great persecutor of Images vnderstanding that Damascen was very actiue in defending their worship and that he had writ learnedly in the defence of that Tenet conterfeited a letter as written by Damascen vnto him inuiting him to surprise the Citty of Damasco wherof he was Gouernor this letter Leo Isaurus sent vnto Hisiam Caliph or King of the Saracens whose subiect Damscen was prouing thence the Treachery of Damascen and his own sincerity and honesty in detesting so execrable an action of a subiect against so deseruing a Prince Hisiam astonisâ—ht that Damascen should be capable of so base an action consulted his Councellers concluded him guilty and condemn'd him to the forfeiture of his Means and Imployments and that his right hand should be cut of and nayld to a gibet in the Market place which being executed the saint retyred to his house humbly beg'd of Hisiam that his hand might be restored to him this was granted and the saint betaking himself to his Oratory prostrated before the Picture of our B. Lady earnestly prayed het that that hand which by the malice of Leo Isaurus he had lost for defending the honor of her and the saints Images might be restored to him which He promised he would continually imploy in defending that Doctrin against the Heresy of the I conoclasts he fell asleep and the Mother of God appearing to him said Theypetition is granted and they hand restored but remember to imploy it according to they promise in vvriting against the impiety of those vvho iniure vs by their vn vvorthy demeanor tovvards our Images awaked out of his sleep he found his hand as perfectly vnited to his arm as euer it hath been This Miracle was diuulged Damascen call'd by Hisiam and after so supernatural a testimony of his Innocency restored to his former dignities and Means all which he renounced gaue his Means to the Poore and became a Priest and a great Opposer of the Iconoclasts There is hardly any age of the Church but affords vs the lyke Miracles wrought by the Roman Catholicks in confirmation of our Doctrin it were tedions to rehearse more especially when these now related are sufficient for the present subiect That these things happen'd whither they were true Miracles or no wee do not dispute now but that such things as wee haue related did really happen no sober man can deny it for certainly he would be held for an obstinat fool that would say there was no such man as Caesar or Cicero in the world that he neuer fought with Pompey for which wee haue no other warrant but the testimony of Heathen Authors for no Christian did euer see them and none but a mad man will deny but S. Agustin S. Bernard Iohn-Hierosolimitanus and other saints and learned D. Doctors that writ the forementioned passages and others of the same kind in seueral other ages are as much deseruing of credit as the Heathens and if you did meet in S. August S. Bern. and other saints that the figuratiue presence was belieued in their ages and such as belieued Purgatory were punisht doutless you would belieue them and cry victory against vs it can not then be but preiudice that will hinder you from belieuing those passages did happen wheras they do in their writtings testify they happen'd in their own presence what caracter would he deserue who would say there was no such man as william the Conqueror in England no such thing as wars betwixt france an England in Ancient tyms no such things a spanish fleet defeated by the English in Queen Elizabeths tyme and Philip the second of Spain would not you iudge such à man to be mad for all this wee haue no other warrant but Histories and the Authors were not more honest learned wyse and holy than S. Augustin Bern and other saints who relate Miracles wrought in all-ages-can he then deserue a better caracter than of a mad man or fool that will deny them moreouer either S. Augustin S. Bern and the other saints that relate those Miracles did belieue the Tenets of Inuocation of saints adoration of Images and real Presence of Christ's body in the Sacrament or not if they did then you confess that the saints now raigning in heauen and confessed by you to be saints and none of the simple sort but learned wyse men did belieue and were saued in the belief of our Tenets if they did not belieue them what end or aduantage could they haue in feigning those Miracles wee must therefore confess those things did happen in their own presence as they say Lastly the Protestant Doctors do not deny but such things did happen but they say they were no true Miracles the Centurists and Osiander in Epit. cent 9.10.11 pag. 213. the Miracles vvhich superstitious Monks relate are either feigned Miracles or vvrought by Satans enchantments to establish vvicked vvorship of Images Inuocation of saints c. not that I think S. Bernard vvas a Magician saies Osiander Cent. 12. pag. 310. but that I think it probable Satan vvrought the Miracles vvherby the saint himself and others vvere deceiued Supposed then that such things did really happen wee will proue they were and wee are bonnd to belieue they were true Miracles for this you cannot deny but that S. August S. Bern Iohn Hierosol and God fred who were wyse learned Holy D. Doctors did know what a Miracle was as well as you those saints and the saints of other ages were ey wittness of what pass'd they examined narrowly the passages and their circumstances thy iudged them to be true Miracles must not wee belieue them to haue been such rather than your iugdment who did not see the passages nor was not born many hundred years after and what is to be obserued that when Damascens hand was restored and S. Bernard cured the sick by the laoues he blessed is it possible if these had not been notorious miracles but enchantments that som Iconoclast and som Henrician or vvaldenses against whose Doctrin they were wrought should not haue examined and discouered the cheat S. Bernard had many Enemyes infrance all the Henricians and Apostolici vvaldenses Damascen had the Emperor Leo for Enemy and all the Iconoclasts and not only them but in the wery Citty of Damasco all the Ambitious Courtiers who enuyed his greatness and pressed Hisiam to cut of his hand and can it be imagined that none of all these should haue writ or published if that passage was a cheat and no knowen miracle or by what means did the Centurists Osiander and Protestants in our age come to discouer they were all but enchantments which the enemyes of those Saints that then liued could not discouer Once that Luther in Germany thought to cheat the world and make men believe he could cast out Deuils the cheat was discouered and many writers of that tyme did relate it Once that Caluin in Geneua thought to delude the world and shew that he could rayse the dead he
Thes 2.13 vvhen you receiued from vs the vvord of the hearing of God you receiued it not as the vvord of Man but as indeed it is the vvord of God And therefore sayes he 1. Thes 4. S. he that despeiseth these things despeiseth not man but God Could a man speake more pertinently to signify that the doctrin of the Church is the doctrin of God that when wee heare her we heare him and that her words are infaillible wheras they are the words of God Observe that the Council of Apostles and Ancients at Ierusalem Act. 15.28 deciding the Controuersy concerning Circumcision delivers their sentence thus It seemeth good to ihe Holy Ghost and to vs. Signifying that the resolution proceeded ioyntly from both from the Holy Ghost by his inward inspiration and direction from the Council by its outward declaration can wee doubt therefore but that the resolution of Controuersyes by that Council was infallibly true and not only of that but also of all succeeding Councils wheras the Apostles pronounced their sentence in those words grounded on the words of Christ He that heareth you heareth me grounded on the words of Christ Io. 15.26 vvhen the Paraclet vviâ—l come he shall giue testimony of me and you shall give testimony in which words Christ did speak to his Church which was the witness which ioyntly with the Holy Ghost was to giue testimony of him and grounded on the Promiss of his Paraclet which was made by Christ not only to the Apostles but to his Church for euer vntill the consummation of the vvorld This is yet more cleerly proved by the following discourse Christ commands vs to heare the Church that he that despeiseth her despeiseth him Lu. 10.16 to obserue and do what those that sit on Moyses his chayre bids vs do Mat. 23.2 commands them to be esteemed as Heathens and Publicans that will not obey her S. Paul commands vs Heb. 13.17 not to be carried away with various and strang Doctrins but obey the Church wherin sayes he Eph. 4. God has placed Apostles Evangelists Doctors and Pastors to teach vs out of these and the lyke texts which are frequent in scripture largue thus He that does what Christ bids him do and belieues what he bids him belieue cannot do amiss nor belieue an errour but Christ bids vs belieue and do what the Church commands vs to belieue and do as appeares by these texts therefore he that does what the Church commands him to do and belieues what she commands vs to belieue cannot do amiss nor belieue an errour consequently what teuer the Church teachs is no errour To conclude S. Io. 1. epis 4.6 hauing warned vs to try our Spirits if from God or Satan he gives vs a rule wherby to try them he that knovveth God heareth vs he that knovveth not God heareth vs not In this vve knovv the Spirit of truth and the Spirit of errour This is the way prescribed by S. Iohn to ascertain vs of the nature of our Spirits if our Spirit be conformable to the Spirit of the Church it s a Spirit of Truth if it does not conform itself to the Spirit of the Church it s a Spirit of errour but if the Spirit of the Church de fallible it can give me no assurance of my Spirit whether it be of truth or of errour for what assurance can you haue that the Cloath which you measure is of a yard in length if you be not assured that the yard wherwith you measure it is an exact yard neither therefore can you be assured that your Spirit is of truth by trying it with the Spirit of the Church if you be not assured that the Spirit of the Church is of Truth But because our Aduersaries will still reply that all this is to be vnderstood of the Apostles who were infallible whylst they liued and are now infallible in their written word I haue already shewen that the written word is not sufficient to ascertain vs of the truth or vntruth of our Spirits and will now proue in this VI. CHAPT THAT NOT ONLY THE APOSTLES and Church in their dayes but that the Church in all succeeding ages is infallible THe Church of England confesses that the Apostles and Church in their tyme nay and for some ages after if you ask how many they do not agree was infaillible this is not consequent to their Principles that say only God is infallible but howeuer it s their Doctrin as appears in Mr Salls discourse pag. 18 professing to belieue the Holy scripture the Apostles Creed and S. Athanasius his Creed parallelling this wth the other two vvith the heauenly gift of faith and if the Council of Nice which deliuered vnto vs the doctrin contained in Athanasius his Creed had not been directed by the Holy Ghost as the Writers of the scripture were it were à Blasphemy to belieue that Creed and the doctrin of the Council with the same Faith with which wee belieue the scripture Now the Protestants all agree in this that now nor in these many ages the Church is not infallible for which assertion you must expect no scripture from them nor no reason but their bare word But let vs see what reason they pretend God say they having giuen vs an infallible written word sufficient to instruct vs Church infallibility was for the future needless what school boy but sees the weakness of this reason first after the scripture was written the Church continued infallible for some ages Mr Sall must confess by what I haue now said as generally all Protestants say and as all must say otherwyse Arrius and other Heresiarks might have questioned the truth of their doctrin if they had been fallible and could not be obliged in conscience to acquiesce to their iugdment nor ought not tobe held for Hereticks nor excommunicated for not submitting to them if they were fallible as yon do not esteem yourself an Heretick for not submitting to the Catolick Church on te same account S. Gregory l. 1. c. 24. sayes of the first four Councils I do embrace and reuerence the four General Councils as the four Books of the Ghospell which had been rashly and impiously said if they had not been infallible Secondly if Church infallibility was needbess because the scripture which is infallible was written then it was also needless that the Church should be infallible in fundamental points of Religion and yet Protestants do constantly auer that the Church is still infallible in fundamental points thought he scripture be infallible also in them Thirdly the Apostles remayned still infallible after the Scripture was written and why not the Church fourthly if infallibility is needless because the Scripture is infallible wee may say also that S Iohn is not infallible in is Ghos pell at least as to those points which were al ready mentioned in Mathew Mark and Luke or that these three lost their infallibility by the writing of S. Iohns Ghos pell because one infallible Ghos
haue disputed with the Deuil as Luther did in points of Religion for the Deuil is not so kind but to the grand Heresiarcks thus far he imitats Luther that in the beginning of his Apostacy his chief drift was a separation from the Catholick Church vpon any account whateuer I say vvhateuer for it is euident that the first Reformers had not fixed on any one settled Religion in oposition to the Catholick wheras they were strugling and disputing for many years in seueral meetings had to that purpose to determin what ought to be belieued by all and what articles of Popery ought to be denyed and which not which doth euidence that their first drift was to separat from the Catholick and their second endeauour was to find out some other Religion wee haue the proof of this in the Chronocles of England for their separation from the Church of Rome began by the Schisme of Henry the Eight which was quite different from the Religion his successor and Son Edwrad the 6. endeauoured to establish and this quite an other from that which Queen Elizabeth introduced for she would haue an Ecclesiastical Hierarchy and other points denyed by the former that which the Queen established was fashioned to an other shape by King Iames and his successors Nay to this day the Sectaries who style them selues Reformed Religion do not agree what Tenets must be held in oposition to the Catholicks but are sufficiently Reformed by denying what the Catholick belieues Thus doth Mr Sall proceed for what he has proposed to himself was a separation howeuer it should be from the Church of Rome but you will find in his discourse that he is not yet throughly resolued what Religion to chuse and what to belieue not only because that he has resolued to be of the Church of England which is an indiuiduum vagum ready to change with all gouernments but that in his Declaration he professes to belieue the 39. Articles of the Church of England and pag. 39. he sayes that the summe of his Faith is the written word of God and the plain vndubitable consequences out of it and it is manifest that the 39. Articles are not plain vndubitable consequences out of Gods written word for a plain vndubitable consequence is that which the Premisses being granted is iudged by all wise learned vnderstanding men to follow out of the Premisses and cannot be denyed be any wyse vnderstanding man That in the Roman Catholick Church there are wyse learned men it were a madness to deny it but a far greater madness to say that the Fathers and Doctors of all ages before those 39. Articles were coyned were not wyse and learned men that studied and vnderstood the Bible and to all these the 39. Articles seems contrary to the word of God so far they were from iudging them plain and vndeniable consequences out of it And the Lutherans Presbyterians Anabaptists and Huguenots of France do not allow the 39. Articles of the Church of England and consequently do not iudge them to be plain vndeniable consequences out of Scripture So that you must say that either all are a company of knaues that speake against their consciences or that those 39. Articles are not plain and vndeniable consequences out of Scripture consequently Mr Salls some tymes belieues only Scripture and its plain consequences sometyms more But what proues that he is not yet throughly a Protestant and so wee know not what he is but a Not Catholick is his blasphemous Position that there is not saluation in the Roman Catholick Religion for it is the constant doctrin of the Church of England that the Catholick Religion is a sauing Religion first because this has been euer yet their complaint against vs that wee are vncharitable in denying saluation in their Church and they extol their own charity for granting that in the profession of Popery prouided he has no other sin a man may be saued Secondly because they confess there was a true Church extant the age that Luther began the Reformation and all the precedent ages for its an Article of our Creed the constant Existence of Gods Church I belieue the Catholick Church and that there was no other Church then extant but the Roman Catholick Church they also confess it and must grant it for the essence of the true Church consisting as they say in the due administration of the Sacraments and preaching of the word of God and no other Church being extant in Luthers age and the precedent that administred Sacraments or preached the Ghospell but the Roman Church doubtless it must haue been the true Church for in what Kingdom Prouince Citty Village Church or Chappell in the world was these things or any of them don by Protestants its therefore the constant doctrin of Protestants that Roman Catholick Church was then the true Church and is now a true Church for its the same now that then it was Now that a man may be saued in the true Church of God prouided his lyfe be good it were a blasphemy to deny it consequently its a blasphemy to say that in the Roman Church a man may not be saued and it were to say that all our Ancestors for so many ages all the Fathers Doctors and saints confessed by the Protestants shem selues to be saints were all damned Neither can Mr Sall excuse his Blasphemy and cure the wound with that plaister of Ignorance which he applyes saying that Papists pag. 116. may be excused by ignorance and this smale comfort he will not grant but to the simple sort and not at all to the learned men So that none of our Ancestors were saued for the space of so many hundred years no saints that are confessed by both Parties to be such if they were not fooles and ignorant people of the simple sort wherby all the wyse and learned Fathers and Doctors of the precedent ages and of this age are absolutly damned Nay and Thomas Aquinas which he him self styles a saint and none of the simple sort but a learned Doctor who confessedly was a Papist is also damn'd It s impossible that his Auditors if they were of the Church of England could heare him with patience to cast all their Ancestors to hell a Blasphemy so opposit to the Doctrin of their Church wherein doth the Charity of the Protestant Church consist and they do vaunt that they exceed the Catholicks is it in saying that by ignorance a Papist maybe saued in his Religion prouided his lyfe be good this is no excess of Charity for wee grant also as wee will declare in the ensueing Chap. that Protestants and not only they but Heathens and Iews may be saued in their Religion if they be ignorant and liue well wee are but little beholding to the Protestant charity if they grant no greater capacity of saluation in the Roman Catholick Religion then in Paganism and Iudaism No Sr since you are resolued to be a Protestant let me teach