Heathens Pagans and infidells And in his Apology for the Switzers Churches he defineth Schisme to be a separation from the rest of the body of the Catholike Church Zanchius also in his treatise of the Church cap. 7. reacheth that Schismatikes are not in the Church And suâ—us in his 3. booke of the Church c. 5. approueth the fame of such Schismatikes as separate themselues from the whole Church The strangers in England writing to Beza in the 24 epistle haue these words in their 13. article VVhosoeuer is lawfully excommunicated of a particuler Church or cutteth himselfe of vpon vnlawfull causes and with scandall in that doth loose all priuiledge of the Catholike Church And Beza answereth them in the name of the Church of Geneua in this manner Your thirteenth article we wholy receiue at most orthodoxall Casaubon in his 15. exercitation against Baronius num 6. It is an vndoubted truth that how often soeuer a pious flock is ioyned to a true Bishop there is a Church of God in so much that if any forsake that Church it cannot be doubted but that he is out of the Church Finally Chamier in his epistle to Armand excludeth Schismatikes out of the Church because sayth he they want the sincerity of the Sacraments English ProtestaÌ„ts Amongst our English Protestants his Maiesty in his foresayd epistle to Cardinall Peron All those testimonies of Augustin proue only this that there is no hope of saluation for those who leaue the Communion of the Catholike Church which the King willingly graunteth D. Whitaker in his 2. controuer 5. quest 6. cap. sayth It is false that hereticall and Schismaticall Churches be true Churches Againe The Catholike Church consisteth not of diuided but of vnited members And cap. 2 The true and Catholike Church is that which consisteth of Catholiks D. Fulke in his booke of the succession of the Church VVhat auailed it them to eternall saluation to haue byn sound in Religion and doctrine seing they were cut of from the Communion of the true Church in which alone saluation is and from her true head VVhat skilleth it whether one being drawne by heresy or Schisme from the body of Christ be subiect to euerlasting damnation D. Humfrey in his answere to the 3. reason of F. Campian VVe confesse that he is vndone who is separated from the followship of the Church And D. Feild in his first booke of the Church cap. 7 The name of the Catholike Church is applyed to distinguish men holding the sayth in vnity from Schismatiks And in his 2. booke c. 2. he sayth that Schismatikes are not Catholike Christians Thus we see how Protestants sometymes do teach that the true Church consisteth of Catholiks of members vnited not deuided that it hath no Schismes or Sects That Schismatiks are not Catholiks that their vnity is not true nor Catholike that their Churches ought to be forsaken that they are not vniuocally Churches nor true Churches that they are not members of the true Church but out of the Church altogeather out of the Church and actually neither of the visible nor inuisible Church and that this is an vndoubted truth which coÌ„fession of theirs must be well noted and kept in mind for thereby is ouerthrowne as we shall see in the 2. booke their only argument wherwith they endeauour to proue that their Church was before Luther and also is defaced their only essentiall mark of finding the true Church by the truth of doctrine For Schismatikes as we shall heare them confesse in the 2. booke hold true doctrine and neuertheles as here they acknowledge are not of the true Church They exclude those that deny any fundameÌ„tal article 5. In like manner they do commonly debarre from their Church all such as deny any principall or fundamentall point of fayth Melancthon in his booke of common places in the title of the Church They are not members of the Church who pertinaciously maintaine errours opposite to the foundation And in his answere to the Bauarian articles Saints may haue errours but not such as ouerthrow the foundation In his examen of those that are to take orders Agreement in the foundation LutheraÌ„s is a thing necessary to the vnity of the Church And vpon the 3. cap. of the 1. epistle to Timothy The foundation is held in the Church otherwise there should be no Church at all And in his 79. proposition tom 4 It is most certaine that those companies are not the Church of God who either are altogeather ignorant of the Ghospell or impugne some article of the foundation that is some article of fayth or doctrine of the decalogue or maintaine open idols Chemnitius in his common places pa. 3. title of the Church Neither can these be acknowledged for the true Church who imbrace fundamentall errours And the Lutherans in the conference at Ratisbon Ses 14. Hutter in his Analysis of the Confession of Auspurg Gesner in his 24. place Adam Francis in his 11. place and other Lutherans commonly agree that the Church cannot erre Fundamentally or in the Foundation And the Confession of Saxony giueth this note to know who are in the Church SacrameÌ„taries Those who hold the Foundation As for Sacramentaries Caluin in his 4. booke of Institutions cap. 2. num 1 So soone as a lye hath broken into the castle of Religion the summe of necessary doctrine is inuerted the vse of Sacraments is fallen certainly the destruction of the Church ensueth euen as a mans life is lost when his throat is cut or his vitall parts deadly wounded And soone after It is certaine that there is no Church where lyes and errour haue gotten to the toppe And cap. 19. num 17 VVithout doubt the Church of the faythfull must agree in all the heads of our Religion Sadeel in his answere to the Theses held at Posna cap. 12 I thinke the matter is thus to be defined by the word of God that if any in what Church soeuer dissent in the foundation of sayth and be obstinate in their errours such appertaine not to the vnity of the Church The like he hath in his answere to Arthure cap. 12. Vesinuâ— in his Catechisme quest 54. cap. 4 The whole Church erreth not nor wholly nor in the foundation Polanus in his Thesis of the Church sayth The Church erreth not in the foundation The same teacheth Zanchius in his treatise of the Church c. 7. Lubbertus in his 2. booke of the Church c 3. Vorstius in his Anti-bellarmin pag. 139. Bucanus in his 41. place and other Sacramentaries commonly And with them herein agree our English Protestants English ProtestaÌ„ts For thus sayth his Maiesty in his epistle to Cardinall Peron The Churches are vnited in vnity of sayth and doctrine in those heads which are necessary to saluation And D. Whitaker in the preface of his Controuersies The foundations of sayth are of that nature that one being shaken nothing in all religion remaineth sound And Contr. 2. quest 4. cap.
3. ca. 13. M. Perkins in his exposition of the Creed Col. 788. The Author of the church in Danaeus Opuscles pag. 1029. D. Fulk of Succession pag. 320. and others who say that the Church VVas propagated and receiued fayth by extraordinary meanes And they also who write that their Church was preserued miraculously merueilously by wondrous meanes or by meere miracle as Luther of priuate Masse tom 7. fol 240. Caluin 4. Instit cap. 1. § 2. Sadeel ad Repetit Sophism Turriani pag. 763. Danaeus of Antichrist pag. 1021. Son is against Spondé cap. 2. pag. 36. But this their assertion they neither do nor can proue otherwise then because God can in such manner preserue the church 10. Thou seest gentle reader vpon what a vaine foundation this imaginary church is built for the space of many ages in which it lay inuisible and lurcking in holes corners For they confesse that for many ages it was not seene of any man and if at any tyme they confesse not so much in words in deeds they confesse it alwayes because they can neuer name any whom they can proue to haue seene it in former ages and neuertheles they will that for al those ages it learnt their fayth miraculously and immediatly from God alone When we aske testimony hereof they produce neither diuine nor humane worthy of credit when we demaund proofe they giue vs no other then this Verstius Antibel pag. 468. Fulke de Succes pa. 74. that God could so teach it fayth As if God did or doth all that he can do We speake of an effect or a matter of fact of Gods will and they answere of his power When we affirme any thing they exact demonstrations that is plaine testimonies of Scripture or at least pregnant proofes deduced thence And when they affirme a matter of so great weight and so incredible as is that the church was so many ages taught her faith of God alone they will haue vs to belieue it not only without any testimony of God or man but euen contrary to the testimony of them both for one silly sophisme ridiculous to the very children and scorned euen of themselues in other matters as shall by and by appeare Surely that I may vse Saint Augustins words They seeme to thinke that they haue not to do with men Cōt Adimant c. 4. but as if they were meere beasts who heare thē or read their writings they abuse the ignorance or dulnesse of them or rather their blindnes of mind Or as Caluin sayth Antid ◠Conc. c. 15. These masters need haue a heard of Oxen if they would haue auditors to whome they may perswade what they will But to their Argument I say with Tertullian against Praxeas cap. 10 Surely nothing is hard to God But if in our presumptions we will so rashly vse this sentence we may feigne any thing of God as if he had done it because he could do it But we must not belieue he hath done that which he hath not because he can do all things but we must seeke whether he hath done it or no. Luther also vpon the 46. cap of Genesis tom 6 fol. 624. saith God can gouerne the church by the holy Ghost without the Ministery but he will not do this immediatly And vpon the 32. chap. fol. 454 He could by the holy Ghost inwardly enlighten the hearts and forgiue sinnes without the Ministery of the word and Ministers but he would not And the Confession of Suitzers cap. 18 God by his power can immediatly gather a church of men but he chose rather to deale with men by the ministery of men Caluin vpon 3. chap. 1. Cor. v. 6 Nothing hindereth God that he may not inspire fayth into men asleep but he hath otherwise determined to wit that that fayth should come by hearing And vpon 1. chap. of S. Luke v. 37 They raue peruersely who imagine of Gods power without his word It is a dangerous dispute what God can do vnlesse withall we find what he will do And 4. Institut cap. 17 § 24. he sayth VVe aske not here what God could but what he would do The like words he hath cap. 1. § 5. lib. 2. cap 7. pag 5. and de vera Eccles Reform pag. 326. Beza in the 2. part of his answere to the Acts of the Conference at Montbelgard pag. 97 An argument taken from the power of God needeth no answere vnlesse his will also appeare to vs by his word The Author of the orthodoxall consent in the Preface It is ridiculous to vrge the omnipotency of God where we know not hi◠pleasure Sadeel of Sacramentall manducation pag. 272. setteth downe this as a Theologicall principle VVe may not in diuinity argue from the omnipotency of God vnlesse his will be before declared by his expresse word Let Protestants therfore produce Gods expresse word wherin he sayth that he hath or will for many ages miraculously by himselfe alone teach the Church her fayth Danaeus also in his 4. booke deamiss grat cap. 15 It litle auaileth to proue Gods power vnlesse his will also be proued And D. Whitaker cont 2. quest 6. cap. 1 p. 617 VVhat a kind of argument is this This may be done because nothing is impossible to God therefore it is done or sometymes hath byn Doth our fayth rely vpon such foundations Finally Casaubon in his 7. Exercitation against Baronius It is a saying of the Fathers that Gods power is the refuge of Heretikes Thus thou seest how vaine euen by the Protestants iudgement is this proofe of the Churches learning immediatly from God They are wont to scoffe at the Miracles done by Saints albeit we proue them by sufficient testimony of man themselues feigne a continuall miracle yea so many miracles as they feigne men whome they say for many ages learn◠their fayth immediatly of God which they can proue by no sufficient testimony either of God or man Yea we will most manifestly herafter disproue it Here I will only note that those Protestants seeme to haue byn some Enthusiasts or heauenly Prophets as Luther scoffingly termed some who in his tyme challenged such immediat learning from God and that the Protestants themselues do sometymes condemne this immediat learning from God as Fanaticall Anabaptisticall Suenckfeldian and Enthusiasticall 11. The Confession of Auspurg art 5. Protestāts reiect immediat taeching of God as Fabritius relateth out of the originall copy sayth thus They condemne the Anabaptists and others who think that the holy Ghost cometh to men without the outward word Martin Luther vpon Genesis tom 6. fol. 117 The holy ghost doth not teach new reuelations besides the ministery of the word according as the Enthusiasts and Anabaptists true Fanaticall Doctours do dreame And in the 8. art of Smalcald In this we most constantly stand that God will not otherwise deale with vs then by the vocall word and Sacraments Schusselburg also in the 10. tom of his Catalogue pag. 30.
church How then can Protestants gather certainly out of the Apocalipse that their Church heretofore was in Popery But as Luther in cap. 9. Genes tom 6. fol. 114. speaketh of the Anabaptists and others VVhy Protestāts accoūt to much of the Apoc. The Anabaptists make so much of obscure bookes as the Apocalipse because there they may seigne any thing And in cap. 11. fol. 136 Ambitious heads think it a great matter if they giue their iudgment freely of obscure places and after stubbornly maintayne their opinion And Praefat. in Cantica tom 4. fol. 47 Some do put all their labour in hard places thinking it a commendation of their wit to medle with those matters which others by reason of their obscurity do fly because in obscure places euery one may diuine and follow his owne head 2. Thirdly I answere that the foresayd place is allegoricall mysticall and obscure and therefore not fit to ground fayth vpon That it is mysticall and allegoricall is manifest because Babylon doth not litterally but at most mystically signify Popery That also the sense which Protestants frame thereof is obscure is euident because they cannot either by any part or by any circumstance therof clearly shew that by Babylon is meant Popery Besides neither any of the Fathers nor of those imaginary Protestants before Luther did perceiue this sense otherwise some of them would haue obeyed Gods commandement and gone out of Popery But it were playne madnes to vrge an incredible thing as is that Protestants were heretofore in Popery to be belieued certainly for one mysticall obscure place VVho sayth S. Augustin without great impudency will goe about to expound for himselfe Epist 48. any thing spoken in Allegory vnlesse he haue manifest places by which the obscure may be lightned Let them bring therefore some euident place Morton part 2. l. 2. c. 5. wherein Babylon signifieth Popery Luther also sayth If in the new testament the signification of a figure be not cleare we must not rely vpon it because the diuell an excellent craftsman playeth with figures if he catch a soule which without certaine ground wresteth the Scripture to Allegories he vseth to cast him here and therelike a dye Bnd in cap. 3. Genes tom 6. fol. 52 An Allegory serueth nothing for proofe Kemnice also 1. part exam tit de epist Apost pag. 79 VVe say that a sentence is not to be builded vpon any obscure places of Scripture which cannot de proued out of other cleare places Peter Martyr in locis tom 2. tract de Missa An opinion is not to be founded in doubtfull words Sadeel ad Sophism Turrian loc 11. pag. 597 The most learned interpreters do teach that Anagogicall arguments must rely vpon cleare and expresse testimonies if they will breed sayth And Pareus lib. 4. de Iustificat cap. 15. pag. 1120 Testimony for a false opinion is in vaine sought out of an Allegoricall and most obscure place But as the Fathers haue noted it was euer the humour of heretiks to seeke some pretext of allegoricall and obscure places Of the Gnostiques thus writeth S. Irenaeus lib. 1. cap. 1 Heretikes seeke out obscure places VVhereas many parables and Allegories are recited which may be drawne into diuerse senses they craftely accommodating that which is ambigious vnto their deuise do lead into captiuity from the truth those which haue a weake fayth in Christ And S. Augustin lib. de Vnitat ca. 24. sayth to the Donatists Yee willingly abide in obscure matters that you may not be compelled to confesse cleare matters And of heretiks in generall thus speaketh Tertullian Praes c. 17. Diuers presumptions of necessity will not acknowledge those things by which they may be ouercome and relye vpon those which they haue falsely forged and haue taken out of vncertainetyes Againe De pud c. 16. This is the custome of froward men idiots and heretikes by occasion of some doubtfull passage to arme themselues against an army of the whole testament And Clement 7. Stromatum They seek out doubtfull speaches and turne them to vphold their opinions The like writeth Luther of Anabaptistes And others as hath byn now rehearsed Wherfore Protestants do follow the custome of Gnostikes Donatists Anabaptists froward idiots and heretikes whiles they fit the Allegory of Babylon to their turne whiles they willingly abide in obscure matters and make such account of the Apocalipse because there they haue leaue to feigne any thing whiles they rely vpon those things which they take out of vncertainties and by occasion of one ambiguous and doubtfull place are armed against an army of sentences of the Scripture which teach that neither Popery is Babylon nor Protestants the people of God Moreouer Donatists for the very like place Isaiae 52 Goe backe againe out of the midst of her lib. de vnic bapt c. 14. L 2. cont Parmen c. 28. l. 2. cōt Gaud. c. 9. would proue that they ought to go out of the Catholik Church of their tyme as witnesseth S. Augustin and Danaeus confesseth lib. 3. de Eccl. c. 9. who also in lib. 1. August cont Parmen hath these words The argument of the Donatists out of Isay the 52. was That we ought to goe backe and goe out of the midst of Babylon And the Anabaptists in Zuinglius tom 2. in Elencho fol. 21. Out of this selfe same place of the Apocalipse did gather that they ought to goe from Protestants Why then may wee not say with D. Whitaker Cont. 2. q. ◠c. 23. Our aduersaries serue themselues of the same weapons whereof most wicked heretikes did and herein shew themselues to be nothing lesse then Catholikes Moreouer I say that if I list to expound Scriptures at my pleasure I might say and more probably too then Protestants that by the foresayd words God commandeth Protestants to goe out of Protestancy For Protestancy may well be called Babylon because it is a Masse and confusion of opposite heresies where almost euery one hath a fayth of his owne and speaketh a peculiar language nor vnderstandeth the tongue or doctrine of another And Protestants may be called the people of God in that they are baptised and therein dedicated to his seruice and pretend the fayth of Christ as did Israel euen after it had foresaken the Synagogue De prouid art 22. And as Caluin sayth that God calleth euen the disobedient his seruants as Nabuchodonozor in Hieremy and as God hath both good and faythfull seruants and naughty and vnfaythfull so hath he good naughty people 3. Secondly I answere that the argument which can be framed out of this place to proue that which the Protestants write of their churches being in Popery before Luther arose to wit Goe you my people out of Babylon Therefore before Luthers tyme the church was in Popery and so secret as for many ages she was not seene either of her own or of others is a meere Sophisme First because
one vnknown thing is here proued by another more vnknown a false thing by another not only false but also impossible For more vnknowne it is more incredible more impossible that the Protestant church should be the people of God or that Babylon out of which Gods people is bidden to goe Popery then that Protestants haue byn heretofore amongst Papists For this although it be both false and incredible yet it is not impossible as the other is How then can they proue vnto vs that they were heretofore in Popery by affirming that they are that people of God and Popery that Babylon sith this is to vs farre more incredible then the other Let Babylyn sometyme in Scripture mystically signify the citty of Rome let it also signify the number of the wicked both faythfull and Infidels but in Scripture it neuer signifieth a certaine religion and least of all Popery Besides his Maiesty in his Epistle to Cardinall Peron hath those words VVhat that Babylon is out of which Gods people is commanded to go the King enquireth not in this place nor pronounceth any thing of that matter And if his Maiesty will not pronounce what that Babylon is why should Ministers do it Secondly it is a Sophisme because there are many things in the consequent which are not at all in the antecedent although it be vnderstood as Protestants would And therefore herein they not only proue an vnknowne thing by another more vnknowne but some things they proue only by themselues that is they affirme them and proue them not at all For let the Protetestants be the people of God and let Popery be that Babylon which they can neuer proue neuerthelesse that the Protestant Church had byn in Popery so long tyme to wit so many ages and in such manner to wit so secret as she was altogeather inuisible either to her own or to others can no way be gathered out of the foresayd words though they were expounded according to the Protestants mind 4. Their second argument they ground vpon that 2. Thessal 2. that Antichrist shall sit in the temple of God which they expound as that the Pope should sit in the true that is according to them the Protestant Church and consequently that heretofor the Pope ruled ouer Protestants To which I answer that this argument is a Sophisme like to the former First because it proueth an vnknown thing by another more vnknowne and one vntruth by another both vntrue and impossible For it is more incredible to vs that Protestants are the temple of God or the Pope Antichrist then that they were heretofore amongst Papists Secondly if hence they Inferre that their Church was so long in Popery and in such manner as we haue recited out of their words they will inferre that in the consequent whereof there is no signe in the Antecedent although it were expounded to their desire Thirdly I say that there can be no certainty gathered out of this place because it is obscure as appeareth both by it selfe and by the different expositions thereof Lib. 20. de Ciuit. c. 29. and by the iudgement of S. Augustine who writeth thus In what temple of God Antichrist is to sit as God it is vncertaine whether in that ruine of the temple which Salomon built or in the Church Againe I truly professe my selfe not to know what he sayd yet I will relate the suspicions of men which I haue heard or read of this matter And againe One in this sort another in that ghesseth at the obscure words of the Apostle Yea D. Andrews intimateth Respon ad Apol. Bellar. c. 5. that it cannot be certainly gathered hence that the Pope is Antichrist when he sayth It is probably gathered out of the 2. chap. 2. Thessal That the Bishop of Rome is Antichrist But we regard not whence they probably gather what they please but only whence they can certainly vndoubtedly proue what they say Fourthly I say that whatsoeuer is the temple of God wherein Antichrist shall sit this place it selfe sheweth that the Pope is not Antichrist because he sitteth not in the Church of God as God but as Bishop and as Gods vicar Fithly I adde that the Protestants themselues do not firmly belieue Protestāts not certaine that the Pope is Antichrist much lesse as a point of their fayth that the Pope is Antichrist howsoeuer they vse the name of Antichrist as a bugg to feare children For Melancthon as Schuffelburg reporteth seemed to doubt whether the Pope were Antichrist or no. D. Whitaker lib. 1. cont Dureum sect 33 sayth In the meane tyme l. 4. Theo◠Cal. p. 166 we must needs probably and iustly suspect the Pope to be Antichrist And Cont. 4. quest 5. cap. 3 Many who care not much for the Pope do not think that it can be proued that he is Antichrist And his Maiesty in his Monitory epistle pag. 70. Surely for so much as pertayneth to define Antichrist I would not vrge a thing so obscure and hidden as a matter necessary to be belieued of all Christians And the same sayth Moulins in his defence of that Epistle To which his Maiesty addeth pag. 142. these words If any list to refute this my ghesse concerning Antichrist c. Behold how the Protestants themselues doubt account it but a suspicion a ghesse an obscure matter and not needfull to be belieued that the Pope is Antichrist How then can they certainly gather out of the foresayd place that the Pope sat among Protestants Yea some of thē deny the Pope to be the true Antichrist For thus Luther in cap. 9. Genes tom 6. fol. 122 VVe hold the Turck for the true Antichrist Zanchius lib. 1. Epist ad Stuckium I am perswaded that the name of Antichrist agreeth rather to the Turck then to Pope And in his answere to an Arian Antithes 21. col 879 The Bishop of Rome is not that Antichrist whereof is meant 2. Thessal 2. And in his Disceptation betwixt two Deuines pag. 637. and respons ad calumnias pag. 217. he plainly denyeth that the Pope is that notable and singular Antichrist wherof the Fathers speake And his opinion herein many Protestant vniuersities do iudge probable namely the vniuersity of Marspurg Heidelberg Zurich Basle among which that of Zurich hath these words The 2. Thesis of Antichrist cannot be reiected as hereticall seeing it is very probable For almost all the Fathers are of that mind Againe Since malice daily increaseth nothing letteth but at the last some notable one may come who in impiety surpasseth all the enemies of the Ghospell Vorstius also in his Antibellarm pag. 79 VVho discourse more aduisedly of this matter do graunt that it is very likely that yet some one shall arise to whom all the qualites of Antichrist may agree in the highest degree What certainty then can Protestants haue out of the foresayd place for their purpose sith some of their best learned doe but doubt and others deny that
ready to proue out of the scripture that we professe the same doctrine of fayth and manners which Christ would haue to be perpetuall by euident reason our succession is manifest althogh all Historyes were silent of the names of the Persons and continuation of succession And the like he hath pag. 154. and 331. D. White in his way pag. 403. sayth he knoweth his Church was alwayes because it holdeth the fayth of the Scripture which cannot be extinguished The like he sayth pag. 320. 326. Likewise Luther de notis Eccles tom 7. fol. 149. Caluin in Matth. cap. 24. vers 28. and generally al of them whiles they make the truth of doctrin the infallible marke of the Church Lib. 2. contra Arian O proofe that I may cry out in S. Augustins words O errour o dotage And with S. Athanase A worthy heresy which wanteth probable reasons to vnder proppe it For this argument on which all their belief that their Church was before Luther doth rely is a most fond sophisme and most counterfait syllogisme as manifestly appeareth whether it be framed in that forme wherein D. Whitaker hath proposed it or whether it be reduced to this forme That Church which holdeth the true doctrine of Christ hath alwayes beene and consequently before Luther The Protestant Church holdeth the true doctrin holdeth the true doctrin of Christ as say they we will proue by scripture Therefore it hath bin alway 3. I answere that this argument is a manifest sophime for many causes For if the Maior be particuler so that the sense thereof be Some Church which holdeth the true doctrine of Christ hath alwayes beene it is true because the catholik church which holdeth Christs true doctrine hath alwayes been but then the Syllogisme is sophism for want of due forme inferring a conclusion out of particuler propositioÌ„s But if the Maior be vniuersall according as it is made of D. Whitaker then so farre is it from being out of controuersy as he affirmeth that it is manifestly false and no way true but only apparant and therefore vnfit to make a true syllogisme but only a counterfait and a sophisme ProtestaÌ„ts assume a manifest falsity That it is manifestly false is euident because that Church or company of ChristiaÌ„s which is strictly and properly termed schismatical holdeth the true doctrine of Christ as both the Fathers teach and the Protestants themselues doe also most plainely affirme yet it is not the true church of Christ Wherefore sith as the Philosopher teacheth those thinges are probable which seem true to all or to most or to wise men and those either al or most or most approued and such as are not probable serue only to make sophismes The foresayd Maior not seeming true to all or most or the wisest Christians yea not euen to the Protestants themselues it is manifest that it is no probable propositioÌ„ but only apparent and therefore not fit to make a true syllogisme but only an apparent and counterfait 4. That the Fathers teach that a Schismatical Church holdeth the true doctrine of Christ is manifest by S. Augustine who lib. quest Euang. pag. 28. tom 4. sayth It vseth to be enquired wherein Schismatickes differ from heretâ—kes That Schismatikes hold true doctrine and this found that no difference in faytht but breach of society in communion maketh Schismatikes And lib. de fide Symbolo cap. 10 Heretikes by belieuing wrong of God violate the fayth but Schismatickes by wicked diuisions leape from fraternall charity albeit they belieue aright those thinges which we belieue And lib. cont Gaud. cap. 9. refuteth him because he had sayd that Schismatikes and Heretikes are the same against which he sayth Thou art a Schismatike by sacrilegious diuision and an heretike by sacrilegious opinion And lib. 1. cont Cresc cap. 29. and de gest is cum Emerito affirmeth that the same fayth is had out of the Church S. Hierome in Tit. 3. VVe iudge this difference to be between heresy and schism that heresy holdeth a naughty opinion schisme separateth from the Church by dissention of Bishops S. Gregory lib. 18. Moral cap. 14. Some doe belieue false thinges of God others by Gods help belieue rightly of God but keep not vnity with their brethren these are diuided by schisme S. Isidor lib. 8. Origin cap 3. Schisme tooke its name of breach for it beleeueth the same religion and rites that others do only is pleased to keep company a part The same teach S. Ireneus lib. 4. cap. 62. S. Chrysost hom 3. in 1. Cor. S. Optat. lib. 1. 4. 5. cont Parmen and others And it is manifest by reason For if Schismatikes did erre also in Fayth they should not differ from heretikes And it is grauÌ„ted both of old and new Heretikes For thus sayth Faustus in S. Augustine lib. 20. cont Faustum cap. 3. Schisme if I be not deceaued is to belieue the same to worship God in the same manner that others do only to be delighted with diuision of assemblyes Caluin 4. Institut cap. 2. § 5. Austin putteth this difference betwixt heretikes and schismatiks that they corrupt the sincerity of the fayth with false doctrines these sometymes euen hauing the like saith breake asunder the band of society And in 1. Cor. cap. 11. vers 19. It is known in what sense the ancient vsed both these nams schisme heresy they put heresy in difference of doctrine but schisme rather in alienation of minds to wit when any either vpon enuy or hatred of the Pastours or of frowardnesse departed from the Church Beza libro de puniendis Haereticis pag. 89 Shism properly is the diuision of those who belieue the same things And pag. 150. Let them remember that we terme them not heretikes who are properly called Schismatiques The same he hath in 1. Cor. 1. v. 10. and other where Plessie lib. de Eccles cap. 1. pag. 16 VVe call erroneous Churches either heretikes or schismatikes according as they erre either in fayth or in charity And pag. 32. VVhat pertaineth to schismaticall Churches either they are simply schismaticall or when heresy also is adioyned as it vseth after schisme as an ague after a wound And cap. 10. pag. 340. True and pure Schismatiks are those who holding the same doctrine yet make meetinges a part Peter Martyr in locis tit de Schism pag. 618. I thinke it more plaine to define Schisme to be a cutting a sunder of the Ecclesiasticall peace vnity And pag. 619 There may be schisme in the Church without heresy Aretius also in locis part 2. fol. 10 Schisme sometymes in the same doctrin breaketh society Bucan in loc quest 33. de Eccl. affirmeth that shismatiks differ from heretiks because heresy properly is dissention in doctrine Polâ—n part 2. Thes de notis Eccl. Albeit schismatical Churches agree in the doctrine of truth c. Zanchius tract de Eccles cap. There may be breach in the symboles of Charity that is in
sooner giue him interest in the couenant then the child that is descended of him For how can the fathers beliefe lay hold on the promises and couenant of God for his children and cannot do it for himselfe 6. These allegations demonstrate The suÌ„mâ— of Protestants ConfessioÌ„ touching Papists that by the Confession of the Protestants the starkest Papists such as are of beliefe that the masse the Popes primacy and all things else of his are good vpright and of God are soldiers vnder Christ may attaine to saluation may be Saints yea that there are among them both many and great Saints That there is in the Church of Rome what so is necessary to saluation the summe of fayth the ground-works the essentiall ground-works the principall grounds of fayth the cheife articles the fundamentall heads the necessary heads the cheife parts the Ghospell of saluation the kernell of Christianity and all Christian good Lastly that the Church of Rome Is a limme and member of the vniuersall Church of the Catholike Church a member of the true Church and is of the family of Iesus Christ that it is mother to the children of God that it is the Church of God the temple of God the body of Christ the Spouse of Christ that it abides yet in the couenant is not yet cast of or put away is not yet killed but is yet aliue Which words plainly import that the Roman or Popish Church is a true Church in the sight of God 7. But is it credible Note that such as make profession of Christian religion should mount to that height of impiety as dare to reiect diuorce themselues from that Church which they confesse remaynes yet in the couenant of God which Christ hath not yet reiected Is it credible that they feare not to impugne to make bitter inuectiues to disgorge curses and execrations against her whom they acknowledge to be their Mother which bore them to Christ to be the Church of God to be the body and Espouse of Christ What can be more lewd and impious then to rage and raile against their owne mother against the Church of God against the very body and Espouse of Christ What strang and monstrous blindnes is it not to perceiue that whiles they confesse the church of Rome to be the church of God Espouse of Christ they acknowledge their owne to be the Synagogue of Antichrist and strumpet of the Diuell For Christ cannot haue two Espouses repugnant each to other Now the Protestant church and church of Rome are parts so opposite as can neuer make one For they iarre and disagree mainely in diuers weighty points as namely touching the canon and exposition of the Scripture touching sacrifice and the Sacraments touching the worship of God his Saints touching the meanes to obtaine remission of sinnes and many the like Whereupon Beza in Confes cap. 7. pag. 56 VVe dissent sayth he from the Papist about they very summe of saluatioÌ„ And others say no lesse as shall be shewed hereafter in the 2. booke and 6. cap If ours be true Religion sayth S. Augustin to the Donatists which yet came nearer to Catholiks then Protestants do yours is superstition Lib. 2. coÌ„t Gaud. c. 11. Againe If our communion be the Church of Christ yours is not Christs Church Lib. 1. de Bapt. c. 11. for that is but one which so euer it be And in another place VVhen they approue that Church which as is manifest we communicate with all and they do not by that their testimony they acknowledge themsâ—lues conuinced Lib. ad Donat post codat and giue you plaine notice if you be wise what you ought to forgoe and what it behoues you to cleaue to and retaine And S. Cyprian epistle 76 If the Church were on Nouatus side it was not with Cornelius Num. 4. 8. The Protestants now and then perceiue as much when they acertaine vs as hath byn shewed in the first chapter that who so seuereth himselfe from any particuler congregation which is a true Church excludes himselfe wholy from the church Caluin saw it when 4. Insti c. 2. § 10. he wrote thus VVe cannot graunt them Papists that they are the church but the necessity of subiectioÌ„ obedieÌ„ce will befall vs. If they be churches the power of the keyes is in their possession If they be churches that promise of Christ VVhatsoeuer ye bind on earth shall be bouÌ„d in heauen takes effect in them M. Perkins perceiued it to when in his explicatioÌ„ of the Creed col 794. he sayd Zanchiuâ— lib. 1. de Eâ—cl c. 7. As long as any church forsakes not Christ we may not withdraw our selues from it The reason is apparant because in so doing we should depart from Christ or Christ shold be parted euen as we are rent and disioynted from the church wherein he is And in his Reformed Catholike tract 22. col 470. Whâ—re he sayth VVe ought not to deuide our selues from any nation or people which hath not before cut it selfe of from Christ D. Feild likewise saw it in his 3. booke of the Church c. 47. Where he makes this acknowledgement Surely if he can proue that we confesse it the Church of Rome to be the true Church he needeth not vse any other argument But we haue clearely prooued it by sundry plaine confessions of many famous Protestants And hitherto we haue discouered how they sometyme harbour and receiue Papists into their church now we will shew that they vse the like curtesy towards the rest CHAP. III. That Protestants acknowledge for members of their Church sometyme those that deny as well fundamentall as other articles of their fayth sometymes Heretiks Schismatiks yea their profest and sworne enemies THAT they esteeme all such to be members of their Church as swarue from the Christian fayth only in points not fundamentall themselues in the preface of the Switzers Confession declare in these words Mutuall consent and agreement in the principall points of doctrine in orthodoxe sense and brotherly charity was of religious antiquity thought abundantly sufficient And D. Whitaker cont 4. quest 1. c. 2. pag. 527 God forbid that they should be no longer of the number of the faythfull who are in some points of a contrary opinion so they assent in the cheife and principall and necessary matters And for as much as the Protestants opinion herein is well knowne for whâ—Ì„ it is obiected vnto them that their churches disagree in points of fayth this serues them for excuse I think it needlesse to alleage any more of their sayings He that will may looke the Confession of Saxony cap. de Eccles Luther tom 7. lib. de not Eccles fol. 149. Melancthon tom 4. in ca. 3. 1. Cor. Kemnitius 1. part Examinis tit de bonis operibus pag. 332. Zuinglius tom 1. in Prefat lib de Prouident Caluin 4. Institut cap. 1. § 12. and cap. 2. § 1. Beza epist 2. Zanchius in prefat lib.
no fayth Infants without all faith according to Protestants and consequently that they are infidels whence it ensueth that they account some infidels to be actually of the church Caluin 4. Institut cap. 16. § 19 I will not lightly affirme that they infants are endued with the same fayth we find in our selues And § seq he sayth Infants are baptized for future repentance and sayth Now if they dye before they are of yeares God reneweth them by the vertue of his spirit which we do not comprehend in such manner as himselfe alone knoweth how to bring to passe Lib. cont Seruet pag. 647. he sayth that that sentence of the Scripture VVhosoeuer belieueth not in the Sonne of God abideth in death and the wrath of God remayneth vpon him belongeth not to infants but only to such as are obstinate And in cap. 5. Rom. v. 17 That you may be partaker of iustice it is needfull that you be faythfull because it is receiued by sayth To infants it is communicated by a speciall manner Bucer in cap. 19. Matthaei pag. 404 Paul sayth that sayth commeth by hearing the word preached and in the same sort all the Scripture speaketh of sayth Seing therefore infants heare not the word preached they cannot haue this kind of sayth But out of that that infants want sayth nothing lesse can be concluded then which some thinke that therefore they cannot please God Infants are blessed by the grace of God and merits of Christ But if they be taken hence in their infancy they shall know God and reape felicity by some other knowledge then fayth Musculus in locis tit de baptismo Infants haue yet no fayth Againe Infants are saued by Gods election though they be taken out of this life not only vnbaptized but euen before they haue fayth Beza in Confess cap. 4. sect 48 It doth not appeare to vs that infants are endowed with that habit of fayth Infants haue not so much as the habit of fayth which we sayd was required to the receiuing of the matter and effect of the Sacraments nor is it likely that they are And in colloq Montisbel pag. 407 VVherefore though the children of the faythfull want sayth yet is not baptisme vnprofitable to them And part 2. Respons ad acta Montisbel pag. 124 All eit infants haue no sayth of their owne especially actuall yet rightly are they baptized according to the forme of the Couenant I will be thy God and of thy seed which is apprehended by the parents to themselues and their children And pag. 129 I confesse that sayth is required that infants comprehended in the Couenant may please God but I deny that they can or ought to be endowed with their owne fayth inherent in them Dancus l. 4. de baptismo cap. 10. pag. 268. proposeth to himselfe this question VVhat is the fayth which in baptisme we require in infants and answereth None Vrsinus in defens argument Bezae God receiueth infants into the Church without fayth Peter Martyr in 1. Cor. 7. pag. 94 Seing the holy Scripture doth not tell me that infants belieue or those miracles are wrought in them neither see I that it is necessary for their saluation I think it is inough that they be thought to be saued because by election and predestination they belong to the people of God are endued with the holy Ghost who is the author of fayth hope and Charity Perhaps they will answeare out of Augustins opinion that they are saued by the sayth of others to wit of their parents But the Prophet sayth that euery one is saued by his owne sayth not by other mens sayth VVherefore we answere more easily who exact expresse and actuall fayth in those that are of yeares but in the children of Christians who are brought to be Christened we say fayth is begun in its principle root because they haue the holy Ghost firm whence all both fayth and other vertues do flow D. Whitaker Cont. 2. quest 6. c. 3. pag. 566 Baptisme doth not infuse any sayth or grace into infants And he sayth plainly that infants haue no fayth And lib. 8. cont Duraeum sect 77 Albeit in the Sacraments fayth which receiueth the word of promise be necessary yet that sayth is not needfull in infants albeit it be not to be doubted but the holy Ghost effectually worketh in them after a secret and wonderfull manner M. Perkins de praedestinaâ— tom 1. col 149 Infants which dye in the Couenant we belieue to be saued by tenour of that Couenant but they were not chosen for fayth or according to fayth which set they had not And 〈◊〉 â—â—rie causar cap. 25 Elected â—nfants dying in the wombe or soone after they be borne are saued after a hidden and vnspeakeable manner ingrafted in Christ by the spirit of God Luther tom 6. in cap. 25. Gen. fol. 322 Vnbaptized infants haue no fayth Melancthon in locis tit de baptismo to 3. fol. 238 It is most true that sayth is required in all that are of years But concernâ—â—g infants sayth he the matter is otherwise Infants 〈…〉 Kemnitius part 2. Exam. tit de baptism pag. 89. telleth vs that some Protestants are of opinion that infants are indeed saued by the grace of God but without sayth Nor doth their saying that the seed or root of fayth or else an inclination or disposition to fayth which some of them affirme infants to haue help them any thing it all both because Scharpe cont 1. de Iustifi graunteth that this seed can neither haue the knowledge nor applying of the promises and therefore is not Protestant faith and because Musculus in locis tit de fide art 7. confesseth that they distinguish and put a difference betweene fayth and this hidden seed Now if it be no fayth it maketh not him faythfull in whome it is And lastly because as themselues acknowledge they are not assured whither infants haue any such seed or no. For Caluin lib. 4. cap. 16. § 9. cit VVhether they haue at all any knowledge like vnto fayth I choose rather to leaue it vndetermined And he addeth that the manner of their renewing is knowne to God alone To these allegations you may adde that M. Perkins in his Reformed Catholike cont 16. sayth a man may be saued by a desire to haue sayth And neuerthelesse confesseth that this desire is not indeed sayth And in 2. Galat. col 91 God accepteth the will and desire to belieue for beliefe it selfe Now as long as a man hath not fayth but only a desire thereof he is an infidel 5. You might think that hauing made this graunt of saluation to infidels their liberality wold rest here and not passe these bounds ProtestaÌ„ts challenge Antichrist but they go yet further and bestow it sometymes euen vpon him whome they sweare yea belieue as an article of their fayth and that with as great certainty and assurance is they belieue God is in heauen or Christ is the
euident argument of true religion and oppose their consent therin as a sufficient cloake to couer all their dissentions in other matters Zuinglius Prefat Ecclesiast tom 1. fol. 39 It is an euident argument of true Religion among you that you cast out all the filth of Popish idolatry and bridle the sloathfull company of Priests and put them from the Church And when Cardinall Hosius obiected to Protestants their disagreement about the Eucharist Iames Andrews in his answere pag. 367 sayth In what ProtestaÌ„ts especially agree VVhat is this dissention to you Papists Be it we truly disagree in this point yet in that we especially agree that with one mind we impugne your Popery as true Antichristianisme And Drentius in the Preface of the same booke Otherwise with one consent they fight against Popery And to the same obiection Caluin in Confutat Holland pag. 576 sayth thus True yet with one consent we all teach that Popish idolatry is to be detested In like manner Beza in Hospin part 2. Hist fol. 300 I confesse yet in this we all agree with vnited minds to impugne your transubstantiation Sadeel also Respons ad Sophism Turriani pag. 562 Yet neuerthelesse this my litle booke will be witnesse with how conioyned strength all our Churches do set vpon the Popish errors And in in dice Repet pag. 808 It is well that all they who conioyned themselues to the reformed Church with one consent reiect the Popes Primacy And D. Whitaker Contr. 2. quest 5. cap. 8. pag. 521 Yet in the meane tyme we all agree against the Pope And in this vnity of theirs to be against the Pope they greatly triumph His maiesty in his monitory epistle p. 174 Almost the halfe part of the Christian world is gon out of Babylon And D. Andrews respons ad Apol. Bellarm. cap. 14 Almost False of the Christian world is so farre vnited in one profession as that they are gon out of Babylon And when Becanus had found fault with him because he sayd The King of great Britany and the Kings of Denmarck and Sweden with the Princes of Germany who are of one beliefe with him are a part of the Lords flock because the Kings of Denmarck and Sweden be Lutherans and therefore are not of one beliefe with the King of great Britany Burhill in defence of him cap. 15. answereth That who are of one beliefe with King Iames is put in steed of who with him refuse to be vnder the Pope They meane then that all those are of one beliefe with them and be part of the Lords flock who refuse to be vnder the Pope Which kind of vnity is that which his Maiesty in his declaration against Vorstius noted Heretiques to keep saying pag. 49 There are in Hungary and Bohemia innumerable Heretiks who agree together only in hatred of the Pope But not only Heretiks but also Iewes Turcks and Infidells agree with Protestants in this point An excellent vnity surely worthy of Christians wherein they shall haue such partners and fellowes Seauenthly I proue it because when they be asked who were Protestants before Luther they produce no other then such as were aduersaries to the Pope Illyricus being to make a role of witnesses dares not call them Protestants or witnesses of the Protestant truth Editio Lugdun but simply witnesses of the truth or witnesses who reclaymed against the Pope and Popish errors And in the Preface professeth that he gathereth as farre as he cold all those who in any sort did before Luther giue testimony to the truth of Christ against the errors and furies of Antichrist And l. 20. col 1951. after he had brought forth all his witnesses he sayth of them thus They desired a fuller manifestation of the truth which at last sayth he we in this sixteenth age haue obtained That is his witnesses attayned not to the knowledge of Protestant truth which was reuealed but in the sixteenth age Neuerthelesse they seemed witnesses good inough for Illyricus because in some sort they were opposite to the doctrine and deeds of the Pope Beza also lib. de notis Eccles pag. 80. when he had obiected to himself that in former tymes their Church was not visible answereth I say that from the Apostles tyme there was scarce any age in which as soone as this Antichrist the Pope began to put out his head God did not raise some who opposed themselues against his tyranny And to the same question thus answeaâ—eth Sadeel in Refutat art 6â— Posnan pag. 851 VVe are ready to shew that there was no age in which there were not some who reproued your false Church Surely these men imagine Protestancy to consist in opposition to the Pope and Popery or they say nothing to the question proposed Likewise D. Whitaker Cont. 2. quest 3. cap. 2. pag. 474. proueth that the Protestant Church hath alwayes byn in Popery because therein haue byn some who though they communicated with Papists yet before death reiected their opinions which kind of proofe supposeth that it sufficeth to a Protestant to reiect Popish opinions 5. You see then that the cheife ring leaders of the Protestants confesse that theirs and their followers end was to abate the authority of the Pope that they deeme the forsaking of the Pope to be the foundation a good part and summe of the Protestant building that they account the leauing of Popery an euident argument of true religion that they define describe paint and name a Protestant by opposition to the Pope that they say their faith differeth not from ours but in denyall of some of our articles that they deny dissemble and extenuate whatsoeuer they dislike in those who are aduersaries to the Pope that they oppose their consent in opposition against the Pope as a buckler against all obiections about their dissentions in other articles finally that being bidden to produce Protestants before Luther they name such as any way opposed themselues against the Pope What do all these things declare but that which some of them say in plaine words that the Protestant Church is a rable of all sects which are not Papists 6. But out of all things which haue byn sayd in this and the former chapters First we see what great power Protestants take to themselues What followeth of all hitherto sayd that according as they please they include or exclude the same men out of the Church VVho will not to vse S. Augustins words feare these men who haue receiued such wonderfull power ouer men Secondly we see that they imitate the old heretiks lib. 3. cont Crescon c. 20. Praescript c. 41.42 L. 18. de Ciuit. c. 50. who as Tertullian sayth make peace generally with all and with whome diuision is their very vnity For as S. Augustin noteth the diuell hath stirred vp heretikes as if they might be indifferently permitted in the citty of God without amendment as the citty of confusion indifferently had Philosophers of different yea of
ordinance in al those things that of necessity are requisite to the same And his maiesty ep cit Whitâ—k Cont. 2. q. â— c. 18. Sutla l. 1. de Eccl. c. 1. Mort. Apol. l. 2. cap. 3â— It is needfull that the churches be vnited amoÌ„g themselues in vnity of saith and doctrine in those points which are necessary to saluation And hereupon diuers Protestants deny those Corinthians who denyed the Resurrection and those Galathians who ouerturned the Ghospell of Christ to haue byn members of the Church because they denyed a fundamentall point point of Christian fayth Wherefore vnlesse Protestants will deny their common doctrine in this matter reiect their owne definition of the Church cast away their only marke of the Church and leaue no marke of her at all they cannot auouch any one to haue byn a Protestant who dissented from them in any fundamentall point of doctrine 2. If any one say that although he who denyeth any fundamentall point of Protestancy cannot be of the visible Protestant Church yet may he be of their inuisible Church I answeare that as shall be shewed hereafter there can be no Church which is inuisible in profession of fayth howsoeuer it be inuisible in iustice and predestination and therefore none can be of the inuisible Church who is not also of the visible Againe Protestants will haue none to be of the inuisible Church but such as are iust But how is he iust who denieth Gods faith and maketh him a lyer and that in a principall point of religion Besides Protestants say that none can be a member of the inuisible Church vnlesse he be also a member of the visible Church if so conueniently he may 3. Moreouer the holy Fathers most frequently Leo. Ierm 4. de Nat. Hier. lib. 3 â—oÌ„t Ruffi Aug. l. de haer q. 11. in Mat. 18. de ciuit c. 51. Basilius in Theodor. lib. 4. c. 19. and sometymes also Protestants themselues do teach that it is necessary to a faythful and belieuing man that he deny no one article of fayth and much lesse a fundamentall or principall article Finally Protestants are wont to laugh at Catholiks if they proue any Father to haue byn a Papist because he held some fundamentall point of Papistry For thus writeth Pareus lib. 1. de amiss gratiae cap. 1 It is ridiculous for him to conclude S. Augustin to haue byn a Papist because in this errour he agreed with them no lesse them if you inferre that we are Papists because we agree with Papists in some truth And D. White in defence of his Way cap. 45. pag. 432 His holding of some things superstitiously which the Church of Rome hath entertayned proues not that he professed the same fayth the Church of Rome now doth because the fayth of the sayd Church comprehends much more then he held and what he held is now otherwise expounded and applyed then by him it was And in his Way pag. 298 If he would deale faythfully and to the point he should not say Bernard professed the Roman fayth and was a monke but he should haue shewed that be professed the present Roman fayth as the Councell of Trent and the Iesuits haue set it downe at least in the fundamentall points thereof Let them then abide the law which themselues haue made and let not them conclude any one to haue byn a Protestant because he agreed with them in one or more points vnlesse he agreed with them at least in all fundameÌ„tall points of their doctrine I adde also that against Protestants we do rightly conclude that the holy Fathers were Papists if we do shew that they dissented from Protestants in one or more fundamentall points For they will not deny but that the Fathers were either Papists or Protestants But Protestants they were not if they denyed their doctrine in any fundamentall point thereof therfore they must needs be Papists And the like is not of others whome Protestants cannot coÌ„clude to haue byn theirs if they can proue that they were none of ours Because neither we wil graunt nor they can auouch that such were either ours or theirs as they graunt of the holy Fathers What is necessarily required to a ProtestaÌ„ts Be it therefore certaine and assured that to a Protestant is necessarily required that either explicitly or at least implicitly and vertually he belieue all the fundamentall points of Protestancy and willfully deny no one of them And that therefore Protestants can no way challenge any who reiected any one of their fundamentall and principall articles It remayneth that we set downe the fundamentall articles of Protestancy lib. de vnie baptism c. â—â— because Protestants themselues agree not herein but as S. Augustin sayd that the Donatists did concerning sinnes which they would haue to exclude men out of the Church so Protestants in a strange fashion distinguish the fundamentall points of their fayth deuising rules of distinction amongst them not out of the scriptures but out of their owne heads Which be the fundamentall heads of Protestancy CHAP. VIII 1. THAT we may determine which be the fundamentall articles of Protestant religion we must first shew How much ProtestaÌ„ts esteeme the Conf. of Ausp that all Protestants professe to receiue the Confession of Auspurge at least in the principall and fundamentall articles thereof Of the Lutheran Protestants this is manifest For in their conference at Aldeburg both parties of them agreed to admit it for a rule of their disputation And ibidem pag. 404. those of the Electors side do say VVe referre our selues and do looke vnto the Confession of Auspurg as to the foundation of religion next after the word of God And other Lutherans in Zanchius in Supplicat ad Senat. Argentinens pag. 70. The fouÌ„dation of Religion do appoint that it be taught according to the Confession of Auspurge presented to Charles the 5. anno 1530 and the Apology thereof subscribed at Numberg and that it be the square and rule of all religion in all articles The square of religion Heshusius lib. de present corp Christi in caelo affirmeth that amongst the Lutherans all that are promoted to degrees and cure of soules do sweare to the Confession of Auspurg and the Apology thereof They sweare to it The same testifyeth Lobechius disp 1. pag. 12. and as Lauatherus addeth anno 1530 The lawes of the vniuersity of VVittemberg do streightly forbid to defend any opinions which are contrary to this Confession Heâ—â—â—sius also lib. cit writeth The authority thereof most holy that the authority thereof ought to be most holy amongst all godly men Westphalus cont Laskum affimeth that it containeth the summe of doctrine founded in the word of God Ernestus Regius in vita Vrbani that it is the square and rule of controuersies in the Church Lobechius lib. cit that it is the rule of sayth and doctrine distinguishing the orthodoxall Church from the heterodoxall Reineccius in armatura tom
12. VVhat as Tertullian sayth meane they otherwise then they write masters of deceit not of truth 10. If any demaund how it came to passe that Protestants should so often and so plainly say that their Church and religion was perished before Luther appeared Wherfor Protestāts say their Church was perished I answeare that there were many causes thereof First because it was so euident that their Church and religion was not at all when Luther began that as themselues haue confessed they cannot deny it It cannot be denyed If any deny it he may be conuinced All men must confesse it The matter it selfe proclaimeth and proueth it Num. 1.4.5.7 And finally that it is manifest both to learned and vnlearned Secondly they sayd so for to moue men to hate the Pope and Papists whome they affirmed to haue destroyed the fayth and Church Thirdly for to purchase the loue of the people as who had restored to them againe the Church and Religion Fourthly they sayd so for to excuse their preaching and playing the Pastours without ordinary calling as if forsooth when they began there had byn no church which could giue them cōmission Finally as phrantike men so Protestants sometymes are in good fittes in which they see and confesse the truth But at other tymes when Catholiks out of this perishing and destruction of their Church and religion do inferre that it is not the Church or religion of Christ Matth. 16. against which as he hath promised the gats of hell shall not preuaile but some other Church religion either first began by Luther or else restored and renowed by him after that it was substantially perished and destroyed then they mollify and glose their former sayings deuise strange violent senses of their words and euery way seeke out shiftes and sleights whereby they may auoyd the force of their owne testimonies which we shall rehearse and refute in the next chapter The Protestants shiftes for to delude their foresayd Confessions touching the substantiall decay of their Church and Religion refuted CHAP. II. 1. ALBEIT the foresayd confessions of the Protestants touching the substantiall decay of their Church and religion before Luther arose be so plaine and euident as we may well say with Tertullian VVho will not acknowledge these rather then expound thē De Resur c. 21. Yet because the obstinacy of heretiks is so great as it may be sooner ouercome then persuaded is wont to seek out all shifts to auoyd the force euen of their owne words I will heare set downe their shifts and confute them 2. Their first shift is Their first shift that the forenamed Protestants by the words of fayth religion and the like when they say that they perished did not meane the inward fayth of the heart as if no man in his heart had held the Protestant fayth or religion but only the outward profession thereof and so meane only that the outward profession of Protestancy was perished or that none professed it I graunt indeed that somtyme they speake of outward profession of faith but this commeth all to one purpose That they say inward faith perished Because the profession of faith can no more perish in the church then the fayth it selfe as hereafter we shall proue by the confessions of Protestants themselues But that they speake not also of the inward fayth or of fayth it selfe is most false First because they say so without all proofe neither can they proue it otherwise then because perhaps the same Protestants haue other where sayd the contrary which kind of proofe we hereafter shew to be nothing worth Lib. 2. c. vl Againe it is credible vnlesse one will belieue what he list that by so many words of light clarity religion worship of God truth of God Ca. 1. n. 2. 3. sayth true knowledge knowledge of fayth Christian fayth knowledge of Christ as they haue vsed and we repeated they meant not fayth it selfe but only the outward profession of faith Besides they sayd plainly That none belieued to be iustified without workes That the doctrine of Iustification by sayth was blotted out of the memory of men Cap. 1. nu 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6 that holesome truth perished from earth and that it was taken from men that Christ was buryed and taken out of the world and the Church that all Protestant consolation was vnknowne that without Luther one iot had not byn knowne that the knowledge of Christ the knowledge of sayth fayled and lastly that Christ was not vnderstood but vtterly vnknowne Which words are manifestly spoken meant of true or inward fayth I adde also that it is a rule of ciuil law approued by Luther and Protestants Luther de abrog mis epist ad Amsd. Schusselb tom 4. Catal haeret that who cold speak clearely and yet spake obscurely should haue his words expounded against him Seeing therefore Protestants could haue spoken farre more clearly if they had meant only that outward professiō of faith had perished we may lawfully expound their words against themselues 3. To this shift is another like wherewith they say that the foresayd testimonies of Protestants touching the destruction or decay of their Church are not to be vnderstood of their inuisible Church The secōd shift which they say is the company of only true faythfull and predestinate men but of the decay of their visible Church which they say is the company of al those that professe true doctrine and is the Church not in the sight of God but only in the eyes of men I do not deny that sometymes they speake of the visible Church notwithstanding as before I sayd it comes all to one purpose because as shall be proued hereafter there can be no inuisible Church without a visible nor a company of faythfull and predestinate men but they must professe their fayth The Protestāts say the true Church hath perished But most false it is that they speake not also of the true Church which they will haue to be inuisible to any but to God alone For first as before I argued this cannot be proued otherwise then that perhaps the same men haue at other tymes sayd the contrary which will proue that they like lyers haue contradicted themselues not that they haue not sayd this which they haue as clearly sayd as euer they sayd any thing else Besides in saying according to their meaning that the Church hath not perished or cannot perish they do not indeed cōtradict themselues when they say that it hath or can perish For when they say that the Church cannot perish by the name of the Church they vnderstand not the Catholike Church that is the Church spread throughout the world Cap. 1. n. ◠for as we saw they teach that the Church may consist or be reduced to one or two and that Elias thought there was none of the Church but himselfe Whereupon D. Whitaker Cont. 2. quest 3. pag.
say the Church can be destroyed 8. If any reply that S. Augustin vpon the 128. psalme sayth that the Church was once in Abel alone and Tertullian lib. de poenit cap. 10. the Church is in one or two I answere that S. Augustin there by the Church vnderstandeth those only whome the scripture by name hath canonized as it hath Abel for otherwise it is manifest that in Abels tyme there were others that were of the Church besides himselfe to wit Adam and Eue. And Tertullian by the Church vnderstandeth not the Catholike or vniuersall Church as we do but any number of Christians such as were those domesticall Churches which S. Paul sometymes saluted 9. The last refuge may be that what Protestants haue sayd of the destruction of the Church and fayth they meant not of their owne Church and fayth but of some others But this is a fond shift For first as I haue shewed they meane the destruction of the true Church and fayth Eyther therefore their Church and fayth is not the true but false or else they meane of their owne For the true Church and fayth is but one as the Apostle sayth Ephes 4 One God one fayth And the Nycen Creed I belieue one church S. Cyprian lib. de vnit One God one Christ one Church and one sayth S. Hilary ad Constant VVhatsoeuer is besides one fayth is not fayth but treachery And S. Leo serm 4. de Natiuit Vnlesse it be one it is no fayth Nay Luther lib. cont Papaâ—um tom 7. fol. 461 Christ knoweth not two kinds of vnlike Churches but one only Church Caluin 4. Inst cap. 1. § 2 VVe cannot find two or three churches vnlesse Christ be pluckt in peeces And in his Catechisme As there is one head of the faythfull so they must all be vnited in one body that there be not many Churches but one only And hereupon inferreth Sadeel in Refutat Thes Posnan art 61. that what is sayd of the true Church is sayd of theirs Seeing sayth he the true Church is one and not many as often as the truth of doctrine shineth openly so often we say the true Church and therfore our Church was visible Secondly because as we haue seene they speake of the destruction of their most principall article of iustificatioÌ„ by only faith which they affirme to be the life soule and summe of their Church Thirdly because they estsoones speake of the destruction of the Ghospell but by the name of the Ghospell they meane their owne doctrine as by the name of Gospellers they vnderstand themselues as hereafter shall appeare Finally because they professe that by the name of a Protestant Lutheran or Caluinist they vnderstand a true Christian Sadeel lib. de peccat remiss cap. 1 Ours that is the true Christian Catholikes opinion D. Fulke lib. de Succest pag. 186 I will neuer deny that Iewell was a noble Protestant that is a Christian And ad Cauillat Staplet The community of Christians whome ye call Protestants Hutten in Expostul cum Erasmo Against Lutherans that is maintayners of the truth Schusselburg tom 7. Catal. haeret Pap. 73 A Lutheran or true Christian is c. And lib. 2. Theol. Caluin fol. 131 Lutherans that is true seruants of Christ Beza cont Illyricum pag. 168 VVe perceiue no difference betweene Sacramentaries and Christians Hospinian part 2. Histor fol. 384 The Sacramentaries that is the orthodoxall And Danaeus cont Bellarm. pag. 311 The Caluinists that is Christians pag. 169 A Caluinist that is a godly man 10. Wherefore out of all whâ—ch hath byn sayd in this and the former Chapter I thus make my first demonstration to proue that Luther was the Author and first beginner of the Protestant Church and religion If the Protestant Church were not at all when Luther began he was the author thereof But it was not at all Therefore he was the author of it The Maior or first proposition is euident For if it were not at all when Luther began he was the beginner of it The minor is manifest by the foresayd CoÌ„fessions of Protestants wherein they plainly say that it was substantially perished That euery man followed a Church and religion different from the Protestant before Luther arose CHAP. III. 1. THE second demonstration wherewith we will proue Luther to haue byn haue byn the Author of the Protestant Church and religion we will take from the Protestants confessions that wheÌ„ Luther first began all the world and euery man imbraced a different religion Luther in the Preface of his first come Here see euen by my case The whole world how hard it is to yet out of errours which are confirmed by the example of the whole world and by long custome as it were changed into nature And to 2. this is written in his Epitaph O Christ Long custome he shewed thâ—e when all the world was ouerwhelmed with darkenesse And lib. 1. de captiuit Babylon fol. 72. being to write against Masse he sayth Neither let it moue thee that the whole world hath the contrary opinion and custome And fol. 68 There is almost this day nothing more receiued or more seâ—led in the Church then that Masse is a sacrifice Againâ— So many ages I set vpon a thing which being approued by the custome of so many ages and consent of all is so ingrafted as it is needfull to change almost the whole face of the Church Consent of all And lib. de â—â—râ—g Miss fol. 244 How often did my trembling hart quake and reprehending me obiected that their strongest and only argument Art thou only wise what did all erre Only Luther wise were so many ages ignorant Behold how Luthers heart or conscience did tell him that he alone knew Protestancy and that for many ages all were ignorant of it And in hiâ— table talkes fol. 10 These cogitations were very troublesome to me Thou only hast the pure word of God all others want it And lib. cit de Missa â—ol 247 The common people without doubt are most fully persuaded that all men are holpen by Masses for it seemeth incredible that all the world should be so forsaken of God And fol. 256 It seemes incredible to them that Luther alone should be wise Contra Cochlaeum fol. 408 The Sophisters and Monks haue seduced the whole world to trust in works The whole world vnder the Pope Tom. 3. in psal 82. fol. 481 In tymes past the whole world was vnder the Popes Dominion Tom. 5. â—n 4. Galat. fol. 388 In former ages Paul was vnknown to the whole world Tom. 6. in cap. 11. Genes fol. 130 The wicked impostour so he termeth the Pope hath deceiued all the word in c. 37. fol. 506 The whole world was horribly brought into madnes and solly by Papists In cap. 19 fol. 238 In the former age all things lay in darknesse Tom. 7. epist ad D. Sabaudiae fol. 483 VVe confesse that the world was by the Pope most miserably seduced
enemies to the world to all others besides themselues could not be discerned from others lurcked in desertes in darknesses like sparkles vnder much ashes professed not their fayth before the world or their aduersaries but at most before themselues and were known only to those that had eyes that is to themselues 3. The same also they meane They teach that the church may be inuisible to the world when they teach that the church of God may be inuisible to the world and all that are out of it Iunius in his 2. book of the church cap. 13 VVe conclude that the outward forme and visible shape of the Church may so in common vanish that it cannot be pointed at or perceiued of the world And againe The Church is oftentymes couered and inuisible to the world Often inuisible to the world And cap. 16 The visible fashion of the Church may be hid and faile from the vngratefull world And in his Theologicall Theses cap. 43 Sometymes the church appeareth to the faithfull alone sometymes it is knowne to some godly persons not to euery one Besnage in his booke of the state of the visible and inuisible Church cap. 4 The Church is not alwayes knowne to the world Sonis in his answere to Spondé cap. 2. pag. 32 God sometymes taketh away the face of the Church from men Lubbertus in his 3. booke of the Church cap. 4 VVe affirme that the Church may be driuen to those straights that it may lye hid from the world and persecutors And cap. 6 VVe deny that she is alwayes visible to the world which he repeateth againe cap. 7. Riuet in his Epirome of Controuersies treatise 1. sect 37 It happeneth sometymes that the Church hath byn inuisible or rather hidden sometymes from the eyes of persecutors sometymes from the eyes of the faythfull themselues to wit of some and the most of them D. Whitaker Controuers 2. quest 3. cap. 3. pag. 474 VVe say that the Church may be conserued in so few that it appeare not to the world And quaest 5. cap. 6. pag. 508 It is most false that the Church shall alwayes be knowne and manifest to the world D. Fulke to Stapletons Cauillat Bullinger Alphonse Chytreus Marlorate and all the rest do acknowledge that the Church by the defence of Christ shal be protected in the desert that is in places remote from the sight and accesse of the wicked Againe The Church is not alwayes apparent to the multitude of the wicked And in his booke of Succession pag. 19 It is not doubted whether the Ecclesiasticall succession of persons and places ought sometymes to be visible to the world but whether at all tymes And pag. 21 Sometyms the Church is vnknowne to the world Pag. 42 God would sometymes prouide for the Church in this sort in striking her enemies with blindnes that they could not find her And pag. 129. The externall policy of the Church is vnknowne to the world that is to the enemies of the Church And pag. 366 I affirme that the Church is sometymes vnknowne to the world D. White in his way to the Church pag 86 The question is only of the outward state of the Church whether it be alway visible to the world or not that in euery age those congregations may be discerned and pointed to which are the true Church For we say not Pag. 87 This number may be very small and their profession so secret amongst themselues that the world and such as loue not the truth shall not see them they remayning so hidden as if they were not at all And pag. 97. The Church may be hid or become inuisible sometyme so that the world cannot see it D. Morton in the 1. part of his Apology lib. 1. cap. 16 ProtestaÌ„ts proper defence Protestants say the Church is not alwayes knowne to all the faythfull nor to her enemies And this he termeth the proper defence of Protestants And cap. 13 VVhen Protestant say the Church is sometymes ecclipsed like the moone they meane that she is brought sometymes to so sew that it is not seene but of those which are in her but not openly knowne by her visibility rites or visible Succession or to all the faythfull D. Willet in his Synopsis Cont. 2 quest 1. pag. 67 A number of faythfull people hath byn alwayes in the world but not alwayes visible to the world Againe If by visible they vnderstand that which is actually visible we say it is not so alwayes visible to the world Thus we see that for to maintaine the inuisibility of their Church they teach that the visible forme of the Church of God may vanish mayly hid may faile from the world is often taken away from men by God is vnknowne to the world That the Church sometymes is vnknowne or appeares not visible to the world sometyme knowne only to the faythfull yet not to all them neither but to some and the fewer of them and that neither by any visible rites nor by visible succession and that this kind of doctrine they terme the proper defence of Protestants to wit for to defend the inuisibility of their Church before Luther Which kind of defence hath neither truth nor probability and though it had yet would it not suffice to defend the inuisibility of their Church before Luthers tyme when it was inuisible not only to the world to enemies to straungers to some or most of the faythfull but to all and euery one as shall manifestly appeare hereafter 4. If any say that it is no meruayle if Protestants teach that their Church was inuisible to the world because the true Church cannot be seene but by fayth I answeare first that this supposeth their Church to be the true Church which ought not to be supposed but proued Secondly that they teach that the Church may be vnknowne not only to the world but also to some or most of the faythfull Lastly that the true Church may be knowne two wayes one way to be the true Church of God an other to be knowne distinctly from all other Churches The true Church discerned from all other Churches euen by Infidels as Christ was knowne to be the Messias only by his disciples but yet he was knowne distinctly from all other men by the Iewes And the scripture is knowne to be the word of God only by Christiâ—ns but is knowne distinctly from other writings by Infidels And in Christs tyme his company was known to be the true Church of God only by the faythfull but knowne distinctly from all other companies or Churches euen by Infidels And the same we say of his Church from his tyme vnto our dayes that it is and euer was knowne to be the true Church of God only of the faythfull but known and seene distinctly from all other Churches euen by the world Infidels And of his kind of knowledge and visibility wherewith the true Church is knowne and visible not only to the faythfull
continuall descent thereof from Christ cannot by such record be shewed Moreouer at sometyms they not only confesse that the Church is alwayes visible but also graunt that the scripture teacheth the same in those parables of the barne and the net For out of them Caluin 4. Protestāts confesse that the Scripture affirmeth that the Church is alwayes visible Institut cap. 1. § 13. inferreth that the Lord pronounceth that the church shall be vexed with this euill till the day of iudgemēt to be burdened with the mixture of the wicked Of the same opinion is D. Whitaker Cont. 2. quest 3. cap. 2. pag. 471. and others But that church which contayneth the wicked is the visible Church for the inuisible they will haue to hold only the good The Scripture therefore testifieth that the visible Church shall euer be Yea Protestants now and then take it so ill that it should be sayd that they teach that the visible Church perished for many ages that D. Sutliue in his answere to Exceptions cap. 7. sayth that Bellarmine lyeth in saying so And D. Whitaker loc cit pag 472. sayth we slaunder them when we affirme they put such a Church as at sometymes can be seene of none And sayth that in this matter there is no controuersy about the thing but about the manner to wit no question whither the Church be alwayes visible or no but in what manner it is visible because forsooth we will haue the Church to be at all tymes visible clearly and of all men and they will haue it to be at sometymes visible but obscurely and of few The like sayth Kemnice in his Common places title of the Church cap. 3. Reineccius in the 4. tome of his Armour cap. 8. and D. Morton in the 1. part of his Apology lib. 1. cap. 13. But yet that in this matter we neither bely nor sclaunder them is manifest by what we haue rehearsed in the 4. chapter before going in the 5. number and those that follow To which I add that Caluin in the Preface of his institutions setteth the state of this question betwixt vs Protestants in these words Vpon this hinge hangeth our controuersy that they Papists will haue the forme of the church to appeare and be visible at all tymes On the contrary we say that the church may consist of no apparent forme And I would to God that Protestants would constantly agree which vs in this matter of doctrine that the church of God is alwayes visible to some either of those that are in it or out of it that the debate might remaine only about the matter of fact VVhy Protestāts contradict thēselues about the inuisibility of the Church whither the Protestāt Church before Luther appeared were seene of any either Protestant or other But Protestants standing betwixt truth and lyes whiles they consider the nature of the Church of God especially as it is described in scripture confesse that it must needs be visible not only to her children but to others also But when they look back vpon the state and condition of their owne church before Luther began are compelled to deny the same as before we most euidently shewed which thing alone if it were well considered would discouer sufficiently that in their own consciences they acknowledge their Church not to be the true Church of God Inuisibility cōtrary to the ends of the Church 7. Fiftly I proue that the Church cannot be inuisible because that were contrary to the ends for which the Church was instituted of God whereof one was that men should worship him after that entier manner of worship which man is to giue which is to honour God not only with heart and mind but also with tongue and deed as it is euident and Caluin in his Confutation of a Hollander many wayes proueth that the Church must render to God not only inward but also outward worship But an inuisible Church worshippeth God only in heart and mind as Whitakers words are Another end of the Church is to feed her children with the word and Sacraments to correct and gouerne them by discipline and to defend them from enemies as also is manifest and scripture teacheth Which offices a Church which neither seeth her children nor is seene of them cannot performe Likewise another end is to conuert the world and those who are out of her to the fayth and worship of God which she can no way do if neither her doctrine nor example be seene of them And yet as Luther sayth vpon the sixt chapter of Isaias tom 4. fol. 234 The Church is in perpetuall practise of conuerting others to the fayth Inuisibility against the nature of human societies 8. Sixtly it is against the nature of a society of men amongst themselues for to be inuisible For as men consist of a body which is visible by the colours and of a soule which is seene by the actions thereof so it is necessary that the society in which they ioyne be visible either by it selfe or by some other thing Whereupon well sayd S. Augustin Li. 19. cōt Faust c. 11. Men cannot ioyne in any religion true or false vnlesse they be bound togeather by some fellowship of visible signes or Sacraments And the same confesseth Gerlachius in his 23. disput of the Church pag. 995. saying VVe willingly confesse graunt that the church cannot be except there be some outward and visible signes by common communion and participation whereof society amongst men may consist And seauently it is contrary to the example of all other societies amongst men whither religious or prophane whereof none consisteth in a thing which is altogeather inuisible and whereby the members of that society cannot be knowne the one to the other 9. Seauenthly Against the perpetuity of the Church it is contrary to the continuance and conseruation of the Church on earth to be visible For if the Church which was in the former age had not byn seene of that which is in this age how could the Church of this age haue receiued the fayth We aske therefore how the Protestant Church of our age learned the fayth of the Church of an other age if in the ages before Luther she were so inuisible as you haue heard them confesse Protestants scared with this question like men with a thunder clap leape a sunder and euery one answeareth not what he knoweth or can proue but what seemeth to him least absurd that hereby we may perceiue that all their talke of their Churches being before Luthers tyme is but as the scripture sayth fables and vaine speaches or fancies and fictions of men speaking without either testimony or reason Some of them say that before Luther their Church receiued the fayth immediatly from God alone During Popery sayth Boysseul in his Confutation of Spondé pag. 75 the holy Ghost taught fayth without a preacher Protestant Church taught miraculously The same also intimate Iunius Cont. 4. lib.
14. Ninthly Nothing can make the church inuisible I proue that the Church could not be inuisible because there is nothing which can make that the Church professe not her fayth For if any thing most of all persecution But as the waters did lift vp the Arck of Nöe which was a figure of the church so do persecutions raise vp the church and make her more knowne And as the heauen in day tyme all shineth but at might glittereth in the starres so the church in tyme of peace flourisheth in all her members but in tyme of persecution is most glorious in her constant soldiers And there are many and most excellent testimonies of the holy Fathers how that the Church is by persecution made more pure more famous and more plentifull which one may read in SS Iustin Irenaeus Tertullian Gregory Nazianzen Hilary Ambrose Hierome Augustin Leo Theodorete Gregory the great others I according to my purpose will alleage only the testimonies of Protestants Luther vpon the 1. psalme tom 3. fol. 125 The faythfull whiles they are killed do encrease while they are diminished do multiply And vpon the 9. of Isaias tom 4. fol. 84 The Church is made fruithfull with the bloud of the Godly and increaseth Caluin against Seruet pag. 595 The true and proper church rising vnder persecution flourished vnder the same The like he hath vpon the 2. Tim. cap. 2. and Philip 1. Lubberia lib. 5. de Eccles cap. 3 The true Church grew vnder suffering persecutions And the Apology of the English Church in the end This flame the more it is kept downe so much the more with greater sorce and strength doth it breake out and fly abroad D. Fulke of Succession pag. 255 I acknowledge that the Church is so farre from being extinguished by the persecution of the materiall sword that I graunt it giueth her occasion to delate and extend her bounds For so as Tertullian sayth well the bloud of Mâ—rtyrs is the seed of the Church This all that are not starck blind do see to haue happened to our Church For how much the more Antichrist raged with fire and sword so much the more famous she became And D. Whitaker Cont. 2 quest 5. cap. 4. pag. 501 Persecutions destroy not the Kingdome of Christ but make it more famous And Cont. 4. quest 5. cap. 2. pag. 669 VVhen tyrants raâ—ed against the church religion suffered no losse yea then most of all flourished How then could the Protestant church if it were the true church of God become inuisible before Luther arose by persecution 15. If any reply that this is true of violent persecution of the heathens but not of persecutions by fraud deceit as is the persecution of Antichrist which made the Protestant Church in former tyms to become inuisible I answere that first he speaketh voluntary without all proofe Againe that the English Apology and D. Fulke speake namely of Antichrists persecution meaning the Pope which they say hath since Luthers tyme made their church more famous How then could it before his tyme make it inuisible Moreouer the scripture and holy Fathers teach that Antichrist shall rage most cruelly against the Church and Protestants affirme that the Pope whome they will haue to be Antichrist hath byn so cruell against Protestants as any Herode Nero Domitian may seeme to haue byn mild if they be compared to him Finally heretikes do by fraud persecute the Church and neuerthelesse the Apostle saith There must be heresies 1. Cor. 10. that those who be tryed may be made manifest So farre is fraudulent persecution from making the Church inuisible as it maketh the tried faythfull to be manifest And both S. Augustin oftentymes others obserue that heresies haue byn occasion of great increase of knowledge vnto the Church 16. Tenthly I proue ProtestaÌ„ts inferre an inuisible Church to be no Church that the Church cannot become inuisible because Protestants do often inferre such and such a Church or company not to haue byn because it was not seene as in the Preface of the Protocoll of Frankentall they proue the Anabaptists were not before the year 1525. Because say they if you read all stories you shall find no people from the beginning of the world who had a Confession of fayth like vnto yours But by the same manner it were easy to proue that Protestants were not before Luther For as Spalatinus in his relation of their CoÌ„fession of Auspurg boasteth One shall not find such a Confession neither in any history neither in any ancient Father or Doctor In Luther tom 9. German And Fox in his Protestation before his Acts sayth that of their Church there is no mention made in Histories Luther also vpon the 3. chap. ad Galat. tom 5. fol. 358. writeth that of his principall opinion nothing is read in books of Monks of Canonists of Scholmen yea nor in the books of ancient Fathers There was a wonderfull silence of it for many ages in all schooles and Churches Likewise when one sayd that the Roman Church was a member of the Catholike Church Caluin in his Answere ad Versipellem pag. 359. sayd I do not gainsay that the Roman Church is a member of the Catholike if he could shew a Church at Rome Which supposeth that no Church is where it cannot be shewed When Bellarmine sayd that beside the Synagogue of the Iewes there were in Elias tyme Churches amongst the Gentils D. Whitaker Cont. 2. quest 3. cap. 3. pag. 475. thus answered If they say that God had other Churches let them shew them and tell which they were and where they were And D. Rainolds in his 12. Prefection vpon the scripture col 106. inferreth that none of the Synagogue did belieue those bookes of Scripture which they deny to be canonicall because we cannot name any When D. Harding sayd that there was such an heresy M. Iewel art 2. diuis 8. pag. 75. denying it sayth It must needs be a very straung heresy that neuer had neither beginning nor ending nor defender nor reprouer nor mouth to speake it nor eare to heare it nor pen to write nor tym to last in nor place to rest in And if an heresy must be heard of certainly much more the Church of God When Beza impugned the Arians thus he discourseth epist 18. pag 98 If their opinion be true we bid them shew where there Church hath byn sith from the propagation of the ghospell it is easy to demonstrate that neuer any one held any such thing who was not condemned by the perpetuall consent of the Church And he addeth epist 81 Certainly there hath byn no true Church if these men teach truth When the Bohemians would proue that they had borrowed nothing of the Anabaptists thus they write in the Preface of their Confession Our Congregation was long tyme before any thing was heard of the Anabaptists or their name knowne in the world Finally M. Bancroft in his Suruey of the
Donatists Zanchius of the Church pag. 138 I admit that succession of true Bishops is a marke of the Church and of this speake the Fathers The like confesse Caluin Respons ad Versipellem pag. 358. and 4. Institut cap. 2. § 3. Beza epist 1. Plessy de Eccles cap. 3. Fulke de Success pag. 36. D. Morton Apol. part 1. lib. 1. cap. 13. Iames Andrews cont Hosium pag. 89. and others Neither is it true which D. Whitaker and Sadeel say that the Fathers did not think that they conuinced the Heretiks not to be the Church because they wanted succesion of Pastors For S. Irenaeus sayth that hereby he confoundeth heretiks and that this is a most full demostration S. Augustine writeth that this argument of succession held him in the Church S. Athanasius calleth it a notable and admirable argument And Sadeel himselfe loc cit sayth that with this battering ramme S. Cyprian did especially vanquish the Nouatians And Peter Martyr in his Common places tit de Schismate writeth that S. Augustines argument taken from the succession of Pastors was very euident against the Donatists ProtestaÌ„ts confesse necessity of Pastors 4. Thirdly I proue that the Church cannot be without Pastors because eftsoones the ProtestaÌ„ts confesse it Luther vpon 10. chap. of Genesis tom 6. fol. 125 The Church cannot consist without continuall vse of the word And of the Notes of the Church tom 7. fol. 151 The Church cannot be without Pastors Melancthon vpon the. 3. cap. of Math. tom 1. fol. 258 God will alwayes haue some publike Ministery He will not suffer the publike ministery to be destroyed And in cap. 16. pag. 489 There is no Church where there is no true Ministery And ibideth in his sermon vpon the rock pag. 176 The Church is built vpon the Ministery And tom 1. in loc cap. de Eccles fol. 227 VVe must not seigne a Church without the Ministry And cap. de numero Sacramentorum fol. 334 The Ministry cannat be quite destroyed And in his dispute of Ecclesiast policy tom 1. Lutheri fol. 442 The Church cannot exist this ministry being extinguished Kemnice in his Common places tit of the Church cap. 4 There are promises extant of the perpetuall conseruation of the Ministry in the Church Gerlachius Disput 22. pag. 940 The publike Ministry is alwayes conserued Iames Andrews against Hosius pag. 330 No man denieth that the Church cannot be without Bishops Oecolampadius vpon the 62. cap. of Isaias pag. 30â— God raiseth vp at all tymes Apostles and preachers Bolanus in his Synâ—agme lib. 7. cap. 11 The function of ordinary Ministers after the Ecclesiasticall order is one setled is perpetuall and to endure to the end of the world Caluin 4. Institut cap. 2. § 4 For neither the light and heat of the Sunne nor meat and drinck are so necessary to cherish and sustaine the present life as the Pastorall function is for to conserue the church on earth And § 3 God hath setled foreuer the way of gouerning and holding his Church by Ministers And § 4 The church can neuer want Pastors and teachers Beza de Notis Eccles pag. 60 The church can neuer want either the seed of the word or sowing or sowers Vorstius in Antibellarm pag. 197 The Ghospellers acknowledge the 3. other orders to be perpetuall in the Church to wit Pastors Priests and Deacons D. Whitaker cont 2. quest 3 cap. 2. pag. 469 I answere that there were alwayes Pastors and sheepe and that there shall be euer Pastors to the end of the world And quest 5. cap. 6. pag. 508 I confesse the succession of Pastors to be necessary Againe I answere that the Church cannot stand without Pastors D. Fulke de Succes pag. 22 I graunt that the succession of Pastors is necessary in the church And pag. 95 The true doctrine of Christ and the Apostles neuer wanted cryers D. White in defence of his way cap. 35. pag. 381 The Church shall neuer want Pastors And his Maiesty in his Monitory epistle pag. 61 Neither can hell stand without some order and distinction The Diuels are deuided into Legions and haue their Princes how then can any compaâ—â—on earth stand which is confused and disordered without all difference of orders or dignity You see how confused a thing Protestants account the Church to be without Pastors and that they speake far otherwise of the Church when they consider the true nature thereof then when they looke vpon the condition of their owne Church in former tymes before Luther Neither do they only sometymes confesse that the Church cannot be without Pastors but also acknowledge that Scripture â—oâ—h teach so For thuâ— Melancthon in his foresayd dispute fol. 483 Scripture requireth Pastors VVhere the Church is there must needs be lawfull ordination of Ministers which ordination is one of the proper giftes of the Church according to that of the 4. chap. to the Ephesians He hath giuen Pastors c. Kemnice in the 2. part of his examen tit de Sacramento ordinis pag. 192 The Sonne of God himselfe will conserue in the Church with perpetuall calling the Ministry of those who teach the Ghospell So sayth Paul Ephes 4. Caluin 4 Institut cap. 3. § 2 In these words Ephes 4 he sheweth the Ministry to be the cheife sinew wherewith the faythfull hung togeather in one body and insinuateth also that the Church cannot otherwise be safe vnlesse it be propped with these helpes in which God would place her safety The like he hath in cap. 4. Ephes and 1. Cor. cap. 6. and 12. and 1. Tim. cap. 3. D Whitaker Cont. 2. quest 5. cap. 19. pag. 549 This place of Esay cap. 59 My spirit c. sheweth that the true preaching of the word shall be perpetuall in the Church D. Whitgift in his Answere to the Admonition pag. 17 The place of Mathew 9. sheweth that Ministers are necessary in the Church D. Fulk ad Cauillat Stapl You do that which is done already whiles you proue out of the Apostles writings that the continuance of the Pastors and Doctors is of no lesse certainty then the continuance of fayth and doctrine And de Succes pag. 180 The Scriptures promise perpetuall succession of Pastors and Doctors Preaching necessary to fayth 5. Fourthly I proue this same because Protestants sometymes do teach that preaching which cannot be done without Pastors is necessary to ingraft fayth in men For as before we rehearsed they condemne the Anabaptists and Suenckfeldians in that they teach that men can come to fayth without preaching And Luther tom 1. fol. 54. writeth that the administration of the word by a Priest is needfull for faith And Cont. Caterin tom 2. fol. 140. sayth that by the vocall word the Church is conceiued formed nourished begotten and conserued And de instituendis Ministris fol. 372 Seing the church is brought forth nourished and conserued by the word of God it is manifest that she cannot be without the word or if it be without
the word that it leaueth to be a Church In cap. 17. Ioannis tom 5. fol. 203 For God hath not determined to conserue them the faythfull without outward meanes albeit he could do it Also vpon the 1. chap. of Zacharias Although God can teach men the Ghospell without sermons yet he will not do it And of the Notes of the church tom 7. fol. 149 VVhat could or would the people of God belieue vnlesse the word of God sounded there Melancthon in locis tom 3. cap. de libero arb fol. 311 God gathereth a true Church by the voice of the Ghospell and not otherwise Kemnice in the 2. part of his examen tit de Sacramento ordinis pag. 391 God by his certaine counsell hath determined that he will dispense those things which belong to the matter of our saluation not immediatly by infusing new and peculiar reuelâ—tions into the minds of men without any meanes but by the outward Ministry of the word Caluin 4 Institut cap. 1. § 5 Howbeit Gods power be not tyed to outward meanes neuertheles be hath tyed vs to the ordinary meanes of Preaching Many are pusht on by pride disdaine and emulation to perswade themselues that they can profit inough by priuate reading and meditating And § 4 The knowledge of her the visible Church is profitable to vs yea necessary for we cannot come to life vnlesse she conceiue vs in her wombe beare vs nourish vs with her duggs And in 1. Tim. cap. 3 The office of preaching which God hath left in his church is the only instrument of truth that it go not out of mens minds The Ministery of the word being taken away God truth will fall downe Beza epist 20 It is cleare that fayth cometh of hearing and therefore preaching must goe before fayth Tayé in his Enchiridion disput 60 The necessity of ecclesiasticall Ministry appeareth in that without it we can not know the word of God nor his will therein reuealed vnto vs. D. Whitaker lib. 1. de Scriptura cap. 9 sect 9. pag. 106 The ministry being taken away neither fayth nor Charity nor obedience nor any vertue will remayne safe And cap. 2. sect 6. pag. 37 VVe cannot at all belieue without the Ministry of the church And lib. 3. cap. 15 sect 20. pag. 478 I affirme determine and hold that there is no entrance to saluation without the Ministry of the word Againe by the Ministry of Pastors we belieue the Scripture neither is it to be hoped that without this Ministry sayth can grow in our minds And cap. 5. sect 2 I confesse the Ministry of the Church to be most necessary And Cont. 2. quest 5. cap. 19. pag. 550 VVe neuer come to fayth without preaching of the word D. Fuâ—ke de Succes pag. 30 The peoples saluation cannot be procured without preaching And pag 162 No Christian will deny preaching of the word to be necessary for the edification of the church M. Latimer in his sermons fol. 38 Take away preaching and take away saluation Fol. 99 The office of preaching is the only ordinary meane whereby God hath determined to saue vs. M. Cartwright in M. Hooker lib. 5. of Ecclesiasticall policy p. 41 Reading may set forward but not begin the worke of saluation sayth may be nourished therewith but not bred herein mens attention to the Scriptures and their speculation of the creatures of God haue like efficacy both being of power to augment but neither to effect beliefe without sermons And the Puritans in D. Whitgifts Answere to the Admonitions Reading is no feeding How then could there be any Protestant Church or fayth at all before Luther when as we heard before there was then no Protestant preacher Scripture requireth preaching And in like sort sometymes they confesse that the Scripture it selfe teacheth that preaching is necessary to haue fayth The Confession of Auspurg cap. de potest Eccles pag. 59 Euerlasting iustice the holy Ghost eternall life cannot be had but by the ministry of the word and Sacraments as Paul sayth The Confession of Bohemia art 10 They graunt that none can attaine to right sayth vnlesse he heare the word of God according to that of S. Paul Fayth is of hearing And againe How shall they belieue in him of whome they haue not heard And the Protestants in their conference at Marspurg agreed as reporteth Hospinian part 2. Histor fol 77 That the holy Ghost if we speake of the ordinary course giueth fayth to none vnlesse preaching or the vocall word goe before but by and with the vocall word he worketh and maketh fayth where and in whome it pleaseth him Rom 10. Caluin also 4. Institut cap. 1. § 5 God inspireth fayth into vs by the instrument of his Ghospell as Paul admonisheth that sayth is of hearing Againe VVe must hold that which I haue set downe out of Paul that the Church is not otherwise edified but by outward preaching and in 1. Tim. cap. 3 Paul meaneth simply that which in other words he deliuereth Rom. 10. because fayth is of hearing that there will be no sayth vnlesse there be preaching The like he hath 1. Cor. 3. v. 6. Heb. 4. v. 12. and Ephes 4. v. 12. Beza in the Conference at Montbelgard pag. 407 The ordinary manner whereby fayth is infused is by hearing the word Rom. 10. And Bucer in cap. 10. Rom The Apostle knew that God could call men without the ministry of men neuertheles he absolutely wrote How shall they belieue in him of whome they haue not heard Hyperius also vpon the same place That is that all belieue and call vpon God it is needfull that before they heare the Ghospell and be taught D. Whitaker lib. 1. de Scrip. cap. 2. sect 4 That of the Apostle how shall they belieue without a preacher conuinceth this much that preaching is necessary to conceiue assured of fayth God And c. 10. sect 4 The Apostle doth plainly say that fayth is of hearing And Cont. 2. quest 5. c. 19. pag. 549 This place of Isay 59. sheweth that true preaching of the word shall be perpetuall in the Church M. Perkins in his exposition of the Creed col 787 I answere that place Rom. 10. Faith is of hearing to be vnderstood of iustifying fayth So that neither the visible nor inuisible Church could euer haue byn without preaching 6. Out of all that hath byn sayd in this and the former chapter I thus make my fourth demonstration for to proue that Luther was Author of the Protestant Church If before Luther the Protestant Church had no Pastors she was not then at all But then she had no Pastors at all Therefore then she was not at all And by him she came to haue both Protestant Pastors and sheep Therfore by him she had her beginning The Maior is euident by those Confessions of Protestants which we haue rehearsed in this chapter and the Minor by those that were repeated in the former That the Protestants Church and Religion before Luther
was no where CHAP. IX 1. THE first demonstration for to proue that Luther was Author of the ProtestaÌ„t church and Religion ProtestaÌ„ts name not the place shall be taken from want of place to wit that it was no where before Luther began And this I proue first because they oftentymes say that before Luthers tyme their Church was in the desert in darknes in lurking holes in Trephonius denne neuertheles they tell not where this desert this darknes this lurking hole this denne was Secondly some of them confesse that they know not where their Church was in tyme paâ—t D. Whitaker Cont. â—â— quest 3. cap. 3. pag. 475 Know not the place They are angry with vs that we cannot â—hew and as it were point with our finger where our Church was in tymes past The same insinuateth Sadeel ad Repetit Sophism Turriani pag. 766. saying that he answered this question VVhere there Church lurked when he sayd That it lay hid by the vnsearcheable iudgement of God as if he sayd It lay so close hid that it cannot be knowne where it lay Also D. Hall in his Rome Irreconcileable sect 1. when he calleth this our demaund VVhere their Church lurked an idle demaund of Pettifoggers But that it is no idle demaund is manifest For first what man in his wittes seeth not that she who is pretended to be the Catholike Church that is spred ouer the world was not at all if no place can be found where she was for many ages Againe because the holy Fathers and Protestants themselues demaund this of heretikes VVho are yee sayth Tertullian when Praes 32.37 and whence come ye where lurked ye so long Againe Let them bring forth the oâ—spring of their Churches S. Athanasius VVhence came these things yea what hell hath vomited them out Lib. de Nicen Synod de Syn. Selenuc Lib 3 de Bapt. c. 2. And S. Augustine VVhere appeared Donatus Out of what ground sprung he Out of what sea arose he from what heauen fell he And Beza epist 18. demaundeth the like of the Arians saying If their opinion be true we bid them shew then where was their Church Besides the Confession of Saxony chap. of the Church professeth that the true Church knoweth where the is And Kemnice in his Common places tit de Eccles cap. 3 God will haue vs to know which and where is the true Church Wherefore it is no idle but a most necessary thing to know where the Church is and if Protestants immediatly before Luther arose knew not where the Church was it must needs follow that she was not the true Church Catholiks alwayes asked where was the Protestant Church 2. Thirdly I proue it because euen those who take vpon them to tell where their Church was in former tymes do shew indeed that they know no place where she was For as M. Iewel sayth art 1. diuis 7. pag. 10 Eckius Pighius Hosius and others haue often cryed out a mayne in their bookes and pulpits where was your religion before Luther first began to preach And that the same hath byn demaunded by Catholiks confesseth Peter Martyr in locis tit de discessu ab Eccl. Rom. col 1492. Beza de Notis Eccles pag. 78. and in his 132. question D. Whitaker Cont. 2. quest 3. cap. 3. M. Perkins in his Reformed Catholik tract 22. cap. 1. and others And it is manifest by the writings speaches of all Catholikes Yea Luther in cap. 19. Isaiae tom 4. fol. 125. writeth that this was our first argument against them and will be our last Art thou alone wise or doest thou thinke that all our auncestours saw nothing Did all those who were before thee erre Because he saw that this argument did most presse him and that he could neuer answere it Let vs see therefore what they answere to this our first and last demaund so often and with such earnestnesse and so great cryes proposed of vs. D. Whitaker cont 2. quest 3. cap. 2. proposeth their answere in these words ProtestaÌ„ts answere Stapleton sayth that Caluin and we say that the true Church was in Popery but that Popery was not the church That indeed we all say And the same in substance answereth Luther lib. de seru arbit tom 2. fo 438. in psalmos graduales to 3. fol. 589. And de Missa priuata tom 7. fol. 236. Iames Andrewes cont Hosium pag. 326. Herbrand in Compend Theol. loc de Eccl. pag. 502. Hunnius Praefat. tract de Iustific Huberus in Antibellarm lib. 4. cap. 2. Hutter in Aâ—alysi Confess August p. 447. Gerlachius disput 22. p. 952. Lobechius disp 10. pag. 202. Gesnerus loc 24. Reineccius lib. 4. armaturae cap. 3. And amongst the Sacramentaries Caluin 4. Instit cap. 2. § 11. Peter Martyr Beza and M. Perkins locis cit Sadeel in Refut Thes Posnan cap. 8. Polanus part 3. Thes de Eccl. Daneus de Antichristo cap. vlt. Iunius lib. 4. de Eccl. cap. 166. Vorstius in Catechism quest 54. art 2. Sohnius in method Theol. pag. 213. Bucanus loc 4. de Eccl. and others commonly 3. But this answere satisfieth not our question for many causes First because to say that the Church was in Popery but Popery was not the Church doth not seeme an answere but a ridle perhaps put of purpose because as Bucer sayd Lib. 1. epist Zanchii Protestants mysteries must not be expounded to Papists Secondly they agree not among themselues what they meane by Popery For Boysseul in his CoÌ„futation of Spondé pag. 723. will haue it to be Popish doctrine saying He knoweth not what we call Popery He imagineth that it is men But we say that it is heresies and errors the abuses idolatries of the Roman Church And D. White in defence of his way cap. 32. pag. 305 The Papacy is nothing else but a disease or excrement breeding in the Church Moulins of Arnolds flights cap. 6 Popery is a masse of errors and corruption of Christianity And Caluin in 1. Galat. v. 9 Popery is a horrible ouerthrow of the Ghospell Others by Popery vnderstand the company of Papists Schusselburg tom 8. Catal. heret pag. 480. writeth that Popery signifieth a company And Iames Andrewes Cont. Hosium pag. 326. sayth Popery that is the Pope Bishops and they who consent to their impiety Thirdly Popery whereby you vnderstand such a company or such doctrine is no place we aske for the place wherin Protestants were before Luthers tyme. Fourthly because we aske not wher only they say thier church was for what can they not say but where they proue their Church to haue byn Lib. 1. coÌ„t Gaud. c. 33. Wherefore that I may imitate S. Augustins words I demaund whither God told them that their Church was in tymes past in Popery or man If God let them read it out of the Scripture If man let them bring him forth that we may iudge whither he be worthy to be belieued or no.
of Christ for thus he writeth Popery as Iudaisme heretofore signifieth that company which at least in her tyme had the true Church with it Such were the Iewes before the comming of Christ and the Papists before the comming of Luther His meaning as I suppose is that as the Christian Church is in state another church from the Synagogue because it hath other Sacraments other Sacrifyce and more points of fayth and Christ another founder of the Church distinct from Moyses so the Protestant Church is a distinct Church from the ancient Christian Church and Luther not only another Elias as they call him but also another Messias a founder and beginner of another Church distinct from that of Christ at least as far as his church differed from the Synagogue Behold Christian Reader wherto all their winding turning and doubling about the being of their Church in Popery is come Surely as S. Augustin sayd L 20. cont Faust c. 12. against the Manichees their imaginations haue lost all wayes For they are nothing bâ—â— the visions of frantike men For their remayneth no probable way to defend that their Church was heretofore in Popery It is mere frenzy to think that it waâ— in Popery virtually and implicitly like as a plant iâ— in the seed or a man in a child at the Christiaâ— Church once was in the Synagogue or that it waâ— openly distinct in Communion and Profession froâ— Papists or that it consisteth of such which either iâ— hart or at least in Profession were Papists or finally that the Church of God such as they will haâ—â— the Protestant to be was for many ages in a differeÌ„t yea a most opposite church where neither by diuine nor humane testimony it can be proued to haue byn neither can there any way be imagined by which it may with any appearance or probability be sayd to haue byn there Thus sayth S. Augustine do they dote lib. 20. coÌ„t Faust c. vl who not abiding true doctrine turne to fables 12 And out of these wherewith we haue shewed that the Protestant Church heretofore was not in Popery is refuted also Zanchius Praefat. lib. de Natura Dei where he sayth that their brethren in tymes past liued in some obscure vallies and Mountaines and met at night And D. Fulke lib. de Succes pag. 324. saying that in Europe the Church was by Antichrist thrust into obscure places but least they should be tript in their lying they name neither those mountaines nor vallyes nor places nor their night-owle-brethren nor finally proue any thing L. 14. cont Faust c. 9. But as S. Augustin sayd of Faustus They say it away they neuer seeke to proue it Or as Christ sayd of the aduersary man they sow cockle and depart It sufficeth for these new Pythagorians to powre out lyes like oracles for they assure themselues that with retchlesse men they will find credit of themselues like weeds grow without tilling Hence also is refuted the same Fulke in cap. 10. Apocal. Where he affirmeth his brethren hertofore haue liued in the Alpes in the Appenine Mountaines and in the Hereinian Forest He might better haue sayd they liued in the Wildernes of Vtopia for he proueth nothing L. 16. cont Faust c. 26 O man that I may cry out which S. Augustine thincking only of his owne talke and not thinking of any gainesayer Againe Doest thou not know lib. 4. cont Cres c. 54. or doest thou not feele with the heart of what man soeuer that in dispute where truth is sought where proofe followeth not the talke is vaine and foolish Wherefore now let vs heare their arguments or rather Sophismes wherwith sometymes they endeauour to proue that their Church was in tymes past in Popery The Sophismes wherwith some Protestant make shew to proue that their Church was heretofore in Popery refuted CHAP. X. 1. THE first argument wherewith Protestants would seeme to proue that their Church in former tymes was in Popery is grounded vpon that saying Apocal. 18 Goe out of her Babylon my people Therefore Gods people were in Babylon that is say theâ— in Popery Thus argueth Luther in cap. 12. Genes tom 6. fol. 144. And in cap. 19. fol. 234. The Magdeburgians in Praefat. Centur. 8. Plessy lib. de Eccles cap. 10. and others commonly Yea M. Perkins in his reformed Catholike tract 22. writeth that by this commandement it may be gathered that the true Church is and was long tyme in the Roman Church Wherein he speakes more truly then he meant For the true Church is and was alwayes in the Romane but the Protestant neither is nor was there To the argument I answere that this place can be no sufficient ground of fayth among the Protestans because their Angel their Apostle and Euangelist Martyn Luther denyeth the Apocalipse to be Canonicall Scripture Againe though indeed it be canonicall Scripture yet for the most part it is so obscure as but very few places therof are fit to grouÌ„d any point of fayth as is euident both by the booke it selfe which is well nigh all Mysticall and allegoricall and by the iudgement of the Fathers and confession of Protestants Euseb l. 7. cap. 20. For thus sayth S. Denis Patriarch of Alexandria of the Apocalipse I verily think that almost in euery sentence there lyeth some mysticall and merueilous sense Likewise S. Hierome Epist ad Paulin. The Apocalipse hath as many mysteries as words And S. Augustin In the booke of the Apocalipse many obscure things are told and there are few things therein lib 20. de Ciuit. c. 17. by light whereof the rest may be sought ought with labour And with Protestants D. Andrewes in his answere to Bellarmines Apology cap. 9 Is he ignorant that concerning the Apocalipse nothing certaine or of fayth is yet prescribed by the Church that it may be lawfull to vse one only kind of interpretation and no other as if it were so cleare and euident that it were a hainous offence to leaue it or to dissent any way from it Yea as any may with greatest probability shew the prophesies there to be fulfilled so is it free for any to vse his iudgement to follow his own opinion in explicating them And D. Whitaker Cont. 4. quest 5. cap. 3 pag. 677 It is well inough knowne that Iohn in the Apocalipse speaketh not of cleare and open matters but of obscurt and hidden M. Brightman in his Preface of the Apocalipse In so great abundance of ancient and new expositions the Apocalipse yet as all agree needeth an Apocalipse And M. Sheldon in his booke of the miracles of Antichrist cap. 4. pag. 54 calleth it a darck Mysticall prophecy in which sayth he quot verba tot latent Mysteria And pag. 226 The Apocalipse is a booke wholy mysticall which doth excepting some few doctrinall rules and exhortations to vertue in types figures formes and resemblances describe and foretell the future euents of the
also in that name it cannot be sayd that they are called so in disgrace or contemp Fourthly it appeareth to be false that D. Morton lib. cit and D. Sutliue lib. de Eccles cap. 2. say It is rather to be attributed to a lye then to Luthers desert that Protestants call themselues Lutherans For as we see Luther himselfe called them so and therin they follow his example Neither skilleth it that Luther did once dislike this name because he did oftentimes vse it it was vsuall to Luther to allow and disallow the same thing Fiftly we see it to be false which D. Whitaker writeth cont 2 quest 5. cap. 2 pag. 494 None of vs euer called himselfe a Lutheran we acknowledge not these names nor are we delighted with them This name our aduersaries haue fastened vpon vs only vpon malice and enuie Neither are we called Lutherans but of the Papists False also is that which D. Fulke sayth de Success pag. 188. that they acknowledge no other name proper to their religion but the name of Christians and Catholiques These I say are false for Luther whome D. Whitaker accounteth his father and the Lutherans whome he termeth his brethren in Christ doe call themselues so and are well pleased with that name Besides they are so termed of the Sacramentaries and common people and therfore not of Papists only nor vpon malice and enuie but as Grauer sayd truly for distinction sake and that most iustly For as S. Athanase sayth VVho deriue the origen of their saith from other then Christ iustly carry the surnames of their Authors But Protestants as we haue shewed confesse that they deriue the origen of their faith from Luther Therfore iustly they beare his name 8. Out of all which hath bin rehearsed in this chapter I thus frame my ninth demonstration of this Matter If Luther and many other famous Protestants sometimes indeed some times in plaine words do confesse that Luther was the Author of their Church and religion he ought to be so taken and esteemed But they do soe confesse Ergo. The Minor is euident by all that is sayd in this Chapter And the Maior by what we sayd in the Preface For so many and such principall Protestants knew well the origen of their religion and willingly would not lye to the disgrace and ouerthrow therof That Protestants cannot proue their Church to haue bin before Luthers time by any probable argument or sufficent testimonie CHAP. XV. THE tenth and last demonstration for to proue that Luther was the first Author of the Protestants Church and religioÌ„ I will take from hence that albeit Protestants doe sometimes boldly affirme their Church and religioÌ„ to haue bin before Luthers time Yet they can neuer proue it by any reasonable argument or sufficent testimony Which thing alone would suffice to shew that as I sayd before it is a fable vainely feigned falsely affirmed and fondly beleiued It hath bin alwayes the fashion of heretiques boldly to auouch any thing but few things to proue euen in shew This S. Augustin doth often obserue in the Manichees and Donatists and some of his sayings we haue alleadged before Of Eunomius S. (a) Lib. 2. cont Eunom Basil noteth the same and S. (b) Serm. 6. in psal 118. Ambrose of all heretikes saying Heretiques are wolues they can howle but proue nothing And this doe Protestants confesse For thus D. Whitaker cont 2 quest 5. cap 18 Heretikes are wont to boast and promise truth In Diatrib but not to proue it Of Luther thus writeth Zuinglius tom 2. fol. 473. and 509 One argument he hath in all these matters He sayd it And fol. 447 Luther relyeth only vpon his â—oyes and deuises Fol. 395 Thou puttest forth whatsoeuer the motion of thy affections do appoint and when a reason of thy saying is exacted of thee thou standest naked vnarmed And of the Lutherans thus writeth Erasmus They say it and for that alone they will be belieued Of the Sacramentaryes in like manner Luther writeth in defens verb. Coenae tom 7. fol. 384. One word not easily ouerturneth all these thinges for if you deny them then as butter melteth in the sun so they quaile And the same is euident to all that read the bookes either of Lutherans or Sacramentaryes In the meane tyme they cry to vs that that Pythagoricall word He sayd it hath no other place but in (c) VVhit lib. 2. de script cap. 10. sect 5. Bullenger in comp l. 1. c. 3. Christ and the Scripture that in other it is the proper argument of (d) Vorstius Antibel p. 468. fooles that to affirme any thing beside scripture is to (e) Powel l. 1. de Antic c. 19. trifle that til we proue our affirmatiue they will stand in their (f) Luth. tom 2. fol. 437. negatiue and exact (g) Vorstius l. cit Fulke de success p. 74. demonstrations that is either expresse testimonies of scripture or forcible reason deduced from thence Now we say the same to them They affirme their Church to haue bin before Luthers time We deny it vntil they proue it Neither let them affirme it only which is the proofe of fooles wilfull men but if they cannot bring demonstrations therof at least let them produce some credible testimonie or some effectuall reason and argument Otherwise their beliefe in this matter Scorp c. 11. is as sayth Tertullian a peruerse beliefe which will not belieue thinges proued and belieueth thinges which cannot be proued 2. That in this matter they be destitute of all credible testimonie appeareth sufficently by what hath heretofore bin rehearsed of their owne confessions and now we will shew that they want also all probable reason or argument For all their arguments herein be reduced to this one Our doctrine is the doctrine of Christ Therfore our Church was alwayes since Christ For thus agreeth D. Whitaker cont 2. q. 5. c. 3. p. 498 I vse this argument VVhat Church soeuer keepeth the doctrine preaching of the Apostls she is the Apostolical Church But our Church doth so Therefore c. Of the Maior sayth he no controuersy can be made And cap. 5. p. 505 It was our Church which was in the tyme of the Apostles and afterward vnto the Apostasie But how doe we proue this By this reason that our Church keepeth the same faith and doctrine which the Church in the Apostles time and afterward kept And cont Dureum sect 1 If thou holdest Christs doctrine thou art a Catholike And sect 2 It must needs be the true Church of Christ which keepeth conserueth Christs doctrine deliuered in his word Dancus cont 3. pag. 388. VVith vs is the true Church of God because we restore the true doctrine of Christ Lubbertus lib. 5 de Eccles cap. 1 If the doctrine which our Church professeth be the same which Christ deliuered then our Church is that which Christ instituted D. Fulke lib. de Success pag. 27 Seeing we are
neither did any maÌ„ feele or perceiue himselfe to haue bin a member of such a Church before that time Wherfore as he should manifestly play the Sophister who would goe about to proue by scripture that the sunne appeareth at midnight so likewise doth he who out of scripture endeuoreth to proue that there was a protestant Church before Luther because all mens sense conuince the one as well as the other Besides Protestants write that though faith commaund vs to beleiue things which we see not yet it doth not commaund vs not to beleiue that which we see for otherwise faith should be contrary to sense and none should become faithfull but he should first be senselesse But surely wonderfull is the blindnes or wilfulnesse of Sacramentaries who in the matter of the Eucharist against the most expresse words of Scripture will endeuour to proue by sense that there is not the body of Christ when as the body of Christ there is not sensible And here in the matter of existence of their Church before Luther out of some apparent shew of scripture against the most manifest sense of all men will proue that it was before Luthers time When as a Church is a sensible thing and can be felt either of others or at least of them who are of it How much better and more reasonably should they proceed if in the Eucharist where Christs body is not sensible they would rather giue eare to the most expresse words of scripture then to the suspicions of their seÌ„ses which can iudge of nothing but of sensible accidents and in the matter of the Church whose being is seÌ„sible they would submit their vncertaine if not false expositions of scripture not only to the sense of all men but also the most certaine expositions of the Church and Fathers But this sheweth that in their beleife they are guided neither by seÌ„se nor scripture but out of them both borrow a shew of proofe for that which of their mere wilfulnes or fancy they choose to beleiue 10. Thus thou seest Christian Reader for how vaine a sophisme whose Maior is manifestly false so false as that out of this matter it is generally denyed of Protestants themselues and so improbable also as that it cannot be proued in no shew or colour and whose Minor is more doubtfull then the conclusioÌ„ it selfe and the manner of prouing sophisticall and no other then the proofes of al Heretikes be for how vaine a sophisme I say then the which scarce any can be more vaine Protestants beleiue or rather will seeme to beleiue a thing wholy incredible and in a thing sensible against the sense of al maÌ„kind to wit that before Luther there was a Church which held the whose substance or all the substantiall and fundamentall points of Protestancy nor in so weighty a matter respect either their oâ—â—e consciences or the iudgements of men or tribunal of God or danger of their eternall damnation Surely Homil. cont Sabel that I may end with S. Basils words I moane and bewayle them that for a meane sophisme and counterfait paralogisme they cast themselues into hel 11. Out of all which hath bin sayd in this chapter I thus frame my tenth and last demonstration If no sufficent testimonie nor any probable argument but only one sond sophisme can be brought to proue that the Protestant Church was before Luther this is not to be beleiued of any wise and prudent man But no other proofe can be brought Therfore c. And if it were not before Luther surely he is the Author of it The Maior is euident by it selfe and the Minor by what hath bin brought in this chapter Certainely if euery one of the demoÌ„strations which we haue brought doe not conuince that the Protestant Church and religion was not before Luther at least all of them together manifestly conuince it For by the first fiue demonstrations was shewed that before Luther it was not at all it was in no place was vnknowne of all the world was not seene of any nor had any Pastors And with the rest hath bin demonstrated that after Luther arose no ancienter Protestant did euer appeare and adioyne himselfe to Luther that all the first knowne Protestant had bin Papists afore times that the Protestant company and religion is new that Luther and other plainly confesse that he was autho of that religion and finally that no proofe besides one friuolous fallacie can be brought to shew that such a Church or religion had bin in former times And if yet any Protestant doubt hereof let him at least compare al the foresayd demoÌ„strations wherwith so many wayes out of the very testimonies of Protestants we haue shewed that no such Church was before Luther with their vaine sophisme wherewith they make shew to proue the contrary and he will easily perceiue on whose side this so important truth is like to stand And if he make any account of truth of Gods seruice of his owne reputation or eternall saluation he will forsake the Protestants Church put himselfe in the lappe of the Catholike Church Which as S. Augustine speaketh euen in the testimony of all mankind hath not only beene in all ages since Christ De vtil credendi cap. 17. but also hath had Pastors nor hath been visible only to her owne but to others also and to the whole world and hath most valiantly fought ouercome and triumphed ouer Iewes Pagans Heretikes Schismatiks and all the gates of hell To preferre before this most ancient most glorious church another newly start vp many ages lurking knowne to none not to her owne and destitute of Pastours flocke seat and appearance and in truth feigned and deuised and to omit all other proofes wounded deadly with so many confessions of her owne champions and proued by one only vaine fallacie what other thing were it then to preferre lyes before truth darcknesse before light death before life the synagogue of Satan before the Church of Christ and finally wilfully to cast himselfe headlong into hell VVhat he must obserue who will answere the foresayd demonstration CHAP. XVI SEEING I haue yielded so much to Protestants condescended to so vnequall conditions as that I haue vndertaken to proue that Luther was the author of their Church and religion by the only Confessions of Luther and other Protestants it is reason that if any one of them goe about to answeare my foresayd demoÌ„strations he hould obserue these most iust lawes which I will here set downe and which themselues haue prescribed to others 2. See Iuel defens Apol par 2. c. d. 5. Kemnice Exam. tit de script Epist Monit p. 145. Calu. cont Seruet p. 643. First therfore touching the words of Protestants which I haue alleadged let him either confesse that they are truely cited by me or if he denye that let him not say it only but let him shew that they are supposed falsifyed or so changed as that the sense which I
lyers they gainesayd themselues May a man accused of crime expound figuratiuely his open Confession of that crime because at other tymes he denyed it Againe Protestants themselues reiect this kind of proofe For as we did see the Ministers of the Prince Electour did reprehend those of the Duke of Saxony because they auoyded Luthers testimonies by opposing other places of his And the Ministers of Saxony pag. 303. say It is a friuolous kind of argument He sayd well sometymes therefore heere Besides it will be as equall for me to inferre that Protestants in those testimonies which he produceth did speake figuratiuely because in those which I alleage they manifestly sayd the contrary For to vse Luthers wordes Tom. 2. fol. 220. By this rashnes and licence ye giue your aduersary leaue to turne it against you Certainly if they clearly haue sayd both we cannot deny but they thought both or ye must confesse that your pleasure shall be the rule and square to know what they speake properly what figuratiuely Moreouer Protestants crie that the holy Fathers contradicted themselues How often sayth Luther doe the Fathers fight with themselues Tom. 2. Assert Art 2. cont Cochleum Praefat. Institut They are men that fight against themselues VVe find the Fathers to haue taught contraryes to haue slumbered And Caluin The Fathers doe often skirmish amongst themselues and sometymes fight with themselues The like sayth Melancthon com 1. Lutheri fol. 341. Iacobus Andreae cont Hosium pag. 282. Beza Praefat. in nouum Testamentum and in Schusselburg lib. 4. Theol. Caluin art 32 Pareus lib. 2 de Grat. lib. arbit cap. 14. lib. 4. cap. 4. Polanus part 1. Thes de Notis Eccles Apologia Anglica And D. Whitaker lib. 5. cont Dureum Wherefore either they must shew some priuiledge whereby Protestants be more excepted from contradicting themselues then the holy Fathers in their opinion were or they must not inferre that they sayd not that which they did in places by me alleaged because other where they sayd the contrary Furthermore Hosp to 2. fo 12. Beza in CoÌ„spicil Zuing to 2. fol. 412. 458. 460. because both the Fathers and Protestants also as I shewed in the Preface doe teach that Heretikes are wont to contradict them selues And the Sacramentaries both say and shew by many examples that Luther oftentymes hath gainsayd himselfe And of Sacramentaries Schusselburg lib. 1. Theol. Caluin art 20. writeth That it is their property to contradict themselues 7. Lastly touching the weight of the Protestant Confessions which we produce let him not think that it is any way impaired in that they haue at other tymes sayd the contrary as if in this matter they were not to be belieued because they haue byn taken in two tales For the Confessions of those that are accused be of greatest force against themselues because as I sayd no man willingly lyeth against himselfe neither can these be discredited by any words of theirs spoken in their owne behalfe For what will it auayle a criminall person if he deny an hundred tymes the cryme which he once openly coÌ„fessed And protestants haue not once but oftentyms most plainly most openly most freely confessed those things which I alleage Againe though no credit be to be giuen to a lyer who gainsayth himself in matters for his owne behalfe or against any others neuerthelesse in a matter against himselfe the greatest yea euen the diuels open free Confession ought more to be credited then any other mans testimony whatsoeuer Wherfore we alleage Protestants sayings not as testimonies but as Confessions neither produce them as witnesses but as Criminels confessing the truth against themselues And as Saint Ambrose sayd Serm. 5. de â—â—uctis I admit not the diuels testimony but his Confession so I accept not the Protestants testimonies but their confessions Let their testimony be of no credit either for themselues or for others or against others vndoubtedly it is of great force against themselues As the Latin Oratour sayd Thy testimony which in another mans matter would be light is in thine owne matter because it is against thg selfe most weighty Besides Protestants cric that it is found to produce the Criminels as witnesses in their owne cause and that any witnesse in his owne cause is to be reiected Vorstius Antibel pag. 44â— 456. Iuâ—â— Def. part 2. c. 3. D. 5. VVhitak cont 4. q. 6. c. 2. q. 4. c. 2. Whereupon in the question of Supremacy they refuse the testimonies of all Popes though neuer so ancient neuer so learned neuer so holy How much better may we reiect the testimonies of Protestants when they speak in behalfe of their religion and yet admit their Confessions when they speake against it These therfore lawes of answearing so iust so equall and approued of the ProtestaÌ„ts themselues if he will not keep who goeth about to answeare my foresayd arguments it will easily appeare that in very deed he could not answeare them And if none endeauour to answeare them it will yet more appeare that they can no way answeate them that this kind of dealing with Protestants out of their owne Confessions is the fittest of all to stop their mouthes FINIS The Translatour to the Reader THE Author adioyned hereto a Catalogue of the Protestant Books with their seuerall impressions out of which he gathered the testimonies by him alleaged but because I thought it not needfull for those that read this English copy I haue omitted it The Reader if he please may see it in the Authors Latin Copy THE INDEX OR TABLE OF THE CHAPTERS CONTAYNED IN THESE BOOKES The first booke of the essence or substance of the Protestant Church and Religion CHAPTER 1. That sometymes Protestants admit very few into the Châ—rch and â—equire very many thinges to the making of a member thereof Chap. 2. That at sometymes Proâ—estants account Pâ—pists to be of the Church Chap. 3. Thâ—t sometymes Protestants acknowledge all that deny either fundamentall or other articles of fayth Heretikes Schismatikes and their professed enemies to be members of their Church Chap. 4. That sometymes they do graunt Idolaters Infidels Atheists and Antichrist himselfe to be members of their Church Chap. 5. That Protestants sometymes account all their brethren who vnder the name of Christians oppose themselues against the Pope Chap. 6. That it is necessarily required to a Protestant that he belieue Iustification by only speciall fayth Chap. 7. That it is also necessary to a Protestant to belieue all the fundamentall points of Protestancy Chap. 8. Which are the fundamentall points of Protestancy and what a Protsteant is THE SECOND BOOKE Of the Author or beginner of the Protestant Church and Religion Chap. 1. THat Protestants confesse that their Church and Religion was substantially perished when Luther began Chap. 2. The shiftes wherewith Protestants would delude their confessions of the substantiall destruction of their Church and Religion refuted Chap. 3. That Protestants confesse that all and euery one followed a differenâ— Church and Religion from theâ—rs before Luther began to preach Chap. 4. That Protestants graunt that their church and Religion was quite inuisible b fore Luther appeared Chap. 5. Those which say there were any visible Protestants before Luther refelled Chap. 6 That the Church cannot be so inuisible as Protestants confesse theirs to haue byn before Lut e s tyme. Chap. 7. That Protestants acknowledge that there were no Protestant Pastors before Luther Chap. 8. That the Church cannot be without Pastors Chap 9. That the Protestant Church was no where before Luther arose Chap. 10. The Sophistries wherewith some Protestants would seeme to proue that in tymes past the Protestants Church was in Popery refuted Chap. 11. That all the first knowne Protestants had byn Papists before tymes Chap. 12. That no auncienter Protestant then Luther stept forth and adioyned himselfe to Luthers company when he preached securely Chap. 13. That the Protestant Church Religion is new Chap. 14. That Protestants doe in plaine termes confesse that Luther was the Author and beginner of their Church and Religion Chap. 15. That Protestants cannot proue by any sufficient witnes or any probable argument that their Church was before Luther Chap. 16. What he must obserue who will vndertake to answeare this Worke. FINIS
that it is one that it is the auncientest of all Churches that it is alwayes visible hath alwayes Pastors and the like And of another principle which may be tryed by our sense and experience as that the foresayd properties agree neither to the Protestants nor to the Anabaptists nor to any hereticall company And therfore these kind of demonstrations moue euen the most obstinate heretiques and are euident euen to the most ignorant and vnlearned persons 3. And hence ariseth a fift cause of handling rather questions of Fact then of doctrin because the fruit of debating those questions is reaped with more facility and of far more For wheras few but diuines do themselues perceaue the true meaning of the testimonyes of Scripture wherwith the questions of doctrin are debated as the true meaning of the law few but lawyers theÌ„selues do see all perceaue the meaning of those testimonyes wherwith the questions of fact are disputed Epist dedicat exercit cont Baron who will affoard an atteÌ„tiue eye to see or eare to heare And heer upoÌ„ Casaubon wrote that for to insinuate into the mind of the Reader any opinion now in controuersie Baronius historyes are of greater force D. Flauignie then Bellarmines disputes And sayd also sometyme as one most worthy of credit who heard him told me that whiles he read Bellarmines disputations he began to doubt of all Religion but whiles he perused Baronius Annales he felt himselfe by little little drawn towards Papistry which thing might wel haue befallen him and such others not because Cardinall Bellarmine proueth lesse soundly for the nature of the matter the truth of Catholik Religion in questions of doctrine then Cardinall Baronius doth the same in questions of Fact but because such is the nature of the testimonyes wherewith the truth of Catholike fayth in questions of doctrine is proued that they are lesse euident then the testimonyes wherewith the Catholike truth in matters of Fact is proued and also haue many thinges which seeme to be contrary and repugnant to them Whereupon it falleth out that some hearing or reading controuersies of doctrine disputed between Catholikes and Heretikes and not being able of theÌ„selues to discern betwixt truth shew of truth either follow neither party but become vncertaine or Atheistes or content with any shew of truth take that part to which any affection of their will doth draw them Whereas none by hearing or reading controuersies of Fact becommeth not more confirmed in the Catholik faith or more auerted from heresy And therefore Tertullian counsaileth vs Praescrip cap. 1â— not to dispute with Heretikes out of Scripture by which questions of doctrine are disputed but aduiseth vs to appeale to antiquity succession and such like which concerne questions of fact 4. Lastly though the fruit of disputing both those kind of questions were equall yet sith the Author by order of nature goeth before the thing whereof he is Authour according to the order of Nature we ought to intreate of the Author of Protestancy before we dispute of Protestancy it selfe For as well sayth Tertullian nothing but God alone is without beginning which how much it goeth before in the state of all thinges so much ought it to go before in the handling of them Lib 5. cont Mar. Lib 3 cont Mar. that the state may be knowne And other where Nothing is knowne before the beginning is knowne Wherfore I will begin my first dispute concerning the Protestant Religion of the Authour therâ—of Yet before I do that I must set downe and determine what a Protestant or the Protestant Church and Religion is and what is necessary for one to be a Protestant and discouer the vncertainty of Protestants And this much touching the matter which I haue made choice of to handle in this little worke and the causes thereof VVhy proued only out of Protestants 5. As for the manner wherwith I vndertake to discusse this question of Fact whether Luther was the first Author beginner of the Protestant Church and Religion I purpose to proue it only out of the confessions of Luther himselfe and of the three sorts of Protestants to wit Lutherans who professe to follow Luther in all points of doctrine Sacramentaries who notoriously dissent from him touching the reall presence of Christs body in the Sacrament and our English Protestants who differ from both the former at least in discipline gouerment of their Church because this kind of proofe out of their owne wordes I find to be both necessary and most effectuall with Protestants Necessary because of this question of Fact neither the Scripture Necessary or the Fathers say any thing as also because seeing Protestants deny part of the scripture and interprete the rest as they please and will not stand to the sentence of the Church Councels or Fathers account reason Sophistrie contem me the testimonies of Catholique writers they haue left nothing but their own coÌ„fessioÌ„s by which we may dispure with them And I pray God they do giue place to their own most frequent and most plaine confessions and not delude them by voluntary and friuolous interpretations for then hope may be that there wil be some end of these controuersies At least we shall reape this profit by this labour that by it shall be manifest to all that either Protestants will heare no testimony admit no iudgement no not their owne which is a most euident argument of a most desperat cause or that they shall be condemned by their owne verdict sentence or lastly that there can be no forme of speech so plaine no words so cleare no sentence so manifest which they with their faigned figures deuises will not wrest frustrate and delude which is in effect to disanull al kind of proofe which is taken out of words or testimonies whatsoeuer For I will bring so plaine testimonies of theirs as plaine can scarce or not at all be deuised I will bring so many as themselues will require no more I will bring so weighty as themselues will demaund none more weighty I wil bring them also most freely and often iterated and repeated lastly I will bring not only those which indirectly and by consequence proue that which I would but those also that especially oftenest which directly testify that which they are brought to confirme Wherfore either they will not delude these words of theirs or they wil delude all wordes whatsoeuer And either they will not refuse these their owne testimonies and confessions or they will reiect all testimonies and iudgements whatsoeuer which is in effect to confesse that their cause is most desperate and most worthy to be reiected and condemned of all Most effectuall 1. This maÌ„ner also of proofe is most effectuall for what can be of greater force to conuince a man then his owne iudgement and acknowledgement of the truth Surely vnlesse a man will professe himselfe to be en enemy
of truth By reasoÌ„ and of the number of them who see good and follow bad he must needs imbrace that truth which himselfe confesseth Experience also sheweth the same By experience For when our Sauiour could neither by infinite miracles nor euident scriptures stop the mouthes of the Iewes he so conuinced them out of their owne words that as the Euangelist writeth they answeared him not a word nor from that day any durst aske him a question And the Donatists Matt. 22. when they made answeare to the Catholikes argumeÌ„ts taken out of scripture were so intangled in their owne fact touching the Maximinists as sayth S. (d) In collat 3. diei c. 11. Augustine they euer more stood dumbe at thatâ— And now we see that Protestants are tongue-tied at no sort of bookes so much as at those which are composed of their owne testimonies This manner of dealing vsed the holy Fathers against the Pagans as is to bee seen in Clement By the Fathers Tertullian Origen Cyprian Arnobius â—actantius Augustin and others and against heretiques also as appeareth in the sayd S. Augustin S. Hierome and others most often and the same they most highly commend For thus writeth (e) In Euseb l. 7. c. 6. S. Denis of Alexandria It helpeth me much that I can disproue them out of their owne wordes S. (f) Orat. de S. Basil Gregorie Nazianzen It is the greatest cunning and wisdome of speach to bind the Aduersary with his owne wordes And (g) De Trini c. 130 Tertullian of Nouatian It is a strong kind of proofe which is taken of the aduersary that truth may be proued eueÌ„ by the enemyes of truth S. (h) Lib. 2. cap. 53. Ireneus We often disgrace them by their owne doctrine And (i) Lib. cont Secund c. 3. S. Augustine Neither will I bring against thee any other sentences for to shew the errour of Manichee then out of thyne owne epistle Which worke of his he (k) Lib. 2. Retract c. 10. preferreth before al the other which he wrote against that heresy Nay the same holy Fathers account this manner of dealing with heretiks necessary and preferre it before all others For thus sayth S. Ireneus (l) Lib. 1. cap. 35. It is needfull to disproue the Valentinians by their Mothers Fathers and Ancestours And in another (m) Lib. 4. c. 14. place That is a true and vnanswerable proofe which bringeth attestation froÌ„ the aduersaryes themselues And (n) Lib. de anima c. 3. Tertullian The aduersaryes testimony is eftsoones necessary Againe I must strike them with their own weapons And (o) Atha l. de carne Christi S. Athanasius who was most tryed in combates with heretikes Against wranglers we must oppose their owne arguments in which sayth he I haue the greatest hope of victory S Chrysostome (p) Hom. 3. in epist ad Tit. also We must conuince them by this when we turne their owne ill sayings against themselues as often as we make those who were the famousest amongst them their accusers And lastly (q) Lib. 1. cont Petil. c. 27. S. Augustine the most fortunate champion of the Church against heretiks seeing that the Donatists could be euidently conuinced by their owne dealing with the Maximinists exhorteth Catholikes to let alone all other kind of arguments and still to vrge this only Remember sayth he this only fact of the Max minists cast this in their faces answere to al obiections by the Maximinists alone And (r) Ibid. cap. 18. againe I will not leaue this only fact which God hath put before their eyes to stop their mouthes and to amend them if they be wise or to consound them if they remayne obstinate And in like manner when he saw that the Donatists cause was quite ouerthrowne by that saying of theirs Neither one cause doth preiudice another nor one person another he thus speaketh vnto Catholiques (s) Sermi 22. de verb. Apostol I request you I beseâ—ch you for Christs sake that you remember it speake it and haue it euer in your mouthes There could not be pronounced on our behalfe a briefer surer and plainer sentence Thus you see how greatly the Fathers esteeme of this kind of dealing with heretikes and how earnestly they vrge vs for to vse it 7. And Protestants ought the more to allow this kind of proceeding with them because they much commend it and preferre it before all others Luther There (t) De ser arbit fol. 442. is no stronger proofe then his owne confession who is accused and his testimony against himselfe And againe No (u) Inc. 1. 1. Pet. fol. 449. man can conuâ—nce a lyer better then by his own words Heâ—husius The (x) Lib. de Coma. shâ—rtest way of al to conuince an aduersary is that whiâ—h is taken out of his owne confession wherwith he openly acknowledgeth that which is obiected Lucas (y) Epist Euchar. Osiander The confession and testimoÌ„y of the aduersary is of greatest authority Peter (z) Loc. tit de Iudaeis fol. 3â—0 Martyr Surely amongst other testimonyes that is of greatest weight which is giuen by the enemies D Bancroft Let (a) Suruey c. 8. pag. 14â— vs take hold of that which they haue graunted You may be bold to build vpon it for a truth that they are so coÌ„strayned to yield vnto D (b) Cont. 292. c. 14. Whitaker It must needs be a strong argument which is taken out of the confession of the Aduersaryes For the testimony of the aduersaryes is of force against themselues And (c) Praef. in Cant. againe It is a notable matter and encreaseth much the triumph for to be proued by the testimony of the aduersaries And D Morton in the Epistle dedicatory of his answere to the Protestants Apology VVhich kind of assistance of learned aduersaryes the Apologists theÌ„selues haue layd down for the greatest reason of satisfaction we do accordingly admit Nay they begin to vse this kind of arguing against vs and vaunt much therof VVho may not sayth the sayd D. (d) Apol. l. 1 cap. 25. Differences betwixt Protest manner of dealing ours Morton iustly congratulate the Protestants happines whome truth it selfe proceeding out of their aduersaries mouths doth patronize 8. But by their leaue there are many and great differences betweene their and our kind of proceeding in this matter First many of the Catholikes whome they produce against vs wrote before their Religion was risen therfore we answere that of them which S. Hierom answered of the ancient Fathers who liued before Arius appeared Lib. 2. contr Rufin Before Arius sayth he arose in Alexandria like a noon-tide Diuell they spake some things innocently and not so warily which cannot escape the obloquie of certaine peruerse men And which S. Augustin answered of S. Chrysostom when the Pelagians alleadged his testimony Discoursing sayth he in the Catholike Church Lib. 1. cont Tul. c. 6. he
written word of God And his Maiesty in his Monitory epistle pag. 97. English ProtestaÌ„tâ— in Latin I call God to witnes that I hold him not for a Christian who in this learned age belieueth that to wit that Enoch and Elias are to come And D. Morton in his answere to the Protestants Apology lib. 4. c. 2. sect 3. after he had sayd that in a Church albeit corrupted with errour and superstition yet if it do not ruinate the foundation the erroneous superstitious professors may be saued adddeth VVhich notwithstanding we must so vnderstand as that the errour and superstition do not proceed from knowledge but from ignorance which ignorance is not affected but simple Thus we see that Protestants somtymes confesse that true fayth is like a graine or Mathematicall point which cannot be parted that the articles of fayth are one copulatiue and cannot be deuided that who so obstinatly denieth one article belieueth truly none that the obstinate deniall of any one poynt of fayth is sufficient to damne or to make an heretik and no brother of the faythfull or member of the Church And finally that she is no true Church who willfully maintaineth any one thing repugnant to the Ghospell or word of God Which indeed is most true and is the doctrine of the holy Fathers and Catholiks and I would to God Protestants would constantly stand vnto it 7. By all which hath byn rehearsed in this chapter out of Protestants it appeareth how many sortes of Christians Protestants do sometymes exclude out of the Church namely Papists Anabaptists Arians al Heretiks all Schismatiks all those who deny any fundamentall point of fayth and finally al who obstinatly deny any point whatsoeuer of fayth or of the word of God And how many things they sometymes require to the making and being of a Protestant to wit that he belieue all and euery point of their fayth and obstinatly dissent in none To which their doctrine if they would as I haue sayd alwayes constantly stand it would easily appeare first how small a company the Protestants Church is and how little it is spread through the world and much lesse Catholike or vniuersal seeing there is no Prouince nor scarse any citty in which all Protestants agree amongst themselues in al points of their doctrine Secondly it would easily appeare that the Protestant Church was neuer before Luther seeing there is no apparence that before him there was any company of Christians who in all points of doctrine agreed with Protestants But ProtestaÌ„ts as I sayd in the Preface accommodate their doctrine and opinions to tymes and occasions And the tymes when they deny Papists to be of the Church are when they exhort them to leaue the Roman Church or excuse their owne reuolting from her or when they dehort others from returning to her For at all these tymes it serueth to their purpose to deny that Papists are of the Church or in the way of saluation which at other tymes as we shall see in the next chapter they are content to graunt And the tymes when they exclude Anabaptists Arians Heretiks Schismatiks and all that deny either fundamentall or other articles of fayth out of the Church are when either the euidence of truth enforceth them thereto or when they are ashamed to acknowledge such vgly monsters for brethren and members of their Church or would exhort such as haue left their company to returne vnto them and keep others from forsaking them or finally would brag of the agreement and purity in doctrine of their company For at those tymes it serueth their turne to renouÌ„ce all the foresayd kind of men whom at other tymes especially when we demaund of them who were of their Church before Luther they are most willing to receiue as their kind brethren diligently scraping gathering such shreeds and clouts when they perceiue their owne nakednes and beggary which themselues when they thought they were rich and had no need thereof most disdainfully cast on the dunghills as shall appeare in the chapters following CHAP. II. That Protestants sometymes account Papists for members of their Church IN the former chapter we haue seene how sparing Protestants sometyms be in admitting others into their Church now we shall see how liberall they be at other tymes in so much that they graunt not only all those whome in the former chapter they reiected but also their professed enemies idolaters Infidells Atheists Antichrist himselfe and all whosoeuer vnder the name of Christians impugne the deeds or doctrine of the Pope to be their brethren their fellowes and members of their Church This we will shew concerning the Papists in this chapter and of the others afterward 1. That Protestants sometymes do acknowledge Papists to be in the Church is manifest First by their open confession thereof LutheraÌ„s For in the preface of their Confession of Auspurg speaking of themselues and Papists Papists serue vnder christ they say VVe are all soldiers vnder one Christ And Luther in his epistle against the Anabaptists as Caluin in his booke against the Chaunter of Lions and D. Whitaker in the place hereafter cited do confesse writeth The kernel of Christianity in Popery That in Popery is true Christianity yea the kernell of Christianity and many pious and great Saints Againe If Christianity be vnder the Pope then it must be the body and member of Christ And vpon the 28. chapter of Genesis VVe confesse that there is a Church among the Papists because they haue Baptisme absolution the text of the Ghospell and many godly men are among them Caluin in his 140. epistle to Soziâ— I think I haue sufficiently proued that in Popery there remayneth some Church albeit halfe destroyed and if you will broken and deformed And vpon the 2. câ—ap of the 2 epistle to the Thessalonians The Body of Christ I confesse it is the temple of God in which the Pope ruleth and he calleth it the very sanctuary of God And de vera reform pag. 332. SacrameÌ„taries â—ayth that S Paul affirmeth that Antichrist whom he will haue to be the Pope shall sit in the temple of God And lib. de scandalis pag. 103 In the midest of Gods temple And lib. cont Precentorem pag. 372 In the very sanctuary of God And Respons ad Sadolet In the midest of Gods sanctuary Surely this is to graunt that the Romane Church in which the Pope sitteth is the very temple and very sanctuary of God And in his answeare to Sadolet VVe deny not those to be Churches of Christ which you gouerne In his 4. booke of Institutions chap. 2. num 11. he sayth that among Papists Gods couenant remayned inuiolable Not yet killed And num 12 VVe deny not that there are Churches among them Neither deny we but there remaine Churches vnder his the Pope he meaneth tyranny but which he hath almost killed Iunius in his book of the Church cap. 17. writeth that the Popish
that before Luthers tyme they seeke their Church in Popery and amongst the Papists 2. Secondly I prooue this same out of that which diuers tymes they graunt that the Roman Church holdeth all the fundamentall articles of fayth That Papists hold the foundation of fayth which themselues commonly teach as hereafter shall be shewed to suffice to make a Church Their Confession of Auspurg in the 21. chapter hath these wodrs This is almost the summe of doctrine among vs in which as it may seeme there is nothing which differeth from scripture or from the Catholike Church or from the Roman Church LutheraÌ„s so farre as it appeareth by writers All the dissention is about some few abuses which haue crept into Churches without certaine authority Whereby we see that the first and auncientest Protestants The suÌ„me of faith in Popeâ—y publikly professed that they differed not from the Roman Church in the summe of doctrine but that all their disagreement was about some few abuses And albeit the wordes be somewhat altered in the printed copies yet that they were in the originall copie which was presented to Charles 5. Emperour is manifest by Fabritius who repeateth them so out of that copie by Pappus in his 3 defence against Sturmius who so also reporteth them by Zanchius in his dispute between two Deuines where he repeateth these wordes out of the said Confession There is nothing in our doctrine which differeth from the church of Rome as far as it is knowne by writers and finally by Hieremias Patriarch of Constantinople in his censure vpon the said Confession it being sent vnto him by the Protestants where he thus writeth to them Yee say yee agree in all things with the Latins Cocleus anno 1â—28 VseÌ„berg causa 17. and that the difference betwixt you and them is only touching some abuses likwise Luther in his foresaid epist cont Anabap VVe confesse that in Popery is much good belonging to Christians yea all Christian good All ChristiaÌ„ good to wit that in Popery is the true Scripture true baptisme the true Sacrament of the altar the true keyes for remission of sinnes the true office of preaching the true Catechisme as the Lords prayer the ten commaundements and the articles of faith Whereupon Schusselburg in his 8. tome of the Catalogue of heretikes pag. 439. saith VVe deny not but that Luther sayd that all Christian goods are in Popery What was needfull to saluation and came from thence vnto vs Iohn Regius in his consideration of the censure c Albeit the Ministery of Papists be corrupted with many traditions and inuentions of men yet it had that which was necessary to saluation to wit the Canonicall scripture the Creed c. Leonard Crenâ—zen The bishop of Rome holdeth the same foundation of the Catholike faith 1. Cor. 3. The fouÌ„dation of Fayth which I and the Catholik Apostolik Church do acknowledge although there be some difference of opinions in certaine circumstances Thus the Lutherans Of the Sacramentaries SacrameÌ„taries Iunius in his 5. controuersy lib. 3. cap. 19. writeth thus of Papists Lutherans and Caluinists VVe agree in the essentiall foundation Essentiall foundation Zanchius in his foresayd preface In despite of the Diuell that Church of Rome hath kept the principall grounds of fayth Principall grounds of fayth Boysseul also in his forenamed confutation pag. 79 VVe acknowledge that it is pure in the cheife articles of Christian Religion And Vorstius in his Anti-bellarmin pag. 188. It is manifest that there are many in that company of Papists who rightly hold the fundamentall points The fundamentall points of our Religion And of the English Protestants his Maiesty in his monitory epistle pag. 148. plainly intimateth that Papists do stick vnto the auncient foundations of the old true Catholike and Apostolike fayth M. Hooker in his 3. booke of Ecclesiasticall policy pag. 128. sayth Touching those maine points of Christian truth wherein they constantly still persist English ProtestaÌ„ts we gladly acknowledge them to be of the family of Iesus Christ D. Whitaker in his 2. cont quest 5. cap. 14 Papists haue the Scripture Baptisme Catechisme the articles of fayth the ten commandments the Lords prayer The main points and those things came to vs from them D. Whitgift in his answere to the admonition pag. 40 Papistry confesseth the same articles of fayth that we do although not sincerely And pag. 62 Papists belieue the same articles of fayth that we do M. Perkins in the preface of his reformed Catholike By a reformed Catholike I vnderstand any one that holds the same necessary heads of Religion with the Roman Church The necessary heads yet so as he pares of and reiects all errours in doctrine whereby the sayd religion is corrupted D. Morton in his answere to the Protestants Apology lib. 3. cap. 18. sect 1 VVe may graunt that God may cooperate with them to the conuersion of Infidels The ghospell of saluation so far as the Ghospell of Christ which is the power of God to saluation is preached by them D. White in defence of his way cap. 38 In the substantiall articles of fayth we agree with them Lastly D. Hall in his foresayd booke sayth The substantiall articles that the Romane Church is one touching the common principles of fayth Those things which she holdeth together with vs make a Church As farre as she holdeth the foundation she is a church 3. Thirdly the same point is proued The articles which make a Church by that they graunt some to be saints whom they acknowledge also to haue liued and died Papists For of S. Bernards holines thus writeth Luther vpon the 4. cap. to the Galathians Bernard a man so holy pious chast c. The Apology of the Confession of Auspurg in the chapter of answere to the ArgumeÌ„ts Antony Bernard That they say some Papists be saints Francis Dominicke and other holy Fathers Brentius in his Apology for the Confession of Wirtenberg pag. 297 I iudge Bernard to haue byn a man indued with great piety and to liue now happily with Christ Caluin in his 4. booke of institutions c. 7. num 22 Gregory and Bernard holy men Vorstius in Anti-bellarmin pag. 181 VVe graunt Bernard indeed to haue byn pious Lubbert in his 6. booke of the church c. 7 VVe think Bernard to haue byn truly holy D. Whitaker cont 3. quest 5. c. 14 I take Bernard to haue byn holy indeed And D. Morton in his Apology part 2. lib. 2. c. 23 I confesse Bernard was a Saint And as plainly do they confesse that he was a Papist For thus Luther in the place now cited Let vs imagine that Religion and discipline of the ancient Popery to flourish now and to be obserued with that rigour with which the Eremits Hierome Augustin Bernard Francis and many others obserued it And in his booke of abrogating Masse Bernard Bonauenture Francis Dominicke with their
followers not knowing the Pope did honour his Kingdome belieuing all things thereof to be good and iust and of God The Magdeburgians in their 12. Century col 1637. speake thus of him He worshipped the God of Maâ—zim they meane the masse till the last moment of his life And in the next columne He was a most eager defender of the seat of Antichrist Melancthon in his booke of the Church and vpon the 14. cap. to the Romanes He yelded to many errours as to the Abuses of the Masse to the Popes power to vowes to the worship of Saints Danaeus in his controuersies pag. 313. sayth He approued the Popery M. Iewell in his defence of the Apology 21. art diuis 8. pag. 450 Bernard was a monck and liuing in a tyme of such corruption and being caryed with the tempest and violence of the same must c. Bale in his 2. century of writers pag. 177 He increased the authority of the bishop of Rome as much as he could D. Feild vpon the 14. of S. Matthew Bernard was deceiued with the errour of Peters superiority And D. Whitaker in his answere to the 7. reason of Father Campian Bernard whome alone your church in many yeares hath brought forth a holy man And in his 4. controuersy quest 2. c. 17. he affirmeth that he endeauoureth to confirme the Popes superiority Seing therefore by the confession of Protestants he was both an earnest Papist vnto his dying day for all his life tyme he honoured masse beleiued the Popes superiority in which two points Protestants say the essence and soule of a Papist doth consist and briefly belieued all things belonging to the Pope to come from God and also was a very holy man in his life tyme and now a blessed Saint in heauen they must needs confesse that euen the most vehemeÌ„t Papist may be of the church because neither true sanctity nor saluatioÌ„ can be found out of the church Whereunto the Protestants in the late Conference at Ratisbon Sess 13. say If they were truly saints then their errour was not of that kind which ouerturneth the foundation For it implieth contradiction that one should be a true Saint and yet foster errour which ouerturneth the ground of saluation In like sort they graunt diuers others to be true saints and yet withall Papists but for breuities sake I will content my selfe with this example of S. Bernard But I will not omit to say that they confesse our Christian forefathers before Luthers tyme to haue byn Papists from the top to the toe from the first to the last as shall be shewed in the 2. booke cap. 3. and notwithstanding dare not say that they be damned yea confesse them to be saued Luther in his booke of priuate masse enquireth what is to be thought of our auncestors who haue founded innumerable Masses and answereth I cannot tell certainly But vpon the 41. cap. of Genesis he sayth Doubtlesse many haue byn saued vnder Popery And vpon the 5. of S. Matthew Our Popish forefathers saued Neither do we condemne the Christians who liued vnder the Pope Brentius in the preface of his Recognition VVe doubt not but that many haue obtayned true saluation in Popery Osiander in his Manual englished VVe do not condemne our godly ancestors who liued in tyme of Popery Zuinglius in his actes of disputation fol. 638 It is impious to pronounce our ancestors to be damned D. Morton in his Apology part 1. l. 1. c. 90 Be this impiety far from vs to adiudge our ancestours to damnation And D. White in his defence pag. 356 I neuer denyed the church of Rome to be the visible church of God wherein our ancestors possessed the true faith and were saued But how could our Popish ancestors be not damned how could they be saued vnles they were in the true church out of which euen Protestants themselues confesse that there is no saluation That they confesse true mission and Pastors in Popery but only damnation 4. Fourthly I prooue that Protestants cannot deny Papists to be of the true Church because they oftentymes both by word and deed acknowledge the vocation and Mission of Popish Pastors to be lawfull and sufficient to make a true Pastour of the Church Luther vpon the 5. cap. of S. Matthew VVe confesse that amongst Papists are pulpits Baptisme Sacraments and all other things belonging to Apostolicall vocation and function And in his booke or priuate masse There remaineth in Popery Vocation Ordination Ministery of the word and keyes to bind and loose Againe Christ hath conserued his Ministery vnder Popery And as is before cited There is all Christian good in Popery the keyes the charge of preaching c. Iohn Regius in considerat Censurae pag. 93 Although it be true that the Popish ministery was depraued with sundry traditions and deuises of men yet had it those things which were necessary to saluation Bucer in Rom. 8. pag. 427. telling vs by what authority and right he preached Protestantisme sayth I had by lawfull meanes already attayned the charge to preach Christ and to teach those things which he commanded Iunius lib. singulari de eccles cap. 17 God calleth the church wherein Popery raigneth by his spirit by his word by the publike instrument of that holy marriage by the ministery by sacred affaires actions On Gods part these things are apparantly in that church Plessy lib. de Eccles cap. 11. p. 361. The vocation of our men is the same that they the Papists boast of Pag. 362 Our aduersaries and our first ministers had the same Ecclesiasticall calling Boysseul in confutat Spondaei pag. 486 It is no reproach for our Pastors to haue issued out of yours or as you say to haue had their vocation from yours Moulins lib. 1. de vocat cap. 5. pag. 20. endeauouring to vphold the calling of their first Reformers sayth They haue that calling which is ordinary in the church of Rome Pa. 21 They had their calling of the Pope cap. 9. pag. 36 They haue the same ordinary calling which our aduersaries haue And lib. 2. tract 1. cap. 1. pag. 172 The calling they had in the church of Rome sufficed to bind them to preach And pag. 173 Their commission was no other then the ordinary charge Serauia in defen Grad minist cap. 2. pag. 31. VVe ought not to thinke that in the church of Rome ecclesiasticall ministery is decayed And pag. 33 I like not their frowardnes who acknowledge no ministery in the church of Rome but deeme all that is there diuelish Ibid Beza doth exagitate Popish orders ouer much wherein I feare least he preiudice a good cause D. Whitaker contr 4. quest 5. cap. 3. pag. 682 The Papists haue some sort of ministery and some preaching of the word which doubtles auaileth many to saluation And other where as is before cited Among the Papists there are the keyes the office of preaching c. M. Bell in his first booke of the Popes funerall cap.
man Sonis Respons ad Spondeum c. 10. pag. 365. Heretiks are within the Church Lubbert lib. 2. de Eccles cap. 3 It is manifest that heretikes are some as yet in the visible Church some also in the church of the elect Iunius lib. 3. de Eccles cap. 4 Heretiks absolutely are of the Church vnlesse they be such as ouerthrow fundamentall articles of religion Cap. 3 n. â—â— Bullinger teacheth the same Decad. 2. serm 8. and it is the common doctrine of the Protestants who as is before proued exclude none from being members of their Church that deny only such articles as are not fundameÌ„tall Howbeit some of them vpon hereticall priuiledge as Tertullian speaketh will not haue such called heretiks Lib. de carne Coâ—isti cap. â—5 being indeed more ashamed of the name then of the thing it selfe Zanchius likewise lib. 1. epist ad Dudit pag. 150. sayth that hereticall and Schismaticall sects are within the Church Tilenus in Syntag. disput 14 Heretiks euen those that subuert the foundation and Schismatiks in regard of outward Communion are in the Church till either of themselues they go to the enemies side or are cast out by the lawfull iudgement of the Church And D. Feild in his first booke of the Church cap 14 Seing God gaue the power of the keyes and the dispensation of his word and Sacraments only to his Church if Heretiks be not of the Church they do not then baptize And cap. 7 They that are partakers of the heauenly calling and sanctified by the profession of diuine truth and the vse of the meanes of saluation are of very diuers sortes as heretikes Schismatiks hypocrites and those that professe the whole sauing truth in vnity and sincerity of a good and sanctified heart All these are partakers of the heauenly calling and sanctified by the profession of truth and consequently are all in some degree and sort of that society of men whome God calleth out vnto himselfe separateth from Infidels which is rightly named the Church D. Whitaker contr 4. quest 5. c. 3. pag 679 All heretiks are within the Church Hooker in his 3. booke of Ecclesiasticall policy pag. 128 VVe must acknowledge euen heretikes themselues to be though a maymed part yet a part of a visible Church Againe If an Infidell should pursue to death an heretike professing Christianity only for Christian Prosession sake could we deny vnto him the honour of Martyrdome By which words it is plaine that they admit heretiks not only into the visible Church but into the inuisible also or company of the elect and predestinate to saluation And D. Andrews in his answere to Bellarmines Apology cap. 5. pag. 121. denyeth that the words Catholik and Heretike are opposite wherefore vnlesse he will debarre and shut out some Catholiks from the Church he must needs giue admittance to heretiks seing by his owne verdict they may be Catholiks D. White in defence of his way cap. 38. pag. 367 The second sort of the militant Church are hypocrites and vnsound members that are not called effectually but disobey the truth whereof they make profession such are heretiks schismatiks c. Touching their acceptations of Schismatiks besides what hath byn already alleaged D. Feild in his first booke of the Church cap. 13. Writeth thus They challenge Schismatiks The departure of Schismatiks is not such but that notwithstanding their schisme they are and remaine parts of the Church of God Iunius in the place before quoted layeth clayme to those Schismatikes VVho sayth he seuer not themselues from the whole Church but only from a part thereof But D. Mortoâ— in the 1. part of his Apology lib. 1. cap. 2. sayth absolutely without any acception or restraint at all Schismatiks are of the Church And lib. 2. cap. 10. pag. 288 Variances sayth he and schismes do not betoken the false Church And D. Willet in his Synopsis cont 2. quest 3. pag. 104 VVe say that Schismatiks though they hold some false points of doctrine yet if their errours be not fundamentall and if they retaine the purity of doctrine in all points necessary to saluation and the administration of the Sacraments may make a particular Church by themselues These are their acknowledgements touching Heretikes and Schismatikes in generall They acknowledge the Grecians Let vs now descend to particularities and see the courteous admission they giue to some of them by name 8. The Grecians and other Easterne Schismatiks yea heretiks to for the most part find that fauour at their hands as they vouchsafe to account them members of their Church His Maiesty epist ad Card. Peron pa. 13 hath thus The Churches of Rome Greece Antioch Aegipt Aethiopia Muscouy and others more are members of the Catholike church D. Whiâ—e in defence of his way c. 37. pag. 355 The visible churches of Greece Aethiope Armenia and Rome with the nations contayned therin haue in them the true church of God wherin men may be saued D. Morton in his answere to the Protestants Apology lib. 4. cap. 2. sect 7. sayth that the Assyrian Churches keep the true foundation of Christian fayth The same especially of the Grecians teacheth Luther tom 2. lib. de captiu Babylon fol. 65. in Assert art 37. fol. 114. Innius cont 4 lib. 4. cap. 6. Sedeel Respons ad Thes Posnan cap. 12. D. Whitaker lâ—b 7. cont Duraeum sect 3. Bucanus loco 41. quest 5 D. Feild lib. 3. de Eccles cap. 5. 28. D. Fulke de Success pag. 120. Burhill pro Tortura Torti c. 15. and others 9. And sometymes they are not lesse free-harted towards westerne heretike Melancthon in locis à Maulio editiâ—tit de Eccles pag. 491. writeth that two girles who were burnt as he sayth for Anabaptisme They challenge the Anabaptists held the foundation of sayth and died in a good Confâ—ssion And Zuinglius tom 2. lib. de Author sedit fol. 134. seq exhorting his fellowers not to reuolt from his doctrine for the debates and quarels between the Protestants and the Anabaptists calleth both parts most learned and sonnes of the same Father Neither must thou sayth he giue any man way to shake and weakeâ— thy sayth although thou see that men of the greatest learning moue disputes and fall by the cares with much â—agernesse of contention touching externall matters he meanes baptisme but let this be rather thy stedfast persuasion that by the Sonne of God we are all made sonnes of the same Father Againe Neither am I wont to speake these things for that I am so greatly moued with the baptisme of children And ibidem lib. de Baptismo fol. 96. he sayth that baptisme is a matter of ceremony which the church may omit or take quite away Oecolampadius in his 2. booke of epistles p. 363. sayth baptisme is an externall thing which by the law of charity may be dispensed withall And Musculus in locis tit de haeresi pag. 605. reckons the Anabaptists amongst those who
by externall profession they are all whose marke of recogniscance hath in it those things which we haue mentioned yea although they be impious idolaters wicked heretikes persons excommunicable Againe Those whose knees were bowed vnto Baal euen they were also of the visible Church of God Boysseul in Confut. p. 822 answering to the place where Spondeus obiected that if the Church of Rome be an Idolatresse as Boysseul had auouched it is not the Church of Christ makes this reply And why not as well as Israel And D. Whitaker Cont. 2. quest 3. cap. 3. pag. 475. saith Although this errour Idolatry in adoring the calfe were most grieuous yet it destroyed not the whole nature of the Church 2. And Infidells That they sometymes comprize also Infidels in the Church is manifest first because they affirme that such may be saued For M. Fox in his Martyrologe pag. 495. reporteth that a certaine Protestant Martyr whole learning piety zeale he greatly commendeth taught that a Turke Saracen or any Mahamet an whatsoeuer may be saued if he trust in one God and keep his law M. Bale in his 6. Century pag. 464. bids vs beware that we condemne not rashly any Turke And Zuinglius tom 1. lib. de prouid fol. 370. sayth It is not vniuersally true that who so hath no fayth is damned Againe As for the damnation of vnbelieuers it is meant only of those who heard and did not belieue And tom 2. declarat de peccat orig fol. 118 This saying who so doth not belieue shall be condemned must in no wise be absolutely vnderstood but it is to be vnderstood of those See Homiâ—â— in Specim Contr. art 27. who hauing heard the ghospell would not belieue And ibidem in exposit fidei fol. 559. he sayth that in heauen Christians shall meet many heathens whose names he there sets downe and amongst the rest that cruel Theseus and Magician Numa the founder of heathenish superstitions amongst the Romans Which opinion of his those of Zurich in Apolog. Gualter in prefat tom 1. Zuinglij Simler in vita Bullengeri and others seeke to patronize and make good Now it were folly and madnes to auouch that these men were of the number of the faythfull They belieue then that infidels may be saued But S. Augustin was of a farre different beliefe lib. 4. cont Iul. cap. 3. where he writes thus VVhat one of those who would be accounted Christians will say an Infidell is iust be it euen Fabritius 3. Secondly their doctrine touching the predestinate carrieth with it a necessary acknowledgement of their Communion with Infidels For they teach that who so is predestinate is alwayes a member of the Church Hus his first article condemned by the Councel of Constance was this The predestinate remayneth euer a member of the Church And Luther tom 2. in Assert art 30 I say the opinions of Iohn Hus are all Euangelicall and Christian Againe I admit all the condemned articles of Iohn Hus. And tom 1. in disput Lypsic fol. 254. he maintaineth openly this article of Hus The Church is the whole multitude of the predestinate Vorstius in Anti-bellarmine page 125 VVe affirme that the Councell of Constance which condemned the doctrine of Hus that who so is predestinate is alwayes a meÌ„ber of the Church was surely in this respect Antichristian Danaeus in Resp ad Bellarm. Contr. 4. lib. 3. cap. 2. sayth The first opinion which was the opinion of Hus is true and is ours Againe our opinion is that the Church is the whole company of men whome God hath predestinated to saluation And cap. 7 It must be answered that Paul was alwayes but not alwayes apparently in regard of men of Gods true Church Againe Such Turkes and Iewes as God hath predestinated to saluation are of the Church euen now at this tyme in regard they are predestinate and in respect of God but they are not yet of Gods Church apparently and in respect of vs for as much as they lack yet those marks whereby God doth heere shew vs men who are of the church And Cont. 4. lib. 3. cap. 12 The true definition of the true church is this The company and multitude of those whome God hath chosen to saluation And Iunius lib. 3. de Eccles cap. 7 Paul was alwayes of the church according to predestination from which sayth he the church taketh her being or formal definition but not according to the outward forme of the church What can be more apparent then that these men teach that the predestinate are members of the church according to the true being therof and in the sight of God euen during the tyme of their infidelity 4. Thirdly this followeth necessarily vpon that which they teach concerning infants especially such as are descended from faythfull parents departing this life vnbaptized For they affirme that the children of the faythfull are actually in the Church as the French Confession article 35 Togeather with the parents God accounteth also their ofspring in the church And the Zuitzers cap. 20 VVhy should not they the children of the faythfull be ingrafted by sacred baptisme who are Gods proper possession and within his church Caluin in Instruct cont Anabap. art 1 Vnspotted infants are in the Communion of the church before they come forth of their Mothers wombe And Pareus lib. 3. de Iustificat cap. 4. pag. 884 Caluin on good reason determineth that the children of the church are borne cittizens of the church Their doctrine also hath the same issue who teach that infants at leastwise the children of the faythfull are saued without baptisme as the Protestants in the colloq Ratisbon And Zuinglius tom 2. Declarat de peccat orig fol. 119 Concerning Christians children we are assured that they are not damned for originall sinn of others we haue not the like assurance howbeit to confesse ingenuously the opinion we taught heretofore to wit that we ought not to iudge rashly of heathens children seemes to vs the more probable Voritius in Anti-bellarmine pag. 542 Zuinglius and some other ghospellers auouch that all children whatsoeuer are by the grace of Christ saued others for the most part hold that at leastwise all the elect whether extract from faythfull or other parents do euen vnbaptized attaine to saluation Whereof he sayth The opinion of these later is surely the safest and yet the first opinion is probable inough and ought not to be rashly condemned Now as D. Whitaker sayth Cont. 2. quest 1. cap. 5. 6 All that are saued are really and actually in the church And D. Morton part 1. Apol. lib. 1. cap. 4 To be of the church in possibility sufficeth not to saluation Lubbertus lib. 2. de Eccles cap. 2 Neither can any one be saued except he be actually and really in the church Whence Martyr in 1. Cor. 7. fol. 177. sayth Infants must of necessity appertaine vnto the church seing there is no saluation without it They teach moreouer that Infants haue
Messias to be that notable Antichrist foretold in Scripture For thus writeth M. Powell lib. de Antichristo cap. 33. pag. 338 I will in no wise say that all the Popes from the tyme wherein Papistry was first reuealed to be Antichristianity are damned Howbeit in the beginning of his booke he makes this protestation I solemnely take God to record that I as certainly know the Bishop of Rome to be that great Antichrist and the Popish church to be the Synagogue of Antichrist as I know God to be in the heauens or Iesus Christ to be the true Messias promised to the Fathers D. Whitaker likewise com 4. q. 5. cap. 3. pag. 694. sayth Let vs cry aloud and swore by him who liues for euer that the Bishop of Rome is Antichrist And to D. Sanders last demonstration that the Pope is not Antichrist pag. 799 VVe may take that most sacred and most true oath and sweare by him who liues for euer that the Bishoppe of Rome is the very Antichrist And neuerthelesse in his answere to the first demonstration he sayth with M. Powell I will not say that from the tyme that Papistry began to be Antichristianity the Popes themselues haue byn all damned And both he cap. cit pâ—g 679. 682. other Protestants ordinarily affirme that Antichrists Sea shal be in the true Church among the company of the saythfull and that he shall be a cittizen and inhabitant and Pastour of the Church To whom I pray will these men deny saluation or a place in their Church who graunt it vnto Antichrist the sworne enemy of Christ whome the scripture it self styleth Christs aduersary the man of sin the sonne of perdition I see not why they should henceforward vpbrayd vs with Antichrist since they themselues clayme him for a member of their Church 6. It is also certaine that they challenge Atheists For Illyricus in Catel lib. 9. col 1916. Dâ— Humfrey respons ad Rat. 3. That they challenge Atheists Camp M. Fox in his Acts printed anno 1596. pag. 646. allot that Atheist Machiauel an honorable roome among the witnesses and maintayners of the truth And Luther apud Manlium in loc tit de Eccl. pag. 483. layth of Valla that he gaue place to none but Epicure himselfe and professed openly that he held opinions repugnant to the foundation of sayth Neuerthelesse the same Luther respons ad Louan Colen tom 2. fol. 38. writeth thus of him Valla in my iudgement was either a remanent sparke or some feâ—â—eli of the primitiue Church whose like in constancy and vnfayned zeale of Christian fayth Italy or the whole Church had not for many ages One Epicure then in Luthers iudgement was the remanent sparke and Iewell of the Church That sometymes Protestants account all those their brethren who vnder the name of Christians oppose themselues any way against the Pope CHAP. V. 1. THAT Protestants sometymes acknowledge all those for members of their Church who vnder the name of Christians do any way oppose themselues against the Pope I proue First because some of them do openly so professe For as Keâ—nice reporteth in locis tit de Eccles pag. 122. Some faine the Church to be a rable of all Sects of Anabaptists Sacramentaries Swineseldians and others so they be not Papists And Capito in Caluin epist 6. Some haue brought in a liberty as if all were of the Ghospells side whosoeuer haue cast of the Popes yoke Musculus also in locis tit de caena pag. 522. sayth I imbrace all for brethren in the Lord howsoeuer they disagree from me or among themselues as long as they mayntaine not the Popish impiety Secondly because they professe that the end of their preaching was to lessen the authority of the Pope For what end Luther and â—is fellowes preached and Bishops and to be contrary to them For thus Luther writeth of himselfe epist ad Frederic Elect. tom 2. fol. 330 The Ecclesiasticall tyranny is now weakned and broaken which only I purposed in writing Or as Slcidan lib. 3. reporteth He writeth that the Ecclesiasticall tyranny is now weakned that that alone was his designe at the first And epist ad Waldenses in Hoâ—pin part 2. fol. 8. he sayth that he impugned transubstantiation only for enny of the Papists And in parâ—â— Confell apud eâ—â—â—dem fol. 13. that he impugned the Eleuation only to spite the Papists Caluin 4. Institut cap. 10. § 1. sayâ—h The end of our contention is to bridle that infinite and barbarous Dominion which those who would be accounted Pastors haue vsurped ouer soules Zuinglius lib. de Auctor Sedit â—om 2. â—ol 125. affirmeth that there is a sort of ProtestaÌ„ts which for no other cause do heare the doctrine of the Ghospell then because they extremely hate the Popedome and enuy Papists their felicity and glory Bucer lib. de regno Christi cap. 4 The greatest part of men seeme to haue sought only these things of the ghospell First that they might shake of the tyranny of the Romane Antichrist and of the false Bishops c. Luther also tom 2. German fol. 22. telleth what was the end of the Sacramentaries Anabaptists I heare sayth he that some imbrace Anabaptisme for this only end that so they may spite the Bishop of Rome euen as the Sacramentaries do only in hatred of the Romish Bishop deny that there is any thing in the sacrament beside bread and wine Of the new Arians end thus writeth Zâ—nchius lib. 1. epist pag. 154 Ouâ— Arians haue determined to ouerturne from the foundation whatsoeuer is in the Church of Rome And what end Illyricus had thus telleth D. Whitaker ad Rat. 8. Campiani Illyricus went further then he should as I think to be the further of from you whome he hated 2. Thirdly because they call the departure from the Pope and Popish doctrine the foundation a good part and the summe of the Protestant building Sâ— dâ—el Respons ad Arthu cap. 12 Protestants agree in this foundation that the Church ought to be reformed out of the word of God and that Popish errours must be remoued out of the Church Seranta epist dedicat ad Episc Angliae It is to be wondered how much almost all the Reformers please themselues in this point that they will haue nothing common with the church of Rome Grotius apud Homium in Specimine c Neither can I forebeare to shew the fountaine and ofspring of this and other calamities VVe think that we are so much the purer the further we go from points of Romish doctrine without any difference Vergerius dial 1. pag. 20 VVe hope that shortly all matters will be composed VVe could do by Gods helpe that which seemed the cheifest of all and the hardest and well nigh impossible that is pull our selues and ridde vs of the Papists tyranny VVherefore nothing is to be doubted but we shall compasse other matters of lesse moment For a good foundation is layd yea a good part
saluation wholy ouerturned And lib. de Necess Reform fol. 47. that the safety of the Church dependeth vpon this doctrine no lesse then mans life dependeth of his soule Pareus in Prooem lib. de Iustificat On this alone the hinges of our comfort and saluation do hang. And lib. 2. cap. 2. affirmeth that it was the cheifest cause of the separation of the Protestant Church from Popery And lib. 4. cap. 2. sayth The only doctrine of obtayning iustice and saluation by only sayth and of loosing them by incredulity is the sincere and proper ghospell all other doctrine in the scripture belongeth to the law And those of Geneua Prefat Syntag. Confess auouch that this article is the groundworke forme and soule of Christian religion The soule the summe of Euangelicall doctrine of which men are called faythfull and true Christians without which the knowledge of other articles hath no holesome fruit For it is the substantiall inward and formall cause of saluation of which all Sacraments instituted by God are and were pledges and seales vnto which article all the other do tend as to their center and in which mans felicity consisteth 5. Neither do our English Protestants make lesse account of this their article of iustification by only fayth For D. Whitaker Cont. 2. quest 6. cap. 3. pag. 562. sayth It seemes to be the cheifest of all and most fundamentall The Prore Puppe as in which the Prore and puppe of our saluation consisteth and who faine any other meanes of Iustification do ouerthrow the foundation and most necessary heads of Christian religion and are fallen from saluation and euerlasting life And Respons ad Rat. r. Camp he writeth thus of their doctrine of Iustification by only fayth If Iames or a heauenly Angell disallow it he is impure wicked and to be detested to hell D. Humfrey in his oration de vitando fermen to calleth this article The cheifest point and hinges of fayth D. Fulke de Success pag. 4. The principall head of the ghospell M. Fox in his acts pag. 440 The foundation of all Christianity And pag. 770 The fouÌ„dation The only principall origen of our saluation And finally M. Powell lib. 2. de Antichristo cap. 5 The summe of the doctrine of sayth Neither is it to be merueiled that Protestants so highly esteeme this their article both because it is the cheifest bait wherwith they draw men vnto them as also because as Luther confessed it is their cheife defence without which they had long since perished and finally because Iustification being one principall end of religion if speciall fayth be the only meanes to attaine to iustification vndoubtedly it ought highly to be esteemed of that religion which belieueth it to be such a meanes ProtestaÌ„ts esteeme of only faith Thus we see that according to the common opinion of Protestants to belieue himselfe to be iustified by only fayth is the cheifest article the foundation the stay the head the fountaine the summe the last end the prore and puppe the hinges the proppe the castle the bulwarck the essentiall difference the definition the soule the forme the formall cause the only rocke the only safegard of Protestancy the only way to heauen which falling the church yea God himselfe falleth But none can be a Protestant without the foundation head soule forme summe definition c. of a Protestant Therefore none can he held for a Protestant vnlesse he professe to belieue to be iustified by only speciall fayth Whomesoeuer therefore Protestants cannot proue to haue held this article they cannot with any reason and coulour challenge for Protestants And because as it shall hereafter appeare they cannot proue that any one before Luther held this article nay on the contrary we will proue that Luther first deuised it they cannot with any appearance of truth auouch that there was any Protestant before him And in like sort whome we can proue not to haue belieued this article we may euidently conclude that they were no Protestants That it is necessary for a Protestant to belieue all the fundamentall articles of Protestancy CHAP. VII â— BESIDE the foresayd article of Iustification by only fayth it is also necessary to the making of a Protestant of a member of the Protestant Church Vâ—â—â—d l. 3. de Eccles c. 2. that he belieue at least all the fundamentall points of Protestancy either explicitly or implicitly so that he obstinatly deny no one of them This is manifest First because as I shewed before cap. 1. it is the common opinion of Protestants that all those are out of the Church whosoeuer deny one fundamentall article Num. 3. Againe because themselues say that the name of a fundamentall article doth insinuate that it sustaineth the Church as the foundation sustaineth the house Besides all Protestants assigne truth or purity in doctrine for the mark of the Church As the Confession of Ausparg cap. 7. The English Confession cap. 19. The Suiâ—zers cap. de Eccles and other Protestants commonly and their meaning is Truth essentiall to the Church that it is the essentiall marck Wherupon D Whitaker Controuers 2. quest 5. cap. 17. pag. 541. sayth that it is absolutely necessary and the essentiall marck And at Rat. 3. Campiani that it is the substantiall note His Maiesty in his epistle to Cardinall Peron that in is the substantiall forme of the Church Caluin epist 190. The purity of doctrine is the soule of the Church And the same say Sadeel ad Sophism Turriani loc 1. Author de Eccles in Danaeo pag. 1029. Vorstius in Antibellarm pag. 145. D. Willet cont 2. quest 3. pag. 102. Yea D. Morton part 1. Apos lib. 1. cap. 6. affirmeth that Protestants account the truth of Euangelicall doctrin the cheifest and almost only essentiall inseparable and perpetuall marck of the Church And hence it proceedeth that they put the truth of purity of doctrine in their definition of the Church as an essentiall part thereof as the French Confession cap. 27. The Magdeburgians Cent. 1. lib. 1. cap. 4 col 140. Melancthon tom 1 in cap. 16. Matthaeâ— D. Whitaker Cont. 2. quest 5. cap. 20. pag. 552. Sadeel ad Sophism surriani loc 21. and others commonly But this purity of doctrine if it must be in any articles especially it must be in those which are fundamentall as is manifest and the Protestants do graunt For thus writeth D. Morton part 1. Purity in fundameÌ„tal points essential to the Church Apol. lib. 2. cap. 38. Purity in the fundamentall principles of fayth is necessary to the being and making of the Church And D. Feild lib. 2. de Eccles cap. 3 Purity from fundamentall errour is necessarily required to a Church And the like hath Vorstius lib. cit pag. 148. Nay the English Confession art 19. defineth the visible Church of Christ to be a congregation of faythfull men in which the pure word of God is preached and the Sacraments duely ministred according to Christs
1. cap. 28. CoÌ„taineth the suÌ„me of doctrine affirmeth that it was inspired from heauen and written by instinct of the holy ghost Nay some Lutherans as testifieth Laskus epist ad Regem Poloniae sayd that they would rather doubt of the doctrine of Paul The Rule of fayth then of the Confession of Auspurg And with the Lutherans herein conspire the Sacramentaries For as Bucer confessed in the Conference of Ratisbon The Protestants condemne all writings Inspired froÌ„ heaueÌ„ which are repugnant to the Confession of Auspurge and the Apology thereof Caluin admonit vlt. ad Westphalum pag. 797. sayth Surius anno 154â— Touching the Confession of Auspurg I answere thus that as it was published at Ratisbon there is not one word in it contrary to our doctrine And epist 236. sayth that be wittingly and willingly subscribed to it Beza epist 1. writeth in this sort I define those to be our Churches which hold the Confession of Auspurg the French Confession c. And Apol. 1. cont Saintem pag. 297 Neither is the Confession of Auspurg such as any pious man may reiect it Zanchius loc cit receiued the Confession of Auspurge as the square and rule of all doctrine And as Vorstius writeth Respons ad epist Parci pag. 91 In the vniuersity of Heddelberg they vsed to sweare to no Confession but to that of Auspurg Or as D. Whitaker affirmeth Cont. 2. quest 5. cap. 5. pag. 505 The Confession of Auspurg is receiued of all Protestants vnlesse perhapps it be in one word or two rather then in any opinion And in truth seing all Sacramentaries professe to hold the Lutherans who follow the Confession of Auspurg for their brethren in Christ and besides when we obiect vnto them their dissention in matters of fayth they appeale vnto their harmony or syntagme of Confessions amongst which the Confession of Auspurg is placed as do those of Geneua Prefat Syntagmatis the Switzers Prefat suae Confess Beza epist 1. Sadeel Indice Repetit Turrian pag. 808. and respons ad Theses Posnan c. 11. Vorstius in Antibellarm pag. 168. D. Feild lib. 3. de Eccles cap. 12. 42. D. Whitaker Cont. 2. quest 5. cap. 8. pag. 521. D. Andrews Respons ad Apol. Bellarm. c. 1. D. Fulke de Success pag. 287. 304. D. White in his way to the Church pag. 138. and others commonly When as I say the SacrameÌ„taries do thus they must needs approue the Confession of Auspurg at least in all the principall and fundamentall points thereof For I hope they will not hold theÌ„ for brethren in Christ whome they see to dissent from them in fundamentall points of Christian fayth nor say that those Confessions agree which are repugnant in the very foundation of beliefe VVhich the coÌ„fess of Ausp accouÌ„teth fundameÌ„tal articles 2. But this Confession of Auspurg so generally receiued and of so high account with Protestants as we haue rehearsed hath set downe and declared which be the fundamentall points of Protestancy For in the beginning thereof is set this title The principall articles and after that many Protestanticall opinions are rehearsed thus it sayth of them cap. 21. The suÌ„me of Protest doctrine This is the summe of the doctrine which is deliuered in our Churches And â—fterward naming certaine controuersies of Indulgences Pilgrimages the like it sayth of them These kind of matters we haue let passe that those things which are the cheifest in this cause might be easierly knowne Againe Cheifest points those things only are rehearsed which were necessary to be told And finally VVe would present these articles before written in which our Confession might be extant Only necessary and the summe of their doctrine who teach vs might be seene And in another edition of this Confession in Melancthon tom 3. thus is written in the end thereof VVe haue comprised the summe of Euangelicall doctrine necessary to Churches SuÌ„me of doctrine necessary Wherefore vnlesse Protestants will reiect their first and most maiesticall Confession of Auspurg they must needs confesse that the articles thereof are the summe of Protestant doctrine the principal articles of their fayth are they only which are necessary to be told and the summe of Euangelicall doctrine necessary to Churches But surely such are fundamentall articles 3. Neither doth the sayd Confession alone but also many other great Protestants acknowledge the articles of it to be fundamentall For thus hath the Apology of that Confession in Melancthon tom 3. fol. 91 Truth necessary to the Church VVe haue comprised in the Confession of Auspurg almost the summe of all Christian doctrine And Melancthon himselfe in the preface of that Apology writeth that that Confession is truth necessary to the Church And likewise in the preface of his 3. to me I gathered together the heads of confession comprising almost the summe of the doctrine of our Churches The whole forme of the Confession was after sent to Luther who wrote back that he had read and allowed this Confession And tom 4. Respons ad Staphylum pag. 817. sayth that the Confession of Auspurg contayneth the whole body of doctrine And in Prefat 2. tom Luther 11 The summe of doctrine which our Church preached is publikely comprehended in the Confession of Auspurg The whole body of doctrine Likewise the D. of Wittemberg in the preface of his Confession speaking of the Confession of Auspurg sayth thus VVe commanded our preachers to write the summe of their doctrine And the Ministers of the Elector in colloq Aldeburg scrip 3. pag. 21. say VVe doubt not but the summe of doctrine reuealed from heauen is dextrously plainly and most sweetly contayned in the Confession of Auspurg And pag. seq VVâ—â—â— the Confession of Auspurg we comprehended the summe of doctrine Kemnice Praefat. lib. de coena The summe of holesome doctrine is comprehended in the Confession of Auspurg out of the word of God Westphalus defens altera cont Laskum sayth It containeth in briefe the summe of Christian doctrine Iames Andrews lib. cont Hosium pag. 22 The summe of pious doctrine is contained in the Confession of Auspurg Finally the Lutherans as the Sacramentaries of Newstad write in Admonit de lib. Concord cap. 4. Note pag. 116 do place in the role of heretiks as erring in the foundation of sayth and saluation all those who find any sault with the Confession of Auspurg or dissent from it in any article And as touching the Sacramentaries themselues the Palatin Confession pag. 198. sayth thus That Confession of fayth which was presented at Auspurg and the Apology annexed thereto was taken out of the doctrine of the Apostles Prophets and the foresayd Creed as a certaine litle summe Caluin lib. 1. de Lib. arbit pag. 142 VVhen at Auspurg there was to be exhibited a forme of Confession Melancthon the Author thereof would not make any stay but only in that doctrine Doctrine necessary to saluation which alone is proper to the
Church and necessary to saluation to be knowne 4. According therefore to the verdict both of Lutherans and Sacramentary Protestants theâ—e Confession of Auspurg contayneth the summe whole body of Protestant doctrine and only those things which are necessary to be told and that only doctrine which is proper to the church and is necessary to be knowne for saluation Whosoeuer therfore dissenteth from the Confession of Auspurg dissenteth from Protestants in the summe and body of Protestancy in things that are necessary 〈◊〉 doctrine necessary to the Church and necessary â—o â—â—â—nation But vndoubtedly who oâ—ssenteth in sâ—ch things dissenteth in fundamentall points And thâ—s manner of examining who is a Protestant cannot be disliked of Protestants because themselues vsed it against the Anabaptists in their Conference at Frankentall wherein they proue that the Anabaptistia were not before the yeare of Christ 1522 For say they if you read ouer all histories you shall not find any people from the beginning of the world who had a Confession of sayth like to yours They are therefore of opinion that it is necessary for an Anabaptist that he hold their CoÌ„fession Why then may not we say the like is necessary to a Protestant Besides Sadeel in Refutat Thes Posnan pag. 866. sayth that we ought to iudge of the fayth of the reformed Churches by the Confessions of their fayth which rule we now follow 5. And if any Protestant do not thinke that the articles of the Confession of Auspurg be fundamentall let him take the Confession of Saxony Fundam articles according to the CoÌ„fess of Saxony to which many principall Protestants subscribed and which they composed with mind to present it to the Councell of Trent For this Confession affirmeth her articles to be fundamentall saying cap. 23 This is the summe of doctrine which with one mouth we preach in our Churches And soone after It is true doctrine and necessary to the Church And Hospin part 2. Hist fol. 215. sayth that the composers of this Confession auouch this in summe that that writing contayneth clearly and fundamentally the princâ—pall articles of Christian fayth and doctrine of Sacraments instituted of Christ Or if he please let him take the Confession of Strasburg According to the CoÌ„fession of Strasburg which in the end thus writeth of the articles thereof These are the cheife points in which our men haue somewhat gone from the common doctrine of the Clergy Or else the Scottish general CoÌ„â—essioÌ„ wherin thus speake the Scots VVe belieue confesse and subscribe According to the CoÌ„fession of Scotland and affirme before God and the whole world that this only is the true Christian sayth which pleaseth God and bringeth saluation to men which is now layd open to the world and receiued of diuers Churches and Kingdoms especially of the Scottish Church For these Confessions do affirme that their articles are principall necessary to the Church and their doctrine the only true Christian doctrine which bringeth saluation But surely such articles be fundamentall Therefore the articles of these Confessions be fundamentall articles in Protestancy And consequently that a man be accounted a Protestant according to the iudgement of these Confessions it is necessary that he professe their articles Or finally let him make choice of the Bohemian Confession According to the CoÌ„fession of Bohemia in the Preface whereof it is written thus VVe imbrace and hold all things which belong to the true Church and without which she can be no where on earth For without doubt such things are fundamentall 6. But if any will not admit either the articles of the Conâ—ession of Auspurg or of Saxony which are Confessions of Lutherans nor the articles of the Confessions of Strasburg or Scotland which are Confessions of Sacramentaries not finally the articles of the Bohemian Confession which is sayd to be the Confession of the Waldenses to be the fundamentall articles of Protestancy First he shall shew that touching which are fundamentall articles he agreeth neither which LutheraÌ„s nor Sacramentaries nor Waldenses Againe besides that which we haue repeated out of Protestants concerning their account of the Confession of Auspurg he shall herein reiect those Confessions to which Protestants as themselues say yeld almost as much as Papists do to the Councell of Trent Vorstiue in Praefat. Antibell Praefat. Syntagm Conf ssionum which they hold for authenticall writings and which they say haue byn sealed with the bloud of many martyrs and approued of Kings Princes and common wealthes most excellent Deuines great seruants of God Assuredly if there be any certainty or worth in Protestant doctrine it is in their Confession of fayth Moreouer he can name no other articles which Protestants by publike and common iudgement haue agreed to be fundamentall and therefore either they haue not by publike consent determined which articles they hold for fundamentall or certainly no iudgement or decree of theirs is to be more esteemed of them then that which we find in their Confessions of fayth If Protestants be not certaine which are fundam articles they are not certaine of their Church Wherefore either they are to be held for fundamental articles or else Protestants are not certaine which are fundamentall articles of their fayth And if they be not certaine herof they cannot be certaine what is the essence or substance of a Protestant or who is a Protestant who not seing as I shewed before the only essentiall forme and substance of a Protestant they put in the beliefe of their fundamentall articles Either therefore they haue not yet determined which are their fundamentall articles and consequently they haue not determined what is the substance of a Protestant or who is a Protestants who not who is a member of their Church who an alien or that which they haue determined in their forsayd Confessions is to be taken for their decree and determination in this matter Finally I regard not what articles this or that Protestant iudgeth to be fundamentall for I might set downe which Luther tom 1. in Praefat. Disput fol. 419. or which Zuinglius Prefat Conf. fidei or which Beza in fine breuis Confess or which Bullinger Praefat. Compend haue reckoned for fundamentall articles but I would determine this matter out of their publike Confessions of fayth Sadeel ad Thes Posnan c 12. Beza epist 1. Rainold praelect 4. because they cannot deny them but in denying their fayth as also because they are of more authority amongst Protestants and finally because themselues require vs so to do 7. Let it be therefore assured and stedfast that according to the iudgement generally of all Protestants it is necessarily and before all matters required to a Protestant that he belieue Iustification by only speciall or particuler fayth What necessary to a Protestant because this is the soule life definition and all in a Protestant and moreouer according to the iudgements of the foresayd Confessions that he belieue
at least virtually and implicitly all their articles and wittingly deny none of them because as we see they are fundamentall articles of Protestancy without which one cannot haue the whole essence or substance of a Protestant nor be an entire and absolute Protestant We speak of any who are ProtestaÌ„ts only in part but only in part and in some sort And we as hath byn often sayd treat here only of an entire and absolute Protestant such as at least hath all the substantiall parts of a Protestant and endeauour to proue that Luther was the author of such a company and of such a faith and religion and regard not whither that before his tyme there were any who were Protestants only in part and in some sort and held only some part of Protestant religion but not the whole substance thereof And hereupon we frame an inuincible argument to proue that there was no true Protestant or Protestant church before Luther The definition of a true ProtestaÌ„t Euery true Protestant belieueth Iustification by only speciall faith and at least virtually and implicitly belieueth the articles of the Confession of Auspurg or of Saxony Scotland Strasburg or Bohemia But there was no man no Church before Luther who thus belieued Therefore no true Protestant or Protestant church The Maior is the very definition of a true Protestant gathered partly out of the common doctrine of all Protestants partly out of the foresayd Confessions of their fayth The Minor being negatiue is sufficiently manifest by that neither Luther nor any in his tyme or to this day could produce any one man or company who before Luthers preaching had belieued in that sort This foundation therefore touching the essence and substance of a Protestant and Protestant Church being layd to wit that he only is a true absolute Protestant who belieueth Iustification by only speciall fayth and the foresayd other fundamentall points of Protestancy and that the Protestant Church is a company of such belieuers and the Protestant religion such a beliefe and worship of God I will endeauour in this next book out of Protestants testimonies and Confessions to proue that Luther was the first beginner of their Church and Religion The end of the first Booke THE SECOND BOOKE Of the Author or Beginner of the Protestant Church and Religion CHAP. I. That Protestants confesse that the substance of their Church and Religion was perished when Luther began THE first demonstration wherewith we will proue that Luther was the author and first beginner of the Protestant Church and religion we will take out of Protestants Confessions of the substantiall destruction of their Church ProtestaÌ„ts confesse their religion was perished religion principall article of Iustification by only fayth before Luther arose For of the destruction of their fayth and religion thus writeth Luther himself tom 1. Proposit 62. fol. 375 Certaine it is that our Apostaticall Bishops raigning Gods fayth perished Perished And lib. de Captiu Babylon tom 2. fol. 77 The Popes tyranny hath many ages agone extinguished the fayth Extinguished And lib. de abâ—og Mist fol. 249. he sayth to the Catholikes Ye haue extinguished the Ghospell And lib. de pijs ceremon is fol. 387 alià s 393 Destroyed The doctrine of the ghospell lay destroyed by humane traditions Tom. 3. in psalm 1. fol. 126 VVhat thinkest thou was in the Church but a whirle wind of Gods wrath by which we were thrust into so many so different so inconstant so vncertaine and those infinite glosses of Lawyers Christ altogeather vnknown and opinions of Deuines in the meane tyme Christ being altogeather vnknowne stumbling into many quicke sands gulfes and snares of conscience were knockt together And in psalm 22. fol. 345 Christ together with fayth is now extinguished Christ and fayth extinguished And fol. 348 Fayth lyeth extinct And in psalm 51. fol. 460 The former age could neither vnderstand nor soundly teach the greatest and weightiest points Praefat. in psalm Grad fol. 509 God punisheth contempt so as he plainly taketh away his word whereof Popery is a notable example Al knowlâ—dge of Christ wholy extinct in which we see it hath so fallen out And fol. 568 Fayth it selfe was plainly extinct Tom. 4. Praefat. Eccl. fol. 1 The schooles of Deuines haue wholy extinguished most assured fayth in Christ togeather with all the knowledge of Christ Tom. 5. in cap. 2. Galat. fol. 306 The Papists with their impious and blasphemous doctrine haue not only obscured but simply haue taken away Not only obserued but simply taken away the Ghospell and ouerwhelmed Christ And fol 322 Christs ghospell being obscured yea truly ouerwhelmed the Pope c. In c. 4. fol. 376 This most common and most receiued opinion of the vncertainty of the remission of sinnes was surely an article of fayth in all Popery Christ shut out of the Church wherewith truly they ouerwhelmed the doctrine of fayth destroyed fayth and shut Christ out of the Church Fol. 400 The Pope hath vtterly extinguished Christian liberty In cap. 1. Petri The sincere knowledge of fayth was extinct In cap. 15.1 Cor. fol. 134. VVithout our helpe they had neuer learnt one word of the Ghospell Without Luther not one word or iot of the Ghospell And fol. 141 They had not knowne one iote of the Gospell vnlesse by our labour and study it had byn brought forth into the world â—om 6. in cap. 3. Genes fol. 43 Holesome doctrine was by little and litle extinct In cap. 4. fol. 57 The light of the word was extinguished by wicked Popes In cap. 17. fol. 199 That I may say all in one word the Pope hath truly buryed Christ In cap. 48. fol. 643 The Pope hath obscured nay destroyed the doctrine of sayth In cap. 49. fol. 660 The Pope hath truly obscured the doctrine and taken away the Promises Christ truly buried that we knew not what Christ was Fol. 666 He hath extinguished the Gospell Tom. 7. lib. de Missa fol. 230 The knowledge of Christ was truly abolished and destroyed This ye Papists ye cannot deny the matter it selfe proclaimeth it And fol. 231 All true VVorship of God being extinct from the bottom c. Epist ad Fredericum Electorem fol. 506 Knowledge of Christ truly destroyed The Pope of Rome hath most plainly rooted out the Ghospell truly oppressed and ouerthrowne lib. cont Papatum fol. 469 Fayth was weakened choaked and extinguished and Christian liberty lost Thus plainly speaketh Luther almost in all his Latin comes of the substantiall destruction of his fayth and Ghospell before that as he sayth he brought it againe into the world Ghospell most plainly rooted out To which he addeth in his 7. Dutch tome in his admonition to the Germans This abomination was increased so that they blotted out and supprest the words of this Sacrament and fayth so that neither a letter nor point of them remayned in all Popery in all
608 findeth fault with Cardinall Bellarmine when he sayth that there is alwayes a visible Church by the name of the Church he vnderstandeth not one or two but a multitude Neither also do they by the name of the Church when then say it cannot perish vnderstand any true particuler Church consisting of a Pastour and flock as is euident both because they say the Church may be reduced to one or two as also because as shall hereafter appeare they thinke that all Pastors may perish Cap. 7. and lastly because D. Whitaker loc cit reprehendeth Bellarmine for that by the name of the Church which cannot faile he vnderstandeth a multitude gathered together in which are Prelates and subiects They are therefore of opinion that both the Catholike Church spred through out the world and euery particuler church consisting of Prelates and subiects may faile and perish and when they say the Church cannot faile by the name of the Church they vnderstand fayth and meane that there shall alwayes be fayth in some one or other as clearly appeareth by their former words and also by these of D. Whitaker loc cit pag. 469 What Protestāts meane by the church whē they say it cannot perish Hence he gathereth not as our aduersaries do that the visible Church shall neuer saile but that sayth shall neuer saile in the whole but that to the end of the world Christian religion shal remayne in some This sayth he is the very thing which we say maintaine Ye see plainly that when they say the church cannot faile they only meane that fayth cannotvtterly faile but that it shall be alwayes in some Wherein there is no contradiction to that which otherwise they teach that the Church can faile because fayth and the Church are different things neither doth fayth in whome soeuer and in how few soeuer make the Church Wherefore if they be mad men and no Christians who say that the Catholike Church may faile or that the Church is not to dure for euer as D. Whitaker himselfe sayth cap. 1. 2. cit certainly these Protestants are such For whiles they say that the Church may be brought to one or two and that all Pastors may perish they manifestly say indeed and effect that both the Catholike and all kind of true Churches may faile Moreouer I proue that they meane that the true Church was perished because they think that she is made by inward fayth but this they affirme to haue perished as euen now appeared Besides the very name of the Church properly signifieth the true Church and only improperly that which is not the true Church And therefore when it is simply and absolutely put it ought to be taken for the true Church which thing also themselues do teach For thus writeth Sadeel in Refutat Thes Posnan cap. 4. pag. 827 VVhen the Church is simply put or when it is sayd the Church of Christ it properly signifieth only the elect Hereupon also Kemnice in loc tit de Eccles cap. 3. defineth the Church to be the Catholike company But the Catholike company is the true Church as is euident by the Creed where we professe to belieue the Catholike Church and is confessed by D. Whitaker Contr. 2. quest 1. cap. 2. 5. by D. Morton Apol. part 1. l. 1. cap. 13. by Lubbert lib. 1. de Eccl. cap. 4. by the French Catechisme Domin 15. and others And therefore most rightly saith S. Augustin that it is a wicked impudent detestable De vni◠Bapt. c. 14. Conc. 2. in Psal 101. and abominable speach to say the Church hath perished which yet would not be vnlesse by the name of the Church were vnderstood the true Church For what offence were it to say that the false Church had perished Furthermore when heretikes as the Donatists Calu. cont Seruet pa. 657. Whitak Cont. 2. q. 3. c. 2. 3. Seruetus and the like do say that the Church was perished or banished the Protestants themselues vnderstand thē of the true Church why then ought not Protestants to be vnderstood in the same manner when they vse the same words Againe because sometymes they say that the Kingdome of Christ the temple of God hath perished Cap. 1. n. 7. But what can be the Kingdome of Christ and temple of God but the true Church for the false is rather the Kingdome and temple of Satan Whereupon D. Whitaker Controuers 2. quest 3. cap. 1. pag. 466. sayth The scriptures most plainly teach that there will be no end of the Kingdome of Christ And ad Demonstrat 17. Sanderi VVhat other thing is the temple of God but the Church of Christ which is built with liuely stones And M. Powell lib. 1. de Antichristo cap. 3 The Church is defined 1. Tim. 3. to be the temple of God Hereto we may add that Ochim sayth that that Church which Christ founded washed with his bloud enriched with his holy spirit which vndoubtedly is the true Church was vtterly destroyed Num. 8. Finally because they say that Elias thought that there was not remayning one pious man besides himselfe that he was the only Christian the only true worshipper of God which was left aliue and actuall member of the true Church Seing therfore they will make Elias to thinke so of the true church of the same also ought themselues to be vnderstood who vse to draw arguments out of Elias his words especially when as they say that it sufficeth if there be one or two faythfull men in the most forlorne tymes of the Church which they must needs meane of the true Church which they will haue to consist only of the faythfull seruants of God That they meane of the vniuersall Church 4. Their third shift may be that when they speake of the destruction of the Church they meane not of the vniuersall or whole Church but of some particuler or part of the Church But this is easily refuted First because as we haue rehearsed they say there was a slaughter of the whole Church that all the Church was corrupted all became idolatrous that scarce the name of Christianity was left that none belieued that not one iot of the ghospell had byn knowne without Luther that the whole knowledge of Christ all pure worship all true religion was abolished Secōdly because vnder the name of Elias they plainly say that the whole Church was extinct the whole Church failed he alone was a faythfull man Num. 8. and actuall member of the true Church Wherefore either they thinke it not blasphemy to say the whole Church hath perished or this horrible blasphemy which calleth in question all religion they most impiously attribute to that holy Prophet Thirdly because they say that their Church was brought to one or two and that it is inough to the Church if there be one or two faythfull persons But what man well in his wittes will say that one or two are inough to make the
they should be vnderstood rather according to Saint Hieromes meaning then according to their owne most proper most plaine and most frequent words especially when as Luther sayth tom 1. fol. 414 Many thinges are borne withall in the Fathers who were knowne to be orthodoxe which we may not imitate 8. Wherefore out of all which hath byn rehearsed in this chapter I thus frame my second demonstration If so be that before Luther arose there were not one only Protestant in the whole world but that all euery man followed a different Religion Luther was the Author and beginner of the Protestant Church and Religion But that is true as manifestly appeareth by the manyfold and open confessions of Luther and many and most famous Protestants Therefore c. That Protestants confesse their Church and religion to haue byn altogeather inuisible before Luther appeared CHAP. IV. 1. THE fourth demonstration wherewith we will proue Luther to haue byn the Author of the Protestant church and religion we will draw out of that which they confesse of the inuisibility thereof before Luther brake out And by the way I must aduertise the Reader of two things The one is that by the name of the Church is not to be vnderstood only the men who are of the Church but their society in religioÌ„ wherby they make a church wherefore those Protestants speake not to the purpose who to excuse the absurdity of their doctrine touching the inuisibility of the Church say they meane not that the men whereof it consisted were inuisible men for it sufficeth that they confesse that they were inuisible worshippers of God according to the Protestant manner or that their society in this kind of worship of God was inuisible Note The other point is that in these kind of questions VVhether before Luther the Protestant Church were VVhether it were visible Colloq Batisban Ses 1.6 10.17 Iuel Def. Apol. par 5. c. 15. d. 1. VVhither it had Pastors and the like the Catholiks hold the negatiue part and Protestants the affirmatiue and that it belongeth to the affirmer to proue what he affirmeth wherein if he faile he is ouercome and it is not needfull for the denyer to proue his denyall but is sufficient reasonably to answere the proofes of the affirmer which if he performe he hath wonne the cause As if one like Anaxagoras would say that there were many worlds besides this or that such and such things haue byn done in tymes past he were bound to proue what he sayth he that should deny such matters were not bound to proue his denyall but only reasonably to answere his aduersaries arguments And the reason is manifest because for to affirme or belieue any thinge we must haue reason or proofe thereof bur for the not belieuing of it we need no other reason then to shew that there is no sufficient reason why it should be belieued Hereupon Luther in his booke against Henry 8. King of England tom 2. fol. 340 sayd He must be taught the principles of disputation who hauing to proue his affirmation vrgeth his aduersary to proue his denyall And Vorstins in his Antibellarm pag. 464 It is inough for the denyer probably to deny Wherefore in these kind of questions Protestants ought to be vrged to performe their part that is to proue what they affirme to wit that before Luthers tyme their Church was had Pastors and the like which if they cannot do they must needs confesse that in this debate they haue lost their cause And they ought not to presse vs to proue that before Luther their Church was not had not Pastors c. Because as I sayd herein we are only the defenders and denyers Tom. 1. fo 389. 473. and therefore it sufficeth for vs to shew that no reasons which the Protestants alledge conuince a reasonable man to belieue that there was any such Church before Luther appeared which if we do we haue wonne the cause That the ProtestaÌ„ts Church was inuisible to strangers Neuerthelesse that I may vse Luthers words in the booke before cited Albeit it belong not to vs to proue the negatiue let vs do it 2. First therefore touching the inuisibility of the Protestant Church before Luthers tyme Protestants confesse that it was inuisible to Papists to enemies to the world and to all that were not of it For thus sayth Sadcel in his Refutation of the 61. article pag. 538 VVe deny not that the Godly men lurcked vnder Popish darknesse and we giue God thanks that such persons families Inuisible to Papists and companies were for a tyme inuisible and vnknowne to the Pope and all his Catchpoles seing they were for a long tyme like sparckles couered with much ashes The same he sayth in his answere to Arthur cap. 8. and to the Sophismes of Turrian loco 10. and to the Repetition of them pag. 706. Danaeus in his booke of Antichrist cap. 38. writeth That there were very few Protestants and those dwelling in wildernesses and also vnknowne to others vnknown to others Iunius in his 4. booke of the Church cap. 5. speaketh thus of Protestants before Luther They professed their sayth amongst themselues but not before dogges wild beasts who would runne vpon them D. Whitaker Cont. 2. quaest 2. cap. 2. pag. 458. VVas it the Protestant Church manifest to all No but to those only who had eyes And pag. 468 There was no true Church on earth Knowne only to ProtestaÌ„ts which appeared to all And quest 6. cap. 2. pag 359 VVe care not for their obiecting solitude vnto vs. For we are not ashamed to haue recalled our Church out of this kind of solitude D. Fulke to the Cauillations of Stapleton The whole forme of the Church was for some ages vnknowne to the vngratefull world And in his booke of succession pag. 118 They confessed Christ but not alwayes before heretiks but before themâ—elues and the Church And in his notes vpon the 11. cap. of the Acts If by visible you vnderstand that which is seene and knowne to the whole world it is not true that the Church was alwayes visible D. Morton in the 1. part of his Apology booke 1. cap. 16. sayth They professed secretly not publikely D. White in his way to the Church pag. 95 That they professed among themselues Osiander in his Manuel pag. 59 In the visible Church of Rome there was the inuisible company of belieuers hidden to the eye of the world Caelius secundus Curio in his booke of the lardgnes of the Kingdome of God pag. 212 It came to passe that for many yeares the Church lay hid and that the Cittizen of this Kingdome could scarce or not at all be discerned from others And the Scots in their generall confession VVe say that this is the only true Christian sayth which is now reuealed to the world Thus they acknowledg that before Luthers tym Protestants were vnknown to the Pope and his officers to their
is not at all tymes subiect to the eyes of men as the experience of many ages witnesseth Againe Elias thought himselfe only left of the Church falsly indeed but that is a proofe that she may lye so hidden And in his 4. booke of Institutions cap. 1 § 3. he affirmeth that it is not needfull to see or to feele the Church and that she may passe our knowledge Beza in his Confession cap. 5. § 9 Diuers tymes the Church seemeth to haue perished vtterly Iunius in his 3 book of the church cap. 16 The Church shall neuer end but shall lye hidden according to her visible forme Chassanio in his common pâ—aces loc 2. of the Church pag. 148 The Church is not alwayes visible Danaeus in his 3. booke of the Church cap. 2. Bellarmine will haue that only to be the Church which is visible which is most false Cap. 12 God oftentymes will haue some visible Church on earth and often tymes none VVhen there is no visible Church OfteÌ„tyms no visible Church on earth then this precept of adioyning himself to the Church ceaseth And cap. 13 Bellarmine laboureth to proue the true Church of God on earth to be alwayes visible That being most false c. And cap 16 VVe say we affirme we auouch that the Church may so faile on earth not that there is none at all but that there is none in respect of vs that is of men that there be none visible to vs on earth Againe S. Paul inferreth generally that the whole Church may leaue to be visible And lib. 4. cap. 8 The true Church may sometymes faile to be visible Son is in his answere to Sponde cap. 2 pag. 33 The whole Church may haue to be visible God maketh that the Church is not alwayes visible Plessy Mornay in his booke of the Church cap. 1 Oftentymes the good corne is hidden vnder the chaffe without any appearance of the Church Polanus in his Antibellarm Colledge disput 14 The visible Church may faile Bucanus in his common places loc 41. sect 9 It oftentymes happeneth that there is no company of men extant which publikely and visibly worshippeth God purely The visible church may faile And sect 12 There is alwayes on earth some number which worshippeth Christ piously but this number is not alwayes visible Trelcatius in his 2. booke of Theologicall Institutions maketh rhis title of one Chapter That the visible church may fayle against Bellarmine Hyperius in his Methode of diuinity lib. 3. pag. 548 VVhiles Elias wandred here and there there appeared no face of the Church Sadeel in his refutation of the 61 â—rticle pag. 531 They are deceiued who think there is no Catholike Church vnlesse they measure it with their eyes And pag. 535 The true church maybe conserned without any visible state And in his repetition of Sophismes pag. 610 It is plaine Wanteth outward forme that the Church is not so to be tyed to any outward forme whatsoeuer that it ought to be denyed to be a Church as often as that forme shall not be extant And of vocation of Ministers pag. 543 The Church sometyme wanteth the externall forme Againe It is cleare that the Church hath sometymes byn without visible and personall succession Pag. 550 Mens wickednes doth sometymes take from vs the visible face of the Church And againe It is sometymes so darkned that it appeareth not to our eyes The whole visible Church may perish Scharpe of Iustification Cont. 5 The visible Church as such may perish The members of the visible Church may perish yea the whole visible Church as such Bastingius vpon the Catechisme title of the Church pag. 227 VVithout doubt in euery age things haue byn so troubled as like a graine couered with straw there appeared no face of the Church Vorstius in his Antibellarm pag 133 A litle before the calling of Abraham no where appeared any visible Church And pag. 136 Hereupon it followeth that the visible church of Christ not only in a great part The whole visible Church may faile but also taken whole in her vttermost extent may for some tyme faile from the true sayth and be wholy darkned The outward church of Christ may perish And pag. 424 Neither did Christ promise that he would absolutely and perpetually hinder the perishing and corruption of the outward Church The Flemmings Confession article 27 The Church in the eyes of men for sometyme seemeth as extinguished And Napper vpon the 11. chap. of the Apoc. pag. 186 They erre who think that the true Church is alwayes visible And vpon 12. cap. pag. 195 The visible Church wholy imbraced the errors of merits of indulgences c. And Proposit 20. pag. 41 The true Church was inuisible and the true knowledge of God so couered with darknesse that none could visibly enter Thus foraine Protestants Of our couÌ„trymen D. Whitaker Contr. 2. quest 3. cap. 2. pag. 470 Sometymes obscurity most of all helpeth the church For at some tyme she could not be safe vnlesse she lay hid And cap. 3. pag. 474 VVe say that sometyme the Church may auoyd the sight of men hide it selfe in corners Cap. 1. pag. 466 VVe confesse that euer more there is on earth some number of them who piously worship Christ hold the true fayth and religion but we say that this number is not alwayes visible Their Papists opinion is that there is euer more on earth a visible church Not alwayes visible It may fall out that there cannot be fouÌ„d out and knowne any true and certaine visible church And cap. 2. cit pag. 468 Our aduersary would proue that there was alwayes in the world some visible church And pag. 469 Hence inferreth Denis the Carthusian not as our aduersaries do that the visible church can neuer perish The visible church may perish or that there is euer more in the world some visible church but that sayth shall neuer perish wholy but that Christian religion shall still perseuer in some to the end of the world This sayth Whitaker is plainly that which we say and defend Marke how plainly he professeth that they do not teach that the visible Church cannot perish Note or that there is alwayes some visible Church on earth but only that some shall alwayes belieue the Christian religion The same doctrine he teacheth pag. 470. 473. 475. 476. and 479. And q. 6. cap. 2. pag. 559. And in his third booke against Duraeus sect 5. 6. 7. 11. M. Perkins in his problem title of the church The ancients do acknowledge that the church on earth is not alwayes visible D. Willet in his Synopsis Cont. 2. q 1. pag. 67 VVe say the church is not always actually visible to the world nay it may sometyms be so hid and secret that the members know not one another Againe In Elias tyme not visible In the dayes of Elias the church was not visible And quest 2. pag. 74 A visible
church we define to be a congregation of men amongst whome the word is truly preached and the Sacraments administred Such a church hath not alwayes byn neither can we be assured that it shall alwayes be sound vpon the earth There was a tyme when as the visible church failed vpon earth The visible church failed This inuisibility of the Protestant Church which I haue hitherto proued by their manifold Confessions I will also proue by sequels out of other their sayings First therefore D. Morton in his Apology part 1. book 1. cap. 31. disliketh not these words of Bellarmine Protestants when they say the church cannot faile or perish meane the inuisibible church And many of them in expresse words deny that the Promises of perpetuity Protestāts say the promises belong not to the visible Church which in the scripture are made vnto the church Math. 16. and other where be made to the visible church D. Whitaker Cont. 2. quest 3. cap. 3. pag. 468 It is most false that it is the visible church against which the gates of hell shall not preuaile And Daneus Cont. 4. lib. 3. cap. 13. pag. 717 There Math. 16. is not meant the visible church To whome assenteth D. Willet in his Synopsis cont 2. quest 2. M. Powell of Antichrist lib. 1. cap. 10. Beurlin in his Refutation of Sotus cap. 53. Moulins of the vocation of Ministers lib. 1. c. 4. in his Bucklet part 1. pag. 49. And D. Morton lib. cit cap. 13. addeth that those three places Math. 16. vlt. and psal 47. which promise the perpetuity of the Church Protestāts belieue not the visible church Are euery one of them vnderstood almost by euery Father of the only company of the elect which the Protestants call the inuisible Church Besides they all generally teach that by the Catholike Church which they professe to belieue in the Creed they meane not the visible Church but only the inuisible Luther in his booke of abrogating Masse tom 2. fol. 247 VVho shall shew vs the holy church seeing it is hidden in spirit and is only belieued according as I belieue the holy church Zuinglius in his explication of the 31. article The church which consisteth of those which are knowne to God alone in that which we professe in the articles of our creed Danaeus lib. cit pag. 713 The question is of the true church of God whereof it is sayd in the creed I belieue the holy church Bellarmine vvill haue it to be the visible vve deny it The like he sayth pag. 789. 717. 718. and 725. Vorstius in his Antibellarm pag. 144 VVe professe not in the creed to belieue the visible church but the inuisible D. Whitaker lib. 3. against Duraeus sect vlt You see vvhat Catholike church vve belieue not the visible multitude of Christians but the holy company of the elect The same he sayth Cont. 2. quest 2. cap. 2. Brentius in Prolegominis pag. 2. and others commonly Furthermore they say that the visible Church is not the true Church in the sight of God For Caluin in his 4. book of Institutions cap. 1. § 7. They say the visible Church is not the true Church before God and the rest graunt that both wicked and reprobate Christians may be of the visible Church but deny that they can be of the true Church in the sight of God Now surely if the visible Church be neither the true Church in the sight of God nor she to whome he hath promised perpetuity nor she which Protestants do belieue what reason can they haue to belieue that the visible Church shall alwayes remayne or which is all one that the Church shall be alwayes visible Againe their common doctrine is that preaching of true doctrine is the note of the visible Church for so teacheth the Confession of Auspurg cap. 7. the English Confession artic 19. and all the rest To which his Maiesty in his epist to Cardinall Peron D. Whitaker Contr. 2. q 5. c. 17. D. Morton part 1. Apol. l. 1. c. 6. M. Willet in his Synopsis Cont. 2. quest 3. pag. 102. Sadeel to Turtians Sophismes loc 5. Vorstius in Antibellarm pag. 145. and others do adde that it is an essentiall note of the visible Church And it is manifest that they must say so because they vse to define the visible Church to be a company vvherein the pure vvord of God is preached the Sacraments rightly administred For so it is defined of the English Confession and of Sadeel lib. cit of Whitaker quest 5. cit cap. 20. of Melācthon tom 1. in cap. 15. Matth. and of others generally But before Luther there was no preaching of Protestantisme as we shall heare them confesse cap. 7. therefore there was then no visible Protestant Church Finally sometymes they say that not only preaching of the word but that also a lawfull ministery or that not only what true preaching soeuer but also such as is made by a lawfull Minister of the word is of the essence and substance of the visible Church For thus writeth D. Whitaker Cont. 2. q. 5. cap. 19. pag. 550 Stapleton sayth that the preaching of the Ghospell by lavvfull Ministers is the proper note of the church and vve say no othervvise And pag. 551. That he confesseth true preaching by a lavvfull Ministery to be a note of the church is no other thing then that vve say and defend The like hath Sadeel in the place now cited and the Switzers Confession cap. 17. putteth lawfull preaching for the chiefest note of the church Caluin 4. Institut cap. 2. § 1. for a perpetuall note the conclusions defended at Geneua pag. 845. for an essentiall note thereof But before Luther there were no Protestant Ministers at all as we shall hereafter heare the Protestants confesse Therefore no visible Protestant Church 8. By that which hath byn rehearsed it is manifest Summe of the foresayd confessions that very many and very famous Protestants haue often and plainly confessed that when Luther came first as they speake to the Ghospell the Protestant Church and religion was not visible say hid lurked lay in the wildernes in lurking holes indarknesse in Trophonius his denne was buryed was vnknowne vnheard of appeared to none cold not be discerned Her image could not be seene no shew of besides a huge spoile did appeare no face no fashion no trace of her was extant and she was so hid that he who would iudge according to the outward shew would think her to be no where And that this is so manifest as that the experience of many ages beareth witnes thereof With what words I pray you could they say that their Church was altogeather inuisible if they haue not sayd it in these 9. Moreouer it is manifest that for to maintaine their inuisible Church they do teach that the Church may be vnknowne to the godly to those who are of it that it may be not visible not appeare not
the Waldenses and therefore the Bohemian Confession is not the Waldenses Confession Nor albeit therein be mention of iustification by only fayth can it be inferred that therefore the Waldenses did belieue it Finally as I haue often sayd and it must be alwayes inculcated I regard not whome any one sayth to haue byn Protestants but whom he proueth to haue byn such Neither whome he can proue to haue byn Protestants in part and in some sort but whome he can proue to haue byn absolutely and wholy Protestants at least for the substance of Protestancy Neither will it auaile any whit to complaine that we haue burnt the writings of the Waldenses by which they might proue that they were true Protestants For if they haue nor wherwithall to proue they were true Protestants they in vaine do feigne it Besides we asked of Luther his followers to produce one man Waldensian or other who had byn a true Protestant before Luthers preaching for which end there was no need of writings but of liuing men Wiclif was no true Protestant 6. In like sort I proue that Wicliffe and his followers were not true and absolute Protestants First because the Wiclifists are by name condemned togeather with other heretiks of Protestants in their Apology of the Confession of Auspurg chap. of the Church in these words VVe haue plainly inough sayd in our Confession that we disalow the Donatists and VViclifists Secondly because neither in Wiclifs booke nor of any of his schollers is there any signe of sole iustifying fayth neither did euer any Catholike writer contend with them there about Thirdly because as Melancthon writeth in his epistle to Myconius in his 1. tom printed at Bâ—sle pag. 416 VViclif neither vnderstood nor held the iustice of fayth Yea Husse his principall follower as we shall anon rehearse belieued that works did iustify And Wiclif himselfe in Thomas Walden tom 3. tit 1. cap. 7. bid euery one hope in the proper iustice of his life and men to trust in their merits which thing alone doth separate him farre inough from the Protestants campe Fourthly because the Wiclifists are reckoned amongst Heretiks of many Protestants as of Schusselburg tom 3. Catal pag. 190. of Kemnice in fundament is Coenae pag. 114. of Pantalcon in his Chronicle and of Matthias Hoe disput 27. they are termed most monstrous monsters And D. Cay in his 2. booke of the antiquity of Cambridge obiecteth Wicliffe to the Oxford men as a flaine of their vniuersity Fiftly wiclif taught diuers things which Protestants dislike And to omit these things which Catholikes obiect vnto him Canisius to 3 antiq lectionum Rokesana Prince of the Hussites in his dispute with Catholiks before the King of Bohemia hath these words These are the articles of VViclif That tithes are meere almes That the Clergy ought to haue no ciuill gouernment If a King be in mortall sinne that he is no more a King Which last article Osiander in his 15. Century repeateth thus There is no temporall Lord no Prelate no Bishop whiles he is in mortall sinne And Melancthon in his foresayd epistle VViclif doth plainly sophistically and seditiously wrangle vpon ciuill dominion And in his dispute of the right of Magistrats VViclif is mad who thinketh the wicked to haue no Dominion And in his Commentaries vpon Aristotles Politiques VViclif would haue those who haue not the holy ghost to loose their Dominion So that I meruaile how D. Andrews in his answere to the Apology of Bellarmine could say that it is a sclaunder that Wiclif taught so when as not only Catholiks but euen Hussites and Protestants do affirme it Moreouer Wiclif as Osiander reporteth in the place aforecited did condemne lawfull oathes and taught that all things fell out according to absolute necessity And Melancthon in his sayd epistle giueth this sentence of him I haue looked into VViclif but I haue found in him many other errors Wiclife held not iustice of sole faith by which one may iudge of his spirit He at all vnderstood not nor held the iustice of sayth He fondly confoundeth the ghospell and politique affaires would haue Priests to haue nothing proper c. And in his common places chap. of Ecclesiasticall power That superstition of VViclif is pernicious and seditious which driueth the ministers of the Church to beggery and denyeth that it is lawfull for them to hold any thing proper M. Stow also in his Cronicle anno 1376. writeth that he taught that Neither King nor lay man could giue any thing to the church for perpetuity Finally Vadianus in his fiâ—t book of the Eucharist pag. 168. confesseth that in many things he fouly erred Hussites no Protestants 7. Husse likewise and his partners we proue not to haue byn true and absolute Protestants First because it cannot be proued that they held the foresayd article of iustification by only fayth and the other fundamentall points of Protestancy Secondly because Husse is by name reiected of Luther who in the defence of his 30. article tom 2. thus writeth of him He agreeth not with me He gaue not a litle to the idol of Rome He seemeth not to repugne against the Popes Monarchy And vpon the 2. psal tom 3. fol 395 Husse did not condemne the sacrifice of Masse as we do And vpon the 9. chapter of Isaias tom 4. fol. 108. he sayth that Husse held a doctrine most pestilent most pernicious horrible and wholy impious yea very diuelish And in his Lypsicall dispute tom 1. fol. 260 I know and that very well that an euill Prelate is not to be reiected and therefore I damne the article of Husse And both there and other where Tom. 1. fo 30. 291. 292. 251. oftentymes denieth himselfe to be a Bohemian by which he meant an Hussite And in his table-talkes chapter of Sâ—ermers sayth Husse belieued that works with fayth do iustify which point alone excludeth him from the number of Protestants Husse belieue not sole faith And in the chapter of Antichrist Husse departed not one iot from the Papists but only reproued vices and naughty life Which also affirmeth Hierome of Prage Husse his fellow in M. Fox vpon the 11. chapter of the Apocal. Where also M. Fox himselfe writeth that Husse agreed with the Papists touching transubstantiation Masse Vowes Predestination Free will formed fayth cause of iustification and merits of works which plainly declare how litle he held of Protestancy Lastly when Bellarmine wrote that there was not in the world when Luther began any religion but Paganisme Iudaisme Mahometisme Grecisme Nestorianisme Hussites heresy and the Romane fayth D. Whitaker Cont. 2. quest 5. cap. 3. pag. 502. denyeth these to haue byn all For sayth he our Church was then In which words he professeth the Protestants to be a different church from the Hussites Iunius also lib. 4. de Eccles cap. 6. acknowledgeth that some Protestant deny Hussites to be of their Church And Luther vpon the 53.
Chapter of Isaias tom 4. fol. 220. thus writeth There is no religion in the world which receiueth this opinion of iustification by only fayth and we our selues in priuate do scant belieue it though we publikely defend it By which words he sheweth that neither Hussytes nor Waldenses nor any Christians besides Protestants and scarce they also do belieue the principall and most fundamentall article of Protestancy howsoeuer openly they professe it That the Church cannot be so inuisible as Protestant confesse theirs to haue byn before Luthers tyme. CHAP. VI. 1. BY the name of the Church we vnderstand not as I sayd before only the men but men sociated or the society of men in the fayth worship of God Wherfore that a church be sayd visible not only the men but their worship of God must be visible Neither by this word visible do I vnderstand here that only which can be seene but whatsoeuer is sensible according both to the vulgar phrase of speach wherewith we say See how it soundeth as S. Augustine noteth and also after the phrase of scripture Lib. 10. Confess c. 35. wherein as the same holy Doctour obserueth All sensible things are called visible And Protestants as is before shewed do confesse that before Luthers rising their Church was simply inuisible Lib. 1. de mor. Manich c. 20. and vnseene of any either of those within or without her And necessarily they must say so because they can name none at all who before Luther arose did see a company of men who professed to belieue iustification by only fayth and the rest of the fundamentall principles of Protestancy yea they affirmed that it was so inuisible Ca. 4. n. 11. as it implyed contradiction to haue byn seene of any That the Church cannot be inuisible 2. Now that the Church Militant or liuing on earth cannot be so inuisible I proue first because it is against an article of fayth of diuers Protestants And if perhaps any hereupon imagine that either Protestants neuer graunted the contrary or that if they did graunt it their testimonies against themselues are not to be accepted let him read what hereafter I write touching that matter in the last chapter of this booke Wherefore in the Confession of Saxony cap. 15. they professe in this sort God will haue the Ministery of the ghospell to be publike he will not haue the voice of the ghospell to be shut vp only in corners but will haue it beard of all mankind Therefore he will haue publike and seemely meetings and in them he will haue the voice of the ghospell to sound He will also haue these same meetings to be witnesses of the Confession and separation of the Church from the sects and opinions of other Nations God will haue his Church to be seene and heard in the world and will haue her deuided by many publik marks from other people And the same they repeat in the Consent of Polony cap. de Coena And the same Confession of Saxony cap. of the Church VVe speake not of the Church as of a Platonicall idaea but we shew a Church which may be seene and heard The eternall Father will haue his Sonne to be heard in all mankind VVherefore we say that the Church is in this life a visible company c. SecoÌ„dly it is against their owne definitions of a militant Church ProtestaÌ„ts definitioÌ„s of the Church For the foresayd Confession of Saxony defineth the Church in this life to be a visible company The Magdeburgians in their 1. Century lib. 1. c. 4. col 170. do thus write The Church may be thus defined The Church in this life is a company of those The câ—urch in this life who imbrace the sincere doctrine of the Ghospell and rightly vse the Sacraments And the very same definition giueth Melancthon tom 4. in cap. 3.1 ad Tim. pag. 398. Hutterus in his Analysis of the confession of Auspurg pag. 444. saith This Church which is sayd to be and to be belieued The Church which we belieue is not a Platonicall idea but the visible company of those that are called Zanchius also in his treatise of the Church cap. 2 The militant Church is the company of the elect and truly saythfull Church militant professing the same sayth partaking the same Sacraments c. Hereof properly speake the scriptures when they call the Church the spouse of Christ the body of Christ redeemed with the bloud of Christ sounded vpon a rock Gerlachius tom 2. Disput 22 Defining the Church as it is on earth we say that it is a congregation of men Church on earth who called by the voice of the Ghospell heare the word of God and vse the Sacraments instituted of Christ. 3. Thirdly it is against the properties and markes of the true Church assigned by the Protestants themselues to be altogeather inuisible For thus their Confession of Auspurg cap. 7 The Church of Christ properly so called The proper Church hath her marks to wit pure doctrine c. The Confession of Saxony cap. 12 The true church is discerned from other nations by the voice of true doctrine and lawfull vse of Sacraments The true Church The French Confession art 27 VVe belieue that the true church ought to be discerned with great care VVherefore we affirme out of the word of God that the Church is the company of the faythfull who agree in following the word of God and imbracing true religion wherein also they daily profit growing and confirming themselues mutually in the feare of God The Confession of the Low Countries art 29 By these markes the true Church shall be discerned from the false if in her the pure preaching of the Ghospell be of force by these markes it is certaine that the true Church may be distinguished The Confession of Scotland art 18 It is necessary that the true Church be discerned from the false by euident marckes least being deceiued we imbrace the false for the true to our eternall damnation Againe VVe belieue the markes of the true Church to be true preaching of the word c. Melancthon in his answere to the Bauarian articles tom 3. fol. 362 It is euident that the true Church is a visible company And vpon the 16. to the Romans tom 1. pag. 486 She is the true Church who teacheth the Ghospell aright and rightly administreth the Sacraments Danaeus in his booke of Antichrist cap. 17 The proper definition of the Church This is the proper definition of the Church that the true Church is the company of the faythfull who serue God purely and keep the notes of adoption instituted by him such as are the heauenly word the Sacraments and discipline By these 3. marks the false Church is distinguished from the true Lubbert in his 4. booke of the Church cap. 2 VVe say that the Church doth shew her selfe to be the true Church by the sincere preaching of the word of
society in profession of true doctrine and right vse of Sacraments is termed of Protestants the true Church not because this Church or society is of it self the true church or the society instituted by God but because alwayes in or vnder it there is the true Church to wit the society in iustice and predestination by reason that in euery company of them that professe true doctrine and rightly vse the Sacraments there are some who are sociated and vnited in iustice and predestination Which D. Whitaker intimateth when Cont. 2. quest 4. cap. 1 pag. 485. he sayth The visible Church which holdeth and professeth true sayth is the true Church only of the part of the elect and predestinated I answere that this supposeth a thing doubtfull and perhaps false For what certainty can there be that in euery particuler company of them who professe the true fayth rightly vse the Sacraments there is alwayes a coÌ„pany of the iust and elect when as Christ sayth Many are called but few are chosen Matt. â—0 especially if as Protestants say one or two make a church Surely Danaeus Cont. 4. pag. 689. seemeth to deny this saying These visible companies are sometymes a part of that true Church sometymes none But admit that in euery company of true professors there be always a company of iust and elect what reason were this to terme the society in profession of true fayth the true Church if in deed the society in iustice predestination be the only true Church This would suffice to say that the apparent Church could neuer be separated from the true Church but not to call that society the true Church which indeed is only the outward appearance of the true Church And much lesse would it suffice to call it the church properly so termed the spouse and body of Christ the Catholike Church the Church which we professe to belieue as the Protestants haue termed the visible Church Neither can these epithets or names be giuen to any other society then to that which hath the true nature and substance of the Church indeed because they signify as properly and expresly that only Church as she can be expressed of vs by any words whatsoeuer And sith Protestants haue giuen them all to the visible church they must needs confesse that shee hath the nature and substance of the very true Church indeed and consequently that an inuisible Church is no true Church indeed 6. Fourthly I proue that the Church cannot be inuisible ProtestaÌ„ts somtyms say that the church cannot be inuisible because oftentymes Protestants do confesse it The Apology of the Confession of Ausburg chap. of the Church The Church is principally the society of fayth and of the holy Ghost in the hearts which yet hath her outward markes that she may be knowne Luther vpon the 4. chap. of Genesis tom 6. fol. 56 The Church was neuer so voyd of externall marks that it could not be not knowne where God was certainly to be sound And vpon 51. psalm tom 3. fol. 474 For Christ will not lye hid in the world but will be preached not between wals but vpon the house top Melancthon vpon the 11. of Daniel tom 2. pag. 511 It is necessary that the Church be a visible company Againe VVe seigne not an inuisible Church like to a Platonicall idea And in the Preface of his 3. tome he thinketh it so absurd to put an inuisible Church as he sayth To what tendeth that perdigious speach Monstruous to say the Church was inuible which denyeth that there is any visible Church We must needs confesse a visible Church And vpon the 3. chap. 1. Tim. tom 4. pag. 398 Others sayth he setting aside wholy the externall shew do speake of an inuisible Church as of a Platonicall idaea which is no where seene or heard Kemnice in his common places title of the Church cap. 3 God will haue vs to know where and which is the Church Therefore she must be knowne not to God only but also to vs and therupon is defined to be the visible company of them who imbrace the Ghospell of Christ and rightly vse the Sacraments Iames Andrews in his book against Hosius pag. 210 VVe are not ignorant that the church must be a visible company of teachers and hearers Againe The Church is and is called a company of men chosen of God in which the word of God soundeth incorrupt c. Hunnius in his treatise of Freewill pag. 91 God in all tymes hath placed his Church as in a high place and hath exalted it in the sight of all people and Nations Hutter in his Analysis of the Confession of Auspurg pag. 430 The elect are not the whole Church no if you speake only of the true church For the church consisteth not only of inward sayth in Christ but also of the outward administration of the word Sacraments Now as farre as this in outward rite is performed so farre the true Church truly is visible Beurlin in the Preface of his Refutation of Sotus I confesse the Church of Christ is alwayes to be acknowledged visible And he addeth that all confesse the same The same doctrine is taught by Gesner loc 24. by Adam Francis in his 11. place and by other Lutherans Amongst the Sacramentaries thus writeth Vrsin in Prolegomenis ad Catechcsin pag. 2 The Church must needs be seene in this world that the elect may know vnto what company they must adioyne themselues in this life Iunius Cont. 4. lib. 3. cap. 13. affirmeth that it is impious to say that the Church can wholy want a visible forme Keckerman in the 3. book of his Theologicall systeme writeth that the Church must always be sensible that other nations may know to what church they ought to adioyne themselues and that Confession of sincere doctrine can neuer faile wholy nor the visible church wholy erre Danaeus in his booke of the visible Church dareth to say that who denieth the true church of God and that visible to haue byn from the beginning of the world he without doubt sheweth himselfe to be ignorant in holy scripture Amongst our English Protestants M. Hooker in his 3. booke of Ecclesiasticall policy pag. 126 God hath had euer euer shall haue some Church visible vpon earth D. Feild in his 1. booke of the Church cap. 10 For seing the Church is the multitude of them that shall be saued and no man can be saued vnlesse he make Confession vnto saluation for fayth hid in the heart and concealed doth not suffice it cannot be but they that are of the true Church must by profession of the truth make themselues knowne in such sort that by their profession and practise they may be discerned from other men And D. White in defence of his Way cap. 4. pag. 390 I acknowledge the prouidence of God who hath left the records of history to confirme our fayth and freely graunt our religion to be false if the
pretended discipline cap 2. auoucheth that the Geneuian discipline began of Caluin because before him it was neuer seene or heard of And if they think that a discipline or an hereticall company could be and not be seene or heard of in the world how much more ought they to think the same of the Church of God 17. Lastly I proue that the Church of God could not be inuisible Absurdities follow of the inuisibility of the Church because thereupon would ensue many and great absurdities For first if the visible Church should faile it is manifest that it is not the Church of Christ against which he hath promised that the very gates of hell shall not preuaile And if it be graunted that the visible Church is not the Church instituted by Christ it must needs be but a humane society instituted by man How then shold it come to passe that one cannot be saued vnlesse he be in the visible Church if so he can be as commonly all Protestants do teach Who contemne all ordinances of men as vnnecessary to saluation why mak they such account of this humane institution At the last the Protestants haue felt this mischeife as ye may see in Caluin in his 3. homily in his Opuscles pag. 548. and Danaeus in his booke of the visible church where they bring many reasons to proue that it is necessary to be of the visible church But seing themselues do teach that the visible church is not the true Church in the sight of God and consequently a humane institution how can they proue that God hath commaunded or men can appoint so strictly to obserue this one humane Institution vnder paine of damnation Another inconuenience is that Christs promises touching the continuance of his church are exposed to the laughter and mockery of Iewes and Infidels For sith as the Law sayth and Protestants acknowledge among men there is no other account made of things that appeare not then of things that are not what man will reasonably perswade himselfe that Christs Church hath euer continued in the world if she for many ages appeared in no one corner of the world Surely this seemeth so incredible that I think not that any man well in his wittes belieueth it howsoeuer for to defend the Protestants Church he may say it But farewell rather such a Church which cannot be defended but by such improbable paradoxes 18. The 3. inconuenience is that the church of God should haue byn much more miserable then hath byn the Synagogue of the Iewes euen since it hath byn forsaken of God For the Synagogue hath euer since Christs tyme byn visible vnto the world and professed her fayth both before her owne and others Lib. 12. cōt Faust c. 11. The Iewish nation sayth S. Augustin whether vnder Pagan or Christian Kings hath not lost the signe of her law wherwith it is distinguished from other nations and people The same testifieth S. Hierome epist 129. ad Dardan And Peter Martyr in his Common places title of the Iewes § 47 The Hebrews albeit subdued of the Romans yet neuer tooke their lawes rites and customes they keep their own yet as well as they can And Sadeel in his Answere to Theses Posnan cap. 8. graunteth the same And the Magdeburgians in euery Century make speciall mention of the Iewes To this some Protestants say that it is no meruaile that the externall condition of the Church was more miserable thē of the Synagogue Iunius Daneus l. 4. de Eccl. c. 5. But whosoeuer shall read the Prophesies of the glory and amplitude of the Church will think this strange But besides not only the externall but also the internall state of the Church was more miserable then the Synagogue if the Synagogue durst in all ages euen before her enemies professe her faith and the Church of Christ for long tyme durst mutter nothing euen before her owne children yea as we shall hereafter heare the Protestants teach adored Antichrist and obserued Antichristian and idolatricall rites worships The 4. inconuenience is that if we say that the Church may be and yet not be seene of any we giue occasion to euery new start vp heretik to say that his church hath euer byn neither can we refute this his dotage vnlesse we do maintaine that the church must be euermore visible professe her faith which as we haue seene Protestants themselues do suppose when they proue that any Church or company hath not byn in former tymes 19. Out of all which hath byn sayd in this chapter it appeareth euidently that whither we put the forme of the Church in some visible thing or inuisible whether we say that the only elect and iust be of the church or not they alone of what kind soeuer I say the forme of the Church be and whosoeuer be of the Church of which matter I disput not now it is euident I say that the Church of God neuer is at any tyme but she professeth her sayth before her children and before the world and consequently that the Church her profession of fayth or which comes all to one that the Church according to her profession of fayth is euermore visible or sensible which sufficeth to my purpose because before Luther arose there was no Church visible in profession of Protestant fayth Wherefore I frame my 3. demonstration for to proue Luther to haue byn the Author of the Protestant Church in this sort VVhensoeuer the Church is she is visible in profession of her sayth whether this profession be an essentiall forme or a property or accident inseparable But the Protestant Church immediatly before Luther arose was not visible in profession of her sayth Therefore immediatly before Luther she was not at all And by his preaching became to be Therefore he was the Author thereof The Maior or first proposition of the Syllogisme is euident by all that hath byn layd in this chapter And the Minor or second proposition by all the verball Confessions which we haue reheased in the former chapter by reall confessions of all Protestants whatsoeuer who neither in Luthers tyme nor since could bring forth any man worthy of credit who had seene any company professing Protestancy before Luther began to preach it Then the which yet nothing had byn more easy to do especially in Luthers tyme if any such company had byn extant That Protestants confesse that before Luther their Church had no Protestant Pastors CHAP. VII 1. THE 4. demonstration for to proue that Luther was the Author of the Protestāt church and Religion we will take out of that Protestants acknowledge their Church before his tyme to haue wholy wanted Pastors First therefore they confesse that their Pastors in former tymes were vnknowne to the world Protestāts Pastors vnknown to the world and to Protestants themselues D. Fulk in his booke of Succession pag. 26 God hath raised vp Pastors in all ages howsoeuer they were vnknowne to the world And pag.
about to shew any other kind of Pastors Finally all those who affirme that the vocation or Mission of Luther and their first Ministers was extraordinary must needs say that there were no former Protestant Pastours of whome they could haue byn sent or approued ProtestaÌ„ts say the Church may be without Pastors 4. The same also they insinuate when they teach that the Church may be without Pastors which they affirme that thereby they may defend the being of their own Church before Luther when it had no Pastors Luther in cap. 4. Oseae tom 4. fol 295 As if the Church were tyed to any certaine order of Ministery The Confession of Saxony cap. 12 God estsoones restoreth the Ministery Caluin of true Reform pag. 332 I graunt indeed that it can neuer fall out that the Church perish but when they referre that to Pastors which is promised of the perpetuall continuance of the church in that they are much deceiued For the Church doth not perish streight if Pastors he wanting Beza of the notes of the Church pag. 55 Ordinary succession and vocation of Pastors was not always needfull or perpetuall Sadeel in Answere to the abiured articles pag. 533 It is false that the outward Ministery must be perpetuall The same he hath in Repetit Sophism Turriani pag. 763. Iunius and Danaeus lib. 4. de Eccles cap. 8. Bucan in his 41. place de Eccles quest 19 Sometyme the outward and vsuall ministry of the church being interrupted the Church is extraordinarily nourished of God as it were in the desert Keckerman in his Theologicall Systeme lib. 3. pag. 397 The Church is often pressed so that the order of succession of Pastors must be somewhat interrupted And Vorstius in his Antibellarm pag. 158 The ordinary succession vseth oftentymes to be interrupted for some tyme. Luâ—bert in his 5. booke of the church cap. 5 VVe say that the church may for a short space be depriued of Pastors D. Whitaker c. 6. before cited pag. 510 I gather that true and lawfull succession may be broken of and that it is not a true but only an accidentall note of the Church because it pertaineth not to the essence of the Church but only to her externall state And pag. 512 VVe say that ordinary succession hath oftentymes byn interrupted and cut of in the true Church D. Morton lib. cit cap. 17. writeth thus The matter of the proposition to wit where there is no succession there is no Church ye know to be weake And cap. 18. he affirmeth this saying to be false Succession of doctrine cannot be deuided from succession of persons And cap. 23. sayth Succession of fayth may be without succession of doctrine and succession of doctrine without succession of persons D. Fulke lib. de Succes pag. 319 Yea euen the very publike preaching of the word may be silent for a tyme and the Church being depriued for a tyme of this ordinary meanes of her saluation may be preserued so long of God And D. VVhite in his way to the Church pag. 87 All the externall gouernment of the Church may come to decay in that the locall and personall Succession of the Pastors may be interrupted And pag. 403 For the externall Succession we care not it is sufficient that in doctrine they succeded the Apostles and primitiue Churches and those faythfull witnesses which in all ages since imbraced the same 5. By the foresayd Confessions of Protestants it is most cleare that when Luther began to play the Pastor there was no Protestant preacher at all For they acknowledge that they are no Church for any ordinary succession that the true order of the church perished that the true Ministery was taken out of the Church true knowledge of diuine ordination was extinguished and ordination abolished and decayed That the Church had no true Ministery and that she was destitute of true Pastors And that they meane these words both of a substantiall vniuersall destruction of true Ministry is manifest both by the selfe same words and others also For they adde withall that the state of the church was quite ouerthrowne ordinary vocation wholy corrupted that ordinary vocation was no where no place left for ordinary vocation and there were none of whome those who freed their Church from Popery might receiue imposition of hands that the state of the Church was so interrupted that God must raise vp Pastors extraordinarily that the true ranck of ordination was so cut of as that their needed a new succour and a new foundation lastly that the Ecclesiastical order the vaine names therof only remayning was ouerthrowne from the foundation and lawfull order quit abolished that there was not left so much as the slenderest shadow of the cheifest parts of ecclesiasticall vocation In which words either they say that there was neuer a Protestant Pastor at all or that can be sayd by no words whatsoeuer And such was the state and condition of the Protestant church not for a small tyme but as themselues say for some ages And for this cause vsually they call Luther his first partners their (a) Plessie l. 1. de Eccl. c. 11. Napp in 14. Apocal. first ministers first (b) Sadeel de Vocat pag. 556. teachers first (c) Gâ—alt Praefat. in ep ad Rom restorers of the ghospell first (d) Perk. in â— Galat. cap. 11. preachers of the ghospell first restorers of the house of God Apostles and Euangelists 6. Finally I proue that there was no true Protestant preacher before Luther out of the reall coÌ„fession of all Protestants For none of them all can by any sufficient testimony or argument proue that there was any such Pastor Wherefore this is rashly affirmed and fondly belieued 〈◊〉 Marc. â— Either proue sayth Tertullian that which thou belieuest or if thou prouest it not how doest thou belieue it And that common argument of theirs wherewith they vse to proue that they had a Church and Pastors at all tymes because they bring the Scripture to proue their doctrine to be true we shall hereafter shew to be a most vaine Sophisme And besides themselues do ouerthrow it in teaching as we haue seene that the Church may be without Pastors wherby it would not follow that they had Pastors albeit they could by the Scripture proue that before Luther they had a Church Moreouer then those who endeauour to name some Protestant preachers or Pastors before Luthers tyme do plainly shew that there was no true and absolute Protestant Pastor to wit such as taught iustification by only faith and the rest of the fundamentall opinions of Protestancy For the Apology of the Church of England pag. 103. sayth That they gaue not so cleare a light but lightned as it were some sparck The Confession of Saxony cap. 12 That they ioyned stable vnto the foundation Cruciger and Rorarius in Luther tom 1. fol. 202 That they had some litle light D. Fulke of Success pag. 131 That perhaps in all points
they knew not the Apostolicall doctrine And D. Whitaker de Scriptura lib. 2. cap. 8. sect vlt Howsoeuer they were enuironed with most grosse darknesse yet they told some sparckes of truth and shewed them to others And what other thing I pray you is this but to confesse that such were but Protestants in part and in some sort Yea they name some whome they confesse to haue reprehended only certaine abuses amongst the Papists as Melancthon in his Answere to the Bauarian articles tom 3. fol. 369. and Illyricus in his Catalogue lib. 15. confesse of Hilten It remayneth yet for the accomplishing of this demonstration that we also shew by the Confessions of Protestants that the true Church of God can neuer want Pastors as they haue confessed theirs to haue wanted for the space of some ages That the true Church cannot be without Pastors CHAP. VIII 1. THAT the Church can neuer be without Pastors I proue first out of the Confessions of the Protestant faith For thus professe they to belieue in the Confession of Saxony cap. 12 The Sonne of God hath giuen ministers of the Ghospell vnto the Church to the end it do not quite perish Againe He would haue alwayes a company in mankind in which the Sonne himselfe appointed and conserued the Ministery of keeping and spredding his doctrine The Confession of Suitzers cap. 18 God hath alwayes vsed ministers for to setle and gather him a Church and also for to gouerne and preserue it and vseth the same now and further will vse them whiles the Church shall be on earth The French Confession art 25 VVe belieue the Church cannot consist if it haue not Pastors who haue the office of teaching The Confession of the low Countries art 30 VVe belieue that the true Church ought to be gouerned and ruled by that spirituall policy which God hath taught in his word so that there be Pastors and ministers in it And the Confession of Strasburg Seing the â—hurch is the Kingdome of God it hath diuers functions of ministers 2. Secondly I proue it because for the church to be without Pastors is to want some part of the essence and definition giuen by the Protestants themselues For Luther Proposition 15. to 1. fol. 385. thus defineth a Church It is a number of baptized persons and belieuers vnder one Pastor And tom 2. fol. 366. he sayth The publike Ministery of the word whereby the Mysteries of God are dispensed must be instituted by holy ordination as the thing which in the Church is the cheifest and principallest of all Kemnice in his Common places title of the Church pag. 146 The Church consisteth of Pastors and learners Gerlachius in his 22. Disput pag. 966 The Church is not a company meeting by chance or disordered but called by the voice of the cryers of the word for to heare the doctrine of the Ghospell Caluin 4. Institut cap. 2. § 7 The Ministery is the cheifest sinew and soule of the Church Beza of the Notes of the Church pag. 9 By the name of the Church properly taken it is certaine that not only Pastors but also stocks are vnderstood Iunius Cont. 5. lib. 1. cap. 15 God instituted orders in the Church for the essentiall outward constitution therof D. Whitaker Cont. 2. quest 5. cap. 6. pag. 508 The Church cannot subsist without Pastors of whome it is taught For doctrine doth make and constitute the Church and is her soule and life And cap. 18. pag. 546 The Church is no other number then that which holdeth the pure preaching of the word and right vse of the Sacraments And cap. 17. dag 541 Syncere preaching of the word and lawfull administration of the Sacraments do make the church in so much as whersoeuer they be there the Church is and where they be not the Church is not D. Feild in his 2. booke of the Church cap. 6 The Ministery of Pastors and teachers is absolutely and essentially necessary to the being of the Church And lib. 1. cap. 10 Bellarmine laboureth in vaine in prouing that there is and alwayes hath byn a visible Church and that not consisting of some few scattered Christians without order of Ministry or vse of Sacraments for all this we do most willingly yield vnto Yea the Philosophers by the light of reason perceiued that it is impossible they should be a Common wealth without Magistrates This same also is manifest by many other definitions which Protestants haue made of the Church and we haue rehearsed them before in which they place true preaching and administration as essentiall parts of the true Church which yet cannot be without Pastors 3. Besides this were against the definitions of the Church giuen by the holy Fathers For thus writeth S. Cyprian epist 79 The Church is the people vnited to the Priest and the flock cleauing to the Pastor And this he proueth out of those words of our Sauiour Math. 16 Thou art Peter and vpon this rock will I build my Church S. Hierome also in his dialogues against the Luciferians It is no Church which hath no Priest S. Ignatius in his epist ad Trallianos VVithout these Priests the elect Church is not no congregation without these no meeting of Saints And whereas Danaeus lib. 4. de Eccl. cap. 8. sayth that these Fathers define only a visible church that auaileth nothing because indeed there is no Church on earth which is not visible in profession of faith Againe Pastors shall be at least of the essence of the visible Church and consequently the Protestant Church which before Luther wanted Pastors was no visible Church Furthermore S. Cyprian proueth his definition out of those words of Christ Matt. 16. which as is certaine and Protestants confesse are spoken of the true Church in the sight of God And S. Ignatius sayth that there is no elect church no congregation of Saints without Priests which he must needs meane of the true Church And Saint Hierome simply sayth it is no Church which hath no Priests which he could no wayes say if the true Church in the sight of God could be without Priests And hereby also is refuted Sadeel in Repetit Sophism Turriani pag. 652. when he sayth The definition of S. Cyprian is not essentiall nor properly teacheth what the Church is but what a one it ought to be For S. Cyprian inferreth out of his definition that if one be not with the Bishop he is not in the Church And Saint Hierome pronounceth one Hilaries sect to haue perished with him because he left no Pastor behind him And for this cause the Fathers do still obiect vnto heretiks the want of succession of Pastors as an euident marke that they are not the Church as euen Protestants themselues confesse For thus writeth D. Whitaker Cont. 2. quest 5. cap. 6. pag. 509 The Fathers rebuked heretiks that they wanted succession of Bishops Sadeel of Vocation of Ministers pag. 546 S. Augustin oftentyms opposed this succession against the Manichees and
If neither God nor man told them this then it is 2. Pet. 1. as the Scripture speaketh an vnlearned fable which cannot be proued by any diuine or humane testimony a fiction a dreame which they would be ashamed to vtter if they were not compelled by necessity to say somewhat But as S. Hilary sayth he is not ashamed of folly who hath lost religion Fiftly I proue this Lib. 7. de Trinit because Protestants euen by their manner of speach do be wray that they are not certaine that their Church was in Popery For D. White in his Way cap. 33. pag. 338. sayth It is more then probable Osiander in his Manuel englished pag. 65. sayth It is Credible Gerlachius tom 2. disput 22. sayth How many shall we think there were Others confesse that they know not those Protestants whome they say to haue byn in Popery Luther in psalm 45. tom 3. fol. 447 Vnder Popery there were alwayes and yet are some belieuers whome we know not Know not D. Whitaker Cont. 2. quest 3. cap. 3. pag. 476 VVe say there were in tymes past many thousands of men in Popery who professed our fayth and adored not the beast whome albeit we cannot name Can not name yet God knew Besides some of them say that there was no face or shew of their Church in Popery D. Whitaker loc cit p. 477 VVe say that there were so few good in Popery as they appeared not Appeared not And Cont. 4. quest 5. cap. 3. pag. 682 VVe surely say that in tymes past the Church lay hid in Popery And Luther vpon the 90. psalm fol. 495 The Church was in Popery but truly so hidden as to him that would iudge of the outward appearance it might seeme to be no where Caluin also 4. Institut cap. 2. § 12. speaketh in this sort of his Protestants whoâ—e â—he imagined in Popery In whome all things are so out of order as there may rather seeme the face of Babilon then of the citty of God By what appearance then iudge they when then say that their Church was in Popery 4. Sixtly What kind of Persons they challenge I proue that the Protestant church was not in Popery by the Persons whom they challenge Luther cont Caterin tom 2. fol. 140. writeth thus VVhere ye see no ghospell as we see none in the Synagogue of the Papists there doubtles is no Church vnlesse you except infants and simple folke And fol. 155 whome in all the world hath not the Pope subdued Infants silly ones except perhaps infants and silly persons saued by an vnknowne Counsaile M. Bale Cont. 1. cap. 74. writeth that their Church since Phocas the Emperours tyme VVas in lurking holes and amongst idiots Gerlachius disput 22. Idiots sayth that Infants were no small part of their Church Osiander loc cit pag. 65. that they were a great part And as Lobechius addeth disput 10. pag. 202 The noblest part A worthy Church vndoubtedly which for many ages consisted of infants idiots and such silly persons And they more silly who giue credit to so silly an affirmation of Protestants without all proofe and they most silly of all who relinquishing the Catholike Church adioyne themselues to such a childish and silly Church so sillily affirmed and without proofe Seauenthly Protestants themselues do plainly professe that the entire substance and essence of their Church was not in Popery but only some part thereof And we as hath byn often sayd speake not of a Church in part or in some sort but of a Church which hath all the essentiall and substantiall partes The whole essence of a protestaÌ„t Church not in Popery and may be simply and absolutely tearmed a Church Caluin 4. Institut cap. 2. after he had sayd § 1. that it is certaine there is no Church where lyes and falsity haue gotten the vpper hand he straight sayth § 2 Seing matters go so vnder Popery VVe may gather how much of the Church remayneth there And addeth that vnder Popery That doctrine without which Christianity standeth not is all buryed and thrust out And Respons ad Sadolet pag. 128. writeth That in Popery there appeareth scarce any scattered and torne remnants of the church Scarse any remnants Only rubbish Peter Martyr in locis tit de discessu a Rom. Eccl. col 1493 Now there are left among Papists only some rubbish and parcels of old walles togeather c. Sonis Resp ad Spondeum cap. 2. pag. 32 Antichrist hath left nothing in all the building but some old wals But old wals Sadeel Praefat. lib. de Verbo scripto The Roman Church is so depraued and corrupted that whiles we seeke the Church in the church we are forced to behold only ashes of the Church Only ashes The Apology of the Church of England part 4. cap. 9. diuis 3 These men now haue left nothing remayning in the Church of God that had any likenesse of his Church Nought but ruins And part 6. cap. 17. diuis 1 VVhen we saw that nothing remayned in the temple of God but pittifull spoiles and decayes we c. Finally Luther in Psalm 22. tom 3. fol. 132. No trace sayth that in Popery there was no trace of the Church And in psalm 17. fol. 285 They haue brought matters to such passe Name only that where the Church of God was heretofore there is nought but heathenish superstition and the name only of the church remayning the substance is quite lost The same also meane those who say that in Popery were some small footsteps some reliques and parcels of the church albeit they had not this exclusiue terme Only But if in Popery the doctrine without which Christianity cannot stand were wholy buryed and shut out If therein scarse appeared torne parcels of the Church only ashes thereof were seene if nothing remayned but old wals rubbish and ruines nothing entire and like to a Church and the name only remayning the substance were quit lost doubtles there was no absolute and true Protestant Church in Popery but only in part and in some sort Which Daneus plainly intimateth when he saith Cont. 4. lib. 3. cap. 13. pag. 387 Some footsteps of the Church remayne yet in that Popish company as if the ruines of a house cast downe and the bare walls were called a house equiuocally Or as Caluin speaketh Respons ad Versipellem pag. 357 In some part the Protestant Church was heretofore in Popery 5. That I may therefore gather togeather all that Protestants say of their Church in Popery befor Luthers tyme Concerning the persons whereof it consisted they were infants idiots silly ones and perhaps not they neither Concerning the substaÌ„ce it was only ruines rubbish old walles ashes and name only of the Church Concerning the number it was (a) Luther in psalm grâ—â—t f. 368 de Missa loc 7. fol. 236. Gerla disput 22. Acontius l. 1. Strat. p. 25. Sadeâ—l ad
Sophis pag. 596. ad Thes Posnon 18. Very small slender reliques few remnants and scarce a few reliques so small reliques one or two persons Touching the place wherein she was that was lurking holes or rather none at all For so sayth D. Whitaker Cont. 2. quest 3. cap. 2. pag. 468 The holy and pious men were togeather with their Pastors dispersed into this or that place without any certaine aboad or Succession And quest 5. cap. 4. pag. 503 Our men were in tymes past scattered here and there Touching the state of their Church that was (b) â—up c. 2. quite fallen downe Mouching the face or shew thereof that was rather of Babylon then of the Church As for the Condition it was afflicted of Antichrist with sauadge domination was miserably brought to naught and all her affaires most desperat For profession of fayth she made none at all For externall rites and worship she was compelled to keep very Babylonicall heathenish idolatricall and Antichristian rites For piety that was all driueÌ„ out Touching fayth that was quite extinct As for her Conseruation that was by meruailous and miraculous meanes by meere miracle And lastly for the testimonies whereby either her being are any of these points are proued they are pure Pythagoricall that is their owne words which is as themselues say arguments of fooles or rather lyes for who so speaketh of himselfe speaketh lyes 6. My eighth reason is because Protestants should haue sayd that their Church had bene in any company rather then in Popery For Luther lib. coÌ„t Regem Angliae tom 2. fol. 334. writeth that Popery is the most â—â—stilent abomination of Satan which hath byn or hereafter shall be vnder heauen And in cap. 25. Genes tom 6. fol. 342 Popery is a Congregation of diuels and of most wicked men And lib. cont Papatum tom 7. fol. 479. saith It is the last mischeife of the world and to which all the Diuells with all their cunning power cannot bring a greater Caluin ad Vsâ— sipel pag. 360. VVhitak cont 2. q 6 c. 1. Ochin diâ—l 25. Horne of the suâ—r p. 101. Others say that Popery is the body of Satan and Antichrist the dungeon of errors heresies that it is worse theÌ„ any sect of heretiks yea then Paganisme or Turcisme And almost all of them cry that it is the Synagogue of Satan and Antichrist Moreouer Luther in Actis exustionis decretalium tom 2. fol. 123. pronounceth that it were safer liuing in the wildernes to see no man then to conuerse in the Popish Kingdome And in cap. 2. Galat. tom 5. fol. 327 VVhosoeuer is earnestly affected towards Godlines let him tremble at the name of Popery And Protestants commonly gather out of that saying of the Apocalips Go out my people that it is the commaundement of God that all pious men should goe out of Popery If then Popery be the Synagogue of Satan and Antichrist worse then any hereticall Turkish or heathenish company or any other whom all the diuels which all their cunning could raise If all pious men ought to tremble at the hearing of the name thereof and rather liue in a desert then therein If finally it be the CommandemeÌ„t of God that all godly men should goe forth of Popery how came it to passe that in former tymes the godly forsooth Protestants liued in Popery and in Popery alone that for so many ages Would godly men abid in that company and only in that company and so long tyme which was the worst that could be before which they shold haue preferred the wildernes haue shaken at the name thereof were commanded to come out from thence by Gods expresse commandement Surely the Protestants must not only haue byn children and simple but also impious and vngodly What I could not or would not the spouse of Christ lurke for so many ages but in the stewes of the diuell Could Christ be no where but with Antichrist Would only Antichrist for so many ages affoard Christ and his church a harbour or lurking place l. 1. de mor. Manich. c. 16. O straightes sayth S. Austine O incredible absurdities For what greater straights what more incredible absurdity can there be theÌ„ to thrust Christ and his Church into the diuels stewes and that for many ages togeather 4. Instit c. 16. §. â—â— But as Caluin himself sayth There is no meruaile if these reprobate spirits as if they were frantique do thrust in most grosse absurdities for to defend their errors for God iustly punisheth their pride and obstinacy which such giddinesse 7. Ninthly I argue and aske what is the meaning of the foresayd ridle The Church was in Popery but Popery was not the Church First I suppose that by Popery heere they meane not as did Boysseul popish doctrine as if the sense were that the Protestant Church consisted of Popish doctrine as we say that the Popish Church consisteth to wit formally of Popish doctrine the Iewish Church of Iudaisme the Turkish of Turcisme because this sense were too far from the question which demaundeth the place and not the forme or doctrine of the Protestant church in former tyms Besides it were too too absurd to say that the Protestant Church consisteth in the contrary doctrine which he condemneth Supposing therfore that hereby Popery they vnderstand the company of Papists their meaning cannot be that their Church was in the company of Papists as in a multitude of men amongst whom they liued only but did no way participate of their doctrine or worship both because in this manner it had byn knowne to Papists which notwithstanding they deny as before we shewed and anone shal be proued to be false as also because in this sort their Church may be sayd to be in Iudaisme Turcisme the like if they liue among Iewes or Turcks which is so absurd as ProtestaÌ„ts deny their meaning to be such For thus Beza epist 10. quest 4 The Church was in Popery which can no way be sayd of the Turks And M. Perkins lib. cit after he sayd that the Church was long tyme in Popery addeth VVhich cannot be likewise sayd of Turks and other Infidels that the Church was conserued or that yet any hidden Church is conserued among them Neither can their meaning be that the Protestant church was in tymes past in Popery as a part in the whole to wit because it consisted of some that belieued both Protestancy and Popery or if they did not belieue Popery yet they professed it because after this manner Popery should no lesse haue byn the Church the Church should haue byn in Popery For as the church should haue byn in Popery because it consisted of such a part of Popery so Popery shold haue byn the church because such a part of Popery had byn the Church Besides it implieth contradiction that one should belieue both Popery and Protestancy which as Protestants say are right opposite in many fundamental points If
any reply that those Papists in whom the Protestant Church of old tyme did consist did not belieue all fundamentall points of Popery nor were absolutely Papists but only in part and in some sort first he mocketh the Reader in saying absolutely that the Protestant church was in Popery because Popery absolutely taken doth signify absolute Papists or Papistry Besides he feigneth and deuiseth those Papists in part in some sort and cannot proue by any sufficient testimony that there were any such Wheras according to S. Augustin He must proue not speake at random Nor can he say 2. Cont. Petil. c. 18. that the Protestant Church consisted of such who though they belieued litle or no Papistry at all yet outwardly professed it For if outwardly they professed only Papistry how know you that inwardly they belieued Protestancy Will you as S. Augustin sayd to the Donatists Lib. 2. de Baptis c. ◠iudge of mens harts and not of their open deeds Besides such Papists are feigned and not at all proued And if there had byn any such they should haue byn termed Denyers not Protesters Lastly such men cold not haue byn the visible Church of Protestants because they denied their fayth and professed Antichristianity and consequently were no holy men of whom only their inuisible Church consisteth 8. Tenthly I argue by enquiring the manner how the Protestant church in former tyms was in Popery to wit whether it professed the substance of the Protestant fayth or no and whether it communicated with Papists in their Popish worship or not Protestants like men vncertaine answere diuersly to this question D. Whitaker Cont. 2. quest 3. cap. 3. pag. 474. sayth Our Churches were alwayes in the middest of Papists churches distinct from Papists in Communion and Profession But this is soone refuted First because it cannot be proued Cont. Parmen ca. 38. And to cast out words and proue naught what is it as S. Augustin sayth but to dote Besides if the Protestant Church had professed Protestancy she had byn knowne to Papists and the same had also byn if she had not communicated with them For as D. Andrews writeth of the Catholikes in England They come not to seruice they heare not sermons they refuse to take the Communion without this or any other oath one may know them to be Papists But she was not knowne to Papists because not only all Papists but also Protestants deny that Besides otherwise Catholiks would not haue so earnestly enquired of Protestants where their Church had byn heretofore Moreouer Catholikes had persecuted them as they persecuted Luther so soone as he was knowne for a Protestant Lastly because Protestants cannot name any Papists who knew of their Church before Luthers tyme. Others therefore say that those imaginary Protestants professed their fayth if not at other tymes yet at least at the point of death D. Whitaker loc cit pag. 473 Many at the point of death if not before prosessed their fayth The same sayth Luther of priuate Masse tom 7. fol. 237. and Lobechi is Disput 10. To which D. White in defence of his way cap. 4. pag. 424. addeth that they renounceth Papistry also in the agony of their conscience And Hunnius before cited not knowing what certainly to determine sayth that they did either openly gird at Papistry or secretly with themselues detest it or at least in the last examen of tentations the stuble of errour being fired did hold the foundation of saluation But to speake with S. Augustin VVho sayth this but he that sayth what he will lib. 5. cont Iul. c. 4. and will not heare what is true They say that in the Scripture alone that saying of Pythagoras Schollers he sayd it taketh place Bulling in Compend fidei ◠1. c. 3. But if they vsed not this Pythagoricall priuiledge they would be more dumbe then fishes What man or diuell told them this professiō of their men at the houre of death How learnt they that which at that tyme no man could fish out Againe if only at the houre of death they professed Protestancy they were Protestants no longer then they lay a dying and consequently the Protestant church endured no longer then some of her children were dying A strange Church certes that liued no longer then her children dyed nor at any tyme drew breath but whiles they gaue vp the ghost Wherefore they find out other deuises to say that those feigned Protestants communicated with Papists and professed their fayth in things lawfull as in Baptisme reading of the Scriptur and such like but not in things vnlawfull Thus Reineccius in the 4. tome of his armour cap. 4. Thou seest reader that as these Protestants had their being only by these mens imaginations so they did or did not what or in what manner they will haue them O great fabulosity that I may cry out which S. Epiphanius of them who vtter these things so manifest it is that this is a shop rather of iuglers then of those who haue the shape of the promise of life and of vnderstanding For who besides his owne imagination told Reineccius that those Protestants deuided thus their Communion with Papists who besides himselfe heard euer of such a halfe-communion 9. Wherefore others of them do absolutely say that their imaginary Protestant Church in Popery communicated with Papists How impious their church in Popery was and professed their fayth For thus writeth Luther in psalm Grad tom 3. fol. 568 The Church vnder Antichrist had no true Ministery or worship but was forced to keep the very Babylonicall and heathenish rites of Papists The same he intimateth tom 7. lib. de Missa priuata fol. 236. 237. and lib cont Papatum fol. 456. Osiander also in the epist dedicatory of his 8. Century sayth of those Protestants that although from their heart they disallowed the Popish errors yet they durst not professe their owne opinions but neglected not the externall rites and were carryed away with the common custome as it were with a torrent for to do those things which others did whose weaknesse sayth he God did beare withall and pardon And the same pardon Luther de Missa priuata fol. 237. bestoweth vpon them saying No sinne could hurt them but God must pardon the miserable afflicted oppressed and captiue Church Thus these men haue Gods pardon in their hands that when they please God must pardon those who all their life tyme denyed their faith and serued Antichrist and idolatry Iunius also lib. 4. de Eccl. cap. 5. sayth that the Church in former tyms was all one with the Roman Againe She communicated with the Roman Church in worship of God euery where so long as she was suffered to communicate in pure worship in right fayth and good conscience Forsooth the Synagogue of Antichrist as they account the Roman church vseth pure worship or the Church of Christ communicateth with her in right fayth and good conscience And D. Whitaker Cont.
28. fol. 396 If the Pope must be worshipped Christ must be denyed And de Missa priuata tom 7. fol. 475 VVhosoeuer is vnder the Pope and obeyeth him cannot be saued Caluin against Seruer pag. 607 Is it not a profanation of the sacred vnity to professe one God and faith with an impious and prophane company And Respons ad Versip pag. 362 How wicked and soule treachery is it to abide in that sacrilegious company of Papists And D. Whitaker ad Rat. 3. Campiani None abide with the lambe in the mountaine who haue any commerce with Antichrist And Caluin in Confutat Hollandi lib. de vitandis superstitionibus bringeth many proofes to shew that the faithfull may not communicate with the false Church and therto citeth the letters of Melancthon Bucer Peter Martyr and those of Zurich and the same is commonly taught of Protestants How then did not those Protestants separate themselues from the body of Christ how were they saued who in tymes past communicated with papists How were they saued vnlesse God be an acceptour of persons and tyms that he will cut of some from his body and from hope of saluation who communicate with Antichrist and not others at these and not in former tymes Againe Protestants teach that the Church ought to professe her fayth as besides the testimonies before repeated the Preface of the Confession of Saxony sayth They that are demaunded must needs tell the doctrine And the CoÌ„fession of Bohemia art 2 They teach that they must vndoubtedly belieue all the articles of the Creed and confesse them with the mouth Luther in 1. Petri cap. 2. tom 5. fol. 464 If any now as the Emperour or other Prince should aske me my fayth I must plainly confesse it to him And de Scru. Arbit tom 2. fol 432 Truth and doctrine must alwayes be preached openly and neuer kept secret or crookt and turnd awry D. Feild lib. 1. de Eccl. cap. 10 For seeing the Church is the multitude of them that shall be saued vnlesse he mak coÌ„fession vnto saluation for fayth hid in the heart and concealed doth not suffice it cannot be but they that are of the true Church must by the profession of the truth make themselues knowne in such sort that c. And the Preface of the Syntagme of Confessions VVhen euery one ought according to the Apostles precept giue a reason of his hope how much more the Church And D. Whitaker Cont. 4. quest 6. cap. 2. pag 696 True sayth can no more be separated from confession with the mouth then fire from beat or the sunne from its brightnes and beames What fayth then had those protestants which as is sayd durst not professe their mind And Cont. 2. qoest 3. cap. 2. pag. 472 It is not lawfull for the godly to dissemble true Religion or make shew of false nor to conceale what they think of Religion if they be examined of them who haue authority to aske them of their fayth But it is not credible that in so many ages in no part of the Christian world no Catholike Magistrate should aske any protestant of his fayth especially if it be true that Luther writeth in psalm 22. tom 3. fol. 344. that Papists do so examine the body of the Church that all her bones may be counted that is none of them can by hid VVherefore we must not imagine that there are any hidden bones of Christ all are bewrayed and counted wheresoeuer they are either by the espials of secret confession or by the tortours or examiners Which sheweth that if there had byn any true protestants heretofore they would haue byn discouered 11. Finally they are brought to these straights that sometymes they say that the protestant church which they imagine was heretofore in popery did consist of those who were papists both in opinion and profession This Caluin intimateth in the words before cited when he sayth that his church was corrupted with pestilent doctrine And Luther de Missa priuata tom 7. fol. 231. saying The very elect were seduced in that great darknesse And in cap. 9. Isaiae tom 4. fol. 95 Behold sayth he the whole face of the Churches vnder Popery Did not they all who truly felt the burden of sinne imagine that they should by good works satisfy for their sinnes Which thing alone would suffice to blot them out of the role of protestants D. White in defence of his way cap. 36. pag. 350. sayth those imaginary protestants were corrupted some more some lesse with those errors which sayth he now we fly And cap. 40. pag. 394. graunteth that they were infected with damnable heresies D. Whitaker lib. 2. de Scriptura cap. 8. sect vlt. sayth They were beset with most thick darknes Nappâ—r in cap. 12. Apocal. pag. 195. that their visible Church in tymes past VVholy embraced the errors of merits and indulgences c. And Morgersterâ—â— tract de Eccl. pag. 41 These things were in tymes past to be forgiuen the godly that they belieued the Pope to be â—hrists vicar and head of the church Popery to be the church Saints to be prayed vnto Masse to be the Lords supper Are these men think you in their wits who call them godly and say they must be pardoned who belieued Antichrist to be Christs vicar Antichrists Synagogue to be the Church of Christ and horrible idolatry such as they account Masse prayer to Saints to be seruice of Christ The same also they meane when they challenge the simple ignorant Papists for theirs or confesse the vulgar Roman Church to be the true Church or as others of them speake graunt the Roman Church but deny Popery the Popish or Roman Popish Church For they imagine that the simple Catholike people neither doth now nor in former tyms did belieue those points of fayth which themselues deny But this they feigne of the simple Catholike people and cannot proue it Besides there is no Catholike â—o simple as doth not vertually belieue all points of Catholike fayth which Protestants deny sith he actually professeth to belieue whatsoeuer the Catholike Church teacheth Neither is there any at all who doth not belieue iustification by good works which point alone would suffice to make them no Protestants Besides Caluin 4. Institut cap. 8. sayth that we affirme him to be no Christian who doth not vndoubtedly agree to all points of doctrine as well affirmatiue as negatiue And the same sayth D. Whitaker Cont. 2. quest 5. cap. 8. pag. 519. D. Morton part 1. Apol. lib. 1. cap. 9. and D. Willet in the Preface of his Synopsis Yea as before we rehearsed Cap 2. they confesse that before Luthers reuolt all from head to foot were drowned in the pudles of Popery that none dreamed of that which is the cheifest point of Protestancy Wherfore Schusselburg tom 8. Catal. Haeret. pag. 440. seemeth to say That befor Luther arose Popery was the true church like as the Synagogue of the Iewes was before the comming
Brentius in his Apology for the confess of Wittemberg pag. 873. speaking of Protestants sayth VVe also once were all fooles seduced and seducing and seruing idolatry and Antichrist Serauia defens lib. de Grad Minist cap. 2. pag. 33. I marke that the Authours of all Reformations which were made in our age were Priests of the Roman Church To al which I adioyne that Luther in cap. 2. Oseae tom 4. fol. 279. sayth that these be the speeches of Papists VVere yee not Christned in the Popes Church VVhy therfore go yee from her And he acknowledgeth that the Roman Church is their Mother but sayth that they haue left her because she is a harlot and an adulteresse And Scrauia de diuers Minist grad cap. 6. pag. 30. hath these wordes Popish Church Mother of Protetestants The Roman Church is our Mother in which and by which God regenerated vs but because she is a harlot and an Adulteresse we iustly contest against her The like hath Iunius lib. singulari de Eccles cap. 17. and others commonly So that they acknowledge themselues to be the children of an harlot and consequently bastardes not begotten of God because God begetteth not children of harlots but only of his chast spouse the Church Let them therfore heare the Romā Church speaking to them in these words of S. Hierome Dial. cont Lucif If an Angel or Apostle haue rebaptised thee I breake not that which thou followest But if thou borne in my lappe nourished with the milke of my breasts doest draw thy sword against me restore what I gaue thee and be if thou canst a Christian by other meanes I am a harlot but yet thy mother I keep not chastity to one husband such I was when thou wert begotten Or els let them harken to S. Athanasius It remayneth that they find fault with the basenesse of their stock De Synod Arim. Seleuc. and say that they came not of pious but of heretikes neither feare they that which is written in the Prouerbs An ill brood curseth their father Or else let them giue care to S. Augustin thus speaking to the Manichees doe so slaues of Cham. L. 11. cont Faust c. 24 lib. 6. c. 5. Get you gon who despise the naked flesh wherof you sprung Againe Yea thou often maryed to elements or rather harlot prostitute to deuils and great with sacrilegious vanities darest thou reuile Catholike maryage of thy Lord with the crime of vnchastity But omitting this because Protestants regard not how farre they disgrace themselues so that they reuile the Church of Rome out of that which we haue rehearsed in this Chapter it appeareth how impudently D. Morton 1. part Apol. lib. 1. cap. 10 wrote that Melancthon Pellican and others were Protestants before Luther arose and much more impudently D. Feild sayd lib. 3. de Eccles cap. 8 that before Luthers time those who defended the Popish errors were but some faction like to those in the Church of Corinth who in S. Paules time denyed the Resurrection which vntruth is so apparant as to haue related it only is to haue confuted it But here by the Reader seeth how needfull it is for me to heap vp many testimōies of Protestants for to proue euen those things which are most manifest 11. My sixt demonstration therfore I frame in this manner If all Protestants who were first knowne whether people or perticuler persōs were Papists before Luther began to preach then were there no Protestants before him and he author of their Church But all the first knowne Protestants were such Ergo. The Maior is manifest by it selfe the Mimor by that which hath bin recited in this chapter That no Protestant ancienter then Luther did come forth and adioyne himselfe to his company when Luther safely preached CHAP. XII THE seauenth demonstratiō for to proue Luther to be the first Beginner of Protestancy shall be taken from thence that after that Luther securely preached Protestancy no Protestant ancienter thou he peeped out and adioyned himselfe vnto him This I proue first out of the reall Confession of all Protestants who neither then nor hitherto could name one such Protestant Whereupon it followeth necessarily that Luthers company was altogether new no one member thereof before him neither did he adioyne those whome de drew out of Popery vnto any company before extant neither did any company which had bin before adioyne it selfe vnto him Secondly this may be proued by the silence of D. Whitaker Cont. 2. quest 5. cap. 3. where being vrged with this argument he answeareth it with silence only and standeth mute as confessing the accusation to be true Thirdly I proue it by the sillinesse of the Answeares of other Iunius lib. 4. de Eccles cap. 5. sayth only that some ancienter Protestants came forth and adioyned themselues to Luther but nameth none nor proueth any thing therfore giueth words nought else He should as Tertullian said to old heretikes haue feignes the names of some Praescrip c. 32. For after blasphemy what may not they doe But I know not how it cometh to passe that wheras Protestants feigne many things and persons yet they dare not feigne names As D. Sutliue when in the Preface of his book of the Church he had sayd only that Bolsec who wrote Caluins life doth insinuate that he wrote for hire after growing more bould in his answeare to exceptions cap. 4. pag 120 deuiseth a synode D. Sutcliue feigneth a Synod in which as he sayth Bolsec publikely recanted the book which he had writtē of Caluins life Of which Synode none before him euer heard but since D. Morton and M. Beard write that they haue heard of it 1. part Apol lib. 2. cap. 33. Beard Motiue 12. perhaps by D. Sutliue but yet durst not feigne the names either of the men who held this synode or of the place where it was held nor yet specifie the yeare of our Lord when it was held This he left to others to feigne or to himselfe at more leasure 2. Fourthly it may be proued by the ridiculous nomination and prouing made by some D. Morton part Apol. lib. 1. cap. 16. writeth that Melancthon Pellican Lambert Capito Osiander Sturmius Bucer came forth which he proueth because Alphonse a Castro in the epistle dedicatory of his booke against heresies hath these words Neither did Luther in this age come forth alone but accompanyed with a great troupe as with a guard and nameth those before cited But first it is ridiculous to say that the foresayd persons were Protestants before Luther sith partly themselues partly Protestants deny it as we shewed in the former chapter Againe it is ridiculous to proue this by Castroes testimony who being a Spaniard and those all Germans except Lambert who was a French mā it is most likely that he neuer knew thē nor heard of their names before Luther had reuolted Moreouer ridiculous it is to imagin that in the forecited words
Castro should say that the fornamed persons did come forth in such sort as we mean that is came out of the Protestāt lurking holes or to haue bin secret Protestāts before Luther appeared seeing he only saith that they came forth in such sort as he saith Luther came forth to wit forth of the Catholik church of Catholiks became heretiks 3. Fiftly I proue it out of the common doctrine of Protestants wherin they teach that euery one ought to adioyne himselfe to the visible Church if so he can conueniently For so teacheth the Confession of the low countryes art 28. the French art 26. Melancthon in cap. 8. Matth. Caluin 4. Institut cap. 1. D whitaker Cont. 2. quest 3 cap. 2 and others commonly But these former Protestants if any such had bin might conueniētly haue ioyned themselues to Luthers cōpany after that they saw him to preach securely and out of danger Seeing therfore no such came to him it is manifest that there were no such at all Finally this is manifest otherwise For suppose that before Luther they lay so close as that they worshipped God only in hart and soule yet when they saw Protestancy to be preached publiquely and securely and that they might liue openly and amongst men who will imagine that they would preferre darcknes before light and lurking holes before townes and citties and alwayes keep in deserts Certaidly such kind of fellowes should be rather batts or owles then men Besides being iust men forsooth why did they not afford God externall worship whē they might securely doe it Why did they not according to Christs commandement celebrate the memory of his Passion by receiuing of the Sacraments 4. Out of these I compose the seauenth demonstration If after that Luther securely preached Protestancy neuer any ancienter Protestant came forth and adioyned himselfe to his company there were no Protestants before But no such euer came forth Ergo. But if there were no Protestant before Luther vndoubtedly he was the beginner of that company That the Protestant Church and Religion is new CHAP. XIII THE eighth demonstration with which we will proue that Luther was the beginner of the Protestant Church and religion we will frame out of Protestāts Confessions of the nouelty therof First therfore they say that in the iudgment almost of all men it is new and that it is almost impossible Now in almost all mens iudgement to wipe away from it the spot of noueltie Thus Illyricus in the Preface of his Catalogue VVhen Doctours raysed of God preach the Protestant gospell and doe inueigh against contrary errors they seeme in the iudgement almost of all men to bring a new doctrine vnheard of before and to impugne the old Againe It is very hard and almost impossible to remoue the hatefull marck of nouelty from the Protestant doctrine Almost impossible To which D. Fulke lib. de Success pag. 454. addeth that the Protestant religion VVas altogether new to most nations 2. Secondly in equiualent words they oftentymes call their Religion new or begun of new For as we shal straight rehearse they terme it in the blade renascent reuiuing borne a new renewed repayred restored raysed againe resuscitated And what can be meant by these termes but a religion either new or newly erecteth such as Christs religion is not For neither is it new in it selfe neither can it be begun or raysed anew because it can neuer fall Luther in cap. 22. Genes tom fol. 208. writeth thus Borne anew In the beginning of the gospell borne a new Monetarius c.. In cap. 31. fol. 434 Nine assemblies haue beene held since the Ghospell began to be borne a new In cap. 32. fol. 458 After the light of the Ghospell was borne againe In cap. 48. fol. 643. Borne againe At the beginning of the Ghospell rising againe In cap. 49. fol. 662. They desire to extinguish the light of the Ghospell rising againe In cap. fol. 342. I remember that before these tymes of the Ghospell borne a new And in the Praefat. Deuter. tom 3. Ienen fol. 75. The rising againe or rather springing Ghospell Rising againe Thus speaketh Luther Melancthon Apol. pro Luthero tom 2. Lutheri fol. 194. You oppose against the rising light of the Ghospell And respons ad Clerum Colon. tom 2. pag. 97. The beginning of the pure doctrine rising againe And in cap. 7 Matth. tom 1. Renewed fol 398 He termeth it renewed doctrine Carion in Chron. pag. 706. calleth their Church the renascent Church Iustus Ionas Epist dedicat lib. Lutheri de Iudaeis tom 7. fol. 166. God would that in our time the Gospel should be borne againe vnder the house of Saxony Reuiuing Besoldus in his Preface of the 4. part of Luthers Cōmētarie vpon Genes hath these words In the begining of the Church borne anew O siander in his Manual englished pag. 62 Our doctrine is renewed And his sonne Lucas Epist Euchar The doctrine of the gospel borne againe The author of the Sponge in Daneus pag. 13. Christianity greene calleth it the light of the Ghospell borne againe the Euangelicall doctrin reuiuing or quickning againe Kemnice in locis part 2. p. 106. In the beginning of the Ghospell borne againe Amongst the Sacramentaryes Zuinglius speaketh thus in supplicat ad Suithenses fol 121 Christianity being greene christianity rising againe And in Eccles fol. 41. New born truth Which phrase he repeateth disput tom 2. fol. 607. Gesnerus in Bibliotheca sayth of Luther The new borne Church doth owe much vnto him Recalled Ghospell Muscle Epist dedicat locorum I was in the beginning of the new rising Euangelicall truth Bucer in Retract pag. 642. vseth these words Beginning of the new born Ghospell Among the Ministers of the recalled Ghospell Beza in cap 3. Rom. v. 20. They by whose Ministery God in our age hath recalled to light Christs Ghospell almost buryed Gualter Praefat. in Rom. How much harme the Anabaptists did at the beginning of the new borne Ghospell Quickning againe Martyr in locis tom 2. pag. 228. In the beginning of the Ghospell born againe And in Epist dedicat comment ad Rom. The Ghospell quickning againe Hospin Epist dedicat 1. part histor The Euangelicall truth borne againe Sohinus in Methodo Theol. pag. 215. Among the Doctours of the Church borne againe And Caluin 4. Institut cap. 7. § 24. The doctrsne of the Ghospell borne againe lib. de scand pag. 76. 94. The ghospell borne againe Admonit 2. ad Westphalum pag. 784. The Ghospell is borne againe And cont Scruetum pag. 592 Of the Ghospell borne againe And in like manner he speaketh ordinarily Sadel respo ad Arthurum cap. 7. The Church borne againe Paraeus in Miscellan Vrsini pag. 26. The light of the Ghospell borne againe Danaeus respons ad Solnec pag. 1565 In the very beginning of the Ghospell borne againe Plessic de Eccles cap. 11 Christ borne againe Cambden in apparatu Annalium The rising
be euery wher Caluin pronounceth Admonit vlt. ad Westphalum pag. 829. that it was not borne long since And Alcsius apud Hospiâ— part 2. fol. 201. sayth I know both the tyme when this opinion was first broached to the Church and who was Author thereof Authores Admonit de lib. concord cap. 3. pag 95. No man taught this their opinion before Luther Do they not bring forth new deuises and not heard of before in the Church Beza also lib. de Omnipraesentia carnis Christi pag. 509. calleth it a doctrine vnheard of in the Church Finally Clenuitius apud Heshus lib. cit calleth the very Confession of Auspurg A new and fifth Ghospell Thus Protestants testify the newnesse of each other doctrine 9. Eightly I proue the newnesse of Protestancy by the new and before vnheard of nams The names of Protestats are new which Protestants giue to themselues and to their Church and religion For they call themselues Protestants or Ghospellers and their Church and Religion Euangelicall and reformed D. Andrewes respons ad Apol. Bellarm. c. 1. Protestants is our name D. Willet in the Preface of his Synopsis VVe refuse not the name of Protestants This name agreeth fitly to our profession Praefat. consensus Poloniae VVe are termed Ghospellers Iezler lib. de bello Euchar. fol. 31. VVe will be called Gospellers and woe be to them who call vs otherwise His maiesty in his declaration against Vorstius pag. 49 The men of our Religion doe estsoones take to them the name of Gospellers D. Morton part 1. Apol. lib. 1. cap. 7 If ye aske where is the Euangelicall and reformed Church all will straight point their finger to the ProtestaÌ„ts assembly But surely all these names are new and neuer heard of before Luther neither can there be any name designed which before Luthers time was proper to the Protestant company But it is incredible that there should haue bin such a company and yet that it neuer had any proper or peculiar name giuen either by those of that company or of any others 10. Lastly I proue the nouelty of the Protestant Church by that that Protestants knowing well the newnesse therof deny that the greatest antiquity among Christian Churches is a marck of the true Church of Christ as doth Iunius lib. de Eccles cap. 16. yea some of them are so offended at this marck of Antiquity as they bid vs (a) Luth. tom 2 fol. 367. shut our eyes at it and say that it is a (b) Raino Confer c. 5. diuiss 2. bastardly marke and rather a mark of the (c) Ples l. de Eccles c. 3. Synagogue of Antichrist theÌ„ of the church of Christ Neuertheles seeing it ought to be vndoubted amongst Christians that since Christs Church was founded by him it neuer failed or perished and that it is manifest that he founded his true Church before any false Christian in imitation of him began a false Christian Church it ought also to be certain that she which amongst all Christian Churches is the most ancient is the very true Church of Christ Neither would euer Protestants deny this if they did not too wel know that their Church is far yonger then the Roman as being according to their saying her daughter 11. Out of all which hath beene recited in this chapter I make my eight demonstration in this sort If the Protestant Church and Religion were in Luthers tyme new or builded or begun a new he was the Authour and beginner thereof But so it was as hath beene made manifest by the aforesayd confessions of Protestants Therefore Luther was the Author thereof That Protestants do plainly confesse that Luther was the Author and Beginner of their Church and Religion CHAP. XIIII THE ninth demonstration that Luther was the Author of the Protestant Church and religion shall be taken out of Protestants open confessions thereof First therefore they say that he was the first who openly preached Protestancy Luther Praefat. in tom 1 The Duch men did looke what would be the euent of so great a matter which before none either Bishop or Deuine durst touch Ibi. fol. 159. It is said Luther first of all in our age did taxe the Popes abominations and illustrate the ancient and pure doctrine of the Church And Praefat. disput fol. 370. Luther the first that preached his Ghospell I first allowed the marriage of Bishops In cap. 3. Galat. tom 5. fol. 333 Many gaue God thankes that by the Ghospell which by Gods grace we then first of all preached c. In cap. 4. fol. 387. God in this later tyme hath againe reuealed the truth of the Ghospell by vs vnto the vngratefull world Epist ad Argentinenses tom 7. VVe dare boast First published Christ that Christ was first published by vs. Melancthon Praefat. in tom 3 VVith what ioy did men receaue the first sparckle of light discouered by Luther praef in tom 2. Lutheri God by him restored the Ghospell to vs. Againe He recalled the minds of men to the Sonne of God First spark of Protestancy and as the Baptist shewed the lambe that taketh away the sinnes of the world And praefat in tom 3 VVhen there was great darcknes in the Charch and the light of the Ghospell was oppressed Luther layd open the iustice of fayth The vniuersity of VVittemberg in Hospin part 2. histor fol. 250 Out of this Church and schoole did shine the first light of pure doctrine touching God and Crist The first light which our new aduersaryes are forced to graunt though they burst with enuy Amsdorfe Alber and others write that Luther was the first vnder heauen who impugned externall sacrifice Priesthood in the new testament Schusselburg lib. 2. Theol. Caluin fol. 130. sayth that Vtenhonius a Caluinist was impudent when he wrote that he heard Conrad Pellican say that many learned men in Germany held the doctrine of the â—hospell before Luther appeared and that Pellican himselfe had reiected Purgatory before Luthers name was heard of This lye sayth Schusselburg the later Caluinists haue refuted And fol. 228. he affirmeth that Luther began the refining of the doctrine of the Ghospell This praise sayth he we truly and with good right giue to Luther though the Caluinists take it in very ill part Morgerstern tract 145. sayth It is ridiculous to thinke that before Luther any held the pure doctrine and that Luther receaued it of them and not rather they of him Milius in explicat confess August art 17. If Luther had had orthodoxall forerunners in his office Had no predecessours there had beene no need of a Lutheran reformation The Author of the booke entituled Prognostica or Finis mundi pag. 12. Luther as is confessed first brought in the ghospell at the end of the world The first that brought in the Ghospell Brentius lib. de Coena in fine God raised vp Luther to carry before vs the torch of the knowledg of Christ. And Smedensted apud Hospin
renewer of Euangelicall truth and doctrine Bucer Resp ad Episc Abrincen pag. 613. writeth that God by Luther hath merueilously and happily restored the summe of the Ghospell in our age Restored the summ of the Ghospell Restored Religion D. Whitaker cont 2. quest 5. cap. 12. pag. 528 Luther only tooke vpon him to restore religion corrupted and to renew the ancient and true doctrine And ad Rat. 10. Campiani calleth him the Renewer of the old sayth or as the English Apology termeth him the promulgator of this doctrine D. Humphrey in Prolegomenis pag. 82. saith VVe reuerence Luther as a great renewer of Religion And what is it to be a renewer Restorer Setler of a thing corrupted especially if he restore the summe thereof as Bucer sayd that Luther restored the summe of Religion but to be an Author or maker of it according to the very substance thereof 5. Finally they plainly graunt that Luther was the first to whom Protestancy was reuealed that he layd the first foundation of Protestant Religion and that he was the captaine Luther first to whome Protestats was reuealed Author and Begetter therof Luther himselfe in sermone Quid sit homini Christiano praestandum tom 7. fol. 274. speaketh thus to Protestants I was the first whome God set in these lists I was also the first to whome God vouchsafed to reueale these thinges which are now preached vnto you Behould Christian Reader a new (a) Theod. l. 2. c. 18. Aetius surnamed Atheist who sayd that those thinges were now reuealed to him by God which hitherto he would haue to be hidden vnto all A new (b) Basil l. cont Eun. Eunomius who sayd that he had seund a new way to God and vnheard of which none before had perceaued A new (c) Vinc. c. 42. Nestorius who gloried that he first vnderstood the Scripture A new Cataphryge (d) Athan. de Synod who sayd VVe haue the first reuelation of vs beginneth the Christian sayth For of thee Luther began the Protestant fayth and thou wert the first to whom the God of this world as the Apostle speaketh vouchsafed to reueueale those thinges which haue beene preached to Protestants Praescrip cap. 34. To thee alone that I may vse Tertullians wordes hath truth been reuealed Forsooth thou hast found greater fauour and more plentifull grace at the Diuells hands Againe in exposit Papaselli tom 2. Laid the first foundation of Protestācy fol. 398. Luther hath these words VVhen I layd the first foundation of this cause as Bullinger Praefat. Comment in Ioan. writeth of Zuinglius saying VVhen Zuinglius layd the first foundation of Euangelicall doctrine Moreouer Luther tom 1. fol. 206. writeth thus to his most inward fellow Melancthon The citty is full of the noyse of my name An Herostratus and all men desire to see the man the Herostratus of so great a fire Ye see how in a letter to his most assured friend he confesseth himselfe to be the Herostratus that is the Author of that fire wherewith not the temple of Diana but the temple of God burneth Melancthon also acknowledged the like as it appeareth by these words of Luther in a letter to him tom 9. Wittemberg Germ. fol. 416. Thou writest Author leader that for my authorityes sake thou didst follow me as the author and leader or captaine in this matter Behould how Melancthon accounted Luther the Author And what suspicion is there that Melancthon should in this matter write otherwise to him then he thought Schusselburg tom 8. Catal. pag. 363. defineth true Lutherans or Protestants to be those who imbrace the doctrin of the Gospell amending Popish abuses of which amendement sayth he Luther was the Author And the same meane they who call Luther the Author of the Protestant reformation For they protest amendment or reformation is indeed as hath beene shewed before a substantiall mutation or change of religion and therefore the Authour of such an amendment or reformation is indeed the Author of a new Church and religion D. Sutcliue lib. 2. de Eccles cap. 3. pag. 237. writeth in this manner VVho were the first Authors of raysing the Church fallen downe Author as Cranmer and other our Bishops also Luther Zuinglius c. And cap. 7. pag. 328. The Princes who first followed the Authours of restoring religion Osiander in Sleidan fol. 22. sayd that Luther Melancthon had made a certaine diuinity which sauoured more the flesh then the spirit Maker Lobechius disput 1. pag. 26. calleth Luther the first deuiser of the Confession of Auspurg Deuiser And Melchior Neofanius Pastour of the Church of Brunswich in loc Kemnitij part 2. sayth How much doth all Duch-land owe to worthy Luther for his great deserts who was the Author of pure Religion Authour D. Couel also in his defens of Hooker art 19. pag. 130. plainely confesseth that some Protestants make Luther and Caluin Authours of the religion which they hold And M. Horne in his harbour maketh England speake in this manner Begetter I am thy Country England which brought forth blessed man Iohn VViclise who begot Hus who begot Luther who begot truth And heereupon it ariseth that as Rescius in his Ministromachia p. 15. reporteth the Lutherans call Islebium where Luther was borne their new Bethleem A new Bethleem Forsooth because there was borne their new Messias the begetter Author and founder of their religion Mark now Reader how Luther by his owne and other Protestants confession was the first to whome Protestant doctrine was reuealed layd the first foundation of the Protestant cause was the Authour of the Protestant amendment or reformation was the deuiser of the first Protestant Confession was the Herostratus of the Protestant fire finally was the leader maker begetter and Authour of the Protestant Church and Religion Which is in plaine termes the very same which in all this booke I endeauour to proue Iustly therefore may Protestants sing to Luther as Lucretius did to his Epicure the Author beginner of Epicurisme Lib. 3. Those also of Basse were not ashamed in the Epitaph of his tombe to call Oecolampadius the first author of Euangelicall doctrine in that citty as report Hospin and Lauather in their Hostories an 1531. and Iunius lib. 4. de Eccles cap. 8. Neither was it peculiar to Luther to spread deuises vnder the name of religiō For thus writeth Iezler de bello Euchar. fol. 26. of Ministers Matters deuised of some few we thrust vpon the whole world And King Henry 8. when he began to encline to Protestancie set forth articles with this title Articles deuised of his Maiesty 6. And from this euidēce acknowledgement that Luther was the Author of Protestant religion it proceedeth First that Luther oftentimes calleth it his doctrine his gospell his word his cause his part For so he speaketh tom 1. fol. 138. tom 2. fol. 23. Protestancy is Luthers doctrine 29.
a true Church and vnderstand their foresayd Maior vniuersally it is false for not euery true Church in that sense is Apostolicall or hath euer beene For a schismaticall Church is true in doctrine and yet is neither Apostolicall nor hath euer beene And if they vnderstand their Maior particulerly the conclusion followeth not because it is deduced out of pure particuler propositions And thus much of the Maior 7. Secondly the foresayd argument is a sophism because of the Minor by which one vnknown thing is proued by another one false thing by another not only false Protestāts proofe out of a thing more vnknowne but also impossible For it is more vncercertaine that the Protestant Church holdeth the doctrin of Christ then that she was before Luther For albeit she were not before notwithstanding it was not impossible that she should haue beene but that she holdeth the doctrine of Christ is both false and impossible also And as Luther sayth in defens verb. Coenae tom 7. fol. 385. It is a mad mans part to proue vncertaine things by others as vncertaine And D. Whitaker cont 2. quest 3. cap. 3. All proofe is by thinges that are more knowne Which also he hath cont 2. quest 5. cap. 18. Sadcel praefat lib. cont Traditiones Daneus l. 4. de Eccles cap. 2. D. Morton part 2. Apol. lib. 1. cap. 37. Pareus lib. 3. de Iustificat cap. 1. Wherupon Luther tom 2. Praefat. assert Antic fol. 95. writeth Aristotle and all sense of nature sheweth that vnknowne thinges must be proued by thinges more knowne and obscure thinges by manifest If therefore as Pareus sayth lib. 1. de Iustificat c. 20. when the Aduersarie is brought to that that eitheir he gainesayth himselfe or beggs that which he is to proue assuming that in his proofe which is in debate or trifleth by repeating now and then the same thing he is vanquished surely then Protestants are vanquished whom in this smal work we haue shewed oftentymes to gaine say themselues now including these within the Church now excluding them now affirming the Church to be inuisible now denying it now to haue alwayes Pastours now denying it and the like And in this argumment with which alone they proue the existēce of their Church before Luther they assume in the Minor that which most of all is in debate Caluin 4. Insticut c. 1. § 12. Narrat de Eccles Belg. p. 196. And the Maior they can proue no otherwise then by trifling by repeating it and saying that it is out of all doubt I add also that the sacramentaryes say that the Lutheran Church erreth euen in the fundamentall points and the like say the Lutherans of the Sacramentaries and scarce there is any Protestant who doth not thinke that the Church whereof he is doth erre in some points What reason then haue they out of the truenesse of the doctrin of their Churches to inferre their perpetuall existence 8. Thirdly I adde that the manner wherwith Protestants doe proue the Minor of their foresayd syllogisme is sophisticall and not such as they exact of vs for proofe of our doctrine For commonly they exact of vs to shew that our doctrine is contained in expresse words in Scripture or as Luther sayth lib. de seru arbit tom 2. fol. 440 inso manifest testimonies as are able so to stop all mēs mouths as they are not able to say any thing against it But manifest it is that such be not the proofes wher with Protestants proue their doctrine For to omit other points where is in expresse words in scripture that fundamentall point of their doctrin that we are iustified by only faith Say the contrary is so expresly in S. Iames epistle Tom. 6. in c. 12. Gen. as therfore Luther blasphemously sayth S. Iames doted And the Lutherans for that very cause deny his epistle to be canonicall Besides VVhitak cont 1. q. 4. cap. 3. Protestants doe now confesse that the scripture is not of it selfe sufficient to end all questions of faith and that Schismatikes cannot be conuinced by scripture How then can they sufficiently proue al the points of their doctrine by scripture VVhitak loc cit p. 490. Plessy l. de Eccles c. 9. Againe themselues acknowledge that they need certaine meanes to attaine to the right sense of the Scripture and that their meanes are humane and not infallible as knowledge of tongues conference of places and such like and with all that such as the meanes be such is the exposition of Scripture If therfore their meanes be not infallible how can their vnderstanding of the scripture be infallible Moreouer they scarce euer proue any thing by both principles out of scripture but almost euermore adioyne one human principles as easily will appeare if their proofs be brought to a syllogisticall forme as well obserue the most learned Bishop of Luçon in his defence of the Principall articles of faith cap. 3. 5. And how can they be infallibly certaine of the conclusion which they cannot know but by one human principle whereof they can haue no such certainty Furthermore because many of their proofes doe not only consist of one humane principle Protestats conclude against sense which is not at al in the scripture but also they inferre a conclusiō directly contradictory to that which the scripture in most expresse words teacheth of that matter As for example when they proue that the Eucharist is of not the very body and bloud of Christ alwayes one of their principles is humane and besides their conclusiō is flat contrary to expresse words of scripture which affirmeth that it is Christs very body and bloud And who is he in his wittes that will perswade himselfe either that the scripture meaneth that the Eucharist is not the body bloud of Christ which directly it neuer sayth rather then that it is his body and bloud which it as expresly sayth as euer it sayth any thing or that that proofe is not sophisticall which out of one humane principle at least inferreth the contrary of that which the scripture most expresly teacheth Lastly they neuer proued any one point of their doctrine any otherwise then euer Heretiks do that is in their own iudgmēt neuer before any iudge or general Councell which Luther himselfe confesseth in c. 27. Gen. tom 6. fol. 368. in the words In the affaire of the Gospell we haue decided the matter against al the impiety of the Pope without form of law VVe accused not the Pope neither could we for there was no iudge Yea their doctrin hath bin cōdemned according to all forme of law in the Generall Councel of Trent of the Patriarch of Constantinople to whō they appealed and of al other kinds of Christians 9. Fourthly I say that the foresayd argument is a sophisme in that in a sēsible matter as the Church is it concludeth against the sense of all men For nether did any see the Protestant Church before Luther
Church as farre as it hath that which belongeth to the definition of a Church is a Church that it hath not giuen vp the ghost that it hath all diuine things Not yet dead and of Gods part is yet the Church Zanchius in the preface of his booke of the nature of God Satan euen in the very Roman Church could not bring all things to that passe that it should no more haue tâ—e forme of a Christian Church And soone after VVherefore the Roman Church is yet the Church of Christ Yet the Church of Christ Pâ—essy in his booke of the Church 2. chap. auoucheth that the Roman Church is the Spouse of Christ Spouse of Christ is not yet forsaken of him that as a Mother she beareth children to God which he repeateth againe in the 10. chap. that she retaineth life and that the name of the Church ought no more to be denied to her then the name of a man vnto a liuing man Bucan in his 41. place of the Church quest 5 The assemblies of Papists are Churches as a man infected with leprosy or besides his wittes doth not leaue to be a man Polanus in his first part and Thesis of the Church The Roman Church truly is a Church because Antichrist sitteth in the Church And in his Syntagme of diuinity lib. 7. c. 8 The present Roman Church is yet the Church of Christ Serauia in his defence of the degrees of ministers pag. 30 The Roman Church is a Church and mark what I say more she is our mother in whome and by whom God did regenerate vs. And pag. 31 The couenant of God remayneth this day in the Latin Church Boysseul in his confutation of Spondé pag. 6 I exclude not the Roman Church out of the vniuersall Church I acknowledge her to be yet in the couenant of God which he repeateth oftentymes And pag. 12 The Roman Church is the Church of God Pag. 19 It is a member of the vniuersall Church p. 283 It is yet the Church Spouse and temple of God Yet the Church Spouse temple of God And pag. 822 VVe deny not that the Roman Church is the Church of Iesus Christ redeemed by him Vorstius in his Anti-bellarmin p. 188 The vulgar Roman church hath not yet lost all spirituall life is not yet openly deuorced from Christ And Peter Martyr in his epistle to Bullinger writeth Yet aliue that he gaue counsaile that the Papists they should not call one the other Heretiks but account themselues for brethren As for English Protestants Engli h ProtestaÌ„ts his Maiesty in his speach to the Parlament anno 1605. 9. of Nouember and put forth in print speaketh thus VVe do iustly confesse that many Papists especially our forefathers laying their only trust vpon Christ and his merits may be and oftentymes are saued detesting in that point and thinking the cruelty of Puritans worthy of fire Papists may be saued that will admit no saluation to any Papist And in his epistle to Cardinall Peron The Roman the Greek c. Churches are members of the Catholike Church Members of the Catholike Church And D. Andrews in his Tortura Torti towards the end speaketh thus to the Papists VVe are content to call you members of the Catholike Church though not sound members Hooker in his 3. book of Ecclesiasticall policy pag. 128 VVe gladly acknowledge them to be of the family of Iesus Christ Of the family of Christ And lib. 5. pag. 188 They should acknowledge so much neuertheles still due to the same Church of Rome as to be held and reputed a part of the house of God a limme of the visible Church of Christ D. Couel in his defence of Hooker pag. 68. May be saued Note sayth VVe affirme them of the Church of Rome to be parts of the Church of Christ and that those that liue and dye in that Church may notwithstanding be saued D. Barlow in his 3. sermon ad Clerum The learneder writers do acknowledge the Church of Rome to be the Church of God M. Bunny in his treatise of Pacification sect 18 Neither of vs Papists Protestants may iustly account the other to be none of the Church of God VVe are no seuerall Church from them nor they from vs. D. Some against Penry in diuers places auouceth That Papists are not altogeather aliens from Gods couenant That in the iudgement of all learned men and all reformed Churches there is in Popery a Church a Ministery a true Christ If you think that all the Popish sect which dyed in the Popish Church are damned you think absurdly and dissent from the iudgement of the learned Protestants D. Whitaker in his fourth controuersy quest 5. cap. 3. calleth the Papists Church the temple of God more then halfe dead and almost decayed And that temple wherein the Apostle sayth that Antichrist shall sit and which he affirmeth to be the Roman Church he termeth the very Church of God the true Church of God the society of the faythfull the liuely temple composed of liuely stones such as are the faythfull the elect And he addeth There is among them Papists some Ministery and some preaching of the word which doubtlesse affordeth saluation vnto some And as the giftes of God are without repentance so the couenant which God made with Christian people is not quite broken And cont 2. quest 5. Gods couenant with Papists cap. 15. after he had confessed that Luther had sayd that in Popery are all the goods belonging to Christians the keyes the office of preaching true Christianity and the very kernell of Christianity he addeth These things are indeed among them M. Powell in his 2. booke of Antichrist cap. 2. graunteth the Roman Church to be the true Church albeit with a new kind of distinction he deny the Popish church And D. Rainolds in his 5. Thesis albeit he say that the Roman Church be more then sickly and weak yet he dares not say that she is quite dead And D. White in his way p. 352. sayth That Popery in as much as it differeth from vs is not to be imagined by vs to be another Church distinct in place and countries from the true Church of Christ but we affirme it to be a contagion raging in the midst of the Church of Christ it selfe And in his defence c. 37. pag. 355 I neuer denied the Church of Rome to be the visible Church of God wherein our auncestors professed the truth and were saued And cap. 41. pag. 408 Professing the Church of Rome it selfe in all ages to haue byn the visible Church of God Lastly D. Hall in his Rome Irreconciliable sect 1. sayth that the Roman Church is a true visible Church but not sound and that it differeth from the Protestant Church At the sick from the whole Heereto I adde that oftentymes they call the Roman Church their Mother which hath borne them to Christ as we shall rehearse hereafter