cannot stand vnles men do creditt one an other in thinges wherin they haue no cause to distrust them for what should we know of things past before our time or of thinges done out of our sight if we would not beleeue such as were present and knew them and ether by word or writing haue reported them to vs. How should we know such to be our parents but by beleefe How should any matter be tryed in Law but by beleefe of mens wordes or writinges what familiaritie humayne societie or frendship could stand if we admitt not beleefe VVherfor abbeit it be a fault to beleeue vpon light or small testimonie which kind of beleeuers the scripture tearmeth light of hart as it is a fault to assent to any friuolous reason yet contrariwise it is a greater fault not to giue credit to euident sufficient authoritie as it is not to yeild to euident reason For in beleuinge vpon weake authoritie we do but preiudice our selues but in not beleeuinge sufficient authoritie we hinder our selues from knowledge of truth discredit our owne reportes to others do against reason which as well bindeth vs to yeild to euident authoritie as to euident reason discredit our neighbors and cut in sunder the very sinowes of humane frendship and societie lib. de vtil Cred. cap. 16. VVherfor wel said S. Austin that though it be miserable to be deceaued by authority yet most miserable it is not to be moued with authoritie And most vnreasonably do some Ministers Hovv manie things vvhich are not in scripture are yet to be beleued say that they are not bound to beleeue the great vertues or miracles of Saints in times past though neuer so authentically recorded because they be not in scripture Indeed if we vrged them to beleue these thinges with diuine and christian faith they might haue some colourable excuse of such speech because as they say all poyntes of christian faitb are in scripture But sith we vrge them onelie to giue humane beleefe to such matters either they must shew some cause why the authority of such writers is not sufficient to giue humane credite vnto the thinges by them recorded or they must reiect all humane authoritie all mens wordes or writinges and beleeue nothinge but what either God hath written or them selues haue seene for if Scripture must be the onelie square of all our beleife both humane and Dyuine we must beleue nothing but what God haeh written no not that such were our parentes that ther are Turkes Moores ar any such thinge as the Scripture mentioneth not Or if we admitt as we must needes that humane authority by either word or writinge may be sufficient for vs to beleue thinges with humayne faith as vve beleue such to be our parentes and the like vve must not thinke it reason to reiect a thinge because it is not in Scripture Inconueniences of not beleuing mens authoritie but vve must allso shevv some reason vvhy such authoritie as testifieth it is not sufficient for a vvise man to giue credit vnto or els we must confesse our selues to be vvilfull to reiect sufficient authoritie vvithout yea against reason to be in iurious to God and our selues in reiecting a meane vvhich he hath bestovved vpon vs for to knovv truth Iniurious to our neighbours in discreditinge them vvithout cause and finallie pernicious to all good frendshipp and societie vvhich vvithout beleefe of humane authoritie cannot stand And to preuent Ministers that they shall not delude the Reader by sayinge that the authoritie vvhich I alleadge for vvhat I say of Saint Austin and Luther is not sufficient Onely Protestāts alledged for vvhat is said of Luther I beseech him to consider that the Authors vvhich I alleadge for vvhat I say of Luther are onelie Protestantes uch as by other Protestantes are greatlie commended for albeit I might iustlie alleadge the testimonies of Catholiques against Luther as I shew heerafter lib. 2. cap. 1. yet partelie to avoyd all cauills but principallie because Protestantes testifie ynough against him I omitt this aduantage And the vvitnesses vvhich I produce for vvhat I vvrite of S. Austin are partelie the said Protestants partely Catholikes but such Catholiques as some of them are great Saintes some great Clarkes some lyued vvhen the thinges vvere done vvhich they vvritt some vvere domesticall some forrayne and all vvere before this controuersie betvvene Protestants and Catholikes arose and all are greatlie esteemed of Protestants as shall appeare in the Catalogue ensuinge and finallie all are contested and approued in their testimonies of diuers Protestants as shall appeare heerafter VVhich kind of testimonie I hope no indifferent man guided vvith reason vvill account vnsufficient And for other obstinat persons who as S. Hierome saith are wount shutting their eyes to denie what they will not beleue I wrot not this vvorke for as S. Austin aduiseth vs vve should rather pray for these kind of men than reason vvhith them For vvhat Readers this booke is vvritten But novv let vs come to the Catalogue of the Catholike vvriters and after of the Protestantes A CATALOGVE Of the cheife Catholike vvriters Vpon whose testimonies the Authour relieth for what he writeth of Saint Austin A ALCVIN liued in the eight age after Christ which was the second of the conuersion of our Nation to the Christian faith He was scholler to S. Bede and Maister to the famous Emperor Charles the great of whom what high esteeme Protestants make you may see Infra lib. 1. cap. 12. B BEDA liued with in the first hundred yeares after the conuersion of our Nation and therfore might well learne the truth therof How greatlie he is accounted of by Protestantes both for vertue and learninge you may read lib. 1. cap. 12. cit onelie because his testimonie is that vpon which I principallie relie in what I say of S. Austin I would heere add what Godwin in the life of Tatwin Archbishop of Canterburie saith that His historie is the most auncient that England hath worthie of credit And that Cambden in Britan. pag. 12. giueth him this testimonie that he is Inter omnes nostros scriptores veritatis amicus amongst all our writers a frend of truth And what himselfe hath in his Epistle to King Cealwulph to put as he saith all that heare or read it out of doubt of the veritie therof that vvhat he writeth of S. Austin and his fellowes he learned of Albinus a man saith he of great learninge brought vp vnder S. Theodor Archbishop and Adrian both men of great worship and learning which thinges saith he the said Albinus knew partely by writinge partlye by tradition of Elders and sent to me by Nothelmus Bale Cent. 2. cap. 8. calleth this Nothelmus a learned and graue man who after was Archbishop of Canterburie Besides this the said Historie vvas approued by the said King Cealwulph and by all writers since and is the verie fountayne of all our English Chronicles whose credit depend
THE PRVDENTIALL BALLANCE OF RELIGION Wherin the Catholike and Protestant religion are weighed together with the weights of Prudence and right Reason THE FIRST PART In which the foresaide Religions are weighed together with the weights of Prudence and right Reason accordinge to their first founders in our Englishe Nation S. Austin and Mar. Luther And the Catholike religion euidently deduced through all our Kings and Archbishopps of Canterburie from S. Austin to our time and the valour and vertue of our Kings and the great learninge and Sanctitie of our Archbishopps together with diuers Saints and miracles which in their times proued the Catholike faith so sett downe as it may seeme also an abridgment of our Ecclesiasticall Histories With a Table of the Bookes and Chapters conteyned in this Volume PSALM 118. The wicked haue told me fables but not as thy Law Printed vvith Licence 1609. EPISTLE TO THE MOST Noble and renovvned ENGLISH NATION my most deere Countrimen 1. RIGHT Honorable right worshipfull and dearelie beloued Countrymen giue me leaue to ioyne you all in one Epistle whom I contayne in one brest of loue and include in one lincke of entire affection Because the end for which I write vnto you concerneth you all alike and equallie to witt the true Religion and worshipp of God and saluation of your owne soules A matter vs of the greatest weight and worthiest of Search fo in these our miserable dayes of most controuersie and perplexed difficultie Wherin to helpe you the better to discerne true gold from shyninge brasse true religion from false and counterfeit I haue framed for you a Prudentiall Balance of Religion by which euery one of you may by the weightes and rules of right reason and true prudence weighe the Roman Catholique and the Protestant religion together and distincklie perceaue whither of them is more likelie to come from God and to lead you to him VVhy this course of comparinge religions is taken 2. And this course of comparinge these two religions together I haue taken before any other because as the Philosopher teacheth and experience confirmeth Contraria iuxta se posita magis elucescunt Contraries put together do more apppeare As beautie in presence of deformitie seemeth more gratious and deformitie more vglie Truth before lies appeareth more loue lye and lies more odious vertue before vice more amiable and vice more detestable Euery thinge as it were striuinge to shew it selfe more when it is set as it were to wrastle with the contrarie And I haue made choyse of comparinge these religions accordinge to the rules of ttue prudence and right reason VVhy the comparinge of religions accordinge to rules of vvisdome is chosen before others rather then otherwise as the most generall most easie most euident and most effectuall for all sortes of people for albeit Catholiques Protestants agree that to be the true religion of God which is most agreable to his word yet sith they neyther agree which is his word Protestants reiectinge much of that which Catholiques reuerence for Gods heauenly word nor which is they sense therof Thus Tertullian lib. de praescript proued by reason the Cath. religion to be preferred befor anie heresie they can not be brought to agree about one balance of Gods word wherby they may weigh their religions together Besides that not onely Catholicks teach but also Protestants confesse that the weaker sorte of Christians can not iudge which is the true exposition of Scriptures And therfor to weighe religions to them by the balance of Scripture D. Reinolds Confer pag. 149. were to weigh one vnknowne thing by an other But the weights of Prudence and right reason are both commun and euident to all therfor the weighinge of religions by them must needs be most generall most easie and most effectual with all sortes of people And if anie refuse to haue their religion tried by these kinds of weights VVhat religion is against vvisdom and reason is follie they confesse therby that they fear their religion to be contrarie to wisdome and reason which is as much as to be fabulous and foolish For what can be opposit to wisdome and reason but follie and fables 3. Nether let anie think that that religion which is most agreable to Prudence and the light of reason is not also most agreable to Scripture Because reason and Scripture are both God his word and Gods truth the one naturall written by his owne hand in our soules by creation the other supernatural written in paper with the hands of his holie Scribes by reuelation The agreablenes of Religion and reason And therfor though these two words be of different degree they can not be contrarie but rather as twinnes of one and the self same parent haue great sympathie and connexion together For as God doth not by his grace destroie the naturall inclination of our will to good but perfecteth it So by his word and faith he extinguisheth not but increaseth the naturall insight which our vnderstanding hath of truthe yea such is the force of our vnderstanding to pearce into Gods truth as that by it the Philosophers as the Apostle witnesseth Rom. 1. came to know the inuisible proprieties of God and his euerlasting power diuinitie S. Paul And sith we see that men by the light of reason know so much of other moral vertues as without all other teaching they perceaue in manie things what is honest what dishonest what iust what vniust what is vertue what vice why should we doubt that God hath giuen to vs equal knowledge of matters of religion and worship of him self Which vertue as it is the cheefest of all morall vertues so the knowledge therof is most necessaire of them all vnto vs. Yea S. Austin accounted so much of Reason as lib. de vtil credendi cap. 12. he said that Recta ratio est ipsa virtus S. Austin because it is the naturall square and rule which God euen in creation giueth to euery one to know what he ought to do Calvvin And Caluin saith that Semen religionis est in mente humana And Iewel art 6. diuis 12. that naturall reason holden within her bondes is not the enemye Iuel but the daughter of Gods truth And therfor he must be very vnreasonable that will without cause be angrye with reason Doct Reinolds And Doctor Reinolds in his conference pag. 207. saith Reason is a notable helpe of mans weaknes This rule therfor of naturall reason and prudence giuen vnto vs by God common and euident to all authorized by verdit of the Apostle confirmed by reason and approued by consent both of Catholiques and Protestantes is that wherwith I intend to direct you in the choyce of Religion and the Balance wherwith I purpose to to weigh before your eyes the two more famous religions which are in our Lande 4. Not because I thinke that onelie naturall light of reason is able without
to remaine in the Pope Third reason for proofe of S. Austins mission 4. Thirdly I argue thus Who hath authority to gouern the whole Church of God hath authority to send Preachers to all Nations But Saint Gregory had authority to gouern the whole Church Ergo he had authority to send Preachers c. The Maior needeth no proofe The Minor I prooue thus Saint Peter had authority to gouern the whole Church euen as it includeth the rest of the Apostles But Saint Gregory succeeded though not immediatly Saint Peter in that authority Protestant graunt euery Apostle to haue bene Head of the rest of the church Ergo That Saint Peter had authority ouer the whole Church besides the Apostles the Protestants do graunt For they teach that Christ made euery one of them Head and Gouernor of all the Church besides them selues D. Whitaker lib. 5. pag. 365. cont Dur. Quis Petrum c. VVho confesseth not that Peter was the foundation of the Church seeing that it is common to all the Apostles And lib. 9. pag. 745. Super Petrum c. Vpon Peter is the Church founded but not vpon him onely Et Petro totius c. And to Peter is the care of the whole Church committed but not to him onely Quia hoc commune c. Because this was common with the rest of the Apostles as the Scripture and Fathers most clearly testifie Declarat of discipl print at Geneua 154◠Christ cōmēded to Peter all his flock Behould how he confesseth that both Scripture and Fathers testifie and that most clearly that the care of the whole Church was committed to Peter D. Reynolds Confer pag. 32. As the name of foundation is giuen to the Apostles Apoc. 21. so the twelue foundations do prooue them twelue heads Ibid. All the Apostles were heads Item pag. 26. Christ promised to build his Church not vpon Peters doctrine onely but vpon his person in some sorte And pag. 28. Christs words to Peter import this sense Vpon thee I will build my Church And Bilson lib. of Obedience pag. 87. granteth The same saith Fulk Annotat. Mat. 16. Ioan. 1. that the Rock on which the Church is promised to be built Matth. 16. was Peters person and that the Church was built vpon him but not vpon him onely but the rest of the Apostles too And if passion did not blynd their eyes they would see that the Scripture and Fathers do as plainly testifie that Saint Peter was Head of the whole Church euen as it includeth the rest of the Apostles as they testifie that euery Apostle was Head of the rest of the Church beside themselues S. Peter as plainly ouer the Apostles as ouer the rest of Christiās For the places of Scripture out of which they do or can prooue that euery Apostle was head of all other Christians as yow may see in Whitaker loco cit pag. 147. and Reynolds loco cit is Matth. 28. where euery Apostle is bidden to teach all Nations and Ephes 2. where Christians are said to be founded vpon the Apostles And Apoc. 21. where the twelue Apostles are called the foundations of the Church by which places they do prooue and well that euery Apostle was made Head ouer euery Christian and the whole Church beside themselues because there is no exception made of any man whome they are not to feede nor of any Christian in the Church which they founded And therfore in the commission giuen by Christ to euery Apostle in the word Nations are included all other beside them selues And in the speech of the Apocalyps vnder the word Church are vnderstood all other Christians whatsoeuer And cōsequently euery Apostle is by the plain verdict of Scripture Preacher to all Nations and Founder of euery Christian beside them selues In which authority because their Apostleship did consist Hovv some Fathers say that others vvere equal in the Apostleship vvith S. Peter and therin all the Apostles were equall to S. Peter for euery one of them was as well sent to all Natiōs with authority to found Churches euery where as he was some Fathers say that other Apostles had parem potestatē with S. Peter as Anaclet dist 21. c. Cū in nouo Cypr. de vnit Eccl. Chrys in 1. Gal. that the Church is equaly foūded on all the Apostles because ouer the rest of the Church besides the Apostles euery one of them had equall authority with Peter the Church not including the Apostles was equaly foūded on euery one of them 5. But by the same maner and in the same euidency that Protestants do prooue that euery Apostle was Head ouer all the Church besides them selues do we prooue that Saint Peter was head ouer all the Church euen as it includeth the rest of the Apostles For as in their cōmission Teach all Nations and the other speech of them Foundations of the Church Proued by Scripture that S. Peters commission includeth the rest of the Apostles all are included beside them selues because none are excepted as they are by reasō of that relatiue opposition which is there found betwene Teachers Taught Founders and Founded therfor euery one of the Apostles being in this speech called a teacher foundatiō none of them in the same speech can be ment to be taught or founded him self So in like sort in S. Peters Commission Ioan 21. Feede my sheepe Luc. 22. Confirme thy brethren and in Christs words of him Mat. 16. Thou art Peter and vpon this Rock will I build my Church No one Apostle or other besides him self who alone is spoken to and is in them apointed Feeder and Confirmer and Foundation is any more excepted than any other Christian is excepted in the Commission of the Apostles in generall And therfore are they as well and as clearly included in his Cōmission vnder the name Sheepe Brethren Church as other Christians are included in theirs vnder the name of Nations and Church And therfor Saint Bernard said de Consider Nihil excipitur vbi nihil distinguitur There being no distinction in these words of Christ my Church my Sheepe thy Brethren made from the rest of the Apostles they are not excepted but included in them Wherfore if Protestants will here admit their commō rule of expounding one place of Scripture by an other they must confesse that Scripture as clearly maketh S. Peter Head of the Apostles as it maketh them Head of all other Christians Secondly prooued by confession of Protestāts Secondly I prooue by confession of Protestāts that Christ in his words My Church My Sheepe Thy Brethren spoken to Saint Peter included the rest of the Apostles For D. Reynolds Conferenc p. 385. saith that Christ by My Church Mat. 16. meant generally the Catholick Church all the chosen But the Apostles were chosen yea the chefest of them And p. 386. It is the Church of Gods elect and chosen which Christ doth call in this place Math 16. my
Church where he addeth that this is cleare and out of all controuersie And p. 368. Christ said of his whole Church that the gates of hell c. Therfore the whole Church was founded on Peter The same he repeateth Conclus 1. p. 615. and Conclus 2. p. 625. and generally all Protestāts graunt the same For out of this place they proue that the Elect can not fall from God because Christ here sayd that Hell gates should not preuaile against his Church That is say they against his Elect. In like sort the said Reinolds Conf. p. 386. saith that these words My Sheepe Iohn 10 where it is sayd my sheepe heare my voice included all the Elect. Therfore Ioan. 21. the very same words include all the Elect beside Peter who is excepted because he is apointed to feede them vnles we will not vpon any different occasion ministred by scripture but vpon our own preconceited opinion expound the same word now one way now an other Finally the sayd Reinolds Conf. pag. 103. confesseth that by Thy Bethren Luc. 22. Christ ment all the faithfull Then surely he included all the Apostles Thirdly by authoritie of Fathers 6. Thirdly I proue that S. Peter was head of the whole Church by the authoritie of holy Fathers whome because Whitaker cōfesseth as yow heard before to teach most clearly that the Church i◠founded vpon Peter I wil omit their words and remit those that list read them to Bellarm. l. 1. de Pont. c. 10. Onely I will shew that they teach that the Church as it includeth the rest of the Apostles is founded vpon Peter onely Cyprian epist ad Iulian. Ecclesia quae vna est super vnum The Church which is one is founded vpon one who by the commaundemēt of our Lord receaued the key therof In which words we see that as the Church is sayd to be one onely so it is said to be founded vpon one onely And lib. 1. epist 8. Ecclesia vna Cathedra vna c. One Church and one Chaire was by our Lords word founded vpon Peter And Saint Hierom. in 2. Isaiae after he had said that the Apostles were Montes mountains addeth Super vnum montium Christus fundat Ecclesiam loquens ad eum Tu es Petrus c. Vpon one of the Montains Christ foundeth his Church and speaking to him thou art Peter c. S. Leo serm 2. de Anniuers saith Saint Peter was plus ceteris ordinatus c. ordained more than the rest whiles he is called a Rock a Foundation and apointed porter of the kingdome of heauen And for this cause the Fathers when they speak of Peter in respect of the rest of the Apostles they manifestly prefer him in authority before them ceteris praelatus discipulis Preferred before the rest of the disciples saith S. Basil homil de Iudicio Eccles And this is so euident as D. Reinolds Confer pag. 179. confesseth that the Fathers call Peter the mouth the Top the highest the President the head of the Apostles and. pag. 562. The Prince the Top the Cheefest of the Apostolick company the Teacher of the whole world and a Father of the houshould And graunteth also that some of these Titles touch gouernment and signifie a preheminence in gouernment Reinolds deuiseth an authoritie in S. Peter to auoid his supremacie Whervpon he is inforced pag. 180. to acknowledg that Saint Peter was superiour among the Apostles as a President of a Parliament in France or as a Consull among the Romans But who wel considereth shall easely perceaue that this is but an authoritie deuised of purpose to delude the words of the Fathers who speaking of Saint Peters authoritie ouer the Apostles vse the very words which we do to declare his supremacy And therfor if they be vnderstood by their own words and not as Reinolds pleaseth to expound them they vsing the same words as we do must be vnderstood as we are But because this question is some what beside my present purpose I will vrge it no farther Onely I would know of Reinolds how Peter did come by his Consulship ouer the Apostles which he graunteth to him Did the Apostles giue it him But where readeth he that Did Christ bestow it on him But where if not Math. 16. and Iohn 21. In which places if Christ gaue him any authoritie ouer the Apostles he gaue him as full power ouer them as ouer other Christians For ther is no limitation of his power towards some more than towards others but they are as well to be foūded on him as others are he was to feede them as wel as others Nether doth this his authoritie ouer the rest of the Church and the Apostles too preiudice the supreme authority of Christ ouer all any more than the lyke authority which the Protestāts graunt euery Apostle had ouer the rest of the Church Secōdly I would know of Reinolds why he doth not graunt this Consulship ouer the whole Church to the Pope or at least to some one Bishop or other but wil make euery Prince head of the Church in his Kingdome That S. Peters authority remaineth in some Bishop of the Church 7. Now that this authority of Saint Peter remaineth still in the Church and descended from him to some Bishop I proue because all the ends for which ether Christ declared or the Fathers affirme that Christ instituted this authoritie to remaine as well after his death as before The first was that the gates of hell should not preuaile against the Church Math. 16. Secondly that what is loosed in earth may be loosed in heauen ibi Thirdly that Peter might cōfirme his Brethren Luc. 22. Fourthly that he might feede Christs sheepe Io. 21. Fiftly that one being made head occasion of Schisme might be taken away Hierom. lib. 1. cont Iouinianum Sixtly that the origine of the vnitie of the Church might appeare Cyprian de simpl Praelat because as he saith lib. 1. epist 3. Priestly vnity rose from Peters chaire And epist ad Fulcian Our Lord began the origine of vnitie from Peter This cause alleadgeth also Leo. epi. 84. and Anast and Optat. l. 2. contra Parmen But all these ends remaine after Saint Peters death Therfore the authoritie also remaineth Besides S. Austin saith l. de Pastor c. 1. Christiani sumus propter nos Praepositi non nisi propter vos Therfore Saint Peter being made Cheefe of Gods Church for the good of it left his authoritie in the Church Whervpon S. Austin tract 50. in Ioannem saith that when Peter receaued the keyes Ecclesiam sanctam significauit he represented the holy Church because he receaued them as her Gouernour vnder Christ and for her good And therfore as long as she remaineth the authority which Saint Peter receaued for her good must remaine Aarons authoritie remained in his Successors Therfore Peters Secondly I proue it because God in the ould law instituted one high Priest who vnder him in
that a while before the Conquest and somwhat after Kings tooke vpon them to inuest Bishops and Abbots as appeareth in Ingulp pag. 806. But this fact of theirs done of som ignorantly as must be thought of King Edred and others before the Conquest who were perfect Catholicks in faith as shall appeare herafter and also vertuous in life of others perhaps presumptuously and couetously against the order of the Church proueth no more that they were no Catholicks than worse facts of theirs against the law of Christ proueth them to haue bene no Christians For if Princes maye by euery fact of theirs be iudged of what religion they are they would sometimes seeme no Christians nor yet to haue a God As for S. Edward he might wel doe what he did for he was apointed by the Pope to be his Vicegerent and as it were Legat as we shall shewe in his life obiec ∣ tion 3 2. Thirdly they made saith Abbots lawes for the order and gouernment of the Church as is to be seene in the lawes of Edward of Alfred of Ethelstan and Canutus in Fox Volum 1. in fine and by many laws made since the Conquest against intrusions of the Pope as is to be seene in Syr Edward Cookes reports part 5. Ansvver Touching the lawes of the Christian Kings before the Conquest I answer that they are not Ecclesiasticall lawes such as define any thing as a point of faith or prescribe any thing concerning Religion and worship of God but are meere commandements partly for execution of former Ecclesiasticall lawes partly for procurement and conseruation of externall peace quietnes and order of the Church which kinde of lawes Princes may make as is to be seene in Stapleton Relect. Controu 2. q. 5. Ar. 1. See stapleton Besides that Christian Princes apoint thus some times things in ecclesiasticall matters not of authoritie but vpon zeale and not to dispose of faith and religion As for the lawes made since the Conquest which may seeme preiudiciall to the Popes authoritie the cheefest Authors of them were Edward 3. and Richard 2. who as shall appeare heerafter plainly professed the Popes Supremacie And therfor what lawes they made were no way to denie his authoritie but to restrain the execution therof in some cases because as the Apostle saith Omnia licent sed non omnia expediunt All things are lawfull but all things are not expedient So they thought that some execution of his authority in some matters would be preiudâ—ciall to their temporall state and therfor thought it not expedient that in those cases it should be practised As for Cookes reports they haue bene so answered as I thinck neither him self nor any for him will obiec ∣ tion 4 replie Fourthlie saith Abbots Then were the scriptures in foure seuerall languages of so many seuerall Nations besides the Latin tongue common to them all Beda lib. 1. cap. 1. This is vntrue Ansvver and Beda rather saith the contrarie His words are these This Iland at this present to the number of the 5. bookes of Moises doth studie and set forth the knowledg of one perfect truth that is with the language of the English the Britons the Scotts the Picts and the Latin which by studie of the scripture is made common to all the rest In which words he saith that the Inhabitants preached and published Christs truth in fiue seueral languages but the scripture they studied onely in Latin and therby it became common to all the Inhabitants And before in the life of Theodor we shewed by the confession of diuers Protestants that masse was in his tyme which was before S. Beda in Latin onely But admit that the scripture were then in Latin and in English too how proueth that that English men then were no Catholicks Haue not English Catholicks now the scripture in English Fiftlie saith Abbots obiec ∣ tion 5 Then were they in Monasteries commanded to be exercised in the reading of scriptures and euery one was required to learn the Lords prayer and Creede in the English tongue This is not worth the answering Ansvver For what doth the Monks reading scripture or the peoples learning the Lords prayer and Creed in English make against Catholick Religion 3. Sixtly saith Abbots Then was the CommunioÌ„ obiec ∣ tion 6 ministred in both kindes as Paris in Heraldo and Rafo reporteth of some soldiers Ansvver What Paris saith of soldiers I knowe not For at this present I haue him not at hand But that English men in our Primitiue Church communicated onely with form of bread appeareth by Beda lib. 2. cap. 5. Wher Pagans say to S. Mellit VVhy dost thou not giue vnto vs of that white bread which thou didst giue to our Father Seba and dost yet giue to the people in Church But if S. Mellit had communicated people in both kinds it is lykly they would haue demanded both Besids that Beda expoundeth that place of Luke Cognouerunt eum in fractione panis where mention is of one onely kinde of sacramental communion Therfor he and consequently our English Church then alowed communion in one kinde But whether they communicated in both or one kinde maketh little to proue that they were not Catholickâ— because til lay people were forbidden it was lawful for them to communicate Obiec ∣ tion 7 in both kindes 4. Seauenthlie theÌ„ saith Abbots was Transubstantiation vnknowne and when it began to be broached or not long after Elfricus Archbishop of Canterburie contradicted it Ansvver How vntrue this is of TraÌ„substantiation hath bene shewed before in the life of S. Greg and S. Odo As for Elfric the Protestant Bishops them selues who published that sermon confesse See befor hovv Bale confesseth Archb. Alfric to haue bene a Papist and of Transubstant in S. Odo Archb. that the Author therof was no Archbishop of Canterbury More likly it is to be true which Fox Acts. pag. 1148. saith that it was Elfric surnamed Bata an Heretick who as S. Dunstan appearing to one in a vision said as reporteth Osbern attempted to disherit his Church but I haue stopped him saith S. Dunstan he could not preuaile Albeit indeed that sermon doth more approoue Transubstantiation than disprooue it For in that is saide that Christ turned through inuisible might the bread to his owne body and wine to his blood And that holy howsel is by might of Gods word truly Christs body and his blood And that after their halowing bread and wine trulye are Christs body and blood And what other do Catholicks now say but what here is said Vz. That bread and wine are by inuisible power turned into Christs body and blood and become after consecration truly not figuratiuly his body and blood And though the Author of the sermon ad that the sacrament after consecration is not bodily but Ghostly Christs bodie yet the word ghostly is not added to deny the word Truly which is absolutly affirmed but onely to deny the word Bodily that is carnally
ignorance increase when our aduersaries thus openly confesse it And what wilfull imprudeÌ„ce is it to think that these kind of fellows can see more thaÌ„ our ancient Prelats and diuines And hauing thus seene Luthers small learning now let vs behold his life and maners CHAP. VIII That Luther was a naughtie and vicious man Three kinds of proof of Luthers vice 1. MY proofes of Luthers vicious and naughtie life I will reduce to three heads The first shal be touching his owne deeds The second touching his doctrine And the third touching the effects of bothe As for his life it seemeth that for a while after he entred into S. Austins order he did seriously giue him self to pietie and deuotion For that he writeth of him self while he was a Frier 1. Galat. fol. 37 I endeuored my self to keep the Popes laws as much as was possible for me to doe Luthers pietie for the time of his Cath. religion punishing my poore bodie with fasting watching praying and other exercises I honored the Pope of mere conscience vnfainedly and whatsoeuer I did I did it of a single hart of good zeall and for the glorie of God And fol. 38. I keept chastity pouerty and obedience I was free from the cares of this present life I was onely giuen to fasting vvatching praying Thus Luther for a time and happie had he bene if he had so continewed But as he entred into religion vpon fear because he with whome he walked in the feilds was there slaine with a thunderbolt So fear being an il keeper of continuance he afterward fell from this zeall of his owne good Gods glorie and in steed therof fostered as him self writeth fol. 38. cit coÌ„tinuall mistrust doubtfulnes and hatred blasphemie against God Luther confesseth that he hated God And praefat 1. operum tom 1. I felt my self saith he to be before God of a most trobled conscience I loued not yea I hated ô horor to hear God iust and punishing sinnes and vvith secret if not blasphemie yet vvith great murmuring I repined at him Luthers fit disposition to become an Archeretik I raged so vvith a feare and perturbed conscience Thus Luther of him self before he began Protestantisme And I pray the Christian Reader was this change in Luther from zeall of Gods glorie to hatred of God from God or from the diuel was a man in this case likelie to haue particuler light from God touching his truth rather than anie in the world besides Or rather hauing as him self confesseth lost a good conscience was he not like as S. Paul speaketh to make shipwrack also of his faith was not a man of his disposition fit to be made of the Diuel a broacher of heresies and an apt instrument to lead manie soules to hell 2. Of his enuie for which he first began Protestantisme you haue heard befor Hic enuie and likwise of his pride for which he coÌ„tinewed it Pride But his pride was otherwise so notorious as Protestants tax him for it God saith Conrad Regius lib. cont Hessum for the sin of pride wherwith Luther exalted him self hath taken away his spirit from him and in steed therof hath giuen him a wrathfull lying and arrogant spirit Oecolampad lib. cont confes Lutheri writeth that Luther was puffed vp with the spirit of pride and arrogancie And the Tigurin Ministers in their answer for Zuinglius pronounce that Luther is caried away with too much insolencie VVrathe â—lenburg de Caâ—sis Cath. fidei cap. 8 â—al vino turcism libâ— 3. cap. 6. Of his wrath and anger D. Feild lib. 3. of the Church cap. vlt. coÌ„fesseth that Luther was of a violent spirit and caried too much with the violent streame of his passions and the Tigurins Gesnerus and others dislike his distemperat passions Fulk in cap. 3. Philip. giueth this verdict of him Luther pursued contentions more bitterly than was meet The Tigurins respons ad Luther write that he followed too much obstinacie and pride and that much of the malignant spirit was in him Iesner in his bibliotheca saith He could bear none but such as agreed with him in all points God saith he forbid lest by his contention and impudencie he hurt the Church Erasmus a CoÌ„fessor with Fox and of good iudgment and a plaine and wel meaning man with D. Reinolds lib cont epist non sobr Lutheri giueth this sentence of him Luthers epistle breatheth deadlie hatred is all full of impotent if not furious reproches and malitious lies He malepertly rageth against Kings and Princes when he list Extreme hatred desire of command and firebrands of Incitors driue him out of the waie He cracketh naught but diuels Sathans Hobgoblins wiches Magaeras such more than tragicall speeches His minde can be satiated with no raling he is besid him self with hatred he hath no sinceritie no sobrietie no Christian modestie If you take out of his books hyperbols railing scoffing repetition asseuerations articles of VViclefs Hus perhaps litle will remaine of his owne Caluin in Schusselburg lib. 2. theol Caluin fol. 126. concludeth that His leacherie Luther in Sleidan lib. 3. fol 2â— my profession is not of life and manners Luther multis vitijs scatet hath many faults As for Luthers fleshlie filthines him self tom 1. epist Latin fol. 334. saith that I am burnt with the great flame of my vntaimed flesh I am feruent in the flesh slothe lust c. And as the world knoweth contrarie to his promise made to God maried a wife and her a Nonne 3. But to leaue Luthers carnall vices and to come to worse such as by them we may clearly see that Luthers preaching came not from God Reiected a parte of Gods vvord First he reiected a good parte of Gods word as not onely Catholiks say but most Protestants also confesse to wit the Epistle to the Hebrues the second of S. Peter the epistle of S. Iames of S. Iude the second and third of S. Ihon and the Apocalips And this he did vpon friuolous yea vpon no reason as is before shewed Now how hatefull a sin it is to reiect Gods word euery one seeth and God him self declareth by his curse Apoc. 22. Secondly of that part of Gods word which he did admitt he corrupted diuers places namely Rom. 3. Corrupted the rest wher he the Apostle saith that maÌ„ is iustified by saith he added Alone And being asked why de did so he answered so I coÌ„maÌ„d so I wil Biblia German my wil shal staÌ„d for reason stil to 5. Germ. fol. 141. And this heinous vice was so notorius in Luther as Zuinglius his Coapostle L. de Sacrant Tom. 4. pag. 411. 412. thus writeth to him Thou doest corrupt the word of God thou art seene to be a manifest common corrupter of the holie scriptures How much are we ashamed of thee who hitherto estemed the byond all measure and now proue the to be a false
miracles For besides the testimony of the word of God which testified the miracles which we reade in scripture what waÌ„t they to be accounted true miracles that any other miracles had The Deedes were supernaturall The effect of them was supernaturall diuine vz the conuersion of Infidells The meanes of doing them holy to wit prayer to God The doers of them were Saints The testimonie of these Deedes are of many eye witnesses freinds and foes learned vnlearned holy and Wicked forrein and domesticall and coÌ„fessed of diuers which refuse S. Austins religion Than the which greater testimonie for miracles can not be required vnles we would haue God to speake from heauen And on the other side what prudent man is he that wil not iudg Luthers wonderments to be friuolous The things reported o him were naturall The testimonies for them are nether of eyewitnesses nor of enemies nor of Saints nor of great learned men nor are they confessed of any who refuse Luthers doctrine Yea they are denied by such as were both freinds and great scollers of Luthers Whie then should we beleeue them Nay whie should we not deny them CHAP. IX S. Austin and Luther weighed according to the Succession or continuance of their doctrine TRuly said Gamaliel Acts. 5. of the Christian religion then preached by the Apostles Si ex hominibus est consilium hoc aut opus dissoluetur Si vero ex Deo est noÌ„ poteritis dissoluere And in like sorte of hereticks said S. Paul 2. Timoth 3. Vltro non proficient And S. Austin in ps 57. compareth the Catholik faith to a Riuer which hauing a continuall spring euer floweth neuer waxeth drie heresie to a brooke rising vp on raine which while the raine falleth runneth boisterously and they who know not that it waÌ„teth a springe would iudg that it would last loÌ„ger than the quiet riuer See this proued l. 1. c. 14. seq ad fin l. 2. c. 1â— but as soone as it leaueth raining they see the water gon the brooke dryed Wherfor let vs see whither S. Aust or Luthers doctrin hath coÌ„tinewed longer in Engl. in their followers or rather we haue seene it alredy For. S. Aust hath had 69. successors in his Archbishoprick successiuly all of the same religion with him 53. kings of EnglaÌ„d besides diuers others as is before declared that when the Crown kingdome was twise violently taken from the Englishe-men by Danes Normans yet his faith was not taken from his successors Nor by so many so long desolations of the Danes many seuere lawes first by King Henrie 8. and then by Queene Elizabeth and so manie bitter torments hard banishmeÌ„ts streight confinments deep Dongeons could Iorns great â—ines Taxes and paymeÌ„ts bluddy deaths could it be rooted these thousand yeares oute of this land but that this day God be thancked S. Aust there are both noble ignoble clerks seculer religious men weemeÌ„ Children who not withstanding all lawes threats dangers will professe to hould the faith of their Apostle S Aust to agree with him in all points of religioÌ„ to honor that See from whence he came Much more vvold S. Austin haue forborne the Protest Church to refuse as he did to ioine in religioÌ„ with them who obserue not the maner as he said to the BritoÌ„s of the holy RomaÌ„ Apostolik Church In so much as not withstaÌ„ding all the lawes terrors ProclamatioÌ„s searches or paymeÌ„ts Torturs BanishmeÌ„ts executions which haue bene made these 50. yeares I B in his Taile of Tvvo leg Foxes c. 11 yet Ministers in their printed bookes dayly complaine of increase of Priests and Catholicks And one lately in his sermon at Pauls Crosse dedicated to the pretented Archb. of Canterbury and lyked of him saith pag. 79. Som. Collins that no bondage or hard measure can euer be thought able to suppresse or reclame vs. This this sheweth S. Austins worke to haue bene of God the water wherwith he watred the plants of his religion to haue an euerlasting flowing fountain from Heauen and the Church which he founded to be built vpon such a Rock as the gates of hel shall not preuail against it And that they which spurne against it do as S. Paule once did spurne against the pricke And on the other side Cranmer if he were as Fox saith a Lutheran in King Henries time it was but secretly And if he professed it in King Edwards time it was but for a verie short space And long since was there not one true Lutheran Protestant to be found in all England So soone was Luthers work dissolued so soone was his brooke growne drie And in steede of it runneth now Zuinglius or Caluins brooke which though it see me for the present to be ful and runne strongly yet if the Prince whose harte is in Gods hands would but ether disfancy it or at least withould his seuere haÌ„d from Catholicks yow should quickly see this ful brooke brought to a lowe ebbe and quickly dreaned and wax as dry as ether the brooke of Luther or the brookes of 300. Archereticks more wherof diuers haue runne far fuller and longer than ether Luthers or Caluins hath and now no signe of them is left Luther epist ad Albert Mogunt An 1525. forte doctrina mea iterum supprimetur yea scarce their names are knowne This Luther him selfe both forsawe and fourtould as is before declared l. 2. c. vlt. And Caluin also in his Preface before his Cathechisme in these wordes Of Posteritie I am so doutful as I dare scarce thinck therof For vnles God miraculously help from heauen me thinks I see extreme barbarousnes hang ouer the world And I pray God that a while hence our children feele not this to haue bene rather a true prophecie than a coniecture And if we mark we shall see that as Vipers broode killeth their Mother of whome they came So new haeresies destroy the ould from whence they sprange Thus the Puritan impugneth the Protestant and the Brownist vndermineth the Puritan Wherfor let all men that be careful of their saluation harken to S. Hieroms aduise saying to a Luciferian Haeretick I will tel thee my mind breefly and plainly That we should abide in that Church which founded of the Apostles contineweth to this daye For shall we doute saith S. Austin l. de vtil Cred. to put oure selues in the lap of the Church wich from the See Apoostolick by succession of Bishops in vaine Haereticks barking about yt hath gotten the hight of authoritie Epilog 1. THus we see most deerly beloued Contrimen that if we compare according to the true rules of prudence and wisdome the Roman Catholike Protest religion in their first founders here in our English Nation other for learning or vertue for missioÌ„ or orders for motiues to preache for vniuersalitie of religioÌ„ or confession of Aduersaries for miracles or succession and continuance the Catholik