5. cap. 3. pag. 684 In tymes past no religion had place in Churches but Papisticall D. Humfrey ad Rat. 3. Campiani At length all left the fellowship of the Church M. Perkins in Exposit Symboli During the space of 900. yeares the Popish heresy spred it selfe ouer the whole world And D. White in his way pag. 352. compareth Popery before Luthers tyme to a leprosy which sayth he possesseth euery part of man And in his defence cap. 37 he sayth I affirme Papacy to be a leprosy breeding in the Church so vniuersally that there was no visible company of people appearing to the world free â—â—om it And whether any company at all knowne or vnknowne were free from it wholy or not I neither determine nor greatly care M. Iewel serm in cap. 11. Lucae pag. 208 VVhen all the world the people Priests and Princes were ouerwhelmed with ignorance when the word of God was put out of sight when all schooles Priests Bishops Kings of the world were sworne to him the Pope that whatsoeuer he tooke in hand they should vphold it VVhen whosoeuer had muttered against him must straight way haue byn excommunicate put to most cruel death as Gods enemy M. Fox in his Acts p. 391 All the whole world was filled and ouerwhelmed with errors and darknesse And finally D. Bancroft in his suruey c. 4. pag 60. hath these words Both the Priests of all sortes and likewise the people became in tyme to be so drowned in the puddles of Popery all of them together from the toppe to the toe Al people from the toppe to the toe forgetting c. 5. By these confessions of Protestants we see plainly that all the westerne Church all Europe all Christian Churches the whole Christian nation the whole body of the Church the whole world all all without exception all alike all euen to the last all euen to the common people all Kings and people from the first to the last all Priests and people from top to toe all and euery one were ouerwhelmed with Popish and more then Cymmerian darknesse Secondly we see that no man strone against Popery no man admonished no man taught no man belieued no man so much as dreamed of that which is the cheifest and most principall point of Protestancy but one only and Luther alone was wise Thirdly that the case was such for so many ages for 600. yea for 900. years last past Fourthly that it is so manifest that as themselues confesse the whole Christian world knoweth it it is confessed manifest by it selfe most cleare and out of all doubt and no man in his writtes can deny it To all which if you add that very many and most famous Protestants oftentymes most plainly most freely and in all kind of writings haue confessed this ye shall most euidently perceiue Lib. 1. cont marc ca. 3. de carne Chr. c. 5. li. 22 cont Faust c. 15. that vnlesse it be hereticall licence as Tertullian speaketh or by some diuelish priuiledge as S. Augustins word is their confessions can be vnderstood in no other sense then that when Luther began there was not one Protestant in the whole world Lastly we see hereby that Protestants herein imitate the phrases of old heretiks Cont. epist fund c. 4. for Manichee as S. Augustin writeth sayd Almost all nations are ignorant how the truth is And the Donatists The Church is perished from the whole world The Luciferians in S. Hierome Heres 69. The whole world is become Diuels Whose damned speach sayth he doth frustrate the Passion of Christ Dial. cont Lucifer Nestorius in Vincent Lyrin auouched That the whole Church had erred And other heretiks there say Learne true fayth which besides vs none vnderstandeth Cap. 26. which lay hid for many ages and now of late is reuealed and shewed Marcion also and Valentinian in Tertullian auouch Praes c. 28. that all had erred at whome he pleasantly iesteth in these words Forsooth truth which was to be freed expected some Marcionists or Valentinians Lutherans or Caluinists In the meane tyme men preached amisse belieued amisse so many thousands we wrongly Christened so many works of fayth wrongly done so many miracles so many graces done amisse so many Priesthoods so many functions wrongly executed 6. If any say that the scripture sometyme speaketh vniuersally when notwithstanding it is not to be vnderstood vniuersally as when it sayth All seeke their owne There is not one that doth good no not one and the like and therefore though the foresayd speaches of Protestants be vniuersall yet they are not to be vnderstood vniuersally I answeare that it is found to affirme that the foresayd speaches of Protestants ought to be vnderstood according to certaine speaches of the scripture and those spoken of other matters rather then according to their own plaine and manifest signification Who made this law of expounding Protestants words Or do they keep it in expounding Catholiks or other mens wordes God may speake in scripture as he thinkes best Protestants ought according to custome which as is sayd is the law and rule of speach both to speak and to be vnderstood Besides sith we know that the scripture cannot lye or gainsay it selfe and in other places it sayth the contrary we iustly limitate its vniuersall speaches in this or that place And therfore vnlesse Protestants can shew that they haue the like priuiledge that they cannot contradict themselues as the Scripture hath there is no reason to expound them according as we do the holy Scripture 7. If any reply that also Saint Hierome Dial. cont Lucifer sayd that the whole world meruayled how it was become Arian and yet meant not that the whole world was Arian I answeare that Saint Hieromes example doth nothing auaile Protestants First because Saint Hierome sayd once so Protestants very often Againe he sayd so only in heat of dispute with his aduersary Protestants haue written so when they disputed with none Besides Saint Hierome in the very same place expoundeth himselfe that he meant not that indeed the whole world was become Arian For he sayth that it was euident that the Bishops vvere no Arians but belieued a right and abode in the agreement of fayth but only speaketh so because all the Bishops assembled at Arimini yelded to the Arians that the word Consubstantiall should not be vsed But Protestants say not that all the world yelded to the Pope about the suppressing of one only word but that all from the first to the last from the top to the toe were drowned in Popish errours and none belieued or so much as dreamed of that which is most fundamentall and necessary in Protestant religion Which kind of speaches S. Hierome neuer vsed Againe Saint Hierome vsed only this phrase The whole world but Protestants vse both that and many more and more plaine Lastly albeit Saint Hierome had spoken altogether as Protestants do yet there were no reason that
enemies to the world to all others besides themselues could not be discerned from others lurcked in desertes in darknesses like sparkles vnder much ashes professed not their fayth before the world or their aduersaries but at most before themselues and were known only to those that had eyes that is to themselues 3. The same also they meane They teach that the church may be inuisible to the world when they teach that the church of God may be inuisible to the world and all that are out of it Iunius in his 2. book of the church cap. 13 VVe conclude that the outward forme and visible shape of the Church may so in common vanish that it cannot be pointed at or perceiued of the world And againe The Church is oftentymes couered and inuisible to the world Often inuisible to the world And cap. 16 The visible fashion of the Church may be hid and faile from the vngratefull world And in his Theologicall Theses cap. 43 Sometymes the church appeareth to the faithfull alone sometymes it is knowne to some godly persons not to euery one Besnage in his booke of the state of the visible and inuisible Church cap. 4 The Church is not alwayes knowne to the world Sonis in his answere to Spondé cap. 2. pag. 32 God sometymes taketh away the face of the Church from men Lubbertus in his 3. booke of the Church cap. 4 VVe affirme that the Church may be driuen to those straights that it may lye hid from the world and persecutors And cap. 6 VVe deny that she is alwayes visible to the world which he repeateth againe cap. 7. Riuet in his Epirome of Controuersies treatise 1. sect 37 It happeneth sometymes that the Church hath byn inuisible or rather hidden sometymes from the eyes of persecutors sometymes from the eyes of the faythfull themselues to wit of some and the most of them D. Whitaker Controuers 2. quest 3. cap. 3. pag. 474 VVe say that the Church may be conserued in so few that it appeare not to the world And quaest 5. cap. 6. pag. 508 It is most false that the Church shall alwayes be knowne and manifest to the world D. Fulke to Stapletons Cauillat Bullinger Alphonse Chytreus Marlorate and all the rest do acknowledge that the Church by the defence of Christ shal be protected in the desert that is in places remote from the sight and accesse of the wicked Againe The Church is not alwayes apparent to the multitude of the wicked And in his booke of Succession pag. 19 It is not doubted whether the Ecclesiasticall succession of persons and places ought sometymes to be visible to the world but whether at all tymes And pag. 21 Sometyms the Church is vnknowne to the world Pag. 42 God would sometymes prouide for the Church in this sort in striking her enemies with blindnes that they could not find her And pag. 129. The externall policy of the Church is vnknowne to the world that is to the enemies of the Church And pag. 366 I affirme that the Church is sometymes vnknowne to the world D. White in his way to the Church pag 86 The question is only of the outward state of the Church whether it be alway visible to the world or not that in euery age those congregations may be discerned and pointed to which are the true Church For we say not Pag. 87 This number may be very small and their profession so secret amongst themselues that the world and such as loue not the truth shall not see them they remayning so hidden as if they were not at all And pag. 97. The Church may be hid or become inuisible sometyme so that the world cannot see it D. Morton in the 1. part of his Apology lib. 1. cap. 16 ProtestaÌ„ts proper defence Protestants say the Church is not alwayes knowne to all the faythfull nor to her enemies And this he termeth the proper defence of Protestants And cap. 13 VVhen Protestant say the Church is sometymes ecclipsed like the moone they meane that she is brought sometymes to so sew that it is not seene but of those which are in her but not openly knowne by her visibility rites or visible Succession or to all the faythfull D. Willet in his Synopsis Cont. 2 quest 1. pag. 67 A number of faythfull people hath byn alwayes in the world but not alwayes visible to the world Againe If by visible they vnderstand that which is actually visible we say it is not so alwayes visible to the world Thus we see that for to maintaine the inuisibility of their Church they teach that the visible forme of the Church of God may vanish mayly hid may faile from the world is often taken away from men by God is vnknowne to the world That the Church sometymes is vnknowne or appeares not visible to the world sometyme knowne only to the faythfull yet not to all them neither but to some and the fewer of them and that neither by any visible rites nor by visible succession and that this kind of doctrine they terme the proper defence of Protestants to wit for to defend the inuisibility of their Church before Luther Which kind of defence hath neither truth nor probability and though it had yet would it not suffice to defend the inuisibility of their Church before Luthers tyme when it was inuisible not only to the world to enemies to straungers to some or most of the faythfull but to all and euery one as shall manifestly appeare hereafter 4. If any say that it is no meruayle if Protestants teach that their Church was inuisible to the world because the true Church cannot be seene but by fayth I answeare first that this supposeth their Church to be the true Church which ought not to be supposed but proued Secondly that they teach that the Church may be vnknowne not only to the world but also to some or most of the faythfull Lastly that the true Church may be knowne two wayes one way to be the true Church of God an other to be knowne distinctly from all other Churches The true Church discerned from all other Churches euen by Infidels as Christ was knowne to be the Messias only by his disciples but yet he was knowne distinctly from all other men by the Iewes And the scripture is knowne to be the word of God only by Christiâ—ns but is knowne distinctly from other writings by Infidels And in Christs tyme his company was known to be the true Church of God only by the faythfull but knowne distinctly from all other companies or Churches euen by Infidels And the same we say of his Church from his tyme vnto our dayes that it is and euer was knowne to be the true Church of God only of the faythfull but known and seene distinctly from all other Churches euen by the world Infidels And of his kind of knowledge and visibility wherewith the true Church is knowne and visible not only to the faythfull
God And Beza wrote a booke of this title Of the true and visible marks of the Catholike Church D. Whitaker in answere of the 3. reason of F. Campian That we iudge to be proper to the true Church that it increase and conserue Christs word that it vse the Sacraments entiâ—rly and purely These we defend to be the most true and essentiall properties of the Church Take these away and you will leaue nothing but the carcasse of the church Againe They containe the true nature of the church which if they be present they make the church and take it away if they be taken away And D. Feild in his 1. book of the church cap. 11 VVe say that that society wherein that outward profession of the truth of God is preserued is that true church of God c. Finally to omit the words of others the same teach Wigand in his method of doctrine cap. 19. Gesner in his 24. place of the Church The Magdeburgians in the Preface of their 6. CeÌ„tury Heshusius in cap. 1.1 ad Cor. Soterius in his method title of the church Pelargus in his Compend of diuinity loc 7. Sohnius in his Thesis of the Church Bullinger in his Catechisme fol. 44. Aretius in his places part 3. fol. 50. Theses of Geneua disput 74. SummeoiÌ„ Protest former CoÌ„sessioÌ„s Thus thou seest good reader that according to the manifold iudgement of Protestants a part of the definition of the essence the marke of the Church in this life of the Church militant of the Church which is belieued of the proper Church of the Church whereof the Scripture properly speaketh when it calleth her the spouse of Christ the body of Christ of the true Church of the Church properly so termed and finally of the Catholike Church that I say it is of the definition and essence a marke of this church to be a visible company professing the faith partaking the Sacraments mutually confirming themselues and that otherwise it is as they say but a carcasse of the Church Wherefore it implieth manifest contradiction that there should at any tyme haue byn a true Church and not a visible company because nothing can be without all its essentiall parts The Protestant Church therefore which as we head was before Luthers tyme altogeather inuisible was no true and proper Church but to vse their termes a Platonicall idaea or a carkasse of a Church If any reply that when Protestants affirme the foresayd definitions properties and marks of the true Church they meane not by the name of the true Church that which is simply and absolutely the true Church but that which is the true visible Church I aske why then do they simply call it the true Church if they do not so meane why are not their words conformable to their meaning Besides the Church wherof they giue the foresayd definitioÌ„s and marks they call not only the true Church but also the Church properly so termed the spouse and body of Christ the Catholike church and such like which cannot agree to any which is but a Church in appearance only and in the sight of men but only to that which is the Church in very deed and in the sight of God Further more according to the opinion of Protestants these two termes True and Visible in the nature of the Church do one destroy the other as these two True and Painted exclude each other in the nature of a man For they imagine that the true Church is a society in something that is inuisible to wit in iustification and predestination Wherupon they deny any ill or reprobate Christians to be of the true Church Wherefore as he should speake fondly who should say A true painted man so according to their owne opinion they speake as fondly when they say The true visible Church But as we can only say the true picture of a man attributing the word True to the picture not to the man so they should only The true appearance or shew of the Church gâ—uing the word True to the shew not to the Church it selfe But they are ashamed to speak so least when they inquire the marks of the true visible Church Why ProtestaÌ„ts somtyme call the visible visible Church the true Church it should appeare that they seeke not the marks of the true Church indeed but only of the shew shadow or shape of the Church And yet in very truth they seeke but the marks of the shadow of the church For the inuisible Church consisting only of the iust and elect which alone they will haue to be the true Church hath no certaine marks else we should know certainly who were the iust and elect And this themselues confesse for thus writeth D. Whitaker Cont. 2. quest 5. cap. 8 ProtestaÌ„ts giue no marks of the true Catholike Church The question is not of the marks of the inuisible Church Againe VVe say the marks of the Catholike Church simply so called are knowne to God alone And D. Humfrey to 3. reason of F. Campian pa. 281. sayth that the marks do not reach vnto the nature of the true Church And the reason is manifest because as I sayd otherwise we should know who were the iust and elect 4. If any againe reply that when Protestants say The true visible Church they meane the visible Church true in doctrine in which speach there is no contradiction according to their owne opinion because they admit that the visible Church that is the society in true doctrine and right vse of Sacraments into which Church or society the wicked or reprobate may enter may be true in doctrine though they graunt not that such a Church or society be the true Church in nature or essence Which perhaps Vorstius meant in his Antibellarm pa. 180. when he sayd The outward Church is not without cause called the true church of Christ by reason of the prosession of true doctrine I answere if they so meant why did they not speak so were they ignorant that it is one thing to be true in doctrine or in speach and another to be true in nature as a lyer is a true man in nature of man but not true in his speach Or if they did know this why did they abuse the words and their hearers Moreouer though in this sense their words did not destroy themselues as they did in the former yet fondly should they as they vse to do assigne the truth of doctrine for the marke of the true Church in doctrine For this were to assigne a thing for a mark of it self as if to know a true man of his word one should giue this marke that it is such as speaketh truth Besides this were rather to define what is a true man then to giue the marke to know who is a true man And yet marks are giuen to know which is the true Church not what is the nature of the true Church 5. If yet any reply that the visible Church or
alledge and vrge to my purpose be either quite altered or else obscured For if in any place for breuities sake the words be so litle chaÌ„ged as the sense which I presse remayne whole and cleare it skilleth not Because I argue not out of the meere titles or letters but only out of their sense and signification Besides if at any tyme there be some colour of cauiling about the alteratioÌ„ of the sense of one or other place for iust cause I hope there will not be though in so many places as are here cited it were no meruaile if some were mistakeÌ„ let him not therfore cry that all the testimonies are falsified or think that therby he hath satisfied all the rest 3. Secondly touching the testimonyes themselues let him obserue that either he answere them all or at least those which are the stronger as for the most part those are which are noted in the mâ—rgent otherwise by the iudgment of the Fathers and Protestants also he will shew in effect that though he could not hold his peace yet could he not answere sufficiently For as S. Augustine (a) Lib. 1. cont Gaudent sayth Surely that he held his peace not his tongue but his cause sailed him And in an other place (b) Lib. 2. cont Maxim I take your silence for consent S. (c) Epi. 61. Hierome You confesse more by silence then you denie by dispute And againe (d) Epi. 83 It skilleth litle whether I binde mine aduersary sleeping or waking only it is easier to binde one that is quiet then one that resisteth (e) Tom. 7. fol. 384. 388. Luther also Euill consciences speake much besides the matter but litle to the purpose and seldome come to it And he noteth that it is the art and nimblenes of Heretikes to skip ouer the matter and difficulty Whitaker pronounceth it to be a signe of a most desperate cause not to touch the Matter And D (f) Defens of serm p. 243. Bilson To this thou answearest nothing and therfore all wise men conclude that thou canst not maintaine that which I then did disproue D Sucliue lib. 2 de Eccles cap. 1 The rest because they say nothing to it I will take for graunted For if there had bin any hope of râ—futing it or any place of calmuniating without doubt they would not haue bin silent And M (g) Pro Tortura forti c. 1. Burhill Amongst the wiser both of our side and yours aâ—tergiuersatour doth no lesse hurt his cause then a bewrayer For he seemeth to consent graunt who then holdeth his peace when silence is suspicious 4. Thirdly touching the exposition of the testimonies let him obserue that when the words are cleare and their sense manifest he doe not expound them or wrest them to another meaning For first if cleare words must be expounded there would be no end of expounding Againe to what purpose should he expound those words which need no exposition This were as (h) Serm. 14. de verb Apost S. Augustin sayth no other then to goe about to bring darknesse into open light Besides Protestants themselues say that cleare words ought not to be expounded For thus (i) Luther co 2. ep ad Carolstad Luther This rule that one place is to be expounded by another without doubt is particuler to wit a doubtfull or obscure place must be expounded by another that is certaine and cleare For to expound certaine and cleare places by conference of other places is wickedly to mock truth and to bring clouds into light The Ministers of Saxony in (k) Pa. 303. Colloq Aldeburg say to their fellowes Let them remember that exposition is not to be admitted in cleare places And those of (l) Hospin fol. 161. Zurich Then there is need of declaration when the words sense thereof is obscure And Melancthon Nothing can be sayd so properly so plainly aduisedly which may not be depraued by some cauillation Beza (m) Ep. 41 also It is easy to wrest other mens writings And M. Dominis (n) l. 1. c. 3. Let those words which are cleare be kept in their proper and plaine sense 5. Fourthly let him obserue that in expounding the Protestants testimonies he deuise not hyperboles or figures at his pleasure but let him bring good reason why he expoundeth them figuratiuely Eyther deny sayth (o) Cont. Prax. c. 13. Tertullian that these are written or who art thou that thou deniest that they ought to be taken as they are written And the Protestants in Admonit de lib. Concord cap. 3. say If they would not that these should be vnderstood as they sound why speake they so And Brentius in Recognit pag. 148. VVhat liberty what temerity is this of abusing words and deuising a new Grammar For first the rule of vnderstanding mens words is that they be taken according to their proper and common signification vnlesse the writer or speaker do by some way declare the contrary Whereupon (p) Tom. 2. fol. 473. Luther sayth VVe haue ouercome that words are to be taken in their naturall sense except the contrary be demonstrated And (q) Colloq c. 8. Diu. 4. D. Rainolds That is the sense of words in which they are commonly taken Besides otherwise all force of prouing any thing by any words of God or man is quite gone Note For sith all the force of such proofe standeth in the sense if this be vncertaine and must be proper or figuratiue according as the hearers or readers will all the force of the proofe shall depend vpon the will of the hearer or Reader And hence it proceedeth that the proofes which Catholikes make out of Scripture against Heretikes seeme to some not to conuince theÌ„ which falleth out not for defect in the proofes themselues but for the manner of theÌ„ to wit because they be taken from words which Heretiks will expound at their pleasure And if there be no rule obserued in expounding words but they be wrested at euery ones fancy what meruaile is there if Heretikes cannot be conuinced either by the words of Scripture or any other whatsoeuer Moreouer if at the will of the Reader or hearer wordes may be expounded eyther properly or figuratiuely he that telleth the greatest vntruths may be thought to tel the greatest truths contrariwyse be that speaketh most piously may be iudged to speake most impiously Hereupon sayd (r) Tom. 2. fol. 489. Luther If this licence raigne I may interpret all things fitly whatsoeuer either Heretiks or the diuell himselfe hath done or sayd or can do or say for euer VVhere then shall be the meanes to refell an heretik or the diuell And (Å¿) Ib fol. 220. againe If it be lawful to play with figures at pleasure without yelding any reason what hindereth but that all words haue new senses Furthermore it was the custome or heretiks to deuise figure of their pleasure Thus (t) Epist ad Serap S. Athanasius
OF THE AVTHOR AND SVBSTANCE OF THE PROTESTANT CHVRCH AND RELIGION TWO BOOKES Written first in Latin by R. S. Doctour of Diuinity AND Now reuiewed by the Author and translated into English by VV. Bas Euery thing must be reduced to its beginning Tertull. Praescript cap. 20. Permissu Superiorum M.DC.XXI The Scope of this Worke. IF both Luther himselfe and the famousest Protestantâ— of all sorts haue many wayes most plainly and most freely confessed that Luther was the Author and Beginner of the Protestant Church and Religion as in this worke doth manifestly appeare then vndoubtedly he was so And if Luther were the Author and Beginner therof assuredly it is not the Church and Religion of Christ. Read therefore and iudge indifferently and thereby an end may be made of all Controuersies in Religion betwixt the Catholiks and Protestants THE PREFACE OF THE AVTHOR TO the Reader Wherein the manner and profit of this Worke is declared THERE are two kinds of questions gentle Reader which are in controuersy betwixt the Catholikes and Protestantes the one kind is of fact to wit Whether Luther was the Author and beginner of the Protestants Church and ReligioÌ„ whether before him it were visible and had Pastours whether he and the first Protestant Preachers were sent to preach Protestancy and the liâ—e The other kind of question is of Christs doctrine or law For example whether Christ taught good workes do iustify be necessary to saluation meritorious and such others Why a a question of Fact is handled rather theÌ„ of doctrin At this present I treate not of this second kind of question but only of the former and that for three causes First the questions of Doctrine are innumerable but the questions of Fact few And many haue handled them and that most exactly but these few haue touched and for ought that I know none of purpose hath hitherto written of the Authour of Protestancy and in that manner as I intend to write Secondly there are few questions of doctrine of that nature that all other controuersies of faith depend vpon them but the most questions of Fact are such as if they be well decided al other Controuersies of religion are at an end Such kind of question this especially is which now I handle VVhether Luther were Author and beginner of the Protestant church and Religion For if it be made manifest that he was the Author and Beginner of it euery one will straihgt see that it is not Christs Church Religion but Luthers deuise and inuention Thirdly in questions of doctrine or law Protestants want not some pretext of Scripture as neither any Heretikes wanted and therfore diuers tymes they are ready to debate these kind of Questions in which as Tertullian sayth they pretend Scriptures Prescrip c. 15. and with this their boldnes shake some and in the dispute weary the constant catch the weake send away the midalâ— sort with scruple and douâ—ts But in questions of Fact they are destitute not only of al pretence of Scripture vnles it be some most vaine but also of all testimony of men and help of reason and stand only vpon their owne sayinges are conuinced by the testimonies of the whol world and sometyme also by their owne confessions and therefore are brought to debate these kind of questions no more willingly then is a theefe to his tryall Neither do they in these disputs either weary the constant or catch the weake but shew their owne weaknes and wilfullnes vnto all kind of men And this is the cause why Ministers are so loath to dispute of the Church because the Church being a company of men includeth many questions of fact as of antiquity succession continuance visibility mission ordination of Pastours and such like in which points there is little colour or shew on their part 2. Fourthly Protestants exact more difficult poofes in questions of doctrine then they can demand in matters of Fact For in matters of Fact wherof the scripture speaketh nothing they must be content with testimonies of men against whome no iust exception can be made or they must refuse all triall of these kind of questions But in controuersies of doctrine they account those only to be lawfull proofes which are taken out of the scripture Neither doe these satisfie them vnlesse they be plaine (a) Melan. Brent in Hospin fol. 107. Colloq Ratisb sess 11. expresse and as they say word (b) Vorst respons ad Slad for word containe that which is in question or at least be so pregnant and strong that they (c) Luth. de seru arbitr fol. 440. Lib. 6. confess c. 4. stopp all mâ—ns mouths that they can gainsay nothing For it is the common fault of Protestants which S. Augustin saith himselfe was guilty of whiles he was an heretike that they will be as certaine of all things as that seauen and three make ten Nay they yield not alwayes to these kind of proofs For what can be sayd more expressy more plainly more literally then the scripture saith that man is iustified by workes and not only by faith that that which our Sauiour gaue with his hands to his Apostles after his last supper was his very body and bloud and such like yet the Protestants yield not to these kind of testimonies but deuise figures and shiftes to delude them Catholiques proofes in controuersies of doctrine are certainly Theological demonstrations because they are clearly drawne from the proper principles of Diuinity to wit from cleare words of God confirmed by the tradition of the Church and vnanimous exposition of the Fathers which kind of proofe is as great and strong as either Diuinity or law or any Science whatsoeuer which is founded in words either doth affoard or the nature of any law or science which is grounded in words as Diuinity is can beare or affoard And as the Philosopher saith well it were starck madnes to exact any other kind of proofes of any Profession then the nature therof can affoard 1. Eth. 1. But because heretiques expound what words soeuer as they list and litle set by the authority of the Church or Fathers and the vnlearned hardly perceaue what kind of proofe is a Theologicall demonstration such as Diuinity can affoard no greater or which is the true sense of Gods word or how great the authority of the Churh and Fathers ought to be therefore with them Catholiks proofs in points of doctrin albeit in truth they be Theological demonstrations take litle effect Wheras on the other side Catholique proofes in matter of Fact are not only Theologicall but also that I may so speake Mathematicall demonstrations because they consist of one principle which is grounded not only vpon the foundations of Diuinity to wit the word of God together with the expositioÌ„ of the Church and Fathers but also is manifest by the light of reason which kind of principles these are That Gods Church hath alwayes him
of truth By reasoÌ„ and of the number of them who see good and follow bad he must needs imbrace that truth which himselfe confesseth Experience also sheweth the same By experience For when our Sauiour could neither by infinite miracles nor euident scriptures stop the mouthes of the Iewes he so conuinced them out of their owne words that as the Euangelist writeth they answeared him not a word nor from that day any durst aske him a question And the Donatists Matt. 22. when they made answeare to the Catholikes argumeÌ„ts taken out of scripture were so intangled in their owne fact touching the Maximinists as sayth S. (d) In collat 3. diei c. 11. Augustine they euer more stood dumbe at thatâ— And now we see that Protestants are tongue-tied at no sort of bookes so much as at those which are composed of their owne testimonies This manner of dealing vsed the holy Fathers against the Pagans as is to bee seen in Clement By the Fathers Tertullian Origen Cyprian Arnobius â—actantius Augustin and others and against heretiques also as appeareth in the sayd S. Augustin S. Hierome and others most often and the same they most highly commend For thus writeth (e) In Euseb l. 7. c. 6. S. Denis of Alexandria It helpeth me much that I can disproue them out of their owne wordes S. (f) Orat. de S. Basil Gregorie Nazianzen It is the greatest cunning and wisdome of speach to bind the Aduersary with his owne wordes And (g) De Trini c. 130 Tertullian of Nouatian It is a strong kind of proofe which is taken of the aduersary that truth may be proued eueÌ„ by the enemyes of truth S. (h) Lib. 2. cap. 53. Ireneus We often disgrace them by their owne doctrine And (i) Lib. cont Secund c. 3. S. Augustine Neither will I bring against thee any other sentences for to shew the errour of Manichee then out of thyne owne epistle Which worke of his he (k) Lib. 2. Retract c. 10. preferreth before al the other which he wrote against that heresy Nay the same holy Fathers account this manner of dealing with heretiks necessary and preferre it before all others For thus sayth S. Ireneus (l) Lib. 1. cap. 35. It is needfull to disproue the Valentinians by their Mothers Fathers and Ancestours And in another (m) Lib. 4. c. 14. place That is a true and vnanswerable proofe which bringeth attestation froÌ„ the aduersaryes themselues And (n) Lib. de anima c. 3. Tertullian The aduersaryes testimony is eftsoones necessary Againe I must strike them with their own weapons And (o) Atha l. de carne Christi S. Athanasius who was most tryed in combates with heretikes Against wranglers we must oppose their owne arguments in which sayth he I haue the greatest hope of victory S Chrysostome (p) Hom. 3. in epist ad Tit. also We must conuince them by this when we turne their owne ill sayings against themselues as often as we make those who were the famousest amongst them their accusers And lastly (q) Lib. 1. cont Petil. c. 27. S. Augustine the most fortunate champion of the Church against heretiks seeing that the Donatists could be euidently conuinced by their owne dealing with the Maximinists exhorteth Catholikes to let alone all other kind of arguments and still to vrge this only Remember sayth he this only fact of the Max minists cast this in their faces answere to al obiections by the Maximinists alone And (r) Ibid. cap. 18. againe I will not leaue this only fact which God hath put before their eyes to stop their mouthes and to amend them if they be wise or to consound them if they remayne obstinate And in like manner when he saw that the Donatists cause was quite ouerthrowne by that saying of theirs Neither one cause doth preiudice another nor one person another he thus speaketh vnto Catholiques (s) Sermi 22. de verb. Apostol I request you I beseâ—ch you for Christs sake that you remember it speake it and haue it euer in your mouthes There could not be pronounced on our behalfe a briefer surer and plainer sentence Thus you see how greatly the Fathers esteeme of this kind of dealing with heretikes and how earnestly they vrge vs for to vse it 7. And Protestants ought the more to allow this kind of proceeding with them because they much commend it and preferre it before all others Luther There (t) De ser arbit fol. 442. is no stronger proofe then his owne confession who is accused and his testimony against himselfe And againe No (u) Inc. 1. 1. Pet. fol. 449. man can conuâ—nce a lyer better then by his own words Heâ—husius The (x) Lib. de Coma. shâ—rtest way of al to conuince an aduersary is that whiâ—h is taken out of his owne confession wherwith he openly acknowledgeth that which is obiected Lucas (y) Epist Euchar. Osiander The confession and testimoÌ„y of the aduersary is of greatest authority Peter (z) Loc. tit de Iudaeis fol. 3â—0 Martyr Surely amongst other testimonyes that is of greatest weight which is giuen by the enemies D Bancroft Let (a) Suruey c. 8. pag. 14â— vs take hold of that which they haue graunted You may be bold to build vpon it for a truth that they are so coÌ„strayned to yield vnto D (b) Cont. 292. c. 14. Whitaker It must needs be a strong argument which is taken out of the confession of the Aduersaryes For the testimony of the aduersaryes is of force against themselues And (c) Praef. in Cant. againe It is a notable matter and encreaseth much the triumph for to be proued by the testimony of the aduersaries And D Morton in the Epistle dedicatory of his answere to the Protestants Apology VVhich kind of assistance of learned aduersaryes the Apologists theÌ„selues haue layd down for the greatest reason of satisfaction we do accordingly admit Nay they begin to vse this kind of arguing against vs and vaunt much therof VVho may not sayth the sayd D. (d) Apol. l. 1 cap. 25. Differences betwixt Protest manner of dealing ours Morton iustly congratulate the Protestants happines whome truth it selfe proceeding out of their aduersaries mouths doth patronize 8. But by their leaue there are many and great differences betweene their and our kind of proceeding in this matter First many of the Catholikes whome they produce against vs wrote before their Religion was risen therfore we answere that of them which S. Hierom answered of the ancient Fathers who liued before Arius appeared Lib. 2. contr Rufin Before Arius sayth he arose in Alexandria like a noon-tide Diuell they spake some things innocently and not so warily which cannot escape the obloquie of certaine peruerse men And which S. Augustin answered of S. Chrysostom when the Pelagians alleadged his testimony Discoursing sayth he in the Catholike Church Lib. 1. cont Tul. c. 6. he
no fayth Infants without all faith according to Protestants and consequently that they are infidels whence it ensueth that they account some infidels to be actually of the church Caluin 4. Institut cap. 16. § 19 I will not lightly affirme that they infants are endued with the same fayth we find in our selues And § seq he sayth Infants are baptized for future repentance and sayth Now if they dye before they are of yeares God reneweth them by the vertue of his spirit which we do not comprehend in such manner as himselfe alone knoweth how to bring to passe Lib. cont Seruet pag. 647. he sayth that that sentence of the Scripture VVhosoeuer belieueth not in the Sonne of God abideth in death and the wrath of God remayneth vpon him belongeth not to infants but only to such as are obstinate And in cap. 5. Rom. v. 17 That you may be partaker of iustice it is needfull that you be faythfull because it is receiued by sayth To infants it is communicated by a speciall manner Bucer in cap. 19. Matthaei pag. 404 Paul sayth that sayth commeth by hearing the word preached and in the same sort all the Scripture speaketh of sayth Seing therefore infants heare not the word preached they cannot haue this kind of sayth But out of that that infants want sayth nothing lesse can be concluded then which some thinke that therefore they cannot please God Infants are blessed by the grace of God and merits of Christ But if they be taken hence in their infancy they shall know God and reape felicity by some other knowledge then fayth Musculus in locis tit de baptismo Infants haue yet no fayth Againe Infants are saued by Gods election though they be taken out of this life not only vnbaptized but euen before they haue fayth Beza in Confess cap. 4. sect 48 It doth not appeare to vs that infants are endowed with that habit of fayth Infants haue not so much as the habit of fayth which we sayd was required to the receiuing of the matter and effect of the Sacraments nor is it likely that they are And in colloq Montisbel pag. 407 VVherefore though the children of the faythfull want sayth yet is not baptisme vnprofitable to them And part 2. Respons ad acta Montisbel pag. 124 All eit infants haue no sayth of their owne especially actuall yet rightly are they baptized according to the forme of the Couenant I will be thy God and of thy seed which is apprehended by the parents to themselues and their children And pag. 129 I confesse that sayth is required that infants comprehended in the Couenant may please God but I deny that they can or ought to be endowed with their owne fayth inherent in them Dancus l. 4. de baptismo cap. 10. pag. 268. proposeth to himselfe this question VVhat is the fayth which in baptisme we require in infants and answereth None Vrsinus in defens argument Bezae God receiueth infants into the Church without fayth Peter Martyr in 1. Cor. 7. pag. 94 Seing the holy Scripture doth not tell me that infants belieue or those miracles are wrought in them neither see I that it is necessary for their saluation I think it is inough that they be thought to be saued because by election and predestination they belong to the people of God are endued with the holy Ghost who is the author of fayth hope and Charity Perhaps they will answeare out of Augustins opinion that they are saued by the sayth of others to wit of their parents But the Prophet sayth that euery one is saued by his owne sayth not by other mens sayth VVherefore we answere more easily who exact expresse and actuall fayth in those that are of yeares but in the children of Christians who are brought to be Christened we say fayth is begun in its principle root because they haue the holy Ghost firm whence all both fayth and other vertues do flow D. Whitaker Cont. 2. quest 6. c. 3. pag. 566 Baptisme doth not infuse any sayth or grace into infants And he sayth plainly that infants haue no fayth And lib. 8. cont Duraeum sect 77 Albeit in the Sacraments fayth which receiueth the word of promise be necessary yet that sayth is not needfull in infants albeit it be not to be doubted but the holy Ghost effectually worketh in them after a secret and wonderfull manner M. Perkins de praedestinaâ— tom 1. col 149 Infants which dye in the Couenant we belieue to be saued by tenour of that Couenant but they were not chosen for fayth or according to fayth which set they had not And 〈◊〉 â—â—rie causar cap. 25 Elected â—nfants dying in the wombe or soone after they be borne are saued after a hidden and vnspeakeable manner ingrafted in Christ by the spirit of God Luther tom 6. in cap. 25. Gen. fol. 322 Vnbaptized infants haue no fayth Melancthon in locis tit de baptismo to 3. fol. 238 It is most true that sayth is required in all that are of years But concernâ—â—g infants sayth he the matter is otherwise Infants 〈…〉 Kemnitius part 2. Exam. tit de baptism pag. 89. telleth vs that some Protestants are of opinion that infants are indeed saued by the grace of God but without sayth Nor doth their saying that the seed or root of fayth or else an inclination or disposition to fayth which some of them affirme infants to haue help them any thing it all both because Scharpe cont 1. de Iustifi graunteth that this seed can neither haue the knowledge nor applying of the promises and therefore is not Protestant faith and because Musculus in locis tit de fide art 7. confesseth that they distinguish and put a difference betweene fayth and this hidden seed Now if it be no fayth it maketh not him faythfull in whome it is And lastly because as themselues acknowledge they are not assured whither infants haue any such seed or no. For Caluin lib. 4. cap. 16. § 9. cit VVhether they haue at all any knowledge like vnto fayth I choose rather to leaue it vndetermined And he addeth that the manner of their renewing is knowne to God alone To these allegations you may adde that M. Perkins in his Reformed Catholike cont 16. sayth a man may be saued by a desire to haue sayth And neuerthelesse confesseth that this desire is not indeed sayth And in 2. Galat. col 91 God accepteth the will and desire to belieue for beliefe it selfe Now as long as a man hath not fayth but only a desire thereof he is an infidel 5. You might think that hauing made this graunt of saluation to infidels their liberality wold rest here and not passe these bounds ProtestaÌ„ts challenge Antichrist but they go yet further and bestow it sometymes euen vpon him whome they sweare yea belieue as an article of their fayth and that with as great certainty and assurance is they belieue God is in heauen or Christ is the
Chapter of Isaias tom 4. fol. 220. thus writeth There is no religion in the world which receiueth this opinion of iustification by only fayth and we our selues in priuate do scant belieue it though we publikely defend it By which words he sheweth that neither Hussytes nor Waldenses nor any Christians besides Protestants and scarce they also do belieue the principall and most fundamentall article of Protestancy howsoeuer openly they professe it That the Church cannot be so inuisible as Protestant confesse theirs to haue byn before Luthers tyme. CHAP. VI. 1. BY the name of the Church we vnderstand not as I sayd before only the men but men sociated or the society of men in the fayth worship of God Wherfore that a church be sayd visible not only the men but their worship of God must be visible Neither by this word visible do I vnderstand here that only which can be seene but whatsoeuer is sensible according both to the vulgar phrase of speach wherewith we say See how it soundeth as S. Augustine noteth and also after the phrase of scripture Lib. 10. Confess c. 35. wherein as the same holy Doctour obserueth All sensible things are called visible And Protestants as is before shewed do confesse that before Luthers rising their Church was simply inuisible Lib. 1. de mor. Manich c. 20. and vnseene of any either of those within or without her And necessarily they must say so because they can name none at all who before Luther arose did see a company of men who professed to belieue iustification by only fayth and the rest of the fundamentall principles of Protestancy yea they affirmed that it was so inuisible Ca. 4. n. 11. as it implyed contradiction to haue byn seene of any That the Church cannot be inuisible 2. Now that the Church Militant or liuing on earth cannot be so inuisible I proue first because it is against an article of fayth of diuers Protestants And if perhaps any hereupon imagine that either Protestants neuer graunted the contrary or that if they did graunt it their testimonies against themselues are not to be accepted let him read what hereafter I write touching that matter in the last chapter of this booke Wherefore in the Confession of Saxony cap. 15. they professe in this sort God will haue the Ministery of the ghospell to be publike he will not haue the voice of the ghospell to be shut vp only in corners but will haue it beard of all mankind Therefore he will haue publike and seemely meetings and in them he will haue the voice of the ghospell to sound He will also haue these same meetings to be witnesses of the Confession and separation of the Church from the sects and opinions of other Nations God will haue his Church to be seene and heard in the world and will haue her deuided by many publik marks from other people And the same they repeat in the Consent of Polony cap. de Coena And the same Confession of Saxony cap. of the Church VVe speake not of the Church as of a Platonicall idaea but we shew a Church which may be seene and heard The eternall Father will haue his Sonne to be heard in all mankind VVherefore we say that the Church is in this life a visible company c. SecoÌ„dly it is against their owne definitions of a militant Church ProtestaÌ„ts definitioÌ„s of the Church For the foresayd Confession of Saxony defineth the Church in this life to be a visible company The Magdeburgians in their 1. Century lib. 1. c. 4. col 170. do thus write The Church may be thus defined The Church in this life is a company of those The câ—urch in this life who imbrace the sincere doctrine of the Ghospell and rightly vse the Sacraments And the very same definition giueth Melancthon tom 4. in cap. 3.1 ad Tim. pag. 398. Hutterus in his Analysis of the confession of Auspurg pag. 444. saith This Church which is sayd to be and to be belieued The Church which we belieue is not a Platonicall idea but the visible company of those that are called Zanchius also in his treatise of the Church cap. 2 The militant Church is the company of the elect and truly saythfull Church militant professing the same sayth partaking the same Sacraments c. Hereof properly speake the scriptures when they call the Church the spouse of Christ the body of Christ redeemed with the bloud of Christ sounded vpon a rock Gerlachius tom 2. Disput 22 Defining the Church as it is on earth we say that it is a congregation of men Church on earth who called by the voice of the Ghospell heare the word of God and vse the Sacraments instituted of Christ. 3. Thirdly it is against the properties and markes of the true Church assigned by the Protestants themselues to be altogeather inuisible For thus their Confession of Auspurg cap. 7 The Church of Christ properly so called The proper Church hath her marks to wit pure doctrine c. The Confession of Saxony cap. 12 The true church is discerned from other nations by the voice of true doctrine and lawfull vse of Sacraments The true Church The French Confession art 27 VVe belieue that the true church ought to be discerned with great care VVherefore we affirme out of the word of God that the Church is the company of the faythfull who agree in following the word of God and imbracing true religion wherein also they daily profit growing and confirming themselues mutually in the feare of God The Confession of the Low Countries art 29 By these markes the true Church shall be discerned from the false if in her the pure preaching of the Ghospell be of force by these markes it is certaine that the true Church may be distinguished The Confession of Scotland art 18 It is necessary that the true Church be discerned from the false by euident marckes least being deceiued we imbrace the false for the true to our eternall damnation Againe VVe belieue the markes of the true Church to be true preaching of the word c. Melancthon in his answere to the Bauarian articles tom 3. fol. 362 It is euident that the true Church is a visible company And vpon the 16. to the Romans tom 1. pag. 486 She is the true Church who teacheth the Ghospell aright and rightly administreth the Sacraments Danaeus in his booke of Antichrist cap. 17 The proper definition of the Church This is the proper definition of the Church that the true Church is the company of the faythfull who serue God purely and keep the notes of adoption instituted by him such as are the heauenly word the Sacraments and discipline By these 3. marks the false Church is distinguished from the true Lubbert in his 4. booke of the Church cap. 2 VVe say that the Church doth shew her selfe to be the true Church by the sincere preaching of the word of
the word that it leaueth to be a Church In cap. 17. Ioannis tom 5. fol. 203 For God hath not determined to conserue them the faythfull without outward meanes albeit he could do it Also vpon the 1. chap. of Zacharias Although God can teach men the Ghospell without sermons yet he will not do it And of the Notes of the church tom 7. fol. 149 VVhat could or would the people of God belieue vnlesse the word of God sounded there Melancthon in locis tom 3. cap. de libero arb fol. 311 God gathereth a true Church by the voice of the Ghospell and not otherwise Kemnice in the 2. part of his examen tit de Sacramento ordinis pag. 391 God by his certaine counsell hath determined that he will dispense those things which belong to the matter of our saluation not immediatly by infusing new and peculiar reuelâ—tions into the minds of men without any meanes but by the outward Ministry of the word Caluin 4 Institut cap. 1. § 5 Howbeit Gods power be not tyed to outward meanes neuertheles be hath tyed vs to the ordinary meanes of Preaching Many are pusht on by pride disdaine and emulation to perswade themselues that they can profit inough by priuate reading and meditating And § 4 The knowledge of her the visible Church is profitable to vs yea necessary for we cannot come to life vnlesse she conceiue vs in her wombe beare vs nourish vs with her duggs And in 1. Tim. cap. 3 The office of preaching which God hath left in his church is the only instrument of truth that it go not out of mens minds The Ministery of the word being taken away God truth will fall downe Beza epist 20 It is cleare that fayth cometh of hearing and therefore preaching must goe before fayth Tayé in his Enchiridion disput 60 The necessity of ecclesiasticall Ministry appeareth in that without it we can not know the word of God nor his will therein reuealed vnto vs. D. Whitaker lib. 1. de Scriptura cap. 9 sect 9. pag. 106 The ministry being taken away neither fayth nor Charity nor obedience nor any vertue will remayne safe And cap. 2. sect 6. pag. 37 VVe cannot at all belieue without the Ministry of the church And lib. 3. cap. 15 sect 20. pag. 478 I affirme determine and hold that there is no entrance to saluation without the Ministry of the word Againe by the Ministry of Pastors we belieue the Scripture neither is it to be hoped that without this Ministry sayth can grow in our minds And cap. 5. sect 2 I confesse the Ministry of the Church to be most necessary And Cont. 2. quest 5. cap. 19. pag. 550 VVe neuer come to fayth without preaching of the word D. Fuâ—ke de Succes pag. 30 The peoples saluation cannot be procured without preaching And pag 162 No Christian will deny preaching of the word to be necessary for the edification of the church M. Latimer in his sermons fol. 38 Take away preaching and take away saluation Fol. 99 The office of preaching is the only ordinary meane whereby God hath determined to saue vs. M. Cartwright in M. Hooker lib. 5. of Ecclesiasticall policy p. 41 Reading may set forward but not begin the worke of saluation sayth may be nourished therewith but not bred herein mens attention to the Scriptures and their speculation of the creatures of God haue like efficacy both being of power to augment but neither to effect beliefe without sermons And the Puritans in D. Whitgifts Answere to the Admonitions Reading is no feeding How then could there be any Protestant Church or fayth at all before Luther when as we heard before there was then no Protestant preacher Scripture requireth preaching And in like sort sometymes they confesse that the Scripture it selfe teacheth that preaching is necessary to haue fayth The Confession of Auspurg cap. de potest Eccles pag. 59 Euerlasting iustice the holy Ghost eternall life cannot be had but by the ministry of the word and Sacraments as Paul sayth The Confession of Bohemia art 10 They graunt that none can attaine to right sayth vnlesse he heare the word of God according to that of S. Paul Fayth is of hearing And againe How shall they belieue in him of whome they haue not heard And the Protestants in their conference at Marspurg agreed as reporteth Hospinian part 2. Histor fol 77 That the holy Ghost if we speake of the ordinary course giueth fayth to none vnlesse preaching or the vocall word goe before but by and with the vocall word he worketh and maketh fayth where and in whome it pleaseth him Rom 10. Caluin also 4. Institut cap. 1. § 5 God inspireth fayth into vs by the instrument of his Ghospell as Paul admonisheth that sayth is of hearing Againe VVe must hold that which I haue set downe out of Paul that the Church is not otherwise edified but by outward preaching and in 1. Tim. cap. 3 Paul meaneth simply that which in other words he deliuereth Rom. 10. because fayth is of hearing that there will be no sayth vnlesse there be preaching The like he hath 1. Cor. 3. v. 6. Heb. 4. v. 12. and Ephes 4. v. 12. Beza in the Conference at Montbelgard pag. 407 The ordinary manner whereby fayth is infused is by hearing the word Rom. 10. And Bucer in cap. 10. Rom The Apostle knew that God could call men without the ministry of men neuertheles he absolutely wrote How shall they belieue in him of whome they haue not heard Hyperius also vpon the same place That is that all belieue and call vpon God it is needfull that before they heare the Ghospell and be taught D. Whitaker lib. 1. de Scrip. cap. 2. sect 4 That of the Apostle how shall they belieue without a preacher conuinceth this much that preaching is necessary to conceiue assured of fayth God And c. 10. sect 4 The Apostle doth plainly say that fayth is of hearing And Cont. 2. quest 5. c. 19. pag. 549 This place of Isay 59. sheweth that true preaching of the word shall be perpetuall in the Church M. Perkins in his exposition of the Creed col 787 I answere that place Rom. 10. Faith is of hearing to be vnderstood of iustifying fayth So that neither the visible nor inuisible Church could euer haue byn without preaching 6. Out of all that hath byn sayd in this and the former chapter I thus make my fourth demonstration for to proue that Luther was Author of the Protestant Church If before Luther the Protestant Church had no Pastors she was not then at all But then she had no Pastors at all Therefore then she was not at all And by him she came to haue both Protestant Pastors and sheep Therfore by him she had her beginning The Maior is euident by those Confessions of Protestants which we haue rehearsed in this chapter and the Minor by those that were repeated in the former That the Protestants Church and Religion before Luther
church How then can Protestants gather certainly out of the Apocalipse that their Church heretofore was in Popery But as Luther in cap. 9. Genes tom 6. fol. 114. speaketh of the Anabaptists and others VVhy Protestāts accoūt to much of the Apoc. The Anabaptists make so much of obscure bookes as the Apocalipse because there they may seigne any thing And in cap. 11. fol. 136 Ambitious heads think it a great matter if they giue their iudgment freely of obscure places and after stubbornly maintayne their opinion And Praefat. in Cantica tom 4. fol. 47 Some do put all their labour in hard places thinking it a commendation of their wit to medle with those matters which others by reason of their obscurity do fly because in obscure places euery one may diuine and follow his owne head 2. Thirdly I answere that the foresayd place is allegoricall mysticall and obscure and therefore not fit to ground fayth vpon That it is mysticall and allegoricall is manifest because Babylon doth not litterally but at most mystically signify Popery That also the sense which Protestants frame thereof is obscure is euident because they cannot either by any part or by any circumstance therof clearly shew that by Babylon is meant Popery Besides neither any of the Fathers nor of those imaginary Protestants before Luther did perceiue this sense otherwise some of them would haue obeyed Gods commandement and gone out of Popery But it were playne madnes to vrge an incredible thing as is that Protestants were heretofore in Popery to be belieued certainly for one mysticall obscure place VVho sayth S. Augustin without great impudency will goe about to expound for himselfe Epist 48. any thing spoken in Allegory vnlesse he haue manifest places by which the obscure may be lightned Let them bring therefore some euident place Morton part 2. l. 2. c. 5. wherein Babylon signifieth Popery Luther also sayth If in the new testament the signification of a figure be not cleare we must not rely vpon it because the diuell an excellent craftsman playeth with figures if he catch a soule which without certaine ground wresteth the Scripture to Allegories he vseth to cast him here and therelike a dye Bnd in cap. 3. Genes tom 6. fol. 52 An Allegory serueth nothing for proofe Kemnice also 1. part exam tit de epist Apost pag. 79 VVe say that a sentence is not to be builded vpon any obscure places of Scripture which cannot de proued out of other cleare places Peter Martyr in locis tom 2. tract de Missa An opinion is not to be founded in doubtfull words Sadeel ad Sophism Turrian loc 11. pag. 597 The most learned interpreters do teach that Anagogicall arguments must rely vpon cleare and expresse testimonies if they will breed sayth And Pareus lib. 4. de Iustificat cap. 15. pag. 1120 Testimony for a false opinion is in vaine sought out of an Allegoricall and most obscure place But as the Fathers haue noted it was euer the humour of heretiks to seeke some pretext of allegoricall and obscure places Of the Gnostiques thus writeth S. Irenaeus lib. 1. cap. 1 Heretikes seeke out obscure places VVhereas many parables and Allegories are recited which may be drawne into diuerse senses they craftely accommodating that which is ambigious vnto their deuise do lead into captiuity from the truth those which haue a weake fayth in Christ And S. Augustin lib. de Vnitat ca. 24. sayth to the Donatists Yee willingly abide in obscure matters that you may not be compelled to confesse cleare matters And of heretiks in generall thus speaketh Tertullian Praes c. 17. Diuers presumptions of necessity will not acknowledge those things by which they may be ouercome and relye vpon those which they haue falsely forged and haue taken out of vncertainetyes Againe De pud c. 16. This is the custome of froward men idiots and heretikes by occasion of some doubtfull passage to arme themselues against an army of the whole testament And Clement 7. Stromatum They seek out doubtfull speaches and turne them to vphold their opinions The like writeth Luther of Anabaptistes And others as hath byn now rehearsed Wherfore Protestants do follow the custome of Gnostikes Donatists Anabaptists froward idiots and heretikes whiles they fit the Allegory of Babylon to their turne whiles they willingly abide in obscure matters and make such account of the Apocalipse because there they haue leaue to feigne any thing whiles they rely vpon those things which they take out of vncertainties and by occasion of one ambiguous and doubtfull place are armed against an army of sentences of the Scripture which teach that neither Popery is Babylon nor Protestants the people of God Moreouer Donatists for the very like place Isaiae 52 Goe backe againe out of the midst of her lib. de vnic bapt c. 14. L 2. cont Parmen c. 28. l. 2. cōt Gaud. c. 9. would proue that they ought to go out of the Catholik Church of their tyme as witnesseth S. Augustin and Danaeus confesseth lib. 3. de Eccl. c. 9. who also in lib. 1. August cont Parmen hath these words The argument of the Donatists out of Isay the 52. was That we ought to goe backe and goe out of the midst of Babylon And the Anabaptists in Zuinglius tom 2. in Elencho fol. 21. Out of this selfe same place of the Apocalipse did gather that they ought to goe from Protestants Why then may wee not say with D. Whitaker Cont. 2. q. ◠c. 23. Our aduersaries serue themselues of the same weapons whereof most wicked heretikes did and herein shew themselues to be nothing lesse then Catholikes Moreouer I say that if I list to expound Scriptures at my pleasure I might say and more probably too then Protestants that by the foresayd words God commandeth Protestants to goe out of Protestancy For Protestancy may well be called Babylon because it is a Masse and confusion of opposite heresies where almost euery one hath a fayth of his owne and speaketh a peculiar language nor vnderstandeth the tongue or doctrine of another And Protestants may be called the people of God in that they are baptised and therein dedicated to his seruice and pretend the fayth of Christ as did Israel euen after it had foresaken the Synagogue De prouid art 22. And as Caluin sayth that God calleth euen the disobedient his seruants as Nabuchodonozor in Hieremy and as God hath both good and faythfull seruants and naughty and vnfaythfull so hath he good naughty people 3. Secondly I answere that the argument which can be framed out of this place to proue that which the Protestants write of their churches being in Popery before Luther arose to wit Goe you my people out of Babylon Therefore before Luthers tyme the church was in Popery and so secret as for many ages she was not seene either of her own or of others is a meere Sophisme First because
one vnknown thing is here proued by another more vnknown a false thing by another not only false but also impossible For more vnknowne it is more incredible more impossible that the Protestant church should be the people of God or that Babylon out of which Gods people is bidden to goe Popery then that Protestants haue byn heretofore amongst Papists For this although it be both false and incredible yet it is not impossible as the other is How then can they proue vnto vs that they were heretofore in Popery by affirming that they are that people of God and Popery that Babylon sith this is to vs farre more incredible then the other Let Babylyn sometyme in Scripture mystically signify the citty of Rome let it also signify the number of the wicked both faythfull and Infidels but in Scripture it neuer signifieth a certaine religion and least of all Popery Besides his Maiesty in his Epistle to Cardinall Peron hath those words VVhat that Babylon is out of which Gods people is commanded to go the King enquireth not in this place nor pronounceth any thing of that matter And if his Maiesty will not pronounce what that Babylon is why should Ministers do it Secondly it is a Sophisme because there are many things in the consequent which are not at all in the antecedent although it be vnderstood as Protestants would And therefore herein they not only proue an vnknowne thing by another more vnknowne but some things they proue only by themselues that is they affirme them and proue them not at all For let the Protetestants be the people of God and let Popery be that Babylon which they can neuer proue neuerthelesse that the Protestant Church had byn in Popery so long tyme to wit so many ages and in such manner to wit so secret as she was altogeather inuisible either to her own or to others can no way be gathered out of the foresayd words though they were expounded according to the Protestants mind 4. Their second argument they ground vpon that 2. Thessal 2. that Antichrist shall sit in the temple of God which they expound as that the Pope should sit in the true that is according to them the Protestant Church and consequently that heretofor the Pope ruled ouer Protestants To which I answer that this argument is a Sophisme like to the former First because it proueth an vnknown thing by another more vnknowne and one vntruth by another both vntrue and impossible For it is more incredible to vs that Protestants are the temple of God or the Pope Antichrist then that they were heretofore amongst Papists Secondly if hence they Inferre that their Church was so long in Popery and in such manner as we haue recited out of their words they will inferre that in the consequent whereof there is no signe in the Antecedent although it were expounded to their desire Thirdly I say that there can be no certainty gathered out of this place because it is obscure as appeareth both by it selfe and by the different expositions thereof Lib. 20. de Ciuit. c. 29. and by the iudgement of S. Augustine who writeth thus In what temple of God Antichrist is to sit as God it is vncertaine whether in that ruine of the temple which Salomon built or in the Church Againe I truly professe my selfe not to know what he sayd yet I will relate the suspicions of men which I haue heard or read of this matter And againe One in this sort another in that ghesseth at the obscure words of the Apostle Yea D. Andrews intimateth Respon ad Apol. Bellar. c. 5. that it cannot be certainly gathered hence that the Pope is Antichrist when he sayth It is probably gathered out of the 2. chap. 2. Thessal That the Bishop of Rome is Antichrist But we regard not whence they probably gather what they please but only whence they can certainly vndoubtedly proue what they say Fourthly I say that whatsoeuer is the temple of God wherein Antichrist shall sit this place it selfe sheweth that the Pope is not Antichrist because he sitteth not in the Church of God as God but as Bishop and as Gods vicar Fithly I adde that the Protestants themselues do not firmly belieue Protestāts not certaine that the Pope is Antichrist much lesse as a point of their fayth that the Pope is Antichrist howsoeuer they vse the name of Antichrist as a bugg to feare children For Melancthon as Schuffelburg reporteth seemed to doubt whether the Pope were Antichrist or no. D. Whitaker lib. 1. cont Dureum sect 33 sayth In the meane tyme l. 4. Theo◠Cal. p. 166 we must needs probably and iustly suspect the Pope to be Antichrist And Cont. 4. quest 5. cap. 3 Many who care not much for the Pope do not think that it can be proued that he is Antichrist And his Maiesty in his Monitory epistle pag. 70. Surely for so much as pertayneth to define Antichrist I would not vrge a thing so obscure and hidden as a matter necessary to be belieued of all Christians And the same sayth Moulins in his defence of that Epistle To which his Maiesty addeth pag. 142. these words If any list to refute this my ghesse concerning Antichrist c. Behold how the Protestants themselues doubt account it but a suspicion a ghesse an obscure matter and not needfull to be belieued that the Pope is Antichrist How then can they certainly gather out of the foresayd place that the Pope sat among Protestants Yea some of thē deny the Pope to be the true Antichrist For thus Luther in cap. 9. Genes tom 6. fol. 122 VVe hold the Turck for the true Antichrist Zanchius lib. 1. Epist ad Stuckium I am perswaded that the name of Antichrist agreeth rather to the Turck then to Pope And in his answere to an Arian Antithes 21. col 879 The Bishop of Rome is not that Antichrist whereof is meant 2. Thessal 2. And in his Disceptation betwixt two Deuines pag. 637. and respons ad calumnias pag. 217. he plainly denyeth that the Pope is that notable and singular Antichrist wherof the Fathers speake And his opinion herein many Protestant vniuersities do iudge probable namely the vniuersity of Marspurg Heidelberg Zurich Basle among which that of Zurich hath these words The 2. Thesis of Antichrist cannot be reiected as hereticall seeing it is very probable For almost all the Fathers are of that mind Againe Since malice daily increaseth nothing letteth but at the last some notable one may come who in impiety surpasseth all the enemies of the Ghospell Vorstius also in his Antibellarm pag. 79 VVho discourse more aduisedly of this matter do graunt that it is very likely that yet some one shall arise to whom all the qualites of Antichrist may agree in the highest degree What certainty then can Protestants haue out of the foresayd place for their purpose sith some of their best learned doe but doubt and others deny that
a true Church and vnderstand their foresayd Maior vniuersally it is false for not euery true Church in that sense is Apostolicall or hath euer beene For a schismaticall Church is true in doctrine and yet is neither Apostolicall nor hath euer beene And if they vnderstand their Maior particulerly the conclusion followeth not because it is deduced out of pure particuler propositions And thus much of the Maior 7. Secondly the foresayd argument is a sophism because of the Minor by which one vnknown thing is proued by another one false thing by another not only false Protestāts proofe out of a thing more vnknowne but also impossible For it is more vncercertaine that the Protestant Church holdeth the doctrin of Christ then that she was before Luther For albeit she were not before notwithstanding it was not impossible that she should haue beene but that she holdeth the doctrine of Christ is both false and impossible also And as Luther sayth in defens verb. Coenae tom 7. fol. 385. It is a mad mans part to proue vncertaine things by others as vncertaine And D. Whitaker cont 2. quest 3. cap. 3. All proofe is by thinges that are more knowne Which also he hath cont 2. quest 5. cap. 18. Sadcel praefat lib. cont Traditiones Daneus l. 4. de Eccles cap. 2. D. Morton part 2. Apol. lib. 1. cap. 37. Pareus lib. 3. de Iustificat cap. 1. Wherupon Luther tom 2. Praefat. assert Antic fol. 95. writeth Aristotle and all sense of nature sheweth that vnknowne thinges must be proued by thinges more knowne and obscure thinges by manifest If therefore as Pareus sayth lib. 1. de Iustificat c. 20. when the Aduersarie is brought to that that eitheir he gainesayth himselfe or beggs that which he is to proue assuming that in his proofe which is in debate or trifleth by repeating now and then the same thing he is vanquished surely then Protestants are vanquished whom in this smal work we haue shewed oftentymes to gaine say themselues now including these within the Church now excluding them now affirming the Church to be inuisible now denying it now to haue alwayes Pastours now denying it and the like And in this argumment with which alone they proue the existēce of their Church before Luther they assume in the Minor that which most of all is in debate Caluin 4. Insticut c. 1. § 12. Narrat de Eccles Belg. p. 196. And the Maior they can proue no otherwise then by trifling by repeating it and saying that it is out of all doubt I add also that the sacramentaryes say that the Lutheran Church erreth euen in the fundamentall points and the like say the Lutherans of the Sacramentaries and scarce there is any Protestant who doth not thinke that the Church whereof he is doth erre in some points What reason then haue they out of the truenesse of the doctrin of their Churches to inferre their perpetuall existence 8. Thirdly I adde that the manner wherwith Protestants doe proue the Minor of their foresayd syllogisme is sophisticall and not such as they exact of vs for proofe of our doctrine For commonly they exact of vs to shew that our doctrine is contained in expresse words in Scripture or as Luther sayth lib. de seru arbit tom 2. fol. 440 inso manifest testimonies as are able so to stop all mēs mouths as they are not able to say any thing against it But manifest it is that such be not the proofes wher with Protestants proue their doctrine For to omit other points where is in expresse words in scripture that fundamentall point of their doctrin that we are iustified by only faith Say the contrary is so expresly in S. Iames epistle Tom. 6. in c. 12. Gen. as therfore Luther blasphemously sayth S. Iames doted And the Lutherans for that very cause deny his epistle to be canonicall Besides VVhitak cont 1. q. 4. cap. 3. Protestants doe now confesse that the scripture is not of it selfe sufficient to end all questions of faith and that Schismatikes cannot be conuinced by scripture How then can they sufficiently proue al the points of their doctrine by scripture VVhitak loc cit p. 490. Plessy l. de Eccles c. 9. Againe themselues acknowledge that they need certaine meanes to attaine to the right sense of the Scripture and that their meanes are humane and not infallible as knowledge of tongues conference of places and such like and with all that such as the meanes be such is the exposition of Scripture If therfore their meanes be not infallible how can their vnderstanding of the scripture be infallible Moreouer they scarce euer proue any thing by both principles out of scripture but almost euermore adioyne one human principles as easily will appeare if their proofs be brought to a syllogisticall forme as well obserue the most learned Bishop of Luçon in his defence of the Principall articles of faith cap. 3. 5. And how can they be infallibly certaine of the conclusion which they cannot know but by one human principle whereof they can haue no such certainty Furthermore because many of their proofes doe not only consist of one humane principle Protestats conclude against sense which is not at al in the scripture but also they inferre a conclusiō directly contradictory to that which the scripture in most expresse words teacheth of that matter As for example when they proue that the Eucharist is of not the very body and bloud of Christ alwayes one of their principles is humane and besides their conclusiō is flat contrary to expresse words of scripture which affirmeth that it is Christs very body and bloud And who is he in his wittes that will perswade himselfe either that the scripture meaneth that the Eucharist is not the body bloud of Christ which directly it neuer sayth rather then that it is his body and bloud which it as expresly sayth as euer it sayth any thing or that that proofe is not sophisticall which out of one humane principle at least inferreth the contrary of that which the scripture most expresly teacheth Lastly they neuer proued any one point of their doctrine any otherwise then euer Heretiks do that is in their own iudgmēt neuer before any iudge or general Councell which Luther himselfe confesseth in c. 27. Gen. tom 6. fol. 368. in the words In the affaire of the Gospell we haue decided the matter against al the impiety of the Pope without form of law VVe accused not the Pope neither could we for there was no iudge Yea their doctrin hath bin cōdemned according to all forme of law in the Generall Councel of Trent of the Patriarch of Constantinople to whō they appealed and of al other kinds of Christians 9. Fourthly I say that the foresayd argument is a sophisme in that in a sēsible matter as the Church is it concludeth against the sense of all men For nether did any see the Protestant Church before Luther