to make an Opposition betweeâ— the Scripture and the Fathers maintaining that to follow the iudgment of the Father is to reiect and abandon Scripture thâ—â— themselues are to be pardoned for prefeâ—ring the Scripture before the Fathers Bâ— to this you mâ—y answere that seeing tâ— Fathers do vrge admit and reuerence tâ— Scripture in as high a degree as the Protâ—stants do the mayne question and douâ—â— here is not whether the Scripture is to 〈◊〉 aduanced aboue the Authority of the Fâ—thers which we all Catholikes do fuâ—â— acknowledg should be but only Whethâ—â— the Fathers or the Protestants do more truly expound the Scripture Animaduersion XLI THe Fathers haue many aduantages aâ—â— priuiledges for interpreting of Scriptuâ—â— and for true or perfect fayth of which tâ— Protestants are altogether depriued Firâ—â— the Fathers liued neare to Christ some coâ—uersing with his Apostles others in succeâ—ding ages and therefore more easy it wâ—â— for them to know what exposition wâ—â— then deliuered of the Scriptures and whâ—â— fayth was first preached Add hereto thâ—â— the very practise of their Religion then 〈◊〉 â—â—d the Church then remayning by the â—cknowledgment of our Aduersaries in her â—â—rity of fayth serued as a Comment to â—hem of the Scriptures Secondly diuers of these Fathers euen â—rom their Mothers breasts did suck those â—ongues wherein a great part of the Scripâ—ure was written And therefore they were â—uch aduantaged for picking out the true â—eaning thereof whereas our Aduersaries â—nowledg of the said tongues is gotten onâ—y by Art and Industry which euer subscribes to Nature Thirdly the Fathers deliuered their senâ—ence and interpretation of Scriptures many â—ges before the points of fayth Doctrine 〈◊〉 for which they were vrged were euer brought in question or doubt and therefore what they writ was free from all partiality of iudgment they not knowing what Innouations were to rise in these our dayes Our Protestant Ministers their â—emporall states being wholy interessed â—herein must now of necessity shape the construction of the Scriptures to the maintenance of the Religion now introduced The Fathers though writing in seuerall ages seuerall tongues vpon seuerall occasions do notwithstanding vnanimously conspire together in their writings for non est Deus dissensionis sed pacis and if any one by chance did vary from the rest he was reprehended by them But the Protestants are so contrary in their writings in maintayning meere contradictory and opposite doctrines as is most wonderfull to obserue of which point who seeeketh further to be satisfied let him peruse such bookes as are lately written vpon that subiect The Fathers did cut of all lets and impediments which might hinder either Deuotion or study Hence it is that they imbraced perpetuall Chastity contemned all riches Honours chastized their bodies with fasting prayer and other spirituall disciplines How far different our ProtestaÌ„t Doctours are from such courses I leaue to the world to iudge The Fathers I meane diuers of them did worke many true and stupendious Vide Cyprian serm de lapsis Ambr. de obitu Satyr c. 7. Optat l. cont Donat. Aug. de Ciuit. l. 22. Chrysost cont Gentiles Eusebius l. 7. c. 14. Miracles which gift of exhibiting Miracles God bestoweth only vpon them who are gracious in his sight and who truly serue him But no man can serue God truly with a false fayth The Protestant Doctours neuer yet wrought any one Miracle in confirmation of their Fayth the euidency of which point appeareth from the liberall Confession of the Protestants themselues For D. Fulke thus acknowledgeth Jt is (y) Against the Rhemish Testam in Apoc. c. 13. knowne that Caluin and the rest whom the Papists call Arch-Heretiks do worke no miracles to whose confession D. Sutcliffe subscribeth saying We do (z) In his Examen of D. Kellisons Suruey printed 1606. p. 8. not practise Miracles nor do we teach that the truth of Doctrine is to be confirmed with miracles The Fathers I speake of diuers (a) As Ignatius Polycarpus Cyprian and others of them for professing only their Christian fayth and religion haue endured with inuincible courage and immoueable resolution which they could neuer haue done but only through the particular assistance of the Holy Ghost most exquisite tormeÌ„ts yea Martyrdome it selfe of whom it may be truly said Paradisi clauis sanguis Martyris Our Sectarie Doctours excepting some Mechanicall and ignorant fellows burn't for their obstinacy in Queene Maries tyme are so far from suffering any pressures for professing their fayth as that most of them haue made their Religion a ladder to clyme vp to worldly preferments they by it only enioying as through want of its losing riches honours other such temporall aduancements The Fathers of the Primitiue Church did represent the body of the whole Church of Christ in those tymes For of necessity it must be granted that all the seuerall members of the Church of God did belieue and practise the same Religion which Gregory Theodores Austin Jerome Chrysostome Epiphanius the Gregories the Cyrills Basill Ambrose Hilary Optatus Cyprian Irenaeus Ignatius and the like did teach since in them according to the seuerall ages wherein they liued those words of the Apostle were fulfilled (b) Ephes 4. Christ hath placed iâ— his Church Pastours and Doctours c. Now all this granted it doth ineuitably follow that if the Fathers of those seuerall ages did iointly erre in their interpretation of Scripture and doctrine of fayth and beliefe resulting from thence that then the whole visible Church of Christ did damnably erre in fayth during all those ages but this mainly crosseth both the command as also the promises of Christ the first in those words Dic Ecclesiae (c) Math. 18. the second in that sentence Behould I am with you all dayes euen to the consummation of the world for neither wold Christ euer send men to a false Church nor can he be said to be euer with his Church if he suffer it to professe for many ages a false and erroneous fayth nor vpon such a supposall could the Church be truly stiled Columna (d) 1. Timoth 3.9 firmamentum veritatis Lastly the more learned Protestants do ascribe all Excellency to the Primitiue Church for purity of fayth and consequently to the Fathers and Pastours of the Church of those tymes for thus we find them to write Kempnitius thus sayth We (e) Exa Concil Trid. part 1. pag. 74. doubt not but that the Primitiue Church receaued from the Apostles and Apostolicall men not only the Text of Scripture but also the right and natiue sense thereof D. Iewell The primitiue (f) In his defence of the Apology Church which was vnder the Apostles and Martyrs hath euer beene accounted the purest of all others without exception Finally to contract this point D. Bancroft heretofore the Archbishop of Canterbury thus writeth touching Caluin and Beza For M. Caluin (g) In his Suruey of the pretended
the supposed answering of those few chosen and picked out by him must serue through the partiality of iudgement in his followers to disgrace all the rest of the Corruptions or falsifications vrged by you Animaduersion LII THe Protestants in falsly alledging the authorityes of Authours do abuse their Readers chiefly foure seuerall wayes First which is the most vsuall by concealing some part of the alledged authority SecoÌ„dly by adding some words of his owne to make the produced Authour or Father to speake like a Protestant Thirdly by transposing the words of an authority thereby to make the sense different from the Authors true meaning Fourthly by a wilfull mistaking or confusion of tymes I will exemplify these foure sorts in the wryting of D. White a great Impostour in his Scripts in his booke called The way to the true Churcâ— Well then the said Protestant in p. 119. oâ— his said Booke produceth a place out of the Rhemists to proue that the Church of Româ— can make that Scripture which is not anâ— vnmake that to be Scripture which is Scripture To proue this he produceth the Rhâ—mists (y) Gaelat 1. thus saying The Scriptures are 〈◊〉 knowne to be true neither are Christians bonâ—â— to receiue them without the attestation of thâ— Church Now heere marke the true wordâ— of the Rhemists and therein obserue his impurity of dealing committed by concealing part of the Sentence iust crossing his intended drift of vrging that authority Their true words are these The Scriptures whicâ— are indeed of the Holy Ghosts inditing being pâ—â— into the Churches triall are found proued anâ— testifyed vnto the World to be such and not maâ—â— true altered or amended by the same Since the Holy Scriptures in themselues were alwayes true before but not so knowne to be to all Christians All these are the words of the Rhemists where you see the wilfull concealement of this Parcell The Scriptures are nâ—â— made true altered or amended by the Church as also that other the Holy Scripturs in themselues were alwaies true meaning without the attestation of the Church Now all that can truly be gathered out of this authority is that the Scriptures though most sacred and true in themselues cannot be so made knowne to vs in which words lyeth the touch of the point without the Churches attestation But how farre off is this from M. Whytes vrging of this place Touching his imposture committed in â—dding of words this one place shall serue Thus then the said D. White produceth Bellarmine in contempt of the Churches authority saying Other meanes may deceiue me but nothing is more knowne nothing more certaine then the Scriptures That it were the greatest madnes in the world not te belieue theÌ„ c. Now in this sentence these words viz. Other meanes may deceiue me are not in Bellarmine but most subtily added to the begining of Bellarmines words and caused to be printed in the same kynd of Character or letter wherein the other words of Bellarmine are printed thereby to make the Reader belieue that they are words of Bellarmine wheras they are added as I about insinuated for the more depressing of the Churches Authority Now the whole sentence of Bellarmine was directed against the Swinkseldians who absolutely denyed Scripture and against whom Bellarmine in that place disputeth Touching the fraud consisting in a cuÌ„ning transposition of words without adding any words to the authority alledged or concealing any parcell therof this example of the foresaid M. Whyte may serue In pag. 344. of his way to the true Church he produceth for the ouerthrow of the religious vse of Images the Councell of Eliberis thus saying No (z) Can. 36. Picture is to be made in the Church lest that be adored which is painted on the walls But the true words of the Canon are these Placâ—â—â— picturas in Ecclesia non habere ne quod coliâ—â— adoretur in parietibus depingatur Jt pleaseth the Councell that pictures should not be in the Church lest that which is worshipped anâ— adored be painted on the Walls The nyce difference in words resteth thus Lest that which is worshipped be painted and as Mâ— Whyte translateth Lest that which is painted be worshipped Where the words of the Councell acknowledging the worship of Images maketh the worship due to them to be the cause why they are not painted on the walls to wit because they were subiect to be defaced either by inuasion of Enemyes or rayne c. Now M. Whites translation only by a subtill transposition of the words imports that Pictures are not to be worshipped at all Lastly concerning the Calumny resting in a wilfull confusion of tymes The said Protestant in pag. 61. for proofe of Priests lawfull mariage produceth a Testimony from Sinesius Bishop of Ptolemais thus writing of himselfe to a friend The sacred hand of Theophilus hath giuen me a wyfe and hereupon Iustify to all men that J will neither forsake her nor priuily as an adulterer keep her Company but I will pray to God to send me by her many and good children This Epistle is at large set downe in (a) Eccl. hist l. 14. c. 55. Nicephorus Now heere tâ—e fraud lyeth that at the tyme when this Epistle was written Sinesius was but a Lay-man but eminent for learning Now after he made himselfe priest and was created Bishop of Ptolemais he euer liued separated from the company of his wyfe as fully appeareth out of Nicephorus in the place aboue alledged Here then the Ministers deceit lyeth in applying that to him as if he had beene then Bishop which was spoken by him being a Layman and so M. White most fraudulently confoundeth those two different tymes together as if all had hapned at one and the same tyme. Animaduersion LIII YF your Aduersary will vant that he will proue all by Scripture only as most of them giue it out they will then force him to draw both his Premisses I meane both his Propositions if so they should be reduced to a forme of Argument from the Scripture alone of which Method within two Arguments at least he is certaine to fayle For if he take either of his Propositions from humane Authority or from naturall Reason you may tell him he leaueth his vndertaken of prouing by Scripture alone and consequently you may deny his force of Argument though Logicall in forme Here I further aduertize that if your Aduersary vndertake the part of an Opponent tye him precisely euer to Oppose which Scene perhaps he being brought to a Non-plus would flyely transferre vpon you In like sort if he taketh vpon him to answere suffer him not to oppose thought he labour so to do to free himselfe from answering Thus be sure that ech of you keepe your chosen Station Animaduersion LIV. IF the Protestant should seeke to expouÌ„d by way of conference of places those words of our Sauiour This is my body this is my Bloud figuratiuely by those other words of his J
and Religion Animaduersion LXXXVI STriue to be more conuersant and ready if oportunity will not suffer you to be ready in all in such Controuersies which consist in practice as about Praying to Saints Jndulgences worshipping of Images Adoration of the most B. Sacrament Communion vnder one kind c. then in others which test only in beliefe and Speculation seeing the vulgar Protestant soonest taketh exception against these former and will expect greater satisfaction from you in them Because these being subiect to their sense in regard of the daily practise of them come neeâ—est within the compasse of their narrow Capâ—city are by them often charged through the calumny of their chiefe Maisters abusing their Credulity with many supposed abuses Whereas other points of Fayth which consist chiefly in Theory and speculation are further remoued from their apprehensioÌ„s and consequently they are least intangled with the doubts thereof Animaduersion LXXXVII TOuching those Articles or Controuersies which chiefly rest in speculation be well traualled in the Question touchiâ—â— the Jnfallibility of Gods Church as also 〈◊〉 that other Question That the Scriptuâ—â— without the Churches attestation cannot proâ—â— it selfe to be Scripture and that all points of beliefe do not receaue their proofe from Scriptuâ—â— alone seeing these two Controuersies potentially include most of all other Controuersies within themselues Also be most reâ—dy in the Question touching the continuâ— Visibility of the Protestant Church seeing tâ—â— Protestants must seeke to proue thâ—â— Church euer to haue beene Visible if thâ— will auer it to be the true Church of Chriâ—â— Whereas indeed you shall find euen by tâ—â— Confession of his owne Brethren as is eâ—â—â— where in this Treatise made cleere that tâ— Protestant is not able to instance for maâ— Centuries and Ages together so much a the being but of one Protestant Animaduersion LXXXVIII THere is scarsly any one Argument oâ— Credibility which more strongly and irrâ—pliably proueth the Antiquity and thereâ—â— the truth of the Roman Religion and the Nouelty and latenes of Protestancy and consequently the falshood therof then this following There cannot be alledged any one Protestant speaking of such Protestants as are out of Controuersy and acknowledged for such both by the Catholikes and Protestants who was not either in himself or in his forefathers first a Catholike and who by dogmatizing some Protestant Opinions afore neuer generally taught did separate himself depart from the Catholike Church afore then in Being Of which sort of men those words in S. Iohn are vnderstood Exierunt (t) 1. Ioan. 1. ex nobis the very stampe or signature of Innouatours in doctrine This Assertion is most true And to exemplify it in the chiefest Protestants or maintayners but of some points of Protestancy I meane Luther Swinglius Ochinus Ierome of Prage Waldo Wicleffe Albigenses Berengarius and to rise to the Heretikes of higher tymes as Acrius Iouinian Manicheuâ— and the rest it is certaine that all these wâ—re Originally Catholikes and by introduciâ—g of some Nouelismes did depart from the Catholike Church That all these and all such others as might be alledged were originally Catholikes is demonstratiuely proued from the implicite Confessions of the learned Protestants themselues acknowledging the Inuisibility of their owne Church for so many ages together Thus for example writeth Sebastianus Francus the Protestant as aboue is sâ—ewed For (u) In Ep. de abrogandis in vniuersum omnibus Statut. Eccles certaine through the worke of Antichrist the externall Church together with the fayth and Sacraments vanished away presently after the Apostles departure and that for these foureteene hundred yeares the Church he meaning his owne Protestant Church hath not beene externall and visible with whom agreeth D. Fuâ—ke saying The (x) Fulke in his answere to a CouÌ„terfeyte Cathol p. â—i Church decâ—yed immediatly after the Apostles dayes Furthermore to enlarge my selfe in the Protestants Confession herein M. Perkins the Protestant sayth thus Before (1) Perkins in his Exposition of the Creed p. 400. the dayes of Luther for the space of many hundred yeares an vniuersall Apostasy ouerspread the whole face of the earth and that our Church was not then visible to the world M. Napper in like manner thus writeth God (2) Napper vpon Reuel in c. 11. 12. l. 2. c. 2. p. 25. hath withdrawne his visible Church from open assemb ies to the harts of particular godly men c. during the space of 〈◊〉 hundred sixty yeares the true Church abyding â—â—tâ—nt inuisible But M. Brocard conâ—esseth further in these words During (3) Broc vpon the Reuel p. 1â—0 euen the second and third age meaning after Christ the true Church of God and light of the Gospell was obscured by the Roman Antichrist himselfe I â—ill here conclude with D. Downam thus aueâ—ring The (4) D. Down lib. de Antichrist Generall defection of the Visibâ—e Church foretould 2. Thessal 2. begun to worke in the Apostles tymes So luxuriant are the Protestants in confessing the Inuisibility of their owne Church for many ages together So as we see that by the Confession of these learned Protestants it is cleere that all the former alledged Protestants or any others which could be though falsely suggested for such were Originall Catholikes Now I hence conclude that if on the one syde it be proued that euery Protestant did Originally come out and departe by venting of some Protestanticall Positions from our Catholike Church afore enioying a Priority of Being and that on the othersyde our Aduersaries cannot shew any visible Society of men professing the true Christian fayth from which as more ancient the present Roman Religion departed as it is impossible for them to do I say I hence conclude that our Catholike fayth is most ancient and therefore true and Protestancy in respect thereof but late Innouations and therefore false Animaduersion LXXXIX I Will here rest in some Animaduersions touching the Doctrine of the Reall Presence And touching the saluing of the Difficulties thereof we are to recur to Gods Power which may in part be explicated in these ensuing Propositions The first Proposition God is able to do euery thing which Mans vnderstanding is able to conceaue The Reason hereof being in that Ens Verum in generall are the Obiects of our mind and therefore what may be conceaued or vnderstood may really exist and consequently be performed The second proposition All Christian Philosophers affirme that not only things which man is able to apprehend in his mind but also many other things incomprehensibâ—e in mans vnderstanding God can effect forseing say they that Totum Ens is Intelligible and to be conceaued and that which is not Ens cannot be conceaued and that the imbecility of Mans vnderstanding is such that it supposeth many things cannot exist or be and consequently cannot be apprehended by the vnderstanding which may indeed exist and so may be performed by God Therefore say they that things incomprehensible in
our Aduersaryes to haue beene more grieuous then euer this of England was Animaduersion CX WHereas our Aduersaries do further vrge in behalfe of the being of Protestants in former Ages that it is often obserued that a little quantity of Copper is in a couÌ„terfeyte Coyne of Gold chaffe is mingled with Corne and yet neither is the Copper Gold nor the Chaffe Corne so say they the Protestant Church was in former ages in the Papacy The Papacy was in the Protestant Church and yet the Protestant Church was not in the Papacy According hereto M. Perkins saith The (o) In his reformed Catholike pag. 328. 329. Church of Rome may be said to be in the Church of God the Church of God in the Church of Rome with whom agreeth Beza thus writing Voluit (p) In Epist. Theol. Epist 1. pag. 15. Deus in Papatu seruare Ecclesiam etsi Papatus non est Ecclesia And D. Whitaker (q) Whiâ—ak l. de Eccles pag. 165. Ecclesia vera fuit in papatu sed papatus non fuit Ecclesia To this I reply and say it is but a froath of words artificially put together Howsoeuer many of our Aduersaries much please themselues with this conceited Answere Therfore for the better examining thereof we are here to conceaue that the sense and meaning of these words is not that the Protestant Church had in those tymes a latent and hidden being in Catholike Countries without hauing entercourse communion with the then knowne and visible Church in the Sacraments for so the true Church could not be said to be in the papacy no more then at this day in respect of its like aboad in Turkish Countries it can be said to be in Turcisme Therefore the particular manner of this strange mixture as it appeares in shew of words is thus truly expressed by Osiander the Protestant in this manner (r) In Epitom Cent. 16. part altera p. 1070. 1072. Quod semper sub Papatu aliqui pij homines fuerint c. No man denyeth but that there were vnder the papacy some holy men who disliked the Errours of the Popes although they durst not openly professe so much nisi ardere aut ad minimum exulare velint except they would burne for their Religion or at least suffer banishment Thus we see the last sublimated sense of the former quaynt sentence resolues to this point To wit that the Protestant Church in those former tymes being in or vnder the Papacy did through feare of burning or banishment dissemble their Religion and communicate in all externall right with the Church of Rome Animaduersion CXI THe Confessed Inuisibility of the Protestant Church aboue set downe during so many former ages doth potentially and vertually include the proofe of the visibility of the Roman Church during all the said ages Seing the Jnuisibility of the Protestant Church for so long a tyme is ascribed by the Protestants themselues to the worke of Antichrist they meaning therby the Pope and the Church of Rome as appeareth by seuerall testimonyes of our Aduersaryes els where in this Treatise expressed particularly of M. Napper thus saying Betweene (s) Napper in his Treatise vpon the Reuelat. pag. 68. the yeares of Christ 300. and 316. the Antichristian Papisticall reigne began reigning vniuersally without any debatable contradiction 1260. yeares And accordingly the Centurists (t) See this in Cent. 4. and so successiuely in Euery Century charge all the ages from Constantine till Luther with Papistry Thus an acknoledged defection of the Protestant Church for many Centuryes doth by our Aduersaryes owne Confession necessarily include and imply a Continuall visibility of the Catholike Roman Church during all the said Centuryes Animaduersion CXII TOuching the supposed change of the fayth of Rome I will deuyde in these three next Animaduersions all the Ages from the Apostles euen to Luthers days into three seuerall Stations or Periods of tymes First then we will see how long it is granted by the Protestants that Rome did perseuere without any alteration of her Primitiue faith Secondly we will set downe the acknowledged continuance of that tyme during all which season the now present fayth of Rome hath continued that is how long Papistry as our Aduersaries terme it hath bene publikly professed throughout all Christendome Thirdly and lastly we will then take a view of the tymes betweene these two former seuerall tymes For these two tymes being once acknowledged on all sydes to wit the tyme during which the Church of Rome confessedly kept her first fayth taught by the Apostles and the tyme during which the present Roman fayth hath continued from this day vpward it ineuitably followeth that this supposed change in Religion did either happen in the Jnterstitium and meane tyme betweene these two former Periods of tymes or els that there happened no such change of Religion in the Church of Rome at all Now concerning the first of these tymes it is granted by the Protestants that Rome retayned her purity of fayth without any alteration from the Apostles tymes till after the death of Optatus Epiphanius and Austin which is during the space of foure hundred and fourty yeares after Christ This I thus proue Wheras our Catholike writers haue much insisted for proofe of their Religion in the succession of the Bishop of Rome euen vntill Austins dayes by the Example of Jrenaus Cyprian Optatus Jerome Vincentius Lyrinensis and Austin D. Fulke answereth in behalfe of these Fathers in this sort That (*) Fulke in his confutation of Purgatory p. 372. these Fathers especially named the Church of Rome it was because the Church of Rome at that tyme as it was founded by the Apostles so it continued in the Doctrine of the Apostles which Doctour in another place thus further writeth The (*) D. Fulke in his Retentiue pag. 85. Popâ—â—â— Church c. departed from the vniuersall Chuâ—ch of Christ long after Austins departure out of this Lyfe Thus he granting that till after Austins death the Church of Rome remayned the true Church In like manner D. Iewell accordeth with D. Fulke herein touching the Argument drawne by those foresaid Fathers from succession of the Bishops of Rome saying As (u) D. Iewell in his reply to D. Harding pag. 246. well Austin as also other godly Fathers rightly yeilded Reuerence to the Sea of Rome c. For the purity of Religion which was there preserued a long tyme without spot To conclude Caluin himselfe maketh good the foresaid Argument taken from the Succession of the Bishops of Rome insisted vpon by Jrenaeus Pertullian Origen Cyprian Austin and Epiphanius in these words Cum (x) Instit l. 4. cap. 2. Sect. 3. extra controuersiam erat nihil á principio vsque ad aetatem illam mutatum fuisse in Doctrina c. Seeing it was a point out of Controuersy that nothing in Doctrine from the begining to that very age was changed these holy
â—â—gurae illae verborum offendunt Jndurabo Coâ— Pharaonis similes Certum ect enim Hebraâ—â—phrazi significare Permissionem non voluntatem efficacem That is these formes of words 〈◊〉 not offend vs for it is certaine that in the Hebrew phraze they signify only permission and nâ—â— any efficacious will Add hereto how repugnant our Aduersaries exposition of this 〈◊〉 diuers other such Texts is to the words of God deliuered by Ezechiell cap. 33. which words may serue as a Syntax or Comment to paraphraze al the threatning passages set downe in Scripture against Sinners and against the doctrine of Reprobation shewing that all such comminations are only Conâ—â—tional Thus then Ezechiel in the Person of God Si dixero impio c. Yf J shall say to the wicked Thou shalt dye the death and he do pâ—â—nance for his Sinne and do Judgment and Iâ—stice liuing he shall liue and shall not dye Animaduersion CLI THe example of Elias is much prostituted by our Aduersaries for the warranting of their owne Churches Inuisibility for so many ages but how impertinently it is vrged obserue what followeth First I say this example maketh wholy against the Protestants seing the words of Elias Relictus sum (27) Reg. 1. solus were not spoken generally of all the Iewish people but only in regard of the Country of Israell and accordingly God answered the complaint of Elias with restraint to that only Country the Scripture saying immediatly after I haue left to me in Jsraell seauen thousand which haue not bowed vnto Baal Add hereto that in those very tymes the Church did greatly florish in the adioyning Countryes of Iuda as was to Elias then knowne and visible vnder the reigne of Asa and Iosaphat And thus is this obiection so much prized by diuers of our Aduersaries answered by (28) In corpore Doctrinae pag. 530. Melancthon Enoch (29) In his Soueraigne remedy pag. 17. Clappam Againe admitting these seauen thousand were vnknowne to Elias yet followeth it not that they were vnknowne to all others at that tyme Much lesse then is this example of force to proue that the Church of God may be latent and inuisible for many hundred yeares together not to one Elias only but to the whole World But for a further discouering of the weakenes of this Example let vs grant for the tyme that the Iewish Synagogue was in the dayes of Elias wholy inuisible yet is this example most defectiuely alledged as applyed to the Church of Christ Since the predictions and promisses made to the Church of Christ whose (30) Hebr cap. 8. testament is established in better promises are far greater and more worthy then those of the Iewish Synagogue Againe the foresaid Example doth not extend to the whole Châ—rch of God before Christ but only to the Iewish Synagogue as being a part or member therof for besides the Iewes there were diuers others faythfull as Melchisedech Cornelius the Eunuch of the Queene of Candace c. Thus far in solution of this obiection Animaduersion CLII. OVr Aduersaries do first teach that concerning Matter of fayth they are to belieue nothing for certaine but only the holy Scripture Secondly they teach that (31) So writeth D. Reynolds in his Conference with M. Hart. pa. 68. it is not the shew but the sense of the worâ—â— of Scripture that must decide Controuersies And that herein the Scripture doth not instruct them of it self but by certaine meanes as M. Hooker (32) In Eccles Policy l. 2 pa. 116. affirmeth Thirdly these Meanes are affirmed to be the reading (33) These meanes are set downe by D. Reynolds in his Conference p. 83. 84. sequentib and by D. Whitaker de sacra scriptura p. 521 522. 523. thereof the Conference of places the weighing of the circumstances of the Text skill iâ— tongues diligence and prayer Fourthly they affirme that these being Actions on their behalfe are but humane Endeauours and such wherein euery man without extraordinary priuiledge from God is subiect to Errour Fiftly they teach that these meanes according to the Nature of themselues afford a necessary doubtfulnes and vncertainty of opinion and therfore D. Whitaker thus writeth hereof Qualia (34) D. Whitak de Eccles contra Bellarm. Controu 2. q. 4. p. 227. illa media sunt talem ipsam interpretationem esse necesse est at media interpretandi loca obscura sunt incerta dubia ambigua Ergo fieri non potest quin ipsa etiam interpretatio incerta sit Si incerta tunc esse potest falsa Thus D. Whitaker discourseth of the foresaid meanes of interpreting the Scripture Now these being the confessed grounds and principles of our Aduersaries Doctrine they do appeare to be no other but as it were linked chaynes or naked connexions of vnauoydable vncertainty which point appeareth more fully from the example of Luther Swinglius Caluin all who vanted that they did vse the foresaid meanes in interpreting these few words Hoc est corpus meum and yet the end was that they deliuered mere contrary constructions of the said words so as supposing one of their constructions to be true it followeth necessarily that the other Construction is false Animaduersion CLIII THe Absurdities necessarily accompaning the doctrine of the Pope being Antichrist are many and great For the more cleere vnderstanding whereof we are here to repeate what was aboue deliuered vpon other occasions First then Luther thus writeth We (35) Luth lib. contra Anabaptist Confesse that there is vnder the Papacy most of the Christian good yea rather all the Christian Good and that from thence it came to vs. Verily we confesse that in the Papacy thâ—â—â— is true Scripture true baptisme the true Sacrament of the Altar the true Kâ—yes of Remission of sinnes c. Yea further that there is in the Papacy true Christianity or rather the true Kernâ—â— of Christianity Thuâ— fâ—r Luther with whom to omit diuers other Protestants D. Doâ—â— conspireth saying (36) D Doue in his persuasion to English Recusants pag. 23. We hold the Creed of the Apostles of Athanasius of Nice of Ephesus of Constantinople and the same Bible which 〈◊〉 receaued from them Now marke the ineuitable absurdity rysing from the premisses Yf the Pope being the head of the Papacy 〈◊〉 Antichrist as our Aduersaries do dreame doth it not then inauoydably follow that with Antichrist there is all the Christian Good that from Antichrist the Protestants receaue the true Scripture true Baptisme the true vse of other Sacraments to wit of the Altar and Absolution of our sinnes Finally that from Antichrist they receaue the Apostles Creed and the other Creeds aboue specifyed What impossibilityes are these and is not this potentially and implicitly to turne Christ into Antichrist Againe the Scripture prophesyeth that the Church of Christ as I haue shewed aboue shall conuert Kings and Kingdomes of the Gentills vnto it according to those words of Esay speaking of the
Adoration or Jnuocation or in any other sort To this Peter (10) Peter Martyr lib. contra Gardin part 1. obiect 150. Martyr and others do answere that if any such reuerence was exhibited by the Fathers to the Eucharist this reuerence was not terminated in the Eucharist it selfe but directed to Christ signifyed therein and so by the mediation of those earthly elements transferred vnto him No otherwyse tâ—â— when the Papists for thus do they partâ—câ—larly instance praying before Jmages 〈◊〉 not their prayers to the Images but to Christ 〈◊〉 the Saint represented therein But against tâ— Euasion I first aske what secret intelligâ— haue our Aduersaryes with the Fathers â—tention herein since the Fathers words gâ— not the least intimation thereof Seconâ— I say that (11) L de Hierarch Eccles c. 3. part 3. saying O Diuinissimum Sacrosanctum Sacram. c. Dionysius doth inuoke 〈◊〉 Sacrament it selfe and not Christ only â—fore the Sacrament Thirdly this their â—sweare admitting it for true doth waâ— euen in their iudgements the Catholâ—â— praying before Images and the reuereâ—â— giuen to them which Doctrine the Proâ—stants do so much inueigh against Animaduersion CLXVII THe Scripture is most difficult for three â—spects First in regard of its multiplieâ— of the Senses of one and the same passage Scripture Secondly in respect of the phrâ—â— wherein the Scripture is deliuered Thirdâ— by reason of the height of the subiect wheâ— the Scripture intreateth To touch all tâ—â— briefly First concerning the Sense Tâ—â— are in diuers passages of Scripture three â—uerall senses besydes the literall all iâ—â—ded by the Holy Ghost The senses are â—led Allegoricus Tropologicus and Anagogâ— Now how shall an ignorant maÌ„ know 〈◊〉 texts of Scripture be capable of all these 〈◊〉 of them The Style of the Scripture is â—â—de difficult as being stored with figures 〈◊〉 Allegoryes and full of Hebrew phrazes 〈◊〉 Dialects as appeareth in perusing the â—â—lms and the Apocalyps The subiect of the â—â—â—ipture is most high as discoursing of the â—â—eation of the world of Nothing of the â—ysteryes of the Trinity and the Incarnatiâ—â— besides many other Dogmatical points 〈◊〉 transcending the light of mans naturall â—â—prehension And therefore S. Ambrose had â—â—od cause thus to pronounce of the holy â—â—â—ipture Mare (12) Ambros Ep. 44. ad Constantium est scriptura Diuina haâ—â—s in se sensus profundos Ad hereto that the â—â—â—ipture hath to an ignorant eye diuers seeâ—ng contrarietyes though in theÌ„selues they are most true and reconcileable For example these two texts (13) Ezec. 18. Filius non portabit iâ—quitatem patris anima quae peccauerit ipsa â—â—rietur And this other Visitans (14) Exod 10. iniâ—â—tatem patrum in filios in tertiam quartaÌ„â—â—nerationem how can an ignorant man or â—o man reconcile these passages And what â—â—ity then may one discerne in a Mechaniâ—â—l fellow or silly woman who can only â—t reade carrying the bible vnder their â—â—me to the Church and vaunting of the â—ines of the Scripture and auerring that â—â—emselues are able to vnfould expound â—e most abstrusest passages there O pride â—â—d ignorance Ad finally that in the Scripâ—â—e the plurall number is sometymes vsed for â—â—e singular number as Marc. 15. we read they that were crucifyed with him rayled at hiâ— and yet we know it was but only one of the theeues that did so the good thiefe honoring our Sauiour See the like hereto touching this kynd of phraze of the Scripture besydes other places in Hebr. 7. Againe the Scripture in diuers texts doth vnderstaÌ„â— by the word Omnis only quidam For example in Math. 27. we reade dicunt omnâ— vt crucifigatur and yet the B. Virgin S. Maâ— magdelen the Apostles and diuers others dâ— not so cry out against our Sauiour The liâ— phraze is in those words Omnes quae sâ— sunt querunt Philip. 2. yet the Apostles and many other good Christians were eâ—empted out of this sentence But now heâ—â— I demand how can an vnlearned man râ—concile these and the like sentences wâ—â— the true meaning of the Holy Ghost in tâ— Scripture Animaduersion CLXVIII THe Catholike Church deliuereth câ—taine Rules for the more perfect knoâ—ledg of true Traditions The first When 〈◊〉 vniuersall Church doth imbrace any doctriâ— as a point of fayth the which is not found in 〈◊〉 holy Scriptures it is necessary to say that thesâ— point proceedeth from the Tradition of the Aâ—â—stles The reason hereof is in that the vniuâ—â—sall Church as being the (1) 1. Timoth 3. pillar and fouâ—dation of truth cannot erre And therefâ— what the Church belieueth to be of fayâ— â—e same doubtlesly is of fayth But no â—int or Article is of fayth but what God â—th reuealed either by the Apostles or Proâ—ts since at this present the Church is not â—ouerned with new Reuelations The second When the vniuersall Church â—h obserue any thing which not any but only â—d had power to institute and yet which is not â—nd written in the Scripture the same we are â—resume to be deliuered from Christ and his â—ostles the reason hereof is like to the reaâ—n of the former Rule to wit in that the â—iuersall Church cannot erre either in belieâ—g or in working especially if the worâ—g doth concerne any rite of diuine worâ—â— And such is the Baptisme of Infants The third That which is obserued throughâ— the vniuersall Church and cannot fynd any 〈◊〉 institution thereof in the most ancient tymes same we are to belieue that it was first ordâ—yâ—â— by the Apostles though it be of that nature that the Church had power firct to ordayne it â—is is the rule of (2) Lib. 4 contra Donat. cap. 24. S. Austin The fast of â—t may be an example hereof For this fast â—ght haue been instituted by the Church Christ or his Apostles had not afore instiâ—ed it Yet we maintayne that it was instiâ—ed by Christ or his Apostles because asâ—ding vp to higher tymes and seeking afâ— the first Origen therof we find no beâ—ning thereof but only in the tyme of Apostles The fourth When all the Doctours of the Church being gathered together either in a generall Councell or in their seuerall writings and bookes do teach with a common consent that such or such a point descendeth from Apostolicall Tradition we are to belieue that it is an Apostolicall Tradition The reason of this rule is because if all the Doctors of the Church shold erre then followeth it that the whole Church should erre since she is obliged to follow her Pastours and Doctours Now where we speake of the Fathers touching any point in their seuerall writings here we are to vnderstand that we hould it not necessary that all the Fathers should write therof but it is sufficient if some Fathers of the chiefest note and eminency do expressely affirme the point in writing and that other Fathers do not contradict them therein taking notize of such their writings Here we say
and 5. Luke â— 16 both who leaue out this exposition saying thus absolutely Whosoeuer putteth aâ—ay his wyfe and marrieth another committeth adultery And this exposition is giuen by S. Thomas Sent. in 4. distinct 35. quaest vnica art 5. So as in these former words of Math. 1â— a Parenthesis is to be vnderstood after this manner Whosoeuer putteth away his wyfe which is not lawfull except it be for fornication marrieth another committeth adultery Now that the exposition of our Aduersaries of the said text was coÌ„demned throughout all ages of the primitiue Church is most cleere since the Fathers of ech such age euâ—â— taught that a man putting away his wife â—pon any occasion yea for Fornication couâ—â— not marry any other Woman For examâ—â— thus in the first Age Clemens teacheth 〈◊〉 Canon Apostol can 48. In the secoâ— Age Iustinus Martyr in Apolog. pro Christ. nis In the third Tertullian l. 4. in Marcâ—nem In the fourth Age the Councell of Eâ—â—â—ris can 9. In the fifth Concil Mileuitanâ—â— can 17. and S. Austin lib. de adulterinis conâ—gijs In the sixt age Primasius in Comment 〈◊〉 cap. 7. prioris ad Corinth Now here I vrâ— that if the former exposition of the Cathâ—likes be false then did the Primitiue Chuâ—â—â— wholy erre therein which is most absurdâ— maintayne In like manner the Primitâ—â— Church of Christ did then wrong maâ— Christians in not suffering them to vse â—pon occasion of the wyues Fornication tâ—â— priuiledg which Christ may seeme to graâ— to them I may add hereto that diuers leâ—â—ned Protestants by maintayning that 〈◊〉 case of Diuorce vpon adultery the innoceâ— party cannot marry againe do reiect câ— Aduersaries exposition of the former 〈◊〉 of Matthew 19. According hereto to â—mit many other moderate Protestants tâ—â—ching the same with vs Catholikes D. Hâ—â—son in his tertia Thesi printed 1602. maintâ—â—neth the same publikely in Oxford In lâ—â— sort some thirty yeares since more or leâ—â— the same Doctrine was preached at Paâ— Crrsse by D. Doueâ— Now to all this aboue â—aid I may adioyne the exposition of S. Auâ—â—in in l. 1. de adulterinis coniugijs cap. 9. of the â—oresaid text who there sayth That the â—ords in Math. 19. vz. nisi ob fornicationem â—ught to be taken negatiuè non exceptiuè by â—ay of negation not of exception So as the sense of them may be this Whosoeuer shall put away his wyfe nisi ob fornicationem that is extra causam fornicationis without the cause of fornication and shall marry another commitâ—â—th adultery From which exposition the Aâ—ultery of him is affirmed who putting away his wyfe without the cause of fornicaâ—â—on shall marry another But nothing is â—ere said of him who putting away his wyfe â—y reason of fornication shall marry anoâ—her Thus far of this Text. Animaduersion CLXXX AS the Inuisibility and Latency of the Protestants Church hath beene fully aboue demonstrated so here I hould it not imperâ—â—nent if I proue the Continuall and vninâ—â—rrupted visibility of our Catholike Church â—nd consequently that it is that Church of God to which so many Prophesyes haue â—eene made of its vneclipsed splendour and â—â—diancy Thy (46) Esa 60. Gates shal be contiâ—â—ally open neither day nor night shall they be â—â—nt c. Now this verity is proued seuerall wayes â—nd first from the confessed Jnuisibility of the Protestant Church during all former ages till Luthers insurrection And this the rather seeing the learned Protestants confesse that all the former Inuisibility of the Protestant Church was wrought by the labour power and diligence of the Catholike Roman Church Now how could the Roman Church effect so much for so long a tyme except it selfe during all that tyme were most visible According to this assertion we find M. Napper to confesse the same reason of his Churches Jnuisibility in these words During (47) Napper vpon the Reuelations caps 11. 12. euen the second thâ—s age meaning since Christ the true Churâ—â— of God and the light of the Gospel was obscureâ— by the Roman Antichrist himselfe Secondly the euer Visibility of the Catholike Church is proued from the acknowledged succession of Pastours in oâ—â— Catholike Church euer since the Apostles since those visible Pastours were the visible and most eminent members of our said Church preaching and instructing others who in this respect must become also viâ—itâ— and knowne Now this our visible succession of Pastours in our Roman Church is confessed euen by our Aduersaries for thus D. Fulke exprobrateth the Catholiks in these words You (48) D. Fulke in his answere to a Counterfayte Catholike p. 27. can name chiefe Personages in all ages marke these words in all ages and their gouerment and ministery and especially the succession of the Popes you haue vpon your fingars Thus D. Fulke Thirdly and lastly the same is thus proued Yf the most ancient and reuerend Fathers of the primitiue Church I meane Ignatius Dionysius Areopagita Iustinus Irenaeus Tertullian Origen Cyprian Athanasius Hilarius the Cyrills the Gregories Ambrose Basill Opratus Gandentius Chrysostome Ierome Austin and diuers others be accounted by our Aduersaries most earnest Professours of our Catholike Roman fayth then it follâ—weth most consequently that our Catholike Church was most coÌ„spicuous in those tymes since those Fathers were the visible Pastours of the Church then in Being Now that the Fathers of those primitiue tâ—mes were Papists professing the present Roman fayth appeareth besides from what is already most fully confessed by our Aduersaries in that behalfe euen from that acknowledgment of Peter Martyr saying As long (49) Peter Martyr l. de votis p. 476. as we insist in the fathers so long we shal be conuersaÌ„t in the Papists errours Now that our Catholike Church hath beene further also most visible since the tymes of those primitiue Fathers I meane for these last thousand yeares is so fully confessed by our Aduersaryes in this Treatise as that I hould it ouer wearisome and fastidious so often to repeate such their Confessions Animaduersion CLXXXI THe mayne ArgumeÌ„t drawne from Reason which our Aduersaryes vrge against vnwritten Traditions is this It seemeth say they impossible that vnwritten Traditions can be kept and conserued since there are diuers hinderances thereof as Forgetfulnes Jgnorance negligence peruersnes of mens Natures and the like And hence it is that we see that such Sentences which Lycurgus Pythagoras and others deliuered only in words and not in wryting are at this day lost and perished To this I answere that I hould it impossible that Apostolicall Traditions should not be preserued since this care is not properly incumbent vpon Man but vpon God who gouerneth the Church Now besydes the prouidence of God which is the chiefe cause of preseruing the Traditions of the Church there are foure other inferiour or subordinate Causes for their preseruation The first is the committing of Traditions to wryting For although they be not set downe in Holy writ I meane in the
Treatise vpon the Reuelation p. 68. Betweene the yeares of Christ three hundred and 316. the Antichristian Papisticall reigne began reigning vniuersally without any debatable contradiction one thouand two hundred and sixty yeares M. Napper practised vniuersally throughout all Christendome almost the space of the foresaid fourteene hundred years by the learneder sort of ProtestaÌ„ts granted to be sufficient (l) That the Catholike sayth is suffiâ—ient to saluation is confessed by Cartwright in his reply to D. Whitgifts defence pa. 82. by D. Feild of the Church l. 36. 46. by D. Couell in his defence of M. Hooker p. 77. and by many others to Saluation was punished with losse of goods inprisonment and often losse of life And thus farre in an eauâ—n libration of the Lawes by which Sectaryes were punished in Q Maryes dayes and of the Statutes by which the Catholikes were persecuted in Q. Elizabeth her raigne Only â—ad hereto that it according to M. Nappers confession our Catholike Religion did raigne vniuersally from the yeares of Christ 316. yeares then it euidently followeth that it did not first then begin but was vndoubtedly in being long before it could possibly become so confessedly vniuersâ—ll which said tiâ—e so long before coâ—d not be short of the Apostle times Animaduersion X. DIuers of our Aduersaries being pressed to shew when any change of the Roman Religion came in as an innouation not being able to instance in any one dogmaticall Poynt so introduced the more easely to cast dust in the eyes of the ignorant do (m) Thus answereth D Whitaker contra Camp rat 7. saying Pilinon subito omnes canescunt And againe In Eâ—clesia Romana accidit quemâ—dmodum magno aedificio videmus enenire quod â—â—mes alâ—quo loco incipit agere c. Ita Romana Eâ—clesia temporum successione c. answere that the changes of Fayth in the Church of Rome vnespiedly did comâ— in euen as hayres of a Mans head inseâ—sibly do grow gray and as houses and edifices 〈◊〉 without any obseruation of the tyme become ruâ—nous and decaying yet certaine it is that the hayres change their former colour to gray anâ— that Houses become ruinous To examine these resemblances as mere impostures and desperate Euasions I first say that the first decay in building the first shew of whitnes in hayre is imperceptible not to be discerned whereas euery change in faith though but in one poynt or Article is most markable and subiect to obseruatioÌ„ Secondly the whitnes of the hayres of the head and the ruins of a house do not happen but by degrees and therefore at the first cannot be discerned Whereas euery Opinion in Doctrine is at the first either true or false and therfore is for such at the First to be apprehended by the vnderstanding Thirdly not any haue the charge or care imposed vpon them to obserue the changes in these petty Matters But in the Church of Christ there are euer appoynted Pastours and Doctours whose office is to marke the first begining of any innouation in Doctrine and accordingly to labour to suppresse the same Lastly these deceytfull resemblances being truly weighed do recoyle back with disaduantage to the Protestants For although we cannot shew when the first hayre began to be whyte or the first slifter in a house beganne to be a slifter yet any notable degrees of the said whytnes in the hayres or of the slifters in a house are easily discerned And therefore the Protestants are obliged euen from the nature of these their owne similitudes to tell vs at what time some sensible degrees increase of this supposed change did happeÌ„ And the manifestation of the degrees is to be made by naming the time the Persons when and by whom such or such a particular point of the Roman Religion was first sensibly introduced into the Church of Rome The which not any Protestant hitherto hath bene able to shew Animaduersion XI IT is Euident that in the ancient times diuers Innouatours did rise denying this or that Catholike Article as for example The Doctrine of the reall presence was first denyed by certaine Heretikes in (n) As witneseth Theod. Dial. 3. Ignatius his dayes which Ignatius was scholler to the Apostles The denyall of freewill taught by the Manichees as (o) Auctin l. de Haeres cap. 46. Austin witnesseth and therein condemneth them The like may be said of more then twenty articles of our Catholike Religion denied by the ancient Heretikes as els where in this Treatise is shewed Now from hence I demonstratiuely conclude that this deniall of the said Caâ—hâ—â—ike points in those ancient times doth necessarily imply that the said Catholike points were affirmatiuely belieued generally taught both in and before the times And thus through the old Heretâ— denying and impugning of our said poiâ—â— of fayth is necessarily presupposed a preâ—stency of those said affirmatiue doctrinâ— the Reall presence Freewill and of the râ—â— wherof those ancieÌ„t Heretiks Tenets are mâ—rely Negatiues I meane they preadmit a former more ancient beliefe of our said Câ—tholike doctrines For why should any Sâ—ctaries in those dayes rise vp to deny aâ— this by writing any of the said doctrineâ— if those doctrines had not beene then aâ—â— before belieued Animaduersion XII SVch frontlesse Protestants as will maintaine the Visibility of their Church for a ages undertaking to giue ExaÌ„ples of seuerall Protestants in such ages do commonly vse this Height and imposture That is they begin to instance in Luther and so vpwards to Waldo who liued about 400. years since And then they arriuing to that time though all those Examples be meerely false and impertinent shift off the instancing from that 400. yeares to the Apostles dayes which containes aboue twelue hundred yeares by saying We shall (p) So answeareth the Author of a Treatise entituled of the perpetuall visibility and succession of the true Church in all ages pa. 89. printed anno 1614. not need to ascend any higher then to Waldo which otherwise is easy to make playne thus leauing a thousand and one hundred yeares without giuing any one Example of ProtestaÌ„ts during all that long period of Ages Now â—ere I say the Protestants imposture is this To begin with Luther vpward and not downeward towards Luther therby the better to conceale from a vulgar eye the small number of those ages or Centuries for which they endeauour to proue the imaginary Visibility of the ProtestaÌ„t Church For if they had begun in instancing with Waldo who as is said liued but some 400. yeares since then euery simple man might haue discerned at the first that they had passed ouer eleuen or twelue hundred years at the least to wit from the Apostles dayes to waldo without pretending so much as one Example of Protestancy during all that large circuite of tyme and so might haue iustly challenged them for their pretermitting of so many Ages In some sort answerably hereto Card. Bellarmine chargeth
Caluin with an accustomed sl ight in this manner When Caluin vndertaketh to answere many texts of Scripture vrged in proofe of some Catholike Article or point Caluin begins to answere two or three of such texts as may seeme in an ignorant eye to be best capabâ—e of some shew of answere and for the other passages of Scripture which are most conuincing for the point vrged in which we Catholikes chiefly insist and wherunto Caluin cannot pretend any answere he passeth them ouer commonly in these words The chiefest passages J haue â—wered as for the other texts of Scripture wrâ—â— by the Papists to the same end they are so imâ—â—tinently alledged as that it were but tyme loâ—â— answere them therfore I passe them ouer as 〈◊〉 worthy of answere Here is Serpentiue craft 〈◊〉 the Card. calls it For Caluin thought it bâ—â—ter policy not to conceale the chiefe 〈◊〉 by vs vrged for that might argue a guâ—nes in Caluin but to take particular noâ— of them and so by slâ—ighting the force all such passages to make the ignorant â—â—der bâ—lieue that they nothing conduce the Catholike point for which they pretended Dolus an virtus quis in hoste quirat Animaduersion XIII THe Protestants do set downe the 〈◊〉 preaching of the Word and the true Aâ—â—â—nistration of the Sacraments to be the Maâ—â— of the Church The reason of this thâ— proceeding is double First herby to reâ—â— the Cathoâ—ikes Notes of the Church 〈◊〉 meane Antiquity Visibility Succession Vâ— c. seeing they are not able to iustâ— these Notes in their owne Church Sâ—coÌ„dly because by erecting their owne Notâ— of preaching the Word and administring 〈◊〉 Sacraments they reduce to their owne Ceâ—sure only reiecting all other Authorities which is the true Church For they will acknowledge the word to be truly preached at the Sacraments rightly administred onâ— such places and after such manner and â—els where or otherwise as themselues 〈◊〉 to thinke and determine And yet by their proceeding they are mightily â—â—nded And here I will briefly recur to â—t D. Whitaker sayth of these Notes These (q) Whitak contia CaÌ„p rat 3. Notes being present do constitute a Church â—eing absent do subuert it Now the Proteâ—ants during many Centuries haue wanted â—hese Notes therefore during all that time 〈◊〉 Church hath beene wholy extinct and â—nihilated That the Protestant Church â—uring many ages hath beene depriued of â—hese Notes I meane of preaching the word â—nd administring the Sacraments is euicted â—ut of the confessed Inuisibility of the Proâ—estant Church for many Ages for thus acâ—ordingly Sebastianus (r) Eâ— de abrogand in vniuersum omnibus statut Ecclesiast Francus a great â—rotestant writeth For certaine through the â—â—orke of Antichrist the externall Church togeâ—her with the fayth and Sacrament vanished aâ—ay presently after the Apostles With whom â—greeth Caluin thus acknowledging Factum (s) Inst 4. c. 1. sect 11. est vt per aliquot secula c. It was brought â—o passe that the true preaching of the word of â—od did vanish away for the space of certaine â—ges Animaduersion XIV A Weake and confused Iudgment may suggest or conceaue difficulties but it is a cleare â—dgment that must resolue them The reason of the disparity herein is this To 〈◊〉 one thing for another or to erre in the pâ—â—per nature essence of things is the soâ— of doubts and questions but to be able range and marshall together things of 〈◊〉 nature and to deuide and seuer things sunder which carry a great likenes oneâ— another for such resemblance of particâ—lars euer begets mistaking as also to knâ— what essentially is agreeing to the naâ—â— of any thing and what but accidentally companieth the same is a worke of the lâ—dicious This I write that vnlearned 〈◊〉 may learne Humility in beliefe and 〈◊〉 seeke to apprehend with their weake iuâ—ments the high Misteries of Christian Râ—gion especially the Articles of the B. â—râ—â—â— the Jncarnation and of the Reall presence Christs body in the holy Eucharist Animaduersion XV. IT sometymes may fall out that the 〈◊〉 Inuentour of a false Opinion may be 〈◊〉 Heretike as mantayning it before it be câ—demned by the Church whereas the Professours of it after its condemnation bâ—come Heretikes according to that sentenâ— of Vincentius (t) L. de Haeresib Lyrinensis O admiraâ— change of things The Authours of one and 〈◊〉 same Opinion are esteemed Catholikes the followers Heretikes Thus we see that it is coâ—tumacy against the Definitions and Decree of the Church of Christ which consummate an Heresy Animaduersion XVI WE are to call to mind that the Ceremonyes in the celebration of the Masse were successiuely and at seuerall times added and first brought in by seuerall Popes And accordingly we fynd that the (u) The Relicks of Rome or the Anatomy of the Masse by â—ntony de Adaâ—o prinâ—ed 1â—56 Hospinâ—â—n Histor Saâ—â—amâ—nt â— â— c. 4. 5. 6. 7. Aduersaryes of the Church of Rome as willing to discouer our Innouations though in the smallest Matters and but in points of Indifferency haue most dilligently and painefully recorded them in their seuerall bookes written of this very subiect with all due circumstances both of the Popes introducing them and the tymes wherein they were introduced Here now I vrge if the Enemyes of the present Church of Rome weâ—e thus diligent and solicitous in noting the begining of ech Ceremony of the Masse all such Ceremonyes being meerely accidentall to the Masse and without which it may as truly and effectually be celebrated as with them If they I say could haue discouered any Innouation in the maine doctrine of the Masse as the doctrine of the Reall Presence the Sacrifice of Christs Body there offered vp c. would they haue beene silent therin Or rather would they not haue loaded their Bookes with relation of all such Innouations they consisting not in small Ceremonies but in most sublime and high points of Christian Religion Animaduersion XVII THe Protestants are so various or rathâ— contrary in their Positions writings as that a man may borrow from their â—â—uerall Confessions both the propositions 〈◊〉 premises out of which the Conclusion shâ— rise wholy making agâ—inst their Religion For example D. Humfrey thus wryteth (x) D. Humfâ— Iâ— sâ—â—s in part 2. c. 3. Oportet Ecclesiam esse Conspicuam Concluâ— est Clarissima Jt is an euident Conclusion thâ— the Church of God ought to be conspicuous 〈◊〉 visible And M. Hooker God hath and caâ— shall haue some visible Church vpon the eartâ— But of the coÌ„fessed visibility of the Churcâ— of God more fully I will shew hereafteâ— Now touching the Inuisibility of the Protestants Church we reade M. Napper thâ— to confesse (y) V. pâ—â— the Reueâ—â—t in c 11 12. God hath with drawne his vâ—sible Church from opâ—n assemblies to the hartâ—â— particular godly men And D. Fulke confessetâ— thus (z) D. Fuâ—ke in his answer to a counterfeyt Cach p. 16. The
by his owne learned Brethrens Confessions or else he must rest silent And this is the reason why the Protestants are so loath to dispute of the Church Since this Question compreheÌ„deth in it selfe diuers points of fact as of its continuall Visibility Antiquity Succession Ordination and Mission of Pastours c. All which Questions receaue their proofes from particular Instances warranted from History by shewing the particular Tymes Persons and other circumstances concerning matter of Fact Animaduersion XXI WE Catholikes charge the Protestants with a vicious Circle of dispute between the Scripture and the spirit and in requitall hereof the Protestants do reciprocally insimulate vs Catholiks within the said vicious circular argumentation betweene the Scripture and the Church Now let vs see whether of vs stand truly chargeable herewith That the Catholikes are free from this kind of arguing I thus proue The Catholikes touching the Scripture and the Church do euer make their proofes in seuerall kinds of Causes and by a partiall manner of proofe and therby do still proue one thing by another more knowne to those persons to whom it is to be proued The actuall assent and beliefe it selfe is wrought wherby we infallibly belieue the Mysteries reuealed though we belieue the verity of the Scriptures reuelation by the authority of the Church propounding the Churches proposition for the authority of the Scriptures reuealing wherby the Scripture reuealing doth giue vs testimony of the Church propounding againe the Church propounding of the Scriptures reuealing Neuerthelesse this reciprocall testimony and proofe is not any proper vicious circle First because it is in diuerso genere causae in diuers kinds of causes for the testimonies of the Scriptures reuelation to the infallibility of the Churches proposition is causa formalis the formall cause by the which we assent to the Churches proposition But the Churches proposition is only Causa conditionalis or as we vse to speake Conditio fine qua non to know the Scriptures Reuelation and so they are reciprocall in a different manner of proofe the one that is Scripture à Priori as including diuine reuelation the other that is the Church à Posteriori required only as a condition The former as a formall precedent Cause the later as a subsequent annexed condition Secondly this reciprocall proofe is not adomnino idem as Aristotle requires to a Circle that is the one is not the totall and sole cause of knowing the other for the Churches proposition is not knowne only by the Scriptures reuelation and not otherwise but also by other proofes signes and testimoâ—ies to wit Miracles Consent Sanctity c. all which conuince that the Churches authority is necessary and infallible to distinguish the true sense of the Scripture from false and to end Controuersies about Scripture But now to cast our eye vpon the Protestants Circle prouing the Scripture by the priuate Spirit and the priuat Spirit from the Scripture it is euident that they proue the Scripture by the Spirit and Spirit by the Scripture in one the same kind of Cause and by one sole whole manner of proofe For demaund of a Protestant how and by what meanes he vnderstaÌ„deth the Scripture He answeres by the Spirit and so knowes the Scripture by the Spirit And aske him by what meanes he knowes he hath the true spirit he answeres the Scripture assures himselfe therof since he is one of the Elect. And thus this his proofe is truly Circular and vicious as being deliuered in eodem genere Causae and omnino ad idem Animaduersion XXII IT is most certaine that Protestants deny all Authorities of all affirmatiue heads making their last refuge to their owne priuaâ— Spirit and Iudgement For example if we insist in the affirmatiue Notes and Marks of the Church to wit vniuersality visibility vnity c. ouâ— aduersaryes as is aboue said discard the testimonyes of all these heads by erecting for Notes the preaching of the word and administration of the Sacraments so reducing to their owne iudgment only when the word is truly preached and the Sacramâ—nts rightly administred Yf in matters of fact we recurre to History I meane concerning visibility Succession vocation c. they reiect this authority by saying Sufficit (g) Whitak contra Duraeum l. 7 p. 478. nobis c. To vs it is sufficient by comparing the Popish opinions with the Scrâ—pture to discouer the disparity of faith betweene them and vs. And as for Historiographers we giue them liberty to wryte what they will If we produce the testimonyes of particular Fathers of the Primitiue Church marke how Luther depresseth them (h) Luth. de seruo arbis 1551. pag. 434. The Fathers of so many ages haue beene plainly blind most ignorant in the Scriptures they haue erred all their life time vnlesse they were amended before their death they were neither Saincts nor pertayning to the Church If we produce Generall Councels they answere saying (i) Petâ—â— Martyr l. de votis pa. 476. As long as we insist in Generall Councels so long we shall continue in the Popish Errors If we passe to Apostolicall Traditions Cartwright in depressing Traditions maintained by S. Austin thus wryteth To (k) Sâ—â— Cartwright in whitgifts defence p. 103. allow S. Austins saying touching Traditions is to bring in popery If we alledge diuers passages of Scripture as out of Toby Ecclesiasticus the Machabees the Protestants with full voyce deny them to be Canonicall and style them only Apocriphal If we take our authorityes out of such books of Scripture as are acknoledged for Scripture on both sydes the Protestants deny the Translation of the Scripture to be true sincere which point appeareth both from the Protestants mutual condemning one anothers translation of Scripture as also from the most bitter censure giuen by our English Puritans against our English Translaiion whereof seuerall books writteÌ„ by them are yet extaÌ„t If we Catholikes proceed further in insisting in the Originall of both the Testaments the Protestants deny that the Originalis are at this present true Thus for example in Math c. 10. we read 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the first Peter Beza (l) Beza in Annotat noui Testam 1556 denyeth the Originall herein mantayning that the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 was inserted into the text by some one fauoring the Popes Primacy In like sort (m) Beza vâ—i supra Beza denyeth that the Greeke Originall in Math. 22. is at this present the same as it was penned by the Euangelist mantayning that it is corrupted in fauour of the Realâ— presence If we yet ascending further entrench our selfe in such books of Scripture whose Originals Translations are accepted on ech party as true and incorrupted and tel our Aduersaryes that the whole Church of God in her primitiue and purest tymes interpreted the passages of Scripture in that sense in which they are at this present by the Catholikes alledged the Protestants
(n) So doth D. Whit. l. de Eccles Bellar. Contro 2. q. 4. pag. â—23 Iewell in his Apolog of the Church of England act 4. cap. 4. absolutely deny that infallible Authority of the Church of God in interpreting the holy Scripture and disclayming from it appeale to their owne Priuat Spirit for the true interpretation of the same Finally in the last place if the Catholiks confirme their Religion with the Authority of Miracles the Protestants in answere thereto absolutely reiect the force of Miracles tearming them (o) So the Conturists â—all them Cent. 4. col 1445. Osiâ—â—â—â—â— Cent. 10. 11. 12. but Antichristian wonders and lying signes as aboue is shewed Thus we see how our Aduersaryes disclayming from all heads of proofes do finally reduce all to their owne priuate Iudgment or Spirit And is not this I demand the foresaid vicious Circulation from the first to the last answere which aboue is disalowed in the â—rotestants impugning or disputing Animaduersion XXIII THat the words of Christ at his last Supper are to be taken literally and not Figuratiâ—ly is proued by these Reasons following in that Christ saying this is my Body (p) Math. â—6 Marc. 14. c. This is my bloud did adioyne therto Quod pro nobis datur qui pro nobis effundetur which later words are conformable to the literall acceptance of the former words The same verity is proued from the seuerall circumstaÌ„ces of the foresaid place of the Scripture The first circumstance may be taken from the matter or Obiect Here the matter or subiect of the former words containes the Institution of a Sacrament the foundation of a supreme point of Christian Religion A will or Compact contracted with the Church But it is most improbable to affirme that a Sacrament a supreme Article of beliefe or a Compact or last Will made by Christ with the Church should be deliuered in figuratiue words The Second Circumstance we may take froÌ„ the person of Christ speaking with whose diuine wisedome and Charity it is not agreabâ—e to haue giuen and ministred the Sacrament by speaking the former words of the Institution in shew in a literall sense but in meaning a figuratiue only an ineuitable occasion of false iudgement in the Hearers and of perpetuall Idâ—latry in the mynds and wils of the sucâ—â—ding Christians during the continuance 〈◊〉 the world Another Citcumstance may be takeâ— from the persons of the Euangelists and thâ— Apostles repeating and relating this speacâ— of Christ Hoc est corpus meum c. Aâ— which men whereas they did write in seuâ—rall times when some of them were presenâ— at the Institution others receaued relatioâ— thereof from them that were present thereat whereas also they had seene the practise of the Apostles about this Sacrament wheâ—â— as lastly they had the spirit of true vndeâ—standing notwithstanding all this they aâ—â— did vnanimously conspire in deliuering 〈◊〉 playne and literall construction of our Sauiours words Which reason is more preuayling by obseruing the contrary course which they tooke in explicating other obscure sentences of our Sauiour for thosâ— words Soluite templum hoc in tribus diâ—bus reaedificabo illud the Euangelist did interpret of Christs Body saying ille (q) Iohn cap. 1. aâ—tem dicebat de templo corporis sui to preuent that the Iewes should not thinke that ouâ— Sauiour spake of the Temple of Salomoâ— In like manner the said Euangelist is founâ— to haue expounded other of our Sauiours doubtfull sayings though in themselues of much lesse importance as Christs (r) Cap. 11. exaltation from the earth The sleeping of Lazarus â—â—e (s) Cap. 11. girding of Peter and stretching forth his â—â—ndes c. And yet neuer expounded the â—oâ—ds of the Institution otherwise then in â—heir plaine direct literall sense Another from the Persons of the Apostles â—earing Christ instituting the Sacrament Now â—f there were any figuratiue speech in â—he words of Christ especially concerning â—o great a matter the Apostles then preâ—ent would neuer haue omitted to haue asâ—ed Christ what had beene the meaning of â—hose strange words being vttered a little â—efore his death As they did touching oâ—her darke speaches spoken by Christ and â—hus we read them to haue said Edissere (t) Math. 13. 15.5 â—obis parabolam Zizaniorum And againe Edisâ—ere nobis hanc Parabolam Againe from â—he persons of the Capharnaits who did take our Sauiours words in that sense as he did properly speake of his flesh to be truly and really eaten and at such their construction they rested much scandalized Neuerthelesse Christ did not therefore explane his former speach nor excuse it by any Tropes or figuratiue phrase of words but more vehemently affirmed his sentence in the same words and with earnest asseueration repeated the same Another Circumstance may be taken from the place of his last supper which Christ did choose to be very secret admitting thereto only his Apostles to whom it was giuen to know and to haue the Intelligence of the diuine Mysteries Therefoâ— in this most secret and reserued schoole 〈◊〉 the Apostles wherein a supreme mystery 〈◊〉 fayth was deliuered he did speake sincere simply plainly and not by figures In this last place we may call to mind 〈◊〉 the circumstances of this busines as tâ— Pronouncing of the sacred words of the Jâ—stiâ—â—tion the washing of the Apostles seet Christs â—â—sire of performing this Mystery his casting vp 〈◊〉 his eyes towards Heauen his application of tâ— words to the matter his separated and disioynâ— blessing of both the Elements his fraction 〈◊〉 giuing and inuiting to a new supper his owâ— eating and after commanding the eating of it tâ— others and lastly his most holy speach deliâ—erâ— therof in Iohn 14.15 c. Here now I conclude that all these reasons with the formeâ— obseruations are most sufficient to persuade any man of iudgment that our Sauiour did not speake Figuratiuely in so serious a matter Animaduersion XXIV THe various interpretation of the words of the Jnstitution made by Protestants doth sufficiently discouer their Errour in the doctrine thereof Carolostadius (u) Carolostad in lib. â—diâ—o Basil 1524. teacheth that by the Pronoune Hoc the Aduerb Hic is to be vnderstood so as the meaning of the words he saith is Hic that is in this place staet corpus meum Bucer (x) In retract affirmeth that by the Pronoune Hoc is vnderstood the whole action of the Supper so 〈◊〉 the sense should be Hoc c. This action â—â—th represent the body of Christ. Swinglius (y) Swingl l de vera falsa relig cap. de Eucharist â—aintayneth that the figure is not in Hoc â—ut in the verbe est which here ought to be â—â—ken figuratiuely for significat Boquinus (z) Boquinus in exam lib Heshufij teacheth that the bread is truly called â—he body of Christ propter communicationem â—â—omatum as by the same we truly say of
â—hrist This man is God Oecolampadius (a) L. de genuina explicat Vâ—rb â—cknowledgeth not any Trope either in the â—ronoune Hoc or in the Verbe Est but in â—orpus thus interpreting the words by the â—gure Metonymia Hoc est corpus meum id est â—ic panis est figura corporis mei Finally to â—mit others Caluin (b) Câ—lâ— l 4. Inst c 17. §. â—â— admitteth with â—ecolampadius the figure to be in the word â—orpus but withall he addeth that the bread of the Eucharist is not a naked signe of the body of Christ but it is a signe or fiâ—ure which doth truly exhibit the thing it selfe to wit the body of Christ Thus we see what diuers interpretations and all false our Aduersaries do giue of the words of the Jnstitution And thus as they all reiect our Catholike interpretation of them so â—ot any one of the former ProtestaÌ„ts doth 〈◊〉 holy imbrace the exposition of another Animaduersion XXV DO not admit this Inference as good Some Fathers do interpret this or that text of Scripture figuratiuely Therefore the said Fathers do teach that such Texts are not to be expounded literally This is a meere Sophisâ— for seeing diuers texts of Scripture beside the literall are capable of allegoricall sense as all learned men both Catholicks anâ— Protestants do teach therefore the figuratiue sense doth not exclude but rather often presuppose and admit of the literall According hereto S. Austin passing ouer a presumed and granted the literall sense 〈◊〉 those words Qui (c) Iohn â— bibit meum sanguineâ— c. allegorically expoundeth them in thâ— sort Bibere sanguinem Christi est credere 〈◊〉 Christum to drinke the bloud of Christ is to belieue in Christ. In like sort also do not approue this kind of disputing for it is a meere Schiomachia or fighting with a shadow The Scriptures speake honourably oâ— Mariage which all we Catholiks do willingly acknowledg therefore vowed virginity is not to be allowed our Aduersaries here laboring to disualew the worth of Virginity by the acknowledged dignity of Mariage its opposit For the worth of both these may stand together the one not crossing the other and in things that are good we must acknowledg there are degrees of goodnes and accordingly we here say Mariage is good but yet vowed virginity is better In like sort our Aduersaries vse another fraudulent kind of reasoning called Logomachia where leauing the sense childishly contend with the naked word for exaÌ„ple find say they the word Purgatory or Masse 〈◊〉 the Scripture if you can But what â—lloweth from hence for are the words â—rinity Person Consubstantiality c. in the â—cripture they are not must we therefore â—â—iect the doctrine of them To proceed â—â—other captious arguing of our aduersaâ—es is taking hold of the very letter conâ—â—ary to the approued mind of the Church â—r example the word Presbyter in Greeke 〈◊〉 nothing but a Seniour therefore in the â—hurch of the new Testament there are no â—riests so truly called But S. Thomas in 1. â—art quaest 13. shall salue this Argument â—ying we are to obserue in words non tam a â—o quam ad quid not so much from whence â—hey are deriued as to what by a warrantaâ—e custome they are applied Animaduersion XXVI THe peruersity of our Aduersaries is such who lighting vpon some few straying â—assages in the Fathers writings where the â—ucharist is called bread they mainely câ—y â—ut that in the Fathers Iudgment it is noâ—hing but materiall bread And yet when in â—uery leafe or page of the Fathers works â—pon this matter they find it termed The body and bloud of Christ all such places or els we wrong them must be interpreted figuratiuely Thus they insisting much in those â—phrazes which are but rare in the Fathers and passing ouer with a censuring neglect such forme of speeches as most frequently occurre in their Bookes Now the Eucharist may be called bread by the Fathers afteâ— consecration without any preiudice to our Catholike doctrine for seuerall reasons the Fathers borrowing this kind oâ— phraze from the Scripture Panis (e) 1. Cor. 10. queâ— frangimus c. First because it is an accustomed Dialect of the Scripture to call a thing by that name which afore it was Thus it Genes 3. Eua is called the bone of Adam because she was made thereof and the Serpents of Moyses in Exod. 7. are termed wandes because the wandes were turned into serpents so for this very reason the Eucharist is somtimes termed bread by the Fathers Another reason why the Eucharist may be called bread by the Scriptures and consequently by the Fathers is in regard of the similitude which it hath with bread I meane in nourishing the soule as bread doth nourish the body A third reason in that the Scripture and in like manner the Fathers do often call things as they do externally appeare to the Eye so the Scripture calls Angels who appeared in humane shape Men and the Brazen serpent a serpent c. Therefore the Eucharist may be termed bread and Wyne either by the Scripture or the Fathers in that to the eye it seemeth only Bread and Wyne Animaduersion XXVII IF it be not lawfull to pray to Saincts the reason hereof must be either because they will not heare vs praying to them But this cannot be seeing they are now endued with more Charity then when they here conuersed vpon earth and being secure of their owne felicity are more sollicitous of our spirituall good and health Or els because the Saints cannot helpe vs. But neither this For if they could help vs with their prayers while they were pilgrimes in this world much more are they now able being arriued to their owne Country Or because they do not know what we pray But not this because from what ground the Angells do know the conuersion of sinners for which conuersion they so much reioyce as is said in Luke 15. from the same ground the Saints do know our prayers Or lastly which is the most ordinary reason giuen by our Aduersaries because an Jniury is committed against God if any other be prayed inuoked vnto then he But not this for then it were vnlawfull to inuocate and pray to the liuing and consequently S. Paul sinned and offended God when he writ thus to the f Romans Brethren I beseech you that you would helpe me in your prayers for me to God Which kind of prayer the Apostle vseth in his Epistle to the Ephesians c. 6. in the first to the Thessalonians c. 5. in his Epistle to the Colossians c. 4. finally in his Epistle to the Hebrews c. 13. Animaduersion XXVIII TOuching Communion vnder one kind oâ— vnder both the true state of this Question is not whether Christ did institute thâ— Eucharist vnder both kinds or whetheâ— himselfe and the Apostles at the first Instiâ—ution of it receaued â—t vnder both kindâ— or whether the Apoâ—â—les and the Father afterwards at sundry tymes
God in their prayers tâ— their Princes or kings and to their ownâ— Parents yet with disparity of honour tâ— ech of these And heere is the source oâ— fountaine of the Protestants mistaking who hearing that Catholikes do somtimâ— exhibit part of that externall worship tâ— Creatures which is giuen to God do instantly exclame forth that Papists do commit Idolatry to Creatures Poore men 〈◊〉 commiserate their ignorance who so much mistake the true meaning of Catholike practise herein Animaduersion XXXV THe seuerall different tymes of the firâ—â— comming of Antichrist assigned by ouâ— Aduersaryes do euidently proue that Antâ—christ is not yet come consequently that â—he Pope is not Antichrist as they in the â—oame of their malice do teach For (q) Vpon the reuel in c. 20. Iuniâ—â— the eminent Protestant affirmes that â—ildebrand who was Pope anno Domini â—â—4 was the first Antichrist With whom â—nspireth D. Downeham (r) In his Treatise concerning Antichrist ca. 110. Bullinger (s) Vpon the Apo. sâ—rm 16. p. 198. afâ—rmeth that Antichrist came in the yeare â—63 he therefore tearming that yeare The â—all yeare D (t) In his answ to a Counterfeyt Cath. pa. 30. Fulke and D. (u) In his Synops pag. 100. Willet do â—ace his comming in the yeare 607. and â—ake Boniface the third to be the first Antiâ—â—rist D. Whytaker thus wryteth of this â—oynt saying (x) De Eccles cont â—eilarâ— contr 9â— qu. a. p. 〈◊〉 2. Gregory the great was the â—â—t true and holy Bishop of the Church therâ—â— because our Aduersaries demaund of vs the â—me when he first came in we designe and set â—wne to them the very tyme of his comming â—za (y) Confess General cap. 7. sect 12. teacheth that he came in anno â—40 thus writing of Leo who liued in that â—â—e Leo did clearely breath forth the arroganâ—â— of the Antichristian Sea M. Napper (z) Vpon the Reuelat. â—g 66. asâ—â—ding higher iustifyes Antichrist his comâ—ng to haue been in the yeare 313. so maâ—ing Siluester the Pope the first Antichrist But Sebastianus Francus a remarkable Protestant not content therewith thus auerâ—eth (a) In Epist. de abrogoâ— l. in vniuer omnibus statut â—cclesiast For certaine through the worke of Antichrist the externall Church together with the sayth and Sacraments vanished away presently after the Apostles departure Now meere diametrically and crosse to all the former Protestants teaching that the Pope is Anâ—ichrist Melancthon (b) So is Melancthon alledged by M. Haruey in his Theol. discourse p. 102. Bucer and M. Fox (c) Act. Mon. of the yeare 1676. pa. 53â— do teach that the Turke is Antichrist and according hereto Bucâ—r stileth the Turke (d) Bucer in his lib. Psal quinque Psal 22. fol. 146. 147. ipfissimus Antichristus Thus much touching the disagreement of our Aduersaries in this point Animaduersion XXXVI THe planting of the Christian Religion is England by Ioseph of Arimathia doth afford an vnanswerable demonstration of the truth of our Catholike and Roman Religion Of this point we first fynd that not only S. Bede who did write the History thereof but M. Cambden also recâ—râ—etâ— that the Brittans of Wales were first conuerted to Christianity by Joseph of Arimathia M. Cambden thus speaking thereof Certum (e) In his Brit. pa. 40. 57. est Britannos in ipsa Ecclesiae infantia Christianam Religionem imbibisse he thus further writing Hie floruit Monasterium Glastenburtense c. Here florished the Monastery of Glastenbury which taketh its ancient beginning of Ioseph of Arimathia Thus M. Cambden The same verity is acknowledged by D. Iewell (f) In his Pageant of Popes and D. Fulke (g) In his booke against Hiskins Sanders pag. 561. Secondly we find that D. Jewell confesseth thus the Britans (h) In his Pageant of Popes being conuerted by Ioseph of Arimathia held that fayth at Austins comming he meaning that Austin who was sent by Pope Gregory to plant his religion among vs English In like manner D. Fulke thus writeth hereof The Catholike Britans (i) Against the Rhemish Testam in 2. Cor. 12. with whom Christian Religion had continued in succession from the Apostles tymes would not receaue Austin From which seuerall Testimonies we gather that till Austins comming into England the Religion planted by Ioseph of Aâ—imathia among the Brittans continued vnchangeable without alteration Thirdly we read that the greatest differences of fayth Religion which at that tyme were found betweene the Britan Bishops Augustin are recorded to be these following for S. Bede (k) Beda l. 2. ca. 2. relateth how Austin and the Britan Bishops did meete at a place called in his tyme Augustinâ—zat for conferring of their Religions together the mention of which meeting is in like manner auerred by Holinshead (l) In his great Chronicle of the last Eâ—ttou l. 5. c. 22. and M. Fox (m) Act Mon. printed 1576. pag. 120. who setteth downe S. Austins Answere to the Britan Bishops in these words Si in tribus his obtemperare mihi vultis vt Pascha suo tempore celebreâ—is vt ministerium Baptizandi iuxta morem Romanae Apostolicae Ecclesiae compleatis vt Genti Anglorum vna nobiscum praedicetis verbum Domini caetera quae agitis aequanimiter cuncta tolerabimus That is if you Britan Bishops will obey me in these three things to wit in celebrating Easter day in due tyme in conferring of Baptisme according to the rites of the Roman Apostolicall Church and in helping vs to preach to the English all other matters which you 〈◊〉 contrary to our manners we will tolerate â—â—suster Thus far S. Bede Fourthly and lastly it is confessed by D. Humfrey what Religioâ— Austin brought into England in thesâ— words Jn Ecclesiam (n) Humfred in Iesuit part 2. ras 5. pa. 5. 627. vero quid inuexerna Gregorius Augustinu Onus caeremoniarâ—â— c. intulerunt pattium Episcopale ad sola missarum solemnta Purgatorium c. Oblationeâ— salutaris Hostiae preces pro demortuis c. reliquias c. â—ransubstantiationem c. Nouâ— templorum conscerationes c. Ex quibus omnibus quid aliud quaesitum est quam vt Indulgentiae Monachatus Papatus reliquumue Pontificiae Chaos extruatur Haec Augustinus magnus Monachus a Gregorio Monacho edoctâ— importauit Anglis Thus far D. Humfrey with whom conspiâ—e herein the (o) In the Alphabeticall table of the 6 Century in the fiâ—st Edition at the word Gregory Centurists and (p) Epit. hist Ecclel cent 6 p. 289. Osiander Now from all these premisses I thus collect First that the true Christian Religion was planted in Britany by Joseph of Arimathia who liued in our Sauiours tyme. Secondly that the same Religion remayned pure and vncorrupted at Austins conueâ—ting of England Thirdly that the differences betweene Austin and the Britans were but about two or three small poynts or Ceremonyes Lastly that
discipline and M. Beza J do thinke of them as their writings do deserue but yet I thinke better of the ancient Fathers And with this I end touching the libration or ballancing of the Fathers of the primatiue Church with our Protestant Doctours Animaduersion XLII THere is one sleight vsed by our Aduersaryes which deserues Annotation It is this They are vnwilling openly to breake with the Fathers so long as they can preteÌ„d any shew of coniunction agreement with them Therfore when they fynd any of our Catholike points to be mantayned by the Fathers they gently tearme them Naeuos Nenia and at most Errores blemishes and errours Thus fauorably they depresse in the Fathers our Catholike Doctrines because they would seeme to continue members of the same Church whereof the Fathers were But now they stile the same Opinions and Doctrines as they are belieued by vs no lesse then Heresyes blasphemyes Jdolatry c. thereby to shew that the Members of the Church of Rome are not members of Christs Church This deceitfull and different appellation is precisely kept and practised by the Centuryes Jllyricus Doctour Whytaker and diuers other Protestant Wryters Animaduersion XLIII OVr Aduersaryes deportment towards the Fathers is most full of imposture and deceyte And they vse certaine stepps or gradatious therein For first they labour to euade the authority or testimony of a Father by shaping some seeming answere to it yet still admitting the authority produced Next if the testimony obiected by vs out of any Father be for its perspicuity not capable of any euading answere then they labour to weaken the authority of the said Father by making him seeme to contradict himselfe in some other place of the same point or els to be contradicted therein by other Fathers After this manner doth D. Whitaker in question of Traditions say of (h) D. Whit. l. de Sacr. Script pag. 670. Basill Basilius secum pugnat as also chargeth S. Austin (i) D. Whit. vbi supra â—8â— with the like contrariety in iudgement touching the same doctrine of Traditions But when they are told that it is most improbable that the Fathers being such learned men as they were should without any acknoledged retractation of their former writings crosse themselues in their later wrytings our Aduersaryes then vnmaske themselues plainly calling the Fathers Superstitious blynd and open mantayners of Papistry which poynt shaâ— be made euident by these testimonyes of the Protestants passed vpon them And to begin with Luther he thus writeth of the Fathers in generall The (k) Luth. de seruo arbitrio printed anno 15â—1 pag. 4â—4 Fathers of so many ages haue beene plainly blind and most ignorant in the Scriptures They haue erred all their life tyme and vnlesse they were amended before their deaths they were neither Saints nor pertaining to the Church Melancthon ioyneth hands with Luther herein (l) Melancth in 1. Cor. cap 31. in these words Presently from the beginning of the Church the ancient Fathers obscured the doctrine concerning Iustification by fayth increased Ceremonies and deuised peculiar worships With both whome to omit the like condemning speeches of others passed vpon the Fathers conspires D. Whitaker thus scurrilously writing Ex patrum (m) Contra â—uâ—aeum p. 4â—3 erroribus ille Pontificiae religionis Cento consutus est The religion of the Papists is a patched Cloath of the Fatâ—ers â—rrours sowed together Thus â—ar of the seuerall peculiar deliueries of our Aduersaries against the Fathers Animaduersion XLIV TOuching the Controuersy whether the Blessed Virgin was conceaued in Originall sinne such Catholikes as deny the same hould the deniall thereof only as a probable and pious Opinion and not as matter of fayth we therfore are to conceaue that the Sinne of the first Parent is communicated to his Sonnes and posterity three manner of wayes First then the Sonnes of Adam are said to haue sinned in Adam himselfe in that Adam did transgresse the precept of God in Paradise And because the Sonnes of Adam were not then in actu but in potentia only therfore that sinne they contracted not in actu but only in potentia And in this sense it may be said that the B. Virgin sinned in Adam Secondly all the Children of Adam are said to be conceaued in Sinne as soone as the child beginnes to exist in the Mothers Wombe although it be then vnformed and without life because a Man then beginneth truly to exist in respect of one of his parts that part hath its beginning from a corrupt Nature and may be said to be truly vitiated by force of its generation And in this sense also we acknowledg that the Blessed Virgin had her beginning from a corrupt Nature and that by force of such generation it was due that Sinne should be contracted as soone as her Rationall soule was ioyned to her Body The third and last manner whereby men are said to be conceaued in Sinne is when their Soules are inspired into their bodies since at that tyme they beginne properly really to become Men and to haue their Wâ—â— naked of Originall Justice and consequently auerted from God and in it selfe deformed Now touching this third and last kind we hould it most probable that the Soule of the Blessed Virgin euen at the first instant of its creation and infusion into the Body was so without spot of Originall Sinne as that person of hers actually existing had neuer any Sinne she herein differing from all others in that she was freed from Originall Sinne euen in the very instant of her Animation Now here it is to be noted that the texts of Scripture vrged by the Protestants to proue that the Blessed Virgin was conceiued in Originall Sinne haue respect reference only to one or other of the first two kinds touching the propagation of Originall Sinne in Man but they haue not any true reference to this last kynd Animaduersion XLV IT is most wonderfull to obserue the great contempt and little respect our Aduersaryes giue to our Blessed Lady Diuers of theÌ„ speaking of Caluin Beza two Sodomits euen by the Protestants (n) See Schlusselburge l â— fol. 121. l. 1 fol. 93. Confessions with great obseruancy stile them (*) So D Banâ—râ—ss stileth Caluin and Beza in his Suruey of the pretended disâ—ipline M. Caluin M. Beza In like manner speaking of Luther that wicked Monke they feare not to call him the Elias (o) Fox Act. Mon. pa. 416. Conductour Chariot of Jsrael But when they come to name our Blessed Lady who is an intâ—merate Virgin the Queene of Heauen an instrument of mans Redemption the Mother of God and Sauiour of the world most of them bluntly and rudely stile her without any addition of Honour only Mary O contempt most sacrilegious and insufferable Animaduersion XLVI IN the Hymne of our Ladyes office thus begining Aue Mariâ— stella c. two passages much distast our Aduersaryes The first 〈◊〉 this Solue
some hundreds and yet remaining to be yearely seene euen with spots of bloud at the chiefe Church in Brussells in the lowe Countryes What can our Aduersaries answere herero Yf they grant the miracle they withall grant the truth of the Doctrine of the Reall Presence To deny it by saying that when one hoast is corrupted through tyme another is secretly thrust in the former place is more then absurd For would the Princes of those Countryes the Lords Bishops Prelates other Religious persons and the whole Communalty suffer themselues to be thus abused from tyme to tyme with such impostures but that they would be most desirous to find out and discry all such wicked stratagemes and deuises Truly I do not see what answere in full weight of Reason can be giuen hereto to conuince the iudgment of any sufficient Man Animaduersion LXXI THat Catholike Religion affordeth Saluation to the Professours thereof is proued seuerall wayes euen from our Aduersaries owne pennes And first Because oâ—â— Aduersaries do reach that the Church oâ— Rome notwithstanding her presumed Eâ—rours is the true Church of Christ consequently her Professours capable of Saâ—uation According hereto thus writeth D. Field (d) L. of the Church c. 46. We doubt not but that Church â—t which the Bishop of Rome with more then Luâ—â—ferlike pryde exalted himselfe was notwithstanding the true Church of God and that it held a sauing profession of the truth in Christ. D. Sâ—â—â— auerreth the same verity in these words (e) In his Defence against Penry pag. 176. you thinke that all the Popish sort wheâ—â— dyed in the popish Church are damned yâ—â— thinke absurdly and do dissent from the iudgment of all learned Protestants With theâ—â— conspireth to omit others D. Couell thâ—â— writing We (f) In his Defence of M. Hooâ—er pag. 77. affirme them of tâ—e Churchâ— Rome to be a part of the true Church of Chriâ—â— and that those that liue dye in that Churcâ— may be saued Another Reason may be taken from the lawfulnes euen in the iudgment of the learned Protestants of Chiâ—dren of Papists as we are stiled whether they be Baptized by Catholike Priests 〈◊〉 Protestant Ministers And the cause of thâ— lawfulnes thereof is deliuered by the Protestants in these words Because (g) So teach the Deuines of Geneua in their propositions and principles disputed at Gen. p. 178. the same is taught by D. Whitgâ—â—fe in 〈◊〉 Defence pa. â—23 by M. Hooker Eccles poâ— l. 3. p. 131. by otheâ— we affirme that those Children are comprehenâ— within the Couenant of eternall life by meanes of the fayth of their Parents A third Reason of the Protestants true iudgment herein concerneth the Fathers of the Primitiue Church in generall who that they liued dyed Papists is most euident by what hath beene confessed aboue by our Aduersaries Now of them Cartwrighâ— thus writeth I (h) Cartwright in his Reply in D. Whitguifts Defence p. 82 doubt not but that diuers Fathers of the Greeke Church who were patrones of Freewill are saued The like charitable opinion of the Fathers though Papists both liuing dying is deliuered by (i) Contra Raâ— Camp pag. 78. D. Whitaker notwithstanding the Fathers Doctrine touching Satisfaction and Merit of Works Finally the Protestants iudgement is also herein manifested in their commonly giuing in their writings and speaches to Austin Ierome Ambrose and the rest whom they acknowledge to Professe and dye in our Catholike fayth and Religion the name and title of Saint as S. Austin S. Jerome c. Animaduersion LXXII YF it be vrged that the Deniall of Freewill for exaÌ„ple was taught by Manicheus and consequently that the Protestant fayth therein is as ancient as those Primitiue tymes It may be replyed that this particular Heretike or that particular Heretike did teach but one or other Protestant Article in those dayes and were sustantly written against for such their Innouations the said Innouatours being Catholike in all other points And therefore you may truâ—â— infer that the vrging of such examples is merely impertinent either for the proofe of the Antiquity of the Protestant Religion or for the Visibility of the Protestant Church in those dayes Animaduersion LXXIII YF you dispute with any Protestant by writing or enterchange of letters write nothing but Matter with as much compendiousneâ— as the Subiect will beare without any Verball Excursions or digressions For this proceeding will force your Aduersary to reply if he will reply to the Maâ—ter For otherwise leauing the materialâ— point which is chiefly issuable and to be handled he will shape a reply to other lesse necessary stuffe deliuered by you And then his Reply must passe abroad by the help of many partiall tongues for a full answere to your whole Discourse Animaduersion LXXIV WHereas you may alledge diuers acknowledged Heresies both in the iudgment of Protestants Catholiks out of the Bookes concerning diuers persons who belieued some few points of Protestancy recorded in the said Bookes here I speake of Wâ—â—ldo Wiclife c. Now if here your Aduersary Disputant doth auouch as many Protestants do that these Heresies were falsly obtruded and fathered vpon the said presumed Protestants by their Enemies you may here reply that to affirme this is against the force of all Reason For seeing the same Bookes do make indifferent mention both of the Protestant opinions and of the other Heresies defended by the same Men either the said Bookes are to be belieued in both or to be reiected concerning both Yf the first then it is certaine that those men did belieue those acknowledged Heresies Yf the later then the said Bookes are not of sufficient authority to proue that there were any Protestants in those ages Animaduersion LXXV IN your proofes drawne from Scripture labour to be much practised in the Protestant Translation of it of which infinite places make for the Catholike Cause euen as the Scripture is translated by the Protestant For this Course gauleth them far more then if you insisted only in the Catholike Translation Animaduersion LXXVI I Will here set downe certaine Obseruations which will easely solue all difficulties or Argument whatsoeuer rising from Scripture or Fathers against Communion vnder one kind only 1. First whereas sundry places of Scripture and Fathers do speake indifferently oâ— only make mention of Communion vnder both kinds or do affirme the vse thereof to be lawfull yet from hence which is the point issuable cannot be inferred any precept of Christ as necessary to Saluation 2. Secondly when such places are vrged which contayne in them a Precept the same places are either vnderstood of Priests who do sacrifice whose bond is different from theirs of the Laity Or els they concerne only the tyme and place when 〈◊〉 where that custome of both kinds was obserued for the custome of the Church whether it be generall in the whole Church or particular in some notable place thereof aâ— in one Country Kingdome
vsage do charge Cyprian and Tertullian who liued in the second and third age For their teaching priuate Confession euen of thoughts and lesser sinnes Thirdly D. Whitaker (r) D. Whita l. contra Duâ—aeum pa. 480. affirmeth that Pope Siricius was the first that annexed perpetuall Chastity to the Clergy men or Ministers of the word This Instance is ouerthrowne by the Confession of Kempnitius (s) Kemp nit in Exam. Concil Trid. p. 50. 601. who doth reprehend Ierome Epiphanius Origen Ambrose all far more ancient then this Siricius for their impugning the supposed lawfulnes of Priests Mariage Fourthly D. Whitâ—ker sayth Qui (t) D. Whit. vbi supra pa. 480. Transubstantiationem primus excogitauit it fuit Innocentius tertius in Concilio Lateranensi who first inuented Transubstantiation was Innocentius the third in the Councell of Lateran which Councell was houlden in the yeare 1215. But I take this obiection away by the authority of D. (u) Iesuitism part 2. rat 5 pa. 628. Humfrey as els where I haue shewed who writeth that Gregory the Great and Austin both which liued a thousand yeares since at their first plantation of Christian Religion here in England to vse the Doctours owne words Jnuexerunt Transubstantiationem Fiftly the D. further proceedeth saying Who (x) Contra Duraeum l. 7. c. 480. first inuented to say that the body of Christ frangitur sensibiliter tractatur dentibus atteritur was Nicolaus the Second To this I answere saying it is but a verball obiection and quarreleth at certain phrases words which words are to be vnderstood in a sober and restrayned construction and therefore we find the like Phrases to be vsed by S. Chrysostome far more ancient then Nicolaus the second saying Christus non (y) Chrysost in Ioan. Homil. 45. se tantum videri permittit defiderantibus sed tangi manduçari dentes â—arni suae infigi Christ doth not only permit himself to be seene of those who desire to see him but also to be touched and eaten by them and their teeth to be fastned in his flesh A point so true that Jacobus Andraeas a famous Protestant but a Lutheran answereth this very obiection of Nicolaus saying (z) Andraeat in confutat Ioannis Gâ—inaei p. 274. 275. Nicolaus nihil continet quod in scriptis Orthodoxorum Patrum Chrysostomi inprimis non continetur Sixtly D. Whitaker (a) D. Whitak vbi supra pa. 480. instanceth in Pope Calixtus for introducing the Fast of Lent and of Quatuor Temporum But Kempnitius thus writeth hereof Ambrose (b) Kempnit in Exam. Concil Trid. part 2. pag. 8â— Maximus Taurinensis Theophilus Ierome and others do affirme the fast of Lent to be an Apostolicall Tradition and thus they make it more ancient by the Confession of Kempnitius then the tymes of Calixtus Seauenthly and lastly D. Whitaker thus writeth Boniface (c) D. Whita vbi supra pag. 480. the third was the first that entituled the Roman Church to be Caput omnium Ecclesiarum The Head of all Churches But this is refuted by D. Whitaker himself who affirmeth that (d) D. Whitak vbi supra pag. 480. Zozimus Bonifacius and Celestinus did challenge superiority ouer other Bishops by forging a Canon of the Nicene Councell so inconstant is this Doctour in his Instances which later assertion of his touching Zozimus Bonifacius and Celestine though it be most false so far as concernes any forging of a Canon and only inuented by our Aduersaries yet it frees Boniface the third from this supposed Innouation Thus far now of D. Whitakers Instances where we are to vnderstand that some of the former Popes did command a more strict obseruation in some points as in not Marrying of Priests touching Auricular Confession touching the Fast of Lent then afore was obserued Now D. Whitakers calumny here lyeth in a willfull confounding of the First Institution of a thing with a Renouation or practise of the same thing which imposture is aboue noted Animaduersion LXXX I Will here draw a Porisma or Resultancy out of this last Animaduersion It is this Whereas we see such Protestant Doctours and those of the greatest Rank who labour by all reading and meanes whatsoeuer to shew the beginning of our Catholike points and after all their disquisition and search they cannot find any colour or pretext to insist in more then Fiue or sixt points to be innouated and yet such their Instances euidently discouered to be of no force but most falsely alledged Therefore the Reader may here iustly presume that no instances of Innouation can be but suggested or imagined to be giuen of the Change of the Church of Rome touching the doctrines here following To wit 1. Visibility of the Church 2 Praying to Saints 3. Freewill 4. Merit of Workes 5. Workes of Supererogation 6. Indulgences 7. Monachism 8. Limbus Patrum 9. Images the 10. Adoration of the Blessed Sacrament 11. Communion vnder one kind 12. Vniuersality of Grace 13. The Necessity and vertue of the Sacrament 14. Inherent Iustice 15. the knowledge of Christ as Man 16. His being God of God and diuers others Here I say no colour how little soeuer can be giuen of Innouation or change in any of these our Catholike Articles For if any pretext or shadow could be afforded of any change of these or of any other doctrines here not specified D. Whitaker or some other of our learned Aduersaries would not haue beene altogether silent therein Animaduersion LXXXI THe Catholike Doctrine touching Praïng to Saints is chiefly deliuered in these ensuing propositions The first It is not lawfull to pray to Saincts as Authours or principall dispensers of Diuine Benefits to obtaine from them either Grace or Glory or the meanes of obtayning eternall felicity since so to pray to them were to make them Gods And therefore when it is said Our Lady helpe me c. we are not to insist in the naked words but in the sense which is Our Lady help me by her intercession and prayers to her Sonne no otherwise then S. Paul sayth of himself To (e) 1. Cor. 9. vt omnes facâ—rem saluos all men I am become all things that I may saue all meaning by his preaching and prayers for them The second Saincts are not our immediaâ—â— Mediatours by way of Jntercession to God bâ—â— whatsoeuer they demand or obtayne for vs they demand and obtaine it through Christ and his Merits and according hereto we find thaâ— all prayers of the Church made to Saincts end with this clause Per Christum Dominuâ— nostrum The third The Saincts which reigne with God do pray for vs not only in generall but it particular This is proued from those words in Ieremy Yf Moyses (f) Ieremy c. 15. and Samuell thaâ— stand before me my soule is not towards thâ—â— people From whence it is inferred that Moyses and Samuel then being dead might were accustomed to pray for the people of Israel I
do still remayne at one tyme though far remote one from another whereas these Precedent and future tymes in both which one and the same Jnstant of Duration or Eternity is are euer in a flowing and departing Motion and consequently cannot by any possibility remayne together For we see that the tyme past doth euer giue place to the tyme to come Thus far of these former Animaduersions in this place to shew that it is possible that Christs Boâ—â— may be in seuerall places at one and thâ— same tyme. Animaduersion LXXXXIV IN all Positiue and Affirmatiue Points oâ— fayth the Protestants do agree with the Catholiks the Protestants borrowing thâ— said Affirmatiue points from the Church of Rome According hereto we find Luthâ—â— thus to wryte We (y) Luther lib. Contra Ana. baptist confesse that there is vnder the Papacy most of the Christian Good yâ—â— rather all the Christian Good and that from thence it came to vs. We confesse that there is iâ— the Papacy true Scripture true Baptisme the true Sacrament of the Altar the true keyes to the remission of sinnes the true office of preaching true Catechisme c. I say further there is in thâ— Papacy true Christianity or rather the truâ— kernell of Christianity Thus Luther To the former position I adioyne this following In such points of fayth wherin Protestancy dissenteth from the Roman Church all the said points are merrely Negations to the contrary Affirmatiue Articles belieued by the Church of Rome As for example Deniall of Reall Presence Deniall of praying to Saints Deniall of Freewill and so of the rest Now from these two propositions do result these Inferences or Conclusions following The first that the Protestant as he belieueth any affirmatiue Articles with the Church of Rome in that respect he is not a Protestant but rather a Catholike as â—king the beliefe of them from the Caâ—â—olike Church as is aboue said The seâ—ond Inference That Protestancy as Proâ—stancy consisteth in Deniall of such Affirâ—atiue points which the Church of Rome â—ffirmes to be true and not in belieuing â—ith the said Church certaine chiefe points â—f Christianity The third Inference Seeing â—he reduplicatiue formality of Protestancy reâ—teth in Negations or priuations of an Affirmatiue fayth and seing Negations or priâ—â—tions haue no Entity subsistence or reall being that therfore Protestancy as Protestancy hath no reality of Being but is in it selfe a meere Non-entity or nothing consequently it followeth that Protestancy cannot proceed from God who is the Authour of things and of that which is but not of that which is not or is Nothing The last Inference shal be That Protestants by their Deniall of so many Affirmatiue Articles of Christianity may seeme to beare great Reference to Antichrist who at his comming shall by his Deniall of all points of Christian Religion seeke what in him lyeth to annihilate and ouerthrow all Christian Religion And for such his proceeding some ancient Fathers do coÌ„iecture that his name shal be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifying Nego as Hyppolitus Martyr writeth in Oratione de consummatione mundi And this both by reason that this Greeke Word maketh vp the number to wit 666. which is ascribed peculiarly to Antichrist in the Apocalyps cap. 13. as also in that Antichrist his Ministers at his comming both in their Dâ—nialls and workes shall labour mightely to euert Christian Religion Animaduersion LXXXXV THough Protestancy seeme to maintaine some Affirmatiue Positions as Parity of Ministers Mariage of Priests and other Votaries Reprobation Christs only Mediatorship by way of Jntercession Christ suffering in Soule yet it is euident that these poutions are only Affirmatiue in words but merely Negatiue in sense since they are Negatiues to the Monarchy of the Churches Gouermentâ— to vowed Chastity to vniuersality of Grace to the Intercession of Saincts and to the all sufficiency of Christs Corporall Death All which our Catholike points are Affirmatiue Such is the subtility of Innouation in Doctrine as for the greater honour to inuest their Negatiue Tenets in Affirmatiue Titles Animaduersion LXXXXVI THough in shew of words Falshood as is aboue shewed may be deliuered in Affirmatiues so I here say that Truth sometimes is deliuered in Negatiue Words notwithstanding Truth is euer Affirmatiue and Falshood Negatiue and therfore the Schoolemen truly teach Intellectus (z) S. Thomas part 1. q. 17. decipituâ— non circa quid est sed circa quid non est To exemplify this Animaduersion To say God is cruel or Man is blind though these sayings be deliuered in Affirmatiue termes and false yet they are in sense and vnderstanding meerely Negatiue since Cruelty is exclusiue to Mercy and blindnes to sight so on the contrary to say God is not Cruell and Man is not blynd though they be in termes Negatiue true yet they are in sense Affirmatiue only as denying the Negation of Mercy in God and of Blindnes in Man Animaduersion LXXXXVII OVr Aduersaries cannot agree among themselues what Doctrines be Protestancy and who ought to be truly termed Protestants Can their Religion then be true and descend from Heauen Here then I will first shew within what narrow Limits our Aduersaries do confine Protestancy and the members of the Protestant Church Next then I will discouer such is the fluctuating and wauering iudgment of them herein how they are content at other times to extend and enlarge those bounds by affording Protestancâ— and the members therof a greater space or compasse as I may say to expatiate and walke in And to begin D. Whitaker thus sayth of the Papists J will (a) L. 2. contra Duraum Sect. 1. not allow the very name of a lawfull Church vnto the Roman Church because it hath nothing which a true Chuâ—â—â— ought to haue The Confession of Ausburg excludes the Anabaptists in these words we (b) Cap. â— condemne the Anabaptists who disallow the Baptisme of Infants and thinke them to be saâ—â—â— without Baptisme to which sentence the Confession of Switzerland (c) Cap. 20. subscribeth The Arians are excluded from being Protestants by the foresaid Confession of Ausburg in these termes We (d) Act. 1. condemne all Heresies rising against this Article meaning the Article of the Trinity as the Manichees Arians Eunomians c. All Heretikes are excluded out of the number of Protestants for thus D. Suâ—cliffe teacheth Heretikes (e) In his first Booke of the Church c. 1. are not of the Church meaning of the true Church and consequently in his iudgment of the Protestant Church With whom agrees D. White saying All (f) In his way to the Church pag. 10. Heretiks teach the truth in some things yet we deny them to be of the Church of God That Schismatikes are not of the Protestant Church is taught for thus writeth D. Fulke (g) Of the succession of the Church What skilleth it whether one being drawne by Heresy or Schisme from thâ— body of Christ be subiect to eternall
Damnatioâ— And D. Whitaker thus auerreth It (h) Controuers 2. q. 5. cap. 9. is false that Hereticall and Schismaticall Churches are true Churches Thus far of our Aduersaries excluding Papists Anabaptists Arians Heretikes and Schismatiks from the Protestant Church and not acknowledging them to be members thereof nor their Doctrines Protestancy Now we will obserue what change and mutability of iudgment herein our Aduersaries shew at other tymes in willingly embracing all these former sort of men and some others also as good Protestants and in state of Saluation And first of the Papists Luther sayth In (i) In Ep. contra Anabapt the Popery there is true Christianity yea the Kernell of Christianity many pious great Saincts M. Hooker (k) L. Eccles Pol. 3. c. 1â—8 we gladly acknowledg them of Rome to be of the family of Iesus Christ and M. Bunny we (l) In his Treatise of pacification sect 18. are no seuerall Church from the Papists nor they from vs. The Anabaptists are admitted for good Protestants by Oecolampadius saying (m) L. 2. Ep. p. 63. Baptisme is an externall thing which by Law of Charity may be dispensed with And D. (n) In his answere to the Protest Apol. l. 4 cap. 3. sect 10. Morton we Protestants iudge the state of the Anabaptists not to be vtterly desperate The Arians are acknowledged by M. Morton to be of the same Church of which the Protestants are and he giueth his reason in these words Because (o) In his booke of the kingdom of Isâ—ael and the Church pag. â—4 the Arians hould the foundation of the Gospell And M. Hooker seemeth to intimate the same in these words The (p) Eccles Pol. lib. 4 p. 181. Arians in the reformed Churches of Poland c. hereby insinuating that those Protestant Churches of Poland did acknowledg the Arians to be members of their Church Of Idolaters M. Hooker thus fauorably writeth Christians (q) Eccles Pol. l. 3 pag. 1â—0 by externall profession they are all whose marke of recognizance hath in it those things which we haue mentioned yea although they be impious Idolaters wicked Hâ—tikes c. Infideâ—ls are also in our Aduersaâ—â—â— iudgments mâ—mbers of a sauing Churchâ— fayth for thus writeth Swinglius Ethâ—â—â— (r) Swingl Ep Oecolam l. 1. p 39 si piam mentem domi fouerit Christianus 〈◊〉 etiamsi hristum ignoret And hereupon Sâ—â—glius concluâ—eth that (s) Swingâ— tom 2. fol. 118. 559. Hercules Socrates â—ristides are now in Heauen as is in anothâ—â— place shewed Finally the Protestants are 〈◊〉 courteous as that they are content to â—â—corporate Antichrist within their Church 〈◊〉 state of Saluation This I thus proue I◠〈◊〉 ouermuch knowne and diuulged that mâ—ny Protestants do teach with full moutâ— that the Pope is Antichrist Now then let 〈◊〉 see how at other times they write of hiâ— whom they hould to be Antichrist and 〈◊〉 Religion Antichristianity Here then we fâ—â—â— D. Whitaker thus to acknowledg I will (t) D White in his answere to the first Demonstration of D. Sanders not say that from the tyme that Papistry begâ—â— to be Antichristianity the Popes themseâ—â—â— haue beene all damned And yet D. Whitaker 〈◊〉 where confidently auerreth the Pope to be Antichrist In like sort M. Powell hath the like sentence saying I will (u) In his answere to the last Demonstration of D. Sanders in no wise say that all the Popes from the tyme that papistry was first reuealed to be Antichristianity aâ—â— damned Thus much of this point whereby we may discerne the wounderfull and vnheard mutability of our Aduersaries Iudgments touching who are Protestants and Professours of that Church wherein a man may be saued A demonstration vnansâ—erabâ—e â—â—le and irrepliable to proue that the Proâ—â—â—â—ant Church and fayth such as these forâ—â—r men do restrayne or enlarge it is 〈◊〉 capable of Saluation And how then can Christian know if he will rely vpon the â—â—gments of Protestants herein to what 〈◊〉 of Protestants or within what Church 〈◊〉 may range himself for the Saluation of 〈◊〉 Soule Animaduersion LXXXXVIII â—N that there are many Catholike Articles the which the Iewes before the comâ—ing of Christ did belieue therefore it folâ—â—weth euidently that the said Articles canâ—ot be reputed to be Innouations or lately â—â—uented Doctrines but as ancient as the â—ymes before our Sauiours Incarnation I â—ill exemplify in some The Booke Eccleâ—â—asticus admit for the tyme it be not Scripture speaketh directly of our Sauiours â—â—scending into Hell in those words where it â—s said in his person I (x Eccles 24. will pierce through â—â—e sower parts of the Earth J will looke vpon all such as be a sleepe and will lighten all them that â—â—ust in the Lord A saying so pertinent for proofe of Limbus Patrum that D. Whitaker (y) Contra Duraeum l. 8 pag. 5â—7 acknowledging the true sense thereof auoydeth it by saying the Booke is not Canonicall which at this present is impertiâ—ent since here I seeke only to proue the â—â—uth of diuers of our Catholike points as being belieued by the Ancient Iewes before our Sauiours tyme in their writings whether Canonicall or not Canonicall Touching Prayer for the Dead It is warranted by the example of Iudas (z) Machab 2. Machabaeus the true seruant of God as also is taught by Rabbi Simeon who liued before Christ and diuers other ancient Rabbyes Rabbi Simeon thus writing of such as are temporally punished after this life After (a) In lib. Zoar. in cap 13. Genesis they are purged from the filth of their sinnes then doth God cause them to ascend out of that place Touching Gods Induration or hardning of Pharaos hart the Iewish Rabins so conspire in affirming with vs the same to be by Gods permission only and not by his working that Peter (b) Peter Martyr in Epist. ad Roman c. 9. Martyr and Munster (c) Munster in Annot. in Exod. c. 7. do accordingly acknowledg this Exposition Concerning Freewill that place in Eccâ—esiasticus (d) Ecclesiast 1â— to wit Say not thou he hath câ—â—sed me to erre Yf thou wilt thou shalt obserue the Commandements He hath set water and fyre before thee stretch out thy hand to which thou wilt Before man is life and death Good Euâ—â—â— what lyketh him shal be giuen him This testimony I say is so euident for Freewill that D. Whitaker in answere thereto reiecteth the authority saying De loco (e) In resp ad ras Camp rat 1 p. 25. Ecclesiasticiparùm laboro c. J make small account of Ecclesiasticus Philo the learned Iew who liued in Christ his tyme thus writeth Man (f) Philo in lib. quod Deus fit immutabelis hath Freewill to which purpose is extant the Oracle in Deuteronomy I haue placed before thee Lyfe and Death Good and Euill chuse Lyfe Concerning Angells Saints the Booke of Tobias written before Christ is so playne (g) Tob.
the Pryest that by Decree of the Iudge that man should dye what punishment theÌ„ is he to vndergoe who in Matters of faith and Religion contemneth the authority of the High Pryest of Christ his Church aduancing his owne priuate iudgement aboue the said Authority Animaduersion CI. IT is most certaine that Luther himself was not a perfect and entire Protestant such I meane as the present Church of England acknowledgeth for a true Protestant my Reasons are these First because Luther after his rising and euer vnto his death retayned and belieued diuers of our Catholike Doctrines disclaymed from by the Protestants of England Secondly because Luther taught and maintayned seuerall Heresies I meane Heresies euen in the iudgmeâ—â— of our now Protestants To begin with the first branch Luther euer maintayned to hâ—s deaâ—h the Reall Presence as the whole worâ—â— knoweth and therefore his followers in thâ—â— doctrine are called for distinction lake Lutherans by Swinglius and Caluin Luther taught the Doctrine of (d) Luther l. de Assertionibus Art 30. Euaâ—gelicall Councells to wit that a man may do more then that he is commanded Luther taught the Doctrine of Purgatory of which point see Tom. 1. Wittenberg 〈◊〉 Jndulgentijs And answerably to this ground he is confessed by (e) Vrbanus Regius in 1 part Operum formulae cautè loquendi de sanct cultu Vrbanus Regiâ—s a Protestant to defend Prayer for the Dead Luther defended Prayer to Saints of which point he thus writeth De (f) Luther in purgat quorundam Articulorum in Epist ad Gregorium Spalat intercissione Dinorum cum tota Ecclesia Christiana sentio iudico Sanctos à nobis honorandos esse atque indicandos Luther taught and approued the vse of Jmages as is witnessed by Beza (g) Beza in resp ad Colloq Montisbelg parâ— altera in praef Touching the making the signe of the Crosse vpon our forehead Iohannes Creucliâ—â— a Lutheran thus writeth Cùm (h) Creuelius in hiâ— refut Caeremoniâ—rum missae printed Magdeburg 163. pag 118. imus cuâ—â—tum fine surgimus è Lecto cruce nos iuxta Lâ—theri altorum piorum institutioncâ—â— signamus Finally to omit some other points wherin Luther neuer dissented from the Church of Rome Luther euer mantained that the gouerment of the Church is Monarchiall neither Aristocraticall nor Popular as appeareth out of his owne (i) Vide Luther in loc Com. Class 1. c. 3. 7. pag. 107. words Now to come to relate Luthers Heresies and such as are reputed for Heresies and some of them for blasphemies both by Catholiks and Protestants which he euer maintained without any after retraction I first alledg his impious Doctrine touching the most Blessed Trinity concerning which he thus speaketh (k) So relateth Swinglius of Luther so speaking to 2. ad respons Confut Luther fol. 474. The Diuinity is threefold as the three Persons be c. And according to this he expungeth out of the Litany this sentence Holy (l) Luth. in Euchir precum anno 1543. Trinity one very God haue mercy vpon vs and he further sayth Anima (m) Luth contra Iacobum Laetomum tom 1. wittemberg Latinê edit anno 1551. mea odit Homousion or Consubstantialis Briefly Luthers Blasphemy was so odious execrable against the B. Trinity that Swinglius (n) Swinglius tom 2. in respons ad Confutat Lutheri did purposely write against Luther touching this very point Touching the Euent of things Luther holdeth contrary to all Christian fayth that all things come to passe through a certaine Stoicall and fatall Necessity thus writing hereof Nullius (o) Luther in Assert damnat per Leonem Decimum Art 30. est in manu c. It is in no mans power to thinke Good or Euill but all things as Wicleffs Article condemned at Constance did rightly teach proceede from absolute Necessity Luther taught an Heresy wherby the propagation of Christian Religion is much hindred to wit that it was not lawfull to wage war against the Turk His words are Praeliari (p) Luth in tom 2. Wittenberg in Assert Damnat per Leonem decimum Assert 34. contra Turcas est repugnare Deo visitanti iniquitates nostras per illos Luther denyed all temporall Magistrates thus teaching hereof Among (q) Luther de saeculari potestate in â—â— 6 Germ. Christians no man can or ought to be a Magistrate but euery one is to another equally subiect Touching fayth and good works Luther thus endoctrinateth his followers Fides (r) Luther to 1 propos 3. nisi sit sine c. Except fayth be without good works it doth not iustify nay it is not fayth And further No (s) Luther in his Sermons Englished pag â—76 worke is disalowed by God except the Authour thereof be disalowed before Luther further taught as D. Couell witnesseth that (t) These be D. Couells words in defence of M. Hooker Art 15. p. 101. the Sacraments were effectuall though they were administred by Satan himself Of which point Hospinian the Protestant thus also writeth Lutherus (u) In hist Sacr. part altera fol. 14. coâ—sque progreditur c. Luther proceedeth so far herein that he maintaineth the Sacrament to be a true Sacrament etiamsi è Diabolo conficeretur though it were to be consecrated by the Deuill To conclude Luther so disualewed the sufficiency of Christ suffering in body for vs as that he most blasphemously teacheth that Christ did not suffer only in body but also his Diuinity suffered for vs His words hereof are these Cùm (x) Luther in Confess Maiore in Caena Domini credo quod sola humana Natura pro me passa est Christus vilis nec magni praetij Saluator est c. Yf J belieue that only the humane Nature suffered for me then is Christ a Sauiour but of a base small worth and himself needeth a Sauiour Thus far now in Demonstration that Luther was not an entyre Protestant and such as is allowed by the present Church of England Animaduersion CII TWo things among others concur as is in this last Animaduersion exemplifyed in Luther to make a perfect Protestant to wit That he doth maintayne all chiefe points of Protestancy Thus he is not to hould only some few points of Prorestancy and in the rest being more in number and of greater importance to partake with the Catholikes The second thing necessary to a Protestant that he doth not hould perâ—inaciously any mayne Heresy or Paradoxe wholy impugned and contradicted both by Catholiks and Protestants For this man in this respect is rather to be styled an open Heretike then a Protestant euen in the Censure of the Protestants themselues Here now I auer that this Animaduersion clearely euicteth that Husse Waldo Wicliffe and the rest so much vrged for ProtestaÌ„ts for the proofe of the visibility of the Protestant Church in those ages were no Protestants at all and consequently that the Protestant Church
Body and that Christ was true Man Thus far Osiander of the Albigenses in the place cited in the margent I will conclude with Berengarius who liued anno 1051. who is challenged for a (z) Act. Mon. pa. 23. Protestant for his deniall of Transubstantiation though he after recanted this his Heresy Now Berengarius did hould diuers Heresyes so as the ProtestaÌ„t Oâ—eolampadius (*) In Oecolam Swinglij Epistolis l. 3. pag. 710. thus writeth of him Berengarius nonnulla affirmat aduersus Baptismum parnulorum Coniugium Againe Damnata est Berengarij opinio Sacerdotio Christiano parum nimis tribuenâ— Thus farre of all these former Heretykes to wit Hus Wicleff Waldo and the rest whereby the indifferent Reader may rest assured that they cannot with any iust shew of Reason and iudgemeÌ„t be alledged for Protestants as our Aduersaryes are accustomed to alledge them for the prouing of the visibility of the Protetestant Church in former Ages Animaduersion CIV ADmitting for the tyme that all these former Innouatours were entyre ProtestaÌ„ts in all Poynts not comparting with the Catholikes in any poynt of the Roman Religion Admitting also that not any of them did hould any one explorate Heresy by all sydes condemned yet are the examples of them most insufficient for the supporting of the Protestants Churches visibility My Reasons are these First The Scriptures (a) Esay 60. 40.1 Timoth. Eph. 4. besydes many other do proue that the Church of Christ must not at one only tyme or other but in all tymes and in all ages without the least interruption or discontinuance much lesse without interruption of many hundred yeares together be most visible and conspicuous This being granted I then demand what Protestants can be alledged liuing betweene Anno six hundred and seauen and anno 1220. Heere are about six hundred yeares betweene these two tymes during all which period as also for euery yeare thereof our Aduersaryes stand obliged to alledge Protestants for the Continuance of the visibility of the Protestant Church But this they are not able to effect And therefore D. Fulke with iust cause thus complayneth of the Inuisibility of the Protestant Church (b) D. Fuâ—ke in his answere to a Counterfeyt Catholikâ— pag. â—0 The Church in the tyme of Boniface the third which was anno 607. was inuisible and fled into the wildernes there to remayne a long season Secondly All the former men I meane Husse Wicleffe Waldo c. were originally Catholikes and after by forging of new Doctrine they deuided themselues from the Church then in Being and so thereby they iustifyed in themselues those words of S. Iohn (c) Ioan. 9. They went out of vs. Now this departure or going out of the Church implyeth in lieu of the continuance and visibility of their Church an interruption discontinuance defection of their Church and consequently a want of the visibility of the said Church Since it infallibly proueth that the Doctrines taught by these Men after their departure were not taught by the Church afore in being For if they had bene taught by it these Men needed not to leaue the then knowne Church for their defending and teaching of the said Doctrines Thirdly The Protestants wiâ—l say no doubt that Husse Wicleffe c. did preach the word of God and administer the Sacraments Heare then I demand seing no man taketh to himself the honour of priesthood but he that is called (d) Hebâ— 5. of God as Aaron was Who then did call Husse Wicleff Berengarius the Waldenses c. to preach the Word and administer the Sacraments or by whom were they sent But here our Aduersaries are at a stand flying to an immediat imaginary and aëry Calling For thus doth Caluin seeke to salue this difficulty Quia (e) Lascit the Protestant reciteth this saying of Caluin lib. de Russor Muscouit c. religione c. 23. Papae tyrannide c. Because through the tyranny of the Pope true succession of ordination was broken of therefore we stand in need of a new Course herein And this function or calling was altogether extraordinary With whom agreeth M. Perkins saying The (*) M. Perkins in his works printed 1605. fol. 916. calling of Wicliffe Husse Luther Oecolampadius Peter Martyr c. was extraordinary An exorbitant and phantasticall Conceite Animaduersion CV THere are two Reasons among others which euidently proue that our Aduersaries are conscious and guilty of their owne Churches Inuisibility One in that they discouer a wounderfull reluctation backwardnes when they are pressed by the Catholikes to name the Protestants liuing in such and such ages sortably hereto we find D. Fulke thus to complayne Proferre (f) Fulke de succes Eccles p. 89. me iubes toto Orbe latitantes vah quam iniquum postulas Thou willest we to produce and name those men who did lye hidd throghout the World How vniust a thing dost thou here demand And D. Wotton complayning in the like manner thus concludeth Proue (g) In his answere to a Popish Pamphlet p. 11. you that our Religion was no where helds This stands vpon you to disproue which when you do by particular Records you shall haue particular Answere Then which what can be first more absurdly spoken as expecting record of things which neuer were in being He furthermore transferring the part of prouing vpon Catholikes to which himself and his fellows only stand obliged The second Reason discouering their tergiuersation herein is in that when they are prest to instance in Protestants for seuerall ages they in lieu of Instancing flye to the Scripture then disputing the true Church of Christ must euer be Visible but theirs is the true Church as is proued out of the Scriptures Therefore their Church was euer visible A most strang and despayring Circulation Animaduersion CVI. THe like guiltines of our Aduersaries is shewed touching the supposed change of the Fayth of the Church of Rome For though this if any such change were be to be proued as being matter of fact from History yet our Aduersaries disclame from all History herein For D. Whitaker thus writeth Jt is not (h) Whitak contra Duraeum p. 177. needfull to search out of Histories the beginning of this change And againe It is (i) Whitak contra Duraeum p. 478. sufficient by comparing the Popish opinions with the Scripture to discouer the disparity of fayth betweene them and vs And as for Historiographers we giue them liberty to write what they will Thus bringing the Question as they did aboue touching the visibility of the Protestant Church to the Scriptures and their owne interpretation of the said Scriptures Which disclaming of theirs from History herein is most vnusuall and vnaccustomed since it hath bene euer the Office of Historiographers generall Councells to register and record any new arising Heresy or change in Fayth and Religion Animaduersion CVII IT cannot be denied but that a Catholike may commonly become sooner
Superstitious then a Protestant And a Protestant sooner becom an Atheist then a Catholike The Reason of both is euident And first whereas the Catholike Religion besides the beliefe of many dogmaticall points of fayth retayneth the practise of many Ceremonies the true vse of which Ceremonies as being first instituted by the primitiue Church are most lawfull but now if the ignorant Catholike through want of due instruction do ascribe more to them then is due or do put greater cōfidence in them then he ought as forgetting them to be but Ceremonies then perhaps he may haue a superstitious conceite of them as it happened in the Brazen Serpent though otherwise seruing as the figure of Christ To which the Iewes through abuse thereof in ascribing more worship to it then they ought at length bare a Superstitions respect But now touching the Protestants greater propension to Atheisme the reason is in that Protestancy euer refynes it selfe by Negatiues Thus for example The Caluinist or Puritan denies more then Lutheran or the moderate Protestāt The Anabaptist more then the Puritan The Anti-trinitarians more then the Anabaptists the Iew or Turks more then the Anti-trinitarians and for the last sublimation through deniall of all Iudaisme and Turcisme resolues into Atheisme And hereupon we find that whereas many Protestants by their often refyning of their Religion and all by Negatiues do in the end become Atheists denying euen the being of a Deity that few or no Catholikes immediatly from Catholike Religion euer fall into the open Blasphemy of Atheisme Animaduersion CVIII THe preaching of the Word and Sacraments supposing them to be Notes of the Church as our Aduersaries do suggest proue only the Place where the Church is but not which is the Church For the Church consisteth of men and we cannot tell who they are that receaue the Word truly preached or the Sacraments truly administred Againe whereas as Lubbertus (k) L. 4. de Eccles cap. 1. a Protestant truly teacheth Notius est duplex vnum Naturae alterum nobis Now here the Question is only of such Notes as are Notes in respect of vs for our better informing which is the true Church and not as they are Notes in respect of Nature For here we are instructed a posteriori and according to the measure of that knowledg which God vouchsafes to afford to vs. Now in reference hereto we freely grant that the true preaching of the word and Administration of the Sacraments may be termed Notes of the Church but not Notes to vs which is only the point here stood vpon For though they be Notes in Nature of the truth of the Church yet what doth this auayle vs since they are not Notes to vs for our direction to find which is the true Church Againe the true preaching of the word and the Administration of the Sacraments cannot be Notes to vs which is the true Church seeing the Scripture it selfe cannot be made knowne to vs for Scripture but only by the attestation of the Church as M. Hooker testifieth in these words Of (l) Hooker in Eccles Pol. saec 14. l. 1. pag. 86. things necessary the very chiefest is to know what Bookes we are to esteeme holy which is confessed impossible for the Scripture it selfe to teach And againe We (m) Vbi supra l. 3. p. 146. all know the first outward Motiue to esteeme of the Scripture is the authority of the Church Thus he Now this being granted it ineuitably followeth that first we must know which is the true Church to giue this approbation of the Scripture before we can know which is the Scripture and much more then before we can be assured of the true preaching of the Word and which is the true construction of the Scripture To these former Arguments I adioyne this pertinent obseruation It is this When the Catholikes demand to set downe the true Notes of the Church our Aduersaries answering That is the true Church which enioyeth a true preaching of the Word and an auayleable administration of the Sacraments Now I here affirme that this description of Notes is but our owne Question returned vs back in other termes and consequently but a Sophisme consisting in an idle circulation of the same point inuested with a new forme of words For when I demand which is the true Church I vertually implicitly and according to the immediate meaning of my words demand which Church is that which enioyeth the true preaching of the word and the true vse of the Sacraments since only the true Church is honored with this kind of preaching and distribution of the Sacraments Thus far touching the Notes prostituted by our Aduersaries as the true Notes of Christ his Church Animaduersion CIX SVch Protestants as do mantayne that there were Protestants in all ages before Luther giue the reason that the feare of Persecution was the cause why the said Protestants did then lye latent and became not visible to the world But this is a meere aēry suggestion For thus I argue The Church of God vnder persecution either communicateth openly with a false visible Church in participation of Sacraments and externall professiō of fayth Or els she doth refrayne from all such externall Communion if she do communicate with a false Idolatrous Church as diuers of our Aduersaryes repute the Church of Rome to be then is she not the true Church since the true Church cannot brooke any such dissimulation For we read With the hart a (n) Rom. 10. Mā belieueth vnto Iustice and with the mouth confesseth vnto Saluation If she doth not communicate with it then by such her forbearing she is made knowne and consequently is become thereby visible for who are persecuted but Men that are knowne Or how can one lying secretly and hiddenly be said to be persecuted The truth of this point is further warrantable from the examples of the persecution in the primitiue Church which of all other pressures of the Church was incomparably the greatest And yet we fynd that the particular Bishops Confessours and Martyrs are euen to this day made knowne who they were what false Opinions and Heresyes they impugned And the like may be said of the English Catholikes persecuted in Queene Elizabeths reigne since the names and memoryes of those reuerend Pryests and others of the Laity to speake nothing of many worthy Confessours and other suffering great losses and disgraces who lost their lyues in her dayes only for Religion are euen to this day fresh and recorded Therefore I heare demaund that if the Catholiks in this our Country being but a small part of Christendome could not but for some few nūbers of yeares in comparison escape the search and hands of their persecutours and become thereby most visible knowne How could then the Protestants being supposed to be dispersed thtoughout many Nations lye hid and auoyd for so many ages together as is pretended the force of that persecution which is affirmed by
fathers did take which they thought sufficient for the destroying of all new Errours to wit the Doctrine constantly and with an vanimous consent retayned euen from the Apostles dayes till their tymes Thus farre Caluin And so far now concerning the durance of the tymes euen by the ProtestaÌ„ts frequent Confessions that no chauge of fayth was made in the Church of Rome Animaduersion CXIII IN this next Animaduersion we will take into our consideration the number of those ages during the length of all which from this day vpward the present Roman faith hath by the like Confessions of the learned Protestants beene generally taught since how long the Protestants do graÌ„t that the Church of Rome hath from this day continued in her present fayth so long it followeth by their owne implicite but necessary censures that the Church of Rome neuer altered her fayth Now this poynt appeareth from the wrytings of D. Humfrey aboue alledged who shewing what Religion Austin the Monke sent by Gregory the Great who liued in the yeare 590 plaÌ„ted in England thus confesseth Jn Ecclesiam (y) D. Humfrey in Iesuitism â—art 2. Rat. 5. pag. â—27 quid inuexerunt Gregorius Augustinus Onus Caeremonâ—arum c. What did Gregory and Austin bring into the Church Aburden of Ceremonyes They did bring in the Archiepiscopall Pall for the Solemnization of the Masse They did bring in Purgatory c. or the Oblation of the healtfull Host and prayer for the Dead c. Relicks Transubstantiation c. a new Consecration of Temples c. from all which what other thing is effected then the introducing of Indulgences Monachisme Papisme and the rest of the Chaos of Popish superstitions All this did Austin she greater Monke being instructed herein by Gregory the Monke bring vnto English men Thus D. Humfrey Now from hence it appeareth that at S. Gregory his sending of Austin into England which was about a thousand yeares since our present Roman Religion was then wholy and publikely practized in Rome and that if the Church of Rome had suffered any change in fayth from that first taught by the Apostles that this change should haue beene made not since but before Gregoryes tyme and before he had sent Austin to plant in England the fayth of Christ In further confirmation of D. Humfreys iudgement herein I may alledge the Centurists who in their Index or Alphabeticall Table of the sixt Century at the word Gregory do set downe with particular figures of references where euery such mentioned OpinioÌ„ may be fouÌ„d as followeth Eiusdem error de bonis operiâ—ut de Confessione de CoÌ„iugio de Ecclesia de sanctorum inuocatione de Inferno de libero arbitrio de Iustificatione de purgatorio de paenitentia de satisfactione c. Briefly with all other particular points mantayned by the now present Church of Rome The lesse wonder therfore that Danaeus resting vpon his owne false principles thus wryteth of our Conuersion Purgatio (z) Danaeus in respons ad disputat Bellarm. part r. pag. 780. illa quam Gregorius primus fecit c. suit inebriatio Meretricis muÌ„do facta de qua est Apocalyp c. 17. 18. thus referring our Conuersion to Christianity to the worke of Antichrist Now from these former acknoledgmeÌ„ts of the learned Protestants we may infallibly conclude that from this day till we arriue at least to the age of the foresaid S. Gregory who liued about a thousand yeares since the present Roman and Catholike Religion was taught besides in our Country in diuers other Countryes and consequently seing those Countryes did receaue their Instructions in fayth froÌ„ Rome it inauoydably followeth that during all this tyme not any innouation or change in fayth was introduced into the Church of Rome Animaduersion CXIV NOw in this third place we are to take into our Consideration the number of yeares which passed betweene the first foure hundred and fourty yeares from Christ and these last thousand yeares from vs which number seeing it is sixteene hundred yeares and more from Christ to vs amounteth to about one hundred and sixty yeares Well then if here we can proue that no change of fayth was made in the Church of Rome within the compasse of this 160. yeares then followeth it inauoydably that the Church of Rome neuer to this day hath suffered any alteration in fayth and Religion since it first imbraced the Christian fayth This point I then first proue from the doctrine which was belieued and generally taught at such tyme as Constantine who was our first Christian Emperour was conuerted to Christianity which was about the yeare three hundred and twenty after Christ and therefore before the foresaid one hundred sixty yeares Now that the fayth in Constantins tyme was the same that the Church of Rome professeth at this present appeareth from the frequent testimonies of the Centurists who most elaborately and punctually do record all the particular Articles of the present Roman fayth to be belieued most constantly by the said Constantine and by the age wherein he liued Touching the fayth of Constantine and that age the Centurists spend seuerall Columnes of the fourth Century to wit from Columne 452. to Columne 497. and D. Whitaker affirmeth that Leo who was Pope anno 440. was a great (a) D. Whitak contra Bâ—llar pag. â—7 Architect of the Antichristian Kingdome Now from all this I necessarily euict that no change of the faith of Rome was made in the compasse of the said one hundred sixty yeares which tyme was set downe betweene the confessed period of the Churches purity and the acknowledged generall Doctrine of the Church of Rome But now to recapitulate the Contents of these three last Animaduersions which beare a necessary dependency and reference one to another I thus make my deduction First if the Church of Rome remayned in her purity of fayth without any change for the first foure hundred and forty yeares Secondly if it be confessed that for this last thousand yeares the Church of Rome euer professed the same fayth without any change which at this day it professeth Thirdly if it be made cleare that during the Interstitium of tyme betweene the first 440. yeares and this last thousand yeares which is but 160. yeares no change in fayth was made as appeareth from the fayth of Constantine our first Christian Emperour and the Fathers of that age What demonstration more certaine and infallible then that the present Church of Rome neuer made any change of fayth and Religion since the Apostles tymes but that she euer preserued as pure and incorrupt the very same fayth and Religion which S. Peter S. Paul and other the Apostles first planted in her And this Demonstration for I can terme it no lesse I present to the mature and diligent perusall of the Iudicious Reader assuring him that all the learned Protestants of Christendome cannot giue any satisfactory answere therto which demonstration I willingly acknowledge that I
decerped out of that Booke heretofore mentioned commonly called The Protestants Apology of the Roman Church Animaduersion CXV IF any man should yet rest vnsatisfyed be persuaded that this imaginary change of fayth in the Roman Church should happen within the Interstitium of the foure hundred forty yeares and the last thousand yeares which mid-tyme only containeth one hundred and sixty yeares as is in the three former Animaduersions aboue shewed then for the greater satisfaction of such a Man I present to him as an Appendix to the three last Animaduersions this obseruation and point following It is this Yf we consider either the plurality of our Catholike Articles or the incompatibility which diuers of them beare partly to our outward sense partly to mans naturall propension or the diuersity of Countryes and Nations in Christendome most remote one from another all which our said Catholike Religion is acknowledged wholy to possesse at the later end of the sixt Age or Century I say if we consider all these different circumstances the tyme of the said one hundred sixty yeares within which most Protestants do teach this change did happen is infinitly too litle and wholy disproportionable so as that within the compasse thereof so great a change alteration should be wrought especially in such an admirable manner that whereas in the beginning of the said 160. yeares it is auerred by the Protestants that not any one point of our Catholike Religion was then taught as is aboue mantayned by them in acknowledging the purity of the fayth of Rome to continue vnto the beginning of the said 160. yeares yet that at the end of the said 160. yeares it should so ouerflow all Christendome with such a violent streame as that no sparke of Protestancy supposing it were afore professed or any other religion did remayne in any one Country or other but that all was wholy extinct Such an Imaginary change and alteration in Religion I say as this is more then stupendious and wonderfull and such as since the creation of the world neuer afore happened I further add hereto that since the Heresies of the Nestorians Pelagians Donatists Monothelites all which did spring vp within the compasse of this foresaid 160. yeares are particulatly recorded by S. Austin (b) Austin l. de Haeres Haeres 88. 89. yea also by the (c) Centurists Cent. 16. Col. 312. Centurists how then can we dreame that any points of our Roman Religion were first introduced as Innouations and yet no record of them to remayne in any History whatsoeuer Furthermore for the close of all I add that in or which is more strange next before the beginning of the said 160. diuers Articles of Protestancy were condemned for Innouations as the deniall of prayer and offering vp sacrifice for the Dead and of appointed fasts as singular Noueltyes in Aerius as Austin witnesseth Haeres 53. In like sort the Deniall of Praying to Saincts and worshipping of Saints Relicks was condemned in Vigilantius as Ierome recordeth l. contra Vigilant c. 2. 3. The deniall of Priests power in remitting of Sinne condemned for Nouelty as the Centurists confesse Cent. 4. col 254. The like may be said of most other points of Protestancy condemned as Noueltyes either a litle before or within the compasse of the foresaid 160. So euident it is that no articles of our Catholike fayth were brought in as Innouations during the said period of 160. yeares Animaduersion CXVI WHereas the Protestants do affirme a beginning though most ancient of diuers points of our Roman Catholike Religion and that we Catholikes take aduantage of such their acknowledgments yet cannot they with true reason thus reply against vs You admit the authorities of the Protestants granting for so many ages the antiquity of the present Roman Religion in such and such points of fayth Therefore you are by force of reason to admit their like authorities in saying that at such a tyme and not before those your Popish Articles were first taught for seing both these points are deliuered by the Protestants in one and the same testimony or sentence why should the one part be vrged by you for true and the other reiected as false To this I answere that our Aduersaries expect herein from vs more then in equity can be demanded My reason is this In the authorities of this Nature produced from our Aduersaries writings we are to distinguish and seuer that which the Aduersaries grant in behalfe of vs from that which they affirme to their owne aduantage what they grant for vs against themselues so far we are to imbrace their authority seeing it may be presumed as is in this Treatise elswhere intimated that ordinarily no learned man would confesse any thing against himselfe but what the euidency of truth enforceth him thereto But what our Aduersaries affirme in fauour of their owne cause and against vs there we are not to stand to their authority since no man is to be a witnesse in his owne behalfe and it may be well and probably presumed that such their Sentence proceedeth out of their owne partiality of their cause and iudgment Animaduersion CXVII THe Apostle foretelleth vs that Pastours (d) Eph. 4. and Doctours are to be in the Church to the Consummation of Saints till we all meet in vnity of fayth that is as D. Fulke (e) Fulke against the Rhemish Testam in Ephes 4. truly interpreteth for euer which Pastoâ—rs Doctours prophecyed by the Apostle shall as the said D. Fulke further auerreth alwayes (f) Fulke in his answere to a Counterfeyte Catholike pag. 11. resist all false Opinions with open reprehension With whom conspires D. Whitaker herein saying The (g) Whitak contra Duraeum l. 3. pag. 240. preaching of the word within which is necessarily included the impugning of all false Doctrines doth coâ—stitute the Church the want thereof doth subâ—erit it According hereto we also thus read in Esay (h) Esay â—â— Vpon thy Wals O Jerusalem I haâ—â— appoynted watch men all the day al the nighâ— for euer They shall not hold their peace Now heare I thus vrge Can any reasonable man thinke that whereas the Protestants teach that the Papists Religion came in by degrees and at seuerall tymes that all the Pastors Doctors and Fathers of those seuerall tymes were a sleepe when the said Doctrines were first broached or that they obseruing their entrance yet not any of them would vouchsafe to make resistance or at least some mention of any such Innouation in Doctrine especially if we consider the nature of our Catholike Doctrines auerred by the Protestants to be introduced as Noueltyes Since they are as aboue is intimated many in number diuers of them of the greatest consequence that may be As the vertue of the Sacraments the manner of our Justification to wit whether by works or by fayth only Others of them most repugnant to Mans sense and common Reason as the Reall presence
vpon vs doth not please me for it tasteth of Barbarism Now to come to the text impoysoned by his Constructions and first that markable passage J and (e) Ioan. 10. the Father are vnum vz. one thing euer mainly insisted vpon by the Ancient (f) Chrysost in hunc locum Austin in hunc locum many others Fathers against the Arians for proofe of the Diuinity of Christ is thus auoyded by Caluin (g) Caluin in Ioan. ca. 10. Abusi sunt hoc â—xo Veteres vt probarent Christum esse Patri Homousion neque enim Christus de vnitate sùbstantiae disputat sed de consensu The ancient Fathers haue abused this place to proue that Christ is Consubstantiall to his Father For Christ here disputeth not of the vnity of Essence but of the vnity of Consent and will Againe that passage There (h) 1. Ioan 5. be three that giue testimony in Heauen the Father the Word and the Holy Ghost and these three be one Which text the ancient Fathers euer expounded of the Trinity Caluin thus answereth Quod (i) Caluin in hunc locum dicitur tres esse vnum ad essenâ—iam non refertur sed ad consensum potiùs That is where it is said these three are One these words are not to be referred to One in respect of Essence but rather of Consent In like manner that place Thou (k) Psal 2. art my Sonne bodie this day I haue begotten thee Calâ—iâ— (l) In Psalm 2. interpreteth with the Arians against the Diuinity of Christ This point I meane of Caluins interpreting the chiefe passages of Scripture euer vrged by the Ancient Fathers for proofe of Christs Diuinity with the Arians to impugne Christs Diuinity is so câ—eere and confessed as that Aegidius Hunnius a most markable and learned Protestant writeth a booke against Caluin of this subiect thus entituling it Caluinus Indaizans hoc est Iudaicae glossae corruptelae quibus Joannes Caluinus illustrissima scriptura sacra loca testimonia de gloriosa Trinitate c. detestandum in moâ—um corrumpere non exhorrait With this blaspheâ—y against the Blessed Trinity Caluin is further charged by Conradus (m) In Theolog. Caluinist l 2. fol. 38. 39. sequent Sclusselburg by (n) In his Admonit de Arianis Pelargus by Stancarus (o) Scâ—nkarus contra ministros Geneuens Tyguriâ—oâ— and lastly by Ioannes Mathaeus all eminent Protestants which Mathaeus did write a booke against Caluin for teaching Arianisme stiling it de Cauendo Caluinistarum fermento c. Animaduersion CXXXIX FRom the confessed Inuisibility of the ProtestaÌ„t Church during so many ages aboue granted it is proued that the Protestant Church is not the true Church of Christ by this Medium following The Prophesyes do fore shew that the Church of Christ in the tyme of the New testament shall conuert to its faith the Gentils their Nations and kingdomes thus accordingly we read Esay to fortell of the Church (p) Esay c. 60. vide etiam cap. 54. The Iles shall waite for thee meaning the Church Their kings shall minister vnto thee and thy Gates shal be continually open neither day nor night shal they be shut that men may bring to thee the riches of the Gentils with whom accordeth the Roiall Prophet speaking in the persoÌ„ of the Church (q) Psal 2. I will giue thee the Heathens for thy inheritance and the ends of the earth for thy possession That these places of Scripture besydes diuers others are vnderstood of the enlargement of Christs Church and the coÌ„uersion of kingdomes and nations vnto it is warranted by the acknowledgement of (r) Oâ—colamp vpon Ieremy Occolampadius (s) In his defâ—nce p. 400. D. Whitguist D. Whitaker (t) In his answere to M. William Reynoâ—â—â— and others as also by the Annotations of the Protestants owne English (u) Printed in the yeare 1576. Bibles Now for proofe that the Protestant Church neuer yet conuerted any Gentils or Heathen Kingdomes and Nations to its fayth we will begin first from Luthers tyme and so ascend by degrees vp to the Apostles And first from Luthers days to Gregory the Great or Boniface the third which contayneth a thousand yeares it is euident that during all this tyme the ProtestaÌ„t Church remained wholy Jnuisible as is aboue demonstrated from the acknowledgments of Protestants and therefore could not conuert any Countryes or Kingdomes to its religion Againe touching all these Countryes here expressed to wit The Danes (x) Cant. 8.9 10.11.12.13.14.15 Morauians Polonians Slauonians Bulgars Hunnes Normans Bohemians Noruegians Saxons Germans and diuers others here omitted the Conuersions of all these happened within this last thousand yeares and therefore were conuerted by the Church of Rome and to the present Roman fayth euen by free acknowledgment of the Magdeburgians or Centurists according as the Bishops of Rome liued within those seuerall ages Neither can our Aduersaries name any one Heathen Country in Christendome conuerted to Christianity by the Protestant Church And hence it ryseth that D. Whitaker doth stile the Conuersion of all the former Countryes as granting them to be conuerted to our present Roman fayth impure (y) Whitak l de Eccles contra Bellarm. § 336. and corrupt Conuersions Now to ascend from these last thousand yeares vpwards to the other next three hundred yeares I meane to the dayes or the first Christian Emperour during the space of which three hundred yeares no Countryes or Kingdomes were conuerted at all to Christian Religion either by Catholikes or any others for it is euident that in those daies there were no Kings professing the Christian Religion the Emperours of the East only excepted among whom some were false (z) As Valens Constantius constans Christians as being defiled with Arianisme others (a) IuliaÌ„ Apostates Now concerning the tyme it selfe of Constantine it is so certaine that neither himself nor any Country by his meanes was conuerted to the Protestant Religion as that the Magdeburgenses all Protestants recording the state of the Church in Constantynes tyme do charge Constantine with all our Catholike points at this day professed by the Church of Rome styling them The (b) Cent. 4. Errours of Constantine and of his Age. Now to ryse higher in tymes to wit from the tymes of Constantine to that of Christ our Sauiour it is witnessed by all Historiographers that the Church of God was in such violent Persecutions as that it had no meanes to inlarge it selfe by conuerting to it Kings or Kingdomes and if it had at that tyme conuerted any yet the Question would then follow whether such a Conuersion had beene made to the Protestant or to the Roman Church But the euidency of this point appeareth both from the writings of the Protestant Deuines of Wittenbâ—rg (c) In the booke Disputationes c. as also from the testimony of D. Barlow who thus discourseth hereof (d) Barlow in his defence
of the Articles of the Protâ—stant Religion pag. 24. the Primitiue Nonage of the Church this promisse of Kings allegiance thereunto was not so fully accomplished because in those days that prophesy of our Sauiour was rather verified You shal be brought before Kings for my name sake by them to be persecuted euen vnto death Now to reflect vpon this argument deduced from the prophesyes that the true Church of Christ shall conuert to it the Gentills their Kings and Kingdomes heâ—â— aboue we see euen from the pens of our Aduersaries that many Countryes Kings and Kingdomes haue beene conuerted to Christianity by the Roman Catholike Church but not any one Heathen king or Counâ—ry by the Protestant Church whether then oâ— these two Churches is the true Church 〈◊〉 Christ Here to reply and say that these prophesyes are to be fulfilled not before bâ—â— after the preaching of Luthers Gospell 〈◊〉 controuled by the iudgment of all learneâ— men and by Experience it selfe and therefore D. Whitaker had iust reason thus to confesse of this point Whatsoeuer (e) Whitak l. 7. contra Duraeum pa. 472. the aâ—cient Prophets haue foretould of the enlargement amplitude and glory of the Church The same to haue beene already performed is most euident out of Histories Thus far of this Demonstration to proue that the Protestant Church is not that Church to which the former prophesyes of conuerting Gentills Kings and Nations do truly appertayne Animaduersion CXL GOod Reader in this one Animaduersion 〈◊〉 intreate thy peculiar lattention This then I say Luther thus chargeth Moyses De (1) Luth. tom 3. Wittin in Psal 46. fol. 423. you collect together all the Wisdome of Moyses and of Heathen Philosophers and you shall find them to be before God either Idolatry or Hypocriticall wisdome c. Away therfore with Moyses Of S. Paul the Magdeburgians thus speake Paul (2) Magdeb Cent. 1. l. 2. ca. 10. doth turne to James the Apoâ—â—â—â— and a Synod of Presbyters being called toâ—â—her he is persuaded by Iames and the rest â—t for the offended Iewes he should purify himâ—fe in the Temple whereunto Paul yeeldeth â—â—ich certainly was no small slyding of so great a Doctour as not hauing sufficient reason thereof Moyses Law being abrogated In the like condemnation of some other Apostles we â—d Brentius the great Protestant thus to â—each *) Brentius in Apolog. Confess c. de Concilijs pag. 900. S. Peter chiefe of the Apostles also Barnabas after the Holy Ghost receaued â—â—gether with the Church of Jerusalem erâ—â—d That the whole Church of Christ may â—tre D. Fulke thus literally auerreth The (*) D. Fu ke in his answere to a Counterfeyt Catholike pag. 86. â—hole Church militant as euery part thereof â—â—y altogether erre Touching generall Counâ—lâ— Peter Martyr thus speaketh As (3) Lib. de vocis long 〈◊〉 we insist in Generall Councells so long we shall â—sist in the Papists errors Of particular Faâ—â—ers D. Whitaker thus censureth Papistarum (4) Contra Duraeum l. 6 p. 421. religio est Cento c. The popish Religion is â—patched Couerlet of the Fathers Errours sowed â—gether Finally Christ himselfe both God Man and Redeemer of the world is â—harged with ignorance by the ProtestaÌ„ts â—r thus Caluin writeth Insanus (s) Caluin in ca 14. Math. foret qui â—grauatim ignorantiae subijceret quam ne ipse â—idem Dei filius nostra causa subire abnuit c. â—hat maÌ„ were mad who with discontent shouâ—d â—knowledg himselfe to be subiect to ignorance â—nce the Sonne of God himself for our sake â—ould not refuse to be ignorant And further Caluin speaking of Christ his prayer in tâ—â— Garden thus chargeth our Sauiour Chriâ— (6) Calu. in 26. Math. oratio in horto fuit abruptum votum sâ—bitò elapsum quod castigauit reuocauit 〈◊〉 prayer of Christ in the Garden was abrupt not premeditated which vow at vnawares â—â—â—ping from our Sauiour he after reuoked ananâ— called Thus now I wind vp my Premisses Yâ— particular Fathers Yf Generall Councells Yâ— the whole Church militant of Christ â—f the Blessed Apostles and this after the desceâ—ding downe of the Holy Ghost Yf Moyâ— finally if Christ himselfe may erre as aâ— this is aboue though falsly taught by oâ— Aduersaries what indiscretion then whâ—â— weaknes of iudgment what motley foolishnes or rather Lunacy is it to ascribe aâ— infallibility of iudgment to Luther an incestuous Monke to Swinglius an Apostatâ— Priest to Caluin and Beza two Sodomits euen by the acknowledgment of their owne (7) Caluin and Beza are charged with Sodomy by Conradus Schlusselb a great Protestant in Theolog. Caluin printed 1504. l. 2. fol. 72. l. 1. ol 91. Brethren to any other Sectary whosoeuer or finally to the priuat reuealing Spirâ—â— of ech illiterate man who holds himselfe through his owne pryde and ignorance to be afflatus or possessed with the Holy Ghost or what Reason had D. Whitaker thâ—â— ambitiously to paint out this Priuat Spiritâ— these words An (8) Whitak in Controu q. 5. ca. 3. 1â— inward perswasion of the Holy Ghost wrought in the closet of the belieueâ—â— hart Animaduersion CXLI WHen we Charge the Protestants with diuers Innouations of the auncient Heâ—â—tykes they in Recrimination thereof laâ—our to insimulate vs with the Doctrines of â—he Gentils or Heathens as appeareth from (*) Reinolds lib. de Rom. Idolatria p. 168. 248. 381. The same is obiected by Kempnitius Examen part 3. pag. 83. D. Reynolds pen And heere they chieâ—â—y insist in two poynts to wit in the Doâ—ryne of Sacrifice and of vowes both which Doctrynes were euer belieued practized and are euen at this present by the Genâ—â—â— and Heathens Heere I thus wype away â—â—is aspersion yet withall I freely grant â—hat we mantayne both Sacrifice and vowes 〈◊〉 do withall acknoledge that the Heathens â—d the like but now to the point To haue â—acrifice and to haue Vowes is deriued to â—en from the light of Nature since euen 〈◊〉 the Law of Nature Men as Men endued â—ith reason not as Heathens euer belieâ—ed the doctrine hereof and practized the â—me In like manner the Heathens only by â—e light of Nature belieued that there was God as the Apostle sheweth shall we Caâ—olykes therefore dissent from the Heaâ—ens in the beliefe therof Now that the â—eathens erred in the Obiect of their Saâ—ifices and Vowes to wit in sacrifizing of men and making improfitable and foolish â—owes this proceeded from the Nature of man corrupted by Originall Sinne and not repayred in them by Christ Euen as they erred in the immediat Obiect of God as noâ— belieuing in one only true God but repâ—ting the Sunne and Moone as Gods Noâ— heere I say it is lawfull to agree with the Heathens in the generalityes of the two former doctrines since the Instinct of Nature impressed by God in MaÌ„ teacheth so much but not in the particularityes of theÌ„ seing
Priests of the Old Law or the High Priests now haue after the establishment of Religion beene sometimes wicked Men or not but the touch of the Question here issuable is whether the truth of Religion hauing beene extinct as is supposed or to the World latent and inuisible for so many hundred yeares as is in this Treatise confessed by our Aduersaries to haue beene extinct and inuisible may with any probability be thought to be reuealed or restored to the world by men of flagitious and wicked Liues I meane by Luther Swinglius Caluin (2) Caluin charged with Sodomy by the publike records of the City of Noyon in FraÌ„ce yet extant and by Conradus Schlusselburg a Protestant in Theolog Caluinist printed 1594. l. Law 1. fol. 72. and Beza (3) Beza charged with Sodomy by the fore said Schlusseiburg vbi suprà and l. 1. fol. 9â— Hessbusius a Protestant in his booke entituled Verae sanâ— Confessionis c. both which last two are condemned of the execrable Sinne of Sodomy euen by other Protestants their brethren And heere the doubt or Question resteth Animaduersion CXLVI THe Prophet speaking with difference of the Synagogue of the Iewes in the Old Law and of the Church of Christ in the Neâ— thus writeth The glory (4) Aggeus â— of this last houâ—â— meaning the Church of Christ shal be greater then the first with whom conspireth the Apostle saying with reference to the Iewish Law and the Law of Christ (5) Hebr. 8. Christ is a mediatour of a better Testament which is established vpon better promisses Now from these passages of Scripture I demonstratiuely deduce that the Protestant Church is not the true Church of Christ since touching its visibility it is much inferiour to the Synagogue of the Iewes I meane which is a Circumstance here chiefly to be obserued euen since the comming of the Messias which was the appointed tyme of the Synagogues Decay and the Christian Churches increase For it is fully confessed heretofore that for the thousand yeares last before Luther or rather some seuerall ages more before the said thousand yeares the Protestant Church hath continued vnknowne latent and inuisible Whereas on the other part it appeareth by sufficient authority of Histories in all tymes that the Jewes during all those ages and euer since Christs tyme haue had their Synagogue though vnder some kind of restraint yet dispersed knowne and Visible in the most notable Prouinces of the world as Greece Italy Spayne France Germany England c. And thus we see that the scandall or scruple hence arysing hath beene an argument for some Protestants to apostatate from Christian Religion and to become Iewes as Bernardine Ochine Neuserus chiefe Pastour of Heidelburg and others as I haue shewed elswhere since these men altogether reiecting the Catholike Church as false and Idolatrous did well obserue that the former Prophesy of the Visibility of the Church of God was not fullfilled in their Protestant Church Animaduersion CXLVII YF we might rest vpon the seuerall iudgments of the Protestants it would follow that most of the chiefest Controuersies betweene vs and them should be but points of Jndifferency and the contrary houlding them off either syde should not be preiudiciall to Mans Saluation which course is indeed to introduce a Neutrality of Religion or rather a contempt of all Religion I will exempâ—ify in diuers particulars And 1 first concerning satisfaction and merit of works D. Whitaker thus writeth The (6) Whitak contra Rat. Camp p. 78. and in his answere to M. William Reynolds cap. 6. pag. 135. ancient Fathers thought by their externall discipline of life to pay the paynes due for sinne c. Which though it be an errâ—ur yet were they notwithstanding good Men and holy Fathers Therefore I conclude their beliefe and practise of the said points were no hindrance to their Saluation 2. Touching the Popes primacy thus fauorably Melancthon writeth thereof The (7) In his Ep extant in the Book entituled Centuria Epistol Theolog. Epist 74 Monarchy of the Bishop of Rome is profitable to this end that consent 〈◊〉 be retayned Wherefore an agreement might easâ—ly be established in this Article of the Popes Prâ—macy if other Articles could be agreed vpon Touching our Lady being preserued froâ— Originall Sinne and worshipping of Jmageâ— M. Bunny thus writeth In these (8) Bunny in his pacification sect 17. pag. 104. or suâ—â— like whosoeuer will condemne all those to be noâ— of the Church that are not fully persuaded therein as we are c. committeth an vncharitabâ—â— part towards his brethren 4. Concerning receauing vnder one or both kinds Luther thus teacheth Si (9) Luth. de vtraque specie Sacramenti veneris ad locum vbi tantuâ— vna species ministratur cum alijs vna tantuâ— specie vtere c. 5. Concerning the Doctrine of the Reall Presence D. Reynolds sayth The (10) Reynolds in his fifth Conclusion annexed to his Conference pag. 722. Doctrine of the Reall Presence is but as it were the grudging of a litle ague if otherwise the party hould the Christian fayth 6. Of Inuocation of Saints D. Goad (11) In their Disputation had in the Tower wiâ—h F. Campian the 1. dayes Conference Arg. 8. Rat. 11. 111. D. Fulke affirme that it doth not exclude from being members of the Church c. 7. of Honoring Saints Relikes and Prayer for the dead M. Spark thus discourseth We are (12) Sparke in his answere to M. Iohn d' Albines pag 382. not so hasty to pronounce condemnation of any such Errours for you know well inough that we make not these matters such as that either we thinke that all must be saued that hould the one way or all condemned that hould the other 8. Of Freewill and prayer for the Dead and some other points M. Cartwright thus censureth The Indifferency (13) Cartwright in his Reply p. 14. Sect. 1. â— of the Doctrines of Freeâ—â—â—l prayer for the Dead a number of others necessary Doctrines is such wherein men being â—â—sted haue notwithstanding beene saued 9. Lastly concerning Masse Luther thus writeth Priuate Masse (14) Luther in Colloq Germanicis ca. de Missa hath deceaued many Sâ—incts and earryed them away into Errour frâ—m the tyme of Gregory for 800. yeares Thus far for a tast touching many points euen of greatest consequence betweene the Church of Rome and the Protestants houlden by the Protestants to be of that Adiaphorous indifferent Nature as that the belieuing of them or deniall of them is no hinderance to the Saluation of the Soule So ready we fynd euen the most learned Protestants against the Nature of true fayth and of the practise of the primitiue Church to dogâ—etize a Neutrality of Christian Religion Animaduersion CXLVIII THe Antimoni who denied the Law of Moyses and the Libertines who teach all sensualicy all most impure wicked Heretikes may in a true iudgment be rightly said
Church of Christ Thou (37) Esay c. â—0 shalt sucke the milke of the Gentills and the breasts of Kings And againe it is prophesied of the Church by the Kingly Prophet J (38) Psal â— will giue thee the Heathens 〈◊〉 thy inheritance and the End of the Earth for sâ—â— thy possession Now two things are cleare the first that many Heathen Kingdomes hâ—â—e beene conuerted to Christianity by the Pope and his ministers This is proued from the coÌ„fession of D. Whitaker who acknowledging the conuersion of many Countryes made by the Church of Rome thus debaseth them The (39) Whitak l. de Eccles pag. 336. Conuersion of so many Nations after the tyme of Gregory haue not beene pure but corrupt Now that the Protestant Church neuer conuerted any Gentill King or Nation to the fayth of Christ appeareth from its coÌ„fessed Inuisibility for so many ages till Luthers tyme aboue set downe Thus then I here aâ—gue The predictions of conuerting Kings and Kingdoms to the fayth of Christ were performed by the Pope only and his Substituts and not by the Protestants Therefore the predictions for the enlarging of Christ his Church by conuerting Gentills vnto it were performed by Antichrist Christs designed Enemy How do these stand together and yet do these incompatibilityes necessarily result out of the former Assertions Animaduersion CLIV. THe example of Paphnutius his standing in the Nicene Councell in defence of Priests mariage so much insisted vpon by so many eminent Protestants is misapplied and withall in all likely hood most false It is misapplyed because where it is vrged in proofe of Priests Mariage it proueth the contrary For though perhaps Paphnutius might be persuaded that Priesthood did not dissolue Mariage afore contracted yet he sayth plainly Those (40) So relateth Socrates l. 1. ca. 8. who are made Priests before they are maried cannot after marry And this Paphnutius calleth Veterem Ecclesiae traditionem The ancient tradition of the Church So far was Paphnutius from ascribing the doctrine of Priests not marrying after the Order of Priesthood taken to the Councell of Nice Now that this example of Paphnutius is vntrue many probabilities may be vrged First because there is not so much as any Mention of this matter concerning Paphnutius made by any who did wryte of the Nicene Councell before Socrates tyme who first relateth the words of Paphnutius For neither did Eusebius Athanasius Epiphanius Theodoret nor yet Ruffinus himselfe who writ many things of Paphnutius and of the Nicene Councell all being more ancient then Socrates make any mention of this matter Now I here demaÌ„d could all these be silent in so great a busines and so earnestly debated in the Nicene Councell Secondly this example of Paphnutius seemeth to be against the third Canon of the said Nycene Councell which altogether forbiddeth Priests to haue dwelling with them any Woman other then their Mother Sister their Fathers sister their Mothers sister c. Now if as Socrates reporteth in the example of Paphnutius the Councell had left liberty for married Laymen afterwards made Priests to haue kept still their former Wynes why then was not the wyse first placed here in the exception but altogether omitted This example of Paphnutius is so much suspected to be false that Frigeuilleus (41) In his palmâ— Christiana p. 103. Ganuius a Protestant doth plainly ascribe it to the forgery of Socrates Animaduersion CLV IT will not be amisse to obserue the Protestants Method in disputing with the Catholikes touching the Reall Presence as it is taught by the Church of Rome For the Question of the Reall Presence being but propounded they quickly tell vs that Christ neuer intended or willed it which answere is made to omit all other Protestants by (42) In his Decads in English serm 8. p. 971. Bullinger And when to declare Christs Will therein we alledge his words they make then a new question of his power as denying such to be his will or sense of words vnder pretence that it is (43) So answereth whitak in his answ to M. William Reynolds pa 179. contradictory to the truth and Nature of his humane body now in Heauen and so is therby impossible And when in reply therto we proue to them directly that it is not impossible then returning per circuitum to their firster Euasion they answere that the Question (44) So answereth D. Whitak in his answere to M. Reynolds refutation pag. 192. is not of his power but only of his Will and so dancing in a round they triffle and delude vs by a subtle escape of an endles Circulation Animaduersion CLVI IT is most certaine that the doctrine of many of our Aduersaries touching the Reall Presence is inuolued with greater shew of Impossibility then our Catholike doctrine thereof is for whereas they teach that Christs reall body is really (45) So teach besides many others M. Perkins in his reformed Catholike pag. 187. and D. Fulke against the Rhâ—mish Testam in 1. Cor. 15. and truly present and yet not bodily and corporally but only Spiritually present By which word Spiritually they do not exclude the true and reall presence of his body Now how this should be free from repugnancy and meere contradiction and therfore impossible I cannot discerne For to affirme that Christs very body and not only a figure or efficacy thereof should be truly and really present and yet not bodily but spiritually present is in it selfe inexplicable and as Swinglius (46) Swimglius co 2. de vera falsa religionâ— fol. â—06 in confutation therof truly obserueth is vpon the matter no other thing then to turne his body into a Spirit For as the true substance of Christs Spirit cannot be said to be present to vs only corporally or bodily and not spiritually because it is a spirit and no Body so neither may the substance it selfe of Christs very body be said to be present to vs not bodily but only Spiritually nor at all spiritually vnlesse we do which is impertinent to the matter in hand vnderstand the word Spirituall as the Apostle doth 1. Cor. 15. because it is a true and reall body no Spirit Animaduersion CLVII VNiuersality of our Catholike Doctrine in all chiefest points dispersed througout all Nations euen by the acknowledgment of our Aduersaries as appeareth from their confessed Inuisibility of their owne Church and Religion for so many ages is a most strong Argument of the truth of our Catholike Religion My reason hereof is in that the doctrine of the Roman Church could not by any pretended corruption be deriued from that Church to so many Nations so far remote and distant ech from other Sundry of which Nations were vnknowne to the Latin Church and many of them at variance therewith in some small points Therefore from hence I conclude that our Catholike fayth was the Primitiue fayth first taught by the Apostles in all those far different Nations wherein
exhort the Reader to the perusing of the foresaid Booke Animaduersion CLXI GRammaticall and literall construction of the words of Scripture is euer houlden the best and securest euen in the iudgment of our learned Aduersaries for thus D. Whitaker writes of this point Qui (58) Whitak de sacra scriptura coÌ„tra Bellarm controu 1. q. 4 pa. 381. potest Grammaticum sensum Scripturae vbique assequi is optimè proculdubio Scripturas explanabit atque interpretabitur And Melancthon accordeth thereunto saying (59) Melancth l. 1. Epist. Iusto Ionae pag. 455. Multas magnat res antea inuolutas Syntaxis profert expouit The syntax doth explayne many things afore inuolued with difficulties Lastly to omit others (60) Zanchius de sacra scriptura p. 388. Zanchius the great Protestant much relyeth vpon the Grammaticall and Literall sense of the Scripture Now this principle and ground being granted as in reason it ought to be how great is our Aduantage herein against our Aduersaries who reiecting the Grammaticall and literall Sense of the passages of Scripture by vs insisted vpon do euer seeke to interpret them figuratiuely or allegorically For Example we rest in the Grammaticall sense and construction of that passage This is (61) Mat. 16. my body c. This is my bloud c. In like sort for the Primacy of Peter we vrge the literall sense of that passage Thou (62) Mat. 16. art Peter and vpon this Rock I will build my Church and the Gates of Hell shall not preuaile against it Also for remission of Sinnes by man Whose sinnes (63) Ioan. 20. you shall forgiue they are forgiuen them and whose sinnes you shall retayne they are retayned And more touching works Do you not see that (64) Luc. 3. man is iustifyed by Works and not by fayth only Finally to omit infinit other testimonies that perspicuous place for remitting of Originall sinne by Baptisme Except a man (65) Ioan. 3. be borne againe of Water and the spirit he cannot enter into the Kingdome of Heauen In all which places we do vrge the Grammaticall playne and literall sense whereas our Aduersaries seeke to expound all the said diuine Authorities by figures and Tropes Add hereto that the Protestants in their vrging of Scripture against vs do for the most part alledge it not in its literall or immediat Grammaticall sense but in some secondary sense seconded by Inferences and deductions at most but probable though often absurd and false Animaduersion CLXII THe prayses giuen to S. Austin by the Protestants are most great For first Luther thus speaketh of him Since (66) Luther in tom 7. wittenb fol. 405. the Apostles tymes the Church neuer had a better Doctour then S. Austin And againe After the (67) Luth loc com class p. 45. sacred Scriptures there is no Doctour in the Church who is to be compared to Austin D. Fyeld thus extolleth him Austin the (68) Of the Church l. 3 fol. 170. greatest of all the Fathers and worthiest Deuine the Church of God euer had since the Apostles times D. Couell Austin (69) D. Couell in his answere to Iohn Burges p. 3. was a man far beyond all that euer went before him or shall in likâ—lyhood follow after him both for Diuine and humane learning M. Forrester a Protestant styleth Austin That (70) â—orrester in Monas Tessagraphica c 〈◊〉 proaemio par 3. Monarch of the Fathers S. Austin Gomarus another Protestant thus celebrateth S. Austin (71) Gomarus in his spec verae Ecclesia p. 96. Austin of all the Fathers is houlden most pure in thâ— opinion of all Finally Caluin thus writeth Austin (72) Calu. Instâ—â— l. 3 cap. 3. sect 10. only is sufficient to shew the iudgment of the ancient Church Now in this next place let vs take a view of what Religion S. Austin was I meanâ— whether a Papist as we are termed or a Protestant and this euen from the writingâ— and Confessions of the Protestants themselues And first in proofe that Gods foreknowledge doth not necessitate or restrayne the 〈◊〉 in her actions contrary to the Iudgâ—ent of most Protestants Saint Austin is so â—â—ll therein that Polanus (73) Pol. in his Symphonia c. 2. p. 114. the Proteâ—â—ant alledgeth seueral authorities out of Austin in defence thereof 2. Touching the induration of Pharoes hart â—y God S. Austin teacheth that this was â—nly through Permission and not through â—y Positiue actuall working of God and â—â—erefore this Father is reprehended by Calâ—â—s saying (74) Caluin Inst. l. 2. c. 4. sect 3. Austin was not free from that â—â—erstition where he sayth that Induration â—iâ—â—ration pertaine not to the working of God â—â—to his foreknowledg â— S. Austin is so expresse and euident that Gods Commandements are not impossible that â—elancthon forbeareth not to confesse and â—prehend to vse his owne words Imagiâ—â—tionem (75) Melancthon l. 1. Ep. p. 290. Augustini de impletione legis 4. S. Austin taught that Christ from his â—atiuity was free from Ignorance This is â—â—nfessed by Danaeus the great Protestant 〈◊〉 these words (76) Danaeus respons ad Bellarm. ad 2. Controu c. 1. p. 145. Austin l. 2. c. 29. de pec 〈◊〉 denyeth Christ to haue taken Childrens inâ—â—nities and ignorance which to be false with â—â—ue of so great a man J haue shewed before 5. That Christ after his Death descended inâ— Hell Doctour (77) Bilson in his Suruey of Christs suffering pag. 616. 598. 599. Bilson produceth teâ—â—monies out of S. Austin in proofe thereof 6. That Christ penetrated the Dores when 〈◊〉 came to his disciples so as his body at â—ut tyme was without all circumscription (78) RuÌ„gius in disput 11 ex Epist. ad Cor. 1. fol. 83. Rungius the Protestant affirmeth it to be the doctrine of S. Austin 7. That the Blessed Virgin Mary was assumpted vp into Heauen according to the iudgment of Austin is confessed by the Centurists who professing to set downe a Catalogue of Bookes written by S. Austin do number and place among his other Bookes (79) Centur 5. c. 10. col 1122. one booke thus entituled De Assumptione Viâ—ginis Mariae l. 1. 8. In like sort the Centurists do alledge confesse out of S. Austin touching the Blessed Virgin being free from Originall sinne in this manner As (80) Centur 5. c. 4. col 499. touching Originall sinne forasmuch as concerneth Mary Austin writeth Excepting the holy Virgin Mary of whom in honour of our Lord when we treat of sinnes J will haue no question at all c. This therefore Virgin Mary excepted c. Thus much do the Centurists alledge out of S. Austin 9. That Austin taught that the Blessed Virgin vowed Chastity is confessed by D. Fulke who most scornfully chargeth S. Austin therein with a Non (81) Fulk against the Rhemish Testament in Luc c 1. sequitur saying although S. Austin gathered she vowed
Virginity yet it followeth not c. 10. That the Scriptures are to be discerned so far as coÌ„cerns our taking notice of theÌ„ by the authority of the Church Austin most fully teacheth and is therefore condemned by Swinglius in these words Here (82) Swingl tom 1. fol. 135. J intreat your indifferent Iudgments that you freely speake whether this saying of Austin meaning about the discerning of Scripture by the authority of the Church be thought more audacious then fitting or to haue beene vttered imprudently 11. Touching the Bookes of Toby Iudith Hester Machabees S. Austin doth admit them all for true diuine and Canonical Scripture and for such his doing is reprehended by Hospinian (83) Hospinian hist Sacr. part 1. p. 160. ZaÌ„chius de sacra scriptura pag 32. 33. D. Fyeld of the Church l. 4. c. 23. p. 246. D. Reynolds in his conclusions annexed to his Conference conclus 2 p. 699. 700. Zanchius D. Fyeld and Doctour Reynolds 12. S. Austin is so full for the Doctrine of Traditions that they are to be receaued as that M. Cartwright speaking of one Tradition which Austin defended thus bursteth out To allow (84) Cartwrights in M. Whitguiftt Defence p. â—6â— S. Austins saying is to bring in Popery againe and further he thus speaking of S. Austin herein Yf (85) In Cartwright his second Reply part 1. pag. 84. 85. 86. S. Austins iudgment be a good iudgment then there be some things Commanded of God which are not in the Scriptures and thereupon no sufficient Doctrine contained in the Scripture 13. Touching the Sacraments conferring Grace to the worthy Receauer S. Austin for teaching our Catholike Doctrine therein is reprehended by (86) Luth. l. contra Coelaeum and Caluin lib. Instit 4. c. 14 sect vlt. Luther and Caluin 14. That Children could not be saued without being baptized Cartwright thus speaketh of S Austin herein Austin (87) Cartwright in whitguifts defence pag. 5â—1 was of mind that Children could not be saued without baptisme And hereupon then Cartwright chargeth S. Austin with Absurdity (88) Vbi supra p 516. Now in regard of this absolute Nâ—ceâ—sity of Baptisme to Children B zâ— (89) Beza in respons ad Act. Colloq Montisbelg par 2. p. 143. confesseth that Austin taught that in case of necessity it is lawfull for the Layty to baâ—â—ize 15. Touching the Reall Presence taught by S. Austin Hospinian (90) Hist Sacramen par 1. l. 4. pa. 292. 293. the Protestant chargeth and reprehâ—ndeth S. Austin therefore and particularly for these words of S. Austin When (91) Austin tom 8. in Psal 33. Christ said This is my body then that his body was carryed in his hands 16. That Austin taught that the wicked contrary to the Doctrine of the Protestants did receaue the body of Christ is confessed and reprehended by Bucer in these words How (92) Script Anglic pag. 619. often doth Austin write thaâ— euen Judas receaued the very body and bloud of our Lord Now further that Austin taught that the Sacrament ought to be taken fâ—sting is confessed by Hospinian in Hist Sacram part 1. pag. 48 In like manner that Austin taught that Holy bread was to be giuen to the Catechumeni D. Fulke confesseth thus answering therto terming iâ— A superstitioâ—â— bread giuen in S. Austins tyme to those tesâ— were Catechumeni insteed of the Sacrament Fulke against Heskins c. l. 3 c. 23. pag. 377. To passe further that the body of Christ in respect of his being in the Sacrament is to be adored in the Sacrament D. Bilson reprehendeth S. Austin for such his Doctrine Bilsâ—â— in his true difference par 4. pag. 536. To conclude touching the B. Sacrament of the Eucharist whereas S. Austin teacheth in tom 3. in Enchirid. cap. 110. saying The Sacrifice of Christs body and bloud is propitious or auaileable for the soules in Purgatory this sentence being confessed by Hutterus the Protestant and in lieu of full answere therto he sayth Jn aeternum defendi non potest This saying of Austin can neuer be defended Hutterus l. de sacrificio Missatico l 2. c. 7. p. 525. 17. S. Austin was so earnest in defence of Freewill and Vniuersall Grace that he is therfore acknowledged and dislyked by the Century (93) Cent. 5. c. 4. col 900. 501. writers The Centurists (94) Centur 5. ca. 10. col 113â— and whitak ad Rat. Camp rat 1. pa. 12. D. Whitaker do acknowledg that Iustification by works is in like manner taught by S. Austin 18. Touching the doctrine of merit of works thus writeth Osiander of S. Austin Austin sometymes in the Article of Iustification seemeth to attribute ouermuch to the merit of works c. Cent. 4. l. 4. cap. 23. 19. Touching Prayer for the Dead thus D. Fulke auoucheth Austin (95) D. Fulk in confut of Purg. pa. 349. defended prayer for the dead And that S. Austin did hould Purgatory is in like manner confessed by (96) Fulk ib. pa. 78. D. Fulke 20. Touching Inuocation of Saints S. Austin is so fully Catholike that himselfe doubteth not to pray to S. Cyprian being long before martyred which action Kempnitius thus repreheÌ„deth (97) Exa par 3. pa. 211. Austin did this without Scripture yielding to the tyme and custome 21. In proofe that Images may be worshipped Hospinian (98) Sacram part â— l. 5. c. 8. though a Protestant yet agreeing with S. Austin herein alledgeth him in proofe hereof 22. Touching the fast of Lent and other fasts S. Austin is reprehended by the Centurist Cent. 5. c. 6. col 686. 687. 23. Touching vowing of Monasticall life the Centurists (99) Cent. 5. col 710 charge S. Austin with the Doctrine thereof and Hospinian thus writeth of Austin herein Austin (100) Hosp de origine Monach. fol. 33. was a great louer of Monasticall profession according to the custome of that age To conclude this long Animaduersion Austin taught that Antichrist should be but one only man and that therfore the Popes being many cannot be truly accounted Antichrist this is confessed and dislyked by the (101) Cent. 1. l. â— col 435 Centurists Thus farre now of this passage from whence we may conclude that that Father to whom so many learned Protestants did aboue giue so high commendation and praise was in all poynts of our Catholike Roman ReligioÌ„ euen by the acknowledgment of the Protestants an entyre Roman Catholike or Papist and hereupon I referre to the iudgement of any man carefull of his saluation whether it be not more secure for one to range himselfe in faith Religion with so worthy a member of Christs Church as Austin was euen in the confession of our Aduersaryes who notwithstanding their Diuersity of Religion from him euen in relating of his Catholike Doctrynes for the most part do giue him the tytle of Saint then to dissent from him in fayth and to ioyne himselfe in Religion
â—e booke But they did wryte either a â—â—tory as the Euangelists did or Epistles â—on some speciall occasion as Peter Paul â—â—es Iudas Iohn and in the same did disâ—te or discourse of dogmaticall points of â—yth only obiter and as circumstances inâ—eed them Animaduersion CLXXI. â—He first Proposition touching Indulgences The foundation and groundworke of â—he Doctrine of Indulgences is that there reâ—ayneth in the Church of Christ a certaine â—pirituall Treasury of the satisfactions of â—hrist and his Saincts which may be applied â—o those who stand subiect to temporal puâ—ishment after the guilt of eternall punishment is remitted in the Sacrament of Penance for the better explicating of which doctrine these following propositions are to be deliuered The first proposition In one and the samâ— good action or worke of a iust man a double price or value is assigned to it the one of Merit the other of Satisfaction For example the one and same act of giuing of Almes is Satisfactory in that it is a laborious or penalâ— worke It is also Meritorious because it is a good worke proceeding from Charity Now the giuing of Almes proceeding from charity is not lesse good because it is laborious and penall vpon the same reason theâ— it followeth that the same prayer may be both impetratory and meritorious The second Proposition A good worke in that respect as it is meritorious cannot be applyed to another but it may be applyed as it iâ— Satisfactory The first part of this proposition is proued because it cannot come to passe that in respect that one doth worke well another should be said to worke well in the said Action The second part is proued because satisfaction is a compensation of the punishment or paying of what iâ— due but it is euident that one man may make compensation of punishment for another man or pay the debt of another man The third Proposition There remayneth in the Church an infinit Treasury of Christs satisfactions which can neuer be exhausted or dryed vp This is euident since the passion of Christ 〈◊〉 of an infinite worth price and dignity â—or it was the Passion of an infinite Person 〈◊〉 wit of the Word Incarnated for he was 〈◊〉 who shed his bloud for the Church â—ut did shee l it in Mans flesh Hypostaticalâ— assumpted Now the dignity of satisfaâ—ion receaues its measure from the dignity 〈◊〉 the person satisfying euen as the greatâ—es of the offence taketh its proportion â—om the dignity of the person offended â—herefore from hence it is inferred that â—â—ere is yet remayning a great part of the â—orth and price of the Passion of Christ â—â—ich may alwayes be applyed to Man The fourth proposition To this superaâ—â—dant Treasury of the satisfactions of Christ â—â—ng the passions or sufferings of the B. Virgin â—as a such other Saints who haue suffered more 〈◊〉 this world then their sins haue deserued For 〈◊〉 is euident not to speake of other Saints â—â—t the Blessed Virgin neuer committed any â—â—tuall Sinne yet it is said that the sword 〈◊〉 griefe pierced her soule Luc. 2. In like sort 〈◊〉 Iohn Baptist being sanctifyed in his moâ—ers wombe did lead a most innocent life â—â—d stood obnoxious to most few and most â—ght or small Sinnes and yet in defence of â—â—e truth hee was beheaded Therefore it â—â—nnot be doubted but that a great heape â—f passions and sufferings of the B. Virgin 〈◊〉 S. Iohn Baptist were vpon their deaths reâ—ayning of which themselues did not staÌ„d in need for the satisfying for any temporall punishment All which superabundanâ—â— of satisfactioÌ„s were layed vp in the Treasâ—â— house of the Church Thus farre of thâ— poynt only I add that so the person mâ—â— be capable of Jndulgences two things are required The first that he be in state of Grace the second that he performe all that whicâ— is inioyned to him for the obtayning of the Jndulgence Animaduersion CLXXII WHen it is said Indulgences do profit the soules of the departed only per moduâ— suffragij the meaning hereof is because Jndulgences do not profit the departed by way of Iuridicall absolution but by way of solution or payment that is by way of Satisfaction Thus when a Man giueth Almes or fasteth or goeth on pilgrimage to holy places for the reliefe of a soule departed he doth not absolue that soule from the guilt of punishment but he only offereth vp that satisfaction that God accepting thereof would free and deliuer it from the due punishment which otherwise it were to suffer Euen so the Pope doth not absolue the departed soule but out of the Treasury of satisfactions remayning in the Church offereth vp so much to God as is needfull to free and deliuer the soule For the close of these Animaduersions touching the Doctrine of Indulgences the Reader is to take particular notice and the rather through the wlilfull malitious mistaking of our Aduersaries â—ho do mightily calumniate vs in this question of Jndulgences that we teach the guilt of eternall damnation being remitted only by the Sacrament of Confession or by most perfect contrition in lieu therof when there is not oportunity of the other the subiect of an Indulgence is only a temporall punishment due to be suffered after the guilt of damnation is remitted which temporall punishment by meanes of Indulgences we hold may be either lessened or wholy taken away in a Man who is in state of Grace but not if he be in state of Mortall Sinne. Animaduersion CLXXIII IT is certaine that the English Translations of the New Testament made by the Protestants are most corrupt and in diuers places most different from the Greeke in which tongue either all or most of the New Testament was first written I will exemplify in two passages The New Testament makes mention of good or pious Traditions of wicked and Iewish Traditions expressing them both by one the same Greeke word to wit 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which properly signifyeth Traditio Now the imposture here resteth For our English Protestant Translations in such Texts wherein are vnderstood Good and profitable Traditions as in 1. Cor. 2. and 2. Thess 2. do translate insteed of the word Traditions the word Ordinances But where the Texts speake of wicked and friuolous Traditions there our Aduersaries put downe most punctually as it Math. 15. in their Translation the right word Traditions Now this calumny is vsed in dislike of Apostolicall Traditions that so the ignorant Reader should neuer find the word Tradition in Scripture in a good sense but alwayes in a bad and disalowed though now in their last Translation but not in any former for the better saluing of their credit they put only in the Margent of such Texts speaking of godly Traditions the word Traditions The like course they hould in translating the Greeke word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifying dignus in English Worthy and the Verbe 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be made worthy For in those Texts which
which we Catholikes call the Sacrament of Extreme Vnction But to proceede further in this point touching the Booke of Common Prayer in those dayes I will alledge the words of M. Done an eminent Protestant who thus writeth hereof Concerning (38) M. Doue in hit persuasion to English Recusants pag. 31. the Booke of Common prayer when the Masse was first put downe K. Henry had his English Liturgy and that was iudged absolute and without exception But when King Edward came to the Crowne that was condemned and another in the place was made which Peter Martyr and Bucer did approue as very consonant to Gods word When Queene Elizabeth began to reigne the former was iudged to be full of imperfections and a new deuised and allowed by consent of the Clergy But about the middle of her reigne we grew weary of that Booke and great meanes hath beene made to abandon that and establish another Which though it was not obtayned yet do we at the least at euery change of Prince change our Booke of CoÌ„mon prayer We be so wanton that we know not what we would haue Thus this ProtestaÌ„t Now from hence I conclude First that Protestancy here in England is not so ancient as from king Edwards dayes Secondly that it was not at perfection in the middle of Queen Elizabeths reigne For if it had then beene perfect and complete there had beene no neede of a new Common Prayer-Booke For at euery change of the Common booke of prayer there was a change of points of fayth according to which points the former CoÌ„munion Booke was to be reformed corrected And therfore according to the iudgment of men of those tymes it is thus said by M. Parker The day-starre (39) M. Parker against Symbolizing part 2. cap. 5. pag. 4. was not risen so high in their dayes when yet Queene Elizabeth reformed the defects of King Edwards Communion Booke c. Yet so altered (40) Ibidem pag. 37. as that when it was proposed to be confirmed by the Parliament it was refused Animaduersion CLXXVIII THe Doctrine of Recusancy is taught both by Protestants and Catholikes Since both of them hould it a most wicked thing and not to be donne but vnder payne of damnation without finall repentance that a man should communicate only in going to the Church and to heare but a sermon contrary to that Religion which himselfe belieueth to be true For though this Act may seeme to be couered vnder pretence of obseruing the Princes commandement for feare of losing our temporall estates yet in very deed this Act of going to the Church virtually and potentially includeth a conformity in all points to the religion of that Church to the which a Man goeth and so â—t comes to be a dissimulation or rather an absolute Abnegation of that Religion which a man houlds in his soule to be the only true Religion Now that the Protestants do teach the Doctrine of Recusancy I meane not to be present at the sermons or Prayers of a different Religion I proue from (41) Caluin de vitandis superstitionibus extat in tract Theolog. pag. 584. Caluin from the Deuines (42) The Deuines of Germany alledged in this point by Sleydan in Comment Englished l. 7 fol. 87. of Germany from Melancthon (43) Melancth in Concâ— Theolog. pa. 618. from Peter (44) Peter Martyr in his discourse hereof recited in Melancth Treatise de Concil Theolog. p. 394. Martyr and to omit others from D. (45) Wâ—â—eâ— in Synops. printed 1600. pag. 612. 613. c. Willet That the Catholikes do with the like or greater feruour preach and practice thâ— same Doctrine of Recusancy is cleare by the Example in our owne Country where sinne Protestancy was first planted some scores besides of the Laity of Venerable learned priests haue chosen rather to suffâ—â— death in Queene Elizabeth her Reigne then once to goe to the Protestant Church their liues being commonly proffered them if they would conforme themselues and leaue their Recusancy But they loathed such Conditions For the more full proofe of this Verity I add the Testimonies of three most eminent most remarkable Men whose iudgments some yeares past being demanded whether the Catholikes of England might for sauing their goods liuings go to the Protestant Church to heare a Sermon did ioyntly condemne the same as most vnlawfull and impious The men were these Cardinall Bellarmine Cardinall Baronius and Mutiâ—â—Vitellescus now generall of the Order of the Society of Iesus I will heere set downe their owne words The Judgment of Cardinall Bellarmine COnsideratis rationibus pro vtraqueparte allatis existimo non licere viris Catholicis in Anglia Haereticorum adire Ecclesias multó minùs concionibus ipsorum interesse minimè autem omnium cum ipsis in precibus vel Psalmodia alijsque ipsorum Ecclesiasticis ritibus conuenire Ideo propria manu subscripsi Robertus Bellarminus Sanctae R. Ecclesiae Presbyter Cardinalis tituli Sanctae Mariae in via The iudgment of Cardinall Baronius VIsis consideratis quae superiùs diligenti peruestigatione in vtramque partem disputata reiectis omnino exufflatis quae pro parâ—e affirmatiua fuere proposita quòd scilicet liceret Catholicis adire Ecclesias Haereticorum vt superiùs sunt proposita inhaeremus saniori sententie posteriori ab Ecclesia Catholica antiquitùs recepta vsu probata quod scilicet ita facere pâ—â— non liceat quam rogo nostros Catholicos Anglâ—â— amplecti ex animo Caesar Cardinalis Baronius titul SS Nerei Achillei Presb. The iudgmeÌ„t of Mutius Vitellescus then Prouinciall now Generall of the Order of the Jesuits VJdi rationes quae in hoc Scripto pro vtraque parte afferuntur existimo non licere vâ— Catholicis in Anglia Ecclesias Haereticorâ—s adire c. Et puto hoc debere esse extra Contrâ—â—ersiam Mutius Vitellescus Prouincialis Romaâ— Prouin Societatis Iesu Thus much in generall touching the Doctrine of Recusancy mantayned by diueâ— learned Protestants and practised with losâ— of life by many Reuerend Priests here 〈◊〉 England and fortifyed with the iudgmeâ—â— of these three former most learned pious and godly Men. Animaduersion CLXXIX â—He most common abuse in England of taking a second wyfe during the lyfe of â—e first committing fornication induceth â—e to expound those words of our Sauiour â—om whence the offenders herein seeme to â—arrant their sensuall proceedings for thus â—â—r Sauiour in Mathew 19. speaketh Whosoeâ—er shall put away his wyfe except it be for forâ—â—tation and shall marry another doth commit â—dultery from which words our Aduersaâ—es seeme to infer that who doth put away â—s wyfe for fornication and marrieth anoâ—her doth not commit Adultery But this is â—hus answered To wit that this exception 〈◊〉 Fornication is only to shew that for this â—use a man may put away his wyfe for eâ—er but not that he may marry another as 〈◊〉 most playne in 5. Mark c. 10.
Germany Sweueland Transiluanta c. The Catholikes to this very day haue not made themselues Lords of any one Towne or Citty much lesse of any State or kingdomâ— which haue belonged to their Protestant Princes And thus far though briefly for the more full stopping of the mouths of our Aduersaries touching the libration weighing in an eauen hand the doctrine taught and the Attemps practized by the Protestants Catholikes in point of Disloyalty against their lawfull dread Soueraigns of a different Religion And here before lend the more fully to discouer the loyalty of the Lay Catholikes of England and of vs Priests to his Maiesty our dread Soueraigne I the Authour of this Treatise in the person and name of vs all do make bold to offer this our ensuing ioynt prayer as a spirituall Sacrifice to the Almighty in behalfe of our most Worthy Kâ—ng Charles his most illustrious Spouse Queene Mary God who is the Protectour of Kings and the first Authour of all true Soueraignty and supreme domination per me (1) Prouerb 8. reges regnant preserue them both and their noble issue vnder the wings of his Diuine care prouidence Defend them from their Enemyes either domesticall or foraine Grant vnto them a long and most happy reigne ouer vs And after the dissolution of their bodies bring their soules into that most blessed state where they once leauing this terrene Kingdome may heare those ioyfull words of our Sauiour as spoken to them touching their fruition of the Celestiall Kingdome Venite (2) Mat. 25. possiâ—ete paratum vobis regnum And this our Common Prayer most Heauenly soueraigne we humbly beseech thee to heare euen by the force of that title which is peculiar to thy selfe and incommunicable to any other king Rex (3) Apocal 19. regum Dominus dominantium Animaduersion CLXXXXII THe Calumny subtilty of our first Aduersaries in their definition of Christs Church was very great and obseruable They (1) Calu. Instit. l. 4. cap. 1. num 2 3. defined the Church to consist only of such as are Just and predestinated but who such are it is not knowne to any man and therefore to remayne in a continuall Latency But what was the reason of this their proceeding Obserue Both the Old and New Testament giue great prayses and Elogia of the Church of Christ For we read that it is called (2) Apocal 2 A holy Citty A (3) Psal 7. fructiferous vine A mighty (4) Esay 2. high mountayne (5) Esay 32. streight way The only (6) Cantic 6. Doue The (7) Cant. 4. spouse Body (8) Ep 5 of Christ The pillar of Truth (9) 1. Timoth 3. Finally â—to omit much more that Society against which who is contumacious and refractory is to be accounted no better then a Heathen (10) Math. 18. or Publican Now in regard of these panegyricke prayses giuen by the written word of God to the Church our first Aduersaryes dared not in expresse words openly to impugne the Church Therefore most â—ubttlly the name of the Church they retayned but the thing it selfe by defining it they did ouerthrowe For as is aboue said they define it to consist only of the Elect and Predestinated and consequently since we cannot tell who are of the number of the Elect and predestinate euer to be in a hidden Latency And to this they were forced because as in many of the former Animaduersions it is expressed it is granted by most of our learned Aduersaryes tâ—at the ProtestaÌ„t Church hath for the space of twelue or thirteene huÌ„dred yeares layne wholy latent inuisible And yet such a Church if any such were may be said in shew of words to be capable of the former definition of the Church See here the serpentine subtilty of our Aduersaryes Animaduersion CLXXXXIII IT is to be much feared that there are many in England who maske themselues vnder the name of Protestants yet in their harts are no better then Atheists as not acknowledging a Deity Yf it chance therfore that this Treatise shall come to any such mens hands I haue purposely thought good to close it vp with certaine Animaduersions for the proofe of so supreme a Truth wishing such Readers to peruse the Booke entituled Rawleighs Ghost first written in Latin by the learned Iesuite Lessius for his greater confirmation out of which booke I grant I haue selected most of these ensuing Animaduersions all which of this Nature though contrary to my Method houlden hitherto in this Discourse I haue ranged together and reduced to one head Now whereas such men that are tainted with so foule a blasphemy and execrable Madnes to whom those words of Cyprian are truly applyed Quae haec (*) Cyprian lib. de Idolorum vanitate summa delictî nolle illum agnoscere quem ignorare non possis do especially if they he Schollers hould that the world was not created of God but was from all Eternity therefore I will first remoue this stumbling Block and will purposely insist only in two Arguments or rather two vnanswerable Demonstrations in disproofe thereof which lye subiect to ech mans apprehension First then from our owne experience we reason thus It is a truth confirmed by triall of all tymes that the quantityes of Mens bodies haue a perceiuable impayring as also the length and continuance of their liues So that if in that infinite space of foregoing tyme I meane from Eternity Men had a being as without question the world was neuer voyd of men the principall and most noble member therof then through continuall and incessant Decay their bodies had beene brought before this day to as litle a quantity as they are capable of if not cleane consumed But we see their quantity is not yet come to the lowest Therefore I conclude that they had not a being from Euerlasting My second Demonstration is this Had this world beene from Euerlasting from all Eternity then Infinite also had beene the propagatioÌ„ of Man And so we should bring into the world an actuall Infinitenesse as absurd in Nature as Paralogismes be in Logicke For in this infinite space and generation there had beene an infinite number of mens Soules which being by Nature incapable of Mortality we cannot say that as one Soule was created another was destroyed And therefore it would follow supposing the world to be ab aeterno that there should be an Infinitnesse in regard of Number actually subsisting in Nature Thus farre for impugning that the world cannot possibly â—xist from all Eternity Omitting many oâ—her more abstruse demoÌ„strations drawne from Phylosophy not subiect to the capaâ—ity of the Ignorant Animaduersion CLXXXXIV ALl those Men who deny the Jmmortality of Mans Soule do withall deny a Deity or being of God Therefore the Immortality of the Soule is first thus proued from Naturall Philosophy the soule of Man hath in it selfe no principles or ground of Corruption seeing
of inward Comfort and how copious is here the haruest of eternall glory But not any of these things can be accompliâ—hed but onlâ— by these men who haue been long and much conuersant in these Questions which men by such their labours and diligence haue both fortifyed their Cause with the munition or furniture of the Church as also haue learned to repell and auoyde the weapons of their Enemyes and to turne the edge of them vpon the Enemyes themselues Thus far the learned and zealous Cardinall But to preceede further It is ingrafted in Mans Nature to vse the more diligence and vigilancy in oppugning and resisting his Enemyes by how much the Enemy is more dangerous and cruell where he ouercommeth From hence then may appeare the most exitiable and calamitous effects which the Enemy heere by me meant to wit Heresy produceth where she hath any Domination rule ouer the soules of men Now this point I will in like manner deliuer in the words of the foresaid Cardinall who declaring the most dangerous Nature of Heresy thereby to persuade his Auditours and Readers being capable thereof to the study of Controuersyes of Religion for the better and more easy resisting or extinguishing of Heresy thus writeth Duo (3) â—ellar vbi supra sunt quae pestem prae caeteris morbis meritò horrendam terribilemque efficiunt Vnum c. There are two things which cause the plage to become more fearefull and terrible then any other Disease or sicknes One is that the plage doth diffuse and send forth its venome with great hast and speed euen vnto the Hart and so in a moment of tyme destroyeth a man being but a litle afore most sound The other effect of the Plage is that in killing of one it killeth many hundreds and this is performed in that the plage so quickly creepes and spreades it selfe abroad in diuers places so as if this day it hath infected but one house within a short tyme after it doth inuade the whole Citty replenishing it with dead Bodyes I dipsum omnino est in animis Haeresis quod in corporibus pestis c. Now looke what the plage in the Body the same is Heresy in the Mynd or soule Primum Gratiae munus c. The first guift of Grace which we receaue from our Heauenly Father in our Conuersion and Justification The first pulse or Motion of a reuiuing or renewed Hart briefly the first sense or feeling of a spirituall Lyfe is doubtlesly Fayth Now from Fayth the Mynâ— is after by little and little stirred vp to Hope the Will to loue the tongue bursteth forth into open Confession of true Christian fayth and the hands are ready to the performance of works worthy a Christian â—ow then seeing Haeresy presently aymeth at the Hart of the soule and proceedeth so far in depriuiâ—g herof her gifts and priuiledges af Grace as that it laboreth to forestall or extinguish the very beginning it selfe of all diuine and Celestiall Lyfe I then here demand what pestilence can be thought more domageable or pernicious then Heresy To come to the second point I would to God that the Heretike did hurt but only himselfe and that he had not dispersed his poyson far and abroad But we find it most truly written by the (4) 2. Tim. 2. Apostle J meane that the words and speeches of Heretiks as a Canker do creepe far and wyde Witnesse of the truth hereof is this our age For who is ignorant that the Lutheran pest or plage first being begun in Saxony within a short tyme did possesse almost all Germany and then it made its passage to the North and to the East For it hath allready inuaded Denmark Norway Suctia Gothia Pannonia Hungaria Againe with the like celerity it turning it selfe towards the West and the South hath in a short tyme depopulated or destroyed a great part of France all England and Scotland heretofore most florishing kingdomes for Religion yea it hath scaled the Alpes and penetrated as far as to Jtaly Thus far with great sense and feeling doth the learned Cardinall discourse of the Nature of Heresy But to proceed to diuine Authority from hence then we now may more clearely see that the Apostle speaking of Heretikes had iust reason to say Haereticum (5) Tit. 3. hominem c. A man that is an Heretike after the first and second admonition auoyde knowing that he that is such an one is subuerted and sinneth being condemned by his owne iudgment And againe the same Apostle Certaine (6) 1. Timoth 1. men made shipwracke touching fayth And S. Austin touching Heresy resting himselfe vpon the Authority of the Apostle thus pronounceth Nihil (7) Austin tra 17. in Ioanâ—â—m sic formidare debet c. A Christian ought to feare nothing so much as to be separated from the body of Christ which is his â—hurch and which is One and Catholike for if he be separated from the body of Christ he is not a member of Christ If no memâ—er of â—hrist then he is not strengntned with his Spirit But who hath not the spirit of God the same Man is not of God Thus S. Austin Now then Reuerend Brethren against these men which are mayntayners of Heresy I so much desire you to employ your tyme and studyes O thinke how confortable a Cogitation it will be to any of you lying vpon your death beds and how able it will be through Gods mercifull acceptance therof to expiate many a sinne when any of you may truly say So many soules which afore were infected with Errour in fayth and beliefe and thâ—rein stood obnoxious for the tyme to eternall perdition were by me reduced to the true Catholike and sauing fayth through the meanes vnder God of that small talent in Controuersyes which his Diuine Maiesty vouchsafed to bestow vpon me so as you may say of them in the words of the Apostle In Christs (8) 1. Cor. 4. Jesu per â—uangelium vos genui Yf many yeares since that war was styled accounted most worthy and sacred which was vndertaken by Catholike Princes and their Subiects for the recouery of the Holy Land wherein Christ suffered death wherin were then remayning and extant many memorialls of his Lyfe and Passion And if those Princes and Souldiers were deseruedly endued for such their truly Heroicall and spirituall Resolution and aduenture with many immunities and priuiledges by the then Church of God Yf that War being vndertaken for temporall matters I say was in those dayes reputed so honorable as to deserue such great respect and estimation what shall we then conceaue of this war of yours whereby you seeke to rescue the soules of your Brethren infected with Heresy from out the iawes of the Deuill to implant in them that fayth in which they only can be saued Therfore hold such slouthfull Clergy men among you if so otherwise God hath giuen them sufficient capacity and apprehension but as