keeping of holie dayes in honour of Saincts And lastly The Popish Masse and Ceremonies To come now to the Armenians (11) Cent. 15. p. 477. Osiander confesseth that In the yeare On thousand foure hundred and thirtie Pope Eugenius then called a Councel at Florence c. To which Councel the Grecians Armenians Iacobins assented M. Marbeck (12) Com. Places p. 258. acknowledgeth that at the Councel of Florence the Christians of Armenia and India consented to the Roman Church and that the Greeks agreed And where as (13) Vol. 2. Generat 39. Nauclerus recordeth that Anno. 1145. The Embassadours of the Armenian Bishops as also their Catholick that is their vniuersal Metropolitan who hath vnder him more then a thousand Bishops came to Pope Eugenius being at Viterbo and hauing ended their iourney after a yeare and a half they offred their Subiection to the Apostolical Sea the same historie is mentioned by M. Symondes (14) Vpon the Reuel p. 223. 150. 250. And See Volater Geograph l. 10. and other Writers And of the great agreement between the Armenians and the Roman Church we may read Gomarus (15) Speculum Ecclesiae p. 163 172. and (16) l. 2 c. 23. fol. 183. Villamont in his voyages printed in French But D. Philip descendeth more particularly and sayth of the Armenians They haue their blemishes For in the forme of their Liturgie mention is made of Inuocation (17) Comment de Regno Christi l. 1. p. 35. And see Cathol Tradit p. 207. and Intercession of Saincts and of oblation of the Sacrament As also (18) Ibid. p 22. Let the Christian Readers know this that not only the churches of the Graecians but also Rutans Georgians and Armenians and Indians Aethiopians who are become Christians do hold the true and Real Presence of the Bodie and Bloud of our Lord wheresoeuer the Eucharist is celebrated c. And (19) Ibid. p. 56. agayne There are not wanting who think that as yet there remayne in sundrie places of Arabia some Mozarabes Christians whom it is euident in Africk and Spayne in former Ages to haue embraced the Religion of Christians not much vnlike to the Popish Rites By al which it appeareth that the anciēt Armenians receiuing their Religion from the Apostles do agree with vs Catholicks in Inuocation of Saincts (21) Cent. 16. p. 970. The Real Presence The oblation or Sacrifice of Christs Bodie In acknowledging their obedience to the Church of Rome and in brief in their Religion in general not much vnlike to that of the Papists Now as touching the Grecians (20) Estate of the Church p. 253. Crispinus affirmeth that (23) Acta Theologorum Vvittemb Ieremiae Patriarchae Constantinop de Augustana Confes p. 55. 102. 128. Anno. 870. the Greek and Latin Churches became diuided only for the Primacie and diuersitie of Ceremonies so fully did they at that time consent in al other poynts Osiander speaking of the other Oriental Churches further remote auerreth that Anno 1585. the Christians who inhabit neer to Mount Libanus became at last conquered and subiect to the Turkish Empire Neither is that to be maruailed at for the Christians in the East haue not sincere Religion but are in most part of Articles Popish Sir Edwin Sandes (22) In his last leafe but fiue in his Relation of the State of Religion vsed in the West partes of the world auoucheth that The Greek Church doth concurre with Rome in opinion of Transubstantiation and generally in the Sacrifice and whole bodie of the Masse In praying to Saincts and Auricular confession in offring Sacrifice and prayer for the dead Purgatorie and worshiping of Pictures c. Yea the Protestant Diuines of Wittemberg do fully testify that the Greek Church yet to this day professeth and teacheth Inuocation of Saincts and Angels (24) Ib. p. 243. 368. Reliques (25) Ib. p 243. 244 247. 251. Worshipping of Images (26) Ib. p. 86. 96. 100. 240. 380. Transubstantiation (27) p. 102. 104 And see Cath. Tradit p. 129. 137. Sacrifice The signifying (28) p. 97. 99. 100. Ceremonies of the Masse (29) p. 87. 10. in Prefat Auricular Confession (30) p. 79 89. Inioyned Satisfaction (31) p. 78 238 Confirmation with Chrisme (32) p. 242. 326. Extreme Vnction (33) p. 77. 242. And Cath. Trad. p. 197. and al the seauen Sacraments Also (34) p. 93. 102. 109. Prayer for the dead (35) p. 93. 104. Sacrifice for the Dead (36) p. 93. 109. Almes for the dead (37) p. 224. 296. 367. Freewil (38) p. 132. 257. Monachisme (39) p 111. 129. 135. vowes of Chastitie (40) p 126. The fast of Lent and other set Fasting-dayes That (41) p. 129. Priests may not marry after Orders taken And lastly to omit manie others That (42) p. 131. 138. 142. the Tradition and doctrine of the Fathers is to be kept So plainly in al these chief Articles of Faith doth the Grecian Church remayne vnchanged and wholy consonant with the Roman But now at last to come to our Neighbours the Britans whom we haue proued before to haue been conuerted in the Apostles times concerning them I wil only declare two things First that the Faith which at first they receaued they kept for six hundred yeares euen vntil the comming of S. Augustin into England vnchanged and the same in al matters of weight and substance The Second that the Faith and Religion which S. Augustin taught in England and which is formerly confessed to haue been altogether Catholick or Romish was the self same Faith and Religion which the Britans beleeued and professed some Ceremonies excepted Now as touching the First M. (43) Pageant of Popes Cent. 1. c. 70. Bale confesseth that The Brittans being conuerted by Ioseph of Arimathia held that Faith at Austins comming And (44) Cent. 1. c. 90. There was alwayes amongst the Brittans preaching of Truth most sure Doctrine and such Worship as was by Gods commandment giuen of the Apostles to the Churches wherupon he calleth the then Brittan Church (45) Cent. 1. c. 73. the true Church of Christ D. Fulk (46) Answ to a Counterf Cath. p. 49. affirmeth that The Brittans before Austins comming continued in the Faith of Christ euen from the Apostles times yea he calleth the Brittans of S. Austins time (47) In 2. Cor. 12.12 Catholicks c. with whom Christian Religion had continued in Succession since the Apostles time M. Fox (48) Act. Mon. p. 463. auoucheth that The Brittans after the receiuing of the Faith neuer forsook it for anie manner of false preaching of other nor for torments and that (49) In his Protestat Religion remained in the Brittans vncorrupt and the Word of Christ truly preached til the comming of S. Austin But M. Midleton (50) Papisto-mastix p. 202. confirmeth this poynt further by succeeding testimonies of the
say besides this her only open refrayning or Recusancie whereto she is euen by the iudgement of Protestants (24) Willet Synop. p. 612 613 614 Act. Mon. p. 1283. 1150. 1151. Melancth in Consil Theol. p. 628 Pet. Mart. ib. p. 634. 635. Buâ—er 16. p. 632. 633 634. Caluin ib p. 635. And Caluin Tract Th. p 584. The Deuines of Germany in Sleydans Comment Engl. f. 87. no lesse in dutie bound lyeth euermore most open easie to be discerned yea by how much the persecution is more grieuous so much the lesse can this Recusancie be kept secret or vnespyed as appeareth most plainly in the example only of our owne times Nations for if during but these last 20. yeares we of this one Nation in coÌ„parison but few could not so escape the search of ProtestaÌ„t Magistrats but that by our only Recusancie we were dayly discerned presented indited coÌ„uicted sundrie wayes persecuted some Martyred Could then a ProtestaÌ„ts pretended to be dispersed throughout so manie Nations of the world escape for so manie hundred yeares togeather that Inquisition of the Roman Church which Protestants affirme to haue been vniuersal and far more grieuous Wherefore to end this inexplicable contradictorie poynt of the ProtestaÌ„t Churches Being or continuance but yet vnknowne inuisible for many hundred yeares togeather that through the greatest persecutions therof by the Pope of Rome I wil only demand with D. Field (25) Of the Church l. 1. p. 19. How possibly there should be a Church in the world the perpetuitie wherof al most constantly defend and none found seene or knowne to professe the Sauing truth of God Or as M. Iewel 26 saith of Heresie so in his words wil I say of his Church It must needes be a very strange Church that had neither beginning nor ending nor defender nor reprouer nor mouth to vtter it nor eare to heare it nor pen to write it nor time to last in nor place to rest in of which straÌ„ge kind of Church was our preteÌ„ded ProtestaÌ„t Church for manie hundred yeares togeather no knowne beginning being assigned of her Inuisibilitie no man defending or reprouing her during the sayd latencie no Pastour of hers preaching or sheep hearing her doctrine no pen writing her MonumeÌ„ts or her pretended pressures suffrings no one houre knowne wherin she had being or corner or cottage in the world wherin she râ—sided Wherefore the absurditie and insufficiencie of this former answer being in so manie respects so easily discouered other Protestants disclayming from this do auouch that their Church according to the Scriptures hath euer continued and that visible and knowne in al former Ages but now sithence through the late violence of the Pope and his Clergie al testimonie MonumeÌ„t Record therof is vtterly suppressed and made away But the idle vanitie of this naked conceipt is manie wayes appearing for first this is but a mere Imagination destitute of al testimonie or proofe in confirmation therof Secondly al proofe experience is directly to the contrarie seing the very books of Husse and Wiccliffe are yet extant to our aduersaries as also the Epistle of Vlrick in defence of Priests marriage the pretended books of Charlemaine against Images Bertram concerning the Eucharist the like And yet in none of these is the least mention afforded of anie ProtestaÌ„t Congregation though neuer so slender to haue been formerly residing in anie caue or corner of the earth though neuer so streight And yet these are the ancientest Records wherin they can insist either in defence of themselues or impugning of vs. Thirdly our General and Prouincial Councels holden in most seueral Nations did euer recite and condemne al new arising Sects Heresies coÌ„trarie to the Roman Faith and yet in none of these is there the least mention or Record to be found of the Church of Protestants Fourthly our Catholick Writers in euerie Age haue plentifully recited and at large coÌ„futed al appearing doctrines contrarie to the Roman Church yet as for anie ProtestaÌ„t Religion knowne before Luther they are wholy sileÌ„t Fiftly from hence do sundrie Protestant Writers take notice and in their owne writings (27) The Cent. Pant. in Chron. OsiaÌ„d Epit. Eccl. Hist Illiricus Catalogus Testam c. Whitak cont Dur. p. 276. 469. make meÌ„tion of the daily opinioÌ„s not passed ouer in sileÌ„ce or wholy suppressed from the view of Posteritie but directly to the contrarie most expresly mentioned recorded and condemned in euerie Age by the Church of Rome Of which opinions certaine also which maketh this point most euident were oftentimes euen some one or other special Doctrine now sithence taught by Protestants and heretofore seuerally professed by some one or other particular condemned person of those times And yet was neuer Protestant hitherto euer able to nominate or assigne a Protestant Church before the dayes of Luther truly agreing in matters of Faith and Religion with our now reformed Church of England Sixtly this confessed general suppression of the Protestant Church and al her Records for so manie hundred yeares doth euidently conuince the sayd Church not to be the Church of Christ but some Heretical Conuenticle for the Scriptures testify of the true Church that her (28) Esa 60.20 Sunne should not be set nor her Moone hid that she (29) Dan. 2 44. should not be giuen ouer to another people but should stand for euer as an (30) Esa 60.15.16 eternal glorie and ioy from generation to generation Lastly euerie vprising Sect though neuer so grosse may as easily and with as much probabilitie pretend for itself the continuance visibilitie of their Church for al former Ages only adding with our Protestants the Imagiginarie suppression and ruine of al testimonies proofes and Records of the same through the power and malice of the Church of Rome then which nothing more dangerous to affirme or more absurd to maintayne The falshood of the two former Answers being thus easily displayed and seene to be most palpable and sensible euen to the meanest iudgements a third remayneth in matter and substance of no greater force then the former but through affected obscuritie of words more difficult and perplexed to an ignorant Hearer As namely that during al those confessed manie Ages wherin no knowledge is had of the Protestant Church her Pastours or administration of Word or anie one Sacrament (*) Whitak de Ecelesia p. 165. Perkins in his Reformed Cathol p. 328. 329. OsiaÌ„d Cent. 16. part alt p. 1072. Calu. l. epist ep 104. p. 222. Rhegius lib. Apolog. p. 95. Beza in ep Theol. ep 1. p. 15. The Protestant Church was in the Papacie and the Papacie was in the Church and yet the Papacie was not the Church An answer not much vnlike to that Censure giuen vpon D. Playford his strange diuiding the Text of his Sermon to wit that it was as A Pye A Pudding A Pudding and a Pye A Pye pudding And a
Innouation therein could be obserued or reproued by Almaricus In like sorte though Robert Bishop of Lincolne withstood the Popes proceedings in England yet this nothing proueth anie change or first comming in of anie point of Faith in the Roman Church obserued or resisted by the sayd Robert Besides D. Godwine reporteth that a Cardinal sayd to the Pope concerning him He (a) Catalo of Bishop of England p. 240. is for Religion a Catholick as wel as we And so dying he gaue al his bookes an excellent Librarie vnto the Friar Minors at Oxford So charitable was he to Friars and consequently so Roman Catholick euen at his verie death And where he affirmeth that Ioakim Abbas sayd that Antichrist was borne at Rome and should sit in the Apostolick sea It is so vntrue that in his Epistle prefiged to his Exposition vpon the Apocalypse he submitteth his writings to the Censure of the Sea Apostolick affirming further that he firmely beleeueth that the Gates of Hel cannot preuaile against the Roman Church and that her Faith shal not perish before the end of the world Yea in his Exposition vpon the 6. Chapter and 11. verse he calleth such the Sonnes of Babylon who impugne the Church of Peter And vpon the 7. Chapter and 2. verse by the Angel ascending from the East hauing the signe of the liuing God he vnderstandeth the Bishop of Rome who with his fellow-Bishops with the signe of the Crosse wil arme the Elect in that last tribulation which Antichrist shal rayse So litle cause there is to vrge this Abbot against the Pope And indeed al that truly can be vrged against him is that being an old man and half out of his wits he was censured by the Pope for certaine fonde Prophecies and some errours also about the B. Trinitie as appeareth by the Decree extant in the Canon Law against him and by other Authours that haue written of him And as for Fidericus the Second Emperour resisting the Popes Supremacie it proueth no more but that euen the most vicious Emperours were most aduerse to the Pope For he being a Prince of most scandalous and wicked life was after due admonitions excommunicated as also deposed by Pope Innocent the Fourth in a general Councel holden at Lyons so that his resisting in this regard the Supremacie is only a guiltie and conuicted Persons resisting of al such lawful Authoritie whereby he is censured and punished Concerning Arnoldus Villanouanus speaking against Friars the Sacrifice of the Masse and Papal Decrees This M. White only proueth by the testimonies of the Magdeburgians and Osiander which being Protestants are no competent witnesses against Catholicks But besides I haue proued (107) l. 2. c. 9. 4. before that the Sacrifice of the Masse and the Popes Authoritie were beleeued and practised in much more ancient times As also that the Institution of Friars proueth no Innouation in Faith and Religion Euerardus broaching those foule and false reproaches against Pope Gregorie the Seauenth called Hildebrand proueth nothing but his owne disobedience and impatience hauing been by the same 108) Greg. 7. Ep. 18. Pope for his owne demerits iustly suspended from his Episcopal function After 1250. 1250. to 1300. I name Gulielmus de S. Amore withstanding Friars and their abuses but how impertinent this is I haue shewed sufficiently before The Preachers also saith he in Sweden that publickly taught the Pope and his Bishops to be Hereticks But M. White receiuing this Relation from Illiricus no further answer wil be requisit Dante 's also saith he writ that the Empire descended not from the Pope But Dante 's being only a Poet intermedling in other matters committed (109) See Bellar. in Append. ad lib. de Sum. Pont c. 14. manie grosse errours for which his bookes are condemned and prohibited by the Church yea he liued in faction against some (110) Ibid. c. 12. Popes and therefore his writing against them is of no force As for Gulielmus Altisiodorensis M. White producing nothing in particular out of him against the Roman Church but only affirming that in his Summes are found manie things confuted that then were comming in no further particular answer can be expected and though he referre himself for particulars to this his own Booke yet citing no page or place thereof I hould it vnworthie of so paineful search it being also wel knowne that Altisiodorensis only differed from other Schoole-men in matters disputable and not defined After 1300. 1300. to 1350. I name sayth he Marcilius Patauinus that wrot against the Popes Supremacie But he being a knowne condemned Heretick a flatterer of the Schismatical Emperour and his Bookes condemned by the Church as also the Popes Primacie being formerly acknowledged in the Primitiue Church his testimonie is sundrie wayes insufficient And the like is to be answered to Ocham (111) Tritheâ—nius Genebrard l. 4. Chron. who was purposely hyred by the Emperour to write against the Pope who was also Excommunicated and his Bookes prohibited Gregorius Ariminensis his differences were only in Schoole points not determined by the Church And as for the Vniuersitie of Paris condemning the Popes Pardons it is most vntrue and therefere M. White did wel to father it only vpon his Brother Illiricus whom he knew to be expert in the art of forging After 1350. 1350. to 1400. I name sayth he Aluâ—rus Pelagius who wrot a Book of the L mentation of the Church wherein he reproueth diuerse abuses of his times But who denyeth but that in the Militant Church consisting of good and euil there are manie abuses in life and conuersation But as for abuse or Innouation in matter of Doctrine and Faith Aluarus maketh no mention at al in his sayd Booke And as for Montziger disputing against â—ransubstantiation and Adoration of the Sacrament and Cesenas calling the Pope Antichrist besides that the truth hereof dependeth only of the testimonie of Fox and Illâ—ricus both of them Protestants I haue sufficiently before cleered both these poynts from al Innouation in Ages much more ancient Now as for Iohn Wiceliffe as I haue shewed (112) l. 1. c. 3. before that in sundrie poynts of Faith he agreed with Catholicks which Protestants now impugne so it is euident that he taught sundrie grosse errours which both Catholicks and Protestants do detest as that If a (113) Fox Act. Mâ—n p. 96. Bishop or Priest be in deadly sinne he doth not Order consecrate or Baptize that Al (114) Osiand cent 9. 10. 11. p. 459. oathes are vnlawful That (115) Osiand cent 15. p. 457. al things come to passe by absolute necessitie That there 116) Ib. p. 454. is no Ciuil Migistrate whilest he is in mortal sinne and sundrie others in regard of which Protestants 117) Pant. Chronol p. 119. Mathias Hoe in his Tract duo Tract 1. p. 27. themselues ranke him in the Catalogue of Hereticks So that smal Credit or succour wil M. White
the first Fathers of superstition and Captaines and Ring-leaders of Popish Diuines Sir Edward Hobbie tearmeth him (50) In his Letter to M. Higgons p. 92. Proud and insolent Augustin your Great Gregories delegate M. Price styleth him that (51) Aâ—sw to Leech l. 1. c. 4. p. 69. Proud pettie Monk Austin And M. Iewel affirmeth that Austin was (52) Reply Art 3. p. 185. Neither of Apostolick spirit nor anie way worthie to be called a Sainct but an Hypocrite a superstitious man cruel bloudie and proud aboue measure M. Mason affirmeth that His superfluitie of ceremonies might wel haue been spared He was too forward to display the Popes Banner (53) Consecration of Eng. Bishops p. 58. and his behauiour towards the Brittans was ful of Pride and disdaine The (54) Cent. 6. c. 10. col â—49 Centurists write when Austin had troubled the Britan Churches Thirteen yeares and subdued them to the Roman Antichrist he dyed c. But (55) Cent. 6. p. 290. Osiander proceedeth much further affirming that He Subdued England to the lust of the Roman Antichrist and therfore after his death went vndoubtedly to Hel there to receaue his reward A reward vniust and a Sentence ouer-cruel for so great benefits as he bestowed vpon vs euen by D. Whitakers and other Protestants most grateful former aknowledgement But hence it clearly appeareth that the Faith of S. Gregorie S. Austin and whereto England was by them conuerted was Roman Catholick Neither was this pretended Popish superstition the priuat opinions of S. Gregorie and S. Austin but the vniuersal Doctrine and beleef of that Age. Insomuch that (56) Hist Sacram l. 2. p. 157 Hospinian confesseth that In the Age of Gregorie the Great al kind of superstition and Idolatrie as a certain Sea owerflowed ouerwhelmed and wholy ouerdrowned almost al the Christian world No man not only not resisting but al adding and affording rather what strength they could And (57) Defence of the Answ to the Admonition p. 442. D. Whitguift speaking of Anno Domini 659. so wholy distrusteth the Doctours of those times that he resolutely auoucheth He would be loath to alleage anie Councel of that time to proue anie thing in Controuersie So confessedly was the vniuersal Church of Christians at the time of S. Gregorie S. Austin and Englands Conuersion in the opinion of Protestants altogeather Popish Antichristian and Romish and indeed the One Holie Catholick and Apostolick Church prescribed by our Creed The Sect of Protestants during the same time being not so much as diuised stamped heard-of or being in anie though most base or obscurest part of the world Now al this as wel of the high and most deserued prayses giuen to S. Gregorie and S. Austin for their vertue learning and other singular guifts as also that the Faith and Religion which themselues professed and whereto they conuerted this our Natiue Countrey from execrable Paganisme was truly the perfect Faith of Christ and pure and incorrupted Christianitie And lastly that this so pure Faith was our now Roman Catholick Faith I haue here conuinced by the testimonies and acknowledgments euen of her greatest Enemies as namely by Osiander Danaeus the Magdeburgians Hospinian Hollinshead Cambden Foxe Bale Whitaker Cowper Humfrey Bel Godwine Bilson Stow Mason Abbots Fulk Harison Ascham Wotton Carthwright Willet Hobby Price Iewel Whitguift and Morton al of them Protestant Writers THAT THE PRESENT ROMAN CHVRCH AND Religion continued and Flourished during the whole time of the Primitiue Church contayning the first Six hundred yeares after Christ CHAPTER V. HAuing thus prooued the confessed being and publick general practice and profession for these last thousand yeares of our Roman Faith and Religion I wil now endeauour the selfe same proof and confirmation for the first Six hundred yeares after Christ Which for greater perspicuitie I wil diuide into two seueral Stations or times The First from Constantin the Great to Gregorie the Great the Second from Christ and his Apostles to Constantin agayne In which behalf I find it affirmed by (1) Vpon the Reuel f. 110. M. Brocard that The Pope fel from Christ in the time of Syluester who liued with Constantin and that for a ThousaÌ„d two hundred and sixtie yeares the Church was oppressed and troden downe by the Papacie euen from Syluesters time to these dayes In like sort auoucheth M. Brightman (2) In Apoc. p. 462. that euer since the time of Constantin the Great Rome hath been the whore of Babylon and the Roman Bishop hath been the Beast and Antichrist (3) Ibid. p. 471 And againe sayth he As aboue we haue made manifest it necessarily followeth since the time of the Heathen Emperours the Pope of Rome to haue been that greatest Antichrist of whom the Scriptures haue so diligently forewarned and the Cittie of Rome from that time to haue been the Whore c. foretold in the Apocalypse M. Leigh (4) Great Britanies great Deliuerie f. B. 2 addeth hereunto that The Popes euer since the first Three hundred yeares after Christ haue been Diuels But no man speaketh more plainly then M. Napper whom (5) Vpon the Reuel p. 262. M. Dent tearmeth a learned Writer and an excellent man This so learned a Writer plentifully acknowledgeth (6) Vpon the Reuel p. 68. And See p. 43. that Between the yeare of Christ 300. and 316. the Antichristian and Papistical raigne began raigning vniuersally and without anie debatable contradiction 1260. And that (7) Ibid. p. 145 Euen 1260. yeares the Pope and his Clergie hath possessed the outward visible Church of Christians (8) Ibid. p. 239 Neuer suffring for the space of 1000. yeares after Syluester the First anie to be seen vouchable or visible of the true Protestant Church c. I wil not here stay to confute the wilful vanitie of D. Morton who for his best answer to this so cleer testimonie of M. Napper writeth thus (9) Prot. Appeale p. 72. But this witnes alas for the darknes of Iudgement of these Apologists speaketh not of the whole Profession of the Romish Church but only of one article predominant therin namely the Doctrine of Popedom c. But seing he speaketh in general of the outward visible Church of Christians which includeth al Poynts beleeued by that Church and that the same Church during the sayd time was so wholy possessed by the Pope and his Clergie that not so much as anie one of the Protestant Church was then to be seen I may more iustly say Alas for want of honestie or learning or both in D. Morton And this the more I might inculcate seing his owne guiltie Conscience at last bewrayeth himself saying (10) Ibid. p. 662. If one of our Aduersaries themselues when six of their principal Doctours were produced against him was licenced to except against them c. how much more lawful might it be for vs to deny the testimonies but of two Authours not of eminent note for
ancient Fathers almost in euerie Age before that in which Gregorie liued saying The Religion cleerly taught in the Word of God brought hither first by Simon Zelotes Niceph. l. 2. c. 4. Ioseph of Arimathia Gildâ—s S. Paul the Apostle Theodoret de Curand Graec. affect l. 9. al or some of them was watred stil on in the dayes of Tertullian l. cont Iudaeos Origen in Ezech. hom 4. Athanasius Apol. 2. Hilarie l. de Synod cont Arian Chysostom hom quod Christus sit Deus Theodoret Hist l. 1. c. 10. l. 4. c. 3. Al which Ancient Fathers speak honourably of the Church Religion and Prelates of Brittanie So exceeding far were the Brittans from being changed in their Religion before the time when S. Augustin came into England Therfore to come to the second and mayne point which is the true harmonie and agreement between the Apostolick Faith of the Brittans and the Catholick Roman Faith of S. Augustin D. Morton labouring purposely to shew (51) Prot. Appeal p. 75. what and of how great importance the differences were between the Brittan Bishops and the Church of Rome at Austins comming can only instance in the difference of Ceremonies or ministring of Baptisme in keeping of Easter and in denial of Subiection vnto Austin which though he much endeauour to proue to be matters of great importance yet if they be considered in themselues and without pertinacie in the Defenders they may with M. Brierlie most truly be sayd to be few and smal points And the more if they should once be compared with our other Roman Articles of Real Presence Adoration of the Sacrament Masse Confession Freewil Merit c. In anie one wherof D. Morton was not able to giue the least Instance of difference between the foresayd Brittans and S. Austin Wherfore to proceed in this same poynt It is reported by Hollinshead out of S. Bede hist. l. 2. c. 2 that S. Austin by the help of King Edilbert obtayned a meeting with the Brittish Bishops and Doctours where he sayd vnto them (52) Beda hist l. 2. c. 2. Hollinsh vol. 1. p. 103. Godwine in his Catalogue of Bish. p. 6. If you wil obey me in these three things That you wil celebrate Easter at the due time That you wil minister Baptisme wherwith wee are borne againe to God according to the custome of the Roman and Apostolick Church That you wil preach with vs the Word of God to the Nation of the English Al other things which you doe though they be contrarie to our customes we wil peaceably suffer In like sort sayth the (53) l. 3. c. 13. p. 133. Authour of the Historie of Great Brittanie The Brittan Bishops conformed themselues to the doctrine and Ceremonies of the Church of Rome without difference in anie thing specially remembred saue only in the Celebration of the Feast of Easter c. (54) Ibid p. 219. And See CaÌ„bdens BritaÌ„ in English p. 578. And agayne when they perceaued the Saxons in some measure to approue it they began to make open Profession of it as seeming therin to agree euen with their Enemies the Saxons howsoeuer otherwise in respect of language situation or Law of Nations they were diuided Yea the (55) Beda hist l. 2. c. 2. Hollinsh vol. 1. p. 102. Brittan Bishops after conference had with S. Austin confessed that they vnderstood that it was the true way of iustice which Austin preached Wherupon as (56) Confut. of Purgat p. 335. D. Fulk acknowledgeth Saint Austin did at the last obtayne the ayde of the Brittish Bishops to the Conuersion of the Saxons (57) Catalogue of Bishops p. 11. Lastly D. Godwin writing of Theodore who was Archbishop of Canterburie some Fiftie or Sixtie yeares after S. Augustin auoucheth that vnto him al the Brittish Bishops and generally al Britanie yealded obedience and vnder him conformed themselues in al things vnto the Rites and discipline of the Church of Rome So euidently doth that Primitiue Faith of the Brittans in al most substantial poynts wholy agree with that Faith which S. Austin taught vs and which the Protestants haue fully acknowledged to be Catholick Roman or Popish And yet is the sayd Faith taught vs by S. Gregorie and S. Austin tearmed by (58) Chron. f. 161. D. Cowper the right beleefe And by (59) Act. Mon. p. 112. M. Fox the perfect Faith of Christ (60) Ibid. p. 124. and the true Faith of Christ And thus from the premisses it necessarily followeth that our present Roman Religion being so consonant or rather the same with that first Faith which the Indians Armenians Graecians and Brittans receiued from the Apostles themselues that therfore no lesse ancient or continuing is our Roman Religion then the Religion of the Apostles M. Brierly hauing produced diuers testimonies of Protestants in proof that the Indians Graecians and Armenians were conuerted to the Faith of Christ in the Apostles times as also that the remnant of Christian Religion which they yet preserue is Roman Catholick not Protestant M. Morton directing a large Reply hereto doth not so much as answer to any one of the foresayd testimonies of his Brethren Osiander excepted of whom he sayth (61) Prop. Appeal p. 79. We approue not Osianders censure c. concerning the Christians in Mount Libanus tearming them Popish for some flying speach But he may now aswel say we do not only not approue Osianders censure but neither the Censures and opinions of D. Philip Nicolai Gomarus Willamont Crispinus the Diuines of Wittemberg Cambden Harison Hollinshead Hal Clapham Fulk Marbeck Symondes Sandes Bale Foxe Midleton Godwine and Cowper al of them Protestants and yet al of them thus affording their helping hands for the proof of our agreement in Faith and Religion with the Doctrine deliuered by the Apostles themselues THE SECOND BOOKE WHERIN IS PROVED THROVGH AL THE CHIEF ARTICLES OF RELIGION AND THAT BY THE Confessions of Protestants that the same Faith Which is now taught by the Roman Church vvas anciently taught by the Primitiue Church of Christ THAT GENERAL COVNCELS DO TRVLY represent the Church of Christ And of the Credit and Authoritie giuen by Protestants to the sayd Councels CHAPTER I. AS in Politick gouernement our Parlament consisting of Prince Peeres Knights and Burgesses doth truly represent the whole Bodie of the Common-wealth and withal is endowed with ful power and authoritie to enact and establish Lawes which euerie particular Subiect is bound to obey and obserue So in gouernement Ecclesiastical a General Councel consisting of the Head of the Church the Bishops and Pastours doth truly represent vnto vs the whole Bodie of the Church itself and in like sort is enriched with plenarie power and vertue to create Decrees and Statutes which may bind the soules and consciences of euery particular member of the sayd Church To which purpose D. Whitaker confesseth expresly that (1) De Conciliis p. 1. 10. The Church is represented in a General
Leo Foelix Gelasius the Fathers of the Councel of Chalcedon of Africk and the 6. of Carthage of Sardis Sixtus Innocentius Siricius Sozimus Damasus Iulius Stephen Denis Cyprian Victor Anicetus Cornelius Ireneus Papias Peter and the other Apostles The Protestants producing and reprouing the foresayd Fathers are the Centurie-writers Danaeus Caluin Bucer Philippus Nicolai Peter Martyr Carion Bullinger Melancthon Osiander Friccius Beza Crispinus Tilenus Frigiuilleus Gauuius Bibliander Amandus Polanus Hamelmannus Illyricus Lubbertus Sarauia Napper Mornay Whitguift Carthwright Whitaker Fulk Bilson Trige Rainolds Brightman Bale Symonides Bunnie Spark Midleton Fox Morton and Field euerie one wherof do cite and reproue some Father or Councel before mentioned concerning some branch of the Bishop of Romes Primacie It is confessed by Protestants that the Primitiue Church of Christ beleeued the Bookes of Tobie Iudith Esther Sapientia Ecclesiasticus and two first of Machabees to be truly Canonical Scriptures CHAPTER V. AS it is vndoubted by al that the true Scriptures Prophetical and Apostolical are most sacred diuine and of infallible authoritie so it remayneth stil in Controuersie which Bookes be the sayd Prophetical Apostolical and Canonical Scriptures for as the (1) Concil Carthag 3. Can. 47. Trid. sess 4. Catholick Church hath defyned the Bookes of Esther Iudith Tobie two of the Machabees Wisdome and Ecclesiasticus to be sacred Canonical and of infallible authoritie so are al the sayd Bookes reiected by Protestants (2) Luth. Zuingl Praef. Bibl. a se CoÌ„uers Calu. Inst l. 1. c. 12. §. 8. l. 2. c. 5. §. 18. l. 3. c. 5. §. 8. as merely apocryphal and only human Now to decide this so waightie a Controuersie by the Primitiue Church Wheras in the Third Carthage Councel wherat S. Austin and sundrie other Fathers and Bishops were present and subscribed it is expresly defined that (3) Can. 47 Nothing be read in the Church vnder the name of diuine Scriptures besides Canonical Scriptures And the Canonical Scriptures are Genesis Exodus c. fiue bookes of Salomon c. Tobie Iudith Hester two bookes of Esdras two bookes of Machabees c. Wheras also the same Canon of Scriptures is made and numbred particulerly by S. Austin (4) De Doct. Christi l. 2. c. 8 Innoc. ep ad Exup c. 7. Gel. To. 1. Concil in Decret cum 70. Ep. Isid l 6. Etymol c. 1. Rabanus l. 2. Instit cler Cassiod l. 2. diuinarum Lect. himself as also by Innocentius Gelasius and other ancient Writers the truth hereof is so manifest that the same is confessed by sundrie Protestant Writers and the same Councel and Fathers in steed of better answere seuerely reprehended for the same Hiperius (5) Meth. Theol. l. 1. p. 46. auoucheth that In the Third Carthage Councel there are added to the Canon c. Sapientia and Ecclesiasticus two bookes of Machabees Tobie Iudith c. Al which bookes in the same order numbreth Augustin Innocentius Gelasius for which he at large afterwards reiecteth their iudgement In like sort (6) de Princip Christ Dogm l. 1. c. 4. p. 8. Lubbertus I grant sayth he certaine of these bookes to be admitted by the Carthaginians but I deny that therfore they are the Word of God for no Councels haue that Authoritie But to be brief the Third Carthage Councel is acknowledged and reproued for this verie doctrine by D. Raynolds (7) Conclus annex to his Conf p 699 700. Zan de Sacr. p. 32. 33. Hosp hist Sacram. p. 1. p. 160. Trelc loc com p. 15. Hoe Tract Tripart Theol. p. 46. Park ag Symb. part 2. p 60. Field of the Church p. 246. 247. Zanchius Hospinian Trelcatius Mathias Hoe M. Parker and D. Field And so likewise is S. Austin and other ancient Fathers herein acknowledged and reiected by Hospinian 8) Hist sacr part 1. p. 161. Hip. Meth. Theol. p. 46. Zanch. de sacra-Scrip p. 32. 33. Field of the Church p. 246. Hâ—perius Zanchius D. Field But Brentius auoucheth more in general that (9) Apol. Confess Wittemb See Bucers Scripta Angl p. 7â—3 There are some of the ancient Fathers who receiue sayth he these Apocryphal Bookes into the number of Canonical Scriptures And in like sort some Councels command them to be acknowledged as Canonical I am not ignorant what was done but I demand whether it was rightly and Canonically done Lastly D. Couel not only most plainly confesseth S. Austins like Iudgement had of the Booke of Wisdome but withal further affirmeth (11) Ib. p 87 of al these Bookes that If Ruffinus be not deceaued they were approued as partes of the Old Testawent by the Apostles So cleer it is that this foresayd Bookes were confessedly beleeued to be Canonical by the Primitiue Church Adde hereunto that (12) Of the Church p. 245. 246. Hut 2. part of his Answ p 176. D. Field M. Hutton both of them teaching that some of the ancient Iewes receiued the foresayd Bookes for truly Canonical though others of them did not beleeue and receaue the same accordingly yet are the sayd Iewes therfore expresly reproued by Protestants themselues Bibliander tearming it The rashnes of the Iewes in which his censure he is approued by the Protestant Sceltco in his booke of the Second coming of Christ Englished by M. Rogers (13) fol. 6. for the supposed worth therof D. Bancroft (14) p. 60. in the verie Conference before his Maiestie reiecteth the obiections of the Iewes made against these Bookes tearming them The old cauils of the Iewes renewed by Hierom who was the first that gaue them the name of Apocrypha which opinion vpon Ruffiâ—us his challenge he after a sort disclaymed Yea D. Bancroft is so ful with Catholicks in Defence of the sayd Bookes as that other of his owne Brethren charge him further to say (15) The 2. parte of the Ministers Def. p. 108. that The Apocrypha were giuen by inspiration from God which is al one as to affirme them to be truly diuine and Canonical And as concerning the booke Ecclesiasticus it is defended to be truly Canonical by the Protestant Writers (16) Ep. ad Volanum Lascicius and Parker of which later D. Willet (17) LoÌ„doro mastix p. 69 sayth How audacious is this fellow that contrarie to the determination of this Church of England dare make Ecclesiasticus a book of Canonical Scripture 10) Against Burges p. 76 77. Furthermore seing it is expresly taught and defended by sundrie Protestants that this waightiest Controuersie of discerning true Scripture from forged can not be decided by the (18) Hook Ecol Pol. l. 1 p. 86. Scriptures themselues neither by Testimonie (19) Whit. cont Staplet p. 370. 357. Hook vbi sup p 147. of the Spirit but (20) Hook ib. p. 146. 116. Aretiu Exam p. 24. by the authoritie of Gods Church Hence it necessarily followeth that the Church of Christ hauing decided and determined this foresayd Controuersie and
think one litle word of Scripture hath more weight with me then a thousand Sayings of Fathers without Scriptures Therfore thou art not to expect that I seuerally wash away those errours of the Fathers So according to the custome of al Hereticks for their last refuge appealing to only Scripture and disclayming from the Doctrine of the ancient Fathers M. Iacob (6) In Bilsons ful RedeÌ„pt p. 188 And see Iacob in Def. of the Treat of Christs fuffringes p 199. 200. honestly acknowledgeth that Al the Fathers with one consent affirme that Christ deliuered the Soules of the Patriarcks and Prophets out of hel at his coming thither and so spoyled Satan of those that were in his present possession with whom agreeth herein D. Bilson (7) Vbi sup p. 189. And in his Suruey p. 656. And D. Barlow (8) Def. of the Articles of Prot. Relig p. 173. testifyeth that This passeth most rife among the Fathers who taking Inferi for Abrahams bosome expound it that Christ went thither ad liberandum liberandos to conuey the Fathers deceased before his Resurrection into the place where now they are A French Protestant (9) Catholick Tradit p. 112. 113. Writer not only affirmeth this to be the doctrine of Chrysostom a very true sayth he Catholick teacher but also of the now present Apostolick Churches of the East whereto sayth he In likelyhood the Christians of Affrick do consent And wheras S. Ignatius (10) Ep. ad Trallianos post med doth cleerly teach the same Doctrine the same is acknowledged in him (11) Def. of his Article c. fol. 22 Bislons Suruey p 657. 658. by D. Hil D. Bilson yea the Poloman (12) De Russorum c. Religione p. 122. 123. Protestant Lascicius doubteth not to affirme and deriue the Doctrine therof not only from S. Ignatius S. Iohns Scholler but also from S. Thadaeus one of the twelue Apostles (13) Math. 10 3. And withal answerably testifyeth herein the opinion and doctrine of the Hebrewes (14) Vbi sup p. 123. of the remote Christians both in Syria Aethiopia And the like acknowledgement of S. Thadaeus his opinion herein is made by (15) Palma Christiana p. 74. And see Eus Hist l 1. c vlt. Frigiuillaeus Gruuâ—us who speaking therof affirmeth that we haue the testimonie of Eusebius Pamphylus who in the Historie of Agbar King of the Edessens testifyeth Thadaeus the Apostle to haue preached before Agbar and others amongst other things the Descension of Christ to Hel c. And then further defending this Historie for Authentical he concludeth No man of mature iudgement wil impugne those things which Eusebius deliuereth of the preaching of Thadaeus at Edessa and the conuersion of Agbar to Christ Finally this testimonie of the holie Apostle Thadaeus is further defended by D. Bilson and sundrie times alledged and vrged by D Hil. The ancient Iewes did so certainly beleeue the Doctrine of Lymbus Patrum and the same is so cleerly taught (17) c. 24. 37. in the booke of Ecclesiasticus that D. Whitaker for his best answer finally betaketh himself to the reiecting (18) Conc. Dur. l. 8. p. 567. of the sayd booke for not Canonical But the falshood herof being formerly (19) See bef l. 2 c. 5. proued (16) Suruey of Christs suffrings p. 653. 654. 657. 660. 661. c. Hil Def. of this Art Christ DesceÌ„d c. and that from the Confession of other Protestants it sufficeth for this present that the sayd booke being but a true Historie doth yet fully manifest the Doctrine herin of the Ancient Iewes who liued before Christ In which regard also D. Beard (20) Retractâ—ue from Rom. Relig p. 78. affirmeth Catholicks to Iudaize in their doctrine of Lymbus Patrum and Purgatorie This Article then of our Creed that Christ after his death truly descended into Hel we see was the confessed Doctrine of S. Austin Leo Fulgentius Chrysostom Prudentius Hierom Ruffine Ambrose Hilarie Gaudentius Epiphanius Iustin Clemens Hippolytus Irenaeus Ignatius Thadaeus the Apostle and of al the Fathers and the ancient Iewes Now the Protestants producing and acknowledging the Fathers Doctrine herin to be Roman Catholick are Danaeus Lascicius Frigiuillaeus Gruuius Whitaker Bilson Hil Iacob Barlow Beard and others IT IS CONFESSED BY PROTESTANTS THAT THE Fathers of the Primitiue Church beleeued and practised our Catholick Doctrine of praying to Angels and Saints CHAP. XIII ALthough the glorious Angels and blessed Saincts do not require or need in regard of themselues anie human Apologie for their deserued honour they being seated in the highest and strongest turrets of the kingdome of Heauen wherin new Triumphs they dayly winne against their Enemies and being as (a) l. de Mortalitate S. Cyprian sayth now secure of their owne immortalitie are yet careful of our securetie Yet if we respect either the general Calumnies and contempts of our modern Hereticks against them or our bounden duties by reason of so manie celestial Graces through their charitable suffrages bestowed vpon vs it may iustly be thought expedient or rather necessarie in their due defence and for sa isfaction of the Aduersarie briefly to set downe the confessed Doctrine and beleef of the Primitiue Church honouring and inuocating the sayd Angels and Saincts as Intercessours agreably as the Roman Church stil doth directly contrarie to our Modern Protestants refusing and impugning the same First then touching S. Gregorie the Great the Protestant Chronicler Carion affirmeth that (1) Chron. l. 4. p. 567. 568. Gregorie ordaâ—ned the publick Rite of Inuocation of Saincts M. Symonds only auoucheth that (2) Vpon the Reuelations p. 83.84.85.86 Gregorie increased two pernicious things in the Church Inuocation of the Dead aâ—d Prayer for the dead And that he wrote to Leontia to make S. Peter Protectour of the Empire in earth and Intercessour in Heauen c. He Sent Austin into England to conuert the English they which were sent spread forth a Banner with a painted Crucifix and so came in Procession to the king singing Litanies in a strange tongue Now one chief part of the Litanie contayneth Inuocation of Saincts Luke Osiander (3) Cent. 6. p. 288. reciting manie Catholick poynts of Faith taught and beleeued by S. Gregorie numbreth amongst the rest that He approued cloaked and defended the Inuocation of Saincts and their worship (4) In the Index of the sixt Century at the word Gregory The Centurie writers numbring vp in like sort the pretended Popish Errours of S. Gregorie charge him with Inuocation of Saints Wâ—th whom agreeth (5) In Iesuitis part 2. r at 5. p. 5. 627. D. Humfrey reprehending S. Gregorie for publick Inuocation of Saints and their worship (6) Cent. 6. c. 131. col 17. And the Centurists further confesse that Gregorie the Great reciteth manie miracles c. which plainly confirme Superstition as confidence in Saints Inuocation of the dead c. Wee need not therefore
iustly condemned c. Osiander (21) Cent. 4. p. 434. reciting the condemned errours of Aerius amongst the rest numbred appoynted Fastes not to be kept c And that fasting is to be when a man wil according to his libertie And wheras S. Epiphanius her 75. affirmeth of Aerius that he sayth Neither shal fasting be appoynted for these things be Iudaical and vnder the Law of Bondage If at al I wil fast I wil choose anie of myself and I wil fast for libertie Al this is acknowledged by Pantaleon (22) In his Chronogr p. 28. and is so agreable with the now Doctrine of Protestants that D. Whitaker (23) Contra Duraeum l. 9. p. 830. auoucheth that Aerius taught nothing concerning fasting different from the Catholick Faith by which he meaneth the Protestant Faith Insomuch that Aerius herein is defended by Danaeus (24) De haresibus c. 53. f. 175. 177. D. Fulk (25) Answ to a countor Cath. p. 45. Though M Hooker (26) Eccles Pol. l. 5. p. 210. And the Author of Quaerim Eccles p. 31. 94 103. and other Protestant Writers doe no lesse condemne him herein of errour then Catholicks doe In like sort wheras D. Fulk 27) Against Rhem. Test in Math. c. 15 fol. 28. And Aretius loc com p. â—72 and other Protestant Writers doe commonly obiect against Catholicks that Montanus the Heretick was the first that appoynted lawes of fasting M. Hooker (28) Eccles Pol l. 5. p. 209. 210. himself answereth with vs that the Montanists were reprehended only for that they brought in sundrie vnaccustomed dayes of fasting continued their fastes a great deale longer made them more rigorous c. wherupon Tertulian maintayning Montanisme wrote a book in defence of the new fast And the like answer is giuen by another Protestant [29) Quaerimonia Eccl p. 110. saying Protestants say that Eusebius manifestly teacheth that Montanus made the first lawes of fasting but they are greatly deceaued in this as in other things c. Montanus bringeth in a new Custome of fasting hauing abrogated the Fastes of the Church c. And of this new Custome in particular Chemnitius (30) Exam. part 4. p. 143. recordeth that The Montanists make three Lents in the yeare as though three Sauiours suffred in the yeare which is altogeather impertinent to Catholicks Agayne wheras it is ordinarily vrged against Catholicks that they absolutely condemne certaine meates contrarie to S. Paul 1. Tim. 4.3 M. Iacob (31) Def. of the Church Ministry of England p. 59. a Puritan acknowledgeth that The place of Paul is vnderstood of Marcion Tatianus who did absolutely condemne Mariage certaine meates And so sayth he are in no comparison with the Papists if they erred in nothing els But to proceed yet to Fathers more ancient The Centurists (32) Cent. 3 col 136. write that Origen hom 10. in Leuiticum mentioneth the 40. Dayes or Lent consecrated to fasting as also Wenesday Friday in which sayth he were solemne Fasts D. Whitaker (33) Cont. Duraeum l. 7. p. 480. Mort. Prot. App. p. 506 D Morton charge Pope Calixtus who liued about Anno Domini 218. that He was the first that ordayned Ieiunium quatuor Temporum or Ember dayes And Hamelmannus (34) De Trad. Apost col 254. speaking of Hermes of whom S. Paul maketh mention Rom. 16 14 affirmeth that in his book intituled Pastor is recorded the then Fasting from certaine meates Abraham Schultetus (35) In Medulla Theol. Patrum p. 440. doth not only affirme to vse his words the superstition of Lent Fasting to haue been allowed commanded by Ignatius (37] Vbi supra and Whitguift in his Def. p. 102. Hooker Eccl. Pol. l. 5. p. 209. but doth also as doth likewise D. Whitguift M. Hooker defend that verie Epistle of Ignatius being ad Philippenses in which this Doctrine is extant to be his true Epistle not counterfaite Chemnitius (38) Exam. part 1. p. 89. confesseth that Ambrose Maximus Tauroninsis Theophilus Hierom others do affirme the fast of Lent to be an Apostolical Tradition And the like almost in the same words is acknowledged by Schrederus 39) Opuscul Theol p. 71. saying Ambrose Theophilus Hierom others do decree that Lent hath descended from Apostolical Tradition Adde lastly that Caluin (40) Insti l. 4. c. 12. sec 19. speaking of fasting confesseth in general that he dareth not wholy excuse the Old Fathers but that they sowed some seedes of Superstition And that (41) Ibid. sec 20. euerie where the obseruation of superstitious Lent was in force Hamelmannus affirmeth that 42) De Traedit col 460. After the death of Iohn the Apostle there began fallings away from the Faith Doctrines of Diuels vnder pretence of the Word of God forbidding of Mariages meates vowes single life c. And the Centurists do confesse report from (43) Cent. 1. l. 2. c. 10. col 581. the testimonie of Clemens Alexandrinus Egesippus Iosephus concerning the abstinence of the blessed Apostle S. Iames that (44) Ibid. col 582. wine sicer he did not drink that he did not feed of anie liuing creature c. that he wore not wollen garments but was attired in Syndon that he prayed so continually vpon his knees that Camel-like they had lost their feeling So strict were the Fasts and other austerities of the ancientest Fathers and Apostles But to touch briefly our Puritan or Sabaoth Fastes wheras M. Welch (45) In his Rep. against Browne p. 196. speaking of himself and his Brethren sayth We think it not Heresie to fast on the Lords more then other dayes The Fourth Carthage Councel Can. 64. is reprehended by Osiander (46) Cent. 5. p. 13. for decreeing that He that aduisedly or of purpose fasted vpon the Sunday should not be esteemed a Catholick And wheras Epiphanius haer 75. reciting and condemning the errour of the Aerians herein affiâ—meth that They affect rather to fast vpon the Sunday and to eate vpon the Wenesday Friday in which respect our moderne Protestants are their docible Schollers M. Midleton alledgeth to the same purpose not only the seueral testimonies of Epiphanius but also of Tertulian Ignatius freely confessing that Sundayes fast was coÌ„demned in Eustathius the Aerians In like sort S. Austin ep 86. ad Casulanum affirming that To fast on Sunday is a great offence (47) In h s Papistomastix p. 35. especially since the detestable Heresie of the Manichees c. who appoynt vnto their hearers this day as lawful to be fasted vpon This saying is alledged by D. Whiteguift [48) In his Def. p. 102. the Centurie-writers (49) Cent. 4. col 445. as also is S. Ambrose for the same purpose by M. Parker 50) Against Symbol part 2. c. 5. sec 16 p. 38. And where Clement l. 5. Constit Apost c. vlt. Ignatius
Fathers in particular pronounceth of them in general thus 40) In Col. Conuiual c. De Patribus Ecclesiae See ye what darknes there is in the Fathers writings concerning Faith for when that Article of the Iustification of men is couered with darknes it can by no meanes be that greater errours he auoyded Bullinger doth 41) In Apoc. Serm. 87. fol. 270. acknowledge that The doctrine of Merits satisfaction and Iustification of works did incontinently after the Apostles time lay their first foundations Caluin affirmeth in general that 42) Inst l. 3. c. 25. §. 2. The ancient Writers of the Church vsing euerie where the word Merit gaue occasion of errour to posteritie therby Adde lastly that D. Whiteguift 43) In his Def. against the Reply of Carthw p. 472. 473. treating of Doctrine taught in anie Age since the Apostles time affirmeth without al other exception either of Age or Father that Almost al the Bishops and learned Writers of the Greek Church and Latin also for the most part were spotted with doctrines of Freewil of Merits c. And the same is likewise taught by 44) De Eccl. cont Bellar. p. 299. D. Whitakers Now concerning the ancient Iewes The Books of 45) c. 12 9. 4.10 Tobie and Ecclesiasticus 46) c. 3. 33. are so pregnant for the Merit of works that sundrie Protestants say therof 47) Minist of Lincolne Dioces in their Abridgment p. 76. The two places of Tobie and Ecclesiasticus tend dangerously to the Iustifying of the Merit of Almes-deeds And others writing against the booke of Homilies say 48) â—ilenced Ministers in the 2. Part of Def. p. 164. The book of Homilies whereto we are required to subscribe c. expoundes Tobie saying that Almes is profitable to purge the soule from the spots of sinne alleaging these words of Tobie 4.10 and 12.19 c. and out of Ecclesiasticus c. Yea they further say This 49) Ib. p. 166. place of Tobie were it Canonical c. is verie pregnant for the Merit of works and as strong for it as the Scriptures are for the merit of Christ Buxdorfius also writeth of the Rabbins that 50) Synagog Iudaica p. 23. They perswade themselues that they may satisfy for their sinnes by doing pennance vpon their skinnes and that they may easily merit eternal life by keeping of the Commandments and Good works And the same also is acknowledged in them by 51) Pharisaisme p. 13. 50. M. Hal. I may then conclude that the Fathers of the Primitiue Church are our firmest Patrons for our Catholick Doctrine concerning Good-works confessedly teaching First that Good-works do truly iustify Secondly Meriting Grace and Remission of sinnes in this life and eternal glorie in the next For which verie doctrine the Fathers acknowledged by Protestants are S. Gregorie Chrysostom Augustin Prosper Ambrose Hierom Nyssene Nazianzene Hilarie Ephrem Cyprian Origen Tertulian Theophilus Lactantius Iustin Clemens Alex. Ireneus Hermes Ignatius and the ancient beleeuing Iewes The Protestant Writers producing and charging the forsayd Fathers are Luther the Centurists Brentius the Diuines of Wittemberg Osiander Caluin Melancthon Chemnitius Winkilmamus Schultetus Bullinger Buxdorfeus Wotton Whitaker Humfrey Couel and Whiteguift It is acknowledged by Protestants that the Ceremonies now vsed by the Roman Church in the ministring of seruice or Sacrifice as also of the Sacraments were formerlie vsed by the Bishops Priests and Fathers of the Primitiue Church CHAP. XXII HAuing thus passed through so manie particular Controuersies of greatest weight and finding in al of them a perfect agreement and sweetest harmonie between the ancient most holie and Primitiue Church and the present Roman Catholick Church and this by no weaker proofes or euidences then the free grants Confessions and acknowledgments of our sworne and professed Aduersaries I wil now for my Conclusion in this kind only examen one poynt further which being not purely Doctrinal but most sensible and external wil therby not only prooue most accommodate to the sense and capacitie of the meanest Reader but withal wil most euidently declare and make manifest the outward gracious and beautiful face of Christian Religion practised by the ancient learned and holie Bishops Doctours and people of the Primitiue Church Nothing is better knowne either to those of greater yeares who as yet may wel remember the Ecclesiastical rites and Customes of our owne kingdome or to others more moderne who haue trauailed forraine Nations then the external Ceremonies vsed in Material Churches in Celebration of Seruice and Administration of the most holie Sacraments For who knoweth not that when Catholick Churches are erected they are specially consecrated and dedicated either to Christ or some of his Saincts That in them are seueral Chancels and Vestries as also Altars Candles Reliques and Images that there are truly Priests who offer daily external Sacrifice at the Altar Whose Vestments and vessels are specially hallowed who likewise obserue Canonical houres saying some prayers in Secret others with a loud voice sometimes giuing the people their benediction and burning Incense at the Altar In the Church likewise there is a Font specially hallowed for the administration of Baptisme which is holden necessarie to Saluation and the same is ministred with the Signe of the Crosse with holie Oyles and sundrie other Ceremonies hereafter specifyed And to omit sundrie other In the Church is blessed by the Priest Holiewater Holie-bread Candles Ashes c. I need not describe the naked walles of Protestants Churches or the bare black coates of their wedded Ministers both of them deuoyd of al grace ornament puritie and state duly befitting places and persons Ecclesiastical And therfore I hasten to the confessed practise of the Primitiue Church Wherein I first find that when Material Churches were first built they were specially hallowed by the Bishop so much as S. Gregorie and S. Austin are reproued by D. Humfrey 1) In Iesuit part 2. rat 5. p. 5. 627. for bringing into England the new Consecration of Churches And the 2) Cent. 6. col 364. 365. Centurie-writers do charge S. Gregorie out of his owne writings with Consecration of Churches D. Morton affirmeth that he vsed 3) Prot. Appeal l. 1. p. 53. Superstitious manner of Consecration of Churches Yea the 4) Cent. 4. col 408. further confesse that Athanasius in his Apologie to Constantin plainly sheweth that Christians did not assemble togeather in Churches not consecrated And that in the Fourth Age the Fathers vsed 5) Cent. 4. col 497. Sumptuous Churches consecrated and Superstitious Insolencie in celebrating of Masse appointed to be sayd in no places but such as were hallowed by a Bishop 6) Cent. 4. col 497. Yea they reprooue Constantin himselfe for that say they concerning Consecration of Churches new built proud adorning of them and other Superstitious things the greatest part Constantine inuented and spread abrode in many Churches And wheras Sozomene hist l. 1. c. 8.
assigned the third place to Hereticks who haue Gone out of the elect people of God but were not of them So that Scriptures Fathers and Protestants do al of them agree That the Going out or departing from the Church is the Badge of Heresie and Persons so Going out are thereby marked Hereticks Examples heerof we haue in al former Hereticks in Arius Macedonius Nestorius Pelagius Eutyches Donatus waldo Wicclif Husse c. who al of them being at first Roman Catholicks through Innouation of opinions afterwards seuered themselues from their mother Church going out from her to new Congregations But now to apply this to Catholicks and Protestants and breefly to examine whether companie hath gone or departed out of a former knowne Church the true Church of Christ and first to giue M. D. Morton a short scantling concerning himself his Brethren his owne neighbour M. Mason answering certaine demands of Catholicks in this kinde saith a) Consecrat of English Bishopes p. 41. When it pleased him which causeth the light to spring out of darknes we did spring from yourselues being stil content to be yours so you would be Christs In like sort sayth a) Apol. p. 288. D. Iewel We haue indeed gone from the Pope we haue shaken of the yoake of the Bishop of Rome It is true sayth b) Act. mon. p. 3. M. Fox we are remoued from the Church of Rome And D. Rainolds c) In his Conclusions annexed to his Conference maketh this one of his Conclusions That the reformed Churches in England Scotland France Germanie and other kingdomes and Common-wealthes haue seuered themselues lawfully sayth he from the Church of Rome And as for Luther himself he was at first so Roman Catholick as that sayth he (d) In Ep ad Gal. fol. 38. and see 37. 188. I did so highly esteeme the Popes authoritie that to dissent from him euen in the least point I thought it a sinne worthy of euerlasting death and would my selfe in the defence of the Popes Authoritie haue ministred fire and sword Caluin speaking of Protestants in general expresly sayth 20) In Ep. 141. p. 273. we were inforced to make a departure from the whole world yea we 21) Instit l. 4. c. 6. § 1. haue departed sayth he from her to wit the Roman Church And so accordingly it is so euident that Waldo Wicliffe Husse Luther Caluin Zuinglius c. were first borne baptised and brought vp in the Catholick Church from whence afterwards through Noueltie Libertie they went out became Apostates as that to endeauour anie special proof therof might iustly be censured of no lesse idle vanitie then to seeme to deny it of greatest ignorance or impudencie And so leauing our Protestants thus confessedly Going out of our former Catholick Roman Church and thereby branding themselues with the infamous Mark of Hereticks I wil examine what Protestants think of the Roman Church in this behalf And indeed this crime of Going out is in it self so foule a blemish as that some Protestants much desire to stayne our Roman puritie therewith So D. Fulk would haue the world to thinke That 22) Retentiue p. 85. the Popish Church is but an Heretical Assemblie departed from the vniuersal Church long since Augustins departure out of this life With whom agreeth his Brother blindbyard D. Sutclif affirming That 23) Suruey of Poper p. 315. the Papists are a sect going out of Christs Church and rising long after Christs time But these great Doctours speake much but proue nothing for it behoued them to assigne a former Church from whence the Papists thus reuolted as also the persons who the time when with other Circumstances of al which they rest silent Wherefore to cleere our Roman Church of this so foule Imputation that to the perfect sight of the blearedst eye And first to omit al former testimonies plentifully exhibited in proof of her confessed knowne and vn-interrupted Conrinuance from the Apostles times to these of ours as also to forbeare that ancient Doctours and Writers in al Ages do specially mention and register vp al notorious departures made by any Hereticks from the true Church not insinuating the least concerning our Roman Our Innocencie herein is so notoriously apparent as that sundrie Protestants being prouoked in this kind to giue the least Instance of anie such departure in our Roman Church are euer inforced in their answer therunto only to fly to our pretended departure from the sacred Scriptures so passing ouer al precedent Ages without anie colour of Examples to be vrged against vs. So M. Knewstubs 24) Answer to certaine assertions c. p. 35. answereth you require to know if our doctrine were the same which they in the Primitiue Church professed who they were that did at that time note our Going out c. This question is altogeather vnnecessarie for when an offender is taken with the manner it is needlesse to stand vpon Examination of them who were at the deed doing We haue taken you with the manner that is to say with Doctrine diuerse from the Apostles and therefore neither Law nor conscience can force vs to examine who were witnesses of your first departing With whom agreeth M. Powel only answering that the Roman Church is 25) Consideration of the Papistes supplication p. 36. fallen from the doctrine comprehended in the writings of the Apostles But to omit that this answer is a base and shameles begging of the thing it self in question to wit that we are departed from the Scriptures which as most vntrue we euer do deny It is further most impertinent to the point now vrged which is whether the Roman Church hath gone out from anie other knowne Church yea it most strongly argueth the contrarie seing they much desiring to exemplify against vs herein for want of al Instance during these 1600. yeares constrained to iumpe them ouer and only to insist in the writings of the Apostles then which what more strongly can be vrged in our behalf And yet in like sort for want of better answer D. Sutclif 26) Answer to the mass Priestes supplicat c. 7. sayth Neither is it material that the Roman Church neuer went out of anie knowne Christian Societie So insinuating her neuer Going out with is the only thing I here desire to proue But if this be not material with D. Sutclif yet is it most material and conuincing with al men of iudgement for if the Roman Church or anie other Church hauing once been confessed members of the true ancient visible Church of Christ did neuer depart or Go out of the sayd true Church then are they stil yet within it and members of it Now that the Romam Church was not only a true Church in the Apostles times but also vnto the time of S. Austin and further it is abundantly already confessed and therefore seing she hath confessedly neuer departed out the sequele is euident that stil she continueth tâ—e
purchase for producing Wiccliffe as one of his witnesses against the Roman Church After 1400. 1400. to 1450. I name sayth he the Lollardes in England c. that were persecuted at that time And that very iustly M. White for besides that they held the former Heresies of the Wiccliuists they further (118) Trithem in Chr. Anno. 1315. impugned the Sacraments of Baptisme and the Eucharist they held that Lucifer with the rest of his Angels were iniuriously thrust out of Heauen by Michael and his Angels and consequently to be restored againe at the day of Iudgement and that Michael and his Angels are for the sayd iniurie to be damned from the day of Iudgement for euer That our B. Ladie could not beare Christ and remaine a Virgin That anie thing done vnder the earth in Caues and Cellars is not punnishable with other such like Which if M. White did know in them and remember greatly might he be ashamed to number them amongst his sound and lawful witnesses for the Protestant Church Now as for Plowmans tale reporting that Chaucer expressly writ the Pope and his Clergie to be Antichrist as vnworthie of other answer I leaue it for a Tale fit for Plowmen to tel in a winters night hauing also spoken of this point before Neither doth Nilus his writing against Purgatorie and the Popes Supremacie anie thing aduantage the Protestant Church or impugne the Roman for both these Doctrines I haue formerly proued to haue been the general beleef of the Primitiue Church Besides Nilus was one of the Greek Church which sometimes in the foresaid points was diuided from the Roman yea he was condemned for an Heretick and therevpon enrolled by Illiricus (119) Catalog Test verit Tom. 2. p. 876. amongst the witnesses of the Truth of Protestancie Concerning Iohn Husse and Hierome of Prage D. White confessing that their Doctrine was the same with that of the waldenses the former answer to them may serue also for this Besides I haue (120) l. 1. c. 3. conuinced heertofore that Husse wholy agreed with Catholicks in sundrie Articles earnestly now impugned by Protestants As for Sauanarola his writings are condemned by the Church of Christ Neither did he impugne anie one point of our Catholick Faith which I haue not formerly shewed to haue been taught by the ancient Fathers And therefore his resisting the Roman Church doth nothing proue anie change or Innouation made by her And the selfe same answer is to be giuen to Wesselus Groningensis whose Bookes are prohibited As also to Ioannes de Vessalia who defended the Heresie of the Grecians concerning the proceeding of the Holie-Ghost who yet in the end recanted al his opinions held against the Church of Rome And where M. White further affirmeth that in England also and Bohemia liued those which followed the Doctrine of Wiccliffe and Husse continuing the same til Luther Supposing this for true the contrarie whereof I haue proued (121) l. 1. c. 3. already at large yet doth it proue no more then the Examples of Wiccliffe and Husse themselues which lately we haue seen to proue nothing at al in behalf of Protestants And when 1500. 1500. yeares were expired arose sayth M. White Luther Suinglius Tindal and diuers others whom God raysed vp to cal his people out of Babylon c. These I must confesse were faithful witnesses for M. Whites Church and great Resisters of the Roman But I cannot confesse that God but the Diuel only raised them vp for so Luther confesseth (122) Tom 7. Wittem l. de Missa f. 443. that Satan disswaded him from the Masse And (123) Tom. 2 l. de subsid Euchar. f. 249. Suinglius acknowledgeth that he was instructed in the night by an Admonisher whether white or black he remembreth not And the same might be shewed of sundrie others first broachers of Protestancie But as now I wil purposely for beare hauing waded ouer long in this so vnsauourie a Pudle of D. Whites Catalogue In which as he hath not proued by anie one Instance anie knowne begining or change in our present Roman Faith since the Apostles times so I cannot but obserue that amongst al the witnesses by him produced against the Roman Church not one can be picked out which was not a man vitious and of a scandalous life or els infected with Schisme and Heresie for which he was euer noted reproued and condemned euen by the Doctours and Writers of the same time wherein he liued And so I stil conclude that our Roman Church hauing neuer Gone out of anie other Church nor euer been noted of Innouation and change in Faith that therefore she is not anie Nouel or Heretical Sect but the One True Catholick and Apostolick Church of Christ THE FOVRTH BOOK WHERIN IS PROVED BY THE CONFESSION OF PROTESTANTS that according to the Sacred Scriptures the Roman Church is the true Church of Christ And so to haue euer continued from his time vntil the Date hereof And of the contrarie the Protestants Church to be only a Sect Heretical neuer to haue been before the dayes of Luther PROTESTANTS FLYING TO THE sacred Scriptures in proof and defence of their Church and Religion it is shewed the sayd flight not only in itself to be dishonourable but also to be the ordinarie flight of al moderne Hereticks CHAPTER I. HAVING laboured thus far with al diligence to search for the finding out of Christs true Church and her necessarie continuance and visibilitie through-out al Ages and euer finding the present Roman Church and Religion to haue been at al times the only knowne publick and professed Church of Christians in al Countries whatsoeuer The Protestant Congregation in the meane time being indeed not in Being and by their owne former acknowledgments not knowne visible or heard-of in the Christian world I begun further to think with myself what strange euasion colour or pretence our Protestants could inuent for their further maintaining of their new-sprong Faith And reading casually in (1) l. 7. p. 478. D. Whitakers book against the Iesuit Duraeus I found him expresly to hold and teach that it is sufficient for vs Protestants by comparing the Popish doctrine and Scriptures togeather to know their difference and disagreing we leave it free for Historiographers sayth he to write what they list And agreably hereto I since found (2) In Bancroftes Suruey p. 219. Beza to say If any shal oppose against my exposition the authoritie of certaine of the ancient Fathers I do appeale to the word of God So that the Protestants last refuge and appeale is to the only written word of God distrusting and renouncing al proof or testimonie either from ancient Councels Fathers or Histories for they willingly (3) Midleton in his Papisto-Mastix p. 193. confesse that perusing Councels Fathers and Stories from the Apostles forward they find the Print of the Popes feet Now for the clearer discouerie of the grosse absurditie and greatest
iure diuino Yea M. Mason himself acknowledgeth and that from M. Fox that amongst (54) Consecration of the Bishops in England p. 264 And see Fox Act. Mon. Vol. 2. p. 1295. The Articles sent by Queen Marie to Bishop Bonner one was this Item Touching such persons as were heretofore promoted to anie Orders after the new sort and fashion of Orders Considering they were not ordered in verie deed the Bishop of the Diocesse finding otherwise sufficiencie and abilitie in these men may supply that thing which wanted in them before and then according to his discretion admit them to Minister Here though M. Mason would gladly inforce a different Glosse yet the words are most plaine that Queen Marie and the Church in her time censured such as were promoted to anie Orders after the new sort and fashion of Protestant Orders in K Edwards time were not ordered in verie deed So that stil it deserueth further search whence our present English Clergie as also other forraine Ministers haue obtayned true power and authoritie to preach administer Sacraments And as for Forainers as the Ministers in Germanie Denmark Holland the rest they are so cleerely and confessedly destitute of al true Ordination that M. Mason acknowledgeth that (55) Consec of Engl. Bish. Ep. Dedic wheras other Reformed Churches were constrained by necessitie to admit extraordinarie Fathers that is to receaue ordination from Presbiters or Ministers rather then to suffer the fabrick of the Lord Iesus to be dissolued The Church of England had alwayes Bishops to conferre Sacred Orders according to the ordinarie and most warrantable Custome of the Church of Christ So that no Protestant Ministers in the world haue anie ordinarie Calling or Ordination by Bishops but only the Ministers of England who yet beg and deriue al that which they haue from their imagined Antichrist himself as now shal be shewed Some Protestants therfore teach that they haue their Calling Ordination from the Church of Rome so D. Bridges (56) Defence of the GouernmeÌ„t p. 1276. speaking of our Catholick Bishops and their Calling vrgeth thus in our behalf If our Protestant Brethren wil make them but meer Lay-men then are neither they nor we anie Ministers at al but meer Lay-men also for who ordayned vs Ministers but such Ministers as were either themselues of their Ministerie or at least were made Ministers of those Ministers Except they wil say the people can make Ministers c. yea some (57) SileÌ„ced Ministers supplication of Anno 1609. p. 9. 10. 17. Puritans do reproue their Protestant Brethren for deriuing their Ministerie from the Church of Rome But (58) Cont. Dur. l. 9. p. 820. D. Whitaker exemplifyeth the same saying Luther was a Priest and Doctour according to your Rite or ordination c. And it is manifest that so also was Zuinglius Bucer Oecolampadius and innumerable others c. M. Parkins (59) Vol. 1. p. 737. speaking of the Calling of the first Preachers of the Protestant Ghospel argueth thus If they had no Calling neither haue we that are their followers But They had their Callings c. from the Romish Church itself for they were either Priests or Schoole-Doctours as in England Wiccliffe in Germanie Luther in Bohemia Iohn Husse and Hierom of Prage at Basil Oecolampadius in Italie Peter Martyr others And therefore these with manie others were ordayned either in Popish Churches or in Schooles c. And agayne We say the first restorers of the Ghospel in our times had their first Callings of them to wit the Papists M. Mason discoursing at large of this verie poynt of Ordination and in particular of the Ordination of our English Protestant Clergie confesseth first that the Roman Church hath euer had true power of Ordination (60) Consecration of the Bishops of England Ep. Dedic Such was the goodnes of God saith he that euen in the darknes of Poperie as Baptisme so the Ministerial function c. was wonderfully preserued for the Church of Rome by Gods special prouidence in her ordination of Priests retayned such Euangelical words as in their true and natiue sense include a Ghostlie Ministerial power to forgiue sinnes c. Thus the Church of Rome gaue power to her Priests to teach the truth c. which (61) Ibid. p. 262. Power saith he is a Rose which is found in the Romish wildernes but the plants therof were deriued from the garden of God It is a Riuer which runneth in Aegipt but the fountaine and Spring of it is in Paradise It is a Beame which is seen in Babilon but the original of it is from the Sphere of the Heauen Wherefore when your Priests returne to vs our Church paring away their Pollutions suffereth them to exercise their Ministerial function according to the true meaning of Christs word And agayne (62) Ibid. p. 262. we being content with their calling and commission of their function already committed vnto them do not reiterate their ordination and Imposition of hands And as Catholick Priâ—sts Apostated only through vice are here allowed for sufficient Ministers without al new ordination from anie Protestant SuperinteÌ„dent so doth M. Mason most seriously labour throughout his whole Booke to proue the ordination of the Protestant English Clergie to haue been certainly deriued from our Catholick Roman Church To which end acknowledging that (63) Ibid. p. 64. 65. 66. The whole Clergie of England at this day deriueth their Consecration from Cranmer he painfully laboureth to proue that Cranmer was appoynted by Pope Clement to be Archbishop of Canterburie and that he was Consecrated by three Catholick Bishops which Consecration was performed with wonted Ceremonies according to the vsual forme of the Romane Church which saith he continued al the dayes of King Henrie the Eighth euen when the Pope was banished yea he expresly concludeth his book thus (64) p. 267. Thus it appeareth that although we receaued our Orders from such as were Popish Priests yet our Calling is lawful So cleer it is that M. Mason would be glad to wring his Ministers Ordering from our Roman Church And the like is acknowledged taught by (è) Cath. Trad. p. 183. Buca loc com p. 509. Bernard in his Diswasion from Brownisme p. 144. Whyte in his way to the Church p. 404. Fotherby his Answer annexed to his 4. Sermons p. 81. Sutcliffe against D. Kellison p. 5. Sarauia of diuers Degrees of Ministers p. 9. sundrie other Protestants But here I can not but obserue by the way how strange it is that Protestants should thus much delight and please themselues in their Ordination from Cranmer a man so vicious inconstant and treacherous both to God and man Doth not D Godwin relate that (65) In Cranmsr p. 123. Being yet verie young he â—aryed and so lost his fellowship in Iesus Colledge in Cambridge Doth not Fox report that being Archbishop in his returne from Rome he brought with him a Dutch
Pudding Pye Being indeed no other but a mere Tergiuersation and idle Battologie of distracted perplexed and obstinate men not willing to yeeld or acknowledge the truth and yet not able a deny the certaintie therof Much agreable to that instabilitie and doubtfulnes which (31) Instit c. de fide p 148. And his like perplexed Sayings see Inst l. 4. c. 2. sec 11. 12. Caluin in the same matter expresseth in other words professing Neither simply to grant nor plainly to deny our Catholick Church to be the Church of God And yet such Confidence is placed in this extremest Refuge that in M. Parkins (32) Reform Cath. p 329. Whitak de Eccl. p. 165. Beza in Ep. Theol. ep 1. p. 15. Calu. lib. Epist ep 104 p. 222. his opinion it wil serue to stop the mouths of Papists who demand of vs where our Church was fourscore yeares before Luther For sayth he hereby They are answered that our Church hath been since the dayes of the Apostles and that in the verie midst of the Papacie But to omit that hereby is plainly granted and supposed that Papacie or the Roman Religion hath euer been since the dayes of the Apostles I wil now lay open this last receptacle wherinto our Enemies do so confidently retire And first when they say their Church was in the Papacie since the Apostles dayes they either meane that their Church continued in Popish Countries amongst the Papists without al external Communion with them in Church or Sacraments euen as Catholicks doe at this day in England Scotland Holland Turkie c. Or els that their Church was in the Papacie because she did Communicate with the Papists Church in al external offices Seruice and Sacraments thereof not being in anie external respect to be discerned from the Papists only reseruing in their inmost thoughts and secret Consciences the Faith of Protestants If they intend the first then had it been more congruously sayd that their Church was without the Papacie or neer to the Papacie or among the Papists or in Popish Countries but at no hand in the Papacie that implying the verie Faith and Religion of the Papists no more then a Catholick can endure to heare that the Roman Church or Religion is in the Protestancie Puritanisme Turcisme or the like Besides if the Protestant Church had been thus stil in Popish Countries with external Recusancie of al Popish Seruice Sacraments then we vrge againe as before for some one testimonie proofe or but shadow therof from anie one Writer Record or Monument of al those former Ages but herein they are most silent through their knowne confessed want of al such helpes And therefore they betake themselues to the second meaning of their Church being in the Papacie that is not being only in Popish Countries but in al external Communion and Profession either of Seruice Sacraments or other matters of Faith and Religion being and shewing itself only Papistical Agreably hereunto M. Parkins expounded himself saying (33) Reform Cath. p 328. The true Church hath been in the Roman Church as Corne in the heape of Chaffe And not seuered each from other in outward profession (34) Ib. p. 329. but mixed togeather for external societie like Chaffe and corne in one heape In which sense Osiander so great an Enemie of our Catholick Church that by no meanes (35) Epit. Hist Eccl. Ep. Dedic Cent. 6. p. 290. Cent. 7. 331 he wil acknowledge it for a true Church yet affirmeth that (36) Ep. Dedic Cent. 8. p. 2. In those darkned times the true Church was vnder the Papacie And that so that though (37) Cent. 16. part alt p. 1076. some godlie men inwardly disliked the Popish errours and Idolatrous Sacrifices yet they durst not alwayes openly professe the same (38) Ibid. 1072. Neither durst they freely professe their owne opinions except they would be burned or at least banished Yea these so godlie men sayth he (39) Cent. 8. Ep. Ded p 3. though they gaue not their mind to these Popish Idolatries yet they did not altogeather neglect the external rites and with a common custome as with a violent Streame they were carried away to do the same things with the Papists Many through feare of the Popish Tyrannie not daring to professe that they disliked the Popish worships whose infirmitie God tollerated and pardoned And so sayth he they communicated with the Popish Church in (40) Cent. 16 p. 1073. Cent 8. Ep Ded p 2. Ministerie of the Ghospel or the Word in the Bible in Baptisme in the Lords supper in taking Orders c. such saith he as those times did affoard c. And so thereby were most euidently no other then plaine Papists in al external Profession And according to this D. White also confesseth that these godlie men did not (41) Way to the Church p. 371. alwayes abandon the Communion of the Roman Church c. the Tyrannie of Rome suppressed them so that they could not manifest abroad to the world their dislike c. but by force and violence were constrayned to deuoure their owne Sorrow in the societie of their Aduersaries This external societie of Protestants with Papists in matters of Religion is further granted by the Protestant Molitor (42) Disquisitiones de Eccl. c. p. 114. who writing hereof sayth We affirme the Church in former Ages to haue layne hid in the midst of the Papistrie as in Caues neither durst it through the abominable Tyrannie of the Sonne of Perdition come forth to light Euen as yet to this day many faithful are in the midst of the Romish Babylon who lye hid there as in a Prison and for feare of danger dare not publickly professe the name of Christianitie So that the verie true and last resolued sense of the Protestant Churches being in the Papacie euer since the dayes of the Apostles importeth no more but that in the secretest corners of their harts they beleeued Protestancie and in al external Communion societie and conuersation they liued and dyed Roman Papists But if men had long studied for an answer most foolish and wicked what more apt then this For first no instance or proofe doe they or can they produce whereby to proue these external Papists to haue been indeed internal Protestants this being only a fiction or Imagination of their owne deuoyd of al testimonie Record or probabilitie whatsoeuer Secondly supposing it to be true doth it import or conclude anie lesse but that the sayd Imagined Church of Protestants in this sort being in the Papacie was a most dissembling and adulterous Church publickly denying in word and deed that verie Faith and Religion which inwardly it beleeued only to be true and committing and practising both in life and death manie foule supposed Superstitions and Idolatries with the Popish Church which they firmely beleeued to be most wicked and damnable And is it possible that an hypocritical Church is the Church of
reuiled by Protestants Ibid. p. 3. Fathers disclaimed by Protestants in their Exposition of Scriptures Ibid. p. 4. Fathers opposed by Protestants to Scripture Ibid. p. 5. Fathers by Protestants made contradictorie to themselues and other Fathers Ibid. p. 6. 7. Protestants by Protestants preferred before Fathers Ib. p. 8. Fathers challenged by Protestants for theirs l. 2. c. 2. p. 6. Fathers authoritie approued by Protestants l. 2. c. 1. p. 1. c. 2. p. 6. Fathers by Protestants preferred before Protestants Ibid. p. 7. Force of the Argument drawne from Man's authoritie Ibid. p. 7. 8. Frederick the Emperour no Protestant l. 3. c. 8. p. 54. Free-wil taught by the Primitiue Church l. 2. c. 20. Free-wil taught by the ancient belieuing Iewes Ibid. Free-wil denyed by the Manichees l. 3. c. 5. p. 14. G. GRecia conuerted by the Apostles l. 1. c. 6. p. 27. Grecians in these times Catholicks not Protestants l. 1. c. 6. p. 29. l. 3. c. 8. p. 37. Gregorie the Great commended by Protestants l. 1. c. 4. p. 16. Gregorie a Roman Catholick l. 1. c. 4. p. 17. Guilelmus de Sancto-Amore no Protestant l. 5. c. 8. p. 36. H. HEresies described l. 3. c. 7. p. 23. Hereticks named by their first Authour or Doctrine l. 3. c. 7. p. 31. Ancient Herâ—ticks defended by Protestants against the Fathers l. 3. c. 5. p. 16. Ancient Heresies confessedly differ from Catholick doctrine l. 3. c. 6. p. 17. 18. Hereticks goe out of the Church l. 3. c. 7. p. 23. 24. Henricus 5. Imperator no Protestant l. 3. c. 8. p. 53. Henricus 8. king of England no Protestant l. 1. c. 3. p. 10. Hildebrand defended against Protestants l. 3. c. 8. p. 52. Howers Canonical vsed in the Primitiue Church l. 2. c. 22. p. 89. Husse no Protestant l. 1. c. 3. p. 10. I. S. Iames the Apostle charged with errour by Protestants l. 5. c. 3. p. 23. S. Iames his Epistles reiected by Protestants for Apocryphal Ib. p. 23. 24. Images worshipped by the Fathers of the Primitiue Church l. 2. c. 14 Images as then placed in Churches Ib. By Images Miracles wrought Ibid. Images impugned by Hereticks these therefore condemned by Fathers l. 3. c. 3. p. 10. c. 8. p. 40. 43. 47. India conuerted by the Apostles l. 1. c. 6. pag. 28. Indians in these dayes Catholicks not Protestants l. 1. c. 6 p. 28. Innouation or first Beginning noted a Badge of Heresie l. 3. c. 7. p. 27. Iob his Booke reiected by Luther for Apocryphal l. 5. c. 3. p. 20. S. Iohn's Ghospel charged by Protestants with errour Ib. p. 21. S. Iohn's Epistles reiected by Protestants as Apocryphal Ibid. p. 24. S. Iohn's Apocalyps reiected by Protestants as Apocryphal Ib. p. 24. S. Iude's Epistle reiected by Protestants as Apocryphal Ibid. p. 24. Iustice inherent denyed and condemned in ancient Hereticks l. 3. c. 5. p. 15. L. LAtria and Dulia confessedly taught by S. Austin l. 2. c. 14. Lollards their errours l 3. c. 8. p. 57. Lotharius the Emperour obiected against the Pope's Primacie and answered l. 3. c. 8. p. 46. 47. At Luther's first reuolt the whole Christian world was Roman Catholick l. 1. c. 3. p. 8. Luther taught manie errours l. 4. c. 4. p. 23. Luther confessedly wrought no miracles Ibid. p. 22. S. Luke's Ghospel charged by Protestants with errour l. 5. c. 3. p. 21. Lymbus Patrum confessedly taught by the ancient Fathers l. 2. c. 12. p. 55. 56. Lytanies vsed by the ancient Fathers l. 2. cap. 22. M. MAchabees Tobie c. approued for Canonical by the Primitiue Church l. 2. c. 5. Obiections against them answered l. 2. c. 5. p. 25. Marsilius Patauinus a coÌ„demned Heretick l. 3. c. 8. p. 56. Malachias a Roman Catholick l. 1. c. 3. p. 13. Masse generally vsed these last 1000. yeares l. 1. c. 2. p. 6. Masse confestedly taught and vsed by the ancient Fathers l. 2. c. 9. p. 41. seq Masse belieued to be Propitiatorie by the ancient Fathers Ibid p. 44. Masse celebrated for the dead l. 2. c. 11. p. 50. seq Masse a Sacrifice according to Melchisedech p. In Masse water mingled with wine l. 3. c. 2. p. 8. Hereticks impugning the Masse condemned Ibidem S. Mathew's Ghospel charged by Protestants with ersour l. 5. c. 3. p. 21. S. Mark 's Ghospel charged by Protestants with errour Ibid. Michael the Emperour obiected against the Popes Primacie answered l. 3. c. 8. p. 48. 49. Miracles attributed by Hereticks to wichcraft l. 3. c. 3. p. 10. 11. Miracles confessedly neuer wrought by anie Protestant l. 4. c. 4. p. 22. 23. Miracles wrought by manie Catholicks l. 4. c. 5. p. 32. Monachisme approued and vsed by the Primitiue Church l. 2. c. 18. p. 74. seq Monks had special Consecration Ib. p. 75. Monks habit Ib. p. 76. Austeritie Ibidem Monks vowed Chastitie Ibidem Monks wrought miracles Ibidem Monks defended by the ancient Fathers against Vigilantius l. 3. c. 4. p. 12. Monastical life in some sort professed by the belieuing Iewes l. 2. c. 18. N. NIlus a condemned Heretick l. 3. c. 8. p. 58. Noueltie reiected Praef. to the Reader Nycetas obiected against the Pope's Primacie and answered l. 3. c. 8. p. 51. O. OCcham no Protestant l. 3. c. 8. p. 57. Orders l. 2. c. 7. p. Otho obiected against the Pope's Primacie and answered l. 3. c. 8. p. 50. P. PArdons and Indulgences taught by the Primitiue Church l. 2. c. 10. p. 48. S. Peter ordained by Christ Head of the Apostles for vnitie l. 2. c. 3. p. 8. seq Vpon S. Peter Christ built his Church Ib. S. Peter's seas of Rome Alexandria and Antioch preferred before others Ib. S. Peter charged by ProtestaÌ„ts with errour l. 5. c. 3. p. 23. Phocas coÌ„ferred not Primacie to Boniface l. 3. c. 8. p. 41. Photius obiected against the Pop's Primacie and answered l. 3. c. 8. p. 48. Pope of Rome S. Peter's successour l. 2. c. 3. p. 9. 10. c. 4. p. 11. Pope's Primacie was Christ his ordinance l. 2. c. 4. p. 12. Pope's Primacie confessedly allowed and practised vniuersally these last 1000. yeares l. 1. c. 2. p. 6. Pope not Antichrist l. 2. c. 4. p. 24. l. 5. c. 2. p. 14. Al Popes for these last 1000. yeares censured by Protestants to haue been Antichrists l. 1. c. 2. p. 6. Pope's Primacie defended by S. Gregorie l. 2. c. 3. p. 9. 10. c. 4. p. 12. l. 3. c. 8. p. 41. by Pelagius Ib. p. 14. by Celestine Ib. by Leo Ib. p. 15. by Gelasius Ibid. p. 16 by Sixtus Ib. by Innocentius Ib. by Siricius Ib. by Zosimus Ibid. by Councels Ib. by Constantine Ib. p. 17. by Damasus others of the fourth Age. Ib. by the Fathers of the third Age. Ib. p. 19. by the Fathers of the second Age. Ibid. p. 20. by S. Peter and the Fathers of the first Age. Ib. p. 21. 21. by the Iewes Ib.
the Emperour doth nothing proue any Innouation in the Roman Church but rather to the contrarie doth plainly shew his vnion and Communion therewith in matters of faith and Religion In like sort where he obiecteth that S. Bernard freely noted diuers Corruptions then comming in it is so vnprobable yea so grossely vntrue as that to the contrarie (90) L. 2. Cont. Dur. p 154. Fulk against Rhem. Test f. 133. D. Whitaker and D. Fulk both of them confesse that he taught the Popes Supremacie and D. Whitaker (91) Ad Rat. Camp rat 7. p. 105. aknowledgeth that he was of our Church (92) In specul Eccl. p. 23. Gomarus calleth him our S. Bernard The Centurists affirme that he was 93) â—ent 12. c. 10. col 1637. a most earnest Defender of the Sea of Antichrist Bel (94) Challenge c. p. 148. tearmeth him Bernard the Popes deare Monk and reuerend Abbot Yea the Centurists further report That he sayd 95) Cent. 12. col 1939. to the Duke of Aquitaine whatsoeuer is out of the Roman Church by the Iudgement of God is certainly to perish euen as those things which were out of the Ark were drowned in the diluge As also he that persecuteth the Pope of Rome persecuteth the Sonne of God Now by this al of it confessed by sundrie and much more learned Protestants then M. White it more then cleerly appeareth that S. Bernard was no fit witnes to be produced against the Roman Church nor that he himself did differ in anie one point of Faith from her much lesse did note anie pretended corruption of Faith comming in And as for the feast of the Conception or the Doctrine concerning the Virgin Maries freedome from original sinne it is not yet to this day defined by the Church as a matter of Faith But where he further vrgeth that S. Bernaâ—d was against Merits Iustificatâ—on by works Freewil keeping the Law Seauen Sacraments and vncertantie of our Saluation and the Popes greatnes in Temporalities it is al of it most vntrue as himself might haue plainly shewed if he had been pleased to haue set downe the answers out of Cardinal Bellarmine as he was to haue his obiections In like sorte that which he obiecteth concerning Arnulph pertaineth only to matter of life and manners not to Faith or doctrine and therefore it maketh nothing to proue anie Innouation or change in our present Roman Religion As also though as then one preached in Antwerp against the Real Presence yet I haue before freed our Church from al Innouation therein in far more ancient times And as for Honorius his noting the bringing in of Wafers into the Sacrament in this Age it is so vntrue that M. Cartwright (96) See before l. 2. c. 8. confesseth that it was brought in by Pope Alexander who liued Anno 111. which is some thousand yeares before the time now obiected After 1150. to 1200. I name saith M. White the Emperour Frederick Barbarossa forbidding Appeales to Rome and the comming of Legats from Rome into Germanie c. But though the Emperour did this being as then at discord with the Pope yet his fact was so faultie as that he was thervpon and for other iniuries Excommunicated From which 97) Baron Anno 1160. num 31. 32. Anno 1168. num 60. after vpon his submission 98) Baron Anno 1177. num 22. and promise of obedience he was absolued and permitted to come to the Pope whose feet the Emperour kissed and bowing his head receiued reuerently his benediction And that the Roman Church as then made no Innouation concerning Appeales or sending of Legats it is most cleere by general practise allowance thereof in the purest times of the Primitiue Church proued at large 99) Before l. 2. c. 4. heretofore And as for Lincolniensis noting as then the Noueltie and Heresie of Friars M. White only barely saith it without al further proof yea though as then the Institution of Friars had been but new yet neither was it in anie thing Heretical nor proued anie Innouation in the Church in Faith and doctrine But to come to the Waldenses who according to D. White were dispersed ouer al this part of the world and in most substantial poynts resisted the Papacie c. as it is not denyed but that in some poynts they reuolted from the Roman Faith so haue I shewed 100) Before l. 1. c. 3. before that in sundrie other weighty Articles of Religion they agreed with Catholicks against Protestants And it is verie easie further to proue that indeed they beleeued sundrie grosse errours though M. White would make the world to think That the sayd errours were falsly imposed vpon them 103) Ibid. p. 729. 747. 760. For Illiricus himselfe 101) Catal. Test verit p 731. 745. 730. 732. testifyeth that they taught That Laymen and women might Consecrate the Sacrament and preach That Clergie men should haue no possessions or proprieties That 104) Ibid. p. 731. 743. married Persons mortally sinned who accompanied togeather without hope of Issue That neither Priest 105) Ibid. p. 760. 740. Osiand Cent. 9. 10. 11. p. 440. nor Ciuil Magistrat being guiltie of mortal sinne did enioy their dignitie or were to be obeyed And to omit many 106) Ibid. p. 734. others they went to the Catholick Churches dissembling and offered confessed and communicated dissemblingly And now must M. White either charge his owne Brother Illiricus to haue falsely imposed these errours vpon them or els must he confesse that these so dissembling and ignorant witnesses are altogeather insufficient to proue anie change in the Roman Church out of which themselues went out After 1200. 1200. to 1250. I name sayth M. White Almaricus a Doctour of Paris that was buâ—ned for withstanding Altars Images c. It is not denyed but that Almaricus was an Heretick falling from the Roman Church But yet I hope D. White wil be ashamed to clayme him for a Protestant for he was condemned first by the Vniuersitie of Paris after by Innocentius and a Synod at Rome for these propositions following (o) Cesarius Dial. l. 5 That there is no Resurrection of bodâ—es Secondly that there is no Paradise norhel Thirdly that the bodie of Christ is no more in the Sacrament after the words of Consecration then in a stone or horse Fourthly that God spake as much in Ouid as in Austin and other such to the number of 20. for which he was burned openly in Paris with certaine other blasphemous Hereticks against the Persons of the B. Trinitie sayth (p) Lib. 6. Hist Franc. and see Gers Tract 3. in Math. Aemilius li. 6. Hist Gal. Genebrad in Chro. Anno 1208. Gagninus Besides I haue (107) Before lib. 2. c. 14. 22. proued before that the foresayd Catholick poynts vrged to be denyed by Almaricus were yet al of them taught and beleeued by the Fathers of the Primitiue Church so that no