Treatise vpon the Reuelation p. 68. Betweene the yeares of Christ three hundred and 316. the Antichristian Papisticall reigne began reigning vniuersally without any debatable contradiction one thouand two hundred and sixty yeares M. Napper practised vniuersally throughout all Christendome almost the space of the foresaid fourteene hundred years by the learneder sort of ProtestaÌ„ts granted to be sufficient (l) That the Catholike sayth is suffiâ—ient to saluation is confessed by Cartwright in his reply to D. Whitgifts defence pa. 82. by D. Feild of the Church l. 36. 46. by D. Couell in his defence of M. Hooker p. 77. and by many others to Saluation was punished with losse of goods inprisonment and often losse of life And thus farre in an eauâ—n libration of the Lawes by which Sectaryes were punished in Q Maryes dayes and of the Statutes by which the Catholikes were persecuted in Q. Elizabeth her raigne Only â—ad hereto that it according to M. Nappers confession our Catholike Religion did raigne vniuersally from the yeares of Christ 316. yeares then it euidently followeth that it did not first then begin but was vndoubtedly in being long before it could possibly become so confessedly vniuersâ—ll which said tiâ—e so long before coâ—d not be short of the Apostle times Animaduersion X. DIuers of our Aduersaries being pressed to shew when any change of the Roman Religion came in as an innouation not being able to instance in any one dogmaticall Poynt so introduced the more easely to cast dust in the eyes of the ignorant do (m) Thus answereth D Whitaker contra Camp rat 7. saying Pilinon subito omnes canescunt And againe In Eâ—clesia Romana accidit quemâ—dmodum magno aedificio videmus enenire quod â—â—mes alâ—quo loco incipit agere c. Ita Romana Eâ—clesia temporum successione c. answere that the changes of Fayth in the Church of Rome vnespiedly did comâ— in euen as hayres of a Mans head inseâ—sibly do grow gray and as houses and edifices 〈◊〉 without any obseruation of the tyme become ruâ—nous and decaying yet certaine it is that the hayres change their former colour to gray anâ— that Houses become ruinous To examine these resemblances as mere impostures and desperate Euasions I first say that the first decay in building the first shew of whitnes in hayre is imperceptible not to be discerned whereas euery change in faith though but in one poynt or Article is most markable and subiect to obseruatioÌ„ Secondly the whitnes of the hayres of the head and the ruins of a house do not happen but by degrees and therefore at the first cannot be discerned Whereas euery Opinion in Doctrine is at the first either true or false and therfore is for such at the First to be apprehended by the vnderstanding Thirdly not any haue the charge or care imposed vpon them to obserue the changes in these petty Matters But in the Church of Christ there are euer appoynted Pastours and Doctours whose office is to marke the first begining of any innouation in Doctrine and accordingly to labour to suppresse the same Lastly these deceytfull resemblances being truly weighed do recoyle back with disaduantage to the Protestants For although we cannot shew when the first hayre began to be whyte or the first slifter in a house beganne to be a slifter yet any notable degrees of the said whytnes in the hayres or of the slifters in a house are easily discerned And therefore the Protestants are obliged euen from the nature of these their owne similitudes to tell vs at what time some sensible degrees increase of this supposed change did happeÌ„ And the manifestation of the degrees is to be made by naming the time the Persons when and by whom such or such a particular point of the Roman Religion was first sensibly introduced into the Church of Rome The which not any Protestant hitherto hath bene able to shew Animaduersion XI IT is Euident that in the ancient times diuers Innouatours did rise denying this or that Catholike Article as for example The Doctrine of the reall presence was first denyed by certaine Heretikes in (n) As witneseth Theod. Dial. 3. Ignatius his dayes which Ignatius was scholler to the Apostles The denyall of freewill taught by the Manichees as (o) Auctin l. de Haeres cap. 46. Austin witnesseth and therein condemneth them The like may be said of more then twenty articles of our Catholike Religion denied by the ancient Heretikes as els where in this Treatise is shewed Now from hence I demonstratiuely conclude that this deniall of the said Caâ—hâ—â—ike points in those ancient times doth necessarily imply that the said Catholike points were affirmatiuely belieued generally taught both in and before the times And thus through the old Heretâ— denying and impugning of our said poiâ—â— of fayth is necessarily presupposed a preâ—stency of those said affirmatiue doctrinâ— the Reall presence Freewill and of the râ—â— wherof those ancieÌ„t Heretiks Tenets are mâ—rely Negatiues I meane they preadmit a former more ancient beliefe of our said Câ—tholike doctrines For why should any Sâ—ctaries in those dayes rise vp to deny aâ— this by writing any of the said doctrineâ— if those doctrines had not beene then aâ—â— before belieued Animaduersion XII SVch frontlesse Protestants as will maintaine the Visibility of their Church for a ages undertaking to giue ExaÌ„ples of seuerall Protestants in such ages do commonly vse this Height and imposture That is they begin to instance in Luther and so vpwards to Waldo who liued about 400. years since And then they arriuing to that time though all those Examples be meerely false and impertinent shift off the instancing from that 400. yeares to the Apostles dayes which containes aboue twelue hundred yeares by saying We shall (p) So answeareth the Author of a Treatise entituled of the perpetuall visibility and succession of the true Church in all ages pa. 89. printed anno 1614. not need to ascend any higher then to Waldo which otherwise is easy to make playne thus leauing a thousand and one hundred yeares without giuing any one Example of ProtestaÌ„ts during all that long period of Ages Now â—ere I say the Protestants imposture is this To begin with Luther vpward and not downeward towards Luther therby the better to conceale from a vulgar eye the small number of those ages or Centuries for which they endeauour to proue the imaginary Visibility of the ProtestaÌ„t Church For if they had begun in instancing with Waldo who as is said liued but some 400. yeares since then euery simple man might haue discerned at the first that they had passed ouer eleuen or twelue hundred years at the least to wit from the Apostles dayes to waldo without pretending so much as one Example of Protestancy during all that large circuite of tyme and so might haue iustly challenged them for their pretermitting of so many Ages In some sort answerably hereto Card. Bellarmine chargeth
Superstitious then a Protestant And a Protestant sooner becom an Atheist then a Catholike The Reason of both is euident And first whereas the Catholike Religion besides the beliefe of many dogmaticall points of fayth retayneth the practise of many Ceremonies the true vse of which Ceremonies as being first instituted by the primitiue Church are most lawfull but now if the ignorant Catholike through want of due instruction do ascribe more to them then is due or do put greater cōfidence in them then he ought as forgetting them to be but Ceremonies then perhaps he may haue a superstitious conceite of them as it happened in the Brazen Serpent though otherwise seruing as the figure of Christ To which the Iewes through abuse thereof in ascribing more worship to it then they ought at length bare a Superstitions respect But now touching the Protestants greater propension to Atheisme the reason is in that Protestancy euer refynes it selfe by Negatiues Thus for example The Caluinist or Puritan denies more then Lutheran or the moderate Protestāt The Anabaptist more then the Puritan The Anti-trinitarians more then the Anabaptists the Iew or Turks more then the Anti-trinitarians and for the last sublimation through deniall of all Iudaisme and Turcisme resolues into Atheisme And hereupon we find that whereas many Protestants by their often refyning of their Religion and all by Negatiues do in the end become Atheists denying euen the being of a Deity that few or no Catholikes immediatly from Catholike Religion euer fall into the open Blasphemy of Atheisme Animaduersion CVIII THe preaching of the Word and Sacraments supposing them to be Notes of the Church as our Aduersaries do suggest proue only the Place where the Church is but not which is the Church For the Church consisteth of men and we cannot tell who they are that receaue the Word truly preached or the Sacraments truly administred Againe whereas as Lubbertus (k) L. 4. de Eccles cap. 1. a Protestant truly teacheth Notius est duplex vnum Naturae alterum nobis Now here the Question is only of such Notes as are Notes in respect of vs for our better informing which is the true Church and not as they are Notes in respect of Nature For here we are instructed a posteriori and according to the measure of that knowledg which God vouchsafes to afford to vs. Now in reference hereto we freely grant that the true preaching of the word and Administration of the Sacraments may be termed Notes of the Church but not Notes to vs which is only the point here stood vpon For though they be Notes in Nature of the truth of the Church yet what doth this auayle vs since they are not Notes to vs for our direction to find which is the true Church Againe the true preaching of the word and the Administration of the Sacraments cannot be Notes to vs which is the true Church seeing the Scripture it selfe cannot be made knowne to vs for Scripture but only by the attestation of the Church as M. Hooker testifieth in these words Of (l) Hooker in Eccles Pol. saec 14. l. 1. pag. 86. things necessary the very chiefest is to know what Bookes we are to esteeme holy which is confessed impossible for the Scripture it selfe to teach And againe We (m) Vbi supra l. 3. p. 146. all know the first outward Motiue to esteeme of the Scripture is the authority of the Church Thus he Now this being granted it ineuitably followeth that first we must know which is the true Church to giue this approbation of the Scripture before we can know which is the Scripture and much more then before we can be assured of the true preaching of the Word and which is the true construction of the Scripture To these former Arguments I adioyne this pertinent obseruation It is this When the Catholikes demand to set downe the true Notes of the Church our Aduersaries answering That is the true Church which enioyeth a true preaching of the Word and an auayleable administration of the Sacraments Now I here affirme that this description of Notes is but our owne Question returned vs back in other termes and consequently but a Sophisme consisting in an idle circulation of the same point inuested with a new forme of words For when I demand which is the true Church I vertually implicitly and according to the immediate meaning of my words demand which Church is that which enioyeth the true preaching of the word and the true vse of the Sacraments since only the true Church is honored with this kind of preaching and distribution of the Sacraments Thus far touching the Notes prostituted by our Aduersaries as the true Notes of Christ his Church Animaduersion CIX SVch Protestants as do mantayne that there were Protestants in all ages before Luther giue the reason that the feare of Persecution was the cause why the said Protestants did then lye latent and became not visible to the world But this is a meere aēry suggestion For thus I argue The Church of God vnder persecution either communicateth openly with a false visible Church in participation of Sacraments and externall professiō of fayth Or els she doth refrayne from all such externall Communion if she do communicate with a false Idolatrous Church as diuers of our Aduersaryes repute the Church of Rome to be then is she not the true Church since the true Church cannot brooke any such dissimulation For we read With the hart a (n) Rom. 10. Mā belieueth vnto Iustice and with the mouth confesseth vnto Saluation If she doth not communicate with it then by such her forbearing she is made knowne and consequently is become thereby visible for who are persecuted but Men that are knowne Or how can one lying secretly and hiddenly be said to be persecuted The truth of this point is further warrantable from the examples of the persecution in the primitiue Church which of all other pressures of the Church was incomparably the greatest And yet we fynd that the particular Bishops Confessours and Martyrs are euen to this day made knowne who they were what false Opinions and Heresyes they impugned And the like may be said of the English Catholikes persecuted in Queene Elizabeths reigne since the names and memoryes of those reuerend Pryests and others of the Laity to speake nothing of many worthy Confessours and other suffering great losses and disgraces who lost their lyues in her dayes only for Religion are euen to this day fresh and recorded Therefore I heare demaund that if the Catholiks in this our Country being but a small part of Christendome could not but for some few nūbers of yeares in comparison escape the search and hands of their persecutours and become thereby most visible knowne How could then the Protestants being supposed to be dispersed thtoughout many Nations lye hid and auoyd for so many ages together as is pretended the force of that persecution which is affirmed by
they are most erroneous in the immediaâ— Obiect Animaduersion CXLII WHen the Catholikes do alledge certaiâ—â— Notes of the Church as Antiquity Vniuersality Succession Conuersion of Heathâ—â— c. our Aduersaryes seeke to auoyde thâ— force of some of these Notes and particularly of Succession and Conuersion of Gentils since they say these two Notes are claymâ—â— by confessedly false Churches seing thâ— Greeke Church houldeth Succession and thâ— Arians haue conuerted the Gothes anâ— Vandals To answere hereto I first say thesâ— two Instances are false for the Greeke Churcâ— hath its Succession as interrupted and begunne from those Intruders who begaâ— their owne separation from the Romaâ— Church about the Holy Ghosts proceeding And as concerning the supposed Conuersâ—ons of the Goths and Vandals by the Arians it is only pretended Seing the Gothes weâ—â— not at the first conuerted by the Arians buâ— being conuerted before were after by them peruerted as appeareth out of Zozomen l. 6. c. 37. and Theodoret l. 4. cap. vlt. Secondly I reply to the former Euasion That the Catholikes rather to preuent the impostures of our Aduersaryes obiecting hereto theÌ„ out of any absolute necessity of the said Notes do propound the foresaid Marks or notes not as proper alone to the true Church but only as markes inseparable though not conuertible from it so they vndertaking thereby not to set downe in the affirmatiue that where any such of these in separably marks be there the true Church certainly is but rather in the Negatiue that where these be wanting there the true Church is not But certaine it is that these Notes are wanting in the ProtestaÌ„t Church Animaduersion CXLIII I grant that the Catholike Religion is inuolued with farre more difficultyes as may be exemplifyed in the doctrine of the Reall presence then the Protestant Religion the reason therof being in that our Religion consisteth of Affirmatiue Articles the Protestants fayth so far forth as it differeth from the Catholike of Negatiues Yet to recompence this we fynd that the Protestant fayth is attended on coÌ„trary to the Catholike faith herein with diuers grosse absurdityes necessarily and immediatly flowing from the Protestants Tenets or Assertions I heere passe ouer how (9) Luth. l. de capt Babil c. de Baptism Luther houldeth that Infants at the tyme of their Baptizing haue an articulate and actual faith of all the chiefe Misteryes of Christianity That our Aduersaryes howsoeuer they disclayme from it in words teach (10) Luther in Assert damuat per Leonem Art 36. Beza in his display of Popish practises pag. 202. Sumglius to 1. de Prodentia fol. 366. that God is the Author of sinne These and many other such like absurd Doctrines I heere passe ouer only I will a little insist how (*) Luther in Assert art 32. sayth That all good works God iudging them are mortall sinne Luther and the rest do mantayne that all the good works of iust Men are Sinnes Now the absurdity of this doctrine how transparent is it Since from it would follow that the worke of fayth by which we are iustifyed should be Sinne as also that prayer wherein we pray Dimitte nobis debita nostra should be a sinne But is it not most absurd that man should be iustified by Sinne and that he should seeke by Sinne to obtaine the remission of sinne Againe from this fountayne we might thus truly Syllogize and reason All good works are to be done but some mortall sinnes are good Works Therefore some mortall sinnes are to be done Againe No mortall sinne is to be committed but all good works are mortall sinnes Therefore no good Worke is to be done These Loe are the inferences of the former absurdity to wit that all good works are mortall Sinnes that some mortall Sinnes are to be committed and that no good worke is to be donne Now whereas by way of retortion our Aduersaries and particularly Kempnitius in his Examen Concilij â—rident vpbraid vs that we teach a more blasphemous doctrine in maintayning that we are iustifyed by our owne works and not by Christ his Passion To this I reply thar in obiecting of this appeares either extreme malice in our Aduersaries or at least most wilfull ignorance Therefore to remoue this stumbling block we say that we are iustifyed by an inherent Iustice or Renouation of life in vs as by the formall Cause but we are also iustifyed by the merits of Christ his Passion as by the meritoriour Cause both which different causes may stand together without any derogation of the one to the other contrary to the intended fraud of our Aduersaries herein in seeking to confound these two different Causes Animaduersion CXLIV YF it be demanded how Luther first being instructed of the Deuill concerning his doctrine as also being of a vicious life as â—n this Treatise is in part elswhere shewed â—hould for his doctrine be so much applauâ—ed repayred vnto by the broken memâ—ers of the Catholike Church To this may â—e answered that Luther his select choice â—reparing of his doctrine to entertayne and â—t the then seuerall affected humours of â—ch peculiar declining estate and degree â—his being accompanied with the Visitation â—f Gods heauy iudgments hanging ouer â—he preuayling Sinnes of those degenerate â—â—mes was the chiefe Allectiue for the more easy imbracing of Luthers Doctrine Noâ— the choycnes of Luthers doctrine consisted to insist in some particulars in mantayning liberty of pretended Mariage in Clergy men in his exposing of Monasteries and other rich spoyles of the Church to the greedy appetite of the temporal Magistrate and finally in deluding of the simple sinfull Laity with his other licentious doctrines of Saluation by only fayth and disclayming from the necessity of Good Workâ— as houlding them needles as aboue out of his owne particular sayings we haue proued In the seuerall imbracing of all whicâ— as S. Jerome (1) Ierome contra Vigilantium in like manner said of Vigilantius his followers Luthers followers fauored not so much him as their owne Vâ—â—â— These are the fatall steps of Luthers suddaâ—â—â— rising greatnes And this is the lesse to 〈◊〉 wondred at seeing we see that the like câ— rather far greater progresse was made 〈◊〉 this kind by Mahomet through his absurd and licentious Doctrines wherewith so many Nations are euen at this day infected Animaduersion CXLV YF in retaliation of what is said in thâ—â— last aboue Animaduersion our Aduersaries shall labour to distract their Discipleâ— with vnequall obiecting insteed of answere the supposed wicked liues of certaine Popes I reply hereto that admitting for the tyme the said wicked liues of the Popes to be true and not forged yet the disparity here resteth in that those Popes were not the first Restorers of our Religion to light since they liued many ages after our Catholike Religion was vniuersally professed as appeareth aboue from the confessed antiquity of the Catholike Roman Fayth Againe I say the Question heere is not whether the high
Church in the time of Boniface thâ— third which was anno 607. was inuisible fled into wildernes there to remaine a long season Now to reduce all these Confessionâ— into an Argument Thus then I dispute D. Humfrey M. Hooker and diuers others here omitted doe generally teach that the Church of Christ must necessarily euer be visible But D. Fulke M. Napper and many other Protestants for breuity here passed oue râ—â— ingenuously confesse that the Protestant Church hath for many ages beene wholy Inuisible Therfore euen in the Iudgement of the Protestants themselues the Protestant Church is not the Church of Christ This kind of arguing in many other Questions may become familiar to him who is conuersant in the Proâ—estaÌ„ts bookes or in that Catholike Booke called The Protestants Apology wherein a man may see euen thousands of ProtestaÌ„ts Confessions against themselues Now to this I annex this following that wheras the Scripture teacheth the necessary visibility of the true Church of God as also wheras diuers learned ProtestaÌ„ts do truly acknowledge that the Protestant Church hath for many ages beene wholy inuisible Therefore diuers other learned ProtestaÌ„ts throgh their inueterate malice to our Catholike Religion and as confessing the predictions in Scripture of the euer visibility and enlargment of the true Church of God not to haue beene accomplished in the Protestants Church haue flatly renounced their Christianity charging Christ our Sauiour as a seducer themselues so becomming Iewes and Turks I will exemplify this point to omit some others in these men following all before their Apostacy most eminent Protestants First then Dauid (1) See the hiâ— ory of Dauid George printed at Antwerp 1568. published by the Deuines of Basill George once Professour at Basill became a blasphemous Apostata Ochinus (2) Of Ochinus his Apostâ—â—y Zanchius witnesseth in his booke de Tribus Elohim who with Peter Martyr first planced Protestancy in England in like sort denied Christ and taught circumcision as Zanchius the Protestant confesseth (3) Of Neuserus his Deniall of Christ Osiander the Protestant witnesseth Cent. 16. part 2. pag. 8â—8 Neuserus once Superintendent of Heidelburge turned Turk anâ— was circumcised at Constantinople as Osiander the Protestant affirmeth (4) Touching Alamannus see Beza in Eâ—ist 65. pag. 308. Alamaâ—nus a Swinglian and once deare to Beza became a Jew as Beza himselfe sayth Laeliâ— (5) The Bookes of Laelius Socinus against the Trinity are yet extant Socinus a scholar in the schoole of Geneua did write whole Bookes against the B. Trinity Finally to omit many other eminent Protestants Georgius (6) That Georgius Paulus denyed the Trinity with the Turks is witnessed by Stancarus the Protest lib. de Mediat fol. 38. Paule minister of Cracouia denied the Triniâ—â— with the Turks Thus of Instances for thâ— point Animaduersion XVIII A Man cannot auoide the force of the former kind of Dispute consisting 〈◊〉 the Confessions of the Protestants by replying that other learned Protestants dâ— maintayne the contrary in the same poinâ— to the Protestanâ—s aboue by me alledged This answere is most weake thâ— reason thereof being in that there is greaâ— disparity betweene learned Protestant confessing some points which do aduantagâ— the Catholike fayth and others thougâ— as learned Protestants maintaining thâ— contrary seeing the first sort of men speak against themselues and their cause who being iudicious and learned men would neuer do but as being conuinced with the Euidency of the truth therein Whereas theâ—â— second kind of men do not admit the confessions of their brethren but speake only in behalfe of their owne Religion and so such their denyalls are to be reputed more partiall And this Animaduersion is to be remembred in many other points confessed by some Protestants and denied by other Protestants Now of what force the Argument from the authority or confession of â—n Aduersary is appeareth both from the testimony of the ancient Fathers and the Protestants themselues First then Irenaeus thus writeth hereof Jt is (a) L. 4. c. 14. an vnanswerable proofe which bringeth attestation from the Aduersaries themselues with whom conspireth Nazianzene saying Jt (b) Orat. de S. Basil is the greatest cunning and wisdome of speech to bynd the Aduersary with his owne words Now touching the Protestants acknowledging the same we find Osiander the Protestant thus to write The (c) In Ep. Eucharist confession testimony of an Aduersary is of greatest authority And Peter Martyr Among (d) Loc. tit ce Iudaeis fol. 300. other testimonies that is of the greatest weight which is giuen by the Eneâ—ies Finally D. Whitaker The (e) Contra Bellar l. de Eccles controu 2. q 5. Argument â—ust needs be strong and efficacions which is â—â—ken from the Confession of the Aduersaries And I do freely acknowledg that truth it selfe is able to extort testimonies euen from its enemies Thus much hereof Therefore I here only conclude that as a testimony of a friend against a friend so of an Aduersary in behalfe of an Aduersary is of great force and most conuincing So certaine are those words of Tertullian (f) In Apolog. Magis fides prona est in aduersus semetipsos confitentes quam pro semetipsâ— negantes Animaduersion XIX THere is great difference to be made betweene ProtestaÌ„ts speaking against themselues and yet belieuing the Protestant doctrine and Conclusion touching some circumstances wherof the Confessions are betweene some others who afore were Catholiks and after do defend some one or other point of Protestancy Since their later men do not speake against themselues but in defence of some such Protestant doctrine then newly entertained by them and consequently in defence of their ownâ— opinions And therfore such their authorities are not to ballance equally with the Confessions of the former Protestants Thâ—â— Animaduersion is giuen with reference to Erasmus Cassander Cornelius Agrippa Polideâ—Virgill Nilus and some others euery onâ— of which imbraced some one Protestanâ— Tenet or other though diuers of them after recoÌ„ciled themselues before their deatâ— to the Catholike Church by abandoninâ— their former receaued Innouations Animaduersion XX. CHoose rather to dispute with a Protestant touching matter of Fact in whicâ— may be proued the falshood of the Protestant Religion then touching any Dogmaticall point of fayth or Doctrine as receauing its proofe from the Scripture This I speake not but that the Scripture maketh most clearely for the Catholiks against the Protestants but because your Aduersary in dispute will euer cauill at your exposition of Scripture reducing it in the end against all Antiquity of the Fathers and tradition of the Church to the interpretation of his owne priuate and reuealing Spirit Now in matter of fact your Aduersary is forced to stand to the Authorities deduced from Ecclesiasticall History and other humane proofes And therefore he must either shape a probable if not a sufficient answere to them which he cannot do they wholy making against him euen
by his owne learned Brethrens Confessions or else he must rest silent And this is the reason why the Protestants are so loath to dispute of the Church Since this Question compreheÌ„deth in it selfe diuers points of fact as of its continuall Visibility Antiquity Succession Ordination and Mission of Pastours c. All which Questions receaue their proofes from particular Instances warranted from History by shewing the particular Tymes Persons and other circumstances concerning matter of Fact Animaduersion XXI WE Catholikes charge the Protestants with a vicious Circle of dispute between the Scripture and the spirit and in requitall hereof the Protestants do reciprocally insimulate vs Catholiks within the said vicious circular argumentation betweene the Scripture and the Church Now let vs see whether of vs stand truly chargeable herewith That the Catholikes are free from this kind of arguing I thus proue The Catholikes touching the Scripture and the Church do euer make their proofes in seuerall kinds of Causes and by a partiall manner of proofe and therby do still proue one thing by another more knowne to those persons to whom it is to be proued The actuall assent and beliefe it selfe is wrought wherby we infallibly belieue the Mysteries reuealed though we belieue the verity of the Scriptures reuelation by the authority of the Church propounding the Churches proposition for the authority of the Scriptures reuealing wherby the Scripture reuealing doth giue vs testimony of the Church propounding againe the Church propounding of the Scriptures reuealing Neuerthelesse this reciprocall testimony and proofe is not any proper vicious circle First because it is in diuerso genere causae in diuers kinds of causes for the testimonies of the Scriptures reuelation to the infallibility of the Churches proposition is causa formalis the formall cause by the which we assent to the Churches proposition But the Churches proposition is only Causa conditionalis or as we vse to speake Conditio fine qua non to know the Scriptures Reuelation and so they are reciprocall in a different manner of proofe the one that is Scripture à Priori as including diuine reuelation the other that is the Church à Posteriori required only as a condition The former as a formall precedent Cause the later as a subsequent annexed condition Secondly this reciprocall proofe is not adomnino idem as Aristotle requires to a Circle that is the one is not the totall and sole cause of knowing the other for the Churches proposition is not knowne only by the Scriptures reuelation and not otherwise but also by other proofes signes and testimoâ—ies to wit Miracles Consent Sanctity c. all which conuince that the Churches authority is necessary and infallible to distinguish the true sense of the Scripture from false and to end Controuersies about Scripture But now to cast our eye vpon the Protestants Circle prouing the Scripture by the priuate Spirit and the priuat Spirit from the Scripture it is euident that they proue the Scripture by the Spirit and Spirit by the Scripture in one the same kind of Cause and by one sole whole manner of proofe For demaund of a Protestant how and by what meanes he vnderstaÌ„deth the Scripture He answeres by the Spirit and so knowes the Scripture by the Spirit And aske him by what meanes he knowes he hath the true spirit he answeres the Scripture assures himselfe therof since he is one of the Elect. And thus this his proofe is truly Circular and vicious as being deliuered in eodem genere Causae and omnino ad idem Animaduersion XXII IT is most certaine that Protestants deny all Authorities of all affirmatiue heads making their last refuge to their owne priuaâ— Spirit and Iudgement For example if we insist in the affirmatiue Notes and Marks of the Church to wit vniuersality visibility vnity c. ouâ— aduersaryes as is aboue said discard the testimonyes of all these heads by erecting for Notes the preaching of the word and administration of the Sacraments so reducing to their owne iudgment only when the word is truly preached and the Sacramâ—nts rightly administred Yf in matters of fact we recurre to History I meane concerning visibility Succession vocation c. they reiect this authority by saying Sufficit (g) Whitak contra Duraeum l. 7 p. 478. nobis c. To vs it is sufficient by comparing the Popish opinions with the Scrâ—pture to discouer the disparity of faith betweene them and vs. And as for Historiographers we giue them liberty to wryte what they will If we produce the testimonyes of particular Fathers of the Primitiue Church marke how Luther depresseth them (h) Luth. de seruo arbis 1551. pag. 434. The Fathers of so many ages haue beene plainly blind most ignorant in the Scriptures they haue erred all their life time vnlesse they were amended before their death they were neither Saincts nor pertayning to the Church If we produce Generall Councels they answere saying (i) Petâ—â— Martyr l. de votis pa. 476. As long as we insist in Generall Councels so long we shall continue in the Popish Errors If we passe to Apostolicall Traditions Cartwright in depressing Traditions maintained by S. Austin thus wryteth To (k) Sâ—â— Cartwright in whitgifts defence p. 103. allow S. Austins saying touching Traditions is to bring in popery If we alledge diuers passages of Scripture as out of Toby Ecclesiasticus the Machabees the Protestants with full voyce deny them to be Canonicall and style them only Apocriphal If we take our authorityes out of such books of Scripture as are acknoledged for Scripture on both sydes the Protestants deny the Translation of the Scripture to be true sincere which point appeareth both from the Protestants mutual condemning one anothers translation of Scripture as also from the most bitter censure giuen by our English Puritans against our English Translaiion whereof seuerall books writteÌ„ by them are yet extaÌ„t If we Catholikes proceed further in insisting in the Originall of both the Testaments the Protestants deny that the Originalis are at this present true Thus for example in Math c. 10. we read 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the first Peter Beza (l) Beza in Annotat noui Testam 1556 denyeth the Originall herein mantayning that the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 was inserted into the text by some one fauoring the Popes Primacy In like sort (m) Beza vâ—i supra Beza denyeth that the Greeke Originall in Math. 22. is at this present the same as it was penned by the Euangelist mantayning that it is corrupted in fauour of the Realâ— presence If we yet ascending further entrench our selfe in such books of Scripture whose Originals Translations are accepted on ech party as true and incorrupted and tel our Aduersaryes that the whole Church of God in her primitiue and purest tymes interpreted the passages of Scripture in that sense in which they are at this present by the Catholikes alledged the Protestants
Damnatioâ— And D. Whitaker thus auerreth It (h) Controuers 2. q. 5. cap. 9. is false that Hereticall and Schismaticall Churches are true Churches Thus far of our Aduersaries excluding Papists Anabaptists Arians Heretikes and Schismatiks from the Protestant Church and not acknowledging them to be members thereof nor their Doctrines Protestancy Now we will obserue what change and mutability of iudgment herein our Aduersaries shew at other tymes in willingly embracing all these former sort of men and some others also as good Protestants and in state of Saluation And first of the Papists Luther sayth In (i) In Ep. contra Anabapt the Popery there is true Christianity yea the Kernell of Christianity many pious great Saincts M. Hooker (k) L. Eccles Pol. 3. c. 1â—8 we gladly acknowledg them of Rome to be of the family of Iesus Christ and M. Bunny we (l) In his Treatise of pacification sect 18. are no seuerall Church from the Papists nor they from vs. The Anabaptists are admitted for good Protestants by Oecolampadius saying (m) L. 2. Ep. p. 63. Baptisme is an externall thing which by Law of Charity may be dispensed with And D. (n) In his answere to the Protest Apol. l. 4 cap. 3. sect 10. Morton we Protestants iudge the state of the Anabaptists not to be vtterly desperate The Arians are acknowledged by M. Morton to be of the same Church of which the Protestants are and he giueth his reason in these words Because (o) In his booke of the kingdom of Isâ—ael and the Church pag. â—4 the Arians hould the foundation of the Gospell And M. Hooker seemeth to intimate the same in these words The (p) Eccles Pol. lib. 4 p. 181. Arians in the reformed Churches of Poland c. hereby insinuating that those Protestant Churches of Poland did acknowledg the Arians to be members of their Church Of Idolaters M. Hooker thus fauorably writeth Christians (q) Eccles Pol. l. 3 pag. 1â—0 by externall profession they are all whose marke of recognizance hath in it those things which we haue mentioned yea although they be impious Idolaters wicked Hâ—tikes c. Infideâ—ls are also in our Aduersaâ—â—â— iudgments mâ—mbers of a sauing Churchâ— fayth for thus writeth Swinglius Ethâ—â—â— (r) Swingl Ep Oecolam l. 1. p 39 si piam mentem domi fouerit Christianus 〈◊〉 etiamsi hristum ignoret And hereupon Sâ—â—glius concluâ—eth that (s) Swingâ— tom 2. fol. 118. 559. Hercules Socrates â—ristides are now in Heauen as is in anothâ—â— place shewed Finally the Protestants are 〈◊〉 courteous as that they are content to â—â—corporate Antichrist within their Church 〈◊〉 state of Saluation This I thus proue I◠〈◊〉 ouermuch knowne and diuulged that mâ—ny Protestants do teach with full moutâ— that the Pope is Antichrist Now then let 〈◊〉 see how at other times they write of hiâ— whom they hould to be Antichrist and 〈◊〉 Religion Antichristianity Here then we fâ—â—â— D. Whitaker thus to acknowledg I will (t) D White in his answere to the first Demonstration of D. Sanders not say that from the tyme that Papistry begâ—â— to be Antichristianity the Popes themseâ—â—â— haue beene all damned And yet D. Whitaker 〈◊〉 where confidently auerreth the Pope to be Antichrist In like sort M. Powell hath the like sentence saying I will (u) In his answere to the last Demonstration of D. Sanders in no wise say that all the Popes from the tyme that papistry was first reuealed to be Antichristianity aâ—â— damned Thus much of this point whereby we may discerne the wounderfull and vnheard mutability of our Aduersaries Iudgments touching who are Protestants and Professours of that Church wherein a man may be saued A demonstration vnansâ—erabâ—e â—â—le and irrepliable to proue that the Proâ—â—â—â—ant Church and fayth such as these forâ—â—r men do restrayne or enlarge it is 〈◊〉 capable of Saluation And how then can Christian know if he will rely vpon the â—â—gments of Protestants herein to what 〈◊〉 of Protestants or within what Church 〈◊〉 may range himself for the Saluation of 〈◊〉 Soule Animaduersion LXXXXVIII â—N that there are many Catholike Articles the which the Iewes before the comâ—ing of Christ did belieue therefore it folâ—â—weth euidently that the said Articles canâ—ot be reputed to be Innouations or lately â—â—uented Doctrines but as ancient as the â—ymes before our Sauiours Incarnation I â—ill exemplify in some The Booke Eccleâ—â—asticus admit for the tyme it be not Scripture speaketh directly of our Sauiours â—â—scending into Hell in those words where it â—s said in his person I (x Eccles 24. will pierce through â—â—e sower parts of the Earth J will looke vpon all such as be a sleepe and will lighten all them that â—â—ust in the Lord A saying so pertinent for proofe of Limbus Patrum that D. Whitaker (y) Contra Duraeum l. 8 pag. 5â—7 acknowledging the true sense thereof auoydeth it by saying the Booke is not Canonicall which at this present is impertiâ—ent since here I seeke only to proue the â—â—uth of diuers of our Catholike points as being belieued by the Ancient Iewes before our Sauiours tyme in their writings whether Canonicall or not Canonicall Touching Prayer for the Dead It is warranted by the example of Iudas (z) Machab 2. Machabaeus the true seruant of God as also is taught by Rabbi Simeon who liued before Christ and diuers other ancient Rabbyes Rabbi Simeon thus writing of such as are temporally punished after this life After (a) In lib. Zoar. in cap 13. Genesis they are purged from the filth of their sinnes then doth God cause them to ascend out of that place Touching Gods Induration or hardning of Pharaos hart the Iewish Rabins so conspire in affirming with vs the same to be by Gods permission only and not by his working that Peter (b) Peter Martyr in Epist. ad Roman c. 9. Martyr and Munster (c) Munster in Annot. in Exod. c. 7. do accordingly acknowledg this Exposition Concerning Freewill that place in Eccâ—esiasticus (d) Ecclesiast 1â— to wit Say not thou he hath câ—â—sed me to erre Yf thou wilt thou shalt obserue the Commandements He hath set water and fyre before thee stretch out thy hand to which thou wilt Before man is life and death Good Euâ—â—â— what lyketh him shal be giuen him This testimony I say is so euident for Freewill that D. Whitaker in answere thereto reiecteth the authority saying De loco (e) In resp ad ras Camp rat 1 p. 25. Ecclesiasticiparùm laboro c. J make small account of Ecclesiasticus Philo the learned Iew who liued in Christ his tyme thus writeth Man (f) Philo in lib. quod Deus fit immutabelis hath Freewill to which purpose is extant the Oracle in Deuteronomy I haue placed before thee Lyfe and Death Good and Euill chuse Lyfe Concerning Angells Saints the Booke of Tobias written before Christ is so playne (g) Tob.
our Aduersaryes to haue beene more grieuous then euer this of England was Animaduersion CX WHereas our Aduersaries do further vrge in behalfe of the being of Protestants in former Ages that it is often obserued that a little quantity of Copper is in a couÌ„terfeyte Coyne of Gold chaffe is mingled with Corne and yet neither is the Copper Gold nor the Chaffe Corne so say they the Protestant Church was in former ages in the Papacy The Papacy was in the Protestant Church and yet the Protestant Church was not in the Papacy According hereto M. Perkins saith The (o) In his reformed Catholike pag. 328. 329. Church of Rome may be said to be in the Church of God the Church of God in the Church of Rome with whom agreeth Beza thus writing Voluit (p) In Epist. Theol. Epist 1. pag. 15. Deus in Papatu seruare Ecclesiam etsi Papatus non est Ecclesia And D. Whitaker (q) Whiâ—ak l. de Eccles pag. 165. Ecclesia vera fuit in papatu sed papatus non fuit Ecclesia To this I reply and say it is but a froath of words artificially put together Howsoeuer many of our Aduersaries much please themselues with this conceited Answere Therfore for the better examining thereof we are here to conceaue that the sense and meaning of these words is not that the Protestant Church had in those tymes a latent and hidden being in Catholike Countries without hauing entercourse communion with the then knowne and visible Church in the Sacraments for so the true Church could not be said to be in the papacy no more then at this day in respect of its like aboad in Turkish Countries it can be said to be in Turcisme Therefore the particular manner of this strange mixture as it appeares in shew of words is thus truly expressed by Osiander the Protestant in this manner (r) In Epitom Cent. 16. part altera p. 1070. 1072. Quod semper sub Papatu aliqui pij homines fuerint c. No man denyeth but that there were vnder the papacy some holy men who disliked the Errours of the Popes although they durst not openly professe so much nisi ardere aut ad minimum exulare velint except they would burne for their Religion or at least suffer banishment Thus we see the last sublimated sense of the former quaynt sentence resolues to this point To wit that the Protestant Church in those former tymes being in or vnder the Papacy did through feare of burning or banishment dissemble their Religion and communicate in all externall right with the Church of Rome Animaduersion CXI THe Confessed Inuisibility of the Protestant Church aboue set downe during so many former ages doth potentially and vertually include the proofe of the visibility of the Roman Church during all the said ages Seing the Jnuisibility of the Protestant Church for so long a tyme is ascribed by the Protestants themselues to the worke of Antichrist they meaning therby the Pope and the Church of Rome as appeareth by seuerall testimonyes of our Aduersaryes els where in this Treatise expressed particularly of M. Napper thus saying Betweene (s) Napper in his Treatise vpon the Reuelat. pag. 68. the yeares of Christ 300. and 316. the Antichristian Papisticall reigne began reigning vniuersally without any debatable contradiction 1260. yeares And accordingly the Centurists (t) See this in Cent. 4. and so successiuely in Euery Century charge all the ages from Constantine till Luther with Papistry Thus an acknoledged defection of the Protestant Church for many Centuryes doth by our Aduersaryes owne Confession necessarily include and imply a Continuall visibility of the Catholike Roman Church during all the said Centuryes Animaduersion CXII TOuching the supposed change of the fayth of Rome I will deuyde in these three next Animaduersions all the Ages from the Apostles euen to Luthers days into three seuerall Stations or Periods of tymes First then we will see how long it is granted by the Protestants that Rome did perseuere without any alteration of her Primitiue faith Secondly we will set downe the acknowledged continuance of that tyme during all which season the now present fayth of Rome hath continued that is how long Papistry as our Aduersaries terme it hath bene publikly professed throughout all Christendome Thirdly and lastly we will then take a view of the tymes betweene these two former seuerall tymes For these two tymes being once acknowledged on all sydes to wit the tyme during which the Church of Rome confessedly kept her first fayth taught by the Apostles and the tyme during which the present Roman fayth hath continued from this day vpward it ineuitably followeth that this supposed change in Religion did either happen in the Jnterstitium and meane tyme betweene these two former Periods of tymes or els that there happened no such change of Religion in the Church of Rome at all Now concerning the first of these tymes it is granted by the Protestants that Rome retayned her purity of fayth without any alteration from the Apostles tymes till after the death of Optatus Epiphanius and Austin which is during the space of foure hundred and fourty yeares after Christ This I thus proue Wheras our Catholike writers haue much insisted for proofe of their Religion in the succession of the Bishop of Rome euen vntill Austins dayes by the Example of Jrenaus Cyprian Optatus Jerome Vincentius Lyrinensis and Austin D. Fulke answereth in behalfe of these Fathers in this sort That (*) Fulke in his confutation of Purgatory p. 372. these Fathers especially named the Church of Rome it was because the Church of Rome at that tyme as it was founded by the Apostles so it continued in the Doctrine of the Apostles which Doctour in another place thus further writeth The (*) D. Fulke in his Retentiue pag. 85. Popâ—â—â— Church c. departed from the vniuersall Chuâ—ch of Christ long after Austins departure out of this Lyfe Thus he granting that till after Austins death the Church of Rome remayned the true Church In like manner D. Iewell accordeth with D. Fulke herein touching the Argument drawne by those foresaid Fathers from succession of the Bishops of Rome saying As (u) D. Iewell in his reply to D. Harding pag. 246. well Austin as also other godly Fathers rightly yeilded Reuerence to the Sea of Rome c. For the purity of Religion which was there preserued a long tyme without spot To conclude Caluin himselfe maketh good the foresaid Argument taken from the Succession of the Bishops of Rome insisted vpon by Jrenaeus Pertullian Origen Cyprian Austin and Epiphanius in these words Cum (x) Instit l. 4. cap. 2. Sect. 3. extra controuersiam erat nihil á principio vsque ad aetatem illam mutatum fuisse in Doctrina c. Seeing it was a point out of Controuersy that nothing in Doctrine from the begining to that very age was changed these holy
and 5. Luke â— 16 both who leaue out this exposition saying thus absolutely Whosoeuer putteth aâ—ay his wyfe and marrieth another committeth adultery And this exposition is giuen by S. Thomas Sent. in 4. distinct 35. quaest vnica art 5. So as in these former words of Math. 1â— a Parenthesis is to be vnderstood after this manner Whosoeuer putteth away his wyfe which is not lawfull except it be for fornication marrieth another committeth adultery Now that the exposition of our Aduersaries of the said text was coÌ„demned throughout all ages of the primitiue Church is most cleere since the Fathers of ech such age euâ—â— taught that a man putting away his wife â—pon any occasion yea for Fornication couâ—â— not marry any other Woman For examâ—â— thus in the first Age Clemens teacheth 〈◊〉 Canon Apostol can 48. In the secoâ— Age Iustinus Martyr in Apolog. pro Christ. nis In the third Tertullian l. 4. in Marcâ—nem In the fourth Age the Councell of Eâ—â—â—ris can 9. In the fifth Concil Mileuitanâ—â— can 17. and S. Austin lib. de adulterinis conâ—gijs In the sixt age Primasius in Comment 〈◊〉 cap. 7. prioris ad Corinth Now here I vrâ— that if the former exposition of the Cathâ—likes be false then did the Primitiue Chuâ—â—â— wholy erre therein which is most absurdâ— maintayne In like manner the Primitâ—â— Church of Christ did then wrong maâ— Christians in not suffering them to vse â—pon occasion of the wyues Fornication tâ—â— priuiledg which Christ may seeme to graâ— to them I may add hereto that diuers leâ—â—ned Protestants by maintayning that 〈◊〉 case of Diuorce vpon adultery the innoceâ— party cannot marry againe do reiect câ— Aduersaries exposition of the former 〈◊〉 of Matthew 19. According hereto to â—mit many other moderate Protestants tâ—â—ching the same with vs Catholikes D. Hâ—â—son in his tertia Thesi printed 1602. maintâ—â—neth the same publikely in Oxford In lâ—â— sort some thirty yeares since more or leâ—â— the same Doctrine was preached at Paâ— Crrsse by D. Doueâ— Now to all this aboue â—aid I may adioyne the exposition of S. Auâ—â—in in l. 1. de adulterinis coniugijs cap. 9. of the â—oresaid text who there sayth That the â—ords in Math. 19. vz. nisi ob fornicationem â—ught to be taken negatiuè non exceptiuè by â—ay of negation not of exception So as the sense of them may be this Whosoeuer shall put away his wyfe nisi ob fornicationem that is extra causam fornicationis without the cause of fornication and shall marry another commitâ—â—th adultery From which exposition the Aâ—ultery of him is affirmed who putting away his wyfe without the cause of fornicaâ—â—on shall marry another But nothing is â—ere said of him who putting away his wyfe â—y reason of fornication shall marry anoâ—her Thus far of this Text. Animaduersion CLXXX AS the Inuisibility and Latency of the Protestants Church hath beene fully aboue demonstrated so here I hould it not imperâ—â—nent if I proue the Continuall and vninâ—â—rrupted visibility of our Catholike Church â—nd consequently that it is that Church of God to which so many Prophesyes haue â—eene made of its vneclipsed splendour and â—â—diancy Thy (46) Esa 60. Gates shal be contiâ—â—ally open neither day nor night shall they be â—â—nt c. Now this verity is proued seuerall wayes â—nd first from the confessed Jnuisibility of the Protestant Church during all former ages till Luthers insurrection And this the rather seeing the learned Protestants confesse that all the former Inuisibility of the Protestant Church was wrought by the labour power and diligence of the Catholike Roman Church Now how could the Roman Church effect so much for so long a tyme except it selfe during all that tyme were most visible According to this assertion we find M. Napper to confesse the same reason of his Churches Jnuisibility in these words During (47) Napper vpon the Reuelations caps 11. 12. euen the second thâ—s age meaning since Christ the true Churâ—â— of God and the light of the Gospel was obscureâ— by the Roman Antichrist himselfe Secondly the euer Visibility of the Catholike Church is proued from the acknowledged succession of Pastours in oâ—â— Catholike Church euer since the Apostles since those visible Pastours were the visible and most eminent members of our said Church preaching and instructing others who in this respect must become also viâ—itâ— and knowne Now this our visible succession of Pastours in our Roman Church is confessed euen by our Aduersaries for thus D. Fulke exprobrateth the Catholiks in these words You (48) D. Fulke in his answere to a Counterfayte Catholike p. 27. can name chiefe Personages in all ages marke these words in all ages and their gouerment and ministery and especially the succession of the Popes you haue vpon your fingars Thus D. Fulke Thirdly and lastly the same is thus proued Yf the most ancient and reuerend Fathers of the primitiue Church I meane Ignatius Dionysius Areopagita Iustinus Irenaeus Tertullian Origen Cyprian Athanasius Hilarius the Cyrills the Gregories Ambrose Basill Opratus Gandentius Chrysostome Ierome Austin and diuers others be accounted by our Aduersaries most earnest Professours of our Catholike Roman fayth then it follâ—weth most consequently that our Catholike Church was most coÌ„spicuous in those tymes since those Fathers were the visible Pastours of the Church then in Being Now that the Fathers of those primitiue tâ—mes were Papists professing the present Roman fayth appeareth besides from what is already most fully confessed by our Aduersaries in that behalfe euen from that acknowledgment of Peter Martyr saying As long (49) Peter Martyr l. de votis p. 476. as we insist in the fathers so long we shal be conuersaÌ„t in the Papists errours Now that our Catholike Church hath beene further also most visible since the tymes of those primitiue Fathers I meane for these last thousand yeares is so fully confessed by our Aduersaryes in this Treatise as that I hould it ouer wearisome and fastidious so often to repeate such their Confessions Animaduersion CLXXXI THe mayne ArgumeÌ„t drawne from Reason which our Aduersaryes vrge against vnwritten Traditions is this It seemeth say they impossible that vnwritten Traditions can be kept and conserued since there are diuers hinderances thereof as Forgetfulnes Jgnorance negligence peruersnes of mens Natures and the like And hence it is that we see that such Sentences which Lycurgus Pythagoras and others deliuered only in words and not in wryting are at this day lost and perished To this I answere that I hould it impossible that Apostolicall Traditions should not be preserued since this care is not properly incumbent vpon Man but vpon God who gouerneth the Church Now besydes the prouidence of God which is the chiefe cause of preseruing the Traditions of the Church there are foure other inferiour or subordinate Causes for their preseruation The first is the committing of Traditions to wryting For although they be not set downe in Holy writ I meane in the
in some Copyes and of King James in other Copyes and yet both of them reigned long after K. Edward Animaduersion IV. WE ought not to reiect the Authority of ancient approued Authors because there appeare some seeming repugnances in their wrytings For vpon this ground an vnbelieuing Atheist might bring the Holy Scriptures into question For example in Matth. 27. words are alledged vnder the name of Jeremy which are not found in Ieremy but in Zachary c. 11. In like sort in Mark our Sauiour is sayd to be crucifyed in the third hower whereas in Iohn 19. we read that Pilate sate in iudgement vpoÌ„ him about the sixt hower Therefore whereas our Aduersaryes vpon the former ground of incertainty of Mens writings do in like sort seek to impugne S. Peters being at Rome because diuers Historiographers do not agree of the time of his coÌ„ming to Rome his stay there we must content our selues in sobriety with acknowledging that receaued Axiome amoÌ„g the learned That is Saepâ— constat de re quando non constat de modo rei Since otherwise we shold not acknowledge that Hester had any husband or that at any tyme Iudith did liue For the opinions of the Iewes are various both touching the persons and the time herein yet we all acknowledge that Hester had a husband that there was such a woman as Iudith The like vncertainty of the tymes wherein actions were performed though the thing it selfe be most certaine is made euident euen from our owne Cronicles for example touching King Iohn his death whereof see the seuerall opinions in Holinshead in his last Edition 3. volume pag. 1â—4 Animaduersion V. IT is worthy consideration to obserue First how the Protestants in seuerall points make the same Arguments against some articles of our Religion which the Iewes were accustomed to make against the same Secondly how the Protestants somtimes vse the same answers to our Arguments which the Jewes did For example touching the Reall Presence and our receauing of Christs body in the Sacrament the Protestants chiefe Argument is taken from the impossibility therof to wit that God cannot performe all those points aboue nature which are found therein And is not this obiection borrowed from the Jewes against Christ giuing his body to eate in these wordes Quomodo (m) Iohn 6. potest hic nobis carnem suam dare ad manducandum Againe The Puritans especially condemne the confession of Sinnes to Man vpon this ground that only God can remit sinne And do they not compart with the Iewes herein demanding Quis (n) Marc. 1. potest dimittere peccata nisi solus Deus And where it is vulgarly obiected by the ignorant that man cannot remember all his sinnes to man therfore his Confession of them is imperfect and maymed I say by this reason we should not coÌ„fesse them to God since we cannot number them to God no more then to man Now to shew how our Aduersaries in like manner borrow from the Iewes their Answers to our Catholike Arguments one instance in place of many shall serue We Catholikes in proofe of our Religion do vrge one chiefe Argument drawne from Miracles exhibited by God in warrant of the same All which testimonies taken from the patration of infinite Miracles recorded by both Ancient and Moderne Authours our Aduersaries do euade by stiling them Antichristian (o) Ofiand cens 10.11 1â— Cent. 4. col 1445. Cent. 5. col 1486. wonders and lying signes and as wrought by the assistance of the Diuell how conspiring is this answere wâ—â— the Answere of the Iewes against the Miâ—cles of Christ Hie (p) Mat. 11. non eijcit Daemonia 〈◊〉 in Beelzebub Principe Daemoniorum Animaduersion VI. AS here aboue we haue shewed how oâ— Aduersaries conspire with the Ieweâ— both in obiecting and answering so I hoâ— it will not be impertinent to discouer in lyne or two how that the Protestants 〈◊〉 agree with the Ancient and condemnâ— Heretiks in obiecting the arguments agaiâ— vs obiected long since by the said Heretiks in impugning our said Catholiâ— points as also how our Aduersaries do coâ—sociate with the very Gentills or Heathenâ— â—gainst the Catholiks yea against our belieâ—â— in Christ. For touching the first we 〈◊〉 find that place to be obiected by Fauâ—â—â— the old Heretike against Abstinence aâ—â— single life and so recorded by Austin In (q) Austin l. 30. c. 4. contra Faust Manich. the later dayes (r) 1. Ti. c. 4. there shall come some forbâ—ding to Marry and to abstaine from certaiâ— Meates A passage of Scripture wherein tâ— Protestants chiefly insist against single lâ—â— and Abstiâ—ence Againe to omit many â—ther such like instances Iustinus (s) Iust Dial. cum Triphon Euseb l. hist 5. c. 1. Marâ—â— recordeth that the Heretikes of his day did as in respect of the Sacrament charâ—â— the true Christians with the grosse and câ—â—nall eating of human flesh with which veâ—â— point the Protestants do at this present 〈◊〉 â—â—aid vs Catholikes Now concerning the Heathens it is cleare that the Heathens and â—ur Aduersaries do mutually agree in denying many points maintained and affirmed by the Catholike Roman Church For both the Heathens and the Protestants do promiscuously deny Freewill Purgatory Jnuocation of Saints vniuersality of Grace Euangelicall Counsells Merit of workes Sacrifice of the Masse and many other Catholike and â—ffirmatiue articles taught by the present Church of Rome But to come to the Seâ—ond point to wit the deniall of the necessity of Christian Religion do we not find Swinglius himself thus to geÌ„tilize with the Heathens Ethnicus (t) Zuin. in Epist. Zuingliâ— Oecolamp l. 1. pag. 30. si piam mentem domi foueat Christianus est etiamsi Christum ignoret and hereupon Zwinglius particularly auerreth that (u) Zuin glâ—tom 1. in exposit fideâ— Christ fol. 150. Hercules Theseus Socrates Aristides all Heathens are now in Heauen which said Blasphemy is in like sort taught by (x) Gualter in Apol pro Zuing. Gualter (y) â—ullinger as is reâ—orded by Simlerus a Protestant in vita Bullingeri Bullinger and other Protestants Thus farre for this present of the strict association and commerce of the Protestants with the Iewes the ancient stigmatized Heretikes and the Heathens or Pagans touching matter of Religion Animaduersion VII THe doctrine of the Reall Presence to the mouth of Fayth is maintained against â—he Puritans by Doctor Whitaker (z) D. Whiâ—ak contra Duraum pag. 168. Bucer in Script Angl. p. 548. c. and diâ—ers other learned Protestants all which men do hould our Catholike Doctrine far more probable then the doctrine of the others who only acknowledge a typicall presence of Christ in the Sacrament Againe many moderate and learned Protestants (a) In his booke of Eccles policy pag. 188. D. Couâ—â— in his defence of â—â—â—er p. 77. do teach the Church of Rome to be the true Church of God and that men dying in
it may be sauâ—d Put agaiâ—st the Pâ—â—itans they thus writâ— The (b) M. â—owâ—â— in his considerat Puritans are notorious and manifest Schismatiks cut of from the Church of God And againe The Puritans (c) M. Fâ—â—ks in his Epist dediâ— p. 3. seeke to vndermine thâ— foundation of fayth Now in requitall of this â—roceeding the PuritaÌ„s prefer the Roman Religion before the Religion of the moderate Protestant for thus with a ioynt consent diuers of them do affirme in a (d) Intituâ—eâ— A Christian and modest off r c. p. 11. booke by them written Jf we be in Errour and the Prelation the contrary syde haue the truth we protest to aâ—l the world that the Pope and the Church of Rome and in them God and Christ Iesus haue great wrong and indignity offered vnto them in that they are reiected Thus they Now what other deduction from these their seuerall censures can be drawne then that the Catholike Religion is the only true Religion the Relgiâ—on both of the Moderate Protestants and the Puritans is false For in that ech of them prefers his owne Reâ—igion before any other this may be presumed to proceede from partiallity and preiudice of iudgment in their owne behalfe But where they hold the Catholike fayth and Church rather to be imbraced then their Aduersaries fayth and Church this riseth from a cleare and imâ—artiall iudgment and from the force of all probable credibility And thus in this busines that most warrantable and receaued sentence takâ—th place Cui caeterae partes vel Sectae secundas vnanimiter deferunt cùm singulae sibi principatum vendicent melior reliquis videtur Animaduersion VIII IT is a point of great iudgment to vrge a passage of Scripture by way of illation in that sort in which the illation is of force not in any other only seeming inference I will exemplity my meaning in texts vrged both by Protestants and vs Catholikes And first the Protestants do insist in those words of our Sauiour against the reall Presence Palpate (e) Luc. 14. videte quia spiritus carnem ossa non habent sicut me videtis habere Handle and see for a spirit hath not flesh and bones as you see me to haue To argue thus Jt is felt and seene Ergo it is a body is a good consequence and this is the force of our Sauiours words But â—t is no good sequele to argue thus Negatiuely as our Aduersaries from this text do it is not felt nor scene Ergo it is no body For it may be that a true hody may be present yet neither seene nor felt because God may hinder that it shall not transmit any Species sensibiles to the sense of sight Besides it may be effected by diuine power that a body may exist indiuisibly after the manner of a Sâ—irit as we Catholiks do hould in a sober coÌ„struction that the body of Christ doth in the blessed Eucharist and yet we teach that it is impossible that a Spirit should exâ—st after the manner of a true and naturall body or be extended in place And the râ—asâ—n hereof is this To wit because a Spirit hath no extension of parts at all and therefore it is indiuisible For seeing to be extended in place â—s a formall effect proceeding from its formall Cause of extension in it selfe if therefore a Spirit should be extended in place we should admit the formall effect without the formall cause which cannot be since the formall effect is later in Nature then the formall Cause and cannot be without the Cause To instance in our vrging of some passages of Scripture In prooffe of temporall punishment after this life we produce that passage (f) Math. â— Luc. 1â— Non exies inde donec reddas vltitauÌ„ quadrantem Thou shaâ—t not goe from thence till thou repay the last farthing FroÌ„ which words we do not thus immediately inferre as our Aduersaryes would seeme to haue vs donec c. vntill thou payâ—t the last farthing Therfore â—fter thou shalt goe from thence which inference we grant is not necessary seing by so arguing we might endeuour to proue that Christ should sit at the right hand of his Father only vntill and no longer he make his enemyes his footstoole according to that text (*) Psal 109. â—ede a dext ris meis donec ponam inimicos scabellum peduÌ„ tuorum which words only proue that aâ— the length the Enemyes of Christ shal be vnder his feet So heere we only thus immediatly inferre Thou shalt not goe from thence till thou payest the last farthing Therefore the last farthing may be payed and consequently that then thou shall goe from thence This kind of vitious arguing might be instanced in diuers other passages of Scripture impertinently vrged by our Aduersaries and falsly obâ—ruded vpon Catholikes Animaduersion IX WHen we Catholikes complayne of the great Persecutions against the Catholikes only for their Religion in Q. Elizabâ—ths raigne our Aduersaryes seeke to choake vs herein by way of recrimination in auerring that as great or greater was practized in Queene Maryâ—s tyme against the ProtestaÌ„ts of those dayes But admit for the tyme so much yet there is great disparity herein and there are diuers reasons more warranting the â—rocedings of Q. Mary in that kind then of Q. Elizabeth Among which reasons these following may seeme to be the chiefe First touching Q Maryes tyme the Lawes whereby Sectaryes were punished for their Religion were instituted some Eleuen or Twelue hundred yeares since those tymes not hauing any foreknowledge that Protestancy should sway rather in these dayes then any other erroneous Fayth In Q. Elizabeths tyme the statutes against Catholikes were made at the beginning of her comming to the Crowne which is fresh yet in the memory of mâ—ny hundreds of Men in England yet liuing Those Lawes wherby Q. Mary punished the Protestants were enacted by Popes and Generall (g) Concil Laodicens can 31. 32. Concil Carthag Can. 16. Councels to whosâ— charge and incumbency the burden of Religion is pâ—culiarâ—y by God committed seconded otherwise by the secular authority of Emperouâ—s and particularly of Valentinian and Marcian of which their seconâ—ing herein peruâ—e the Councell of Calcedon (h) Act. 7. Thâ—se other Lawes were first inuented by a Woman and a Parliament of Lay Persons the incompetent Iudges of Faith and Religion Lastly by the former Decreâ—s a Religion confessed by the chiefe Professours of it to be neuer heard of at least for fourteene hundred yeares together and therfore to be an annihilation of faith which is held by Catholikes to be a destruction of faith necessary to Saluation is interdicted prohibited And according hereto D. Fulke thus confesseth (i) Fulke in his answ to a counterfeyte Cath. p. 35 The true Church decayed immediatly after the Apostles tymes By these later Decrees a Religion coÌ„fessed by its greatest Enemyes and particularly (k) M. Napper thus confesseth in his
Caluin with an accustomed sl ight in this manner When Caluin vndertaketh to answere many texts of Scripture vrged in proofe of some Catholike Article or point Caluin begins to answere two or three of such texts as may seeme in an ignorant eye to be best capabâ—e of some shew of answere and for the other passages of Scripture which are most conuincing for the point vrged in which we Catholikes chiefly insist and wherunto Caluin cannot pretend any answere he passeth them ouer commonly in these words The chiefest passages J haue â—wered as for the other texts of Scripture wrâ—â— by the Papists to the same end they are so imâ—â—tinently alledged as that it were but tyme loâ—â— answere them therfore I passe them ouer as 〈◊〉 worthy of answere Here is Serpentiue craft 〈◊〉 the Card. calls it For Caluin thought it bâ—â—ter policy not to conceale the chiefe 〈◊〉 by vs vrged for that might argue a guâ—nes in Caluin but to take particular noâ— of them and so by slâ—ighting the force all such passages to make the ignorant â—â—der bâ—lieue that they nothing conduce the Catholike point for which they pretended Dolus an virtus quis in hoste quirat Animaduersion XIII THe Protestants do set downe the 〈◊〉 preaching of the Word and the true Aâ—â—â—nistration of the Sacraments to be the Maâ—â— of the Church The reason of this thâ— proceeding is double First herby to reâ—â— the Cathoâ—ikes Notes of the Church 〈◊〉 meane Antiquity Visibility Succession Vâ— c. seeing they are not able to iustâ— these Notes in their owne Church Sâ—coÌ„dly because by erecting their owne Notâ— of preaching the Word and administring 〈◊〉 Sacraments they reduce to their owne Ceâ—sure only reiecting all other Authorities which is the true Church For they will acknowledge the word to be truly preached at the Sacraments rightly administred onâ— such places and after such manner and â—els where or otherwise as themselues 〈◊〉 to thinke and determine And yet by their proceeding they are mightily â—â—nded And here I will briefly recur to â—t D. Whitaker sayth of these Notes These (q) Whitak contia CaÌ„p rat 3. Notes being present do constitute a Church â—eing absent do subuert it Now the Proteâ—ants during many Centuries haue wanted â—hese Notes therefore during all that time 〈◊〉 Church hath beene wholy extinct and â—nihilated That the Protestant Church â—uring many ages hath beene depriued of â—hese Notes I meane of preaching the word â—nd administring the Sacraments is euicted â—ut of the confessed Inuisibility of the Proâ—estant Church for many Ages for thus acâ—ordingly Sebastianus (r) Eâ— de abrogand in vniuersum omnibus statut Ecclesiast Francus a great â—rotestant writeth For certaine through the â—â—orke of Antichrist the externall Church togeâ—her with the fayth and Sacrament vanished aâ—ay presently after the Apostles With whom â—greeth Caluin thus acknowledging Factum (s) Inst 4. c. 1. sect 11. est vt per aliquot secula c. It was brought â—o passe that the true preaching of the word of â—od did vanish away for the space of certaine â—ges Animaduersion XIV A Weake and confused Iudgment may suggest or conceaue difficulties but it is a cleare â—dgment that must resolue them The reason of the disparity herein is this To 〈◊〉 one thing for another or to erre in the pâ—â—per nature essence of things is the soâ— of doubts and questions but to be able range and marshall together things of 〈◊〉 nature and to deuide and seuer things sunder which carry a great likenes oneâ— another for such resemblance of particâ—lars euer begets mistaking as also to knâ— what essentially is agreeing to the naâ—â— of any thing and what but accidentally companieth the same is a worke of the lâ—dicious This I write that vnlearned 〈◊〉 may learne Humility in beliefe and 〈◊〉 seeke to apprehend with their weake iuâ—ments the high Misteries of Christian Râ—gion especially the Articles of the B. â—râ—â—â— the Jncarnation and of the Reall presence Christs body in the holy Eucharist Animaduersion XV. IT sometymes may fall out that the 〈◊〉 Inuentour of a false Opinion may be 〈◊〉 Heretike as mantayning it before it be câ—demned by the Church whereas the Professours of it after its condemnation bâ—come Heretikes according to that sentenâ— of Vincentius (t) L. de Haeresib Lyrinensis O admiraâ— change of things The Authours of one and 〈◊〉 same Opinion are esteemed Catholikes the followers Heretikes Thus we see that it is coâ—tumacy against the Definitions and Decree of the Church of Christ which consummate an Heresy Animaduersion XVI WE are to call to mind that the Ceremonyes in the celebration of the Masse were successiuely and at seuerall times added and first brought in by seuerall Popes And accordingly we fynd that the (u) The Relicks of Rome or the Anatomy of the Masse by â—ntony de Adaâ—o prinâ—ed 1â—56 Hospinâ—â—n Histor Saâ—â—amâ—nt â— â— c. 4. 5. 6. 7. Aduersaryes of the Church of Rome as willing to discouer our Innouations though in the smallest Matters and but in points of Indifferency haue most dilligently and painefully recorded them in their seuerall bookes written of this very subiect with all due circumstances both of the Popes introducing them and the tymes wherein they were introduced Here now I vrge if the Enemyes of the present Church of Rome weâ—e thus diligent and solicitous in noting the begining of ech Ceremony of the Masse all such Ceremonyes being meerely accidentall to the Masse and without which it may as truly and effectually be celebrated as with them If they I say could haue discouered any Innouation in the maine doctrine of the Masse as the doctrine of the Reall Presence the Sacrifice of Christs Body there offered vp c. would they haue beene silent therin Or rather would they not haue loaded their Bookes with relation of all such Innouations they consisting not in small Ceremonies but in most sublime and high points of Christian Religion Animaduersion XVII THe Protestants are so various or rathâ— contrary in their Positions writings as that a man may borrow from their â—â—uerall Confessions both the propositions 〈◊〉 premises out of which the Conclusion shâ— rise wholy making agâ—inst their Religion For example D. Humfrey thus wryteth (x) D. Humfâ— Iâ— sâ—â—s in part 2. c. 3. Oportet Ecclesiam esse Conspicuam Concluâ— est Clarissima Jt is an euident Conclusion thâ— the Church of God ought to be conspicuous 〈◊〉 visible And M. Hooker God hath and caâ— shall haue some visible Church vpon the eartâ— But of the coÌ„fessed visibility of the Churcâ— of God more fully I will shew hereafteâ— Now touching the Inuisibility of the Protestants Church we reade M. Napper thâ— to confesse (y) V. pâ—â— the Reueâ—â—t in c 11 12. God hath with drawne his vâ—sible Church from opâ—n assemblies to the hartâ—â— particular godly men And D. Fulke confessetâ— thus (z) D. Fuâ—ke in his answer to a counterfeyt Cach p. 16. The
(n) So doth D. Whit. l. de Eccles Bellar. Contro 2. q. 4. pag. â—23 Iewell in his Apolog of the Church of England act 4. cap. 4. absolutely deny that infallible Authority of the Church of God in interpreting the holy Scripture and disclayming from it appeale to their owne Priuat Spirit for the true interpretation of the same Finally in the last place if the Catholiks confirme their Religion with the Authority of Miracles the Protestants in answere thereto absolutely reiect the force of Miracles tearming them (o) So the Conturists â—all them Cent. 4. col 1445. Osiâ—â—â—â—â— Cent. 10. 11. 12. but Antichristian wonders and lying signes as aboue is shewed Thus we see how our Aduersaryes disclayming from all heads of proofes do finally reduce all to their owne priuate Iudgment or Spirit And is not this I demand the foresaid vicious Circulation from the first to the last answere which aboue is disalowed in the â—rotestants impugning or disputing Animaduersion XXIII THat the words of Christ at his last Supper are to be taken literally and not Figuratiâ—ly is proued by these Reasons following in that Christ saying this is my Body (p) Math. â—6 Marc. 14. c. This is my bloud did adioyne therto Quod pro nobis datur qui pro nobis effundetur which later words are conformable to the literall acceptance of the former words The same verity is proued from the seuerall circumstaÌ„ces of the foresaid place of the Scripture The first circumstance may be taken from the matter or Obiect Here the matter or subiect of the former words containes the Institution of a Sacrament the foundation of a supreme point of Christian Religion A will or Compact contracted with the Church But it is most improbable to affirme that a Sacrament a supreme Article of beliefe or a Compact or last Will made by Christ with the Church should be deliuered in figuratiue words The Second Circumstance we may take froÌ„ the person of Christ speaking with whose diuine wisedome and Charity it is not agreabâ—e to haue giuen and ministred the Sacrament by speaking the former words of the Institution in shew in a literall sense but in meaning a figuratiue only an ineuitable occasion of false iudgement in the Hearers and of perpetuall Idâ—latry in the mynds and wils of the sucâ—â—ding Christians during the continuance 〈◊〉 the world Another Citcumstance may be takeâ— from the persons of the Euangelists and thâ— Apostles repeating and relating this speacâ— of Christ Hoc est corpus meum c. Aâ— which men whereas they did write in seuâ—rall times when some of them were presenâ— at the Institution others receaued relatioâ— thereof from them that were present thereat whereas also they had seene the practise of the Apostles about this Sacrament wheâ—â— as lastly they had the spirit of true vndeâ—standing notwithstanding all this they aâ—â— did vnanimously conspire in deliuering 〈◊〉 playne and literall construction of our Sauiours words Which reason is more preuayling by obseruing the contrary course which they tooke in explicating other obscure sentences of our Sauiour for thosâ— words Soluite templum hoc in tribus diâ—bus reaedificabo illud the Euangelist did interpret of Christs Body saying ille (q) Iohn cap. 1. aâ—tem dicebat de templo corporis sui to preuent that the Iewes should not thinke that ouâ— Sauiour spake of the Temple of Salomoâ— In like manner the said Euangelist is founâ— to haue expounded other of our Sauiours doubtfull sayings though in themselues of much lesse importance as Christs (r) Cap. 11. exaltation from the earth The sleeping of Lazarus â—â—e (s) Cap. 11. girding of Peter and stretching forth his â—â—ndes c. And yet neuer expounded the â—oâ—ds of the Institution otherwise then in â—heir plaine direct literall sense Another from the Persons of the Apostles â—earing Christ instituting the Sacrament Now â—f there were any figuratiue speech in â—he words of Christ especially concerning â—o great a matter the Apostles then preâ—ent would neuer haue omitted to haue asâ—ed Christ what had beene the meaning of â—hose strange words being vttered a little â—efore his death As they did touching oâ—her darke speaches spoken by Christ and â—hus we read them to haue said Edissere (t) Math. 13. 15.5 â—obis parabolam Zizaniorum And againe Edisâ—ere nobis hanc Parabolam Againe from â—he persons of the Capharnaits who did take our Sauiours words in that sense as he did properly speake of his flesh to be truly and really eaten and at such their construction they rested much scandalized Neuerthelesse Christ did not therefore explane his former speach nor excuse it by any Tropes or figuratiue phrase of words but more vehemently affirmed his sentence in the same words and with earnest asseueration repeated the same Another Circumstance may be taken from the place of his last supper which Christ did choose to be very secret admitting thereto only his Apostles to whom it was giuen to know and to haue the Intelligence of the diuine Mysteries Therefoâ— in this most secret and reserued schoole 〈◊〉 the Apostles wherein a supreme mystery 〈◊〉 fayth was deliuered he did speake sincere simply plainly and not by figures In this last place we may call to mind 〈◊〉 the circumstances of this busines as tâ— Pronouncing of the sacred words of the Jâ—stiâ—â—tion the washing of the Apostles seet Christs â—â—sire of performing this Mystery his casting vp 〈◊〉 his eyes towards Heauen his application of tâ— words to the matter his separated and disioynâ— blessing of both the Elements his fraction 〈◊〉 giuing and inuiting to a new supper his owâ— eating and after commanding the eating of it tâ— others and lastly his most holy speach deliâ—erâ— therof in Iohn 14.15 c. Here now I conclude that all these reasons with the formeâ— obseruations are most sufficient to persuade any man of iudgment that our Sauiour did not speake Figuratiuely in so serious a matter Animaduersion XXIV THe various interpretation of the words of the Jnstitution made by Protestants doth sufficiently discouer their Errour in the doctrine thereof Carolostadius (u) Carolostad in lib. â—diâ—o Basil 1524. teacheth that by the Pronoune Hoc the Aduerb Hic is to be vnderstood so as the meaning of the words he saith is Hic that is in this place staet corpus meum Bucer (x) In retract affirmeth that by the Pronoune Hoc is vnderstood the whole action of the Supper so 〈◊〉 the sense should be Hoc c. This action â—â—th represent the body of Christ. Swinglius (y) Swingl l de vera falsa relig cap. de Eucharist â—aintayneth that the figure is not in Hoc â—ut in the verbe est which here ought to be â—â—ken figuratiuely for significat Boquinus (z) Boquinus in exam lib Heshufij teacheth that the bread is truly called â—he body of Christ propter communicationem â—â—omatum as by the same we truly say of
the supposed answering of those few chosen and picked out by him must serue through the partiality of iudgement in his followers to disgrace all the rest of the Corruptions or falsifications vrged by you Animaduersion LII THe Protestants in falsly alledging the authorityes of Authours do abuse their Readers chiefly foure seuerall wayes First which is the most vsuall by concealing some part of the alledged authority SecoÌ„dly by adding some words of his owne to make the produced Authour or Father to speake like a Protestant Thirdly by transposing the words of an authority thereby to make the sense different from the Authors true meaning Fourthly by a wilfull mistaking or confusion of tymes I will exemplify these foure sorts in the wryting of D. White a great Impostour in his Scripts in his booke called The way to the true Churcâ— Well then the said Protestant in p. 119. oâ— his said Booke produceth a place out of the Rhemists to proue that the Church of Româ— can make that Scripture which is not anâ— vnmake that to be Scripture which is Scripture To proue this he produceth the Rhâ—mists (y) Gaelat 1. thus saying The Scriptures are 〈◊〉 knowne to be true neither are Christians bonâ—â— to receiue them without the attestation of thâ— Church Now heere marke the true wordâ— of the Rhemists and therein obserue his impurity of dealing committed by concealing part of the Sentence iust crossing his intended drift of vrging that authority Their true words are these The Scriptures whicâ— are indeed of the Holy Ghosts inditing being pâ—â— into the Churches triall are found proued anâ— testifyed vnto the World to be such and not maâ—â— true altered or amended by the same Since the Holy Scriptures in themselues were alwayes true before but not so knowne to be to all Christians All these are the words of the Rhemists where you see the wilfull concealement of this Parcell The Scriptures are nâ—â— made true altered or amended by the Church as also that other the Holy Scripturs in themselues were alwaies true meaning without the attestation of the Church Now all that can truly be gathered out of this authority is that the Scriptures though most sacred and true in themselues cannot be so made knowne to vs in which words lyeth the touch of the point without the Churches attestation But how farre off is this from M. Whytes vrging of this place Touching his imposture committed in â—dding of words this one place shall serue Thus then the said D. White produceth Bellarmine in contempt of the Churches authority saying Other meanes may deceiue me but nothing is more knowne nothing more certaine then the Scriptures That it were the greatest madnes in the world not te belieue theÌ„ c. Now in this sentence these words viz. Other meanes may deceiue me are not in Bellarmine but most subtily added to the begining of Bellarmines words and caused to be printed in the same kynd of Character or letter wherein the other words of Bellarmine are printed thereby to make the Reader belieue that they are words of Bellarmine wheras they are added as I about insinuated for the more depressing of the Churches Authority Now the whole sentence of Bellarmine was directed against the Swinkseldians who absolutely denyed Scripture and against whom Bellarmine in that place disputeth Touching the fraud consisting in a cuÌ„ning transposition of words without adding any words to the authority alledged or concealing any parcell therof this example of the foresaid M. Whyte may serue In pag. 344. of his way to the true Church he produceth for the ouerthrow of the religious vse of Images the Councell of Eliberis thus saying No (z) Can. 36. Picture is to be made in the Church lest that be adored which is painted on the walls But the true words of the Canon are these Placâ—â—â— picturas in Ecclesia non habere ne quod coliâ—â— adoretur in parietibus depingatur Jt pleaseth the Councell that pictures should not be in the Church lest that which is worshipped anâ— adored be painted on the Walls The nyce difference in words resteth thus Lest that which is worshipped be painted and as Mâ— Whyte translateth Lest that which is painted be worshipped Where the words of the Councell acknowledging the worship of Images maketh the worship due to them to be the cause why they are not painted on the walls to wit because they were subiect to be defaced either by inuasion of Enemyes or rayne c. Now M. Whites translation only by a subtill transposition of the words imports that Pictures are not to be worshipped at all Lastly concerning the Calumny resting in a wilfull confusion of tymes The said Protestant in pag. 61. for proofe of Priests lawfull mariage produceth a Testimony from Sinesius Bishop of Ptolemais thus writing of himselfe to a friend The sacred hand of Theophilus hath giuen me a wyfe and hereupon Iustify to all men that J will neither forsake her nor priuily as an adulterer keep her Company but I will pray to God to send me by her many and good children This Epistle is at large set downe in (a) Eccl. hist l. 14. c. 55. Nicephorus Now heere tâ—e fraud lyeth that at the tyme when this Epistle was written Sinesius was but a Lay-man but eminent for learning Now after he made himselfe priest and was created Bishop of Ptolemais he euer liued separated from the company of his wyfe as fully appeareth out of Nicephorus in the place aboue alledged Here then the Ministers deceit lyeth in applying that to him as if he had beene then Bishop which was spoken by him being a Layman and so M. White most fraudulently confoundeth those two different tymes together as if all had hapned at one and the same tyme. Animaduersion LIII YF your Aduersary will vant that he will proue all by Scripture only as most of them giue it out they will then force him to draw both his Premisses I meane both his Propositions if so they should be reduced to a forme of Argument from the Scripture alone of which Method within two Arguments at least he is certaine to fayle For if he take either of his Propositions from humane Authority or from naturall Reason you may tell him he leaueth his vndertaken of prouing by Scripture alone and consequently you may deny his force of Argument though Logicall in forme Here I further aduertize that if your Aduersary vndertake the part of an Opponent tye him precisely euer to Oppose which Scene perhaps he being brought to a Non-plus would flyely transferre vpon you In like sort if he taketh vpon him to answere suffer him not to oppose thought he labour so to do to free himselfe from answering Thus be sure that ech of you keepe your chosen Station Animaduersion LIV. IF the Protestant should seeke to expouÌ„d by way of conference of places those words of our Sauiour This is my body this is my Bloud figuratiuely by those other words of his J
is now forbidden as a thing vngodly 11. That there are any Sacraments of the New Testament instituted by Christ for the good of mans Soule Lastly to omit some others 12. That before the ending of the world Antichrist shall come who shal be a designed Enemy of Christ and shall labour to subuert and ouerthrow all Christian Religion All these points both Protestant and Catholike do belieue and hould that the beliefe of them is necessary to Saluation And yet not any of these Articles are expressed or set downe in the Creed Whence I conclude that the Apostles Creed cannot be a sufficient boundary to containe and limit an auayleable Fayth Animaduersion LXII THe bitter Inuectiues of the Protestants one against another are of sufficient force to discouer their dissentions in doctrine as where Luther sayth We (n) Luther in Thes Cont. Louaniens Thes 21. seriously iuâ—ge the Swinglians and Sacramentaries to be Heretiks and Aliens from the Church of God And to confront this Swinglius thus retorteth vpon Luther Luther (o) Swingl tom 2. in resp ad Luther fol 458. is guilty of high blasphemy against the nature and essence of God c. To descend to the Puritans and Protestants in England we find that the booke entituled Constitutions and Canons Ecclesiasticall printed anno â—604 doth ipso facto excommunicate the Puritans for their maintaining of these positions following as they are there set downe in the Booke The worship of the Church of England is corrupt superstitions vnlawfull repugnant to the Scriptures The Articles of the Bishops Religion are Erroneous their Rites Antichristian c. Now the Protestants do thus râ—quite the Puritans saying The (p) M. Powell in hâ—s consiâ—erations Puritans are notorious and manifest Schismaticks cut of from the Church And againe The (q) M. Paâ—ks in his Ep. Deâ—ic Puritans seeke to vndermyne the foundation of fayth Now add hereto that although infinite other passages might be brought to shew the great discord in fayth among the forraine Protestants yet there is no one more short Argument to conuince this point then to recur to the foure Catalogues of ProtestaÌ„t Books set downe in the later end of the Booke called The Protestants Apology of the Roman Church In which 4. Catalogues one may find about three hundred Bookes written in great acerbity of stile by one Protestant against another The names of all which books are taken out of Coccius his Thesaurus or from Hospinian both which Authouâ—s dyed many yeares since Now if so mâ—â—y Bookes of disagreements in fayth among the Protestants were made within so sport a Tyme how many hundred more might be alledged if one did know all other Bookes written by the Protestant against the Protestant since the death of those two former men Animaduersion LXIII MAny vulgar and vnlearned Protestants and especially the Caluinists Puritans do condemne the Catholike Roman Religion because it defendeth and practizeth diuers Ceremonyes they ignorantly tearming such Ceremonyes Idolatrous and superstitious And there is no one argument more preuayling with such men to auert them from our Catholike Religion theâ— this Now to take a way this scandall oâ— stumbling block I say that if it were God good pleasure to haue his Fayth and Religion of the old Testament which for the tyme was the true Religion to consisâ— much in Ceremonyes as we see it did faâ—â— out in the seuerall Sacrifices appoynted by God In the Tabernacle with the appurtenances and of what matter number and qualityes all things should be as also with prouiâ—ion of Oyle and Lampes The Arke The propitiatory the Consecration of priests the Institution of all vestures vessels and other holy things then belonging to the seruice of God all these to be made performed and done after a strange and different manner as we reade in Exodus As also the Institution of Circumcision consisting in paring away a piece of flesh which serued for freeing Man in that tyme from Originâ— Sinne the preparing and eating of the Paschall Lambe sprinkling the dores with the bloud thereof and infinit other Ceremonies recorded in the foresaid booke of Exodus I say if this was Gods vnsearcheable Will to ordaine these things during the tyme of the Old Law wherein he would haue the Honour Seruice and worship exhibited to â—im partly to consist why then may not our Sauiour institute the Religion fayth of Christians belieuing in him to be attended on with diuers Ceremonyes and yet this without any Superstition or Idolatry Now our Aduersaryes common euasion to this our Argument is to say that God instituted Ceremonyes in the Old Law to serue as figures or Types of things which were after to fall out in the New Law which Ceremonyes were theÌ„ to end vpon the promulgation of the fayth of Christ. This answeare is most impertinent First because not all the Ceremonyes in the Old Law but only some did serue as figures or Adumbrations of things to happen in the New Testament Secondly because the Question heere is not why or to what end the Ceremonyes of the Old Law were instituted but only whether Ceremonyes tending to the worship of God be pious lawfull Therefore I conclude that seeing the Ceremonies in the Old Law were instituted by Gods direction for the worship of him as we read in Exodus c. 8 Ostendas populo Caeremonias ritus colendi let the other secondary end of them be what it will that therefore and by force of Gods proceeding in the Old Law we Christians may not thinke strange that our Sauiour being God and Man would now in the New Law institute and giue to his Church the like power some Ceremonies and pâ—blike Rites wherewith he will be worshipped and wherin part of Christian religion shall consist Now therefore let our Aduâ—â—saries if they can giue any true reasoâ— why the Ceremâ—nies of the Old Law bâ—ing incomparably more in number shall be accounted lawfull and yet the Ceremonies of the New Law or Testament as long as they are reputed but Ceremonies must be râ—puted superstitions aâ— Idolatrous Animaduersion LXIV WE Catholikes charge the Protestaâ—â—â— with ancient Heresies For example wâ— shew how the Manichees according to S Austin depriued Man (r) L. de Haeres cap. 4â— of Freewill Hoâ— â—ouinian (s) Ier. l 1. cont Iâ—â—in Aug l. Haeres cap. taught that Fasting was not mâ—ritorious and Virginity was no better theâ— wedlock or mariage How Aerius (t) Austin l. de Haeres c. 33. taugâ— it to be most vnlawfull to pray or offerâ—â— Sacrifice for the Dead How the Arians (u) L. 1. cont Marin cap. â— reiected all vnwritten Traditions who aâ—â—â— (x) Athanas in Apolog. pro fuga perpetrated Sacrilege against the Sacraments Altars Priests and Religious person How the (y) Austin l. â— Vnitate cap. 12. Donatists taught the Churcâ— of Christ to be Jnuisible How the Deniall 〈◊〉 the Reall Presence was condemned by certaine ancient Heretiks
haue done in prayse of our Blessed Lady or in honour of the Crosse or the like then being taken literally can well be iustifyed But they were more bold so to write because they as then hauing no Aduersaries to their Catholike doctrine in those points might rest assured that their words would be taken in that pious sense wherein they deliuered them Of which kind of their writing our Aduersaries take hould against the said Fathers The last obseruation heere shal be that when the Catholikes do alledg the Fathers the Protestants seeke to charge the said Fathers so alleged with some one Errour or other and therefore say they his authority is to be reiected in any other point which especially happeneth in Tertullian Origen Cyprian as is aboue intimated But to this you may answere that you produce the Fathers only in such Catholike points touching the which they were not written against by any other Father and therefore their authority therein is of force since it is presumed hereby that all the other Fathers and consequently all the Church of God agreed with them therein Animaduersion LXVIII YF your Aduersaries pretend that all the wrytings and memory of Protestants in former ages were extinguished by the Popes of the said and after succeeding ages you may shew how absurd this Assertion is And the reason hereof is in that the Popes of those tymes could not presage that Protestancy should in these our tymes sway more then any other Heresies condemned in their very tymes which other Heresies remayne yet registred to this very day by the acknowledgment of the Protestants Againe the personall (x) Benedictus the third was written against by the Councell of Constance Gregory the sâ—auenth by Benno Eugeniuâ— the Pope was written against by the Councell of Basill vices and faults of some Popes are recorded in histories yet to be read Is it then probable that the Popes were so solicitous to extinguish all remembrance of the Protestant fayth yet content to suffer their owne lesse iustifiable liues of themselues and their predecessours to be registred for all ages after to peruse Lastly in the Canons of ech age there is made mention of all particular Heresies of those tymes condemned by the said Councells Stands it then with any shew of Reason that the Pope and the Councells should be so voyd of iudgment as carefully to register all other impugned Heresies and on the other syde as carefully to suppresse all arising opinions of Protestancy Animaduersion LXIX YF you intend to bring and obiect any foule and wicked sayings especially out of Luther against the Blessed Trinity or about his acknowledged Lust and sensuality be carefull to note the Edition of the Booke wherein such sayings are to be found For in some later Editions of his workes many such sentences are for very shame left out and vnprinted And thereupon there are diuers Protestants who vtterly deny that euer any such wicked or sensuall words were written by him Animaduersion LXX OVr Aduersaryes labour by seueral wayes to depresse the force of Miracles exhibited in proofe of the Roman Religion For first some of them do deny the working of all Miracles and to fortify this their denyall they thinke it sufficient if they can produce but any one or two strange relations supposed to be Miracles and yet after discouered to be but forgeryes to the disgracing of all true Miracles but this euasion is weake seeing by force thereof we should deny all the bookes of Scripture because some false wrytings were in the Primitiue Church obtruded vnder the names of the Apostles as (y) Cont Aduers log prophet l. 1. c. 20. Austin and (z) Hist l. 3. c 19. Eusebius do record Againe if they will deny all Miracles they may also by the same reason deny all History eyther prophane or Ecclesiasticall Therefore if we will ascribe so much confidence to the wrytings of Eusebius Zozomene Austin Ierome and others as we do to the lyues of Liuy or Commentaryes of Cesar or to Speeds Cronicle we cannot reiect all Miracles for forgeryes vntruths Other of our Aduersaryes confesse the doing of many Miracles vrged by the Catholykes but then they ascribe them to the power of the Diuell and do commonly style them Antichristian (a) So do the Cent. call them Cent. 4. col 1445. Cent. 5 1486. In like manner Osiand also stileth them Cent. 10. 11. 12. wounders and lying signes But against this subterfugion I say it cannot be applyed to the Miracles wrought in the primitiue Church and eecorded by Zozomene Austin Ierome and others long before the comming of Antichrist since most of our Aduersaryes do place Antichrists first comming in (b) So doth D. Willet teach in his Synop. p. 160. D. Fulke in his answere to a counterf Cath. p. 36. D. Downenam in but his Treatise of Antichrist lib. 2. pag. 4. Boniface who was Pope in the yeare 1006. loÌ„g after the dayes of the former Fathers Secondly I say that our Aduersaryes in ascribing the Miracles to the working of Antichrist consequently of the Diuell do ouer neere interleage with the Iewes condemning the Miracles of Christ in these wordes This man (c) Math. 1. casteth not out Deuills but by Belsebub the Prince of Deuills Agaiâ—â— I say that the Protestant Vrsinus trulâ— sayth that the (d) In Comment Catech. 21. Power of the Miracles oâ— Antichrist are not true Miracles but such aâ— the Order of Nature obserued may be effected by the deceyte of men or Deuills But diuers miracles are recorded which transcend the power of the Deuill as to stay the flux and reflux of the sea or to cure incurable diseases without applying any secondary meanes and such like c. Of which there are many miracles recorded by the former Fathers Thirdly I auer that the Miracles of the Deuill are euer done to some vaine and pernicious end and not for the good of the particular person vpon whom they are wrought Fourthly if the Deuill could effect such stupendious workes how chanceth it that he would neuer concurre with condemned and on all sydes acknowledged miscreants to strenghthen and countenance thereby those mens misbeliefe and Heresies I meane with Simon Magus Porphiry Iulian the Apostata Mahomet c. and other Sects condemned euen by the Protestants for most erroneous Lastly I conclude that our Aduersaries in condemning all Miracles either but as forgeries or as the Works of the Deuill do charge diuers Princes Commonwealths Ecclesiasticall persons and infinite multitudes of people both of former and later tymes with extreme simplicity yea Lunacy in suffering such forgeries and delusions to be obtruded vpon them I will adioyne hereto the miraculous preseruation for many hundred yeares of certaine Relicks I will passe ouer the vncorrupted bodies of many Saints euen till this day and will insist in the miraculous preseruation of the Eucharist stabbed with knyfes by the Iewes many scores of yeares since if not
some hundreds and yet remaining to be yearely seene euen with spots of bloud at the chiefe Church in Brussells in the lowe Countryes What can our Aduersaries answere herero Yf they grant the miracle they withall grant the truth of the Doctrine of the Reall Presence To deny it by saying that when one hoast is corrupted through tyme another is secretly thrust in the former place is more then absurd For would the Princes of those Countryes the Lords Bishops Prelates other Religious persons and the whole Communalty suffer themselues to be thus abused from tyme to tyme with such impostures but that they would be most desirous to find out and discry all such wicked stratagemes and deuises Truly I do not see what answere in full weight of Reason can be giuen hereto to conuince the iudgment of any sufficient Man Animaduersion LXXI THat Catholike Religion affordeth Saluation to the Professours thereof is proued seuerall wayes euen from our Aduersaries owne pennes And first Because oâ—â— Aduersaries do reach that the Church oâ— Rome notwithstanding her presumed Eâ—rours is the true Church of Christ consequently her Professours capable of Saâ—uation According hereto thus writeth D. Field (d) L. of the Church c. 46. We doubt not but that Church â—t which the Bishop of Rome with more then Luâ—â—ferlike pryde exalted himselfe was notwithstanding the true Church of God and that it held a sauing profession of the truth in Christ. D. Sâ—â—â— auerreth the same verity in these words (e) In his Defence against Penry pag. 176. you thinke that all the Popish sort wheâ—â— dyed in the popish Church are damned yâ—â— thinke absurdly and do dissent from the iudgment of all learned Protestants With theâ—â— conspireth to omit others D. Couell thâ—â— writing We (f) In his Defence of M. Hooâ—er pag. 77. affirme them of tâ—e Churchâ— Rome to be a part of the true Church of Chriâ—â— and that those that liue dye in that Churcâ— may be saued Another Reason may be taken from the lawfulnes euen in the iudgment of the learned Protestants of Chiâ—dren of Papists as we are stiled whether they be Baptized by Catholike Priests 〈◊〉 Protestant Ministers And the cause of thâ— lawfulnes thereof is deliuered by the Protestants in these words Because (g) So teach the Deuines of Geneua in their propositions and principles disputed at Gen. p. 178. the same is taught by D. Whitgâ—â—fe in 〈◊〉 Defence pa. â—23 by M. Hooker Eccles poâ— l. 3. p. 131. by otheâ— we affirme that those Children are comprehenâ— within the Couenant of eternall life by meanes of the fayth of their Parents A third Reason of the Protestants true iudgment herein concerneth the Fathers of the Primitiue Church in generall who that they liued dyed Papists is most euident by what hath beene confessed aboue by our Aduersaries Now of them Cartwrighâ— thus writeth I (h) Cartwright in his Reply in D. Whitguifts Defence p. 82 doubt not but that diuers Fathers of the Greeke Church who were patrones of Freewill are saued The like charitable opinion of the Fathers though Papists both liuing dying is deliuered by (i) Contra Raâ— Camp pag. 78. D. Whitaker notwithstanding the Fathers Doctrine touching Satisfaction and Merit of Works Finally the Protestants iudgement is also herein manifested in their commonly giuing in their writings and speaches to Austin Ierome Ambrose and the rest whom they acknowledge to Professe and dye in our Catholike fayth and Religion the name and title of Saint as S. Austin S. Jerome c. Animaduersion LXXII YF it be vrged that the Deniall of Freewill for exaÌ„ple was taught by Manicheus and consequently that the Protestant fayth therein is as ancient as those Primitiue tymes It may be replyed that this particular Heretike or that particular Heretike did teach but one or other Protestant Article in those dayes and were sustantly written against for such their Innouations the said Innouatours being Catholike in all other points And therefore you may truâ—â— infer that the vrging of such examples is merely impertinent either for the proofe of the Antiquity of the Protestant Religion or for the Visibility of the Protestant Church in those dayes Animaduersion LXXIII YF you dispute with any Protestant by writing or enterchange of letters write nothing but Matter with as much compendiousneâ— as the Subiect will beare without any Verball Excursions or digressions For this proceeding will force your Aduersary to reply if he will reply to the Maâ—ter For otherwise leauing the materialâ— point which is chiefly issuable and to be handled he will shape a reply to other lesse necessary stuffe deliuered by you And then his Reply must passe abroad by the help of many partiall tongues for a full answere to your whole Discourse Animaduersion LXXIV WHereas you may alledge diuers acknowledged Heresies both in the iudgment of Protestants Catholiks out of the Bookes concerning diuers persons who belieued some few points of Protestancy recorded in the said Bookes here I speake of Wâ—â—ldo Wiclife c. Now if here your Aduersary Disputant doth auouch as many Protestants do that these Heresies were falsly obtruded and fathered vpon the said presumed Protestants by their Enemies you may here reply that to affirme this is against the force of all Reason For seeing the same Bookes do make indifferent mention both of the Protestant opinions and of the other Heresies defended by the same Men either the said Bookes are to be belieued in both or to be reiected concerning both Yf the first then it is certaine that those men did belieue those acknowledged Heresies Yf the later then the said Bookes are not of sufficient authority to proue that there were any Protestants in those ages Animaduersion LXXV IN your proofes drawne from Scripture labour to be much practised in the Protestant Translation of it of which infinite places make for the Catholike Cause euen as the Scripture is translated by the Protestant For this Course gauleth them far more then if you insisted only in the Catholike Translation Animaduersion LXXVI I Will here set downe certaine Obseruations which will easely solue all difficulties or Argument whatsoeuer rising from Scripture or Fathers against Communion vnder one kind only 1. First whereas sundry places of Scripture and Fathers do speake indifferently oâ— only make mention of Communion vnder both kinds or do affirme the vse thereof to be lawfull yet from hence which is the point issuable cannot be inferred any precept of Christ as necessary to Saluation 2. Secondly when such places are vrged which contayne in them a Precept the same places are either vnderstood of Priests who do sacrifice whose bond is different from theirs of the Laity Or els they concerne only the tyme and place when 〈◊〉 where that custome of both kinds was obserued for the custome of the Church whether it be generall in the whole Church or particular in some notable place thereof aâ— in one Country Kingdome
and Religion Animaduersion LXXXVI STriue to be more conuersant and ready if oportunity will not suffer you to be ready in all in such Controuersies which consist in practice as about Praying to Saints Jndulgences worshipping of Images Adoration of the most B. Sacrament Communion vnder one kind c. then in others which test only in beliefe and Speculation seeing the vulgar Protestant soonest taketh exception against these former and will expect greater satisfaction from you in them Because these being subiect to their sense in regard of the daily practise of them come neeâ—est within the compasse of their narrow Capâ—city are by them often charged through the calumny of their chiefe Maisters abusing their Credulity with many supposed abuses Whereas other points of Fayth which consist chiefly in Theory and speculation are further remoued from their apprehensioÌ„s and consequently they are least intangled with the doubts thereof Animaduersion LXXXVII TOuching those Articles or Controuersies which chiefly rest in speculation be well traualled in the Question touchiâ—â— the Jnfallibility of Gods Church as also 〈◊〉 that other Question That the Scriptuâ—â— without the Churches attestation cannot proâ—â— it selfe to be Scripture and that all points of beliefe do not receaue their proofe from Scriptuâ—â— alone seeing these two Controuersies potentially include most of all other Controuersies within themselues Also be most reâ—dy in the Question touching the continuâ— Visibility of the Protestant Church seeing tâ—â— Protestants must seeke to proue thâ—â— Church euer to haue beene Visible if thâ— will auer it to be the true Church of Chriâ—â— Whereas indeed you shall find euen by tâ—â— Confession of his owne Brethren as is eâ—â—â— where in this Treatise made cleere that tâ— Protestant is not able to instance for maâ— Centuries and Ages together so much a the being but of one Protestant Animaduersion LXXXVIII THere is scarsly any one Argument oâ— Credibility which more strongly and irrâ—pliably proueth the Antiquity and thereâ—â— the truth of the Roman Religion and the Nouelty and latenes of Protestancy and consequently the falshood therof then this following There cannot be alledged any one Protestant speaking of such Protestants as are out of Controuersy and acknowledged for such both by the Catholikes and Protestants who was not either in himself or in his forefathers first a Catholike and who by dogmatizing some Protestant Opinions afore neuer generally taught did separate himself depart from the Catholike Church afore then in Being Of which sort of men those words in S. Iohn are vnderstood Exierunt (t) 1. Ioan. 1. ex nobis the very stampe or signature of Innouatours in doctrine This Assertion is most true And to exemplify it in the chiefest Protestants or maintayners but of some points of Protestancy I meane Luther Swinglius Ochinus Ierome of Prage Waldo Wicleffe Albigenses Berengarius and to rise to the Heretikes of higher tymes as Acrius Iouinian Manicheuâ— and the rest it is certaine that all these wâ—re Originally Catholikes and by introduciâ—g of some Nouelismes did depart from the Catholike Church That all these and all such others as might be alledged were originally Catholikes is demonstratiuely proued from the implicite Confessions of the learned Protestants themselues acknowledging the Inuisibility of their owne Church for so many ages together Thus for example writeth Sebastianus Francus the Protestant as aboue is sâ—ewed For (u) In Ep. de abrogandis in vniuersum omnibus Statut. Eccles certaine through the worke of Antichrist the externall Church together with the fayth and Sacraments vanished away presently after the Apostles departure and that for these foureteene hundred yeares the Church he meaning his owne Protestant Church hath not beene externall and visible with whom agreeth D. Fuâ—ke saying The (x) Fulke in his answere to a CouÌ„terfeyte Cathol p. â—i Church decâ—yed immediatly after the Apostles dayes Furthermore to enlarge my selfe in the Protestants Confession herein M. Perkins the Protestant sayth thus Before (1) Perkins in his Exposition of the Creed p. 400. the dayes of Luther for the space of many hundred yeares an vniuersall Apostasy ouerspread the whole face of the earth and that our Church was not then visible to the world M. Napper in like manner thus writeth God (2) Napper vpon Reuel in c. 11. 12. l. 2. c. 2. p. 25. hath withdrawne his visible Church from open assemb ies to the harts of particular godly men c. during the space of 〈◊〉 hundred sixty yeares the true Church abyding â—â—tâ—nt inuisible But M. Brocard conâ—esseth further in these words During (3) Broc vpon the Reuel p. 1â—0 euen the second and third age meaning after Christ the true Church of God and light of the Gospell was obscured by the Roman Antichrist himselfe I â—ill here conclude with D. Downam thus aueâ—ring The (4) D. Down lib. de Antichrist Generall defection of the Visibâ—e Church foretould 2. Thessal 2. begun to worke in the Apostles tymes So luxuriant are the Protestants in confessing the Inuisibility of their owne Church for many ages together So as we see that by the Confession of these learned Protestants it is cleere that all the former alledged Protestants or any others which could be though falsely suggested for such were Originall Catholikes Now I hence conclude that if on the one syde it be proued that euery Protestant did Originally come out and departe by venting of some Protestanticall Positions from our Catholike Church afore enioying a Priority of Being and that on the othersyde our Aduersaries cannot shew any visible Society of men professing the true Christian fayth from which as more ancient the present Roman Religion departed as it is impossible for them to do I say I hence conclude that our Catholike fayth is most ancient and therefore true and Protestancy in respect thereof but late Innouations and therefore false Animaduersion LXXXIX I Will here rest in some Animaduersions touching the Doctrine of the Reall Presence And touching the saluing of the Difficulties thereof we are to recur to Gods Power which may in part be explicated in these ensuing Propositions The first Proposition God is able to do euery thing which Mans vnderstanding is able to conceaue The Reason hereof being in that Ens Verum in generall are the Obiects of our mind and therefore what may be conceaued or vnderstood may really exist and consequently be performed The second proposition All Christian Philosophers affirme that not only things which man is able to apprehend in his mind but also many other things incomprehensibâ—e in mans vnderstanding God can effect forseing say they that Totum Ens is Intelligible and to be conceaued and that which is not Ens cannot be conceaued and that the imbecility of Mans vnderstanding is such that it supposeth many things cannot exist or be and consequently cannot be apprehended by the vnderstanding which may indeed exist and so may be performed by God Therefore say they that things incomprehensible in
do still remayne at one tyme though far remote one from another whereas these Precedent and future tymes in both which one and the same Jnstant of Duration or Eternity is are euer in a flowing and departing Motion and consequently cannot by any possibility remayne together For we see that the tyme past doth euer giue place to the tyme to come Thus far of these former Animaduersions in this place to shew that it is possible that Christs Boâ—â— may be in seuerall places at one and thâ— same tyme. Animaduersion LXXXXIV IN all Positiue and Affirmatiue Points oâ— fayth the Protestants do agree with the Catholiks the Protestants borrowing thâ— said Affirmatiue points from the Church of Rome According hereto we find Luthâ—â— thus to wryte We (y) Luther lib. Contra Ana. baptist confesse that there is vnder the Papacy most of the Christian Good yâ—â— rather all the Christian Good and that from thence it came to vs. We confesse that there is iâ— the Papacy true Scripture true Baptisme the true Sacrament of the Altar the true keyes to the remission of sinnes the true office of preaching true Catechisme c. I say further there is in thâ— Papacy true Christianity or rather the truâ— kernell of Christianity Thus Luther To the former position I adioyne this following In such points of fayth wherin Protestancy dissenteth from the Roman Church all the said points are merrely Negations to the contrary Affirmatiue Articles belieued by the Church of Rome As for example Deniall of Reall Presence Deniall of praying to Saints Deniall of Freewill and so of the rest Now from these two propositions do result these Inferences or Conclusions following The first that the Protestant as he belieueth any affirmatiue Articles with the Church of Rome in that respect he is not a Protestant but rather a Catholike as â—king the beliefe of them from the Caâ—â—olike Church as is aboue said The seâ—ond Inference That Protestancy as Proâ—stancy consisteth in Deniall of such Affirâ—atiue points which the Church of Rome â—ffirmes to be true and not in belieuing â—ith the said Church certaine chiefe points â—f Christianity The third Inference Seeing â—he reduplicatiue formality of Protestancy reâ—teth in Negations or priuations of an Affirmatiue fayth and seing Negations or priâ—â—tions haue no Entity subsistence or reall being that therfore Protestancy as Protestancy hath no reality of Being but is in it selfe a meere Non-entity or nothing consequently it followeth that Protestancy cannot proceed from God who is the Authour of things and of that which is but not of that which is not or is Nothing The last Inference shal be That Protestants by their Deniall of so many Affirmatiue Articles of Christianity may seeme to beare great Reference to Antichrist who at his comming shall by his Deniall of all points of Christian Religion seeke what in him lyeth to annihilate and ouerthrow all Christian Religion And for such his proceeding some ancient Fathers do coÌ„iecture that his name shal be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifying Nego as Hyppolitus Martyr writeth in Oratione de consummatione mundi And this both by reason that this Greeke Word maketh vp the number to wit 666. which is ascribed peculiarly to Antichrist in the Apocalyps cap. 13. as also in that Antichrist his Ministers at his comming both in their Dâ—nialls and workes shall labour mightely to euert Christian Religion Animaduersion LXXXXV THough Protestancy seeme to maintaine some Affirmatiue Positions as Parity of Ministers Mariage of Priests and other Votaries Reprobation Christs only Mediatorship by way of Jntercession Christ suffering in Soule yet it is euident that these poutions are only Affirmatiue in words but merely Negatiue in sense since they are Negatiues to the Monarchy of the Churches Gouermentâ— to vowed Chastity to vniuersality of Grace to the Intercession of Saincts and to the all sufficiency of Christs Corporall Death All which our Catholike points are Affirmatiue Such is the subtility of Innouation in Doctrine as for the greater honour to inuest their Negatiue Tenets in Affirmatiue Titles Animaduersion LXXXXVI THough in shew of words Falshood as is aboue shewed may be deliuered in Affirmatiues so I here say that Truth sometimes is deliuered in Negatiue Words notwithstanding Truth is euer Affirmatiue and Falshood Negatiue and therfore the Schoolemen truly teach Intellectus (z) S. Thomas part 1. q. 17. decipituâ— non circa quid est sed circa quid non est To exemplify this Animaduersion To say God is cruel or Man is blind though these sayings be deliuered in Affirmatiue termes and false yet they are in sense and vnderstanding meerely Negatiue since Cruelty is exclusiue to Mercy and blindnes to sight so on the contrary to say God is not Cruell and Man is not blynd though they be in termes Negatiue true yet they are in sense Affirmatiue only as denying the Negation of Mercy in God and of Blindnes in Man Animaduersion LXXXXVII OVr Aduersaries cannot agree among themselues what Doctrines be Protestancy and who ought to be truly termed Protestants Can their Religion then be true and descend from Heauen Here then I will first shew within what narrow Limits our Aduersaries do confine Protestancy and the members of the Protestant Church Next then I will discouer such is the fluctuating and wauering iudgment of them herein how they are content at other times to extend and enlarge those bounds by affording Protestancâ— and the members therof a greater space or compasse as I may say to expatiate and walke in And to begin D. Whitaker thus sayth of the Papists J will (a) L. 2. contra Duraum Sect. 1. not allow the very name of a lawfull Church vnto the Roman Church because it hath nothing which a true Chuâ—â—â— ought to haue The Confession of Ausburg excludes the Anabaptists in these words we (b) Cap. â— condemne the Anabaptists who disallow the Baptisme of Infants and thinke them to be saâ—â—â— without Baptisme to which sentence the Confession of Switzerland (c) Cap. 20. subscribeth The Arians are excluded from being Protestants by the foresaid Confession of Ausburg in these termes We (d) Act. 1. condemne all Heresies rising against this Article meaning the Article of the Trinity as the Manichees Arians Eunomians c. All Heretikes are excluded out of the number of Protestants for thus D. Suâ—cliffe teacheth Heretikes (e) In his first Booke of the Church c. 1. are not of the Church meaning of the true Church and consequently in his iudgment of the Protestant Church With whom agrees D. White saying All (f) In his way to the Church pag. 10. Heretiks teach the truth in some things yet we deny them to be of the Church of God That Schismatikes are not of the Protestant Church is taught for thus writeth D. Fulke (g) Of the succession of the Church What skilleth it whether one being drawne by Heresy or Schisme from thâ— body of Christ be subiect to eternall
5. with vs touching Patronage and intercession of Angells that therfore D. Whitaker doth accordingly confesse and say thereof Jllum (h) Whitak in respons ad rat Camp rat 1. p. 15. verò Tobiae Raphaelem c. Litle do we regard the Example of Raphaell the Angell mentioned in Toby c. All this is different from the Canonicall Scriptures c. Concerning the force of Merit of Almes and other good works proceeding from true fayth in the Messias The Doctrine of the Ancient Iewes is deliuered in the Booke of Tobyâ— Almes (i) Tob. 1â— doth deliuer from Death and doth purge all sinne and in the foresaid booke of Ecclesiasticus As water (k) Eccles 3. quenceth burning fyer So Almes expiateth sinne Touching vnwritten Traditions (l) Orig. hom 5. in Numer Hilar. in Psalm 2. Origen and Hilary do affirme that Moyses did leaue many things vnwritten the knowledge whereof was continued by tradition And Rabby Iudas affirmeth the same of Moyses a thing so euident that the doctrine of the Tradition of the Iewes is confessed by (m) writing vpon the Booke in Capitulis patrum Paulus Phagius the Protestant That Monasticall Lyfe was not altogether wanting but in some sort professed among the ancient Iewes is witnessed by Iosephus thus writing The (n) Ioseph antiquitaâ—um Iudaicarum l. 18. c. â— righteousnes of the Essenes is meruaylous c. They enioy their riches in Common c. And in this course aboue foure thousand men do liue hauing neither wyfes nor seruants c. And in another place Triall (o) Ioseph l. de bello Iudaito l. 2. cap. 7. is had of a mans continency and his other manners are for two yeares tryed and then he is taken into the Company Lastly to omit for greater breuity the Doctrine of Vowes the doctrine of one Visible high Priest head of the Church in those Jewish tymes the Doctrine of the Iewes in remitting the ending of Controuersyes not to the Scripture but to a certaine visible and liuely Judge the doctrine of the Iewes concerning Confession of sinne all these being related by (p) Gala. in areanis Cathol veritatis l. 10 v. 3. Galatinus I will close this passage with Melchisedech his offering of bread and Wyne in sacrifice and the prefiguration thereby of our Sacrifice of the New Testament Of this point Rabby Phinees thus sayth Jn (q) Phinees in cap. 28. Numer the tyme of the Messias all Sacrifice shall cease but the Sacrifice of bread and Wyne shall not cease c. as it is said Psalm 100. Thou art a Priest for euer according to the Order of Melchisedech Rabby (r) Hasardan in Bereschit Rabbi ad cap. 14. Gen. Hasardan Rabby (s) Samuel in Bereschit Rabbi ad cap. 14. Genes Samuel say the like of Melchisedech his offering vp of bread and wyne in figure of the Sacrifice now in the tyme of the New Testament a point so euident that (t) Bibliander de SS Trinitote l. 2. pag. 89. Bibliander the remarkable Protestant doth not doubt to confesse the same of the old Jewish Rabins Thus far of the doctrines of the ancient Iewes before Christ his Incarnation which doctrines we Catholiks at this day hold All which doctrines are meerely Dogmaticall points without any Type or reference to Christ his comming that only of Melchisedech excepted and therefore it cannot be answered that the said doctrines should now cease vpon our Sauiours comming in flesh into the world as some ignorant men would suggest but it must needs be that the said Doctrines if they were true then they must be also true now By which so many foresaid Examples of our Catholike fayth thus affirmed by the ancient Iewes it is made most certaine that our Religion â—s not New or lately inuented but most ancient and vndoubtedly Apostolike Animaduersion LXXXXIX IT is a most impudent assertion of D. Field who thus writeth We (*) D. Fâ—â—ld in his Book of the Church l. 3. c 8. p. 76. firmely belieue that all the Churches of the world wherein our Fathers liued and dyed to haue beene the true Protestant Churches of God c. and that they which taught imbraced and belieued those damnable Errours which the Romanist do defend against vs were only a faction But see now this most vast Lye is controuled First then D. Iewell thus acknowledgeth The (u) Iewel in his Apology of the Church part 4. c. 4. Truth was vnknowne at that tyme and vnheard of when Martin Luther and Hulderick Swinglius first came vnto the knowledg and preaching of the Gospel And therefore (x) Buâ—ter in Ep. anno 36. ad Episc Hereford Bucer stileth Luther The first Apostle to vs of the reformed Doctrine And Schlusselburg the great Protestant thus contesteth the same Jt (y) In Theolog. Calu. l. 2. fol. 130. is impudency to affirme that many leâ—ned men in Germany before Luther did hold tâ—â— Doctrine of the Gospell Yea Luther himselfe thus vaunteth of himself Christum (z) Luther Ep. ad Argentinens à nobis primo vulgatum audemus gloriari And truly the force of reason assureth vs that there were no Protestants at or immediatly before the breaking out of Luther For if any were why did they lye hid and vnknowne at Luthers Rising No other pretext can be alledged but feare of persecution But this cannot be alledged For the Protestants if any then were might securely step out and ioyne themselues with Luther considering that then diuers Magistrats and Commonwealths had openly vndertaken the Patronage of Luthers Doctrine and Religion Animaduersion C. IN all points of faith the Authority of the Priuate Spirit is to be contemned as begetting nothing but Noueltyes and Innouation And let ech good Catholike anchor his iudgement vpon the authority of Christs visible Church and the chiefe Head therof assuring himselfe that although Simon the fisher was not able to determine Matters of fayth yet that Simon Peter and his Successours assisted with competency of meanes haue euer an impeacheable Soueraignty granted to them and a delegated authority from Christ himselfe for the absolute discussing and deciding of all Controuersyes in Religion Tu (a) Math. 16. es Petrus super hanc Petram aedificabo Ecclesiam meam portae Jnferi non praeualabunt aduersus eum And truly if the visible Church of Christ and the Supreme Iudge therof could err in matter of fayth how could God be excused from Cruelty by threatning to all Men eternall Perdition if we be not obedient to the Church of God Dic (b) Math 18. Ecclesiae si Ecclesiam non audierit sit sicut Ethnicus Publicanus Furthermore as the Apostle saith (*) Hebr. 8. Our Testament is established in better Promisses c. meaning then the Testament of the Jewes But if it was said in the tyme of the Old Law that he who (c) Deuteron 17. presumptuously refuseth to obey the CommandemeÌ„t of
the Pryest that by Decree of the Iudge that man should dye what punishment theÌ„ is he to vndergoe who in Matters of faith and Religion contemneth the authority of the High Pryest of Christ his Church aduancing his owne priuate iudgement aboue the said Authority Animaduersion CI. IT is most certaine that Luther himself was not a perfect and entire Protestant such I meane as the present Church of England acknowledgeth for a true Protestant my Reasons are these First because Luther after his rising and euer vnto his death retayned and belieued diuers of our Catholike Doctrines disclaymed from by the Protestants of England Secondly because Luther taught and maintayned seuerall Heresies I meane Heresies euen in the iudgmeâ—â— of our now Protestants To begin with the first branch Luther euer maintayned to hâ—s deaâ—h the Reall Presence as the whole worâ—â— knoweth and therefore his followers in thâ—â— doctrine are called for distinction lake Lutherans by Swinglius and Caluin Luther taught the Doctrine of (d) Luther l. de Assertionibus Art 30. Euaâ—gelicall Councells to wit that a man may do more then that he is commanded Luther taught the Doctrine of Purgatory of which point see Tom. 1. Wittenberg 〈◊〉 Jndulgentijs And answerably to this ground he is confessed by (e) Vrbanus Regius in 1 part Operum formulae cautè loquendi de sanct cultu Vrbanus Regiâ—s a Protestant to defend Prayer for the Dead Luther defended Prayer to Saints of which point he thus writeth De (f) Luther in purgat quorundam Articulorum in Epist ad Gregorium Spalat intercissione Dinorum cum tota Ecclesia Christiana sentio iudico Sanctos à nobis honorandos esse atque indicandos Luther taught and approued the vse of Jmages as is witnessed by Beza (g) Beza in resp ad Colloq Montisbelg parâ— altera in praef Touching the making the signe of the Crosse vpon our forehead Iohannes Creucliâ—â— a Lutheran thus writeth Cùm (h) Creuelius in hiâ— refut Caeremoniâ—rum missae printed Magdeburg 163. pag 118. imus cuâ—â—tum fine surgimus è Lecto cruce nos iuxta Lâ—theri altorum piorum institutioncâ—â— signamus Finally to omit some other points wherin Luther neuer dissented from the Church of Rome Luther euer mantained that the gouerment of the Church is Monarchiall neither Aristocraticall nor Popular as appeareth out of his owne (i) Vide Luther in loc Com. Class 1. c. 3. 7. pag. 107. words Now to come to relate Luthers Heresies and such as are reputed for Heresies and some of them for blasphemies both by Catholiks and Protestants which he euer maintained without any after retraction I first alledg his impious Doctrine touching the most Blessed Trinity concerning which he thus speaketh (k) So relateth Swinglius of Luther so speaking to 2. ad respons Confut Luther fol. 474. The Diuinity is threefold as the three Persons be c. And according to this he expungeth out of the Litany this sentence Holy (l) Luth. in Euchir precum anno 1543. Trinity one very God haue mercy vpon vs and he further sayth Anima (m) Luth contra Iacobum Laetomum tom 1. wittemberg Latinê edit anno 1551. mea odit Homousion or Consubstantialis Briefly Luthers Blasphemy was so odious execrable against the B. Trinity that Swinglius (n) Swinglius tom 2. in respons ad Confutat Lutheri did purposely write against Luther touching this very point Touching the Euent of things Luther holdeth contrary to all Christian fayth that all things come to passe through a certaine Stoicall and fatall Necessity thus writing hereof Nullius (o) Luther in Assert damnat per Leonem Decimum Art 30. est in manu c. It is in no mans power to thinke Good or Euill but all things as Wicleffs Article condemned at Constance did rightly teach proceede from absolute Necessity Luther taught an Heresy wherby the propagation of Christian Religion is much hindred to wit that it was not lawfull to wage war against the Turk His words are Praeliari (p) Luth in tom 2. Wittenberg in Assert Damnat per Leonem decimum Assert 34. contra Turcas est repugnare Deo visitanti iniquitates nostras per illos Luther denyed all temporall Magistrates thus teaching hereof Among (q) Luther de saeculari potestate in â—â— 6 Germ. Christians no man can or ought to be a Magistrate but euery one is to another equally subiect Touching fayth and good works Luther thus endoctrinateth his followers Fides (r) Luther to 1 propos 3. nisi sit sine c. Except fayth be without good works it doth not iustify nay it is not fayth And further No (s) Luther in his Sermons Englished pag â—76 worke is disalowed by God except the Authour thereof be disalowed before Luther further taught as D. Couell witnesseth that (t) These be D. Couells words in defence of M. Hooker Art 15. p. 101. the Sacraments were effectuall though they were administred by Satan himself Of which point Hospinian the Protestant thus also writeth Lutherus (u) In hist Sacr. part altera fol. 14. coâ—sque progreditur c. Luther proceedeth so far herein that he maintaineth the Sacrament to be a true Sacrament etiamsi è Diabolo conficeretur though it were to be consecrated by the Deuill To conclude Luther so disualewed the sufficiency of Christ suffering in body for vs as that he most blasphemously teacheth that Christ did not suffer only in body but also his Diuinity suffered for vs His words hereof are these Cùm (x) Luther in Confess Maiore in Caena Domini credo quod sola humana Natura pro me passa est Christus vilis nec magni praetij Saluator est c. Yf J belieue that only the humane Nature suffered for me then is Christ a Sauiour but of a base small worth and himself needeth a Sauiour Thus far now in Demonstration that Luther was not an entyre Protestant and such as is allowed by the present Church of England Animaduersion CII TWo things among others concur as is in this last Animaduersion exemplifyed in Luther to make a perfect Protestant to wit That he doth maintayne all chiefe points of Protestancy Thus he is not to hould only some few points of Prorestancy and in the rest being more in number and of greater importance to partake with the Catholikes The second thing necessary to a Protestant that he doth not hould perâ—inaciously any mayne Heresy or Paradoxe wholy impugned and contradicted both by Catholiks and Protestants For this man in this respect is rather to be styled an open Heretike then a Protestant euen in the Censure of the Protestants themselues Here now I auer that this Animaduersion clearely euicteth that Husse Waldo Wicliffe and the rest so much vrged for ProtestaÌ„ts for the proofe of the visibility of the Protestant Church in those ages were no Protestants at all and consequently that the Protestant Church
Body and that Christ was true Man Thus far Osiander of the Albigenses in the place cited in the margent I will conclude with Berengarius who liued anno 1051. who is challenged for a (z) Act. Mon. pa. 23. Protestant for his deniall of Transubstantiation though he after recanted this his Heresy Now Berengarius did hould diuers Heresyes so as the ProtestaÌ„t Oâ—eolampadius (*) In Oecolam Swinglij Epistolis l. 3. pag. 710. thus writeth of him Berengarius nonnulla affirmat aduersus Baptismum parnulorum Coniugium Againe Damnata est Berengarij opinio Sacerdotio Christiano parum nimis tribuenâ— Thus farre of all these former Heretykes to wit Hus Wicleff Waldo and the rest whereby the indifferent Reader may rest assured that they cannot with any iust shew of Reason and iudgemeÌ„t be alledged for Protestants as our Aduersaryes are accustomed to alledge them for the prouing of the visibility of the Protetestant Church in former Ages Animaduersion CIV ADmitting for the tyme that all these former Innouatours were entyre ProtestaÌ„ts in all Poynts not comparting with the Catholikes in any poynt of the Roman Religion Admitting also that not any of them did hould any one explorate Heresy by all sydes condemned yet are the examples of them most insufficient for the supporting of the Protestants Churches visibility My Reasons are these First The Scriptures (a) Esay 60. 40.1 Timoth. Eph. 4. besydes many other do proue that the Church of Christ must not at one only tyme or other but in all tymes and in all ages without the least interruption or discontinuance much lesse without interruption of many hundred yeares together be most visible and conspicuous This being granted I then demand what Protestants can be alledged liuing betweene Anno six hundred and seauen and anno 1220. Heere are about six hundred yeares betweene these two tymes during all which period as also for euery yeare thereof our Aduersaryes stand obliged to alledge Protestants for the Continuance of the visibility of the Protestant Church But this they are not able to effect And therefore D. Fulke with iust cause thus complayneth of the Inuisibility of the Protestant Church (b) D. Fuâ—ke in his answere to a Counterfeyt Catholikâ— pag. â—0 The Church in the tyme of Boniface the third which was anno 607. was inuisible and fled into the wildernes there to remayne a long season Secondly All the former men I meane Husse Wicleffe Waldo c. were originally Catholikes and after by forging of new Doctrine they deuided themselues from the Church then in Being and so thereby they iustifyed in themselues those words of S. Iohn (c) Ioan. 9. They went out of vs. Now this departure or going out of the Church implyeth in lieu of the continuance and visibility of their Church an interruption discontinuance defection of their Church and consequently a want of the visibility of the said Church Since it infallibly proueth that the Doctrines taught by these Men after their departure were not taught by the Church afore in being For if they had bene taught by it these Men needed not to leaue the then knowne Church for their defending and teaching of the said Doctrines Thirdly The Protestants wiâ—l say no doubt that Husse Wicleffe c. did preach the word of God and administer the Sacraments Heare then I demand seing no man taketh to himself the honour of priesthood but he that is called (d) Hebâ— 5. of God as Aaron was Who then did call Husse Wicleff Berengarius the Waldenses c. to preach the Word and administer the Sacraments or by whom were they sent But here our Aduersaries are at a stand flying to an immediat imaginary and aëry Calling For thus doth Caluin seeke to salue this difficulty Quia (e) Lascit the Protestant reciteth this saying of Caluin lib. de Russor Muscouit c. religione c. 23. Papae tyrannide c. Because through the tyranny of the Pope true succession of ordination was broken of therefore we stand in need of a new Course herein And this function or calling was altogether extraordinary With whom agreeth M. Perkins saying The (*) M. Perkins in his works printed 1605. fol. 916. calling of Wicliffe Husse Luther Oecolampadius Peter Martyr c. was extraordinary An exorbitant and phantasticall Conceite Animaduersion CV THere are two Reasons among others which euidently proue that our Aduersaries are conscious and guilty of their owne Churches Inuisibility One in that they discouer a wounderfull reluctation backwardnes when they are pressed by the Catholikes to name the Protestants liuing in such and such ages sortably hereto we find D. Fulke thus to complayne Proferre (f) Fulke de succes Eccles p. 89. me iubes toto Orbe latitantes vah quam iniquum postulas Thou willest we to produce and name those men who did lye hidd throghout the World How vniust a thing dost thou here demand And D. Wotton complayning in the like manner thus concludeth Proue (g) In his answere to a Popish Pamphlet p. 11. you that our Religion was no where helds This stands vpon you to disproue which when you do by particular Records you shall haue particular Answere Then which what can be first more absurdly spoken as expecting record of things which neuer were in being He furthermore transferring the part of prouing vpon Catholikes to which himself and his fellows only stand obliged The second Reason discouering their tergiuersation herein is in that when they are prest to instance in Protestants for seuerall ages they in lieu of Instancing flye to the Scripture then disputing the true Church of Christ must euer be Visible but theirs is the true Church as is proued out of the Scriptures Therefore their Church was euer visible A most strang and despayring Circulation Animaduersion CVI. THe like guiltines of our Aduersaries is shewed touching the supposed change of the Fayth of the Church of Rome For though this if any such change were be to be proued as being matter of fact from History yet our Aduersaries disclame from all History herein For D. Whitaker thus writeth Jt is not (h) Whitak contra Duraeum p. 177. needfull to search out of Histories the beginning of this change And againe It is (i) Whitak contra Duraeum p. 478. sufficient by comparing the Popish opinions with the Scripture to discouer the disparity of fayth betweene them and vs And as for Historiographers we giue them liberty to write what they will Thus bringing the Question as they did aboue touching the visibility of the Protestant Church to the Scriptures and their owne interpretation of the said Scriptures Which disclaming of theirs from History herein is most vnusuall and vnaccustomed since it hath bene euer the Office of Historiographers generall Councells to register and record any new arising Heresy or change in Fayth and Religion Animaduersion CVII IT cannot be denied but that a Catholike may commonly become sooner
Some aduerse to Mans naturall propension as the Doctrines of Virginity Pouerty Obedience most of them consisting not only in an internall beliefe but euen in an externall action and operation and therefore the first entrance of them are become thereby most discernable Such are the Doctrines of praying to the Saints of praying vpon beades Pilgrimage single life in the Clergy and to omit diuers others all Monachisme And lastly some supposing their doctrine to be false subiect to externall Idolatry as the worshipping of Christ with supreme honour in the Eucharist Here then I conclude that if any man shall affirme that these Doctrines could stealingly creep into Gods Church without all resistance of its Pastous Doctours and Fathers and without any mention recorded of their first entrance that Man not only giues the lye openly to the Holy Scripture in seuerall place◠witnessing the contrary but that withall he ceaseth to be a man by loosing wholy the naturall light of all humane discourse and Reason Animaduersion CXVIII IT is most cleare that the Heresies rising in the beginning of the primitiue Church as the Heresies of the Valentinians Tationists Manichees Arians and diuers others as also the Heresies of the foresaid Heretikes before S. Gregories tyme are recordeth both by the ancient Fathers and euen by the Centurists our Aduersaries In lyke sort the Heresies of Berengarius Waldo Wicleffe c. are also registred That this is most true I proue from the Centurists who in the fift Chapter of euery seuerall Century from Osiander in his Centuries from Pantaleon the Protestant in his Cronology haue recorded all the said ancient Heresies And as for Berengarius Lanfrancus Guitmundus and Algeru◠make mention of his Heresy Waldo is recorded by (i) In his Catalog testium veritatis Illiricus as also by Osiander (k) In Epitom histor Eccles Wicleff by M. Fox as also by Stow and by Wicleffs owne writings as is aboue shewed This then being most true and indeniable I thus infer Seeing it is manifest that the Heresies rysing within the first foure hundred yeares the Heresies budding vp the next two hundred yeares the Heresies hatched in euery age during the last thousand yeares are most largly recorded partly in the wrytings of the ancient Fathers in particular and set Tracts against them partly in the Canons of Generall Councells condemning them partly by the obseruing diligence of Ecclesiasticall Historiographers whose designed labour is to transmit and commend ouer to after ages the true state of Christs Church in former ages and partly by the Protestants like endeauours who haue written seuerall Volumes of this very subiect Seing I say all this is manifest can it then enter into any brayne but to weene that so many Articles of the present Roman Religion being in number far more then all the aboue rehearsed in weight and consequence greatly exceeding them for diuersity of Countryes and Nations far further diuulged and spread then all or any of the former Heresies euer were most of these others being restrayned only to one Country or Nation could euer so vnespiedly infect the whole Church of Christ with their Contagion and worke a more notorious change therein then euer yet was wrought by all the Heretiks since Christs tyme put together And yet not one Father Pastour or Doctor of those times either to take notice of any of those supposed Heresies or knowing them not to impugne the first assaults by preaching or writing neither any one Ecclesiasticall History but to mention in their Histories any one of the said Articles or Innouations in fayth Can this I say be imagined or can it be in the power of man thus to create a new Religion at his pleasure without controule or discouery To mantaine this is to maintayne an assertion against all probability against all reason against all possibility Animaduersion CXIX THe Greeke Church hath beene for many ages emulous of the Church of Rome and therefore if the present Church of Rome had anciētly made any diuision or Schisme from the true Church of Christ the Grecian no doubt would haue been most apt to recōmend the memory of such a chāge in our Church to all after ages in their Historyes But no such records we find in any of their writings Yea the Grecians are so farre from that as that on the contrary side the present Church of Rome is able to specify and note out of most auncient and approued Authours the very tymes when the Grecians introduced those particular Opiniōs wherein at this day they dissent from our Roman and Catholike Church For example to insist in some few The Grecians deniall of their Obedience to the Church of Rome was first begunne by Iohn of Constantinople and was written against by Gregory (l) Greg. l. 4. Ep. 34. 36 the Great and Pelagius (m) Pelag in his Epistle vniuersis Episcopis Their deniall of the proceeding of the Holy Ghost from the Father and the Sonne tooke it beginning about the yeare 764. was gain-said and contradicted at its first rysing as (n) In System Theol. p. 68. Kekermanus a Protestant witnesseth Their Deniall of Prayer for the Dead was begunne by Aerius and impugned by Epiphanius (o) Epiph Haeres 75 and Austin (p) Aug. Haeres 53 Finally their bringing in of Leauenes Bread by the Grecians in the celebration of the Eucharist was first begunne about the yeare 1053. as appeareth out of the wrytings of Leo (q) In Epist ad Michael Episcopum Constan. cap. 5. the Nynth and the (r) Cent. 11. cap. 8. Centurists Now heere I demand Can it be imagined that these Innouations of the Grecians being few in number could be so precisely contradicted gain-said and left registred to all Posterity and yet this supposed chāge of the Church of Rome consisting in bringing in of farre more Articles in number and as of great consequence should neuer be noted nor impugned by any one Doctour or Father nor recorded nor obserued by any one Historiographer the said Fathers and Historiographers liuing in the very same Ages wherein this supposed alteration is said to haue happened Animaduersion CXX IT is certaine that what generall propension Nature or rather God himselfe by Nature as by his Instrument hath ingrafted in all mē the same is in it selfe most true certaine and warrantable since otherwise it would follow that God should insert in the Soule of Man idly vainly and as directed to no end certaine naturall impressiōs and instinctions which to affirme is most derogatory to his diuine maiesty and wisedome and repugnant to that auncient receaued Axiome God and Nature worke nothing in vayne Now to apply this against our Neutralists in Religion who thinke a Man may be saued in any Religion We fynd according hereto both by History experience that diuers zelous and feruent professours of all Religions whatsoeuer both true and false haue beene most ready to expose their liues in defence of
to be really in the Eucharist since by this reason say they it may become rotten and mouldy and be eaten by myce should passe to the belly and so to the common passage To this I answeare that these supposed indignityes do not touch the body of Christ but only affect the species and forme of the Eucharist which is ioyned with the body Againe seeing our Christian fayth teacheth vs that Christ was included for a long tyme within the Wombe of the Blessed Virgin being a Woman that he was swadled and lapped in Cloaths that then he might fall vpon the earth and might also haue beene eaten with beasts or burnt if so by miracle he were not preserued from such mischances if rheÌ„ he was truly and in his owne person subiect to all these difficultyes without any dishonour what dishonour is it to him if he did vndergo in another forme the former supposed Indecencyes vrged by our Aduersaryes Againe the former Indignityes do no more truly and properly touch the body of Christ then the Diuinity which being in all places can be said to be burnt it being in the fyre or being rotten it being in bodyes that are rotten c. Animaduersion CXXIX OVr Aduersaries draw another argument taken from the vnprofitablenes of the Reall Presence in the Eucharist Thus they dispute The reall being of Christs body in the Eucharist is needles in that seeing the end and fruite of the Eucharist is to nourish the Soule and this nourishment consisting in fayth and Charity may as auayleably be performed by apprehending Christ by fayth as he is only in Heauen it therefore followeth that no profit aryseth from the Catholike doctrine herein which is not by other meanes as well effected To this I answere first that it is false to say that the same fruite is reaped by Christ in Heauen as by receauing him really into our bodies since Experience doth witnesse that by this receauing him in the Eucharist our Fayth Charity Deuotion and Reuerence are more encreased Besides our reall coniunction with Christ affordeth many benefits to the soule which Christ giueth not without this Coniunction no otherwise then he cured all such who touched the Hemme of his garment whom he would not haue cured though otherwise he could if they had not touched it Secondly I affirme It is a false â—â—â—ation to conclude It was not conuenient that Christ should be really in the Eucharist because the fruite reaped thereby may be obtained by other meanes For that is profitable which doth confer any Good though the same good may be obtayned otherwise For one drop of Christs bloud or any other laborious worke vndertakâ—n by him for our good had beene sufficient for our Redemption yet it followeth not that all his paines labours effusion of bloud yea death it selfe were vnprofitably and bootelesly performed Yea God could haue redeemed the world without the Incarnation of Christâ— shall we therefore say that the Incarnation of Christ was needles inconuenient and vnprofitable Animaduersion CXXX WHereas aboue there haue beene alledged diuers testimonies out of the Iewes and ancient Rabins in proofe of diuers Articles of our Roman Catholike fayth particularly of the Sacrifice which the Rabins say the Messias shall make at his comming our Aduersaries seeke to euade the force of all the Iewish Rabins authorities by saying that those testimonies of the Rabins were first forged by Galatinus and fathered vpon the Iewes for their greater credit And according hereto we find D. Whitaker thus to answere Dureus who vrged some Jewish sentences out of Galatinus for proofe of the Reall Presence and Sacrifice Tuum (h) Whitak contra Duraeum pag. 818. in hac causa Petrum Galatinum minimè profectò desideramus nec Haebreorum testimonijs illis indigemus Now to free Galatinus from suspition of forging all such sentences of the Rabins in fauour of Christianity and of Articles of our Roman Religion I answere hereto and say that one Hieronymus de Sancta fide being a Jew and conuerted to Christianity in the tyme before Galatinus whose Physitian he was did write a booke entituling it Hebraeo-mastrix or vindex impietatis perfidiae Iudaicae wherein he proueth diuers points of Christianity from the there allâ—dged â—estimonies and sentences of the said formâ—r Iewes mentioned by Galatinus This booke of his was printed at Franckford anno 1602. Animaduersion CXXXI IT is much obserued how our Aduersaries in answering to Catholike Bookes often giue slip to the argument or authority produced and in lieu thereof either by degrees flye to the state of the Question as though afore it were not acknowledged or to the Scripture themselues only interpreting the same where they may range vp and downe ar large or to some by circumstance meerely accessory to the Question and difficulty disputed of or do vse deceytefull resemblance and exchange of matter subtilly conueyed and brought in by tedious entertainment of prolonged discourse and all this to hold the Reader therewith that so vnespiedly they may diuert the Readers eye and memory being thus fixed vpon their digressions from the authority and reason alledged Here also may alledge their accustomed practize in printing the Catholikes Books at large their answere conioyned thereto in the same bulke or volume Their vsuall imposture then is to cause the Catholike authors words to be set downe in a most little obscure and darke letter or Character thereby to withdraw the Readers eye from perusing and reading it at large whereas their answere thereto they procure to be printed in a fayre and great Character or letter that so they may more easely inuite the Reader to the full perusing of it And this sleight is particularly besides in others manifested in D. Whitakers Answere to B. Father Câ—â—pian his ten Reasons in his Challenge to the two Vniuersities also in D. White his Booke against his Aduersaries entituled The way to the true Church Animaduersion CXXXII YF many miracles were wrought concerning Christs body before and whiles he here conuersed vpon earth may not then a man be more easely induced to belieue the great Miracle of his body in the Institution of the Eucharist A litle before the Natiuity thereof we reade Coâ—ceptus est de Spiritis Sancto At the very instant of his birth Natus est ex Maria Virgine some small tyme after his deathe Tertia die resurrexit vpon his last departure from vs Ascendit ad Caelos In all which passages Nature herselfe was if not dissolued at least suspended yea whi es he here conuersed vpon earth the samâ— sacred body of Christ was sometimes nourished without (i) To wit during Christs fast of forty dayes eating at other tymes did eate without (k) WheÌ„ he did eate with his Apostles after his Resurrection any nourishment thereby furthermore the same body remayning Visible (l) According to Luc. 4. Ipse transient peâ— medium illorum ibat became Jnuisible To conclude â—hrist blessed body did walke (m)
done but that which is donne cannot be vndone though it be done freely and contingently Therefore it may be concluded that the Prescience of God imposeth not a necessity to things as foresight or foreknowledg is considered in it selfe neither as it is considered to be the Prescience of God This is proued for as God doth foresee what men will do so he also foreseeth what himselfe will doe but the Prescience of God doth not force God that he will worke or do any thing therefore by the same reason his Prescience doth not force men In like manner the Protestants obiect that Gratia efficax which we Catholikes do grant that it is giuen to diuers men doth destroy Freewill To this I answere with S. Austin that this Gratia efficax hath indeed an infallible certitude but yet hath no necessitude but only ex hypothesi and in this respect it doth not hinder the Freedome of mans Will for though certaine it is that this Gratia efficax will not be reiected yet it is as certaine that it may be reiected And therefore this efficacious grace where it is giuen doth no more induce a necessity or hinder the Freedome of the will then the Prescience or foreknowledg of God doth Animaduersion CXXXVI SOme of our Aduersaries and particularly Luther as is aboue said do thus write The ten (p) Luther ser de Moyse Commandements appertaine not to Christians And againe The ten (q) Fox Act. Mon. p. 1335. Commandements were giuen vs not to do them but to know our Damnation and to call for Mercy And yet more plainly D. Willet writeth The Law remayneth still impossible to be kept by vs through the weaknes of our flesh Neither (r) Willet in Synops Papism pa. 564. doth God giue vs ability to keepe it but Christ hath fulfilled it for vs. Thus these men seeke to free vs from keeping the CoÌ„mandements because say they Christ hath kept them for vs. And may not any man conclude from the same ground that we Christians are not bound to pray at any tyme or to practise Vertue and Piety because Christ hath prayed for vs all and liued a most holy life for vs all Such incentiues to all vice and turpitude in conuersation doth this doctrine beget in the belieuers thereof and therefore the lesse wonder that we find Luther thus to write A (s) Luth. tom 1. wittenberg de captiuit Babilon fol. 74. Christian man is so rich that although â—e would he cannot loose his Saluation by any sâ—nne how great soeuer vnlesse he will not belieue Animaduersion CXXXVII IN setting downe the necessity of the euer Visibility of Christs Church I will not so much insist in the Scriptures or in the authority of the Fathers confirming the same as in the true and ingenious acknowledgment of the learned Protestants thereof which being here once expressed then I will draw a most dangerous and irrepliable inference to the mayne ouerthrow of the Protestants Church Well then to beginâ— We find Caluin thus to write Nan (t) Inst. l. 4. c. 1. Sect. 4. is visibili Ecclesia c. Extra cuius gremium non est speranda peccatorâ—m remissio Out of whose besome we cannot expect any remission of sinneâ— Hâ—nnius giueth his sentence in these words God (u) In his Treatise of Eâ—â—â—will pa. â—1 in all times hath placed his Church is a high place and hath exalted it in the sight of aâ—l â—eople and Nations Iacobus Andraeas that famous Protestant We (x) In his booke against Hosius pag. 210. are not ignorant that the Church must be a visible CoÌ„pany of teachers and hearers Melancthou is most luxuriant in his Sentences of this point who thus writeth Necesse (y) Melanct in Concil Theologi â—art 2. est fateri esse visibilem Ecclesâ—am c. It is necessary to confesse the Church to be visible Whither tendeth then haec portentosa Oratio this monstrous Opinion which denieth the Church to be visible And in another place this Protestant thus further discourseth Whensoeuer (z) In loc com â—dit 15â—â— c dâ— Ecclâ—s we thinke of the Church let vs bâ—hould the Company of such men as are gathered together which is the visible Church neither let vs dreame that the Elect of God are to be found in any other place then in this visible Society c. Neither let vs imagine of any other inâ—isible Church Briefly the said Melancthon vrging seuerall texts of Scripture in proofe of the Churches visibility sayth (a) Melanct vbi supra Hi simâ—â—s loci c. these and such like places of Scripture Non de idaea Platonica sed de Ecclesia visibili loquuntur D. Field thus writeth The (b) Lib. 1. of the Church c. â—0 pag. 19. Persons of whoÌ„ the Church consisteth are visible their profession knowne euen vnto the prophane c. I will conclude with D. Humfrey thus teaching Cur (c) D. Humfrey in his Iesuitis part 2. cap. 3. anxiè curiosè probant quod est à nobis numquam negatum Why do the Papists so painfully seeke to proue that which we neuer denyed And then after he sayth Non enim clunculâ—rij secâ—stus connoçationes sâ—nt Christianae The Society of Christians are not secret meetings And then there speaking of the Church militant he further thus sayth Oportet Ecclesiam essâ— conspicuam Conclusio est clarissima It is a manifest Conclusion that the Church is to be conspicuous and visible Thus far of the learned Protestants confessing the truth touching the euer necessary and vninterrupted visibility of the Church of Christ Now the Deduction which I draw from the premisses is this That seeing the Church of Christ must euer be conspicuous and visible And further seeing that the Protestant Church hath beene wholy latent and inuisible according to the iudgment of some Protestants for the space of this last thousand yeares but by the acknowledgment of other learned Protestants during these last thirteene or foureteene hundred yeares as aboue I haue set downe in our Aduersaries literall authorities and sentences acknowledging so much what other thing then can result out of our Aduersaries owne positions but that the Protestant Church through want of a necessary and vninterrupted visibility is not the true Church of Christ Animaduersion CXXXVIII THat Luther was an Enemy to the Diuinity of Christ and the Blessed Trinity is aboue shewed In this Animaduersion Caluin shal be charged with the like impiety This I proue in that Caluin labours to auoyd detort all such chiefe places of sacred writ as the Ancient Fathers were accustomed to alledge in proofe of Christs Diuinity Now first I will set downe his owne words against the B. Trinity whereof he thus sayth Haec (d) In Ep. 2. ad Polonos in tract Theolog. p 796. precatio Sancta Trinitas vnus Deus miserere nostri mihi non placet barbariem â—mnino sapit This prayer Holy Trinity one God â—aue mercy
vpon vs doth not please me for it tasteth of Barbarism Now to come to the text impoysoned by his Constructions and first that markable passage J and (e) Ioan. 10. the Father are vnum vz. one thing euer mainly insisted vpon by the Ancient (f) Chrysost in hunc locum Austin in hunc locum many others Fathers against the Arians for proofe of the Diuinity of Christ is thus auoyded by Caluin (g) Caluin in Ioan. ca. 10. Abusi sunt hoc â—xo Veteres vt probarent Christum esse Patri Homousion neque enim Christus de vnitate sùbstantiae disputat sed de consensu The ancient Fathers haue abused this place to proue that Christ is Consubstantiall to his Father For Christ here disputeth not of the vnity of Essence but of the vnity of Consent and will Againe that passage There (h) 1. Ioan 5. be three that giue testimony in Heauen the Father the Word and the Holy Ghost and these three be one Which text the ancient Fathers euer expounded of the Trinity Caluin thus answereth Quod (i) Caluin in hunc locum dicitur tres esse vnum ad essenâ—iam non refertur sed ad consensum potiùs That is where it is said these three are One these words are not to be referred to One in respect of Essence but rather of Consent In like manner that place Thou (k) Psal 2. art my Sonne bodie this day I haue begotten thee Calâ—iâ— (l) In Psalm 2. interpreteth with the Arians against the Diuinity of Christ This point I meane of Caluins interpreting the chiefe passages of Scripture euer vrged by the Ancient Fathers for proofe of Christs Diuinity with the Arians to impugne Christs Diuinity is so câ—eere and confessed as that Aegidius Hunnius a most markable and learned Protestant writeth a booke against Caluin of this subiect thus entituling it Caluinus Indaizans hoc est Iudaicae glossae corruptelae quibus Joannes Caluinus illustrissima scriptura sacra loca testimonia de gloriosa Trinitate c. detestandum in moâ—um corrumpere non exhorrait With this blaspheâ—y against the Blessed Trinity Caluin is further charged by Conradus (m) In Theolog. Caluinist l 2. fol. 38. 39. sequent Sclusselburg by (n) In his Admonit de Arianis Pelargus by Stancarus (o) Scâ—nkarus contra ministros Geneuens Tyguriâ—oâ— and lastly by Ioannes Mathaeus all eminent Protestants which Mathaeus did write a booke against Caluin for teaching Arianisme stiling it de Cauendo Caluinistarum fermento c. Animaduersion CXXXIX FRom the confessed Inuisibility of the ProtestaÌ„t Church during so many ages aboue granted it is proued that the Protestant Church is not the true Church of Christ by this Medium following The Prophesyes do fore shew that the Church of Christ in the tyme of the New testament shall conuert to its faith the Gentils their Nations and kingdomes thus accordingly we read Esay to fortell of the Church (p) Esay c. 60. vide etiam cap. 54. The Iles shall waite for thee meaning the Church Their kings shall minister vnto thee and thy Gates shal be continually open neither day nor night shal they be shut that men may bring to thee the riches of the Gentils with whom accordeth the Roiall Prophet speaking in the persoÌ„ of the Church (q) Psal 2. I will giue thee the Heathens for thy inheritance and the ends of the earth for thy possession That these places of Scripture besydes diuers others are vnderstood of the enlargement of Christs Church and the coÌ„uersion of kingdomes and nations vnto it is warranted by the acknowledgement of (r) Oâ—colamp vpon Ieremy Occolampadius (s) In his defâ—nce p. 400. D. Whitguist D. Whitaker (t) In his answere to M. William Reynoâ—â—â— and others as also by the Annotations of the Protestants owne English (u) Printed in the yeare 1576. Bibles Now for proofe that the Protestant Church neuer yet conuerted any Gentils or Heathen Kingdomes and Nations to its fayth we will begin first from Luthers tyme and so ascend by degrees vp to the Apostles And first from Luthers days to Gregory the Great or Boniface the third which contayneth a thousand yeares it is euident that during all this tyme the ProtestaÌ„t Church remained wholy Jnuisible as is aboue demonstrated from the acknowledgments of Protestants and therefore could not conuert any Countryes or Kingdomes to its religion Againe touching all these Countryes here expressed to wit The Danes (x) Cant. 8.9 10.11.12.13.14.15 Morauians Polonians Slauonians Bulgars Hunnes Normans Bohemians Noruegians Saxons Germans and diuers others here omitted the Conuersions of all these happened within this last thousand yeares and therefore were conuerted by the Church of Rome and to the present Roman fayth euen by free acknowledgment of the Magdeburgians or Centurists according as the Bishops of Rome liued within those seuerall ages Neither can our Aduersaries name any one Heathen Country in Christendome conuerted to Christianity by the Protestant Church And hence it ryseth that D. Whitaker doth stile the Conuersion of all the former Countryes as granting them to be conuerted to our present Roman fayth impure (y) Whitak l de Eccles contra Bellarm. § 336. and corrupt Conuersions Now to ascend from these last thousand yeares vpwards to the other next three hundred yeares I meane to the dayes or the first Christian Emperour during the space of which three hundred yeares no Countryes or Kingdomes were conuerted at all to Christian Religion either by Catholikes or any others for it is euident that in those daies there were no Kings professing the Christian Religion the Emperours of the East only excepted among whom some were false (z) As Valens Constantius constans Christians as being defiled with Arianisme others (a) IuliaÌ„ Apostates Now concerning the tyme it selfe of Constantine it is so certaine that neither himself nor any Country by his meanes was conuerted to the Protestant Religion as that the Magdeburgenses all Protestants recording the state of the Church in Constantynes tyme do charge Constantine with all our Catholike points at this day professed by the Church of Rome styling them The (b) Cent. 4. Errours of Constantine and of his Age. Now to ryse higher in tymes to wit from the tymes of Constantine to that of Christ our Sauiour it is witnessed by all Historiographers that the Church of God was in such violent Persecutions as that it had no meanes to inlarge it selfe by conuerting to it Kings or Kingdomes and if it had at that tyme conuerted any yet the Question would then follow whether such a Conuersion had beene made to the Protestant or to the Roman Church But the euidency of this point appeareth both from the writings of the Protestant Deuines of Wittenbâ—rg (c) In the booke Disputationes c. as also from the testimony of D. Barlow who thus discourseth hereof (d) Barlow in his defence
of the Articles of the Protâ—stant Religion pag. 24. the Primitiue Nonage of the Church this promisse of Kings allegiance thereunto was not so fully accomplished because in those days that prophesy of our Sauiour was rather verified You shal be brought before Kings for my name sake by them to be persecuted euen vnto death Now to reflect vpon this argument deduced from the prophesyes that the true Church of Christ shall conuert to it the Gentills their Kings and Kingdomes heâ—â— aboue we see euen from the pens of our Aduersaries that many Countryes Kings and Kingdomes haue beene conuerted to Christianity by the Roman Catholike Church but not any one Heathen king or Counâ—ry by the Protestant Church whether then oâ— these two Churches is the true Church 〈◊〉 Christ Here to reply and say that these prophesyes are to be fulfilled not before bâ—â— after the preaching of Luthers Gospell 〈◊〉 controuled by the iudgment of all learneâ— men and by Experience it selfe and therefore D. Whitaker had iust reason thus to confesse of this point Whatsoeuer (e) Whitak l. 7. contra Duraeum pa. 472. the aâ—cient Prophets haue foretould of the enlargement amplitude and glory of the Church The same to haue beene already performed is most euident out of Histories Thus far of this Demonstration to proue that the Protestant Church is not that Church to which the former prophesyes of conuerting Gentills Kings and Nations do truly appertayne Animaduersion CXL GOod Reader in this one Animaduersion 〈◊〉 intreate thy peculiar lattention This then I say Luther thus chargeth Moyses De (1) Luth. tom 3. Wittin in Psal 46. fol. 423. you collect together all the Wisdome of Moyses and of Heathen Philosophers and you shall find them to be before God either Idolatry or Hypocriticall wisdome c. Away therfore with Moyses Of S. Paul the Magdeburgians thus speake Paul (2) Magdeb Cent. 1. l. 2. ca. 10. doth turne to James the Apoâ—â—â—â— and a Synod of Presbyters being called toâ—â—her he is persuaded by Iames and the rest â—t for the offended Iewes he should purify himâ—fe in the Temple whereunto Paul yeeldeth â—â—ich certainly was no small slyding of so great a Doctour as not hauing sufficient reason thereof Moyses Law being abrogated In the like condemnation of some other Apostles we â—d Brentius the great Protestant thus to â—each *) Brentius in Apolog. Confess c. de Concilijs pag. 900. S. Peter chiefe of the Apostles also Barnabas after the Holy Ghost receaued â—â—gether with the Church of Jerusalem erâ—â—d That the whole Church of Christ may â—tre D. Fulke thus literally auerreth The (*) D. Fu ke in his answere to a Counterfeyt Catholike pag. 86. â—hole Church militant as euery part thereof â—â—y altogether erre Touching generall Counâ—lâ— Peter Martyr thus speaketh As (3) Lib. de vocis long 〈◊〉 we insist in Generall Councells so long we shall â—sist in the Papists errors Of particular Faâ—â—ers D. Whitaker thus censureth Papistarum (4) Contra Duraeum l. 6 p. 421. religio est Cento c. The popish Religion is â—patched Couerlet of the Fathers Errours sowed â—gether Finally Christ himselfe both God Man and Redeemer of the world is â—harged with ignorance by the ProtestaÌ„ts â—r thus Caluin writeth Insanus (s) Caluin in ca 14. Math. foret qui â—grauatim ignorantiae subijceret quam ne ipse â—idem Dei filius nostra causa subire abnuit c. â—hat maÌ„ were mad who with discontent shouâ—d â—knowledg himselfe to be subiect to ignorance â—nce the Sonne of God himself for our sake â—ould not refuse to be ignorant And further Caluin speaking of Christ his prayer in tâ—â— Garden thus chargeth our Sauiour Chriâ— (6) Calu. in 26. Math. oratio in horto fuit abruptum votum sâ—bitò elapsum quod castigauit reuocauit 〈◊〉 prayer of Christ in the Garden was abrupt not premeditated which vow at vnawares â—â—â—ping from our Sauiour he after reuoked ananâ— called Thus now I wind vp my Premisses Yâ— particular Fathers Yf Generall Councells Yâ— the whole Church militant of Christ â—f the Blessed Apostles and this after the desceâ—ding downe of the Holy Ghost Yf Moyâ— finally if Christ himselfe may erre as aâ— this is aboue though falsly taught by oâ— Aduersaries what indiscretion then whâ—â— weaknes of iudgment what motley foolishnes or rather Lunacy is it to ascribe aâ— infallibility of iudgment to Luther an incestuous Monke to Swinglius an Apostatâ— Priest to Caluin and Beza two Sodomits euen by the acknowledgment of their owne (7) Caluin and Beza are charged with Sodomy by Conradus Schlusselb a great Protestant in Theolog. Caluin printed 1504. l. 2. fol. 72. l. 1. ol 91. Brethren to any other Sectary whosoeuer or finally to the priuat reuealing Spirâ—â— of ech illiterate man who holds himselfe through his owne pryde and ignorance to be afflatus or possessed with the Holy Ghost or what Reason had D. Whitaker thâ—â— ambitiously to paint out this Priuat Spiritâ— these words An (8) Whitak in Controu q. 5. ca. 3. 1â— inward perswasion of the Holy Ghost wrought in the closet of the belieueâ—â— hart Animaduersion CXLI WHen we Charge the Protestants with diuers Innouations of the auncient Heâ—â—tykes they in Recrimination thereof laâ—our to insimulate vs with the Doctrines of â—he Gentils or Heathens as appeareth from (*) Reinolds lib. de Rom. Idolatria p. 168. 248. 381. The same is obiected by Kempnitius Examen part 3. pag. 83. D. Reynolds pen And heere they chieâ—â—y insist in two poynts to wit in the Doâ—ryne of Sacrifice and of vowes both which Doctrynes were euer belieued practized and are euen at this present by the Genâ—â—â— and Heathens Heere I thus wype away â—â—is aspersion yet withall I freely grant â—hat we mantayne both Sacrifice and vowes 〈◊〉 do withall acknoledge that the Heathens â—d the like but now to the point To haue â—acrifice and to haue Vowes is deriued to â—en from the light of Nature since euen 〈◊〉 the Law of Nature Men as Men endued â—ith reason not as Heathens euer belieâ—ed the doctrine hereof and practized the â—me In like manner the Heathens only by â—e light of Nature belieued that there was God as the Apostle sheweth shall we Caâ—olykes therefore dissent from the Heaâ—ens in the beliefe therof Now that the â—eathens erred in the Obiect of their Saâ—ifices and Vowes to wit in sacrifizing of men and making improfitable and foolish â—owes this proceeded from the Nature of man corrupted by Originall Sinne and not repayred in them by Christ Euen as they erred in the immediat Obiect of God as noâ— belieuing in one only true God but repâ—ting the Sunne and Moone as Gods Noâ— heere I say it is lawfull to agree with the Heathens in the generalityes of the two former doctrines since the Instinct of Nature impressed by God in MaÌ„ teacheth so much but not in the particularityes of theÌ„ seing
Priests of the Old Law or the High Priests now haue after the establishment of Religion beene sometimes wicked Men or not but the touch of the Question here issuable is whether the truth of Religion hauing beene extinct as is supposed or to the World latent and inuisible for so many hundred yeares as is in this Treatise confessed by our Aduersaries to haue beene extinct and inuisible may with any probability be thought to be reuealed or restored to the world by men of flagitious and wicked Liues I meane by Luther Swinglius Caluin (2) Caluin charged with Sodomy by the publike records of the City of Noyon in FraÌ„ce yet extant and by Conradus Schlusselburg a Protestant in Theolog Caluinist printed 1594. l. Law 1. fol. 72. and Beza (3) Beza charged with Sodomy by the fore said Schlusseiburg vbi suprà and l. 1. fol. 9â— Hessbusius a Protestant in his booke entituled Verae sanâ— Confessionis c. both which last two are condemned of the execrable Sinne of Sodomy euen by other Protestants their brethren And heere the doubt or Question resteth Animaduersion CXLVI THe Prophet speaking with difference of the Synagogue of the Iewes in the Old Law and of the Church of Christ in the Neâ— thus writeth The glory (4) Aggeus â— of this last houâ—â— meaning the Church of Christ shal be greater then the first with whom conspireth the Apostle saying with reference to the Iewish Law and the Law of Christ (5) Hebr. 8. Christ is a mediatour of a better Testament which is established vpon better promisses Now from these passages of Scripture I demonstratiuely deduce that the Protestant Church is not the true Church of Christ since touching its visibility it is much inferiour to the Synagogue of the Iewes I meane which is a Circumstance here chiefly to be obserued euen since the comming of the Messias which was the appointed tyme of the Synagogues Decay and the Christian Churches increase For it is fully confessed heretofore that for the thousand yeares last before Luther or rather some seuerall ages more before the said thousand yeares the Protestant Church hath continued vnknowne latent and inuisible Whereas on the other part it appeareth by sufficient authority of Histories in all tymes that the Jewes during all those ages and euer since Christs tyme haue had their Synagogue though vnder some kind of restraint yet dispersed knowne and Visible in the most notable Prouinces of the world as Greece Italy Spayne France Germany England c. And thus we see that the scandall or scruple hence arysing hath beene an argument for some Protestants to apostatate from Christian Religion and to become Iewes as Bernardine Ochine Neuserus chiefe Pastour of Heidelburg and others as I haue shewed elswhere since these men altogether reiecting the Catholike Church as false and Idolatrous did well obserue that the former Prophesy of the Visibility of the Church of God was not fullfilled in their Protestant Church Animaduersion CXLVII YF we might rest vpon the seuerall iudgments of the Protestants it would follow that most of the chiefest Controuersies betweene vs and them should be but points of Jndifferency and the contrary houlding them off either syde should not be preiudiciall to Mans Saluation which course is indeed to introduce a Neutrality of Religion or rather a contempt of all Religion I will exempâ—ify in diuers particulars And 1 first concerning satisfaction and merit of works D. Whitaker thus writeth The (6) Whitak contra Rat. Camp p. 78. and in his answere to M. William Reynolds cap. 6. pag. 135. ancient Fathers thought by their externall discipline of life to pay the paynes due for sinne c. Which though it be an errâ—ur yet were they notwithstanding good Men and holy Fathers Therefore I conclude their beliefe and practise of the said points were no hindrance to their Saluation 2. Touching the Popes primacy thus fauorably Melancthon writeth thereof The (7) In his Ep extant in the Book entituled Centuria Epistol Theolog. Epist 74 Monarchy of the Bishop of Rome is profitable to this end that consent 〈◊〉 be retayned Wherefore an agreement might easâ—ly be established in this Article of the Popes Prâ—macy if other Articles could be agreed vpon Touching our Lady being preserued froâ— Originall Sinne and worshipping of Jmageâ— M. Bunny thus writeth In these (8) Bunny in his pacification sect 17. pag. 104. or suâ—â— like whosoeuer will condemne all those to be noâ— of the Church that are not fully persuaded therein as we are c. committeth an vncharitabâ—â— part towards his brethren 4. Concerning receauing vnder one or both kinds Luther thus teacheth Si (9) Luth. de vtraque specie Sacramenti veneris ad locum vbi tantuâ— vna species ministratur cum alijs vna tantuâ— specie vtere c. 5. Concerning the Doctrine of the Reall Presence D. Reynolds sayth The (10) Reynolds in his fifth Conclusion annexed to his Conference pag. 722. Doctrine of the Reall Presence is but as it were the grudging of a litle ague if otherwise the party hould the Christian fayth 6. Of Inuocation of Saints D. Goad (11) In their Disputation had in the Tower wiâ—h F. Campian the 1. dayes Conference Arg. 8. Rat. 11. 111. D. Fulke affirme that it doth not exclude from being members of the Church c. 7. of Honoring Saints Relikes and Prayer for the dead M. Spark thus discourseth We are (12) Sparke in his answere to M. Iohn d' Albines pag 382. not so hasty to pronounce condemnation of any such Errours for you know well inough that we make not these matters such as that either we thinke that all must be saued that hould the one way or all condemned that hould the other 8. Of Freewill and prayer for the Dead and some other points M. Cartwright thus censureth The Indifferency (13) Cartwright in his Reply p. 14. Sect. 1. â— of the Doctrines of Freeâ—â—â—l prayer for the Dead a number of others necessary Doctrines is such wherein men being â—â—sted haue notwithstanding beene saued 9. Lastly concerning Masse Luther thus writeth Priuate Masse (14) Luther in Colloq Germanicis ca. de Missa hath deceaued many Sâ—incts and earryed them away into Errour frâ—m the tyme of Gregory for 800. yeares Thus far for a tast touching many points euen of greatest consequence betweene the Church of Rome and the Protestants houlden by the Protestants to be of that Adiaphorous indifferent Nature as that the belieuing of them or deniall of them is no hinderance to the Saluation of the Soule So ready we fynd euen the most learned Protestants against the Nature of true fayth and of the practise of the primitiue Church to dogâ—etize a Neutrality of Christian Religion Animaduersion CXLVIII THe Antimoni who denied the Law of Moyses and the Libertines who teach all sensualicy all most impure wicked Heretikes may in a true iudgment be rightly said
â—â—gurae illae verborum offendunt Jndurabo Coâ— Pharaonis similes Certum ect enim Hebraâ—â—phrazi significare Permissionem non voluntatem efficacem That is these formes of words 〈◊〉 not offend vs for it is certaine that in the Hebrew phraze they signify only permission and nâ—â— any efficacious will Add hereto how repugnant our Aduersaries exposition of this 〈◊〉 diuers other such Texts is to the words of God deliuered by Ezechiell cap. 33. which words may serue as a Syntax or Comment to paraphraze al the threatning passages set downe in Scripture against Sinners and against the doctrine of Reprobation shewing that all such comminations are only Conâ—â—tional Thus then Ezechiel in the Person of God Si dixero impio c. Yf J shall say to the wicked Thou shalt dye the death and he do pâ—â—nance for his Sinne and do Judgment and Iâ—stice liuing he shall liue and shall not dye Animaduersion CLI THe example of Elias is much prostituted by our Aduersaries for the warranting of their owne Churches Inuisibility for so many ages but how impertinently it is vrged obserue what followeth First I say this example maketh wholy against the Protestants seing the words of Elias Relictus sum (27) Reg. 1. solus were not spoken generally of all the Iewish people but only in regard of the Country of Israell and accordingly God answered the complaint of Elias with restraint to that only Country the Scripture saying immediatly after I haue left to me in Jsraell seauen thousand which haue not bowed vnto Baal Add hereto that in those very tymes the Church did greatly florish in the adioyning Countryes of Iuda as was to Elias then knowne and visible vnder the reigne of Asa and Iosaphat And thus is this obiection so much prized by diuers of our Aduersaries answered by (28) In corpore Doctrinae pag. 530. Melancthon Enoch (29) In his Soueraigne remedy pag. 17. Clappam Againe admitting these seauen thousand were vnknowne to Elias yet followeth it not that they were vnknowne to all others at that tyme Much lesse then is this example of force to proue that the Church of God may be latent and inuisible for many hundred yeares together not to one Elias only but to the whole World But for a further discouering of the weakenes of this Example let vs grant for the tyme that the Iewish Synagogue was in the dayes of Elias wholy inuisible yet is this example most defectiuely alledged as applyed to the Church of Christ Since the predictions and promisses made to the Church of Christ whose (30) Hebr cap. 8. testament is established in better promises are far greater and more worthy then those of the Iewish Synagogue Againe the foresaid Example doth not extend to the whole Châ—rch of God before Christ but only to the Iewish Synagogue as being a part or member therof for besides the Iewes there were diuers others faythfull as Melchisedech Cornelius the Eunuch of the Queene of Candace c. Thus far in solution of this obiection Animaduersion CLII. OVr Aduersaries do first teach that concerning Matter of fayth they are to belieue nothing for certaine but only the holy Scripture Secondly they teach that (31) So writeth D. Reynolds in his Conference with M. Hart. pa. 68. it is not the shew but the sense of the worâ—â— of Scripture that must decide Controuersies And that herein the Scripture doth not instruct them of it self but by certaine meanes as M. Hooker (32) In Eccles Policy l. 2 pa. 116. affirmeth Thirdly these Meanes are affirmed to be the reading (33) These meanes are set downe by D. Reynolds in his Conference p. 83. 84. sequentib and by D. Whitaker de sacra scriptura p. 521 522. 523. thereof the Conference of places the weighing of the circumstances of the Text skill iâ— tongues diligence and prayer Fourthly they affirme that these being Actions on their behalfe are but humane Endeauours and such wherein euery man without extraordinary priuiledge from God is subiect to Errour Fiftly they teach that these meanes according to the Nature of themselues afford a necessary doubtfulnes and vncertainty of opinion and therfore D. Whitaker thus writeth hereof Qualia (34) D. Whitak de Eccles contra Bellarm. Controu 2. q. 4. p. 227. illa media sunt talem ipsam interpretationem esse necesse est at media interpretandi loca obscura sunt incerta dubia ambigua Ergo fieri non potest quin ipsa etiam interpretatio incerta sit Si incerta tunc esse potest falsa Thus D. Whitaker discourseth of the foresaid meanes of interpreting the Scripture Now these being the confessed grounds and principles of our Aduersaries Doctrine they do appeare to be no other but as it were linked chaynes or naked connexions of vnauoydable vncertainty which point appeareth more fully from the example of Luther Swinglius Caluin all who vanted that they did vse the foresaid meanes in interpreting these few words Hoc est corpus meum and yet the end was that they deliuered mere contrary constructions of the said words so as supposing one of their constructions to be true it followeth necessarily that the other Construction is false Animaduersion CLIII THe Absurdities necessarily accompaning the doctrine of the Pope being Antichrist are many and great For the more cleere vnderstanding whereof we are here to repeate what was aboue deliuered vpon other occasions First then Luther thus writeth We (35) Luth lib. contra Anabaptist Confesse that there is vnder the Papacy most of the Christian good yea rather all the Christian Good and that from thence it came to vs. Verily we confesse that in the Papacy thâ—â—â— is true Scripture true baptisme the true Sacrament of the Altar the true Kâ—yes of Remission of sinnes c. Yea further that there is in the Papacy true Christianity or rather the true Kernâ—â— of Christianity Thuâ— fâ—r Luther with whom to omit diuers other Protestants D. Doâ—â— conspireth saying (36) D Doue in his persuasion to English Recusants pag. 23. We hold the Creed of the Apostles of Athanasius of Nice of Ephesus of Constantinople and the same Bible which 〈◊〉 receaued from them Now marke the ineuitable absurdity rysing from the premisses Yf the Pope being the head of the Papacy 〈◊〉 Antichrist as our Aduersaries do dreame doth it not then inauoydably follow that with Antichrist there is all the Christian Good that from Antichrist the Protestants receaue the true Scripture true Baptisme the true vse of other Sacraments to wit of the Altar and Absolution of our sinnes Finally that from Antichrist they receaue the Apostles Creed and the other Creeds aboue specifyed What impossibilityes are these and is not this potentially and implicitly to turne Christ into Antichrist Againe the Scripture prophesyeth that the Church of Christ as I haue shewed aboue shall conuert Kings and Kingdomes of the Gentills vnto it according to those words of Esay speaking of the
Virginity yet it followeth not c. 10. That the Scriptures are to be discerned so far as coÌ„cerns our taking notice of theÌ„ by the authority of the Church Austin most fully teacheth and is therefore condemned by Swinglius in these words Here (82) Swingl tom 1. fol. 135. J intreat your indifferent Iudgments that you freely speake whether this saying of Austin meaning about the discerning of Scripture by the authority of the Church be thought more audacious then fitting or to haue beene vttered imprudently 11. Touching the Bookes of Toby Iudith Hester Machabees S. Austin doth admit them all for true diuine and Canonical Scripture and for such his doing is reprehended by Hospinian (83) Hospinian hist Sacr. part 1. p. 160. ZaÌ„chius de sacra scriptura pag 32. 33. D. Fyeld of the Church l. 4. c. 23. p. 246. D. Reynolds in his conclusions annexed to his Conference conclus 2 p. 699. 700. Zanchius D. Fyeld and Doctour Reynolds 12. S. Austin is so full for the Doctrine of Traditions that they are to be receaued as that M. Cartwright speaking of one Tradition which Austin defended thus bursteth out To allow (84) Cartwrights in M. Whitguiftt Defence p. â—6â— S. Austins saying is to bring in Popery againe and further he thus speaking of S. Austin herein Yf (85) In Cartwright his second Reply part 1. pag. 84. 85. 86. S. Austins iudgment be a good iudgment then there be some things Commanded of God which are not in the Scriptures and thereupon no sufficient Doctrine contained in the Scripture 13. Touching the Sacraments conferring Grace to the worthy Receauer S. Austin for teaching our Catholike Doctrine therein is reprehended by (86) Luth. l. contra Coelaeum and Caluin lib. Instit 4. c. 14 sect vlt. Luther and Caluin 14. That Children could not be saued without being baptized Cartwright thus speaketh of S Austin herein Austin (87) Cartwright in whitguifts defence pag. 5â—1 was of mind that Children could not be saued without baptisme And hereupon then Cartwright chargeth S. Austin with Absurdity (88) Vbi supra p 516. Now in regard of this absolute Nâ—ceâ—sity of Baptisme to Children B zâ— (89) Beza in respons ad Act. Colloq Montisbelg par 2. p. 143. confesseth that Austin taught that in case of necessity it is lawfull for the Layty to baâ—â—ize 15. Touching the Reall Presence taught by S. Austin Hospinian (90) Hist Sacramen par 1. l. 4. pa. 292. 293. the Protestant chargeth and reprehâ—ndeth S. Austin therefore and particularly for these words of S. Austin When (91) Austin tom 8. in Psal 33. Christ said This is my body then that his body was carryed in his hands 16. That Austin taught that the wicked contrary to the Doctrine of the Protestants did receaue the body of Christ is confessed and reprehended by Bucer in these words How (92) Script Anglic pag. 619. often doth Austin write thaâ— euen Judas receaued the very body and bloud of our Lord Now further that Austin taught that the Sacrament ought to be taken fâ—sting is confessed by Hospinian in Hist Sacram part 1. pag. 48 In like manner that Austin taught that Holy bread was to be giuen to the Catechumeni D. Fulke confesseth thus answering therto terming iâ— A superstitioâ—â— bread giuen in S. Austins tyme to those tesâ— were Catechumeni insteed of the Sacrament Fulke against Heskins c. l. 3 c. 23. pag. 377. To passe further that the body of Christ in respect of his being in the Sacrament is to be adored in the Sacrament D. Bilson reprehendeth S. Austin for such his Doctrine Bilsâ—â— in his true difference par 4. pag. 536. To conclude touching the B. Sacrament of the Eucharist whereas S. Austin teacheth in tom 3. in Enchirid. cap. 110. saying The Sacrifice of Christs body and bloud is propitious or auaileable for the soules in Purgatory this sentence being confessed by Hutterus the Protestant and in lieu of full answere therto he sayth Jn aeternum defendi non potest This saying of Austin can neuer be defended Hutterus l. de sacrificio Missatico l 2. c. 7. p. 525. 17. S. Austin was so earnest in defence of Freewill and Vniuersall Grace that he is therfore acknowledged and dislyked by the Century (93) Cent. 5. c. 4. col 900. 501. writers The Centurists (94) Centur 5. ca. 10. col 113â— and whitak ad Rat. Camp rat 1. pa. 12. D. Whitaker do acknowledg that Iustification by works is in like manner taught by S. Austin 18. Touching the doctrine of merit of works thus writeth Osiander of S. Austin Austin sometymes in the Article of Iustification seemeth to attribute ouermuch to the merit of works c. Cent. 4. l. 4. cap. 23. 19. Touching Prayer for the Dead thus D. Fulke auoucheth Austin (95) D. Fulk in confut of Purg. pa. 349. defended prayer for the dead And that S. Austin did hould Purgatory is in like manner confessed by (96) Fulk ib. pa. 78. D. Fulke 20. Touching Inuocation of Saints S. Austin is so fully Catholike that himselfe doubteth not to pray to S. Cyprian being long before martyred which action Kempnitius thus repreheÌ„deth (97) Exa par 3. pa. 211. Austin did this without Scripture yielding to the tyme and custome 21. In proofe that Images may be worshipped Hospinian (98) Sacram part â— l. 5. c. 8. though a Protestant yet agreeing with S. Austin herein alledgeth him in proofe hereof 22. Touching the fast of Lent and other fasts S. Austin is reprehended by the Centurist Cent. 5. c. 6. col 686. 687. 23. Touching vowing of Monasticall life the Centurists (99) Cent. 5. col 710 charge S. Austin with the Doctrine thereof and Hospinian thus writeth of Austin herein Austin (100) Hosp de origine Monach. fol. 33. was a great louer of Monasticall profession according to the custome of that age To conclude this long Animaduersion Austin taught that Antichrist should be but one only man and that therfore the Popes being many cannot be truly accounted Antichrist this is confessed and dislyked by the (101) Cent. 1. l. â— col 435 Centurists Thus farre now of this passage from whence we may conclude that that Father to whom so many learned Protestants did aboue giue so high commendation and praise was in all poynts of our Catholike Roman ReligioÌ„ euen by the acknowledgment of the Protestants an entyre Roman Catholike or Papist and hereupon I referre to the iudgement of any man carefull of his saluation whether it be not more secure for one to range himselfe in faith Religion with so worthy a member of Christs Church as Austin was euen in the confession of our Aduersaryes who notwithstanding their Diuersity of Religion from him euen in relating of his Catholike Doctrynes for the most part do giue him the tytle of Saint then to dissent from him in fayth and to ioyne himselfe in Religion
Adoration or Jnuocation or in any other sort To this Peter (10) Peter Martyr lib. contra Gardin part 1. obiect 150. Martyr and others do answere that if any such reuerence was exhibited by the Fathers to the Eucharist this reuerence was not terminated in the Eucharist it selfe but directed to Christ signifyed therein and so by the mediation of those earthly elements transferred vnto him No otherwyse tâ—â— when the Papists for thus do they partâ—câ—larly instance praying before Jmages 〈◊〉 not their prayers to the Images but to Christ 〈◊〉 the Saint represented therein But against tâ— Euasion I first aske what secret intelligâ— haue our Aduersaryes with the Fathers â—tention herein since the Fathers words gâ— not the least intimation thereof Seconâ— I say that (11) L de Hierarch Eccles c. 3. part 3. saying O Diuinissimum Sacrosanctum Sacram. c. Dionysius doth inuoke 〈◊〉 Sacrament it selfe and not Christ only â—fore the Sacrament Thirdly this their â—sweare admitting it for true doth waâ— euen in their iudgements the Catholâ—â— praying before Images and the reuereâ—â— giuen to them which Doctrine the Proâ—stants do so much inueigh against Animaduersion CLXVII THe Scripture is most difficult for three â—spects First in regard of its multiplieâ— of the Senses of one and the same passage Scripture Secondly in respect of the phrâ—â— wherein the Scripture is deliuered Thirdâ— by reason of the height of the subiect wheâ— the Scripture intreateth To touch all tâ—â— briefly First concerning the Sense Tâ—â— are in diuers passages of Scripture three â—uerall senses besydes the literall all iâ—â—ded by the Holy Ghost The senses are â—led Allegoricus Tropologicus and Anagogâ— Now how shall an ignorant maÌ„ know 〈◊〉 texts of Scripture be capable of all these 〈◊〉 of them The Style of the Scripture is â—â—de difficult as being stored with figures 〈◊〉 Allegoryes and full of Hebrew phrazes 〈◊〉 Dialects as appeareth in perusing the â—â—lms and the Apocalyps The subiect of the â—â—â—ipture is most high as discoursing of the â—â—eation of the world of Nothing of the â—ysteryes of the Trinity and the Incarnatiâ—â— besides many other Dogmatical points 〈◊〉 transcending the light of mans naturall â—â—prehension And therefore S. Ambrose had â—â—od cause thus to pronounce of the holy â—â—â—ipture Mare (12) Ambros Ep. 44. ad Constantium est scriptura Diuina haâ—â—s in se sensus profundos Ad hereto that the â—â—â—ipture hath to an ignorant eye diuers seeâ—ng contrarietyes though in theÌ„selues they are most true and reconcileable For example these two texts (13) Ezec. 18. Filius non portabit iâ—quitatem patris anima quae peccauerit ipsa â—â—rietur And this other Visitans (14) Exod 10. iniâ—â—tatem patrum in filios in tertiam quartaÌ„â—â—nerationem how can an ignorant man or â—o man reconcile these passages And what â—â—ity then may one discerne in a Mechaniâ—â—l fellow or silly woman who can only â—t reade carrying the bible vnder their â—â—me to the Church and vaunting of the â—ines of the Scripture and auerring that â—â—emselues are able to vnfould expound â—e most abstrusest passages there O pride â—â—d ignorance Ad finally that in the Scripâ—â—e the plurall number is sometymes vsed for â—â—e singular number as Marc. 15. we read they that were crucifyed with him rayled at hiâ— and yet we know it was but only one of the theeues that did so the good thiefe honoring our Sauiour See the like hereto touching this kynd of phraze of the Scripture besydes other places in Hebr. 7. Againe the Scripture in diuers texts doth vnderstaÌ„â— by the word Omnis only quidam For example in Math. 27. we reade dicunt omnâ— vt crucifigatur and yet the B. Virgin S. Maâ— magdelen the Apostles and diuers others dâ— not so cry out against our Sauiour The liâ— phraze is in those words Omnes quae sâ— sunt querunt Philip. 2. yet the Apostles and many other good Christians were eâ—empted out of this sentence But now heâ—â— I demand how can an vnlearned man râ—concile these and the like sentences wâ—â— the true meaning of the Holy Ghost in tâ— Scripture Animaduersion CLXVIII THe Catholike Church deliuereth câ—taine Rules for the more perfect knoâ—ledg of true Traditions The first When 〈◊〉 vniuersall Church doth imbrace any doctriâ— as a point of fayth the which is not found in 〈◊〉 holy Scriptures it is necessary to say that thesâ— point proceedeth from the Tradition of the Aâ—â—stles The reason hereof is in that the vniuâ—â—sall Church as being the (1) 1. Timoth 3. pillar and fouâ—dation of truth cannot erre And therefâ— what the Church belieueth to be of fayâ— â—e same doubtlesly is of fayth But no â—int or Article is of fayth but what God â—th reuealed either by the Apostles or Proâ—ts since at this present the Church is not â—ouerned with new Reuelations The second When the vniuersall Church â—h obserue any thing which not any but only â—d had power to institute and yet which is not â—nd written in the Scripture the same we are â—resume to be deliuered from Christ and his â—ostles the reason hereof is like to the reaâ—n of the former Rule to wit in that the â—iuersall Church cannot erre either in belieâ—g or in working especially if the worâ—g doth concerne any rite of diuine worâ—â— And such is the Baptisme of Infants The third That which is obserued throughâ— the vniuersall Church and cannot fynd any 〈◊〉 institution thereof in the most ancient tymes same we are to belieue that it was first ordâ—yâ—â— by the Apostles though it be of that nature that the Church had power firct to ordayne it â—is is the rule of (2) Lib. 4 contra Donat. cap. 24. S. Austin The fast of â—t may be an example hereof For this fast â—ght haue been instituted by the Church Christ or his Apostles had not afore instiâ—ed it Yet we maintayne that it was instiâ—ed by Christ or his Apostles because asâ—ding vp to higher tymes and seeking afâ— the first Origen therof we find no beâ—ning thereof but only in the tyme of Apostles The fourth When all the Doctours of the Church being gathered together either in a generall Councell or in their seuerall writings and bookes do teach with a common consent that such or such a point descendeth from Apostolicall Tradition we are to belieue that it is an Apostolicall Tradition The reason of this rule is because if all the Doctors of the Church shold erre then followeth it that the whole Church should erre since she is obliged to follow her Pastours and Doctours Now where we speake of the Fathers touching any point in their seuerall writings here we are to vnderstand that we hould it not necessary that all the Fathers should write therof but it is sufficient if some Fathers of the chiefest note and eminency do expressely affirme the point in writing and that other Fathers do not contradict them therein taking notize of such their writings Here we say
which we Catholikes call the Sacrament of Extreme Vnction But to proceede further in this point touching the Booke of Common Prayer in those dayes I will alledge the words of M. Done an eminent Protestant who thus writeth hereof Concerning (38) M. Doue in hit persuasion to English Recusants pag. 31. the Booke of Common prayer when the Masse was first put downe K. Henry had his English Liturgy and that was iudged absolute and without exception But when King Edward came to the Crowne that was condemned and another in the place was made which Peter Martyr and Bucer did approue as very consonant to Gods word When Queene Elizabeth began to reigne the former was iudged to be full of imperfections and a new deuised and allowed by consent of the Clergy But about the middle of her reigne we grew weary of that Booke and great meanes hath beene made to abandon that and establish another Which though it was not obtayned yet do we at the least at euery change of Prince change our Booke of CoÌ„mon prayer We be so wanton that we know not what we would haue Thus this ProtestaÌ„t Now from hence I conclude First that Protestancy here in England is not so ancient as from king Edwards dayes Secondly that it was not at perfection in the middle of Queen Elizabeths reigne For if it had then beene perfect and complete there had beene no neede of a new Common Prayer-Booke For at euery change of the Common booke of prayer there was a change of points of fayth according to which points the former CoÌ„munion Booke was to be reformed corrected And therfore according to the iudgment of men of those tymes it is thus said by M. Parker The day-starre (39) M. Parker against Symbolizing part 2. cap. 5. pag. 4. was not risen so high in their dayes when yet Queene Elizabeth reformed the defects of King Edwards Communion Booke c. Yet so altered (40) Ibidem pag. 37. as that when it was proposed to be confirmed by the Parliament it was refused Animaduersion CLXXVIII THe Doctrine of Recusancy is taught both by Protestants and Catholikes Since both of them hould it a most wicked thing and not to be donne but vnder payne of damnation without finall repentance that a man should communicate only in going to the Church and to heare but a sermon contrary to that Religion which himselfe belieueth to be true For though this Act may seeme to be couered vnder pretence of obseruing the Princes commandement for feare of losing our temporall estates yet in very deed this Act of going to the Church virtually and potentially includeth a conformity in all points to the religion of that Church to the which a Man goeth and so â—t comes to be a dissimulation or rather an absolute Abnegation of that Religion which a man houlds in his soule to be the only true Religion Now that the Protestants do teach the Doctrine of Recusancy I meane not to be present at the sermons or Prayers of a different Religion I proue from (41) Caluin de vitandis superstitionibus extat in tract Theolog. pag. 584. Caluin from the Deuines (42) The Deuines of Germany alledged in this point by Sleydan in Comment Englished l. 7 fol. 87. of Germany from Melancthon (43) Melancth in Concâ— Theolog. pa. 618. from Peter (44) Peter Martyr in his discourse hereof recited in Melancth Treatise de Concil Theolog. p. 394. Martyr and to omit others from D. (45) Wâ—â—eâ— in Synops. printed 1600. pag. 612. 613. c. Willet That the Catholikes do with the like or greater feruour preach and practice thâ— same Doctrine of Recusancy is cleare by the Example in our owne Country where sinne Protestancy was first planted some scores besides of the Laity of Venerable learned priests haue chosen rather to suffâ—â— death in Queene Elizabeth her Reigne then once to goe to the Protestant Church their liues being commonly proffered them if they would conforme themselues and leaue their Recusancy But they loathed such Conditions For the more full proofe of this Verity I add the Testimonies of three most eminent most remarkable Men whose iudgments some yeares past being demanded whether the Catholikes of England might for sauing their goods liuings go to the Protestant Church to heare a Sermon did ioyntly condemne the same as most vnlawfull and impious The men were these Cardinall Bellarmine Cardinall Baronius and Mutiâ—â—Vitellescus now generall of the Order of the Society of Iesus I will heere set downe their owne words The Judgment of Cardinall Bellarmine COnsideratis rationibus pro vtraqueparte allatis existimo non licere viris Catholicis in Anglia Haereticorum adire Ecclesias multó minùs concionibus ipsorum interesse minimè autem omnium cum ipsis in precibus vel Psalmodia alijsque ipsorum Ecclesiasticis ritibus conuenire Ideo propria manu subscripsi Robertus Bellarminus Sanctae R. Ecclesiae Presbyter Cardinalis tituli Sanctae Mariae in via The iudgment of Cardinall Baronius VIsis consideratis quae superiùs diligenti peruestigatione in vtramque partem disputata reiectis omnino exufflatis quae pro parâ—e affirmatiua fuere proposita quòd scilicet liceret Catholicis adire Ecclesias Haereticorum vt superiùs sunt proposita inhaeremus saniori sententie posteriori ab Ecclesia Catholica antiquitùs recepta vsu probata quod scilicet ita facere pâ—â— non liceat quam rogo nostros Catholicos Anglâ—â— amplecti ex animo Caesar Cardinalis Baronius titul SS Nerei Achillei Presb. The iudgmeÌ„t of Mutius Vitellescus then Prouinciall now Generall of the Order of the Jesuits VJdi rationes quae in hoc Scripto pro vtraque parte afferuntur existimo non licere vâ— Catholicis in Anglia Ecclesias Haereticorâ—s adire c. Et puto hoc debere esse extra Contrâ—â—ersiam Mutius Vitellescus Prouincialis Romaâ— Prouin Societatis Iesu Thus much in generall touching the Doctrine of Recusancy mantayned by diueâ— learned Protestants and practised with losâ— of life by many Reuerend Priests here 〈◊〉 England and fortifyed with the iudgmeâ—â— of these three former most learned pious and godly Men. Animaduersion CLXXIX â—He most common abuse in England of taking a second wyfe during the lyfe of â—e first committing fornication induceth â—e to expound those words of our Sauiour â—om whence the offenders herein seeme to â—arrant their sensuall proceedings for thus â—â—r Sauiour in Mathew 19. speaketh Whosoeâ—er shall put away his wyfe except it be for forâ—â—tation and shall marry another doth commit â—dultery from which words our Aduersaâ—es seeme to infer that who doth put away â—s wyfe for fornication and marrieth anoâ—her doth not commit Adultery But this is â—hus answered To wit that this exception 〈◊〉 Fornication is only to shew that for this â—use a man may put away his wyfe for eâ—er but not that he may marry another as 〈◊〉 most playne in 5. Mark c. 10.
mâ—n forcible to wring out Confession then any racâ—â— torment For the proofe of this verity I refer the studious Reader to the Booke of the Protestants Apology where beginning at the Page 684. sâ—quentib at the letter M. in the margent he shall find fyfty at least of our Affirmatiue and Catholike Doctrines defended and maintayned by the most learned Protestants that euer did write I will here only reckon the tiles of diuers of the said Articles so belieued and taught by the Protestants viz. 1. Real presence 2. That Sacraments do confer grace 3. The sufficiency of Chricts corporall Death 4. That Christ descended in soule into Limbus Patrum 5. The continuall Visibility of the Church 6. The Necessity of Good works to Saluation 7. Euangelicall Counsells 8. The Doctrine of vniuersality of Grace 9. That God doth only permit sinne but decreeth it not 10. That men are not certaine of their Election 11. That to Children of the faythfull dying vnbaptized saluation is not promised 12. Free-will 13. That in regard of Christs Passion and promisse our Good works are meritorious 14. TeÌ„porall punishment reserued by God in Iustice after the sinne is remitted 15. Peters Primacy 16. Intercession of Angells 17. Intercession of Saincts 18. Jnuocation of Saincts 19. Vowed Chastity 20. Voluntary â—ouerty Chastity and Obedience 21. Prayer for the Dead 22. Purgatory 23. Limbus Patrum 24. Images in Churches 25. Worshipping of Images 26. Reuerence and bowing at the name of Jesus 27. That the good Works of one may help another 28. Power of a priest to remit sinnes 29. Confession of sinnes 30. Distinction of mortall and veniall sinne 31. The indifferency of Communion vnder one kind 32. Sacrifice of the New Testament according to the Order of Melchisedech 33. The possibâ—lity of the Commandements 34. Transubstantiation 35. That Christ is God of God 36. Thaâ— Christ as Man was from his Natiuity free from Ignorance and was full of knowledg 37 Baptisme of Women and Lay persons in tyme oâ— Necessity 38. Seauen Sacraments 39. Implicitâ— fayth called Fides implicita 40. That Antichrist is yet to come 41. Patronage and protection of certaine Angells ouer certaine Countryes and Kingd mes 42. That the Obseruation of Sunday for our â—abaoth is not alterable 43 That the alteration of the â—aboth from Saturdâ—â— to Sunday not proued by Scripture 44. Set tymes of fasting 45. The true visible Church cannot erre 46. Externall iudgment and not onâ—y Scripture appointed for determining of Contrâ—uersies 47. That the gouerment of the Church is Monarchicall 48. Which is true Scripture determined to vs only by the Church 49. That the Church of Rome is a part of the house of God 50. Vnwritten Traditions besides some other Catholike points taught by the learned Protestants Here now I demand that if the Protestants Proselyts and followers do belieue their Grand-maisters in diuers points of their owne Religion why then should not they belieue the learned Protestants maintayning our Catholike doctrines â—ntâ— abstracting from the authority of the Church both the said seuerall sorts of Protestants do maintayne their contrary Tenets euen with equall and indifferent priuiledg of their owne Priuate Spirit Animaduersion CLXXXVIII AS aboue I compared Luther being Catholike touching manners and Conuersation of Lyfe with Luther being Protestant So heere I will make another comparatiue betweene the Liues of Catholikes and of Protestants And here it is to be obserued that I will not compare the most pious men in former tymes with the best of the Protestants nor the worst men for life of the one Religion with the worst of the other but for the greater confronting of our Aduersaries and aduantage to our Catholike Cause I will compare the declining state of Catholike tymes with the best tymes of Protestancy which is presumed to be at the first entrance and beginning of Protestancy when the first Protestants enioyed the â—rimitiae and first fruites of their Religion This point will be made euident euen from the confessions of the Protestants themselues First then we fynd Luther himself thus to write From (n) Luth in postill super Euangel Dominiâ—ae primae Aduentus the tyme in which the pure Doctrine of the Gospell was first reuealed to light the world hath growne dayly worse Men are more reuengefull couetous licentious then they were euer before in the Papacy With whom Musculus agreeth thus complayning hereof Vt verum (o) Musculus in loc com in cap de Decalog pag. 62. essâ— fateor c. To confesse the truth men are become so vâ—â—ike themselues that whereas in the Pâ—pacy they were religious in their Errours and Superstition now in the light of the knowne truth they are more prophaâ—â— then the very Sonnes of the world I wiâ—â— conclude with the testimony of Erasmus thus discoursing of this point Quos (p) Erasmus Ep. ad fratres Inferioris Germaniae aâ—tea noueram c. Such men as I knew to be before vpright candid modest and sincere in theâ— Conuersation after they had embraced thâ—â— new Sect meaning of the Gospell they iâ—stantly begun to talke of young Women to playâ— dice to leaue of prayer to be most impatient reuengfull of Iniuries and to conclude to abaâ—don all humanity expertus loquor Thus far â—rvsmus And thus much of the balancing oâ— men of these two seuerall Religions Noâ— I heere refer to an indifferent Iudgmenâ— whether it be not a great blemish to Protestancy that it is confessed by the Protâ—stants that the Professours thereof euen 〈◊〉 their best tymes were far worse and moâ— wicked in manners then the Catholikâ—â— their worst and most declyning tymes Animaduersion CLXXXIX THe Protestants much solace themselâ—â— in alledging certaine Texts of Scriptâ—â— in proofe of Iustification by fayth only whâ—â— passages being truly weighed are found 〈◊〉 be most weakely or rather impertineâ—â— alledged as in Math. 9. Thy fayth hath sâ—â— thee Iohn 3 Who belieueth in the Sonne hâ— eternall Lyfe Finally to omit some oâ—â— such seeming Texts Rom. 5. We being â—â—â—fyed by fayth let vs haue peace towards God Tâ— these and such like I answere and deny that it followeth That Fayth only iustifyeth though only Fayth be named For sometymes also other Vertues are only named or the Sacraments For example Luc. 7. we read Many sinnes are forgiuen her because she loued much Iob. 12. Almes deeds freeth from death Rom. 8. By hope we are saued Finally Titus 3. He hath saued vs by the Lawes of regeneration besydes many other such passages And yet no man will gather from theâ—e authorities that Charity or Almesdeeds or Hope or Baptisme do iustiâ—y without Fayth Therfore when many different causes concur to produce one Effect the Scripture ascribeth the same Effect sometymes to one Cause sometymes to another and yet the Scripture doth not intend thereby to signiâ—y that one cause is sufficient without the other causes Now the reason why the Apostle more frequently attributes Iustification to fayth
For that the Soule of Man to be in the body it is necessary that it becommeth the Forme of the body and that so it be ioyned with the body as that one man be made of the body and the Soule But it is not neeedfull that God should become the Soule of the world neither that of him and the world one compounded substance should be made For God out of his immensity is in euery place out of his indiuisible vnity is whole wheresoeuer he is and out of his Omnipotency doth gouerne support and moue all things Furthermore the Soule of Man though it may be said to be in the whole body yet properly it is not but in such parts of the body as haue lyfe and therefore it is not in the Humours in the Hayres of the heade in the nayles But God is absolutly in al things and not only in corporall but euen in spirituall things for it is impossible that any thing should be in which God is not Lastly the Soule is not but in the body and that being but small and of a narrow compasse so as the parts thereof during the staying of the Soule therin must be continued and ioyned together for if any part of the body be separated or deuided from the rest in that part or member so deuided the Soule cannot be But God is whole euen in the Vniuersity or frame of all things created though that frame be great and the parts thereof become separated and deuided asunder Yea if a second or third World or more should be created God would be in them all and in euery part of them for where God should not be there nothing should be So true are those words of Holy writ 2. Par. 6. Caelum Caell Caelorum non te capiunt Thus far touching the similitude resemblance which the Soule of Man hath with his Creatour the similitude being so great as is aboue touched as that there is no other way by the which a man may more easely â—scend to know in part what God is then from the consideration or contemplation what the Soule of Man is with so iust reason we read it said by God himself when he first created Man Let vs make man in our Jmage according to our lyknes Genes 1. And with this I impose an end to these my Animaduersions A Pareneticall Conclusion to the younger Sort of Priests and Students of the English Seminaries exhorting them to the study of Controuersies in Fayth and Religion THus farre Reuerend Friends and Brethren you see I haue proceeded in this Miscellane and indigested Tract These Animaduersions may serue as certaine prelibations or foretasts of Controuersyes in fayth Yf so you shall reape profit thereby O how abundantly shall I hould my small labour therein taken to be recompenced but if they should not find that full successe with you which I desire yet let your charitable acceptance in part imitate the Abysmall and bottomlesse charity of God who placeth a good intention only where further Ability or other Circumstances are wanting and a good worke actually performed in one and the saâ—â— ballance But now before my pen giueâ— you its last farewell let me take leaue witâ— your good allowance to expatiate a liâ—â— in discourse thereby to persuade you tâ— more forcibly to the particular study oâ— English Controuersyes in fayth and Religion 〈◊〉 Prouince or charge most peculiarly in my iudgment incumbent vpon you in regarâ— of your mayne proiects determinations espoused as I may say to the Saluation 〈◊〉 soules You are hereafter in England to encouâ—ter with Protestants your professed Aduersaries in fayth Imitate then a skilfuâ— Generall in the warres who laboureth noâ— only to hinder his Enemies attempts anâ— approaches but withall seeketh to assauâ—â— his Enemyes So here you haue vndertaken both a Defensiue as also an Offensiue War prepare your selues then not only to mantaine by way of disputation and proofes your owne Catholike Religion but be also prest which is partly coincident with the former by all forces both Diuine humane to make violent incursions vpon Heresy or Innouation in Religion For your greater encouragement hereto obserue this following That Prince would hould it for a great Aduantage to wage such a war wherein he were assured that many of his Enemyes souldiers would fight in his behalfe And yet your Case is heere the same â—â—nce in this your spirituall Combat or â—ookwar with Heresy you haue the volunâ—ary and vncoacted confessions of your Adâ—ersaries euen fighting on your side As â—ou may euidenly discerne by the many â—cknowledgments of the Protestants deâ—iuered in seuerall former Animaduersions against themselues and in strenghtning of our Roman Religion Thus you draw a Sword from the Enemyes syde and after sheath it in his owne bowells The most illustrious and worthy Cardinall Bellarmine that chiefe Heresy-Mastix of this age in his Preface to the Bookes of his (1) Prefixed before his Tome de verbo Dâ—i Controuersies vndertaketh to shew the Necessity of study of Controuersies in this our age I presume his words will be most preuayling with you all and therefore I haue thought fit to set them downe in this place by translating them into English for the better satisfaction euen of the more vulgar Reader Thus then he writeth Vtilitas quidem propositarum nobis Disputationum ex eo intelligi facile potest c. The profit of the Disputations vndertaken by vs may easely from hence be apprehended Agendum est enim non de stillicidijs fundis non de rebus leuibus c. For heere we are to discourse not of the droppings of the caues of a House not of farmes or Country Houses not of small and light matters little auayling whether they be after one manner or other Neither are we to dispute of Metaphysicall subtiltyes of which without anâ— detriment to the soule a man may be ignorant the which may sometymes be impugned wiâ—â— Commendation and prayse of the Opponent Bâ—â— here we are to dispute of God of Christ of the Church of the Sacraments of Justification of the ayde of Grace of the freedome of Mans Wâ—â— and of many other most graue most difficult anâ— most abâ—â—ruse points which belong euen to the foundation and essence of fayth Of all which seuerall Articles if a man laboreth by disputation to weaken but any One then as S. Austin (2) Austiâ— lib. 1. contra Iulian. cap. 2. prudently admonisheth that man seeketh to ouerthrow the whole frame of that which we belieue in Christ. Furthermore to recall Hereticaâ—l men to the light of sayth or at least to represse breake their force and fury to dryue awaâ— those fierce Beasts from our Lords sheepefold to protect and defend the Church of Christ to rescue or snatch away the sheepe already taken from the iawes of those Wolfes and to bring them hack vnto our Lords custody How great here I demand is this Benefit how true a cause
to your Priesthood and to your Religion and are made a foyle to your Aduersary Therefore worthy men make great disquisition and search by your owne priuate Labours into those Controuersyes which are at this day most agitated betweene the Catholikes and the Protestants and through desire of vanquishing your Aduersaries become euen breathles therin And though you shall haue vse of other Studyes as Cases of Conscience and of schoole Diuinity which serue chiefly to apply Vniuersall Truths of Schooles to particular points of Controuersyes yet let the Study of Controuersyes be your fauorite Study make it become at it were Ars Architectonica to all the rest You are to become spirituall Pastours to mens soules feeding them with the celestiall foode of the Sacraments of Gods Church yet euer remember that that Shephard performeth his duty with the greatest perfection who not only preserueth and keepeth safe those sheepe which are allready enclosed in his folds but laboureth also to reduce and bring back to the fold such straying sheepe as yet lye open to the danger of the Wolues Thus much out of my thirsty desire of persuading you what in me lyeth to the earnest prosecution and imbracing of the foresaid Study But now before I end this my Parenefis and exhortation to you I will make bould with your good lykings briefly to sâ—â— downe what Course or Method I could wish you to take in the Studyes of Controuersyes euer subiecting my iudgment herin to the iudgments of the more learned and better experienced Controuersists 1. First then I could wish you because our Aduersaries seeme to rely chiefly vpon Scripture to be much conuersant in such Texts of Scripture as are either obiected by them for the impugning of our doctrine or which are insisted vpon by vs for the confirmation of the same But touching such passages of Scripture which we vrge it were good to make choyce of those whose true interpretation is indiffereÌ„tly acknowledged by vs and our Aduersaries for these are most pressing Such are the Texts touching the coÌ„tinuall visibility of the Church of God and of its priuiledg of conuerting Heathen Kings and Kingdomes vnto it as is aboue shewed in some of the former Animaduersions 2. Be most expert in the Protestant English Translation of Scripture as is aboue premonished for this gauleth the Aduersaries the more in that they cannot take exception against the Translation and certainely the Scripture euen as translated by them most euidently foyleth their Cause 3. Concerning those passages of Scripture which are chiefly vrged by our Aduersaries it were necessary to obserue the true interpretation of them either in Bellarmine his Controuersies or in the Rhemist Testament if so they be drawne out of the Neâ— Testament 4. Touching the authorities of Fathers and Councells considering it requireth a mighty labour to read them at large that either your want of hauing them or want of opportunity and tyme in perusing of them may easely preuent the same Therefore I could wish you first to peruse them in the Tomes of Bellarmine and then to content your selues with the Confessions of the learned Protestants who openly disclayme from them as Patrons of Papistry which Confessions of our Aduersaries throughout all points of fayth you may easely fynd in the foresaid booke of the Protestants Apology 5. I could wish you in proofe of any Catholike point to be much conuersant in Arguments drawne from Reason because those arguments stealingly penetrate the iudgments of the vnlearned and also they are more easely committed to memory Againe arguments drawne from Reason may be vsed at all tymes and vpon any occasion without the help of Bookes which are not euer at hand And furthermore the force of Reason is such as that it is not in Mans power after his true apprehension thereof to withstand in iudgment or struggle against it since man himselfe is a reasonable Creature The Controuersies of Bellarmine will afford you all abundance of this kind of proofe 6. It is very necessary as is deliuered in one of the Animaduersions that you be most prepared and well furnished in the Controuersies which consist vpon Matter of fact Such are the foresaid mentioned points of Conuersion of Kingdomes of the supposed continuall Visibility of the Protestant Church of Ordination Vocation and Mission of Ministers in the Church of God All which must receaue their proofe from Histories And hence it is that our Aduersaries foreseeing they cannot warrant from History these points to be performed in their Church therefore in their extremest need herein many of them are forced for their last refuge to say That the true Church is endued with all these priuiledges But their Church is the true Church as they proue say they from Scripture Therefore in their Church all the former points haue beene at all tymes performed A most shamefull begging of that as granted which stil is in Question and a subtill transition from History to the Scripture and this as it is expounded only by themselues Others againe of them for the better vindicating of their Church from the imminent danger ensuing from the premisses are glad to shrowd their Church vnder our Catholike Church teaching that both of them are but one and the same Church a Paradox implicitly refuted in some of the former Animaduersions but Durum telum necessitas vnto such poore shifts doth penury want bring Men. You ought to be obseruant what collaterall points touching the Articles of fayth we Catholikes hould to be but Matters of Jndifferency and may without breach of fayth as not being defined by the Church be holden either way These you are to distinguish from those other Conclusions of fayth which are inuiolably maintayned belieued by all Catholikes And therefore if your Aduersarie should insist in this kind of IndiffereÌ„cy to proue therby a disunion in iudgment among Catholikes you may tell him he doth but diuerberate the ayre and impertinently and ignorantly vrgeth such points which in no sort impugne the Vnity of our Catholike Church Now to know what points be meere Indifferencyes I refer you to the most painifull learned booke called The Triple Cord where you shall find certaine Paragraphes reserued only for the expressing of them in ech mayne CoÌ„trouersy To conclude referring the diligent Reader to diuers of the former Animaduersions tending to the Method of studying of Controuersies I could desire you to be most expert in impugning the Question of the Priuate Spirit and skilfull in the Iudge of Controuersies since these two mayne points potentially include all other Controuersies within them as a greater Circle comprehendeth in it selfe a lesser Circle And thus Vertuous Men wishing you a most plentifull haruest in this your Spirituall tillage of soules so to terme it I cease Once more most humbly beseeching you euen by that force of Christian charity which I presume your selues do enioy and by that true hope of Mercy which at the last day you expect as our
cannot be said to be truly in them To begin with Iohn Husse who liued anno 1400. The Articles wherein Husse and the Bohemians his followers did belieue are related by M. Fox to be these following saying The (y) Act. Mon. p. 260. only propositions were these foure Articles The first Communion vnder both kinds The second that all Ciuill Dominion was forbidden to the Clergy The third that the preaching of the Word was free for all men and in all places The Fourth that open Crymes are in no wise to be suffered for auoyding of greater Euill Now that Husse himselfe was Catholike in all other points appeareth from the Testimony of Luther who thus speaketh of Husse The (z) In Colloq Geâ—man cap. de Antichristo Papists burned Husse when he parted not a fingars breadth from the Papacy for he taught the same which the Papists do Only he did find fault with their vices and wicked Lyfe Against the Pope he did nothing Thus â—uther of Husâ—e Now to the foresaid Heresies of Husse this is in like manner confessed and set downe by M. Fox (a) Fox Act. Mon. 230 to wit that there are no Princes Priests or Bishops while they are are in mortall Sinne. Of which his Heresy Osiander thus discourseth Nullus (b) In Epitom Cent. 15. pag. 465. est Dominus Ciuilis nullus est Praelatus nullus est Episcopus dum est in mortali peccato Haec propositio non potest approbari c. To come to Wicleffe who was first a Catholike Priest Io. Stow thus relateth Wicleffe (c) Stow in his Annallâ— of England printed an 1591. p. 425. first inueighed against the Church of Rome because he had beene depriued by the Archbishop of Canterbury from a certaine Benefice Touching the Catholike opinions euer houlden by Wicleffe among others I alledge these following He maintayned besides Baptisme and the Eucharist the Sacraments of Order and of Penance in like sort the Sacraments of Confirmation and Extreme Vnction For in Postilla in c. 15. Marci Wicleffe mentioneth all the seauen Sacraments He also belieued the Rites and (d) As appeareth in his booke de Apostasia c 18. Ceremonies of the Masse He was feruerous in praying to our B. Lady thus writing of this point Hic (e) Wiclâ—ff ser de Asâ—â—mpt Mariae videtur mihi quòd impossibile est praemtaâ—i sine Mariae suffragio Hâ— acknowleâ—ged the â—orship of Relikes and Images saying hereof Conceditur quod Jmagines cum prudentia Mariae sunt adorandae (f) Wic ef de Eucharistia c. 8. Finally Wiclâ—ff so admitted the doctrine of Merit of Works and Works of Supererogation as that Stow thus writeth of him Wicleff (g) Stow in his Annals printed 1992. pa. 426. his Disciples went in Course rustet garments downe to the heele seemed to contemne all temporall goods for the loue of eternall riches adioyned himselfe to the begging fryars approuing their pouerty and extolling their Perfection The grosse Heresies maintayned by Wicleffe were these following He taught that all things came to pâ—sse by an absolute and Stoicall Necessity he condemned lawfull Oathes sauoring herein as Osiander (h) Osiander Cent. 15. pag. 4â—7 459. sayth of Anabaptisme He further taught that there is no Ciuill Magistrate whiles he is in mortall Sinne as Melancthon (i) Melancthon in Ep. ad Prâ—dericum Micon in Epist. Swinglij Oecolamp chargeth him Of whom Melancthon in the place alledged further sayth J haue found in Wicleff many Errours wherby a man may iudge of his Spirit Finally to omit some other of his Heresies M. Fox thus speaketh of him Wicleffe (k) Act. Mon. pag. 95. vsed soften for feare of persecution and danger to dissemble his Religion Animaduersion CIII IN this next Animaduersion I will discourse vpon the former grounds of these Innouarours following And to begin with Waldo from whom are sprung the Waldenses Waldo was a Layman of Lyons in France a rich man and gaue Money for the translating of the Scripture into his owne tongue Now that neither Waldo nor the Waldenses were Protestants is thus proued First they still did hould many Catholike poynts as the Reall presence in the B. Sacrament as Caluin (l) Caluin Ep. 144. confesseth They also mantayned Seauen Sacraments the Doctrine of vowes of single Life and of Purgatory as Benedictus (m) In Tract de Eccles pag. 1â—4 Morgenstrensis a Lutheran relateth Finally they were so full in defending the Doctrine of Merit of Works as that D. Humfrey (n) In Iesuitism part 2. rat 3. p. 270. thus writeth of Waldo Waldo did forsake all things that being poore he might follow Christ and the Euangelicall Perfections The Heresyes of the Waldenses were many First they taught that Maried Persons sinned in doing the Act of Matrimony without hope of Jssue as witnesseth Illyricus (o) Illyriâ—us in Catadestium veritatis p. 743. They did hould all imbracements and all things (p) Illyr vbi supr done aboue the Girdle as kissing touching words Compression of the Papps c. to be done in Charity They further taught that neither (q) Illyrius ibid. p. 760. Pryests nor Ciuill Magistrates being guily of mortall Sinne were to be obeyed That Laymen (r) Ibid. p 711 p. 745. and Women might Consecrate and preach That Cleargy (s) Ibidem pag. 7â—9 men ought to haue no Possessions They (t) Ilâ—yr ibidem p. 734. weÌ„t to Catholike Churches dissemblingly Confessed and Communicated dissemblingly Finally (u) Illyr ibidem pag. 735. 7â—5 they condemned all Princes and Iudges The Albigenses are also prostituted by some of our Aduersaryes for Protestants But it appeareth by the teâ—timonyes of D. Abbots that the Albigenses were of the same Sâ—ct of the Waldenses or rather the same Men for thus the said Doctour writeth These (x) In his boâ—ke against D Hâ—â—â— his Reasons pag. 57. Leonists or poore Men of Lyons and Waldenses and Aâ—bigenses were the same Men but diuersly and vpon diuers occasions tearmed by the Romish Synagogue Now these Aâ—bigenses whether they were the same with the Waldenses or not as they mantayned some Poynts of Protestancy so withall by the testimony of Osiander the Protestant they taught diuers execrable Heresyes Osianâ—er his words are thefe (y) Ofiander in Cent. 1. l. 1. c 4. p. â—â—9 Albigensibus dogmata haec tribuntur Duo esse Principâ—a Deum â—z bonum Deum malum hoc est Diabolum c. These opinions are ascribed to the Albigenses That there are two principles to wit a good God and a bad God which is the Diuell who created all Bodyes as the good God did all Soules c. They do reiect Baptisme and they say to goe to Churches and to pray â—â— them is not profitable c. They condemne Mariage and do allow as holy promiscuos concubitus all promiscuous lying together how wicked soeuer They deny the Resurrection of the