for the same by Prot. 124. F FAstes prescribed 175. 310. Obiections against fasting answeared 311. Fathers by Protestantes made contrary to them selues 256. Fathers obscure sayinges are to be expounded by the common receiued opinion of other Fathers 259. Their speaches vttered in heat of disputation are to be discerned from sayinges dogmatical 262. They are confessed in general for our Catholicke faith 313. They are disclaimed from by Prot. 320. Freewil taught 139. 302. The denyal therof condemned in the Manichees 140. Obiections against it answeared 248. G GOd doth not reprobate any to sinne or damnation 11. Yet Prot. teach the contrary 10. Gods foreknowledge doth not hinder freewil 13. H HEl haith in it material fyre 161. The contrary reproued in Origen 162. And yet taught by some Prot. 162. Holy bread aunciently vsed 89. Houres Canonical aunciently vsed 204. I IMages of Sainctes aunciently vsed 168. Their placing in Churches approued by Lutheranes Caluinistes 172. 299. Obiections against them answeared 244. Incertainty of our predestination 148. Inconstancy of diuerse Prot. in matters of faith Pref. p. 12. 13. 14. Iustification consisteth not onely in remission of sinnes 145. Once had it may be lost 147. Workes do iustify 147. K KIng Iames his deserued commendation Ep. to his Maiesty Kyrieleison aunciently vsed in Masse 208. L LEnt fast obligatory 173. 310. Wednesday Fryday and Saterday aunciently fasted 174. 311. The denyal of prescribed fastes reproued in Aerius 174. Saboth fastes impugnâ—d 175. Lâ—mbus Patrum or Christes descending into hel 163. 296. M MArriage a Sacrament 134. Married persons by mutual assent may vow perpetual chastity 137. 177. 306. The Preistes benediction after marriage 138. Marriage after the vow of chastity vnlawful 177. 305. Mary the mother of God freed from original sinne 22. Assumpted into heauen 23. Vowed perpetual chastity 24. Masse a proper sacrifice 104. 290. according to the order of Mâ—lchisedech 104. 291. It is the sacrifice of the body and bloud of Christ 105. Of our mediator 106. Of our price or redemption 106. Of Christians 107. It is propiciatory 107. 291. for the deade 108. 292. It is offered vpon Altars 109. Aunciently said in Latine 208. The word Masse auncient 210. Miracles wrought by oblation therof 220. Water mingled with wine in the Chalice 294. Merites of workes 149. Diuerse degrees of merites 150. The denyal thereof reproued in Iouinian 150. Merits of one may helpe another 151. Miracles in proofe of Catholicke Religion 213. 325. Obiections against them answeared 224. c. 251. 327. Prot. worke no miracles 329. Monastical life approued 180. 307. It requireth al thinges in common 180. It is vnder vow 181. The impugning therof is reproued in Petilianus 181. the particular habit of Monkes and Nunnes 182. 307. Their great abstinence 183. 308. S. Austin him selfe was a Monke 183. Monkes obedience to their superior 309. N NVnnes in ancient time 182. 308. their consecration in the Church and their habit 309. Their Monasteries 309. 310. O OBedience of religious persons 309. Obscure places of Scriptures and Fathers are to be explained by plainer 254. Orders a Sacrament 125. Inferior orders 131. 277. Their proper offices 131. P PEnetration of bodies proued by miracles 221. Penance importeth more then repentance of the minde 111. It is imposed by the Church according to our sinnes 111. 120. 281. It is somtimes remitted by Indulgence 120. 282. Penance is a Sacrament 122. S. Peter head of the Church 50. 268. Popes of Rome S. Peters successors 53. 268. Prayer for the dead 157. 295. Prayer to Sainctes 164. 297. Miracles in proofe of prayer to Sainctes 213. Apparitions made by Sainctes 215. Obiections against praying to Sainctes answeared 242. Prayer toward the East 104. Princes Kinges or Emperours not supreame heades of the Church 57. 270. Obiections for them answeared 233. Preistes properly so called 127. Preist the spiritual Iudge 113. He haith power from Gâ—d to remit sinne 115. The denyal therof condemned in the Nouatians 115. Preistâ—s are inferior to Bishopes 126. The denyal therof condemned in the Acrians 1â—6 They may not marry 133. 306. The contrary condemned in Iouinian Vigilantius 307. Purgatory and temporal punishment after this life 160. Obiections against it answeared 246. R REliques of Sainctes to be honoured 166. 246. 299. Miracles wrought by Reliques 216. 219. Rogation dayes aunciently vsed â—04 Roman faith haith continued and beene knowen in al ages 330. S SAcraments confer grace 60. Some of them imprint a character in the soules of the receiuers 62. There are seauen Sacraments 64. Sainctes are to be worshipped 165. Scriptures not able to geue vs certaine knowledge of them selues Pref. p. 5. Al conference therof by priuate men subiect to error Ibidem p. 7. The Canon therof not agreed vpon by Prot. Pref. p. 6. They and their sense are knowen by the Church Ib. p. 9. 26. The bookes of Toby Iudith c. Canonical 28. 266. Obiections against them answeared 30. 231. One text of Scripture may haue diuerse true senses 33. Heretickes insist onely vpon Scripture 37. Sinnes mortal and venial of their owne natures 155. Venial sinnes forgeuen by our Lords prayer and Ceremonies 155. Stewes permitted 194. T TRaditions are to be beleeued 35. 267. Obiections against them answeared 232. V VEssels consecrated 201. Vestiments consecrated 203. Virgins preferred before married persons 150. 177. Vowes of chastity aunciently vsed 305. Vowes made by Monkes Nunnes 181. 305. Obiections against vowes answeared 250. Vsury vnlawful 192. W VVOrkes do iustify 147. Obiections answeared 248. do merit 149. 303. Workes of supererogation 152. FINIS
obiection our due reuerence therto not withstanding the wicked liues of any Popes (n) Tom. 2. ep 165. ante med although saith he any traitor in those times had crept into that rancke of Bishops which is continued from Peter himselfe to Anastasius who now sitteth in the same chaire it would nothing hurt the Church and innocent Christians for whom our Lord prouiding saith of euil Pastors what they say do ye but what they do do ye not Lastly this wholsome councel he geueth vnto al heretickes (o) Tom. 7. in Psal contra partem Donati versus finem come ye brethren if you wil be ingrafted in the vine it is a greife when we see you cut of so to lye number the Preistes euen from the Sea of Peter and see in that rancke of Fathers who succeedeth another that is the Rocke which the proud gates of hel do not ouercome S. Austin denyeth Ecclesiastical Primacy to Emperours and Kinges SECTION 6. THe Milleuitan Councel wherat S. Austin was presēt (a) In the last Canon of rhe Mileuitan Councel prescribed decreed in the case of cleargy mē that (b) Can. 19. whosoeuer should aske of the Emperour the knowledge or hearing of publicke iudgements should be depriued of his honour Of which Canon (c) Cent. 5. c. 33. p. 152. Osiander saith It is not worthy of commendation And wheras M. Iewel (d) Reply art 4. p. 272. obiecteth the testimony of S. Austin concerning Constantine the great vndertaking the iudgements of Bishops and their causes vpon appeale made to him in that behalfe S. Austin him selfe shal geue him his answeare in these wordes (e) Tom. 2. ep 162. multo post med The Emperour graunted them another iudgement at Arles to wit of other Bishops not because it was needful but yealding to their importunities c. for neither durst the Christian Emperour so receiue their tumultuous and deceiptful complaints that him selfe would iudge of the sentence of Bishops which sate at Rome but as I haue said he graunted other Bishops frō whom they also chose to appeale againe to the Emperour wherein you haue heard how he detested them c. And as he had yealded to thē to iudge of their cause after the Bishops afterwardes he asked pardon of the holy Prelates Yea S. Austin saith further that (f) Ep. 166. ante med because Constantine durst not iudge of the cause of a Bishop he committed the same to be discussed and ended by Bishops Optatus also who liued with S. Austin alledging Constantines answeare to the Bishops that appealed to him saith (g) Lib. 1. versus finem Constantine with great anger answeared c. you aske of me iudgement in the world when I except the iudgement of Christ And a litle after Donatus thinketh that he may appeale from Bishops to which appeale Constantine thus answeared O outragious bouldnes of fury as in the causes of Gentiles c. Yea this is so cleare in S. Austin that M Carthwright answeareth to M. Whitguifts like obiecting hereof saying (h) 2. Reply part 2. p. 163. Austin saith that the Emperour was driuen by the Donatistes importunity who made no end of appealing vnto him to geue sentence in that matter for the which also he was to craue pardon of the Bishops c. Lastly S. Athanasius reporteth that the Bishop Hosius said to Constantine (i) In ep ad solitariam vitam agentes I beseech thee to cease and remember thou art mortal c. do not entermedle in Ecclesiastical matters nor do thou commaund vs in this kind God haith committed to thee the Empyre to vs those thinges which concerne the Church c. Take heede lest that drawing to thee those thinges which concerne the Church thou be guilty of great crime c. And againe who seeing him in decreeing to make him selfe the prince of Bishops to be president in Ecclesiastical iudgements may not deseruedly say that he is that abhomination of desolation which was foretold by Daniel Concerning the Sacraments CHAPTER 5. S. Austin teacheth that the Sacraments do not only signify but truly confer grace to the worthy receiuer SECTION 1. THough (k) Fulke against Purgat p. 35. Willet in his Sinopsis p. 415. Perkins in his reformed Catholicke p. 294. 298. Iewel in his defence p. 201. Protestants vsually teach that Sacraments do signify grace but not confer it yet S. Austin with vs Catholickes teacheth the contrary saying (l) Tom. 9. in Iohn tract 80. versus finem from whence is that so great vertue of the water that touching the body it washeth the heart but the word working it c. Clensing therefore would not be attributed to the liquid and slippery element if it were not added in the word And he proueth by example of Circumcision the force of Baptisme to children though they want faith saying (m) Tom. 7. l. 4. de Bapt. cont Don. c. 24. post init The Sacrament of it selfe was of great force But this doctrine is so clearly S. Austines that Luther answeareth to Cochlaeus his obiecting of S. Austin in this manner (n) Lib. cont Cochlaeum But if there be any of the Fathers who haue thought the Sacraments to iustify by their owne vertue though it be Austin as Cochlaeus contendeth I nothing care they are the sayinges of men Agreeably to which also writeth Caluin (o) Lib. 4. Instit c. 14. sec vlt. peraduenture those immoderate commendations of the Sacraments which are read in the auncient writers as that of Austin c. haith deceiued those miserable Sophisters And whearas (p) Willet in his sinopsis p. 418. Protestants do further teach that the Sacraments of the old law are equal in force to ours S. Austin with vs to the contrary auoucheth that (q) Tom. 8. in Psal 73. multo ante med There are some sacraments geuing saluation others promising the Sauiour the Sacraments of the new Testament geue saluation the Sacraments of the old Testament promise the Sauiour A saying so pregnant against Protestants that if we beleeue (r) Loc. com p. 299. and see Caluin l. 4. institut c. 14. sec vlt. Musculus it was spoken inconsideratly by Austin Yea saith Caluin (s) Lib. 4. instit c. 15. sec 7. And see Chemnitius examen part 2. p. 38. Let it trouble no man that the auncient Fathers striue to make a difference betweene the one and the other their authority ought not to be such as to shake the infallibility of Scripture c. Neither is that quircke of Austin to be approued that by the Baptisme of Iohn sinnes are forgeuen in hope but by the Baptisme of Christ sinnes are forgeuen indeede S. Austin teacheth that certaine of the Sacraments do imprint a Character or marke in the soule of the receiuer SECTION 2. THough D. (t) Sinopsis p. 419. and vpon the 112. Psal p. 91. Willet with other Protestants vtterly deny al such Character yet