meanes to preuent Schismes dissentions in the Primitiue Church when the Graces of God were far more abundant and eminent then now they are Nay if the Twelue were not like to agree except there had been one Chief among them for sayth Hierom among the Twelue one was therefore chosen that a Chief being appoynted occasion of dissention might be preuented How can they think that equalitie would keep al the Pastours in the world in peace and vnitie c. For in al Societies Authoritie which can not be where al are equal must procure vnitie and obedience In like sort the (4) Cen. 4. Col. 556. Centurists confesse that Optatus l. 2. cont Donat. writeth It can not be denyed but that thou knowest in the Cittie of Rome the Episcopal Chaire to haue been first bestowed vpon Peter in which Peter the Head of al the Apostles sate wherupon he is called Cephas In which one Chaire vnitie should be kept by al least the other Apostles should euerie one defend his owne So that he should be esteemed a Schismatick and sinner who should erect another against that singular Sea therfore there is one Chaire c. (5) Cent. 4. Col. 1100. They also reprehend him for that he extolleth ouermuch the Chaire of Peter and the Succession of the Roman Bishops And (6) In his Retentiue c. p. 248. D. Fulk chargeth Optatus with absurditie for saying of Peter He deserued to be preferred before al the Apostles and he alone receaued the Keyes of the kingdome of heauen to be communicated to the rest (7) Retentiue against Bristows Motiues p. 248. D. Fulk (7) Retentiue against Bristows Motiues p. 248. speaking of S. Leo and S. Gregorie Bishops of Rome confesseth that The mysterie of iniquitie hauing wrought in that Seate neer fiue or six hundred yeares before them so anciently before them did the Roman Sea in his opinion begin to be Papal and then greatly encreased they were so deceaued with long continuance of errour that they thought the dignitie of Peter was much more ouer the rest of his fellow Apostles then the holie Scriptures of God do allow Yea the (8) Cent. 3. col 85. Centurists recite and reproue Origen hom 17. in Lucam for calling Peter the Prince of the Apostles And D. Raynolds (9) In his Cōference p. 485. citeth S. Dionysius de diuinis nominibus c. 3. tearming Peter the chief and most ancient Top or Head of the Apostles (10) Apocalypsis in cap. 13. p. 343. This poynt is so euident in the Fathers that M. Brightman thinketh It hath its original from a corrupt Doctrine to wit the false boasted Authoritie of the Chaire of Peter wherof almost at euerie word the Roman Bishop braggeth and which the Ancient Saints Tertullian Cyprian and others extolled with immoderate prayses not knowing with what impietie they prepared the way c. But the Fathers further proceed teaching that the whole Church was built or founded vpon S. Peter To which purpose the Rhemists citing S. Gregorie D. Fulk answereth The (11) Ag. Rhem. Test in Math. 16.19 Authoritie of Gregorie c. being a Bishop of Rome himself and so neer the time of the open reuelation of Antichrist in the Romish Sea is partial in this case and therefore not to be heard And againe Leo (12) Ibid. vers 18. Bishop of Rome striuing for the dignitie of his Sea as his Predecessours Zosimus Boniface and Celestin had done before c. is no equal Iudge in this case The (13. Cent. 8. col 555. Centurists charge S. Hilarie that he speaketh incommodiously of Peter the Apostle that he lyeth vnder the building of the Church and is made the Foundation therof They (14) Cent. 4. col 557. see col 1250. likewise affirme that S. Hierom sayth incommodiously of Peter that our Lord built his Church vpon him And for the like Saying they (15) Cent. 4. col 558. and see col 1250. reproue Nazianzene Yea they (16) Cent. 3. col 84. charge Tertullian that not without errour he seemeth to think that the Keyes were committed only to Peter and that the Church was built vpon him And they (17) Cent. 3. col 84. confesse that Cyprian in manie places affirmeth the Church to be founded vpon Peter as l. 1. ep 3. l. 4. ep 9. c. And they (18) Cent. 3. col 85. charge Origen Tract 5. in Math. to say Peter by promise deserued to be made the foundation of the Church (19) Resp Ad Bellar. disp part 1. p. 277. Danaeus reproueth the Fathers in general for that they sayth he naughtily expounded of the Person of Peter that Saying of Christ Math. 16. Thou art Peter and vpon this Rock I wil build my Church (20) Instit l. 4. c. 6. sec 6. Caluin sayth The Church to be built vpon Peter because it is sayd vpon this Rock c. some of the Fathers haue so expounded but the whole Scripture gaynsayeth Yea the Fathers kept a yearely Festiual day in honour of S. Peters Sea or Chaire which poynt Bellarmine confirming by the testimonies of sundrie Fathers Danaeus (21) In Resp ad Bellar. Disp part 1. p. 275. 276. only answereth that the Fathers assertion therof was the Iudgements and Testimonies of the Church then corrupted and bewitched or made blind with this errour And wheras Anacletus ep 3. Leo ep 53. and Gregorie l. 6. ep 37. do al of them teach a special preheminence to be giuen euen to the Seas of Alexandria and Antioch before other Apostolical or Patriarchal Seas in respect of S. Peter who first founded them Danaeus (22) In Resp ad Bell. part 1. p 275. in his answer to Bellarmin obiecting them in steed of a better euasion barely writeth What he bringeth out of Anacletus Leo and Gregorie is in vaine seing they plead for themselues in their owne cause But D. Field (23) of the Church l. 5. c. 31. p. 162. ingenuously confesseth that There were in the beginning only Three Patriarcks to wit the Bishop of Rome Alexandria and Antioch The reason as some think why the Bishops of these Seas were preferred before others and made Patriarcks was in respect had to blessed S. Peter who was in sort before expressed in order and honour the First and Chiefest of the Apostles c. Al Churches are rightly called Apostolick but these more specially in which the Apostle Peter sate And in proof of this he alleageth Anacletus Leo and Gregorie before mentioned D. Fulk (24) In his Confut. of Papists quarrels c. p. 4. affirmeth in general that manie of the ancient Fathers were deceaued to think something more of Peters Prerogatiue and the Bishop of Romes dignitie then by the word of God was giuen to either of them Hence then we see that Catholicks defending S. Peter to haue been appoynted by Christ the Head of the Apostles and of the whole Church As also the Church
Fathers in particular pronounceth of them in general thus 40) In Col. Conuiual c. De Patribus Ecclesiae See ye what darknes there is in the Fathers writings concerning Faith for when that Article of the Iustification of men is couered with darknes it can by no meanes be that greater errours he auoyded Bullinger doth 41) In Apoc. Serm. 87. fol. 270. acknowledge that The doctrine of Merits satisfaction and Iustification of works did incontinently after the Apostles time lay their first foundations Caluin affirmeth in general that 42) Inst l. 3. c. 25. §. 2. The ancient Writers of the Church vsing euerie where the word Merit gaue occasion of errour to posteritie therby Adde lastly that D. Whiteguift 43) In his Def. against the Reply of Carthw p. 472. 473. treating of Doctrine taught in anie Age since the Apostles time affirmeth without al other exception either of Age or Father that Almost al the Bishops and learned Writers of the Greek Church and Latin also for the most part were spotted with doctrines of Freewil of Merits c. And the same is likewise taught by 44) De Eccl. cont Bellar. p. 299. D. Whitakers Now concerning the ancient Iewes The Books of 45) c. 12 9. 4.10 Tobie and Ecclesiasticus 46) c. 3. 33. are so pregnant for the Merit of works that sundrie Protestants say therof 47) Minist of Lincolne Dioces in their Abridgment p. 76. The two places of Tobie and Ecclesiasticus tend dangerously to the Iustifying of the Merit of Almes-deeds And others writing against the booke of Homilies say 48) â—ilenced Ministers in the 2. Part of Def. p. 164. The book of Homilies whereto we are required to subscribe c. expoundes Tobie saying that Almes is profitable to purge the soule from the spots of sinne alleaging these words of Tobie 4.10 and 12.19 c. and out of Ecclesiasticus c. Yea they further say This 49) Ib. p. 166. place of Tobie were it Canonical c. is verie pregnant for the Merit of works and as strong for it as the Scriptures are for the merit of Christ Buxdorfius also writeth of the Rabbins that 50) Synagog Iudaica p. 23. They perswade themselues that they may satisfy for their sinnes by doing pennance vpon their skinnes and that they may easily merit eternal life by keeping of the Commandments and Good works And the same also is acknowledged in them by 51) Pharisaisme p. 13. 50. M. Hal. I may then conclude that the Fathers of the Primitiue Church are our firmest Patrons for our Catholick Doctrine concerning Good-works confessedly teaching First that Good-works do truly iustify Secondly Meriting Grace and Remission of sinnes in this life and eternal glorie in the next For which verie doctrine the Fathers acknowledged by Protestants are S. Gregorie Chrysostom Augustin Prosper Ambrose Hierom Nyssene Nazianzene Hilarie Ephrem Cyprian Origen Tertulian Theophilus Lactantius Iustin Clemens Alex. Ireneus Hermes Ignatius and the ancient beleeuing Iewes The Protestant Writers producing and charging the forsayd Fathers are Luther the Centurists Brentius the Diuines of Wittemberg Osiander Caluin Melancthon Chemnitius Winkilmamus Schultetus Bullinger Buxdorfeus Wotton Whitaker Humfrey Couel and Whiteguift It is acknowledged by Protestants that the Ceremonies now vsed by the Roman Church in the ministring of seruice or Sacrifice as also of the Sacraments were formerlie vsed by the Bishops Priests and Fathers of the Primitiue Church CHAP. XXII HAuing thus passed through so manie particular Controuersies of greatest weight and finding in al of them a perfect agreement and sweetest harmonie between the ancient most holie and Primitiue Church and the present Roman Catholick Church and this by no weaker proofes or euidences then the free grants Confessions and acknowledgments of our sworne and professed Aduersaries I wil now for my Conclusion in this kind only examen one poynt further which being not purely Doctrinal but most sensible and external wil therby not only prooue most accommodate to the sense and capacitie of the meanest Reader but withal wil most euidently declare and make manifest the outward gracious and beautiful face of Christian Religion practised by the ancient learned and holie Bishops Doctours and people of the Primitiue Church Nothing is better knowne either to those of greater yeares who as yet may wel remember the Ecclesiastical rites and Customes of our owne kingdome or to others more moderne who haue trauailed forraine Nations then the external Ceremonies vsed in Material Churches in Celebration of Seruice and Administration of the most holie Sacraments For who knoweth not that when Catholick Churches are erected they are specially consecrated and dedicated either to Christ or some of his Saincts That in them are seueral Chancels and Vestries as also Altars Candles Reliques and Images that there are truly Priests who offer daily external Sacrifice at the Altar Whose Vestments and vessels are specially hallowed who likewise obserue Canonical houres saying some prayers in Secret others with a loud voice sometimes giuing the people their benediction and burning Incense at the Altar In the Church likewise there is a Font specially hallowed for the administration of Baptisme which is holden necessarie to Saluation and the same is ministred with the Signe of the Crosse with holie Oyles and sundrie other Ceremonies hereafter specifyed And to omit sundrie other In the Church is blessed by the Priest Holiewater Holie-bread Candles Ashes c. I need not describe the naked walles of Protestants Churches or the bare black coates of their wedded Ministers both of them deuoyd of al grace ornament puritie and state duly befitting places and persons Ecclesiastical And therfore I hasten to the confessed practise of the Primitiue Church Wherein I first find that when Material Churches were first built they were specially hallowed by the Bishop so much as S. Gregorie and S. Austin are reproued by D. Humfrey 1) In Iesuit part 2. rat 5. p. 5. 627. for bringing into England the new Consecration of Churches And the 2) Cent. 6. col 364. 365. Centurie-writers do charge S. Gregorie out of his owne writings with Consecration of Churches D. Morton affirmeth that he vsed 3) Prot. Appeal l. 1. p. 53. Superstitious manner of Consecration of Churches Yea the 4) Cent. 4. col 408. further confesse that Athanasius in his Apologie to Constantin plainly sheweth that Christians did not assemble togeather in Churches not consecrated And that in the Fourth Age the Fathers vsed 5) Cent. 4. col 497. Sumptuous Churches consecrated and Superstitious Insolencie in celebrating of Masse appointed to be sayd in no places but such as were hallowed by a Bishop 6) Cent. 4. col 497. Yea they reprooue Constantin himselfe for that say they concerning Consecration of Churches new built proud adorning of them and other Superstitious things the greatest part Constantine inuented and spread abrode in many Churches And wheras Sozomene hist l. 1. c. 8.
the first Fathers of superstition and Captaines and Ring-leaders of Popish Diuines Sir Edward Hobbie tearmeth him (50) In his Letter to M. Higgons p. 92. Proud and insolent Augustin your Great Gregories delegate M. Price styleth him that (51) Aâ—sw to Leech l. 1. c. 4. p. 69. Proud pettie Monk Austin And M. Iewel affirmeth that Austin was (52) Reply Art 3. p. 185. Neither of Apostolick spirit nor anie way worthie to be called a Sainct but an Hypocrite a superstitious man cruel bloudie and proud aboue measure M. Mason affirmeth that His superfluitie of ceremonies might wel haue been spared He was too forward to display the Popes Banner (53) Consecration of Eng. Bishops p. 58. and his behauiour towards the Brittans was ful of Pride and disdaine The (54) Cent. 6. c. 10. col â—49 Centurists write when Austin had troubled the Britan Churches Thirteen yeares and subdued them to the Roman Antichrist he dyed c. But (55) Cent. 6. p. 290. Osiander proceedeth much further affirming that He Subdued England to the lust of the Roman Antichrist and therfore after his death went vndoubtedly to Hel there to receaue his reward A reward vniust and a Sentence ouer-cruel for so great benefits as he bestowed vpon vs euen by D. Whitakers and other Protestants most grateful former aknowledgement But hence it clearly appeareth that the Faith of S. Gregorie S. Austin and whereto England was by them conuerted was Roman Catholick Neither was this pretended Popish superstition the priuat opinions of S. Gregorie and S. Austin but the vniuersal Doctrine and beleef of that Age. Insomuch that (56) Hist Sacram l. 2. p. 157 Hospinian confesseth that In the Age of Gregorie the Great al kind of superstition and Idolatrie as a certain Sea owerflowed ouerwhelmed and wholy ouerdrowned almost al the Christian world No man not only not resisting but al adding and affording rather what strength they could And (57) Defence of the Answ to the Admonition p. 442. D. Whitguift speaking of Anno Domini 659. so wholy distrusteth the Doctours of those times that he resolutely auoucheth He would be loath to alleage anie Councel of that time to proue anie thing in Controuersie So confessedly was the vniuersal Church of Christians at the time of S. Gregorie S. Austin and Englands Conuersion in the opinion of Protestants altogeather Popish Antichristian and Romish and indeed the One Holie Catholick and Apostolick Church prescribed by our Creed The Sect of Protestants during the same time being not so much as diuised stamped heard-of or being in anie though most base or obscurest part of the world Now al this as wel of the high and most deserued prayses giuen to S. Gregorie and S. Austin for their vertue learning and other singular guifts as also that the Faith and Religion which themselues professed and whereto they conuerted this our Natiue Countrey from execrable Paganisme was truly the perfect Faith of Christ and pure and incorrupted Christianitie And lastly that this so pure Faith was our now Roman Catholick Faith I haue here conuinced by the testimonies and acknowledgments euen of her greatest Enemies as namely by Osiander Danaeus the Magdeburgians Hospinian Hollinshead Cambden Foxe Bale Whitaker Cowper Humfrey Bel Godwine Bilson Stow Mason Abbots Fulk Harison Ascham Wotton Carthwright Willet Hobby Price Iewel Whitguift and Morton al of them Protestant Writers THAT THE PRESENT ROMAN CHVRCH AND Religion continued and Flourished during the whole time of the Primitiue Church contayning the first Six hundred yeares after Christ CHAPTER V. HAuing thus prooued the confessed being and publick general practice and profession for these last thousand yeares of our Roman Faith and Religion I wil now endeauour the selfe same proof and confirmation for the first Six hundred yeares after Christ Which for greater perspicuitie I wil diuide into two seueral Stations or times The First from Constantin the Great to Gregorie the Great the Second from Christ and his Apostles to Constantin agayne In which behalf I find it affirmed by (1) Vpon the Reuel f. 110. M. Brocard that The Pope fel from Christ in the time of Syluester who liued with Constantin and that for a ThousaÌ„d two hundred and sixtie yeares the Church was oppressed and troden downe by the Papacie euen from Syluesters time to these dayes In like sort auoucheth M. Brightman (2) In Apoc. p. 462. that euer since the time of Constantin the Great Rome hath been the whore of Babylon and the Roman Bishop hath been the Beast and Antichrist (3) Ibid. p. 471 And againe sayth he As aboue we haue made manifest it necessarily followeth since the time of the Heathen Emperours the Pope of Rome to haue been that greatest Antichrist of whom the Scriptures haue so diligently forewarned and the Cittie of Rome from that time to haue been the Whore c. foretold in the Apocalypse M. Leigh (4) Great Britanies great Deliuerie f. B. 2 addeth hereunto that The Popes euer since the first Three hundred yeares after Christ haue been Diuels But no man speaketh more plainly then M. Napper whom (5) Vpon the Reuel p. 262. M. Dent tearmeth a learned Writer and an excellent man This so learned a Writer plentifully acknowledgeth (6) Vpon the Reuel p. 68. And See p. 43. that Between the yeare of Christ 300. and 316. the Antichristian and Papistical raigne began raigning vniuersally and without anie debatable contradiction 1260. And that (7) Ibid. p. 145 Euen 1260. yeares the Pope and his Clergie hath possessed the outward visible Church of Christians (8) Ibid. p. 239 Neuer suffring for the space of 1000. yeares after Syluester the First anie to be seen vouchable or visible of the true Protestant Church c. I wil not here stay to confute the wilful vanitie of D. Morton who for his best answer to this so cleer testimonie of M. Napper writeth thus (9) Prot. Appeale p. 72. But this witnes alas for the darknes of Iudgement of these Apologists speaketh not of the whole Profession of the Romish Church but only of one article predominant therin namely the Doctrine of Popedom c. But seing he speaketh in general of the outward visible Church of Christians which includeth al Poynts beleeued by that Church and that the same Church during the sayd time was so wholy possessed by the Pope and his Clergie that not so much as anie one of the Protestant Church was then to be seen I may more iustly say Alas for want of honestie or learning or both in D. Morton And this the more I might inculcate seing his owne guiltie Conscience at last bewrayeth himself saying (10) Ibid. p. 662. If one of our Aduersaries themselues when six of their principal Doctours were produced against him was licenced to except against them c. how much more lawful might it be for vs to deny the testimonies but of two Authours not of eminent note for
Learning and Iudgment c. So willing indeed is M. Doctour to detract from the Authoritie and testimonies of his owne deare Brethren M. Napper and M. Brocard And where he would gladly mince the matter by affirming that they were but Two the perusal of this Chapter and other parcels of this booke wil clearly discouer that there were manie more Twoes of this opinion Wherfore to proceed M. Brightman (11) Apoc. p. 503. thus vrgeth Bellarmine As concerning the continuance of the Apostacie from the true Faith we haue learned by the Apocalypse that the same hath preuayled more then 1260. yeares and that more cleerly then anie of your Subtilties can euade (12) Ibid. p. 539. And againe Antichrist hath raigned from the time of Constantin the Great to this day wherof the Apocalypse affordeth such Demonstrations as neuer anie Iesuit can confute Yea (13) Ibid. p. 477. further The Pope of Rome is the Beast which 1300. yeares receiued power c. therefore from 1300. yeares he is the Antichrist So certain it is by M. Brightmans strongest Demonstrations grounded vpon Scripture that the present Roman Religion hath continued for these last 1300. yeares during which time the Pope in his opinion hath raigned as Antichrist Answerably herevnto (14) Against Staplet Martial p. 25. D. Fulk relateth that some Protestants haue written that the Pope hath blinded the world these manie hundred yeares some say 1000. some 1200. some 900. c. And (15) In Apoc. p. 263. Winckelmanus speaking of the begining and end of the Churches persecution by Antichrist reporteth that there are some Protestant Writers who make the end Anno 1517. when M. Luther first began and so the beginning should be Anno 257. others place the end Anno Christi 1521. when Luther at the Assemblies at Wormes excellently gaue testimonie to the truth and so the beginning should be from Anno Christi 261. c. (16) De Antichristo p. 96. Danaeus also speaking of Antichrists first coming confesseth that some Protestant Writers teach that he came in the Yeare 1000. others 500. others 400. from Christs birth So clear it is that the Pope of Rome for these 1300. yeares in the opinion of Protestants hath raigned as Antichrist But as the Popes for these last 1300. yeares are thus censured for Antichrists so are the most ancient and first Christian Emperours condemned for Papists and fauourers of Antichrist For though D. Morton speaking of the Popes authoritie affirmeth that it hath been (17) Prot. Appeal p. 661. often and notoriously contradicted in Antiquitie c. by right Christian and renowned Emperours Yet M. Brightman speaking of the verie first most ancient and Christian Emperours auerreth the contrarie saying (18) Apoc. p. 344. Into which Catalogue come Constantin the Great Constantius Constans Constantin and their Sonnes Iulian Iouinian Valentinian Gratian Valentinian the Second Theodosius c. for these then raigning the Beast was notably defended and his dignitie much increased Agreably sayth (19) Reioynd to Bristow p. 2. D. Fulk I neuer ment to acknowledge the Emperours Constantin Iouinian Valentinian c. to be such as I would wish for For both in their Religion and manners diuers things are found which I could wiâ—h had been more agreable to the Word of God So that for the second 300. yeares after Christ it resteth euident and for such acknowledged that The Pope and his Clergie possessed the outward visible Church of Christians neuer suffring for 1000. yeares after Syluester the First anie to be seen vouchable or visible of the Protestant Church For which verie cause al the Popes of those Ages are censured for Antichrists and the verie first Christian Emperours for their fauourers and defenders To make now the like trial of the Roman Churches Continuance and her vniuersal and publick profession and practise of her Faith and Religion for the first 300. yeares after Christ to wit from his blessed Apostles to Pope Siluester the First and Constantin the Great Wheras our Catholick Writers do often obiect the Custom of the ancient Fathers in prouoking the Hereticks of their times with the Succession of the Roman Bishops according to the example of Ireneus Cyprian Tertullian Optatus Hierom Augustin and Vincentius Lyrinensis (20) Against Purgat p. 373. D. Fulk for his best answear is enforced to confesse saying That these men specially named the Church of Rome it was because the Church of Rome at that time as it was founded by the Apostles so it continued in the doctrine of the Apostles (21) ConfereÌ„ce vvith M. Hart. p. 442. D. Raynolds being prouoked in the like kind acknowledgeth in like manner that The succession of the Roman Bishops was a proof of the true Faith in the time of Augustin Epiphanius Optatus Tertullian and Irenaeus c. (22) Instit l. 4. c. 2. sec 2. 3. And Caluin himself setting downe our foresayd Allegation affirmeth of Catholicks that They indeed set forth their Church verie gloriously c. They report out of Irenaeus Tertullian Origen Augustin and others how highly they esteemed this Succession wherto he giueth the like answear and reason saying Considering it was a matter out of al doubt that from the beginning euen vntil that time nothing was changed in Doctrine the forsayd Doctours took in argument that which was sufficient for the ouerthrowing of al new errours to wit that the Hereticks oppugned the doctrine which euen from the verie Apostles themselues had been inuiolable and with one consent retayned And in his book of Institutions set forth in French he writeth expresly that It was a thing notorious and without doubt that after the Apostles Age vntil those foresayd times no change was made in doctrine neither at Rome nor other Citties In like sort sayth Zanchius (23) De vera Relig. p. 148. In times past the Roman Church and the succession of their Bishops vntil the times of Irenaeus Tertullian Cyprian Some others was such as that not vndeseruedly these Fathers were accustomed to prouoke and cite the Hereticks of their time to her and others such like (24) De Ecclesia p. 278. D. Whitaker speaking of certain Apostolical Churches and amongst them of Rome by Name collecteth thus From whence we vnderstand why Tertullian prouoked to these Churches to wit because as then by perpetual succession they kept the Doctrine of the Apostles Agreably to which almost in the same words sayth (25) Against Purgat p. 374 D. Fulk The Church of Rome retayned by succession vntil Tertullians dayes that Faith which it did first receiue of the Apostles (26) Fox his Act. Mon. p. 1359. M. Ridley auoucheth that The Patriarch of Rome in the Apostles time and long after was a great maintayner and Setter forth of Christs glorie in the which aboue al other Countries and Regions was preached the true Ghospel the Sacraments were most duly administred c. After the Emperours became Christians
the Ghospel there flourished most And (27) Reply to Harding p. 246. D. Iewel freely granteth that Aswel S. Austin as also other godlie Fathers rightly yeelded Reuerence to the Sea of Rome c. for the puritie of Religion which was there preserued a long time without Spot And agayne (28) Ibid. p. 628. The godlie Fathers of those foresayd times sought to the Church of Rome which then for puritie in Religion and Constancie in the same was most famous aboue al others (29) Suruey of the Popes supremacie p. 85. M. Bunnie speaking of the verie same times affirmeth that At that time there was no Church that did more sincerely keep that which the Apostles taught c. These so frequent and free testimonies of our Aduersaries for Romes Continuance in the true Faith and Religion from the Apostles vntil the time of S. Austin are so clear from al exception and further Comment that D. Morton in steed of other answer sayth (30) Prot. Appeal p. 573. This general consent of our so profoundly Iudicious Protestants in appealing vnto the Primitiue Church for the space of the first Foure hundred and fortie yeares after Christ thus acknowledged by our Aduersaries may wel serue for a iust reproof of their slaunder who vsually vpbrayd Protestants with Contempt of al Antiquitie for here euen old Rome is commended by Protestants By al which it is most euident not only that the Roman Church with continual succession of Bishops hath stil continued euen from the Apostles vntil the times of S. Augustin Epiphanius Optatus c. which was for Foure hundred and fortie yeares after Christ but withal during the same time for puritie in Religion and constancie in the same she continued most famous aboue al other Churches But to arise (31) Vpon the Reuelat. p. 191. And See Cent. 2. c. 4. col 55. M. Napper auoucheth that During euen the Second and Third Ages next after Christ the true temple of God light of the Protestant Ghospel was obscured by the Roman Antichrist himself Whereto are assenting (32) In Bancrofts Suruey c. 27. p. 343. M. Carthwright and Beza And (33) Against Symbolizing vvith Antichrist part 2. sec 8. p. 128. M. Parker sayth I know right wel that within the Two hundred yeares after Christ there were crept into the Church manie idle Ceremonies c. There began in this mixt Age Exufflation of the Baptized Consecration of the Font with oyle and Crosse Oyle in Baptisme the Reseruing of the Sacrament Exorcisme Offring and prayer for the dead Fasting on certain dayes with opinion of Necessitie and Satisfaction and the seeds of Monkerie See then among what weeds the Crosse grew vp and in what a dunged soyle of manie supersti ions sayth M. Parker But (34) Epist de Abrogandis in vniuersum omnibus statutis Eccles Sebastianus Francus auerreth for most certaine that Presently after the Apostles times al things were turned vpside downe c. And that for certain through the work of Antichrist the external Church togeather with the Faith and Sacraments vanished away presently after the Apostles departure c. M. Bunnie (35) Treatise tending to Pacification sec 14. p. 89. vsing al warines to acknowledge more then of necessitie he must confesseth yet as inforced of the whole time since the Apostles to this present that The Church of Rome hath euer continued after a sort in profession of the Faith since the time that by the Apostles it was deliuered to them c. And hath also in some manner preserued and hitherto maintayned both the Word and Sacraments that Christ himself did leaue vnto vs which surely sayth he is a verie special blessing of God and an euident work of the Holie Ghost D. Field (36) Of the Church l. 3. c. 6. p. 72. speaking of the Latin or Roman Church before Luthers appearing affirmeth that It is friuolous that some demand where our Church was before Luther began for we say it was where now it is If they aske vs which we answer it was the knowne and apparent Church in the world wherin al our Fathers liued and dyed wherin Luther and the rest were Baptized receiued their Christianitie Ordination c. Not forbearing to make his Title of that Chapter in these words Of the Latin Church that it continued the true Church of God til our time c Now it is plentifully heretofore confessed that the knowne and apparent Church of the world for many hundred yeares togeather before Luther and wherin Luther was Baptized ordayned Priest and a Professed Austin-fryar was the onlie Roman or Latin Church which as then raigned vniuersally the Protestant Church during the sayd time being confessedly latent vnknowne inuisible and indeed not in being as shal be proued at large hereafter But for the surer sealing-vp of al which hath been sayd in this behalf I desire lastly to be obserued that wheras D. Whiteguift (37) Defence c. p. 351. iustly vrgeth against M. Carthwright this general rule or proofe of Apostolick Doctrine saying For so much as the original or beginning of these names Metropolitan Archbishop c such is their Antiquitie can not be found so far as I haue read it is to be supposed they haue their original from the Apostles themselues for as I remember S. Austin hath this rule in his hundred and eighteenth Epistle And it is of (38) Ibid. p. 552. And see Suinglius tom 2. fol. 94. credit with the Writers of our time namely with M. Suinglius M. Caluin and M. Gualter and surely I think no learned man doth dissent from them In like sort sayth (39) Ansvver to obiections against the Crosse in Baptisme p. 26. D. Fotherby in behalf of the Crosse If it be but an humane Inuention let vs know I pray you the first Inuenter of it and when it was first decreed and how it came so soon to be so generally obserued which if you can not shew vs I think we may with greater probabilitie esteem it to be an Apostolical tradition And so of the contrarie according to (40) Contra Duraeuml 7. p. 479. D. Whitakers opinion no man denyeth but that it much auayleth to the confuting of Heresies to know their beginning Now according to these Rules it is so certaine that the present Roman Religion was deliuered by the Apostles and thus continued to vs that (41) In Vvhitegu Def. p. 352. M. Carthwright inferreth from the foresayd Rule That therby a window is open to bring in al Poperie And I appeale sayth he to the iudgement of al men if this be not to bring in Poperie agayne to allow of S. Austins Saying c. But now a litle to obserue what our last Refiner M. D. Morton determineth concerning this foresayd Rule of S. Austin Wheras D. Whiteguift whom M. Morton styleth their (42) Prot. Appeal l. 2. p. 228. learned Archbishop and an (43) Ibid. p. 225. Authour of worth
keeping of holie dayes in honour of Saincts And lastly The Popish Masse and Ceremonies To come now to the Armenians (11) Cent. 15. p. 477. Osiander confesseth that In the yeare On thousand foure hundred and thirtie Pope Eugenius then called a Councel at Florence c. To which Councel the Grecians Armenians Iacobins assented M. Marbeck (12) Com. Places p. 258. acknowledgeth that at the Councel of Florence the Christians of Armenia and India consented to the Roman Church and that the Greeks agreed And where as (13) Vol. 2. Generat 39. Nauclerus recordeth that Anno. 1145. The Embassadours of the Armenian Bishops as also their Catholick that is their vniuersal Metropolitan who hath vnder him more then a thousand Bishops came to Pope Eugenius being at Viterbo and hauing ended their iourney after a yeare and a half they offred their Subiection to the Apostolical Sea the same historie is mentioned by M. Symondes (14) Vpon the Reuel p. 223. 150. 250. And See Volater Geograph l. 10. and other Writers And of the great agreement between the Armenians and the Roman Church we may read Gomarus (15) Speculum Ecclesiae p. 163 172. and (16) l. 2 c. 23. fol. 183. Villamont in his voyages printed in French But D. Philip descendeth more particularly and sayth of the Armenians They haue their blemishes For in the forme of their Liturgie mention is made of Inuocation (17) Comment de Regno Christi l. 1. p. 35. And see Cathol Tradit p. 207. and Intercession of Saincts and of oblation of the Sacrament As also (18) Ibid. p 22. Let the Christian Readers know this that not only the churches of the Graecians but also Rutans Georgians and Armenians and Indians Aethiopians who are become Christians do hold the true and Real Presence of the Bodie and Bloud of our Lord wheresoeuer the Eucharist is celebrated c. And (19) Ibid. p. 56. agayne There are not wanting who think that as yet there remayne in sundrie places of Arabia some Mozarabes Christians whom it is euident in Africk and Spayne in former Ages to haue embraced the Religion of Christians not much vnlike to the Popish Rites By al which it appeareth that the anciēt Armenians receiuing their Religion from the Apostles do agree with vs Catholicks in Inuocation of Saincts (21) Cent. 16. p. 970. The Real Presence The oblation or Sacrifice of Christs Bodie In acknowledging their obedience to the Church of Rome and in brief in their Religion in general not much vnlike to that of the Papists Now as touching the Grecians (20) Estate of the Church p. 253. Crispinus affirmeth that (23) Acta Theologorum Vvittemb Ieremiae Patriarchae Constantinop de Augustana Confes p. 55. 102. 128. Anno. 870. the Greek and Latin Churches became diuided only for the Primacie and diuersitie of Ceremonies so fully did they at that time consent in al other poynts Osiander speaking of the other Oriental Churches further remote auerreth that Anno 1585. the Christians who inhabit neer to Mount Libanus became at last conquered and subiect to the Turkish Empire Neither is that to be maruailed at for the Christians in the East haue not sincere Religion but are in most part of Articles Popish Sir Edwin Sandes (22) In his last leafe but fiue in his Relation of the State of Religion vsed in the West partes of the world auoucheth that The Greek Church doth concurre with Rome in opinion of Transubstantiation and generally in the Sacrifice and whole bodie of the Masse In praying to Saincts and Auricular confession in offring Sacrifice and prayer for the dead Purgatorie and worshiping of Pictures c. Yea the Protestant Diuines of Wittemberg do fully testify that the Greek Church yet to this day professeth and teacheth Inuocation of Saincts and Angels (24) Ib. p. 243. 368. Reliques (25) Ib. p 243. 244 247. 251. Worshipping of Images (26) Ib. p. 86. 96. 100. 240. 380. Transubstantiation (27) p. 102. 104 And see Cath. Tradit p. 129. 137. Sacrifice The signifying (28) p. 97. 99. 100. Ceremonies of the Masse (29) p. 87. 10. in Prefat Auricular Confession (30) p. 79 89. Inioyned Satisfaction (31) p. 78 238 Confirmation with Chrisme (32) p. 242. 326. Extreme Vnction (33) p. 77. 242. And Cath. Trad. p. 197. and al the seauen Sacraments Also (34) p. 93. 102. 109. Prayer for the dead (35) p. 93. 104. Sacrifice for the Dead (36) p. 93. 109. Almes for the dead (37) p. 224. 296. 367. Freewil (38) p. 132. 257. Monachisme (39) p 111. 129. 135. vowes of Chastitie (40) p 126. The fast of Lent and other set Fasting-dayes That (41) p. 129. Priests may not marry after Orders taken And lastly to omit manie others That (42) p. 131. 138. 142. the Tradition and doctrine of the Fathers is to be kept So plainly in al these chief Articles of Faith doth the Grecian Church remayne vnchanged and wholy consonant with the Roman But now at last to come to our Neighbours the Britans whom we haue proued before to haue been conuerted in the Apostles times concerning them I wil only declare two things First that the Faith which at first they receaued they kept for six hundred yeares euen vntil the comming of S. Augustin into England vnchanged and the same in al matters of weight and substance The Second that the Faith and Religion which S. Augustin taught in England and which is formerly confessed to haue been altogether Catholick or Romish was the self same Faith and Religion which the Britans beleeued and professed some Ceremonies excepted Now as touching the First M. (43) Pageant of Popes Cent. 1. c. 70. Bale confesseth that The Brittans being conuerted by Ioseph of Arimathia held that Faith at Austins comming And (44) Cent. 1. c. 90. There was alwayes amongst the Brittans preaching of Truth most sure Doctrine and such Worship as was by Gods commandment giuen of the Apostles to the Churches wherupon he calleth the then Brittan Church (45) Cent. 1. c. 73. the true Church of Christ D. Fulk (46) Answ to a Counterf Cath. p. 49. affirmeth that The Brittans before Austins comming continued in the Faith of Christ euen from the Apostles times yea he calleth the Brittans of S. Austins time (47) In 2. Cor. 12.12 Catholicks c. with whom Christian Religion had continued in Succession since the Apostles time M. Fox (48) Act. Mon. p. 463. auoucheth that The Brittans after the receiuing of the Faith neuer forsook it for anie manner of false preaching of other nor for torments and that (49) In his Protestat Religion remained in the Brittans vncorrupt and the Word of Christ truly preached til the comming of S. Austin But M. Midleton (50) Papisto-mastix p. 202. confirmeth this poynt further by succeeding testimonies of the
ancient Fathers almost in euerie Age before that in which Gregorie liued saying The Religion cleerly taught in the Word of God brought hither first by Simon Zelotes Niceph. l. 2. c. 4. Ioseph of Arimathia Gildâ—s S. Paul the Apostle Theodoret de Curand Graec. affect l. 9. al or some of them was watred stil on in the dayes of Tertullian l. cont Iudaeos Origen in Ezech. hom 4. Athanasius Apol. 2. Hilarie l. de Synod cont Arian Chysostom hom quod Christus sit Deus Theodoret Hist l. 1. c. 10. l. 4. c. 3. Al which Ancient Fathers speak honourably of the Church Religion and Prelates of Brittanie So exceeding far were the Brittans from being changed in their Religion before the time when S. Augustin came into England Therfore to come to the second and mayne point which is the true harmonie and agreement between the Apostolick Faith of the Brittans and the Catholick Roman Faith of S. Augustin D. Morton labouring purposely to shew (51) Prot. Appeal p. 75. what and of how great importance the differences were between the Brittan Bishops and the Church of Rome at Austins comming can only instance in the difference of Ceremonies or ministring of Baptisme in keeping of Easter and in denial of Subiection vnto Austin which though he much endeauour to proue to be matters of great importance yet if they be considered in themselues and without pertinacie in the Defenders they may with M. Brierlie most truly be sayd to be few and smal points And the more if they should once be compared with our other Roman Articles of Real Presence Adoration of the Sacrament Masse Confession Freewil Merit c. In anie one wherof D. Morton was not able to giue the least Instance of difference between the foresayd Brittans and S. Austin Wherfore to proceed in this same poynt It is reported by Hollinshead out of S. Bede hist. l. 2. c. 2 that S. Austin by the help of King Edilbert obtayned a meeting with the Brittish Bishops and Doctours where he sayd vnto them (52) Beda hist l. 2. c. 2. Hollinsh vol. 1. p. 103. Godwine in his Catalogue of Bish. p. 6. If you wil obey me in these three things That you wil celebrate Easter at the due time That you wil minister Baptisme wherwith wee are borne againe to God according to the custome of the Roman and Apostolick Church That you wil preach with vs the Word of God to the Nation of the English Al other things which you doe though they be contrarie to our customes we wil peaceably suffer In like sort sayth the (53) l. 3. c. 13. p. 133. Authour of the Historie of Great Brittanie The Brittan Bishops conformed themselues to the doctrine and Ceremonies of the Church of Rome without difference in anie thing specially remembred saue only in the Celebration of the Feast of Easter c. (54) Ibid p. 219. And See CaÌ„bdens BritaÌ„ in English p. 578. And agayne when they perceaued the Saxons in some measure to approue it they began to make open Profession of it as seeming therin to agree euen with their Enemies the Saxons howsoeuer otherwise in respect of language situation or Law of Nations they were diuided Yea the (55) Beda hist l. 2. c. 2. Hollinsh vol. 1. p. 102. Brittan Bishops after conference had with S. Austin confessed that they vnderstood that it was the true way of iustice which Austin preached Wherupon as (56) Confut. of Purgat p. 335. D. Fulk acknowledgeth Saint Austin did at the last obtayne the ayde of the Brittish Bishops to the Conuersion of the Saxons (57) Catalogue of Bishops p. 11. Lastly D. Godwin writing of Theodore who was Archbishop of Canterburie some Fiftie or Sixtie yeares after S. Augustin auoucheth that vnto him al the Brittish Bishops and generally al Britanie yealded obedience and vnder him conformed themselues in al things vnto the Rites and discipline of the Church of Rome So euidently doth that Primitiue Faith of the Brittans in al most substantial poynts wholy agree with that Faith which S. Austin taught vs and which the Protestants haue fully acknowledged to be Catholick Roman or Popish And yet is the sayd Faith taught vs by S. Gregorie and S. Austin tearmed by (58) Chron. f. 161. D. Cowper the right beleefe And by (59) Act. Mon. p. 112. M. Fox the perfect Faith of Christ (60) Ibid. p. 124. and the true Faith of Christ And thus from the premisses it necessarily followeth that our present Roman Religion being so consonant or rather the same with that first Faith which the Indians Armenians Graecians and Brittans receiued from the Apostles themselues that therfore no lesse ancient or continuing is our Roman Religion then the Religion of the Apostles M. Brierly hauing produced diuers testimonies of Protestants in proof that the Indians Graecians and Armenians were conuerted to the Faith of Christ in the Apostles times as also that the remnant of Christian Religion which they yet preserue is Roman Catholick not Protestant M. Morton directing a large Reply hereto doth not so much as answer to any one of the foresayd testimonies of his Brethren Osiander excepted of whom he sayth (61) Prop. Appeal p. 79. We approue not Osianders censure c. concerning the Christians in Mount Libanus tearming them Popish for some flying speach But he may now aswel say we do not only not approue Osianders censure but neither the Censures and opinions of D. Philip Nicolai Gomarus Willamont Crispinus the Diuines of Wittemberg Cambden Harison Hollinshead Hal Clapham Fulk Marbeck Symondes Sandes Bale Foxe Midleton Godwine and Cowper al of them Protestants and yet al of them thus affording their helping hands for the proof of our agreement in Faith and Religion with the Doctrine deliuered by the Apostles themselues THE SECOND BOOKE WHERIN IS PROVED THROVGH AL THE CHIEF ARTICLES OF RELIGION AND THAT BY THE Confessions of Protestants that the same Faith Which is now taught by the Roman Church vvas anciently taught by the Primitiue Church of Christ THAT GENERAL COVNCELS DO TRVLY represent the Church of Christ And of the Credit and Authoritie giuen by Protestants to the sayd Councels CHAPTER I. AS in Politick gouernement our Parlament consisting of Prince Peeres Knights and Burgesses doth truly represent the whole Bodie of the Common-wealth and withal is endowed with ful power and authoritie to enact and establish Lawes which euerie particular Subiect is bound to obey and obserue So in gouernement Ecclesiastical a General Councel consisting of the Head of the Church the Bishops and Pastours doth truly represent vnto vs the whole Bodie of the Church itself and in like sort is enriched with plenarie power and vertue to create Decrees and Statutes which may bind the soules and consciences of euery particular member of the sayd Church To which purpose D. Whitaker confesseth expresly that (1) De Conciliis p. 1. 10. The Church is represented in a General
no period or difference of time wherin the Church of Christ hath more gloriously shined either for puritie of Faith or Sanctitie of life then during the time of her primitiue being which according to the accompt (1) Ievvel in his Sermon at Paules Crosse And in his Reply p. 1. Humfrey in vita Iuelli p. 123. 124. VvitaKer Resp ad Ranones Campiani p. 90. of the learnedst ProtestaÌ„ts extended itself to the ful tearme of the first six hundred years after Christ our Sauiour his glorious Ascension In greatest confidence wherof D. Iewel whom M. Mason (2) Consecration of English Bish. p. 267 styleth and esteemeth a Iewel made his so aduenturous a Challenge when he publickly exclaimed at Pauls Crosse O Gregorie O Austin O Hierom O Chrysostom O Leo O Denis O Anaclet O Calixt O Paul O Christ If we be deceaued you haue deceaued vs this you taught vs c. And As I sayd before so I say now againe I am content to yeald and subscribe if anie of our learned Aduersaries or if al the learned men that be aliue be able to bring anie one sufficient Sentence out of anie old Catholick Doctour or Father or out of anie old General Councel c. for the space of 600. yeares after Christ which maketh agaynst anie one of 27. Articles by him there repeated and defended And this he protested to preach not as carryed away with the heate of Zeale but as moued with the simple truth This proffer of D. Iewel was so pleasing to D. Whitaker that he most valiantly renewed it in behalf of al Protestants (3) Resp ad Rat. CaÌ„p p. 90. And see p. 9. saying to our glorious Martyr Campian Attend Campian the speach of Iewel was most true and constant when prouoking you to the Antiquitie of the first six hundred years he offered that if you could shew but anie one cleare and playne Saying out of anie one Father or Councel he would grant you the victorie It is the offer of vs al The same do we al promise and we wil performe it With like courage steppeth forth (4) Of the Church l. 5. in his Appendix therto Part. 1. p. 33. D. Field We say sayth he with Bishop Iewel in his worthie Challenge that al the learned Papists in the world can not proue that either Gregorie or Austin held anie of these twentie seauen Articles of Popish Religion mentioned by him Neither wil D. Morton yeald a foot herein stoutly auouching that (5) Prot. Appeal p. 354. It hath been the common and constant profession of al Protestants to stand vnto the Iudgement of Antiquitie for the continuance of the first foure hundred years and more in al things Yea he further publickly professeth that (6) Protest Appeale p. 573. 574. Protestants in oppugning Doctrines which they cal new and not Catholick c. are so far from suffring the limitation of the first 440. years that they giue the Romanists the scope of the first fiue hundred or six hundred years as our Aduersaries themselues do acknowledge For D. Stapleton writing of the opinion of Luther Caluin and Melancthon sayth that they did yeald vnto the tryal of truth by the testimonie of Antiquitie for the space of the first Fiue or Six hundred yeares M. Campian a Iesuit reporting the Challenge of Bishop Iewel for the mayntenance of these Articles which he then propounded for Catholik sayth that he appealed vnto the Iudgement of Antiquitie for the first six hundred years And againe (7) Ibid. p. 512 Protestants in the disquisition of truth do not absolutely bound the name of Antiquitie within the compasse of the first Centurie of years but are content to allow it a longer extent and therfore in al Doctrines which are truly Catholick c. they refuse not to be tryed by the testimonies of the ancient Fathers in the first fiue hundred years after Christ Yea (8) Ib. p. 680. we repose our securitie in those two impregnable fortresses of the Catholick Faith one is the ancient Tradition of the Primitiue Church as the Protestants are confessed to professe c. So willingly do the learned Protestants prouoke and appeale to the Primitiue Church of Christ for the certayne tryal of truth in matters of Faith and Religion Al which they pretend to do because as Luther sayth (9) Tom. 2. Germ. f. 243. Epist ad Marchionem Branâ—eburg It is dangerous and horrible to heare or beleeue anie thing which is contrarie to the vnanimous testimonie of Faith and to the doctrine of the holie and Catholick Church which she from the beginning agreably kept for aboue One thousand fiue hundred years And as Chemnitius truly obserueth (10) Exam. par 1. f. 74. No man doubteth but the Primitiue Church receaued from the Apostles and Apostolical men not only the Text of Scripture but also the right and natiue sense therof wherupon sayth he (11) Ibid. p. 64. we are greatly confirmed in the true and sound sense of Scripture by testimonie of the ancient Church Which according also to other Protestants (12) Harmonie of Confess p. 400. Is the true and best Mistresse of Posteritie and going before lâ—adeth vs the way Yea sayth D. Beard (13) Retractiue from Romish ReligioÌ„ p. 372 without al question al truth was taught by the Apostles to the Primitiue Church and no part therof was left vnreuealed c. Besides it is as certayn that that Church which next succeeded the Apostles was the most pure and absolute Church whether for doctrine or manners matter or forme that euer was in the world and therefore to degenerate from that must needs be to degenerate from the puritie and sanctitie of Religion And againe it can not be denyed that c. though the Primitiue Age of the Church after the Apostles was most pestered with Hereticks yet euermore the truth preuayled both in regard of birthright and predominance D. Morton Declareth that (14) Protestant Appeale p. 513. In the maine question of discerning the true bookes of holie Writ the Protestants do appeale c. vnto the IudgemeÌ„t of the Primitiue Church attributing vnto it the right and Authoritie of assigning and determining what is the perfect Canon of Scriptures With whom agreeth Chemnitius saying (15) Exam. part 1. p. 69. Andradius affirmeth that the testimonie of the Church is either alwayes to be reiected or alwayes to be receaued I answer c. where the Fathers set downe this Tradition of the books of Scripture they proue it by testimonies of the Primitiue Church if with the same course of certayntie they shal do the like of other Traditions wherof sometimes they make mention it is to be respected and they are to be receaued by the same law D. Sarauia confirmeth the authoritie of the Primitiue Church from her special assistance by the Holie-Ghost saying The (16) De diuersis Ministrorum Gradibus p. 8. Holie-Ghost who gouerneth the Church is the best interpreter
of Scriptures from him therfore is the true interpretation to be sought and seing he can not be contrarie to himself who ruled the Primitiue Church and gouerned it by Bishops it is not agreable to truth now to cast them off D. Iewel acknowledgeth in general that (17) Def. of the Apologie p. 35. The Primitiue Church which was vnder the Apostles and Martyrs hath euermore been accounted the purest of al others without exception D. White testifieth that (18) way to the Church Ep. Dedic nu 8 The Primitiue Church and al the Doctours therof would neuer yeald I wil not say in an opinion but not so much as in a forme of speach or in the change of a letter sounding against the Orthodoxal Faith wherof he further giueth sundrie pertinent examples concluding that So religious were they that had Religion that they would not exchange a letter or a Syllable of the Faith wherwith our Sauiour had put them in trust And in another place he auoucheth that (19) Ibid. p. 385. In the first six hundred yeares there was no substantial or fundamental innouation receiued into the Church So plentifully are the deseruedst prayses of the Primitiue Church during the first six hundred yeares freely giuen and set forth by our greatest Protestants thus much acknowledging and admiring the puritie of her Doctrine and appealing to her Tribunal for the Determination of their doubts And I can not but here admire the potent force violence of truth which racketh from her deadliest Enemies the true Confession thereof For what Church during those primitiue and purest times was euen in the iudgement of Protestants so faithful so chast so constant in soundnes of Faith and sinceritie of manners as the Catholick Roman Church What Bishops euer so renowned either for feeding of their flocks or for patient suffring of so manie and so cruel torments yea and death it self as the Popes and Bishops of Rome (20) Ep. Ded. of F. Persons in his Ansvv to him Doth not Sir Ed. Cooke himself say We do not deny but that Rome was the Mother Church and had thirtie two Virginal Martyrs of her Popes arow What Doctours what Fathers what Pastours more duly honoured by al Posteritie then such as were strictly linked in Faith and Communion with the then Roman Church D. Whitaker being to answer D. Sanders his truest assertion that the Roman Church was not changed during the first six hundred yeares after Christ through clearest euidence of truth acknowledgeth the same saying (21) l. De Antichrist p. 35. c. During al that time the Church was pure and flourishing and inuiolably taught and defended the Faith deliuered from the Apostles D. Iewel confesseth that (22) Reply to Harding p. 246. Aswel S. Austin as also other godlie Fathers rightly yealded Reuerence to the Sea of Rome c. for the puritie of Religion which was there preserued along time without spot And that The Godlie Fathers of those gray-headed times sought to the Church of Rome which then for puritie in Religion and constancie in the same was most famous aboue al others Sundrie other such like testimonies duely dignifying the ancient Roman Church I willingly pretermit hauing treated elsewhere of the same subiect more at large But who likewise more peremptorily pretend the truest harmonie between their Doctrine and the Doctrine of the ancient Fathers as also the iust defence and patronage of their due credit and esteeme then our Moderne Protestants For to omit D. Iewels former complaint that if Protestants be deceaued it was Gregorie Austin Hierom Chrysostom c. that deceaued them not anie one Sentence in anie one Father or Councel of the first six hundred yeares making in his opinion against Protestancie D. Sutcliffe confidently auoucheth that (23) Examination of Kellisons Suruey p. 17. The Fathers in al poynts of Faith are for vs sayth he and not for the Pope D. Willet maketh his solemne Protestation (24) Antilog p. 263. I take God to witnes before whom I must render accompt c. that the same Faith and Religion which I defend is taught and confirmed in the more Substantial Points by those Histories Councels and Fathers that liued within fiue or six hundred yeares after Christ. And againe (25) Ib. p. 264. It is most notoriously euident that for the grossest poynts of Poperie as Transubstantiation Sacrifice of the Masse Worshipping of Images Iustification by workes the Supremacie of the Pope Prohibition of Mariage and such other they to wit the Papists haue no shew at al of anie euidence from the Fathers within fiue hundred yeares after Christ. Pierre de Moulin a French Protestāt is so vndertaking herein that (26) Defenc. against Coefteau p. 139. In this Challenge sayth he I wil lay downe my Ministers cloake readie to be frocked in a Monks Cowle if I shal find a man that wil satisfy me in this point Melancthon sayth (27) Ep. ad Cratonem for the setling of our minds I think the consent of Antiquitie to be of great force c. The best Maisters and guides to vs may be Ireneus Tertullian Augustin who left to Posteritie manie things of this kind And (28) Epist. ad Frider. Miconium As I willingly aduise with such writers liuing as haue some vse of Spiritual things So I think these Ancients whose writings are approued are likewise to be consulted For I think the Church generally beleeued that which they haue writen And it is not secure to depart from the common opinion of the old Church Yea others tearme it in some of their Brethren Paradoxical to disclayme and dissent from the ancient Fathers wherof one sayth (29) The Authour of a Brief Answ to certaine obiect ag the Descension of christ into Hel. p 1. where you say we must build our Faith on the Word of Faith tying vs to Scripture only you giue iust occasion to think that you neither haue the ancient Fathers of Christs Church nor their Sonnes succeding them agreeing with you in this point which implyeth a defence of some strange Paradox D. Bancroft doubteth not to preferre the ancient Fathers before the learnedst Protestants (30) Suruey p. 378. p. 64. For M. Caluin and M. Beza I do think of them sayth he as their writings deserue but yet I think better of the ancient Fathers I must confesse it Yea he purposely vndertaketh their iust defence against the Puritans for where S. Austin sayd to Iulian the Pelagian (31) Contra Iulian. l. 2. c. 10 Truly I haue what to do I haue whither to fly for I may prouoke from these Pelagian darknes to these so cleare Catholick Lights of the Fathers which I now do But tel me what wilt thou do whither wilt thou fly I from the Pelagians to these thou from these to whom c. But thou darest cal them blind And hath time so confounded lowest things with highest Are darknes called light and light darknes
that Pelagius Celestius Iulianus al of them Hereticks do see and Hilarie Gregorie Ambrose c. are blind This so worthie a Saying of S. Austin being alleaged against the Puritans by D. Bancroft he therupon inferreth (32) Suruey p. 352. 353. 351. Surely I do not perceiue why I may not without offence apply the same wordes to those men in those dayes c. Were there neuer learned men before you were taught the Principles of the Geneua Discipline c. Do you know what was in the Apostles times better then they who succeded the Apostles c. Is the light that shewed it self so manie wayes in the Ancient Fathers become such darknes that Carthwright Trauerse Fenner to whom I might as truly adde Luther Zuinglius Caluin Beza c. and such like should be thought so clearlie-sighted And shal Ireneus Tertulian Cyprian Ambrose Hierom Chrysostom Austin Gregorie Hilarie and al the rest of those whorthie men be reckned blind So cleerly doth D. Bancroft the Protestant late Primate of England acknowledge the shining light and glorie of the ancient Fathers and defend their authoritie from the imputations of Nouelists D. Morton ioyfully acknowledgeth (33) Prot. Appeal p. 33. That the ancient Fathers c. did obtayne in the Church of Christ honourable Titles as Augustin the great Mall or hammer against Hereticks Basil the light of the world Chrysostome The Doctour of the whole world Athanasius the Pillar as it were of the Church Nazianzene by a phrase of excellencie the Diuine Origen the Maister of the churches Cyprian the President of the whole world And lastly Ambrose A man called by God vnto an Apostolical Presidencie Now as for the Confidence which Catholicks place in the ancient Fathers D. Morton testifyeth for vs that (34) Ib. p 348 Neuer did the ancient Iewes more boast of their original and descent from father Abraham then do the Romanists glory in their pretended consent of ancient Fathers And though it be true that the ancient Fathers were men yet (35) Eccl. Pol. p. 115. The strength of mans Authoritie in M. Hookers iudgement is affirmatiuely such that the weightiest affaires in the world depend therupon Yea (36) Ib. p. 116. whatsoeuer we beleeue concerning saluation by Christ although the Scripture be therin the ground of our beleef yet is mans Authoritie sayth he the key that openeth the doore c. The Scripture could not teach vs these things vnles we beleeued men And wheras the sacred Scriptures do foretel sundrie things to be performed by the Church of Christ in succeeding Ages the answerable accomplishment therof in particular being matter of fact can be to vs at this day no otherwise made knowne then vpon the Credit of humane Testimonie commended to vs by Ecclesiastical Histories In which respect D. Whitaker truly teacheth that (37) Cont. Duraeum l. 7. p. 472. Historie plainly testifyeth al that to be accomplished which the ancient Prophets haue foretold concerning the Propagation amplitude and glorie of the Church So that there is no doubt sayth he but that Ecclesiastical Historie doth strengthen the Predictions of the Prophets Now from the Premisses we may briefly remember that not only al Catholicks but euen the Primest ProtestaÌ„ts that euer were do thus willingly appeale for the decision of Controuersies in Faith and Religion to the Censure and Determination of the Church of Christ which for the first six hundred yeares was confessedly sincere holie and religious Acknowledging withal the integritie and puritie of the Roman Church during the sayd time and professing to beleeue and teach no other Faith and religion then that which was taught and beleeued by the ancient Fathers of the same Church This then supposed I wil now descend in particular to the chiefest articles of Faith disputed at this day between Catholicks and Protestants And wil only examine whether the Roman or Protestant Church is now more agreable with the confessed Faith and Religion of the Fathers of the Primitiue Church in the foresayd poynts And for the cleerest preuenting of the manifold shiftes and euasions vsed by ProtestaÌ„ts when they are vrged in this kind I wil only produce such proofe from the Primitiue Church and Fathers as is recorded and confessed by Protestants and by them disliked and reiected as agreeing with our Roman Faith and condemning Protestancie THAT THE FATHERS AND DOCTOVRS OF the Primitiue Church beleeued and taught that S. Peter was ordayned by Christ the Head of the Apostles and of the whole Church and that the Church was founded vpon S. Peter it is Confessed by Protestants themselues CHAPTER III. BEcause the deciding of this present Controuersie of the Churches Primacie is indeed the speediest and most certaine meanes for the final dissoluing of al doubts in Religion either already begun or hereafter to arise I wil therfore more particularly and at large set downe the manifest and confessed Doctrine and practice of the Primitiue Church concerning the same And first as al gouernment whether Politick or Ecclesiastical the more it reseÌ„bleth the gouernment of this world by the Creatour therof ONE GOD or the gouernment of the Church during our Sauiours aboad vpon earth by ONE CHRIST the more it is to be approued coÌ„mended and followed so nothing is holden more Soueraigne or more needful for the procuring or preseruing of vnitie and concord in anie Bodie or Communitie then the vnitie of one Head or gouernment Monarchical Herevpon the (1) Bel. de Rom. Pont l. 1. c. 10. l. 2. c 12. Catholick Church doth beleeue and teach That S. Peter was ordayned by Christ the Supreme Ecclesiastical Head not only ouer the rest of the Apostles but euen ouer the whole Church And that the Bishop of Rome succeedeth him in the same Power and Authoritie The direct (2) Luther l de Potestate Papae in assertione Art 25. Calu. l. 4 Instit c 6. Morton in his Appeale l. 2. c. 5. Sect. 11. Negatiue wherof is not only taught by the Protestant-Church but withal it further beleeueth maintayneth that the Bâ—shop of Rome in steed of being the true Successour of S. Peter and the Vicar of Christ is the true Antichrist or Man of Sinne wherof so much is foretold in the sacred Scriptures To discouer now the Faith and practise of the Primitiue Church and to begin with the confessed Primacie of S. Peter And first that for the preseruing of vnitie and preuenting of Schismes he was appoynted by Christ the Supreme Head of that slender Bodie or litle Church of the twelue Apostles Wheras S. Hierom l. 1. cont Iouinianum teacheth that Amongst the Twelue one is chosen that a Head appoynted the occasion of Schisme should be taken away From hence (3) In his Examination c. against the Plea of the Innocent p. 106. 107. D. Couel hauing spoken of the necessitie of One aboue the rest to suppresse the seed of dissention thus argueth most strongly If this were the Principal
to haue been built or founded vpon Peter and in this regard Peters Sea to haue been preferred before the Seas of al other Patriarcks do herein but symbolize with the ancient Fathers Gregorie Leo Optatus Hierom Hilarie Origen Cyprian Tertullian Dionysius Areopagita and the other Fathers in general who are here produced and reproued in these respects by the Protestant Writers the Centurists Caluin Danaeus Brightman Fulk Field Couel and Raynolds IT IS CONFESSED BY PROTESTANTS that the Fathers of the Primitiue Church beleeued and taught the Bishop of Rome to Succeed S. Peter in the Primacie of the whole Church CHAPTER IV. HAuing hitherto proued the Primacie of S. Peter ouer the whole Church the next point to be considered is whether the sayd Primacie not being personally tyed to him as to dye with him but rather being to suruiue and continue in his Successours to the Churches good euen to the end of the world whether I say the sayd Primacie is deriued to the Bishop of Rome as the Successour of S. Peter And herein D. Bilson (1) In his true difference c. part 1. p. 147. confesseth most playnly and in general that The Ancient and Learned Fathers cal the Roman Bishop Peters Successour The Centurists (2) Cent. 5. col 1262. charge S. Leo that He painfully goeth about to proue that singular preheminence was giuen to Peter aboue the other Apostles and that thence rose the Primacie of the Roman Church And the like is confessed of S. Leo by D. Raynolds (3) In his conference p. 42. 43. who further granteth that (4) Conference p. 218. 219. The Fathers say Peter was Bishop of Rome naming Hierom Eusebius Ireneus And (5) Chron. D. Cowper calleth Linus first Bishop of Rome after Peter Osiander (6) Cent. 4. p. 294. speaking of the ancient Councel of Sardis decreing Appeales to Rome professeth to deliuer the then common opinion and reason therof saying It was the ancient common and receaued errour that Peter was the first Bishop of Rome therefore this honour was thought due to the Successour of Peter according to the common opinion c. Bucer (7) In Praeparatorijs ad Concilium sayth We plainly confesse that among the ancient Fathers the Roman Church obtayned Primacie aboue others as that which hath the Chaire of S. Peter and whose Bishops haue almost alwayes been accounted the Successours of Peter Yea the ancient Fathers were so confident herein that they taught the Primacie of the Roman Bishop to be the ordinance of Christ himself and not anie Humane or Ecclesiastical Institution So Gelasius In Decretis cum 70. Episcopis teaching that The Roman Church is preferred before the other Churches not by anie Synodical Constitutions but hath obtayned the Primacie by the Euangelical voyce of our Lord saying Thou art Peter and vpon this Rock I wil build my Church The (8) Cent. 5. col 1274. Centurists hereupon inferre and confesse that Gelasius contended that the Roman Church by the law of God was the First or Chief of al Churches In like sort (9) De Regno Christi l. 2. p. 149. Philippus Nicolai granteth that Pope Iulius who liued Anno. 370. as Socrates and Sozomene relate sent Letters to the Eastern Churches in which as the Letters witnesse he often declareth the right of calling General Councels to belong to him alone who by singular Priuiledge euen by Gods ordinance is the Prelate of the first Sea c. to wit the Roman This Diuine ordinance was so beleeued reuerenced and obeyed by the Fathers of the Primitiue Church as that nothing is more manifest in al their writings or other histories and Records of Antiquitie nor more fully acknowledged and disliked by the greatest Enemies therof the Protestant Writers And to begin with S. Gregorie whom M. Bale (10) In Act. Rom. Pont. p. 44. styleth Gregorie the Great of al the Roman Patriarks the most excellent in life and learning This so excellent a Patriark is charged out of his owne writings by the Centurists (11) Cent. 6. col 425. 426. 427. 428. 429. 430 431. 432. c. with clayme and exercise of Iurisdiction and Primacie ouer al Churches Carion (12) Chron. l. 4. p 567 568. affirmeth that Though he tragically declaymeth himself to abhorre the name of Vniuersal Bishop yet indeed he sheweth himself earnestly to desire that which the Title importeth And Peter (13) In Cap. 8. Iudicum And see the liKe in Philippus Nicolai De Regno Christi l. 2. p. 66. Martyr in this scoffing manner reprehendeth him saying This litle Saint Gregorie would haue the thing it self of Vniuersal Bishop although he streightned the name and Title For as the Histories of those times teach and his owne Epistles witnesse he did not abstayne from gouerning other Churches M. Bale (14) In his Image of both Churches fol. 11. See Bullinger in 2. Thess 2. p. 531. And Melancton in Ep. Ad Rom. p. 405. q. 2. p. 17. acknowledgeth that Iohn of Constantinople contended with Gregorie of Rome for the Supremacie in which contention Gregorie layd for himself S. Peters keyes with manie other sore arguments and reasons The Protestant Authour 15 of Catholick Traditions reporteth that Maurice the Emperour would haue taken away the Primacie from Gregorie Bishop of Rome and giuen it to Iohn Bishop of Constātinople c. Gregorie did oppose himselfe against him least he should loose his place vrging how insolent that Title was The Centurists (16) Cent. 6. col 425 confesse that Gregorie vpon the fourth Penitential Psalme greatly inueigheth against the Emperour who challenged to himself the Roman Church being the Head of al Churches and would make her a seruant being the Mistresse of Nations Christ also saying I wil giue to thee the Keyes And (17) Cent. 6. col 425. Gregorie glorieth that the Emperour and Eusebius his fellow-fellow-Bishop of Constantinople do both of them acknowledge that the Church of Constantinople is subiect to the Apostolick Sea Yet the Magdeburgians do further charge S. Gregorie and by collection out of his owne writings by them particularly alleadged that (18) Cent. 6. col 426. He challenged to himself power to command Archbishops to ordayne or depose Bishops at his pleasure And (19) Cent. 6. col 427. tooke vpon him right to cite Archbishops to declare their cause before him when they were accused And also (20) col 427. to Excommunicate and Depose them Giuing (21) col 428 Commission to theyr Neighbour Bishops to proceed against them That (22) col 428. 401 In theyr Prouinces he placed his Legats to know and end the causes of such as appealed to the Roman sea That (23) col 428. He vsurped power of appoynting Synods in theyr Prouinces (24) col 429. And see more col 430. 432. 433. 434. 435. 436. 437. 438. And required other Archbishops that if anie cause of greater importance fel out they should referre the
And that (48) Ib. p. 550. Popes namely Innocent Leo Gelasius Vigilius Gregorie taught that the Fathers by the Sentence of God decreed that whatsoeuer was done in Prouinces far of should not be concluded before it came to the notice of the Sea of Rome And this they say al churches took their beginning from the Roman that al Bishops had their honour from Peter And herewith he confesseth that in those times Popes (49) Ibid. p. 540. were learned and Catholicks and were (50) Ibid. p. 552. 554. 555. sued vnto by S. Basil S. Chrysostom and S. Austin and the African Bishops sought vnto them for their aduise and counsel for their authoritie and credit To come to S. Leo for whom (51) of the Church l. 5. p. 284. D. Field speaking of this verie poynt profereth thus largely Surely if they can shew that Leo sayth anie such thing as the former Popes are taught to say we wil most willingly listen to them for we acknowledge Leo to haue been a most worthie Bishop and the things that go vnder his name to be his indubitate workes And M. Mason (52) Consecration of Engli Bishops p. 115. tearmeth him Pope Leo a holie and learned Pope Now for D. Fields and al other Protestants further satisfaction in this poynt I wil but only recite what other Protestant Writers acknowledge and censure of that most worthie Bishop Leo. (53) In Confess Geneu c. 7. sect 12. Beza affirmeth that It is manifest that Leo in his Epistles doth cleerly breath-forth the arrogancie of the Antichristian Roman Sea (54) In his Conference vvith Hart. p. 50. D. Raynolds writeth I do freely professe that I mislike those haughtie speaches in Leo and I think that the Mysterie of iniquitie so wrought through his so ambitious aduancing Peter that c. (55) De Conciliis contra Bellarm p. 37. D. Whitakers censure is As for Leo the First I litle care he was a great Architect of the Antichristian kingdome And yet this notwithstanding the same (56) Ibid. p. 34. D. Whitaker acknowledgeth that Leo was a learned and godly Bishop but yet sayth he ouer ambitious The (57) Cent. 5. col 1013. Centurists report how that Theodoret a Greek Father being deposed by the Second Councel of Ephesus did make his appeale to Pope Leo and that thereupon the most godlie Leo restored to Theodoret his Bishoprick They likewise (58) Cent. 5. col 778. confesse that Leo confirmed Maximus Bishop of Antiochia in his Bishoprick and established to Proâ—erius Bishop of Alexandria the ancient rights of that Sea according to the Canons and Priuiledges as is shewed in the 68. and 69. Epistle of Leo. And they affirme (59) Cent. 5. col 779. that the Popes of those times took vnto themselues power to excommunicate other Archbishops and Churches So Leo excommunicated the Eastern Bishops and Foelix Acacius Gelasius condemned Acatius and Peter sending letters into the East And that (60) Cent. 5. col 780. They endeauoured to challenge that Authoritie ouer Archbishops that if they did anie thing they should be thought to do it by Authoritie of the Roman Bishop as though they were his seruants and slaues So Leo Epist 84. sheweth that the Bishops of Thessalonica alwayes supplyed the place of the Apostolick sea and he admonished Anastasius then their Bishop that in remote Prouinces in some sort he should visit himself and decree nothing but what he knew would be approued by him Also They (61) Cent. 5. col 779. dared to exact of Archbishops that if there were anie thing they could not determine by their owne Iudgments they should referre it to them So Leo epist 84. prescribeth this law to the Bishop of Thessalonica In like sort they (62) Cent. 5. col 781. assumed to themselues power to cal General Councels as appeareth in the 93. epist of Leo c. And they reiected as vnlawful such Synods as were assembled without their Authoritie c. Leo sent Paschasius Bishop of Sicilie to be President in the Councel of Chalcedon And (63) Col. 782 The Fathers often for honour sake desired theyr Decrees to be confirmed by them So the Councel of Chalcedon writeth to Leo we desire that thou wilt honour our Iudgement with thy Decrees and as we desirous of good haue agreed so thy Height or greatnes may fulfil in thy sonnes what is fitting And yet D. Raynolds confesseth of this Councel (64) Conf. p. 563. that it 67 was a companie of 630. Bishops sound in Religion and Zealous of the glorie of God affirming further that the sayd Councel (68) Ib. p. 562 named Pope Leo their Head and that he was President of the Councel But to conclude this of Leo wherin for D. Fields further satisfaction I haue been the larger it is playnly confessed by the Centurists (69) Cent. 5. col 12. 62. that Leo verie paynfully goeth about to proue that singular preheminence was giuen to Peter aboue the other Apostles and that thence rose the Primacie of the Roman Church For which verie cause D. Morton chargeth S. Leo to haue been (70) Prot. Appeal l. 2. p. 283. 285. Peremptorie c. and ambitious As for Pope Leo (71) Prot. Appeal l. 2. p. 294. 295. sayth he he was so peremptorie that for his presumption he found in his time some Brotherlie checks To proceed Prosper de ingratis c. 2. affirming Rome to be the seat of Peter and the Head of Pastoral Honour ouer the world is censured for the same by (72) Resp ad Bellar. par 1. p. 594. Danaeus to be the Popes flatterer In like sort Vincentius aduersus Haer. is charged (73) Ibid. p. 313. by him to haue plainly flattered the Pope of Rome when he tearmed S. Faelix and S. Iulius Bishops of Rome to be the Head of the world and S. Cyprian and S. Amhrose the Sides But to passe to others the (74) Cent. 5. col 778. Centurists affirme that Gelasius in his epistle to Faustus doth impudently lye affirming that it is established in the Canons that Appeales of the whole Church should be brought to the Examen of the Roman Sea and from her in no place Appeale should be made And agayne (75) Cent. 5. col 780. Gelasius in his epistle to the Dardanians affirmeth that he hath giuen the charge of the Church of Alexandria to Acacius of Constantinople and therefore that he ought to relate al things vnto him Yea (76) Cent. 5. col 779. they further confesse that Gelasius in the Tome of Excommunications denyeth that Peter of Alexandria Bishop of the second Sea can be absolued by anie then the Bishop of the first Sea to wit the Roman As also (77) Cent. 5. col 1274. M. Symondes vpoÌ„ the Reuel c. 5. p. 58. Gelasius held that Councels are subiect to the Pope and that al should appeale to him but none from him They (78) Cent. 5.
from a Partie in his owne cause And M. Carthwright (97) In his 2. Reply part 1. p. 501. auoucheth that Iulius Bishop of Rome at the Councel of Antioch outreached in claiming the hearing of causes that appertayned not to him The (98) Cent. 4. col 529. Centurists confesse that The Roman Bishops made a Law that they might command al things first to be written to them as appeareth by the Epistle of Iulius in Athasius Apologia secunda For Iulius sayth Are you ignorant this to be the custome that first we be written vnto c. (99) Vpon the Reuel c. 5. p. 53. And see Mornay of the Church in English p. 264. M. Symonides testifyeâ—h that Iulius decreed that whosoeuer suspected his Iudge might appeale to the Sea of Rome In so much that wheras the Arians had expelled Athanasius Bâ—shop of Alexandria Paulus Bishop of Constantinople and diuers other Catholick Bishops of the East Church it is (100) Cent. 4. col 530. testifyed that Iulius commanded the Arians to come to Rome and appoynted also a day to Athanasius Theodoret. l. 2. c. 4. c. where hearing euerie mans accusations and (101) Cent. 4. col 550. complâ—ynt He restored euerie one of these wronged Bishops to his owne place or Bishoprick and that not by intreatie or arbitrably but as the (102) Cent. 4. col 550. 530 Centurists confesse by Prerogatiue of the Roman Sea Al which might as ye be made much more euident by Iulius his vndoubted Epistle extant in Aâ—hanasius his second Apologie and alledged by the Centurists (103) Cent. 4. col 735. who mention their (104) col 737 742. Citation euen vnto Iudgement (105) col 739. 740. and at a certayne day and greatly reprehending this (106) col 529 And see D. field of the Church l 5. p. 178. Saying of Iulius Are ye ignorant this to be the custome that first we be written vnto that from hence that which is right may be defined c. for what we haue receaued froÌ„ the blessed Apostle Peter that I signify vnto you To coÌ„clude this of Pope Iulius Doctour Philippus Nicolai (107) De Regno Christi l. 2. p. 149. auoucheth that Pope Iulius as Socrates and Sozomene relate sent letters to the Eastern Bishops in which as the letters witnes he often affirmeth the right of calling general Councels by a certain singular Priuiledge euen by Diuine Precept to belong to himself alone who as he sayth is the Prelate of the first Sea He also affirmeth that it no lesse appertayneth vnto him being the Bishop of that Cittie that he be acquaynted with the affaires of Bishops and other waightie businesses of that kind After the same manner and with like ambition Damasus c. and afterwards Innocentius c. Thus far the Protestant Philippus To whom I wil only adde M. Fox confessing that (108) Act. Mon. l. 1. p. 1. The Church of Rome in al those Ages aboue specifyed from the Apostles challenged to it self the Title and ring-leading of the whole vniuersal Church on earth by whose direction al other Churches haue been gouerned And (109) Ibid. p. 8. whatsoeuer was done in other places coÌ„monly the manner was to write to the Roman Bishop for his approbation The testimonie of the Roman Bishop was sometimes wont to be desired in those dayes of Pope Iulius for admitting Bishops in other Churches wherof we haue examples in Socrates l. 4. c. 37. when Bishops of anie other Prouinces were at anie dissension they appealed to the Bishop of Rome Neither was this only the priuate opinion of some particuler Popes of those times but it was the general receaued doctrine of other Bishops and Fathers In so much as the Councel of Sardis which M. Bel (110) In his Regiment of the Church p 158. tearmeth The famous and ancient Councel of Sardis coÌ„sisting of 300. Bishops and aboue assembled from Spaine (111) Cent. 4. col 747. Theodoret. hist. l 2. c. 8. FraÌ„ce Italie Greece AEgipt Thebais Palestine Arabia c. and most other parts of the Christian world wherat sundrie Fathers of the Nicene CouÌ„cel were (112) Carion in his Chron. p. 282. present (113) Cent. 4. col 764. decreed Appeales to the Bishop of Rome Insomuch as the (114) Ibid. Centurists and (115) Epitome p. 294. Osiander do both of them acknowledge and recite this 7. Canon of that Councel It hath seemed good to vs that if a Bishop be accused if the Bishops of the Prouince assembled togeather haue iudged the matter and haue depriued him if the Partie depriued do appeale and fly to the Bishop of Rome c. if the Partie accused desiring his cause to be heard once againe do intreate the Bishop of Rome to send Legats à latere suo from him it shal be in the power of the Bishop to do as he shal think good c. (116) Antich Disp bipart p. 31. sect 103. Tilenus speaking hereof auoucheth that The Decree of the CouÌ„cel of Sardis of Appealing to Rome made the Roman Bishop more bould And in regard of this Decree this so ancieÌ„t a Councel is much reproued (117) Instit l. 4. c. 7. sect 9. by Caluin (118) In his com places in English p. 4. p. 39. Peter Martyr (119) Palma Christiana p. 30. 122. 124. Frigiuilleus Gaunius and (120) Cent 4. p. 294. Osiander But to end this Centurie wherin our first Christian Emperour Constantin the Great liued ruled The Protest writer (121) Palma Christiana p. 35. Frigiuilleus Gaunius plainly confesseth that the sayd Constantin himself attributed Primacie to the Roman Bishop before al. that (122) Ibid p. 34. Therby it appeared to be fatal that CoÌ„staÌ„tin would giue power to the Beast which Pope Iulius forthwith put in practise for Constantin the Great carryed in his Ensignes the Dragon for his Armes c. so that he was the Dragon Apoc. 13.2 (123) Fidelis Relatio c. p. 19. Bibliander acknowledgeth that Constantin the Great raigning c. Siluester the Bishop of Rome began to lay the foundations of the Papistical Monarchie c. M. Bale hath almost the same words saying (124) Cent. 1. c. 36. In these times of CoÌ„stantin Syluester began to lay the foundation of the Popes Monarchie and finding the key of the depth he opened the pit if it be true which Papists write of him Yea al the Popes after Syluester to Bonif. 3. he tearmeth Mitred Bishops preparing by their CanoÌ„s and Decrees the seat for the great Antichrist The (125) Cent. 4. col 549. CeÌ„turists coÌ„fesse in general that In this age the Mysterie of iniquitie was not idle (126) Cent. 4â— col 550. And that The Bishop of Rome challenged by Ecclesiastical Canon the dissallowing of those Synods wherat they were absent So cleer it is that the Fathers Bishops and Councels of this Age agreed with vs Catholicks in the
doctrine practise of the Popes Primacie Now as cōcerning the Age next ensuing the 20. yeares after Christ in which persecution so raged as the Churches gouernment was thereby much the more obscured yet it is confessed (127) Cent 3. col 168. that Pope Stephen in this Age did threaten Excōmunicatiō to Helenus Firmilianus al others throughout Cilicia Cappadocia for rebaptizing Hereticks (128) Apocalypsis c. c. 7. p. 193 yea M. Brightman is of opinion that scarcely would anie beleeue those proud brags of the Roman Sea wherwith the Decretal Epistles abound not to haue been forged by succeding Popes and so falsely ascribed to the more ancient they are so impudent and vayne but that Firmilianus assureth they were theyr owne at least a great part of them whose names they beare for speaking of Stephen then Bishop of Rome who sayth he so braggeth of the place of his Bishoprick and contendeth himself to hold the Succession of Peter vpon whom the foundations of the Church were placed and he declareth abundantly how boasting the Bishops then were amongst the Epistles of Cyprian ep 75. The (129) Cent. 3. c. 7. col 168. Centurists confesse that Dionysius Bishop of Rome through the false accusation of some excommunicated Dionysius Bishop of Alexandria but Dionysius of Alexandria made his Apologie and refuted the errours falsely obiected vnto him as Athanasius reporteth Hereby appeareth not only the authoritie of the Bishop of Rome in excommunicating but also the obsequiousnes of the Bishop of Alexandria in not contemning but making his Apologie vnto him They (130) Cent. 3. col 84. likewise reproue S. Cyprian for teaching that There ought to be one Bishop in the Catholick Church And for his calling (131) Ibid. Peters Chayre the principal Church from whence Priestly vnitie ariseth (132) Vpon Iude p. 285. M. Trig reprehendeth S. Cyprian saying Cyprian giueth more priuiledges to the Roman Church he calleth it the chief Church from whence Priestlie vnitie began c. And to which infidelitie cannot haue accesse Wherupon M. Trig thus inferreth Here we may note what certaintie it is to build our Faith on the Fathers c And the (133) Cent. 3. col 84. And See Brightman in his Apocalypsis in c. 13. p. 343. Centurists charge him for teaching say they without anie foundation of Scripture that the Roman Church ought to be acknowledged of al other for the Mother and root of the Catholick Church Yea D. Morton (134) Prot. Appeal l. 2. p. 294. 295. professing willingly to admit S. Cyprians Iudgement as Vmpier in this controuersie is yet inforced to say Although the next sentences of S. Cyprian may seem at their first view vnto the vnexpert Reader to obserue in the Church of Rome both a grace of Impossibilitie of Erring and also a Prerogatiue of the Mother Church of al others and are therefore censured by our Centurists for speeches inconuenient Yet no man exercised and conuersant in his writings and other Fathers can be ignorant that such like speeches are but the languages of Rhetorical Amplification which commonly they vse by way of persuasion rather then by asseueration But what testimonie though neuer so cleer in anie matter whatsoeuer may not easily be euaded if it wil suffice to answer that it was but the language of Rhetorical Amplification or demy-lying Or for what cause should S. Cyprian and other Fathers vtter the foresayd Sayings by way of Persuasion in behalf of the Roman Churches Prerogatiues if they had thought in their owne Iudgements and Consciences that the sayd Prerogatiues had not been due vnto her So vndoubted it is that S. Cyprian and the other Fathers of his Age beleeued and acknowledged the Primacie of the Roman Church But as touching the Age next after the Apostles themselues wherof as M. Hutton (135) In his ansvver to the 2. par of the Reasons of Refusal to Subscription p. 105. obserueth but few Monuments are now remayning As then liued Pope Victor who in D. Whiteguifts (136) In his Defence c. p. 510. opinion was a godlie Bishop and Martyr and the Church at that time in great puritie And yet of him sayth D. Whitaker (137) Cont. Duraeum l. 7. p. 480. FulK in his Ansvv to a counterf Cath. p. 36. with D. Fulk The first that exercised Iurisdiction vpon forraine Bishops was Victor Insomuch as he excommunicating the Bishops of Asia for not obseruing the Feast of Easter-day according to the vse of the Latin Church D. Fulk (138) Ibid. chargeth him that He passed the bounds of his authoritie Amandus Polanus )139) In Sillog Thes Theol. p. 165 accuseth him to haue shewed a Papal mind and arrogancie And M. Spark (140) Against Iohn de Albines in his Answer to the Preface And see Osiander cent 2. p. 87. 96. affirmeth that somewhat Pope-like he exceeded his bounds when he took vpon him to excommunicate the Bishops of the East Beza (141) Pref. ad Princip Condensem before his Translation of the New Testament tearmeth Victor the most foolish and most ambitious Bishop of Rome And (142) Of the state of the Church p. 47 Crispinus speaking of this Age auoucheth that The Roman Bishops now became more audacious to forge new Ceremonies yea and to force vpon other Churches c. Victor in his 2. Decretal calleth himself Archbishop of the Roman and vniuersal Church D Fulk (143) Against the Rhem. Test in 2. Thess 2. sec 9. p. 659. maketh the Mysterie of iniquitie to work in Peters Sea in the times of Anicetus Victor and Cornelius In like sort D. Morton iustifyeth such Protestant Authors as (144) Prot. Appeal l. 2. p. 300. reprehend Victor for arrogancie and transgressing the bounds of his Iurisdiction in excommunicating the Churches of Asia c. The Centurists record that (145) Cent. 2. c. 7. col 159. Anacletus in the Epistles which heare his name in the general regiment of Churches so loyneth them togeather that to the Roman Church he attributeth Primacie and excellencie of power ouer al Churches and ouer the whole flock of the Christian People and that by the authoritie of Christ saying to Peter Thou art Peter and vpon this Rock wil I build my Church c. The Bishop of Rome is placed first as the supreame Head of the Church who though he erre yet wil he not haue him to be iudged of others c. He sayth also that certaine Citties receaued Primates from the Blessed Apostles and from S. Clement c. He prescribeth that If greater difficulties arise or causes fal out among the Bishops and Primates themselues let them be brought to the Sea Apostolick if such Appeale be made for so the Apostles ordayned by the appoyntment of our Sauiour that the greater and harder questiōs should alwayes be brought to the Apostolick Sea vpon which Christ built his vniuersal Church Math. 16. In like sort they say of Xistus that In
his 2 Epistle he nameth himself the Bishop of the vniuersal Apostolick Church And willeth others to appeale to the Apostolick Sea as to the Head Whereby it is euident that the ancient Popes Victor Anacletus Xistus and our Gregorie xv do wholy agree in their due clayme of Primacie In like māner holie Ireneus who according to Hamelmanus (146) De Traditionibus col 528. might yet remember the Apostles owne liuelie preaching affirming l. 3. c. 3. that It is necessary that al Churches do accord to the Roman Church in regard of a more powerable principalitie is charged for the same by the Centurists (147) In the Alphabetical Table of the 2. Cent. at the word Ireneus with a corrupt Saying concerning the Primacie of the Roman Church But to arise yet euen to the times of the blessed Apostles themselues wheras Papias as appeareth by the testimonie of Ireneus alleadged by the Centurists (148) Cent. 2 col 172. liued in the Apostles time as D. Fulk (149) In his Answ to A Counterf Cath. p 35. confesseth was Schollar to S. Iohn yet doth M. Midleton (150) Papisto-Mastix p. 200. charge him saying Papias was the first Father and Founder of Traditions and Peters Primacie or Romish Episcopalitie (151) De Scrip. Auth. l. 2. c. 20. fol. 166. Bullinger reporteth that forthwith from the verie times of the Apostles especially from the gouernment of Constantin the Great vnder whom some say the first poysen was powred into the Church the desire of gouerning was often put in practise by certain Roman Bishops c. D. Downeham (152) Antichristi l. 2. c. 8. p. 79. acknowledgeth though not the then open Exercise of the Popes vniuersal Dominion yet the priuate Doctrine therof saying The Antichrist which is to be destroyed at the second coming of Christ was come euen in the Apostles time although he was not reuealed by exercising openly a Soueraigne and vniuersal Dominion M. Midleton (153) Papisto-mastix p. 193. affirmeth confidently that we are sure that the Mysterie of iniquitie did work in Pauls time and fel not a-sleep so soone as Paul was dead waking againe six hundred yeares after when this Mysterie was disclosed c. And therefore no maruaile though perusing Councels Fathers and Stories from the Apostles foreward we find the print of the Popes feet c. But Philippus (154) De Regno Christi p. 221. Nicolai vndertaking to speak of the beginning and increase of the Popes Dignitie auoucheth yet further that The desire of Primacie was the common Infirmitie of the Apostles (155) Catal. Testium veritatis Tom. 1. p. 27. and of the first Bishops of the Cittie of Rome Yea some Protestants doubt not to deriue from S. Peter himself as being the prognosticon or type therof the confessed clayme of his Successours the Bishops of Rome saying to this purpose It can not be denyed but that Peter sometimes was subiect to ambition and desire of Rule c. By which infirmitie of Peter it was vndoubtedly signifyed that these Bishops who boasted of Peters succession were to be subiect to the like yea to greater ambition by infinit degrees c. wherfore this so corrupt ambition of Peter and ignorance and negligence of diuine matters c. without douht did foreshew that the Bishop of Rome in that he wil be the Chief and the Heire of Peters Priuiledges was to be ignorant and a contemner of heauenlie things and a louer of human riches power and pleasures And D. Whitaker blusheth not to write that (156) De Concil p. 37. The mysterie of iniquitie did work in the Sea of Rome in Peters time and did shew itself in Anicetus Victor Cornelius Sozimus Bonifacius Celestinus Now if it be true which Caluin affirmeth that (157) Resp ad Sadoletum It is playne conspicuous both to learned and vnlearned that the Kingdome of Christ by which he meaneth the Protestant Church was ouerthrowne when the Primacie of the Roman Bishop was erected then seing the sayd Primacie confessedly began in S. Peter himself and since hath euer continued in his Successours the Bishops of Rome it followeth that therfore the Protestant Church hath been ouerthrowne and ruinated euer since the time of S. Peter then which what can be produced more conuincing in proof that the Protestant Church indeed neuer was But to conclude this with that Princely testimonie of K. Henrie Luther (158) In Assertione 7. aduersus Luther Art 2. cannot deny sayth he but that al the Church of the faithful acknowledge and reuerence the holie Roman Sea as their Mother and Chief if they be not debarred accesse by distance of places or by dangers in the Way And yet if they speak truth which come hither from India the verie Indians themselues distant by so manie parts of the Earth of the Seas of the deserts do yet submit themselues to the Bishop of Rome Therefore if the Pope hath obtayned neither by the commandment of God nor by the assent of men so great and so vniuersal power but hath challenged the same to himself by his owne power Let Luther tel me when he burst into possession of so great Dominion Can the beginning of so great power be obscure especially if it began within the memorie of man but if he say that it was aboue one or two Ages agoe let him make vs remember the same out of Historie for otherwise if it be so ancient that the beginning of so great a matter be blotted out let him know that it is prouided by the Lawes that whose right or Title so surpasseth al memorie of men that it cannot be knowne what beginning it had it is iudged to haue had a lawful beginning And it is clearly forbidden by the consent of al Nations that those things be not changed which haue long continued without change So vndoubted it is that this our Catholick doctrine of the Bishops of Romes Primacie hath been generally taught and practised time out of mind euen from S. Peter himself euen to the end of the Primitiue Church and euer since as hath been formerly proued To come now to the Gouernment of the Church before Christs time The Puritans themselues do confesse that (159) Engl. Puritan p. 16. And Hook Eccl. Pol. l. 5. p. 235. The high Priest of the Iewes was typically and in a figure the supreame Head of the whole Catholick Church which though say they it were visible only in the Prouince and Nation of Iewrie yet those of other Nations and Countries as appeareth by the Historie of the Acts euen though they were Aethiopians were vnder this High Priest and acknowledged homage vnto him So that he was c. in verie deed an Oecumenical vniuersal Bishop of the whole world yea sayth M. Iacob (160) Reasons taken out of Gods word p 5. The Iewish Church vnder the Law was National and only One in the world vnder one high Priest
Leo Foelix Gelasius the Fathers of the Councel of Chalcedon of Africk and the 6. of Carthage of Sardis Sixtus Innocentius Siricius Sozimus Damasus Iulius Stephen Denis Cyprian Victor Anicetus Cornelius Ireneus Papias Peter and the other Apostles The Protestants producing and reprouing the foresayd Fathers are the Centurie-writers Danaeus Caluin Bucer Philippus Nicolai Peter Martyr Carion Bullinger Melancthon Osiander Friccius Beza Crispinus Tilenus Frigiuilleus Gauuius Bibliander Amandus Polanus Hamelmannus Illyricus Lubbertus Sarauia Napper Mornay Whitguift Carthwright Whitaker Fulk Bilson Trige Rainolds Brightman Bale Symonides Bunnie Spark Midleton Fox Morton and Field euerie one wherof do cite and reproue some Father or Councel before mentioned concerning some branch of the Bishop of Romes Primacie It is confessed by Protestants that the Primitiue Church of Christ beleeued the Bookes of Tobie Iudith Esther Sapientia Ecclesiasticus and two first of Machabees to be truly Canonical Scriptures CHAPTER V. AS it is vndoubted by al that the true Scriptures Prophetical and Apostolical are most sacred diuine and of infallible authoritie so it remayneth stil in Controuersie which Bookes be the sayd Prophetical Apostolical and Canonical Scriptures for as the (1) Concil Carthag 3. Can. 47. Trid. sess 4. Catholick Church hath defyned the Bookes of Esther Iudith Tobie two of the Machabees Wisdome and Ecclesiasticus to be sacred Canonical and of infallible authoritie so are al the sayd Bookes reiected by Protestants (2) Luth. Zuingl Praef. Bibl. a se CoÌ„uers Calu. Inst l. 1. c. 12. §. 8. l. 2. c. 5. §. 18. l. 3. c. 5. §. 8. as merely apocryphal and only human Now to decide this so waightie a Controuersie by the Primitiue Church Wheras in the Third Carthage Councel wherat S. Austin and sundrie other Fathers and Bishops were present and subscribed it is expresly defined that (3) Can. 47 Nothing be read in the Church vnder the name of diuine Scriptures besides Canonical Scriptures And the Canonical Scriptures are Genesis Exodus c. fiue bookes of Salomon c. Tobie Iudith Hester two bookes of Esdras two bookes of Machabees c. Wheras also the same Canon of Scriptures is made and numbred particulerly by S. Austin (4) De Doct. Christi l. 2. c. 8 Innoc. ep ad Exup c. 7. Gel. To. 1. Concil in Decret cum 70. Ep. Isid l 6. Etymol c. 1. Rabanus l. 2. Instit cler Cassiod l. 2. diuinarum Lect. himself as also by Innocentius Gelasius and other ancient Writers the truth hereof is so manifest that the same is confessed by sundrie Protestant Writers and the same Councel and Fathers in steed of better answere seuerely reprehended for the same Hiperius (5) Meth. Theol. l. 1. p. 46. auoucheth that In the Third Carthage Councel there are added to the Canon c. Sapientia and Ecclesiasticus two bookes of Machabees Tobie Iudith c. Al which bookes in the same order numbreth Augustin Innocentius Gelasius for which he at large afterwards reiecteth their iudgement In like sort (6) de Princip Christ Dogm l. 1. c. 4. p. 8. Lubbertus I grant sayth he certaine of these bookes to be admitted by the Carthaginians but I deny that therfore they are the Word of God for no Councels haue that Authoritie But to be brief the Third Carthage Councel is acknowledged and reproued for this verie doctrine by D. Raynolds (7) Conclus annex to his Conf p 699 700. Zan de Sacr. p. 32. 33. Hosp hist Sacram. p. 1. p. 160. Trelc loc com p. 15. Hoe Tract Tripart Theol. p. 46. Park ag Symb. part 2. p 60. Field of the Church p. 246. 247. Zanchius Hospinian Trelcatius Mathias Hoe M. Parker and D. Field And so likewise is S. Austin and other ancient Fathers herein acknowledged and reiected by Hospinian 8) Hist sacr part 1. p. 161. Hip. Meth. Theol. p. 46. Zanch. de sacra-Scrip p. 32. 33. Field of the Church p. 246. Hâ—perius Zanchius D. Field But Brentius auoucheth more in general that (9) Apol. Confess Wittemb See Bucers Scripta Angl p. 7â—3 There are some of the ancient Fathers who receiue sayth he these Apocryphal Bookes into the number of Canonical Scriptures And in like sort some Councels command them to be acknowledged as Canonical I am not ignorant what was done but I demand whether it was rightly and Canonically done Lastly D. Couel not only most plainly confesseth S. Austins like Iudgement had of the Booke of Wisdome but withal further affirmeth (11) Ib. p 87 of al these Bookes that If Ruffinus be not deceaued they were approued as partes of the Old Testawent by the Apostles So cleer it is that this foresayd Bookes were confessedly beleeued to be Canonical by the Primitiue Church Adde hereunto that (12) Of the Church p. 245. 246. Hut 2. part of his Answ p 176. D. Field M. Hutton both of them teaching that some of the ancient Iewes receiued the foresayd Bookes for truly Canonical though others of them did not beleeue and receaue the same accordingly yet are the sayd Iewes therfore expresly reproued by Protestants themselues Bibliander tearming it The rashnes of the Iewes in which his censure he is approued by the Protestant Sceltco in his booke of the Second coming of Christ Englished by M. Rogers (13) fol. 6. for the supposed worth therof D. Bancroft (14) p. 60. in the verie Conference before his Maiestie reiecteth the obiections of the Iewes made against these Bookes tearming them The old cauils of the Iewes renewed by Hierom who was the first that gaue them the name of Apocrypha which opinion vpon Ruffiâ—us his challenge he after a sort disclaymed Yea D. Bancroft is so ful with Catholicks in Defence of the sayd Bookes as that other of his owne Brethren charge him further to say (15) The 2. parte of the Ministers Def. p. 108. that The Apocrypha were giuen by inspiration from God which is al one as to affirme them to be truly diuine and Canonical And as concerning the booke Ecclesiasticus it is defended to be truly Canonical by the Protestant Writers (16) Ep. ad Volanum Lascicius and Parker of which later D. Willet (17) LoÌ„doro mastix p. 69 sayth How audacious is this fellow that contrarie to the determination of this Church of England dare make Ecclesiasticus a book of Canonical Scripture 10) Against Burges p. 76 77. Furthermore seing it is expresly taught and defended by sundrie Protestants that this waightiest Controuersie of discerning true Scripture from forged can not be decided by the (18) Hook Ecol Pol. l. 1 p. 86. Scriptures themselues neither by Testimonie (19) Whit. cont Staplet p. 370. 357. Hook vbi sup p 147. of the Spirit but (20) Hook ib. p. 146. 116. Aretiu Exam p. 24. by the authoritie of Gods Church Hence it necessarily followeth that the Church of Christ hauing decided and determined this foresayd Controuersie and
to that solemnitie Certain Councels also cal the Masse a Sacrifice as the Councel of Antioch the Seauenth of Carthage the Sixth of Constantinople the Councel of Arles Hospinian (12) In Concord discord in Prolog fol. 5. writeth That it appeareth out of S. Gregorie himself that in the Age wherein he flourished which was about the yeare Six hundred after S. Augustin one hundred fiftie seauen the oblation of the Supper as a Sacrifice for the liuing and dead was deeply seated rooted in the minds of men And againe (13) Hist Sacr. part 1. l. 2. p 159. The Enemy of mankind brought into the Church of Christ by Gregorie the Roman Bishop this pernicious errour of Sacrifice for the dead as a certain thick cloud couering the whole Heauens In like sort Chytraeus (14) Apoc. in c. 9. p 199 chargeth S. Gregorie that he established manie foule errours especially the Idolatrous inuocation of Saincts Masses for the Dead which from that time as a Deluge haue ouerflowed the whole Church And agayne (15) De Baeptismo Euch. p. 453. And see Pelargus in Schola fidei fol. 8. And Praetor de Sacr p. 280. In the times of Gregorie the Great were ordayned priuat Masses Finally M. Fox reporteth that about the yeare Seauen hundred and eightie Pope Adrian ratifyed the order of S. Gregories Masse (16) Act. Mon p. 130. at what time sayth he this vsual Masse of the Papists began to be vniuersal vniforme generally receaued in al Churches But now to free most clearly S. Gregorie and his Age from al innouation or first beginning of this so material a poynt of Faith Ancient to him was Gregorie Turonensis who according to the confession (17) Cent. 6. col 336. of the Centurists mentioneth in his Fourth book c. 30. Chapter a certaine Priest of France named Cato (18) Loc. conc de Caena Domini p. 339. who the plague being great stayed there sayd Masses That you may vnderstand say the Centurists that the Celebration of Masses had then fulfilled al places Predecessour to S. Gregorie in the Popedome was Pelagius of whom Musculus reporteth that Pelagius placed in the Secret of the Canon of the Masse the Commemoration of the dead c. that the vertue efficacie of the Masse may be communicated to the dead And he is further charged with the opinion of Masse helping the dead by (19) Vpon the Reuel p 81. M. Symonides Before him was Symmachus Bishop of Rome of whom the Magdeburgians (20) Cent 6. c. 10. c. 664. say He had the Markes of Antichrist for he brought the Masse into forme or order which forme was so agreable to the Masse at this day that Hieronymus (21) In his Eusebius Captiuus c. in Act. 3. diei f. 142. Marius auoucheth that Symmachus brought the Masse into that order wherein we see it disposed at this day Before him gouerned S. Leo of whom M. Bale (22) In his Pageant of Popes f. 27. And see in Act. Rom Pont. p. 32. 33. writeth Leo the First allowed the Sacrifice of the Masse not without great blasphemie to God Before Leo was the Carthage Councel this Pelargus reproueth saying (23) Schola fidâ—i c. in tract de Concil p. 13. The Fift Councel of Carthage brought in prayer and Masse for the dead And Osiander (24) Cent. 4. p. 16. sayth of the Seauentie ninth Canon of the Fourth Carthage Councel wherat S. Austin was present This Canon if it be not forged shewed at that time prayers Sacrifices to be made for the dead Before these Councels was S. Ambrose whom the Centurists (25) Cent 4 e 4. c. 295. charge with not writing wel of Transubstantiation application for the dead And that He vseth speeches which none of the Fathers before him vsed as to say Masse to offer Sacrifice c. Before him liued Gregorie Nyssene of whom Crastouius (26) De opificio Missae l. 1 sec 164. p. 8 And see Whit. cont Du oeâ—m l. 4. p 320. writing against Bellarmin sayth Doth he not know that the opinion of Nyssen is of itself absurd c. for Nyssene sayth when therefore Christ gaue to his D sciples his bodie to eate c. then hiddenly vnspeakably inuisibly his Bodie was sacrificed c. Before him was Cyril of Hierusalem of whom Hospinian reporteth (27) Hist Sa r p. 167. saying As concerning Cyril of Hierusalem he sayth indeed according to the receaued custome of his time that the Sacrifice of the Aultar is the greatest help of Soules Before these times liued S. Cyprian whom the Centurists (28) Cent. 3â— c. 4. col 83. reproue saying Cyprian sayth the Priest exerciseth the office of Christ and Sacrifice is offred to God the Father Insomuch as they further (29) In the Index of the 3. Centurie vnder the letter 5. say Cyprian affirmeth Superstitiously that the Priest exerciseth the office of Christ in the supper of the Lord. Tertullian is charged by Osiander (30) Cent 3 l. 1. p 10. Fulk in his Confutation of Purgatory p 265. Cent. 3. c. 5. c. 138. the Centurie-writers and D. Fulk for that He approued Sacrifice for the dead Origen is reproued by Chemnitius (31) Exam. p. 3. p. 50. 58 for teaching that It is certaine that the dayly Sacrifice is hindred to them who serue the necessities of Wedlock wherupon it seemeth to me that he only is to offer the dayly Sacrifice who hath vowed himself to dayly perpetual chastitie Before these liued Ireneus him Caluin (32) Lib de vera Eccl. Reformat extant in Tract Theo. Caluin c. p. 389. reiecteth for that he expoundeth the place of Malachie c. 1. 10. 11. of the Sacrifice of the Masse And the Centurists (33) Cent. 2 c. 4 col 63. auouch that He seemeth to speake verie incommodiously of Sacrifice l. 4. c. 32. when he sayth Christ taught a new Sacrifice of the new Testament which the Church receauing from the Apostles offreth to God ouer the whole world In the same time liued Alexander the First of whom Szegedine 34) Graues aliquot quaestiones fol. 162. And fee Hierom Maerius in Eusebius Capt. in Act. 3. oieide Missae p. 143. writeth Alexander the First taught that which was receiued from the Heathens to be blotted out by this Sacrifice Yea Szegedine vndertaking to set downe the framers of the Masse beginneth with the Fathers from the Apostles times and the more ancient Councels of the Primitiue Church saying (35) In speculo Pontif. p. 68. The framers of the Papistical Masse were Clemens Anacletus Alexander c. And the (36) Ibid. p. 69. Councels of Bishops for the Papistical Masse were the Councels of Ephesus Antioch the Second of Carthage of Constantinople of Arles c. Before al these liued S. Ignatius of whom the Centurists (37) Cent. 2 c. 4. col 63.
recorded by (25) Libro de Passione Imaginis Christi And although some doubt be made vvhether this book be made by S. Athanasius yet it is cited as a most ancient historie by the seauenth Synod Act. 4. S. Athanasius of a certaine holie Image of Christ our Sauiour left in a house where a Christian had inhabited a litle before and at his remoual had forgot the same which the Iewes finding in derision of Christ Crucifyed spit vpon it buffeted it with their hands nayled the hands and feet vpon a Crosse offred it vineger mingled with gaul crowned it with a crowne of thornes strock the head therof with a reed and at the last pearced the right side therof with a lance from whence forthwith issued out water and bloud Which the Iewes perceiuing caused a vessel to be set vnder which presently was filled But they remouing it into theyr Synagogue intending therby to offer the greatest disgrace to Christ our Lord assembled thither al the disease and infirme which they could find which annoynting therwith there were cured the Sick of the palsie the blind the lame the deaf the dumbe the leapers and others Which the Iewes themselues seeing beleeued in Christ our Lord and went vnto the Catholick Church in that Cittie where prostrating themselues at the feet of the Metropolitan Bishop confessed their Sinnes and related al the Historie passed Wherupon the Bishop caused the Christian who had inhabited the house before to be brought vnto him and enquiring of him how he came to the Image he answered Nicodemus who came to Iesus by night made it with his owne hands and dying gaue it to Gamaliel who dying left it to Iames and Iames to Symeon and Symeon to Zachaeus and so by theyr Successours it continued in Hierusalem vntil two yeares before the Subuersion therof by Titus and Vespasian When the Christians admonished by the holie-Ghost left the cittie and comming into Syria they brought with them al things which belonged to the worship of Religion At which time the Image being brought amongst other things which concerned the Church remayned vntil this day in Syria which I receauing from my Parents departing this life haue vntil this time possessed by right of inheritance The Bishop hearing this was verie ioyful and instructing the Iewes in the Christian Doctrine after three dayes fast baptised them al and at their intreatie consecrated their Synagogue into a church in honour of the Sauiour of the world Afterwardes consulting what to doe with the sacred liquour of water and Bloud in the vessel resolued to send the same in bottles of glasse made of purpose to al churches through Asia Africa and Europe Exacting this of them that euerie yeare vpon the ninth of Nouember the like Solemnitie should be vsed as vpon the dayes of Christmas and Easter This sayth S. Athanasius is the true and verie credible Historie of the bloud of the side of our Sauiour which issued out of his holie Image which was crucifyed in Syria in the citie Berithus Here wil I leaue our Protestants condemning S. Athanasius of Credulitie and Superstitious Papistrie Now to proceed Functius confesseth that (26) Lib. 7. commentariorum in praeced chron fol. 6. Anno 494. Xenaias was the first in the church that stirred vp warre against Images So quiet possession had they in the Church before that time (27) Exam. part 4 pa. 26. Chemnitius sayth In one and only Tertulian I haue obserued the historie of the Sheepheard calling and seeking his wandring sheep to be paynted and grauen vpon holie Chalices In like sort sayth D. Beard (28) Retractiue from Romish Religion pag 401. Indeed we confesse that there was in these primitiue times of the church an historical vse of Images as may appeare by that Statue of our Sauiour at Cesarea mentioned by Eusebius and the pictures of Peter and Paul in the same Authour And of the good shepheard feeking the lost sheep paynted vpon the Chalices in Tertulian Another Protestant discoursing of the Religion taught and professed publickly by the Graecians and Abissines reciting amongst the rest their hauing (29) In his Catholick Tradictions pag. 212. 214. Pictures in their Churches and inclining and howing before the Images of Saints doth from thence conclude in these words (30) Ibid. pa. 216. It seemes that this is the greatest accusation which Protestants haue against the Churches of the East and Africa neuertheles c. the ancient Doctours which destroyed the Pagans Idolatrie haue approued it their deuotion did lead them vnto it c. So cleerly therfore may we conclude that our Catholick vsage of Pictures in placing them in Churches and reuerencing them doth most truly accord with the like practise and Deuotion of S. Gregorie Leo Paulinus Prudentius Austin Chrisostome Nicephorus Sozomene Athanasius Tertulian Lastantius Witnesses wherof are the Protestant writers the Centurists Osiander Chemnitius Peter Martyr Hospinian Functius Symonds Bale Fulk Parker Parkins Beard and Morton IT IS ACKNOWLEDGED BY PROTESTANTS that the Fathers of the Primitiue Chuch did specially honour and reuerence the holie Relicks of Martirs and other Saincts carying them in Processions and making Pilgrimages vnto them At which also manie Miracles were wrought CHAP. XV. AS it is to be supposed that such Hereâ—icks as deny the due worship and Inuocation of Saincts wil much more deny al reuerent respect or worship to be giuen to the Relicks of their dead Bodies So we may as confidently expect that al holie fathers who so confessedly before exhibited honour to the Blessed Saincts or Soules in Heauen wil likewise performe their answerable respect to their sacred Bodies vpon earth And to begin with S. Gregorie It is acknowledged by (1) In Act. Rom. Pontif. p. 44. c. M. Iohn Bale that Gregorie the great c. commanded Masses to be celebrated ouer the dead bodies of the Apostles And Carion (2) Chron. l. 4. p. 567. 568. auoucheth that He dedicated Churches to the bones and Ashes of Saincts (3) Cent. 6. Col. 381. The Centurie-writers charge him with Translation of Reliques (4) In Iesuit part 2. rat 5. p. 5. 627. And D. Humfrey reciting sundrie particular poynts of Catholick Doctrine which S. Gregorie and S. Austine brought into England amongst the rest doth number Relicks D. Fulk auoucheth that (5) Ag RheÌ„ Test in Apoc. 6. Gregorie liuing so neer the Reuelation of Antichrist it is no maruaile though he be more superstitious in Relicks And Againe (6) Ib. in 1. Tim. 4. Gregorie indeed willeth c. Altars to be built and Relicks to be layd-vp Gregorie indeed did send manie Superstitious tokens c. He sendeth a litle Key froÌ„ the bodie of S. Peter for his blessing in which is enclosed the iron of his chaynes c. Such was the practise and reuerence giuen to the Relicks of Saincts by S. Gregorie But to proceed S. Ambrose hauing made a godlie speech about the pious honouring of Martyrs Tombes the
learned to let your lockes grow long Epiph. Haer. 80. Eightly of the Pharisees you receaued your superstitious Massing-garments which you cal Amictus Dâ—lmatica and Pallia c. Thus far D. Fulk First in general I answer hereto that al this is most impertinently vrged seing there is not anie of the forsayd Examples which being truly deliuered is not at this day condemned by the Roman Church as being not slenderly or obscurely but most strongly and manifestly different from our Catholick doctrine either by certaine excesse or defect thereto But to descend to particulars To the first against Images I answer with S. Epiphanius that those Hereticks were reproued for that togeather 5) Epiph. her 27. Iren. l. 1. c. 24. with the Images of Philosophers Pithagoras Plato Aristotle and others they did set vp the Images of Iesus and did then adore them and celebrate the mysteries of the Pagans al which the Catholik Church doth censure for damnable idolatrie To the second against the signe of the Crosse the Valentinians are reprehended by S. Ireneus 6) Iren. l. 1. c. 1. Epiph. her 31. S. Epiphanius for inuenting 30. Gods which they called Aones and in them two Christs one of which they named Crux but against the signe of the Crosse they do not so much as insinuate anie one word As to the third against Extreme Vnction prayer for the dead and sprinkling theÌ„ with Holie-water S. Epiphanius 7) Her 36. Iren. l. 1. c. 18. answereth That the Heracleonites thinking to redeeme those who were seduced by them at the end of their life some of them powred vpon the head of the Partie departed oyle mingled with water others an oyntment which is called the Iuice of Balme and water yet both vsing this common Inuocation c. Nessia Vphareg Namepsaeman Chaldaeam Mosomedea Acplirane Pseuua Iesu Nazaria And this they do that those who haue these inuocations at the end of their life with water and oyle or an oyntment mingled may be incomprehensible and enuisible to supernal Principalities and Powers Thus far S. Epiphanius and the same is taught by S. Ireneus Al which is most impertinent dissonant to our knowne doctrines of Extreme Vnction Prayer for the dead and Holie-water To the Fourth against Inuocation of Angels S. Epiphanius 8) Haebr 3. cited plainly testifyeth that the Cainans worshiped Caïn and Iudas glorying that they were allyed to them As also to the Sodomites Esau and Core affirming that others could not be saued except they went through al sinnes referring their particular abhominations either to Angels or to such as falsly by them were called Angels attributing to euery one of them some haynous sinne applying their action to the name of the Angel whom they wil. And when they do these things they say O Angel I vse thy worke ô Power I do thy action Al which is condemned by Catholicks as most ridiculous and impious To the Fifth against Baptisme by women in case of necessitie S. Epiphanius (9) Haer. 42 testifyeth that Marcion held that a man might be thrice Baptized that he made women no lesse then men the publick and ordinarie Ministers of Baptisme Now that women may Baptize in case of necessitie it is defended by (10) Hook Eccl. Pol. l. 5. sec 61. 62. Schluselburg Theol. Cal. f. 68. Lambert Act. mon. p. 541. Woodman Ib. p. 1590. Sarcerius loc com f. 229. sec Whiteg Def. p. 518. 522. 523. 518. sundrie Protestants And more then this the Roman Church doth not teach herein To the Sixt against the Images and worship of our B. Ladye S. Epiphanius 11) Haer. 79. writeth that certaine women decking a square table and spreading a linen cloth ouer it vpon a solemne day of the yeare did set on bread and offer it in the name of Marye so taking vpon them to be her Priests and to offer Sacrifice to her Which S. Epiphanius condemneth in that sayth he from the begining of the world neuer waman Sacrificed to God no not Eue as also in that God only is to be honoured with Sacrifice Al which is also reiected by the Roman Church which only alloweth Sacrifice to God To the Seauenth against long haire I do not vnderstand why it is vrged more against vs then against themselues But as for the Messalians 12) Haer. 80. S. Epiphanius recordeth that they suffred their heads to grow at length like women which I haue neither seene nor heard to be practised in any Catholick Countrey To the Eighth against Church-garments S. Epiphanius 13) Haer. 15.16 writeth that the Scribes and Pharisees wore in their common daily garments Cassacks with dilated Philacteries and inlarged fringes which vse also our Sauiour 14) Mat. 23.5 describeth in them as noting thereby their hypocrisie But what maketh this against Church apparel which Protestant Ministers and Bishops themselues vse and which D. Whiteguift 15) Def. p. 264. defendeth deriuing the vse thereof from the Apostles times But D. Fulk 16) Against Purgatorie p. 419. yet farther vrgeth against Catholicks that They take prescript times of fasting and vnmeasurable extolling of single life in the Ministers of the Church from the Manichees Tatianists and Montanists Secondly Prayer for the dead of the Montanists Thirdly Purgatorie-fire of the Origenists Fourthly Of 17) Answ to a Count. Cath. p. 21. 22. the Essenes the superstition of Relicks for they vsed to take the spittle and other filth from the bodies of Marthis and Marthana which were of the seed of Elxai that is great Saints with them and vsed them to cure diseases Fiftly of the sayd Elxai to command the people to pray in a strange tongue But al this is as idle and impertinent as the former And so to the first against prescribed times of fast D. Fulk shal receaue his answere from his owne Brethren 18) Eccl. Pol. l 5. p. 209. 210. M. Hooker answereth that the Montanists were reprehended only for that they brought in sundrie vnaccustomed dayes of fasting continued their fasting a great deal longer and made them more rigorous c. Whereupon Tertullian maintayning Montanisme wrote a booke in defence of the new Fast 19) Exam. part 4 p. 143. Chemnitius coÌ„fesseth more particularly that the Montanists make three Lents in the yeare as though three Sauiours had suffred in the yeare And he further chargeth them for ieiunia propria for Fasts peculiar to themselues In like sort an other 20) Querimonia Eccl. p. 110. Protestant roriter answereth saying They say that Eusebius plainly teacheth that Montanus made the first lawes of fasting but they are gratly deceaued in this as in other things c Montanus abrogating the Fasts of the Church brought in a new custome of fasting Herein also D. Morton is our kind Aduocate (a) Prot. Appeal p. 309. We obiect not sayth he vnto our Aduersaries the grossenes of the Montanists who held three lents wherin they imposed only an
Fulk (5) Against Rhem. Test fol. 335. Caluin Inst c. de fide sec 37. 38. p. 233. 234. Melan. loc com c. de Ecclesiae Caluin Melancthon Hence it is that (6) Calu. vbi sup Whitak de Ecclesia p. 281. 285. Caluin D. Whitaker do affirme that The Church can neuer want Pastours and Doctours And which is more D. Fulk is of opinion that Christ wil suffer no particular Church to continue without a seruant to ouersee it 8) Ib p. 536. And that Pastours and Doctours must be in the Church til the end of the world euen 9) Ib. p 569 from Christs time til Luthers Age. M. Spark 10) Answ to Albines p. 11. affirmeth that The Church of Christ hath alwayes had and shal haue to the end successiuely in al Ages in one place or other such as haue shewed the truth fully vnto others (7) Against Hoskins c. p 359. as haue shined as Lights in their dayes set vpon a Candlestick And D. Field (11) Of the Church c 6. p. 51 auoucheth that Lawful and holie Ministrie is an inseparable and perpetual note of a true Church and that no Church can be without it Secondly the holie Sâ—riptures teach that these Pastours which must euer continue must not vndertake the charge by vsurpation without sending but by lawful Calling According to that of S. Paul 12) Heb. 5.4 No man taketh to himself the honour of Priesthood but he that is called of Gâ—d as Aaron was to wit visibly and by peculiar Consecration And againe 13) Ro 10.14 How shal they preach except they be senâ— Christ himself auoucheth that 14) Ioh 10.1 who so enâ—râ—th not by the doore into the sheepfold but climeth another way is a theef And God Almightie saith by the Prophet Hieremie (15) c. 23.21 I haue not sent these Prophets yet they ranne (16) c 14.14 1â— 27. 15 The Prophets prophecy lyes in my name I haue not sent them 17) c. 29.31 Semetas hath prophecyed to you and I sent him not Insomuch (18) 2. Paralip c. 26.16.18.19 as Vzias presuming to vsurp the Priests office was therefore reprehended and stroken with Leprosie wherof other like examples are not wanting in the (19) 2. Reg. 6.6.7 1. Paralip 13.9.10 Scriptures Now agreably to these Scriptures Protestants teach that this personal Succession of Pastours is to be continued in the Church no otherwise then by lawful sending or calling by man's Ministerie Luther (20) Vpon the Epistle to the Galath fol. 10. teacheth that God calleth vs at this day to the Ministerie of his Word not immediatly himself but by man As also (21) Tom. 5. Wittemb in c. 1. Gal. fol. 376. God calleth vs at this day to the Ministerie of the Word by Mediate vocation which is done by meanes that is by man c. that vocation hath continued euen til these times and shal continue til the end of the world Piscator (22) Vol. 1. Thes Theol. p. 405. auoucheth that God after the Apostles times hath called and as yet doth cal and to the end of the world is to cal Pastours Doctours and Priests by the Church D. Bilson (23) Perpetual Gouernment c. c. 9. p. 111. affirmeth that The Moderation of the keyes and Imposition of hands were at first setled in the Apostles and that They can haue no part of Apostolick commission that haue no shew of Apostolick succession And therefore that Pastours do receaue by Succession the power and charge of the Word and Sacraments from and in the first Apostles Whereto assenteth also M. Bernard saying (24) Plaine Euidences c. p. 184. 185. In the Scripture of the new Testament there is none allowed to ordayne a Minister but a Minister c. In the new Testament al the Apostles time the Ministrie was by Succession Ministers as it were begetting Ministers by Ordination by laying on of hands let but one Instance be giuen to the contrarie After their time like Succession hath been kept from time to time Bishop after Bishop and Ministers ordayned by them c. The Scriptures promising the same to the worlds end c. Thus by plaine Historical narration both of God and Man we see a Succession of the Ministerie from one Minister to another M. Cartwright (25) 2. Reply part 2. p. 128. auoucheth that It is forbidden that anie should take honour to himself but he which is called of God as was Aaron What greater apparence of necessitie of Sacrificing could be then when Saul took vpon him to Sacrifice 2. Sam. 13.11 c. Likewise what greater apparence of necessitie then when Vzias stayed the Arke readie to haue fallen 2. Sam. 6.6.7 yet these necessities notwithstanding for so much as they tooke vpon them that whereto they were not called they receaued the reward of their boldnes And agayne (26) 2. Reply part 2. p. 141. A Pastour can no more preach now in a particular congregation without a sending then an Apostle could then in al the world c. affirming yet further that one not sent may not preach although he speake the words of Scripture yea (27) Vpon the Epistle to the Galath Eng. in c. 1. f. 10. It is not enough sayth Luther for a man to haue the Word and puritie of Doctrine but also he must be assured of his Calling and he that entreth without this certainly entreth to no other end but to kil M. Mason (28) Consecration of Engl. Bishops p. 9. not only affirmeth it to be impossible to be a lawful Minister without a lawful calling but withal confirmeth the same from seueral texts of Scripture from the testimonie of Beza saying This is an order appoynted in the Church by the Sonne of God and obserued inuiolably by al true Prophets and Apostles That no man may teach in the Church vnles he be called So that according to holie Scriptures and Protestants themselues the true Church must euer haue Pastours endued with lawful callinâ— and ordinarie Succession Thirdly the same Scriptures do teach that the sayd Pastours must not be silent but must preach the Word and administer the Sacraments The Prophet Esay (29) Esa 62.6 fortelleth of the Churches Watchmen that they shal not hold their peace And S. Paul (30) Rom. 10.14.15 setteth downe the necessitie of Preaching in these words How shal they beleeue him whom they haue not heard And how shal they heare without a Preacher But how shal they preach vnles they be sent (31) Rom. 10.17.18 Faith then is by hearing and hearing is by the word of Christ And certes into al the earth hath the sound of them gone forth and vnto the ends of the whole world the words of them And as concerning the administration of Sacraments it is so to continue vntil the end of the world that expressely it is sayd of the Eucharist (32) 1. Cor.
11.26 As often as you shal eate this Bread and drink the Chalice you shal shew the death of our Lord vntil he come to wit at the day of Iudgement Answerably to these Scriptures Protestants teach concerning Preachers that (33) Fulk in his Answ to Counterf Cath. p. 100. The truth can not be continued in the world but by their Ministrie that therefore (34) Propositions disputed in Gen. p. 845. The Ministerie is an essential Mark of the true Church M. Deering (35) Vpon the Epist to the Heb. c. 3. lect 15. 16. teacheth that Saluation springeth in preaching of the Ghospel and is shut vp againe with ceasing of it And that Take away preaching you take away Faith for which he citeth manie Scriptures D. Fulk (36) Answ to a Counter Cath. p. 11. 92. affirmeth that the Churches Pastours shal alwayes resist al false opinions with open reprehension And M. Deering (37) VpoÌ„ the Hebr. in c. 2 lect 10. is of opinion that The Religion being of God no feare of man shal keep them back because that were to kâ—ep the honour of God for corners and solitarie places For as the (38) Rom. 10.10 Apostle prescribeth with the hart we beleeue vnto Iustice but with the mouth Confession is made to Saluation (39) SermoÌ„s vpon the Canticles Englished p 79. 80. Beza confesseth that there must be Pastours and Doctours to the end of the world for the administration of the Word and Sacraments And (40) See the Survay of the Holy preteÌ„ded c p. 440. 441. The Ministrie of the Word and Sacraments are in absolute degree of Necessitie to Saluation D. Whitaker (41) Cont. Duraeum l 3 p. 260. assureth vs that they are Essential Notes of the Church (42) Ibid. p. 249. which being present they do constitute a Church and being absent do subuert it And D. Willet (43) Synopsis p. 71. auoucheth that These Markes can not be absent from the Church and it is no longer a true Church then it hath these Markes for 44 Ib. p. 69 as he further saith The only absence of them do make a nullitie of the Church Lobechius (45) Disput Theo p. 213. speaking of these Markes and of the Church affirmeth that They are coupled togeather with so streight and indissâ—luble a knot that in the assemblies of those who are called the one can not be without the other and the one denyed the other of necessitie is to be denyed Hiperius (46) Meth. Th p. â—48 557. teacheth that These Notes are needful to distinguish the true Church from the false that men careful of their Saluation may know where the true Church is and to which Companie chiefly they ought to adioyne themselues By the premisses now it is euident aswel by the sacred Scriptures as by the manifest Confessions of Protestant Writers that the Church of Christ must euer haue in her Ecclesiastical Pastours and Preachers which must be lawfully sent and ordinarily called by the Church and which must preach the true Word and Faith and administer the holie Sacraments The only poynt therefore resting to be examined is whether the Roman or Protestant Church hath euer had in al Ages the forsayd Pastours lawfully called and succeeding one another truly preaching the holie Word and administring the Sacraments And first concerning the Protestant Church Al personal Succession of Pastours hath been so interrupted or rather altogeather wantâ—ng that in steed of anie Successiâ—n of Pastours to be named it is at large confessed before (47) Before l. 3. c. 1. that their Church hath been wholy Inuisible and vnknowne for manie hundred of yeares togeather Yea Caluin [48) In Lascicius de Russor c. Râ—lig p. â—3 And see Caluin Inst l 4. c 3. sec 4. Danaeus Isagog part 4. p. 36. plainly confesseth that Through the Tyrannie of the Pâ—pe the true Succession of ordination was broken off in the Protestant Church And agayne (49) Tract Th. p. 374. The Church of God for some Ages was so torne and pulled a-sunder that she was destitute of true Protestant Pastours (50) Ep. Theol. ep 5. Beza acknowledgeth that among them ordinarie vocation was no where extant And (51) Disputationes Theol. p. 719 Sadel relateth that sundrie Protestants who acknowledge the doctrine which their Church doth embrace to be true and grounded vpon the expresse word of God do yet affirme the Ministers with them to be destitute of lawful calling as not hauing a continued visible Succession from the Apostles times which they do attribute only to the Papists In like sort saith Bullinger (52) Vpon the Apocalyps ser 145 fol. 137. Sâ—e Libauius in his Gretzerus triumph p. 102. and knewstubs in Confut. of the principal pointes of Popery p. 38 Albeit we can not at this day referre our calling to the Pope and Bishops which brag of lawful Succession yet for so much as we can proue that our Doctrine is Christs Doctrine and therefore that our Ministerie is lawful we care not a whit c. So confessedly is the Protestant Church destitute of lawful Calling And to touch breefly the Calling and Succession of our English Ministerie wheras D. Barlow in his Sermon before the King at Hampton Court publickly taught that The Apostles reserued Ordination to themselues and conueyed it to Bishops c. Neither would the Church of Christ succeeding admit anie other but Bishops to that busines as not iustifyable for the Presbiters either by reason example or Scripture c. Not one Example sayth he is to be showed through the whole Storie Ecclesiastical that anie besides a Bishop did it if some one of the inferior rank presumed to do it his act was reuersed for vnlawful It is so certaine that our Catholick Bishops after the death of Queen Marie were so far from Consecrating those other which were for such named by Q. Elizabeâ—h at her entrie to the Crowne and from whom sithence al the Protestant Clergie of England deriueth itself that the (53) p 177. Protestant Writer of The Assertion for true Christian Church-Policie auoucheth that It cannot be proued that anie Lord Spiritual was so much as present in Parlament or gaue anie assent to the Enacting of Statutes made Anno primo Elizabethae Yea in supply therof there was a Statute made An. 8. Eliz. c. 1 the Title therof being An Act declaring the manner of making and Consecrating Archbishops of this Realme to be good And towards the end of that Statute it is enacted that Al Acts done by anie Person about anie Consecration c. by vertue of the Queens Maiesties Letters Patents shal be good c. And that al Persons that haue been or shal be Consecrated Archbishops c. shal be Archbishops c. But the then Parlament or her late Highnes Letters Patents could not enable the first Protestant Bishops to be true Bishops because that function is not Ciuil but Spiritual and ex
light vpon anie tooth of this dead Lion they tread vpon it with contempt Neuer considering that as out of the (119) Iudg. 14 14. Strong came sweetnes so in those Sentences of Luther which they most traduce there is commonly inclosed the most Sacred truth ful of as diuine comfort as man's hart can ruminate vpon But if the former and innumerable such like Sentences of the Protestants Lyon Luther be so comfortable to D. Morton sure I am that they are odious and loathsome to chast and Christian eares and for such are taxed by sundrie (120] See Ezecanomiê° de corruptis moribus Wygandus de bonis malis Germ. Hospin â—oÌ„c discord 99. Couel Dâ—f of Hook p. 101. Saying Tom. 2. in Resp ad Conf. Luth. f. 458. sundrie lothers of his owne brood euen Protestant Writers who rested much scandalized thereby And therefore M. Morton patronizing so vnpardonable errours may giue ouer iust suspicion of his owne guilt in the like But to returne from the Premisses therefore it euidently followeth our Protestant Clergie to be wholy destitute of al lawful Calling seing it is already proued euen by their owne confessions that their Succession hath been interrupted and that they haue not ordinarie Calling and therefore do fly to extraordinarie which also they are deuoyd of through their confessed want of Miracles and truth of Doctrine or freedome from errour which doth euer certainly accompany the same Now the sacred Scriptures concerning the Churches Pastours Calling preaching and administration of Sacraments not being fulfilled and performed in the Protestant Church It only remayneth to be examined whether the same are verifyed and accomplished in the Catholick Roman Church And first the same is confirmed by ad such Arguments as (121) Before 4. 1. c. 23. 4. heretofore we haue vsed in prooff of the Roman Churches Euer-visibilitie which doth euer suppose the like coÌ„tinuance of Ecclesiastical Pastours with administration of Word and Sacraments Secondly the same is euidently supposed and confessed by al such Protestants as (122) See Before l. 3. c. 4. formerly acknowledged deriued their Succession and Ordination from the Church of Rome for if the Roman Pastours succession Ordination were not good or interrupted then were it fruitles and absurd for the Protestants Clergie to deriue their owne succession Ordination from them Thirdly the Centurie writers of Magdeburg in the tenth Chapter of euerie seueral Centurie do make special mention of the Bishops and Doctours of the Roman Church who liued ahd flourished in euerie Age. Fourthly (123) De rebus grauiss contr Disp p. 719. M. Sadel plainly confesseth sundrie ProtestaÌ„ts not only to affirme the Ministers with them to be destitute of lawful Calling seing they haue not a perpetual visible Succession from the Apostles to these times but also they attribute this only to the Papists whom therefore in this question they preferre before vs. In like direct sort D. Fulk (124) Answ to a Count. Cath p. 27. And in his Reioynder to Bristow p. 343. acknowledgeth vnto vs saying You can name the notable persons in al Ages in their government and Ministrie and especially the Succession of the Popes you can rehearse in order vpon your fingars M. Mason granteth that (125) Cons of the Engl. Bish. p. 52. The Church of Rome c. was planted by two so great Apostles Peter and Paul And that (126) Ibid. p. 41. The Priesthood which the Apostles conferred c. being conueyed to Posteritie successiuely by Ordination is found at this day in some sort in the Church of Rome in regard wherof you may be said to succeed the Apostles c. So certaine it is that the Bishops of the Roman Church haue euer successiuely continued in al Ages euen from Christs time to this and that true Ordination hath been euer in the sayd Church since the Apostles The poore Protestant Familie being meerly Laical as being confessedly destitute of al Calling either ordinarie or extraordinarie The fourth Proof from sacred Scriptures in Confirmation of the Roman Church and Confutation of the Protestant is taken from the Conuersion of Heathen Kings and Nations to the Faith of Chtist CHAPTER IIII. IT is most cleerly taught vs by the sacred Scriptures that the Church of Christ shal conuert manie Heathen Kings Countries to the Faith of Christ The Prophet Esay (1) Esa 60.16 speaking of the Church of Christians saith Thou shalt suck the milk of the Gentils and the breasts of Kings And (2) Esa 60.11 Their Kings shal minister to 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 And that their Kings may be brought c. (3) Esa 49.23 Kings shal be thy nursing Fathers and Queens thy Mothers vpon which place in the Annotations of the English Bible of Anno 1576. it is sayd The meaning is that Kings shal be conuerted to the Ghospel and bestow their power and authoritie for preseruation of the Church Yea God almightie hath further promised that (4) Esa 2 2 Al nations shal flow vnto it And that (5) Psal 2.8 He wil giue the Heathen for thy inheritance and the end of the earth for thy possession Yea it was sayd to (6) Apoc. 10.11 S. Iohn and in him to other Pastours Thou must prophecy againe vnto Nations peoples tongues and manie kings (7) Es 62 2. As also The Gentils shal see thy Iustice and al Kings thy glorie and thou shalt be called by a new name which the mouth of our Lord shal name (8) Ps 102.15 Then the Heathen shal feare the name of our Lord and al the Kings of the earth his glorie These and sundrie other such places are so coÌ„uincing for the CoÌ„uersion of the Heathen Kings and Nations by the Church of Christ that Protestants themselues do endeauour to confirme the same truth from the sacred Scriptures Luther (9) Tom. 4. Wittemb in Es 60. fol. 234. writing vpon the Prophet Esay chap. 60. affirmeth that Kings shal obey and beleeue the Ghospel c. the Church is in perpetual vse of conuerting others to the Faith c. for this is signifyed by her gates being continually open And Oecolampadius (10) In Hier. c. 33. writeth vpon Hieremie that God speaketh heer of the eternitie of Christs Kingdome c. he shal haue Kings and Priests and that for euer and not a few but as the stars of heauen c. for their multitude (11) Tabulae Analyticae in Es c. 60. p. 126. Szegedine affirmeth that the Prophet Esay fortelleth that Gentils and Kings shal embrace with great desire the religion of Gods people which ought to be referred to the Kingdome of Christ where he foretelleth the coming of the Gentils and that in such number as that it should make the beholders amazed In like sort teacheth (12) Meth. Dâ—script p. 583.
Christ Or that Godlie men would for feare of anie persecution not only deny Christ before men but withal commit Adulterie with the pretended whore of Babylon in partaking with her in al her superstitions Idolatries and abominations what more forcible can be desired or vrged against the sayd imagined Church that she was not the Church of Christ then her owne confession of grosse and palpable dissimulation in the weightiest matters of Faith and Religion Doth not Christ himself auouch say (43) Math. 10.33 whosoeuer shal deny me before men him wil I also deny before my father in heauen And his Apostle teacheth (44) Rom. 10.10 that with the hart a man beleeueth vnto Iustice and with the mouth confesseth to Saluation And how possibly could the (45) Math. 16.18 Gates of Hel more strongly preuayle against the Church of Christ then by making her to commit Idolatrie and Superstition and that for manie hundred yeares togeather Wheras in steed of these (46) Psal 86.3 glorious things are foretold of the Church of Christ as that (47) Esa 60.11 her Gates should be continually open her (48) Esa 62.6 Pastours neuer silent her (49) Dan. 2.44 Kingdome not giuen ouer to another people but should stand for euer as (50) Esa 60.15.16 an eternal glorie and ioy from generation to generation So that the censure which by this last answer is imposed vpon the Protestant Church and that by her owne Children is that in steed of Christs Church she is a dissembling Church a Church denying Christ and his Religion a Church for temporal respects committing manie Idolatries and Superstitions and so by most true consequence no Church at al. THE FIFT BOOK WHERIN IS SHEVVED THAT PROTESTANTS IN THE Decision of Controuersies betvveen them and CatholicKs do absolutly disclaime from Antiquitie reiecting the Ancient Fathers and Councels for Papistical and the Sacred Scriptures for erroneous THAT PROTESTANTS DISCLAIME from al Antiquitie since the Apostles and further reiect and condemne as Papistical the Ancient Fathers and General Councels CHAPTER I. SO foule is the stayne of Noueltie in anie profession of Religion as that some Protestants haue aduentured to charge our Roman Church with the deformitie and crime therof Mr. Hal therupon auouching that (1) Peace of Rome p. 24. Poperie is but a new fashion and D. (2) Way to the true Church p. 341. 342. White vndertaking to proue it contrarie to the primitiue Church But as nothing can be more grateful to a Christian Reader then a cleere and sincere trial of this point to wit whether the ancient Fathers of the primitiue Church were the true Progenitours and Fathers of Catholicks or Protestants so among manie meanes and arguments al of them able most cleerly to determine the same I wil only make choice for this time of the free grants acknowledgements and confessions of Protestants themselues And this chiefly concerning their owne bastardie degenerating and disclaiming from those so ancient so noble so worthie Peeres of those purest times And first concerning the Argument drawne from Antiquitie in general it is acknowledged to be a Popish Argument and for such to be auoyded and taken heede of so do some careful Ministers prescribe to the King's Maiestie himself saying Let 3) Suruey of the Booke of common prayer p. 18. not your Maiestie be now deceiued by the Popish Argument of supposed Antiquitie as Iosue was with the old and mouldie bread of the Gibeonites c. And now followeth the reason of this so necessarie preuention And the rather O Christian King take heed because Antichrist began to work euen in the Apostles dayes Yea sayth D. Willet Papistrie 4) Synop. Controu 2. q. p. 56. c. began to work in S. Paul's dayes So that Papistrie being as old as S. Peter and S. Paule it behooueth Protestants in al good policie to reiect and vtterly abandon Antiquitie as a Popish argument and as the old and mouldie bread which the poore Papists feed on The like prouident and most necessarie preuention for Protestants vsed the Maddeburgians 5) Pref. ep Dedicat. ad Elizab. Angliae Reg. in Cen. 4. before to Q. Elizabeth to whom pretending to bring Antiquitie for her Maiestie to looke vpon yet at the first premonish that few Doctours in ancient times did write Luculenter et cum iudicio perspicuously and witb iudgement And withal complayne that very manie are as it were so bewitched with the holie title of Antiquitie that without al attention and true iudgement they do giue willingly consent to neuer so foule errours if they be set downe by Antiquitie so fearful are these deepest Diuers and Searchers into Antiquitie to be tryed therby Iust cause had then D. Humfrey to reproue Mr. Iewel for his so bold appealing to the first 600. yeares saying Iewel 6) De vita Iewelli p. 212. And see the like in Fulks Retentiue p. 55. prouoked to al that Antiquitie but he was ouer liberal and yeelded more then reason and was ouer iniurious to himself c. and in a manner spoiled himself and his Protestant Church c. It is sufficient for a Christian to say So saith the Lord c. What haue we to do with Fathers with flesh or bloud or what belongeth it to vs Protestants what the false Synodes of Bishops shal ordaine Here our Doctour wisely controuleth Mr. Iewel for his so rash appealing to the primitiue Church as seeing plainly that his new Protestant familie would be vtterly spoyled and vndone therby And the like dislike sheweth Iacobus Acontius against some Protestants alleadging the Fathers in their owne behalf saying 7) Stratag li. 6. p. 296. Some are come to that that they wil fil al their writings with the authoritie of Fathers which I would to God they had performed with as prosperous successe as they hopefully attempted it c. I do verily think that this custome is most dangerous and altogeather to be eschewed So that in this Doctours iudgement it is no wisdome but imminent danger for Protestants to meddle with the Fathers Now if any desire to know the true cause of this danger hanging ouer Protestants by appealing thus to Fathers it is confessed to be no other but because the sayd Fathers were Papists We are sure saith Mr. 8) Papisto-mastix p. 193. Midleton that the mysterie of iniquitie did work in Paul's time and fel not a-sleep so soone as Paule was dead waking againe 600. yeares after when this mysterie was disclosed c. and therfore no maruaile though perusing Councels Fathers and Stories from the Apostles forward we find the print of the Popes feet O how firme and during are the Pope's steps or our Roman faith which at this day are presented vnto vs by Councels Fathers and stories from the Apostles times al of them recording to vs their Posteritie the Popish Faith to be the Faith of their times What reason then haue Protestants to appeale to such
is so copiously preached by vs that truly in the Apostles time it was not so cleare And seing 48) Tom 2. lib. Cont. Reg. Angliae f. 344. God's word is aboue al the Diuine Maiestie maketh for me So that I passe not if 100. Austins 1000. Cyprians 1000. King Harrie 's Churches stood against me Wherefore 49) Lib. de Seruo Arb. And see Cnoglerus his Symbolatria p. 152. Cast you off what armour the ancient Orthodoxal Fathers shal afford or the schooles of Diuines the authoritie of Councels Bishops the consent of so manie Ages of al Christian People we receiue nothing but Scriptures but yet so that the infallible authoritie of interpreting is only in vs what we expound that the Holy-Ghost thinketh what others though great though manie bring it commeth from the spirit of Sathan and a mind distracted Yea the Pope 50) L. aduersus Papatum Romae à Satana fundatum f. 1. knoweth saith Luther that by the singular guift and bountie of God I am more learned in the Scriptures then himself and al his Asses But if Luther himself doth so fully mouthe his owne prayses and deserts we may presume his disciples and followers are not sparing in the like And so indeed writeth Alberus 51) Contra Carolostadianos l. 7. I doubt not but that if Austin were now liuing he would not be ashamed to professe himself Martin Luther's Scholler But Musculus lasheth far further for 52) Praef. in Libellum Ger. de Diaboli Tyramide since the Apostles times saith he there liued not in the world a greater then Luther And it may be sayd that God powred al his guifts vpon this only man and that there is as great difference betwixt the ancient Doctours and Luther as betwixt the light of the Sunne and of the Moone Neither is it to be doubted but that the ancient Fathers euen those that are chief and best among them as Hilarie and Austin if they had liued and taught in the same time with Luther would without blushing haue carried the lanterne before him as his Schollers or Ministers And another professeth that 53) In Hos in Hist Sacra part alt f. 346. He preferreth one leaf in Luther before the writings of al Fathers So that if we beleeue either Luther or his Schollers not only Austin and Hilarie and Ambrose but euen al the Fathers since the Apostles times must giue place to Luther in regard of his profoundest knowledge and learning But not only Luther himself thus far excelleth the ancient Fathers but in his opinion the onlie 54) In Col. mensa c. de Patribus Eccl. Apologie of Philip Melancthon doth far excel al the Doctours of the Church and exceed euen Austin himself Beza in like sort affirmeth 55) Praef. in nouum Testament dicat Principi Condiensi Caluin to haue far exceeded al the ancient and later writers in interpreting of the Scriptures wth varietie of words and allegation of reasons Yea saith he 56) Epist Theol. ep 1 p. 5. I haue been accustomed to say and not without cause as I take it that whilst I compare those verie times next the Apostles with our times they had then more conscience lesse knowledge And on the other side we haue now more knowledge and lesse conscience This is my opinion c. Agreably herevnto saith D. Whiteguift in his 57) Defence c. p. 472. Brief Comparison between the Protestants Bishops of our time and the Bishops of Primitiue Church The doctrine taught and professed by our Bishops at this day is much more perfect and sound then it commonly was in anie Age after the Apostles times 58) Ibid. p. 473. Surely you are not able to reckon in anie Age since the Apostles time anie company of Bishops that taught and held so perfect and sound doctrine in al poynts as â—he Bishops of England do at this time Yea in the truth of doctrine our Bishops be not only comparable with the old Bishops but in many degrees to be preferred before them In like sort saith Zanchius 59) De Sacra Scriptura p. 411. Christ hath now giuen to vs more excellent Interpreters then euer heretofore stnce the Apostles Yea saith M. Iacob 60) Defence of Treatise of Christ's sufferings p. 146. And see the Answ to Downham's sermon p. 20. this is the profit that comes by ordinarie flanting with the Fathers c. if in this case we were to looke after anie man surely we haue more cause to regard our late faithful teachers rather then those of old who being equal with the best of them in anie of the excellent graces of God's Spirit c. By which we may see the smal account made by Protestants of ancient Doctours not blushing thus to equal yea much to preferre their owne latest Writers before al the Fathers since the Apostles times But what should I vrge thus much their dislike disclaiming and disgracing of ancient Fathers when they spare not to reiect and contemne the authoritie of al Councels though neuer so general neuer so ancient And first doth not Luther affirme in general 61) In Asser Articulorum per Leonem X. damnat Art 29. That the way is made to vs Protestants of weakning the authoritie of Councels and of freely contradicting their decrees and of iudging their Acts and of confessing confidently whatsoeuer seemeth true to Protestants whether it be approued or reproued by anie Councel Doth not Beza affirme that 62) Praef. in nouum Testam ad Princ. C ndiens euen in the best times the ambition ignorance and lewdnes of Bishops was such that the verie blind may easily perceaue how that Sathan was president in their assemblies or Councels Doth not D. Humfrey disclaime from the Councels celebrated in the first 600. years saying 63) De vita Iuelli p. 212. What concerneth it vs what the false Synods of Bishops as then shal ordayne And doth not M. Carthwright reiect as erroneous euen the first Nycene Councel saying 64) 2. Reply part 1. p. 509. We haue good cause to hould for suspect whatsoeuer either in gouernment or doctrine those times left vnto vs not confirmed by substantial proofs out of the Word c. This appeareth in the first Councel of Nyce where the most errours decreed vpon c. besides the vngodlie custome which may appeare to haue occupyed almost al the Churches touching the forbidding of the second Marriage of Ministers before that Councel And againe 65) Ibid. p. 484. In the same Councel appeareth that to those chosen to the Ministerie vnmarried it was not lawful to take anie wife afterwards c. Paphnutius sheweth that not only this was before that Councel but was an ancient Tradition in the Church in which both himself and the whole Councel rested c. If the ancient Tradition of the Church saith Cartwright cannot authorize this neither can ancient custome authorize the other to wit of Metropolitans Luther
stileth the Canons of the sayd Councel of Nyce 66) Luther l. de Cōcilijs part 1. p. 92. hay straw wood stubble and demandeth whether the the Holie-Ghost hath nothing els to do in Councels but to bind and burden his Ministers with impossible dangerous and vnnecessarie lawes So absurd was the Councel of Nyce in Luther's iudgement affirming further That more light is brought to a Christian by that Catechisme which children do learne then by al the Councels Caluin calleth the Fathers of the sayd Councel of Nyce 67) Lib. de vera Eccl. reformat opuscul p. 486. And Inst l. 4. c. 9. 3. 10. Phanaticos that is men Phanatical or deluded by the Diuel and withal giueth leaue to euerie priuate man to examin the decrees of Councels by the Scriptures saying 68) Inst l. 4. c. 9. §. 8. 9 11. Let no names or authorities of Councels Pastours Bishops hinder vs but that we may examin al Spirits of al men by the rule of the Word of God And againe 69 Ib. 3. 14. I deny that Interpretation of Scripture to be alwayes true and certain which is receaued by the consent of a Councel But I cannot heer but obserue the strange giddines of this primest protestant Caluin who directly contrarie to his former Assertions writeth thus 70) Inst l. 4. c. 9. §. 8. Those ancient Synods as Nyce Constantinople the first of Ephesus of Chalcedon and the like which were assembled for the confuting of errours we do willingly embrace and reuerence as Sacred for as much as concerneth doctrines of Faith For they containe nothing but the pure and natiue Interpretation of Scripture which the holie Fathers with spiritual wisdome applyed to the vanquishing of the Enemies of Religion which then appeared But to leaue him thus fighting with himself and to come to the Ministers of the Church of Scotland 71) In the end of the Harmonie of Coafes p. 19. And see the sayd Harmonie sect 1. p. 14. Without iust examination we do not receaue say they whatsoeuer is obtruded vnto men vnder the name of a General Councel for plaine it is that as the men assembled were men so haue some of them manifestly erred and that in matters of great weight and importance So far then as the Councel proueth the determination and commandment that it giueth by the plaine word of God so soone do we reuerence and embrace the same Heervnto also do accord our English Protestants teaching that 72) Articles of faith agreed vpon in the Conuocations of A. 1562. 1604. art 21. General Councels c. may erre and sometimes haue erred euen in things pertaining vnto God Wherefore things ordained by them as necessarie to saluation haue neither strength nor authoritie vnles it may be declared that they be taken out of holie Scriptures So vnwilling or rather truly fearful are Protestants to appeale vnto General Councels for the decision of Controuersies But D. Luther proceedeth further seriously expecting exacting that al Councels shal be subiect to his Censure determination 73) Tom. 2. wittenberg f. 375. The Rectours of Churches saith he the Pastours of Christ's sheep haue indeed power to teach but the sheep ought to iudge whether they propose the voice of Christ or of strangers c. Wherefore let the Pope Bishops Councels c. decree appoynt and ordaine what they wil we wil not hinder them but we who are the sheep of Christ and heare his voice wil haue it in our power to iudge whether they propose things true and agreable to the voice of our Pastour or no and they are to yeald subscribe and obey our Censure and Sentence Now if Councels be subiect to the Censure of Luther or anie other such rotten sheep then lesse is the authoritie of Councels then of Luther himself then the which nothing can be spoken more absurd or ridiculous In like sort saith Peter Martyr in general 74) De votis p. 476. As long as we rest in Councels Fathers we shal be euer conuersant in the same errours Yea saith M. Carthwright 75) In whiteg Tract 2. p. 95. If this be a sufficient proof to say such a Councel decreed such a Doctour sayd so there is almost nothing so true but I can impugne nothing so false but I can make true And wel assured I am that by their meanes the principal grounds of our Protestant Faith may beshabken But to conclude 76) De Concil contr Bellar. 9. 6. Fulk Answ to a Counterf Cath p. 89. 90. Will. Syno 92. D Whitaker D. Fulk D. Willet and most other Protestants teaching that General Councels may erre in Faith and manners it is no wonder though they reiect their authoritie but yet it euidently conuinceth that in matters of Faith and Religion Protestants dare not relye and submit themselues to the decrees and definitions either of ancient or moderne General Councels So that though Ministers in their Pulpits where none wil gainsay them do florish and flaunt forth the ancient Fathers prayses approue their authoritie applaud them as Protestants and appeale to those primitiue Doctours as Maisters and Patrons of their errours yet when they are pressed by Catholicks with cleerest euidence of their particular writings sayings and practise and with the answerable acknowledgements of the learned Protestants then their tone is changed bitterly exclaming that The argument drawne from Antiquitie is a Popish argument that To appeale to the Primitiue Church is to iniurie the Protestant Congregation That for Protestants to fil their books with the authorities of Fathers is dangerous and to be eschued That in al Councels Fathers and Stories since the Apostles the print of the Popes feet is to be found That the Papists strongest towers are in the testimonies of the Doctours That the Fathers were blind and ignorant in the Scriptures That they were certainly damned for their Papistical opinions vnles they repented That their interpretations of Scripture were aduantagious to Papists and preiudicial to Protestants That their books and Commentaries were contrarie to Scripture Yea that the Fathers did contradict one another and often one and the same himself That Luther and sundrie other Protestants are much to be preferred for learning before S. Austin S. Ambrose and al the other Fathers That the Doctrine now taught by the Bishops of England is much more sound then euer was taught by any Bishops since the Apostles and therefore that our Bishops are in manie degrees to be preferred before them that euen in the best times Sathan was president in Councels And lastly that al decrees of Popes Bishops and Councels are to yeeld and obey the Censure of Luther Dot not al this most strongly confirme that in the verie harts and consciences of Protestants themselues the ancient Fathers were Roman Catholicks and most aduerse to Protestants and that therefore and only therefore they are thus reiected contemned disgraced and wronged by them euen by Luther Caluin Beza
Apostles withal and the Euangelists themselues euen after their receauing of the Holie-Ghost did write teach and defend seueral errours how can anie Christian build an infaillible sauing Faith vpon the Ghospels or other Apostolical writings How then can they be acerteyned of anie one true sentence of God's Word if the writers and deliuerers therof were not infallibly guided by the Holie-Ghost into al truth and so freed from al errour ignorance misprision or falshood And if some peraduenture except that these so Atheistical and Sacrilegious reproaches imposed vpon the sacred Scriptures and the Blessed Euangelists and Apostles be not the ordinarie opinions or practise of Protestants but peraduenture only of some few either ignorant or not endowed with the spirit the falshood and vanitie of this euasion is most apparent for who of forraine Protestants were euer reputed more learned or more enlightned with the spirit then Luther Caluin Beza Chemnitius Islebius Illiricus with the other Centurie-writers Castalio Zuinglius Musculus Brentius Andreas Friccius Adamus Francisci Bullinger and sundrie such others al of them highly esteemed of by their other Protestant Brethren Or who at home more honoured then Tyndal Iewel Goad Fotherbie Fulk Whitaker c. and yet al of those being indeed the primest men that euer they had do ioyntly conspire in this greatest impietie of censuring controuling correcting or reiecting some one part or other of the forenamed Canonical Scriptures or els of condemning the Euangelists and Apostles of seueral errours infirmities and sliding in matters of faith and Religion Which foule proceeding of so manie and so learned Protestants doth euidently according to D. Fulk's Rule conuince them to be perfect Hereticks For (88) Confut. of Purgatorie p. 214. whosoeuer sayth he denieth the authoritie of the Holy Scriptures thereby bewrayeth himself to be an Heretick Laus Deo B. V. Mariae FINIS A TABLE OF THE BOOKES AND CHAPTERS THE FIRST BOOKE WHERIN IS PROVED BY THE Confession of Protestants that the Catholick Roman Church hath continued Euer most Knowne and Vniuersal euen from Christs verie Time vntil the Date hereof THE antiquitie of the true Church and the force of the Argument drawne from the Authoritie thereof As also of these great necessitie of finding-out this true Church chap. 1. fol. 1. That the present Roman Church and Religion for the last thousand yeares after Christ haue stil continued most Knowne and Vniuersal throughout the Christian world chap. 2. fol. 4. A further confirmation of the vniuersal continuance of our Roman Church Religiō for these last thousand yeares is taken from the Confessed belief and profession of such Persons as liuing within the foresayd time were most Famous and Notorious in one respect or other chap. 3. fol. 8. That the faith of S. Gregorie S. Augustin and whereto England was by them conuerted was our Roman Catholick and not Protestant chap. 4. fol. 10. That the present Roman Church and Religion continued and flourished during the whole time of the Primitiue Church contayning the first six hundred yeares after Christ chap. 5. fol. 20. A further proof of the present Roman Religions Continuance from the Apostles time to these dayes is taken from the Christian belief of the Indians Armenians Grecians and Brittans al of them Conuerted in the dayes of the Apostles chap. 6. fol. 27. THE SECOND BOOKE Wherin is proued through al the chief Articles of Religion and that by the Confessions of Protestants that the same Faith which is now taught by the Roman Church was anciently taught by the Primitiue Church of Christ THat General Councels do truly represent the Church of Christ And of the Credit and Authoritie giuen by Protestants to the sayd Councels chap. 1. fol. 1. That the argument drawne from the Authoritie of the Primitiue Church of Christ and of her Doctours and Pastours is an Argument of force And for such approued by sundrie learned Protestants chap. 2. fol. 3. That the Fathers and Doctours of the Primitiue Church beleeued and taught that S. Peter was ordayned by Christ the Head of the Apostles and of the whole Church and that the Church was founded vpon S. Peter it is Confessed by Protestants themselues chap. 3. fol. 8. It is Confessed by Protestants that the Fathers of the Primitiue Church beleeued taught the Bishop of Rome to succeed S. Peter in the Primacie of the whole Church chap. 4. fol. 11. It is confessed by Protestants that the Primitiue Church of Christ beleeued the Bookes of Tobie Iudith Ester Sapientia Ecclesiasticus and two first of Machabees to be truly Canonical Scripture chap. 5. fol. 25. It is acknowledged by Protestants that the Fathers of the Primitiue Church beleeued taught our now Catholick Doctrine concerning Traditions chap. 6. fol. 30. It is Confessed by Protestants that according to the Fathers of the Primitiue Church the Sacraments do truly conferre Grace and Remission of sinnes And that they are in number seauen chap. 7. fol. 32. It is Confessed by Protestants that the Fathers of the Primitiue Church beleeued and taught the Real Presence of Christs true Bodie and Bloud in the Eucharist As also our further Catholick Doctrines of Transubstantiation Adoration Reseruation and the like chap. 8. fol. 35. Protestants confesse that the Primitiue Church of Christ beleeued taught practised the Sacrifice of the Masse as also that it is a Sacrifice according to the order of Melchisedech and truly Propitiatory for the liuing the dead chap. 9. fol. 41. It is acknowledged by Protestants that the Fathers of the Primitiue Church taught and beleeued the Power of Priests to Remission of Sinnes The necessitie of Auricular Confession The Imposition of Pennance and satisfaction to God thereby As also our Roman Doctrine of Pardons or Indulgences chap. 10. fol. 46. It is granted by Protestants that the Catholick Doctrine of Purgatorie of Prayer and Sacrifice for the dead was beleeued taught and practised by the Fathers of the Primitiue Church chap. 11. fol. 50. It is confessed by Protestants that the. Fathers of the Primitiue Church beleeued and taught our Catholick Doctrine of Christs Descending into Hel. chap. 12. fol. 55. It is confessed by Protestants that the Fathers of the Primitiue Church beleeued and practised our Catholick Doctrine of praying to Angels and Saints chap. 13. fol. 57. It is confessed by Protestants that the Fathers of the Primitiue Church allowed the vse of Christs Image and his Saincts placing them euen in churches and Reuerencing them chap. 14. fol. 60. It is acknowledged by Protestants that the Fathers of the Primitiue Church did specially honour reuerence the holie Relicks of Martyrs and other Saints carrying them in Processions and making Pilgrimages vnto them at which also manie Miracles were wrought chap. 15. fol. 63. It is confessed by Protestants that the holie Doctours of the Primitiue Church not only vsed the signe of the Crosse but likewise worshiped the same attributing great efficacie power and vertue thervnto chap.
16. f. 65. It is confessed by Protestants that the Fathers of the Primitiue Church allowed and practised the vow of Chastitie and that they neuer allowed such as were of the Clergie afterwards to marrie or such as had been twice married to be admitted to holie Orders without special dispensation chap. 17. fol. 69. It is confessed by Protestants that the Fathers of the Promitiue Church allowed practised the Religious State of Monastical life and that manie Christians of those purest times both men and women did strictly obserue and professe the same chap. 18. f. 74. It is acknowledged by Protestants that the Fathers of the Primitiue Church allowed practised prescribed fasts and abstinence from certaine meats vpon dayes and times appointed holding the same obligatorie vnder sinne condemning also our Puritan Sabboath Fasts chap. 19. fol. 80. It is admitted by Protestants that the Fathers of the Primitiue Church expresly taught our Catholick Doctrine concerning Free wil. chap. 20. fol. 84 It is granted by Protestants that the Fathers of the Primitiue Church taught not only Faith but likewise Good works truly to iustifye that the sayd works are meritorious of Grace and Glorie chap. 21. fol. 86. It is acknowledged by Protestants that the Ceremonies now vsed in the Roman Church in the ministring of seruice or Sacrifice as also of the Sacraments were formerly vsed by the Bishops Priests and Fathers of the Primitiue Church chap. 22. fol. 89 THE THIRD BOOK WHERIN is proued that the Church of Protestants was neuer knowne or in Being before the d yes of Luther And that the Articles of Religion now taught by the Protestant Congregation were Heresies condemned by the Primitiue Church of Christ IT is confessed by Protestants that from the dayes of the Apostles vntil the tyme of Luther themselues neuer had any knowne Church or Congregatiō in anie part of the vniuersal World chap. 1. fol. 1. A Further conuincing proof of the Protestant Churches not being during the first 600. yeares is taken from the Fathers Condemning in the ancient Hereticks the chiefest articles of the Protestant Religion and our Protestants Confessing the same And First Concerning the Sacraments chap. 2. fol. 6. That the Fathers condemned in ancient Hereticks the opinions of Protestants concerning the Scriptures and the Church Militant and Triumphant chap. 3. fol. 9. That the Fathers condemned in ancient Hereticks the opinions of Protestants concerning Monachisme the mariage of Priests and prescribed Fasts chap. 4. fol. 12. That the Fathers condemned in ancient Hereticks the opinions of Protestants concerning Free-wil Faith Good works the Commandments sinne and the knowledge and Death of Christ chap. 5. fol. 14. Protestants Vsual recrimination of obiecting old Heresies to the Catholick Roman Church is cleerly examined discouered confuted by their owne acknowledgements chap. 6. fol. 17. A Further trial is Made Whether Catholicks or Protestants be true Hereticks and this by sundrie knowne badges or markes of Heresie chap. 7. fol. 23. A brief Suruey of D. Whites Catalogue wherin contrary to the Confessed truth in the precedent Chapter of no knowne beginning or change of our Romane Faith in anye Age he vndertaketh according to his Title therof to shew That the present Religion of the Roman Church was obserued resisted in al Ages as it came in and increased naming withal the Persons that made the Resistance And the poynts wherin And the time when from fiftie yeares to fiftie through-out al Ages since Christ chap. 8. fol. 35. THE FOVRTH BOOK WHERIN is proued by the Confession of Protestants that according to the Sacred Scriptures the Roman Church is the true Church of Christ And so to haue euer continued from his time vntil the Date hereof And of the contrary the Protestants Church to be only a Sect Heretical and neuer to haue been before the dayes of Luther PRotestants flying to the sacred Scriptures in proof defence of their Church and Religion it is shewed the sayd flight not only in itself to be dishonourable but also to be the ordinarie flight of al moderne Hereticks chap. 1. fol. 1. That euen the Sacred Scriptures themselues do most plentifully testify our Romane Church to be the Church of of Christ and the Congregation or Church of Protestants to be no true Church but a Sect Heretical most contrarie to the said Scriptures And that first by the Churches necessarie continuance and vniuersalitie chap. 2. fol. 5. The second Proof from sacred Scriptures in cōfirmation of the Roman Church and Confutation of the Protestant is taken from the Euer visibilitie of Christ's Church chap. 3. fol. 10. The third Proof from Sacred Scriptures in Cōfirmation of the Roman Church and Confutation of the Protestant is taken from the Churches Pastours which must euer continue with lawful Calling and Succession and with Administration of Word and Sacraments chap. 4. fol. 13. The fourth Proof from sacred Scriptures in confirmation of the Roman Church and Confutation of the Protestant is taken from the Conuersion of Heathen Kings and Nations to the Faith of Christ chap. 5. fol. 24. A Discouerie or brief Examination of sundrie sleights and Euasions vsed by Protestant Writers in Excuse of the manifest confessed want of their Churches fulfilling the foresaid Scripiures concerning the continuance vniuersalitie and visibilitie of Christs true Church chap. 6. fol. 33. THE FIFT BOOK WHERIN is shewed that Protestants in the Decision of Controuersies between them and Catholicks do absolutly disclaime from Antiquitie reiecting the Ancient Fathers and Councels for Papistical and the Sacred Scriptures for erroneous THat Protestants Disclaime from al Antiquitie since the Apostles and further reiect and condemne as Papistical the Ancient Fathers and General Councels chap. 1. fol. 1. That the Protestant Church disclaimeth from the Fathers of the Primitiue Church it is further proued by the Protestants condemning al the ancient Fathers in general for beleeuing teaching and practising the seueral particular actions of our Catholick Roman Faith and Religion chap. 2. fol. 12. That Protestants do not only disclaime from al the ancient Fathers as Papists but do further reiect the authoritie of the sacred Scriptures and of the Apostles themselues as being erroneous and that therefore they do not found their Faith or Religion vpon Sacred Scriptures or Christ his Apostles chap. 3. fol. 18. A TABLE SHEWING THE particular matters handled in this Booke A. AELfricus no Protestant l. 3. c. 8. pag. 51. Albigenses taught sundrie errours lib. 1. c. 3. pag. 12. Almaricus his errours l. 3. c. 8. p. 55. Antiquitie commended Praef. to the Reader and lib. 5. c. 1. pag. 1. 2. Antiquitie reiected by Protestants as a Popish Argument l. 1. c. 5. pag. 26. Anthonie the Monk commended l. 2. c. 18. Apostles according to Protestants erred in Faith euen after the comming of the Holie-Ghost l. 5. c. 3. p. 23. 25. Apocalyps reiected by Protestants lib. 5 c. 3. p. 24. Armenia conuerted by the Apostles lib. 1. c. 6. p.
p. 23. Primacie Ecclesiastical denyed to Emperours by the Fathers of the Primitiue Church l. 2. c. 4. p. 23. l. 3. c. 3. p. 9. 10. Priests ordained by Bishops l. 2. c. 22. Priests are to liue chast l. 2. c. 17. p. 69. Hereticks impugning the same condemned l. 2. c. 17. l. 3. c. 8. p. 42. 48. Priests anoynted at their Consecration l. 2. c. 22. Priests haue power from God to remit sinne l. 2. c. 10. p. 46. Priests crownes shauen in the Primitiue Church l. 2. c. 22. The Primitiue Church her authoritie l. 2. c. 2. p. 3. seq To the Primitiue Church some Protestants pretend to appeale l. 2. c. 2. p. 3. 4. Other Protestants dislike the foresaid Appeale l. 5. c. 1. p. 2. Protestant Church inuisible at S. Gregorie's time l. 3. c. 1. p. 1. Inuisible al these last 1000. yeares Ib. p. 1. at Luther's time Ib. p. 2. at Wicklifes time Ib. p. 3. at at Waldo's time Ib. p. 4. at Constantine's time and since Ib. p. 4. 5. In the Apostles time and after to Constantine Ib. p. 5. Protestants went out of the Catholick Church l. 3. c. 7. p. 24. Protestants neuer wrought miracles l. 4. c. 4. p. 22. 23. Protestants confessed external dissimulation in matters of ReligioÌ„ l. 4. c. 6. p. 38. Protestant Writers preferred by Protesstants before S. Peter and S. Paul l. 5. c. 3. p. 22. 23. The name Protestant from whence first l. 3. c. 7. p. 32. The name Puritan from whence first Ib. 32. Protestants are enforced to vse diuers names for distinction of their Religion and opinions Ibid. p. 33. The name Papist whence Ibid. p. 31. Purgatorie Prayer and Sacrifice for the dead confessedly taught by the Fathers of the Primitiue Church l. 2. c. 11. p. 50. seq l 5. c. 2. p. 14. Purgatorie belieued by the ancient belieuing Iewes l. 2. c. 11. p. 53. Purgatorie denyed by Aerius and he condemned for the same by the Fathers l. 2. c. 11. p. 52. l. 3. c. 3. p. 11. R. RElicks confessedly reuerenced by the Fathers of the Primitiue Church l. 2. c. 15. l. 5. c. 2. p. 15. By Relicks miracles wrought l. 2. c. 15. To Relicks Pilgrimages made in the Primitiue Church Ibidem Relicks translated Ibidem Relicks impugned by Vigilantius and he condemned for the same by the Fathers l. 3. c. 3. p. 10. Roman Church continued confessedly a pure Church for the first 600. yeares l. 1. c. 5. p. 21. 22. l. 2. c. 2. Roman Church continued vniuersally these last 1000. yeares l. 1. c. 2. p. 4. Roman Church continued vniuersally since Constantine l. 1. c. 5. p. 26. Roman Church continued the first 300. yeares after Christ l. 1. c. 5. p. 22. Roman-Church hath no knowne beginning since the Apostles l. 1. c. 5. p. 26. Roman Church her beginning is ascribed to the Apostles times Ib. p. 20. S. SAcraments to conferre grace is the confessed doctrine of the Primitiue Church l 2. c. 7. p. 32. Seauen Sacraments taught by the Primitiue Church l. 2. c. 7. p. 32. Saints to be prayed vnto is the confessed doctrine of the ancient Fathers l. 2. c. 13. p. 57. Saints to be prayed vnto was taught by the ancient Iewes l. 2. c. 13. p. 59. Vigilantius and Aerius denying the same were condemned by the Fathers l 2 c. 13 p. 58. l. 3. c. 3. p. 10. Scotus obiected against the Real presence and answered l. 3. c. 8. p. 46 47. Scriptures appealed vnto by al Hereticks l. 3. c. 3. p. 9. l. 4. c. 1. p. 2. Scripture hath seeming repugnances l. 2. c. 5. p. Scriptures discerned for Canonical by the Church l. 1. c. 1. p. 2. Simeon the Monk commended l. 2. c. 18. p. Sinne attributed to God as the Authour condemned l. 3. c. 5. p. 15. Sigebert l. 3 c. 8. p. 52. T. TRaditions confessedly taught by the Primitiue Church l. 2. c. 6. p. 30. Traditions taught by the ancient belieuing Iewes Ibid. p. 31. Transubstantiation confessedly taught by the Fathers of the Priuitiue Church l. 2. c. 8. p. 34. V. VEstments Vessels consecrated to Church vses l. 2. c. 22. Vow of Chastitie approued and practised by the Primitiue Chuch l. 2 c. 17. p. 69. Iouinian condemned for denyal therof l. 3. c. 4. p. 13. W. WAldo no Protestant l. 1. c. 3. p. 12. Wales conuerted to Christianitie in the Apostles times l. 1. c. 6. p. 18. The VVelch-men or ancient Brittans were Roman Catholicks l. 1. c. 6. p. 28. They changed not their Faith before S. Austin's coming l. 1. c. 6. p. 30. VViccliff no Protestant l. 1. c. 3. p. 11. 12. VVorkes to iustifye and merit confessedly taught by the Primitiue Church l. 2. c. 21. p. 86. Heretiks denying the same condemned l. 3. c. 5. p. 14. FINIS FAVLTS ESCAPED Epist Ded. Parag. Now supposing for plainly read painfully Lib. 1. c. 1. pag. 2. lin 26. for Ccclestical read Ecclesiastical p. 3. for ea read and. cap. 2. p. 4. lin antepen for Confirmation read Confutation Lib 2. c. 1. p 2. lin vlt. for Church read Churches c. 4 p. 17. lin anteantep for which read with p. 18. lin 18. for Athasius read Athanasius p 19. lin 40. for 20 read second hundred cap. 5. p. 26. lin 42. for Churches read Councels p. 29. lin 33. for only not read not only cap. 8. p. 37. lin 10. for purposely to read purposely profâ—sseâ—h to p. 38. lin 13. for or read of cap. 10 p. 48. for command read commend Lib. 3. c. 1. p. 4. lin 21. for thy read this cap. 4 p. 13. lin 34. for Arians read Aerians cap. 6. p. 2. lin 14. for roriter read writer cap. 7. p. 23. lin ante p adde 9 p. 26. lin 6. for with read which p. 31. lin 24. for that read the. p. 32. lin 14. for the read that cap. 8. p. 37. lin 36. for Turctisme read Turcisme p. 48. lin 1. for contracted read contradicted lin 17. for 66 read 26 p. 43. lin 29. for noâ— worthie read not vnworthie Lib. 4. c. 2. p. 5. lin 25. v. Dauid adde 7 lin 27. v. Church adde 8 p. 6. lin 2. v. Vvittemberg adde 17 p. 7. lin 36. v. VvhitaKer adde 34 p 8. lin 1. for often read after lin pen for Scriptures read Scriptures cap 4. p. 13. lin pen. p. 14. lin 27. for Vzias read Ozias lin 9. p. 20. lin 9. for had read and p. 24. lin 3 for ad read al lin 35. for Chapter 4. read Chapters Lib. 5. c. 1. pag. 3. lin 1. sor read sort c. 1. pag. 4. lin 3. ad read and. pag. 10. lin penult beshabken read beshaken lib. 5.
Truth like a chast matrone though it be slandred yet is so bold and powerful that it feareth not to be tryed by those that are the greatest enemies therof Now this kind of inuincible and vnanswerable argument haue I specially chosen and pursued throughout this Treatise following as wel thereby to take the most speedie surest course for the final deciding of Cōtrouersies as also clearly to preuent the endles shifts euasions and deceipts so generally and so cunningly practised by al kind of Sectaries For who would not thinke but that anie man of iudgement and learning diligently perusing the large and learned Works but only of Cardinal Bellarmine and Iodocus Coccius men so studious payneful and sincere in describing the pedigree of the Church of Christ but that he would easily see iudge and confesse the ancient primitiue Church Faith and Religion the most approued General Councels and learnedst Doctours the most authentical Records Histories and Monuments of those purest times al of them to testifye to depose and confirme the self-same Truth Faith and Religion which the present Roman Church at this day beleeueth practiseth and professeth And yet what a world of tricks fallacies and inuentions hath the Enemie suggested to our moderne Hereticks for the blemishing and obscuring of that clearest glasse of the Primitiue Church wherin our present Roman is so liuely represented Who would thinke it equal to oppose a dark and casual saying of S. Austin for example against his knowne practise and laboured proof to the contrarie And who would not blush to oppose S. Austin to his fowlest disgrace as contrarie to himself What more desperate course can be taken then to censure his most certain writings for counterfet because they contradict and confute their impious Nouelties What greater schisme can be raised against the Church then to pretend her chiefest Bishops Doctours and Pastours in the chiefest articles of Faith to be at mutual and deadlie warres amongst themselues What more audacious temeritie and base ingratitude can Malice itself offer to those our so noble Progenitours then to alter and corrupt their learnedst writings which as clearest euidences for the Catholick Faith they bequeathed to Posteritie And yet these and manie more then these are the ordinarie Sophismes of our late Sectaries For the surest and final preuention of al which what shorter or more expedite course can I take then Protestants for example appealing to the Primitiue Church and her Doctours and Pastours to produce themselues confessing al these to be their Enemies and the Teachers and Patrons of Papistrie How more vnanswerably can I conuince that S. Austin beleeued taught our Catholick doctrine of Purgatorie Prayer and Sacrifice for the Dead then if sundrie Protestants of greatest knowledge and reading not beleeuing the same doctrine themselues doe yet acknowledge and reproue the same in S. Austin Now whether in this Treatise following I performe this and that by the confessions not of few or of those of the least esteeme but of very manie and those of the primest Protestants that are or euer were and these not only reprouing S. Austin but with him S. Ambrose S. Gregorie S. Hierome S. Chrysostom S. Leo S. Epiphanius S. Gregorie Nazianzen S. Gregorie Nyssen S. Cyril S. Hilarie S. Basil S. Cyprian S. Ireneus S. Ignatius S. Dionisius and the rest of the most renowned Doctours of the purest and most approued times and this not only in the Doctrine of Purgatorie but in al the points of chiefest weight I remit myself wholy to the seuerest Censures of al Iudicious and Diligent Readers THE EPISTLE DEDICATORIE TO M. DOCTOVR MORTON SVPERINTENDENT OF LICHFIELD AND COVENTRIE GOOD M. Doctour As yourself were occasionally the principal motour for me to compose this Treatise following so haue seueral reasons since summoned themselues to my serious thoughts for the further presenting of the same vnto you For who now more renowned in the new English Church for his supposed learning then yourself Who more paynefully hath laboured for the promoting of the Protestant Ghospel then D. Morton Who higher aduanced meerly for the former respects from his lowest fortunes then the Superintendent of Lichfield And therefore I cannot but expect tbat your kinde acceptance wil afford some luster vnto it at least in the eyes of your illuminated Brethren Wherof I rest also very confident in that the method generally obserued therin by concluding my intent from the confession of my Aduersaries is the course specially affected and studyed by yourself in al your writings which cannot but beget some better liking in your setled iudgement therof But that indeed Sir which did chiefly induce me aboue the rest both to compile and dedicate this Work as you see was your Appeale for Protestants made in answer to the Protestāts Apologie for the Roman Church For hauing diligently perused and examined this our Apologie and finding the Arguments there framed to be most concluding the testimonies produced to be most pertinent and al this euer to be backed and strengthned with the answerable acknowledgements of Protestants themselues I must confesse my thirsting curiositie was such as that neither my thoughts nor desires were at rest vntil with like diligēce I had perused and examined your Protestants Appeale Which finding to be such as I wil shortly describe I was hēce encouraged to make yet further vse of the foresayd Apologie conioyning therewith some labours of my owne in that kind which as I desire they may be profitable to al so to yourself most earnestly I wish And so now briefly to discouer to yourself and al other iudicious Readers the manner of your answer vsed throughout your whole Appeale M. Brierlie a Catholick Roman Priest presuming to present vnto his Maiestie of Great Britanie our Soueraigne Lord King Iames his humble Petition in behalf of the Catholicks of England so grieuously pressed and persecuted during the Raigne of Q. Elizabeth his late Predecessour amongst innumerable Motiues which as so manie darts would presently wound a hart so sensible of his Subiects miseries iniuries and oppressions he specially selected the sweetest harmonie and most pleasing concord in matters Diuine and Celestial between the Ancient Apostolick and Catholick Faith of the Primitiue Church of Christ and our present Roman nothing doubting but that the bare presenting of the louelie face of so gray Antiquitie would timely beget in so generous and noble a Mind an immouable loue and liking to al her true heires and lawful posteritie But M. Brierlie further knowing the malignant Enemie his ordinarie imposture in sending forth Emissaries for the dazeling and deluding of the best aspects in preuention therof and al other imaginable deceit in that kind the self-same Emissaries his greatest enemies he specially picked for his chiefest Aduocats strangely but indeed most strongly affecting the equitie of his Cause to be finally decided by no other Iudge then the Aduersarie therof For wheras the indubitate writings of the ancientest Fathers the sacred Decrees
of al General Councels the credible Histories of al times and places the surest records of al Lawes and Countries yea al monuments of greatest Antiquitie doe ioyntly contest and depose not only for the vniuersal and vninterrupted continuance of our Roman Faith from Christ's verie time vntil the Date heerof but also for the sympathie or rather Identitie of our same Faith with the Faith of the Apostles and their first Disciples M. Brierlie often obseruing al these our honours and helps to haue been so strangely defaced blemished and obscured by the art and malice of the foresayd Emissaries as that their true face and beautie were neuer suffred to be seen or knowne to vulgar Protestants purposely therefore forbare to presente Antiquitie only in her natiue colours and chiefly to rest contented with that stayned dye and luster which the Protestant pencil through her clearest splendour durst not denye her producing to that end the plentiful and clearest testimonies of almost al the primest Writers that euer Protestancie brought forth al of them as it were conspiring in flat charging reprouing and impugning the learnedst Doctours and most renowned Bishops of the eldest and purest times for the self-same doctrines and practise of Religion which the Roman Church at this day exerciseth Now supposing M. Brierlie his sincere and faithful demeanour heerin what could the wit of man produce more palpable and concluding for our foresayd harmonie with the Primitiue Church For if the volumes of Fathers and Councels be so clear in themselues for our Catholick Roman and Papistical Faith that the learnedst Protestans most playnly studying and perusing the same are finally enforced through euidence of their words and deeds to acknowledge and reproue the self-same Doctours and Bishops for Roman Catholicks then M. Brierlie his desire and intent of prouing our Roman Faith and Church to continue most agreable with the Primitiue Faith and Church of Christ and his Apostles is fully accomplished And that M. Brierlie his candour may more clearly shine and his so vnanswerable Arguments be the better conceaued I wil therefore dispel those thick clowdes wherewith yourself M. Morton hath most painefully laboured to couer or darken the foresayd brightnes What then must we expect from you for an Answer pertinent and direct and as proceeding from a iudicious and learned Doctour yea from a Minister of simple truth but either ingenuously to confesse with the Puritans and so manie your other Protestant Brethren cited by M. Brierlie that the sayd Primitiue and purest Church of Christ was one and the same for Faith and Religion with our now Roman or else that M. Brierlie had cunningly corrupted maymed and defaced the sayings and writings of your foresayd Brethren in his owne behalf If you seing the first to be most true would haue honestly subscribed therunto as manie more learned Protestants then yourself had formerly done then your Answer or Appeale had been altogeather needles The second you durst not auouch knowing right wel that M. Brierlie his affected nicenes and precisenes in so particularly quoting his Aduersaries Bookes Chapters Pages lines or letters would ouer strongly contest for his Religious integritie industrie and fidelitie in handling the same What then is imaginable for you M. Doctour to answer against such pregnant testimonies of other Protestant Doctours Nothing at al but what M. Brierlie foresaw and accordingly premonished and wherof yourself also taketh notice in the beginning of your Appeale would be only trifeling vnworthie extrauagant and impertinent As first when your other Brethren are plentifully produced confessing and reprouing the Fathers for teaching our Roman Faith yourself often very honestly ioyne with them acknowledging the same in our behalf and against yourself so that in this Case in steed of Answer or Appeale you make a strong Apologie for M. Brierlie and the Romish Church Doe not you yourself speaking of the Antiquitie of our Doctrine concerning the Popes Primacie confesse and say [1) Prot. Apol. p. 72. Be it granted for so it is that the Papal Primacie beginning in Boniface the Third is now 900. yeares old Doe you not arise and write of S. Gregorie that (2) Ibid. p. 31. whether or how farre c. S. Gregorie did reach his arm of Iurisdiction beyond his Dioces is a question by reason of his diuers obscure speaches and some particular practises diuersly answered of our Protestant Authours Doe you not charge S. Leo to haue been in this respect (3) Ibid p. 283 285. peremptorie and ambitious and that he was so 4 Ib. 294. 295. peremptorie that for his presumption he found in his time brotherlie checks Yea doe you not confesse that certain (5) Ib. 294. 295. Sentences of S. Cyprian may seeme at their first view vnto the vnexpert Reader to obserue in the Church of Rome both a Grace of impossibilitie of erring and also a prerogatiue of the Mother-Church of al others But though yourself may be deemed an Expert Reader yet no otherwise doe you euade those cleerest sentences then by affirming that such like speaches are but the languages of Rhetorical Amplification which commonly the Fathers vse by way of perswasion rather then by asseueration And seing you admit that the Fathers did commonly vse such speaches by way of perswasion you must needs admit that they being holie and learned men did also beleeue and affirme the same Yea you approue such (6) Ib. pag. 300. Protestant Authours as reprehēd Victor for arrogācie transgressing the bounds of his Iurisdiction in Excōmunicating the Churches of Asia Lastly wheras in proof of Antichrist's short raigne (7) Ib. pag. 143. M. Brierlie produceth M. Fox teaching that almost al the holie and learned Interpreters doe by a time times and half a time vnderstand only three yeares and a half affirming further this to be the consent and opinion of almost al the ancient Fathers Doe not you likewise subscribe therunto and say (8) Ib pag 144. Now therefore c. why might not these Fathers be sayd to haue erred in prefining the time of Antichrist c. So that you are inforced to confesse that in the Fathers opinions al our precedent Popes are cleered from being Antichrists In like sort concerning Vnwritten Traditions you grant that S. Gregorie vseth (9) Ib. pag. 62. to confirme some things by Tradition and that the ancient beleeuing Iewes (10) Ib pag. 377. pretended vnwritten Traditions As teaching Purgatorie and Prayer for the Dead you reproue S. Gregorie touching that (11) Ib pag. 19. 20. the Sacrifice of the Altar is profitable for the Soules departed And againe (12) Ib p. 498. S. Austin speaketh with a Peraduenture but S. Gregorie kindled the fire with a Credo But you somewhat passed Peraduenture when you writ that Protestant (13) Ib. pag. 495. Authours haue obserued S. Augustin to haue been the first who opened the window vnto the doctrine of Purgatorie by whose owne direction say you we
conscience and true knowledge would also dedicate your further labours I doubt not but you would become a dutiful Child to your Mother-Church and a paineful labourer in Christ's Vinyeard for which I wil not cease to entreate his Infinit Goodnes and wil euer rest Yours in him N. N. THE FIRST BOOKE WHERIN IS PROVED BY THE CONFESSION OF PROTESTANTS THAT THE CATHOLICK ROMAN CHVRCH hath continued Euer most Knowne and Vniuersal euen from Christs verie Time vntil the Date hereof THE ANTIQVITIE OF THE TRVE Church and the force of the Argument drawne from the Authoritie thereof As also of the great necessitie of finding-out this true Church CHAP. I. AS we may not doubt but that the Church of God speaking in general is equal in Ancestrie with our first Parents in Paradise so in regard of her Birth-right prime Antiquitie long precedent and preferred before the Scriptures themselues so euen of the Church of Christians it may not be denyed but that as in the same instant with Christ her Head and Spouse she receaued her first being life and birth in this world according to that of (1) Ad c. 3. Lucae S. Ambrose God built his Church in the chief Corner-stone CHRIST IESVS so was this her greatest nobilitie of birth not only to cōtinue for some few generatiōs but euer to remayne for al posteritie Agreable to which the Prophet Daniel foretold of the Church (2) cap. 2.4 that it is A kingdome that shal neuer be destroyed but shal stand for euer And so shal be according to Esay as (3) cap 60.15 An eternal glorie and ioy from generation to generation So that in steed of further discussing the Ancientest Birth-right and not-interrupted continuance of Christ his Church I wil now only treat of the force of that Argumēt which is drawne from the Authoritie Determinatiō of the sayd so Noble Anciēt a Church Wherein for greater expeditiō I wil pretermit most plentiful proofes both from sacred Scriptures and learnedst Fathers in steed therof wil for the present rest satisfyed with the freest Grants and ample Acknowledgements of the learnedst Protestants who first as they euer pretend to build their whole Faith Religion vpon the Written Word so do they further aknowledge the same to be only knowne and discerned from forged and adulterat Scriptures by the sacred Authoritie and Testimonie of the Church of Christ In which respect (4) Ans to a Counterf catho pag. 5. D. Fulk auoucheth that The Church of Christ hath Iudgemēt to discerne true writings from counterfait and the Word of God from the writings of men and this Iudgemēt she hath of the Holie-Ghost With whom accordeth (5) Def. of the Apolog. p. 201. D. Iewel affirming that The Church of God hath the Spirit of wisdome whereby to discerne true Scriptures from false In like sort M. (6) Ecc. Pol. pag. 86. Hooker teacheth that of things necessarie the verie chiefest is to know what books we are bound to esteeme holie which point is confessed impossible for the Scripture itself to teach Whereof he further sayth (7) Ib pa. 102. It is not the Word of God which doth or possibly can assure vs that we do wel to think it is his word for if anie one Book of Scripture did giue testimonie of al yet stil that Scripture which giueth credit to the rest would require another Scripture to giue credit vnto it Neither could we come vnto anie pause whereon to rest vnles besides Scripture there were something which might assure vs c. which something afterwards he acknowledgeth (8) Ib. pa. 146. 116. And see Aretius his examen p. 24. And Bachmanus his Centuriae tres c. p. 267. To be the authoritie of Gods Church Agreably hereunto D. whitaker doth confesse that this weightiest controuersie concerning Canonical Scriptures is to vs determined not by (9) Cōt Staplet p. 370. 357. HooK Eccl. Pol. p. 147. Testimonie of the Spirit the which sayth he being priuat and secret is vnfit to teach and refel others but as he further teacheth (10) Ibi. p. 300. 298. 24. 25. And against Raynolds p. 44. by the Ecclestical Tradition An argument whereby may be argued and conuinced what books be Canonical and what not And another Protestant Writer (11) Auth. of the scripture and the church f. 71 72. 73. 74 75. much commended by (12) Ibid. in the Preface Bullinger affirmeth that The church is endued with the Spirit of God and that The diligence authoritie of the Church is to be acknowledged herein which hath partly giuen forth her Testimonie of the assured writings and hath partly by her Spiritual Iudgement refused the writings which are vnworthie Yea he further assureth vs with (13) Tom 6. cōt ep fund cap. 5. Tert. lib. 1 de Praescrip cap. 6. S. Augustin and Tertullian that (14) Scrip. and the church p. 72 74. 75. And see Melancthon in epist ad Rom cap. 14. pa 358 359. we could not beleeue the Ghospel were it not that the Church taught vs and witnessed that this doctrine was deliuered by the Apostles So that the authoritie of Gods true Church is so great as that by her warrāt we are only assured of the Written Word of God itself and for such by her wisedome giuen by the Holie-Ghost discerned to vs from al forged Apocryphal and counterfait writings A power and authoritie then which none stronger seing the certain knowledge of the true word of God is the chiefest foundation of our Christian Faith Now if in this question so important we may securely follow and beleeue the Sentence and Determination of the Church how much more then in other doubts of smaller respect Adde further hereunto in surest confirmation of the Churches authoritie that it is likewise granted and taught by the learnedst Protestants that the true visible Church can not wholy erre in matters of Faith Insomuch as they expresly confesse of this verie point that (15) Bertr de Loque in his discourse of the church p. 198. Phil. Act. mon. p. 1401. Bilney ibid. p. 464. Ridley 16. pag. 1361. 1286. Baynhā ib. p 493. Fox ib. pag. 999. Bancroft in his sermon preached 8. Febr. 1588. pag. 42. 43. The Diuines of Geneua in their Propositions and Principles disputed c. p. 142. Zanchius de Relig pa. 157. Rhegius in Discus The. p. 213. Hunnius in Act. Colloq Ratisb fol. 205. KecKermannus in System Theol. pag. 387. Povvel of things indifferent p. 7 The controuersie c. is not of the Catholick or vniuersall Church for we al agree say they herein that she cannot orre touching Faith c. wherefore this question is touching only a particular church Now if the true Church can not erre in matters of Faith Religion then is her Authoritie sacred her Decrees infallible her Children secured and al difficulties arising easily composed Yea from hence also may we iustly collect amongst al
world could speake more fully for vs Catholicks in this behalf then doth the Protestāt (2) In his cōsideration of the Papists reasons pag. 105. M. Powel in these wordes I grāt that from the yeare of Christ 605. the Professant companie of Poperie hath been verie visible and perspicuous Or (3) In his discourse vpō the Catalo of Doc. ī the epi. to the Reader Simon de Voyon affirming that Anno 605. when Pope Boniface was stalled in the Papal Throne thē falsehood got the victorie c. Thē was the whole world ouerwhelmed with the dregs of Antichristian filthines abominable superstistions and Traditions of the Pope then was that vniuersal Apostacie from the Faith foretold by Paul And (4) In his exposition of the Creed v. 1. pag. 266. M. Parkins hauing spoken of the second signe of Christs comming which there he maketh to be the reuealing of Antichrist in Boniface Anno 607. alleageth thē next after as a third signe and as being distinct frō the other a general departing of most men from the Faith saying respectiuely thereof during the space of nine hundred yeares c. the Popish Heresie so do Hereticks stile it hath spred it self ouer the earth and so vniuersally in his opinion through-out al parts of Faith that sayth he next afterwards and the faithful seruants of God were but as a handful of wheat in a mountaine of chaffe (8) In his Reioynder to Bristow p. 34 which can scarce be discerned And againe (5) Ib. p. 310. we say for the space of manie hundred yeares an vniuersal Apostacie ouerspred the whole face of the earth and that our Protestant Church was not then visible to the world but lay hid vnder the chaffe of Poperie and the truth of this the Records of al Ages manifest M. Morton (6) Protest Apeale p. 71. would euade these testimonies of M. Parkins by answering that he speaketh this only of the Article of the Popes Primacie and not in regard of so large continuance and general belief of the other points of our now Catholick Faith which yet is most vntrue Parkins speaking in general of a general departing from the Faith and of an vniuersal Apostacie In so much as the Protestant church or Religion was not according to Parkins then visible to the world In which sense also (7) In his Ansvver to a counterf Cath◠p. 36. D. Fulk confesseth that The very Religiō of the Papists came in and preuailed Anno Dom. 607. c. And so vniuersally that saith he The reuelatiō of Antichrist with the Churches flight into the wildernes was Anno 607. So clear and cōfessed it is that our now Roman Religion hath cōtinued vniuersally for these last thousand yeares A truth so euidēt also that most Protestāts do from thence inferre and auouch that al the Popes of Rome for these last 1000. yeares haue been Antichrists (9) De Antichrist in praef p. 1. 2. M. Powel affirmeth that the Pope hath been Antichrist at al times since Gregorie the Great According to (10) Cont. Bellar. par 1. pag. 371. Danaeus The Kingdome of that Antichrist hath now manifestly cōtinued more then nine hundred yeares from the Emperour Phocas to the time af Luther D. whitaker (11) De Eccles cōt Bellar p. 144. affirmeth Boniface the Third who liued Anno 607 and al his successours to haue been Antichrists (12) In his Answ to a counterf catho pa. 27. and in his confut of Purgatory pa. 344 and ParKins v. 1. pag. 266. D. Fulk auoucheth that the Popes from Boniface the Third were blaspemous Hereticks and Antichrists (13) In his treatise of Antic p. 4. D. Downeham auerreth that The whole row or rable of Popes frō Boniface the Third downeward were Antichrists (14) In his Tryal of the Romish cler pa. 330. M. wotton tearmeth Boniface the Third the first reuealed Antichrist And (15) Hist sacr par p. 189. Hospinian censureth him and al his successours to be verissimos Antichristos most true Antichrists D. whitaker (16) De eccl cōt 8. l. cōtro 2. q. 4. p. 144. deliuering his owne and other Protestants opinion herein sayth we affirme Gregorie the Great to haue been the last true and holie Bishop of that Church c. For those that followed were true Antichrists c. And because they aske and demand of vs some certain time we assigne them this to wit of Antichrist's first comming So manifest it is that al the Roman Bishops after these last thousand yeares being thus censured by so many Protestants for Antichrists haue no lesse professed and maintayned the present Roman Religion then Gregorie the Fifteenth who now gouerneth that Sea and is charged by Protestants to be Antichrist himself And as al the Popes for these last thousand yeares are thus censured for Antichrists so is the article of the Popes Primacie or supreme authoritie ouer the whole Church in al matters Ecclesiastical plainly acknowledged by D. Morton himself to be no lesse ancient For wheras M. Brierlie produceth the testimonies of Parkins Napper and Broccard for the continuance of our Roman Religion in general for these last thousand yeares D. Morton restraineth their meaning though vndeseruedly only to the point of the Popes Primacie saying (17) Prot. Appeal p. 71 The alleaged Authours speak of the Primacie of the Pope And againe 18 Ibid p. 72 Be it granted for so it is that the Papal Primacie beginning in Boniface the Third is now nine hundred yeares old So ancient and vniuersal is this so transcendent Article of the Popes Primacie in matters Spiritual A point of such importāce that D. Reynolds affirmeth therein (19) confe p. 568. the very being and essence of a Papist to consist And D. Whitaker auoucheth that (20) contra Duroe pag. 503. It is the head of Popish Religion of which almost al the rest depend But what more forcibly can be produced for the further confirming of our Churches foresayd cōtinuāce for these last 1000. yeares then the publick exercise of our Churches Liturgie the holy Sacrifice of the Masse during the foresayd time Seing not only according to D. Sutclif (21) Answear to Exceptions pa. 11. In the Masse the verie Soule of Poperie doth consist as also according to D. Whitaker (22) contra Duroe pag. 426. Nothing is more holie and diuine in our conceipt But withal the Masse including sundrie articles of our Catholick Faith as true external Sacrifice the Real presence of Christs Bodie and Bloud in the Eucharist Priesthood Prayer to Angels and Saints Prayer and Sacrifice for the dead and sundrie such like thereby doth plainely conuince the vniuersal continuāce of our Catholick Religion D. Luther (23) In colloquiis Ger. de Missae affirmeth that Priuat Masse hath deceiued many Saints and carried them away into errour frō the time of Gregorie for 800. yeares With him agreeth M. Tindal (24) Act. Mon. p. 1338 in
is tearmed (80) Lib. German quo causas recusati concilij Trid. reddunt f. 257. An impudent Writer heauing the Pope vp into an Idol a corrupter of Gods honour and preacher of Antichrist Yea so sincerely was he affected to the Pope and the Church of Rome that the Centurists report him to (81) Cent. 12. Col. 1639. say to the Count of Aquitaine whatsoeuer is out of the Roman Church that by Gods iudgement is of necessitie to perish euen as those things which were out of the Ark were drowned in the Deluge c. As also he that persecuteth the pope of Rome whom the Centurists here cal Antichrist he persecuteth sayth S. Bernard the Sonne of God himself Neither was anie of this Papistrie noted as then to be singular in S. Bernard but to the contrarie it is confessed by M. Iewel and M. Whitaker that S. Bernard liued in the midst of the Popes Rout and Tyrannie D. Morton as formerly calling S. Bernard for his life a Sainct and for his doctrine a Lamp to preuēt obiections thereby arising against him prouidently addeth that he neither was Sainct nor Lamp (83) Prot. Appeal p. 458. Simply as vnspotted with errours but Comparatiuely or c. in his generation that is in respect of the Age wherin he liued when a deluge of iniquities and mist of Popish Superstition had ouerspred the outward face of the Church So truly Papistical was S. Bernard At this time of S. Bernard liued also S. Malachias of whom Osiander writeth thus (84) Cent. 12. p. 315. 256. Malachias an Archbishop in Ireland from his childhood was giuen to learning and Religion and at length intreated and much inforced he vndertook to be the Archbishop of Ireland He was verie familiar with S. Bernard admiring and imitating his Monachisme and embracing Popish superstitions He worshipped the Pope of Rome for God To him verie manie miracles are ascribed c. So truly Roman Catholick was S. Malachias (82) Def. of the Apol. p 557. Vvhit cont Dur. l. 2. p. 154. In the Age precedent to these liued Berengarius who being a Catholick Priest and the Archdeacon of Angiers dissented afterwards from the Roman Church in the Doctrine of Transubstantiation which yet before his death he so fully (85) Fox Act. Monu p. 13. Vvestphalus his Apologetica c. fol. 6. Osiand Cent. 11. p. 158. Centurie-writers Cent. 11. col 458. recanted and conformed himself to the Roman Church as that the same is plainly acknowledged by M. Fox by Westphalus Osiander and the Centurists who record his recantation verbatim as it was Before him liued the most renowned Emperour Charles the Great who was so wholy deuoted to the Roman Religion as that the same is plentifully aknowledged by (86) Osiand in ep cent 8 p. 101. Cowpers Chron. fol 173. Fox in Apoc. p. 436. Crispinus of the Estate of the Church p. 221. Bulling in 2. Thess p. 533. Osiander D. Cowper M. Fox Crispinus and Bullinger In somuch that (87) In Epist Dedic Hist Sacram. Hospinian affirmeth that The Emperour Charles the Great commanded not only by publick Edicts that the Ceremonies and Rites as also the Latin Masse of the Roman Church and the other Decrees Statutes and Ordinances of the Roman Bishop should be obserued but himself also by imprisonnents and other kindes of punishments compelled Churches to the same Yea such was the vnion between the Popes of Rome and Charles the Great in matters of Faith and friendship as that according to D. Cowpers (88) Chron. f. 174. relation there were Certain Bishops sent by Adrian to Charles who held a Councel in France against the condemnation of Images c. And of the other side wheras Paulus (89) Lib. 2. Hist Franc. Aemilius relateth that Charles the Great sent twelue Bishops vnto a Councel holden at Rome by Pope Stephen in confutation of the errour of the Greeks against Images the same is so true that the like report therof is made by the (90) Cent. 8. col 570. Centurie-writers So assured it is that this Age in the opinion of Protestants was most superstitious and Papistical Before Charles liued S. Bede whom (91) Cent. 8. p. 58. Osiander tearmeth a good man and D. Cowper (92) Chron. f. 171. confesseth that he was Renowned in al the world for his learning and godly life For which he was also priuiledged with the Surname of Reuerend (93) Hollinsh Chron at An. 735. Covvpers Chron. at An. 724 fol. 168. Fox Act. Mon. p. 128. and by D. (94) Iesuit part 2. p. 326. Humfrey is specially registred among The Godlie men raised-vp by the Holie-Ghost D. Morton sayth (95) Prot. Appeal l. 1. p. 70. Although we deny not that Bede did hold diuers Romish Doctrines yet do we find sufficient cause in his writings why we may allow him his Title of Venerable and good man M. Bale further testifyeth that S. Bede (96) Cent. 2. c. 1. was so practised in prophane Authours that he scarce had his match in that Age He learned Physick and Metaphysick out of the purest fountaines He knew the Mysteries of the Christian Faith so soundly that for his exact knowledge both of Greek and Latin manie preferred him before Gregorie the Great There is scarce anie thing worth reading to be found in al Antiquitie which in due places is not read in Bede If he had liued in the times of Augustin Hierom Chrysostom I doubt not but he might haue contended for Equalitie with them He put forth manie bookes ful of al kind of Learning M. Fox acknowledgeth that (97) Act. Mon. p. 127. He was a man of worthie and memorable memorie and famous learning The whole Latin Church at that time gaue him the Maistrie in Iudgement and knowledge of the holie Scripture M. Bel granteth (98) Downfal that Bede for vertue and learning was renowned in al the world And M. Cambden recordeth that Bede (99) Descrip Brit. p. 670. the singular glorie of England by Pietie and Erudition obtayned the name of Venerable wrot many volumes most leardnedly So truly godlie learned and renowned was S. Bede euen in the iudgement of Protestants But now to obserue in particular whether the Faith and Religion taught beleeued and practised by this so worthie a man was Roman Catholick or English Protestant [100] Cent. 8. p. 58. Osiander who before called him A good man in expresse tearmes confesseth that Bede was wrapped in al the Popish Errours wherin we Protestants at this day dissent from the Pope For he admired and embraced the worship of Images the Popish Masse Inuocation of Saincts c. In which respect also M. Fox (101) Act. Mon. p. 128. 129. acknowledgeth that he liued in great credit and esteem with the Popes of that Age whom M. Fulk (102) Retentiue ag Bristovv p. 278. tearmeth Antichrists and therupon reiecteth S. Bedes authoritie saying The last Testimonie out of Bede
who liued vnder the Tyrannie of Antichrist I wil not stand vpon M. Sanders may haue great store of such For (103) Against Rhem. Test in Heb. 10.11 Bede liued in a superstitious time long after Antichrist did openly shew himself c. He affirmed that Men vnderstood that the healthful Sacrifice auayled to Redemption both of bodie and soul euerlasting and (104) Ib. in 1. Pet. 3.19 In some things was carryed away with the errours and corruptions of his time By which it clearly appeareth that in the Age of S. Bede the Popes of Rome were so Roman Catholick and the external gouernment of the Church thereto so answerable that our moderne Protestants do therfore traduce those ancient Popes for Antichrists and their Gouernment for Tyrannie In the Age before S. Bede liued the two most famous Brethren named Eualdi whom M. Bale tearmeth (105) In Catal. Scrip. c. Cēt. 14. p. 145. Osiand Cent. 7. p. 559. Papistical Martyrs suffring for Papistrie And though D. Morton (106) Prot. Appeal p. 67. 68. endeauoureth to obscure this by affirming that Protestant Writers were doubtful whether the sayd Brethren dyed by the hands of Christians or Infidels which later himself thinketh more probable yet this hindreth not but according to his Brother Bale and Osiāder cited by himself that they dyed for our Roman Faith Yea so litle was this doubt that D. Morton himself sayth If notwithstanding Catholicks shal insist in their clayme of these Two suffring death in maintenāce of Papal Iurisdiction ouer forraine Churches miserable wil be their issue especially considering that we haue manie Twoes to oppose against these euen a thousand and two hundred religious Britans who in a resolute resistāce of that Iurisdictiō and Authoritie of Austin the Legate of S. Gregorie dyed vnder the hands of Pagans and as Galfrid speaketh suffred Martyrdome But to omit that Protestants (107) Carthvvright in his 2. Reply part 1. p. 475. themselues charge this Galfrid with vntruth and too too childish errours wherof his owne (108) See l. 8. c. 19. l. 9. c. 4. l. 10. c. 3. l. 12. c. 4. c. writings wil be best witnesses as also that D. Morton doth vntruly and vndeseruedly referre the death of these religious Britans occasionally to S. Augustin I can not yet but obserue the greatest penurie of ancient Protestant Martyrs when D. Morton is glad to clayme for such those who liued and dyed Catholick Monks euen the Monks of Bangor So great a Bangor doth our Doctour make in making Protestants Ministers and Martyrs of Religious Monks THAT THE FAITH OF S. GREGORIE AND S. Augustin and whereto England was by them conuerted was our Roman Catholick and not Protestant CHAPTER IV. TO arise euen to the height or beginning of these last thousand yeares and first to examine the Faith of S. Gregorie and his time Concerning him D. Morton writeth (1) Prot. Appeal p 5. wee willingly cōfesse that S. Gregorie was an happie Father of the Faith of manie and deliuered to thē the sauing knowledge of Christ crucifyed And as cōcerning our Countries Conuersion by him he further sayth (2) Prot. Appeal p. 60. This happines of our English Conuersion to the Faith of Christ and worthines of our Conuerter S. Gregorie we could easily acknowledge without anie further adoe c And againe our Protestants Authours looking on their right hand beholding how Pagans and Heathnish people c. by the light of the Ghospel through the Ministerie of Austin the Legat of S. Gregorie were brought vnto the Fold of Christ did togeather with the Angels of heauen reioyce in remembrance of this their happines and therefore called it a gratious Conuersion And that most iustly seing our sayd Conuersion was confessedly from Paganisme to the true Faith of Christ for so Hollinshead testifyeth that (3) Description of Britannie l. 11. c. 7. S. Austin was sent by Gregorie to preach to English-men the Word of God who were yet blind in Pagan superstition And Anno 596. Gregorie sent Austin into this Ile to preach the Christian Faith vnto the English Saxons which Nation as yet had not receaued the Ghospel Agreably also hereunto sayth M. Cambden (4) Descript Britan. p. 104. Austin hauing rooted-out the Monsters of Heathnish superstition ingrafting Christ in English-mens minds with most happie successe conuerted them to the Faith And the like is acknowledged by M. Fox (5) Act. Mon. 110. 115. 172. Bale Cent. 1. c. 73. Cent. c. 1. VvitaKer cont Dur. p. 394. Cooper chron anno 599. Stovv 596. M. Bale D. Whitaker D. Cowper Now this Faith was so certainly the Faith planted by Christ and his Apostles that M. Fox calleth it (6) Act. Mon. p. 111. 120. 122 The Christian Faith (7) Ib. p. 115. 116. the Faith and Doctrine of Christ (8) Ib p. 121. Christs Religion and that Church The Church of Christ and The (9) Ib. p. 112. perfect Faith of Christ Cowper styleth it (10) Chron. anno 636. The right Beleef Stow (11) Chron. p. 9. The Christian Faith and (12) Ibid. p. 72. pure and incorrupted Christianitie Cambden (13) Descript Brit. p. 519. The true Religion of Christ (14) In vit Paulin. Godwine The Ghospel and sundrie such like Now this our Conuersion to this Faith of Christ by the meanes of Saint Gregorie was in truth a Blessing so great that (15) Cont. Duraeum l. 5. p. 394. 502. 397. D. Whitaker most humbly thus writeth therof we wil euer most gratefully remember that great benefit which Gregorie bestowed vpon vs And I confesse S. Gregorie to haue been a good and holie man c. He was a learned and holie Bishop (16) Iesuit p. 2. p. 624. D. Humfrey tearmeth him therefore Gregorie in name Great and indeed Great and M. Bel (17) Suruey of Poperie p. 187. calleth him S. Gregorie surnamed the Great the holie and learned Bishop of Rome According to (18) Cent. 1. c. 68. M. Bale He was the most excellent of al the Bishops of Rome for learning and life That against his wil and striuing to the contrarie and at last compelled he succeeded Pope Pelagius That he was a learned and good man founded Hospitals inuited Pilgrims to his Table sent things necessarie to the Monkes of Hierusalem and maintayned three thousand Virgins (19) Ibid. c. 7. He reduced the Gothes from Arianisme to the Church professed himself by writing the Seruant of Gods seruants that thereby he might appeare most far from al Ambition and desire of command In like sort is S. Augustin honoured by M. Godwine (20) Catalog of Bish. p. 7. and See Cābd Descript Brit. p 515. 178. Bale Cent. 13. c. 7. Cent. 14. c. 13. with the Title of our Apostle Wherof also sayth M. Mason (21) Consecration of English Bishops p. 57. 58. for as much as Lethardus gathered but a few clusters and the mayne Vintage was reserued
for Austin let vs enlarge the signification of the word Apostle and extend it to Austin and moreouer though improperly to Gregorie and Eleutherius c. whose proceedings towards the Prince were Chistian honest and orderlie They came to plant the Faith of Christ c. They came to preach obedience c. Their Ghospel was a Ghospel of peace c. They coÌ„uerted People c. They sought to build the Church c. Yea S. Austins desire to conuert the Pagans and his dutiful respect to the Prince deserue to be written in Letters of gold So worthily doth this Prostant here think of S. Eleutherius S. Gregorie and S. Austin And no lesse are his most deserued prayses blazed by M. Hollinshead recording that (22) Historie of Engl. Austin and his companie arriued at Canterburie where he made his abode by the Kings permission exercised the life of Apostles in fasting watching and prayers preaching the word of God to as manie as they could despising al worldlie pleasures as not appertayning to them c. Also Ethelbert was persuaded by the good example of S. Austin and his companie and by miracles shewed to be Baptized The like hereof is testifyed by (23) Act. Mon. p. 105. 116. M. Fox D. Bilson also acknowledgeth that (24) of Obedience p. 57. Austin and his fellowes came with Religion to God and submission to Princes Stow reporteth that (25) Chron. p. 65. S. Austin and his fellowes liued in the feare of God And D. Godwine acknowledgeth that (26) Vita August He was a Monk of great vertue calling him S. Austin But now to be satisfied what was the Faith and Religion taught by these two so holie men S. Gregorie and S. Austin or what the vniuersal and publick profession of Christians al ouer the world at those times was whether Catholick or Protestant I wil appeale to our Protestant Doctours Amongst whom writeth M. Bale that (27) Cent 1. c. 68. c. 70. Gregorie burdned the Church and Religion of God more then al with more then Iewish ceremonies He ordered the Rites of Masse commanded Masses to be sayd ouer the dead bodies of the Apostles deuised Litanies and Procession permitted the Image of the Blessed Virgin to be carryed about confirmed Pilgrimage to Images by Indulgences for the peoples Deuotions He was maintayner of Pardons granted Indulgences to those that visit Churches on certain dayes made foure Books of Dialogues for strengthning Purgatorie admitted Adoration of the Crosse and Masses for the Dead called Englishmen to Romish Rites by Austin the Monk (28) Cent. 1. fol. 3. who was sent from Gregorie to season the English Saxons with the Popish Faith And (29) Iesuit part 2. rat 5. p. 5. 627. D Humfrey affirmeth that they brought into England the whole Chaos of Popish superstition M. Harison chargeth (30) DescriptioÌ„ of Britanie before Holinsh. Chron. vol. 1. p â—7 Austin to haue conuerted the Saxons from Paganisme to no lesse hurtful superstition then they did know before making aâ— Exchange from open 〈◊〉 secret Idolatrie In so much as he (31) Ibid. p. 29. 27. concludeth in playne â—eaâ—â—es thaâ— Augustin came and brought-in Poperie In like sort (32) Apologia pro coena Domini p. 33. M. Ascham chargeth him to be The ouerthrower of true Religion and the establisher of al Popish Doctrine D. Abbots tearming S. Austin (33) Answ to D. Bishop p. 197. A black Monk affirmeth that this (34) Ibid. p. 20 Italian Monk brought new obseruations from Rome and the English receaued the same And that this (35) Ibi. p. 198 Romish Priest requireth the British Bishops to be subiect to his Romish Authoritie And this Romish Archbishop brought-in Nouelties and Superstitions and did contaminate the Faith of Christ Mellitus Laurentius Iustus al of Austins Companie and condition D. Fulk affirmeth that (36) Against Rhem. Test in 1. Cor. 4. Austin did not beget the Nation of English-men to Christ by the pure Ghospel c. but with mixture of mens Traditions And that Christian Religion which he found in the Britans he laboured to corrupt with Romish Inuentions M. Bale auoucheth that (37) Cent. 1. c. 70. Austin entred not with the Ghospel of Christian peace but with the Banner of his Apostleship with a Siluer Crosse Litanies Procession Images painted Pictures Reliques and Ritual bookes And that (38) Ib. c. 73. King Ethelbert first of al English men receiued of Gregorie the First Bishop of Rome by Austin the opinion of the Roman Religion with al inposture or deceit and dyed the One and twentith of his receaued Papisme As also that (39) Cent. 8. c. 85. Austin brought-in Popish Monkerie and besides the Popes Traditions ô Heretical mouth brought nothing but mans dung (40) Cent. 13. c. 1. Austin the Roman brought hither Romish rites without sound doctrine The King receaued Romanisme with the annexed Idolatries He brought in Monks Altars Vestments Images Masses Chalices Crosses Candlesticks Banners Holie as they cal them Vessels holie Water and Bookes of Roman Customes Their chiefest studies were about the oblations of Masses (41) Cent. 14. c. 31. Yea Austin disposed al things in England to the forme of the Synagogue of Rome and made Englishmen honourers of the Pope Finally (42) Catal. Scrip. Illust cent 14. p. 117. Austin by his interpreters taught our people the Papistical Faith Wherupon D. Fulk tearmeth our (43) Against Purgat p 333. Conuersion from Infidelitie our peruersion (44) Resp ad Bellar. p. 1. p. 780. And Danaeus calleth it The inebriation of the whore of Babilon mentioned Apoc. 17. Concerning these two last testimonies of D. Fulk and Danaeus D. Morton sayth (45) Prot. Appeal p. 60. These Apologists with more art then truth do obiect vnto vs our owne Authours calling it a peruersion and inebriation herein peruerting their direct meaning and propounding their testimonies as spoken absolutely concerning euerie particular point of Roman Faith which was only respectiuely and restraynedly intended But as this Glosse is only his voluntarie Imagination and indeed a direct peruerting of his owne Brethren so is it sufficiently confuted by so manie Protestant Doctours last cited and next following who most agreably confesse that the Faith speaking in general taught here by Austin was the Popish Faith the whole chaos of Popish Superstition Yea Poperie it self Wherfore to proceed (46) Trial of the Romish Clergie p. 377. M. Wotton auoucheth that Neither was England conuerted by your proud Monk Austin but peruerted rather And (47) Answ to a Popish Appologie f. 8. D. Fulk affirmeth that Austin an vnlearned Monk came into the Land to corrupt the sinceritie of the Faith which the Britans had receiued c. Yea S. Augustin was so wholy ours that (48) 2. Reply part 1. p 301. M. Cartwright calleth him Romish Augustin And (49) Tetrastylon Papismi p. 122. D. Willet expresly placeth Augustin and Gregorie among
did formerly auouch that the sayd Rule was of Credit euen with the Protestant Writers of our time namely with M. Suinglius M. Caluin and M. Gualter and that he thinketh no learned man doth dissent from them Yet M. Morton who would take it vnkindly and that deseruedly to be censured for Vnlearned doth thus far aduenture directly to discredit and disauthorize the foresayd Rule as shamefully to curtle it both in bredth and depth The (44) Ibid. p. 345. bredth sayth he though most vntruly reacheth no further then vnto matters of Ceremonies and other Customes of the Church c. Secondly the depth of the same position if it be rightly sounded wil be found to be a truth of strong Probabilitie only and not of an absolute infallibilitie which is to say in good English that the sayd Rule only concerneth trifles and matters of smal moment as also that it is not a certain true Rule but peraduenture true and peraduenture false which strongly implyeth that our Doctour in matters of faith and moment now disputed between Catholicks and Protestants would be loath to be squared and tryed thereby And so in substance acknowledgeth that which he reproueth in M. Carthwright that thereby a window is open to bring in al Poperie So euidently in deed doth the forsayd Rule prescribed by S. Austin and approued by so manie of the learned Protestants strongly confirme and conuince the vninterrupted Current and continuance of our Roman Religion from the Apostles themselues to these our dayes Agreably to the premisses (45) Consideration of the Papists supplication p. 43. M. Powel expresly and ingenuously confesseth We can not tel by whom or at what time sayth he the enemie did sow the Papists Doctrine c. Neither indeed do we know who was the first Authour of euerie one of your blasphemous opinions (46) Reioynder to Bristow p. 265. D. Fulk answering to the demand of the Roman Churches change sayth thereto I answer my Text sayth it was a mysterie not reuealed and therefore could not be at first openly preached against c. And though D. Whitaker taught before that No man denyed but that it much auayled for the confuting of Heresies to haue knowne their beginning Yet the same (47) Resp ad Rat. Comp. p. 101. D. Whitaker is inforced to confesse that The time of the Roman Churches change can not easily be told Yea to such absurdities are Protestants brought in this poynt that Vrbanus Rhegius being vrged to shew wherin the Roman Church had changed her Faith at last betaketh himself to this desperat boldnes saying (48) In lib. Apologet. p. 192. But to conclude though it were true that the Roman Church had changed nothing in Religion would it therefore presently follow that she were a true Church I think not sayth he And yet I think hardly any one Protestant can be picked out so ignorant or impudent as wil openly auouch that the Roman Church was not a true Church when S. Paul writ vnto the Romans in these words (49) Ep. Ad Rom c. 11. vers 5.6.7.8.9.11.12 By Christ we receaued Grace and Apostleship for obedience to the Faith in al Nations c. among whom are you also the called of Iesus Christ. To al that are at Rome the beloued of God called to be Saints Grace to you and Peace from God our Father and our Lord Iesus Christ. First I giue thanks to my God c. for al you because your Faith is renowned in the whole world c. without intermission I make a memorie of you alwayes in my prayers c. And I desire to see you that I may impart vnto you some spiritual grace to confirme you that is to say to be comforted togeather in you by that which is common to vs both your Faith and mine Now if the Roman Churches Faith was once thus the same with S. Paules Faith then if she neuer changed her sayd Faith as this Protestant supposeth she must needs continue a true Church Al this Sun shine notwithstanding D. Morton wil needs defend his brother Rhegius herein because (50) Prot. App. p. 675. diuers Hereticks who liued in the Apostles times such as were the Simonians Basilidians Nicolaitans albeit they liued in the dayes of the Apostles yet did they not professe the Doctrine of the Apostles which sufficiently demonstrateth the infirmitie of the Consequence But I must confesse I did not expect such weake Demonstrations from D. Morton for the Consequence was not that Hereticks liued in the Apostles dayes therefore their Doctrine is the doctrine of the Apostles as our Doctour would abuse an vncautelous or vnlearned Reader but as himself before thus confessed The Church of Rome hath not altered anie article of Faith since the Apostles times ergo the now Faith of the Church of Rome is the same with that which was taught by the Apostles This Consequence is so cleer supposing that the Church of Rome in Saint Pauls time professed the true Faith which I haue formerly proued and no Protestant dare deny as that al further proof would discouer no lesse tediousnes in the Writer then the denying therof hath bewrayed ignorance and temeritie in M. Doctour So cleer it is that no Protestant whosoeuer is able to assigne anie knowne beginning of our Roman Religion since the Apostles times Wherefore in playne tearmes they ascribe the beginning therof to S. Pauls time To this effect sayth D. Willet (51) Synopsis Controu 2. q. 3. p. 56. Therefore S. Paul calleth Papistrie a mysterie of iniquitie which began euen to work in his dayes M. Midleton (52) Papisto-mastix p. 193. auoucheth that we are sure that the Mysterie of inquitie did work in Pauls time and fel not a sleep so soone as Paul was dead waking againe 600. yeares after when this Mysterie was disclosed c. And therfore no maruaile though perusing Councels Fathers and Stories from the Apostles forward we find the print of the Popes feet c. M. Parkins desiring 53 Reformed Cath. p. 329. To stop the mouths of Papists who demand of vs sayth he where our Church was foure-score yeares before Luther They are answered sayth he that our Church hath been since the dayes of the Apostles and that in the verie midst of the Papacie So supposing the Papacie or Roman Church to haue continued since the dayes of the Apostles Lastly the truth hereof is so certayne that the same is acknowledged by our seuerest (54) Suruey of the BooK of common prayer in the Preface to the King p. 18. Puritans who speaking to the Kings Maiestie giue this wholsome persuasion Let not your Maiestie be now deceiued by the Popish Argument of supposed Antiquitie as Ioseph was with the old and mouldie bread of the Gibeonites c. And the rather ô christian King take heed because Antichrist began to work euen in the Apostles dayes So vndoubted and to be supposed it is that the Argument drawne from
the longest Continuance and greatest Antiquitie is a Popish Argument And the Doctrine of the Pope or Church of Rome was so timely working as that it was in being euen in the Apostles dayes For our Conclusion then we haue it here confessed that euer since the time of Constantin and Pope Siluester which contayneth some 1300 yeares al Popes and the Church of Rome haue been so agreable in Doctrine and Faith with our Present Pope and Church that therefore they are al censured for Antichrists Rome for Babylon the imagined Protestant Church during the same time not hauing anie one visible member in the world And not only this but that euen our first Christian Emperours are reproued by Protestants in regard of their very Religion and their honouring and defending of the foresayd Popes And as for the Roman Churches continuance from Christs time vntil the Raygne of Constantin it is plentifully acknowledged that as she was founded by the Apostles so she continued in the doctrine of the Apostles euen vntil the verie times of S. Augustin who flourished almost 100. yeares after Constantin in so much as during al the sayd time the verie Succession of Roman Bishops is granted by Protestants to haue been a good proof of the true Faith And wheras S. Austins Rule of making al such Doctrine truly Apostolical as hath no knowne beginning since the Apostles is approued and applauded by the learnedst Protestants yet themselues likewise confesse that the allowance of this Rule is the opening of a window to bring in al Poperie so truly Apostolical is the Doctrine of Papists Adde lastly that the Antiquitie of our present Papistrie is confessedly no lesse gray-headed then the times of S. Paul and the other Apostles and the continuance therof euer since such as that perusing Councels Fathers and Stories from the Apostles we stil find the print of the Popes feet Now my kindest Aduocats in this so important a Plea are no other then Caluin Suinglius Zanchius Danaeus Beza Winckelmanus Sebastianus Francus Rhegius Brocard Brightman Leigh Napper Parkins Whitaker Powel Fulk Raynolds Ridley Iewel Bunnie Carthwright Parker Field Whitguift Fotherbie Willet Midleton and Morton al of them Protestant Writers and men much renowned by their other Brethren A FVRTHER PROOF OF THE PRESENT ROMAN Religions Continuance from the Apostles times to these dayes is taken from the Christian belief of the Indians Armenians Grecians Brittans al of them Conuerted in the dayes of the Apostles CHAPTER VI. IT is recorded by sundrie Historiographers and acknowledged for most true by the learnedst Protestants that manie Heathen Nations were conuerted by the Apostles themselues to the Faith of Christ whereof peculiar instance is giuen of India Armenia Graecia Britanie c. The Conuersion of India is confessed by (1) Cent. 1. p. 37. Osiander and (2) Comment de Regno Christi p. 45. Nicolaus Phillippi affirmeth S. Thomas to haue been their first Apostle Chemnitius (3) Exam. part 2. p. 7. teacheth that S. Bartholomew preached the Ghospel to the Armenians And as for the Conuersion of Greece it clearly appeareth by Saint Pauls Epistles to sundrie of that Nation as to the Corinthians Ephesians Thessalonians and by the Apocalypse chap. 1. vers 11. Now as concerning the first Conuersion of Britanie it was so vndoubtedly Apostolick as that (4) Britannia c. p. 40. M. Cambden auoucheth that It is certayne that the Brittans receiued the Christian Religion in the verie infancie of the Church In proof wherof he there alleageth sundrie ancient Authorities (5) Ibid. p. 157. And See M. Hal in his Apologie against the Brovvnists p. 58. Further also teaching that in Britannie flourished the Monasterie of Glassenburie which taketh its ancient beginning from Ioseph of Arimathia c. for this the ancientest Monuments of this Monasterie do testify c. Neither is there cause why we should doubt thereof In like sort sayth (6) Description of Britanie annexed vnto Holinshead c. v. 1. p. 23. M. Harison That Ioseph preached here in England in the Apostles times his Sepulchre yet in Glassenburie and Epitaph affixed thereto is proof sufficient (7) Remedie against Schisme p. 24. M. Henoch Clapham is so confident of the Britans conuersion in the Apostles times as that he auoucheth that our Schismatikes may aswel ask me what assurance I haue there was a King Henrie as demand what assurance I haue of the other (8) Against Rhem. Test in 2. Cor. 12. fol. 316. D. Fulk thefore calleth them The Catholick Brittans with whom Christian Religion had continued in succession since the Apostles times This then supposed that al the former Countries were conuerted to Christianitie by Christ his Apostles and disciples themselues The next point to be examined is whether the sayd Faith and Religion which as then they learned receaued and beleeued and which for sundrie succeding Ages they practised and professed is more agreable to the present Roman or Protestant Faith And first as concerning the Indians (9) Comment de Regno Christi l. 1. p. 45. 46. D. Philippus Nicolai relateth that India in sundrie places is inhabited by them in great number who receiued the doctrine of the Ghospel from S. Thomas the Apostle c. vpon the seauenth day according to our custome they meete in the Churches that they may be present at the Sacrifices heare Sermons they vse in their Sacrifices wine made of dryed Grapes giuing bread they not only giue the bodie of Christ but also by drinking of the consecrated Chalice they giue his bloud hauing before made confession of their sinnes c. At the entrance of the church like vnto the Papists they are sprinkled with holie water with the same rite and the same religion they burie the dead c. praying vnto Christ for their eternal Saluation c. The Priests are so shauen vpon the head that they haue vpon the crowne the Image of the Crosse Amongst them there are Societies of Monks and companies of Sacred Virgins shut vp in seueral houses Chastitie is kept by al them with a great desire of honestie abstinence and religion c. They strictly obserue the fasts of Aduent and Lent c. And In the honour of S. Thomas they keep a Festiual day Yea he further writeth (10) Ibid. p. 64. of the remote Cataians of India that they haue their chappels in which for the safetie of their Marchants trauayling in strang countries Sacrifice is offred with Popish ceremonies and Masses Now by this testimonie of so learned a Protestant it appeareth that the Indian Christians first conuerted by S. Thomas retayne yet and practise these Catholick poynts of Faith The real presence of Christs Bodie and Bloud in the Eucharist Confession of sinnes before Receiuing Sprinkling with holie water prayer for the dead Shauing Priestes Crownes The Image of the Crosse Companies of Monks and Nunnes their Chastitie and abstinence The Feasts of Aduent and Lent The
same to him c. appoynting in Prouinces his Vicars ouer other Churches to end smaller matters and to reserue the greater causes to himself Caluin (25) Instit l. 4. c. 7. sec 12. auoucheth that There is no word in the writings of Gregorie wherin more proudly he boasteth of the greatnes of his Primacie then this to wit I know not what Bishop is not subiect to the Apostolick Sea when he is found faultie c. He assumeth to himself power to punish those who offend D. Raynolds findeth no better shift for the foresayd Saying of S. Gregorie then impudently to say that (26) Conference p. 547. Either Gregorie wrot not so or he wrot an vntruth to cheer vp his Subiects (27) Cent. 6. p. 289. See Philippus Nicolai de Regno Christi li. 2. p. 67. 351. Osiander acknowledgeth that Augustin was sent from Gregorie the Great Bishop of Rome into England that he might subdue the same to the Iurisdiction of the Roman Bishop (28) Cent. 6. p. 290. and to the lust of the Roman Antichrist for which sayth Osiander Austin was after his death vndoubtedly damned to Hel. Yea D. Morton (29) Prot. Appeal l. 1. sec 28. p. 31. a man most sparing to tel the truth yet yeeldeth thus far saying Whether or how far Two hundred yeares after S. Gregorie did reach his Arme of Iurisdiction beyond the limits of his Diocesse is a question by reason of his diuers obscure speeches and some particular practises diuersly censured of our Authours But besides the cleerest premisses this Question of D. Morton is made none by D. Raynodls teaching that (30) Confer p. 550 The Primacie which Gregorie Leo and others giue to the Sea of Rome doth so exceed the truth that c. And (31) Ibid. p. 545. that Gregorie is somwhat large that way Yea that he and al the Popes for three hundred yeares before him (32) Ib. p. 549 auouch more of their Sea then is true and right in the opinion of Protestants With whom accordeth D. Fulk saying Gregorie (33) In 2. Thess 2. was a great worker and furtherer of the Sea of Antichrist and of the mysterie of iniquitie And (34) In Iohn 21. we go not about to cleer Gregorie from al vsurpation of Iurisdiction more then to his Sea appertayned So certayne and out of al question it is that S. Gregorie the Great was a true Roman Catholick in his Doctrine and practise of the Popes Primacie By the premisses then it is euident that the obiection so much vrged by (35) Contrae Camp rat 6. p 97. FulK in his Answer to a Counterf Cath. Iewel in his Reply art 4. p. 225. 226. 227. Mortons Appeal l 1. c. 2. sec 29. p. 32. D. Whitaker D. Fulk D. Iewel D. Morton and sundrie other Protestants from S. Gregorie his reiecting and disliking of the Title of Vniuersal Bishop is altogeather impertinent seing S. Gregorie reiected the same in that sense which Iohn Bishop of Constantinople applyed to himself to wit that he was the sole Bishop and none Bishop but he A thing so euident that the Protestant (36) De Ecclesia l. 2. c. 10. p. 570. Andreas Friccius whom (37) In his com Places part 4. p. 77. Peter Martyr tearmeth an excellent learned man in like sort expresseth the same saying Some there be c. that obiect the Authoritie of Gregorie who sayth that such a Title pertayneth to the Precursour of Antichrist but the reason of Gregorie is to be knowne and it may be gathered of his wordes which he repeateth in manie Epistles that the Title of vniuersal Bishop is contrarie to and doth gainsay the Grace which is commonly powred vpon al Bishops He therfore that calleth himself the onlie Bishop taketh the Bishoplike power from the rest wherfore this Title he would haue to be reiected c. But it is neuertheles euident by other places that Gregorie thought that the charge and Principalitie of the whole Church was committed to Peter c. And yet for this cause Gregorie thought not that Peter was the forerunner of Antichrist So plainly doth this Protestant answer this so often vrged obiection from S. Gregorie and so euident also it is that S. Gregorie himself claymed and defended the Primacie of the Roman Bishop and Church ouer al other Bishops and Churches whatsoeuer But to arise from S. Gregorie to other Doctours and Fathers more ancient his next predecessour Pope Pelagius is for the self same cause much reproued by Osiāder (38) Cent. 6. p. 242 in these words Pelagius greatly inueigheth against Iohn of Constantinople because he assumed to himselfe the Title of Vniuersal Patriarch and shewed by that prophane Title of Vniuersal to abolish the name of other Patriarchs c. But in the meane time he contendeth the Roman Church to be the Head of al other Churches and he bableth manie things of the Priuiledges giuen by Christ to S. Peter The Centurie-writers speaking of the Fathers errours which liued in the fift Age playnly and at large confesse (39] Cent. 5. col 774. that In this fift Age the Roman Bishops applyed themselues to get and establish dominion ouer other Churches So they acknowledge that Pope Celestin of whom (40) In his Defence p. 588. D. Whitguift sayth He was a godly Bishop gaue priuiledge of vsing the Title of Pope and the Miter to Ciril of Alexandria whom he had substituted in his place to be President in the Councel of Ephesus He is also charged by M. Carthwright (41) In his 2. Reply part 1. p. 512. to haue claymed superioritie ouer al Churches taking vpon him as it were the name of Vniuersal Bishop (42) Cent. 5. col 1246. Osiander affirmeth that He contended in behalf of the Roman Churches Primacie more impudently then did his Predecessours (43) Cent. 5. col 1285. Nestorius the Heretick then Bishop of Constantinople he allotted ten dayes space to repent which if he did not he should not only be excommunicated but his name should be blotted out of the Catalogue of Priests And for the accomplishment of the premises he made Cyril of Alexandria his Legat. The Centurists (44) Cent. 5. col 778. charge the Popes of those times that They vsurped to themselues power of commanding other Bishops that whom they would and should propose in forraine Churches they might ordayne Bishop or whom they would not haue might depose So Celestin in his Epistle to Cyril of Alexandria and Iohn of Antioch and Rufus of Thessalonica commandeth them that they designe Proclus Bishop at Constantinople D. Raynolds affirmeth that the (45) Conference p. 457. Popes of the Second Three hundred yeares after Christ claymed some Soueraintie ouer Bishops And that (46) Ib. p. 383. Sozimus Boniface Celestin did vsurp ouer the churches of Africk while S. Austine was aliue c. (47) Ib. p. 544. They would haue Bishops and Elders appeale to Rome
col 778. And Symondes vpon the Reuel p. 57. likewise charge Pope Sixtus that In his 3. Epistle to the Eastern Bishops and 5. chapter he decreeth that against a Bishop appealing to the Sea Apostolick nothing shal be determined but what the Roman Bishop iudgeth But to omit sundrie other particular Popes (79) In his Tryal of the Popes Title p. 117. M. Bunnie confesseth that Innocentius telleth the Bishops of Macedonia that they should haue regard to the Church of Rome as to their Head and that it is wronged because they did not at first yeald to his Iudgement c. The Bishops of Rome gaue also out Decrees which they would bind al to obserue as appeareth in Siricius and Innocentius It sauoureth of too great arrogancie that Sozimus threatneth seueritie if anie despise the Apostolick authoritie So did Leo what should I seek to speak of euerie one their owne Decretals do sufficiently beare witnes Yea it is acknowledged in general (80) Cent. 5. col 778. that the Popes of this fift Age ordayned and required that in the causes of Bishops it might be lawful to appeale to them as is manifest by the Acts of the 6. Carthage Councel And (81) In his Def. p. 342. D. Whitguift auoucheth that It is certaine that then Viz. in the time of the Carthage and African Councels the Bishops of Rome began at least to clayme Superioritie ouer al Churches Now the Councel of Carthage was assembled about Anno 419. and the African Anno 423. Yea it is granted by (82) In his second Reply part 1. p. 510. VVhitguift in his Def. p 344 Sarauia de diuersis gradibus c. p. 493. M. Carthwright and other Protestant Writers that the Councel of Chalcedon whose authoritie is established to our Aduersaries by Act of Parlament Anno 1. Elisabeth c. 1. did offer the name of vniuersal Bishop to the Bishop of Rome And hence it is that the Centurists (83) Cent. 5. col 774. affirme of these ancient Roman Bishops that They had flatterers who affirmed that without permission of the Roman Bishop none might vndertake the person of a Iudge (84) Cent. 5. col 775. Who then likewise auerred that Antiquitie had attributed the Principalitie of Priesthood to the Roman Bishop aboue al. And accordingly that Turbius Asturiensis flattered Pope Leo and acknowledged his superioritie And wheras Theodoret speaking of the Roman Sea sayth That holy Sea hath the Gouernment of al the Churches of the world M. Iewel findeth no better answer hereto then to say (85) Art 4. Diu. 21. That man naturally aduanceth his power at whose hands he seeketh help As though Theodoret would giue an Antichristian Title for so Protestants account it for auarice or S. Leo would accept it for flatterie Thus much as touching those Fathers and Bishops who liued in the Fift Age after Christ and their confessed testimonies of the Iurisdiction really executed by the Popes of those times not only ouer their Neighbour Churches and Bishops in Italie but ouer remote Countries and the other greatest Archbishops and Patriarcks of the world as of Antioch Hierusalem Alexandria and Constantinople and by them then accordingly acknowledged and obeyed To come now to the Fathers that liued in the Age precedent which is the time wherin Constantin the Great liued although the Church began as then but as it were to take breath from her former long endured persecutions whereby neither her Writers were so manie nor her face of outward Gouernment so knowne as in the times succeeding Yet is there not wanting euen for that time sufficient confessed testimonie in this kind In this Age liued Pope Damasus a man for vertue and learning so highly deseruing as that (86) Decades in English on the page next before the first Decade Bullinger not only calleth him Blessed Damasus Bishop of Rome c. but withal setteth downe the Imperial Decree of the Emperours Gratian Valentinian and Theodosius for the embracing of the Religion taught by Damasus and Peter of Alexandria (87) In his Def. c. p 345 M. Whiteguift confesseth that Damasus was a Vertuous Learned and Godlie Bishop (88) The Estate of the Church p. 137. And Crispinus reporteth how much he was esteemed of by Hierom Athanasius and Nazianzen This so much esteemed a Pope for learning and vertue is charged by M. Cartwright (89) In his Reply part 1. p. 502. to speak in the Dragons voice when he shameth not to write that the Bishop of Romes Sentence was aboue al other to be attended for in a synod Crispinus (90) The Estate of the Church p 137. chargeth Damasus that he was too much giuen to eleuate the Dignitie of his Sea For sayth he he begimeth his sayd Epistle to them of Constantinople In the Reuerence deare children which you owe to the Apostolick Sea you do much for your selues c. (91) Vpon the Reuel c. 5. p. 54. and See Cent. 4. col 550 M. Symondes acknowledgeth that Damasus wrote to the Councels of Africk that the Iudgement of the causes of Bishops and al other Matters of great importance may not be determined but by the authoritie of the Apostolick Sea And wheras Socrates l. 4. c. 30. reporteth that Peter Patriarch of Alexandria being thence expulsed by the Arians was vpon his iourney and request to Damasus Bishop of Rome and returne from thence which Damasus his letters restored and confirmed thereby in his Sea of Alexandria This same Historie is acknowledged by the (92) Cent. 4. col 1367. col 532. Centurists And M. Bunnie (93) In his Tryal of the Popes Title p. 117. acknowledgeth that Damasus in his 4. Epistle to Prosper and other Bishops of Numidia commandeth them that in al doubtful matters they referre themselues to him as to the Head c. Siricius taketh vpon him to threaten to pronounce Sentence against such as wil do otherwise then he would haue them So firme was Damasus in defence and execution of the Popes Primacie In this same Age liued also Pope Iulius of whō (94) In his 2. Reply par 1. p. 510. M. Carthwright writeth Iulius Bishop of Rome sayth it was decreed by the Lawes of the Church and immediatly after the Nicen Councel that the Bishop of Rome must be called to the Sinod and that that was voyd which was done there besides his Sentence (95) De Conciliis quest 2. p. 42. 43. 44. D. Whitaker relating the Ecclesiastical Canon of those times wherby it was decreed That no Councel should be celebrated without the sentence of the Bishop of Rome confesseth further that Iulius challenged to himself the like authoritie And wheras Bellarmin doth obiect this example of Iulius and other Bishops of Rome alleaging this Canon (96) Resp ad Bellarm. part 1. p. 595. Danaeus his onlie answear is that this obiection is of no moment because it is produced from the testimonie of a Roman Bishop that is
(161) Cent. 4. col 549. And see Carthwright in Whâ—tguift Def. p 700. See Osiand cent 4. p. 477. AmaÌ„dus Polanus Symphonia p 841. 849. And as the Fathers were thus direct and ful for the Bishop of Romes Primacie so did they answerably reiect al pretended spiritual Primacie in anie temporal Magistrate So the Centurie-writers confesse that Emperours assumed to themselues vnseasonably the iudgement of matters of Faith which thing Athanasius reprehendeth in Constantius Ambrose in Valentinian Yea (162) Of the Estate of the Churcb p. 99 Crispinus confesseth that our first Christian Emperour Constantin sayd God hath ordayned you Bishops and hath giuen you power to iudge of yourselues by meanes wherof we yeeld ourselues to your iudgement Men may not iudge you but God alone Yea (163) Ibid. p. 93 And see the Abridgement of Fox his Acts Mon. p 67. Crispinus further acknowledgeth that he gaue power vnto Clerks for to appeale from Ciuil Magistrats to Bishops And others (164) In the sayd Abridgement p. 66 grant that He freed them from al manner of publick duties and burdens As also that (165) Napper vpon the Reuâ—l p. 145. He subdued al Christian Churches to Pope Syluester And (166) Frigiuilleus Ganuius in his Palma Christ p. 35. Attributed Primacie to the Roman Bishop before al. And such was his respect to Ecclesiastical Gouernours as that the Centurists (167) Cent. 4 col 4â—0 relate that It is knowne what reuerence and obseruance he had to Bishops in the Councel of Nyce where he would not sit downe vntil the Bishops willed him And then as 168) Chron. p. 274. And Lubbertus de Concilijs Carion reporteth Constantin sate downe on a lower Seat amongst the Bishops So far was this most renowned and Christian Prince from challenging to himself Supremacie in causes Ecclesiastical The Centurists (169) Cent. 5. col 663. doe acknowledge and recite Pope Innocentius his Epistle to Arcadius the Emperour and his wife who were aduerse to Chrysostom and took part with Theophilus where he thus writeth I the least of al and a Sinner hauing yet the Throne of the Great Apostle Peter committed to me do separate and remoue thee and her from receiuing the immaculate Mysteries of Christ our God And euerie Bishop or anie other of the Clergie which shal presume to minister or giue to you those holy mysteries after the time that you haue read the present letters of my bound pronounce them voyd of their dignitie c. Arsacius whom you placed in the Bishop-like Throne in Chrysostoms roome though he be dead we depose and command that his name be not written in the role of Bishops In like manner we depose al other Bishops who deliberatly haue communicated with him c. To the deposing of Theophilus we adde Excommunication c. From hence then it appeareth that the Fathers of the Primitiue Church not only denyed euen to the greatest Emperours al pretended Supremacie in Ecclesiastical matters but that also Constantin himself disclaymed from the same and when other Emperours offended against the Church the same Church spared not to punish them for the same The premisses likewise do most fully conuince that the Primitiue Church neuer thought anie Pope or succession of Popes to be Antichrist But contrarie to Protestants making al Popes for manie hundred yeares past to be Antichrists it is confessed by D. Whitaker (170) l. De Antichristo p. 21. that The Fathers for the most part thought that Antichrist should be but one man but in that sayth he as in manie other things they erred either because they yeelded too much to the common opinion concerning Antichrist or because they waighed not the Scriptures so diligently as they ought And as M. Whitaker forsooth hath done M. Carthwright's (171) In his 2. Reply part 1. p. 508. See Gracerus his Historia Antichristi p. 11. censure is that Diuers of the ancient and the chiefest of them imagined fondly of Antichrist as of one singular Person And as for the time of his coming and continuance M. Fox (172) In Apoc. c. 12 p. 345. acknowledgeth that Almost al the holie and learned Interpreters doe by a Time Times and halfe a Time vnderstand only Three yeares and a halfe And (173) In Apoc. c. 13. p. 362. that this is the consent opinion of almost al the ancient Fathers Bullinger (174) In Reuel c. 11. ser 46. f. 142 auoucheth that Doubtlesse al Expositours grounding themselues vpon this Text haue attributed to the Kingdome of Antichrist and to his most cruel persecutions no more then Three yeares and a halfe This shortest time of Antichrists raigne was so cleerly the Doctrine beleef of the ancient Fathers that D. Morton for his truest answere confesseth the same reprouing them al of Errour saying (175) Prot. Appeal l 2. p. 144. Why might not these Fathers be sayd to haue erred in prefining the time of Antichrist who haue been thus farr ouerseen in reporting his Tribe So confessedly do the Fathers cleer al our Popes from being Antichrists (176) Of the Church 9. p. 286 Philip Mornay proueth at large that Antichrist is not to come during the continuance of the Roman Empire in which behalf he alleadgeth the agreable Sayings of S. Ambrose Hierom Austin Chrysostom and S. Paul By al which it is most euident that in the opinion of the ancient Fathers Antichrist is to be but one man and the continuance of his Raigne to be Three yeares and a halfe before the ending of the world before which the Roman Empire must cease To reuiew then the truest harmonie between the Primitiue and our present Roman Church in this principal Controuersie concerning the Popes Supremacie in Causes Spiritual and Ecclesiastical The Fathers and Bishops as then taught First that the Bishop of Rome was S. Peters successour and that this Succession was not anie humane or Synodical Constitution but euen the ordinance of God himself Secondly that therfore Popes might Exercise their Iurisdiction Primacie ouer al Churches Thirdly And so accordingly they did ordaine Excommunicate depose restore and cite other forraine Bishops Archbishops Fourthly they placed their Legats or Vicars in other Countries to end smaller matters reseruing the greater causes to theÌ„selues Fiftly Appeales were made to them from al Christian Kingdomes Sixâ—ly and they not only had power to cal General Councels but they also appoynted Presidents in the same Yea Councels were then so subiect vnto them as that no Councel was holden lawful which was not assembled approued by their authoritie Seauenthly Princes Emperours were subiect to their Spiritual Censures And yet no Father Bishop or King of those times did euer traduce anie one of those Popes with that fowlest note or stayne of Antichrist Now the ancient holie Doctours and Bishops which are here acknowledged and reproued for the foresayd seueral poynts and priuiledges of the Popes Primacie are Gregorie Pelagius Celestin
that not only by General Churches of later times but euen by the Councels Tradition of the true Primitiue Church that therfore al parties are bound to approue beleeue the foresayd Bookes to be truly Canonical Al which wil yet be made much more euident by our easie Refutation of their chiefest arguments vsually vrged against them For first it is obiected by D. Whitaker (21) Answ to Rayn p. 22. 23. that therfore they are not Canonical because They were written in Greek or some other forraine language and not in Hebrew nor had for their knowne Authours those whom God hath declared to be his Prophets But neither of these are of force for it is no litle temeritie so to measure the Scriptures by the tongue wherein they are written as to restrayne the Spirit of God to one only language The further falsehood and vanitie wherof is abundantly disproued by example of Daniel a great part wherof (22) to wit from Chap. 2 vers 4. to the end of the 7. chap. though not written in Hebrew is yet by our Aduersaries themselues acknowledged for Canonical Neither likewise is it true that God would direct by his holie Spirit no Authours in their writings but such as were knowne and also further declared by certaine testimonie to be Prophets For Protestants themselues can not yet tel who were Authours of the seueral Bookes of Iudges the Third and Fourth of Kings the Two of Chronicles and the Bookes of Ruth and Iob Euen D. Whitaker (23) De sacra Scrip. p 603. himself doth directly answer his owne obiection saying The Authours of manie Bookes are not knowne as of Iosue Ruth Paralipomenon Hester c. And we receiue sayth D. Willet 24) Syn p. 4 manie Bookss in the old Testament the Authours wherof are not perfectly knowne Yea Caluin Beza and the publishers of certaine of our English Bibles in the Preface or Argument of the Epistle to the Hebrewes do al of them professe to rest doubtful of the Authour therof Caluin Beza there affirming that it is not written by S. Paul So that though the foresayd Bookes be not written in the Hebrew nor haue their Authours or Penners knowne yet by like example of other approued Scriptures it maketh nothing against their Sacred and Diuine Authoritie (25) of Anno 1584. 1578 See Calu. in c 2. Heb ver 2. Secondly it is obiected that the sayd Bookes were reiected or doubted of by sundrie of the ancient Fathers as namely by Origen (26) In Ps 1 apud Euseb Hist l. 6. c. 19. Epiph. de Pondere Mens Haer. 8. Epicureorū Hier Pref. in l Regum Epiphanius and Hierom who agreed therein with the ancient Iewes But first these Fathers in the places cited do not speak of their owne opinion but do only report what was the opinion of certaine of the Iewes therin for Origen was so far from according herein with the Hebrewes that he expresly defended (27) Ep. ad Iulium hom 1. in Leuit. against Iulius Africanus who doubted therof the Historie of Susanna which Iewes and Protestants reiect Yea he auerreth )28) Ep. ad Iulium that part of Esther to be Canonical which Protestants refuse as not being in the Hebrewes Canon In like sort S. Epiphanius 29) Haer. 76 numbreth Sapientia and Ecclesiasticus among the Diuine Scriptures and referreth (30) Lib. de Pond Mensura post init Sapientia vnto Salomon As concerning S. Hierom wheras he vnto an vnwarie (31) Praef. in Daniel Reader may seem to seclude certaine Chapters of Daniel as not being in the Hebrewes Canon insomuch that Ruffinus mistaking herein S. Hierom's meaning doth therfore as Protestants (32) Whit. cont Camp p. 18. stil doe reproue and charge him with refusal of these foresayd parts of Daniel S. Hierome (33) Apol 2. cont Ruffin fin answereth and explaineth himself saying Truly I did not set downe what myself thought but what the Hebrewes are accustomed to say against vs herein calling there further Ruffinus and in him our Protestants a foolish Sycophant for mistaking and charging him herein with the Hebrewes opinion Yea S. Hierom's thus explaining himself is a matter certaine that it is accordingly confessed by D. Couel (34) Answ to Burges p. 87. Banc. in the Conf. before his Maiestie p. 60. D. Bancroft And it is further euident that S. Hierom placed the Bookes of Machabees bees (35) Prolog in Machab. among the Stories of diuine Scripture (33) Apol 2. cont Ruffin fin And of the Booke of Iudith he sayth (36) Pref. in Iudith with the Hebrewes the book of Iudith is read among the Hagiographal writings whose authoritie to strengthen those things which fal in Contention to wit with the Iewes may be thought lesse fit c. But because we read that the Nycene Councel accompted this in the number of holie Scriptures (34) Answ to Burges p. 87. Banc. in the Conf. before his Maiestie p 60. I haue yeelded c. So cleer it is that the Fathers obiected did only relate in the foresayd places the opinion of the Hebrewes from which themselues did yet disclayme Secondly supposing it for true that the foresayd Fathers haue doubted or reiected the foresayd Bookes yet neither hence wil it follow that they are not truly Canonical it being certaine that in the Primitiue Church the Canonical Scriptures were not generally receaued al at once but in great varietie of pretended 37) 2. Thes 2.2 Euseb hist l. 3. c. 19 l. 6. c. 10. Aug. cont Aduers Leg Proph l. 1. c. 20. Gelas in Decret cū 70. Episc Sozom hist l. 7. c. 19. Hamelman de Tradit Apostol 1. part l 1. col 251 part 3 col 841. Scriptures special care and search was requisite whereby it came to passe that sundrie Bookes were for the time misdoubted or by some Fathers or Councels (38) Conc. Laodic can vlt. omitted or not receiued which yet afterwards were vpon greater search and consideration generally acknowledged A poynt so euident that D. Bilson testifyeth in our behalf that (39 Suruey of Christs suffrings p. 664. The Scriptures were not fully receiued in al places no not in Eusebius time He sayth the Epistles of Iames Iude the 2. of Peter the 2. and 3. of Iohn are contradicted as not written by the Apostles the Epistle to the Hebrewes was for a while contradicted c. The Churches of Syria did not receaue the 2. Epistle of Peter nor the 2. and 3. of Iohn nor the Epistle of Iude nor the Apocalyps c. The like might be sayd for the Churches of Arabia wil you hence conclude saith D. Bilson that those partes of Scripture were not Apostolick or that we need not to receaue them now because they were formerly doubted of So fully doth this Protestant Doctour answear his owne Brethrens like vsual obiection had against the Machabees and the other Bookes
of the Old Testament now in question And that the foresayd Epistles of S. Peter S. Iames S. Iohn S. Iude and the Apocalyps were doubted of by some Fathers of the Primitiue Church and not generally receaued by al it is further confessed by the Deanes of Paules and Windsor who in the Towers Disputation had with that Ornament of our Nation and most victorious Martyr Edmund Campian do thus report of themselues (40) The first Dayâ—s Conf. D. 1. For proofe hereof we alleadged the testimonie of Hierom in Catal. where he thus writeth The Epistle of Iames is sayd to be published by some other vnder his name and of the 2. of Peter he sayth that it is denyed of manie to be his we also alledged Eusebius writing thus Those Bookes that be gaynsaid though they be knowne to manie be these the Epistle attributed to Iames the Epistle of Iude the latter of Peter the 2. and 3. of Iohn And D. Walker in the same Disputation affirmeth 41) 4. Dayes Confâ—r fâ—l 2. 6. that S. Hierom saith concerning that Epistle which is written to the Hebrewes manie haue doubted of it And also concerning the 2. of Peter he sayth it was doubted of by manie and so with some were the two last Epistles of Iohn c. Now if the Bookes of Machabees Tobie c. be not Canonical because as Protestants before obiected they were reiected or doubted by some ancient Writers then by the same reason Protestants must likewise reiect the Epistle to the Hebrewâ—s the Epistles of S Peter S. Iames S. Iude S. Iohn and the Apocalyps because these also were no lesse doubted reiected by sundrie ancient Writers Wherefore the weaknes and ensuing absurditie of this obiection being thus discouered we are to obserue that the Canonical Scriptures are to vs at this day discerned and made knowne not by that which some ancient Writers omit deny or doubt of but by that which most of the Fathers constantly affirme and chiefly by that which is iudged and decreed by the Catholick Church lawfully assembled in General Councel Thirdly some obiect that there are in the foresayd Bookes diuers repugnances or Contradictions and consequently that they are not inspired by the holie-Ghost But to omit that in those Scriptures which are beleeued by al to be Canonical there are manie hidden difficulties and seeming (42) See Mat. 10.10 Mar. 6.8 1. Reg. 8.9 2. Par. 5.10 Hebr. 9.4 Act. 9.7 Act 22.9 Math. 26.34 Marc 14.68 Mar. 15.25 Io. 19.14 Luc. 3.35.36 Gen. 11.12 And see Iewel Def. c. p. 361. repugnances which yet notwithstaÌ„ding we are bound to acknowledge the sayd Scriptures to be true and sacred I wil for breuitie only alledge what other Protestants think and answer themselues to the foresayd pretended Contradictions in the Bookes of Machabee Tobie c. D. Couel (43) Answ to Burges p. 85. writeth We could without violence haue afforded them the Reconcilement of other Scriptures and vndoubtedly haue proued them to be most true Yea he particularly answereth certaine of the pretended repugnances In like sort Conradus Pelican (45) Ep. Dedic Professour at Tigure writing his Commentarie vpon the foresayd Bookes sayth I easily yeelded c. especially seing those Bookes were alwayes accompted so Ecclesiastical and Biblical that euen from the Apostles times they were read in the Catholick Church with much reuerence although they were not produced in authoritie against the Iewes as Canonical who receiued not these into their Sacred Canon wheras they do not only not contradict in anie thing the writings of the Law and the Prophets (44) Ib. p. 87 88. 89. 90. but also c. for the most part they cleerly carry the right style of the holie-Ghost certain knots or difficulties intermingled which are sound more easie to be loosed then some haue thought c. Wherupon they were euer reuerenced and read by holie men yea the Sayings therof are found to be alledged by the Apostles Agreably hereto M. Hutton (46) 2. Parte of the Answ p. 238. 239. at large answereth and cleereth the common obiection against Iudith and the like in behalf of Ecclesiasticus (47) Ibid. p. 247. and (48) Ibid. p. 246. And see Bucers scripta Anglic p. 713. Daniel So weake and impertinent are the Contradictions pretended by Protestants against the foresayd Bookes Now from the premisses that by the CoÌ„fessions of our Aduersaries we may collect that the foresayd Bookes of Scripture were only not approued for truly Canonical by S. Austin Innocentius Gelasius and al the Fathers and Bishops of the 3. Carthage Councel but also were approued as partes of the Old Testament by the Apostles and for such alledged by them and so from the Apostles times were read in the Catholick Church with much reuerence Witnesses wherof are the Protestant Writers Hiperius Lubbertus Zanchius Hospiman Trelcatius Hoe Scelico Brentius Bibliander Lascicius Pelican Raynolds Parker Field Couel Bancroft Hutton Parkes D. Bilson al of them affording their helping hands in maintayning and defending the foresayd Bookes by true Antiquitie It is acknowledged by Protestants that the Fathers of the Primitiue Church beleeued and taught our now Catholick Doctrine concerning Traditions CHAPTER VI. THE Catholick Doctrine concerning (1) Bellarm. de Verb. Dei non Scripto l. 4 c 3. Traditions is that the sacred Scriptures or written Word of God do not expresly containe al poynts or matters concerning Faith and manners And therfore besides the same is necessarily required the not written Word of God that is Diuine and Apostolical Traditions To the Contrarie Protestants (2) Luth. in Comment c. 1. ad Gal. Caluin Inst l. 4. c. 8. sec 8 directly teach that al things necessarie to Saluation are set downe in the sacred Scriptures And that we are not bound to beleeue or do anie thing which is not taught and commanded thereby Now what the Primitiue Church beleeued and whether the present Roman or Protestant Church doth Symbolize and agree therewith the Sequele only taken from the free and liberal testimonies of Protestants themselues shal euidently demonstrate And to begin with S. Gregorie D. Morton confesseth that (3) Prot. Appeale l. 4. p 62. He vseth to confirme some things by Tradition S. Augustin also whom D. Field (4) Of the Church l. 3. p. 170. tearmeth Austin the greatest of al the Fathers and worthiest Diuine the Church of God euer had since the Apostles times This indeed most worthie Diuine endeauouring to proue that those who are Baptised by Hereticks should not be rebaptised freely confesseth that (5) De Bapt. cont Don. l. 5. c. 23. The Apostles commanded nothing hereof but that Custome which was opposed herein against Cyprian is to be beleeued to proceed from their Tradition as manie things be which the whole Church holdeth and are therefore wel beleeued to be commanded of the Apostles although they be not written A Saying so euident
Cyprian erroneously maketh necessarie Chemnitius (30) Exam. part 2 p. 58 also reprehendeth S. Cyprian for saying of Baptisme and Confirmation Then they may be clearly sanctifyed and become the sonnes of God if they be borne of both Sacraments 31) Against Symb p. 133. M. Parker reproueth (32) Ep. ad Iubaianum S. Cyprian for tearming The Oyle Signaculum Dominicum our Lords Seale And Chemnitius (33) Exam. part 2 p. 58. 64. 65. chargeth not only S. Cyprian but also the Laodicen Councel Melchiades Cornelius and Tertulian for the Sacrament of Confirmation For which also Danaeus (34) Resp ad Tom 2. Bell. p. 451. 452. reciteth and reiecteth sundrie of the ancient Fathers Concerning holie Orders to omit that already it is confessed here that S. Cyprian Tertulian and S. Denis did teach them to be truly a Sacrament numbring them amongst the rest the verie Minores Ordines inferiour Orders of Deacons Subdeacons Readers Exorcists Acolytes are so plainly taught in the Primitiue Church that D. Field maketh (35) Of the Church l. 5. p. 121 OsiaÌ„d cent 1. p. 131. no question but these Minour Orders were verie ancient alledging in proof therof the testimonies of Cyprian Cornelius and Ignatius And for the same the 36) Cent. 4. col 873. p. 874. Centurists alledge the Fathers of the Fourth Age. (37) Tom. 6. Wittemb fol. 53. But Luther confesseth that S. Denis S. Pauls Scholler affirmeth that there are in the Church Bishops Deacons Subdeacons Lectours Exorcistes c. Lastly as touching Extreame vnction Innocentius is reproued by (38) PageaÌ„t of Popes fol. 26. Szeged in Speculo Pontif. p 33. M. Bale Szegedine for that he affirmed Anoyling of the Sick to be a Sacrament Wel then the Poynts here confessedly taught by the Fathers of the Primitiue Church are that the Sacraments do not only signify but truly conferre Grace Iustification and Remission of sinnes That Infants dying vnbaptised can not be saued That in case of necessitie Lay-persons may baptize and that the Sacraments are seauen in number Now the Fathers produced and reproued by Protestants for these Poynts are S. Austin Innocentius Cyprian Origen Tertulian Iustin Clement Vrban the Councel of Laodicea Melchiades Cornelius Ignatius S. Denis The Protestants charging the foresayd Fathers are Luther Caluin Musculus the Mâ—gdeburgians Zuinglius Sarcerius Bucer Bullinger Scultetus Rhegius Chemnitius Danaeus Osiander Whitaker Carthwright Humfrey Parker Field Bale So euident it is that the Primitiue and our now Roman Church do most truly agree in the Doctrine number of the holie Sacraments It is Confessed by Protestants that the Fathers of the Primitiue Church beleeued and taught the Real Presence of Christs true Bodie and Bloud in the Eucharist As also our further Catholick Doctrines of Transubstantiation Adoration Reseruation and the like CHAPTER VIII IT is the (1) Conc. Trid s ss 1â— c. 1. 4. certaine and general Decree of the Catholick Church that in the Blessed Sacrament of the Eucharist after the Consecration of bread and wine our Lord IESVS CHRIST God and man is truly really and substantially contayned vnder the formes of those sensible creatures And that the whole Substance of bread is conuerted into the Substance of Christs Bodie and the whole substance of wine into the substance of his Bloud which Conuersion is fitly called Transubstantiation Protestants herein being much diuided amongst themselues The (2) Luth. l. de Captiuit Babyl c. de Euchar. Chemn l. duabus Christi naturis Lutherans teach the Real Presence no lesse plainly then Catholicks only with this difference that they think withal the bread and wine to remayne after Consecration with the Bodie and Bloud which alteration is called Consubstantiation (3) Zuingl l De vera falsa Relig. Zuinglians are of opinion that Eucharist is only a signe figure or remembrance of Christs Bodie no wayes truly contayning the same Caluinists (4) Cvlu l. de Coena Domini Beza de Caena Domini seem in shew more liberal admitting the Bodie of Christ to be truly and really in the Sacrament and that the Sacrament is not only a Signe or figure or that thereby is only giuen to vs the fruits merits of Christs Bodie but euen the Bodie itself yet with this qualification that the same is not receiued by the bodilie mouth of the CoÌ„municant but only by his Faith Neither that the bread wine cease to be or are conuerted into the Bodie and Bloud of Christ but that when the bread and wine are receaued with the bodily mouth at the same time the bodie bloud of Christ are receaued spiritually mystically and by Faith Now in one thing herein I wil accord with D. Morton that (5) Prot. Appeal l. 2. p. 105. This question of Transubstantiation being of so great consequence that if it be defensible Protestants must stand chargeable of Heresie but it may be confuted the Romanists must necessarily be condemned of Idolatrie That therfore we both think it our bounden dutie to consult more exactly with the Senat of Antiquitie which I wil now only performe from the free grants confessions of D. Morton's owne Brethren And so to begin with S. Gregorie D. Humfrey (6) Iesuit parr 2. rat 5 p. 627. speaking of him and S. Augustin demandeth what Gregorie and Augustin brought into the English Church To which himself answereth that They brought with manie other Catholick poynts by him there recited Transubstantiation To arise to S. Chrysostome the Centurists (7) Cent. 5. col 517. confesse that he seemeth to teach Transubstantiation And Musculus (8) Loc. com p 336. reciteth and reproueth a Saying of S. Chrysostom's for the Real presence The Centurists (9) Cent. 4. c 10 col 985 295. likewise affirme that Eusebius Emissenus did speak vnprofitably of Transubstantiation And 10) Antony de Adamo in his Anatomy of the Masse f. 222 And see Cent 4. c. 4. col 295. Oecolamp lib. Epist p. 756. VadiaÌ„ de Euchar. Aphor. l. 5. p. 150 151 many Protestant Writers do greatly reproue the Bookes of Sacraments truly ascribed to S. Ambrose for affirming the opinion of Christs bodilie Presence in the Sacrament Insomuch that the Centurists (11) Cent 4. c. 4. col 295 charge S. Ambrose for not writing wel of Transubstantiation and Application for the dead In this respect also Peter Martyr (12) In de fens obiect Gardin p 4. p. 124. professeth to dislike the iudgement of S. Cyril And (13) In his Epistles annexed to his Common Places ep to Beza p. 106. p. 98 further annexeth I wil not so easily subscribe to Cyril who affirmeth such a Communion as thereby euen the Substance of the Flesh and Bloud of Christ first is ioyned to the blessing for so he calleth the holie bread c. Insomuch as in his second Alphabetical Table at the word Heresie is set downe Heresie of Cyril touching our Communion
opinion The Adoration of the Sacrament And wheras Nazianzene orat 11. telleth how his diseased Sister Gorgonia prostrated herself beforâ— the Aulter and calling vpon him who is worshipped on it O miracle sayth he she departed presently receauing health D. Fulk (35) In Resp ad Stapleton de Successâ—one Eccl. p. 230. merely trifleth in his answear hereto being inforced to say that The Eucharist vpon the Aulter was not adored by her although it was had in great reuerence and peraduenture not without Superstition But Hospinian (36) Hist Sacr. part 1. p. 470. plainly tearmeth Gorgonia's fact wicked and Superstitious S. Ambrose in orat praepar ad Missam (31) In his Reioynder to Bristow answere to Sanders p. 687. is so plaine in this poynt that the Centurists (37) Cent. 4. col 437. do therfore affirme of those prayers of S. Ambrose that They contayne the Adoration of the Bread in the Sacrament And the same is acknowledged by M. Parkins (38) In his Probl p. 21. Crispi of the Church p. 87 Crispinus And yet are those prayers acknowledged and alledged for the writings of S Ambrose (39) In his true Differ par 4. p 622. by D. Bilson Lastly the general custome of the Primitiue Church in this poynt is acknowledged 40) Assert Theol part sec 47. by Marbachius in these words As concerning the most ancient custome which the Church vsed in shewing to the People the Eucharist to be adored in the Masse c. Thirdly In regard of this Adoration Consecration being made the Eucharist was Eleuated that the people might see and adore it accordingly as is now vsed in the Roman Church Insomuch that the Protestant Pelargus (41) Schola fidei Art 10. fol 1. 5. relateth that Basile maketh mention in his book of the Holie-Ghost or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or shewing but this was no other then the Papists Eleuation vsed in the times of Basil c. And Altkircharus (42) De Mystico Inâ—ruento Saerifiâ—io p. 79. 348. reciting these words of S. Basile de Spiritu Sancto c. 27. who hath left in writing the words of Inuocation when the bread of the Eucharist and Cup of benediction is shewed affirmeth the answerable performance therof to be In Eleuatione in the Eleuation yea he alledgeth (43) Ibid. p. 105. both S. Basile S. Chrysostome as mentioning and affirming the holie Eleuation Fourthly from the same root of Real presence proceeded that ancient custome in the holie Fathers of receiuing the Eucharist fasting according to that of S. Austin ep 118. c. 6. It pleased the Holie-Ghost and was vniuersally obserued that our Lords Bodie should enter into the mouth of a Christian before other meates and that for this reason sayth he In honorem tanti Sacramenti In honour of so great a Sacrament (44) Hist Sacr. part 1. l 2 p 48. Sepperus de Saâ—r p. 804. Hospinian hauing alledged this verie Saying affirmeth therof that Austine insinuateth not obscurely this fast to haue been an Apostolical Tradition And wheras Tertulian l. 2. ad Vxor. affirmeth that the Eucharist is to be receaued before al meate the same is confessed in him by the (45) Cent 3 col 132. Centurists Fiftly in those ancient times in due Reuerence to this most holie Sacrament the Laytie before Receiuing forbore for some time the companie of their wiues A Doctrine so manifest in S. Hierome that D. Fulk (46) Against Heskins Sanders c. p. 458. in this case acknowledgeth Hieroms admonition giuen to marryed persons to abstayne from companie with their wiues c. which he there tearmeth vnworthie and Popish Diuinitie And yet Hospinian (47) Hist Sacr. part 1. l. 2. p. 46. see OsiaÌ„d Cent. 4 p. 180. confesseth in general that In the Primitiue Church the Eucharist was receiued chastly And this particularly he demonstrateth in sundrie ancient Fathers for which verie poynt also Zepperus (48) De Sacram p. 805 reprehendeth the Elibertine Councel Tertulian Hierome and S. Hieroms sundrie Sayings to the same effect are confessed and reprehended by the (49) Cent. 4 c. 7. col 487. Chemnit Exam part 3. p. 61. Centurists Chemnitius (50) Exam. part 3 p. 50. 58. for the same reproueth Origen But Hos inian (51) Hist Sacr part 1. l. 2. p. 132. reprehendeth and alledgeth herein Siricius Innocentius Calixtus Vrbanus the 2. Councel of Arles the Councels of Neocesarea Carthage Sixtly wheras according to Protestants Doctrine the Eucharist is no Sacrament vnles it be receaued our contrarie Catholicâ— Doctrine and practise of Reseruation is so agreable with the Primitiue Church that D. Fulk (53) Against Heskins c. p 77. confesseth hereof saying That the Sacrament of some was reserued in the elder dayes of the Church is not so great a Controuersie as whether it ought to be reserued And Caluin (54) Instit l. 4. c. 17. sec 39. acknowledgeth The Reseruation of the Sacrament to be the example of the ancient Church Chemnitius (55) Exam. part 2. p. 102. also testifyeth that witnesses of this custome of priuate Reformation of the Eucharist are Tertulian Cyprian Ambrose Hierome Basile c. And that certain of the ancient Fathers greatly commended the same as Nazianzene Ambrose c. And that it was an ancient Custome spread abroad and long continued Insomuch as Peter Martyr can not but acknowledge that by the testimonie of Cyril the Anthropomorphites were specially condemned for their impugning of the Sacraments Reseruation For wheras S. Cyril ad Calosyrium sayth I heare they say that the mystical blessing if anie remnants therof do remayne til the next day following is vnprofitable to sanctification but they are mad in so saying for Christ is not made another neither shal his Bodie be changed but the vertue of blessing and liuelie Grace doth alwayes remayne in it Peter Martyr (56) Contrae Gardiner de Euchar. obiect 213. col 838. mentioning this verie sentence of S. Cyril affirmeth therof that wheras it is added that the Remnants of the Eucharist reserued til the day following doe not cease from Sanctification this I think belongeth to a certaine receaued custome c. which Custome though it sauour of some Superstition yet Cyril and others subscribed vnto it for forthwith euen from the times of the Apostles by litle litle it began to degenerat from that ancient simplicitie of Gods worship (52) Willee in his Synop. p. 460. Crispinus (57) Of the Estate of the Church p. 87. speaking of Constantins time affirmeth that Such as made anie great voyage by Sea or Land carryed the Eucharist D. Field confesseth that (58) Of the Church l. 3. c. 34. p. 149. In the Primitiue Church the manner of manie was to receaue the Sacrament and not to be partakers of it presently but to carry it home with them and to receiue it priuatly when they were disposed as Tertulian
ridiculously that reason truth compelleth vs to dissent from them And agayne (55) In omnes Pauli Epist in Hebr. 7. p. 924. How much the more do I admire so manie old Doctours of the Church to be possessed with this opinion that they wil persist in the oblation of Bread wine for thus they say Christ is a Priest according to the order of Melchisedech but Melchisedech offred bread wine therefore the Sacrifice of Bread and wine agreeth to the Sacrifice of Christ D. Fulk (56) Against Hoskins c. p 100. admitteth that It is granted that Cyprian thought the bread wine brought forth by Melchisedech to be a figure of the Sacrament that herein also Melchisedech resembled the Priesthood of Christ And agayne (57) Against Heskins c. p. 99. And see against Rhem. Tâ—st in Hebr. c. 7. sec 8. f. 405. Whitak cont Dur. p. 818. 819. more in general I confesse that diuers of the old Fathers were of opinion that the bread wine which Melchisedech brought forth was sacrificed by him that it was a figure of the Sacrament which they improperly cal a Sacrifice (58) De opificio Missae l. 1. p 28. It is not lawful sayth Chrastouius for Christian Pastours to cast away the consent harmonie of Interpretation that both for the neernes of the Apostolical Age as also for the singular agreement of al which is had in al places c. Al as it were conspiring that the Sacred oblation of Melchisedech is proposed that not only it may be thought to be offred to the Souldiers of Abraham but also an vnbloudy Sacrifice to God The ancient Iewes also were so agreable with vs herein that the Protestant Bibliander doubteth not to affirme that (59) De S. Trinitate l. 2. p. 89. with the Ancient Iewes it was a most receiued opinion that at the câ—ming of the blessed Messias al Legal Sacrifices were to cease only the Sacrifice Thoda of thankes-giuing to be celebrated c. and that to be done with bread wine (60) In his Defence c. p 473. See Parker against Symbolizing part 1. c. 2. p. 103. euen as Melchisedech King of Salem Priest c. brought forth bread and wine The Fathers also likewise much vrge the necessitie of mingling water with wine in the Chalice before oblation and consecration D. Whitguift affirmeth that Cyprian was greatly ouerseen in making it a matter so necessarie in Celebration of the Lords Supper to haue water mingled with wine which was at that time no doubt Common â—o more then to him Carthwright (61) In Whitguift Def. p. 525. acknowledgeth that In the mingling of water with wine a necessitie great mysterie was placed as may appeare both by Iustin Martyr Cyprian And M Iewel (62) In his Reply p. 34. See Schultetus in Med. Theo. p. â—70 also confesseth that Indeed S. Cyprian certain old Fathers spake of it force it much wheras not one new Protestant doth either allow or practise the same But D. Morton (63) Prot. Appeal l. 2. p. 142. is content to refer this new Romish Custome vnto Pope Alexander the supposed Authour thereof sayth he But may not D. Morton blush to cal it New Romish Custome and yet referre it to Pope Alexander who liued almost within a Hundred yeares after Christ Here then we may conclude that our Sacrifice of the Masse was not only allowed and vsed by the Fathers of the Primitiue Church but withal acknowledged by them to be truly a Sacrifice Propitiatorie for the remission of sinnes As also that the same was truly represented by the Sacrifice of Melchisedech offring bread and wine Now the Fathers confessed and reproued by Protestants for our forsayd doctrine of Masse are S. Gregorie Gregorie Turonensis Pelagius Symmachus Leo Austin Ambrose Nyssene Cyril Arnobius Athanasius Cyprian Origen Tertulian Ireneus Alexander Clemens Anacletus Ignatius As also the Councels of Ephesus Antioch the Second and Fourth of Carthage of Constantinople of Arles the Fathers in general The Protestants acknowledging and reprouing the forsayd Fathers are the Centurists Caluin Melancthon Carion Szegedine Hospinian Chitraeus Musculus Marcus Pelargus Osiander Chrastouius Chemnitius Sebastianus Francus Zepperus Schultetus Fox Whitaker Symonides Ascham Fulk Field Whiteguift Iewel Morton It is acknowledged by Protestants that the Fathers of the Primitiue Church taught and beleeued the Power of Priests to Remission of Sinnes The necessitie of Auricular Confession The Imposition of Pennance and satisfaction to God thereby As also our Roman Doctrine of Pardons or Indulgences CHAPTER X. COncerning the Sacrament of Pennance the (1) Bellarm. de Paenitent l. 1. c. 10. l. 3. c. 2. l. 4. c. 5. Catholick Church teacheth First That God hath giuen truly and properly to Bishops and Priests as his instruments Power and Authoritie to forgiue sinne Secondly That sinners are bound to confesse their Sinnes in particular to Priests Thirdly That the sayd Priests are to impose Pennance or punishment vpon the Penitent after Confession of his Sinnes and that the Penitent in satisfaction is to performe the same by Prayer Fasting Almes-deeds and the like Now the Protestant Church hauing no true Subsistence but being a mere Negation or denial of true Religion directly (2) Instit l. 4 c. 19 §. 15 B za in CoÌ„f. fiâ—â—ci 7. art 11. denyeth al the foresayd Poynts taught and practised by the Roman Church What the Primitiue Church beleeued and practised herein I wholy referre to the plentiful Confe sions and testimonies euen of Protestant Writers And to begin with S. Gregorie Osiander (3) Cent. 6. p. 288. chargeth him that he teacheth vntruly of Pennance And the Centurists (4) Cent. 6. c. 10 p. 748. reprehend him for his opinion of Confession c. Pennance Satisfaction D. Morton acknowledgeth that S. Gregorie (5) Prot Appeale l. 1 sec 23. p. 26. indeed requireth that after man hath confessed his sinnes he should take reuenge of himself by penitential exercises c. S. Hierome tearming Pennance The second Table after Shipwrack Caluin (6) Inst l 4. c. 19. §. 17. reproueth him saying But it is the Saying of Hierome whose soeuer it is it can not be denyed but that it is plainly impious if it be expounded in their sense And as concerning the Power and Authoritie of Priests to remit sinne the denyal therof was reprehended in Acesius by the Emperour Constantin for the Centurists (7) Cent. â— col 653. report that Acesius his opinion was that al men should be exhorted to Pennance but the hope of remission of sinnes should be expected not from Priests but from God But when Acesius had sayd these things the Emperour added â— Acesius set a Ladder and clime alone to heauen This Historie is likewise confessed by Osiander (8) Cent. 4. p. 119. Chemnitius (9) Exam. part â— p. 188 part 2. p.
and euen the whole Chaos of Popish Superstition be builded vp But to cleare S. Gregorie of al Innouation in this point of Doctrine The Centurists acknowledge that (33) Cent. 5. c. 6. col 692. S. Chrysostom mentioneth dayes of Indulgence and Pardon And D. Field (34) Of the Church l. 1. c. 17. p. 33. confesseth that The Ancient Bishops were wont to cut off great partes of enioyned Pennance which remission was called an Indulgence Now to conclude Confession being made and Pennance inioyned the Priest as the Centurists confesse for the practise of the Third Age did afterwards absolue the Penitent euen with the now-like vsed ceremonie of imposing his hand So that the Primitiue and our present Roman Church do confessedly agree in the doctrine of Pennance First As that Priests haue truly Power to remit Sinnes Secondly that Auricular Confession is necessarie Thirdly that after Confession Pennance is to be imposed Fourthly (35) Cent. 3 col 127. that the same is truly Satisfactorie Fiftly after Pennance Absolution is giuen with Imposition of hands Sixtly yea Pardons and Indulgences are acknowledged to be granted and vsed in those purest times of the Church Primitiue Now the Fathers cited and reproued by Protestants for our foresayd doctrines are S. Gregorie Leo Chrysostom the Doctours in the Age of Constantin Ambrose Augustin Cyprian Tertulian the Carthage Councel the 1. Councel of Neece and the Fathers in general The Protestants accusing them are the Centurie-writers Caluin Chemnitius Melancthon Hamelmanus Osiander Hieronimus Marius Pantaleon Valera Symonides Bale Humfrey Field Morton and Whitaker It is granted by Protestants that the Catholick Doctrine of Purgatorie and of Prayer and Sacrifice for the dead was beleeued taught and practised by the Fathers of the Primitiue Church CHAPTER XI WHAT more generally disliked by Protestants then our Catholick doctrine of Purgatorie and our charitable pracise of Praying Sacrificing for the dead And yet what more generally confessed by Protestants to haue been the beleef and custome of the Primitiue Church then Purgatorie Prayer and Sacrifice for the dead Concerning S. Gregorie D. Humfrey (1) In Iesuit part 2. rat 5 p. 5. 627. acknowledgeth that he taught vs Englishmen by the preaching of S. Austin the doctrine of Purgatorie c. the oblation of the healthful Sacrifice Prayers for the dead (2) In Chro. l. 4. p. 567. 568. Carion confesseth that he approued the opinion of the oblation of Christs Bodie Bloud to be made for the dead Iohn Bale (3) In Act. Rom. Pontif. p. 44. 45. 46. 47. is of opinion that he made his foure books of Dialogues for the vpholding of Purgatorie c. and admitted euen Masses for the dead The Magdeburgians (4) In the Index of the 6. Centurie at the word Gregorie charge him out of his owne writings with the Doctrine of Purgatorie c. (5) Cent. 6. col 373. and with oblation of Sacrifice for the dead D. Fulk (6) Ag. Rhem. Test in 1 Cor. 3. sayth In the dayes of Gregorie c. the opinion of Purgatorie had gotten some ground in the Latin Church c. yet in the place by the Rhemistes quoted he granteth it but for very smal offences D. Sutcliffe auoucheth that Gregorie (7) Subuersion c. 4. vsed Litanies allowed Purgatorie c. And wheras D. Whitakers confidently auoucheth that (8) Contra Duraeum l. 7. p. 480. He that first deliuered Purgatorie for a certaine Doctrine was Gregorie the Great Yet M. Symonides (9) Vpon the Reuel p 83. only chargeth him not with beginning but with increasing two pernitious things in the Church Inuocation of the Dead and Prayer for the dead yea D. Morton confesseth that S. Gregory (10) Prot. Appeale l 1. Sec. 17. p. 19. â—0 frameth thus his conclusions Because such Soules departed appearing after desire the help of the liuing the Sacrifice of the Altar is profitahle for them Wherupon our Doctour concludeth saying This doth giue vs cause to obserue in him a deep plunge into Superstition And againe S. Augustin spake with a Peraduenture but S. Gregorie kindled the fire with a Credo c. And now of late the Romanists haue blowâ—e the flame with an Anathema So hotly do Roman Catholicks follow the Sent giuen by S Gregorie and S. Augustin But to clear S. Gregorie of al Innouation in this poynt (11) Ibid. p. 498. I wil ascend to his predecessours and Ancients And to begin with S. Augustin whom though D. Morton pretendeth to speak hereof only with a Paraduenture or doubtfully yet Bullinger hauing perused diuers places of S. Augustins writings concerning this poynt auoucheth (12) De origâ—â— Erroriâ— f. 223. That not in one but in manie places Augustin maketh mention of Sacrifice for the dead c. in Enchirid. c. 109. for it is not to be denyed sayth he but that the Soules of the dead are releeued by the pietie of their liuing friends when the Sacrifice of the Mediatour is offered for them c. And in his 32. sermon de Verbis Apostoli This sayth he deliuered from the Fathers the whole Church obserueth that prayer be made for them who dyed in the Communion of the Bodie and Bloud of Christ when in their place they are remembred in the Sacrifice and the Sacrifice also is offered for them This therfore sayth Bullinger I set downe more at large that thou mayst vnderstand this custome of Sacrificing for the dead to be ordayned not by the Apostles but by the holie Fathers D. Willet affirmeth That diuers of the ancient Fathers (13) Tetrastylon part 3. p. 97. did incline too much to maintayne and commend prayer for the dead with which errour sayth he S. Austin seemeth somewhat to be infected Augustine sayrh Caluin (14) Instâ—t l. 3. c. 5. § 10 in his books of Confessions telleth that his mother Monica earnestly desired that Memorie of her might be made at the Altar in performing the mysteries An old womans desire sayth Caluin which her Sonne squared not by the rule of Scripture but through affection of Nature would haue it approued to others D. Fulk confesseth that (15) In his Confut of Purgat p. 1â—0 Austin de Ciuitate Dei l. 21. c. 13. concludeth verie clearly that some suffer temporal paynes after this life this may not be denyed Yea he boldly auoucheth that Austin (16) Ibid. p 313. blindly defended prayer for the dead D. Morton affirmeth that Protestant Authours (17) Prot. Appeal p. 495. haue obserued S. Augustin to haue been the first who opened the window vnto the doctrine of Purgatorie by whose owne direction sayth he we haue a good warrant to dissent from him c. So admitting S. Austin for Purgatorie but most disgraciously insinuating that therin he is contrarie to himself which as most palpably vntrue I forbeare to confute and only proceed cleerly to shew that neither S. Austin was first nor the sole man that opened
the window herein as our Doctour with his other Brethren haue blindly obserued To which effect D. Fulk acknowledgeth that S. Ambrose (18) In his Confutation of Purgat p 78. 320. 326 202. allowed prayer for the Dead and that it was the common errour of his time As also (19) Ibid. p 194. And see Cent. 5. c. 6. col 675. that Chrysostom Hierome allowed prayer for the dead And Chemnitius confesseth the same of Ambrose (20) Exam. part 3. p. 93. 94. Prudentius Hierome and further reprehendeth S. Epiphanius (21) Ibid. p. 107. as not daring to refute such opinions of the common people as also S. Augustin S. Chrysostom for yeelding ouer much herein to the custome of the time and the receaued opinions of the vulgar (22) De Ratione Refor Eccl. Edic Gal. I do not deny sayth Caluin these prayers for the Dead to haue been receiued by S. Chrysostom Epiphanius S. Austin and such others because they had them from their Predecessours c. But these good men whom I haue named with ouer much credulitie without al discretion Iudgement followed that which within short time had gotten authoritie Osiander testifyeth that 23 Pelagius the Second decreed that Memorie of the dead should be made in euerie Masse after the Eleuation of the healthful Hoste Which decree is obserued euen vnto this day Melancthon chargeth the whole Councel of Carthage herewith saying (24) In his Libelli aliquot c. f. 19. and see Apol. Conf Aug c. de vocabulis Missae f. 216 The fourth Carthage Councel contayneth a Decree of Prayer Sacrifice for the dead in these words c. D. Fulk acknowledgeth that this forefather (25) In his Answer to a Counterf Cath. p. 44. Aerius taught that prayer for the Dead was vprofitable as witnes sayth he both Epiphanius Austin which they count for an errour Hereunto agreeth Hospinian saying (26) Hist Sacr part 1. fol. 155. It was the common opinion of the vulgar that the Soules of the dead might something be holpen by the prayers Almes Sacrifices which are done vpon earth as is euidently vnderstood by the disputation of Epiphanius with Aërius D. Fulk not only reprehendeth (27) In his Confut. of Purgat p. 320. 294. 326. 349. Ambrose Chrysostome Austin for allowing Prayer for the dead but withal he admitteth that it (28) Ibid. p. 320. 326. 34â— 78. was the common errour of their times and that the errour of Purgatorie was somewhat rifely budded in Austins time (29) Ibid. p. 161. Yea answering to D. Allen he granteth that (30) Ibid. p. 78. Austin speaketh of the Amending fire in the place by M. Allen alledged He doth so indeed sayth D. Fulk but Austin had no ground of that fire but in the common errour of his time So confessedly was the Amending fire of Purgatorie the common doctrine of S. Austins time A truth so certayne that Chemnitius for the self same doctrine reprehendeth (31) Exam. part 3. p. 92. Clemens Alexandrinus (32) Ibid. p. 93. Ambrose Hierom (33) Ibid. p. 94. Prudentius (34) Ibid. And Fulk speaking of Constantin the Great who liued somewhat before these Fathers affirmeth that (35) In his Confut of Purg. p. 313. In the burial of Constantin there is mention of Prayer for his soule according to the errour of his time In like sort the Centurists obserue that (36) Cent. 4. col 454. a great multitude of people powred out their prayers with teares for the Soule of the Emperour And for the same doctrine of Purgatorie they accuse (37) Cent. 4. c. 4. p. 304. Lactantius Prudentius S. Hierome D. Beard speaking of Those fathers (38) Retractiue from Romish Religion p. 414. which do patronize Purgatorie mentioneth from Bellarmine Athanasius Basil Gregorie Nazianzene Neither was this so general practise of the people or vniforme consent in doctrine of these ancient Fathers anie Innouation or first beginning errour of their times For it is further confessed by D. Fulk that the doctrine of Purgatorie not began but (39) In his Retentiue c. p. â—06 preuayled sayth he within three hundred yeares after Christ And M. Gifford (40) In his DemoÌ„stratioÌ„ that our Brownistes be ful Donatistes p. 38. granteth that In the Churches publick worship to pray for the Soules of the dead and to offer oblation for the dead was general in the Church long before the dayes of Austin as appeareth sayth he in Cyprian Tertulian which was before him and neerer to the times of the Apostles So likewise Caluin (41) Inst l 3 c. 5. sec 10. acknowledgeth that aboue One thousand three hundred yeares since it was vsual that prayers should be made for the dead whatsoeuer hereof is read in the Ancient Writers was yeelded to the publick custome and to the ignorance of the people c. I confesse they were drawne headlong into Errour euen as inconsiderat Credulitie doth vsually depriue the minds of men of Iudgement And relating the Custome of making Commemoration of the dead in the Supper or Sacrifice that place of ease light and peace might be giuen to them he further sayth I do not deny this to haue been a most ancient Custome and because great is the force of Custome or rather Tyrannie therfore I confesse these prayers to haue been approued by Chrysostome Epiphanius Augustin and the like because as by hands they were deliuered to them from their Ancestours Beza speaking of the times of Cyprian Austin and Chrysostom confesseth that as then (42) Praef. in nouum Test ad Princ. Cond Prayers for the dead were begun to be vsed more freely The Protestant (43) In Apoc. p. 206 Ioannes Winkelmannus auoucheth that Origen decreed a Purgatorie wherin after this life some sinnes are purged The Centurists (44) Cent. 3. col 87. report that Thou mayst see some seedes of Purgatorie spread abroad in some places of Origen as hom 2. in psal 36. yea in the same place they alledge sundrie of Origens sayings affirming Purgatorie And (45) Cent. 3 col 265. in another place they acknowledge that Origen in his bookes de Principijs decreeth Purgatorie to be the punishment of Sinnes And for the same doctrine they reprehend (46) Cent. 3. col 138. 139. both Cyprian and Tertullian Yea other Protestants affirme of S. Cyprian S. Augustin S. Iohn Damascene in that they defend Prayer for the dead that (47) Clypeus fidei Dial. 11. p. 449. they are mere fooleries which they haue written of this matter And that such their doctrine is to be ascribed to ihe rash stupiditie wherewith their heades were moued seing they were deuoyd of the Holie-Ghost Chemnitius granteth that in the writings of Dionysius the Areopagite who was conuerted by the Apostles mention is made of Prayer (48) Exam. part 3. p. 110. for the dead in the Church And the like
is acknowledged of Dionysius by Melancthon (49) In aliquot libel c. fol. 23. D. Fulk 50) Against Purgatory p. 353. which D. Fulk in plainest words teacheth that Tertulian (51) Against Purgat p. 3â—2 see p 303. 393. Cyprian Austin Hierom and a great manie more do witnesse that Sacrifice for the dead is the Tradition of the Apostles Wherunto Bucer accordeth (52) In Enarrat in Sacra quatuor Euangel in Math. c. 12. p 311. affirming that prayer and almes were made for the dead almost from the verie beginning of the Church Lastly Zuinglius being impugned for denying Prayer for the dead and pressed with the Authoritie of Fathers especially of S. Chrysostom S. Augustin who deriue this Custome from the Apostles answereth thus (53) Tom. 1. Epicheroe de Can. Miss f. 186. And see Tom. 2. in Elench contra Anabap f. 10. If it be so as Augustin and Chrysostom report I think that the Apostles suffred certayne to pray for the dead for no other cause then to condescend to their infirmitie So insimulating the Apostles wilfully to haue permitted others to erre according to the errours of Protestants in praying for the Dead which they could not do without errour in themselues Yea the Doctrine of Purgatorie and Prayer for theÌ„ dead was beleeued and practised by the ancient true beleeuing Iewes For whereas M. Morton speaking of the Church before the coming of Christ affirmeth the doctrine then taught by the Iewes to be now knowne among other Reasons (54) Treat of Israel the Church p. 93. 94. By the open Confession of the Iewes in al Ages since the coming of Christ For sayth he it is plaine that they hold euen to this day those opinions which they receaued from their Ancestours and were commonly held of that Nation Yea say the Centurists (55) Cent. 8. col 885. The Iewes are constant in their opinions And Pet. Martyr writeth that (56) Com. plac in Engl. part 2. p. 599. The Iewes as yet continue and kept in so great aduersities in so diuers and griâ—uous Captiuities and Dispersions they hold stil their Religion Doubtles no ancient Troians Lumbards Hunnes or Vandals haue so held their owne c. and could shew their original Historie set forth in most true writing and being euerie where dispersed as they were could neuertheles keep their owne Ordinances c. Now concerning these Iewes so constant in their Faith and admitting the bookes of Machabees but only for a true Historie it is euident thereby that Iudas Machabeus a holie and iust man procured (57) 2. Machab 2.43.45 Sacrifice for the dead and that the Priests of Hierusalem then true beleeuers offred the same wherein also our later Iewes are so conformable that D. Whitaker confesseth the same in these words (58) Cont. Dur. l. 1. p. 85. I know that the Iewes haue libros memoriales books of Commemorations which they read in their Synagogues and I am not ignorant that now they are accustomed to vse certaine prayers for the Dead Insomuch that Buxdorsius also reporteth their knowne and confessed doctrine of Purgatorie (59) Synagoga Iudaica p. 24. 505. 506. 508. 275. D. Beard auoucheth that (60) Retractiue from the Romish Religion p. 77. The Romanists are like vnto the Iewes in their doctrine and practise of Prayer for the dead for they hold and teach that prayer Sacrifice is to be offered for the dead grounding their opinion partly vpon the example of Iudas Machabeus who as they affirme procured Sacrifice to be offered by the Priests for the dead c. and partly vpon the Thalmudical Traditions of diuers of their ancient Rabbins From the Premisses then we may remember that the ancient Fathers did confessedly beleeue a place of Purgatorie after this life Secondly wherin Sinnes were punished and remitted Thirdly for which Remission they vsed to Pray giue Almes and offer the most precious Sacrifice of Christs Bodie and Bloud Now the Fathers acknowledged and reprehended by Protestants for the forsayd Poynts are S. Gregorie Austin Ambrose Hierome Chrysostom Prudentius Epiphaenius Pelagius the Fourth Carthage Councel Cyprian Tertullian Origin Clemens Alexandrinus Dionysius the Areopagite the Apostles and the ancient beleeuing Iewes The Protestant Writers obseruing and disliking in the sayd Fathers the forsayd Poynts are Caluin Beza Bullinger Zuinglius the Centurie-writers Carion Chemnitius Osiander Melancthon Hospinian Winkelmannus Buxdorsius Bucer Symondes Bale Sutcliffe Humfrey Fulk Whitaker Gifford Willet Morton It is confessed by Protestants that the Fathers of the Primitiue Church beleeued and taught our Catholick Doctrine of Christs Descending into Hel. CHAPTER XII ACcording to the Article of our Creed He descended into hel Catholicks generally teach that the Soule of Christ presently after his death descended into Hel or Lymbus Patrum or Abrahams Bosome there to deliuer and redeeme the Captiue Soules of the holie Patriarks Prophets and other Iust who liued before his time But Protestants being diuided amongst themselues (1) Buâ—er in c. 27. Mat. Beza in c. 2. Act. some of them teach that by the foresayd Article is only vnderstood that Christ descended to his Graue (2) Calu. Instit l. 2. c. 16. § 8 9. 10. 11. 12 others that he suffred the paynes of the Damned Soules Now do decide this Controuersie by the beleef and Doctrine of the Fathers of the Primitiue Church and that by the confessed acknowledgement of our Aduersaries who in a case so euident liberally confesse the general streame of ancient Doctours to be most aduerse vnto them in this verie Article of our Faith wheras that most holie and euer renowmed Cardinal Bellarmine in proofe of this Article alledged (3) Tom. 1. l 4. de Chri. Anima c. 14 the plaine testimonies of the Greek Fathers as namely of Iustin Ireneus Clemens Origen Eusebius Basil Nazianzen Nyssen Epiphanius Chrysostome c. And of the Latin Fathers Tertulian Hypolitus Cyprian Hilarie Gaudentius Prudentius Ambrose Hierome Ruffinus Austin Leo Fulgentius c The Protestant (4) Ad Bellarm Disput part 1. p. 176. Danaeus in answer to so manie most famous Fathers testimonies most barely affirmeth that As concerning them they were not instructed out of Gods word neither do they confirme their opinion from it but only from their owne coniectures c. Thus supposing their Catholick opinion herein and therefore reiecting al their iudgements as confirming their Faith only by their owne coniectures in Danaeus his opinion which as no lesse absurd in itself then improbable to al Iudicious I omit as an answer purely Protestantical In like plaine manner (5) Conc. Dur. l 8. p. 567 And see p. 773. D. Whitaker in answer to the like testimonies of the Fathers vrged by our Catholick Writer Duraeus writeth thus That which thou couldest not do by Scriptures no doubt thou wilt performe by the testimonies of the Fathers of whom that I may freely and briefly answer thee what I
think one litle word of Scripture hath more weight with me then a thousand Sayings of Fathers without Scriptures Therfore thou art not to expect that I seuerally wash away those errours of the Fathers So according to the custome of al Hereticks for their last refuge appealing to only Scripture and disclayming from the Doctrine of the ancient Fathers M. Iacob (6) In Bilsons ful RedeÌ„pt p. 188 And see Iacob in Def. of the Treat of Christs fuffringes p 199. 200. honestly acknowledgeth that Al the Fathers with one consent affirme that Christ deliuered the Soules of the Patriarcks and Prophets out of hel at his coming thither and so spoyled Satan of those that were in his present possession with whom agreeth herein D. Bilson (7) Vbi sup p. 189. And in his Suruey p. 656. And D. Barlow (8) Def. of the Articles of Prot. Relig p. 173. testifyeth that This passeth most rife among the Fathers who taking Inferi for Abrahams bosome expound it that Christ went thither ad liberandum liberandos to conuey the Fathers deceased before his Resurrection into the place where now they are A French Protestant (9) Catholick Tradit p. 112. 113. Writer not only affirmeth this to be the doctrine of Chrysostom a very true sayth he Catholick teacher but also of the now present Apostolick Churches of the East whereto sayth he In likelyhood the Christians of Affrick do consent And wheras S. Ignatius (10) Ep. ad Trallianos post med doth cleerly teach the same Doctrine the same is acknowledged in him (11) Def. of his Article c. fol. 22 Bislons Suruey p 657. 658. by D. Hil D. Bilson yea the Poloman (12) De Russorum c. Religione p. 122. 123. Protestant Lascicius doubteth not to affirme and deriue the Doctrine therof not only from S. Ignatius S. Iohns Scholler but also from S. Thadaeus one of the twelue Apostles (13) Math. 10 3. And withal answerably testifyeth herein the opinion and doctrine of the Hebrewes (14) Vbi sup p. 123. of the remote Christians both in Syria Aethiopia And the like acknowledgement of S. Thadaeus his opinion herein is made by (15) Palma Christiana p. 74. And see Eus Hist l 1. c vlt. Frigiuillaeus Gruuâ—us who speaking therof affirmeth that we haue the testimonie of Eusebius Pamphylus who in the Historie of Agbar King of the Edessens testifyeth Thadaeus the Apostle to haue preached before Agbar and others amongst other things the Descension of Christ to Hel c. And then further defending this Historie for Authentical he concludeth No man of mature iudgement wil impugne those things which Eusebius deliuereth of the preaching of Thadaeus at Edessa and the conuersion of Agbar to Christ Finally this testimonie of the holie Apostle Thadaeus is further defended by D. Bilson and sundrie times alledged and vrged by D Hil. The ancient Iewes did so certainly beleeue the Doctrine of Lymbus Patrum and the same is so cleerly taught (17) c. 24. 37. in the booke of Ecclesiasticus that D. Whitaker for his best answer finally betaketh himself to the reiecting (18) Conc. Dur. l. 8. p. 567. of the sayd booke for not Canonical But the falshood herof being formerly (19) See bef l. 2 c. 5. proued (16) Suruey of Christs suffrings p. 653. 654. 657. 660. 661. c. Hil Def. of this Art Christ DesceÌ„d c. and that from the Confession of other Protestants it sufficeth for this present that the sayd booke being but a true Historie doth yet fully manifest the Doctrine herin of the Ancient Iewes who liued before Christ In which regard also D. Beard (20) Retractâ—ue from Rom. Relig p. 78. affirmeth Catholicks to Iudaize in their doctrine of Lymbus Patrum and Purgatorie This Article then of our Creed that Christ after his death truly descended into Hel we see was the confessed Doctrine of S. Austin Leo Fulgentius Chrysostom Prudentius Hierom Ruffine Ambrose Hilarie Gaudentius Epiphanius Iustin Clemens Hippolytus Irenaeus Ignatius Thadaeus the Apostle and of al the Fathers and the ancient Iewes Now the Protestants producing and acknowledging the Fathers Doctrine herin to be Roman Catholick are Danaeus Lascicius Frigiuillaeus Gruuius Whitaker Bilson Hil Iacob Barlow Beard and others IT IS CONFESSED BY PROTESTANTS THAT THE Fathers of the Primitiue Church beleeued and practised our Catholick Doctrine of praying to Angels and Saints CHAP. XIII ALthough the glorious Angels and blessed Saincts do not require or need in regard of themselues anie human Apologie for their deserued honour they being seated in the highest and strongest turrets of the kingdome of Heauen wherin new Triumphs they dayly winne against their Enemies and being as (a) l. de Mortalitate S. Cyprian sayth now secure of their owne immortalitie are yet careful of our securetie Yet if we respect either the general Calumnies and contempts of our modern Hereticks against them or our bounden duties by reason of so manie celestial Graces through their charitable suffrages bestowed vpon vs it may iustly be thought expedient or rather necessarie in their due defence and for sa isfaction of the Aduersarie briefly to set downe the confessed Doctrine and beleef of the Primitiue Church honouring and inuocating the sayd Angels and Saincts as Intercessours agreably as the Roman Church stil doth directly contrarie to our Modern Protestants refusing and impugning the same First then touching S. Gregorie the Great the Protestant Chronicler Carion affirmeth that (1) Chron. l. 4. p. 567. 568. Gregorie ordaâ—ned the publick Rite of Inuocation of Saincts M. Symonds only auoucheth that (2) Vpon the Reuelations p. 83.84.85.86 Gregorie increased two pernicious things in the Church Inuocation of the Dead aâ—d Prayer for the dead And that he wrote to Leontia to make S. Peter Protectour of the Empire in earth and Intercessour in Heauen c. He Sent Austin into England to conuert the English they which were sent spread forth a Banner with a painted Crucifix and so came in Procession to the king singing Litanies in a strange tongue Now one chief part of the Litanie contayneth Inuocation of Saincts Luke Osiander (3) Cent. 6. p. 288. reciting manie Catholick poynts of Faith taught and beleeued by S. Gregorie numbreth amongst the rest that He approued cloaked and defended the Inuocation of Saincts and their worship (4) In the Index of the sixt Century at the word Gregory The Centurie writers numbring vp in like sort the pretended Popish Errours of S. Gregorie charge him with Inuocation of Saints Wâ—th whom agreeth (5) In Iesuitis part 2. r at 5. p. 5. 627. D. Humfrey reprehending S. Gregorie for publick Inuocation of Saints and their worship (6) Cent. 6. c. 131. col 17. And the Centurists further confesse that Gregorie the Great reciteth manie miracles c. which plainly confirme Superstition as confidence in Saints Inuocation of the dead c. Wee need not therefore
sayth D. Morton (7) Prot. Appeal l. 1. sec 24 p. 27. be greatly moued with the contrarie Doctrine of S. Gregorie allowing praying to Saincts c. And agayne Neuertheles as we find in him very rarely anie prayer vnto Saints c So desiring to mince but not daring to deny a truth so manifest and for such confessed by so manie of his other Brethren of S. Gregorie his defending Inuocation of Saints But to ascend from S. Gregorie to other more ancient Doctours (8) Exam. part 3. p. 211. Chemnitius alleageth S. Austin inuocating S. Cyprian and coÌ„cludeth saying therof These things did Augustin without scripture yeelding to the times and custome Prudentius I grant sayth D. Whitaker (9) Answer to Campian Reas 5. p. 140. 141. as a Poet somtims called vpon the Martyrs whose Acts he describeth in verse And the superstitious Custome of praying to Saints had now taken deep root in the Church which as a Tyrant haled somtimes the holie Fathers into the same errour [10) In his Reioynder to Bristow p 5. D. Fulk spareth not to speak thus plainly I confesse sayth he that Ambrose Austin and Hierom held Inuocation of Saints to be lawful And that (11) Against the Rhem. Test in 2. Pet. c. 1. sec 3. fol. 443. In Nazianzene Basil and Chryostome is mention of Inuocation of Saints And that Theodoret also speaketh of prayers vnto Martyrs As also that Leo ascribeth much to the prayers of S. Peter for him And in brief that manie of the ancient Fathers held that the Saints departed pray for vs. (12) Cent. 5. c. 6. col 675. The Centurists charge S. Chrysostom's Lyturgie with Inuocation of our B. Ladye by name Chemnitius (13) Exam. part 3. 200. auoucheth that About the yeare of our Lord three hundred and seauentie Inuoâ—aâ—ion of Saints began to be brought into the publick assemblies of the Church by Basile Nyssen and Nazianzene (14) Ibid. p. 211. And he reprehendeth for the same Doctrine Theodoret and Hierome A French Protestant answering to the testimonie of S. Gregorie Nazianzene writeth (15) Clypeus fidei Dial. 8. p. 258. In that thou citest S. Gregorie praying to S. Basil dead that he would pray for him I wil let thee know that Gregorie knew not what he sayd when he sayd so Belike this Protestant thought that greatest Diuine S. Gregorie Nazianzen to haue been ouertaken with drinke when he prayed so as we may iustly suspect this giddie French Protestant was when he writ thus But the Centurie-writers (16) Cent. 4. col 295. 296. 297. alledge sundrie examples of prayer to Saincts Athanasius Basil Nazianzene Ambrose Prudentius Epiphanius and Ephrem (17) Apocal. in c. 14 p. 382. M. Brightman hauing named Athanasius Basil Chrysostom Nazianzen Ambrose Hierom Austin c. reproueth them as in words condemning Idolatrie but indeed establishing it by Inuocation of Saints worshipping of Relicks and such like wicked Superstitions c. sayth he And wheras D. Bishop alleageth S. Chrisostom affirming the Emperour Constantin to haue prayed to Saincts (18) p. 17. M. Wotton in his book against D. Bishop only answereth by barely reiecting the Saying for suspected and forged yet (19) In his Ansvver to D. Bishop p. 174. D. Abbot acknowledgeth the contrarie saying We deny not Chrysostom to be authour of the words And then inuenteth an answer no lesse false then impertinent to wit (20) Ibid. that Chrisostom thereby meaneth the Emperour Arcadius who was Emperour aboue sixtie yeares after Constantin but of Constantin it is sayth he that we enquire for what others did after the time of Constantin Superstition more and more increasing is nothing concerning him But yet to omit al other answere this may so much concerne anie indifferent man that it may sufficiently assure him that Inuocation of Saincts was confessedly vsed in the Church at least about Anno Domini 398. when Arcadius raigned Yea this Doctrine was so general and so certainly beleeued in the Primitiue Church that the holie Fathers are reproued by our young Protestant writers for condemning the contrarie Protestant Doctrine as Heretical in Vigilantius and Aerius D. Fulk sayth (21) In his ansvver to a counterf Cath. p. 46 Last of al Vigilantius shal be brought in who wrot against the Inuocation of Saincts c. Him Hierom reprooueth And (22) In defen tract de Diuers p. 349. D. Sarauia and Beza (23) Ibid. p. 346. do both of them affirme that Aërius was likewise charged and condemned by the Fathers for his then affirming that the Saincts departed are not to be prayed vnto But to arise yet somwhat higher and a litle to view the times neer Christ and his Apostles Beza speaking of the times of Cyprian Austin and Chrysostom acknowledgeth that (24) Prefat nou Test ad Princip Condens then preuayled Inuocation of the Dead The Centurie writers speaking of (25) Cent. 3 col 84. S. Cyprian say thus Verily Cyprian in the end of his first Epistle of his first book doth not obscurely think that Martyrs and Saincts departed do pray for the liuing (26) Cent. 3 col 83. Yea they further charge Origen for praying O holie Iob pray for vs wretches And for teaching hom 1. in Ezech. that Angels are to be prayed vnto But to auoyd tediousnes in reciting the other particuler Fathers of that Age they in grosse confesse (27) Cent. 3. c. 4. col 83. that There are manifest steps of Inuocation of Saincts in the Doctours of that ancient Age which was the third Age or hundred yeares after Christ And wheras (28) l. 5. c. 19. S. Ireneus termeth the B. Virgin Marie Eues Aduocat some Caluinists auouch that these were the words (29) Clypeâ—â— fidei Dial. 8. p. 277 Ediâ— Gall. rather of some Idolater or if they were the words of Ireneus Ireneus had not the true vnderstanding of the confession of the holie Faith of Christian Religion But if so ancient and holie Ireneus wanted true vnderstanding of Faith and Christian Religion we may assure our selues that new borne Protestants are wholy blind therin But without al restraint of Age or time (30) In his Examination c c. 9. p 120. D. Couel affirmeth that Diuers both of the Greek and Latin Church were spotted with errours about Free-wil Merits Inuocation of Saincts c. Yea D. Whitguift discoursing of (31) In h is Def. c. against the Reply of Carthwright p. 472. 473. Doctrine taught in anie Age since the Apostles time affirmeth without any exception either of Age or Father that to vse his owne words (32) Ibid. p. 473. almost al the Bishops and learned writers of the Greek Church and Latin also for the most part were spotted with Doctrines of Free wil of Merit of Inuocation of Saincts and such like Now the Doctrine and practise herof in the ancient Iewes is so cleerly recorded in the books of (33) c. 5.
(3) Bellar. de Monach. l. 2 c. 20. c. Monkes and other Religious concerning Chastitie Pouertie and Obedience and their strick order of life are likewise lawful holie and laudable Directly (4) Luth. l. de Votis Monasticis Caluin Inst l. 4 c. 13. c. 12. contrarie to al which is the Doctrine and practise of the Protestant Church which First teacheth that no vowes are to be made to the honour of God but such as are of things already commanded Secondly that it is lawful for the Clergie or Ministerie euen after Orders taken to marry wiues Thirdly that the Vowes of al Religious Persons with their manner of life are impious vaine Superstitious and not to be kept Now how repugnant are our Moderne Libertines herein to the ancient Fathers and wholy agreable our present Roman with the Primitiue Church let these few lines following serue for fullest proof Luke (5) Cent. 6. p. 208. Osiander numbring vp manie Catholick poynts of Faith wherwith he chargeth S. Gregorie the Great to haue been fouly and Popishly deluded amongst the rest affirmeth that he Sharply vrged the single life of the Ministers of the Church D. Morton accordingly sayth hereof (6) Prot. Appeal l. 1. sec 52. p. 38. The Apologists do truly obiect that our Osiander noted S. Gregorie to haue been a vehement vrger of Single life of the Clergie And concerning such of the Clergie as were married before their Orders taken M. Symondâ— (7) Vpon the Reuel p. 83. 84 85. 86. reproueth him for that He decreed that the Clergie should not haue knowledge of their wiues c. Carion (8) Carion in Chron. l. 4 p 567. 568. reciting his seueral pretended Catholick errours repeateth his errour of Vowes and Single life But to leaue S. Gregorie and to arise to S. Augustin other ancient Fathers I know sayth (9) de Votis p. 524. Peter Martyr declared no lesse to my Auditours in Oxford that Epiphanius with manie others of the Fathers erred in that they hold it a Sinne to break the Vow of virginitie they do il to number it amongst the Apostolical Traditions Chemnitius (10) Exam. part 3. p. 41. 40. 42. in general confesseth saying We are not ignorant that the Fathers allow the vowes of perpetual Chastitie acknowledge them to be obligatorie Insomuch as he doth specially recite and reiect in this behalf the seueral sayings of S. Basil S. Ambrose S. Chrysostome S. Epiphanius S. Austin and S. Innocentius And Iustus Molitor (11) De Ecclesia Milit. p. 80. reproueth the whole Councel of Chalcedon which was most famous and ancient for that It forbad to Monks and Nunnes the vse of Mariage In like sort S. Augustin and al the Fathers assembled with him in the Carthage Councel are reiected by Danaeus (12) Contrae Bellarm. 1. part alterae parte p. 10 11 for that sayth he they abused manifestly the Word of God saying vpon the Apostles words If anie widowes how young soeuer c. haue vowed themselues to God left their Laical habit and vnder the testimonie of the Bishop Church appeared in Religious weed if afterwards they go to Secular mariage they shal according to the Apostle haue damnation because they dared make voyd the vow of Chastitie which they made to God And Osiander (13) Cent. 5. l. 1. c. 1. p. 20. for the same respect confesseth and at large reprehendeth the forsayd Canon of the Carthage Councel Yea the Councel of Nice wherof D. Whitguift (14) In his Def. p. 330 sayth That notable famous Councel of Nyce which is of al wise and learned men reuerenced esteemed and imbraced next to the Scriptures themselues this so famous a Councel did as M. Carthwright (15) In his 2. Reply part 1 p. 485. D. Bancroft in his Suruey c. p. 386. Centurists Cent. 4. c. 9. col 656. D. Fulk against Rhem. Test in Math. 8. fol. 14. and sundrie other Protestant Writers acknowledge affirme and teach that vnto those that were chosen to the Ministrie vnmarryed it was not lawful to take anie wife afterwards only being marryed before entrance into the Ministrie it was lawful for them to vse the benefit of that precedent Marriage And Paphnutius one of the Councel sheweth coÌ„cerning Priests vnlawfulnes to marry after Priesthood vndertaken that not only this was before that Councel but was also yet further an ancient tradition of the Church in which both himself and the rest of the Councel Thus farre M. Carthwright Luther (16) Tom. â— Germ Ienae f 97. de Concil part 1. p. 92. like wise much disgusted with the forsayd Councel of Neece reiecteth the same saying I do not acknowledge the holie Ghost in this Nicene Councel because it forbiddeth him who hath gelded himself to be made Priest and also commandeth the Clergie to haue none dwelling with them but their Mother Sister c. Had the Holie Ghost no other thing to do in Councels but to bind his Ministers to such imposed dangerous and not necessarie Lawes Frigiuillaeus Gaunius (17) Palma Christiana p 103. reprehendeth Socrates and Sozomene for their report of Paphnutius saying Socrates added this report rashly of his owne deuising c. wâ—th like falshood did he wrest the Saying of Paphnutius in the Nicene Councel c. And Sozomene following after Socrates followeth his explication in maintenance of the doctrine of Diuels coÌ„demned by Paul 1. Tim. 4. And the Centurie-writers (18) Cent. 4. c. 9. col 656. D. Fulk (19) Ag. Rhem. Test in Math. 8. sec 3 fol. 14. doe both of them confesse that Paphnutius though he thought that Priesthood did not dissolue Mariage contracted before Orders giuen yet he affirmed to the Nycene Councel that Those who were made Priests before they were marryed should not afterwards marry alledging for this veterem Ecclesiae consuetudinem the ancient Tradition of the Church In like sort say our Puritans 20) A brief Discouery of vntruthes in D. Bancrofts serm p. 21. We must needs confesse that not only this Gouernment of the Church but also manie other poynts of greatest weight in Religion fel to decay long before the councel of Neece c. besides manie other Corruptions which wâ—re past ouer yea and established at that Councel c. Paphnutius alone was inforced to stand vp against the whole Synod in the cause of the Mariage of Miniâ—â—ers which notwithstanding he c. so defended that he would not haue him that were a Minister being vnmarryed euer after to be ioyned to a wife Agreable hereunto sayth D. Morton (21) Prot. Appeal p. 480. The Councel of Neece restrayneth them from mariage who were vnmarryed when they entred into Orders But to proceed the Magdeburgians (22) Cent 4. col 704. And see further Crispinus of the Estate of the Church p. 107. confessing that the second Synod of Arles being celebrated in the time of the
Ireneus and are repugnant to the Scriptures In like sort Osiander 22) Cent. 2. p. 5. 6. And see the Centurists Cent. 2. col 207. reproueth Iustin saying Iustine extolled too much the libertie of mans Wil in obseruing the Commandments of God And it is granted 23) Cent. 2. c. 4. col 59. And see Caluin Inst l. 2 c. 2 §. 4. that Clemens euerie where defendeth Freewil so that it may appeare say they that not only al the Doctours of that Age were in such darknes but also that the same after increased in the later Doctours D. Abbots 24) In defence of the Reformed Catholick part 1. p. 114. speaking of the booke of Hermes entituled Pastor and some others forged according to his opinion in the Apostles times sayth The poyson which Satan had conueyed into such counterfaite books was receiued as wholesome food and sundrie errours and superstitious fancies of vowed Virginitie and Prayer for the dead of Freewil of Inuocation of Saincts of Antichrist and the Assumption of Marie and such like by litle and litle got footing in the Church And here was indeed sayth Abbot the true beginning of manie doctrines of Poperie c. The Centurists 25) Cent. 2. c. 4. 4 coâ— 58. speaking of the times next after the Apostles doe acknowledge That almost no poynt of Doctrine began so soon to be obscured as this of Freewil Yea it is confessed 26) So say the Puritanes cyted in D. Bancrostes Sermon p. 23. that the Protestants know that euer since the Apostles time in a manner it flourished euerie where vntil Martin Luther took the sword in hand against it A true so euident that D. Humfrey 27) Iesuit part 2. p. 530. thinketh It may not be denyed but that Ireneus Clemens and others quos vocant Apostolicos whom they cal Apostolical in respect of the time in which they liued haue in their writings the opinions of Freewil c. Yea sayth M. Caluin 28) Instit l. 2. c. 2. § 9. Al Ecclesiastical Writers excepting Augustin haue written so ambiguously and differently in this matter of Freewil that nothing certain can be gathered from their wrytings And they were ouer ful in extolling Freewil Lastly D. Whiteguift 29) In his Defence against the Reply of Carthwright p. 472. 473. discoursing of Doctrine taught in anie Age since the Apostles time affirmeth without anie other exception of Age or Father that to vse his words almost 30) Ibid. p. 473. And see the lyke in Whitak de Eccl. Con. Bellar. Controu 2. p. 299. al the Bishops and learned Writers of the Greek Church and Latin also for the most part were spotted with doctrines of Freewil of Merit of Inuocation of Saincts and such like And the same also almost in the same words is confessed by D. Couel saying 30) In his Exam. c. 9. p. 120. Diuers both of the Greek and Latin Church were spotted with errours about Freewil Merits Inuocation of Saincts c. Yea the ancient Iewes did so firmely beleeue our Doctrine of Freewil that to omit the 31) c. 15. 12. 15. 16. 17. cleerest words of Ecclesiasticus which D. Whitakers had no other wayes 32) Resp ad Camp Rat. 1. p. 15. to euade but by denying the sayd booke to be Canonical Scripture D. Fulk tearmeth 33) Defence of the Eng. Transl p. 320. The Iewish Rabbins Patrons of Freewil which D. Morton 34) Prot. Appeal l. 2. p. 371. iustifyeth and further sayth 35) Ibid. p. 370. What if it be confessed that some Rabbins maintayned the libertie of mans Wil as Rabbi Moses did Yea M. Hal chargeth the Pharisees 36) Pharisaisme p. 50. with Freewil and Merit which is more then either Christ or his Apostles did who yet in other respects spared not to discouer their true Errours Wel then our Catholick Doctrine of Freewil is the Primitiue Doctrine taught by S. Gregorie Hierome Epiphanius Nazianzene Basil the Councel of Nice Chrysostome Athanasius Lactantius Cyprian Origen Tertulian Theophilus Iustine Athenagoras Tatianus Clemens Alexand. Ireneus Hermes and by al the Fathers since the Apostles vntil Luthers time Our strongest witnesses herof are the Protestant Writers The Centurists Beza Osiander Hamelmannus Schultetus Calum Humfrey Abbot Hal Morton Whiteguift Fulk and Whitaker Jt is graunted by Protestants that the Fathers of the Primitiue Church taught not only Faith but likewise Good works truly to iustify And that the sayd works are meritorious of Grace and Glorie CHAP. XXI COncerning Good-works It is the general (1) Se Bellarmin De Iustificatione l. 1. 4. 5. and receiued doctrine of the Roman Church First that the works of the iust are truly good and not of their owne nature sinne Secondly that not only Faith but likewise good works doe truly iustifie a man obtaine remission of sinnes Thirdly that the same good works do truly merit or deserue Grace in this world and glorie in the next Directly 2) Luther in Assert art 31. 32. 36. Caluin Instit l. 3. c. â—◠§ 4. and c. 41. §. 9. c. 19. §. 2. 4. 7. c. 15. § 2. contrarie to al the forsayd poynts concerning Good-works is the ordinarie doctrine of our new Protestants First affirming that the best works of the iust are of their owne natures deadlie sinne Sâ—condly that only Faith doth iustify Thirdly and lastly that works do neither merit Grace nor glorie To come now to the doctrine and Faith of the Primitiue Church The 3) Cenâ— 6. c. 10. col 748. Centurists making a Catalogue of S. Gregories pretended errours amongst the rest number his Errour of good workes and Iustification And 4) Cent. 6. p. 288. Osiander much reproueth him for that he attributeth ouer much to good works S. Augustin is reiected by 5) In Confess Wittemb Brentius for that the taught Affiance in mans merits towards remission of Sinnes The 6) Harmony of Confess in English sec 16. p. 509. Diuines of Wittemberg affirme that These reasons which Augustin bringeth for his opinion of Purgatorie doe seem to leane to this foundation That we obtaine remission of our sinnes and life not only for Christ his sake through Faith but also for the merits of our works And for the same doctrine of Merit of works he is further reprehended by 7) Cent. 4. p. 520. Osiander the 8) Cent. 5. col 507. 1133. Centurists 9) Instit l. 3. c. 11. § 15. Caluin 10) l. 1. Ep. p. 290 in Consil Theol. p. 240. And see Colloq Altemberg fol. 307. Field of the Church l. 3. c. 42 p. 170. Melancthon and D. Field So likewise the 11) Cent. 5. col 1178. Centurie-writers speaking of S. Chrysostom affirme that Chrysostom handleth impurely the doctrine of Iustification and attributeth merit to works They likewise say of Prosper 12) Cent. 5. c. 10. col 1363. that he retayned not a few freckles of his Age Such an
reporteth that Constantin when he went to the warres vsed to carry about with him a Tabernacle made in forme of a Church to the end that a Consecrated house should not be wanting either to himself liuing in the Deserts or to his Armie c. And that Priests and Deacons did daily attend vpon the Tabernacle the truth herof is so certaine that it is confessed by Crispinus 7) Of the Estate of the Church p. 89. But for further testimonie of hallowing of Churches in those ancient times see D. Fulk 8) Against Rhem. Test in 1. Thim 4. see 13. fol. 378. the Centurie-writers 9) Cent. 4. col 408. and Crispinus 10) Of the Estate of the Church p. 93. Secondly these Consecrated Churches were dedicated in memorie of Christ or some of his Saincts In which respect S. Gregorie is charged by 11) Chron. l. 4. p. 567. 568. Carion to haue Commanded Churches to be dedicated to the bones and Ashes of Saincts M. Mason affirmeth that 12) Consecration of Engl. Bishops p. 57. In Canterburie the Regal Cittie euen when Austin arriued there was a Christian Church built in the time of the Romans dedicated to the Memorie of S. Martin And wheras Eusebius de vita Constantini l. 3. c. 47. relateth that Constantin erected Churches in the honour of Martyrs And l. 4. c. 58. 59. dedicated a most sumptious Church in Memorie of our Sauiour's Apostles the 13) Cent. 4. col 408. Centurists speaking hereof say These Dedications seem to haue sprong from Iudaisme without anie Commandment of God Yea 14) Cent. 4. col 452. they further confesse that Constantin appointed a verie Solemne Feast for the Dedication of the Church And Brightman 15) Apoc. in c. 12. p. 325. acknowledgeth that at Constantins comming in c. Temples were Consecrated to Martyrs Yea sayth D. Beard 16) Retractiue from Romish Religion p. 388 389. The Annual Feastes of Dedication of Churches grew from a sinister imitation of Constantin the Great who because he kept a Solemne day at the Dedication of a certain Church which he had built therfore it was receaued as a law c. to solemnize euerie yeare a Holiday vpon the day of the Dedication of their Church Thirdly in the Churches was built a place seueral for the laying vp of holie things called the Vestrie wherof the Centurists 17) Cent. 4. col 835. alleage the Laodicen Councel saying It is not fit that Subdeacons haue libertie to goe into the Vestrie and touch our Lords vessels Yea they 18) Cent. 4. col 409. And see Osiand cent 5. p. 391. acknowledge the Vestrie to be mentioned by S. Ambrose l. 1. offic c. 50. Fourthly as concerning Chancels D. Raynolds 19) In his Conference with M. Hart p. 488. confesseth from S. Denis the Areopagite that in his time there were Chancels seuered with Sanctification from the rest of the Church And Hospinian 20) De Templis p. 85. makeh mention of Chancels vsed in Constantins time And the Centurists 21) Cent. 4. col 1165. Hospin do Templis p. 85. 86. 87. affirme that Lay-persons were prohibited to come into the Chancels Osiander 22) Cent. 4. p. 390. chargeth the Laodicen Councel as Superstitious herein Fiftly but nothing was more diligently regarded and obserued in Churches then sacred Altars S. Gregory is charged by the Centurists 23) Cent. 6. col 369. with Consecration of Altars And Osiander 24) Cent. 6. p 289. 290. affirmeth that Augustin sent by S. Gregorye thrust vpon the English Churches the Roman Rites and Customes to wit Altars c. Peter Martyr 25) In his Common places in English part 4. p. 225. writeth that Petrus Alexandrinus attributeth more to the outward Altar then to the liuelie temples of Christ He further 26) Ibid. p. 226. confesseth that Optatus l. 6. against Parmenianus sayth what is the Altar Euen the Seate of the bodie and bloud of Christ Such sayings as these sayth Peter Martyr edifyed not the people And for the selfe same Saying is Optatus reproued by the Centurie-writers 27) Cent. 4. c. 6. col 409. Hospinian 28) de Templis p. 98. And see p. 101. 459. 460 100. sayth I dare not deny but that in the time of Constantin the great Statelie Temples Statelie and beautiful Altars took their beginning and the same were fixed and of stone The Centurists 29) Cent. 4. col 409. speaking of the same Age affirme that The Histories of this time testify that there were Altars in the Churches c. but this Custome came into the Church of Christ from the Iewish custome But Praetorius 30) De Sacramentis 287. ariseth higher auouching that Anno 262. Pope Sixtus the Second abrogated the tables hitherto vsed and erected Altars which sayth he better represent Iudaisme then Christianisme M. Carthwright 31) â—n his 2. Reply part 1. p. 517. And see Iacob in his Reasons taken out of Gods word c. p. 58. thinketh that Ignatius calleth the Communion Table vnproperly an Altar Yea he 32) â—n his 2. Reply part last p. 264 reproueth the Fathers in general saying The ancient Writers abuse herein may easily appeare in that in this too great libertie of speech they vsed to cal the holie supper of the Lord a Sacrifice and the Communion table an Altar In like sort sayth Peter Martyr 33) In his Com. plac part 4. p. 225. The Fathers should not with so much libertie haue seemed here and there to haue abused the name Aultar So plaine it is that Altars consecrated were vsed in those ancientest times of the Primitiue Church Sixtly vpon these Altars were placed lights or Candles M. Bale 34) In Act. Rom. pontif p. 44. confesseth that S. Gregory gaue lights to Churches And D. Morton sayth of him 35) Prot. Appeal l. 1. p. 57. Margin He indeed requireth lights but not that therby he might burne day c. Which may seem to haue been rather the institution of his Successour Sabinianus for c. But our late Writer D. Beard proueth the same from 36) Retractiue from Rom. Relig. p. 65. the decree of our owne Popes Gregorie the First and Sabinian his Successour the one of which appointed certaine lands for the maintenance of waxe-câ—ndles and Lampes in Churches the other ordayned that burning lampes should be alwayes kept in their Churches The 37) Cent. 4. col 487. Centurists charge Constantin that He ordayned the burning of Candles in the Churches in the day-time And againe say 38) Cent. 4. col 410. they Eusebius hath reported that wax-Candles and Lamps were burned in the day-time in the places of the Assemblies by Constantin the great In like sort Crispinus 39) Of the Estate of the Chuâ—ch p. 93. thinketh that In Constantines time manie Ceremonies il-agreing with Gods Word were brought in as Candles lighted in the day-time M. Beard affirmeth that In
40) Retractiue from Romish Religion p. 66. Hieroms Age this Superstition of Candles lighted in the day-time began to grow vpon the Church Yea the 41) Cent. 4. col 454. Centurists acknowledge that Waxe candles were accustomed to be carryed at Burials And that Priests did carry before the Corse Lamps and wax-candles 42) Cent. 4. col 453. And that Funeral-rites and Ceremonies in this Age of Constantin Superstition say they increasing were heaped vp partly from Heathenisme partly from Iudaisme Seauenthly as for the vse of Images in Churches in the time of the Primitiue Church the same is prooued at large in the Chapter (a) See before l. 2. c. 14. of Images Eightly D. Raynolds 43) In his Conference with M. Har. p. 552. coÌ„fesseth that Altars Sacrifice are linked by nature in Relation and mutual dependance one of another Wherupon it doth euidently follow that Aultars being vsed in Churches in the ancientest times true external Sacrifice was likewise vsed which Sacrifice to haue been the Sacrifice of the Masse I haue largely proued in the (b) See before l. 2. c. 9. Chapter of Masse Now because true and proper Sacrifice can not be offred at the Altar but by a Priest therfore in the Primitiue Church there were true Priests whose Ordination was euer by a Bishop and not by the Laïtie The 44) Cent. 4. col 435. Centurists confesse that The Constitutions of the Laodicen Councel forbad Ordinations by the iudgement of the multitude And that They were desired of that Bishop who had authoritie to giue Orders as appeareth say they by the Fourth Epistle of Basil to Gregorie and the Thirtith to the Cesareans And else-where 45) Cent. 4. col 489. they say expresly that The ordination of Ministers was proper to the Bishop And as for the word Priest so hateful now to our Protestant Clergie it was so vsual in the Primitiue Church as that 46) In his Defence p. 411. D. Whiteguift saith This name Priest is vsually applyed to the Minister of the Ghospel in al Histories Fathers and Writers of Antiquitie The like is acknowleged by 47) L. 9. cont Dur. p. 813. D. Whitaker who only answereth that the Fathers vsed the word Sacerdos Priest not properly but by abuse of speech an answere directly contrarie to the expresse words of S. Austin himself De Ciuit. Dei l. 20. c. 10. But D. Fulk 48) Against Rhem. Test in Act. 14. see 4. f. 210. Willet in his Synop. Controu 13. p. 482. and D. Willet do both of them reproue the Fathers for their vsing the word Priest properly Yea the Priests of the Primitiue Church were as ours stil are specially anoynted in so much as S. Cyprian in his Sermon de Chrismate mentioning the same is therefore reproued by 49) Exam. part 2. p. 247. Chemnitius They had also their Crownes shauen for M. Brightman 50) Apoc. in c. 9. p. 249. confesseth that the Fathers vsed to entreate Priests by their Tonsure or shauing as now we may see in the Epistles of Hierome and Augustin And 51) Medulla Patrum p. 484. Schultetus affirmeth that Dyonisius the Areopagite in his book of Ecclesiastical Hierarchie writeth manie things of Temples Altars Sacred-places the Quier Consecration of Moâ—ks the Tonsure and shauing of heads Ninthly the Priests vsed also consecrated vestments and vessels for the celebration of Masse and other offices of the Church The 52) Cent. 4 col 504. Centurists affirme that S. Athanasius mentioneth Ecclesiastical vestments and ornaments and other things necessarie for the Church 53) De Sacramentis p. 44. Zepperus auoucheth that The Ministers or Priests vsed in the celebration of this Mysterie of the Eucharist a peculiar kind of apparel which they tearmed holie neither was it lawful for Priests to weare them but in the celebration of the Eucharist yea they were not to be touched by anie persons but such as were sacred which inuention the first Decretal Epistle of Pope Stephen referreth to himself 54) Of the Crosse part 1. sec 36. p. 52. And see Hut 2 in his 2. part of the Answ and p. 194. 195. 196. Whiteguift in his Def. p. 268. 270. M. Parker granteth in general The Fathers wil haue the Garments to be Religious that are vsed in the Church in proofe wherof he citeth in the Margent Origen and Hierome And to descend to particulars wheras Theodoret l. 2. c. 27. reporteth that Constantin gaue to the Bishop of Hierusalem a Cope or pretious garment wrought with gold to administer Baptisme the same is confessed by 55) In his Persuasion to vniformity c. 5. p. 19. whyteg in his Def. p. 269. M. Sparke and D. Whiteguift in so much as 56) Ibid. p. 268. M. Carthwright testifyeth Theodoret maketh mention of a golden Cope The Centurists 57) Cent. 4. col 876. confesse that in the Fourth Age the Albe was vsed and 58) In his Persuasion to vniform c. 5. p. 19. M. Spark alleageth sundrie ancient Fathers al mentioning the Albe D. Raynolds 59) In his Confer c. 8. diuis 4. acknowledgeth that in the Liturgies of S. Basil S. Chrysostome are mentioned the Amice the Girdle the Chisible the Fanel The Centurists 60) Cenâ— 4. col 835. likewise confesse that as then was vsed the Stole And D. Whiteguift 61) In his Def. p. 269. 270. admitteth the Dalmatica to be vsed in S. Cyprians time alleageth Peter Martyr to be of the same mind who 62) In his Epistles annexed to his com plac in Engl. p. 119. And Whiteg in his Def. p. 264. 268. likewise relateth that as then was vsed the Bishops Pontifical Plate or Miter and 63) Ibid. p. 269. D. Whiteguift auoucheth the same to haue been worne by S. Cyprian The Centurists 64) Cent. 4. col 835. And Osian cent 4. p. 391. likewise report that in the Fourth Age were vsed by Priests in Churches Holie vessels which Subdeacons and Lay persons might not touch And 65) Cent. 4. col 490. they mention the then Careful committing of the holie Chalice to the Priests Custodie D. Sutilisse 66) De Mâ—ssa Papist ca. l. 5. c. 7. f. 96. sayth We do not deny the Church as Chrysostome sayth hom 4. in Math. and de S. Babila to haue had holie vessels and the same not to be touched by lay-men Yea the Centurists 67) Cent. 4. col 504. And see col 409. And Chem. Exam. part p. 26. affirme that Theodoret l. 3. c. 12. sheweth that the Church of Antioch had manie pretious vessels which Constantin and Constantius gaue to it And they mention 68) Cent. 4. col 873. 874. likewise the yet controuerted rites of Chalice Paten Cruet ful of water Towel Wax-candle for Church lights book of Exorcismes c. Tenthly the Priests thus furnished with sacred vestments and vessels not only offred Sacrifice but likewise obserued Canonical Houres of
Antichrist part 2. sec 8 p. 128 I know right wel that within the 200. yeares after Christ there were crept into the Church manie idle Ceremonies c. There began in this mixt Age Exufflation of the Baptised Consecration of the Font with Oyle Crosse Oyle in Baptisme The reseruing of the Sacrament Exorcisme Offring Prayer for the dead Fasting on certaine dayes with opinion of necessitie Satisfaction and the seed of Monkerie See then sayth M. Parker among what weeds the Crosse grew vp and in what a danged soyle of manie Superstitions c. (103) Ib. part 1. p. 152. And part 2 p 131. Yea he further alleageth Nazianzene reporting that Iulian agreably to our present Protestants laught at the Sufflations of Baptisme But Beza (104) In Epist Theol. ep 8. p. 79. sayth in general I can not sufficiently admire al that decking wherwith euen the most ancient Fathers thought they could adorne Baptisme the Lordes Supper And hauing recited sundrie of the former Rites vsed as himself confesseth euen by the most ancient he yet tearmeth them Stage-playes follies And further thus concludeth Verily those that make the Apostles Authors of these follies need no confutation though they be neuer so ancient Writers So insinuating the former Ceremonies to be ascribed euen to the Apostles themselues by most ancient Writers But to conclude so great was the respect which ancient Fathers had to holie Ceremonies as that with the planting of true Faith religiō special care was had of Sacred Rites Ceremonies as an external ornament therof (105) Iesuit part 2 〈◊〉 5. p. 5. 627. D. Humfrey demanding what Gregorie Austin brought into the English Church answereth A burden of Ceremonies c. They brought in the Archbishops Palle for the Solemnities of Masse Purgatorie c. The oblation of the wholesome Host prayers for the dead c. Reliques c. Transubstantiation c. new Consecrations of Temples c. of al which what els was sought then that Indulgences Monachisme Papistrie the whole Chaos of Popish Superstition should be built These things Augustin the grea◠Monk taught by Gregorie the Monk brought vnto the English But yet more particularly saith (106) Cent. 6. p. 289. 290. Luke Osiander Augustin thrust vpon the English Churches the Roman Rates and Custome◠to wit Altars Vestments Images Masses Chalices Crosses Candlesticks Censors Bāners Sacred vessels Holie waters and euen the bookes of Roman Ceremonies Accordingly saith (107) Prot Appeal l. 1. p 53 58. D. Morton In the Innouating and multiplying of new Rites Gregorie himself was not the lea◠Agent As also Be it knowne to al our Aduersaries that the too manie Ceremonies vsed by S. Gregorie can not excuse their now far more multitudes nor can some of his not good iustify their 〈◊〉 worse Rites c. (108) In Praef. noui Testam ad Principem Condenser Beza speaking of the times of Augustin Chrysostome Cypria◠affirmeth that 91) Cent. 4. col 417. 418 419. cent 3. col 114. 115 116. And see Eobanus in his libel Theolog. p. 230. Some Bishops c. applyed themselues to the building of Statelie Temples c. 〈◊〉 the increasing of Ceremonies c. And that others would not only not represse open Superstitio◠arising but also would mayntaine them And a litle after he aoucheth directly that At th◠same time c. the multitude of Ceremonies increased But I wil end with M. Calfehil who as (109) In his Reioynd to Martials Reply p. 131. 132 D. Fulk relateth of him auoucheth is general that The Fathers declined al from the Simplicitie of the Ghospel in Ceremonies And with (110) In 1. Cor. c. 3. Melancthon who auerreth that presently from the beginning of the Church the ancient Fathers obscured the doctrine concerning the iustice of Faith encreased Ceremonies and deuised peculiar worships So disliking to our Protestants was the Doctrine and Ceremonies vsed by the Fathers euen from the beginning of the Church of Christ Here then we haue besides the former more substancial poynts of Faith Religion euen the verie outward semblance face of our present Roman Church confessedly most like or agreeing to the ancient Primitiue both of them teaching vsing First Hallowing or Consecration of Churches Secondly Dedication also of thē to Christ or some of his Saincts Thirdly Seuering thē also with vestries Chancels Fourthly Placing in them Altars Fyftly with wax-candles lamps burning in the day time Sixtly which also were vsed at Burials Seauenthly there were also in the Church placed Images of Christ his Saincts Eightly At the Altars serued Priests who offered the Sacrifice of the Masse who at their Consecration were specially anoynted hauing afterwards their Crownes shauen Ninthly the vestments vessels vsed by the Priests in administration of the Sacrifice and Sacraments were so peculiarly reuerenced as that they were not to be touched by the Laitie Tenthly the Priests in time of Sacrifice sayd some prayers secretly others audibly Eleuenthly they kept also the Canonical Houres of Prime Third Sixt Ninth Tweluethly with prayer also they hallowed water bread oyle ashes sundrie other creatures Thirteenthly as also the Font water of Baptisme vsing in Baptisme the signe of the Crosse Anoyling Exorcismes sundrie such like vsed euen at this day by the Roman Church though greatly impugned and contemned by the Protestant Congregation Now the Doctours alleadged reiected by Protestants for the foresayd points are S. Gregorie Ambrose Optatus Petrus Alexand. Augustin the Fathers of the Laodices Councel Hierom Theodoret Naziazene Cyril Basil Chrysostom Eusebius Sixtus Cyprian Athanasius Stephen Tertulian Origen and S. Denys Scholler to S. Paule The Protestans producing and reiecting the foresaid Fathers are the Centurists Crispinus Carion Osiander Hospinian Peter Martyr Praetorius Chemnitius Schultetus Zepperus Bullinger Mornay Hamelmanus Caluin Gesnerus Beza Melancthon Humfrey Brightman Fulk Raynolds Bale Carthwright Iacob Hutton Spark Willet Whiteguift Whitaker Beard Parker Morton Mason Calfehil and Parkins THE THIRD BOOK VVHERIN IS PROVED THAT THE CHVRCH OF PROTESTANTS vvas neuer knovvne or in Being before the dayes of Luther And that the Articles of Religion novv taught by the Protestant Congregation vvere Heresies condemned by the Primitiue Church of Christ IT IS CONFESSED BY PROTESTANTS that from the dayes of the Apostles vntil the tyme of Luther themselues neuer had any knovvne Church or Congregation in anie part of the vniuersall Vvorld CHAPTER I. SEING contraries placed togeather do more clearely appeare hauing hither to offred to the view of the indifferēt Reader the clearest continuance of our Catholick Church from the Apostles tymes to these our dayes as also the cōfessed agreement throughout particular Congrouersies betwene our present Roman and the ancient Primitiue Church of Christians I will now in further manifestation of the truth no lesse clearely discouer the Protestant Churches inuisibilite or rather nullitie not-being during the
one litle part or other but Apostasie hath auerted the whole bodie from Christ By which it appeareth that euen at these first beginnings of Luther not only one member or parcel but euen the whole bodie of Christianitie was auerted from Protestancie the Church of Protestants as then not being being knowne to haue the least Being in the smalest parcel or member of the same bodie The like obscuritie or nullitie of the Protestant Church at Wicclifs first reuolt from the Catholick Faith is confessed by (22) Act. mon p. 85. M. Fox in these wordes Out of al doubt al the world was in a desperate and vile estate and lamentable ignorance and darkenes of Gods truth had ouershaddowed the whole earth when Iohn Wiccliffe stepped forth as the morning starre in the midst of a cloud And againe (23.‖ Act. mon p 391. In times of horrible darkenes when there seemed in a manner to be no one so litle sparke of pure Protestant doctrine left or remaining Wiccliffe by Gods prouidence rose vp through whom the Lord would first awaken and raise vp againe the world c. ‖24‖ Estate of the Church p. 418. Crispinus also auoucheth that Ihon Wiccliffe beganne as from a deepe night to draw out the truth of the doctrine of the Sonne of God And D. ‖25‖ Vita Iuelli p 263 Humfrey affirmeth that Ihon Wiccliffe in these last times was almost the first Trumpeter of this Ghospel In so much that ‖26.‖ Cent. 9. 10. 11. p. 439. Osiander confesseth that he as then had not so much as anie Companions of that time brotherly to admonish him So assured we may rest that at Wiccliffs time the Protestant Church was ouershaddowed with horrible darkenes not so much as one litle spark of pure Protestancie appearing in the world But yet neither was Wiccliffe himself Protestant for besides his sundrie Catholick opinions before proued it is testifyed of Wiccliffe to the contrarie by Melancthon ‖k‖ Ep. 〈◊〉 Frider. micō inter ep Suinglii p. 612. saying I haue looked into Wiccliffe who maketh a great ado about this Controuersie of the Eucharist but I haue found manie other errours in him by which we may iudge of his Spirit surely he neither vnderstood nor held the Iustice of Faith which onlie point is so necessarie to the Saluation of Protestants that Luther sayth therof ‖l‖ Praefat. Ep. ad Gal. If article of Iustification by onlie Faith be once lost then is al true Christian doctrine lost And as manie as hold not that doctrine are Iewes Turkes Papists or Hereticks Againe by this only doctrine the Church is built and in this it consisteth ‖m‖ In c. 1. ad Gal. If we neglect the article of Iustification we loose al togeather For ‖n‖ In c. 2. ad Gal. it is the principal article of al Christian doctrine al other articles are comprehended in it It is the foundation sayth M. ‖o‖ Act. mon p. 840 Fox of al Christianitie and the ‖p‖ Ibid. p. 770. only origin of our Saluation It is the ‖q‖ Tovver Desp soule of the Church sayth D. Chark Now this soule foundation principal Article of Protestancie Wiccliffe did not beleeue Yea such were the demerits of Wiccliffe that D. ‖r‖ Antiqu. l 2. p. 268. Caius obiecteth him to the Oxonians as a disgrace to their Vniuersitie And Melancthon censureth him to haue been ‖s‖ Loc. com Tit de Pot. Eccl. A mad man and sundrie his grosse errours and Paradoxes condemned both by Catholicks and Protestants wil discouer hereafter so litle cause haue the Protestants to appeale to Wiccliffe for the continuance of their Church in his time Now as concerning Waldo 27‖ Estate of the Church p. 338. Crispinus confesseth Waldo his beginning to haue been in time of thick darkenes and as a first little begining of the instauration of Christian Religion But whereas Father Campian Rat. 3. affirmeth that the Protestants cannot for manie Ages togeather giue exāple so much as of anie one Cittie village or house professing their doctrine ‖28‖ Resp. ad rat Cāpiani rat 3 p. 48. D. Whittaker coming to answer thy very point telleth in general that in the worst times manie Faithful were found and that all Histories do witnesse this But being prouoked to giue particular instance out of anie one Historie either of time or person he becometh mute affirming in the same place directly to the contrarie that In the times of the Apostles al Churches al Citties al Townes al Families embraced the same Religion which we Protestants professe Afterwards by litle and litle the purritie of doctrine began to be corrupted and much superstition more and more to be spred abroad to which yet the most holie Fathers resisted what they could vntil that mysterie of iniquitie which tooke roote euen in the Apostles Age went through al the partes of the Church and so at last possessed the whole Church So true it is that for manie Ages togeather insteed of anie Instance of the Protestant Churches being Popish pretended superstition possessed euen the whole Church But some may say the Protest Churches inuisibilitie for these last 1000. yeares is a point vndoubted and for such by themselues formerly and fully confessed But it is the Primatiue Church of the first 600. yeares wherein they glory their Church was most splendent knowne and conspicuous Now of al the Ages of the Primitiue Church none is more famous or better knowne or wherein Christian Religion more clearly shined ouer the whole face of the earth then the Age of Constantin whereof say the ‖29‖ Cent. 4 Ep. dedic Reginae Elizabeth Centurists The state of the Church at Constantins time illustrated the whole world with her splendour And D. Morton styleth Constantin himself The ‖a‖ Prot. Appeal l. 2. p. 328 great and first Christian Emperour so greatly honoured in the first and most famous Synode of Nice And yet in so great a Sun-shine of Christs true Church it was impossible as then to see a Protestant Chappel for M. ‖30‖ In Apocalyp in his synopsis before the Booke A 1. § 11 Brightman teacheth that the Protestant Church from the times of Constantin for 1260. yeares was hid c. And ‖31‖ Ib A. 2 §. 14. And see p. 383. againe for 1000. yeares from Constantin the was conuersant with Christ in most hidden dens Yea as 32) Ibid. p. 326. then there were no Protestant publick assemblies wherein the Diuine Institutions did wholy flourish So Constantin a sonne of the Church saith he did more hurt then an Enemie As 33) Ibid. p. 577. see p. 341. also the want of publick Religion hath been manie Ages to wit from Constantin the Great to this day al which time Antichrist raigned whilst the Woman the Protestant Church liued in the desert To the same effect sayth M. Napper 34) Vpon the Reuelat. p. 161. From the yeare of Christ 316. God hath withdrawne his
visible Church from outward assemblies to the harts of particular godlie men c. during the space of 1260. yeares Gods true 35) Ibid. p. 191. Church most certainly abiding so long latent and 36) Ibid. p. 161. 156. 237. 23. 188. inuisible the Pope 37) Ibid. p. 145. and his Clergie during al that time possessing the outward visible Church of Christians And 38) Ibid. p. 239. neuer suffering for the space of a 1000. yeares after Syluester the First anie to be seene vouchable or visible of the true Church Whereby it is confessed as most certaine that at Constantins time and euer since vntil Luthers there was neuer anie publick Church of Protestants or their poorest Congregation seen or knowne in the world But to enquire yet further for a Protestant Church in anie Age betweene Constantin and the Apostles It is likewise acknowledged by M. Napper 39) Vpon the Reuelat. p. 191. and see cent 2. c. 4. coll 35. that during euen the second and third Ages next after Christ the true temple of God and light of the Ghospel was obscured by the Roman Antichrist himself whereto assent 40) In Bācrofts suruey c. 27. p. 343. both M. Cartwright Beza D. Fulke 41) Answ to a Counter Cath. p. 35. auoucheth that the true Church of Protestants decayed immediatly after the Apostles times And 42) De amplitudine regni Dei l. 1. p. 43. Caelius Secundus Curio further sayth Are we ignorant in how great darknes blindenes and ignorance the world hath continued almost from the Apostles Age to these verie times in which aboue al expectation the Lord began to manifest himself In like sort it is affirmed by another 43) Anti-Christus siue prognostica finis mundi p. 13. Protestant that from the Apostles time til Luther the Ghospel neuer had open passage 44) Ep. de Abrogandi statutis Ecclesiasticis Sebastianus Francus auerreth that Presently after the Apostles al things were turned vpside downe c. And that for certayne through the worke of Antichrst the external Protestant Church togeather with the Faith and Sacraments vanished away presently after the Apostles departure And that for these 1400. yeares the Protestant Church hath been no where external visible Lastly D. Downeham 45) Antip l. 2. p. 25. teacheth that the general defectiō of the visible Church foretold 2. Thessal 2. began to work in the Apostles times Most certainly then we may conclude that the Church of Protestants was wanting and vnknowne euen in S. Pauls time and so continued in the darkest lakes of Auernus vntil Luther sent out by Pluto enlighetned the world by the comfortable beames of his libertine Ghospel So cleare and vndoubted then it is that this new Protestant Congregation was neuer knowne to the world before the dayes of Luther that we produce only in proofe therof for witnesses the Protestant writers the Centurists Hospinian Simon de Voyon Bumlerus Luther Caluin Beza Miluius Morgensterne Rhegius Bucer Camerus Crispinus Osiander Curio Sebastianus Francus Humfrey Fulk Parkins Brightman Dent Fox Napper Cartwright Downham Whittaker and Iewel A FVRTHER CONVINCING PROOF OF THE Protestant Churches not being during the first 600. yeares is taken from the Fathers Condemning in the ancient Hereticks the chiefest articles of the Protestant Religion and our Protestants Confessing the same And First Concerning the Sacraments CHAPTER II. AS it is most certaine that the Protestant Church and Religion was neuer hard or knowne of in anie Age whatsoeuer precedent to ours So it may not be denied but that in seueral Ages there haue some gone out of our Catholick Church who teaching or professing some one or other article contrarie to the same were euer condemned by the Doctours and Pastours of the sayd Church for Hereticks 3) Cent. 5. col 585. and their opinions for Heretical amongst which to treat only of such as are now renewed defended and beleeued by the Protestant Church I wil beginne with the holie Sacraments And first concerning Baptisme wheras Caluin Beza Morton and other Protestants do al of them teach that children dying vnbaptized may be saued This errour was condemned in the Pelagians by S. Augustin who reporteth that amongst other their errours they taught that children might haue life 1) Haer. 88. contra Iul. Pelag. l. 6. c. 7. euerlasting although they were not Baptized which opinion 2) In rescr ad Meleuit Concil and Leo ep 86. Innocentius tearmeth in them to be very foolish This errour of Pelagians is so certaine that it is confessed and reported by the Centurie-writers and by 4) Loc. com fol. 88. Sarcerius In like sort (a) Synopsis 415. vpō the 122. Ps Fulk against Purgatorie p. 35. D. Willet D. Fulk denying remission of sinnes and grace to be giuen by Baptisme are condemned in the Manichees by the acknowledgement of 5) Contra Dureum l. 10. 883. Sarcerius loc com Tom. 1. de Baptismo fol 232. D. Whitaker saying of him selfe some other Protestants Wee beleeue and teach that Sinnes are forgiuen and grace conferred in Baptisme which the Manichees were accustomed to deny The denial of Exorcisme and Exsufflation vsed in Baptisme was condemned in Iulianus the Pelagian wherof sayth 6) De imperijs concupis li. 2. c. 29. c. 17. cont Iulian Pela l. 6. c. 2. S. Augustin Iulian reproacheth the most ancient tradition of the Church wherby children are exorcised and breathed vpon And 7) Against Symbolizin part 1. sect 13 p. 152. part 2. sect 9. p. 131. M. Parker alleageth Nazianzen reporting that Iulian laught at the sufflations of Baptisme To come to the Eucharist 8) Theodoret dial 3. S. Ignatius affirmeth of certaine Hereticks of his time That they do not admit Eucharists and oblations because they do not confesse the Eucharist to be the flesh of our Sauiour Iesus Christ which flesh suffered for our sinnes These words are acknowledged and cited for the saying of S. Ignatius by 9) de Tradit Apost col 746. Chem. Exam. part 1. p. 94. Simon method aliquot locor part 3. fol. 172. Recitationes de Concilo Scripti libri Concord p. 177. Hamelmannus Chemnitius Symon Pauli and other Protestants Communion vnder both kindes was condemned in Nestorius Vrbanus Rhegius sayth hereof 10) Loc. com fol. 56. Nestorius communicated the Laïtie vnder both kindes but the Councel of Ephesus withstood him The denial of the B. Sacraments Reseruation which Protestants now generally deny was condemned in the Anthropomorphites of whom sayth S. Cyril I heare 11) Ad Calosyrium they say that the mystical blessing if anie remnants therof do remaine til the next day following is vnprofitable to sanctification but they are mad in so saying for Christ is not made an other neither shal his bodie be changed but the vertue of blessing and liuely grace do alwayes remaine in it This censure of S. Cyril is confessed
the Armenians and the present Protestant Church THAT THE FATHERS CONDEMNED in ancient Hereticks the opinions of Protestants concerning the Scriptures and the Church Militant and Triumphant CHAPTER III. TO examine now such doctrines as concerne the sacred Scripures and the Church both Militant and Triumphant It hath been obserued in al Hereticks to pretend only Scripture in defence of their errours therby to euade the manifest and most conuincing arguments from Councels Fathers and Histories So S. Hilarie 28) Orat. 2. cont Constantium wisheth vs to remember that there is no Heretick which doth not faigne that the blasphemies which he teacheth are according to the Scripture And S. Austin 29) L. 1. de Trinit c. 3. affirmeth that al Hereticks endeuour to defend their false and deceiptful opinions out of the Scriptures Yea he reproueth 30) L. 1. con Maxim Maximinus the Arian for saying as Protestants now do If thou shal bring anie thing from the sacred Scripture which is common to al it is needful we heare you But these wordes which are out of the scripture in no case are to be receaued of vs. In like sort sayth S. Vincent 31) L. 1. coÌ„t haeret If one shal aske anie Heretick c. from whence do you proue from whence do you teach that I ought to forsake the vniuersal and ancient Faith of the Catholick Church Presently he answereth for it is written and forth with he prepareth a thousand testimonies a thousand examples a thousand authorities from the Law from the Apostles from the Prophets c. Agreeably herevnto the Arrians denied the Sonne of God to be consubstantial to his Father because the word Consubstantial is no where in the Scriptures as S. Athanasius S. Austin and S. Hierome testifie in sundry places writing against them The Macedonians 32) Basil de Spiritu Sancto c. 25. l. 1. contr Eunomium and Eunomians denyed the Holie-Ghost to be equal with the Father and the Sonne because in their opinion it is no where expresly set downe in the Scriptures The 33) Cyril Socrates and others writing of the Nestorians Nestorians denyed the B. Virgin Marie to be the Mother of God because these wordes are not expresly in Scripture And the selfe same pretense of only Scripture is stil vsed now by Protestants as I haue proued at large els-where The continuance and visibilitie of the Church of Christ was denied by the Donatists of whom S. Austin affirmeth that they vsed to collect certaine places of Scripture and to wrest them against the church of God that so it might be thought to haue fayled and perished out of the whole world And as Protestants say now of the Church before Luthers time 34) de vnita Eccl. c. 2. so sayd the Donatists before 35) August in Ps 101. Conc. 2. The Church hath reuolted and perished out of al Countries But this saith S. Austin say they who are not in it Or impudent speech The claime of Ecclesiastical Primacie was condemded in the Emperour Constantius to whom Osius 36) Athan. Epist ad Solit. vit agentes Ambr. Ep. 32. 33. Sozom. l. 6. c. 7. Conc. 3. Carthag can 9. Aug. Ep 48. 50. 162. 165. sayd I. beseech thee cease and remember thou art mortal be fearful of the day of Iudgement keepe thyself pure against that day do not intermedle in Ecclesiastical affaires neither commande vs in this kind but rather learne those things from vs. God hath committed the Empire to thee and to vs those things which belong to the Churches Take heede least drawing vnto thee such things as concerne the Church thou be guiltie of great crimes And againe for who seeing him in decreeing to make himself the Prince of Bishops and to be cheef Iudge in Ecclesiastical Iudgement wil not iustly say that he is that abhomination of Desolation which was foretold by Daniel Herof also the 37) Cent. 4 col 549. Polanus in Symphonia p. 836. 837. 8â—8 839. 841. 842. 843. 844. 849. Cartwright in whiteg def p. 700. Osiand cent 4. p. 477. Centurists Emperours also sometimes vnfittingly assumed to themselues the Iudgement of matters of Faith which thing Athanasius reprehendeth in Constantius and Ambrose in Valentinian c. The denial of Inuocation of Saints was condemned in Vigilantius the Heretick of whom 38) Answer to a Count. Cath. p. 46. Par. against Symb. part 1. p. 74. 83. Cent. 4. col 1250. Crisp his Estate of the Church p. 131. Osian cent 4. p. 506. D. Fulk sayth Last of al Vigilantius shal be brought in who wrot against Inuocation of Saints Superstition of Reliques and other Ceremonies him Hierome reproueth And the same is confessed of Vigilantius by M. Parker the Centurists Crispinus and Osiander In like sorte D. Sarauia and Beza do both of them affirme that Aerius was likewise condemned by the Fathers for his then teaching that the Saincts departed are not to be prayed vnto The which also is acknowledged by 40) Loc. com p. 514 Bucanus against Aerius The denial and contemning of Saincts Reliques is condemned in Eunomius and Vigilantius whereof sayth 41) De Ecl. dog c. 73 see Chemnit Exam. part 4. p. 7. S. Austin We beleeue that the bodies of Saincts and especially the Reliques of Blessed Martyrs are most intirely to be honoured if anie man contradict this he is supposed not to be a Christian a but an Eunomian and Vigilantian So likewise the Arrians and Vigilantius denying the Diuels to be tormented by the Reliques of Martyrs are condemned therefore the first by S. Ambrose 42) Ser. 93. De Inuent corpo S. Geruasij Protasij the second by 43) Contr. Vigil c. 4. S. Hierome The denial of the Images of Christ and his Saincts was condemned in Xenaias of whom sayth 44) Hist Eccl. lib. 16. c. 27. Nicephorus That Xenaias first ô audacious soule and impudent mouth vomited forth that speech That the Images of Christ and those who haue pleased him are not to be worshipped According to which the Protestant 45) Comment in proc Chronol l. 7. at Antichr 494. see Cedemus in Compend hist Functius confesseth that 39) Defen Tract de diuersi p. 349. 346. Xenaias first raised warres in the Church against Images The denial of the signe of the Crosse was condemned in some ancient Magicians of whom thus writeth 46) Hist li. 3. c. 3. Theodoret The Diuels appearing in their accustomed shape feare compelled Iulian the Emperour to signe his forehead with the signe of the Crosse whereupon the Diuels beholding the figure of our Lords victorie and remembring their owne ruine forthwith vanished away c. Iulian affirmed that he greatly admired the vertue of the Crosse and that the Diuels fled away because they could not endure the signe therof to whom the Magician sayd Do not so think for they do not feare for that reason which you alleage but detesting your fact they withdrew themselues
assigned the third place to Hereticks who haue Gone out of the elect people of God but were not of them So that Scriptures Fathers and Protestants do al of them agree That the Going out or departing from the Church is the Badge of Heresie and Persons so Going out are thereby marked Hereticks Examples heerof we haue in al former Hereticks in Arius Macedonius Nestorius Pelagius Eutyches Donatus waldo Wicclif Husse c. who al of them being at first Roman Catholicks through Innouation of opinions afterwards seuered themselues from their mother Church going out from her to new Congregations But now to apply this to Catholicks and Protestants and breefly to examine whether companie hath gone or departed out of a former knowne Church the true Church of Christ and first to giue M. D. Morton a short scantling concerning himself his Brethren his owne neighbour M. Mason answering certaine demands of Catholicks in this kinde saith a) Consecrat of English Bishopes p. 41. When it pleased him which causeth the light to spring out of darknes we did spring from yourselues being stil content to be yours so you would be Christs In like sort sayth a) Apol. p. 288. D. Iewel We haue indeed gone from the Pope we haue shaken of the yoake of the Bishop of Rome It is true sayth b) Act. mon. p. 3. M. Fox we are remoued from the Church of Rome And D. Rainolds c) In his Conclusions annexed to his Conference maketh this one of his Conclusions That the reformed Churches in England Scotland France Germanie and other kingdomes and Common-wealthes haue seuered themselues lawfully sayth he from the Church of Rome And as for Luther himself he was at first so Roman Catholick as that sayth he (d) In Ep ad Gal. fol. 38. and see 37. 188. I did so highly esteeme the Popes authoritie that to dissent from him euen in the least point I thought it a sinne worthy of euerlasting death and would my selfe in the defence of the Popes Authoritie haue ministred fire and sword Caluin speaking of Protestants in general expresly sayth 20) In Ep. 141. p. 273. we were inforced to make a departure from the whole world yea we 21) Instit l. 4. c. 6. § 1. haue departed sayth he from her to wit the Roman Church And so accordingly it is so euident that Waldo Wicliffe Husse Luther Caluin Zuinglius c. were first borne baptised and brought vp in the Catholick Church from whence afterwards through Noueltie Libertie they went out became Apostates as that to endeauour anie special proof therof might iustly be censured of no lesse idle vanitie then to seeme to deny it of greatest ignorance or impudencie And so leauing our Protestants thus confessedly Going out of our former Catholick Roman Church and thereby branding themselues with the infamous Mark of Hereticks I wil examine what Protestants think of the Roman Church in this behalf And indeed this crime of Going out is in it self so foule a blemish as that some Protestants much desire to stayne our Roman puritie therewith So D. Fulk would haue the world to thinke That 22) Retentiue p. 85. the Popish Church is but an Heretical Assemblie departed from the vniuersal Church long since Augustins departure out of this life With whom agreeth his Brother blindbyard D. Sutclif affirming That 23) Suruey of Poper p. 315. the Papists are a sect going out of Christs Church and rising long after Christs time But these great Doctours speake much but proue nothing for it behoued them to assigne a former Church from whence the Papists thus reuolted as also the persons who the time when with other Circumstances of al which they rest silent Wherefore to cleere our Roman Church of this so foule Imputation that to the perfect sight of the blearedst eye And first to omit al former testimonies plentifully exhibited in proof of her confessed knowne and vn-interrupted Conrinuance from the Apostles times to these of ours as also to forbeare that ancient Doctours and Writers in al Ages do specially mention and register vp al notorious departures made by any Hereticks from the true Church not insinuating the least concerning our Roman Our Innocencie herein is so notoriously apparent as that sundrie Protestants being prouoked in this kind to giue the least Instance of anie such departure in our Roman Church are euer inforced in their answer therunto only to fly to our pretended departure from the sacred Scriptures so passing ouer al precedent Ages without anie colour of Examples to be vrged against vs. So M. Knewstubs 24) Answer to certaine assertions c. p. 35. answereth you require to know if our doctrine were the same which they in the Primitiue Church professed who they were that did at that time note our Going out c. This question is altogeather vnnecessarie for when an offender is taken with the manner it is needlesse to stand vpon Examination of them who were at the deed doing We haue taken you with the manner that is to say with Doctrine diuerse from the Apostles and therefore neither Law nor conscience can force vs to examine who were witnesses of your first departing With whom agreeth M. Powel only answering that the Roman Church is 25) Consideration of the Papistes supplication p. 36. fallen from the doctrine comprehended in the writings of the Apostles But to omit that this answer is a base and shameles begging of the thing it self in question to wit that we are departed from the Scriptures which as most vntrue we euer do deny It is further most impertinent to the point now vrged which is whether the Roman Church hath gone out from anie other knowne Church yea it most strongly argueth the contrarie seing they much desiring to exemplify against vs herein for want of al Instance during these 1600. yeares constrained to iumpe them ouer and only to insist in the writings of the Apostles then which what more strongly can be vrged in our behalf And yet in like sort for want of better answer D. Sutclif 26) Answer to the mass Priestes supplicat c. 7. sayth Neither is it material that the Roman Church neuer went out of anie knowne Christian Societie So insinuating her neuer Going out with is the only thing I here desire to proue But if this be not material with D. Sutclif yet is it most material and conuincing with al men of iudgement for if the Roman Church or anie other Church hauing once been confessed members of the true ancient visible Church of Christ did neuer depart or Go out of the sayd true Church then are they stil yet within it and members of it Now that the Romam Church was not only a true Church in the Apostles times but also vnto the time of S. Austin and further it is abundantly already confessed and therefore seing she hath confessedly neuer departed out the sequele is euident that stil she continueth tâ—e
true Church then which what can be vrged more material either in our defence or more disgraceful against al Protestants But the truth hereof is so palpable as that the learnedst Protestants in colour and excuse of their Church not departing out of the knowne visible Church do chiefly vrge and pretend their owne communion with the Roman Church in al Ages whatsoeuer So M. Bunnie verie wisely teacheth that 27) Treat to pacific see 18. p. 108. Of departing from the Church there ought to be no question at al amongst vs c. we 28) Ib. p. 113. are no seueral Church from them nor they from vs and therefore there is no departing at al out of the Church for anie to depart from them to vs nor from vs to them Al the difference between vs is concerning the truer members whether we or they may be found more worthie of that account As for the other we allow no such question In so much that he affirmeth that 29) Ib. p. 109. it was il done of them who first vrged such a separation coÌ„fessing further our aduantage 30) Sec. 15. p. 92. giuen therby for that 31) â—b p. 96. sayth he it is great probabilitie with them that so we make ourselues answerable for to finde out a distinct and seueral Church from them which continued from the Apostles Age to this present else that needs we must acknowledge that our Church is sprong vp of late or since theirs So earnestly doth he labour his Churches not Departing from the Roman Church and thereby supposeth the Roman Churches neuer departing from anie other for if the Roman Church had euer departed her self then were it no proofe but rather a conuiction of the Protestant Churches most certaine departure But insteed of al such pretended departure D. Field acknowledgeth further That 32) Of the Church p. 88. the Roman Church held stil Communion with those other Churches which neuer fel into errour and so were both of one Communion Which euidently proueth she neuer went out of the true Church but stil preserued Communion and Societie with her So euident it is that our Roman Church is freed from that infamous Marke of Heresie of Going out of the Church which yet Protestants haue so cleerly done going out of our Roman Church and that our honour and their infamie therin is proclaymed to the world by men condemned thereby euen by Luther Caluin Osiander Pantaleon Clapham Alison Mason Fox Rainolds Iewel Fulk Sutclif Knewstubs Powel Bunnie and Field But to giue M. D. Morton yet another scantling whether Catholicks or Protestants be truly Hereticks It is a supposed principle taught by S. Hierome 33) Ad Ctesiphont and Vincent Lyri cont haereses c. 4. That to reduce an Heresie to it beginning is a confuting of it Thus S. Ireneus refuted the Valentinians and Marcionists saying 34) L. 3. c. 4. Before Valentine there were not anie which are from Valentine neither before Marcion were they which are from Marcion And D. Whitaker auoucheth That 35) Cont. Duraeum l. 7. p. 479. no man denyeth but that it much auayleth to the confuting of Heresies to haue knowne their beginning In like sort D. Fotherbie in behalf of the Crosse argueth thus If 36) Answ to obiect against the Crosse in Bap. p. 26. it be but an humane inuention let vs know I pray you the first Inuentour of it and when it was first decreed and how it came so soone to be so generally obserued which if you cannot shew vs I think we may with greater probabilitie esteeme it to be an Apostoltcal Tradition D. Sarauia sayth vpon an other occasion 37) In def Tract de diuers minist Grad c. 23. p. 361. I answer it is not enough to say so but it must be shewed out of Histories which were those schismes and where and when they sprong vp and how from thence so general a custome came Agreably writeth M. Bel 38) RegimeÌ„t of the Church p. 26. 27. If anie man deny this old custome let that man shew when it came in And D. Iewel vrgeth D. Harding concerning an errour of former times alleaged by him 39) Reply p. 112. If there had been anie shew of truth in it M. Harding would haue layd out al the Circumstances when this strange errour first began where and how long it continued who wrot against it c Verily this great silence declareth some want D. Bilson sayth (a) Suruey of Christs suffâ—ings p. 660. The report of Eusebius proueth this clause of Christs descending to Hades to haue been anciently and openly professed in the primitiue Church otherwise the Religious of those Ages that liued with and after Eusebius if he had broached anie new point of Faith as in dutie they were bound so no doubt they would haue refuted and resisted them D. Whiteguift defending Cathedral Churches against M. Cartwright demandeth accordingly of him 40) Denfen p. 747. From what Pope they came or in what time they were first inuented Yea he further teacheth 41) Ibid. p. 351. That as for so much as the original and begining of these names Metropolitan Archibishop c. such is their antiquitie cannot be found so farre as I haue read it is to be supposed they haue their original from the Apostles themselues for as I remember S. Austin hath this Rule in his 118 Epistle And 42) Ibid. p 352. It is of credit with the writers of our time namely with M. Zuinglius M. Caluin and M. Gualter and surely I think no learned man doth dissent from them Lastly sayth D. Morton (a) Prot. Appeal p. 465. We willingly ioyne issue and if we cannot proue that the Roman Church hath in manie weightie points of Religion degenerated from herself then shal we no more decline from her as from a malignant stepdame but deuoutly yeeld vnto her al due acknowledgement as vnto a Mother-church And now to ioyne issue herein with M. Doctour and so to square hereby the truth of Roman or Protestant Religion Our Catholicke Faith is so confessedly free from anie knowne beginning since the Apostles and so wholy agreable with S. Austins foresayd Rule as that 43) Ib. Thereby in M. Cartwrights opinion a window is open to bring in al Poperie yea 44) Ibid. p. 103. I appeale to the iudgement of al men if this be not to bring in Poperie againe to allow of S. Austins saying So euident it is that Poperie is without anie knowne beginning and consequently no Heresie In like sort M. Powel being prouoked that if 45) Consideration of the Pap sts Supplic p. 43. our Doctrine be errour then to tel vs when it came in who was the Authour of it c. answereth therto directly in our behalf saying We cannot tel by whom or at what time the Enemie did sow it c. Neither indeed do we know who was the Authour of euerie one of your blasphemous epinions
And so D. Whitaker confesseth 46) Resp ad Camp Rat. 7. p. 101. That the time of the Roman Churches change cannot easily be told Yea wel foreknowing the impossibilitie of anie such time to be assigned he only euadeth by affirming That Protestants 47) Lib. 3. Cont. Dur. p. 277. are not bound to answer in what Age Superstition crept into the Church And It is not needful for Protestants to search out in Histories the begining of this change With whom agreeth Buchanus saying 48) loc com p. 466. It belongeth not to vs to assigne what time the Church begunne to fade away But if this be not needful for D. Whitaker or other Protestants to finde out why did D. Whitaker before teach that no man denyeth but that it much auayleth for the confuting of Heresis to haue knowne their beginning So forcible is the truth of the Roman Churches neuer changing in Faith and Religion D. Field being vrged to giue Instance of anie Contradiction made against the Roman Church vpon the example but of anie one first known change in Doctrine in steed of answer acknowledgeth that 49) Of the Church l. 3. â— 13. p. 89. the aberration in the Church of Rome in matters of Doctrine was in such things and so carried in the beginings that the Authours of these new and false opinions were not disclaimed and noted as damnable Hereticks Yea the Authours of these errours and they that were free from them were notwithstanding these differences both of our Communion and therefore the Circumstances of the first Authour and his Contradiction c. cannot be shewed Here though it pleased M. Doctour to tearme our Catholick points of Doctrine errours yet is he further pleased in our behalfe plainly to acknowledge that no first Authour or begining can be shewed of these pretended errours which is the point we desire D. Fulk likewise being vrged to giue anie example of the time when or by whom our Roman Faith was contradicted or charged with Innouarion only sayth 50) Rtioinder to Bristow p. 265. I answer my text sayth it was a Mysterie not reuealed and therefore could not be openly preached against But though the Iniquitie or Apostasie foretold by 51) 2 Thess 2.7 S. Paul whereof D. Fulk speaketh be a Mysterie in tâ—e prediction yet this nothing letteth but that it may be conspicuous and most markable in he euent as the accomplishment of al predictions are Yea this truth of no knowne begining or change in our Roman Faith is so certaine as that sundrie Protestants earnestly labour to finde out seueral pretenses or excuses why anie such change or Innouation was neuer noted or obserued so supposing and granting their ignorance of al such imaginarie change and only seeking to euade by mere fallacies and impertinent examples Thus D. Fulk examining why our Religion entred the Primitiue Church without Contradiction resolueth 52) Answ to a Conterfaite Cath. p. 43. that it entred by smal degrees at the first and was therefore lesse espied by the true Pastours who were earnestly occupyed against greater Heresies as the Valentinians Marcionists and Manichees And therefore 53) Against Purgatorie p. 256. either had no leisure to espie or els made lesse account to reforme the same But this is most idle for the Fathers were most watchful and readie to suppresse al errours euen of much lesser importance in themselues then are or were our Catholick Doctrines of Masse Real Presence Adoration of the Sacrament Confession Iustification by work c. tâ—ough we should for the time suppose them to be errours Examples hereof might be giuen about the keeping of Easter-day 54) Ignat. Ep. ad Philip Euseb l. 2. c. 22. 23. in the time of Victor and before about prescript dayes of 55) Epiph. haer 75. fasting about mingling of water 56 with wine in the Chalice about the verie ceremonies 57 of Exorcisme and Exufflation in Baptisme and sundrie such like which I purposely pretermit D. Couel himself granting that 58) Examination c. p. 64. 65. great and violent dissentions haue risen in the Church for Ceremonies and that Councels haue condemned some as Hereticks only for being opposit in this kinde But D. Fulk vrgeth further that some of our opinions as namely Prayer for the dead 59) Answer to a Count. Cath. p. 39. deceiued simple men the sooner because it had a pretence of charitie and shew 60) Against Purgat p. 386. of pietie confirmed by custome wherby it was at length allowed of by Austin and others who neuer weighed the matter by Scripture But what errours had more pretence of pietie or charitie then Origens for the Saluation of Diuels Tertullians for chastitie S. Cyprians against Baptisme by Hereticks Montanus for austere Fastings and Papias for Christs raigninge vpon earth a thousand yeares aster the Resurrection and yet al these Montanus only excepted being principal men and of special deseruings in the Church of Christ were greeuously contradicted and reproued by the Catholick Doctours of theirs and succeding times for these verie errours But M. Woton persisteth saying to Catholicks 61) Trial of the RomaÌ„ Clergie p. 378. It is ridiculous for you to challenge vs to shew when the Faith receiued by the Church of Rome from the Apostles began to faile in it it was done as our Sauiour speakes in the like case while men slept And the same sleepie argument is vrged by D. White 62) Way to the true Church p. 371. But this is cleerly to contradict God himself who sayd 63) Isa 62.6 vpon thy walles ô Hierusalem haue I set watch men al the day and al the inght for euer they shal not hold their peace Now if they were al asleep when so manie and so great pretended errours of Catholick Doctrines as are supposed to haue begun and that in seueral times and Ages how could they be more silent or how could they be sayd to watch either day or inght How could that saying of S. Austin be true 64) Ep. 119. c. 19. The Church of God beset with chaffe and cockle although she tolerate many thinges which she is not able to redresse yet such things as be against Faith or good life she neither alloweth nor passeth ouer in silence Or how is that verified of D. Fulk 65) Answ to a Count. Cath. p. 11. and 92. that the true Church hath alwayes resisted al false opinion with open reprehension Or how is that true which White himself auoucheth saying q) Way to the true Church Ep. Ded. sec 8. The primitiue Church and al the Doctours thereof would neuer yeeld I wil not say in an opinion but not so much as in a forme of speech or in the change of a letter sounding against the orthodoxal Faith c. Yea r) Ib. sec 6. the vigilancie zeale courrage of the Primitiue Bishops was admirable c. There could no Heresie harbour vnder them
but they droue it out So cleer it is that the true Churches Pastours are neuer so sleepie as to suffer anie errours to be published or practised without their resistance But D. White M. Woton and other Protestants obseruing that this pretence of sleeping would nothing auayle them do therefore acknowledge that such was the nicenes of our imagined Inuentions that they could not be seene or discerned so faith M. Wooton 66) Trial of the RomaÌ„ clergy p. 383. You presse vs that if there had been anie alteration of Religion it would haue been recorded but how should it haue been recorded when it was not seen The alteration grew so nicely that few or none could discerne it D. White exemplifyeth this saying 67) Way to the true Churhc p. 370. The Romish Faith came into the true Church as sickenes doth in to the bodie and ruin to a house which appeareth not by and by at the first but then when it is ripened D. Whitaker instanceth in the haires of a 68) Cont. Camp Rat. 7. p. 101. 102. mans head which waxe not white suddainly and in slifters entring into a building at first not to be perceiued But to omit that as Peter Martyr confesseth 69) Epist anex to his com plac in Engl. p. 131. vnles a man do diligently examine similitudes he shal easily be deceaued by them This argument being taken froÌ„ excrements diseases and ruines is no lesse vnworthie infirme and ruinous itself for first in none of these is the change made instantly and at the first but by degrees and in successe of time whereas in Doctrine euerie opinion is at the first either true or false Secondly the first whitnes of haires or the first decay in health or building cannot at the first he discerned though they were most precisely regarded which is euidently otherwise in change of Doctrine and practise thereof Thirdly none are specially appointed neither is there anye such vrging necessitie to marke the first change of the haires and the like whereas it is the special charge and command not of few but of al the Churches Pastours not only to obserue but also publickly to withstand the other with the vttermost of their power and learning But admitting for the time that the foresaid similitudes were pertinent and that we were not to vrge Protestants to shew the first begining of our so great a change as is by them imagined Yet we are in al reason to expect that as though the first white haire or slifter or degree of disease be not discerned yet the further degrees and encrease of them being most markable to be seen that therefore they are to discouer describe to vs some sensible proceedings encrease of this our supposed change And if they wil say it was not made al at once but by litle litle sometimes in on point of Faith sometimes in an other then stil must we vrge them to shew those seueral litle changes as what points of doctrine were so by degrees changed Who were the Authours of the change What Popes begun or first allowed them by what Doctours and Pastours were they first contradicted Or els they in al these being most silent we may most strongly conclude that our Roman Church being thus free from al knowne change or Innouation since the Apostles times that therefore she is not anie Heretical sect Going out or departing from a former Church nor her doctrine Heretical no one Article thereof being lyable to that foulest stayne of Innouation Whereas to the contrarie the verie first beginings changes and Apostasies made by Waldo Wicclif Husse Luther Suinglius Caluin or anie other pretended Protestant in anie Age whatsoeuer were euer so obserued contradicted and condemned by the watchful Pastours of the Roman Church as that euerie particular both of Person time place and opinion are euerie where to be seene in sundrie Writers both Catholick and Protestant But to reach M. D. Morton yet an other scantling of an Heretick we must obserue that this name Christian giuen at first to al beleeuers was especially taken to distinguish them from the Iewes and Gentils which beleeued not at al in Christ But when Hereticks began to arise from among the Christians who professed stil Christs name and sundrie Articles of Faith the name Christian was too general to seuer Hereticks from true beleeuers And therefore the Apostles imposed the name Catholick vpon al such as in al points were obedient to the Churches Doctrine Hereof saith expresly M. Wotton 70) Trial of the Romish clergy p. 285. 286. The reason of the name Catholick was at first that there might be a title to distinguish sound Christians and true churches from Hereticks And of the contrarie in al Ages it was euer vsual that euerie Sect or Companie embracing new Doctrine though but in some one or other point contrarie to the Catholicke fayth receiued thervpon the like answerable alteration of name sometimes from the Doctrines so newly embraced sometimes and that more vsually from the first Authour and Inuentour himself And it was thought meet saith M. Woton 71) Ib. p. 286. That Hereticks should be called by some special name either of their Authour or of some points of errour which they held In like sort D. Field doubteth not to say 72) Of the Church l. 2. c. 9. p. 57. Surely it is not to be denyed but the naming after the names of men was in the time of the Primitiue Church peculiar and proper to Hereticks and Schismaticks only Neither 73) Apologie c. p. 30. 31. do I see saith M. Parker anie sufficient reason why those among vs whom singularitie in affection and noueltie in faction haue denomitated Puritans should not be distinguished by that name c. for in truth such new names haue in al former Ages for distinction sake been attributed vnto al such who defended new opinions either deuised by themselues or others contrarie to the receiued doctrine of the whole Church Thus from the erroneous Doctrines which they broached defended were named the Heretical Monothelites Aquarians Agnoites Theopaschites Catabaptists c. And according to Hospinian 74) Concord dâ—scord f. 131. the Enthusiastes Anabaptistes Antimonians and Sacramentaries And from that Authours themselues were named the Nicolaites the Manichees the Arians the Pelagians the Donatists the Nestorians the Eutichians the Waldenses the Wiccliuists the Hussites the Lutherans the Caluinists the Suinglians To examine now both Catholicks and Protestants about this point The name Catholick we haue seen was imposed to distinguish sound Christians and true Churches from Hereticks and was for the same cause inserted into the Creed by the Apostles themselues and so accordingly it hath been vsed and vnderstood by al Fathers 75) Cyril Catech. 18. Aug. Cont. Ep. fundam c. 4. de vera Rel. c. 7. Patianur Ep. ad Sympron and Writers in former Ages And as for the name Papist as it was neuer heard of
been no part of the Protestant Faith for then they would not haue resisted them but embrace them as they do al the rest this kind of arguing as it would be grateful to them so would it proue most disgraceful and distastful to Protestants for hence would it follow that in those verie points wherin Puritans are diuided from Protestants the Protestant Church should be changed and the Puritans should be the men who should obserue resist the same for according to our Doctours wise reasoning if the Puritan poynts had been part of the Protestant Faith then would they not haue resisted the Protestant Articles but embrace them as they do al the rest The which also may be vrged in behalf of Broâ—nists Anabaptists and al other Sectaries whatsoeuer for according to M. White if the Protestant Church were not changed the Puritâ—ns Brownists Anabaptists c. would not haue resisted it in some points but embrace them also as they do in al the rest then which nothing can be vttered more absurd in it self or more aduantagious to al Hereticks euer arising And so I passe to the last and worst part of D. Whites witnesses produced against vs and in behalf of himself that is to those whom sayth he the Church of Rome then persecuted and now calleth Hereticks that is Protestants which in his Catalogue he nameth to be Berengarius Bertram Ahnaricus the Waldenses Wicclinists Lollards and Hussites al which he coupleth togeather like Sampsons foxes to make them good witnesses against the Roman Church But first in what Court or Tribunal wil anie mans naked testimonie be auailable against his Aduersarie and especially of a conuicted offender against his Iudge when he speaketh only for his owne priuate Who may not disclaime and reiect as suspected anie mans bare word in his own cause This is the case of our last witnesses who going out and departing from our Roman Church as al other Hereticks haue euer done were alwaies noted contradicted and condemned for the same What then can the force of their testimonie be against vs but as of a Felon or Traytour against his lawful Iudge or Prince hauing denounced sentence of death against him Besides I wil make it manifest that these who are produced as Protestants resisting the Roman Church in al Ages were not Protestants but cleerly dissenting from them in manie fundamental points And lastly I would gladly know how possibly D. White could haue so good Intelligence of Protestants resisting in al those seueral Ages our Roman Church when as I haue largely conuinced (27) l. 3. c. 1. before by the ful testimonies of manie and the most learnedst Protestants that euer were that during al the foresaid Ages by him instanced there was neuer any one Protestant known and visibile to the world before the dayes of Luther Wherefore after good examining I doubt not but my Doctours Protestants resisting in al Ages our Roman Church wil finally resolue into his owne idle fancies which if they were as forcible to proue as his fond imagination is fertil to frame them the ruine of Catholicks were ineuitable and their verie memorie hateful But to leaue now a while these so sound and lawful witnesses and to come to the poynts wherin they made resistance I wil only obserue that sundrie of the poynts instanced by D. White are either matters of indifferencie or not of Faith neuer yet determined by the Church of God or els of fact and not of right or lastly only of life and conuersation al which is most impertinent in proof of anie change in Faith and Religion which is the only point here to be proued by our Doctour Wherefore now to graple neerer with our Catalogue-Maker and to examine the points instanced in euerie Semicenturie for the Roman Churches change After 600. yeares were expired saith he the seueral poynts of true Faith began one after another to be more grossely corrupted and changed by the Church of Rome In the first fiftie I name Serenus Bishop of Marseils in France who brake the Images that began to be set vp in his Diocesse But at the verie first M. Doctour iuggleth with vs for whereas this matter concerning Serenus was written first by S. Gregorie the great (28) l. 7. Ep. 111. he doth not anie thing insinuate that Images began then to be set vp in the Churches of Marseils in France but only obserueth that Serenus perceauing some Christians lately conuerted to adore the Images in the Church as though they were Gods through Zeale did breake them and cast them downe for which verie fact was he yet seuerely reproued by S. Gregorie himself writing thus vnto him Pictures are vsed in Churches that those who are vnlearned at least should read by seing in the walles those things which they could not read in bookes Thy Brotherhood therfore ought to haue preserued the Pictures and to haue hindred the people from their adoration that so the ignorant might haue from whence to gather knowled e of the Historie and the people not sinne in adoration of the Picture Further also affirming that not without cause (29) l. 9. Ep. 9. Antiquitie admitted Histories to be painted in the venerahle places or Churches of Saincts So cleer it is that the placing of Images in Churches did not as then first begin A truth further so euident that sundrie Protestant Writers (30) Before l. 2. c. 14. haue largely heretofore acknowledged the vse and placing of Images in Churches during the purest times of the Primitiue Church alleaging to that end seueral examples from Sozomene Athanasius Prudentius Nicephorus Tertullian and others who al of them liued some Ages before Serenus was borne But to proceed In the same 50. yeares sayth he Gregory the Bishop of Rome resisted the Supremacie for which he (31) l. 4. Ep. 32. 34. 38. 39. citeth certaine Epistles of S. Gregorie al written against Iohn Bishop of Constantinople who as then assumed to himself the name of Vniuersal Bishop which as he deseruedly reproued in him so was he so farre from denying his owne Primacie as that M. Bale reporteth to the contrarie (32) Image of both Chur. f. 11. that Iohn of Constantinople contended with Gregorie of Rome for the Supremacie in which contention Gregorie layd for himself S. Peters keyes with manie other sore arguments and reasons The which also is granted by manie other (33) See before l. 2. c. 4. Protestants amongst whom one reporteth that whereas (34) Cath. Traditions q. 2. p. 17. the Emperour Maurice would haue taken away the Primacie from Gregorie and giuen it to Iohn Bishop of Constantinople c. Gregorie did oppose himself against him And the Centurists adde further that (35) Cent. 6. col 425. Gregorie gloried that the Emperour and Eusebius his fellow Bishop of Constantinople did both of them acknowledge that the Church of Constantinople was subiect io the Apostolick Sea of Rome Neither was this Primacie first begun by
S. Gregorie (36) See before l. 2. c. 4. for his Predecessours Pelagius Celestine Leo Gelasius Sixtus Siricius Innocentius Sozimus Damasus Iulius Steuen Dionisius Victor c. yea S. Peter himself are al of them reproued by Protestant Writers for the foresayd Primacie So confessed it is that the Primacie of the Roman Church did not first begin in the time of S. Gregorie Now whereas D. White further added that the whole Greek Church complayned when Phocas had first conferred it on Boniface that their complaint supposing it for true is nothing material for they being as then diuided in this poynt from the Roman Church assuming to themselues the sayd Primacie their testimonie in their owne Cause is of no account But neither is it true that Phocas did first conferre it on Boniface for though he did by his Edict declare that the Roman Church was the Head of al Churches as testify S. Bede and others (37) l. de Sex Aetatibus in Phoca Ado in Chron. Paulus Diacon l. 18. de Rebus Roman yet is there no intimation that he first bestowed it yea further they affirme that the reason of the sayd Edict was the pride of the Bishops of Constantinople who iniuriously styling themselues vniuersal Bishops and contemning the Excommunications denounced against them by S. Gregorie Pelagius the Emperour therefore thought it necessarie to interpose his owne authoritie which the Grecians much more feared And he is so free from innouating in this Cause that besides the late premisses of the ancientest Popes euer claiming the same Iustinianus (38) Ep. ad Ioann 2. the elder ancient to Phocas by 70. yeares affirmeth the Roman Church to be Head of al Churches And Valentinian who preceded Phocas 140. yeares auoucheth that the Roman Bishop hath euer had the Principalitie of Preisthood aboue al others Yea in fullest satisfaction hereof it is plainly coÌ„fessed by Protestants theÌ„selues that Constantin our first Christian Emperour elder to Phocas almost 300. yeares (39) Before l. 2. c. 4. attributed Primacie to the Roman Bishop before al. So free was Phocas from first conferring Primacie to the Roman Church and so cleerly she resteth acquitted of these pretended Changes Innouations in the first 50. yeares After 650. 650. to 700. I name sayth D. White the Sixt general Councel decreing the marriage of Priests against the Church of Rome labouring to restraine it for which he citeth Can. 13. But the truth is there are not anie such Canons in the Councel cited for the true Sixt General Councel put forth no Canons as it is euident by the Seauenth (40) Act. 4. 5. Synod Wherefore after the Sixt Synode certaine Bishops assembled at Constantinople who in the Emperour Iustiniâ—n the Second his Pallace called Trullum published those Canons vnder the name of the sixt Synode which were neuer approued by anie Roman Bishop but to the contrarie then contradicted by Pope Sergius (41) Beda l. de Sex Aetatibus in Iustiniano Caulus Diacon l. 8. c. 9. de Rebus Rom. But though these Canons were authentical yet litle would they auaile our marrying Ministers not one of them allowing anie Clergie-man to marry after Orders taken and only permitting such to keepe their wiues as had them before they were of the Clergie and neither (42) Can. 6. 12. 48. this do they allow to Bishops but only to others of inferiour Orders Yea the Roman Church is so free from making anie change in this respect at the time prescribed that sundrie (43) Before l. 2. c. 17. Protestants for the self same prohibition of marriage to the Clergie do reproue manie more ancient and confirmed Councels as the 2. Councel of Arles holden in the time of Constantin the Councel of Neocesaraea of Eliberis the first of Nice and sundrie others As also for the same cause they reprehended the ancient Popes Leo Innocentius Calixtus Siricius c. and the learnedst Doctours of those times as S. Hierome S. Ambrose Origen with manie others so that at the time of the 6. Councel of Constantinople no changee at al was made by the Roman Church concerning the Single life of the Clergie But D. White further vrgeth that the sayd â— Councel forbiddeth to make the Holie-Ghost in likenes of a Doue But neither is this true for though it did preferre other Pictures before the Picture of Christ in the figure of a Lambe and the Picture of Holie-Ghost in forme of a Doue yet doth it not condemne these (45) Act. 5. And in the 7. Synod 44 the Image of the Holie-Ghost in forme of Doue is expresly approued Yea therin was also read the Epistle of Adrian to Tharasius in which it is sayd that in the 6. Synod was commended the Image of Christ in forme of a Lambe And that the Roman Church long before those times allowed Images it is euident enough by that which is before sayd concerning Serenus But our Doctour yet vrgeth that at this time there was a Councel holden in Portugal where the Cup is appointed to be ministred to the people against the practise of some that vsed to dip the bread and so to giue it which was one begining of the half Communion But this Councel being the third Councel of (45) Can. 1. Brach did iustly forbid that dipping in that it was neither so instituted by Christ nor could be confirmed by anie testimonie or example from Scripture yet doth it not command both kinds to be giuen And though it had yet were the obiecting thereof impertinent seing as then it was free lawful to vse both kinds Now that CoÌ„munion vnder one kind was sometimes vsed in much more ancient Ages it might easily be proued by Sozomene (46) Hist l. 8. c. 5. Niceph. hist l. 13. c. 7. Hieron Apol. pro l. in Iouin Cypr. Serm. de lapsis Tertul. l. 2. ad vxor Clem. Al. l. 1. strom 700. Nicephorus S. Hierome S. Cyprian Tertullian and others So that D. Whites Examples for the Roman Churches change in this 50. yeares are altogeather friuolous After 700. to 750. I name saith M. White the General Councel of Constantinople vnder Leo Isaurus against Images This Councel was neuer confirmed but reiected for none of the Patriarchs were present S. German only excepted who would not consent therevnto and thereupon was depriued of his Sea of Constantinople Wherefore this only proueth that some of the Grecians changed their Faith concerning Images for which they were contradicted not only by the Latin Church but by sundrie also of the greatest Doctours of the Greek Church In this Age also he nameth Clemens Scotus and Adelbartus who saith he preached against the Supremacie Traditions Images and in the defence of Priests marriage also against Purgatorie Masses for the dead c. And al this he proueth only by one of his lawful witnesses his Protestant Brother Illiricus which being wholy destitute of al other Authoritie I may lawfully forebeare it al further
answer After 750. 750. to 800. I name saith he the Councel of Constantinople vnder Constant Copronymus and of Franckford vnder Charles the Great against Images and the booke yet extant that he caused to be made against the 2. Nicene Councel with another set forth by Ludonicus his Sonne to the same effect A great tooth stil hath our Minister against Images but it neuer biteth for tâ—is Councel of Constantinople was likewise neuer confirmed but expressely condemned in the Seauenth Synod (47) Act. 6. Paul Diac. l. 21. 22 de Rib. Rom. Zonoras in Annalibus And being assembled only of Grecians who in the doctrine of Images were manie of them diuided from the Roman Church the testimonie thereof is of no force as I haue shewed before But besides it is not worthie of obseruation that as neither of these Councels of Constantinople so often vrged by our Doctour were euer confirmed by the Bishop of Rome without whose allowance according to the first Councel (48) Socrat. l. 2. c. 13. of Nice it was not lawful to assemble General Councels so neither did anie of the Patriarchs themselues euer assent vnto them as is manifest by Zonoras Cedrenus Paulus Diaconus and other Writers hereof Yea further al Authours who write of General Councels as Psellus Photins Zonoras Nicephorus Cedrenus Nycetas Paulus Diaconus Rhegino Ado Sigebert Abbas Vspergensis and others do either not number these two of Constantinople amongst the Councels of the Church or els do expressely reproue them and the 2. Councel of Nice which was truly General and plenarie did directly abrogate and condemne them Adde hereunto in fauour of our Doctour who is so far in loue with these Councels that in that vnder Constantin is decreed (49) Can. 15. those to be accursed who do not inuocate the B. Virgin Marie As also 50) Can. 17. those who do not worship and Inuocate the rest of the Saincts And 51) Can. 18. those who do not beleeue that God wil giue eternal life for merits of works according to the iust waight of his Iudgement al which Catholike Canons are 52) Cent. 8. c. 9. col 639 recited by the Centurists Now if M. White wil vrge this Councel against Images in which respect it was impugned and contradicted by seueral means why may not I much more vrge it for these other poynts wherein it was neuer reproued by any Councel or other Writers Now as concerning the Councel of Franckford vrged here and by sundrie other Protestants against Images First the a) Cen. 8. c. 9. col 639. Magdeburgians themselues acknowledge that Pope Adrian then Bishop of Rome neuer consented vnto it but both himself and his Legates resisted it Now neuer 53) Galasius Temo de vinâ—ulo Anathematis was there anie one Councel holden lawful whereunto the Roman Bishop resisted In so much that this Councel of Franckford itself decreed 54) In lib. Catolino That the last Iudgement of Controuersies belonged to the Roman Bishop and with this verie argument cheifly it endeauoured to confute the seauenth Synode imagining this to haue been assembled without the authoritie of the Bishop of Rome So that this Councel of Franckford by the testimonie of the Centurists destroyeth it selfe Secondly the Centurists in the same place teach that the 2. Nicene Synod was confirmed by Pope Adrian but the Councel of Franckford reiecteth only such Synods as are assembled without the Popes Authoritie wherefore according to the Magdeburgians not the Councel of Nice wherein Images were approued but some other was reproued by the Councel of Franckford Thirdly The Centurists further confesse that the Councel of Franckford did not decree that Images should be taken out of the Churches but remayning in the Churches that they should not be adored Wherefore then do Protestants pul down Images and break them Wherefore do not themselues obserue the Decree of the Councel Yea this verie Councel thundreth Anathema 55) l. Carol. Hincmarus Magdeburg to al such as deface break pul down Images how then wil our Protestants escape this bolt Fourthly the Councel of Franckford did indeed impugne 56) l. Carol. Hincmarus two Councels one of Constantinople which decreed against Images and the other of Nice which was for Images But the impugning of this latter was only through errour and materially euen as the Councel of Ariminum condemned the word Homousios for the Authour of the Bookes vnder the name of Charles had obtruded vnto the same Councel of Franckford two vntruths 57) In praef lib. Carol. First that the Councel of Nice had decreed that Images should be worshipped with the honour of Latria or that which is due only to God 58) l. Carol. The second that this decree was made by the Grecians without the consent of the Bishop of Rome Now these two lyes supposed for truths it is no wonder though the Councel of Franckford resisted the Councel of Nice And that these were mere Impostures falsly imposed vpon the Councel of Nice it is euident aswel in that the Legates of the Roman Bishop subscribed to euerie Act as also in that the Epistles of Pope Adrian himself for Images 59) Act. 2. were read in the Councel it self And so likewise that the sayd Councel did not decree Images to be worshiped with Latria is further manifest in that Basil of Ancyra who was formerly an Heretick being now conuerted and professing the Catholick Faith the (60) Act. 1. whole Councel hearing him and approuing him affirmed that he did worship Images but not with Latria seing that was due only to God And the like (61) Act 3.4.7 was professed by Constantin Bishop of Constance and other Bishops in the Seauenth Synode Neither let it seeme improbable that such vntruths could be forged against a general Councel so lately before celebrated Wheras most Protestants dare now affirme that Catholicks adore Images as Gods whereas almost thousands of Catholick Writers and the General Councel of Trent celebrated in the Confins of Germanie do declaime the contrarie what wonder then if the like be forged of a Greek Synod which few could read and vnderstand and which was celebrated in the Oriental parts being far distant Lastly it is to be remembred that though this Councel of Franckford did erre yet was it not in matter of Faith but only in fact condemning vpon false information the Councel of Nice neither was it euer confirmed but expressely reiected by the Bishop of Rome and therefore the errour thereof doth nothing preiudice the infallible authoritie of lawful approued General Councels So manie wayes doth it appeare that this thredworne Argument from the Councel of Franckford against Images is altogeather impertinent And now to come to the bastard Booke fathered vpon Charles the Great First the Booke of Adrian the First to Charles is extant whereby it appeareth that the sayd Booke was written by some Heretick and sent from Charles to Adrian
that he might answer it Secondly the Roman 62) Zonaras Cedrenus Paulus Diac. in vita Leonis Isauri Bishops Gregorie the Third Adrian the First and Leo the Third Excommunicated the Grecian Emperours and transferred the Empire from them to the French cheifly for that they patronised the Heresie against Images whereas the French persisted euer constant in the ancient Catholick Faith wherefore it is most improbable that Charles should write in defence of the Grecian errour against the Pope of Rome Thirdly 63) L. 1. de cultu Imaginum Ionas Aurelianensis who liued in the Raigne of Ludouicus sonne to Charles testifyeth that Claudius Taurinensis a special Patrone of the Heresie durst neuer open his mouth therein during the life of Charles Fourthly Pope 64) Paulus Aemil. l. 2. Franc. And see cent 8. c. 9. col 570. Stephen holding a Councel at Rome against the sayd Errour Charles himselfe sent 12. of the cheifest Bishops of his Kingdome to assist him therein And D. Cowper 65) Chron. 174. reporteth that certaine Bishops were sent by Adrian to Charles who held a Councel in France against the condemnation of Images Fiftly this most famous Emperour Charles was so wholy Roman Catholick as that 66) Ep. ded Hist Sacra Hospinian recordeth of him 67) Epist Hist Eccl. Cent. 8. p. 101. Crisp of the Estate of the Church p. 221. 216. Bul. in 2. Thess c. 2. p 533. Cowp Chron. f. 173. 195. Foxin Apoc. p. 436. that he not only cōmanded by publick Edicts that the verie Ceremonies Rites and Latin Masse of the Roman Church as also the Decrees Lawes and Ordinances of the Roman Bishop should be obserued through his whole Empire but himself by imprisonments and diuers kinds of punishments compelled Churches to the same The like whereof is confessed of him by Osiander Crispinus Bullinger D. Cowper and M. Fox So vnlike was he to write against the Roman Church concerning Images Sixtly Caluin himself insinuateth this Booke to be forged about Charlemaines time saying 68) Iust l. 1. c. 11. sec 14. There is extant a refuting Booke vnder the name of Charles the Great which by the words thereof we may gather to haue bene made at the same time Seauently wheras Charles was knowne to be verie skilful both in Greek Latin learned ingenious in this booke there are manie absurdities committed as where it affirmeth Constantinople to be a Citty most knowne in Bythinia whereas indeed it is in Thracia as also that at Constantinople there was a Councel celebrated in defence of the worshipping of Images whereas the sayd Councel was celebrated at Nice And that the Nicene Councel tearmed the Eucharist the Image of Christs bodie whereas directly and purposely they refute and condemne the sayd speech Eightly supposing for the time against al the premisses that it had been Charles his Booke yet nothing would it auaile but much preiudice Protestants for therein is expressely taught that the last sentence in Controuersies of Faith belongeth to the Roman Bishop And that he hath his Primacie not from Councels but from God himself It prescribeth also Exorcismes to be vsed in Baptisme Churches to be dedicated with special Rites That we are to pray for the dead and Inuocate Saincts and their Relicks to be worshipped That Chrisme and Holie-water are to be vsed That in the Eucharist there is the true Bodie of Christ and the same to be worshipped yea to be offred as a true and proper Sacrifice Al which do mainely impugne Protestant Religion And therefore if they wil haue vs to beleeue this Booke teaching that the Councel of Nice erred concerning Images let them beleeue it teaching the other Catholick poynts next recited Lastly if it could be proued that Charles himself had made this Book that he had been a perfect Protestant in al poynts yet how would it hence follow that the Roman Church had changed her Faith in the time of Charles Or what would the testimonie of a Lay-man auaile them seing according to 69) Orat. 2. de Imag. Damascen Christ committed not his Church to Kings and Emperours but to Bishops and Pastours But we haue seene sufficiently before that Charles was a Prince wholy deuoted to the Roman Church and a special Patron of Images and consequently the Booke written against them and imposed vpon him is meerly forged and of no authoritie And so likewise is no lesse forged that other vnder the name of Lewes his Sonne which for such is condēned by the Catholick Church Neither 70) Index lib. prohibit doth our Doctour affoard vs the least colour of proof for the legitimation of either of these Bookes but only sayth that they are extant as though it were rare among Hereticks to finde manie spurious adulterine Bookes And so I cōclude that seing our Ministers proofs for the Roman Churches change in these 50. yeares are al of them in seueral respects either most impertinent or most false that therefore the Roman Church during the same time did not change After 800 800. to 850. I name sayth our Cataloguer Ioannes Scotus c. who resisting the Real presence c. was therefore murdred The same time Berthram also writ against it c. Claudius Bishop of Towres resisted Images worship of Saincts and Pilgrimage Lotharius the Emperour reduced the Pope to the obedience of the Empire c. These are the examples of the Roman Change in this time But let vs examine them As concerning Scotus that he resisted the Real presence M. White proueth it only by the testimonie of Daneus who being a formal Protestant of these times his testimonie is insufficient as bearing witnesse in his owne Cause therefore al further answer were needles But yet I do acknowledge that about the same time there was one Scotus not the subtil Doctour who liued some Ages after but an other who writ something doubtfully in this poynt but his Booke was condemned in the Councel at Vercella as testifyeth Lantfrancus (a) lib. de verit Corp. Et sang Domini in Eucharistia And he is obserued to be the first in the Latin Church who writ suspiciously against the Real Presence And as for Bertram though the Booke extant vnder his name doth vse some doubteful and obscure words as Figure Spiritual and Mysterie yet at other times doth it speak as plainly Affirming the Presence of Christs Bodie vnder the veyle or couerture of Bread Yea the Centurists confesse that Bertram 71) Cent. 9. c. 4. Col. 212. in the sayd Book hath the seeds of Transubstantiation Secondly this sayd Book being set forth lately by Oecolampadius may iustly be suspected and rather in that Pantaleon 72) p. 65. in his Chronograph mentioning Bertram and his other writings forbeareth yet to mention this Booke or to charge him with this pretended opinion Thirdly Illiricus making a Catalogue of Protestant witnesses to whom our Minister for this of his is no litle beholding
to examine matters but to define nothing before his notice and withal not to communicate with Photius as a Bishop but only as a Secular man being ordayned contrarie to the Canons and hauing vniustly deposed Ignatius which when Photius perceuied he hindred the sayd Legats for conferring with anie but only their own followers and withal assembled a Synod wherein through the power of the Emperour he further confirmed the Deposition of Ignatius and his own Creation threatning also the Popes Legats that vnles they also would subscribe to the sayd Councel the Emperour would bannish them into remote Countries where for verie hunger they should be inforced to eate lice Through which terrours and also through bribes from Photius the Legats contrarie to the Popes command subscribed to the condemnation of Ignatius and establishment of Photius Which when Pope Nicolas truly vnderstood assembling a Councel in Rome he excommunicated Photius and his own Legats and deposed them al restoring Ignatius to his Sea Which Basil the Emperour succeding Michael according to the Popes determination fully executed Now what doth anie of this make against the Popes Supremacie but rather confirme the same seing that both Michael and Photius sent Embassedours to the Pope entreating that he would send Legats from himself for the redressing of abuses at Constantinople And when themselues were found cheifly faultie the Emperour was seuerely reprehended by the Pope and Photius excommunicated and deposed Adde hereunto that the Greek Writers themselues do generally testifye that both Michael and Photius were men extremely addicted to manie and most enormous vices and therefore their resisting the Pope is of no greater Authoritie then of an offender or Rebel resisting his lawful Iudge or Prince So likewise concerning the Bishop of Rauenna's resisting the Pope Anastasius cited by M. White in proof thereof reporteth (81) In Nicolao 1. that sundrie Persons going to Pope Nicolas with manie complaints of greiuous wrongs and dommages done vnto them by the sayd Bishop the Pope therevpon did by his Legats and letters admonish him to surcease the same and to make satisfaction Which the Bishop neglecting and adding stil more to his former impieties he further commanded him to repaire to Rome there in the Synod to answer in his own behalf which he likewise refusing and contemning to do he was therevpon Excommunicated by the same Councel Yea the Pope himself vpon the earnest intreatie of the people of Rauenna went to the same Cittie where presently he restored manie things taken wrongfully by the Bishop who hauing Intelligence before hand of the Popes comming was fled to Papia there to desire Ludonicus the Emperours help and backing against the Pope But as the people there in the streets did eschew his companie hearing that he was Excommunicated by Pope Nicolas so the Emperours answer was only this by his Messenger Let him go and laying pride aside let him humble himself to the Pope to whom both we and al the Church are subiect Which when the Bishop heard despayring of al other meanes he went to Rome where submitting himself to the Pope and promising reformation and performance of sundrie matters enioyned him and commanded by the same Pope he was therevpon absolued from his Excommunication and suspension from saying Masse This being the truth of the Storie concerning the Bishop of Rauenna his resisting the Pope I referre it to the Iudgement of anie impartial Reader whether this doth not strongly confirme the Primacie of the Bishop of Rome But to proceed after 900. 900. to 950. 950. and so forward D. White vrgeth sundrie abuses noted as then in the Church of Rome But those by him specifyed concerning only matter of life and manners are altogeather improper and insufficient to proue any change in Faith and Doctrine which was the only point pertinent to be proued Yea Baronius by him alleaged speaketh only of such abuses as were brought into the Church by Anti-Popes and Intruders not by true Popes And whereas further it is obiected that certaine of the English Clergie maintayned the Sacrament to be only a figure of the Bodie bloud of Christ against the Real Presence then increasing Besides that the confirmation hereof dependeth vpon the testimonie of the old Fabler Fox I haue shewed heretofore in the Examples of Scotus and Bertram that our Catholick Doctrine of Real Presence was confessedly beleeued and taught in the purest times of the Primitiue Church After 950. 950. to 1000. we haue fayth D. White Otho the Great that deposed Iohn the Pope and assumed into his hands the nominating and making of Popes hereafter c. But this only proueth what was done not with what right it was done for though through the solicitation of a false Synod Otho assented to the deposition of Iohn by reason of manie crimes obiected against him Yet the proceeding therin was in sundrie respects not Iuridical but directly contrarie to the much more ancient practise and decrees of the Church as Baronius proueth at large Anno 963. Neither is it true that Otho assumed into his hands the nominating and making of Popes hereafter for no sooner was Iohn deposed but immediatly in the hearing of the Emperour the Bishops assembled iâ— the same Synod sayd We choose Leo our Pastour that he may be the cheif and vniuersal Pope of the Roman Church to which though the Emperour afterwardes assented yet did he neither first nominate or elect him In this Semi-centurie M. White further vrgeth that Aelfricus Archbishop of Canterburie preached and published his Homilies against the Real Presence comming in But first Aelfricus the Archbishop of Canterburie was so Roman Catholick that D. Godwin testifieth (n) Catal. of Bishops p. 23. that he was brought vp in Glassenburie And M. Bale assureth vs that he was Schollar to S. Ethwald and Abbot of Abingdon and for his craftie (x) Cent. 2. c. 41. sayth he in promoting Papistrie made Archbishop of Canterburie Secondly the Protestants which (*) In the Preface before it published that Sermon confesse that the Authour thereof was no Archbishop of Canterburie And it is more likely to be true which M. Fox (y) Act. mon. p. 1148 1040. sayth that it was Aelfrick surnamed Bara an Heretick who as S. Dunstan appearing to one in a vision sayd as reporteth Osberne attempted to disinherit his Church but I haue stopped him sayth S. Dunstan and he could not preuaile Thirdly that Sermon diligently read maketh as much for Transubstantiation as against it Lastly though we should suppose for the present that Aelfricus did preach or publish such Homilies yet was that doctrine so far from comming in as then as that the best and ancientest Fathers of the Primitiue Church are formerly confessed and reproued for the same doctrine by sundrie Protestant Writers In like sort though Arnulphus a man vicious inueighed against the Pope vrging that if he be voyd of charitie puffed vp only with knowledge he is Antichrist
c. but if he want both charitie and knowledge then is he an Idol Yet doth he not anie where absolutely affirme the Pope to be Antichrist and especially that Antichrist which the Scriptures foretel shal come a litle before the end of the world and so he only tearmeth him Antichrist in that sense of S. Iohn (83) 1. Io. 2.18 Now there are become manie Antichrists After a 1000. 1000. to a 1050. yeares I name sayth he Rodulphus Ardeus preaching against Merits c. Glaber Rodulphus against the Popes Primacie and Leuthericus denying the Real Presence But for breuitie admitting al this for true yet doth it not hence follow that the Roman Church made anie change or Innouation in the foresayd poynts seing the same were al of them taught and beleeued generally by the Church in times much (84) Before l. 2. c. 21. 4. 8. more ancient and approued After a 1050. 1050. to 1100. I name sayth he Nycetas an Abbot and the Bishops of Italie France and Germanie resisting Hildebrand and deposing him when he would restraine the Clergie from Marriage Henrye the Third c. withstanding the Popes Supremacy c. and iudging him to be deposed Sigebert c. noting the Popes Excommunicating Princes and absoluing their subiets from their obedience tearming it a noueltie and Heresie Berengarius resisted the real Presence c. But as for Nycetas as I do confesse that he writ manie things against the Roman Church and in particular in behalf of Priests marriage so yet did he afterwardes so (85) Baron Anno 1054 nun 19. much repent himself thereof as that in presence of the Emperour Constantinus Monomachus and the Popes Legats he recalled and accursed al his sayd writings as also al such he accursed as denyed the Roman Church to be cheif of al Churches or presumed to impugne in any thing the Orthodoxal Faith thereof wherevpon immediately the Emperour caused the said Books to be burned in the sight of al. So that the argument here drawen from Nycetas is most fully answered by Nycetas himself And as for sundry Bishops and Henry the Third the Emperour withstanding Pope Hildebrand and iudging him to be deposed it is altogeather immaterial for the sayd Bishops adhering schismatically to the Emperour for the which (86) Baro Anno 1076. num 15. themselues were Excommunicated and the Emperour also for his manie enormous vices it is no maruaile though such men would endeauour their best for his deposing And yet the Emperour (87) Ib. Anno 10â—7 num 10. 18. after submitted himself going to the Pope bare-footed and after foure dayes fasting was admitted to his speech and vpon certaine Conditions was absolued by the Pope from his Excommunication Yea it is obserued from the Writers of those times that the Bishops and other Principal men who withstood the Pope during the sayd Schisme were most or al of them seuerely punnished by God in this world amongst whom William Bishop of Virick being the Ring-leader and one who as Lambertus recordeth vsually vpon Festiual dayes at Masse-time publickly inueighed against the Pope this man being suddainly taken with a greuous infirmitie with miserable houling before al that were present cryed out that by the iust Iud ement of God he had lost both this present and eternal life in that with al his power he had concurred with the King in al things which he wickedly intended and for desire of his fauour had wittingly and willingly vttered greiuous Contumelies against the Roman Bishop a man most holie and of Apostolical vertues which when he had sayd as the report is he dâ—ed without Receiuing or anie Satisfaction Thus far Lambertus But (88) In Chronico Citicensi Langius addeth further that In the verie place wherin he detracted from the Roman Bishop he fel sick where he continued vntil the miserable end of his life and his disease stil encreasing one of the Kings seruants asking him that he might returne to the King with his Command I send answered he to the King this Command That he and I and al that fauour his Iniquitie are damned for euer yea when he was admonished by some of his Clergie that he would not say so he replyed what should I say but that which I visibly see to be true for behold the Diuels do compasse my bed about that when I dy they may presently catch me Wherefore I desire you and al faithful people not to trouble themselues with praying for me after my death Now by this we must briefly note what wretched and most damnable witnesses our Minister stil produceth against the Roman Church and in defence of his owne As for Sigebert he was knowne to be one of the followers and flatterers of Henrie the fourth the Emperour and therefore his testimonie in this case is of no force But besides his affirming the Popes Excommunicating of Princes c. to be a noueltie and Heresie is most absurd and vntrue as might be proued at large by the much more ancient Examples of Pope Leo the Third translating the Empire from the Grecians to the Germans and of Pope Zacharie deposing King Childericus creating Pepinus of S. Gregorie the Second excommunicating the Emperour Leo of S. Ambrose Excommunicating the Emperour Theodosius and sundrie such like Lastly concerning Berengarius as he resisted for a time the Real Presence so did he publickly (a) Fox Act Mon. p. 146. recant the same Yea his Errour was so great and his Condemnation so iust that the Centurists thus write thereof (n) Cent. 11. c. 10. p. 527. Leo the Ninth deserued in this one thing no smal praise aboue his predecessours that presently at the begining he condemned the Heresie of Berengarius togeather with the Authour in a Synod at Rome But I haue sufficiently before cleered our Roman Church of al pretended change in this behalf After 1100. 1100. to 1150. I name saith M. White Henrie the Fift the Emperour who against Paschalis then Pope maintained his right of making Bishops and other priuiledges c. (89) Chron. Casmense l. 4. But who doubteth that anie Prince may not defend his right Yet that which was done in the case proposed was done by fraud and violence by the Emperour against the Pope who for the quiet of the Church yeelded in some respects concerning the same Priuiledges much bloud hauing been shead of either side and great warres lâ—kely to ensue And yet the sayd Emperour vpon the same agreement swore vnto the Pope that he would restore such Lands and possessions of the Roman Church as he had taken away or which the Pope ought to haue and that he would obey the Pope the honour of his Kingdome and Empire euer preserued After which the Pope saying Masse when himself and those of the Clergie assisting at the Altar had Communicated the Emperour also Receiued at the hands of the Pope Now by this it sufficiently appeareth that this Example of
Innouation therein could be obserued or reproued by Almaricus In like sorte though Robert Bishop of Lincolne withstood the Popes proceedings in England yet this nothing proueth anie change or first comming in of anie point of Faith in the Roman Church obserued or resisted by the sayd Robert Besides D. Godwine reporteth that a Cardinal sayd to the Pope concerning him He (a) Catalo of Bishop of England p. 240. is for Religion a Catholick as wel as we And so dying he gaue al his bookes an excellent Librarie vnto the Friar Minors at Oxford So charitable was he to Friars and consequently so Roman Catholick euen at his verie death And where he affirmeth that Ioakim Abbas sayd that Antichrist was borne at Rome and should sit in the Apostolick sea It is so vntrue that in his Epistle prefiged to his Exposition vpon the Apocalypse he submitteth his writings to the Censure of the Sea Apostolick affirming further that he firmely beleeueth that the Gates of Hel cannot preuaile against the Roman Church and that her Faith shal not perish before the end of the world Yea in his Exposition vpon the 6. Chapter and 11. verse he calleth such the Sonnes of Babylon who impugne the Church of Peter And vpon the 7. Chapter and 2. verse by the Angel ascending from the East hauing the signe of the liuing God he vnderstandeth the Bishop of Rome who with his fellow-Bishops with the signe of the Crosse wil arme the Elect in that last tribulation which Antichrist shal rayse So litle cause there is to vrge this Abbot against the Pope And indeed al that truly can be vrged against him is that being an old man and half out of his wits he was censured by the Pope for certaine fonde Prophecies and some errours also about the B. Trinitie as appeareth by the Decree extant in the Canon Law against him and by other Authours that haue written of him And as for Fidericus the Second Emperour resisting the Popes Supremacie it proueth no more but that euen the most vicious Emperours were most aduerse to the Pope For he being a Prince of most scandalous and wicked life was after due admonitions excommunicated as also deposed by Pope Innocent the Fourth in a general Councel holden at Lyons so that his resisting in this regard the Supremacie is only a guiltie and conuicted Persons resisting of al such lawful Authoritie whereby he is censured and punished Concerning Arnoldus Villanouanus speaking against Friars the Sacrifice of the Masse and Papal Decrees This M. White only proueth by the testimonies of the Magdeburgians and Osiander which being Protestants are no competent witnesses against Catholicks But besides I haue proued (107) l. 2. c. 9. 4. before that the Sacrifice of the Masse and the Popes Authoritie were beleeued and practised in much more ancient times As also that the Institution of Friars proueth no Innouation in Faith and Religion Euerardus broaching those foule and false reproaches against Pope Gregorie the Seauenth called Hildebrand proueth nothing but his owne disobedience and impatience hauing been by the same 108) Greg. 7. Ep. 18. Pope for his owne demerits iustly suspended from his Episcopal function After 1250. 1250. to 1300. I name Gulielmus de S. Amore withstanding Friars and their abuses but how impertinent this is I haue shewed sufficiently before The Preachers also saith he in Sweden that publickly taught the Pope and his Bishops to be Hereticks But M. White receiuing this Relation from Illiricus no further answer wil be requisit Dante 's also saith he writ that the Empire descended not from the Pope But Dante 's being only a Poet intermedling in other matters committed (109) See Bellar. in Append. ad lib. de Sum. Pont c. 14. manie grosse errours for which his bookes are condemned and prohibited by the Church yea he liued in faction against some (110) Ibid. c. 12. Popes and therefore his writing against them is of no force As for Gulielmus Altisiodorensis M. White producing nothing in particular out of him against the Roman Church but only affirming that in his Summes are found manie things confuted that then were comming in no further particular answer can be expected and though he referre himself for particulars to this his own Booke yet citing no page or place thereof I hould it vnworthie of so paineful search it being also wel knowne that Altisiodorensis only differed from other Schoole-men in matters disputable and not defined After 1300. 1300. to 1350. I name sayth he Marcilius Patauinus that wrot against the Popes Supremacie But he being a knowne condemned Heretick a flatterer of the Schismatical Emperour and his Bookes condemned by the Church as also the Popes Primacie being formerly acknowledged in the Primitiue Church his testimonie is sundrie wayes insufficient And the like is to be answered to Ocham (111) Tritheâ—nius Genebrard l. 4. Chron. who was purposely hyred by the Emperour to write against the Pope who was also Excommunicated and his Bookes prohibited Gregorius Ariminensis his differences were only in Schoole points not determined by the Church And as for the Vniuersitie of Paris condemning the Popes Pardons it is most vntrue and therefere M. White did wel to father it only vpon his Brother Illiricus whom he knew to be expert in the art of forging After 1350. 1350. to 1400. I name sayth he Aluâ—rus Pelagius who wrot a Book of the L mentation of the Church wherein he reproueth diuerse abuses of his times But who denyeth but that in the Militant Church consisting of good and euil there are manie abuses in life and conuersation But as for abuse or Innouation in matter of Doctrine and Faith Aluarus maketh no mention at al in his sayd Booke And as for Montziger disputing against â—ransubstantiation and Adoration of the Sacrament and Cesenas calling the Pope Antichrist besides that the truth hereof dependeth only of the testimonie of Fox and Illâ—ricus both of them Protestants I haue sufficiently before cleered both these poynts from al Innouation in Ages much more ancient Now as for Iohn Wiceliffe as I haue shewed (112) l. 1. c. 3. before that in sundrie poynts of Faith he agreed with Catholicks which Protestants now impugne so it is euident that he taught sundrie grosse errours which both Catholicks and Protestants do detest as that If a (113) Fox Act. Mâ—n p. 96. Bishop or Priest be in deadly sinne he doth not Order consecrate or Baptize that Al (114) Osiand cent 9. 10. 11. p. 459. oathes are vnlawful That (115) Osiand cent 15. p. 457. al things come to passe by absolute necessitie That there 116) Ib. p. 454. is no Ciuil Migistrate whilest he is in mortal sinne and sundrie others in regard of which Protestants 117) Pant. Chronol p. 119. Mathias Hoe in his Tract duo Tract 1. p. 27. themselues ranke him in the Catalogue of Hereticks So that smal Credit or succour wil M. White
purchase for producing Wiccliffe as one of his witnesses against the Roman Church After 1400. 1400. to 1450. I name sayth he the Lollardes in England c. that were persecuted at that time And that very iustly M. White for besides that they held the former Heresies of the Wiccliuists they further (118) Trithem in Chr. Anno. 1315. impugned the Sacraments of Baptisme and the Eucharist they held that Lucifer with the rest of his Angels were iniuriously thrust out of Heauen by Michael and his Angels and consequently to be restored againe at the day of Iudgement and that Michael and his Angels are for the sayd iniurie to be damned from the day of Iudgement for euer That our B. Ladie could not beare Christ and remaine a Virgin That anie thing done vnder the earth in Caues and Cellars is not punnishable with other such like Which if M. White did know in them and remember greatly might he be ashamed to number them amongst his sound and lawful witnesses for the Protestant Church Now as for Plowmans tale reporting that Chaucer expressly writ the Pope and his Clergie to be Antichrist as vnworthie of other answer I leaue it for a Tale fit for Plowmen to tel in a winters night hauing also spoken of this point before Neither doth Nilus his writing against Purgatorie and the Popes Supremacie anie thing aduantage the Protestant Church or impugne the Roman for both these Doctrines I haue formerly proued to haue been the general beleef of the Primitiue Church Besides Nilus was one of the Greek Church which sometimes in the foresaid points was diuided from the Roman yea he was condemned for an Heretick and therevpon enrolled by Illiricus (119) Catalog Test verit Tom. 2. p. 876. amongst the witnesses of the Truth of Protestancie Concerning Iohn Husse and Hierome of Prage D. White confessing that their Doctrine was the same with that of the waldenses the former answer to them may serue also for this Besides I haue (120) l. 1. c. 3. conuinced heertofore that Husse wholy agreed with Catholicks in sundrie Articles earnestly now impugned by Protestants As for Sauanarola his writings are condemned by the Church of Christ Neither did he impugne anie one point of our Catholick Faith which I haue not formerly shewed to haue been taught by the ancient Fathers And therefore his resisting the Roman Church doth nothing proue anie change or Innouation made by her And the selfe same answer is to be giuen to Wesselus Groningensis whose Bookes are prohibited As also to Ioannes de Vessalia who defended the Heresie of the Grecians concerning the proceeding of the Holie-Ghost who yet in the end recanted al his opinions held against the Church of Rome And where M. White further affirmeth that in England also and Bohemia liued those which followed the Doctrine of Wiccliffe and Husse continuing the same til Luther Supposing this for true the contrarie whereof I haue proued (121) l. 1. c. 3. already at large yet doth it proue no more then the Examples of Wiccliffe and Husse themselues which lately we haue seen to proue nothing at al in behalf of Protestants And when 1500. 1500. yeares were expired arose sayth M. White Luther Suinglius Tindal and diuers others whom God raysed vp to cal his people out of Babylon c. These I must confesse were faithful witnesses for M. Whites Church and great Resisters of the Roman But I cannot confesse that God but the Diuel only raised them vp for so Luther confesseth (122) Tom 7. Wittem l. de Missa f. 443. that Satan disswaded him from the Masse And (123) Tom. 2 l. de subsid Euchar. f. 249. Suinglius acknowledgeth that he was instructed in the night by an Admonisher whether white or black he remembreth not And the same might be shewed of sundrie others first broachers of Protestancie But as now I wil purposely for beare hauing waded ouer long in this so vnsauourie a Pudle of D. Whites Catalogue In which as he hath not proued by anie one Instance anie knowne begining or change in our present Roman Faith since the Apostles times so I cannot but obserue that amongst al the witnesses by him produced against the Roman Church not one can be picked out which was not a man vitious and of a scandalous life or els infected with Schisme and Heresie for which he was euer noted reproued and condemned euen by the Doctours and Writers of the same time wherein he liued And so I stil conclude that our Roman Church hauing neuer Gone out of anie other Church nor euer been noted of Innouation and change in Faith that therefore she is not anie Nouel or Heretical Sect but the One True Catholick and Apostolick Church of Christ THE FOVRTH BOOK WHERIN IS PROVED BY THE CONFESSION OF PROTESTANTS that according to the Sacred Scriptures the Roman Church is the true Church of Christ And so to haue euer continued from his time vntil the Date hereof And of the contrarie the Protestants Church to be only a Sect Heretical neuer to haue been before the dayes of Luther PROTESTANTS FLYING TO THE sacred Scriptures in proof and defence of their Church and Religion it is shewed the sayd flight not only in itself to be dishonourable but also to be the ordinarie flight of al moderne Hereticks CHAPTER I. HAVING laboured thus far with al diligence to search for the finding out of Christs true Church and her necessarie continuance and visibilitie through-out al Ages and euer finding the present Roman Church and Religion to haue been at al times the only knowne publick and professed Church of Christians in al Countries whatsoeuer The Protestant Congregation in the meane time being indeed not in Being and by their owne former acknowledgments not knowne visible or heard-of in the Christian world I begun further to think with myself what strange euasion colour or pretence our Protestants could inuent for their further maintaining of their new-sprong Faith And reading casually in (1) l. 7. p. 478. D. Whitakers book against the Iesuit Duraeus I found him expresly to hold and teach that it is sufficient for vs Protestants by comparing the Popish doctrine and Scriptures togeather to know their difference and disagreing we leave it free for Historiographers sayth he to write what they list And agreably hereto I since found (2) In Bancroftes Suruey p. 219. Beza to say If any shal oppose against my exposition the authoritie of certaine of the ancient Fathers I do appeale to the word of God So that the Protestants last refuge and appeale is to the only written word of God distrusting and renouncing al proof or testimonie either from ancient Councels Fathers or Histories for they willingly (3) Midleton in his Papisto-Mastix p. 193. confesse that perusing Councels Fathers and Stories from the Apostles forward they find the Print of the Popes feet Now for the clearer discouerie of the grosse absurditie and greatest
insufficiencie of this desperate answer I wil make proofe of two seueral truthes First that the sayd answer hath euer been and is stil the ordinarie answer of al Hereticks thereby intending to escape not only the foulest stayne of Nouellisme or Innouation but withal to preuent al strongest arguments drawne from general Councels though neuer so lawful from ancient Doctours though neuer so learned and from Ecclesiastical Histories though neuer so true The second truth is that their so appealing to the Sacred Scriptures is the thrusting their owne throates againsts the sharpest poynts of their Enemies swords For by them I wil euidently proue the Roman Church and Religion to be the only true Church and Religion of Christ and his Apostles As also the Congregation of Protestants and their profession to be most aduerse and disagreing with the Scriptures themselues and so in itself to be nouel heretical and damnable And to omit the ordinarie custome of elder Hereticks in appealing from al other proofes to only Scripture obserued and reproued in them by the ancientest and learnedst (4) lib. De Prescript c. 15. Hieron ep ad Paulin tom 3 cont Lucifer Augu. cont Faust Manic l. 32 c. 19 l. 1. de Trinit c. 3. ep 222. Hilar. l ad Const Vincent Lyrin l. aduers haeres c. 35. Ambr. in c. vlt. ad Tit. Orig. hom 7. in Ezech. Doctours and Fathers of the Primitiue Church namely Tertulian Hierome Augustin Hilarie Vincentius Lyrinensis and others And only to obserue how the refinedst Sectaries of these our dayes with the same pretence of Scripture do dayly reuolt and rebel from their other Brethren And first concerning the Puritans agaynst the Protestants D. white guift alleaging and vrging in behalf of Metropolitanes the authoritie of the Nicene Councel (5) In his 2. Reply part 1. p. 484. M. Cartwright replyeth Touching the perfect vnitie of Substance of our Sauiour Christ with God the Father it giuing Sentence vpon the infallible Word of God is worthily to be reuerenced But if the Doctours wil haue their soundnes in that poynt to authorize the rest c. it is that which we can by no meanes assent vnto And that it may appeare how iustly we cal this Canon of the Councel touching Metropolitanes vnto the touchstone of the word of God Let it be considered c. yea the same 6) In Whiteg Def. p. 111. M. Cartwright alloweth the iudgment of his learnedst father Caluin but with this restraynt So far sayth he as we can esteeme that that which M. Caluin sayth doth agree with the Canonical Scriptures This practise is so ordinarie with the Puritans that D. Bancroft in his Suruey of pretended Discipline spendeth wholy his 27. Chapter in obseruing and reprouing the same In like sort the (7) In their Apologie p. 103. 4. 98. 99. 100. And see M. Aynsworth in his Counterpoyson p. 15. 154. Brownists of Amsterdam answering to D. Bilsons allegations from the Fathers resolutely affirme and say Let M. Bilson with these Doctours know that vnles they can approue by the word of God their Prelacie c. Al the colour they bring out of former times and writers is of no moment in this case And as for the Anabaptistes (8) Eccl. Pol. pref p. 38. M. Hooker reporteth of them that the Book of God they for the most part so admired that other disputation against their opinions then only by allegation of Scripture they would not heare for which verie poynt and errour they are reproued by (9) Tract Theol p. 171 in Psycophannichiae p. 451. And in his Instructiō aduersus Anabap p. 478. M. Caluin in these words Because sillie Christians who haue some zeale towards God can be seduced by no shew or appearance more faire then when the word of God is pretended and alleaged the Anabaptists against whom we now write haue it alwayes in their mouths and they alwayes solemnly recite it c. And agayne The Deuil himself armed himself with the word of God and girded himself with that sword to inuade and assault Christ And we find true by experience that he doth daily vse these guiles or artes by organs or instruments to depraue the truth and so to lead miserable Soules to destruction So ordinarie it is with the Anabaptists and the Diuel himself in defence of their errours euer to appeale to the only written word The same answer is likewise giuen by the Protestant Arians of these times insomuch as (10) Lib de Christi Naturae p. 222. Socinus in defence of his errour agaynst the Diuinitie of Christ answereth his Protestant Aduersarie Volanus in these wordes We propound to vs in this question none for Maister or Interpreter but only the Holie-Ghost c. we do not thinke that we are to stand to the iudgement of anie men though neuer so learned of anie Councels though in shew neuer so holie and lawfully assembled of anie visible Church though neuer so perfect and vniuersal Simlerus (11) De aeterno De◠filio l. 1. c. 2. writeth of the Arians They prouoke vs to Scriptures and because they know al Antiquitie to be against them they reiect al without exception And (12) In ep Theol. ep 15. p. 119. 120. Beza sayth to the Arian Statorius who was sometime Bezas Scholler and deare to him Oughtest thou not to remember from whom to whom thou hast reuolted But thou saist I do not depend of men but of the word of God Very wel But doth the word of God teach thee c. that he can be a Sauiour c who is not God So that our moderne Puritans Brownists Anabaptists and Arians do al of them in defence of their seueral errours being vrged by other Protestants with the authoritie of the Church Fathers and Councels euer appeale vnto the only written word But who would not thinke but that our ordinarie Protestants thus reprouing in their reuolting Brethren their contempt of the Church Fathers and Councels and their running to only Scripture would not be found faultie herein themselues And yet when their learnedst Bishops and Doctours are vrged vpon seueral occasions by our Catholick writers with the authoritie of Church Fathers and Councels none more readie then themselues to refuse disgrace and reiect the same and that euer with pretence and appeal to only Scripture A truth so euident that their forsayd rebellious Brethren do playnly acknowledge that this their course of appealing to only Scripture was taught and defended by themselues for thus say the (13) Simlerus De filio Dei in Bullingers pref there fol. 4. And in Simlerus his other Priface fol. 1. Antitrinitarians to the Tigurine Protestans You haue taught vs that nothing is to be receaued besides the Scriptures therfore we demand where it is written in the Scriptures c. Except you shew this according to your Rule we reiect and condemne those things therfore we haue learned of you to contemne the Fathers And
against al the furies of Sathan euen vntil the comming of Christ at the last Iudgement Insomuch as 19) Trast Theol. c. in Refut Errorum Ser. p. 762. Caluin vpon this knowne principle of the Churches Continuance thus vrgeth Seruetus I haue not touched that continual banishment from the earth which he faigneth of the Church in which he playnly argueth God of lying c. He faigneth the Church for 1260. yeares to haue been banished from the world so that Heauen should be her place of exile c. Againe God otherwise should haue lyed who promised a certaine people alwayes to himself as long as the Sun and Moone shal shine in Heauen we know what the Prophets haue in sundrie places testifyed of the eternal kingdome of Christ Do they place the seate therof in the Heauens yea they foretel that our Lord wil shew a far-of her Scepter from Sion wherewith She may rule from the East to the west and her inheritance may be the whole world The Protestant 20) Harm of Confess p. 321. Confession of Belgia teaecheth that there is one Catholick or vniuersal Church c. which as it hath been from the beginning of the world so it shal continue vnto the end therof The which appeareth by this that Christ is our eternal King who can neuer be without subiects And to conclude this holie Church is not situated or limited in anie set or certaine place nor yet bound and tyed to anie certaine and peculiar persons but spread ouer the face of the whole earth c. The Protestant 21) Ibid. p. 306. 307. Confession of Heluetia in the same behalf argueth thus 17) In OsiaÌ„d cont 16. p. 1064. Forasmuch as God from the beginning would haue men to be saued and to come to the knowledge of truth therfore it is necessarie that alwayes from the beginning at this day to the end of the world there should be a Church c. As also Seing that there is alwayes but one God one Mediatour c it followeth necessarily that there is but one Church which we therfore cal Catholick because it is vniuersal spread abroad through al parts and quarters of the world and reacheth vnto al times and is not limited within the compasse either of time or place But none is more ful heerin then 22) The way to the true Church p. 85. 86. D. white saying we confesse the Church neuer ceaseth to be but continueth alwayes without interruption to the worlds end And that so vniuersally that 23) In his Defence p. 465. D. Whiteguift auoucheth that The Church of Christ is dispersed through the whole world and can not now be shut vp in one Kingdome for that he termeth an impossibilitie 23) In his Defence p. 465. D. Whitaker confesseth of the fore-alleaged Scriptures that The promises of God concerning the largenes and beautie of his Church haue been accomplished And in this regard of the Churches euer continuance and vniuersalitie thus plainly taught by the Scriptures and beleeued by Protestants the holie Apostles in their Creed gaue vnto the Church the Surname of Catholick that is vniuersal for so saith 25) Soueraigne Remedie against Sâ—hisme p. 23. M. Clapham the Church was to enlarge her Tents stretch her Cordes vniuersally through the earth 24) Answ to Raynolds in the Pref. p. 37. for which cause it is called Catholick But now to examine whether the Roman or Protestant Church is this Apostolick Church thus plainly taught by the sacred Scriptures and the acknowledgments of Protestants euer to continue euen from Christs time to the end of the world and that not in one or other particular Nation but euen vniuersally ouer the whole world First concerning the Protestant Church it hath so litle performed the fore-sayd predictions of the Sacred Scriptures for the Churches euer Continuance and Vniuersalitie as that to the contrarie (26) Râ—sp ad Camp rat 3. p. 48. D. Whitaker confesseth that The Mysterie of iniquitie which took roote in the Apostles times went through al the partes of the Church and at length possessed the whole Church Now if the whole Church of Protestants and al the parts therof were thus possessed with the mysterie of iniquitie what true Church was then left in being or continuing in the world Agreably hereto teacheth (27) In epist Iesuit part alt p. 49. Cannerus we are come to these times which euen exceed the confusion of the Arian furie errour hath possessed not one or other litle part but Apostasie hath auerted the whole bodie from true Christ So that in these times the Protestant Church consisted without a bodie In like sort writeth (28) Vpon the Creed p. 400. M. Parkins we say that before the dayes of Luther for the space of manie hundred yeares an vniuersal Apostacie ouerspred the whole face of the earth Which necessarily inferreth the Protestant Churches not being during the foresayd Apostacie But D. Willet obseruing the certaine discontinuance or not-being of his Church for many former Ages is not ashamed for his best help contrarie to the foresayd Scriptures and his other Brethren boldly to impugne and deny the euer certayne Continuance of Christs Church vpon earth for (29) Synopsis p. 54. thus he sayth A visible Church we desire to be a congregation of men among whom the Word is truly preached and the Sacraments administred Such a Church hath not alwayes been neither can we be assured that it shal be alwayes found vpon the earth c. concluding of the time of Antichrist that then shal the visible Church fayle vpon earth With whom agreeth (30) Answ to a Counterf Cath. p. 79. D. Fulk affirming that the visible Church may become an Adulteresse and be diuorced from Christ And which (31) Answer to a Popish Pamphlet p. 100 M. Woodcock acknowledgeth that ProtestaÌ„ts haue often wanted in their assemblies worshipping of God in the Word Sacraments and Prayer Now from these premisses doth vnauoydably follow the real impugning of the certaine continuance of Christs Church vpon earth for if according to D. Willet here the Churches visibilitie doth consist in administration of Word and Sacraments of which himself saith (32) Synops. p. 71. These markes can not be absent from the Church and it is no longer a true Church then it hath those markes for as he further (33) Ib. p. 69 auoucheth the only absence of them do make a Nullitie of the Church Then if the visible Church may fayle vpon earth who then so dul as discerneth not that by necessarie sequele hereof the true Church may also fayle vpon earth (54) Against M. Raynolds in his Answ to the Pref. p. 33. Directly contrarie to which D. Whitaker sayd before We beleeue that Christs Church shal neuer fayle and we accompt it a prophane Heresie to teach that Christs Catholick Church hath perished from the earth at anie time for this Assertion shaketh the foundation of
al faith Into such miserable streights manifest coÌ„tradictions are the learnedst Protestants driuen through want of their Churches continuance and vniuersalitie Yea vpon the self same ground of the Protestant Churches not fulfilling the predictions of the Churches continuance (35) In his Preface of the great Latine Bible dedicated to K. Edward the Sixt. Castalio bursteth out into these words Verily we must confesse either that those things shal be performed hereafter or haue been already or that God is to be accused of lying If any man answer that they haue been performed I wil demand of him when If he say in the Apostles time I wil demand how it chanceth that neither then the knowledge of God was altogeather perfect and often in so â—bort space vanished away which was promised to be eternal and more abundant then the flouds of the Sea And agayne The more I do peruse the Scriptures the lesse do I find the same performed howsoeuer you vnderstand the sayd Prophecies But (36) Apcalypsis insignium aliquot Haerâ—siarcharum fol. 4. nu 8. Dauid George a Protestant at Basile proceeded much further vpon the self same cause as is recorded by one of his brethren who introduceth him disputing thus If the doctrine of Christ and his Apostles had been most true and most powerful to Saluation the Church by their Doctrine they had framed and confirmed should not haue been torne asunder for against the Church the Gates of Hel Christ himself witnessing can not preuayle But now it is euident that the building of Christ and his Apostles is vtterly ouerthrowne by Antichrist as is abundantly seen in the Papacye From whence he necessarily concludeth the Doctrine of the Apostles to haue been torne and discontinued c. To the same effect it is reported in his Historie (37) Historia Georgij Dauidis published by the Diuines of Basile that he thus disputed If the Doctrine of Christ and his Apostles had been true and perfect the Church which they planted c. should haue continued c. But now it is manifest that Antichrist hath subuerted the Doctrine of the Apostles and the Church by them begun as is euident in the Papacie therefore the Doctrine of the Apostles was false and imperfect Not much lesse dangerously writeth (38) In praef suorum Dialogorum Bernardine Ockin When I did consider how Christ by his power wisdome and goodnes had founded and established his Church washed it with his bloud and enriched it with his Spirit And againe discerned how the same was vtterly ouer-throwne I could not but wonder and being desirous to know the cause I found there had been Popes So playne it is that the Church of Protestants which themselues suppose to be the Church of Christ directly contrarie to the forsayd Scriptures hath not continued but hath been vtterly ouerthrowne A truth so certaine and plaine that therfore Christ his Apostles and Doctrine are al of them accused of lying through want of accomplishment of the forsayd Prophecies in the Protestant Churches continuance and vniuersalitie And heer I can not but admire the follie and impudencie of D. White (39) The way to the Church p. 85. who directly contrarie to his other brethrens coÌ„fessions to al Histories writeth thus audaciously We confesse the Church neuer ceaseth to be but continueth alwayes without Interruption to the worlds end and against al Papists we make it good that this verie Faith we now professe hath successiuely continued in al Ages since Christ and was neuer interrupted so much as one yeare moneth or day and to confesse the contrarie were sufficient to proue vs no part of the Church of God c. And yet the Contrarie is plainly confessed by D. Whitaker before affirming the mysterie of Iniquitie to haue possessed the whole Church by Cannerus confessing Apostacie to haue auerted the whole bodie of the Church from Christ by M. Paâ—kins confessing for manie hundred yeares an vniuersal Apostacie by D. Willet defending that the Church in which the Word is truly preached and Sacraments administred hath not alwayes been by Castalio confessing that the Prophecies of the Churches Continuance he cannot find performed in the Protestant Church by Dauid George confessing that the Protestant Church hath been vtterly ouerthrowne not continued and by Bernardine Ockin teaching the very same So cleer it is that the Church of Protestants is not the Church of Christ which according to the Shriptures is euer to continue euen from Christs time vnto the end of the world But now to examine whether in our Roman Catholick Church the forsayd Scriptures are truly verifyed by her perpetual Continuance euen from Christs time to these our dayes I hold it superfluous seing I haue proued the same at large heretofore through euery Centurie or Age and that by no weaker proofes then the plainest acknowledgements of manie and the learnedst Protestants as namely (40) See before l. 1. c. 2. for these last 1000. yeares by M. Parkins Powel Wotton Tindal Iohnson Doue Beacon Fulk Downham Whitakers Luther Caluin the Centurists Osiander Hospinian Danaeus and sundrie others And for the like Continuance of our Roman Church for the first 600. yeares (41) See before l. 1. c. 5. by Zanchius Zuinglius Caluin Beza Danaeus Francus Rhegius Broccard Brightman Napper Fulk Powel Leigh Morton Midleton Parkins Bunnie Iewel and manie others Now whereas the Apostles in their Creed do giue to the Church the Surname of Catholick and that for this verie reason according to (42) The Harmonie of Confess p. 307. Clapham in his Soueraigne Remedy p. 23. Protestants themselues because it is vniuersal spread abroad through al parts and quarters of the world and reacheth vnto al times c. This name Catholick is so peculiar and appropriat to the Roman Church and her Professours as that it is applyed only vnto them by their greatest Enemies (43) Act. Mon. p. 613. M. Fâ—x tearmeth our aduersaries Protestants and vs Catholicks (44] l. 7. fol. 96. l. 10. fol 127. Sleydan recordeth that Luther and others differed only in opinion touching the Lords Supper which the Catholicks reioyced at and the rest much lamented And the same name is applyed to vs by M. (45) Reâ—soÌ„s taken out of Gods word p. 5. 23. 24. 73. 74. Willet in his Obedience c. p. 29. Humfrey vita Iuelli p. 202. Iacob D. Willet D. Humfrey and others Yea the sayd name is so dissorting from the Prot. Church so agreable to the Roman that therefore it is hateful and disliked by Protestans Insomuch as Luther translating the Apostles Creed into Dutch thrust out the word Catholick and in steed therof put-in Christian And of the like course obserued by Lutherans (46) Against Rhem. Test in Act. 11. fâ—l 377. D. Fulk himself acknowledgeth and saith It is not to be allowed Yea in the Synod holden at Altemberg betweene the Diuines of the Palsgraue of Rhene and the Duke of
iure diuino Yea M. Mason himself acknowledgeth and that from M. Fox that amongst (54) Consecration of the Bishops in England p. 264 And see Fox Act. Mon. Vol. 2. p. 1295. The Articles sent by Queen Marie to Bishop Bonner one was this Item Touching such persons as were heretofore promoted to anie Orders after the new sort and fashion of Orders Considering they were not ordered in verie deed the Bishop of the Diocesse finding otherwise sufficiencie and abilitie in these men may supply that thing which wanted in them before and then according to his discretion admit them to Minister Here though M. Mason would gladly inforce a different Glosse yet the words are most plaine that Queen Marie and the Church in her time censured such as were promoted to anie Orders after the new sort and fashion of Protestant Orders in K Edwards time were not ordered in verie deed So that stil it deserueth further search whence our present English Clergie as also other forraine Ministers haue obtayned true power and authoritie to preach administer Sacraments And as for Forainers as the Ministers in Germanie Denmark Holland the rest they are so cleerely and confessedly destitute of al true Ordination that M. Mason acknowledgeth that (55) Consec of Engl. Bish. Ep. Dedic wheras other Reformed Churches were constrained by necessitie to admit extraordinarie Fathers that is to receaue ordination from Presbiters or Ministers rather then to suffer the fabrick of the Lord Iesus to be dissolued The Church of England had alwayes Bishops to conferre Sacred Orders according to the ordinarie and most warrantable Custome of the Church of Christ So that no Protestant Ministers in the world haue anie ordinarie Calling or Ordination by Bishops but only the Ministers of England who yet beg and deriue al that which they haue from their imagined Antichrist himself as now shal be shewed Some Protestants therfore teach that they haue their Calling Ordination from the Church of Rome so D. Bridges (56) Defence of the GouernmeÌ„t p. 1276. speaking of our Catholick Bishops and their Calling vrgeth thus in our behalf If our Protestant Brethren wil make them but meer Lay-men then are neither they nor we anie Ministers at al but meer Lay-men also for who ordayned vs Ministers but such Ministers as were either themselues of their Ministerie or at least were made Ministers of those Ministers Except they wil say the people can make Ministers c. yea some (57) SileÌ„ced Ministers supplication of Anno 1609. p. 9. 10. 17. Puritans do reproue their Protestant Brethren for deriuing their Ministerie from the Church of Rome But (58) Cont. Dur. l. 9. p. 820. D. Whitaker exemplifyeth the same saying Luther was a Priest and Doctour according to your Rite or ordination c. And it is manifest that so also was Zuinglius Bucer Oecolampadius and innumerable others c. M. Parkins (59) Vol. 1. p. 737. speaking of the Calling of the first Preachers of the Protestant Ghospel argueth thus If they had no Calling neither haue we that are their followers But They had their Callings c. from the Romish Church itself for they were either Priests or Schoole-Doctours as in England Wiccliffe in Germanie Luther in Bohemia Iohn Husse and Hierom of Prage at Basil Oecolampadius in Italie Peter Martyr others And therefore these with manie others were ordayned either in Popish Churches or in Schooles c. And agayne We say the first restorers of the Ghospel in our times had their first Callings of them to wit the Papists M. Mason discoursing at large of this verie poynt of Ordination and in particular of the Ordination of our English Protestant Clergie confesseth first that the Roman Church hath euer had true power of Ordination (60) Consecration of the Bishops of England Ep. Dedic Such was the goodnes of God saith he that euen in the darknes of Poperie as Baptisme so the Ministerial function c. was wonderfully preserued for the Church of Rome by Gods special prouidence in her ordination of Priests retayned such Euangelical words as in their true and natiue sense include a Ghostlie Ministerial power to forgiue sinnes c. Thus the Church of Rome gaue power to her Priests to teach the truth c. which (61) Ibid. p. 262. Power saith he is a Rose which is found in the Romish wildernes but the plants therof were deriued from the garden of God It is a Riuer which runneth in Aegipt but the fountaine and Spring of it is in Paradise It is a Beame which is seen in Babilon but the original of it is from the Sphere of the Heauen Wherefore when your Priests returne to vs our Church paring away their Pollutions suffereth them to exercise their Ministerial function according to the true meaning of Christs word And agayne (62) Ibid. p. 262. we being content with their calling and commission of their function already committed vnto them do not reiterate their ordination and Imposition of hands And as Catholick Priâ—sts Apostated only through vice are here allowed for sufficient Ministers without al new ordination from anie Protestant SuperinteÌ„dent so doth M. Mason most seriously labour throughout his whole Booke to proue the ordination of the Protestant English Clergie to haue been certainly deriued from our Catholick Roman Church To which end acknowledging that (63) Ibid. p. 64. 65. 66. The whole Clergie of England at this day deriueth their Consecration from Cranmer he painfully laboureth to proue that Cranmer was appoynted by Pope Clement to be Archbishop of Canterburie and that he was Consecrated by three Catholick Bishops which Consecration was performed with wonted Ceremonies according to the vsual forme of the Romane Church which saith he continued al the dayes of King Henrie the Eighth euen when the Pope was banished yea he expresly concludeth his book thus (64) p. 267. Thus it appeareth that although we receaued our Orders from such as were Popish Priests yet our Calling is lawful So cleer it is that M. Mason would be glad to wring his Ministers Ordering from our Roman Church And the like is acknowledged taught by (è) Cath. Trad. p. 183. Buca loc com p. 509. Bernard in his Diswasion from Brownisme p. 144. Whyte in his way to the Church p. 404. Fotherby his Answer annexed to his 4. Sermons p. 81. Sutcliffe against D. Kellison p. 5. Sarauia of diuers Degrees of Ministers p. 9. sundrie other Protestants But here I can not but obserue by the way how strange it is that Protestants should thus much delight and please themselues in their Ordination from Cranmer a man so vicious inconstant and treacherous both to God and man Doth not D Godwin relate that (65) In Cranmsr p. 123. Being yet verie young he â—aryed and so lost his fellowship in Iesus Colledge in Cambridge Doth not Fox report that being Archbishop in his returne from Rome he brought with him a Dutch
woman (67) Act. Mon. p 1037 to whom saith Fox it is supposed he was maryed yet certaine it is that no shew therof was made in K. Henries time when he carryed her vp and downe in a trunck marying her afterwards in K. Edwards time He was also most treacherous to his Prince for albeit he had been so greatly exalted by K. Henrie and by him appoynted one of the Executours of his Wil yet presently after his death he assented to the breaking thereof And after K. Edwards death endeauoured al he could to the aduancing of Q. Iane and vtter excluding from the Crowne of K. Henries lawful daughter Queene Marie To whose dis-inheriting he first subscribed as also to that rebellious letter which he and his complices sent to Queen Marie and which to his euerlasting infamie and confusion (68) Act. Mon. p. 1299 Fox himself hath recorded And although from his cradle he was a Roman Catholick vntil his being Archbishop which honour he receaued from the Pope taking the vsual oath of fidelitie vnto him Yet in the next yeare after K. Henrie by Parlament procuring himself to be tearmed Head of the Church he also forsook the Pope and forswore himself in that poynt agreing yet as also the King in al other with him and both by words and deeds persecuting Protestants as is euident in the death of Lambert and others written by M. Fox Yea in K. Edwards time as Stow (69) Chron. p. 594. reporteth The French King being deceased c. also the Church of S. Paul in London being hanged with black and a sumptuous Herse set vp in the Quire a Dirge was there song and on the next morrow the Archbishop of Canterburie Cranmer assisted of 8. Bishops al in rich Miters and other their Pontificals did sing a Masse of Requiem c. yet after this he fel to Lutheranisme publishing a Catechisme wherin with Luther he taught the Real Presence which not long after impugning he turned with the Duke of Somerset to Zuinglianisme setting forth another Catechisme against the Real Presence And yet after al this vnder (70) Act. Mon p. 1710 Q. Marie he recanted for hope of life al his Protestantisme both by tongue pen professed the Roman Catholick Faith But perceiuing that he must dye choosing rather to dye in the opinion of vulgar Protestants a Martyr then in the true iudgement both of ProtestaÌ„ts and Catholicks as a Malefactor and Traytour he finally dyed in Zuinglianisme being both condemned for Heresy against God and for Rebellion against his Prince as M. Fox (71) Act. Mon p. 1698 confesseth So infamous was the life and death of the first Protestant Bishop that euer England had and from whom al our English Ecclesiastical frie do deriue their Ordination and other good conditions not vnlike vnto his But to returne from whence we haue digressed al this begging by M. Mason and the rest forenamed of Protestant Orders from the Church of Rome is directly contradicted and loathed by others of their Brethren as thinking the Bishop of Rome to be Antichrist himself and the Roman Church to be the whore of Babylon M. Powel (72) De Antich p. 6. 310. tearmeth our Catholick Orders the Mark of the Beast D. Downham (73) Of Antichrist l. 2. p. 108. spareth not to say I say their Priesthood is Antichristian The Diuines of Geneua (74) Propositions Disputed c. p. 245. affirme that There is in Babylon thereby meaning the Roman Church no holie Order or Ministrie indeed no lawful Calling but a meer vsurpation M. Penrie writing against the Protestant Calling disputeth thus From whence haue they their calling had they it not from those which sit in the Chaire of Antichrist (75) Vpon the 122. Ps fol. D. 8. yea how manie are in al Christendome c. but their ordination haue come from Popish Prelacie within three or foure generations at the most c. Can an vnlawful calling bring forth a lawful though it descend from one to another a hundred or thousand times Therefore vnles they can approue the lawfulnes of their calling vnder some other title then that which they now haue by the Clergie it wil fal out there shal hardly be found a Minister duly called in al the world c. In like sort D. Fulk (76) Answ to a Counterf Cath. p. 50. answereth to vs Catholicks you are highly deceaued if you think we esteeme your offices of Bishops Priests and Deacons anie better then Lay-men and you presume to much to think that we receiue your ordering to be lawful And agayne (77) Retentiue p. 67. with al our hart we defy abhorre detest and spit at your stinking greasie Antichristian Orders c. In like modest sort saith Beza (78) Apud Sarauiam in Defens Tract c. p. 56. Popish Orders are nothing els then the impurest buying and selling of the Roman Stewes And (79) Consideration of the Papistes Reasons p. 71. M. Gabriel Powel auoucheth that The Popish ordination is nothing els but mere prophanation c. there is no true Ecclesiastical Vocation in the Papacie We iudge no otherwise saith D. Whitaker (80) Cont. Dur p 635. of your Priests then of Christs Aduersaries and enemies of his Priesthood (81) Ibid. p. 662. You haue neither lawful Bishops nor Priests nor Deacons And according to D. Sutcliffe 82) Answ to Eyâ—â—pt p. 82 The Pope himself is neither true Bishop nor Priest for he was ordayned Priest but to offer Sacrifice and to say Masse for the quick and the Dead But this Ordination sayth he doth not make a Priest nor had true Priests and Elders euer anie such Ordination Therefore (83 Ib p. 87 And see his Chaâ—leng p. 35 The Romish Church is not the true Church hauing no Bishops nor Priests at al but only in name Now if the Protestant Clergie wil not deriue their Vocation and Ordination from the Church of Rome as the former Protestants do refuse and in reason they cannot supposing their absurd Doctrine of the Pope being Antichrist for what more ridiculous then that Christs Ministers should receaue their spiritual power and Commission from Antichrist Then stil we are to demand from whence the Protestant Clergie hath their Calling and Commission seing according to the former Scriptures the true Churches Past ours must be lawfully called sent and ordayned In these so extreme straytes some Protestants acknowledge and defend their Ordination and calling to be from the Laitie itself as from the temporal Magistrate and their hearers followers (84) His two Letters conâ—erning the Earl of Lauale Eng. fol. c. 3. D. Tilanus teacheth that Farel had his sending of the people sf Geneua who had right had authoritie saith he to institute and depose Ministers And The reformed Churches and their calling partly from God and partly from the people as by lawful instruments M Dilingam (85) p. 78. writing against M. Hil
saith our Preachers were called by Christian Magistrates whose allowance they had which to be warrantable you can not deny D. Sutcliffe 86] Against D. Kellison p. 5. is not abashed to teach that in case of necessitie such as Protestants had at Luthers first reuolt The multitude of Christians without Ministers haue power to appoynt Ministers among themselues And M. Symondes (87) Vpon the Reuel p. 123. auoucheth A Calling to preach by the Ciuil Magistrate A holie and sufficient calling saith he in the time of these confusions Now according to this strange Doctrine hath been the answerable practise of Protestants for M. Mornay (88) Treatise of the Church p. 371. saith Some of our men in such a corrupt State of the Church as we haue seen in our time c. did at first preach without this former calling and afterward were chosen and called to the holie Ministerie by the Churches which they had taught A practise preposterous and directly contrarie to the order set downe by S. Paul (89) Rom. 10.14 saying How shal they inuocate in whom they haue not beleeued How shal they beleeue whom they haue not heard How shal they heare without a Preacher And how shal they preach except they be sent So euidently is sending or calling and Ordination precedent in order to preaching Yea agreably hereunto writeth M. Mason (90) Consec of Engl. Bishops p. 3. It is cleere that the Presbâ—terie here mentioned ordayned Timothie by Imposition of hands which no Lay-men may do But besides how absurd is it to affirme that mere Lay and temporal men as Shoomakers Taylours Bâ—acksmithes and the like can bestow vpon others that most Spiritual and highest power and Iurisdiction of preaching true Faith and administring the most holie and celestial Sacraments wherof they are wholy deuoyd destitute themselues The indignitie disgrace and absurditie then of this base begging of Calling from the Laitie being discerned by other Protestants as much ashamed therof they wholy disclayme from it as also in al other ordinarie and Mediate Calling and Succession betaking themselues for their last refuge to extraordinarie and immediate Vocation from God So D. Fulk (91) Against Staples c. p. 2. confesseth that The Protestantâ— that first preached in these last dayes had extraordinarie calling And (92) Retentiue c. p. 300. In the State of the Church so miserably deceaued as in Luthers time God sendeth extraordinarily immediatly from himself as Elias and Elizeus and the Prophets were sent c. So Christ sent his Apostles and Euangelists and so was Luther and such as he sent to repaire the ruines of the Church c. Agreably hereunto are those words of M. Cartwright (93) In Whiteg Def. p. 217. When the Churches haue been by Antichrist euen razed from the foundation God hath stirred Euangelists euen immediatly by his Spirit without any calling of men to restore his Church againe as Wiccliffe Husse Luther Zuinglius In like words saith M. Parkins (94) In his works printed 1605. fol. 916. The calling of Wiccliffe Husse Luther Oecolampadius Peter Martyr c. was extraordinarie Ramus (95) Commentaries of France English p 74. reporteth the French Protestants to say We beleeue it is vnlawful for anie of his owne authoritie to take vpon him gouernment of the Church without lawful Election if so it may be had We add this if because some-time as in our time also when the Church hath been persecuted manie haue been constrayned without ordinarie calling by motion of the Spirit c. Caluin (96) In Lascicius de Russor c. Relig. p. 23. Calu. Inst l. 4. c. 3. sec 4. also writeth Because the true Succession of Ordination hath been broken off by the Tyrannie of the Pope a new help is now needful c. and therefore this office was altogeather extraordinarie which the Lord hath enioyned vnto vs. And Beza (97) In Sarauia his Def. tract c. p. 56. 60. 74. in the Conference at Poysie being demanded of the Calling of himself and his other then Associats affirmed the same to be Extraordinarie (98) Ep. Theol. ep 5. p. 49. And in his Epistle to Alemannus he further vrgeth Verily thou canst not pretend ordinarie Vocation for who chose thee therefore let vs see of Extraordinarie But to this then only do we giue place when there is none or almost no ordinarie vocation as hath happened in our times in the Papacie when ordinarie Vocation which was no where neither ought nor could be expected So that in the opinion of Beza Caluin Fulk Parkins and sundrie other Protestants al the calling which the first Protestant Preachers had was only extraordinarie immediate from God But now to discouer the great insufficiencie and manifest falshood of this their last Euasion and thereby plainly to discouer al our Protestant Clergie euen to this day to be destitute of al lawful Calling and Mission and so to proue al our Ministers to be vsurpers intruders and meer Lay-men First according also to Beza his former Doctrine it is certaine that extraordinarie Vocation taketh not place but when ordinarie is wanting which is also taught by M. Parkins (99) Vol. 1. p. 738. vsing the same words Extraordinarie calling neuer hath place but when ordinarie calling fayleth Wherefore our Protestants pretending for themselues extraordinarie calling do thereby disclayme and debarre themselues of al ordinarie which is directly against the former Scriptures and sundrie of their learnedst Brethren before cited amongst whom Luther sayd God calleth vs at this day to the Ministerie of his Word not immediatly by himself but by man Secondly extraordinarie Calling is alwayes accompanied confirmed by extraordinarie signes and wonders So saith (100) Loc. com class 4. c. 20 p. 58 Luther whom our Protestants most pretend to haue been extraordinarily called Try this whether they can proue their Vocation for neuer hath God sent anie but either called by man or declared by signes no not his owne Sonne 101) Tom. 5. Ien. Germ. fol. 491. And againe From whence commest thou Who sent thee Where are the Seales that thou art sent from men Where are the Miracles which testify thee to be sent from God (102) Tom 3 Ien. Germ. f. 455. 456. In like sort he admonished the Senat of Milhouse against Munster the Anabaptist saying If he say he was sent from God and his Spirit as the Apostles were let him proue this by working of Signes and Miracles or els do not suffer him to preach for wheresoeuer God doth change the ordinarie way there alwayes he worketh Miracles In like manner are the Anabaptists vrged by Bullinger (103) Cont. Anabap. l. 3. c. 7. If you say you haue a peculiar Vocation like vnto the Apostles proue it by signes and Miracles c. but this you wil neuer do therefore your calling is of no worth yea it is pernicious to the Church of Christ D. Sarauia (104)
Pudding Pye Being indeed no other but a mere Tergiuersation and idle Battologie of distracted perplexed and obstinate men not willing to yeeld or acknowledge the truth and yet not able a deny the certaintie therof Much agreable to that instabilitie and doubtfulnes which (31) Instit c. de fide p 148. And his like perplexed Sayings see Inst l. 4. c. 2. sec 11. 12. Caluin in the same matter expresseth in other words professing Neither simply to grant nor plainly to deny our Catholick Church to be the Church of God And yet such Confidence is placed in this extremest Refuge that in M. Parkins (32) Reform Cath. p 329. Whitak de Eccl. p. 165. Beza in Ep. Theol. ep 1. p. 15. Calu. lib. Epist ep 104 p. 222. his opinion it wil serue to stop the mouths of Papists who demand of vs where our Church was fourscore yeares before Luther For sayth he hereby They are answered that our Church hath been since the dayes of the Apostles and that in the verie midst of the Papacie But to omit that hereby is plainly granted and supposed that Papacie or the Roman Religion hath euer been since the dayes of the Apostles I wil now lay open this last receptacle wherinto our Enemies do so confidently retire And first when they say their Church was in the Papacie since the Apostles dayes they either meane that their Church continued in Popish Countries amongst the Papists without al external Communion with them in Church or Sacraments euen as Catholicks doe at this day in England Scotland Holland Turkie c. Or els that their Church was in the Papacie because she did Communicate with the Papists Church in al external offices Seruice and Sacraments thereof not being in anie external respect to be discerned from the Papists only reseruing in their inmost thoughts and secret Consciences the Faith of Protestants If they intend the first then had it been more congruously sayd that their Church was without the Papacie or neer to the Papacie or among the Papists or in Popish Countries but at no hand in the Papacie that implying the verie Faith and Religion of the Papists no more then a Catholick can endure to heare that the Roman Church or Religion is in the Protestancie Puritanisme Turcisme or the like Besides if the Protestant Church had been thus stil in Popish Countries with external Recusancie of al Popish Seruice Sacraments then we vrge againe as before for some one testimonie proofe or but shadow therof from anie one Writer Record or Monument of al those former Ages but herein they are most silent through their knowne confessed want of al such helpes And therefore they betake themselues to the second meaning of their Church being in the Papacie that is not being only in Popish Countries but in al external Communion and Profession either of Seruice Sacraments or other matters of Faith and Religion being and shewing itself only Papistical Agreably hereunto M. Parkins expounded himself saying (33) Reform Cath. p 328. The true Church hath been in the Roman Church as Corne in the heape of Chaffe And not seuered each from other in outward profession (34) Ib. p. 329. but mixed togeather for external societie like Chaffe and corne in one heape In which sense Osiander so great an Enemie of our Catholick Church that by no meanes (35) Epit. Hist Eccl. Ep. Dedic Cent. 6. p. 290. Cent. 7. 331 he wil acknowledge it for a true Church yet affirmeth that (36) Ep. Dedic Cent. 8. p. 2. In those darkned times the true Church was vnder the Papacie And that so that though (37) Cent. 16. part alt p. 1076. some godlie men inwardly disliked the Popish errours and Idolatrous Sacrifices yet they durst not alwayes openly professe the same (38) Ibid. 1072. Neither durst they freely professe their owne opinions except they would be burned or at least banished Yea these so godlie men sayth he (39) Cent. 8. Ep. Ded p 3. though they gaue not their mind to these Popish Idolatries yet they did not altogeather neglect the external rites and with a common custome as with a violent Streame they were carried away to do the same things with the Papists Many through feare of the Popish Tyrannie not daring to professe that they disliked the Popish worships whose infirmitie God tollerated and pardoned And so sayth he they communicated with the Popish Church in (40) Cent. 16 p. 1073. Cent 8. Ep Ded p 2. Ministerie of the Ghospel or the Word in the Bible in Baptisme in the Lords supper in taking Orders c. such saith he as those times did affoard c. And so thereby were most euidently no other then plaine Papists in al external Profession And according to this D. White also confesseth that these godlie men did not (41) Way to the Church p. 371. alwayes abandon the Communion of the Roman Church c. the Tyrannie of Rome suppressed them so that they could not manifest abroad to the world their dislike c. but by force and violence were constrayned to deuoure their owne Sorrow in the societie of their Aduersaries This external societie of Protestants with Papists in matters of Religion is further granted by the Protestant Molitor (42) Disquisitiones de Eccl. c. p. 114. who writing hereof sayth We affirme the Church in former Ages to haue layne hid in the midst of the Papistrie as in Caues neither durst it through the abominable Tyrannie of the Sonne of Perdition come forth to light Euen as yet to this day many faithful are in the midst of the Romish Babylon who lye hid there as in a Prison and for feare of danger dare not publickly professe the name of Christianitie So that the verie true and last resolued sense of the Protestant Churches being in the Papacie euer since the dayes of the Apostles importeth no more but that in the secretest corners of their harts they beleeued Protestancie and in al external Communion societie and conuersation they liued and dyed Roman Papists But if men had long studied for an answer most foolish and wicked what more apt then this For first no instance or proofe doe they or can they produce whereby to proue these external Papists to haue been indeed internal Protestants this being only a fiction or Imagination of their owne deuoyd of al testimonie Record or probabilitie whatsoeuer Secondly supposing it to be true doth it import or conclude anie lesse but that the sayd Imagined Church of Protestants in this sort being in the Papacie was a most dissembling and adulterous Church publickly denying in word and deed that verie Faith and Religion which inwardly it beleeued only to be true and committing and practising both in life and death manie foule supposed Superstitions and Idolatries with the Popish Church which they firmely beleeued to be most wicked and damnable And is it possible that an hypocritical Church is the Church of
Fathers were no Protestants but meerly Papists wherin we may glorie as reuerencing their sanctitie admiring their learning and honouring their Antiquitie Neither is it true as Protestants vse to suggest that Catholicks distrusting their cause if it be committed to trial by Scripture do therefore fly from it to Fathers and Doctours for as for al such poynts as are contayned in Scripture to Scripture we appeale it is that we vrge her literal sense and words hath made vs Papists We therefore only recurre to Fathers eyther for the better finding-out and vnderstanding the true meaning of sundrie difficult passages and texts of Scripture or for the true discerning of seueral Ecclesiastical Traditions and doctrines taught and practised by the Church and yet no where mentioned in the Writen Word And as this is not most impiously to oppose Fathers to Scriptures or to fly from Scriptures to Fathers So is it in these respects the most assured meanes to giue vs satisfaction For as none euer left more liuelie Monuments of rarest wit profundest knowledge or more shining testimonies of greatest puritie and sanctitie in life or more astonishing wonders and miracles in confirmation of their Faith and doctrine then these ancient Fathers so were there none euer furnished with so good means eithers of knowing the Apostles or the Apostles preaching as the Apostles first heires and next successours the sweetest fruits of their labours our holie Fathers But to prosecute yet further this so lunatick proceeding of Protestants against these grauest Sages of Christ's Catholick Church what more indigne or iniurious can be vttered then that these so great Doctours al of them vnited members of one Catholick Church should be at deadlie warres and dissention amongst themselues in important articles of Faith Religion Yea that one and the same Doctour should contradict himself that in matters fundamental of greatest consequence And yet Caluin blusheth not to say 32) In Inst in Praef. ad Reg. Galliae p. 7. Those holie men were ignorant of manie things they often fight amongst themselues and sometimes with themselues Beza likewise speaking of the ancient Fathers in Theodosius his time sayth 32) In Inst in Praef. ad Reg. Galliae p. 7. I confesse as then there were most learned Bishops 33) In nou Test Praef. ad Princip Condens p. 4. but this also I affirme c. that scarce anie of them can be named who dissenteth not both from himself and others in manie things and those of greatest moment A thing incredible in such learned Bishops if Caluin and Beza were not the Broachers who seldome tel truth 34) Ep. ad Rom. c. 14. p. 419. Melancthon also thus writeth of the Fathers Seing they sometimes speak contrarie things they must pardon vs if we reprehend certain things in them And 35) Devotis p. 463. Though the Fathers were wise and learned and saw many things sayth Peter Martyr yet they were men and could erre And that chiefly is to be obserued that the Fathers do not always agree amongst themselues and sometimes one dissenteth from himself Those Fathers saith 36) Retractiue from Romish Religion p. 223. 224. D. Beard that liued in the next two hundred yeares after the first speak of this mater of Inuocation of Saints very variously and doubtfully as if it were a Doctrine which they knew not what to say to and were not fully resolued in Thirdly of those Fathers which he alleadgeth though in some places they seeme to allow that custome which was then brought into the Church yet in other places they disallow the same yea and they are disapproued also of others that liued in the same Age. Thus true Athanasius condēneth Inuocation of Saints c. false Athanasius alloweth it c. Basil approueth it but Nazianzene doubteth of it and Epiphanius c. vtterly condemneth it Chrysostome in some places seemeth to allow of it in others he speaketh against it and so doth Augustine and the rest The like contradition D. Whitaker instanceth in S. Basil saying 37) De Sacra Scrip. p. 670. Basil fighteth with himself And 38) De Princip Christ Dog l. 2. c. 10. p. 675. I oppose saith Lubbertus Basil against Basil And 39) Ib. p. 678. Damascene is contrarie to himself Yea 40) Ib. p. 676. I oppose Chrysostome against Chrysostome of whom also saith Whitaker 41) De Sacra Scrip. p. 678. he is at variance with himself And 42) Ibid. p. 676. Let vs not attend what Cyprian sayd but let vs examin him by his owne law Yea of S. Augustin Whitaker blusheth not to say 43) Ibid. p. 690. Although in this he may be thought to fauour Traditions yet in other places he defendeth earnestly the perfection of the Scriptures Of whom also sayth D. Beard 44) Retractiue from Romish Religione 413. Augustin whom they challenge for the greatest Patrone of this fire yet defineth nothing determinately of it but speaketh doubtingly and problematically and if he affirme it in some one place he leaueth it in suspence in others and vtterly denyeth it in a third D. Morton acknowledgeth that Protestants 45) Prot. Appeal l. 2. p. 201. 202. haue particularly and by name obserued that Iustinus Ireneus Clemens Tertullian Origen Cyprian and others albeit manie times they pleaded for the free wil of the corrupt nature of man yet were they sometime reduced vnto the more Orthodoxal hold writing therof more commodiously belike as denying Free-wil But this being only a Protestant or lying obseruation I must inferre that as this so base proceeding against the Fathers doth euidently demonstrate and discouer the vnablenes of Protestants in alleadging the Fathers further against vs then they are pretended to be against themselues which al of iudgement wil confesse to be nothing So doth it alfo no lesse cleerly conuince that Protestants in their owne consciences do find and know the Fathers directly to condemne their opinions and to patronize Papistrie for otherwise they would neuer endeauour so fowly to blemish them by vrging contradiction with themselues which the meanest Writer though in triuial matters doth euer scorne as too cleer an argument of grosse obliuion or worse inconstancie Now from this conceipt of the Fathers ignorance and contradiction to themselues Protestants doubt not to preferre their owne moderne writers for iudgement knowledge and learning before the greatest ancientest Doctours of the Primitiue Church So Luther in his Protestant humilitie thus speaketh of himself 46) Lib. ad Ducem Georgium And see Colloq lat c. de Consolatione Since the Apostles times no Doctour or writer hath so excellently and cleerly confirmed instructed and comforted the consciences of the secular States as I haue done by the singular grace of God This certainly I know that neither Austin not Ambrose who are yet in this matter the best are equal to me heerin 47) Tom. 7. Serm. de Euersione Hierusalem f. 271. The Ghospel
Acontius Pomeran Zuinglius Peter Martyr Sommerus Melancthon Lubbertus Polanus Alberus Musculus Hospinian Zanchius Humfrey Willet Midleton Carthwright Whiteguift Iacob Fulk Beard Morton and Whitaker THAT THE PROTESTANTS CHVRCH disclaimeth from the Fathers of the Primitiue Church it is further proued by the Protestants condemning al the ancient Fathers in general for beleeuing teaching and practising the seueral particular actions of our CatholicK Roman Faith and Religion CHAPTER II. HAVING in the former Chapter so plentifully displayed our Protestants free confessions for the ancient Fathers Papistrie least some should yet obiect that not al but only some few of the Fathers were reprouable therin or that not in al but only in some few points and those of lesser moment they were so faulty I wil now make manifest through al the principal points of our Catholick Religion at this day controuerted with Protestants that either al the Fathers indefinitly or sundrie of them at once are acknowledged and reproued by our Protestant Aduersaries as agreing with vs Catholicks in the foresayd Articles And first concerning the holie Sacraments and Sacrifice 1. as touching the efficacie or Grace truly giuen by Sacraments Zuinglius saith 1) Tom. 2. de Bap. f. 70 Here most of the Doctours by the name of water vnderstanding that material and external water of Baptisme haue attributed more thereunto then was meet Wherupon it came to passe tbat after they ascribed the cleansing of the Soule to the element of water Luther saith in general 2) Tom. 2. Witten f. 229. I hold the Fathers pardonable who through temptation or necessitie stifly denyed sinne to remaine after Baptisme Musculus reproueth the Fathers in general for that 3) Loc. com p. 299. They attribute greater efficacie to our Sacraments then to the Sacraments of the old Testament affirming ours to be more effectual signes of Grace not only signifying the same as the others did but also conferring and giuing Grace and Saluation And Vrbanus Rhegius confesseth that 4) In part 1. operum in Catechismo minore f. 105. the Scripture and authoritie of the ancient Church constraine him to beleeue that litle children dying vnbaptised are damned In which respect 5) Inst l. 4. c. 15. §. 20. Caluin acknowledgeth that Manie Ages since almost from the verie beginning of the Church it was vsual that in danger of death Lay people might Baptize if the Minister were not present So cleer it is that the ancient Fathers did generally teach that the Sacraments of Christ did truly giue grace as Catholicks beleeue and not only signifie the same as Protestants pretend Secondly as concerning the Sacrament of Pennance or Confession the Centurists 6) Centur. 3. c. 6. col 127. speaking of the general vse therof in the ancient times of Tertullian and Cyprian report that They gaue absolution from sinnes thus If any did pennance they first confessed their sinne for so Tertullian greatly vrgeth Confession in his book of Pennance And that priuate Confession was vsual in which they confessed their sinnes and wicked thoughts it appeareth by some places of Cyprian c. And that Satisfaction or Pennance according to the quantitie of the fault was accustomed to be enioyned it appareth in his fift sermon de Lapsis So vsual was Auricular Confession and Pennance in those ancient times which Pennance also was sometimes by Pardons or Indulgences in part remitted For thus writeth D. Field 7) Of the Church l. 1. c. 17. p. 33. The ancient Bishops were wont to cut off great parts of enioyned Pennance which remission was called an Indulgence And wheras D. Field would euade this our so strong argument for Pardons and Indulgences by affirming that the enioyned Pennance thus remitted was not then imposed as in satisfaction of God's Iustice it is so euidently against the Fathers doctrine and practise that D. Whitaker himself confuteth it in these words 8) Cont. caÌ„p rat 5. p. 78. The Fathers thought by their external discipline to pay the paines due for sinne and to satisfy God's Iustice And that not Cyprian only but almost al the holy Fathers of that time were in that errour and depraued the Doctrine of Pennance 9) Ib. p. 78. Yea saith Melancthon 10) Libelli aliquot c. fol. 11. al the Councel of Nyce ouercome with the consent of Multitude and of the time approued the Canons of Pennance So that our Catholick Doctrine of Confession Pennance and Pardons is the general confessed Doctrine of the ancient Fathers Thirdly as concerning the Real Presence in the Sacrament of the Eucharist I haue shewed 11) lib. 2. c. 8 before that S. Gregorie Eusebius Emissenus S. Ambrose S. Cyril S Hilarie S. Cyprian S. Chrysostome Tertullian Origen and S. Ignatius are al of them acknowledged and reproued by Protestants for our Catholick doctrine of Real Presence and Transubstantiation Yea some Protestants confesse that 12) Adamus Francisci in Margar. Theol. p. 256. Transubstantiation entred early into the Church And that they 13) Antony de Adamo in his Anotomy of the Masse p. 236. haue not yet hitherto been able to know when this opinion of the Real Bodilie being of Christ in the Sacrament did begin But Bucer speaking of the Fathers in general professeth in this point 14) Scripta Eruditorum aliquot virorum de Cena Domini p. 37. to auoyd their sayings as being saith he seruiceable to Antichrist and ouer-much varying from the scriptures Whereby it is euident that the ancient Fathers were wholy agreable to our Roman Church in this weightiest Article of Real Presence 4. Concerning Holie Orders D. Field auoucheth 15) Of the Church l. 5. p. 121. And se the like Cent. 3. c. 7. Col. 149. 150 That there is no question but that the Minor Orders of Subdeacons Acolyths Exorcists Lectors Ostiaries are verie ancient In proof wherof he alleadgeth S. Cyprian and manie other Fathers 5. As touching Extreme-Vnction D. Whitaker answering to the sundrie ancient Fathers obiected testimonies in behalf therof confesseth saying 16) Contra Dureum l. 8. p. 650. I confesse the superstitious vse of this vnction to haue continued longer in the Church then was meet 6. Our sacrifice of the Masse was so generally beleeued and offred by the Fathers that Caluin himself affirmeth that 17) In Heb. c. 7. p. 924. And devera Eccl. Refor extant in Tract Thel p. 389. The ancient Fathers forged a sacrifice in the Lord's supper without his commandment and so adulterated the supper with adding of sacrifice Chrastouius witnesseth that 18) De Opifiâ—io Missae l. 1. p. 28 58. 102. 171. The Fathers thought the Eucharist to be a Sacrifice according to the Order of Melchisedech And 19) Against Hoskins c p. 99. 100. I confesse saith D. Fulk that diuers of the old Fathers were of opinion that the bread and wine which Melchisedech brought forth was sacrificed by him and that it was a figure of
the Sacrament which they improperly cal a Sacrifice Yea saith Chrastouius 20) De Opificio Misse l. 1. p. 167. The sayings of the Fathers do not only import impetration or prayer but a certayn intrinsecal force of appeasing God's Iustice For which verie point of the Masse being a Propitiatorie sacrifice he produceth the sayings of Origen Athanasius Chrysostome Ambrose Austin Gregorie and others al which were no lesse Massing Priests then the Roman Priests of these times 7. That the ancient Fathers thought that S. Peter was the Head of the Church and the Bishop of Rome his successour therin D. Field testifyeth saying 21) Confut. of the Papists quarrels p. 4. Manie of the ancient Fathers c. were deceaued to think something more of Peter's prerogatiue and the Bishop of Rome's dignitie then by the word of God was giuen to either of them And Philippus Nicolai vndertaking to speake 22) De Regno Christi p. 221. of the beginning and encrease of the Pope's dignitie auoucheth that the desire of Primacie was the common infirmitie of the Apostles and of the first Bishops of Rome 8. That the Pope is not Antichrist D. Whitaker confesseth that 23) Lib. de Antichr p. 21. the Fathers for the most part thought that Antichrist should be but one man but in that as in manie other things they erred sayth he And M. Cartwright affirmeth that diuers 24) 2. Reply part 1. p. 508. of the ancient and chiefest of them imagined fondly of Antichrist as of one singular person And as for the time of Antichrist's continuance M. Fox acknowledgeth that 25) In Apoc. c. 12. p. 345. almost al the holie and learned Interpreters doe by a time times and half a time vnderstand only three yeares and a half 9. Vnwritten Traditions are so plainly taught and defended by the Fathers as that Chemnitius reproueth for the same 26) Exam. part 1. p. 87. 89. 90. Clemens Alexandrinus Origen Epiphanius Ambrose Hierome Maximus Theophilus Basil c. D. Fulk confesseth the same 27) Against Purg. p. 362 303. 397. Against Marcial p. 170. 178. Against Brist mot p. 35. 36. of Tertullian Cyprian Chrysostome Augustin Hierome c. And D. Whitaker reprehendeth for the same 28) De Sac. Scrip◠p. 678. 681. 683. 685. 690. 695. 696. 670. 668. Chrysostome Epiphanius Tertullian Cyprian Augustin Innocentius Leo Basil Eusebius c. 10. Purgatorie Prayer and Sacrifice for the Dead were so ordinarily and generally taught by the Fathers as that D. Gifford confesseth 29) Demōst that Brownists be Donatists p. 38. that in the Churches Worship to pray for the soules of the dead and to offer oblation for the dead was general in the Church long before the dayes of Austin as appeareth in Cyprian and Tertullian D. Fulk acknowledgeth that 30) Ag. Purgat p. 362. Tertullian Cyprian Austin Hierome and a great manie more doe witnes that Sacrifice for the Dead is the Tradition of the Apostles And he further affirmeth that 31) Ib. p. 161 the errour of Purgatorie was somewhat rifely budded in Austin's time And that it was the common errour of his time 11. Lymbus Patrum or Christ's descending into Hel was so generally belieued by the Fathers that M. Iacob witnesseth that 33) In Bilson's ful Redempt p. 188. Al the Fathers with one consent affirme that Christ deliuered the soules of the Patriarcks and Prophets out of Hel at his coming thither and so spoiled Sathan of those that were in his present possession 12. Inuocation of Saints was so vniuersally belieued in the Primitiue Church that D. Whiteguift and D. Couel do both of them confesse that 34) Def. ag Cartwr Reply p. 473. Couel in his Exem c. 9. p. 120. almost al the Bishops and learned writers of the Greek Church and Latin also for the most port were spotted with the doctrines c. of Inuocation of Saints and such like And D. Brightman reproueth for the same doctrine 35) In Apocal. c. 14. p. 382. S. Athanasius S. Basil S. Chrysostome S. Gregoire Nazianzen S. Ambrose S. Hierome S. Austin c. And 36) Exam. par 3. p. 211. Chemnitius alledgeth S. Augustin inuocating S. Cyprian wherin sayth he he yealded to the times and custome D. Beard speaking of the Fathers opinion heerin sayth 37) Retract frō Romish Relig. p. 224. First the Fathers if they did allow of this Inuocation yet it was in their priuate Deuotions not sayth he though vntruly in the publick Liturgie of the Church c. vntil Gregorie the First 's time c. Secondly the Fathers though they may seeme to haue prayed sometimes vnto the Saints out of the heat of their deuotion yet it was but now and then and as it were by the way c. Thirdly the Fathers albeit they directed their prayers sometimes to the Saints yet they reposed most confidence in their prayers to God So confessedly did the Fathers themselues pray vnto Saints 13. For worshipping of Saints Relicks S. Basil S. Athanasius S. Chrysostome S. Gregorie Nazianzen S. Ambrose S. Hierome S. Austin c. are al of them reproued 38) In Apoc. p. 382. by D. Brightman The Centurists charge the Fathers of the fourth Age with 39) Cent. 4. c. 6. col 456. publick Translation of Saints Relicks And Chemnitius chargeth the Fathers indefinitly not only 40) Exam. par 4. p. 10. with Translation and Circumgestation of Saints Relicks alledging in proof therof the testimonies of S. Austin S. Hierom and Lucillus but yet further also with Pilgrimage to the Relicks of Saints 14. Images were then so generally vsed as that sundrie examples of their verie placing in churches are giuen by 41) Against symbol par 1. p. 32. Cent. 4. col 409. Exam. part 4. p. 26. 29. 30. M. Parker the Centurists and Chemnitius out of the writings of Sozomen Athanasius Prudentius and others And Functius plainly confesseth 42) L. 7. Comment in Chronol f. 6. at An. 464. that An. 494. Xenaias was the first in the Church that stirred vp warre against Images so general and peaceable was the vse of Images for the first 464. yeares after the Apostles 15. Concerning the Crosse M. Burges acknowledgeth that 43) In Couels Answer to Burges p. 130. 136. there is nothing ascribed to the Crosse in or out of Baptisme by the ranckest Papists but the Fathers are as deeply engaged in the same so as if we wil vse it as the Fathers did c. we take the soule to be fenced by Crossing of the bodie and the Crosse to haue vertue of Consecrating the Sacrament driuing away Diuels witchcraft c. In proof wherof he there alledgeth sundrie ancient Fathers Yea the worshipping of the Crosse was so vniuersal as that M. Parkins reporteth that 44) Vol. 2. p. 596. Paulinus Epist 11. sayth The Bishop of Hierusalem yearly at Easter set forth the Crosse for the people to worship himself being the
chief of the worshippers so general and receaued was the practise heerof in the time of Paulinus who as Osiander relateth was 45) Cent. 5. p. 387. familiar with Hierom Austin and Ambrose 16. Concerning the Vow of Chastitie Chemnitius confesseth that 46) Exam. part 3. p. 41. we are not ignorant that the Fathers allowed the Vowes of perpetual Chastitie and that they thought them to be obligatorie I know sayth Peter Martyr that 47) De Votis p. 524. Epiphanius with manie other Fathers erred in that they affirme it to be sinne to breake this Vow when need shal require and that he referreth the same naughtily to Apostolical Traditions Yea sayth M. Wotton it is one of the blemishes 48) Defence of Parkins p. 491. of the ancient Writers 17. The Chastitie or single life of Priests was so generally prescribed and practised by the ancient Fathers who were Priests also themselues that M. Iewel speaking of this point 49) Def. of the Apol. p. 195. saith Heer I grant that M. Harding is like to find some good aduantage as hauing vndoubtedly a great number of holie Fathers on his side Bucer likewise acknowledgeth that 50) Gratul ad Eccles Angliae p. 35. in the time of S. Hierome the Churches of Aegypt of the East and of the Sea Apostolick were not accustomed to receaue for Priests but such as either were not married or abstained from their wiues 18. Monastical life was so general with the Fathers that M. Cartwright confesseth that 51) In Whiteg Def. p. 344. Ruffin Theodoret Sozomen Socrates do mention Monks almost in euerie page And the Centurists do begin a whole special Tract the title wherof is 52) Cent. 4. c. 10. col 294. Of the Monks through Syria Palestina Bythinia and the other places of Asia vnder Constantin the Great as also the title of another Tract is 53) Cent. 4. c 10. col 1306. The African Monks through Aegypt vnder Constantin the Great And the title of another Tract is 54) Ib. col 1331. The Monks through Europe So that in those purest and ancientest times Religious or Monastical life was generally practised ouer the whole face of the Christian world euen through Asia Africk and Europe 19. Prescribed times for fasting are so ancient and general that Chemnitius confesseth that 55) Exam. par 1. p. 89. Ambrose Maximus Taurinensis Theophilus Hierome and others do affirme the Fast of lent to be an Apostolical Tradition And Caluin professeth that 56) Instit l. 4. c. 1 2. §. 19. heerin he dareth not excuse the old Fathers but that they sowed some seeds of superstition And that 57) Ib. §. 20. euerie where the obseruation of superstitious Lent was in force 20. Concerning Free-wil some Protestants say 58) A Discouer of vntruthes contained in D. Bancrofts serm p. 23. 59 We know that euer since the Apostles times in a manner it flourished euerie where til Martin Luther took the sword in hand against it The Centurists speaking of the times next after the Apostles say 59 In like sort Clemens affirmeth euerie where Free-wil that it may appeare not only al the Doctours of that Age to haue been in such darknes but that it likewise encreased in their successours 21. Merit of works was so generally belieued by the ancient Fathers that D. Whitaker chargeth with errour therin 60) Resp ad Camp p. 78. not only Cyprian but almost to vse his owne words al the most holie Fathers of that time And 61) Iesuit par 2 p. 531. It may not be denyed saith D. Humfrey but that Ireneus Clemens and others called Apostolical haue nothing Apostolically inserted into their writings the opinions of Free-wil and Merit of works 22. And as for the vse of Ceremonies in the Church M. Calfhil affirmeth that 62) In Fulks Reioynder to Martials Reply p. 131. 132. the Fathers declined al from the simplicitie of the Ghospel in Ceremonies Melancthon also affirmeth that 63) In 1. Cor. c. 3. Presently from the beginning of the Church the ancient Fathers obscured the doctrine concerning the iustice of Faith encreased Ceremonies and deuised peculiar Worships 23. But to include manie in one D. Whiteguift a prime Metrapolitan amongst Protestants discoursing 64) Defence c. p. 472. 473. of Doctrine taught in anie Age since the Apostles time affirmeth without anie exception either of Age or Father that almost al the Bishops and learned Writers of the Greek Church and Latin also for the most part were spotted with doctrines of Free-wil of Merit of Inuocation of Saints and such like c. Meaning thereby such other like points of our Catholick Religion which his Assertion hath since been renewed by D. Couel who speaking of the ancient Fathers vseth these like words as 65) Exam. against the Plea of the Innoc. p. 120. Diuers both of the Greek and Latin Church were spotted with the errours about Free-wil Merit Inuocotion of Saints Manie things expressing their Papistrie might be alledged in this kind if it were anie vertue to rip vp their faults whom we ought to honour And wheras Bellarmin alledgeth 66) De Not. Ecclesiae l. 4. c. 9. the particular sayings of Caluin and the Centurie-writers as charging the ancient Fathers with our doctrine of Free-wil Lymbus Patrum Denyal of our Concupiscence without consent to be sinne Satisfaction Prayer for the Dead Merit Pennance the Fast of Lent the vnmarried life of Priests Baptisme of Lay-persons in case of necessitie the manner of Sacrificing c. D. Whitaker answering thereto iustifyeth the same saying 67) De Eccles cont Bellarm. Contr. 2 q. 5. p. 299. Bellarmin alledgeth certain testimonies from Caluin and the Centurie-writers as noting certain errours of the ancient Fathers which were common to them with the Papists as namely Free-wil Merit Lymbus Inuocation of Saints the vnmarried life of Priests Satisfaction and certain other such like c. before mentioned by Bellarmine I answer thereto that it is true which Caluin and the Centurie-writers haue written that in manie things the ancient Church erred as in Lymbus Free-wil Merit of works and in al the residue of those other before recited 24. In like sort M. Brightman hauing named S. Athanasius S. Basil S. Chrysostom S. Ambrose S. Hierom S. Augustin c. affirmeth of them al that 68) In Apoc. in c. 14. p. 382. in words they condemned Idolatrie but in deed they established it by Inuocation of Saints Worshipping of Relicks and such other wicked Popish superstitions 25. Beza speaking of the times of S. Cyprian S. Austin and S. Chrysostom auoucheth that 69) Praef. in Nou. Test ad Princip Cond Then Sathan layd the first foundations in Greece of Inuocation of the Dead whereto some of the chiefest Bishops were so far from resisting c. others c. did not only not represse open superstitions arising but did also nourish them c. Hence those opinions of Free-wil of Faith
of free Iustification was as then almost oppressed with the Comments of the Grecian Bishops c. At the same time the Inuocation of the Dead preuailed and the foolish opinion of single life which shameful errours Hierom openly defendeth the multitude also of Ceremonies then encreased c. And al for the most admired the Monks in Aegypt Syria c. no otherwise then if they had been Angels Prayers also for the Dead began then more freely to be vsed and the Platonical question risen concerning Purgatorie c. So ancient and general amongst al the holie Fathers were al the foresayd Articles of our present Roman Faith 26. So that our Catholick Roman Faith concerning the Sacraments conferring grace of Confession of Pardons of Transubstantiation of Holie-Orders of Extreme-Vnction of the Masse of S. Peter's and the Pope's Primacie of the Pope not being Antichrist of Traditions of Purgatorie and Prayer for the Dead of Limbus Patrum of Inuocation of Saints Reuerencing of Relicks Images and the Crosse Vowes of Chastitie single life of Priests Monastical life prescribed Fasts Free-wil Merit of Works and the Ceremonies of the Church was the general receaued Faith of al ancient Fathers and other Christians Witnesses wherof in our behalf are Luther Caluin Zuinglius the Centurists Rhegius Melancthon Adamus Francisci Antonie de Adamo Bucer Crastouius Philippus Nicolai Chemnitius Functius Osiander Peter Martyr Beza Brightman Field Humfrey Fulk Cartwright Whiteguift Couel Fox Gifford Iacob Parker Parkins Wotton Beard Calfhil whitaker and Iewel THAT PROTESTANTS DO NOT ONLY disclaime from al the ancient Fathers as Papists but do further reiect the authoritie of the sacred Scriptures and of the Apostles themselues as being erroneous and that therefore they do not found their Faith or Religion vpon Sacred Scriptures or Christ his Apostles CHAPTER III. I haue laboured often and long for the finding out of some ground work Argument or Principle wherupon the Protestant Church should be builded and sustained And stil obseruing al proofs whatsoeuer drawne either from Histories Fathers Councels Church or Antiquitie to be al of them contemned and despised by them as meerly Papistical I retired and tyed my thoughts at last to that surest Ancker of God's heauenlie Word proposed vnto vs in the sacred writings of his Prophets and Apostles nothing doubting but that the credit authoritie therof would in the iudgement and verie beleef of al Protestants be euer admitted acknowledged and reuerenced as Diuine infallible and inspired from God the Holie-Ghost himself And yet frustrate in this my last expectation I find the verie writings of the Prophets and Apostles to be censured and reiected and the Prophets and Apostles themselues to be scorned disgraced disallowed by the learnedst Protestant Writers And to begin first with the scriptures of the old Testament omitting also Tobie Iudith c. and the rest which Protestants generally reiect for Apocryphal wheras Moyses was confessedly the first that writ anie part of sacred Scripture yea that writ the Law of God or Ten Commandments in Tables of stone he and the sayd Commandments are al of them reiected by our new Protestants 1) Tom. 3. Germ f. 40. 41. And in Colâ—oq Mensal Gâ—rm fol. 152. 153. We wil neither heare nor see Moyses sayth D. Luther for he was giuen only to the Iewes neither doth he belong anie thing to vs. Let him be to the Iewes as the Law of the Saxons and let him not disquiet or trouble vs Gentils As France regardeth not the Law of the Saxons so the Law of Moyses doth not bind vs. If anie propose vnto thee Moyses with his Lawes and would compel thee to keep them then shalt thou say Go to the Iewes with thy Moyses I am no Iew thou shalt not enwrap me with Moyses And againe 2) In Colloq Mensal c. de Leg. Euang. I wil not receaue Moyses with his Law for he is the enemie of Christ If he shal come with me to examination I wil reiect him in the name of God and wil say Let Christ stand heer 3) Fâ—l 118. Moyses is the maister of al hangmen no man matcheth him in terrifying streightning tyranizing threatning and thundring he cruelly assaulteth the consciences he terrifyeth tormenteth and teareth the hart 4) Ad Ps 46. Away therefore with Moyses to obstinate and cruel men and prowd Saints whome he may terrifye humble 5) Tom. 3. Witemb in Ps 45. f. 423. And see 422. And in Colloq Mens Ger. f. 152. 153. Moyses indeed had lips but profunda great ones vnpleasant stopped angrie in which there is not a word of grace but of anger death and sinne Gather al the wisedomes of Moyses and of the Heathen Philosophers and you shal find them to be in God's sight either Idolatrie or hypocritical wisdome or if it be Politick yet the wisedome of wrath c. For Moyses hath his lips ful of gal and anger c. Away therefore with Moyses c. Moyses being thus discarded Away likewise say Protestants with the Law and Commandments 6) Tom. 3. Germ. fol. 121. The Law sayth Luther is a true Labyrinth which only casteth consciences into errour The iustice of the Law is the monster Minotaurus that is a meer fable not leading to saluation but to the waters of Acheron 7) In Colloq Mensal Germ. f. 152. 153. To the Iewes belongeth the Law of Moyses it doth not bind vs c. I wil not haue Moyses with his Law for he is the enemie of Christ our Lord yea 8) Tom. 3. Wittemb f. 6. 7. the Decalogue itself testifyeth that Moyses doth not oblige the Gentils And his owne Brethren alleadge him saying 9) Admonitio Christiana p. 211 And see Hospin concord discord f. 225. As France respecteth not the Law of the Saxons so let not Moyses be thrust vpon vs we in the New Testament wil neither see nor heare Moyses And as for the Ten CoÌ„mandments themselues Luther expresly teacheth that 10) Serm. de Mose the Ten Commandments pertaine not to Christians 11) In Conuiual Colloq cited by Aurifab cap. de lege And therefore saith he Let the Ten Commandments be altogether reiected and al Heresies wil presently cease For the Ten Commandments are as it were the fountain from whence al Heresies spring According to which Islebius Luther's owne scholler 12) Cent. 6. p. 311. 312. 310. taught as Osiander relateth that the Decalogue was not to be taught in the Church c. He dispersed in publick writings his Antinomian errour and drew into errour some learned Protestants He seemeth to haue taken occasion of this errour from the writings of Luther not rightly vnderstood And 13) Act. Colloq Aldeburg p. 94 being great in the Court he preached earnestly for the Antinomian libertie These Antinomians 14) Sleidan Hist l. 12. f. 262. receauing their first beginning from Islebius Luther's scholler publickly taught as other Protestants confesse 15)
auoucheth 51) In D. Bancrofts Suruey p. 373. that if Paul should come to Geneua and preach the same hower that Caluin did I would leaue saith he Paul and heare Caluin And 52) Ibid. p. 372. another in Basile did attribute no lesse to Farellus then to Paul Yea some of Luthers schollers 35 not the meanest among their Doctours sayd 53) Lauaterus Hist sacram p. 18. see Schlusselb Theol. Cal. l. 2. f. 146. they had rather doubt of S. Paul's doctrine theÌ„ of Luther or the Confession of Augusta And yet the doctrine of Luther is often so absurd so impure and scandalous as that some Protestants themselues as much ashamed therof haue reiected the same And the Confession of Augusta hath been often impugned by sundrie Caluinists But preaduenture S. Peter is in better credit then S. Paul And yet I find him rebuked by Protestants for his claime of Primacie 54) Catalog Testium veritatis to 1. p. 27. It cannot be denyed say they but that sometimes Peter laboured with Ambition and desire of greatnes c. Wherefore this so peruerse Ambition of Peter and ignorance and negligence of Diuine matters c. But Luther saith further 55) In Epist ad Gal. c. 1. Be it that the Church Austin and other Doctours also Peter Apollo yea and an Angel from Heauen teach otherwise yet is my doctrine such as setteth forth God's only glorie c. Peter the chief of the Apostles did liue and teach besides the Word of God And againe 56) Tom. 5. Vvittemb f. 290. Whether S. Cyprian Ambrose Austin or S. Peter S. Paul yea an Angel from Heauen teach otherwise yet I know this certainly that I do not perswade humane but Diuine things Caluin likewise affirmeth that Peter's pretended erring was 57) In omnes Pauli Epist in Gal. c. 2. p. 510. 511. 37 To the Schisme of the Church the endangering of Christian libertie and the ouerthrow of the Grace of God 38 D. Fulk chargeth S. Peter with errour of ignorance and against the truth of the Gospel And that this pretended erring of S. Peter 58) Against Rhem. Test in Gal. 2. f. 322. was euen after the descending of the Holie-Ghost vpon him D. Goad auoucheth saying 59) Tower Disp 2. Confer Arg. 6. Pâ—ter did erre in faith and that after the sending downe of the Holie-Ghost vpon him Brentius likewise affirmeth that 60) In Apol. Conf. c. de CoÌ„cilijs p. 900. S. Peter chief of the Apostles and also Barnabas after the Holie-Ghost receaued togeather with the Church of Hierusalem erred In like sort saith D. Whitaker 61) De Eccl. cont Bellar. Controu 2. q. 4. p. 223. But peraduenture they wil say Christ had not yet ascended and the Holie-Ghost was not yet giuen to the Apostles whereto he immediately thus replyeth what did they not erre afterwards Yea it is euident that after Christ's Ascension and the descension of the Holie-Ghost vpon the Apostles the whole Church not only the common sort of Christians but also euen the Apostles themselues erred concerning the calling of the Gentils c. Yea Peter also erred concerning the abrogation of the Ceremonial Law c. And this was a matter of faith and in this Peter erred He furthermore also erred in manners c. And these were great errours and yet we see these to haue been in the Apostles euen after the Holie-Ghost descending vpon them So that S. Peter is of as smal authoritie with Protestants as S. Paul before was To come now to S. Iames Andreas Friuius a Caluinist whom 62) Com. Plac. in Engl. part 4. p. 77. Peter Martyr tearmeth an excellent learned man affirmeth that 63) Ib. 2. de Eccl. c. 2. p. 411. Christ at his last supper ioyned wine with bread if therefore the Church separate these she is not to be heard The Church of Hierusalem did separate these S. Iames as some dare affirme gaue only one kind to the people of Hierusalem what then The Word of God is plaine and manifest Eate and drink This is to be heard of vs and preferred before al Iames words of the Church And 64) De Captiuit Bab. c. de Extr. vnct tom 2. wittemb f 86. further say saith Luther that if in anie place it be erred in this place especially concerning Extreame-Vnction it is erred c. But though this were the Epistle of Iames I would answer that it is not lawful for an Apostle by his authoritie to institute a Sacrament this appertaineth to Christ alone As though S. Iames would institute or publish a Sacrament without warrant from Christ And the Centurists before affirmed that S. Paul was drawne into errour by S. Iames and the rest of the Apostles Now as concerning S. Iames his Epistle Luther auoucheth that 65) Praef. in Epist Iacobi in Edit Ien. The Epistle of Iames is contentious swelling dry strawie and vnworthie an Apostolical spirit As also 66) Adc. 22. Gen. Abraham was iust by Faith before he was knowne to be so by God Therefore Iames concludeth il c. It doth not follow as Iames doateth c. Let our Aduersaries therfore be packing with their Iames whom they obiect so often vnto vs. Againe 67) In Coll. Mensal lat tom 2. de lib. nou Test Manie haue much laboured in the Epistle of Iames that they might accord it with Paul as Philip tryed in his Apologie but without successe for they are contrarie Faith iustifieth Faith iustifieth not Agreably heervnto also saith Musculus 68) Loc. com c de Iustific The Papists obiect the Epistle of Iames But he whosoeuer he was the Brother of Christ and a Pillar amongst the Apostles and a great Apostle aboue measure yet he alone cannot preiudice the truth of Faith And after the disagreement between S. Paul and S. Iames according to his imagination shewed at large he thus schooleth and correcteth S. Iames He alleadgeth the example of Abraham nothing to the purpose where he saith wilt thou know ô vaine man that Faith without works is dead c. He confoundeth the word Faith How much better had it been for him diligently and plainly to haue distinguished the true and properly Christian Faith which the Apostle euer preached from that which is common both to Iewes and Christians Turks and Diuels then to confound them both and set downe his sentence so different from the Apostolical doctrine whereby as concluding he saith you see that a man is iustified by works and not by Faith alone wheras the Apostle out of the same place disputeth thus c. where hauing made S. Paul to speak as he thinketh best he inferreth Thus saith the Apostle of whose Doctrine we doubt not Compare me now with this argument of the Apostle the Conclusion of this Iames A man therefore is iustifyed by works and not by Faith only and see how much it differeth wheras he should more rightly haue concluded thus c.
29. Armenians retaine stil sundrie points of Catholick Religion l. 1. c. 6. p. 29. Aultars vsed in Churches in time of the Primitiue Church l. 2. c. 22. p. 85. Aultars disliked by Hereticks l. 3. c. 2. p. 8. S. Austin the Monk commended by Protestants l. 1. c. 4. p. 16. 17. S. Austin conuerted England to the now Roman Faith l. â— c. 4. p. 16. B. BAptisme conferreth Grace and Remission of sinnes l. 2. c. 7. p. 33. Baptisme necessarie for the saluation of infants Ib. Baptisme ministred by lay persons in case of necessitie lawful l. 5. c. 2. p. 12. In Baptisme sundrie Ceremonies vsed by the Primitiue Church l. 2. c. 22. Barnabas the Apostle according to Protestants erred in Faith l. 5. c. 3. p. 23. Beades or litle stones vsed to pray with in time of the Primitiue Church l. 2. c. 22. S. Bede confessedly a Roman Catholick and a holie man l. 1. c. 3. p. 14. Berengarius his errour and Recantation l. 1. c. 3. p. 14. S. Bernard a Roman Catholick l. 1. c. 3. p. 15. and l. 3. c. 8. p. 53. Bertram no Protestant l. 3. c. 8. p. 46. Bigamus not admitted to Holie Orders in time of the Primitiue Church l. 2. c. 17. p. 73. C. CAlling necessarie for Preaching and Administration of Sacraments l. 4. c. 4. p. 13. 14. Protestant Ministers are distitute of al lawful Calling l. 4. c. 4. p. 15. 16. 17. seq c. The Calling of the English Ministerie l. 4. c. 4. p. 16. Some Protestants deriue their Calling from Catholicks Ib. p. 17. Others denye it Ib. p. 19. Calling by the Laytie allowed by Protestants Ib. p. 20. Protestants being confessedly destitute of al ordinarie Calling doe flye vnto extraordinarie Ib. p. 20. Extraordinarie Calling is euer confirmed by Miracles Ib. p. 21. Extraordinarie Calling is freed from errour Ib. p. 23. Catholick Priests haue lawful Calling l. 4. c. 4. p. 17. 18. 24. Candles lighted in Churches in the day in time of the Primitiue Church l. 2. c. 22. p. 86. Canticles reiected by Protestants as Apocryphal l. 5. c. 3. p. 20. Castalio his Apostacie l. 4. c. 2. p. 7. The name Catholick why imposed at first l. 3. c. 7. p. 30. 31. l. 4. c. 2. p. 9. Applied only to the Roman Church Ib. p. 9. Disliked by Protestants Ib. p. 9. Ceremonies approued by the Fathers of the Primitiue Church l. 2. c. 22. p. 89. Charles the Emperour a Roman Catholick l. 1. c. 3. p. 14. The Booke written vnder Charles his name against Images is counterfeit l. 3. c. 8. p. 45. Chrisme vsed and approued in the Primitiue Church l. 2. c. 22. p. 88. Christ to haue been ignorant condemned in ancient Hereticks and Protestants l. 3. c. 5. p. 15. Christ as God to haue suffred and dyed condemned in Protestants l. 3. c. 5. p. 15 Church to be knowne is most necessarie l. 1. c. 1. p. 3. Out of the true Church there is no saluation Ib. l. 4. c. 3. p. 11. Church of Christ is most ancient l. 1. c. 1. p. 3. Church of Christ cannot fayle l. 4. c. 2. p. 3 Church of Christ cannot erre l. 1. c. 1. p. 2 Church of Christ is euer visible l. 3. c. 3. p. 9. l. 4. c. 3. p. 10. 11. 12. Church of Christ conuerteth Heathen kings and Nations l. 4. c. 5. p. 24. 25. seq Church of Christ discerneth true Scriptures from Apocryphal l. 1. c. 1. p. 3 Churches were hallowed in time of the Primitiue Church lib. 2. c. 22. p. 90. Churches were dedicated to Christ and his Saints Ibid. p. 91. Churches had Vestries Ibid. Churches and Chancels Ibid. Commandments to be impossible condemned in ancient Hereticks and Protestants l. 3. c. 5. p. 14. Ten Commandments reiected by Protestants l. 5. c. 3. p. 19. Communion vnder one kind l. 3. c. 2. p. 6. 7. c. â— p. 21. Confession of the Aduersarie a strong Argument Praef. to the Reader Confession of sinnes to the Priest vsed in the Primitiue Church l. 2. c. 10. p. 47. l. 5. c. 2. p. 12. Confession being made Pennance was imposed l. 2. c. 10. p. 48. And Absolution giuen with imposition of hands Ibid. p. 49. Confirmation vsed in the Primitiue Church l. 2. c. 7. p. 33. 34. Consecration of water Bread Ashes and vsed in the Primitiue Church l. 2. c. 22. pag. 88. Cranmer his life and death l. 4 c. 4. p. 18. Creed of the Apostles doubted of by Protestants l. 5. c. â— p. 20. Crosse worshipped by the Fathers of the Primitiue Church l. 5. c. 2. p. 15. l. 2. c. 16. per totum The signe of the Crosse then vsed Ibid. Crosse vsed in Consecration of Sacraments Ibidem Miracles wrought by the Crosse and the signe therof Ibidem Crosse impugned by ancient Hereticks and Protestants l. 3. c. 3. p. 10. 11. Councels represent the Church l. 2. c. 1. pag. 1. Councels best meanes to decide Controuersies Ib. p. 2. Councels cannot erre in matters of Faith Ibidem Some Protestants pretend to submit themselues to general Councels Ibidem Councels reiected by Protestants lib. 5. c. 1. p. 9. Councel of Francford l. 3. c. 8. p. 44. D. DAntes the Poet. lib. 3. c. 8. p. 56. Dauid George his falling from Protestancie to Apostacie l. 4. c. 2. p. 8. E. ECclesiastes reiected by Protestants for Apocryphal l. 5. c. 3. p. 20. Emperours reigning during the time of the Primitiue Church reiected by Protestants for Papists l. 1. c. 5. p. 20. Eucharist to be the Sacrament of Christ's true Bodie Bloud was beleeued by the Fathers of the Primitiue Church euen by the confession of Protestants l. 2. c. 8. per totum l. 5. c. 2. p. 13. Eucharist carefully kept from falling l. 2. c. 8. p. 37. Eucharist adored in the Primitiue Church Ibidem Eucharist accustomed to be eleuated in Masse-time Ibid. p. 38. Eucharist receaued fasting Ibid. Eucharist receaued chast Ibid. Eucharist reserued Ibid. l. 3. c. 2. p. 7. Eucharist vsed in around figure in time of the Primitiue Church l. 2. c. 8. p. 39. Eucharist foretold by the ancient Iewes Ibidem Eucharist impugned by Hereticks lib. 3. c. 2. p. 6. 7. l. 3. c. 8. p. 51. Extreme-Vnction belieued and vsed by the Fathers of the Primitiue Church l. 2. c. 7. p. 34. F. FAith alone to iustifye condemned in ancient Hereticks l. 3. c. 5. p. 14. Fast of Lent confessedly approued and obserued in the Primitiue Church l. 2. c. 19. Fasts prescribed in the Primitiue Church Ibidem Aerius denying prescribed Fasts condemned by the Fathers of the Primitiue Church Ib. l. 3. c. 4. p. 13. Yet defended by Protestants against the Fathers Ibid. c. 5. p. 16. Fasts condemned in Montanus confessedly different from our Catholick Fasts Ib. p. 19. 20. Fasts not to be kept vpon the Sunday l. 2. l. 3. c. 4. p. 13. Fathers confessed by Protestants to haue been Papists l. 5. c. 1. p. 2. Fathers
reuiled by Protestants Ibid. p. 3. Fathers disclaimed by Protestants in their Exposition of Scriptures Ibid. p. 4. Fathers opposed by Protestants to Scripture Ibid. p. 5. Fathers by Protestants made contradictorie to themselues and other Fathers Ibid. p. 6. 7. Protestants by Protestants preferred before Fathers Ib. p. 8. Fathers challenged by Protestants for theirs l. 2. c. 2. p. 6. Fathers authoritie approued by Protestants l. 2. c. 1. p. 1. c. 2. p. 6. Fathers by Protestants preferred before Protestants Ibid. p. 7. Force of the Argument drawne from Man's authoritie Ibid. p. 7. 8. Frederick the Emperour no Protestant l. 3. c. 8. p. 54. Free-wil taught by the Primitiue Church l. 2. c. 20. Free-wil taught by the ancient belieuing Iewes Ibid. Free-wil denyed by the Manichees l. 3. c. 5. p. 14. G. GRecia conuerted by the Apostles l. 1. c. 6. p. 27. Grecians in these times Catholicks not Protestants l. 1. c. 6. p. 29. l. 3. c. 8. p. 37. Gregorie the Great commended by Protestants l. 1. c. 4. p. 16. Gregorie a Roman Catholick l. 1. c. 4. p. 17. Guilelmus de Sancto-Amore no Protestant l. 5. c. 8. p. 36. H. HEresies described l. 3. c. 7. p. 23. Hereticks named by their first Authour or Doctrine l. 3. c. 7. p. 31. Ancient Herâ—ticks defended by Protestants against the Fathers l. 3. c. 5. p. 16. Ancient Heresies confessedly differ from Catholick doctrine l. 3. c. 6. p. 17. 18. Hereticks goe out of the Church l. 3. c. 7. p. 23. 24. Henricus 5. Imperator no Protestant l. 3. c. 8. p. 53. Henricus 8. king of England no Protestant l. 1. c. 3. p. 10. Hildebrand defended against Protestants l. 3. c. 8. p. 52. Howers Canonical vsed in the Primitiue Church l. 2. c. 22. p. 89. Husse no Protestant l. 1. c. 3. p. 10. I. S. Iames the Apostle charged with errour by Protestants l. 5. c. 3. p. 23. S. Iames his Epistles reiected by Protestants for Apocryphal Ib. p. 23. 24. Images worshipped by the Fathers of the Primitiue Church l. 2. c. 14 Images as then placed in Churches Ib. By Images Miracles wrought Ibid. Images impugned by Hereticks these therefore condemned by Fathers l. 3. c. 3. p. 10. c. 8. p. 40. 43. 47. India conuerted by the Apostles l. 1. c. 6. pag. 28. Indians in these dayes Catholicks not Protestants l. 1. c. 6 p. 28. Innouation or first Beginning noted a Badge of Heresie l. 3. c. 7. p. 27. Iob his Booke reiected by Luther for Apocryphal l. 5. c. 3. p. 20. S. Iohn's Ghospel charged by Protestants with errour Ib. p. 21. S. Iohn's Epistles reiected by Protestants as Apocryphal Ibid. p. 24. S. Iohn's Apocalyps reiected by Protestants as Apocryphal Ib. p. 24. S. Iude's Epistle reiected by Protestants as Apocryphal Ibid. p. 24. Iustice inherent denyed and condemned in ancient Hereticks l. 3. c. 5. p. 15. L. LAtria and Dulia confessedly taught by S. Austin l. 2. c. 14. Lollards their errours l 3. c. 8. p. 57. Lotharius the Emperour obiected against the Pope's Primacie and answered l. 3. c. 8. p. 46. 47. At Luther's first reuolt the whole Christian world was Roman Catholick l. 1. c. 3. p. 8. Luther taught manie errours l. 4. c. 4. p. 23. Luther confessedly wrought no miracles Ibid. p. 22. S. Luke's Ghospel charged by Protestants with errour l. 5. c. 3. p. 21. Lymbus Patrum confessedly taught by the ancient Fathers l. 2. c. 12. p. 55. 56. Lytanies vsed by the ancient Fathers l. 2. cap. 22. M. MAchabees Tobie c. approued for Canonical by the Primitiue Church l. 2. c. 5. Obiections against them answered l. 2. c. 5. p. 25. Marsilius Patauinus a coÌ„demned Heretick l. 3. c. 8. p. 56. Malachias a Roman Catholick l. 1. c. 3. p. 13. Masse generally vsed these last 1000. yeares l. 1. c. 2. p. 6. Masse confestedly taught and vsed by the ancient Fathers l. 2. c. 9. p. 41. seq Masse belieued to be Propitiatorie by the ancient Fathers Ibid p. 44. Masse celebrated for the dead l. 2. c. 11. p. 50. seq Masse a Sacrifice according to Melchisedech p. In Masse water mingled with wine l. 3. c. 2. p. 8. Hereticks impugning the Masse condemned Ibidem S. Mathew's Ghospel charged by Protestants with ersour l. 5. c. 3. p. 21. S. Mark 's Ghospel charged by Protestants with errour Ibid. Michael the Emperour obiected against the Popes Primacie answered l. 3. c. 8. p. 48. 49. Miracles attributed by Hereticks to wichcraft l. 3. c. 3. p. 10. 11. Miracles confessedly neuer wrought by anie Protestant l. 4. c. 4. p. 22. 23. Miracles wrought by manie Catholicks l. 4. c. 5. p. 32. Monachisme approued and vsed by the Primitiue Church l. 2. c. 18. p. 74. seq Monks had special Consecration Ib. p. 75. Monks habit Ib. p. 76. Austeritie Ibidem Monks vowed Chastitie Ibidem Monks wrought miracles Ibidem Monks defended by the ancient Fathers against Vigilantius l. 3. c. 4. p. 12. Monastical life in some sort professed by the belieuing Iewes l. 2. c. 18. N. NIlus a condemned Heretick l. 3. c. 8. p. 58. Noueltie reiected Praef. to the Reader Nycetas obiected against the Pope's Primacie and answered l. 3. c. 8. p. 51. O. OCcham no Protestant l. 3. c. 8. p. 57. Orders l. 2. c. 7. p. Otho obiected against the Pope's Primacie and answered l. 3. c. 8. p. 50. P. PArdons and Indulgences taught by the Primitiue Church l. 2. c. 10. p. 48. S. Peter ordained by Christ Head of the Apostles for vnitie l. 2. c. 3. p. 8. seq Vpon S. Peter Christ built his Church Ib. S. Peter's seas of Rome Alexandria and Antioch preferred before others Ib. S. Peter charged by ProtestaÌ„ts with errour l. 5. c. 3. p. 23. Phocas coÌ„ferred not Primacie to Boniface l. 3. c. 8. p. 41. Photius obiected against the Pop's Primacie and answered l. 3. c. 8. p. 48. Pope of Rome S. Peter's successour l. 2. c. 3. p. 9. 10. c. 4. p. 11. Pope's Primacie was Christ his ordinance l. 2. c. 4. p. 12. Pope's Primacie confessedly allowed and practised vniuersally these last 1000. yeares l. 1. c. 2. p. 6. Pope not Antichrist l. 2. c. 4. p. 24. l. 5. c. 2. p. 14. Al Popes for these last 1000. yeares censured by Protestants to haue been Antichrists l. 1. c. 2. p. 6. Pope's Primacie defended by S. Gregorie l. 2. c. 3. p. 9. 10. c. 4. p. 12. l. 3. c. 8. p. 41. by Pelagius Ib. p. 14. by Celestine Ib. by Leo Ib. p. 15. by Gelasius Ibid. p. 16 by Sixtus Ib. by Innocentius Ib. by Siricius Ib. by Zosimus Ibid. by Councels Ib. by Constantine Ib. p. 17. by Damasus others of the fourth Age. Ib. by the Fathers of the third Age. Ib. p. 19. by the Fathers of the second Age. Ibid. p. 20. by S. Peter and the Fathers of the first Age. Ib. p. 21. 21. by the Iewes Ib.
the Emperour doth nothing proue any Innouation in the Roman Church but rather to the contrarie doth plainly shew his vnion and Communion therewith in matters of faith and Religion In like sort where he obiecteth that S. Bernard freely noted diuers Corruptions then comming in it is so vnprobable yea so grossely vntrue as that to the contrarie (90) L. 2. Cont. Dur. p 154. Fulk against Rhem. Test f. 133. D. Whitaker and D. Fulk both of them confesse that he taught the Popes Supremacie and D. Whitaker (91) Ad Rat. Camp rat 7. p. 105. aknowledgeth that he was of our Church (92) In specul Eccl. p. 23. Gomarus calleth him our S. Bernard The Centurists affirme that he was 93) â—ent 12. c. 10. col 1637. a most earnest Defender of the Sea of Antichrist Bel (94) Challenge c. p. 148. tearmeth him Bernard the Popes deare Monk and reuerend Abbot Yea the Centurists further report That he sayd 95) Cent. 12. col 1939. to the Duke of Aquitaine whatsoeuer is out of the Roman Church by the Iudgement of God is certainly to perish euen as those things which were out of the Ark were drowned in the diluge As also he that persecuteth the Pope of Rome persecuteth the Sonne of God Now by this al of it confessed by sundrie and much more learned Protestants then M. White it more then cleerly appeareth that S. Bernard was no fit witnes to be produced against the Roman Church nor that he himself did differ in anie one point of Faith from her much lesse did note anie pretended corruption of Faith comming in And as for the feast of the Conception or the Doctrine concerning the Virgin Maries freedome from original sinne it is not yet to this day defined by the Church as a matter of Faith But where he further vrgeth that S. Bernaâ—d was against Merits Iustificatâ—on by works Freewil keeping the Law Seauen Sacraments and vncertantie of our Saluation and the Popes greatnes in Temporalities it is al of it most vntrue as himself might haue plainly shewed if he had been pleased to haue set downe the answers out of Cardinal Bellarmine as he was to haue his obiections In like sorte that which he obiecteth concerning Arnulph pertaineth only to matter of life and manners not to Faith or doctrine and therefore it maketh nothing to proue anie Innouation or change in our present Roman Religion As also though as then one preached in Antwerp against the Real Presence yet I haue before freed our Church from al Innouation therein in far more ancient times And as for Honorius his noting the bringing in of Wafers into the Sacrament in this Age it is so vntrue that M. Cartwright (96) See before l. 2. c. 8. confesseth that it was brought in by Pope Alexander who liued Anno 111. which is some thousand yeares before the time now obiected After 1150. to 1200. I name saith M. White the Emperour Frederick Barbarossa forbidding Appeales to Rome and the comming of Legats from Rome into Germanie c. But though the Emperour did this being as then at discord with the Pope yet his fact was so faultie as that he was thervpon and for other iniuries Excommunicated From which 97) Baron Anno 1160. num 31. 32. Anno 1168. num 60. after vpon his submission 98) Baron Anno 1177. num 22. and promise of obedience he was absolued and permitted to come to the Pope whose feet the Emperour kissed and bowing his head receiued reuerently his benediction And that the Roman Church as then made no Innouation concerning Appeales or sending of Legats it is most cleere by general practise allowance thereof in the purest times of the Primitiue Church proued at large 99) Before l. 2. c. 4. heretofore And as for Lincolniensis noting as then the Noueltie and Heresie of Friars M. White only barely saith it without al further proof yea though as then the Institution of Friars had been but new yet neither was it in anie thing Heretical nor proued anie Innouation in the Church in Faith and doctrine But to come to the Waldenses who according to D. White were dispersed ouer al this part of the world and in most substantial poynts resisted the Papacie c. as it is not denyed but that in some poynts they reuolted from the Roman Faith so haue I shewed 100) Before l. 1. c. 3. before that in sundrie other weighty Articles of Religion they agreed with Catholicks against Protestants And it is verie easie further to proue that indeed they beleeued sundrie grosse errours though M. White would make the world to think That the sayd errours were falsly imposed vpon them 103) Ibid. p. 729. 747. 760. For Illiricus himselfe 101) Catal. Test verit p 731. 745. 730. 732. testifyeth that they taught That Laymen and women might Consecrate the Sacrament and preach That Clergie men should haue no possessions or proprieties That 104) Ibid. p. 731. 743. married Persons mortally sinned who accompanied togeather without hope of Issue That neither Priest 105) Ibid. p. 760. 740. Osiand Cent. 9. 10. 11. p. 440. nor Ciuil Magistrat being guiltie of mortal sinne did enioy their dignitie or were to be obeyed And to omit many 106) Ibid. p. 734. others they went to the Catholick Churches dissembling and offered confessed and communicated dissemblingly And now must M. White either charge his owne Brother Illiricus to haue falsely imposed these errours vpon them or els must he confesse that these so dissembling and ignorant witnesses are altogeather insufficient to proue anie change in the Roman Church out of which themselues went out After 1200. 1200. to 1250. I name sayth M. White Almaricus a Doctour of Paris that was buâ—ned for withstanding Altars Images c. It is not denyed but that Almaricus was an Heretick falling from the Roman Church But yet I hope D. White wil be ashamed to clayme him for a Protestant for he was condemned first by the Vniuersitie of Paris after by Innocentius and a Synod at Rome for these propositions following (o) Cesarius Dial. l. 5 That there is no Resurrection of bodâ—es Secondly that there is no Paradise norhel Thirdly that the bodie of Christ is no more in the Sacrament after the words of Consecration then in a stone or horse Fourthly that God spake as much in Ouid as in Austin and other such to the number of 20. for which he was burned openly in Paris with certaine other blasphemous Hereticks against the Persons of the B. Trinitie sayth (p) Lib. 6. Hist Franc. and see Gers Tract 3. in Math. Aemilius li. 6. Hist Gal. Genebrad in Chro. Anno 1208. Gagninus Besides I haue (107) Before lib. 2. c. 14. 22. proued before that the foresayd Catholick poynts vrged to be denyed by Almaricus were yet al of them taught and beleeued by the Fathers of the Primitiue Church so that no