doctrine of Antichrist But M. Downam giueth vs two differences betwixt these markes before Antichrists comming and after First vntill the yeare 607. there was not saith he in the Catholike Church an vniuersall subiection to the Pope as the head and consequently till then these things could not be vsed as signes thereof as since they haue But M. Downam may when it pleaseth him take the paines to peruse what Bellarmine The Church was alway subiect to the Pope bringeth in the 19. last Chapter of his second booke concerning this point I doubt not but he will acknowledge an vniuersall subiection to the Pope euen from the Apostles or if he be obstinate and will nor yield to an euident truth yet I am sure he will neuer be able to answere Bellarmines proofes if his pryde be such that he presumeth that he can let him begin when he will and see what he shall gaine by it The second difference which M. Downam alleadgeth is that before the yeare 607. these thinges were not imposed and inioyned vpon all by the lawes of the Pope as since they are so that the cause of vsing them now is not the example of the ancient Church but the authority of the Popes law But this is a very poore difference and argueth a wonderfull corruption in the ancient Church since that she was so forward to take Antichrists markes that she needed no commaund and besides if M. Downam maketh the ancieÌ„t Church to be very corrupt Downam will take the paines to peruse the ancieÌ„t Councells and Decrees of Popes which Bellarmine bringeth in these particuler controuersies he shall find that there was the same necessity for all men to performe these things then that there is now many of them being commaunded by Gods law and others not exacted of all and some not of any as the Reader may easily distinguish by considering the particulers 6. Wherefore now let vs consider how M. Downam answereth VII Bellarmines particuler obiectioÌ„s And first coÌ„cerning Chrisme vsed in the Church before the yeare 607. Chrisme he answereth that those three Fathers speake of the annoynting with oyle vsed in the Sacrament of Baptisme and addeth that this also without warrant of the Scripture is retayned among the Papists Where you see he maketh these three Fathers Papists in that point at the least and though it be true that they acknowledge that Cerimony of Baptisme yet in these places they speake most plainely of Chrisme and the Sacrament of Confirmation For Tâ—rtullian and S. Cyprian compare it with baptisme attributing to it the effects of grace aswell as to Baptisme and S. Augustine placeth it betwixt baptisme and the Eucharist and calleth it Chrisming which is the proper name of this Sacrament Wherefore M. Downam must of force confesse that these Fathers were Papists in this point also and that this marke was long before the yeare 607. Now whether this vnction were vsed in the primitiue Church or no is a new question belonging to another place and it is inough for vs now that it was long before Antichrist came according to the Protestants accompt and that they do not much vse euen the imposition of hands which they acknowledg was vsed in the primityue Church of which M. Downam can giue no better reason then for that it was abused by vs. By which in their opinion they might also leaue off Baptisme Eucharist and all other rites and exercises of How chrisme maketh vs Christians de Consecrat dist 5. c. Vt ieiun Ibid. c. De bis verò Christian Religion as indeed they haue done in great part only they loue to heare themselues talke in a Pulpit though they say neuer a true nor wise word I omit his other impertinent obiections out of the Canon law where first that holy Pope and Martyr Melchiades saith that a man shall neuer be a Christian meaning a strong and valiant or perfect Christian except he first receaue this Sacrament for so he vseth the name Christianus as the Latins vse Vir and the Aurelian Councell saith that this Sacrament is more to be reuerenced then Baptisme if we respect the person of him who ministreth it because he must of necessity be a Bishop How Chrisme is more to be reuerenced then Baptisme and besides this Sacrament supposeth and in some sort includeth baptisme and in that respect is said to be more venerable then baptisme by it selfe And this is all that M. Downam can say for himselfe or against vs for that which he addeth coÌ„cerning the ordayning of the Sacrament as though it were ordayned by the Church and not by Christ is a fond Chymera of his owne For we affirme that it was instituted by Christ as all other Sacraments were and besides it is now from the purpose since our whole question is whether this Sacrament were vsed before the yeare 607. which Bellarmine hath euidently conuinced that it was To the second obiection M. Downam answereth with a distinction that to cleaue to the Roman Church in ancient tyme was the note of a good Christian because then that Church was Apostolicall but now it is the marke of an Antichristian because now that Church is Apostaticall Where you find him still in the same fault of petitro principij And besides you see he graunteth asmuch as Bellarmine would haue him that in old tyme the cleauing to the Roman Church was so far from beeing the marke of Antichrist that it was the chiefest note to know a good Catholike Christian from a false and wicked heretike and consequently it is to be accompted so still For the heretikes in those tymes could say as M. Downam doth that the Roman Church was Apostaticall but they were not able to proue it any more then M. Downam is and all good Catholikes were then and are now certayne that it can neuer be so since Christ hath promised the contrary to S. Peter and his successors And besides it is very strange that Christ Antichrist cannot haue both one marke Christ and Antichrist should both haue one marke And that the argumeÌ„ts which the old Fathers vsed against heretikes should come to be vsed by Antichrist against Catholikes But to these absurdities must they needes fall who call light darkenes and darkenes light as M. Downam and all heretikes doe M. Downam goeth forward with his distinctions and differences affirming that in ancient tymes at other Churches did cleaue to the Church of Rome so did the Church of Rome cleaue to them Now it acknowledgeth no Church besides it selfe All which is false for now also other Churches cleaue to the Church of Rome as to their head and the Church of Rome cleaueth to them as to her members and it acknowledgeth many other particuler Churches besides it selfe still though all subiect and subordinate to it as they were euer How the Church of Rome is vnited standeth with other Churches And that which he addeth is a meere
wonderfull meanes as the doctrine and miracles of Christ his Apostles and Disciples were notwithstanding it was forcible inough to keep them in their former synnes and to draw them into farre greater what meruaile is it that being destitute of such extraordinary helpes and set vpon by Antichrist and his followers who shall abound with all power and deceitfull meanes and such especially as they expect that they yield vnto his doctrine take him with one accord to be the Messias whom they haue so long expected And as for the rest of the world that shall ioyne with him it shall not come especially at the first so much for the liking of his doctrine as for desire of liberty coldenes of charity and abounding in synne which be the chaines by How Antichrist shall draw men to follow him which men are drawen into errours heresies and infidelity as both our Sauiour and S. Paul teach and the experience of all ages and particulerly of this of ours doth manifestlie shew which I could wish M. Downam and others of his mind to consider attentiuely they may perhaps come to know more plainely the ground of their new ghospell by this consideration duly weighed then by all the bookes that they can read written eyther for it or against it And besides M. Downam may consider what great ouerthrowes in Faith temporall commodities and persecution will cause of which he may also find store of examples in this our miserable Countrey where no small multitudes ioyne with Protestants only for these respects as would easily appeare if it would please his Maiesty to giue all men liberty to vse their conscience and professe the Religion which they belieue in hart to be true Lastly M. Downam taketh vp Bellarmine very short for abusing the authority of S. Augustine and yet with reading the place in Bellarmine he should haue seene that Bellar saith only that S. Augustine writeth that the place of S. Paul Downam mistaketh and abuseth Bellar and other Authors was so vnderstood by many ancient writers so that in this M. Downam delt very hardlie with Bellarmine but after abuseth not only Bellarmine but also those Ancient writers and S. Augustine himselfe by affirming that they only speake of the mystery of Iniquity teaching that it should still worke that is that vnsound men in the church shall more more reuolt vntill they make a sufficient number for Antichrist but that there is neuer a word of this defection caused eyther by one man or in so short a time but rather the contrary The cause of which rash assertion is his mistaking for Bellarmine citeth those which S. Augustine alleadgeth for the exposition of the word Discessio or as he readeth it Transsuga by which he saith some vnderstand not ipsum Principem the chiefe Antichrist himselfe but his whole body that is the multitude of men which belong to him togeather with the chiefe himselfe By which it plainly appeareth that he speaketh of the defection caused by this Prince the tyme of whose raigne is manifest in the Scripture it selfe 18. To the 4. answere M. Downā replieth hauing first made aparēthesis in Bell. name as though he thought that the apostasy wherof the Apostle spake were to endure many ages though he could not chose but see that he thought nothing lesse that this 4. answere is ouerthrown by the first In which he is either very simple or deceiptful for it is plaine that whē one giueth diuers answeres to one argumēt he is not bound to make thē all agree togeather but euery one by it selfe After he saith that he hath shewed that the whole body of Apostataes and Heretikes professing the name of Christ is Antichrist about which I remit the Reader to that which hath bene answered to what he hath said hitherto Thirdly he answereth insteed of replying that all degrees going before the reuelation of Antichrist were a disposition not to the being but to the reuealing of Antichrist for as S. Iohn saith Antichrist was in the Apostasy neither could he be reuealed vnles he first were But to this Bellarmine answered long since that Antichrist was not in the Apostles tyme in person but only in his forerunners and the distinction of being and reuealing is impertinent euen in M. Downams owne opinion if he speake Antichrists comming reuelation all one of the chiefe Antichrist in person whome he will haue to haue bene reuealed so soone as he came so likewise were his forerunners also which is no meruaile if we consider that their comming is when they begin to teach false doctrines by which they are also necessarily knowne to be come to all such as know those doctrines to be false so that it is plaine that their comming and their reuelation is all one as the comming of the sunne the light by which it is reuealed And the like is of any thing that is necessarylie cōioyned to some manifest token by which it may be knowne as heretikes and Apostataes are if they declare themselues for such by doctrine and workes of which M. Downam may haue examples in his Maisters Luther Caluin and the rest who were forthwith reuealed to be Heretikes so soone as they began to teach new doctrines only it may be that they may for some space dissemble and seeme to be Catholikes though in hart they be Heretikes But this maketh nothing to the purpose for all that tyme they are not come in the sight of men but only in the sight of God and no man will deny but that Antichrist may come in this sort before he begin to teach But this is not the comming which M. Downam talketh of since he saith that Antichrist was come in Symon Magus and others who taught Heresies and yet he will not haue him reucaled till the chiefe Antichrist come also After this he citeth Theodoretus who by Apostasy vnderstandeth Antichristes presence As though Bellarmine had not admitted and answered that interpretation before Lastlie he noteth for a thing verie vnlikelie that the preparation for Antichrist should be 1500. yeares in making that he should continue ōly 3. yeares and a half As though the preparation for our Blessed Sauiour had not bene as long the tyme of his preaching and working miracles as short Besides that Antichrist was not to come till the Ghospell of Christ had bene preached ouer all the world many partes fallen away from the Faith which they had receaued and the rest in great disposition by reason of their corrupt customes to doe the same All which could not be done in few yeares as neither was Antichrist to be suffred to raigne any long tyme least he should ouercome euen the very chosen if it were possible and therfore our Sauiour was to destroy him in so short a space 19. To the last answere he vaunteth as though he had gotten a great aduantage for that Bellarmine goeth so farre as supposing all that which they would haue were true
certaine that the day of oppression hath begun to be ouer our heades and the end of the world and tyme of Antichrist is approached S. Hierome ep ad Ageruchiam de Monogamia He which did hould is in making out of the way and doe we not vnderstand that Antichrist approacheth S. Gregorie lib 4. ep 38. All thinges which haue bene foretould are in doing the King of Pride is neere And in his Homylies vpō the Ghospells he doth bouldly pronounce that the end of the world draweth neere but these were suspicions and not errors For these Holy Fathers durst not set downe any certaine tyme. Others more bouldlie appointed a certaine tyme. One Iudas as S. Hierome relateth l. de Viris Illust thought that Antichrist should haue come and the world ended the two hundreth yeare after Christ who as is manifest was deceiued Lactantius l. 7. cap. 25. diuin Instit saith That all expectation seemeth to be for no more then two hundred yeares c. Where he teacheth that Antichrist was to come and the world to end within two hundred yeares after his tyme and he liued in Constātines tyme in the three hundreth yeare after Christ so that he thought the worldes end should haue bene the fiue hundreth yeare after Christ But he also was deceaued as experience witnesseth S. Augustine lib. 18. de ciuitate Dei cap. 53. mentioneth the errour of some others which said that the world should be ended the foure hundreth yeare after our Lords Ascēsion and of others which appointed the thousandth yeare who were all deceaued as it happened also to the Pagans who as S. Augustine witnesseth in the same place out of the answere of some Oracle gathered that Christian religion should endure only three hundred threescore and fiue years There was also a Bishop of Florence about the yeare of our Lord a thousand an hundreth and fiue who affirmed that Antichrist was then borne and therefore that the worldes end was at hand For which cause there was a Councell of three hundred and fourty Bishops gathered at Florence by Paschalis the second Pope of that name See the Chronicle of Matthew Palmer and Platina in the life of Paschalis the second Lastly it hath alway byn a famous opinion of many which affirme that the world shall last six thousand yeares since God created the world in six daies and a thousand yeares are with God as one daie So teach S. Iustine Martyr q. 71. ad Gentes S. Irenaeus lib. 5. Lactantius l. 7. cap. 14. S. Hilar. in cap. 17. Matth. S. Hierom. in Psal 89. ad Cyprianum with which doth also agree the opinion of the Thalmudists who say that they haue a Prophesy out of the Prophet Hely by which it is affirmed that the world shall endure six thousād yeares This opinion cannot yet be refuted by experience for according to the true Chronologie or accompt of times there are about fiue thousand and six hundreth yeares past since the world was made Wherfore S. Ambrose who l. 7. in Luc. cap. 2. reiecteth this opinion affirming that in his time there were 6. thousand yeares past is manyfestly deceaued S. Augustines moderation is very good who thought this opinion probable and followed it as probable l. 20. de Ciuit. Dei c. 7. Neither doth it follow from hence that we doe know the tyme of the last daie for we say that it is probable that the world will not endure aboue 6. thousand yeares but we doe not say that it is certaine Wherfore S. Augustine sharpely rebuketh those who affirme that the world shal be ended at some certaine tyme since our Lord said Act. 1. that it doth not belong to vs to know the tymes and moments which the Father hath put in his owne power See S. Augustine epist 80. ad Hesychium in Psal 89. lib. 18. de ciuitate Dei cap. 53. But omitting these let vs come to the Heretikes Wheras all the Heretikes of this tyme doe teach that the Bishop of Rome is Antichrist and that he hath appeared already is now in the world notwithstanding they doe not agree among themselues of the tyme when he appeared for there be six opinions of theirs The first is of the Samosatenes which liue in Hungary and Transiluania who in a certaine booke which they intitle Forewarnings of Christ and the Apostles of the abolishing the true Christ by Antichrist do teach that Antichrist appeared a little after the Apostles time to wit when that doctrine began first to be preached that Christ is the euerlasting Sonne of God for they thinke that Christ is only man and that in God there is only one person and that this faith was preached by Christ and his Apostles but that a little after the Apostles death the Roman Antichrist came and hauing abolished the true Christ which was only man brought in another eternall Christ and made a threefould God and a twofould Christ This opinion besides the arguments which afterward we will bring against all Heretikes is most easilie refuted in two sortes First for that Antichrist when he commeth shall make himselfe God and not any other as the Apostle saith 2. Thess 2. but the Bishop of Rome as they themselues say hath not made himselfe God but preached Christ and of only man hath made him God Secondly because they saie that straight after the death of Christ and his Apostles the true faith of Christ was wholy extinguished by Antichrist and afterward in the whole world Christ was adored for God But Christ foretould that the gates of hell should not preuaile against his Church Matth. 16. and the Angell fortould that Christs Kingdome should endure for euer Luc. 1. and Dauid foretould that all Kinges should serue Christ Psal 71. how therefore is it true that in the very beginning the Church being yet but newly borne was destroyed by Antichrist The second opinion is of Illyricus who in his Catalogue of witnesses teacheth that Antichrist came when the Roman Empire began to incline to destruction but it is manifest that the Roman Empire began to decline after the tenth yeare of Honorius when Rome was first taken that is in the yeare foure hundreth and twelue as Blondus doth shew in the first booke of the first Decade of Histories from the declination of the Roman Empire But Illyricus doth seeme to vnderstand this of the conception not of the natiuitie of Antichrist for he himselfe Cent. 6. Cap. 1. in the beginning saith that Anchrist was conceaued after a certaine manner in the beginning of the 400. yeare after quickned formed and nourished in his Mothers wombe about the fiue hundreth yeare and lastlie borne the 6. hundreth and sixt yeare to wit when Phocas graunted to the B. of Rome that he should be called the head of the whole Church Againe cent 1. l. 2. cap. 4. colum 438. he affirmeth that Antichrist should reigne tyranize with the spirituall sword a thousand two hundred and threescore yeares and with
little vpoÌ„ the ChristiaÌ„ Princes in whose dominioÌ„s at this daie there is The difference betwixt the Catholike the ProtestaÌ„t Princes diuersity of Religions he shall find that all the Catholike Princes tolerate in some sort their Hereticall subiects as the Emperour the King of France the King of Poland now the Arch-duke in Flanders whereas heere in England the Catholikes canfind no such fauour who that they suffer for Religion and not for treason none but impudent Ministers and their mates can deny Neither is this craft of ProtestaÌ„ts any great glory for theÌ„ who by reasoÌ„ of the distrust which they haue in their owne cause vse to put Catholiks to death vnder the name of Treason Catholikes are put to death for Religion by Protestants though they can prooue nothing against them but the exercise of their Religion For in this they imitate the Iewes who dealt so with our Sauiour and some other Tyrants but chiefly Iulian the Apostata which were alway accompted the greatest and worst persecutors Whereas Catholikes haue alway punished heretikes directely for their heresie esteeming it as it deserued a far greater crime then treason as being coÌ„mitted against the King of HeaueÌ„ whoÌ„ all earthly Princes are bouÌ„d to respect more then theÌ„selues so wee see in Queene Maries tyme Bishop Craâ—mer had his Treasons pardoned but not his heresies for which hee was burned And so it appeareth by the proceeding of our aduersaries that wee are free froÌ„ heresie how false their imputations of treasons are is proued by many and lastely by W. R. in his CoÌ„futatioÌ„ of O. E. aliâs Sutcliffes vaunting challeng in the last chapter to which I remit my reader And this shall suffice for the greatnes of the persecution vnder Antichrist 6. Touching the manifestnes of it M. Downam is not of Bellarmines mynd yea he thinketh his doctrine contrary to our Sauiours who hath said that the good and bad shall grow togeather like wheat and tares vntill the day of the great haruest But M. Downam Antichrists persecutioÌ„ most manifest Matth. 13. may vnderstand that Bellarmine houldeth with S. Augustine quaest 11. super Matth. that this is to be vnderstood of the whole world in which Bellarmine denieth not but there wil be store of tares in this tyme of Antichrist and besides our Sauiour only willeth his seruants not to roote out all the tares when there is danger that the corne may also he destroyed by that meanes But now we speak of his enemies who partly by persecuting partly for feare of persecution will separate themselues of their owne accord from among Gods wheate to wit his elect and yet are to bee separated also in the day of Iudgment against their wills which is all that the place alleadged doth proue To the authority of S. Augustine alleadged by Bellarmine he giueth two answeres First if he had said so we might haue Downam reiecteth S. Augustine esteemed his speach to haue bene but a human coniecture rather then a prophesy diuine so that it is no matter what S. Augustine or any other can say For if it please not M. Downams vaine fancy it shall be accompted but an humane coniecture though he gather it out of Scripture as S. Augustine doth this But secondly saith M. Downam Bellarmine without all shame falfifieth his wordes who speaketh of the Diuell alone and not of all the wicked saying Now it is said that he shall goe forth viz. into open persecution he shall breake forth of the couerts of hatred for which we must note that S. Augustine interpreteth the depth into which the Diuell was put to be their hartes which hate the Christians in quorum saith he quotidie velut in abysso Bellarmin vniustly charged by M Downam cacis prosundis cordibus includitur cap. 8. In whose blind and profound hartes he is daily inclosed as in a depth Which exposition he mentioneth againe cap. 11. which Bellarmine cited where he expoundeth how he is said to come forth out of this depth to wit out of the couerts of hatred within which he was inclosed into open persecution because he shall seduce those whose harts he possessed to make warre against Christians which before he hated but was not permitted to hurt all which that he meaneth of all the wicked the wordes following immediately declare Haec enim erit nouissima persecutio noâ—issimo imminente iudicio cùm saÌ„cta Ecclesia toto terrarum orbe patietur vniuersa scilicet ciuitas Christi ab vniuersa Diaboli ciuitate quantacumque erit vtraque super terram For this shal be the last persecution the last iudgment being at hand which the holy Church shall suffer ouer all the world to wit the whole citty of Christ by the whole citty of the Diuell how great soeuer either of them shall be vpon the earth Can any thing be more plaine then this And after againe he saith that the holy Church shal be enuironed ab omnibus inimicâ—â— suis by all her enemies yea he repeateth the very like wordes to those which he had spoken in the singular number againe in the plurall speaking of the Nations quae sunt in quatuor angulis terrae in the foure corners or quarters of the earth in apertum odium de operto erupturae sunt they shal breake forth into open hatred of their hidden malice Wherfore let any man iudge whether Bellarmine changed S. Augustines sense though for brenity and perspicuities sake he cited his wordes in the plurall number as they were to be vnderstood are repeated also by S. Augustine himselfe All the Churches enemies shal ioyne to impugne her in Antichrists tyme. 7. Now that al that hate Christians or the Church haue not hitherto ioyned against them is so manifest that M. Downam cannot deny and therfore granting it he only turneth to aske whether they shall do so when Antichrist commeth or no To whome we returne answere that they shall as hath bene sufficiently proued and therfore it is manifest that Antichrist is not yet come To the second part of Bellarmines proofe he answereth that the vncertainty of the beginning of Antichrists persecution if it were true doth not disproue the greatnes but argueth the length As though now we treated of the greatnes and not of the manifestnes of this persecution Downam forgetteth what he impugneth which surely is plainly disproued if it were so secret that no man can tell when it began Secondly he saith the persecutions vnder Nero the rest were wel knowne when they began and when they ended because there was some intermission of them but these now haue no end nor yet intermission except it be when they haue none to persecute And is not this a wise answere thinke you to tell vs that the beginning of a persecution cannot be shewed because it hath no intermission nor end Except he would haue vs to vnderstand him that he meaneth that it hath had no beginning
cauill for the Church of Rome if we vnderstand that particuler diocesse is still accompted but a part of the Catholike Church and in this sense a man may still be a good Christian although he be not of the Church of Rome And in ancient tymes the Church of Rome alone that is the Church of which the Bishop of Rome is the chiefe Pastor was accompted the Catholike Church And consequently that he that was not a member of that Church was not taken for a Catholike or true Christian as appeareth sufficiently by the places which Bellarmine citeth to which I will only adde one more out of S. Hierome in his Epistle to Pope Damasus I am vnited in Communion saith he to thy Blessednes that is to the Chayre of Peter I know that the Church was built vpon that rock whosoeuer eateth the Lambe out of this house is prophane if any man be not in the Arke of Noe he will perish in the deluge I know not Vitalis I refuse Those which belong not to the Church of Rome belong not to Christ but to Antichrist Meletius I esteeme not Paulinus whosoeuer gathereth not what thee scattereth that is whosoeuer belongeth not to Christ belongeth to Antichrist Now let M. Downam compare the writing of any Catholike at this tyme and see if they attribute more to the Pope or Church of Rome at this tyme then S. Hierome did at that and with all consider if in S. Hieromes iudgement it be not a playne marke of an Antichristian to be against the Roman Church and of a good Christian to be vnited to it 8. To the third obiection M. Downam answereth that the Oath which Bellarmine alleadgeth is not an Oath of obedience and allegiance to the Pope but of faith and Religion towards God conformable to the faith and Religion then professed by the Bishop and The oath of obedience made to the B. of Rome before the yeare 606. Church of Rome But by M. Downams leaue the wordes of the Bishop are these Sub meiordinis casu spondeo atque promitto tibi perte Sancto Petro Apostolorum principi atque eius Vicario Beatissimo Gregorio vel successoribus ipsius me numquā c. ad schismata reuersurū sed semper me in vnitate Sanctae Ecclesiae Catholicae communione Romani Pontificis per omnia permansurum Vnder perill of loosing my place I profer promise to thee and by thee to S. Peter Prince of the Apostles and to most blessed Gregory his Vicar or to the successors of him that I will neuer returne to schisme but will alwayes in all pointes remayne in the vnity of the holy Catholike Church and in the communion of the B. of Rome By which we see that the promise to remayme in the communion of the Pope was as absolute as that other to remayne in the vnity of the Catholike Church which I suppose M. Downam will admit to be perpetuall without limitation of any tyme. And this promise he presently cōfirmeth with an Oath by Almighty God by the 4. Ghospells which he held in his hands and by the health of Nations and of the rulers of his Common wealth Now it is a friuolous cauill to say that this Oath was taken vpon the occasion of his lapse for this Bellarmine denieth not but only affirmeth that it was taken before the comming of Antichrist according to the Protestāts accompt Neither is it to the purpose that now such Oathes are more generall and common for this Bellarmine denieth not and who seeth not that the exaction of Oaths may proceed vpon diuers occasions And if the Oath be lawfull the often exacting of it is not culpable but rather If the Oath be lawfull the often exacting of it is not culpable commendable arguing greater vigilancy in them which gouerne And the like may be said of some other clauses more expresly set downe in some other formes of oathes according to the necessity of tymes and the qualities of them who are to sweare M. Downam should shew vs that there is any oath exacted of any now that is not fit to be performed by them which thinke it necessary to liue in the communion of the Pope as this Bishop did as appeareth by his Oath wherein he promiseth as much in generall as any other can expresse in particuler for he protesteth that he will neuer be drawne from this cōmunion by any perswasions or any other meanes and consequently that he will alway remaine in the obedience of the Pope for he renounceth not any heresy as M. Downam supposeth but only schisme which he performed by returning ad vnitatem Sedis Apostolicae to the vnity of the Apostolike Sea which I hartily wish that M. Downam and his fellow Protestants may also doe for otherwise it would not be sufficient to renounce their heresies though this were a good step to that To the fourth after a fit of rayling M. Downam answereth Priestly vnction vsed before the yeare 606. Desacra vnctione c. Cum venisset at length that both the places of S. Gregory Nazianzen are to be vnderstood figuratiuely of consecration to the Ministry this he endeauoureth to proue by the testimony of Innoc. 3. by which it appeareth that this cerimony of annoynting was not vsed in the Greek Church whereof Naziāzen was but reiected as Iewish vntill he imposed the same vpon them about the yeare 1200. But M. Downam goeth beyond Innocentius for he only affirmeth that they to whom he wrote that is at the most the Grecians of his tyme were not wont to vse this cerimony of annoynting but that the Greeke Church had not vsed it before Innocentius affirmeth not and much lesse that they had reiected it as Iewish Wherefore these are M. Downams additions which we may bouldly reiect since he hath no proofe for them and consequently his figuratiue interpretation falleth to the ground and we are to take the words of S. Gregory Nazianzen as they sound especially since others as ancient as he both of the Greeke and Latin Church make expresse mention of this Cerimony as M. Downam may see in Bellarmine lib. 1. de Sacramento Ordinis cap. 12. where he also handleth this obiection out of Innocentius 3. and vrgeth it further then M. Downam Bellarmin vrgeth Downams obiection further then he doth himselfe doth whome I must intreat not to be angry though I passe ouer his rayling in silence since he saith nothing to the purpose which is not already answered for now all our question is how ancient this Cerimony is and for the lawfulnesse therof I remit him to the place of Bellarmine already alleaged where he solueth that obiection taken from the Iewes and whatsoeuer els M. Downam can inuent 10. To the fifth obiection M. Downams answere is that S. Augustine is to be vnderstood of Sacrifice of prayer and not of any propitiatory Sacrifice but by M. Downams leaue he cannot carry it so for we will appeale to S.
yet expressing it in the conclusion which is a meere cauill for Bellarmine would not add any word in the premisses which he found not in Melancthon Caluin and Illyricus whose opinion he alleadged In the conclusion which was his owne he might very well expresse that which was necessarily to be vnderstood as Bellarmin explicateth out of Caluin himselfe for M. Downams deuise that the Church of Christ The Church comprehendeth not al that professe the name of Christ may be taken for the company of Christians that is of those that professe the name of Christ is too ridiculous since by this meanes he includeth all heretikes whatsouer who are indeed the Synagogue of the Diuell so confoundeth the Church of God and the Sinagogue of the Deuill wheras S. Paul saith that Antichrist shall sit in the TeÌ„ple of God he meaneth according to M. Downams interpretation the temple of the Diuell All which is so obsurd that the authors with whom Bellarmine disputeth would haue byn ashamed of so ridiculous an assertion and therfore they sought other cuasions as we shal see forthwith but now let vs go on with the other illation that the Protestants are out of the true Church for how the Temple of Hierusalem is by S. Paul called the Temple of God we shall see afterward in the discussion of Bellarmines answeres to the arguments of the Protestants 5. Wherfore M. Downam to saue himselfe and his brethren from being out of the true Church of Christ is driuen to this exigent to deny that there is any one visible Catholike Church but only one invisible Catholike Church and many particuler visible Churches which is a most extrauagant and absurd paradox contrary both to Scriptures Fathers and Councells as Bellarmine sufficiently proueth lib. 4. de There is one visible Catholicke Church Ecclesia militant cap. 10. But now I will only oppose to this insolent madnes the authority of the Creed generally receaued of all where the Church is called One Holy Catholike and Apostolike and who seeth not that all which belong truly to Christ must agree in one faith and not to be deuided by schismes and heresies which in M. Downams conceipt can only happen in particuler Churches or at least in them only be acknowledged and rooted out So that if any particuler Church will wholy fall to either or rather if the chiefe head and pastour of any such Church shal become either schismaticall or hereticall there is not meanes left for his reduction since that he is not bound to be at vnity with other particuler Churches nor to subiect himselfe to any visible Catholike Church or to any visible head therof which is as much in effect as to say that Christ hath left no meanes vpon earth to decide controuersies concerning Faith or to take away schismes diuisions but that euery particuler Church or Pastor yea indeed euery particuler man may freely follow his owne fancies without contradiction or controlement of any so long as he can pretend any text of Scripture though neuer so much wrested and falsly vnderstood for that which he is resolued to hould And is it meruarle that heresies and schismes be so rife in our daies since these absurd paradoxes are so currant But what should heretikes and schismatikes do but defend schismes and diuisions and imâ—ugne vnity and concord which if they would admit they must of force returne to the Catholike Church whereit is only to be found Since therfore the visible Church of Christ is one and by the aduersaries confession it is the RomaÌ„ it followeth manifestly that they themselues are out of Christs Church since that they The ProtestaÌ„ts are out of the Church of Christ are out of the Roman For the other cauill which M. Downam maketh that the RomaÌ„ Church is a particuler Church is not worth the answering for euery child can tell him that the Roman Church is taken for all those which agree in faith and are vnited with the Bishop of Rome who is not only Bishop of that particuler Citty but also the head and Pastor of the whole Church which of him her Head is called the Roman Church which coÌ„tinueth the true Church of Christ as Bellarmine proueth and Melancthon Caluin and Illyricus dare not deny howsoeuer M. Downam is so impudent in his rayling consorting himselfe with a vaine Poet whose meaning notwithstanding was far better then M. Petrarcha Downams is 6. M. Downam hauing thus shufled vp the matter hitherto at length commeth to explicate himselfe more plainly and agreeth with Caluin that the Church of Rome vnder the Pope may be called the Church of God in respect both of some notes and signes of a visible Church as the administration of the Sacrament of Baptisme and the profession of the Name of Christ as also of some reliques and remainder as it were the gleanings of the inuisible Church for he doubteth not but that in the corruptest times of Popery the Lord hath reserued some who haue not receaued the marke of the beast And for explication he compareth the Church of Rome to the state of Israel vnder Ieroboam and Achab because they then retained the Sacrament of Circumcision and professed Iehoua to be their God although they worshipped him Idolatrously And euen vnder Achab the Lord had reserued 7000. who neuer bowed their knee to Baal In which comparison M. Downam insisteth wholy Downam his petitio principij vpon his wonted figure of Petitio principij and consequently all that he saith is but meere railing If he would haue said any thing to the purpose he should haue shewed two points in that example the first that the visible Church among the Iewes was altogeather ceased by that Idolatry of Israel The second that Israel departed not from the Religion which was generally houlden before but that the ancient Religion was by little and little changed to Idolatry and that those which came after separated themselues from the former and yet were the true Church With these two points M. Downam might haue made some comparison betwixt the people of Israel and the Church of Rome But since The Protestants like to Israel the Catholikes to Iuda neither of these are so but the quite contrary it will fall to M. Downam and his fellowes share to be like the people of Israel since they haue left the visible Church of which they once were as the other did and consequently the Church of Rome is like to the people of Iuda and the rest which ioyned with them since it continueth in the ancient faith generally holden throughout Christendome before there were any Protestants in the World Neither do we graunt that the Protestants haue any part of Christs Church no more then the Israelites had since they haue not any iote of true faith howsoeuer they make profession of some articles for the reason why they hould them is not the authority of God proposed by the Scriptures or the
Church but only their owne fancies because so it seemed necessary for their reputation and credit or some other human and priuate respect how much soeuer they pretend to be only moued by Scripture for of this they admit no more The Protestants haue no probable rule of faith nor any true faith at al. then they please and for the interpretation they haue no other rule then their owne pruate spirit or fancy which is far of from being any probable rule of truth much lesse so certaine as is necessary for the certainty of diuine and supernatural faith to be built vpon And this is the true reason why the Church of God is but one because there is but one rule of fayth from which whosoeuer falleth cannot haue any true faith at all nor belong to the true Church of God The other comparison which M. Downam vseth is much les to the purpose for it is not the Church but the Bishop of Sardis as he himselfe saith that it is agreed by In his Sermō at Lābeth pag. 2. Apoc. ◠1. Interpreters both new and old who had a name that he liued but indeed was dead neither was this death for want of faith but of charity and good workes as is manifest and though it were otherwise yet M. Downam could proue nothing by this comparison except we would belieue his bare word that the Church of Rome were in this case which is our chiefe question and M. Downams wonted figure to take it as granted Wherfore since he can argue no better let vs see how he can answere 7. To Bellarmines first reply vpon Caluins deuise that the Roman Church is not the true Church but that there VIII remaine in it only the ruines and reliques of a true Church M. Downam granteth that all visible Churches may faile and fall away but not the inuisible Church of Christ which he calleth the Catholike Church nor any one sound Christian that is of this inuisible Church In which answere he graunteth Bellarmine as much as he went about to proue that the gates of hell in his opinion haue preuailed against Christs visible Church so that in a whole thousand yeares Christ had not so much as one constant professor of his truth and though I might easily proue that Christ spake of his visible Church and that it The visible Church is to endure to the end of the world was to endure vntill the worlds end yet now I will not trouble my Reader with so needles a digression since the matter is so plaine and euident in it selfe that me thinks any man which maketh accompt of Christ his passion and glory or of his desire to saue soules and to prouide for their conuersion and faith should stop his eares not to heare so great a blasphemy vttered as M. Downam is not ashamed to affirme yet if any man haue any doubt or desire to be more fully satisfied in this point let him read Bellarmine him selfe lib. 3. de Ecclesia militant cap. 12. 13. To Bellarmines second reply M. Downam answereth that it proueth nothing except he suppose that the Church of Rome is the only true Church But he should haue answered it in forme admitted only that which Caluin auoucheth that the Papists hold the ruines of the Church and the foundations yea the buildings themselues halfe throwne downe for out of this only Bellarmine argueth and sheweth that the Protestants can neither haue the whole intire church since in their opinion it is fallen nor the part which remaineth of it since they grant The Protestants cannot haue the Church of Christ but only some new building of their own it to be amōg the Papists to which delēma M. Downā answereth not a word but only braggeth that the Church of Rome may fall yet the Catholicke Church of God may stand yea shall stand c. But he forgetteth himselfe marketh not what his Maister Caluin hath graunted that not only the Church of Rome but euen the very Church of Christ is fallen and that the Papists haue as much as is left of it cōsequētly the Protestāts can only haue some new hereticall building of their owne though M. Downam be neuer so loth to acknowledge it Neither will the example of the Church of Iuda vnder Iosias serue his turne for that was only a reformation of manners and a destruction of Idolatry without any departing from the ancient Church of God in which remained the true succession of Priests and Gods true religion after a visible manner no otherwise then if it should please his Maiesty to put downe heresie and aduance Catholike Religion in his Kingdome which were only to imbrace the true Church of Christ and not to erect any new building as the Protestants haue done as Bellarmine conuinceth 8. M. Downam hauing thus impugned Bellarmines arguments commeth to refute his solutions to their obiections and wheras Bellarmine gaue three solutions to the first See part 2. cap. 2. M. Downam passeth two of them ouer in silence telling vs that he hath taken thē away in another place which how true it is the Reader shall be iudge when we come to that encounter Now let vs see how he refuteth the second solution which Bellarmine giueth that the harlot of which S. Iohn speaketh is Rome Ethnick raigning worshiping Idols and persecuting Christians and not Rome Christian the Apoc. 17. contrary of which M. Downam neuer goeth about to proue with any new argument as he should haue done it being his turne now to argue but only contenteth himselfe to answere Bellarmines proofe which he doth also by halfes for Bellarmine proueth his exposition euidently by the authority of Tertullian S. Hierome and sheweth the impudency of heretikes that are not ashmed to alleadg those authours altogeather against their meaning to proue that S. Iohn speaketh of Rome Christian To all which M. Downam giueth him not a word but is very well content to be thus beaten so that it may not be spoken of but to the other proofe he thinketh himselfe able to say something therfore answereth two wayes 1. that though Popish Rome had not dominion ouer the Kings of the earth and were not drunke with the blould of the Saints and martyrs of Iesus yet we might vnderstand the Apostle thus that that Citty which then had dominion ouer the Kings of the earth and then persecuted the Saints is called Babylon because it was to be the seate or sea of Antichrist So that as you see M. Downam will haue Rome to be called Babylon because it was to be the seate or sea of Antichrist which he supposeth as manifest though Bellarmine in this third solution and before also in one of his arguments both which M. Downam passeth ouer in silence sheweth manifestly that Antichrist shall hate this Babylon and not make it the seat of his kingdome So that this first solution is nothing but M. Downams wonted
the day which he hopeth not and in the houre he knoweth not and will deuide him and put his part with Infidels Do you heare who is the Iudge of the euill Steward whome our Lord hath appointed ouer his Family For Christ saith not that he shal be iudged by a Councell but the Lord will come in the day which he hopeth not and that which followeth Wherfore our Lord reserueth to himselfe the iudgment of that Seruant whom he hath appointed ouer all his Family and therfore the Pope taketh not away their authority from the iudgment of the Councells and the whole Church when he suffereth not himselfe to be iudged by it for that caÌ„not be taken away which was neuer giuen But neuer did the Councells rightly congregated euer take that to themselues that excepting the case of Heresy they would giue sentence against the Pope But of this we haue said inough in due place The other thing which you say and proue not is that this is to make himselfe God to refuse to be iudged by the Church or by any other for when you say of any without doubt you meane of any man for you are not ignorant that the Pope belieueth and professeth that he is to be iudged by Christ Now how doth he make himselfe God who belieueth that he is to be iudged by God Besides certainly the Kings of the earth do not acknowledge any Iudge vpon earth for so much as doth belong to politicall affayres and in your opinion who take coactiue power from Bishops they haue not any Iudge euen in Ecclesiasticall matters shall there therfore be so many Gods as Kings I do not thinke that you are so mad as to say this wherfore it remayneth that it is not true that he forth with maketh himselfe God who will not be iudged by any man Lastly you adde The Synode These so horrible errours and this impiety he defendeth with exceeding great cruelty and killeth them who dissent from him Bellarmine Now how impudently you lye in this place you may know euen by this one instance that I my selfe who write these things do openly affirme and that in the Citty of Rome not vnknowne to the Pope that the Pope may not change the doctrine or worships of Christ nor institute new worships which should be held for diuine or should any way be repugnant to the Ghospell and yet I am not only not killed by him but neyther receaue any molestation Because the Pope knoweth very well that I say true you lye As also a little after when you adde The doctrine of pennance is altogeather depraued by the Pope and his members for he teacheth that sinnes are remitted for the worthines of our works Likewise they neuer teach that sinnes are freely remitted for Christ Which surely are not our opinions but your lyes for we teach not that but altogeather the contrary as the Councell of Trent plainly witnesseth Sess 6. cap. 5. 6. 7. 8. But of this inough I passe to Caluin THE TVVENTITH CHAPTER Caluins lyes are refuted WHEREFORE Iohn Caluin expounding the place of the Apostle 2. Thess 2. VVho extolleth himselfe aboue all that is called God saith indeed many thinges and with great pompe of wordes but he proueth in a manner nothing Paul saith he signified in these wordes that Antichrist would vsurpe to himselfe those thinges which are proper to God alone so that he will extoll himselfe aboue all diuine power and the whole religion and all the worship of God shall lye vnder his feet And after Now whosoeuer shal be taught out of the Scripture what thinges are most proper to God and on the other side shall behould what the Pope vsurpeth to himselfe although he be a child of ten yeares old he will not much labour in the discerning of Antichrist Surely a magnificall promise But let vs heere with what reasons he proueth at length that which he hath proposed for peraduenture they wil be such that children of 10. yeares old will not labour much in soluing them The Scripture pronounceth that God is the only law-giuer Isa 33. v. 22. who can keep and destroy Iacob 4. v. 12. The only King whose office is to gouerne soules with his word it maketh him likewise the author of all holy thinges it teacheth that iustice and saluation is only to be sought for of Christ it assigneth also the manner and meanes There is none of these thinges which the Pope affirmeth not to belong to his power he glorieth that it is his office to bind consciences with what lawes he thinketh good and to subiect them to eternall punishements He either instituteth new Sacraments at his pleasure or corrupteth and vitiateth yea wholy abolisheth those which were instituted by Christ that he may substitute in their place the sacriledges which be hath seygned He forgeth meanes of obtayning saluation altogeather repugnant to the doctrine of the Ghospell Finally he doubteth not to change the whole Religion at his beck what I beseech you is it to extoll himselfe aboue all that is reputed God if the Pope doth it not Did not I â—ay well that many thinges are said by Caluin little or nothing proued For that the Pope glorieth that it is his office to bind consciences with what lawes he thinketh good that he instituteth new Sacraments that he abolisheth the old that he forgeth meanes to saluation repugnant to the doctrine of the Ghospell that he changeth all religion Caluin saith so indeed but he proueth it not And if to say with him be to proue by like reason to deny must be to refute Certaynely all we Catholikes which obey the Bishop of Rome Christs Vicar say freely and without any iniury to him that it is not lawfull for him to bynd men with any lawes whatsoeuer that is with pernicious also and vniust nor to institute new Sacraments nor to corrupt and abolish those which are instituted by Christ nor to inuent meanes to Saluation repugnant to the doctrine of the Ghospell nor to peruert or change Christian Religion and this we say the more willingly because we know that he also thinketh and saith so for if he thinketh not so if he thinketh that he may make vniust lawes institute new Sacraments abolish the old and do other thinges of that sort how doth he suffer vs to speake so who notwithstanding are in his power and not in I know not what corner but teach in the Citty of Rome it selfe by his knowledge and will But they will say the Pope saith not that it is lawfull for him to do these things but yet in very deed and in fact he striueth that it is lawfull for him to do them Let it be proued then that he hath done any of these thinges for otherwise to assume that which is to be proued which indeed is common with our Aduersaries is called by the Logicians petitiâ— principâ— Now these two places Isa 33. and Iac. 4. which Caluin only produceth are not any