(n) De Eccles contra Bellarm. controuer 2. q 5. pag. 327. among the Papists are but futiles concerning things of small importance And D. Fulke agreeth with him saying As for the (o) Against Heskins Sanders c. pag. 295. consent and peace of the Popish Church it proueth nothing but that the Diuell had all things at his Will and therefore might sleepe thus truly acknowledging Vnity in Fayth in the Roman Church but most maliciously transferring the Cause therof to him who is the chiefe Enemy to Vnity But Syr Edwin Sands a most remarkable Protestant doth not only acknowledge all war of dissention in our Catholike Church but also giueth his reason thereof in these Words The Papists (p) In his Relation fol. 8. haue the Pope as a common Father Aduiser and Conductour to reconcile their iarres to decide their differences to draw their Religion by consent of Councells to Vnity c. To whose Iudgment herein subscribeth Andraeas Duditius the Protestant aboue mentioned in the Epistle Dedicatory who thus writeth The Roman (q) Beza reporteth these words of Duditius in his Epist Theolog. Epist. ad Duditium Church is not deuided with so many Dissâ—ntions but it hath the plausible apparence of Venerable Antiquity Ordinary Succession and Perpetuall Consent Thus Duditius And thus farre by way of Preuention of all such Arguments as the Protestant Wryters may seeme to vrge thereby to make their Ignorant followers belieue that the Catholiks do labour with one and the same disease with themselues touching disagreements in points of Fayth and Religion Only before I passe further I thinke good to relate that ordinary and common refuge and tergiuersation which diuers Protestants of England being vpbrayded with disagreements in Fayth among themselues are accustomed to fly vnto who thus reason I am an English Protestant I litle regard how forraine Protestants disagree among themselues I am content to range my selfe vnder our English learned Protestants who I am assured maintayne the Truth of Fayth without any contradiction or dissention among themselues Now because this point requyreth a large and full Answere therefore as willing to contract this Preface in as few words as conueniently I may I refer the Reader for his full satisfaction herein to the latter end of this ensuing Treatise viz. at 22. Paragraph where he shall see the Vanity of this silly euasion fully layed open and answered Before I come to any other Passages of this Preface I hould it not amisse to relate for the benefit of others what happened touching these former Points to my selfe In my being in Spayne a Chaplayne of the English Embassadours there resyding being my former familiar acquaintance in England oftentimes came to the place where I there studied and did much solicite and diswade me from entring into Holy Orders for then I was not Priest His chiefest argument by him alledged was taken out of D. Mortons Apologia Catholica which booke it seemes he had studyed diâ—igently touching the dissentions in doctrine of some few broken Catholiks aboue alledged as Erasmus Nilus Cassander c. as also from the dissention of the Thomists and Scotists touching the Conception of our B. Lady the Chaplaine much vrging and inferring that our Catholike Religion as wanting Vnity in doctrine in the Professours thereof could not be true This his Argument for a tyme I grant seemed very strong to me I then being but yong and not conuersant in the Protestants owne bookes thereby to discerne their dissentions in doctrine and did cause me to defer my taking of Priesthood a yeare or more longer then afore I was determined to haue done But after acquainting others of my daily familiars much read in the Protestants Writings with this my doubt they fully resolued and satisfyed me touching those Pseudo Catholiks to wit what kind of Men they were how vpon what grounds they for the tyme dissented from the then Common doctrine of the Catholike Church As also I was then informed how the Question of the immaculate Conception of the B. Virgin was not defined on either syde by the Church and that therefore it was lawfull without any breach of Vnity to maintayne either part Vpon whose learned Resolution all my former doubt instantly vanished away And indeed this Accident first be got a desire in me to looke into the Protestants Works more fully to see whether they had thy disagreements in Fayth amoÌ„g them So forcible we see the Argument drawne from waÌ„t of Vnity in Fayth though but indirectly and with mistaking vrged seemes to proue that Religion which wanteth Vnity in Fayth and doctrine cannot be the true Religion instituted by our Sauiour Iesus Christ But to recall my selfe and to proceed further In the next place of this my Preface I will demonstrate the absolute necessity of Vnion touching Matters of Fayth in the Church of God it being an acknowledged and inseparable Marke thereof and how incompatible dissentions and Errours in Fayth are with the said true Church Adulterari (r) August lib. de Vnitate Ecclesia non potest sponsa Christi Incorrupta est pudica This I will euict both from humane and diuine Authorities and will begin with humane proofes and so ascend in weight of proofes to the diuine Scriptures And first I will alledge some testimonies of Protestants themselues For do we not fynd Luther thus to teach A Kingdome (s) Luther tom 3. Witten berg in Psalm 5. fol. 166. deuided in it selfe shall not stand Neither haue any Heretiks at any tyme beene ouercome by force or Subtilty but by mutuall dissention Neither doth Christ fight with them otherwise then with a spirit of giddinesse and disagreement And more The Authours (t) Luth. tom 5. Witten berg in Galat. c. 5. fol. 416. of Schismes are disagreeing among themselues c. They byte and deuours one another c. till at the last they perish c. O see how truly his owne Words do recoyle vpon himselfe The Like want of this Vnity in doctrine do the Deuines of Manifold vrge as a Marke of a false Church against the Sacramentaries to impugne their doctrine those deuines thus writing We haue (u) Theologi Mansfeldenses in Confessione Mansfeldica Latina fol. 110. iust reason to hold in suspition the doctrine of the Sacramentaries in that they are not concordant in one and the same sentence or iudgment but are among themselues deuided so as some of them are called Carolostadians others Swinglians Occolampadians Caluinists c. And the same kind of argument is vsed by the Deuines of Heidelberge all Protestants against the Anabaptists thus vrging Si (x) Proâ—ocollo Frankaltalensi nâ— Praefatad Anabaptistas vobis Ecclesiae titulum concedere vellemus c. Yf we would grant to you the name of a Church what Sect among you should be reputed the Church of God seing you are deuided into so many Sects To come in this next place to the
Catholikes are contumeliously called are excluded from the members of the Protestant Church is so generally taught and but truly taught as that I need not to insist therein only D. Whitakers words shall serue at this tyme thus scurrilously rayling I (l) Contro Duraeum 2. sect 2. will not allow the very name of a lawfull Church vnto the Roman Church because it hath nothing which a true Church ought to haue Thus far to shew what men are not acknowledged by most Protestants and in part most truly to be members of the Protestant Church But now we will see how they are contradicted by other Protestants and sometimes by their owne pens And first we fynd the Anabaptists to be accounted mēbers of the Protestants Church for D. Whitaker thus writeth We (m) Controuers 4. 9. c. 2. p. 716. may abstaine from Baptisme so there be no contempt thereof Oecolampadius Baptisme (n) L. 2. Epist pag. 363. is an externall thing which by the Law of charity may be dispensed with and D. Morton seemes to enclyne to the same iudgment thus saying We (o) In his answere to the Protestants Apology l. 4. c. 1. sect 10. Protestants iudge the state of the Anabaptists not to be vtterly desperate Touching the Arians M. Morton iustifyeth that the Arians are of the Protestant Church because to vse his owne words the Arians (p) In his booke of of the kingdome of Israel the Church p. 94. hould the foundation of the Gospell M. Hookers words are these The Arians (q) Eccles polic l. 4. pag. 181. in the reformed Churches of Poland c. Now these Reformed Churches in Poland are Protestanticall Churches therefore the Arians are included as members of the said Protestanticall Churches Touching Idolaters whether they be of the Protestant Church or no heare what the said M Hooker writeth (r) Eccles pol. l. 3. p. 216. Christians by ezternall Profession they are all whose marke of recognizance hath in it those things which we haue mentioned yea although they he impious Idolaters wicked Heretikes c. Thus he Touching Infidells M. Fox relateth how a Protestant of Eminency for learning did thus teach A Turke (s) Act. Mon. pag. 493. Saracene or any Mahometan whatsoeuer may be saued if he trust in one God and keep the Law But if such a man may be saued then followeth that he is of the Protestant Church seeing most Protestants teach that the Protestant Church only affordeth Saluation And (t) Cent. 6. pag. 404. Bale admonisheth vs to be wary in condemning ouer rashly any Turke Finally this their most wicked opinion is already made euident by the aboue alledged testimonies of Swinglius and others who teach that Heathens dying Heathens and not belieuing in Christ may be saued That the Papists and the Protestants are members of one and the same Protestant Church is taught though most falsly by these Protestants following The Confession of Ausburge speaking of the Catholiks and the Protestants thus belieue say We (u) In Praefat. are all souldiers vnder one Christ. And Luther thus In (x) Luther in Epist. contra Anabapt Popery there is true Christianity yea the kernel of Christianity c. M. Hooker we (y) L. Eccl. pol. 3. c. 118. gladly acknowledge them of Rome to be of the Family of Iesus Christ M. Bunny We (z) In his Treatise of Pacificat are no seuerall Church from them meaning the Papists nor they from vs. D. Whitguift The (a) In his answere to the Admonition pag 40. Papists do belieue the same Articles of Faith which we do Finally D. Whyte In the (b) In defence of the way c. 38. substantiall Articles of our Fayth we agree with the Papists From all which testimonies it followeth that these said Protestants thus teaching do hould the Catholiks to be members of their Protestant Church I will conclude shewing that whom diuers Protestants hould to be Antichrist other Protestants acknowledge the same man to be in state of Saluation and consequently a member of the supposed true Protestant Church This I proue thus Most Protestants teach that the Pope is Antichrist as is well knowne yet other Protestants confesse that some Popes euen since they began to be Antichrist are saued But none are saued but such as are members of the true Church And according hereto I find M. Powell thus to write I will in (c) L. de Antichr c. 33. pag. 338. no wyse say that all the Popes from the tyme wherein Papistry was reuealed to be Antichristianity are damned With whom D. Whitaker euen in the same words thus affirmes I (d) In his answere to the first Demonstration of D. Sanders will not say that from the tyme that Papistry began to be Antichristianity the Popes themselues haue beene all damned And yet we see euen by these two last testimonies that both D. Whitaker and M. Powell teach that the Pope is Antichrist by the reason of the Word Antichristianity by them both vsed in their said testimonies I will shut vp their Disagreements touching the members of the Protestant Church with the malicious Asseueration of Musculus thus writing I imbrace (e) In loc comm de Coena pag. 552. all for brethren in the Lord howsoeuer they disagree from me or among themselues as long as they maintayne not the Popish Impiety Thus far of Protestants contrary iudgments touching who are members of the Protestant Church and who are not I will conclude their dissentions touching the Church whether the Papists as we are styled dying Papists though in part it hath beene all ready displayed out of the Protestant Church may be saued Euery man knoweth that all the Puritans as houlding Papists Religion to be idolatrous and superstitious and the Pope to be Antichrist deny to them all Hope of saluation Yet D. Some thus censureth of this point Yf (m) In his Defence against Penry p. 176. you thinke that all the Popish sort which dyed in the Popish Church are damned you thinke absurdly and do dissent from the iudgment of all learned Protestants D. Barrow I dare (n) In his 4. Sermons and two Questions disputed ad Clorum p. 448. not deny the name of Christians to the Romanists sith the learneder Writers do acknowledge the Church of Rome to be the Church of God M. Cartwright I doubt (o) In his Reply to D. Whitguifts Defence p. 82. not but diuers Fathers of the Greeke Church and who were Patrones of Freewill are saued And the same sentence is deliuered by D. Whitaker (p) Contra rat Camp pa. 74. touching the Saluation of the Ancient Fathers notwithstanding their doctrine of Iustification and merit of works D. Field We doubt (q) Of the Church l. 3. c. 46. not but that the Church in which the Bishop of Rome with more then a Luciferian pryde exalted himselfe was notwithstanding the true Church of God and that is held a sauing
Of which Controuersy D. Field thus sayth Touching (e) D. Field l. 2 â—f the Church â— 9. pag. 58. Contradictory Opinions some were named Thomists other Scotists in Controuersyes of Religion not yet determined by consent of the Vniuersall Church So idly and impertinently do the Protestants diuerberate the ayre in vpbrayding the Catholikes with this Controuersy touching the Conception of our B. Lady 4. Another Obseruation of which I thinke good to aduertise the Reader concernes certaine forlorne and broken Men yet competently learned who once were Catholiks but after did apostate from the Catholike Church by entertayning some one or other Opinion of Nouelism condemned by the said Church With euery one of which we may well expostulate in the Dialect of Josue Noster (f) Iosuâ— c. 5. es an Aduersariorum yet before their deaths most of them abandoned their said Innouations and so by their finall submission they dyed Members of our Catholike Church Such were these few following Erasmus Berengarius Aeneas Siluius Polidor Virgil Laurentius Valla Wicelius Cassander and one or two oâ—her Pseudo-Catholiks out of all which Doctour Morton (g) In his â—â—olog Cathoâ— is not ashamed to vrge that they being Papists are deuided in doctrine among themselues Now to this I answere This Obiection is of no force because the former Men did maintayne but some one or other Point against the Church comparting and interleaging in all the rest with the Catholiks But after the most part of them relinquishing their former Errours dyed Catholiks and in regard of their submission before their deaths to the Church of Rome and not otherwise they are accounted Catholiks Secondly I say that whiles these former Men did persist in their Nouelismes during all that tyme they were condemned by the Church of Rome for Heretiks and therefore it cannot be vrged that these Men were Papists at that tyme of their dissenting from the Vniuersall Church for by such their Schisme they were cut off from the Catholike Church and wholy reiected for members thereof And I freely grant that a Catholike or Papist as we are opprobriously called may become an Heretike by entertayning some Innouations But then I say he ceaseth to be a Catholike or Papist But the Case is far otherwise with the Protestants vrged in this following Treatise For first the Protestants heere produced being incomparably far greater in number then the former named Sectaries do not disagree in one or two or three Points only of Protestancy among themselues but they are distracted almost in all points of Protestancy Againe I say the Protestants by me vrged though reciprocally crossing one another contrary to the state of Berengarius Erasmus and the rest aboue specified yet during he same time of maintayning their coÌ„tradictory Opinions do still remayne Protestants accordingly they are all promiscuously acknowledged as good Members of the ProtestaÌ„t Church So great is the disparity betweene the former vrged Authours by D. Morton and the Protestants hereafter by me alledged That these Protestants whether they be Lutherans or Swinglians vnder whom are comprehended Caluinists which I am to produce notwithstanding their great discrepancy and dissentions in Fayth do remayne still Members of the Protestant Church appeareth from the iudgmeÌ„t of D. Whitaker who thus writeth to his Aduersary Father Campian happy Man who pledged his bloud for the fayth of Christ Quod (h) In respons ad rationes Campiani rat 8. autem Lutheranos cum Swingliants coniungis c. In that thou dost conioyne and vnite the Lutherans and the Swinglians together thou dost not offend vs For we willingly honour Luther as our Father and all them meaning the Lutherans Swinglians and Caluinists as our most deare brethren in Christ. And according to this tenour D. Iewell affirmeth saying The (i) In his Apolog. of the Church of England pag. 101. Swinglians and Lutherans are good friends they vary not among themselues vpon the Principles and foundation of our Religion but vpon only one Question which is neither weighty nor great And thus far of the transparency of the former Obiection touching Berengarius Erasmus c. Hitherto may be adioyned that whereas the Protestants are hereafter charged with great dissentions inconstancy touching their often altering their Common Booke of Prayer D. Doue acknowledging so much seekes to auoyd this blemish by saying The (k) D. Dâ—ne in his persuasion to English Recusants pag. 11. Papists haue done the like c. How many tymes haue their Breuiaryes beene altered But good Reader see the great difference herein The Protestants altering their Communion Booke do withall alter some points of Beliefe and doctrine seing the change of their Communion Booke resteth only in change of doctrine the later Communion Booke euer reiecting certaine Articles of Fayth which the former did allow off Now the altering of the Breuiaries consists only in inserting certaine prayers in the later which were not in the former throgh occasion of Canonization of Saints or some other vrgent Cause But there is not any alteration or change or Articles of Fayth in their different Breuiaries which is the point only here to be insisted vpon Now these Premonitions being afore acknowledged for true whereby are preuented some weake Obiections of which diuers of our Aduersaries haue made vse to seeke to proue the Catholiks disagreements in matter of Fayth it is lesse strange that some of them haue not forborne such is the scarsity and want of them to alledge (l) This obiection of different Orders in the Church of Rome is vrged by D. Fulke in his answere to a Counterfeyte Catholike p. â—5 By D. Iewell in his Apology of the Church of England pag. â—â— and by others for matter of Controuersyes that among the Papists some are called Franciscans some Benedictines others Augustines c. These do sometymes eate flesh those other feede only vpon fish most idly and ignorantly insisted vpon For what do these differences concerne matter of Fayth and Religion Do not all these seuerall Orders of Gods Church belieue all the Articles of our Catholike and Roman Fayth They only differ among themselues in liuing in a more strict or remisse course of life And this Answere is giuen by D. Field in these Words We must (m) Of the Church l. 2. c. 9. pag. 58. obserue that they who professe the Fayth of Christ haue beene sometimes in these later Ages of the Church called after the speciall names of such Men as were the Authours Beginners and Deuisers of such courses of Monasticall Profession as they made choyce to follow as Benedictins such like Thus D. Field Therefore I conclude that in regard of want of true Arguments in proofe of dissentions amoÌ„g Catholiks touching meerely matters of Religion I cannot but much approue the ingenuous and playne Confessions of some of our Aduersaries heere in our be halfe And fortably hereto we fynd D. Whitaker thus to confesse of this Point The dissentions
tymes of the Apostles my iudgment is that those tymes had plus conscientiae scientiae minus and we scientia plus conscientiae minus The Archbishop of Canterbury thus vanteth against those ancient tymes The (m) In his Defence of the answere to the Admonition pag. 472. 473. Doctrine taught professed by our Bishops at this day is more perfect and sounder then it was in any age after the Apostles I will close vp the Aristarchian and censuring iudgments of the Protestants against the ancient Fathers merely contrary to the former alledged Protestants with the scurrilous and depressing words of Luther passed vpon them who thus in one place writeth The (n) Tom. 2. Wittenb anno 1551. lib. de seruo arbitrio Fathers of so many ages haue beene plainly blynd and most ignorant in the Scriptures they haue erred all their lyfe tyme and vnlesse they were amended before their deaths they were neither Saints nor appertayning to the Church And further The (o) In Colloq mensal lib. de seruo arbitrio Apology of Philip Melancthon doth far excell all the Doctours of the Church and exceedes euen Austin himselfe And of his owne iudgment with reference to their iudgments he thus Thrasonically boasteth I (p) Contra Henricum regem Angliae eare not if a thousand Austins a thousand Cyprians a thousand Churches stood against me But to come to particular Fathers marke how Luther showers downe words of reproach against them In the (q) In Colloq mensa lib cap de Patribus Ecclesia writings of Ierome there is not a word of true Fayth in Christ sound Religion Tertullian is very superstitious I haue houlden Origen long since accursed Of Chrysostome I make no account Basill is of no worth he is wholy a Monke I waygh him not of a hayre Thus Luther and with this I end this Paragraph aduertising the Reader that besides the dissentions which these last alledged Protestants haue with the former Protestants acknowledging the Fathers authorities and worth these sharpe censures deliuered in so full a manner against the Fathers make greatly in proofe of our ancient Catholike and Romay Fayth Seeing they irreplyably proue that those most blessed and learned Fathers so neere to the dayes of our Sauiour Christ and his Apostles were Papists in Fayth and Religion and not Protestants The XI Paragraph CEasing to discourse further of particular Fathers how they are admitted by some Protestants and reiected by others I will ascend to speake of Generall Councells which consist of the Assembly and confluence of many hundred of Fathers touching which point we shall fynd great contrariety of opinions among the Protestants And first for the reiecting of the authority of Generall Councels we fynd D. Whitaker thus expresly to say (r) L. dâ— Concil contra Bellarm. q. 6. Generall Councels may erre But Peter Martyr is more full and plaine herein shewing the reason why Councells are not to be admitted thus writing As long (s) L. de rotis pag. 476. as we insist in Generall Councells so long we shall continue in the Papists Errours In like manner D. Fulke thus depresseth the authority of Generall Councels The (t) In his answere to a Counterfeyt Catholike p. â—0 90. and p. 86. whole Church militant may erre altogether as euery part thereof Beza actually chargeth the Primitiue Generall Councells with errour saying (u) In his Preface vpon the New Testament Dedicated to the Prince of Condy. anno 1587. Euen in the best tymes meaning the Primitiue tymes the ambition ignorance and lewdnes of Bishops was such that the very blynd may easely perceaue how that Satan was President in their Assemblies But now obserue how other learned Protestants contradict their former brethrens sentences herein And first Doctour Bilson discouâ—sing of the meanes to decyde Controuersies in Fayth thus writeth To haue (x) In his perpetuall Gouerment c. pag. 37â— no Iudge for the ending of Ecclesiasticall contentions were the vtter subuersion of all peace thereupon the said Doctour concludes thus Synods (y) Vbi suprà p. 370. are an externall Iudiciall meanes to discerne errours and the surest meanes to decide doubts And he further thus writeth Yf (z) Vbi suprà pag. 374. Synods were not the Church neither at any tyme was nor indeed safely can be without tempests D. Sutcliffe as not allowing triall of Controuersies only by Scripture thus writeth (a) In his reuiew of his Examination of D. Kellisons Suruey printed 1â—06 p. 41. It is false that we will admit no iudge but Scripture for mâ— appeale still to a lawfull Generall Councell M. Hooker (b) In his Preface to his booke of Ecclesiast Policy relateth now Beza as being tyred with disputs only from Scripture submitteth himselfe finally to a lawfull Assembly or Councell And the said M. Hooker in the place aboue alledged thus further writeth We are sure of this that Nature Scripture and Experience haue taught the world for the ending of Controuersies to submit it selfe vnto some iudieâ— all and definitiue sentence meaning to the iudgment or a Generall Councell D. Field conspireth with M. Hooker herein thus writing (c) In his Treatise of the Church in his Epist. Dedicat. Seeing the controuersies in Religion in our tyme are growne so many in number and in nature so intricate that few haue tyme leasure and strength to examine them what remayneth for man desirous of satisfaction in things of such consequence but diligently to search out which among all the Societies of the men in the World is that blessed Company of Holy ones that househould of Fayth that spouse of Christ that Church of the liuing God c. He meaning the iudgment of the Church deliuered in a Generall Councell To conclude an Externall iudgment or Definitiue Sentence besides the Scripture which is chiefly the sentence of a Generall Councell is further taught by D. Baneroft (d) In his Sermon preached 1. February 1588 pag. 4â— D. Couell (e) In his modest Examination pag. 108. and 109. and finally to omit others euen by the Puritanes of whose iudgment herein sâ—e D. Baneroftâ— (f) Pag. 1â—4 Suruey The XII Paragraph TO come to Traditions That they are reiected by most Protestants it will be needlesse much to labour therein Seeing they are so luxuriant especially the Puritans and the most forward Protestants and abundant in the condemnation of all Traditions yet obserue (k) L. â— pistol Swinglij Oecolamp pag. 301. how diuers points of Christian Fayth not taught in the Scriptures are acknowledged by other learned Protestants to be Apostolicall Traditions And to begin (g) Tom. â— l. de Baptism fol. 9â— Swinglius and h Oecolampadius confesse that Baptisme of Infants is not taught in the Scripture to whose iudgment D. Field subscribeth in these words (i) Of the Church pag. â—1â— Baptisme of Infants is a Tradition because it is not expresly deliuered in Scripture
regard This refuge and tergiuersation is most poore First in that there is no more reason why a man should be rather an English Protestant then any other kind of Protestant Since all kinds of Protestancy as reiecting the authority of Gods vniuersall Church proceed Originally from the priuate Spirit to the which Protestancy euen commits Idolatry And yet there is no more reason why an English ProtestaÌ„t should assume to himselfe an infallibility of his priuate Spirit then any other foraine Protestant of other Country SecoÌ„dly because the English Protestants haue no reason to disclayme from the Protestants of other Countries if so we will belieue the English Protestants themselues for D. Iewell though most falsly thus teacheth The Lutherans and the Swinglians (s) D. Iewell in his Apology of the Church of England p. 101. within which number the English Protestants are comprehended are good friends they vary not betweene themselues vpon the principles and Foundations of their Religion but only vpon one Question which is neither waighty nor great With whom agreeth D. Whitaker speaking to his Aduersary Father Campian for his conioyning together the Lutherans and Swinglians in Fayth and Religion for this Doctour thus writeth Quòd (t) In respons ad rationes Camp rat 8. versus â—â—em autem Lutheranâ—s cum Swinglianis coniungere voluisti in eo nos quidem nequaquam offendisti c. In that thou dost conioyne and vnite the Lutherans the Swinglians together thou dost not offend vs for we willingly honour Luther as our Father and all them meaning the Lutherans and the Swinglians as our most Deare Brethren in Christ Thirdly the inueterate Dissentions euen among the English moderate Protestants themselues as also betweene the English moderate Protestants against the English Puritans both touching the Translation of the English Bible the Common booke of prayer and diuers other points of Controuersies aboue displayed manifesteth the shallownes of this former Replye Thus much concerning the auoyding of this seely Refuge I haue thought good to insist in the discouering the vanity of it in this place though it be aboue touched in the Preface only by mentioning of it because it is the ordinary Asyle or Sanctuary whitherunto many Protestants do flye when they heare the Catholikes to vpbraid them with mutuall Dissentions in the Articles of Protestancy The XXIII Paragraph NOw before I close vp this Treatise I will draw certaine Inferences or Resultancies out of the former Premisses 1. The First whereof may concerne the beliefe of the former Catholike Points by Protestants which beliefe is indeed no supernaturall beliefe I meane it is not any of the three supernaturall vertues but only it is in them a meere priuate opinion or inducement to giue a naturall consent to that which is true For the better and more cleere illustration of which point the Reader is to conceaue that two things do necessarily concurre to the producing of the Vertue of supernaturall Fayth The one is Prima (u) S. Thomas part 2. q. 8. veritas reuelans which is God The other is called the authority of the Church This prima veritas reuelans being God is otherwise called by the Deuines Obiectum formale Fidei This prima veritas doth reueale all true points of Fayth The second to wit The Authority of the Church is called Amussit Regula or the Propounder because it propoundeth to the members of the Church all such points to be belieued which God reuealed to the Church to be belieued Now to applye this to our purpose This Prima veritas reuelant as also this Propounder do indifferently propound to the Members of the Church all points of Fayth to be belieued as well as any one only point and the Persons to whom such points of Fayth are reuealed and propounded to be belieued do through the same authority of the Church belieue all points of Fayth to be reuealed alike Therefore seeing the former Protestants belieuing the former particular Catholike Articles do belieue them not through the Authority of the Church propounding them to be belieued for if they did belieue them by force thereof they would in like sort belieue all other Catholike points seeing all of them are alike reuealed by God to the Church and alike propounded by the Church to Christians to be belieued Therefore from hence it followeth that the former Protestants do belieue the foresayd Catholike Points only through the force of their owne priuate spirit which intertayneth them as points probable and true And thus the Close of all is that the said Protestants do belieue or rather giue assent vnto Truths falsly so mans Ghostly Enemy when he speaketh the truth he lyes that is they belieue truths vpon false Grounds and Principles For they belieue certaine Catholike Doctrines but they belieue not the Church teaching those Doctrines Thus much touching the first Porisma 2. The second shal be the scandall and stumbing block which these great Dissentions among the Protestants do beget in the minds of other ProtestaÌ„ts to wit a forsaking of the Protestant Religion and imbracing the Catholike Religion To begin We fynd Duditius the markable Protestant thus to confesse of this point The (x) Beza in his Epistol Theolog. Epist ad Andraeam Duditium p. 13. relaâ—teth Duditius thus to say Protestants are caryed about with euery wynd of Doctrine now to this part now to that whose religion what it is to day you may perhaps knowe but what it wil be to morrow neither you nor they can certainly tell Thus Duditius And Syr Edwin Sands in like manner thus writeth Protestants (a) In his relation c. fol. 8. are as seuered or rather scattered troupes ech drawing aduerseway c. In like sort Georgint Maior a great Lutheran thus disconsolately writeth Obijciunt (b) In Orat de Confusionibus Dogmatum veteribus recentibus nobis Papistae c. The Papists do obiect to vs Scandals and Dissentions I do freely acknowledge such to be as cannot be sufficiently lamented And Melancthon thus complayneth hereof as is aboue noted Nulla (c) Melanch in Concil Theolog. part 1. pag. 245. res aequè deterret homines ab Euangelio ac nostra Discordia no one thing deterreth and withdraweth men more from the Gospell then the Discord among our selues And vpon this ground it is that Dresserus the Protestant thus speaketh of Staphylus who was once a Protestant Oh Theologorum dissidia (d) Dresserus in Millenar â— pa. 214. ad Catholicos defecit Staphylus Staphylus reuolted to the Catholiks by reason of the Disagreements among the Protestant Deuines And dare our Aduersaries notwithstanding suggest the Protestant Church to be the true Church it being thus depriued of Vnity the inseparable marke of the true Church 3. A third may be that whereas many Protestants aboue alledged do approue and allow many Articles of our Catholike Fayth that such Confessions euen of the Aduersaries themselues do much aduantage
themselues Petra Scandali who to all good Christians is Lapis angulularis 7. Touching the Diuersity of Persons which are included within the members of the Protestant Church aboue defended by some Protestants and denyed by others Their disagreements are so vncertaine as that some admit Papists Anabaptists Arians Heretâ—kes Infidells yea by supposall Antichrist himselfe So making their Church to consist of certaine mungreâ—l Persons whereas other Protestants do exclude all these kinds from being members of the Protestant Church Now I say their irresolution and vncertainty of Iudgment is so wonderfull herein as that no Protestant can assure himselfe with what kind of men he may communicate in practise of Fayth Religion and from what men he ought to abstayne in all such spirituall entercourse and association 8. Touching the deniall of Freewill the certainty of Reprobation and of Predestination and both without any reference to our good or bad works Contrary to other learned Protestants Iudgments How do all these Doctrines most forcibly impell men to the perpetrating of the most flagitious crymes whatsoeuer Seeing vpon these their grouÌ„ds granting them by supposall for true they may iustly Apologize for themselues First that they are to be pardoned in all such their Enormous actions seeing they had not Free-will to forbeare the committing of them punishment euen in force of Reason belongeth to such only in whose power it is to do or not to do such or such a wicked thing Secondly they may Reply that seeing by their former Doctrines of Predestination and Reprobation a vicious lyfe is no way preiudiciall to a mans predestination not a vertuous life for the preuenting of ReprobatioÌ„ why may they not then liue yea become thrall to all pleasure voluptuousnes sensuality without any remorse or sting of CoÌ„science Againe by their sayd Doctrines of Predestination and Reprobation we yearely see many most lamentable Tragedies of diuers shortning their owne dayes by violent deaths wrought by their owne Hands some euen butchering themselues through a vayne hope and expectation of ariuing the sooner to Heauen And others agayne perpetrating the lyke through a most wicked and desperate conceyt of their Reprobation that it is not in their power concurring with Gods grace to preuent it so forgetful these men are of those most comfortable words of holy Scripture (i) Ezech. 18.31.32 Cast away all your transgressions c. for I desire not the death of him that dyeth This speaketh he who hath placed his (1) Psalm 18. Tabernacle in the Sunne and who himselfe being Sol increatus is not inexorable but wil lend a willing eare to him who hath true penitency of his sinnes saying to such Deleui (2) Isa 44. vt nubem iniquitates tuas quasi nebulam peccata tua 9. In lyke sort touching their Doctrines that good workes are not auaylable towards IustificatioÌ„ nor are respected by God nor sinnes or bad workes any way exitiall or hurtfull to Saluation as also that Tenet of diuers Protestants that God is the Authour of all our Sinnes what a sluce and fludgate do these Doctrines open to all turpitude in maÌ„ners and Conuersation For seeing it is nauseous and vngratefull to mans nature to weary himselfe out in the exercise of a vertuous lyfe if such a life as wanting all pleasing motiues thereto be no wayes beneficiall to his Soule as on the contrary most sweet to man to liue in all voluptuousnes pleasure and Iouialisme if so this course cannot be in any sort dangerous to him and this the more seeing he is indoctrinated by diuers Protestants that what sinnes are coÌ„mitted by him God is the Authour of them himselfe but Gods bare instrument therein they by such their beliefe running vpon the Dint of those words spoken by the Psalmist in the Person of God (l) Psalm 128. supra dorsum meuÌ„ fabricauerunt peccatores As if I would say they haue transferred the committing of their sinnes euen vpon me Thus they making God who dyed for sinne to be the Patrone of sinne 10. The Doctrine of Polygamy and Diuorce according to Swinglius and others most different from the iudgment of other Protestants how doth it sow the seeds of dissention betweene husband and wyfe to repudiate one the other and to part a sunder vpon the least dislike or discontent on eyther side boâ—h of them to mary againe they being warranted by this Doctrine to take vpon occasion of such discontents as many wyues and husbands as they will so both the parties liuing after their first Diuorce in a continuall state of Adultery and begetting and bringing forth seuerall broods of bastards 11. The Positions of some Protestants aboue alledged that no Princes or Magistrates are now to be in the tymes of the new Testament ingendreth nothing but a tumultuous Anarchy intestine simulties warrs and Traiterous insurrections of the Subiects against their Prince threating vipar-lyke an vtter euisceration of their owne Country And woe be to that Nation or Realme which nourisheth such Monsters of sedition and disloyalty and which placeth all Soueraingty and Principality in the common people the many Headed-Tyrant of Mankind since the certaine euent thereof will be that a mans owne Country shall finally become a Golgathae or field of bloud And with this my Pen giues it last pause to this short discourse AN APPENDIX In which is proued First that the ancient Fathers by the acknowledgements of the learned Protestants taught our Catholike and Roman Fayth Secondly that the said Fathers haue diuers aduantages aboue the Protestant Writers for fynding out the true sense of the Scripture WHEREAS in this former Treatise I meane in the tenth Paragraph we haue shewed how most Protestants do contemne the ancient Fathers exercising their fomy language in the eiuculation of most gaulfull words agaynst them though the sayd Fathers be by other more moderate Protestants respected reuerenced Now heere in this short Appendix I thinke it to be much conuenient First to shew the reason more particularly why the Protestants do rest disaffected agaynst the Fathers It being though aboue in part intimated in that it is ackowledged by the ProtestaÌ„ts themselues that all the Articles of Catholike Religion were with an Vniformity of Iudgment belieued taught and practised by the sayd Fathers in those most pure tymes Secondly I will make it euident euen with seuerall choaching Reasons why euery Christian Man solicitous of entertayning a true faith should prefer the ancient Fathers in the ExpositioÌ„ of the Scriptures from whence they draw of theirs and our Catholike fayth and Religion before the different or contrary expositions of them giuen by the ProtestaÌ„t Doctours The discouery of which later Point shall rest in setting down diuers conducing and auaylable Circumstances in behalf of the Fathers but altogether preiudiciall and incompetent to the Protestants Which two former Points shall be the Subiect of this short Appendix Now to begin with the first I meane in
ΑΔΕΛΦΟΜΑΧΙΑ OR THE WARRS OF PROTESTANCY Being a Treatise wherein are layd open the wonderfull and almost incredible DISSENTIONS of the Protestants among themselues in most if not all Articles of Protestācy And this proued from their owne wordes writinges VVritten by a Cath. Priest WHEREVNTO IS ADIOYNED A briefe Appendix in which is proued First That the Ancient Fathers by the acknowledgments of the learned Protestants taught our Cath. and Roman Fayth Secondly That the said Fathers haue diuers aduantages aboue the Protestant Writers for finding out the true sense of the Scripture I will set the Aegyptians against the Aegyptians so euery one shall fight against his Brother Isa 19. M.DC.XXXVII TO THE LEARNED PROTESTANT WRYTERS the Authour of this Treatise vvisheth all true Fayth LEARNED MEN. It may be you will thinke strange that I haue selected you from all others to dedicate this small Treatise vnto I cannot expect your Patronage heereof in regard of the disparity of our Religions My mayne Allectiue of this my Dedication is Because You being placed vpon the stage of the Worlds Eye and most different from me in Fayth and Religion may by reading these few leaues perceaue with what disease of Contrarieties in Fayth Protestancy being your owne Religion doth labour A most dangerous sicknes and such as in tyme through its violent Conuulsions may threaten its owne future dissolution Heere you shall fynd that the chiefest Protestants haue with their Pens made infinit blots and blurs of Contradictions in their Writings So certaine it is that the high swelling Riuer of Protestancy is fedde with the different or rather most opposite opinions of ech Professour of it Therefore I probably assure my selfe and the rather in regard of your presumed Integrity Learning and other good Parts that after your perusall of this Treatise you will euen blush in your owne Brethrens behalfe For is it not strange and deseruing Admiration to fynd men otherwise reputed most learned to be so flexuous variable and of such fluctuating iudgments touching their doctrines as that Andraeas Duditius a literate Protestant doth in these words following euaporate forth his griefe conceaued through his owne Brethrens dissentions In (a) Beza in Epist. Theolog. epist. ad Dudit pag. 5. relateth these words of Duditius what Religion sayth he do they agree who impugne the Roman Bishop If you examin all from the head to the foote you shall almost fynd nothing affirmed by one which another will not affirme to be wicked c. Their deuines do daily differ from themselues c. menstruam fidem habent coyning a Monthly Fayth Thus we see how Duditius strikes his owne Religion euen in its mayster-Veyne Who notwithstanding is called by Beza (b) Beza vbi supra pag. 1. Clarissimus ornatissimus Vir and saluted by him by the name of (c) vbi supra pag. 2. Frater And the Learned Melancthon complayneth in like sort of this point saying Quos (d) The authour of the Treatise intituled A mirrour for Martinists printed 1590. pag. 24. relateth these words as spoken by Melancthon fugiamus habemus meaning the Papists sed quos sequamur non intelligimus In so much as he further writeth in one of his Bookes Nulla (e) Melancthon in Concil Theolog. part 1. pag. 149. res aquè deterret homines ab Euangelio ac nostra discordia Thus Learned Men you see that the Sphere of Protestancy euen in the iudgment of its owne Mathematicians turneth vpon the Poles of Dissention in doctrine I presume that you haue made great progresse not only in the study of Diuinity but also in humane Learning and Philosophy Call then to remembrance How God in his Creation of the World and the parts thereof may seeme euen zealously to affect Vnity Concordancy Non (f) 1. Cor. 14. est dissentionis Deus fed Facis For first do we not see how the seuerall Spheres in Heauen in their continuall rotation and mouing both in respect of Primum Mobile as also of their peculiar Motions do notwithstanding the diuersity of them still moue without any hindrance or crossing one of anothers Motions in that sweet temper as that some of the Philosophers did ascribe a pleasing and Musicall Harmony to such their Motions In like sort to contemplate vpon the Elements How hath that supreme Workman made them to conspire and agree togeather through force of their symbolizing qualities In so much as by this meanes there is a Transelementation among them one turning it selfe into another Againe how wonderfully by the hand of the same Diuine Prouidence do the Inferiour Causes in Nature humble as it were and subiect themselues to the Higher Causes without the least Reluctation or Contradiction In the proportion of Mans body and the Faculties thereof what Miracles of Vnity and Concordancy are found one member thereof becomming seruiceable to another and all of them Vniting the forces without any mutiny as I may say for the keeping of the whole Body in a gratefull repose of Health Yf then God who hath created all things in Numero Pondere Mensura Who is euer working yet euer quiet more radiant shyning in his Works then all Light more high then all sublimity and yet more low then any depth Being aboue all in gouerning of things Vnderneath all in supporting of things Finally internall in all things by his penetration externall to all things by his comprehending them within his large Circumference If then I say this most wise Intelligence or Spirit Spiritus (g) Ioan. 4. est Deus be so sollicitous in the structure and manner of creating preseruing of things created and this with a most stupendious and conspiring Symmetry Proportion and Consonancy not brooking in them the least iarre of Diuision how can it be thought that he would institute a Religion for the sauing of Mans Soule for whom all other things are created which consisteth of such Heterogenious and different doctrines as Protestancy is found to be exhaling and breathing nothing but Enormity in Manners Simulties Oppositions and manifest Contradictions in Fayth the Professours thereof tearing asunder ech others reputation honour with their violent Philippicks and declamatory Satyrs It is not probable It is not credible It is not possible The true Church of Christ is charactred in sacred Writ with the stampe of Vnity therefore it is stiled (h) Ioan. 20. One sheepfould (i) Rom. 1◠One Body (k) Cant. 6. One Spouse These things then Worthy Men being thus explorate and euident let not the fruition of temporall Preferments and Opulency of state neither the Applause of Men being but a poore wyndy purchase of Ayre nor any other humane and transitory Respects since all these are but glorious and guilded Miseries seele vp your Iudgment and Will from acknowledging and practizing the truth of Religion (l) Matth. 10. Quid prodest homini si vniuersum mundum lacretur Animae verò suae detrimentum
patiatur O remember That euery thing is short which is measured with the yard of Tyme and Eternity only long Striue therefore in a Christian contempt of Temporalities to say in zeale of spirit with S. Austin Fecisti (m) L. 1. Confess c. 1. nos Domine ad te inquietum est cor nostrum donec requiescat in te And assure your selues that what thing soeuer is as I may say out of God soone breedeth a fastidious saciety 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Thus forbearing further surplusage of Words I commit you to his Holy Protection of whom through the boundles sea of his Mercy it is said If any (n) Apocalyp â— Man will heare his voyce and open the Gate he will come into him and suppe with him I beseech his Diuine Maiesty that you may auayleably interest your selues in this most comfortable Inuitation Yours in all Christian Loue and Charity B. C. Aduertisment to the Reader THIS Treatise is entituled Adelphomachia which Greeke Word signifieth A fight among Brethren because it sheweth the DISSENTIONS among the Protestants themselues touching matter of Fayth and Religion All which Protestants whether they be Lutherans Swinglians or Caluinists which are comprehended vnder the name of Swinglians do hold one another for Brethren For Doctour Whitaker in respons ad rationes Campiani rat 8. thus confesseth of this Point We willingly honour Luther for our Father and the Lutherans and the Swinglians as our most deare Brethren in Christ. A TABLE OF Such disagreements of the Protestants in matter of Fayth and Religion as are handled and set downe in the ensuing Treatise § 1. THe Contentions deliuered in most contumetious Words of one Protestant against another Protestant And first of the Lutherans against the Sacramentaries or Swinglians and Caluinists Secondly of the Swinglians or Caluinists against the Lutherans Thirdly of the Lutherans among themselues Fourthly the Caluinists among themselues Fyftly The Puritans against the moderate Protestants Sixtly the Moderate Protestants against the Puritans Within which Clause are comprehended the English moderate Protestants and the English Puritans § 2. The most splenefull Titles full of malignity of twenty Bookes made by Protestants against other Protestants their Brethren § 3. Touching other externall Comportment of the Protestants among themselues And first the prohibiting of the Sale and Reading of ech others Bookes 2. The banishing of ech other from their Territories 3. The appointing of Articles of Visitation and enquiry concerning the discouery and apprehending of ech other 4. Their committing of ech other to Prison 5. The entring into open Armes of one Party against another 6. The inhumane deportment of some Protestants against the dead Bodies of other Protestants All which seuerall kinds of Violent Proceedings are only for matter of Religion among the Protestants § 4 Disagreements touching the Scripture First what Bookes be Scripture what not 2. Touching the Translation of acknowledged Scripture either in Latin or in English 3. Touching the supposed easinesse or difficulty of the sense of the Scripture § 5. The English Protestant disagreements touching their Communion Booke of Prayer § 6. The Protestants disagreements touching Christ First touching the Nature of Christ 2. Whether Christ did merit any thing for himselfe or not 3. According to what Nature Christ suffered 4. Whether Christ dyed for all the World or but for the Elect only 5. Whether Heathens not belieuing in Christ can be saued § 7. Disagreements touching the Primacy of Peter and his successours § 8. Whether the Pope be Antichrist or not 2. Supposing him to be Antichrist at what tyme Antichrist did come § 9. Disagreements touching the Church First whether the Protestant Church hath euer beene Visible 2. Whether in the Protestant Church there euer hath beene a Perpetuall Succession and Vocation of Ministers 3. Who be the Persons that constitute the Protestant Church 4. Whether Papists dying Papists and members of the present Roman Church can be saued § 10. Disagreements Whether the Ancient Fathers of the Primatiue Church are to be admitted or reiected § 11. Whether the Authority of Generall Councells are to be admitted or reiected § 12. Whether there be any Apostolicall Traditions or not § 13. Disagreements touching the Sacraments First of the number of the Sacraments 2. Whether the knowne intention of the Church be necessary to the Administration of the Sacraments 3. Whether any of the Sacraments do imprint any indeleble Character in the Receauers of them 4. Whether the Sacraments do only signify or withall conferre Grace § 14. Baptisme in particular First Whether Baptisme be absolutly Necessary or not 2. Whether any particular forme of Words be necessary in Baptizing or not 3. Whether Lay Persons and Women in tyme of Necessity may administer Baptisme § 15. Disagreemenâ—â— whether Man hath Freewill or not § 16. Disagreements touching the doctrine of certainty of Reprobation of Predestination and of the certainty of Iustification § 17. Disagreements touching the doctrine of good Works First Whether good Works do merit or not or at least be necessary to saluation 2. Whether Perpetuall Chastity Fasting and Pouerty be gratfull and pleasing to God or not 3. Whether Vowes be now lawfull in these tymes of Christianity § 18. Disagreements touching the doctrine of Sinne First What Sinne is in its owne Nature 2. Touching the distinction of Veniall and Mortall sinne 3. Whether all sinnes be equaâ—l or not 4. Whether sinne be hurtfull to him that belieueth 5. Whether God be the Authour of sinne § 19. Disagreements Whether Absolute Princes and Magistrates ought to be now in the tyme of the Gospell and how their Authority may be resisted § 20. Disagreements touching Polygamy First whether a Man may haue many Wyues at one tyme 2. Touching diuorse and the Occasions thereof § 21. Other disagreements of Protestants touching twenty Catholike Points besides those aboue intreated of which points some Protestants belieue as true others reiect them as false The point are these following 1. Touching Christs descending into Hell presently after his Corporal death 2. Touching â—â—bus Patrum 3. Touching 〈◊〉 â—cession of Saints 4. Touching intercession of Angells 5. Touching Inuocation of Saintes 6. Touching Prayer for the dead 7. Touching the Possibility of the Ten Commandements 8. Touching the Patronage of certaine Angells ouer certaine Countryes 9. Touching Images to be in the Churches 10. Touching reuerence and bowing downe to the Name of IESVS 11. Whether the good Works of one may help another 12. Whether Christ as Man was from his Natiuity freed from Ignorance 13. Touching Euangelicall Counsells or Works of Supererogation 14. Whether it can be knowne to vs without the Churches Tradition What Scriptures be Canonicall what not 15. Whether Jnfants haue actuall Fayth in the tyme of their Baptising 16. Whether the Sacraments of the Old Testament be of equall force and vertue with the Sacraments of the New Testament 17. Touching Auricular Confession 18. VVhether temporall Punishment be reserued for sinne already remitted
Authoriries of the ancient Fathers Whose Pens were euer imployed against euery then new arising Doctrine not bearing Vnity to the Fayth of Gods Vniuersall Church we fynd S. Athanasius thus to Wryte Jllud (y) Orat. 1. contra Arianos quoque prorsus admirabile c. This also is very wonderfull that all Heresyes in coyning diuers things do differ in themselues and do iointly agree in defence of falshood S. Chrysostome sharpeneth his penne in this sort against the Enemyes of Vnity in Fayth Omnes Infideles (z) Opera imperfect in Math. hom 20. qui sub diabolo sunt c. All such Infidells or Misbelieuers which are in the power of the Diuell are not vnited but are deuided through diuersity of Opinions And such is the want of Fayth among Hereticks who neuer agree in one consent of Things but maintayne as seuerall Opinions as themselues are seuerall in number Thus S. Chrysostome S. Hilarius in this sort pensilleth out the face and countenance of disagreing Heretiks (a) L. 7. dâ— Trinitate Haeretici omnes contra Ecclesiam veniunt c. All Heretiks do assault the Church But whiles Heretiks do mutually ouercome one another they ouercome nothing therin since their Victory when one Heresy doth euen fight against another is finally become the TriuÌ„ph of the Church Tertullian (b) L. de Praescription aduersus Haeres 41. writes of this point in this manner Inspectae Haereses omnes c. All Heresyes being truly looked into are deprehended to dissent in many things euen with thiâ— owne Authours I will conclude with Irenaeus Videmus (c) L. 1. c. 5. in initio nunc corum inconstantem sententiam c. We now see their inconstant iudgment who if they be but two or three in number how diuersly they teach the same things And further the said Father Durum (d) Vbi supra c. 1â— est omnium describere sententias c. Jt is a difficult thing to set downe the different Sentences of all Hereticks For greater breuity of this point I refer the Reader to the testimonies of S. Ierome (e) In Math. â—4 S. Austin (f) Contra Epist Parmenian l. 3. c. 4. S. Ambrose (g) L. de fide ad Gratianum c. â— and the Councell of (h) In de cretis Synod Niâ—e nae contra Haeresâ—m Arianam Nyce And thus far touching the Fathers herein Now in this last place to ascend to the sacred Authorities of Gods Word which are the stamps sealing vp the Truth of all the former Humane Authorities which testimonies I reserue hitherto wherewith to close yp the Iudgment of the Reader herein And first to shew the Vglines of Dissention we read (i) Luc. 11. Euery Kingdome deuided in it selfe shall perish And vpon this ground the Prophet thus prayeth Destroy (k) Psalm â—5 O Lord and deuide their Tongues implying hereby that their deuided Tongues in iudgment shall occasion their destruction And another Prophet in further proofe of this point thus hath left recorded Their (l) Ose â—0 Hart is deuided they shall now perish And the Wiseman instructeth vs in these Words God (m) Prouerb 6. hateth him that raiseth vp Contentions among Brethren All which Scripturall Authorities as they shew the malice wickednes of Disunion and Dissention in generall so they implicitly and potentially proue that Want of Vnity in Doctrine cannot stand with true Fayth Therefore the more reason had the Apostle S. Paul to vse this his feruerous admonition to the Christians of his tyme saying I beseech (n) 1. Cor. 1. you Brethren that there be no dissentions among you Not forsaking (o) Hebr. 10. the fellowship which we haue among our selues Neither is the Apostle lesse slow in recommending the Vertue of Vnity in expresse words though this be coincident with the former for thus he instructeth his followers I beseech (p) 1. Cor. 1. you that you all speake one thing be you knit togeather in one mind and one iudgment (q) Ephes 4. Endeuoring to keep the Vnity of spirit in the band of peace God is the God (r) 1. Cor. 14. not of diuision but of Peace And according hereto we read that our Sauiour prayed for the Members of his Church that they may be One (s) Ioan. 17. And to conclude according to this his prayer it is recorded that the Multitude of them which belieued were (t) Act. 4. of One Hart and One Soule so luxuriant abounding we fynd the sacred Scriptures to be â—or the extirpation of all Dissention and Diâ—ision out of the society of Christians and â—or the entertayning of Vnity among them in all Matters of Religion Now then hauing thus demonstrated the Necessity of Vnion in matters of Fayth both from diuine and humane Authorities and withall hauing in the beginning aboue as it were beset all wayes passages by which our Aduersaries might in a vulgar iudgment seeme to assault vs by their pretence of some weake and feeble Reasons (u) Szegedin the Protestant in loc om pag. 1â—4 thus saith Vnity one of the Notes of the Church for proofe of Diuision in Fayth to be in our Catholike Church it remayneth that we hasten to shew whether Vnity in Fayth as being a Marke of the true Church euen by the iudgment of Protestants themselues can be found in Protestancy Or in place thereof implacable and irreconcileable Disagreements and Warres A most foule scarre or moale to remayne vpon the Fayth of the supposed Chiefe Professours of the Ghospell So indisputably true it is that Protestancy lyes exposed or rather becomes thrall to all Fluctuation Inconstancy in doctrine And with this I say I will hasten to present to the sight of the Reader that face which is ingendred of so many Contradictions in Fayth and I will be content for the tyme to become the Protestants Herauld in blasing the Armes of their Contentions So shall the Reader withall discerne that the Protestants Pens are euer prest and ready to discharge vpon their owne Brethren for matter of Fayth and Religion euen whole Volleys of shot of most reproachfull Words and intemperate Language ΑΔΕΛΦΟΜΑΧΙΑ OR THE WARRS OF PROTESTANCY The I. Paragraph BEFORE we enter into the distentions of the Protestants touching particular Doctrines seuerally maintayned by seuerall sydes of them I will first lay open with what kind and brotherly language one Sect of them and yet all good Protestants doth entertayne another Now this Discors Concordia this disagreeing Harmony of theirs consisteth of many parts To wit First of the Lutherans against the Sacramentaries I meane the Swinglians and Caluinists then reciprocally of the Caluinists against the Lutherans Secondly The Lutherans among themselues Thirdly The Caluinists among them selues Fourthly The Moderate Protestant against the Puritan and the Puritan against the Moderate Protestant within which Clause are comprehended the Eâ—gâ—â—sh Moderate Protestants and the English Puritans 1 And to
l. 4. cap. 17. §. 16. Marcion is raised out of Hell And in like sort Caluin thus more writeth The (t) Admonit 3. ad Westâ—y balum Lutherans are forgets and Lyars These implacable and mutuall dissentions betweene the Lutherans and the Caluinists are so great and irreconcileable as that Conradus (u) Schlusselburg in Theolog. Caluinist in his Catalogue praecipuorum Doctrinae Capitum c. Schlusselburg the great Lutheran reciteth three and thirty seuerall Articles of Doctrine in question and controuerted betweene the Lutherans whom he defendeth and the Caluinists against whom he writeth And Luke Osiander the Protestant did write a Treatise bearing this title Enchiridion Controuersiarum quas Augustanae Confessionis Theologi habent cum Caluinianis Printed Tubingae 1603. And Hubberus a learned Lutheran wrote a booke in Dutch printed Regiomonti 1592. hauing this title The Opposition of the Lutheran and Caluinian Doctrine in certaine chiefe Articles of Fayth So iust reason had Nicolaus Gallus the Protestant and superintendent at Ratisbone thus to complayne of the Contentions betweene his owne Brethren all Protestants Non (x) In Thesibus of Hypoiâ—esibus sunt leues c. The dissentions that are among vs are not of light matters but of the greatest articles of Christian Doctrine of the Law and the Gospell of Iustification and good Workes c. And finally Pappus the Protestant hath no lesse resentment and feeling touching this point thus writing Etsi (y) Papipus in Theolog. Caluinist l 1. Art 28. initio de vno tantùm articulo c. Although in the beginning one only Article was called into doubt notwithstanding the Caluinists are now so far gone as they call in doubt neither few neither the least Articles of Christian Doctrine c. With whome conspites Bullinger the Protestant in these words Ipsi inter (*) Bullinger in his â—undamentum fiâ—mum cap. 1. pag. 5. se Euangelici acriter pungunt pugnant c. Those alone who are professours of the Gospell do vehemently prick and feight one against another And from hence are hard among vs those vnfortunate names or appellations of the Lutherans and the Swinglians 3. In this next place let vs behould how the Lutherans do agree among themselues Their contentions are so great that Conradus Schlussenburg (z) Schlussâ—lb in Catal. Haeret nostri temporis l. 2. the most eminent Lutheran placeth six sorts of his owne Lutherans in the Catalogue of Heretikes And from this seuerall sort of Lutherans did first rise that distinction of Molles Lutherant and Rigidi Lutherani These seuerall Kinds of Lutherans had seuerall appellations or names for some of them were called Substantarij for teaching sinne to be of the essence and nature of Man Others opposite to these were tearmed Accidentarij who impugned the former Opinion Some called Vbiquitarij for confounding Christs Humanity with his Diuinity Some called Osiandrians in regard of their different Doctrine of Iustification Some others were styled Maiorists of Gregorius Maior in respect of the necessity of Good Workes Others Flaccians of Flaccus Illyricus who oppugned the Maiorists therein Finally others were denominated Adiaphorists for maintayning the indifferency of Rites and Ceremonies wherein they are greatly written against by the Flaccians Now all these as aboue is said are Lutherans and do imbrace and acknowledg the Confession of Augusta which Confession of fayth the Caluinists do wholy reiect And yet these Seuerall sorts of Lutherans haue written and published seuerall Bookes one against another in defence of their seuerall maintayned different Doctrines 4. To come to the Sacramentaries or Caluinists alone we find that Castalio the Sacramentary or Caluinist condemneth Caluin himselfe for his presumed Doctrine of God being the Authour of sinne thus writing hereof By this (a) Castal l. ad Caluinum de Praedestinat meanes not the Deuill but the God of Caluin is the Father of Lyes But that God which the holy Scripture teacheth is altogether contrary to this God of Caluin And then after The true God came to destroy the workes of the Caluinian God And these two Gods as they be contrary in Nature one to another so they beget and bring forth Children of contrary disposition to wit that God of Caluin Children without mercy proud c. Thus the foresaid Castalio In like sort Caluin (1) L. de Coena Dom. l. 4 Instit c. 15. sect 1 wholy condemneth Swinglius for his teaching that the Sacraments are bare externall signes and (2) Epist. ad quandam Germaniae Ciuitatem fol. 196. Swinglius reciprocally condemneth Caluin for his teaching that to the Sacraments more is attributed then to externall signes According to these dissentions of the Protestants or Sacramentaries among themselues Doctour Willet a formall Protestant thus reprehendeth M. Hooker D. Couell and others in these words From this Fountayne (b) In his meditat vpon the 12â— Psalme haue sprung forth those and such other whirlepooles and bubbles of new doctrine c. and then after Thus haue some beene bould to teach and write who as some Schismatikes meaning the Puritans haue disturbed the peace of the Church one way in externall matters concerning Discipline they haue troubled the Church another way by opposing themselues by new quirks and deuises to the soundnes of Doctrine among Protestants Thus far D. Willet of the strifes among the moderate Protestants themselues In this last passage we will descend more particularly to the doctrinall contentions of English moderate Protestants and English Puritans And to begin the English Puritans writing against the English Protestants thus say If (c) In a Treatise entituled A Christian and modest offer p. 11. we be in errour and the Prelats on the contrary side haue the truth we protest to all the World that the Pope and the Church of Rome and in them God and Christ haue great wrong and indignity offered vnto them in that they are reiected c. And more the English Puritans thus complayn hereof Do we (d) In the mild defence of the silenced Ministers supplication to the high Court of ParlameÌ„t vary from the sincere doctrine of the Scripture Nay rather many of them meaning the Bishops and their Adherents do much swarue from the same touching generall Grace and the death of Christ for euery particular person c. Touching the manner of Christs presence in the Eucharist c. Finally the English Puritans do more fully dismaske themselues thus bursting out and maintayning that the (e) These Positions of the Puritans are verbally recited and condemned in the booke entituled Constitutions and Canons Ecclesiasticall printed anno 1604 Worship of the Church of England is corrupt superstitious vnlawfull repugnant to the Scriptures Againe The Articles of the Bishops Religion are erroneous their rites Antichristian Aâ—d yet more The gouerment of the Church of England vnder his Maiesty by Archbishops and Deanes is Antichristian and repugnant to the word of God 6. Now to turne ouer
in defence of the deceits and falsifications with which Iohn Caluin in a detestable manner hath corrupted the most illustrious or cleare testimonies of Scripture touching the mistery of the Trinity as also the Oracles of the Prophets concerning Christ 3. Demonstratio imposturarum fraudum quibus Aegidâ—us Hunnius Ecclesiae Othodoxae doctrinam petulanter corrumpere pergit Brema 1592. A demonstration of the impostures and deceits with the which Egidius Hunnius proceedeth perulantly to corrupt the doctrine of the Orthodoxall Church 4. Oratio de Incarnatione filij Dei contra impios blasphemos Errores Swinglianorum Caluinisturum Tubingae 1586. An Oration or Discourse of the Incarnation of the Sonne of God against the wicked blasphemous Errours of the Swinglians and the Caluinists 5. Aegidij Hunnij Caluinus Iudaicans Hoc est Iudaicae Glossae corruptelae quibus Ioannes Caluinus illustrissima Scripturae sacra loca testimonia de gloriosa Trinitate Deitate Christi spiritus Sancti Cum primiâ— autem vaticinia Prophetarum de Aduentu Messiae natiuitate eius Passione Resurrectione Ascensione ad Caelos Sestiane ad Dexiram Dei detestandum in modum corrumpere non abhorruit Wittembergae 1593. Caluinus Iudâ—iâ—ans written by Egidius Humnius That is a declaration of the Iudaicall expositions and falsifications with the which Iohn Caluin was not afraid detustâ—â—bly to corrupt the most cleare places and testimonies of Holy Scripture against the glorious Trinity the Deity of Christ and the Holy Ghost As also the Prophesies touching the Incarnation of the Messias his Natiuity Passion Resurrection Ascension to Heauen and his sitting at the right hand of God 6. Pia defensio aduersus Ioannis Caluini Petri Boquini Theodori Bezae Willielmi Clebitij c. similium Calumnias Item Refutatio Pelagiani seu Anabaptistici Caluinistarum Erroris de Baptismo peccato Originali Adduntur Collectanea plurimoruÌ„ Caluins contra Deum eius Prouâ—dentiam Praedestinationem Printed Errordiae 1583. A godly Defence against the Calumnies or deceits of Iohn Caluin Peter Boquinus Theodorus Beza Willielmus Clebitius and such others c. Also a Refutation of the Pelagian or Anabaptisticall errour of the Caluinists concerning Baptisme and Originall sinne Here are also adioyned certaine Collections out of Caluin against God and his Prouidence and Predestination 7. Veritatis Victoria ruina Papatus Saxonici Printed Losannae 1563. The Victory of the Truth and the ruine of the Papacy of Saxony 8. Conradi Schlusselburgi Theologiae Caluinisticae libri tres in quibus seu in tabula quadam quasi ad oculum plusquam ex ducentis viginti triâ—us Sacramentariorum publicis scriptis pagellis verbis proprijs Authorum Nominibus indicatis demonstratur eos de nullo ferè Christianae Fidei articulo rectè sentire Francoforti 1594. Three bookes written by Conradus Schlusselburg touching Caluinisticall Diuinity in which as in a table to the very eye is demonstrated from more then two hundred twenty three publike writings of the Sacramentaries with setting downe the pages their owne words and the Names of the Authors that the Caluinists do scarsly belieue truly any one Article of Christian Fayth 9. Argumentorum Obiectorum de praecipuis articulis doctrinae Christianae cum Responsionibus quae sunt collecta ex scriptis Philippi Melancthonis additis scholijs illustrantibus vsum singularum responsionum partes septem Neap oli 1578. Seauen partes or Heades touching the Arguments and Obiections of the principall articles of Christian Religion with their Answeres Which Answeres are gathered out of the writings of Philipp Melancthon with the illustration of the vse of all the Answeres 10. Responsio triplex ad Fratres Tubingenses triplex eorum scriptum de tribus grauissimiâ— Quaestionibus de Coena Domini de Maiestate hominis Christi de non damnandis Ecclesijs Dei nec auditis nec vocatis Geneuae 1582. A threefould Answere to the brethren of Tubing and their threefould writing touching three most weighty Questions to wit of the supper of our Lord of the Maiesty of Christs as man and of not condemning the Churches of God before they be heard and called to answere for themselues 11. Gulielmi Zepperi Dillenbergensis Ecclesia Pastoris Institutio de tribus Religionis summis Capitibus quae inter Euangelicos in Controuersiam vocantur Hanoniae 1596. An Institution or Discourse made by Gulielmus Zepperus Pastour of the Church of Dillinberg concerning three chiefe Heades or points of Religion which are called into Controuersy by the Professours of the Gospell 12. Apologia ad omnes Germaniae Ecclesias reformatas quae sub Swingliani Caluiniani Nominis inuidia vim iniuriam patiuntur Tiguri 1578. An Apology to all the reformed Churches of Germany the professours whereof suffer wrong and iniury vnder the title of being Swinglians or Caluinists 13. Ad Ioannis Brentij argumenta Iacobi Andreae Theses quibus Carnis Christi omni-praesentiam nituntur confirmare Id est aduersum renouatos Nestorij Eutichetis Errores responsum Geneuae 1570. An Answere to the arguments of Iohn Brentius and to the Theses of Iacobus Andreas by the which they labour to confirme the omni-presence of Christs Flesh That is against the reuiued Errours of Nestorius and Eutiches 14. Colloqui Montisbelgardensis inter Iacobum Andream Theodorum Bezam Acta Tubingae 1584. The Acts of the Conference at Mont-belgard betweene Iacobus Andreas and Theodorus Beza 15. Christophori Pezelij Apologia verae doctrinae de definitione Euangelij apposita Thrasonicit prastigijs Ioannis Wigandi Wittembergae 1572. An Apology of Christopher Pezelius touching the true doctrine of the definition of the Gospell opposed against the Thrasonicall and boasting sleights and impostures of Ioannes Wigandus 16. Hamelmannia siue Aries Theologizans Dialogus appositus duabus Narrationibus Historicis Hamelmanni Neostadij 1582. Hamelmannia Or a Theologizing Ramme being a Dialogue impugning two historicall Narrations of Hermannus Hamelmannus 17. Hieremiae Victoris vera dilucida demonstratio quod Swingliani Caluinistae nunquam se subiecerunt Confessioni Augustanae exhibita Carolo Quinto Anno 1530. Germ. Francofurti 1591. A true and euident Demonstration prouing that the Swinglians and the Caluinists did neuer submit themselues to the Confession of Augusta exhibited in tyme of Charles the Fifth 18. Christiani Kittelmanni decem graues perniciosi Errores Swinglianorum in doctrina de peccatis Baptismo ex proprijs eorum libris Collecti refutati Madelburgi 1592. Ten weighty and pernicious Errours of the Swinglians concerning the doctrine of sinne Baptisme being taken out of their owne Bookes and refuted by Christianus Kittelmanus 19. Responsio ad scriptum quod Theologi Bremenses aduersus Collectores Apologiae formula Concordiae publicarunt Lipsiae 1585. An answere to the writing which the Deuines of Brema published against the Collectours of the Apology of the forme of Concord 20. Ioannis Mosellani Praeseruatiua contra venenum Swinglianorum Tubingae 1586. A Preseruatiue of Ioannes Mossellanus
against the poyson of the Swinglians Thus far of these twenty Titles of the Protestant venemous kind of writing one against another And here we may say with the Poet ex vno discite omnes that is from Consideration of these twenty titles only we may make the like coniecture of many scores of bookes by them written Only this I may note that if the Titles of the foresaid bookes be so fraught with Malice what spleenfull sentences full of Rancour may in all probability be thought to occur here and there in the said bookes The III. Paragraph BVt what doth the Scene of the Protestants Disagreements rest only in words and writing one against another No for it passeth further finally into extreme and barbarous outrages For first they are not content to call one another Heretikes as by many afore alledged testimonies are euident but with all they prohibit the sale reading of ech others books For thus Hospinian the Protestant writeth touching the restraint made in Sxony Edictum promulgatum (m) In histor Sacrament part altera fol. 393. est c. An edict is promulgated diuulged by the which not only the reading but also the selling of all bookes written by the Caluinists is prohibited And the Lutherans do charge the Caluinists in this sort Biblia (n) Hospinian vbi suprà fol. 3â—4 Catechismum Lutheri c. The Caluinists haue prohibited the Bibles and the Catechisme approued by Luther and his followers Secondly they banish ech other from their Territories not suffering them to enter therein as Crispinus (o) In his booke of the state of the Church pag. 697. Osiander (p) In Epitom histor Eccles Cent. 16. part altera pag. 803. 860. Conradus (q) In Catalogo Haret l. 13. vltimo pag. 828. 847. Schlusselburg all Protestants and others do witnes Thirdly they appoint Articles of Visitation and Enquiry concerning the discouery and apprehending of ech other For thus the foresaid Hospinian writeth of this point shewing how the Saxons made a petition to their Duke Vt famosos (r) Hospinian in histor Sacrament part altera fol. â—93 Sacramentariorum libros prohiberet c. That he would forbid all markable Bookes of the Sacramentaries and that he would chastice the Authours of them with due Punishments And that in the next visitation he would giue directions that All Caluinists should be cast out from the Schooles Churches from all Magistracy or publike gouerment Fourthly They commit them to imprisonment of which point Hospinian thus recordeth (s) Hospinian vbi supra Nicolaus Crellius Saxoniae Cancellarius in vincula conijcitur Nicolaus Crellius being Chancelour of Saxony is cast into bonds or Prison And againe in the foresayd place Theologi nonnulli c. Many Deuines being apprehended in seuerall places are cast into bonds Fifthly they will not affoard ech other Common entertaynement vsuall to all Strangers in euery Country This course of the Lutherans against the Caluinists is reported by the foresaid Hospinian (t) In histor Sacramen part 2 fol. 399. and by Osiander (u) In Epirom c. Cent. 16. pag. 6. 8. And on the other syde by the Caluinists against the Lutherans the same is related by (x) In Catalog Haeret l. 13. vltimo p. 828. Conradus Schlusselburge Sixtly they enter into Armes one syde against another For that the Lutherans did hastily and tumultuously assault the Caluinists is recorded by Hospinian (y) Vbi supra p. 395. And that the Caluinists did actually attempt the like against the Lutherans is witnessed by Osiander (z) Epitom Cent. 16. pag. 7â—â— p. 803. This is further euident by the Example of the Arminians and Gomorists not many yeares since in Holland where one called Barneuille being the head of one of the Factions was beheaded Lastly the implacable Dissentions haue beene so violent exceeding all humane Nature as that the Lutherans haue extended their malice towards the dead Corps of the Caluinists This is verified by Hospinian Cum (a) In histor Sacrament part 2. fol. 308. impetu occurrentes Sandapilam c. The Lutherans assaulting one called Sandapila by force in humanely vsing his body did expose it to be eaten by Dogs See here the Vatinian and irreconcileable hatred of the Protestants against the Protestants Now here the Reader is to be aduertized that the different Names of Lutherans Swinglians Sacramentaries Caluinists Puritans c. are not inuented for disgrace and contumely to the different Professours but euen of necessity for the better distinguishment of their different Doctrines And according hereto M. Parkes thus writeth touching the name of Puritans Neither (b) In his Apology vnder the title of Quaerulous Motions pag. 30. do I see any sufficient reason why those among vs whom singularity in Affection and Nouelty in Faction haue denominated Puritans should not be distinguished by that Name Bu. Conradus Schlusselburg passeth more fully into the subdiuision of the word Protestant thus writing (c) In Catalog Haeret l. 13. vltim de Interemistis p. 866. Neque verò nostra partis Theologi c. Neither do the Deuines of our syde name their Aduersaries Swinglians Caluinists Sacramentaries through detraction or bate neither when we our selues are called Lutherans Finally Hospinian thus writeth Schismatica (d) In histor Sacrament par altera throughout his whole-booke he vseth these different Names ista c. I hate these Schismaticall Names of Lutherans Swinglians Caluinists and yet I vse them in this my history for the better distinguishing of their doctrines and instructing the Reader So clearely appeares the great disparity of the seuerall Religions among them euen from the seuerall appellations imposed vpon the seuerall Professours Hauing in the precedent passages discoursed of the almost incredible Dissentions in Religion betweene seuerall sorts of Protestants and this chiefly from the alledging of wordes full of contumely disgrace and rancour one against another only for matter of Religion and from the tetricall harsh and opprobrious titles of twenty of their Bookes written in great acerbity of style and lastly from their externall comportment and yet all of them promiscuously assuming to themselues in generall the Name of Protestants I hould it now conuenient in this next place to descend more particularly to the different points of Religion in which these seuerall Sects maynely dissent among themselues one syde not approuing but wholy reiecting the iudgment of the other side The IV. Paragraph I Will begin touching the Question of the Word of God or Scripture And first touching such Bookes of Scripture as are reiected by some Protestants but approued and allowed for Scripture by other Protestants Secondly the Protestants disagreements in the Translation of confessed Scripture Thirdly touching their dissentions in the interpretation of such places or texts which are on all sydes confessed to be Canonicall Scripture and truly translated And to begin with the New Testament
presently they dissent in ech ones particular construction giuen thereof They resembling many lynes which meet together in one Center but then presently they breake of and runne seuerall wayes The Protestants do no lesse disagree touching the manner of receauing the body of Christ for First all the Lutherans mantaine with the Catholiks that the body of Christ is receaued with the Corporall mouth But Caluin teacheth it is truly present and receaued with the mouth of Fayth in regard whereof as placing a great Mystery therein Caluin thus breaketh forth in words Nihil (1) Caluin l. 4. Instit c 17. §. 7. restat c. Nothing remaineth but that I breake forth into admiration of this mistery the which neither the vnderstanding is able to conceaue nor the tongue to deliuer in words With Caluin agree herein D. (2) D. Whitak contra Duraeum pag 109. Whitaker The Confession (3) The Confession of Belgia in the English Harmony pag. 4â—1 of Belgia M. (4) Hooker Eccles pol. l. 5. sect 67. pag. 174. Hooker (5) Bucer inscript Anglic. p. 548. 549. Bucer and many others Yet this doctrine is impugned by Peter (6) Peter Martyr in his Epistles annexed to his Common places in English p. 107. epist. 25. Martyr (7) Aretius serm 1. de Coena Aretius Ludouicus (8) Alamannus in positionib apud Lugdunens editis anno 1566. Alamannus reproouing it in these words Neque etiam per fidem c. Neither is the body taken by the mouth of Fayth after an incomprehensible manner as they say for this is clearely imaginary and is euidently repugnant to the word of God Finally the former doctrine is denyed by all our English (9) In their Christian letter to M. Hooker pag. 35. Puritans Touching those words Thou art (t) Math. 16. Peter and vpon this rocke will I buyld my Church c. Now heere the Protestants to auoyde this pressing Authority for the proofe of Peters Primacy do answere seuerally and most distractedly For Caluin (u) Lib. 4. Instit c. 6. §. 6. sayth that here by the word Rock is vnderstood Christ figuratiuely (x) Eras in hunc locum Erasmus maintayneth that euery one of the faythfull is vnderstood thereby But (y) Lib. de Potestate Papae Luther that the Word Rock there signifyeth The Confession of our Fayth So disparate the Protestants are in themselues in the construction of this Text. In like sort they are not much lesse various in expounding that Article of the Creed Descendit ad inferos He descended into Hell For (*) Bucer in Math. â—â— Bucer by the word Hell vnderstandeth the Graue by the Figure Epexegesis or rather by an idle Tautology Yet Caluin and most though not all of the Caluinists do interprete by the word Hell that Christ suffered really and truly the paynes of Hell For thus Caluin discourseth of this text and the sense thereof Since (z) Calu. l. 1. Instit. c. 16 â—um â—0 11. Christ only by corporall Death could profit vs nothing his soule therefore ought to fight with euerlasting Death that by this meanes be might expiate our wickednes and punishment To whose construction herein (a) In Caâ—â—ches anâ—â— 155â— Brentius subscribeth Yea Caluin is so preâ—ipitious and resolute in his exposition of the former words as that he tearmeth all others Perditos (b) L. â— Iustit c. 26. num â—1 nebulenes qui doctrinam istam solatij plenam exagitant Lost and damned fellowes who should call in question this most Comfortable Doctrine So iust reason had that Blessed Martyr Father Campian to burst out in a Christian and Zealous feruour saying (c) In ratio redd Academ rat 8. O Tempora Tempora cuiusmodi monstrum aluistis Touching that place of Scripture I and my Father are one (*) Caluin in Ioan â—â— Caluin differently from all others affirmeth thus This text sheweth not that Christ is Consubstantiall with his Father Which exposition of Caluin is also defended by D. Whitaker contra Campian rat 8. pag. 123. In like sort that Sentence in Psalm 2. Thou art my sonne this day I haue begotten thee Which text proueth the Diuinity of Christ euen in the iudgment of most Protestants Yet Caluin differently expoundeth it from them thus wâ—â—â—ing in Hebr. c. 1. Friuola Augustini argutia est c. The subtility of Austin is here friuolous who by the word Hâ—diâ— interpreteth Eternall and Continuall Againe where we read 1. Ioan. 5. There be three which giue testimony in Heauen The Father the Word and the Holy Ghost and those three bâ— one alledged not only by the Fathers and Catholiks but also euen by most Protestants to proue the Diuinity of Christ yet Caluin vpon this place thus differently from them all expoundeth these words saying Quod dicit tres esse vâ—um ad essentiam non refertur sed ad consensum Whereas it is here said these three are one this is to be referred not to the essence but rather to consent Lastly to auoyd prolixity concerning the word Eloim in Genes c. 1. M. Willet vpon Genes in c. 1. thus vrgeth 11 Against the Iewes who deny the Trinity we haue euident proofe in this Chapter where the word Eloim c. Which Interpretation Peter Martyr and Zanchius in Hunnius his Anti-paraus pag. 16. 19. and many other Protestants of note do approue yet Caluin diss nteth in the Construction thereof from them all thus writing in Genes c. 1. Ex verbo Eloim colligero solent c. They are accustomed to infer from the Word Eloim that there are three persons in God but because the proofe of so great a matter seemeth to me but weake I will not insist in that word but rather will admonish my Readers that they take heed of such violent Glosses and interpretations Thus far of Caluins constructions of the former Texts against the iudgment almost of all other Protestants to impugne with the Arians the Diuinity of Christ And thus far for a tast of some few texts of Holy Scripture receauing from our Aduersaries Pens most contrary constructions So as admitting one of the said Constructions to be true it followeth necessarily that all the rest are false for they are in sense and in the inferences thereof most incompatible one with another This point shall be made more euident hereafter by setting downe many points of Catholike Religion maintayned by learned Protestants from the Scriptures and therfore the said Protestants dissent wholy in interpreting the Scriptures touching those Doctrines from other Protestants not belieuing the said Doctrines The V. Paragraph I Will in this next place insist in our Aduersaries disagreements touching their Liturgy or booke of Common Prayer chiefly peculiar to England shewing how often the Protestants through diuersity of Iudgments at seuerall tymes haue altered the same the later Edition thereof euer condemning the former And to begin The Reformed Communion Booke of Prayer begun by
dreaming him already to haue beene come he first appeared But I hasten to other Points The IX Paragraph I Will next intreate of the Church and First of the Visibility of the Protestant Church seuerally mantayned by seuerall of our Aduersaries Secondly whether in the Protestant Church there hath beene Personall succession and Vocation of Ministers Thirdly who be the Persons of Members that Constitute the Protestants Church Fourthly whether the present Roman Church be the true Church of God and the same Church with the Protestants Lastly whether Papists as the Protestants call the Catholiks dying Papists may be saued In all which seuerall points the Reader shall fynd strang Dissentions in the Protestants writings touching them 1. And to begin with the Visibility of the Protestant Church we fynd most Protestants confidently to iustify the Visibility of it in all Ages And according hereto D. Field with a most frontles impudency thus writeth We (q) D. Field in his booke of the Church l. 3. c. 8. pag. 76. firmely belieue all the Churches of the World wherein our Fathers liued and dyed to haue beene true Protestant Churches of God c. And that they who taught imbraced and belieued those damnable Errours which the Romanists defend against vs were only a Faction Which words necessarily imply that the Protestant Church was in his iudgment euer visible In like sort a litle Booke written in the yeare 1624. and intituled A Treatise of the Perpetuall visibility and succession of the true Church in all ages written as is thought by the last pretended Archbishop of Canterbury D. Abbots or els by D. Whyte or D. Featly in proofe of the vninterrupted visibility of the Protestant Church iustifyeth their like iudgment herein Finally D. White and D. Featly in their priuate Conference in London some yeares since with M. Fisher and M. Sweet of the Society of Iesus with great venditation in words auerred the continuall Visibility of the Protestant Church in all ages and the greater Part of Protestants do mantayne the same Now let vs see how these men are crossed and impugned in this their Tenet by other learned Protestants First D. Iewell merely crossing D. Fields former most bold shameles assertion thus sayth The (r) In his Apology of the Church part 4. l. 4. truth meaning the Protestant Fayth and Religion was vnknowne at that tyme and vnheard of when Martin Luther and Hulderick Swinglius first came vnto the knowledge and preaching of the Gospell And vpon this it proceedeth that Bucer styleth Luther The (s) In Epist Anno 36. ad Episcopum Hereford first Apostle to vs of the reformed Doctrine With these former agree Benedictus Morgensterne the Protestant thus saying It is ridiculous (t) Tract de Ecclesia pag. 145. to say that any before the tyme of Luther had the purity of the Gospell And Conradus Schlusselburg the Lutheran is no lesse feruent in this point thus auerring It is (u) In Theolog. Caluinist l. 2. fol. 130. impudency to affirme that any learned men before Luther did hould the Doctrine of the Gospell From all which authorities it appeareth that before Luthers first breaking out the Protestant Church was inuisible throughout the whole world But let vs see what more the Protestants confesse contrary to the assertions of infinite other their Brethren touching the inuisibility of the Protestant Church during the seuerall ages before Luther First then Caelius secundus Curio a learned Protestant thus teacheth Factum (x) De amplitudine regni Dei p. 212. est vt per multos iam annos Ecclesia latuerit c. It is brought to passe that the Church for many yeares hath beene latent and that the Citizens of this Kingdome could scarsly ac ne vix quidem and indeed not at all be knowne of others In the same Dialect writeth M. Perkins saying We (y) In his exposition of the Creed pag. 44â— say that before the dayes of Luther for the space of many hundred yeares an vniuersall Apostacy ouerspred the whole face of the earth and that our Church was not then visible to the World Doctour Fulke speaketh heere of more particularly touching the time of the Protestants Churches Inuisibility saying The (z) In his answere to a Counterfeyte Catholike p. 16. Church in tyme of Boniface the third it being anno 607. was inuisible and fled into wildernes thereto remayne a long season The forsaid D. Perkins in another of his Bookes writes more expresly of this point his words are these During (a) In his exposition of the Creed the space of nyne hundred yeares the popish Heresy hath spred it selfe ouer the whole earth M. Napper riseth higher acknowledging thus (b) In his Treatise vpon the Reuelation pag. â—8 Betweene the yeares of Christ 300. and 316. the Antichristian and Papisticall reigne began reigning vniuersally without any debatible Contradiction one thousand two hundred and sixty yeares Yea the said M. Napper in another place ascendeth to higher tymes thus writing During (c) Vpon the Reuel in c. 11. 12. euen the second and third age to wit after Christ the true Church of God and light of the Gospell was obscured by the Roman Antichrist himselfe with whome conspireth M. Brocard saying During (d) Vpon the Reuelat pag. 100. the second and third age after Christ the true Temple of God and light of the Gospell was obscured by the Roman Antichrist Sebastianus Francus a great Protestant more liberally acknowledgeth of this point writing in this manner For (e) In Epistol de â—brogandis in vniuersum omnibus statutis Ecclesiast certaine through the worke of Antichrist the externall Church together with the Fayth and Sacraments vanished away presently after the Apostles departure And that for these Foureteene hundred yeares the Church hath not beene externall and Visible With whom D. Fulke as forgetting what before he had written touching anno 607. fully agreeth auerring thus The true (f) In his answere to a Counterfeyte Catholike p. â—3 Church decayed immediatly after the Apostles tyme. Thus much concerning the Protestant Church where we see that whereas most Protestants do teach that it hath in all ages continued Visible diuers others most remarkable Protestants do not only dissent from these former in teaching the contrary Doctrine to wit that the Protestant Church hath beene wholy inuisible for many ages But also these later disagree among themselues touching the tyme of the Latency of their Church Some of them designing a shorter tyme others a longer tyme of its Inuisibility Yea one and the same Authour at seuerall tymes writeth seuerally of the tyme of their Churches Inuisibility as appeareth by the aboue alledged different iudgments of Doctour Fulke and M. Napper So wonderfull are their contentions herein 2. In this Passage I come to the Doctrine of Personall succession and vocation of Ministers in the Protestant Church differently mantayned by different Protestants For first Caluin challengeth to himselfe
Profession of the truth of Christ. To contract this point D. Couell thus expresly teacheth We (r) In his Defence of M. Hooker pag. 77. affirme them of the Church of Rome to be parts of the Church of God and that those who liue and dye in that Church may notwithstanding be saued charging other Protestants teaching the contrary to vse his owne words with ignorant Zeale Thus much touching the dissentions of the Puritans and the moderate Protestants concerning the saluation of Papists dying Papists coÌ„cluding this point with the iudgment of the Deuiues of Geneua contrary to other their brethren who teach that the Baptisme of Catholike Children either by Protestant Ministers or Catholike Priests is aualeable because say they the (s) So teach the Deuines of Geneua in the Propositions and Principles disputed 〈◊〉 Geneua p. 128. Children are comprehended within the Couenant of eternall life by meanes of the Fayth of their Parents Which very point is in like manner taught to the great dislike of many Puritans by D. Whitguift (t) In his Defence pag. 62â— and M. Hooker (u) Eccles pol. l. 5. pag. 1â—â— For most if not all the Puritans teach that Papists dying Papists cannot be saued seeing say they their Fayth is Idolatry and superstition The X. Paragraph I Next come to the Ancient Fathers because they were the most learned and eminent members of the Ancient Church where we shall see the strang diuersity of the Protestants Iudgments of them Some of the Protestants reuerencing and imbracing their Authorities others wholy betrampling their testimonies and entertayning them with all contempt and scorne And First we will alledge the iudgments of diuers Protestants admitting their Authorities and worth according hereto we fynd that D. Iewell in his Sermon at Paules Crosse thus cryed out O Gregory O Austin O Ierome c. if we be deceaued you haue deceaued vs And after in the said Sermon As I said before so I say againe I am content to yield and subscribe if any of our learned Aduersaries or if all the learned men that be aliue be able to bring any one sufficient sentence out of any old Catholike Doctour or Father or out of any old Generall Councell for the space of six hundred yeares after Christ Which challenge D. Whitaker after iustified in these words writing to Father Campian Audi (x) Whitak in respons ad ration Camp rat 5. Campiane c. Heare O Campian that most true and constant Challenge which Iewell that day made when he appealed to the antiquity of the first six hundred yeares c. That is the proffer and Challenge of vs all we do promise the same with Iewell and we will make it good D. Sutcliffe thus auerreth The (y) In his Exam. of D. KellisoÌ„s suruey Fathers in all points are for vs and not for the Pope D. Willet is no lesse confident herein thus protesting I take (z) In his Antilog p. 263. God to witnes before whom I must render an account c. that the same Fayth and Religion which I defend is taught and confirmed in the more substantiall points by those Histories Councells and Fathers that liued within fyue or six hundred yeares after Christ. Kempnitius We (a) In Exam. Concil Trident. part 1. pag. 74. doubt not but that the Primitiue Church receaued from the Apostles and Apostolicall men not only the text of Scripture but also the right and natiue sense thereof And againe We are greatly confirmed in the true and sound sense of the Scripture by the testimony of the ancient Church The Confession of Bohemia The (b) In the Harmony of Confessions pag. 400. ancient Church is the true and best Mistris of posterity and going before leadeth vs the way D. Bancroft speaking of Caluin and Beza thus sayth For (c) In his Suruey of the pretended holy Discipline M. Caluin and M. Beza I do thinke of them as their Writings do deserue But yet I thinke better of the ancient Fathers I must confesse I will conclude this their acknowledgment of the Primitiue Church and Fathers with D. Iewell with whom I first did begin he thus writing The Primitiue (d) In his Defence of the Apology Church which was vnder the Apostles and Martyrs hath euer beene accounted the Purest of all others without exception But now let vs see how Diametrically and repugnantly other Protestants stand to these former Protestants touching the Authority and dignity of the ancient Fathers And to forbeare the former Confessions of Protestants touching the Inuisibility of their Church during the first fiue or six hundred yeares after Christ aboue related which euidently demonstrateth that such Protestants who teach so long an Inuisibility do consequently teach and grant that the Fathers of those tymes were in iudgment Papists and not Protestants for if they had beene Protestants then the Protestanticall Church had most remarkably beene visible and conspicuous in the said Fathers To forbeare the iteration I say therof I will descend to the particular Reproualls giuen by the Protestants against them And first do we not find the same D. Whitaker obserue the inconstancy of this man who aboue so much maintayned D Iewells appeale thus to write Ex (e) Whitak contra Duraeum l. 6. p. 423. Patrum erroribus vester ille religionis Cento consutus est Your Popish Religion is but a patched Couerlet of the Fathers errours sowed together Pomeran the Protestants thus writeth Nostri Patres siue sancti fiue non sancti c. Our (g) Pomeran in Ioâ—au ancient Fathers whether they were holy or not holy I not much rest vpon were blinded with the spirit of Montanus and through humane Traditions Doctrines of the Deuills c. they did not teach purely of Iustification c. Neither were they sollicitous to preach Iesus Christ in his Gospell Iacobus Acontius the Protestant thus condemneth the Fathers Quidem (h) In stratagem Satanae l. c. p. 196. eò redierunt c. Certaine men meaning Protestants are gone so far as that they would haue all points to be tryed by the authorities of the Fathers c. But this custome I hould to be most pernicious and altogether to be auoided D. Humfrey so smally pryaeth the Fathers as that he rebuked D. Whitaker for renewing D. Iewels challenge in appealing to the ancient Fathers aboue related in this manner D. Whitaker (i) Lib. de vita Iewel li. printed at London pag. 212. gaue the Papists too large a scope was iniurious to himselfe and after a manner spoyled himselfe and the Church Melancthon (k) In 1. Cor. cap. 3. Presently (k) In 1. Cor. cap. 3. from the beginning of the Church the ancient Fathers obscured the Doctrine concerning Iustification by Fayth encreased Ceremonyes and deuised peculiar worships Beza thus ballanceth the Fathers with the Protestants of this age saving Yf we (l) In Epist Theolog Ep. 1. compare our tymes next to the
sinne being the euill Example to our neighbour How doth this Doctrine open the sluse to all Impurity Wickednes and Libertinisme the maintayners of which Doctrine are in the number of those who as S. Iude sayth transfer (c) Iude Epist vers 14. the grace of God into wantonnesse Now this Doctrine of extenuating and lessing sinne is so mainly contradicted and gainsaid by all morall and Ciuill Protestants as that it were needles to set downe the names of them In like sort it is implicitly impugned by all those particular Protestants aboue alledged who requyre goodworkes at least to accompany Fayth For it sinne cannot be preiudiciall to Fayth to what end then should the former Protestants teach that good workes of necessity must accompany Fayth In this last place concerning Sinne I will set downe the disagreements of Protestants of which some do teach that God is the Authour of sinne Other Protestants condemning this Doctrine as most blasphemous and iniurious to God And to begin with such as really teach God to be the Authour of sinne I produce Luther thus saying How (d) Luth. in â—ssert damnat per Leonem art 36. can man prepare himselfe to good seeing it is not in his power to make his wayes euill Nam mala opera in impijs Deus operatur for God worketh the wicked workâ— in the wicked Beza thus writeth God (e) In his Display of Popish practises p. 202. exciteth the wicked will of one Thiefe to kill another guideth his hand and weapon iustly inforcing the Will of the thiefe M. Willet thus (f) In Synops pag. 563. God not only permitteth but leadeth into temptation euen with an actiue power and not permissiuely only D. Barrow thus (g) In his Treatise of Gods Prouidence in English c. 4. God doth truly and by his determinate purpose harden make blynd leade into temptation and enclyne the hart to euill Swinglius thus God (h) Swiâ—gl tom 1. de Prouidentia Dei fol. 366. moueth the Thiefe to kill and the Thiefe killeth God procuring him And againe The (i) Swinglius vbi saprà Where he sayth Aâ— inquus coactus est aâ— peccandum peâ—e mitto thiefe is inforced to sinne And more Deo impulsore (k) Swinglius vbi suprà occidit The thiefe killeth God mouing and inforcing him thereto Melancthon thus The Adultery (l) Melancth in Rom. 8. of Dauid was the proper worke of God as was the Conuersion of Paul Finally that Caluin teacheth the said Doctrine appeareth not only from Castaliâ— charging him therewith in these words by this meanes not the Deuill but the God of Caluin is Authour of Lyes but also from the places of Caluins (n) Instit l. 2 c. 4. sect 3. 4. 5. et l. 1. c. 18. sect 1. owne bookes here noted in the Margent Now this Doctrine is mainly contradicted and this most deseruedly by other Protestants And first D. Whitaker as maintayning the contrary Doctrine and in defence that not any Protestant teacheth this foresaid doctrine thus prouoketh his Aduersary in most confident words (o) Whitaker contra Camp rat 8. pag. â—15 Yf Caluin Peter Martyr Melancthon or Luther or any of ours affirme God to be the Authour of sinne I will not deny but that we are all guilty of horrible blasphemy and wickednes So much doth this Dâ—ctour dislike the foresaid Doctrine and so gladly would he vindicate and free his Protestant Brethren if he could from maintayning the said wicked Position In like sort Hemingius (p) Hemingius l. de Vniuersal Grat pag. 109. as maintayning this contrary Doctrine chargeth and reprehendeth the Caluinists for their teaching that God is the Authour of sinne The Caluinists are also condemned for this their impious Doctrine by Sitzlinus (q) In his Disputat Theolog. de prouidentia Dei sect 141. the Protestant by Iacobus Andraeas the remarkable Protestant who in expresse words thus writeth Deus (x) Andraeas in Epitom Colloq Montisblegar pa. 47. 49. 53. est authour peccati secundum Bezam This point is so euident as that the Magistrates of (s) Vide literas Senatus Bernensis ad ministros c. 1555. Berna decreed it to be punishable by their Lawes for any to preach Caluins Doctrine hereof within their owne Territories Iurisdiction or for the people to read any of Caluins Bookes of that subiect The foresaid Doctrine of God being the Authour of sinne is further contradicted condemned by (t) Lib. ad Caluinum de Praedestinat Castalio by Amandus (u) Polanus in partition Theolog. l. 1. pag. 46. Polanus by M. (x) Gibbens in his Questions vpon Genesis pag. 108. Gibbens by the Booke entituled Corpus doctrina c. printed 1561. in folio pag. 618. It is further condemned not only almost by all the Lutherans but euen by all moderate and temperate Protestants So disagreeing are the Protestants touching this Tenet The XIX Paragraph TOuching the Doctrine which denyes we ought to haue any absolute Princes or Magistrates now in the tyme of the Gospell Luther thus teacheth Among (y) Luth. de secular potestat in tom 9. German Christiâ—â—â—en none is Superiour saue one and only Christ And yet more fully Among (z) Luth. vbi supra Christians no man can or ought to be a Magistrate but ech one is to other equally subiect And further (a) Luth. Sermons Englished and printed 1579. pag 97. As Christ cannot suffer himselfe to be tyed or bound by Lawes c. So ought not the Conscience of a Christian to suffer them Other Protestants though they do not write so absolutely against Princes and all Magistracy yet they wounderfully seeke to depresse and lessen their Authority for thus Swinglius indoctrinateth his followers Quando (b) Swing tom 1. in explanat Art 41. perfidè extra regulam Christi egerint Principes c. When Princes do euill and contrary to the Law of Christ they may be deposed Againe Swinglius thus further teacheth Romanum (c) Sâ—ing in l. Epist Oecolamp Suing l. 4. Epist â—â—nhardo â—omio Imperium imò quoduiâ— aliud imperium c. Yf the Roman Emperour or any other Prince or Soueraigne shall begin to oppresse the sincere Religion nas illud negligenter patimur c And we negligently suffer the same we shall stand charged with the contempt thereof as much as euen the oppressours themselues Now this sentence is so much displeasing to moderate and loyall Protestants as that Doctour Bilson in place of further answere to them thus sayth As I (d) In his true difference part 3. pag. 273. muse at Swinglius his wordes so I like not his iudgment (e) Caluin in Daniel c. â— Caluin conspireth with Swinglius thus affirming Earthly Princes de depriue themselues of authority when they erect themselues against God Yea they are vnworthy to be accounted among the number of men and we are rather to spit vpon their faces then to
affirmed by Peter Martyr (c) In his com places pa. 1. c. â— sect 8. by Lubbertus (d) De Princip Chrstian Dogm l. 1. c. 4. p. 18. the Protestant by D. Whitaker (e) Aduersus Stapletonum l. 2. cap. 6. p. 370. p. 357. l. 2. c. 4. p. 300. p. 298. by M. Hooker (f) Eccl. Pol. l. 1. sect 14. p. 86. l. 2. sect 4. p. 102. l. 3. sect 8. p. 147. and some others Yet impugned by (g) Inst l. 1. c. 7. Sect. 4. Caluin Vrsinus (h) Vrsinus in his doctrinae Christianae compend in Proleg p. 13. the Protestant as also by certaine English (i) In their Christian Letter to M. Hooker p. 9. 10. Protestants 15. That Infants haue not actuall Fayth in the tyme of their Baptizing is affirmed by D. Whitaker (k) D. Whita contra Duraeum l. 8. p. 6â—1 by Beza (l) In resp ad Act. Montisbelg part 2. p. 124. by M. Cartwright (m) In D. Whitguifts Defence p. 611. by Iacob Kimzdocus (n) In his Redemption of mankind l. 〈◊〉 15. p. 654. the Protestant and by most other ProtestaÌ„ts Yet impugned by Luther (o) Luther in loc com Class 2. p. 122. by Andraeas (p) See Andraeas his words in Beza his resp ad Act. Colloq Montisb part â— p. 124. and generally by the Lutherans 16. That the Sacraments of the Old Testament were not equall in working and effect with the Sacraments of the New Testament affirmed for the most part by the Lutherans whereof see Schlusselburg (q) In Theol. Caluin l. 1 fol. 95. Luther (r) Loc. Com. Class 1. p. 88. and Osiander (s) In Epit. Cent. 11. p. 411. yet the contrary maintayned by the Caluinists of which point see (t) In his Synops p. 418. M. Willet 17. Auricular Confession of sinnes taught by (u) In loc Com. de Confessione fol. 289. Sarcerius the Protestant thus writing Falsum est c. It is false to affirme that Confession which is made to God should take away all Priuate Confession The same is taught by Lobechius (x) In Disput Theol. pa. 295. sect 4. by Schlusselburg (y) In Theolog. Caluinist l. 2. fol. 147. by Melancthon (z) Lib. Epist pag. 234. by the Confessions (a) In the Harmony of confessions pag. 231. p. 357. 358. of Saxony and Bohemia and diuers others yet impugned for Popish by most of the Puritans 18. That Temporall punishment is reserued for sinne remitted by Gods Iustice is affirmed by Iohn Knox (b) In his answere against the Aduersaries of Gods Predestination pag. 215. 216 217. by Gasper Oleuianus (c) In Symbolum pag. 8. the Protestant and by the Publike Confessions of the Protestants yet contradicted for Popish as implying the Doctrine of Purgatory by M. Willet (e) In Synops pag. 514. by Caluin Beza c. and most other earnest Protestants 19. That the true Visible Church cannot wholy erre affirmed by D. Bancroft (f) In a Sermon preached by D. Bancroft by the Deuines of Geneua (g) In their Propositions and Principles disputed pag. 141 sect 12. 13. by M. Fox (h) Act. Mon. pag. 999. and others Impugned by D. Fulke (i) In his answere to a Counterfeyte Catholike pag. 8â— who thus writeth The whole Church Militant consisting of men which all are lyars may erre altogeather as euery part thereof And impugned in like sort by the Puritans who in their briefe Discouery of vntruths (k) Pag. 34. do reproue D. Bancroft for his teaching the contrary Doctrine in a Sermon preached by the said Doctour 1588. pag. 34. 20. That set tymes of Fasting and from (d) In the Harmony of Confess pag. 229. certaine meates appointed not only for polytick Order but for spirituall considerations is affirmed by the Protestant Authour of the booke entituled Quaerimonia (l) Pag. 31. 94. and 103. Ecclesiae printed Londini 1592. who reproueth Arius for his denying of all religious Fasting who also answereth the Obiection of Montanus It is also affirmed by M. Hooker (m) Eccles polic l. 5. sect 72. p. 204. 205. in so much as he (n) M. Hooker vbi suprà 209. answereth the vulgar obiection of Montanus and the Common obiection from S. Paul 1. Timoth. 4. and thus concludeth Arius was worthily condemned for his opposition against Fasting Yet is this Doctrine gainsaid for Popish by D. Whitaker (o) Contra Duraeum l. 9. pag. 830. who obiecteth 1. Timoth. 4. to proue this Fasting to be the Doctrine of the Diuells In like sort the foresayd Doctrine is condemned as Popish by D. Fulke who to the contrary obiecteth (p) D. Fulke against the Rhemish Testament in Math. 15. sect 5. fol. 28. Montanus and defendeth Arius (q) D. Fulke in his Answere to a Counterfeyte Catholike pag. 45. Thus far touching these former twenty Points of Catholike Religion maintayned by diuers learned Protestants and contradicted in great Dissention of spirit by other Protestants The XXII Paragraph IN this last place of Displaying the Protestants Disagreements I will insist in certaine Catholike Points the which though the Protestants which are to be alledged do not wholy imbrace and intertayne them as absolutly true as the former Protestants aboue cited haue done touching the twenty Articles allready discoursed of yet they hould them to be of that Adiaphorous Nature and indifferency as that either by denying or affirming them the said Protestants hereafter to be produced do hould them to stand compatible with mans Saluation though other more seuere Protestants do altogether condemne the said Articles as Popish and do exclude the Belieuers of them from all hope of Saluation So irresolute and contradicting the Protestants are among themselues in their different and irreconcileable Iudgments and Censures herein 1. To begin First touching prayer to Saints D. Goad (r) D. Goad D Fulke in the Disputation had in the Tower with Fat Campian 2. dayes conference argum 8. rat 111. and D Fulke thus write It doth not exclude from being members of the Church c. 2. Touching the Reall Presence D. Reynolds thus sayth the Reall (s) In his 5. Conclusion annexed to his Conference pag. 722. Presence is but as it were the grudging of a former Ague if the Party otherwise hould the Christian Fayth Iacobus Acontius a learned Protestant thus accordeth with D. Reynolds saying It is (t) In l. 3. Stratagem Satanae p. 135. euident as well concerning those who hould the Reall Presence of Christs Body in the bread as those others which deny it that although of necessity the one part do erre yet both are in the way of Saluation if in other things they be obedient And Frith one of M. Fox his Martyrs sayth The (u) Act. Mon. pag. 503. matter touching the substance of the Sacrament bindeth no man of necessity to Saluation or Damnation
necessity of Baptisme M. Cartwright thus confesseth Austin (u) In D. Whitgifts defence pa. 1227. was of mynd that Children could not be saued without Baptisme Scultetus the Protestant writeth thus (x) In medulla Theolog pag. 30. The blemish noted in Cyprian c. is that he thinketh Baptisme to be absolutly and simply necessary Vrbanus Rhegius confidently auerreth that (y) in part 1. operum Catheâ—his minor fol. 105. the Scripture and the Authority of the ancient Church constrayned him to belieue that Children vnbaptized are damned And hence it is that Caluin thus confesseth Almost (z) L. Instit 4. c. â—5 sect 20. from the beginning of the Church Baptisme by Lay Persons was vsed in danger of death Thus much of the Sacraments 11. That the doctrine of Limbus Paetrum was taught by the Primitiue Church and Fathers First I will produce the words of D. Whitaker against whom when Duraeus his Aduersary had alledged testimonies from the Fathers for the proofe of Limbus Patrum the said Doctour thus answereth him Quod (a) Contra Duraeum l. 8. pag. 557. Scripturis euincere minùs potuisti c. That which thou could lesse proue by Scriptures that thou doubtlesly wilt euince from the testimonies of the Fathers But touching this I answere thee briefly what I conceaue That is that one Word of Scripture carrieth more force with me then the Sentences and Iudgments of a thousand Fathers without Scripture therfore do not expect that I will make particular Answeres to the seuerall erroneous testimonies of the Fathers alledged by thee Thus D. Whitaker confessing that the Fathers vnanimously taught the doctrine of Limbus Patrum D. Barlow thus writeth This (b) In his Defence of the Articles of the Protestant Religion pag. 173. passeth most ryfe among the Fathers Who taking Inferi for Abrahams bosome expound it that Christ went thither ad liberandum liberandos to conuay the Fathers deceased before the Resurrection into that place where now they are In like manner M. Iacob the Protestant thus most fully acknowledgeth All the (c) See this in D. Bilsons booke of the full Redemption of Mankind pag. 188. Fathers with one consent affirme that Christ deliuered the soules of the Patriarchs Prophets out of Hell at his comming thither and so spoyled Satan of those who were in his present Possession To close vp this point whereas Cardinal Bellarmine (d) Bellarm tom 1. l. 4. de Châ—isti Animae c. 14. alledgeth in proofe of Limbus Patrum the testimonies of the Greeke Fathers to wit of Iustinus Irenaeus Clemens Origen Eusebius Basill Nazianzene Nicene Epiphanius Chrysostome c. As also of the Latin (e) Bellarm vbi suprà Fathers namely Tertullian Hyppolitus Cyprian Hillary Gaudentius Prudentius Ambrose Ierome Ruffinus Austin Leo Fulgentius c. Danaeus the Protestant acknowledging all this for true answereth only thus As concerning (f) Danaeus ad Roberti Bellar. disput part pag 176. these Fathers they were not instructed out of Gods word Neither do they confirme their Opinion from it but only from their owne Coniectures c. Thus Danaeus 12. That the Primitiue Fathers did conspiringly teach the doctrine of Freewill is most perspicuous For the Centurists reciting the sayings of Lactantius Athanasius Basill Nazianzene Epiphanius Ierome c. in defence of Freewill thus contemne all their Testimonies Patres omnes (g) Cent. 4 col 29â— ferè huius aetatis c. Almost all the Fathers of this Age do speake confusedly of Freewill In like sort (h) In meâ—ulla Theoâ—og Patrum pag. 379. 304 466. c. Scultetus the former Protestant reprehendeth Cyprian Theophilas Tertullian Origen Clemens Alexandrinus Iustine Irenaeus Athanagoras Tatianus c. for their teaching of freewill In like manner certaine English Puritans thus largely confesse hereof saying Freewill (i) This saying of the Puritans is related in their briefe discouery of Vntruths c. contained in D Bancrofts Sermon pag. 203. euer since the Apostles times in a manner florished euery where till Martin Luther tooke the sword in hand against it So true is that Confession of D. Humfrey a testimony vpon other occasion aboue alledged It may not be denyed but (k) In Iesuitism part 2. pag. 530. that Ireneus Clemens and others called Apostolicall men haue in their Writings the Opinions of freewill c. According hereto the Centurists speaking of the tymes next to the Apostles thus freely say Nullus (l) Cent. 4. cap. 4. col â—8 ferè doctrinae locus c. Almost no one Point of doctrine so quickly began to be obscured as the doctrine Whether man had Freewill or no And thus much briefly of the Protestants Confessions touching Freewill of which point as also of all the former doctrines aboue discoursed of in this Appendix I haue not set downe the halfe of what the Protestants do acknowledge therein touching the ancient Fathers beliefe and doctrines in the said Points 13. Touching Peters Primacy aboue the rest of the Apostles The antiquity of this doctrine is so great that The Centurists do reprehend Ierome (m) Cent. 4 col 11 15. (n) Cent. 4. col 555. Hilary (o) Cent. 4. col 558. Nazianzen (p) Cent. 3. col 84. Tertullian (q) Cent. 3. p. 84. Cyprian (r) Cent. 3. col 85. Origen and in generall many other Fathers for teaching that the Church was built vpon Peter Their wordes touching Cyprian are these in the place aboue alledged Passim dicit Cypriaenus super Petrum Ecclesiam fundatam esse Caluin thus writeth In Petro (s) lib. 4. instit cap. â— sect 6. fundatam esse Ecclesiam c. diuers Fathers did expound that the Church was founded vpon Peter because it is sayd Super hanc Petram c. But the whole Scripture maketh agaynst this their exposition Thus Caluin The Centurists (t) Cent. 4. col 5â—â— do further charge Optatus for saying Petrus Apostolorum caput vnde Cephas appellatur D. Reynolds (u) In his Conference pag. 485. rebuketh Dionysius for styling Peter the chiefe and most ancient topp or head of the Apostles To conclude D. Fulke speaking of S. Leo and S. Gregory Bishops of Rome sayth The mystery (x) In his retentiue against Bristowe motiues pag. 248. of iniquity did worke in that seate neere fiue or six hundred yeares before them which must be in the Aposties dayes or presently after and then greatly increased they were so deceaued with long continuance of Errour that they thought the dignity of Peter was much more ouer the rest of his fellow Apostles then the Holy Scriptures of God do allow 14. Now that the Bishop of Rome is Peters Successour in the iudgment of the Fathers is no lesse certayne for D. Bilson confesseth it plainly in these words The (y) In his difference part 1. pag 1â—7 ancient and learned Fathers call the Roman Bishop Peters Successour The CeÌ„turists charge Leo in this
maÌ„ner Leo (z) Cent. 5. col 1262. paynfully goeth about to proue that singular preeminence was giuen to Peter aboue the other Apostles and that thence did rise the Primacy of the Roman Church D. Cowper (a) In his Chronicles calleth Linus first Bishop of Rome after Peter To conclude Bucer thus freely sayth We (b) In prae paratorijs ad Concil plainely confesse that among the auncient fathers the RomaÌ„ Church obtayned Primacy aboue others as that which hath the Chayre of S. Peter and whose Bishops haue almost alwayes beene accounted the successours of Peter Thus Bucer 15. Touching the Catholike Ceremonies of Funerals and other Ecclesiasticall customâ—â— we thus fynd confessed The Centurists acknowledge that (c) Cent. â— col 454. Solebant Cerei proferri funeri c. Wax candels were accustomed to be brought in the tyme of the funeralls And the Centurists do also graÌ„t that it was (d) Cent. 4 col 455. the custostome to couer the graue with flowers The sayd Centurists further make mention of minning dayes in these words Celebris (e) Cent. 4. col 455. ob defuncti memoriam fuit dies quadragesimus post obitum the fortith day after the death of the party was kept with solemnity Lastly they recorde those words of Tertullian We (f) Cent 3. col 138. offer vp sacrifices oblations euery anniuersary day for the dead 16. That prayer was made towards the East in those ancient times is confessed by the (g) Gent. 4. col 432 Centurists That Canonicall (h) Cent. 4. col 433. howres of Prayers were then vsed the Centurists confesse They also record that there was in those primitiue times (i) Cent. 4 col 459. rising in the night to prayer Also that the (k) Cent. col 433. Lyturgy was then accustomed to be recited That (l) Cent. 4. col 1326 prayers were then made by nuÌ„bring them vpon litle stones which is the same as in these dayes by numbring prayers with beades 17. D. Fulke (m) Against Heskinâ— c. pag. â—57 confesseth that the Crosse by report of Paulinus was by the Bishop of Ierusalem his appointment at Easter yearly to be worshipped by the people But heer we are to note that Paulinus did not meane any idolatrous worship to be giuen to the Crosse as the Protestants do most wrongly charge vs Catholiks to exhibite to it but only a Christian reuerence and respect as being an Instrument vpon which the Sauiour of the world suffered for Mans Redemption 18. That set tymes of fasting were vsed in those ancient tymes is cleare for first touching the fast of Lent KeÌ„pnitius (n) In Examen part 1. pa. 8â— coÌ„fesseth that Ambrose Maximus Taurinensis Theophilâ—â— Ierome and others do affirme the fast of Lent to be an Apostolicall Tradition Yea Scultetus thus sayth The (o) In medulla Theolog. p. 440. superstitious fast of Lent was allowed and commanded by Ignatius Now Ignatius was in the Apostle dayes M. Cartwright is alledged by M. Whitguift (*) In D. Whitguifts defence pag. 100. to reproue S. Ambrose for saying It is a sinne not to fast in Lent Touching the fast of Quatuor Tempora (*) Whitak contra Duraeum l. 7. p. 80. D. Whitaker confessetht it to be as auncieÌ„t as Calixtus the Pope who was immediate Successour to Pope Victor who liued in the third Century 19. I will conclude the Protestants Confessions touching the ancient Fathers in the doctrine of Religious Persons And first touching Monkes the Centurists (p) Cent. 4. col 46â— vnder the title de Consecratione Mâ—nachi acknowledge Monkes to haue beene in those Primitiue Tymes D. Humfrey thus writeth of Gregory the Great These (q) In Iesuitis par 2. rat 5. things Austin the MoÌ„ke taught by Gregory the great Monke brought in Thus the Doctour acknowledging Mâ—nachisme in those dayes M. Cartwright thus confesseth (r) In D. Whitguifts defence pag. 344. Ruffinus Theodoret Sozomene Socrates c. do mention Monks almost in euery Page In like manner the Centurists speaking of the age wherein Constantine liued (s) Cent. 4. c. 10. col 1294. do confesse that there were Monks throughout Syria Palestine Bithinia and other places of Asia The Centurists further acknowledging a place of S. Basil in prayse of Monasticall life thus censure him All which (t) Cent. 4. p. 300. 3â—â— words meaning of Basil are both besydes and contrary to the Holy Scripture 20. The Centurists (u) Cent. 4. c. 6. col 404. 466. also make mention of Monasteries wherein the Monks did dwell The Centurists finally record the Monasteries (x) Cent. 4. col 467. 479. â—335 c. of Virgins The like mention the Monasteries of Virgins is made by (y) Osiander cent 4. pa. 507. 503. c. Osiander Thus far of all the former Points of Catholike Fayth and Religion that they were taught and practized by the ancient Fathers euen in our Aduersaries Iudgment I could proue the like by the Confessions of the learned Protestants in all other Articles controuerted betweene vs and the Protestants But I trust that these former Articles being of greatest Moment may serue in lieu of all the rest which are of lesser Consequence Only I thinke good to adioyne here this ensuing Animaduersion To wit That whereas in the producing of the former Authorities of the Fathers in behalfe of the Catholike Religion all Fathers are not brought in by the Confession of the Protestants to teach the said Catholike Articles Now the reason of this is in that euery ancient Father did not wryte of euery particular Article of Catholike Religion and consequently such could not be alledged by the Protestants confessions in proofe of the Articles omitted by them Neuerthelesse it vnauoidably followeth by all true inference of Reason that all other Fathers in such particular points of Catholike Religion as are omitted by the Protestants do agree and conspire with the former Fathers aboue confessed The reason iâ— this Yf the other Fathers aboue omitted and not spoken of had maintayned contrary doctrines to the former produced Fatâ—ers they then would haue beene written against by some other more Orthodoxall Writers and Fathers touching the said points As we see that certaine Errours in Origen Tertullian Cyprian to omit the like Examples in Donatus Iouinian Pelagius and sundry such other Nouelists were instantly impugned by Austin Ierome Epiphanius Theodoret c. But no such writing was against the former confessed Fathers in this Treatise for their houlding the foresaid Catholike Points Therefore it is certaine that all other Fathers of the Primitiue Church did jointly teach and belieue the said Catholike doctrines with the aboue confessed Fathers Againe the alledged Fathers in this Appendix were the chiefe Pastours in God Church in those dayes in whom the Church of Christ was peculiarly and more markably personated Therefore all other Inferiour Members of the Church did agree with them in the beliefe
of the said Catholike Doctrines or otherwise by their deniall of them they did cease to be members of the said Church of God Cum (z) Cyprian l. Vnitate Ecclesiae Deo manere non possunt qui in Ecclesia Dei vnanimes esse noluerunt Now to descend to the secoÌ„d Part of this Appendix which is touching the Comparison made betweene the ancient Fathers and the Protestant Doctours and Wryters for the fynding out of the intended sense of the Holy Ghost in the exposition of the sacred Scripture In the consideration of which point I grant I am finally moued to a iust and warrantable Anger since the want thereof vpon so vrgent an occasion might well be reputed but stupidity and an insensiblenes of the indignities and wrongs offered to those blessed and happy Saints Therefore let the Reader pardon me if I here sharpen my Pen which can hardly spend its inke vpon a more worthy and noble subiect and if I become somewhat more luxuriant in defence of these Champions of Christ his Church vpon whom diuers Protestants as in the former Treatise is shewed do euen showre downe infinit words of reproach contumely and do throwe vpon their honorable Memories the durte and filth of their owne most intemperate and gaulefull Language But first I thinke it conuenient to take away the vulgar stumbling-Block which most of our Aduersaries haue layed betweene the Truth and the eyes of the ignorant and credulous Protestant Which is as the Protestants most wrongfully and to themselues consciously suggest That seing the Scripture as being the vndoubted Word of God is to be aduanced before the Authority of the Fathers they being but men and seeing the Protestants say they relye only vpon Scripture the Fathers vpon their owne and oâ—her humane Authorities Why then should not the Scripture be pryzed aboue the Authorities of the said Fathers Now to dispell and dissipate this weake smoake from the Eyes of the Ignorant I do auer this their answere to be a mere Elench of Fallacy called by the Logitians Petitio Principij since here it is falsly presumed that the Protestants do relye only vpon the true sense of the Scripture and the Fathers do reiect the Scripture Whereas indeed the Fathers with all Reuerence and honour do affect the Scripture and most humbly submit themselues to it And therefore the life and touch of the doubt in this point only consisteth To wit whether the Fathers who buyld the Articles of their Fayth vpon the Scriptures are to be preferred before the Protestants interpreting the said Scriptures in a contrary Sense And thus the Antithesis or opposition is here to be made not betweene the Fathers and the Scripture as our Aduersaries do calumniously pretend but betwene the Constructions giuen by the Fathers of certayne Texts of holy Scripture and the different or contrary constructions of the sayd Text giuen by the Protestants The lyke subtility our aduersaries to wit the Centurists D. Whitaker Illyricus and others do vse when the call Catholike doctrines as they are maintained by vs Idolatry Heresies Blasphemies c. thereby to intimate that the Papists are no members of Christs Church which very doctrines as they are taught by the ancient Fathers the Protestants stile but nauos naenia errores c. with intention to shew that the Protestants do not deuide themselues from the Church of which the Fathers were members O incredible and serpentine Craft and Imposture But to launce further in discoursing of the Comparison betweene the Fathers and the Protestants For I hould it my honour to be their poore Aduocate vpon earth and I hope that in their Seraphicall and burning Charity they wil be my Adocate in Heauen and will vouchsafe to intercede to his Diuine Maiesty for the remission of my infinite sinnes and transgressions Heere I say that any true and zealous Christian ought to haue a sensible griefe and religious Resent to see that Saphyrs should be preferred before Diamonds the lowest Shrubs to dare to contend in height with the Cedars of Lybanus vpstart Innouation to take the wall as I may say of reuerend and gray-hayrd Antiquity I meane that Luther Swinglius Melancthon Caluin Beza and such refuse of men should shoulder out of the due Seatâ— of Honour and Authority Austin Ierome Epiphanius the Gregories the Cyrills Basil Ambrose Hylary Optatus Athanasius Cyprian Ephrem Irenaeus Ignatius Polycarpus and diuers other Fathers of those Primitiue and purest tymes But to descend more particularly to the dissecting of this point I hould it most conducing to present to the Readers Eye certaine forcible Circumstances aduantaging the ancient Fathers much aboue the Protestants for the searching and picking out the true and intended sense of the Holy Ghost in the Texts of sacred Writ produced either by the Catholiks or the Protestants Thus I meane to Parallele the Fathers with the ProtestaÌ„ts not as Plutarch did by comparing Worthy Men with Worthy Men but by ballancing the ancient graue and most literate Doctours with certaine Nouellizing and but competently learned Sectaries 1. And to beginne Our first Circumstance may be taken from the different times wherein the Fathers and the former Protestants did liue The Fathers as is knowne florished in those pure tymes neere to Christ and his Apostles when his Spouse I meane his Church remayned intemerate and incontaminate as then not brooking any defiled touch but of one Heretike We may adioyne hereto that in regard of their proximity in tyme to Christ for some of them liued in the (a) Ignatius Dionysius Areopagita liued in the dayes of the Apostles Apostles dayes others in the next (b) Iustinus Martyr Pope Pius Ireneus liued in the second age Origen Tertullian Cyprian c. in the third age Athanasius Hilarius Cyrill of Ierusalem Ambrose Basil Optatus Gregorius Nyssenus Gregorius Nazianzenus Ephrem Epiphanius c. in the fourth Age in which age was celebrated the Councell of Nyce Gaudentius Chrysostome Ierome Austin Cyrill of Alexandria Proclus Constantinopolitanus Theodoret Gelasius Leo Pope Hilarius Eusebius Emyssenus in the fifth age Gregory the Great and Austin our Apostle in the sixt age ensuing ages the true Fayth and Doctrine and consequently the true meaning of the Scripture might well be Paraphrazed by force of Tradition during that short desceÌ„t of the Church ech man receauing from his Predecessour euen from hand to hand the practise of the true Religion so as such Men as then would not acknowledge the splendour of the Catholike Religion in those firster Tymes may well resemble the stars when they are darkened through ouer much light This far of this Circumstance in behalfe of the Fathers from whence we may gather that diuers of them liued a thousand yeares since others more then fifteene hundred But now let vs cast our eye vpon the other End of the Ballance Haue our Protestant Writers beene in Rerum Natura fifteene hundred yeares since Haue they beene a thousand yeares Haue they beene
one hundred This is the most if so much so as if you will haue recorded the seuerall Stations of their Church you must deuide them by Centuries of Moneths insteed of Centuries of yeares So fully it is confessed by one of their prime Men It (c) Benedictus Morgensternensis a Lutheran so writeth tract de Ecclesia pag. 145. is impudency to say that any before the tyme of Luther had the purity of the Gospell Is there any Man of so stopt a Nose as not throughly to sent the disparity of these two different tymes wherein the Fathers and the Protestants Writers liued and consequently the great aduantage of which the Fathers for the true interpreting of the Scripture and practize of Christian Religion are made capable the Protestants resting wholy ther on precluded 2. But to proceed further The Fathers I speake of the Orthodoxall Fathers though writing their Voluminous Tomes vpon different emergent Occasions in different â—ymes in different tongues in different â—ost discoasted Nations euer in defence of â—â—e Catholike and Roman Fayth did so vâ—animously conspire (*) The Catholiks graÌ„t that the Fathers did expound some Texts in different senses but not euer in behalfe of the Protestants Errours for example Luke 13. When you haue done all these things which are commanded Isay We are vnprofitable Seruants Chrysostome in Illud Illatum est cor Osiae sayth We should only thinke our selues though humility to be vnprofitable seruants Austin in Sermon de Verbis Domini interpreteth We are called vnprofitable seruants because we haue done nothing but what we ought to haue done But neither of these expositions do preiudice the doctrine of good works or works of Supererogation against which this text it vrged by the Protestants in their Writings 〈◊〉 if one and the same Genius had a generall â—nfluency ouer all their Pens Whose very â—ens were euer prest to rescue the Church in â—ny sort endangered with the arising Heresies of those tymes Now touching the Protestants the Reader may fully glasse their infinit and immortall dissentions in their Wrytings by perusing these former Leaues Their Agreement hereâ—n being like to the agreement of (d) Esay 9. Ephraim and Manasses who did eate vp one another The Protestants euen spinning out at length seuerall yeares in writing reciprocall venemous Satyrs and Inuectiues 3. The Fathers liued in a most strict seuere course of Discipline and Manners through their thirsty expectation of Heauen and hope to fynd their former sinnes drowned in the bloud of Christ And hereupon they obserued perpetuall Chastity practized much Prayer and Fasting betrampled with a spirituall Contempt vpon all fading Honours and Temporalities euer checking the malice of ech Temptation with an internal Eleuation of their soules to God Thus did their Religious comportment by which they wholy exposed their labours to the seruice of God dispell driue away all mists and cloudes gathered before the Eye of their Vnderstandinge for their myning out of the sense of the Scripture and did euen depose the inexpugnable Certainty of their Fayth But now as the Sunne casteth its Influence vpon seuerall Countryes indifferently and after the same manner yet with most different and contrary effects So Gods Inspirations though sent to the ancient Fathers and to the learned Protestants through their willfull reiecting of them do produce most opposit operations For if we call to mind the cariage of most of our Protestants first writers we shall fynd that Vertue with them was reputed but as an aery and intentionall Schoole-name they lying for the most part in the mud of sensuality and temporall pleasures such a Confluence of seuerall Vices was in diuers of them He that resteth doubtfull hereof let him peruse besides the Booke of daily Experience the Booke entituled The life of Luther printed anno 1624. wherein he shall fynd pencilled and delineated at large the most facinorous and enormous lifes of Luther Andreas Melancthon Bucer Ochinus Carolostadius Swinglius Caluin and Beza All of them chiefe Promoters of the Protestants Religion with their Pens And what in that Booke is deliuered in painting forth their wicked and irreligious courses is deliuered from the Writings only of other Protestants their Brethren so truly are verified of these Protestant Wryters Animalis (e) 1. Cor. 2. homo non percipit ea quae sunt Spiritus Dei Furthermore diuers learned Protestants of these dayes are so far from abandoning the temporall Benefis of the World as that they commonly make their Religion a Shoing-horne to draw on some opulent and great Ecclesiasticall Liuing or Parsonage so they finally making a Steeple yea two or three steeples sometymes of so great a swallow diuers of them are and a Sister in the Lord thus coopling Pluto and Venus together their very But or Marke of all their Scholasticall endeauours or their supreme felicity in this World So thrall and mancipated they are become to all transitory and fading Allectiues and so breathlesly do they run in crye in the pursuite of them Howsoeuer many of them through their sophisticall Comportment and dooble-faced Actions seeme externally to be wholy spiritualized and euen to feed only vpon the Gospell 4. Another Priuiledge granted from God to those blessed Men of ancient tymes and others of the faythfull of those dayes is that diuers of them had the honour of working most stupendious Miracles and this often in defence and proofe of their Catholyke Religion in the patration of which Miracles it was in their power to dissolue and vntye the knot of Nature For example Touching Miracles done in proofe of the vertue of the signe of the Crosse read (f) In vita Antonij Athanasius (g) Haeres 30 Epiphanius (h) In vita Hilarionis Ierome and (i) Histor. l. 5. c 21. Theodoret. Touching the Image of Christ read (k) Histor l. 7. c. 14. Eusebius Touching Miracles at the presence of Relickes of Saincts read (l) L. 9. Confess c. 7. 8. S. Austin touching some done at the Monuments or Tombes of Martyrs see the foresayd (m) L. de Ciuitate Dei 22. c. 8. S. Austin Touching Prayer to Saints see also (n) Aug. vbi suprà S. Austin In confirmation of the Reall presence see (o) L. 6. de Sacerdotio c. 4. Chrysostome To be short the guift of working Miracles was so ordinary in those tymes as that one Father to wit Gregorius Thaumaturgus tooke his denomination and Name from working of Miracles for so much doth the greeke Word Thaumaturgus import so iust reason had S. Austin to haue recorded (q) In his Suruey of D Kellisons c. D. Morton in his Apol. Cathol part 1. l. 2 25. and diuers others Culmen authoritatis obtinuit Ecclesia Catholica Haerecicis miraculorum maiestate damnatis But let vs see if any Protestant was euer graced with the working of such supernaturall Wonders (p) L. de Vtilitate credendi cap 27. But it is
19. VVhether the Visible Church of God can wholy erre or not 20. VVhether set tymes of fasting from certaine meates be appointed only for Polytick order but with all for spirituall Considerations § 22. Besides the former disagreements touching the twenty Catholike Articles aboue recited There are certaine Catholike Points maintayned by diuers Protestants to be of that indifferency of Nature as that the belieuing or not belieuing of them it not in any sort necessarily to be exacted through any danger to the party belieuing them or not belieuing them The beliefe of which Points in particular other Protestants do hould as most impious superstitious and not standing with the Saluation of the party belieuing them The Articles are these following 1. Touching the Beliefe of Praying to Saintes 2. Touching the beliefe of the Reall Presence 3. Touching receauing vnder Both or One kind only 4. Concerning Freewill 5. Concerning the Indifferency of honoring the Reliques of Saintes 6. Touching our B. Lady being preserued from Originall sinne 7. Touching Satisfaction and Merit of Works 8. Concerning the Popes Primacy 9. Touching the Indifferency of Priuate Masse 10. Touching not only the Indifferency of Priuate Masse but of seuerall other Catholike Points so iointly maintayned in the Protestant Writings § 23. Now to all these former disagreements among the Protestants are adioyned certaine Porismata or Resultancyes ineuitably rising from a true Consideration of diuers of the said dissentions and Disagreements THE PREFACE Wherein First are discouered the seuerall sleights vsed by Protestants to charge the Church of Rome with Dissentions in doctrine Secondly it is proued that the Necessity of Vnity in Fayth ought to be in the Church of Christ. HORRENTIA Martis Arma Virumque cano Vndertaking to record the vnnaturall and blouddy Wars which the Protestant wageth against the Protestant in matter of Fayth And intending in this Ensuing discourse to dismantle and lay open to the view of all the naked state of Protestancy so far forth as it concernes its want of Vnity and the immortall Dissentions among the Professours thereof and further well remembring that our Aduersaries through their Serpentine calumny of some among them are euer ready pressed by way of Recrimination to obtrude though most wrongfully the like dissentions vpon vs Catholiks Therefore I haue thought good in the front hereof to remoue such Replies and surprize all Obiections by preuention as may seeme to fix vpon the Catholiks that blemish or Scar wherewith Protestancy lyes here iustly chargeable I herein imitating the proceeding of a carefull Generall in the Wars who first labours to preclude and forestall the Enemy of all Passages and Wayes whereby the approach of his forces might endanger him and then drawes out his owne Troupes for the assaulting of his said Enemy Well then to the point 1. First we are to obserue which the yawning and heedles Reader perhaps will not espye that in doctrines there are to be considered two things as Beza (a) Beza â—n Epist Theolog. Epist 18. sayth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 explicandum sempe◠〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 nunquam nisi sobriè prudenter attingenâ—um well noteth to wit The 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifying a Categoricall or Positiue assertion that such a thing is true in doctrine hath euer reference to the Conclusion As for example That Saintes in Heauen do heare vs. The 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 hath respect only to the Manner or some other Circumstance of the Conclusion As whether the Saintes do heare vs by behoulding all things intuitiuely in God in whom they see all things Or that they heare our Prayers through their celerity and incredible speedines of the Motion of their soules who in the smallest tyme are able to descend and ascend from Heauen to earth This 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Conclusion in Fayth is that in which all Catholikes continuing Catholiks do vnanimously agree But touching the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or manner of such a point or Conclusion they dissent sometymes among themselues Because the manner of a point in doctrine is for the most part of that Adiaphorous and indifferent Nature as that seuerall learned Men may teach seuerally touching the said Manner without any breach of Fayth And we are thus warned from being ouercurious and searching into the Manner of the Conclusion by an ancient Father who sayth (b) Nazianzeâ—â— Orat 1. 〈◊〉 Theologia 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And thus accordingly hereto all Men are obliged to belieue all decreed Articles of Fayth yet not euer to belieue the particular Manner or Reason thereof Which manner being a Point but of Indifferency is often reduced for triall to some Scholasticall subtilty or apprehension 2. I am to aduertize the Reader that whereas there is Questio Juris and Questio Facti we are heere to obserue that matter of Fact but not matter of Fayth may be controuerted among Deuines without any want of Vnity in doctrine because the Sentences determinations passed vpon matter of Fact may and ought to be altered vpon later and better Informations touching the matter of Fact And in this sense and vpon this Occasion were alterable the Decrees obiected against vs by some Protestants of Pope Formosas by Pope Steuen the 6. and Pope Sergius the 3. Which decrees were after confirmed againe by Pope Romanus Theodorus 2. and Iohn 10. Now the reason of altering the said decrees originally proceeded from matter of Fact to wit whether Formosus was truly and Canonically elected Pope and consequently had full power to make those decrees or was but only a schismaticall Pope And thus these other Popes maintayned seuerall Opinions touching his Election being but matter of Fact and according to their different iudgments therein did abrogate or confirme the decrees of the said Formosus 3. A Third Obseruation may heere be taken from the authority of S. Austin thus writing Sometimes (c) S. Austin l. de Baptismo Contra Iulian. Telag l. 1. c. 2. the most learned and best defenders of the Catholik Rule do without breaking the Frame of Fayth not accord And more Diuers (d) August de Baptism contra Donat l. â—â— c. 18. men be of diuers iudgments without breach of Peace vntill a Generall Councell allow some one part for cleare pure Thus according hereto we are instructed that if any doubt of Points concerning Fayth and Religion do occur and rise neuer before determined by the Authority of Gods Church Christians may maintayne different Opinions touching the same Points vntill the Voyce of Gods Church hath definitiuely and sententionally decreed the said Points one only way And according to this Caution the Controuersy houlden betweene the Thomists and Scotists concerning the Conception of our Blessed Lady much insisted vpon against vs by our Aduersaries may be houlden without any violence to Vnity in Fayth seing this Controuersy is not yet determined and defined by the Church
the leafe and see how the more moderate English Protestant recompenseth the English Puritans Charity herein And First we find that M. Barks thus auerreth confidently The Puritans (f) In his Epist. Dedicat p. 3. are beadstrong and hardened in errour They stryke at the mayne points of fayth Shaking the very foundation it selfe Heauen and Hell The Diniuity and Humanity Yea the very soule and Saluation of our Sauiour And yet more plainely in the foresaid place They haue pestilent Heresies And finally They are hereticall and sacrilegious And further the said M. Parks thus discourseth The Creed (*) M. Parks vbi supra it selfe which alwayes hath beene the badg or cognisance whereby to discerne and know the faythfull from vnbelieuers c. is the mayne poynt in question betweene vs and the Puritans D. Couell speaking of certaine fiery English Puritans thus deliuereth his words The (g) In his Examen pag. 1. first English Ministers so far descended that some bookes and the greatest Part of Christendome was filled with vnreuerent vnholy and vnnaturall Contentions c. M. Powell is very playne with them for thus he writeth The (h) Powell in his considerations Puritans are notorious and manifest Schismatiks cut from the Church of God To forbeare diuers others like Censure passed vpon our English Puritans I will alledg these few following First of the foresayd D. Couell who registring the positions of the English Puritans among other of their positions setteth downe these following The (i) In his defence of Hooker p. 65. 74.75 statute Congregations of England are no true Church And againe The Protestant Church of England hath no forme of a Church We also thus read in the Booke of The Suruey of the pretended Discipline The (k) C. 5. c. â—4 c. 35. Puritans peruert the true meaning of certaine places both of Scripture Fathers to serue their owne turnes And againe The word of God is troubled with such choppers and changers of it Lastly besides diuers other such reprehensions of them we thus read The Catebraulls pittifull Distractions and Confusions among the Puritans proceed from such intollerable presumption as is vsed by peruerting false interpretation of holy Scripture Now by all this touching the immortall dissentions betweene our English Protestants and English Puritans we may discerne the Vanity of the Protestants answere to the Catholikes charging them in England with Controuersies in fayth the Protestants replying that their Dissentions rest only touching gouerment and other Indifferencyes but touching the mayne Articles of Protestancy they haue no Differencye at all O os impudens So ingenuously truly doth M. Parks confesse hereof saying The Protestants deceaue (l) M. Parks in his Epiâ—t Dedic the world and make men belieue That there is agreement in all substantiall Points They affirme that there is no question among them of the Truth Now the mayne Differences in doctrine betweene the Caluinists especially betweene the forraine Protestants amoÌ„g themselues and the English Protestans and the Puritans be among others these following 1. Whether the Ecclesiasticall Minister doth truly forgiue sinne or but only pronounce the remission thereof 2. Touching the Churches Visibility and Inuisibility 3. Whether in case of adultery the innocent party may marry agayne 4. Whether Christs body be really and substantially present to the Mouth of Fayth as D. Whitaker and M. Hooker do hould or but Sacramentally only present as the Puritans do teach 5. Touching Reprobation and vniuersality of Grace 6. Christs suffering in soule the paynes of Hell His descending into Hell after his death 7. Baptisme by lay persons in tyme of Neressity 8. Whether Ministers should be ordayned by imposition of handes or by the Election of the Presbytery 9. Whether Vsury be lawfull 10. Whether the Sacraments do confer Grace or but only signify it 11. Whether there hath beene since the Apostles tyme any extraordinary Calling Or whether such Calling may be 12. Whether vowes are now to be abrogated as supposed to be but Ceremoniall and parcell of the old Law 13. Whether the Roman Church be a true Church affording saluation 14. Whether the Ciuill Magistrate may be head of the Church 15. Whether the Communion ought euer to be deliuered vnder both kinds 16. Finally to omit somâ— others touching the vse of the signe of the Crosse of the Surplisse of Organs in the Church c. The II. Paragraph NOw hauing displayed in part the great Differences betweene the Protestants of all kinds among themselues and this but only from the particular sentences and wordes found here and there scattered in their writings In this next place I will demonstrate the same more fully euen from the many scores if not some hundreds of Bookes written all by Protestants against Protestants of which one Catalogue of them comprehends such bookes as are written by the Caluinists against the Lutherans Another Catalogue of bookes written by the Lutherans against the Caluinists A third by the Lutherans against the Lutherans All which three Catalogues of bookes may be found in Iodocus Coccius his Thesaurus Tom. 2. The fourth Catalogue containes the bookes written by the Protestants one against another touching the Question only of the Sacrament The Catalogue of which bookes is taken from the Protestant Wryter Hospinianus in his historiae Sacrament part 2. And all these were made betweene the yeare of our Lord 1574. and 1598. Since which tyme diuers other bookes of that subiect haue beene written by other Protestants against their owne Brethren Now in regard of the multiplicity of the said bookes of the seuerall same Catalogues and for greater breuity I refer the Reader to the two foresaid Authours Coccius and Hospinian in the places aboue alledged Yet for some delibation and tast of all the rest I will set here downe the particular titles only of twenty of the said Bookes from the vitulency and bitternes of which Titles the Reader may coniecture of all the other bookes in what spirit of Charity or rather of Serpentyne hatred and malignity they are written by Protestants against Protestants Of which twenty Bookes here alledged not any doth touch the question of the Reall presence maintayned by the Lutherans because I haue purposely forborne that subiect in relation of the Bookes here alledged in that the Lutherans agree with vs Catholikes therein 1. The First Booke then which I alledge is entituled Alberti Grauari bellum Ioannis Caluini Iesu Christi Printed Braptae Anno Domini 1598. The warr betweene Iohn Caluin and Iesus Christ written by Albertus Grauerus 2. Antiparaeus hoc est Refutatio venenati scriptià Dauide Paraeo editi in defensionem stropharum corruptelarum quibus Ioannes Caluinus illustrissima Scripturae testimonia de Mysterio Trinitatis nec non oracula Prophetarum de Christo detestandum in modum corrupit Printed Franeo-furti Anno 1598. Antipaeraeus that is a Refutation of a venemous writing published and made by Dauid Paraeus
our said Religion For why should their iudgments agree with the Catholike Church therein but that the force of the Truth constrayneth them thereto and therefore it is truly said of D. Whitaker The (e) Whitak contra Bellarm. l. de Eccles Controuers 2. q. 5. c. 14. argument must be strong and efficacious which is taken from the Confessions of the Aduersaries And I do freely acknowledge that Truth is able to extort testimonies euen from its Enemies Whose Sentence herein is agreable to the iudgment of Irenaeus thus writing It is (f) Lib. 4. c. 14 an vnanswerable prooffe that bringeth attestation from the Aduersaries themselues And further it may be inferred that seeing most Protestants do reiect the Doctrine of Traditions that therefore those Protestants who are related aboue to giue an assent to our Catholike Positions do consequently belieue that the said Articles are most agreeable to the Holy Scriptures seeing these Protestants will belieue nothing as matter of Fayth but what hath its proofe from Scripture 4. A Fourth is their reiecting of parts of true Scripture and their contentions touching the seuerall translations of confessed Scripture Now it bring once granted that it is not certainly knowne what bookes be Scripture and that all translations of Scripture yet extant are false how preiudiciall must this be to the Protestants who erect the Scripture alone for the sole Iudge of all Controuersies in Fayth Seeing admitting that the Scripture should be this Iudge yet this is to be vnderstood of those writings which are infallibly Diuine Scripture and are truly and faythfully translated Since otherwise such bookes of the Bibles which are Spurious and not the true Word of God and such Translations of true Scripture which are adulterated and made contrary to the Sense of the Holy Ghost therein should become this Iudge And thus it followeth that the Protestants till this day euen by their owne implicit Censure neuer enioyed a true Iudge for the decyding of Controuersies in sayth 5. Touching the imaginary facility in fynding out the true sense of the Scripture iustifyed not only by some learned Protestants but also by euery silly Puritanicall Woman and Mechanicall fellow that can out read vanting themselues to be as it were possessed with the Holy Ghost how dangerously doth this assertion lye open to the defence of any Heresy I will here set downe some few Texts wherof the literall words may seeme to iustify strang Errours and Heresies so certaine Drugs taken in their grosse substance are hurtfull to a mans health which being extracted become most medicinable The texts shal be these 1. The King of Kings and Lord of Lords who only hath Immortality 1. Timoth. c. 6. Now from this place one might seeme to argue that since God alone is immortall the soule of Man is not immortall but dyeth with the body an Atheisticall blasphemy 2. He that striketh thee on the Cheeke offer also the other and him that taketh away thy Cloake forbid not to take thy Coate also Luke 6. Which words of our Sauiour seeme to implye that we must offer vpon such an occasion the other cheeke to be strocken and suffer our Coate to be taken away with our Cloake And if we do not this we sinne since it is a sinne not to obserue the precept of Christ 3. Call no man your Father vpon earth Math. 23. c. Which words seeme to sound that the sonne ought not to call that man which begot him Father 4. Yf any man come to me and hateth not his Father and mother and Wyfe and brethren and sisters c. he cannot be my Disciple Luc. 14. Here the naked words sound that whereas in the ten Commandements we are taught to honour our Father and mother as also obliged to loue our wyues and friends yet here the next way to serue Christ truly is to hate our Parents our Wyues other our nearest Friends 5. Vanum est vobis ante lucem surgere Psalm 126. It is but vayne for you to ryse before it he light thus it seemes a man ought not to ryse before Sunne-rising A good pretence for sluggards 6. Melchisedech King of Salem c. Without Father without mother without Genealogy hauing neither beginning of Dayes or end of Lyfe Hebr. 7. A text from whence if one rest only in the naked Words an illiterate man may seeme to euict that this Melchisedech being a man is neuerthelesse as it were another God as neither hauing beginning nor ending as being sempiternall And also that he is another Adam as not begotten by any Carnall Copulation 7. I do accomplish those things quae desunt passionum Christi that want of the Passions of Christ in my flesh for his body which is the Church Colos 1. From whence the poore Puritan-Reader might be induced to thinke that the Apostle did here speake no lesse then blasphemy as intimating that something were wanting or defectiue in the Passion of Christ which himselfe was to fullfill and make perfect 8. Lastly to turne my Pen more particularly to our She-ignorant Puritans who by carrying the Bible they thinke they can vnderstand any part thereof Now how would these ignorant Fooles vnderstand this text against themselues Melior est iniquitas viri quam mulier benefaciens The Iniquity or wickednes of a man is better then a Woman doing good Ecclesiast 42. by which words the Puritan-Woman must be forced to confesse vnderstanding the words as they simply lye that a man fraught with all wickednes is to be preferred before herselfe who seemes to be full of the spirit and the written word Thus far these few examples for instance sake to the which many hundred more may be adioyned All which are most true in the sacred and intended sense of the Holy Ghost yet they conuince that the Scriptures are not of that facility and easines for the perfect vnderstanding of them as diuers Protestants alledged towards the beginning of this Treatise merely contrary to the more graue iudgments of other Protestants their brethren do make shew to teach 6. In this next place we may call to mynd what Indignity and dishonour that most blasphemous and miscreant Opinion and Sentence of Swinglius and his Companions as so many Charons seruing to wast soules ouer to Hell do offer to the Christian Fayth by teaching as is aboue shewed most differently from all their owne Christian Protestant Brethren That a man though not belieuing in Christ so that he lead not a wicked lyfe may be saued For who houldeth this for true litle pryseth the Passion of Christ they being in the number of those of whom it is said They deny (g) 1. Petr. 2. him that bought them the Lord bringing vpon themselues speedy Damnation So forgetfulll they are of that other sacred Sentence There is no (h) Iohn 1. other Name vnder Heauen giuen vnto men then that of Iesus wherein we must be saued And thus these men make him to become to