our aduersaries owne confessions the true and Orthodox Church did reiect those Apocryphall bookes which our Church refuseth which the Trent Councell allowes at this day for Canonicall And thus briefly I haue produced a Catalogue of ancient Fathers and moderne Writers in the Romane Church who haue witnessed with vs the same Canon of Scripture which wee professe at this day whereby I haue giuen you a taste of that challenge which God willing I purpose heereafter to make good in the principal points of our Religion that our Church and doctrine hath continued Visible in all ages euen to the dayes of Luther SECT VI. Our Aduersaries pretences from the authorities of Fathers and Councels to prooue the Apocryphall bookes Canonicall answered THe former Testimonies are so true and pregnant in our behalfe that our learned aduersaries are inforced to confesse that most of those Authours did reiect the bookes in question for Apocryphall To say nothing of the Trent Anathema layd vpon those reuerend Fathers and learned Doctors of the ancient and moderne Churches who reiected those bookes in all ages let vs weigh their chiefest reasons and arguments for defence of their cause and it will appeare there are no solid and certaine authorities to proue the Apocryphall books in question for canonicall Bell. lib. 1. de verbo Dei c. 12. To instance in particulars Bellarmine saith the booke of Iudith was held by Hierome for Canonicall and withall pretended this reason for it This booke hath a singular testimony from the famous and first generall Councell of Nice It is true that both contending parties subscribe to this first and best Councell of Nice but I pray where is that Canon to be found and sure I am there is no such testimony extant Asseruit esse ApocryphuÌ„ Salm. Com. in Hebr. disp 2. Acost lib 2. de Christo Reuel c. 13. Quod mihi dubituntis suspicionem subindieare videtur naÌ„ Nicena Synodus olim hunc libruÌ„ in Canonem redegerat cur annis 80 post non accenset eum Synodê° Laodicena cur Nazianzenus eius non meminit quid sibi vult quod idem c. Lind. Panopl lib. 3. cap 3. as is pretended by the Cardinall nay more Salmeron his fellow Iesuite protesteth Saint Hierome affirmed the booke of Iudith Apocryphall And Acosta the Iesuite professeth è Canone exemit hee exempted it out of the Canon and as touching the Councell of Nice their owne Lindanus proclaimeth that this assertion giues him great cause of doubting for if the Nicene Councell did anciently reckon the booke of Iudith in the Canon why did not the Councell of Laodicea reckon it why did not Nazianzene make mention of it what meant hee to say the Church at that time did reade the bookes of Iudith Tobie and the Maccabees but did not receiue them amongst the Canonicall Scriptures Againe looke vpon the Councell of Laodicea called in the yeare 364 there you shall finde the booke of Iudith Bin. Not. in Concil Rom sub Syluest by the testimony of Binius himselfe reiected for Apocryphall and this Councell is confirmed by the second Canon of the sixt Generall Councell of Trullo which the Fathers of that Councell would neuer haue done if the first Generall Councell of Nice had decreed the contrary I proceed to the examination of the chiefest ground and principall cause of their Trent Decree The third Councell of Carthage called in the time of Siricius Bishop of Rome about the yeere 399 Placuit vt praeter scripturas Canocas nihil in Ecclesiâ legatur sub nomine diuinarum scripturaruÌ„ sunt autem Canonicae Scripturae Tobias Iudith Hester Esdrae libri duo MachabeoruÌ„ libri duo Conc. Carth. 3. circa tempora Syriâ—ij Canone 47. touching the Apocryphall bookes makes this declaration It pleaseth vs that nothing be read in the Church besides the Canonicall Scriptures and there they publish for the Canonicall bookes Tobie Iudith Hester Esdras and the two bookes of Maccabees And to this Councell say the Romanists Saint Austen subscribed This testimony I confesse is extant in the 47. Canon of this Councell but giue mee leaue to tell you the Church of Rome doth not generally avowe that Canon of that Councell It is the confession of Cardinall Baronius Haud omnes Haudomnes Canones in hâc Synodo sanciti probantur sed diuersisaliis coÌ„ciliis Carthaginensibus vt inter alios iste quo sacroruÌ„ libroruÌ„ certus numerê° definitur Baron An. 397. nuÌ„ 46. Canones 50. quoruÌ„ tituli hîc assignaÌ„tur non omnes in hâc Synodo sed diuersisaliis coÌ„ciliis CarthagineÌ„sibê° sanciti probaÌ„tur inter alios 19.30 et 47. which last Canon is the CanoÌ„ in question Bin. in CoÌ„cil Carth. 3. c. Not all the Canons of this Councell are established but they are allowed in diuers other Councels of Carthage as namely that Canon wherein the number of sacred bookes were defined And Binius the publisher of the Councells makes the like acknowledgment that the 50 Canons which were intituled to that Councell were not all confirmed by it but by other Councells of Carthage as namely the 47 Canon and that which argues suspition of a forged Canon the bookes of Maccabees which are inserted in the Latine copie of that Councell are not to bee found in all or any of the ancient Greeke copies or Manuscripts Hic Canon Carthaginensis Concilii extat in collectione CanonuÌ„ Cresconii Africani Episcopi nonduÌ„ edita sed ibi Machabee ruÌ„ libri non recensentur ne in omnibê° Gracis codicibus editis Mss Christ Iustellus obseru Not. in Cod. CanonuÌ„ Eccle. Africanae Bell. de Roman Pont. lib. 2. ca. 31. Quintum Bell. de CoÌ„cil author lib. 2. cap 8. Decimo Neither is this Councell of that authoritie as the Romanists themselues pretend for when our learned Protestants doe otherwise produce this Councell against the head of their Church Bellarmine makes answere This Prouinciall Councell ought not to bind the Bishop of Rome nor the Bishops of other Prouinces If wee oppose against it the Councell of Laodicea which decreed those bookes for Apocryphall Bellarmine makes answere The Councell of Carthage is of greater authoritie then that of Laodicea because it is later and because it was Nationall but the Councell of Laodicea was prouinciall In the one place when it seemingly makes for him hee termes it a Nationall Councell in the other when it plainely makes against him hee termes it Prouinciall But Oportet esse memorem Falsehood had need haue a good memory It is vsuall with Bellarmine with Canus with Costerus and the best learned Romanists to excuse Saint Hierome Saint Austen Saint Gregorie and many others which denied the Apocrypha for part of the diuine Canon with this generall Answere It was no sinne Bell de verbo Dei lib. 1. cap. 10. no heresie in them to reject those bookes because no Generall Councell in their dayes had decreed any thing touching them If therefore no Generall Councell had decreed
siue Purgatorii fiue IndulgentiaruÌ„ fides in Primitiuâ Ecclesia at que nunc est Roffen Aâ—t 18 p. 496. Touching Vniuersalitie It is the confession of Fisher their owne Bishop of Rochester Whosoeuer will reade the Commentaries of the ancient Greekes so farre as I see he shall finde very seldome mention of Purgatory or none at all and the Latins in the Westerne Church did not receiue the truth of this matter altogether but by little and little neither indeed was the faith either of Purgatorie or Indulgences so needfull in the Primitiue Church as now it is A strange confession of a learned Bishop that two principall Articles of Faith viz. Purgatorie and Indulgences were scarce knowne in the ancient Church nor yet very necessary to bee receiued at all times and of all persons Let it suffice many poynts of the now Romane Religion were vtterly vnknowne to the Greeke Church which in the first ages did wholly communicate with the ancient Romane Faith and therefore their Alphonsus à Castro thinkes it the best way to solue the poynt in question with this answere Vnus ex notissimis erroribus GraecoruÌ„ et ArmenoruÌ„ est quo docent nullum esse purgatoriuÌ„ locum quo animae ab hac luce migrantes purgentur à sordibus Alph. à Cas aduers haeres lib. 12. It is one of the most knowne errours of the Grecians and Armenians whereby they teach there is no place for Purgatorie where soules after this life are purged from their offences Touching Succession St. Chrysostome Gregorie Neocaesaria Olympiodorus and diuers ancient Fathers were vtterly ignorant of it and Saint Austen a Latine Father was so farre from receiuing it as a poynt of Faith that doubtingly hee professeth Tale aliquid etiam post haÌ„c vitaÌ„ fieri incredibile noÌ„ est et vtrù ita sâ— quaerâ— potest aut â—â—enâ—â—â—uâ—latere Aug. in Enchirid. ad Laurent cap. 69. It is not incredible that some such thing should bee after this life and whether it bee so or no it may beâ— a question and it may bee either found or bee hidden 〈◊〉 we all know and confesse that if Saint Austen and the Romane Church had receiued the doctrine of Purgatory in his dayes as it is now taught for an Article of Faith certainely hee would neuer haue told vs perhaps it is so it may be or it may not bee and it is a doubt whether there be any such place or no. And howsoeuer it is pretended that the Greeke Church at the Councell of Florence for peace sake was content to yeeld that the middle sort of soules were in a place of punishment but whether that were fire or darknesse and tempest or something else they would not contend yet I say if they had assented to this or the like doctrine it was 1400 yeeres after Christ and therefore most vnfit to be receiued for an Article of Faith but the truth is Marcus Bishop of Ephesus who was one of the Legats of the Patriarchs of Antioch Hierusalem would neuer consent to this Doctrine neither could the Greeke Church afterwards by any meanes bee drawne to yeeld to it Besides within two yeeres after Cardinall Cusanus and the Deputies of the Councell of Basil in the yeere 1438 doe sufficiently manifest the opinion of the Greek Church wherein the Grecians begin their disputation in this maner Mart. Crus in Turc Graec. p. 186 A Purgatory fire and a punishment by fire which is temporall and shall at last haue an end neither haue wee receiued from our Doctors neither doe wee know that the Church of the East dâ—eth maintaine it And from these and the like propositions they make this peremptory conclusion 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ibid. Sacran c. 2. For these reasons therefore neither haue wee hitherto affirmed any such thing neither will wee at all affirme it I may adde to these Testimonies the opinions of the Muscouites who affirme that there is no Purgatory but onely two receptacles for soules Heauen and Hell Againe the Cophites and the Abissines the Georgians and Armenians together with the Syrians and Caldeans that are subiect to the Patriarkes of Antioch and Babylon from Cyprus and Palestina vnto the East Indies neuer made discouery of the new found land of Purgatory This doctrine therefore wants the proper markes of the Romane Church viz. Antiquitie Vniuersalitie and Succession and therefore can bee no Article of faith no Apostolique Tradition as is pretended in the second poynt Priuate Masse wherein the Priest alone doth communicate without the people hath neither Antiquity Vniuersalitie nor Consent and consequently hath not the true markes of Romish Traditions Touching Antiquitie it is the confession of their owne Cochleus Coch. de sacrif Missae contra Musculum Anciently all the Priests and people did communicate together as appeareth by the Canons of the Apostles and writings of ancient Fathers Odo in Exposit Canonis And Odo Cameracensis professeth that in the Primitiue Church they neuer had Masses without the conuention of the people to communicate together Touching Vniuersalitie it is the confession of Iohannes Hoffmeistenus Cassand Consult de solit Miss pag. 906. The thing it selfe doeth speake and crie aloud both in the Greeke and Latin Church that not onely the sacrificing Priest but the other Priests and Deacons and the rest of the people or at least some part of the people did communicate together and how this custome ceased it is to bee wondred and it is to be endeauoured that this good custome may bee restored to the Church Touching Succession St. Chrysostome speaking to the lay people of his time Chrys in 2. Thessal Hom. 4. saith Neither doe we receiue more and you lesse of the holy table but we taste therof equally both together And St. Basil an other Greeke Father witnesseth the common vnion of Priests and people expressely in these words Liturg. Basilii All wee receiuing of one bread and one cup c. the Quire singeth the Communion and so they communicate together I will adde to these the confessions of their owne learned Authors Cardinall Bessarion a Greeke borne declareth the maner of the Communion in his time PrimuÌ„ consecrare deinde fraÌ„gere postea distribuere quod nos in praesenti facimê° Bessar de sacr Euch. An 1450. The very order of the things required first that we should consecrate or blesse bread next that we should breake it last of all that wee should diuide or deliuer it to the people which thing we Grecians doe at this present day And for a conclusion of this poynt Iustinian and Durand publikely declare and professe that in ancient times Iustin in 1. Cor 10. Durand Rat. 4 c. 53. diuers parts of one consecrated loafe were distributed to all the which the Greeke Church vseth at this day that by their Communion their vnion with Christ might bee more plainely expressed Thus Priuate Masse wants the requisite conditions of the Romane
of people almost all the Apostolique Seas most of the Patriarchs seuen Vniuersall Councells the Syrian language wherein Christ spake the Greeke wherein the Scripture of the New Testament was written and withall a personall Succession euen from the Apostles themselues without interruption and that which is knowne to the meanest Grecian 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the words of Church of Bishop of Priest of Deacon of Baptisme of Eucharist of Christian are al deriued from the Greekes and proue that Religion came from them from whom those termes were borrowed This doctrine is so true that it inforced the Bishop of Bitonto to professe openly in the Councell of Trent Eia igitur Graecia Mater nostra cui id totuÌ„ debet quod habet Latina Ecclesia Conc. Trid. orat Episc Bitont It is our Mother Grecia vnto whom the Latine Church or the Church of Rome is beholding for all that euer she hath And thus much touching the foundation of the Greeke Church Now that we may the better discerne the Antiquitie of our Religion and the Noueltie of the Romane let vs examine the Tenets of the Greeke Church and by them wee shall discerne whether the Roman church hath continued visible in that doctrine which shee now teacheth and consequently whether their pretended Apostolike Traditions haue Antiquitie Vniuersalitie and Succession in all ages Matthias Illiricus being borne in Dalmatia not farre from the confines of Graecia and therefore may bee thought to be well acquainted with their orders tells vs The Churches of Grecia the Churches of Asia Macedonia Misia Valachia Russia Muscouia and Africa ioyned thereunto that is to say in a manner the whole world or at least the greater part thereof neuer granted the Popes Supremacie neuer allowed either Purgatorie or Priuate Masses or the Communion vnder one kind wee may adde to these Transubstantiation Prayer in an vnknowne tongue Forbidding of marriage to Priests and Popish Inuocation of Saints as it is now beleeued were vtterly vnknown to the Greeke Church and consequently want Antiquitie Vniuersalitie and Succession the proper markes of true Traditions in the Roman Church To examine them in order The Popes Supremacie is a Tradition Apostolicall and declared for an Article of Faith in the Romane Church yet this Tradition wants Antiquitie Vniuersality and Succession Nemo decessoruÌ„ meoruÌ„ hoc tam prophano vocabulo vti coÌ„sueuit-Nullus Romanorum Pontificum hoc singula ritatis nomeÌ„ assumpsit Greg. lib. 4. ep 76. 80 Touching Antiquitie Pope Gregorie 600 yeeres after Christ professeth publiquely That none of his predecessors did euer assume that profane Vniuersall title Touching Vniuersalitie Aluarez tells vs that Prester Iohn sent vnto him to know why the Pope diuided the Churches of Antioch and Rome seeing the Church of Antioch was in a manner the chiefe and head of all Churches Cathol Trad. pag. wherein St. Peter gouerned dwelt 5 yeres Whereunto when hee answered they were obliged by an Article of their faith hee replied If the Pope would vsurpe so great a prerogatiue as to command things vnlawfull they would make no reckoning of it and if by such meanes their Abuna their Primate would presume so far they would burne the copie of such a command In like maner Nilus Archbishop of Thessalonica tells vs Nilus lib. 1. de Primat Papae The Greeke Church though it neuer denyed the primacy of Order to the Pope of Rome yet their assumed predominance of authoritie it alwayes resisted Touching Succession Bellarmine himselfe confesseth Bell. in Praefat de Rom. Pontif. The first who most earnestly withstood the Supremacy of the Bishops of Rome seeme to bee the Grecian Fathers for since the yeere 381 they laboured to preferre the Bishop of Constantinople the three Patriarkes of the East in the second place next to the Bishop of Rome and this saith he may bee vnderstood by the second Generall Councell And as in this Councell of Constantinople there was a resistance made against the power and iurisdiction of the Bishop of Rome so likewise hee telleth vs further that in the yeere 451 Bell. ibideÌ„ the Greeke Fathers not being content with their determination laboured to make the Bishop of Constantinople equall with the Bishop of Rome for in the Councell of Chalcedon the Greeke Fathers decreed it but deceitfully in the absence of the Popes Legat that the Bishop of Constantinople should haue the second place after the Bishop of Rome notwithstanding hee should haue equall priuiledges with the other Thus two generall Councells the one consisting of 150 Bishops the other of 630 by the testimonies of the Popes Cardinall opposed the Supremacie of the Bishop of Rome the which Supremacie if in those dayes it had been receiued for an Article of faith or a Tradition Apostolique without doubt those two famous Councels would haue subscribed to it without any resistance or opposition to the vniuersall Head of the Church And that you may yet further know the Churches of Asia and Grecia continued their Resolution in this poynt Conc. Florentinum An. 1436. looke vpon the late Councell of Florence and there you shall obserue Paulus Aemilius Pantalcon that Michael Palaeologus by reason hee submitted himselfe to the Pope in that Councell was hated of all the people while hee liued and being dead was forbidden Christian buriall And Isidorus the Archbishop of Kiouia in Russia Math à Michonia in Nouo Orbe Iewel p. 411 for that he began for Vnities sake to mooue the people to the like submission was therefore deposed of his Bishoprick and put to death Thus the Popes Supremacie wants Antiquitie Vniuersalitie and Succession the proper markes of Romane Traditions and consequently can bee no Article of Faith no Apostolique Tradition as is pretended in this first poynt Purgatorie is reputed a Tradition Apostolicall and receiued in the Romane Church for an Article of Faith yet this doctrine wants Antiquitie Vniuersality and Succession Touching Antiquitie Nilus Archbishop of Thessalonica professeth in the name of the Greeke Church that it could bee no Tradition Apostolicall for saith hee Wee haue not receiued by Tradition from our Fathers Nil de Purgat igne Câ—th Trad. q. 16. that there is any fire of Purgatory or any temporall punishment and we know that the Easterne Church doth not beleeue it And amongst other reasons why Purgatory was not receiued by them Marcus Ephes in Graecorum Apolog. de igne Purgatorio ad Concil Florentinum they render this for one that whereas their Fathers had deliuered vnto them many visions and dreames and other wonders concerning the euerlasting punishment in hell yet none of them had declared any thing concerning the temporary fire of Purgatory Legat qui velit GraecoruÌ„ veteruÌ„ CoÌ„mentarios et nullum quantum opinor aut quaÌ„ rarissimè de Purgatorio sermoneÌ„ inueniet Sed neque Latini simul omnes at sensim huius rei veritatem conceperunt neque taÌ„ necessaria fuit
scrip Eccles. ann 290. Gregorie Nyssen his eight Bookes De Philosophia are cited by Bellarmine for Free-will yet in his Catalogue aforesaid he confesseth they seeme not to be the bookes of Gregory Nyssen Lactantius Verses are cited by Bellarmine for Adoration of the Crosse and yet he confesseth elsewhere that it is doubted whether Lactantius were the Author Bell. li 1. de ver Dei ca. 14. Nec librum illum esse Augustini vt erudit fatentur Bell. de Mis lib. 2. c. 12. Ad locum Saint Austen is cited ad Orosium by Bellarmine to prooue Ecclesiasticus Canonicall Scripture but elsewhere when he is obiected in our behalfe in that Tract hee answeres it is not Saint Austens worke as learned men confesse Iustin Martyr Bell lib de Bap c. 25. Idem lib. de Confir c. 5. Idem lib. de Euch. c. 2. Idem lib. 1. de Sanct. 1. 4 § 3. his Questions are alleadged by Bellarmine for Vnction in baptisme for the Sacrament of Confirmation for Transubstantiation but elsewhere hee declareth them to be the work of some new Authour and not the workes of Iustin Martyr Origen in his Homilies on the Gospels Lib. 2. de Euch. c. 8. lib 3. de paenit ca 7. is cited by Bellarmine for the Reall presence and his Homilies on the Psalmes he cites for Auricular confession In lib. de Script Eccles yet the one he disclaimeth as none of Origens the other he freely confesseth it is doubted of who is the Author Cassianus is cited by Bellarmine for an ancient Author Bell de Iustif l. 1. c. 13 for the poynt of Iustification Idē de bon oper cap. 2. lib. 2. and set times of fasting yet elsewhere hee acknowledgeth the booke for Apocryphall and counterfet Bell li. 6. de lib. arb ca. 4 § accedat and condemned in a Roman Councell vnder Pope Gelasius Bell li. 2. de Pont. c. 14. Eusebius his third Epistle is cited by Bellarmine for the Supremacie yet he professeth elsewhere Idem de Confirm lib. 2. c. 7. it is not certaine who is the Author thereof Hee that shall reade these and many such like authorities of pretended Fathers in behalfe of the Roman Religion might at first sight happily bee induced to beleeue that all or most of the ancient Doctors of the Church belong to them when as in truth our aduersaries vse them but as Merchants vse their Counters sometimes they stand with them for pence sometimes for pounds as they bee next and readiest at hand to make vp their account Thus one while they muster vp their forces by multitudes of authorities as if they would make that good by number which they want in weight Sometimes they condemne them as counterfet sometimes they purge them as if they were full of corruptions according to seuerall occasions they haue their seuerall deuices to produce them or auoyd them at their pleasure Si conficta historia non est vllius authoritatis Bell. lib. 2. de Pont. cap. 9. whereas if they bee counterfeit as they are confessed to bee they are of no authoritie if Catholique and Orthodoxe they make nothing for the points in Controuersie as shall bee presented in the next place SECT XI The most substantiall poynts of Roman Faith and Doctrine as they are now taught and receiued in the Church of Rome were neuer taught by the Primitiue Church nor receiued by the ancient Fathers NEither are these men content to challenge a right to all the Fathers although they confesse they are not all orthodox and true Fathers but they likewise charge vs that Sebast Flash in profess Cath. we make no more account of them then wee doe of the Turkes Alcaron or Aesops Fables Nay saith Bristow it is well known to such as heare the Protestants Sermons Bristow Mot. 14. or bee in place to heare them talke boldly and familiarly among themselues are not afrayd to confesse plainely that the Fathers are all Papists A strange and senselesse fiction deuised by these men when not onely our learned Diuines but the vulgar people are all eye-witnesses that the Booke written by the Iewel of our age is published in all the Churches of our kingdom whose challenge for the principall points of our Religion is made good and will euer remaine vnanswerable out of the Writings and Authorities of the ancient Fathers But admit some Protestants were so ignorant or senselesse as to say priuately All the Fathers were Papists what stupiditie then may we think it in the chiefe Pastors of the Romane Church which by their publike writings and open confession acknowledge the principall poynts of Controuersie yea their chiefe Articles of Faith were vnknowne to the ancient Fathers We confesse it for a truth that the ancient Fathers St. Austen S. Ambrose St. Hierome and the rest were learned men they were Instruments of Grace and Mercy we read them we reuerence them we giue God thankes for them but withall wee learne this lesson frō them Wee weigh not the writings of men August ad Fortunat. Epist 111. bee they neuer so worthy and Catholique as wee weigh the Canonicall Scriptures but yeelding that reuerence that is due vnto them Wee may mislike and refuse something in their writings if we find they haue thought otherwise then the trueth may beare and such saith Austen am I in the writings of others and such I would wish others to be in mine Saint Austen thought it no preiudice to the Romane Church nor disparagement to his own learning to haue his writings examined by the rule of Scripture Nay more saith he that which in my bookes thou thinkest to bee vndoubtedly true Quod certū non habebis nisi certum intellexeris noli firmè retinere Aug in Proae lib 3. de Trinit vnlesse thou perceiue it to bee true indeed hold it not resolutely St. Ambrose was so farre from wishing Prince or people to rely vpon his doctrine that by way of preuention hee writes to Gratian the Emperour Nolo argumento eredas sancte Imperator nostrae disputationi Scripturas interrogemus c. Ambros de Fide ad Grat l 1 c. 4 Beleeue not O Emperour our Arguments and our Disputations let vs aske the Apostles let vs aske the Prophets let vs aske Christ. Now admit a doubtfull Recusant at this day repaire for instruction to a Romish Priest or Bishop will he answer him with Austen Examine my doctrine by the rule of Scripture and if you find it not agreeable to that Word hold it not resolutely or will he answer him with Ambrose Heare not my arguments beleeue not vs that are the professed Priests and Pastors of the Church but read the Scriptures consult with the Oracles of God let Christ the Head of the Church resolue the doubts and controuersies of Religion Surely nothing is more to bee wished for by vs nothing is lesse to be hoped for from them True it is that St.
by the application of Saints merits and that priuate satisfactions which were left to the discretion of euery Bishop were transferred wholly to the power of the Pope and so receiued de Fide as an article of faith as it is now vsed in the Romane Church and I will subscribe He that will proue out of the ancient Fathers that Confirmation Penance Orders Matrimonie are oftentimes called by the name of Sacraments let him spare the labour I will confesse it But let him proue the poynt in question that al those Sacraments were instituted by Christ in the new Testament and that there are neither more nor lesse then seuen termed by the name of Sacraments and those onely were properly so called and that number of seuen was receiued de fide as an Article of faith and I will subscribe He that will proue out of the ancient Fathers that St. Peter had a primacie of Order amongst the Apostles and that the Bishop of Rome had the first place amongst other Bishops let him spare the labour I will confesse it but let him proue that Peter had iurisdiction ouer the Apostles and that the Bishop of Rome was helde Christs Vicar generall and Head of the Vniuersall Church and that such his power and Supremacie was receiued de fide as an article of faith as it is now taught in the Roman Church and I will subscribe Lastly he that will proue out of the ancient Fathers that out of the Cath. church there is no saluation let him spare the labor I will cōfesse it but let him proue that the present Roman Church is that Catholike Church as it is decreed de fide by their last Article of their Creed and I will subscribe Thus briefly I haue giuen you my poore opinion how to examine the Trent Faith and doctrine whereby you may easily discouer the vanitie of those men who challenge an interest in all the Fathers in behalfe of their Religion and certainly if this rule bee rightly obserued and pursued by any indifferent Iudge he shal finde there is not greater distance in the times then difference in their doctrine This is so well knowne to the best learned on their side that when wee charge them that they haue created new Articles of Faith vnknowne to the first and best ages by way of preuention they giue this solution that true it is many poynts of doctrine were not explicitè reuealed and publikely declared as Articles of faith in the dayes of the ancient Fathers because no heretikes did then oppose them but say they they were implicitè obscurely secretly reseruedly knowne and receiued of the Ancients with an implicit faith by which confession their later errour will bee greater then the first for as one way they would seemingly auoyd the creating of new Articles of faith so by acknowledgement of an implicit faith they ouerthrow by consequence the Visibilitie of their Church for if the Church of Rome had but an implicite beliefe in those things which are now publikely declared without doubt the Church at that time was not visible in the faith it was not like a Citie vpon a hill knowne and conspicuous to all persons and thereupon the grand poynt of Visibilitie which they so much magnifie among themselues will easily be called in question For a conclusion of this poynt I will giue you but one instance whereby you may the better iudge of the rest Looke vpon the learned Treatise of the right Reuerend Bishop of Meath now Primate of Armach wherein the iudgement of the ancient Fathers An Answer to a challenge made by a Iesuite in Ireland 1624. touching seuerall poynts of controuersie is faithfully deliuered in our behalfe what Reply might wee thinke could bee made by our aduersaries to those Authorities so rightly produced Behold a Iesuite by Order W. Malone by name A Reply to Mr. Vshers answere hath made a Reply wherein hee hath produced in number many more authorities of Fathers in behalfe of the Roman Church and Trent Doctrine The encounter being made the end of the victory may seeme doubtfull for the Fathers are produced by both contending parties and seemingly they adhere to both sides as if they made both for Papist and Protestant in one and the same substantiall poynts of doctrine The reason being examined it will appeare the Fathers do not vary from themselues nor from vs in poynts of faith but the Iesuite produceth Authorities impertinent to the poynt in question As for instance in the first Article of Traditions Our Reuerend Bishop tels the Iesuite by way of preuention B Vsher cap. Traditions p. 35. that Traditions of all sorts are not promiscuously strucke at by vs but such vnwritten traditions which are obtruded for Articles of Religion As for example It is the first part of the Article of the Roman Creed I admit and imbrace the Apostolicall and Ecclesiesticall Traditions To this first part of the article the reformed Churches doe subscribe but the other Obseruances and Constitutions of the Church which is the latter part of the Article we thinke it great reason to gainesay for vnder the pretence of other Obseruances the Church of Rome doeth vphold her priuate Masse her Latine Seruice her halfe Communion her Inuocation of Saints her worship of Images the like all which are admitted for part of Gods worship and accepted by them for Apostolike Traditions when as in truth they are flat contrary to the doctrine of the written Word The question then is not whether the doctrine deliuered by Christ or his Apostles by word of mouth were of equall authoritie with the Word written for this neuer any Protestant denied but whether the vnwritten Doctrine now taught in the Romane Church were deliuered by Christ and his Apostles whether their Ecclesiastical Obseruations and Constitutions now vsed bee of equall authoritie with the written Word whether their Papal Traditions were alwayes or euer admitted into the rule of faith and lastly whether the Scriptures are not sufficient for the saluation of the beleeuer without the helpe of those Traditions Let these questions bee rightly propounded in our behalfe and the multitude of the Iesuites authorities will fall to ground of themselues for what Father hath hee produced to proue that the Papall Traditions now receiued de fide in the Church of Rome were deliuered by word of mouth by the Apostles what Father hath hee cited to prooue that the Constitutions of their Church had a constant and continuall succession from the time of the Apostles as Articles of faith ought to haue what Fa her hath he vrged that admitted doctrinall Traditions vnwritten into the Rule of faith Lastly what ancient Father hath hee truely alleadged that denies the Scriptures to bee sufficient for all beleeuers without the helpe of Romish Traditions It were no difficult matter as I conceiue to giue a full answer to the Iesuits replie in the right stating of the Questions wherby it might easily appeare that hee
to the Commission granted to Kings and Princes by expresse warrant from Gods owne mouth if I say contrary to Gods command after a continued succession in the right of Kings and Princes for 2400 yeeres he will vsurpe the right of calling Councells the Pope will not bee found Innocent nor his assemblies lawfull for the Towne-clerke of Ephesus could tell Dometrius and his fellowes If they enquire any thing Acts 19.39 concerning matters it must bee determined in a lawfull Assembly The promises of Christ no doubt are many and gracious to his Church but they are annexed to a condition if they come together in his Name the condition then being once broken the Obligation to the Church and Councell becommeth voyde of none effect It will not be amisse therefore to vnderstand what it is to assemble in Christs Name and then see whether the Church of Rome hath performed that second dutie in her assemblies It cannot be denied that they are said to assemble in Christs Name whom neither respect of priuate gaine induceth nor the ambitious desire of honour inuiteth nor the prick of hatred and enuie incite and driue forward but whom the inflamed loue of peace and the feruent affections of Christianitie impell and not the spirit of contention Surely these conditions are requisite to their right calling and these were anciently performed in the first foure Generall Councells to which our Church subscribeth but as their owne Cardinal Cusanus protested that the authority of Councels doth not depend vpon the Pope so likewise their owne learned Ferus professeth that In matters of Faith and things which concerne the conscience it is not sufficient for them to say Wee will and command but you must consider in what manner the Apostles dealt in their Assemblies they came together in simplicitie of heart seeking onely Gods glory and the saluation of others Nos aliter conuenimus nempe cum magnâ poÌ„pâ nosque ipsosquaerimê° atque nâ—bis â—ollicâ—â—ur nihil nobis non licere de plenitu dine potestatis quomodò spiritê° sanctê° eiusmodi conuentus probare possit Ferus super Acts 15. no maruell therefore if the Spirit of God was in that Councell but saith hee Nos aliter conuenimus Our meeting is in another manner namely with great pompe and seeking our selues and promising to our selues licence vpon fulnesse of power to doe any thing and this being so how is it possible for the Spirit of God to approue such assemblies Heere then wee haue our learned Aduersaries confessions that two principall conditions anciently in vse are both abrogated by the latter Councels the one is The Pope calls Councells that hath no right to call them the other is That they assemble in their owne name and for their owne end not for the Catholique peace and Christian Charitie And thus much briefely concerning the authoritie of Calling Councells Let vs take a short view of Councels in all ages and withall let vs adde to the Popes vnlawfull Calling the errors of Councels the vncertaintie of their Canons the manifest forgeries of ancient Decrees the palpable and grosse suggestions of new deuised Acts with their senselesse condemnation of true Decrees and Canons that make against their Romish Faith and Trent Doctrine and tell mee if these men haue any cause or reason to equall Councells with the Scriptures or to build vpon them in matters of Faith or to claime them all for theirs when by their owne ensuing testimonies they are doubtfull which are right which are false which are lawfull which are counterfet And lastly when they are not agreed amongst themselues whether Councels rightly called are infallible or stand subiect vnto errour SECT XV. Councels which our aduersaries pretend as a chiefe bulwarke of their faith giue no support at all to the Romish Religion as it is prooued by particular obiections made against seuerall Councells in all ages by the Romanists themselues CArdinall Bellarmine who formerly told vs the Church of God might safely subsist without Councels giues vs likewise to vnderstand by way of preuention Libri ConcilioruÌ„ negligenter conseruati sunt multis vitiis scatent Bel. de Concil l. 3 c. 2. that the Bookes of Councells being negligently kept doe abound with many errours and heereby we may guesse what is like to be the doctrine of those Councells that are guiltie of such errours and what will bee the issue of that doctrine that depends vpon such Councels Whether errors haue crept in by the negligence of the keepers I cannot tell but sure I am many generall and particular Councels haue erred many Decrees and Canons of Councells which are produced for the Romane Religion are acknowledged by themselues to bee spurious counterfet and many true Canons and Councels which make against their Trent faith are condemned by our aduersaries as fallible and erronious as shall appeare by their owne seuerall confessions in all ages from the time of Christ till the dayes of Luther The first Age to 100 yeeres In the first Age. The Councell at Hierusalem gathered vnder the High Priest wherein Caiphas was President Marke 14. sought testimonie against Iesus and excommunicated those who confessed Iesus to be Christ Errauit in fide perniciosissime Caiphas cum vâ—iuerso CoÌ„cilio cuÌ„ iudicauit Iesum blasphemasse Bellar. de Conc. auth lib. 2. c. 8. Bellarmine tells vs Before the comming of Christ the Councels of the Iewes could not erre but saith hee Caiphas with the whole Councell did erre most pernitiously when they adiudged Christ a blasphemer And this may serue for a leading case to shew that Councels may erre as they haue erred in the first Age. In the second Age. The 2 Age Ann. 100. to 200. In the yeere 102 the Councel of Antioch is cited by Gretzerus by Turrian by Baronius for the Worship of Images yet neither Merlin nor Crabbe nor Surius nor Nicholinus Coâ—e censura PatruÌ„ pag. 237. publishers of the Councells euer mention it and Binius who produceth it doeth acknowledge to haue receiued it from Baronius and Baronius returnes his Author for the Iesuite Turrian and Turrian professeth that Pamphilus found it in Origens Librarie And this may serue to shew that some Councels are deuised to proue the Trent doctrine and the raâ—her because worship of Images requires Antiquitie and Consent of Bishops to proue it an Article of Faith The 3 Age. Ann. 200. to 300. In the third Age In the yeere 258 the third Councell of Carthage had fourescore and seuen Bishops but saith Binius Huius Prouincialis The Catholique Church doeth not receiue the Decrees of this Councell Concilii decreta non recipit Catholica Ecclesia Bin. in marg Concil p. 149. And the reason is pregnant This Synod toucheth the Popes Supremacie for when as Stephanus Bishop of Rome called himselfe Episcopus Episcoporum The Bishop of Bishops Saint Cyprian and the whole Councell opposed that new Title And this may serue to prooue