holy Doctor and then approv'd of by all the world and ever since accepted and applauded in God's Church be defective or deceitfull then a translation made since the pretended Reformaâ—ion by men not only engaged in that new doctrin but maintain'd therby and so addicted to the pleasures and profits of this world as the first Reformers and their Successours the Protestant Clergy are known to be not only in England but in all other parts of Christendom Let them be pleased also to consider whether the judgment of the Roman Catholick Clergy in these Kingdoms who in being of that judgment can have no motive but conscience as is manifest by the incapacities and penalties lay'd vpon them for not conforming to Protestancy be not a more impartial and less to be suspected rule for any prudent person to follow then the judgment of the Protestant Clergy rewarded and promoted to the greatest employments both in Church and state for being of that opinion they profess and who would forfeit all their being if they declared them-selves contrary to Protestancy This being as maturely and impartially considered as the importance of the matter doth require non will believe that the vulgar Translations made by Protestants is holy Scripture they being so contrary to our vulgata in latin translated out of the true Greeck and Hebrew copies writen first by a holy Martyr and after revewed by a St. whose sincerity and learning were sufficient to canonize his Translation had it not bin the word of God and most holy of it self and so declared by the testimony and approbation of the Church for the space of 1200. years before the Councel of Trent In vain therfore do Protestant Writers tell us that theiâ— Translations are taken immediatly from the fountains of the Greek and Hebrew so is our vulgata only with this difference that ours was taken from the fountains when they were cleere and by holy and learned men that knew which were the crystal waters and true copies but theirs is taken from fountains of trouble'd waters by lewd and vicious persons and after that the Arians and other Hereticks had poyson'd and corrupted them with their false and filthy doctrin Thus much against the Protestant letter of Scripture now to their sense of Scripture SECT V. The Protestant interpretation is not the true sense of Scripture THE principal part and as it were the soule of Scripture is the sence which was delivered to the Church togeather with the letter For as St. Hierom in ep ad Galat. sayth the Ghospel is not in the word but in the sence not in the bark but in the sapp not in the leaves of the words but in the root of the meaning So that though we should grant the Protestant Translations to be true yet if we prove their interpretation false we demonstrat they have no Scripture nor the least pretext or colour for their Reformations And first that the Church received togeather with the letter the true sense of Scripture is as evident as it is that God would not speak words without sense or leave the interpretation of them to men whose capacities reach not the mysteries of Religion contained in the words Therfore our learned Adversaries are obliged to confess that no man doubteth but that the primitive Church received from the Apostles and Apostolical men not only the text of Scripture but also the right and native sense therof The dispute therfore between Catholicks and Protestants is not whether the Church ever received the true sense of Scriptures but whether that sense continued as well as the letter in the Church and whether the interpretations of Luther Calvin Cranmer Hamond c. or of the Prelaticks of England ought to be preferr'd before that of the Roman Catholick Church because the true sense of Scripture is supposed by all Protestants to have bin lost for many ages and that the whole visible Church of God was either so careless as to forget the ancient sense or so wicked as to forge a new sense of Scripture And first it seems against reason to believe that any Christian Congregation could be less carefull of the sense of Scripture then of the letter because the sense is that which importeth most for preservation of the faith Therfore if the Prelats and Pastors of the Church have bin so watchfull and diligent in all ages as to find out and correct all heretical corruptions of the letter of Scripture how is it possible they would neglect the same industry for preservation of the sense which is the principal part of God's word And if Protestants think the letter was safe in the custody of the Roman Chatholick Church from which they received it how can they suspect the purity of that sense which was kept and delivered to them by the same Church and authority And if God's providence as they confess was engaged in keeping the leaves and letter of Scripture from corruption surely it could not be so vnconcern'd for the integrity of the sence and substance as to permit it to perish Besides it is much easier to keep the sense of Scripture incorrupt and pure then the letter The letter was writ only in paper or parchment the sense in the heads and hearts of the Bishops Doctors and People of the Church a dash of a pen may alter the letter but cannot have access to the sence which lodgeth in the hearts and heads of the faithfull The precept of receiving the sense of Scripture from the Church is not only agreable to reason but prescrib'd in Scripture as the only way of saluation Go not from the doctrin of the elders for they have learned it from their Fathers and of them thou shalt learn vnderstanding and to answer in the time of need Eccles. 8.8 The first Protestant Reformers observed not this they went to no precedent Church nor Fathers for their interpretation of Scripture and therfore the words of Ieremy 18.15 may be literally applyed to them They have stumbled from the ancient ways to walk in ways not troden The Protestant Clergy ought to say and confess ingeniously that of holy Iob 8.8 Jnquire therfore I pray thee of the ancient generation and prepare thy self to search of their Fathers for we are but yesterday and ought not intrude their own Imaginations as the true explanation of God's word They do not imitat St. Gregory Nazianzen and St. Basil who as Eusebius relates Hist. l. 11. cap. 9. did seek the vnderstanding of the Scriptures not from their own presumption but from the writings and authority of their Ancestors They do not follow the rule of Origen saying tract in Math. 29. That in our vnderstanding of the Scripture we must not dâ—part from the first Ecclesiasticall tradition nor believe other-wise but as the Church of God hath by succession delivered to us Nor that of Tertulian l. 1. de prescrip c. 6. What the Apostles preach'd what Christ reveal'd to them ought not be otherwise proved
Catholick Doctrine is inconsistant with the Sovereignty and safety of Kings and with civil Society between Catholicks and Protestants Pag. 443 Bishop Mortons Falsifications about the Lawfulness of killing a Tyrant Pag. 444 Bishop Mortons Falsification of Catholicks against the Sovereignty of Princes and how he excuses himself by saying he received it from the Archbishop of Canterbury Pag. 445 Mortons Answer in which see an Imposture continu'd against Catholicks by the whole Convocation of the Protestant Clergy in their Synod held Anno 1603. Pag. 546 The Protestant Falsification to perswade that the Canon-Law doth warrant deposition of Kings by the Pope Pag. 447 A Protestant Falsification to perswade that Catholicks may cheat any Excommunicated Persons of their Lawful Debts Pag. 449 Bishop Mortons Falsification to perswade that Catholicks hold it Lawful to Murther and Massacre Protestants Pag. 451 Bishop Morton's Falsification to Assert the Kings Supremacy Pag. 453 Ten Falsifications set down together by Bishop Morton to prove that we hold that Popes cannot be deposed nor be Hereticks Pag. 457 Primate Bramhalls Falsification to prove that Popes may and have Decreed Heretical Doctrines Pag. 458 It is prov'd by Reasons and Examples that no Religion is so little dangerous to the Sovereignty and safety of Kings or so Advantagious to the Peace and Prosperity of Subjects as the Roman Catholicks notwithstanding the Doctrin of the Pope's Supremacy Pag. 459 Protestants cannot clear their Religion from their Doctrin and danger of Deposing Sovereigns and Disposing of their Kingdoms Pag. 470 That Protestants could never prove any of the wilful falsifications wherewith they charge Roman Catholick Writers but themselves are convicted of that Crime wheresoever they Attempted to make good their charge against us Pag. 473 Bellarmin accused by Sutcliff of Falsifying the General Council of Chalcedon in favour of the Popes Supremacy Pag. 474 How Protestants are Convicted by Bellarmin of holding twenty ancient condemned Heresies and how Sutcliff and Bishop Morton to clear them of six only fourteen seems they confess do falsifie the Fathers and Catholick Authors about worshipping of Images Pag. 476 Two Pelagian Heresies imputed to Protestants and how they falsify to clear themselves of the One and say nothing of the other Pag. 477 Two Novatian Heresies Imputed to Protestants the one answered with Silence the other with Falsifying Pag. 478. The Manichean Heresie against Freewill Imputed to Protestants and how pittifully Answered by Bishop Morton Pag. 479. How Bishop Morton Answers to Bellarmin's Imputation of Arianisme unto Protestants Pag. 479. How Morton Falsifies and Abuses Bellarmine who Imputes the denyal of Christs Real Presence in the Sacrament to Protestants Pag. 480. Falsifications Objected against Cardinal Baronius by Mr. Sutcliff Pag. 483. Calumnies and Falsifications of Luther Calvin Archbishop Laud and Primate Usher to Discredit Catholick Religion against their own Knowledge and Conscience Pag. 487. Of Calvins Calumnies against Catholicks and their Doctrine Pag. 488 Frauds Falsifications and Calumnies of Primate Usher against the Real Presence and Transubstantiation Pag. 491. Usher's Falsifications against Confession Pag. 492. His Falsifications against Absolution of Sins Pag. 493. Against Purgatory Pag. 494 Against Worshiping Saints and their Reliques Pag. 496 Against Prayer to Saints Pag. 499 Of Archbishop Laud's Frauds and Falsifications HOw unsincerely Bishop Laud would fain Excuse the Modern Greek Heresie concerning the Procession of the Holy Ghost Pag. 502 How Bishop Laud Abuses St. Augustine to make Protestants believe that General Councils may Err against Scripture and evident Reason Pag. 504 Vicentius Lirinensis abus'd by Laud to prove the Fallibility of the Church c. Pag. 507 How Bishop Laud falsifies Occham to infringe St. Augustin's Authority concerning the Infallibility of the Church in succeeding Ages as well as in that of the Apostles And is forc'd by his Error to resolve the Prelatick Faith into the Light of Scripture and the private Spirit of Phanaticks which he Paliats under the Name of Grace and thereby Warrants all Rebellions against Church and State Pag. 509 Divers Frauds and Falsifications of Bishop Laud to defend that Protestants are not Schismaticks Pag. 512 Whether it be Piety or Policy to permit the Protestant Clergy of these three Kingdoms to enjoy the Church Revenues for maintaining by such Frauds and Falsifications as hitherto have been alledged the Doctrine of the Church of England which also they acknowledge to be fallible and by consequence for all they know false And hâ—re the said Revenues may be Conscientiously apply'd to the Vse and Ease of the People without any danger of Sacriledge or any Disturbance to the Government if a publick Tryal of both Clergies Sincâ—rity be allowed and Liberty of Conscience granted Pag. 521 The same further demonstrated and how by Liberty of Conscience or by Tolerating the Roman Catholick Religion by Act of Parliament the British Monarchy will become the most considerable of all Christendom Peaceable at Home and recover its Right Abroad How evidently it is the mutual Interest of Spain and England to be in a perpetual League against France and how Advantageous it is for Spain to put Flanders into English Hands Pag. 534 The King 's Right to France Pag. 544 My Lord of Clarendin's Policy Censur'd by all Wise Men. Pag. 548. Part 4. The Roman Catholick Religion in every particular wherein it differs from the Protestant confirmed by undenyable Miracles THat such Miracles as are approved by the Roman Catholick Church in the Canonization of Saints are true Miracles and the Doctrine which they Confirm cannot be rejected without denying or doubting of Gods Veracity and how every Protestant doth see true Miracles though he does not reflect upon them in Confirmation of the Roman Catholick Faith Pag. 553 The Miracle of St. Januarius of Naples Pag. 555 The Famous and undenyable Miracle of St. Francis Xaverius wrought on the Person of Marcello Mastrillo Pag. 556 Antichrist's Miracles are not Credible if compar'd with Ours Pag. 561 Of Visible Miracles seen though not observ'd by every Protestant in Confirmation of the Roman Catholick Faith The difference between true and false Miracles Pag. 562 Of True Miracles related in the Ecclesiastical History by men of greatest Authority in every Age to confirm the particular Mysteries of our Catholick Faith and that sense of Scripture wherein Roman Catholicks differ from Protestants Pag. 566 Of Miracles related by St. Chrysostom St. Gregory Nazianzen c. in Confirmation of Transubstantiation Adoration of Christ in the Sacrament the Sacrifice of the Mass Communion under one Kind and Purgatory Pag. 567 Primate Usher's Falsification to discredit two Miracles Pag. 569 How Protestants falsify and corrupt the very Statutes and Law-Books Pag. 572 Miracles for the Mass. Pag. 573. Miracles for Purgatory Pag. 573 Miracles to Confirm the Worship and Virtue of the Sign of the Cross. Pag. 576 Miracles in confirmation of the Catholick Worship of Images Pag. 581 The Protestant Distinction of Civil and Religious Worship misapply'd by Ministers to delude
r. known p. 296 l. 29 for Sect. 8. r. Sect. 3 4 8. p. 30â— l. 8 omitted not p 302 l. 18 for reverences r. revenues p. 309 l. 31 for reverences r. revenues p. 315 l. 8 for became r. began p. 326 l. 17 for foundeth r. founded p. 327 l. 31 omitted Lutheran Book p. 328 l. 12 for tought r. sought p. 341 l. 23 for Pabam r. Papam p. 355 marg l. 3 for fol. 30 r. fol. 301 p. 156 l. 26 for greer r. geer p. 367 l. marg l. ult for 993 r 789 p. 371 l. 21 for 57 r. 53 p. 377 l. 2 Institiam r. Justitiam p. 378 marg l. 20 for three r. two p. 393 l. 4 for eidoolan r. eidolon p. 393 l. 32 for with r. which p. 396 marg l. 9 for Mat. c. 17. r. Mat. c. 27. p. 396 marg l. 11 12 13. these words Et in Harm in Mat. 26. ver 39. are to Be expung'd p. 407 l. 18 for 1 Thess. r. 2 Thess. p. 417 marg l. 5 for orgilat r. or great p. 424 l. 27 for he r. I p. 425 l. 4 for notice r. Notes p. 430 l. 24 the word and must be expung'd p. 444 l. 8 for restored r. retorted p. 453 l. 5 for report r. detort p. 457 l. 31 for rot r. not p. 458 l. 10 for Pramhalls r. Bramhalls p. 473 l. 9 for ad r. and p. 475 l. 7 for praeras r. praeeras p. 481 marg l. 19 for Figurinis r. Tigurinis p. 482 l. 13 for ad r. and p. 482 marg l. 13 for le r. de p. 495 marg l. 17 thy r. they p. 503 l. 30 for at r. as p. 528 l. 11 r. mentibay nefas in the same line r. hoc for tue p. 508 for 22 r. 32 p. 515 l 10 for our r. your p. 525 l. 21 after return is omitted to p. 540 l. 31 for them r. then p. 549 l. 23 for Anion r. Anjou p. 560 marg l. 6 for Matth 11.12 r. Matth. 11.21 Ibid marg l. 7 for Joan. 10.26 r. Joan 10.25 Ibid marg l. 9 for Joan 2.23 r. Joan 3.2 p. 562 l. 20 for receive r. revive p. 566 l. 5 for this r. thus p. 571 l. 16 at Waldensis omitted cap. 63. n. 6. p 573 marg l. 24 for Moral r. Dialog p. 584 l. 15 for 1664. r. 1604. p. 613 l. 27 for Regal r. Legal pag. ult of the Conclusion l. 8 for Actions 1. Nations A TREATISE OF RELIGION AND GOVERNMENT FIRST PART Of the beginning progress and principles of Protestancy in general and of the Prelatick Church of England in particular SECT I. Hovv necessary a rational Religion is for a peaceable Government What Religion ought to be judged rational That the truth of mysteries of Faith is more credible then cleere A digression concerning the Notions and Natures of things and in particular of a Body Hovv unreasonable it is to judg of impossibilities in order to Gods omnipotency because they seeme so to our human understandings How dangerous it is for a temporal Soueraign to pretend a spiritual iurisdiction ouer his subjects and how the Catolick world ever acknowledged the Bishop of Rome his spiritual iurisdiction ouer all Christians AMongst our Adversaries discourses against the Roman Catholick Religion the inconsistency therof with the soueraignty and safety of Princes seemeth to be most applauded The Protestant Ministers ceas not to proclaim from pulpit and press that Kings are but Tenants at will to the Pope and that his spiritual iurisdiction depriues them of all temporall power We shall rid I hope protestant Princes of that iealousy when we treat of this point by manifesting the calumny In this part of our Treatise we confine ourselues to matters of fact reserving to dispute of the right herafter And indeed none can frame a true iudgment of this or of any other Controuersy before he be informed of the historical part therof Therfore our method is to set down in the beginning of this work the state and belief of the visible Christian and Catholick Church untill the yeaâ—â— 1517. wherin the world heard first of protestancy afterwards we shall proceed to examin whether the soul and state may be better gouerned by the principles of protestancy then of Popery We doubt not with Gods assistance to retort against our adversaries their own arguments and to proue that as no Religion is a safe way to salvation but ours so likewise not any is so fauorable to the soueraignty of lawfull Magistracy and to the peacebleness of human gouernment as the same Roman Catholik We need not inculcat to States-men how euer so Irreligious that the support of gouernment is Religion and that thâ—ir own Masterpiece is to keep the multitude in awe of the lawes not so much by force of armes an expedient more dangerous then durable as by a religious fear of God and a firm persuasion that Soueraigns are his Vice-gerents and divine prouidence so concerned in the maintenance of their authority and prerogatives that neither can be opposed without infallibility of eternall damnation to the opposers This persuasion must not be the sole work or word of the Soueraigns themselves or of their state Ministers their testimony would be suspected by the subjects as partial it must be grounded upon authority credibly reported to be divin as among Christians the holy Scriptures explained by the ancient tradition and sense of Councels and Fathers which by another name we call the Church or Clergy that is men to whom God hath committed the charg of soules and commanded us to follow their directions in spirituall matters as being Jnterpreters of the divin Law which Soveraigns must observe There could not be an expedient more satisfactory then the institution of such a Church Clergy and spiritual Court of Iudicature For if interpretation of Scripture had bin left to the Soveraign the subjects would mistrust his sincerity in explaining the same if to the lay subjects the Soveraign would be as diffident of their explications Wherfore to avoid differences and disputes God appointed the Clergy for spiritual Iudges as being by their institution less concerned in temporal affaires and therfore presumed to be more conscientious and less partial in their sentences then lay persons and Tradition for the rule wherby they must direct their judgments to the end their doctrin be Apostolical not arbitrary or altered from the primitive but rather all novelties and differences concerning matters of Faith be still suppressed and therby all unlawfull pretensions which both Soveraigns and subjects frequently claim under the pretext of Religion be remedied or prevented for that souveraignty is as apt to degenerat into tyranny as subjection into rebellion if not regulated by a religion that makes it as vnlawfull for lay men to intermeddle with the doctrin of the Church as it is improper for Church men to intrude themselves into matters of state But because neither Soueraigns nor subjects are bound to submit their judgments in matters of
of the two parties are guilty of counterfeiting evidences that is of changing the ancient letter and sense of Scripture and of corrupting and falsifying the Catholick Fathers and Councells It is but matter of fact and may be soon resolved We have given our charge against our Adversaries long since in our printed Books and in this do renew the same Let the Court command them to put in their answer And because the Protestant Clergy hath alwayes endeavored to make vs odious and obnoxious to the state as vnnatural subjects and ill patriots and will strive now to persuade the world that our zeale in manifesting their frauds and falsifications proceeds not from a desire of manifesting the truth but from covetousness of possessing their lands we doubt not but that in case reason and equity appeareth to be on the Catholick side the Catholick Clergy will resign vnto his Majesty all their claim and right to the Church livings of the three Kingdoms to be freely disposed of in pious and publik vses as he and his Parliament will think most fit for the honor of God and defence of this Monarchy against forrein enemies and seditious subjects Wherin we do no more then duty and our Brethren did in the like occasion in Q. Maries reign And as our offer can have no design but duty so this Tryal can not be against conscience and may prove to be of great consequence both for the salvation of soules and satisfaction of his Majestyes subjects It can not be against the tenderness of Protestant consciences because Roman Catholicks who pretend to a greater certainty of doctrin as believing the Roman Catholick Church to be infallible have admitted of such a tryal in France an 1600. in presence of the King then a Catholick the princes and of all the Court and hath bin translated into English in the third part of the 3. Conversions In hopes that Protestants may be moved by such an example and follow the same Method I will set down the summe of the Tryal SVBSECT IV. A brief relation of a Tryal held in France about Religion wherof the Lord Chancellor of France was Moderator IN the year 1600. there came forth a book in Paris vnder the name of Monsieur de Plessis a Hugonot and Governor of Samur against the Mass which book making great shew as the fashion is of abundance and ostentation of Fathers Councells Doctors and stories for his purpose great admiration seemed to be conceived therof and the Protestants every where began to tryumph of so famous a work Iust as our prelatiks have don of late when Doctor Ieremy Taylor 's Dissuasive from Popery was published in Ireland printed and reprinted in England wherupon divers Catholick learned men took occasion to examin the sayd book of Plessis as others have don lately with Doctor Taylors Dissuasive and finding many most egregious deceits shifts and falsifications therin divers books were written against it and one in particular by a French Iesuit discovering at least a thousand falshoods of his part And the Bishop of Eureux afterwards Cardinal Peron Protested vpon his honor in the pulpit that he could shew more then 500. Falsifications in the Book for his part Hereupon the Duke of Bovillon Monsieur Rosny Mr. Digiers and other Protestant Lords began to call for a tryal of the truth for that it seemed to touch all their honors as well as that of their Protestant Religion It were to be wish'd that some of our English Protestant Nobility and Gentry did imitat the French Hugonots rather in this example of the sense they shewed both of honor and conscience then in the fashion of their cloaths cringies and congies The English Protestants have more reason to vindicat Doctor Taylor 's Dissuasive from the aspersions of frauds and falsifications layd to that Bishop's charge then the french Hugonots had to vindicat de Plessis his Book which was but the work of a Lay-man or at least not set out by order of the Hugonot Clergy as Bishop Taylor 's Dissuasive was resolved vpon and published by order of the Protestant prelatik Convocation of Ireland and both the book and Taylor the Author or Amanuensis so much applauded in England that the Dissuasive hath often bin printed at London and the Dissuader's picture in his Canonical habit placed in the beginning of his book with a stern and severe countenance as if he were sharply reprehending St. Ignatius and his learned Jesuits for cheating and selling of soules of which crime they are accused with Mottos set vnder and over their pictures after Taylor 's preface If you add to this insulting dress the impudent drift of the book which is to dissuade all the Irish and English Catholicks from popery you will find that the credit and Religion of prelatik Protestants is more deeply engaged in maintaining the truth of Bishop Taylor 's cause then the French Hugonots in vindicating Monsieur de Plessis and defending his book against the Mass. But to our story Though Plessis had challenged Peron to prove the falsifications that Peron had layd to his charge yet when he saw that Peron accepted of the challenge Plessis began to shrink and seek delayes but by the King 's express command both parties appeared before his Majesty at Fontainbleau where Plessis came with five or Six Ministers on his side to which sort of people it seems he gave too much credit and vpon their word took all his arguments as appeareth by the words of Peron After that Peron had offered to shew 500. enormous and open falsifications in his only book of the Mass he addeth and moreover I say if that after this our conference ended he will take vpon him for his part to choose amongst all his citations of his Book or Books any such authorities as he thinketh most sure against vs I do bind my self for conclusion of all to refute the whole choice and to shew that neither in his sayd Book against the Mass nor in his Treatise of the Church nor in his Common-wealth of Traditions is there to be found so much as any one place among them all which is not either falsly cited or impertinent to the matter or vnprofitably alledged c. neither do J hereby pretend to blame him for any other thing then that he hath bin over credulous in believing the fals relations and Collections of others that have endeavored to abuse the industry and authority of his pen. This disputation saith Peron in his answer to Plessis Challenge shall not be like to others in former times wherein were examined matters of doctrin and the truth therof c. In examination wherof the shifts and sleights of the Disputers and other disguising of the matters might make the truth vncertain to the hearers But all Questions in this disputation shall only be questions of fact whether places be truly alledged or no for tryal wherof it shall only be needfull to bring eyes for Iudges to behold whether
be 〈◊〉 with in other questions not diligently digested nor yet made firm 〈◊〉 authority of the Church there error is to be born with but 〈◊〉 not to go so farr that it should labour to shake the very 〈◊〉 of the Church The Bishop sayes this can not be 〈◊〉 of the definition of the Church though St. Austin 〈◊〉 expressly of the authority therof but of Scripture But 〈◊〉 afterwards the words might be vnderstood of the 〈◊〉 of the Church or general Councells to the end that 〈◊〉 might not imagin St. Austin thought such definitions were 〈◊〉 or vnquestionable he adds But plain Scripture with 〈◊〉 sense or a full demonstrative argument must have room 〈◊〉 a wrangling and erring disputer may not be allowed it And 〈◊〉 neither of these but may convince the definition of the 〈◊〉 if it be ill founded And to shew that this is no fancy of 〈◊〉 but the doctrin of St. Austin he quotes his words 〈◊〉 see them in the margent with an F. referring the word 〈◊〉 to Scripture So that if you believe the Bishop and rely 〈◊〉 his quotations St. Austin doubted not but that the 〈◊〉 of the Church in general Councells may be contrary to 〈◊〉 and confuted by full demonstrative arguments I confess that when I read this page and part of Bp. Laud's 〈◊〉 with Fisher I found my self much troubled vntill 〈◊〉 the matter and then I resolved never more to 〈◊〉 him or any Protestant writer however so Saint-like or 〈◊〉 by report or in appearance The truth is St. Austin 〈◊〉 place cited by the Bishop hath nothing at all either 〈◊〉 Scripture or evident sense or demonstrative arguâ—â—â—ts but addressing his speech to the Manicheans he writes 〈◊〉 Apud vos autem vbi nihil horum est quod me invitet ac 〈◊〉 sola personat veritatis pollicitatio and then follow the words 〈◊〉 by the Bishop quae quidem si tam manifesta monstratur c. 〈◊〉 truth so bragd of and promised by the Manicheans to 〈◊〉 demonstrated in that epistle called Fundamentum saith St. Austin if it be demonstrated to be so cleer c. is to be preferred where you see St. Austin's quae referred not to Scripture but to that fictitious truth which the Manichees pretended to be in their doctrin Nay St. Austin is so far from doubting of the infallibility of the Church and general Councells in that very place quoted by the Bishop that he disputes ex professo against the possibility of its erring or of its definitions being contrary to Scripture and sayes that if the doctrin of the Catholick Church could be contrary to Scripture he should not be able to believe rationaly and infallibly either the one or the other not the Scriptures because he receives them only vpon the authority of the Church Not the Church whose authority is infringed by Scripture which is suposed to be brought against her Si ad Evangelium me tenes ego ad eos me teneam quibus praecipientibus Evangelio credidi his jubentibus tibi omnino non credam Quod si forte in Evangelio aliquid in apertissimum de Manichaei Apostolatu invenire potueris infirmabis mihi Catholicorum authoritatem qui jubent vt tibi non credam qua infirmata jam nec Evangelio credere poterâ— quia per eos illi credideram ita nihil apud me valebit quicquid inde protulâ—ris Quapropter si nihil manifestum de Manichaei Apostolatu in Evangelio reperitur Catholicis potius credam quam tibi si aâ—tem inde aliquid manifestum pro Manichaeo legeris nec illis nec tibi illis quiÌ„a de te mihi mentiti sunt Tibi autem qui eam scripturam mihi profers cui per illos credideram qui mihi mentiti sunt Aug. cont Epist. Fundament cap. 4. Wherfore St. Austin doth not suppose as the Bishop pretends that Scripture or reason can be contrary to the definitions of the Church he professedly teaches the contrary in the very place cited and vses the alledged words quae quidem si tam manifesta monstratur c. only ex suppositione impossibili in the same manner as St. Paul speaketh Gal. 1. Jf an Angell from heaven teach otherwise then we have taught you let him be accursed St. Paul well knew it was impossible that an Angell from heaven should teach contrary to the Ghospel and so did St. Austin that the definitions of a general Councel should be contrary to Scripture or reason as appeareth by his own discours against the Manichees Vincentius Liâ—inensis abused by Mr. Laud to prove the fallibility of the Church pretending that learned Father supposed and sayd she might change into Lupanar errorum à strumpet or stewes of errors BUt A. C. tells us further saith Mr. Laud that if one may deny or doubtfully dispute against any determination of the Church then may he also against an other and so against all since all are made firm to us by one and the same divine revelation sufficiently applyed by one and the same full authority of the Church which being weakned in any one can not be firm in another First A. C. borrowed the former part of this out of Vincentius Lirinensis and as that learned Father vses it I subscribe to it but not as A. C. applyes it For Vincentius speaks there de Catholico Dogmate of Catholick Maxims c. which are properly fundamental but here the Bishop is mistaken for Vincentius speaks also of not fundamentals as of the celebrating of Easter according to St. Victor's decree the not rebaptizing of those who had bin baptized by hereticks c. now in this sense saith the Bishop give way to every cavilling disputer to deny or quarrel at the maxims of Christian Religion c. And why may he not then take liberty to do the like of any other till he have shaken all But this hinders not the Church her self nor any appointed by the Church to examin her own decrees and to see that she keep the principles of her faith vnblemished and vncorrupted for if she do not so but novitia veteribus new doctrins be added to the old the Church which is Sacrarium veritatis may be changed in Lupanar errorum I am loath to english it Hitherto the modest Bishop who quotes Vincent Lirin in his Margent for his lupanar errorum c. and for the whole discours Vincentius Lirinensis is so far from expressing any fear or suspition of danger that the Church should be changed into lupanar errorum a stews of errors by addition of novelties or falling from the primitive doctrin that as if he had foreseen this corruption of his meaning and cutting short his words practised by Mr. Laud he declares in that very place by him quoted that only hereticks and vngodly men can entertain any such thoughts of Christs spouse sed avertat hoc a suorum mentibus divina pietas sitque hoc potius impiorum furor
these are his words and concealed by the Bishop who also striks out of Vincentius Lirin other words wherby it did appear what a kind of keeper the Church is of the truths deposited with her and how litle danger there is of corrupting the old or admitting of new doctrin The Bishop pag. 38. sets down the sentence thus Ecclesia depositorum apud se dogmatum Custos c. Denique quid vnquam Conciliorum Decretis enisa est nisi vt quod antea simpliciter credebatur hoc idem postea diligentius crederetur c. But in Vincentius Lirinensis It is thus Christi vero Eoclesia sedula cauta depositorum apud se dogmatum Custos here first he skips over these two words sedula cauta diligent and wary because they spoiled his plot of persuading us that the Church might by negligence of its Pastors be insensibly changed and corrupted To the same intent he conceales with an c. the rest that followes which would have cleered all and left no room for the Bishops fraud for Vincentius Lirin his words are But the Church of Christ is a diligent Depositary or Keeper of the truths committed to her never changes any thing at all in them lessens nothing adds nothing nether cuts away things necessary nor adjoyns things superfluous neither looseth what is hers nor vsurpes what belongs to others Let any Christian or honest Pagan Iudge whether these words be not Diametrically contrary to what the Bishop pretends vnto in this passage viz. suspition and possibility of the Churches adding novitia veteribus novelties to the old doctrin of making a change of that faith she first received from Christ and his Apostles and of becoming Lupanar errorum which this good man and holy Martyr sayes he is loath to english and yet leaves out cuts and corrupts the Latin text of set purpose to fix vpon Christs Espouse the greatest infamy How Bp. Laud falsifies Occham to infringe St. Austins authority concerning the infallibility of the Church in succeeding ages as well as in that of the Apostles and is forced by his error to resolve his prelatick faith into the light of Scripture and the privat Spirit of Fanaticks which he palliates vnder the name of grace and therby warrants all rebellions against Church and state AN act of divine faith must be prudent that is men are not bound to believe any article therof v. g. that Scripture is the word of God vnless there evidently appear prudent and sufficient motives to exclude all moral possibility that any but God is the Author of the doctrin proposed to be believed These motives of credibility we call the signs of the Church and are the miracles of Christ and his Disciples sanctity and succession of his doctrin and Doctors Conversion of Kings and nations to christianity c. These signs or motives of credibility though they do not evidence demonstratively that our faith is true or that the Church or Congregation of men wherin they be found is the Catholick yet they demonstrat an obligation in us of believing it as we have proved elsewhere in so much that if no such signs or motives of credibility had bin none would be bound to believe any point of Christian Religion with certainty of faith and therfore St. Austin sayd he would not believe the Scripture had he not bin moved therunto by the authority of the Church because Scripture of it self hath no sufficient arguments and signs to ground a prudent and undoubted belief of its being the word of God but the signs and motives of credibility invest the Church with sufficient authority to declare both that and all other mysteries of faith and to make our Ecclesiastical Ministery and Mission more authentikly divin then any Regal Commissions or human Badges can set forth the truth and dignity of Ministers of state and officers of war Therfore as not to believe or to contemn men so qualified when they command in the Kings name is by the light of reason and consent of all nations judged obstinacy and rebellion not to be excused by pretending ignorance or want of greater evidence then those vsual signs of their employments afford so must it be obstinat heresy not to believe that what is proposed by the Church qualified with the aforesaid signs is revealed by God This supposed the main Controversy between Protestants and Catholicks is about the resolution of Christian faith for though both parties pretend that they believe because God revealed to the Prophets and Apostles the Mysteries of faith yet we say that Protestants can not shew how it may be prudently believed that Christ preached or revealed any such doctrin as is pretended vnless it be acknowledged that the Church of every succeeding age was and this present is as truly and realy though perhaps not so highly quoad modum infallible in delivering the Apostles doctrin as the Apostles were in delivering that of Christ. We do not say that Tradition or the Testimony of the Church confirmed by the foresaid signs is the prime motive and last resolution of faith but that the Tradition and Testimony of the present Church is infallible to the end it may infallibly apply the prime motive which is Gods veracity to vs and we prudently assent thervnto But the Bishop denying this is driven with Presbyterians and Fanaticks to an inbredâ—light of Scripture and to the privat Fanatick spirit with this only difference that where they say they are infallibly resolved that Scripture is the word of God by the Testimony of the Spirit within them his Lordship pag. 83.84 averrs he hath the same assurance by grace And because we object and admire that no Catholick could ever perceive this inward and inbred light of Scripture wherby all Protestants pretend they are assured it is the word of God he concurrs pag. 86 with Fanatitks in telling vs that blind eyes can not and pervers eyes will not see it It s strange his Lordship did not foresee the sad effects which this Protestant principle and presumption wrought against himself and his Prelatick Church within a very short time after he writ this doctrin and applyed the same against the Roman Catholicks He might be sure it would be retorted against the Church of England for why may not every Protestant Sectary pretend that the Prelatick Church of England is as blind and pervers in not seing the light of Scripture as Luther and Laud pretend the Roman Catholick is It is but every particular mans fancy and word no other proof is required by Protestants nor indeed can any better be produced to make good that so many honest and learned searchers of Scripture as have bin and are in the Roman Catholick Church can not or will not see the pretended light of Scripture so largely diffused among Protestants and distributed to every Fanatick Presbyterian and Prelatick whose faith can not be maintained without this rash judgment and most dangerous
which may be seuerally wrought and wrought upon by a corporeal instrument If an Atom be so thick that a corporeal instrument may touch one side therof and not touch or reach the other side there is ground and room enough for Gods power to separat one side from the other for if one side of a Body or Atom can be wrought upon independently of the other it may exist also or be moued independently of the same and by consequence is distinct and separable from it And indeed if to be toucht and not to be toucht be not contradictions sufficient to prove real distinction between the sides or extremes so denominated no kind of contradictions can inferre real distinction To say as Mr. Bonart doth pag 301.303 passim that to be toucht and not toucht argues only a verbal not a real distinction in the Atom wherof one side is realy toucht the other not realy toucht and to pretend that this is cleerly deduced from the first notion or nature of a Body or extense because forsooth the notion of Parts must suppose not only one extense but many with a certain manner and measure of extension and that therfore an Atom may be extended and yet not partible To maintain this discourse I say seemeth to me a begging of the question and as difficult as any other opinion in this matter For 1. It is not easy to conceiue how any extension whatsoeuer can include in its first notion or nature an exclusion of division 2. In M. r Bonart his own principles it seemeth in-intelligible how any Body or Atom that hath so much extension that is so much length bredth and profundity as to be capable of being toucht on the one side with out being toucht on the other is not composed of parts distinct one from the other For pag 303. he grants that if in the expansion or extension of an Atom did appeare any little line or point that line or point would conclude a real distinction of parts in the Atom Now why the touch of any corporeal instrument suppose of a Painters pencil framed and managed by Gods hand may not leaue an impression of it selfe which impression you may call a line or point in that place or side of the Atom that is toucht no reason can be giuen and by consequence there can not be any for denying real distinction and division of the parts in the Atom Lastly It must be concluded that the Atoms are either partible or penetrated Because if they be not partible they do touch each other wholy and euery where according to their dimension and extensions and if they touch in such a manner they are penetrated or in one and the same place And if they be penetrated or penetrable impenetrability can not be the essence or property of the Body which they compose and wherof it only consists This is only sayd by the way to shew that the best wits may mistake the notion and nature not only of a spirit but also of a Body and that they are not the best Guides when they steere themselues and others more by their own privat discourses then by the common sense of the faithfull in mysteries of faith wherof it is a property to be more credible then cleere But if the euidence of sense be fallacious and the reflections of our mind fallible what certain knowledg can we haue of any thing Must we al turn Stoiks or Sceptiks Shall we doubt of all Geometrical Demonstrations No we haue certain Knowledg of our own existence and of some other euident truths And as for the Demonstrations of Geometry Euclid himself neuer pretended that his notions of a point line superficies perfect circle c. did point at the real existence of any such objects as indivisible points lines perfect cercles c. he knew and Mathematicians confess there are no such things in rerum natura And seing Mathematicians are so ingenuous as to acknowledg that their cleerest notions are not real natures or immutable essences I see no reason why Philosophers whose demonstrations are not so cleere should be so positiue in defining things as if they were defyâ—ing Gods omnipotency to make them otherwise then they haue dictated in the Schooles or published in their Bookes And he that thinks to declare the reasonableness of Christian Religion by making the mysteries therof agree rather with his own Philosophical notions then with the common sense of the Church will involue himselfe into a labyrinth of errours The reasonableness therfore of Christian Religion must not be measured by any cleere euidence of truth that human reason discouers either in the works of nature or in the diuine mysteries for we shall proue herafter such euidence to be inconsistent with faith but rather by the cleere euidence of an indispensable obligation that euery man finds and feeles in himselfe of submitting his judgment to the Church when he reflects upon the signs and sufficiency of its authority in order to propose diuine doctrin To submit our reason to a Church or Clergy that hath no cleere and authentick signs of diuine authority is simple and sinfull credulity not to submit to its sufficient authority that is to authority signed with supernatural signs is heretical obstinacy As for the meanes wherby euery one concerned in this spiritual subjection to the Church and Clergy ought to be informed of their miracles authority and jurisdiction they are the same which all men practise and judg to be sufficient for knowing and acknowledging the true and lawfull Heire of a Kingdom or estate The right to temporal dominion is decerned by succession and that succession by Tradition so also the right to gouern soules and decide Controuersies of faith must be acknowledged to reside in them that by a continual succession of Episcopall hands deriue their spiritual caracter or mission from the Apostles and neuer varied from the Apostolical doctrin of which succession of Caracter and continuance of doctrin the best proof is a neuer interrupted Tradition or Testimony of honest and knowing persons in euery age against whose verdict there can be no Lawfull exceptions That Church or Clergy whose doctrin caracter miracles and jurisdiction is witnessed by this Tradition ought to be obeyed as hauing the spiritual superiority wherunto Christ our Saviour commanded both Soueraigns and subjects to submit their iudgments in the mysteries and Controversies of Religion Though this expedient of a Church and Clergy so qualified ought to be acceptable and satisfactory to lay Princes and people yet modern Politicians stand upon such nyceties that the greatest danger and difficulty which they apprehend in the government of a Christian Commonwealth is to order so affaires that the spiritual and temporal jurisdiction may not clash they feare that by mistake or ambition of the Clergy the temporal may be too far intrenched upon and made not only subordinat but subject to the spiritual and the spiritual at length become
and reformations They began in Luthers owne days and still continue to increase and multiply having no rule of faith but an obscure text of Scripture nor no Church or Court of judging the controversies therof with an obligation to submit there-unto but every ons privat opinion which must needs breed diuision add confusion And so it happened in the very beginning to Luther For his Disciples observing that every one of them-selves might pretend to be sent by God by an extraordinary vocation as well as Luthers seing he proved not his Mission by Miracles or by any supernatural sign to reforme the Church divers of them separated from him and set up for them-selves as Zuinglius who invented the Sacramentarian Religion against Christs real presence in the Sacrament and Bernard Rotman Father of Anabaptists c. It were tedious to relate all their divisions and almost impossible We will only assure the Reader that in the space of 30. years after Luther began his Reformation it was divided and subdivided in Germany alone into 130. Sects For first his Disciples divided them-selves into four principal Reformations of plain Lutherans halfe Lutherans Antilutherans or Sacramentarians and Anabaptists These plain Lutherans into eleuen Sects and these againe into soft rigid and extravagant Lutherans the semilutherans or half Lutherans also into eleven Sects The Sacramentarians or Antilutherans into 56. and one of these into 9. The Anabaptists into 13. Sebastianus Traneus a Protestant numbreth 70. How all these have bin subdivided since we may guess at by the variety we see in England of Protestant Religions not with standing the severity of the Laws in favor of the Prelatik Not one of these Sects have subordination to another and agree only in some generall Notions of Christianity and in impugning the Roman Catholick Religion one of the marks wherby the Holy Fathers discerned Heresies Each of them pretend to be a true Church and condemn the rest as Schismatical and Heretical Congregations perpetualy quoting Scripture one against the other but understood according to every on s conveniency fancying or feigning that the Spirit of God inspires him to reform not only the Roman Doctrin but the Protestant reformations But when we call to them for their comission which must be signed by Miracles and desire to know by what authority they presume to take vpon them so high an employment they tell vs that Miracles are ceased in the Church and all ours either counterfeit or Diabolicall wrought by the Devill to confirm us in the Idolatry of the Mass Invocation of Saints c. But because our Miracles exceed the Devills power and can be wrought only by God rather then Protestants will embrace the truth by Miracles testified they teach a blasphemy saying that God doth give power of working true Miracles unto false teachers not to confirm their false and Popish opinions but to tempt those the Indians Iaponeses and Chineses unto whom they be sent By which Paradox they call in question Christianity it self for why might not God tempt the Iews and primitive Christians by Christs Miracles as well as the Indians and Iaponians by others of the same nature and as prodigious If the Indians be not bound to belieue the doctrin preach't to them though confirmed by our true miracles why should the Jews or any others be obliged in conscience to belieue Christ For if God may work true Miracles to make a falshood so plausibly credible as to oblige prudent men to belieue it no prudent man is bound to belieue the truth when it is euidently confirmed with true Miracles and by consequence none was or is bound to belieue in Christ which doctrin is impious and contrary to our Sauiours own words Ioan. 5.36 and against 2. Cor. 12. Hebr. 2.4 and Marc. 16.20 and Joan 15.24 Where our Sauiour declares that the reason why the incredulous Jews did sin in not believing his Diuinity was because he confirmed his doctrin with Miracles Jf I had not don among them the works which no other man did they had not sinned As for their authority of reforming the Roman Catholick faith they answered that they needed no other warrant but Scripture which did cleerly condemn the Popish Tenets Being desired to shew what parts or words of Scripture were Contrary to the Popish Tenets for that after comparing all places and Texts very godly and learned men could find no such opposition between Gods word and the Roman doctrin they replied that the reason why the Popish Diuins and Prelats did not see their own errors afterall their search and study was because they had not the spirit of God which had reuealed to Protestants the true meaning of holy writ though they could not deny but that their own interpretation was new and contrary to that which the visible Church of the 15. â—n age had receiued from the 14 th and the 14 th from the 13 th and so forth Therfore they all conspired in maintaining that the visible Church had erred in doctrin and that the mystery of iniquity began euen with the Apostles or immediatly after But because some parts of Scripture are so cleere against their new doctrin that they could not be wrested against the Roman Catholicks nor reach the Protestant thy framed a new Canon of Scripture and excluded as Apocryphall many Books and Chapters which spook cleerly against them and in their translations of the ould and new Testament into vulgar languages they added to and substracted from Gods word what they thought fit to make the illiterat people belieue that their new inuentions were agreable to Scripture and that Popery was quite contrary to the same And because none of the first Reformers was a Bishop and they knew Bishops only could consecrat other Bishops and Priests and that no Congregation could be esteemed a Church with out that caracter and calling according to the receiued maxim of S. Hieron Ecclesia non est quae non habet Sacerdotem Luther And the rest who pretended a Reformation judged it necessary to alter this doctrin and declare that all Christians both men and women are Priests by baptism yet that only such as are chosen by the Congregation or Magistrat ought to exercise the function for the auoyding of confusion Luther endeauors to proue it at large thus The first office of a Priest is to preach the word c. But this is common to all next is to baptyze and this also may do euen women c. The third is to consecrat bread and wyn but this also is common to all no less then Priests and this I avouch by the authority of Christ him-self saying Do this in remembrance of me this Christ spook to all there present and to come afterwards whosoever should eat of that bread and drink of that wine c. This also is wittnessed by S. Paul who 1. Cor. 11. repeating this applyeth it to all the Corinthians making them all as
for her proued incest and adultery yet his pride and wilfulness was so excessiue that rather then acknowledg his former error by a formal recantation he continued to exercise his scandalous supremacy so violently that he devised Articles of Religion made Cromwel his Vicar-general in spiritual affairs took upon him to define what was heresy what Catholick faith permitted the Scriptures to be translated by heretiks and read in English and to vexe the Pope countenanced and connived at any novelties though afterwards he burn't the novelists for heretiks and prohibited when it was too late their Translations of Scripture and other Books which he had formerly permitted But seing that notwithstanding his severity the Sacramentarian heresy which he most of all hated did increase in his Kingdom and that the spiritual sword in his lay hand did not work those effects which it had don when it was managed by the Bishops of Rome by whose sole authority all the heresies of the first 300. years were condemned and suppressed without the help of a general Councel and that the Keys which he had usurped served rather to open the doors of the English Church to all errors then shut them out and perceiving his end draw neer he began to think of a reconciliation with Rome but such a one as might sute with his humor which he termed Honour Therfore he sent his favorit Bishop Gardener to the Jmperial Diet with privat instructions to endeavour in such a manner his return to the unity and obedience of the Church through the mediation of the Catholick Princes of Germany and of the Pop's Legat that on King Henrys side it might look more like a princely condescendâ—ncy then a penitent conversion wherunto he seemed to incline at the solicitation rather of others then moved by a detestation of his own errors But God with whom none must dally nor Princes capitulat summon'd him to an account sooner then was imagined Whether he repented or despaired at his death is vncertain Some say his last words were omnia perdidimus all is lost In his last will and Testament he named 16. Tutors for his Son to govern during his minority with equall authority charging them not to bring in the Sacramentarian Religion But God permitted his will to be broken before his body was buried who had changed the last wills of so many thousands deceased and that but three days after his death for upon the 1. of February Seamor Earle of Hartford brother to Ed. 6. Mother was made Protector of the King and Kingdom by his own ambition and privat authority of his faction which prevailed amongst the 16. Executors without expecting any Parliament or consent to the Realm for so great a charge or for the change of religion which immediatly followed And because Wriothesly Earle of Southampton Lord Chancelor the Earle of Arundel and Bishop Tonstall and some others would not betray their trust and opposed the new reformation they were disgraced and displaced SVBSECT I. Of the English Religion and Reformers in King Edward VI. reign THe Earle of Hartford newly created Duke of Somerset and Lord Protector of England was a man fitter to be governed then to govern his judgment was weak but himself very wilfull and so blindly resolut in commanding and executing the designs of others by whom he was guided that without perceiving it he was made the instrument of his own ruin as wel as of his brothers and of the yong King also by the chang of the ancient Religion Dudley Earle of Warwick was his director both in Church and state affairs and yet was his greatest enemy which Somerset had not the wit to see though all the world knew him to be his Competitor And albeit Dudly had bin always a Roman Catholick in his judgment yet as most Polititians do he dissembled his belief and yet â—oothed the Protector in his inclination to the protestant reformation not doubting but that having once intoxicated the people with the liberty and inconstancy therof he might lead them from the contempt of spiritual authority to rebel against the temporal and humor so well their mad zeale that for their new Ghospel's preservation and propagation they would fix vpon him for their Director and stick to whom he would appoint for their Soveraign He was not deceived in his expectation the Protector Seamour was destroyed Dudly himself made chief Minister of England the King poysoned the Princess Mary excluded the Lady Jane Gray declared Queen because she was a Protestant and marryed to Dudlys Son All which things he compased in a short tyme though by degrees as you shall hear No sooner was K. Henry 8. dead but Dudly Earle of Warwick advised Somerset to take vpon him the Protectorship and to make him odious by his privat authority to alter the publick profession of faith and because he knew so notorious a fraud could not be effected without force he devised with the Protector the journy of Musselborough field and the war of Scotland vnder pretence of gaining by force the yong Queene of Scots to marry K. Edward 6. but in reality to get the power of the Militia into his own hands and therby to settle in England a Religion wherby he might in due tyme vpon the score of a refin'd reformation vnsettle the government and alter K. Henry 8. Testament and persuade England that his Daughter Marys reign would eclipse the light of the ghospel which then began to shine After that he had made the Protector so odious that none could endure to hear his name or to live vnder his government he thought it a proper tyme to establish by Parliament that new profession of faith which he knew could not be effected without the consent and concurrence of that great Assembly And though he was not ignorant of the absurdities contained in the best of the new reformations yet because since the setlement of the spiritual headship of our Kings he perceived the common people might be led any way and that an Act of Parliament was held sufficient to make them believe the ancient Christian Religion was profane and that any protestant reformation was the primitive and Apostolick faith he wrought so much by the feare of the army and the Kings authority that albeit in the first Parliament and year of Edward 6. reign nothing more could be obtained in favour of Protestancy but an indemnity for the preachers therof from penalties enacted by the ancient laws against married Priests and Heriticks and a repeal of the English Statuts confirming the Imperial Edicts against heresies yet in the second year and Parliament of Edward the VI. It was carried though by few votes and after a long debate of aboue four months that the Zuinglian or Sacramentarian reformation should be the Religion of England The charge of framing Articles of this Religion as also of composing the Liturgy and a book of rits ceremonies and administration of Sacraments had bin commited to
their own Canon and sense of Scripture and of the falshood of the Canon and sense of Scripture of the Church of England as there is for the English Church to make it self judg of the falshood of the Canon and sense of the Church of Rome As for the authority which the Prelatick religion receives from the laws of the land that gives but little advantage seing the Roman Catholick doctrin hath bin confirmed by the temporal laws of every Kingdom Country and Citty besor and at the tyme that Protestancy succeeded and prevailed and yet that legality was not valued by the Reformers The 35. Article is to authorise some Puritan homilies as the 2. wherin the danger of idolatry in Popery is much insisted vpon as if Christians could easily mistake Images for Idols or Saints for Gods Jews and Hereticks have often endeavoured to confound the one with the other Catholicks never The ancient Fathers as also the second Councel of Nice have long since declared the Protestant Doctrin against Images to be heresy and the Councel of Trent confirms the same decree of Nice and demonstrats how far that the Catholick doctrin of worshiping Images is from any danger of Idolatry The words of the Councel sess 25. are The Images of Christ of the Virgin Mother of God and of other Saints are to be had and retained especialy in Churches and that due honour is to be imparted vnto them not for that any Divinity is to be believed to be in them or vertue for which they are to be worshipt or that any thing is to be begg'd of them or that hope is to be put in them as in tyms past the Pagans did who put their trust in Idols but because the honour which is exhibited to them is referr'd to the first pattern which they resemble So that by the Images which we kiss and before which we vncover our heads and kneele we adore Christ and his Saints whose likness they beare we reverence that which is ratified by the Decrees of Councels especialy of the second of Nice against the impugners of Images In the 36. they make it an Article of Religion that their new form of ordaining Priests and Bishops is valid and containeth all things necessary but since his Majesty's happy restauration they have judged the contrary and therfore thought necessary to add thervnto the words Priest and Bishop Yet this wil not serve their turn for before they can have a true Clergy they must change the Caracter of the Ordainers as wel as the form of ordination a valid form of ordination pronounced by a Minister not validly ordained gives no more caracter then if it had continued invalid and never bin altered The present Protestant Bishops who changed the form of their own Ordination vpon their Adversaries objections of the invalidity therof might as wel submit to be ordained by Catholick Bishops as alow by altering the from after so long a tyme and dispute that it was not sufficient to make themselves and their Predecessours Priests or Bishops In their 37. Article they give a spiritual supremacy to the temporal Soveraign But because the world laught at that vanity and at the statuts 1. 8. Eliz. 1. Wherin is declared that the English Soveraignty is so spiritual as that it may give to any person whatsoever whether man or woman lay or ecclesiastick power and authority to exercise any spiritual function and consecrat Priests and Bishops they would fain make vs now believe that they did not attribut to the Queen and her Successours any power of ministring God's word or the Sacraments notwithstanding that the aforesaid Statuts yet in force certify the contrary And indeed if none can give what himself hath not seing the Kings of England can give power and authority to any person watsoever to consecrat Priests and Bishops and to exercise all kind of spiritual ministery and jurisdiction concerning God's word and Sacraments this power and ministery cannot be denyed to be inherant in themselves In the 38. and 39. articles they endeavour to supress some errors of the Anabaptists which necessarily follow from the foundation and principles of Protestancy for if it be lawfull to deprive men of a spiritual authority and jurisdiction wherof they are in present possession and which their Predecessours had peaceably enjoy'd tyme out of memory the consequence of the lawfulness to deprive men of their temporal jurisdiction Dominions riches and goods is evident by a parity of reason for if peaceable and present possession confirm'd by a prescription of many ages be not sufficient to ground right for the Roman Bishop and Clergy to govern souls and to enjoy the Church livings ther is no temporal Prince or person can be secure or have a right to govern subjects or possess his Dominions So that by the same warrant wherby Prelatick Protestants have taken from the Pope and Roman Clergy their spiritual jurisdiction and temporalities the Anabaptists and all others may evidently demonstrat that all goods are common and no one person can pretend right to Superiority or any thing he doth possess SECT VI. Of the effects which these 39. Articles of Prelatick Protestancy immediatly produced in England and may produce at any tyme in every state wher such principles are made legal and how the Roman Catholick Religion was restored by Act of Parliament of Queen Mary AFter that Prelatick Protestancy had not only bin permitted but established by Parliament in England ensued the destruction of many thousand innocent people as also of the Protector Seamor and K. Eduard 6. togeather with the exclusion of Q. Mary and others the lawful Heires of the Crown and the in trusion of the Lady Jane Grey and in her of Dudly's son and family vnto the Royal throne These were effects of Protestancy not events of fortunc they were designs driven and directed by the principles of the Reformation the like wherof any politick and popular subject may compass as wel as Dudly witness our late long Parliament and Oliver Cromwel's proceedings Though K. Edward 6. was but a Child and his vncle the Protector no great Polititian yet they had a grave and wise Councel but against the liberty and latitude which men are allow'd by the principles of Protestancy no conduct can prevail nor government be safe as appeareth in many examples and in our late Soueraign's Reign and death Jt's in vain to make particular articles of Religion or temporal Statuts if there be a general principle admitted as if it were the word of God wherby both are rendred vnsignificant One of the general principles and indeed the foundation of Prelatick Protestancy is that it is lawful for privat men and subjects such were all the first Protestant Reformers to despise and depose their spiritual Superiours by their own arbitrary interpretations and applications of Scripture notwithstanding the peaceable possession immemorial prescription legality and exercise of their sayd Superiour's authority and jurisdiction From hence it
their doctrin and of the sincerity of their Doctor And though it seemeth to me impossible for any man to know what parts of the new Testament the 6. Article and Canon of the Church of England declares Canonical it being so intricatly worded that either it must be non sense or els exclude from the Canon the Epistles of Iames the second of Peter the second and third of John the Epistle of Iude the Epistle to the Hebrews and the Apocalips seing the authority of all and every one of these hath bin doubted of in the Church and the 6. Article of the Protestant Religion of the Church of England is that In the name of the holy Scripture we do vnderstand those Canonical Books of the old and new Testament of whose authority was never any doubt of in the Church Though I say it 's impossible for me to comprehend how common sense and Christianity can meet in this Article but that if the words therof signify any thing out of the English Protestant new Testament must be excluded all the aforsaid Epistles and Apocalyps yet leaving this difficulty to the decision of that Church I wil suppose at the present with D. r Cosins that all these Epistles and Apocalyps are included in the English Canon and come to the examination of the Arguments wherby he pretends to defend it He therfor foreseing the impossibility of giving any reason why the parts of the New Testament hertofore doubted of should rather be received by Protestants into their Canon then the Books of the Old Testament no more questioned by the Church of Christ then the aforsaid epistles and the Apocalyps thought to avoyd the force of this pressing parity by flatly denying pag. 5. alibi That ever any intire Church or any National or Provincial Counsel or any multitude of men in their confessions and Catechisms or other such publick writings rejected or doubted of the sayd epistles c. In case so many solemnities had bin requisit for the questioning of Canonical authority which his Lp knows are not necessary It seems his lordship did not peruse Eusebius his works though he quotes them very often or at least did not thinck that the ancient Churches of Syria and Arabia deserve to be called Churches not that the Lutherans of Germany Denmark Suethland c. who stick to Luther's principles and Canon can make one or many Churches It s a gross mistake in the Doctor to say pag. 4. 5. that Luther or his Lutherans recalled or recanted their error concerning the Epistle of St. James he might see the contrary in the very book him-self cites of Chemnitius the famous Lutheran whose authority and words he placeth in his addition of certain Testimonies in the same rank with sentences of St. Augustin and St. Thomas of Aquin c. This Chemnitius in most of his works as in his Enchirid. pag. 63 and in his examin of the Councel of Trent p. 1. pag. 55. 56. declareth his own sense and that of his Church in these words The second Epistle of St. Peter the second and third of John the Epistle of Jude and the Apocalyps of John are Apocryphal as not having sufficient testimony of their authority His lordship might also have bin better informed of Luther's sence and Church by the saying of Illiricus an other pillar and Writer therof whom Mr. Bell in his regiment of the Church pag. 28. termeth a very famous Writer and most worthy defender of the Christian truth his words are Luther in his preface vpon St. Iem's Epistle giveth great reasons why this epistle ought in no case to be accompted for a writing of an Apostolick authority vnto which reasons I think every godly man ought to yeeld Luther's reasons are to be seen in the ancient editions of Jene and are comprehended in these few words of his The Epistle of Iames is contentious swelling dry strawy and vnworthy an Apostolick spirit And because these words and others were omitted in the later editions of Wittemberg by some Divins that would fain reform Luther's Canon Religion and Church the chief Lutheran Doctors mett in a Synod at Altembury complained of their Adversaries corrupting Luther's books and resolved to stick to the ancient editions and to the literal sence of his words So that in case it were true the Canon of Scripture could not be sayd to have bin questioned by any Protestant Congregation whithout declaring their doubt in a publick confession of faith we see the Lutheran doth so as also in their confession of Wittemberg quoted by Belarmin lib. 1. de verb. Dei cap. 7. init which is seconded by all hereticks of these tims saith Belarmin the Calvinist only excepted But the Doctor is so much mistaken in the necessity of such a formality that the Arians were condemned as hereticks notwithstanding that in their publick confessions of faith they endeavored rather to disguise then declare their errors It is wel known that Lutheran Churches in Germany not only do reject from their Canon the Epistles of S. Iames Iude the second of Peter and third of S. Iohn the Epistle to the Hebrews and the Apocalyps but are so obstinat in denying them to be in any wise Canonical Scripture that they do not as much as print them in their Bibles And if my Lord of Duresme thinks that the rigid and moderat Lutherans half Lutherans and other Protestant Congregations wherin are many as learned Ministers and Writers as him-self deserve not the name of a Church he may expect that they wil censure his Church after the same manner and perhaps with as much reason But lett them agree as wel as they can it concerns not vs. Yet I hope he wil not pronounce so severe a Censure against the Greeck and Latin Churches and vn-church both Wherof S. Hierom in epist. ad Dordunum testifieth that the Greeks doubted as much of the Apocalyps against the common consent of the Latins as the Latins did of the Epistle to the Hebrews against the common consent of the Church Seing therfor it is evident by the confession both of ancient Fathers and modern Proâ—estants that in the primitive Church the Canonical Scriptures were not generally received all at once but in so great variety of pretended Scriptures great care and search was requisit to determin which Scriptures were Canonical and which not wherby it came to pass thaâ— sundry books and parts were for a long time misdoubted by some Churches and Fathers and by some Councels omitted or not received which yet afterward vpon greater search and consideration were generally acknowledged it must be very great obstinacy in Doctor Cozins and other Protestants to reject the Canon which the Councel of Trent proposeth and embraceth because forsooth some books therin contained were not as soon believed by all Catholicks to be Canonical as the others Or to deny the authority and authentikness of some books of the old Testament because they were not in
as Kings and their Courts by the laws But Protestants do not observe that as the interpretation of the laws depends not of them who sue the King but of the ancient practise of his Judges and Courts so the interpretation of Scripture must not be made by tâ—em who sue the Pope and Councels but by the Bishop and the Church who ar to explain it not according to every on 's privat fancy as Protestants do but according to the tradition customs and practises of the orthodox Christians in former Ages And by this we free the Roman Catholick Church and the Councel of Trent from the Protestant calumny of novelty of doctrin not only in this particular of the Canon of Scripture but in all it 's other definitions Proâ—estants confound our new Decrees with new doctrin wheras nothing is more cleer then that old doctrin may be defined by a new Decree that is made more publick and authentick The Councel tels them sess 4. that it only declares what Canon of Scripture the primitive Church held and quotes for it divers ancient Faâ—hers and Councels and therfor it 's Decree maks no new Canon of Scripture but is a promulgation of the old which induceth an obligation of believing what formerly had not bin so generaly known because it had not bin so cleerly and solemnly proclaimed Methinks none ought to carp less at the novelty of our definitions then Protestants if they would reflect vpon their own reformations They pretend that their doctrin is not only renewed but revived because forsooth the whole visible Church had lost that purity of the Primitive faith for many ages which they now have restored Roman Catholicks are more moderat and modest as having a better opinion of the Church and of God's providence they confess that the doctrin defended by the Councel of Trent was never extinguished in the Church but that it lived in the harts and profession of many faithful though many others of the same communion did not hold them-selves obliged to believe it as a doctrin of faith vntil it had bin sufficiently and solemnly proponed by the Definition of the Church in a general Councel as Divine That being don no addition or alteration was made of divine faith For new definitions are not new articles of faith but promulgations of the old faith or declarations of our obligation to believe as articles of faith those things which had bin formerly revealed but not so sufficiently proposed to the whole Catholick Church Wherfore articles of Faith not believed before they be decreed by a general Councel may be aptly compared to laws or ordinances before they ar published as the publication or proclamation of a law maks not a law but declares the obligation of complying therwith so the definition of a general Councel maks not the article of faith but declareth the obligation of believing that doctrin which before the publication or proclamation of the Church had not bin sufficiently proposed as Divine revelation To what purpose then did Doctor Cozins trouble him-self and his Readers with composing a book against the Catholick Canon of Scripture declared in the Councel of Trent when all his arguments are but sayings of men who doubted of books and parts of Scripture before they were declared and only because they were not declared Canonical by a general Councel He would fain impose vpon the world that S. Ierom was so much a Jew and so little a Christian as for the Canon of the old Testament to rely altogeather vpon the Hebrew Rabins and that he set a greater value vpon their testimony then vpon the authority of the Church or of the great Councel of Nice which received into the Canon of Scripture the book of Judith though rejected by the Jews His proof of S. Jerom's judgment being the same with that of Protestants in this controversy is that in some places of his writings he says the contested books of the old Testament are not in the Canon of the Jews nor received as Canonical by the Christian Church to which is answered that S. Jerom altered his opinion as appeareth in his prefaces prefixed to the said books which he translated into latin at the instance of the Churches and Bishops that held them to be Canonical to whose belief S. Jerom at length conformed his own judgment In his preface to the Book of Tobie he says Yee desire me to translate a booke from the Caldean language to Latin the book of Tobie which the Hebrews admit not into the Catalogue of Sacred Scriptures J have satisfied your desire c. The Hebrews reprehend vs c. Because we have translated into latin things against their Canon But I judged it better to displease the judgment of Pharisees then disobey the commands of Bishops c. In conformity to this he says in his preface of Iudith With the Hebrews the book of Iudith is read amongst the Agiographa the authority wherof is judged less fit to decide controversie c. But because the Nicen Synod is read to have computed this book in the number of holy Scripturs J have acquiesced or complyed with your demand Out of which words it is manifest 1. That St. Jerom was not of the same opinion with the Iews concerning these books because he says he displeased or offended their judgment by his translation as a thing against their Canon which would not have â—in vnless his intention in translating and judgment were known to favour the belief of the Bishops and Christians that held them to be Canonical for the translating them only as pious books could not be offensive to the Iews who acknowledged them for such as Cozins with Chemnitius and all Protestants confess though pag. 82. he contradicts him-self having no other shift left to prove St. Ierom a Iew in this particular And his words of the book of Iudith demonstrat that he opposed the authority of the Nicen Councel against the opinion of the Iews to prove that book Canonical and fit to determin controversies of Religion and in case we should grant he doubted whether the Councel numbred it in the Canon yet non can doubt but that he believed the Councel had authority to declare it Canonical which is the point disputed of But Doctor Cozins would willingly make us believe by a notorious fraud and imposture that Cardinal Belarmin doth not only acknowledg St. Ierom to have persisted still in his former opinion of excluding these controverted books from the Canon but also that the Councel of Nice never received that of Iudith into it and to that purpose pag. 45. quotes Belarmin's words de verbo Dei lib. 1. c. 10. vlt. thus Admitto Hieronymum in ea fuisse opinione quia nondum generale Concilium de his libris aliquid statuerat These words the honest Protestant Bishop of Duresme setts down in capital letters and with them concluds Cardinal Belarmin's sentence and sense concerning Hierom's opinion of the book of Iudith and
ought every one to renounce his own judicature of Religion and Scripture tyed to no rules but to his own discretion and to an indiscernable and privat spirit There is greater danger that Protestants may abuse this spiritual Soveraignty by an indirect application therof to temporal affaires then the Pope his who being a stranger and at such a distance can not if he would have the conveniencies oportunities and occasions of plotting rebellion which Natives and subjects may lay hold on with less danger of a discovery and greater hopes of success It is sayd that in time of a Parliament wherin many of the lower House stood vpon higher termes then was thought convenient for the state though warranted by the purest Protestancy a Gentleman presented a petition to King James who seemed to admire that any would sue to him in a time ther were as his Majesty said three hundred Kings sitting in the House of Commons and therfore bid the Gentleman repaire thither for relief We see in the late long Parliament how some few membres of the House of Commons prevail'd against K. Charles I. in his own Court and Citty by making them-selves popular vpon the score of the Protestant Religion and Scripture How afterwards these and their faction were supplanted by Cromwell's sense of Scripture and how that he wanted only the name of King How after his death every Commander had hopes to succeed him in this power and Protectorship and without question some might had not the Duke of Albermalâ— bin so honest We have grounds therfore to say that every Protestant that hath wit and valor and will take hould of the advantages of his Religion may hope to be a King or Protector and we cannot but admire that any states-man doth except against the Roman Catholick Tenets for admitting of one Pope wheras according to the ground and principles of all Protestant Reformations there are as many Popes as Proâ—â—stants and every one of them much more absolute then the Bishops of Rome and their supremacy less consistent whith the security of Princes and peace of the people then his spiritual jurisdiction Besids the stay and security of a state consists in a discreet distribution of publick charges and employments and this in the choyce of persons qualified with such signs of conscience and loyalty as can hardly be counterfeited or misapplied wherof the principal is the profession of the Religion of the state therfore we see non trusted in weighty affaires of the Common-wealth but such as are of the Prince his Religion But if that Religion have no certain rule or only such a rule that maks men of no certain Religion it can be no more a sign of conscience and loyalty or fit to direct â—he King and Councell in their choyce of persons for their purpose and â—ust then a plume of feathers or a garniture of ribands fancied for it's colours The reason is obvious and concluding because the security of a King and the prosperity of his Kingdoms is grounded vpon the loyalty of his subjects and servants who are intrusted with secret designs and publick employments both in the civill and military list their loyalty is directed by their conscience their conscience by their Religion their Religion by their rule of faith If therfore their rule of faith be but their own fancy of Scripture or Scripture as it is interpreted by every man's privat judgment without any obligation of conscience to submit to the contrary interpretation of their national Synâ—â— or Church because neither of them pretend to be infallible then loyalty conscience religion government and King are as subject to the changes of fortune and animosities of faction as the fickle fancy of every privat person is apt to vary according to his weackness of Iudgment or strength of passion and to declare for that party which will be most for his interest This inconstancy of the reformed Religions is acknowledged by them-selves Duditius a learned and zealous protestant quoted and highly commended by Beza for his piety and elegant witt ep 1. ad Andraeam Duditium pag. 13. lamenteth the condition of his reformed Brethren in these words They are carryed about with every wind of doctrin now to this part now to that whose Religion what it is to day you may perhaps know but what it will be to morrow neither you nor they can certainly tell pag. 5. ep Bezae cit In what head of Religion do they agree that impugn the Roman Bishop If you examin all from the head to the foot you shal almost find nothing affirmed by on which another will not averr to be wicked And their Divines do dayly differ from them-selves Menstruam fidem habentes coyning a monthly faith Now what smale hopes there are of remedying this mis-fortune Sands ingeniously confesseth in his relation fol. 82. The Papists have the Pope as a common Father Adviser and Conductor to reconcile their jarrs to decide their differences to draw their Religion by consent of Councels vnto vnity c. wheras on the contrary side Protestants are as severed or rather scattered troups each drawing adiverse way without any means to pacify their quarrels no Patriarch one or more to have a common superintendance or care of their Churches for correspondency and vnity no ordinary way to assemble a generall Councel of their part the only hope remaining ever to assuage their contention To this we may add the saying of Melancton as remarkable as true Quos fugiamus habemus sed quos sequamur non intelligimus we know who we should avoyd meaning the Papists Religions is to believe what you think fit according to your best vnderstanding of a writing you can not vnderstand by any human and privat industry of your own and will not learn from any publik authority of the Church because by following the interpretation of the Church you fancy that you may be mistaken so that for feare of being mistaken in or by publick authority the protestant either falls into obstinacy in his own privat opinion or into an indifferency for all opinions and so becoms to be an Heretick or of no Religion Among the protestant Confessions of faith the 39. Articles of the prelatick Church of England is estem'd an excellent piece and yet the same Articles acknowledg that the visible Church of God hath erred and may err from time to time and by consequence the prelatick may have erred in this very assertion as in most of the 39. Articles How this acknowledged vncertainty of truth can agree with the certainty or Christianity of faith or with any hopes of salvation I can not comprehend But albeit these articles seem as insufficient for salvation as men are vncertain of their truth yet are they thought usefull to the government for though they want the substance that is the certainty of faith yet they have the face of religion and formality of law because they talk of God Christ Trinity c. And are
vs as sacred Thus much have I thought good to remember that Volanus may receive answer from himself when he so often inforceth against vs the authority of learned men and the consent of the Church c. And truly Socinus doth defend his error concerning Christ with as many and as cleer texts of Scripture not vnderstood in the sense of the Roman Catholick Church as any point of Protestancy is maintained by other Protestants The Puritans now called Presbiterians vse the same way of arguing against the Prelatiks and with no less success then socinus against Volanus as may be seen in Cartwright in his second reply against episcopacy p. 1. pag. 484. And that it may appear saith he how justly we call this Canon of the Councell the first generall of Nice in the Canon touching the Metropolitan which the Prelatiks vrged in favor of Episcopacy vnto the tuch stone of the word of God let it be considered c. In the same Councell appeareth that to those chosen of the ministery vnmarried it was not lawfull to take any wife afterwards c. Paphnutius sheweth that not only this was before that Councell but was an ancient Tradition of the Church in which both him-felf and the whole Councell rested c. If the ancient Tradition of the Church can not authorise this neither can ancient custome authorise the other The Prelatick Clergy would fain hould Episcopacy by virtue of Tradition and of the authority of the Nicen Councell and yet would have Priests marry contrary to the same tradition and authority In like manner as the same Mr. Cartwright well observeth ibid. pag. 582. the Bishops of the Church of England would needs have the Nicen Councell be of sufficient authority to maintain Arch-Bishops but not the Pope wheras the on is as cleerly expressed as the other and no less necessary for the government of the Church If saith he an Arch-Bishop be necessary for calling a Provincial Councell when the Bishops are divided it is necessary there be also a Pope which may call a generall Councell when division is among the Arch-Bishops for when the Churches of one Province be divided from other as you ask me so I ask you who shall assemble them togeather who shall admonish them of their duties when they are assembled If you can find a way how this may be don without a Pope the way is also found wherby the Church is disburdned of the Archbishop When Prelaticks dispute with Presbiterians about Episcopacy and ceremonies c. they extoll the four first general Councells but when they dispute with Roman Catholicks about the vnmarried life of Priests the Pop's supremacy or any other point of Popery then they extenuate the authority of the same Councells and will admitt of no other rule of faith but Scripture So that a Prelatick Protestant against Presbiterians is a Papist and against Papists is a Presbiterian what he is or would be if both did argue against him at the same time is not well known to me nor as I suppose to him-self but if he admits of the two main pillars wherby protestancy is supported which are the pretended fall and fallibility of the visible Church and the arbitrary interpretation of Scripture he may be any thing he pleases and to speak more modestly of him then Modestinus of Calvinists he is in a faire way to be a baptised Iew Mahometan or Arian and can not miss that way if he will be guided by the Protestant principles and follow the track of the most learned of the reformation Both Luther and Calvin dislik't the word Trinity on sayd it sounded couldly the other barbarously and Luther by omitting in his Translation of the new Testament this Text of Scripture There-be three which give witness in heaven the Father the word and the holy Ghost and these three be one sheweth how little inclined he was to believe that sacred Mystery and by saying that his soule hated Homusion and that the Arians did very well to reject that new and profane word from the rules of faith he declareth how his Protestant rule and reformation doth direct men to heresy and to all kind of infidelity for there is not a more refined heresy then Scripture mis-interpreted and mis-applyed and Scripture may be as easily mis-interpreted and mis applyed against the Trinity or the second Person 's equality and consubstantiality as applied to any on point of Protestancy The Anti-Trinitarians of Poland Transilvania and Hungary think themselves as good Calvinists as any French Hugonots and better Protestants then English Prelaticks or German Lutherans because they not only agree with all reformed Churches in the Fundamentalls of Protestancy that is in supposing the Apostacy of the Catholick Church and in reforming it by privat authority and their own interpretation of Scripture but go a step further in the Reformation by denying the Trinity By the principles of Protestancy and the practise of the first Protestant Reformers it is left to the choyce and discretion of every particular Church and person what articles of Popery are fitt to be rejected by their privat interpretation of Scripture and indeed it is impossible for men not tyed to any rule but to their own fancies of Scripture to agree in the points of Popery what to reject or retain They who confine with the Turk's Dominions venture to deny the Trinity and the Divinity of Christ and laugh at their brethrens arguments against their impiety as deduced only from Tradition Councells and Fathers and call them old Roman raggs long since torn in pieces by the Protestants them-selves in other points of Protestancy c. Hi sunt vetusti panni quos vos laceratis in aliis fidei articulis c. lacerata jamdudum calceamenta Nullus Nemo H. 9. They are say they patcht showes worn out long agon but heer in England France c. where no neighboring Nations deny the Trinity or Incarnation Protestants make those Misteries fundamental articles of faith but in Transilvania and Hungary The principles of Protestancy are not kept in such awe as heer they make bold there to apply Scripture against any mysteries of Christianity Wherfore we must not admire that they as Mr. Hooker tells vs Eccles. Polâ—â— l. 4. pag. 183. Of the reformed Churches of Poland think the very belief of the Trinity to be a part of Anti-Christian corruption and that the Pop's triple Crown is a sensible mark wherby the world might know him to be that misticall Beast spoken of in the Revelation in no respect so much as in his doctrin of the Trinity Nor when they say that St. Athanasius his Symbol is the Symbol of Sathan and brag that Luther did scarce vntile the Babilonian Jower of Rome but that they do vtterly demolish it and dig vp its very foundation By which words they give cleerly to vnderstand that the Protestants of Germany England Denmark c. are but superficial Protestants
when certain officers known by the vsual marks and badges of their Master's Soveraignty and their own military or civil charges propose his orders either by proclamation letters patents or otherwise so Protestants will acknowledg that all Christians are bound to believe it i◠a sufficient proposal of the 〈◊〉 existence of Divine Revelation and that God speaks or commands whensoever his mind is declared to them by that Church and Ministers who beare at least as authentick marks and badges of God's authority and of their own ministery to evidence their trust and jurisdiction as the Officers of state and Justice do in a Republick or 〈◊〉 Government In a word all that we desire of Protestants is that they will give as much credit and respect to God as to Princes and no less to the Ministers of God's Church then to Senators or to the Officers of a King's Court. But their fundamental distinction dispenseth with all such duties and leads them a quite contrary way 〈…〉 not obliged to believe the mysteries of faith as they are proposed by the Roman Catholick Church though the sayd Church be more authentickly waranted thervnto by God then any Ministers or Magistra◠are waranted to 〈…〉 of state by their Prince vnless it be clearly evident 〈…〉 evidently credible will not serve their turn that God revealed what the Church proposeth as his word and command Such Doctrines of the Roman Church as they fancy cleer or self evident either by their owne privat spirit and discourse or by the vnanimous and general acknowledgment of all Christians such and only such do Protestants believe as points of faith and call them fundamental articles or articles necessary for salvation all others either they hould only as probable opinions and things of indifferency or reject as superfluous and superstitious And because the mysteries of the Trinity and Incarnation are generally professed in these parts of Europe by all Christians though not by all in the Catholick sense but with certain interpretations Therfore the learned Prelatick Protestant Writers both ancient and modern reduce all the articles and the total summe of Catholick faith and of the foure first generall Councells to a belief of the Trinity and Incarnation that is to some Kind of faith though it be but the Arian in JESUS Christ the Son of God and Saviour of the world as Doctor Morton Bishop of Duresme and others teach who vpon this score maintain that the Arian Churches and by consequence all ancient hereticks are to be accounpted members of the Church of God We have quoted their words num 3. of the precedent section That no King's Ministers or Magistrats have so authentick marks and badges to evidence in them-selves their Master's authority for exercising their respective charges and jurisdictions as the Roman Catholick Church hath of being entrusted and apointed by God to deliver his Divine doctrin declare his sense of Scripture and decide Religious controversies is manifest by the signs and marks of God's Church compared with the marks and badges of Princes Officiers Omitting many other marks of the true Church J will touch but three which are Conversion of Kings and Nations from paganism to Christianity Succession of Pastors and doctrin from the Apostles to this present and miracles All these are visible only in the Roman Catholick Church and are more authentick because they cannot be easily counterfeited then any human euidences even the most esteemed which is the King's hand and Seale To say because some pretended miracles have bin impostures no miracles at all are true or none ought to be credited is no less vnreasonable then to cry down all current money because there is some fals coyne and is as ridiculous and rebellious as to disobey and reject all royall commissions and orders of Councell because some may or have bin counterfeited and subreptitiously obtained But suppose as Protestants pretend that miracles were ceased I hope the Conversion of so many Nations and Kings of the Gentils to Christianity and a continuall succession of the Roman doctrin and Pastors are neither ceased not counterfeited no other Church but the Roman Catholick hath these signes of God's providence and as non can deny but that they are more convincing arguments and greater evidences of the super-natural Ministery and jurisdiction which the Roman Church doth claim then any human signes badges or commissions can be of the Royal authority exercised by King's officiers either civil or military so likewise it must be acknowledged that there is a cleerer and greater obligation vpon men to submit their judgments and wills to the definitions and Decrees of the Roman Catholick Church and Councells proposing or declaring God's revelations and commands then there can be vpon subjects to obey the orders of temporal Souveraigns published or proclaimed by their chief Ministers and subordinat officers Therfore as it is notorious Rebellion in subjects against their King's authority to contemn his commands when they are proposed by Ministers that shew his commissions so is it manifest heresy and a denial of God's veracity to contemn or doubt of the doctrin proposed as Divine by the Roman Catholick Church so authentickly qualified with the aforesaid supernatural marks And as it is want of duty and alleigance in subjects and a ridiculous excuse for not obeying Orders to pretend they have not cleer evidence that the King signed them or for all they know that his Minister or Officer may be an Impostor and his commission or warrant counterfeit so must it be concluded want of christian belief and excess of hereticall obstinacy in Protestants to excuse their contempt of the Roman Catholick doctrin and authority by pretending a possibility of mistake in the same Church because forsooth they are not convinced of it's infallibility and authority by a Demonstration or revelation so evident that though they would they cannot deny it Such evidences are not necessary nor even compatible with Christian belief as shall be proved herafter less are sufficient to convince them-selves and all rational men of a strickt obligation to believe and obey a temporal Prince and Magistrat and sure they are vnreasonable if they imagin God deserves less belief duty and subjection then Princes That Protestants believe not their own Churches or Congregations with out doubts and feares of being mistaken in the reformed doctrin and authority of proposing the same we do not admire because not any on of their churches doth pretend to infallibility nor could hitherto or can yet shew any sign or seale of God for their sense of Scripture or reformations but that they should think them-selves obliged to take a Herald or Trompeters Coat and a Constable or Cathpol's staffe and other such badges so easily counterfeited for sufficient evidences of the King's authority and yet except against the authentickness of the conversion of Kings and Nations the Succession and sanctity of Pastors and doctrin of the Roman Catholick Church Which are things that cannot be
absolutly necessary for salvation and not to believe it in a matter not absolutly necessary when equaly proposed by the same testimony and authority is as much as to say that God can speak by his Church litle vntruths but not great vntruths or that he may permit his veracity to be violated or vitiated in litle but not in great matters as if forsooth the authority and infallibility of the Church were to be measured by the matter it proposeth and not by the manner and supernatural marks of the proposal and by the dignity of the speaker More over their pretence of the Churches fallibility in not Fundamental articles hath no solid ground for the Protestant Church is either fallible or infallible in saying so and in it's doctrin of Fundamentals if fallible non can prudently rely thervpon either in this or in any other matters of faith if infallible then the Protestant distinction of Fundamentals must be a fundamental article of faith because they admit not any Church to be infallible in articles that are not fundamental And yet the same Protestants say the Roman Catholick Church is also infallible in fundamentals but the Roman Catholick and Protestant Church contradict on the other in this doctrin of fundamentals Therfore one of both must erre and that on must be the Protestant because it maintains that two Churches teaching contradictory doctrins may both be infallible therin Add hervnto that if the Roman Catholick Church be infallible in fundamentals or in all articles necessary for salvation how can Protestants excuse their reformation and separation from the guilt of a grievous sin and schism so vncharitable a breach is not justifiable by less then damnable or dangerous doctrin in the Church that is forsaken And what damnable doctrin or danger of damnation could or can be in adhearing to the Roman Church it being confessedly infallible in Fundamentals that is in all things necessary for salvation If therfore God's veracity is denyed even according to the Protestants doctrin and distinction by saying that the Church is fallible in fundamentals it can be for no other reason but because the fundamental articles are sufficiently proposed by the Church as revealed by God and seing the not fundamental articles are proposed by the same Church and testimony and by consequence as sufficiently as the fundamental Protestants must grant that God's veracity is no less denyed by maintaining the fallibility of the Church in not Fundamentals then in Fundamentals So that they must either acknowledg the infallibility of the Church in all articles and matters of faith whether absolutly necessary or not necessary for salvation or deny God's veracity and the foundation of all Christian belief SECT XIII The same further demonstrated and proved that neither the Protestant faith nor the faith lately asserted in a book called sure footing in Christianity is Christian belief where also is treated of the resolution of faith NOt the maâ—â—er believed but the Motive and manner of believing makes a belief Christian There may be an historical or imaginary faith of Christ as well as Divine and real that is men may believe the mysteries of Christianity 〈◊〉 they believe the roman history and fancy that such a belief is not human but Divine This we maintain to be the Protestants case and faith which is not grounded vpon Divine revelation but vpon human persuasion and vpon an imaginary evidence of God's revelation They assent not to the mystery of the Trinity or to any other because God revealed it but because they think it vndeniably evident either by the publick confession of all Christians or by the privat suggestion of their own spirit or by the principles of natural reason or by their pretended cleerness of Scripture that God revealed such mysteries as they are pleased to make choyce of for the Articles or fundamentals of their Reformations And therfore according to the diversity of the evidences wherupon they build their faith the Protestant sects are framed and divided into Prelaticks whose Motive and evidence is the concurrence of all Christians in their fundamentals of Christianity and into Fanatiks amongst whom we include Presbiterians c. who rely vpon the evidence of their spirit and the cleerness of Scripture and into Socinians who make evident reason the rule of their Religion c. That these Protestant persuasions are not grounded vpon Divine revelation or vpon God's Authority and veracity we proove because it is impossible to make an authority the motive of our belief vnless we believe all things that are equaly proposed and delivered to vs as depending of and asserted by that authority St. Austin says non can believe that the Ghospel of St. Matthew is the word of God vnless he doth likewise believe that the Acts of the Apostles is the word of God because they are both delivered as God's word by the same authority The same testimony and the same visible Church which delivered to the first Protestants the mystery of the Trinity and Incarnation as revealed by God delivered also to them Transubstantiation Purgatory c. as revealed by God and they or their followers can not pretend to have any other testimony for the engagement of God's veracity in certifying them of the truth and revelation of the articles they retain but the same testimony which delivered to them the articles they reject Therfore the reality and Divinity of the revelation being equally testified and applicable by on and the same testimony to both articles aswell to the retained as to the rejected it is impossible that Protestants can believe those they retaâ—â—â— moved thervnto by God's veracity or for being revealed by God seing the same veracity and revelation is equally and as cleerly applyed by the testimony of the Catholick visible Church to the other articles which they reject as not revealed If you ask a learned Protestant why doth he believe the mystery of the Trinity or Incarnation He will answer as all Hereticks ever did aswell as Catholicks because God revealed it But if you inquire further why doth he believe that God revealed it He will tell you because it is manifest in SVBSECT I. I Am right sorry to number among Protestants and Manichees who hould also this error of believing nothing which they did not fancy to be self evident the Author of a book called sure footing in Christianity who will needs have it self evident by virtue forsooth of tradition that God revealed all the points of our Roman Catholick doctrin Jt's pitty he stumbled so irrecoverably at his very first step pretending to see so cleerly and tread so surely vpon a plain ground had he bin as wary in the choice of his principles as he is witty in deducing his conclusions I should have followed him as an excellent Guide but he striving to raise Christian faith vnto a greater height of evidence then is consistent with it's nature and with our merit and liberty or convenient for the Government of God's
dictamen of a good conscience become a Roman Catholick or according to the rigor of the purest Protestant consequences become a ranck Presbiterian or Fanatick I report me therfore to the judgment of all moderat and sober persons whether it be piety or policy to engage the authority of a Protestâ—â—â— soveraign and Parliament in 〈◊〉 the severity of lawes against subjects for not professing the prelatick Reformation which the most learned men therof can not maintain without granting manifest contradictions 〈◊〉 practise without condemning the fundamental principles 〈◊〉 Protestancy I must confess that the Presbâ—â—erian Fanatick or any other arbitrary Religion that is Religion directed by the letter of Scripture subject to every man's privat interpretation will at length destroy the state if ther be not a limit set to the indiscreet zeale and extravagant fâ—ncies of every particular person and Congregation that 〈◊〉 to the purity of a Reformation but I can hardly believe that temporal lawes are a proper and efficatious meanes to refrain that spiritual liberty which according to the Principles of protestancy is due by the Ghospel to every Protestant and not subject to any human authority As for that much celebrated and generaly practised expedient and distincâ—â—on of Brentius and the Divines of Wittemberg saying that though it belongs to every privat person to judg of Doctrin and Religion and to distinguish the true from fals yet between the Prince and privat man is this difference that as the privat man hath privat authority of judging and deciding the doctrin of Religion so the Prince hath publick And through-out the whole book doth defend that the secular Prince is obliged to force his subjects even with punishment of death to that Religion and sense of Scripture which he judgeth true and also that the subjects are bound to stick to their own contrary sense of Scripture and Religion this expedient I say doth not prevent the daunger or remedie the desease of a politick body sick of protestancy but doth increase the distemper and renders it incurable And though in some parts of our more northern Climat several Protestant Princes have purchased some quiet by the severity of their lawes in favor of the sects which they profess yet that quiet proceeding from want of curiosity in the people of examining the truth or from want of courage to profess it we can not expect in the English Monarchy the like acquiescense and success the British Nations are naturaly serious and scrupulous in the scrutinâ— of Religion and either zealous or seditious in the maintenance therof Wherfore it imports no less then the peace of these nations that the Act of vniformity be not the rule of their Religion Seing therfore it is the nature of Protestancy as of all other Religions grounded vpon voluntary and privat interpretations of an obscure writing to breed disorders and confusion in all Common-wealths wherin the liberty of interpreting that writing is not restrained by law and if restrained by law the legislative power is opposed and it's authority contemned as contrary to the law and word of God and this opposition is waranted by the principles of protestancy which exempt all reformed Christians from any conscientious obligation of submitting to Church or state Governors in matters of Religion supposing I say this to be the nature of Protestancy it is apparent how contrary it is to policy to enact or continue lawes against the profession of the Roman Catholick faith which alone amongst all Christian Religions needeth not the support of human lawes or of temporal statutes to make it the Religion of the soule or to setle the Common-wealth as appeareth by the feare of Prelaticks to grant liberty of conscience to Papists For the space of 1000. years did our English Ancestors profess the Roman faith and in all that time they never had the least contention in the state about matters of Religion and in the space of these last 100. years there had bin more Rebellions more deposing and murthering of Soveraigns in this one litle Island of great Britanny vpon the accompt of Protestancy then hath bin since Christ's birth in the whole world vpon the accompt of Popery Wherfore seing that one of the differences between Popery and Protestancy is that although Popery be co 〈…〉 y to liberty of opinion to sensuality and depraved inclinations yet is it so plausible and popular that Protestants notwithstanding the legal incapacities 〈◊〉 penalties which they lay vpon Papists are afraid it will spread over the whole Kingdom in a short time and therfore call it a growing Religion it is evident that it increaseth by the reasonableness and sanctity of it's principles and without the help of law or countenance of 〈◊〉 government nay against the greatest severity of law and against the known inclination of the Soveraign in such a measure that the King and Parliament have thought of new remedies against the grouth therof But Protestancy especialy the Prelatick notwithstanding all it's liberty of opinion and pretended assurance of being saved by only faith without the trouble of pennance fasting or other mortifications of the flesh with all the favor of the lawes and countenance of the Government can not be made the Religion of the state Of three parts of England the one is Prelatick Protestant in their judgments and the two parts which are not will sooner become Papists then Prelaticks Now whether it be sound policy to persecute the Roman Religion by law which doth increase against law and to endeavor to setle by law the Prelatick Religion which so lately hath occasioned the abolishing of all lawes we humbly submit to the consideration of them who sit at the helme Besids one of the greatest prejudices that a Prince or Common-wealth can suffer is to be deprived of loyal conscientious and able men's services either in civil or military employments By the penal and sanguinary Statuts the King and Country deprive them-selves of many servitors of approved loyalty wisdom and eminent abilities and not only deprive themselves of such servitors but by virtue of legal incapacities set vpon Papists enable every ambitious man or discontended faction to asperse the King and his chief Ministers with favoring foâ—â—ooth Popery if they do not exercise cruelty and the rigor of 〈◊〉 sanguinary and penal Statuts against deserving persons or 〈◊〉 least if they shew them any countenance how-ever so meriting and vsefull they have bin in the worst of times and may prove to be again if this Protestant zeale should prevaile for it is alwayes the fore-runner of rebellion and is now become so rash that it attempteth to asperse my Lord Late Chancellor with favoring Popery who is a pillar and patâ—rn oâ— Protestancy Perhaps his Lordship 's gentle nature great wisdom justice and integrity might incline him to thinck that lawes made by Queen Elizabeth for excluding the Stewards from the Crown and for destroying that Religion and party wherby their title was supported
protestant principles to the discovery of the frauds and â—â—â—â—â—fications wherwith the prâ—â—atick Clergy doth disguise them and divert their flocks from reflecting vpon those sad effects which they have wrought and must work wheresoever they are 〈◊〉 the Religion of the staâ—e A TREATISE OF RELIGION AND GOVERNMENT THE THIRD PART Containing a plain discovery of the Protestant Clergies frauds and falsifications wherby alone their doctrin is supported and made credible The conscience and conveniency of restoring or tolerating the Roman Catholick Religion demonstrated SECT I. That either the learned Protestant or Roman Catholick Clergy are Cheats and how every illiterat protestant may easily discern by wich of the two Clergieâ— he is cheated and therfore is obliged vnder pain of damnation to examin so neer a concern and to renounce the doctrin and communion of that Church wherin he is cheated of the true Church being so conspicuous and manifest by such eminent and visible marks Christ might well forbid the faithfull to communicat with Hereticks and Schismaticks for that their conventicles 〈◊〉 never be mistaken for the whole or even a part of the Catholick Church vnless men â—ill be so simple as to take their â—are word when they say Hic est Christus aut illic wheras if it were possible for learned men to be innocently mistaken Christ's command had not bin obligatory for in such â— case we were not bound to believe that Christ is rather in one Church then other seing each Church had reason sufficient to excuse learned parties from schism and â—â—resy But it being impossible that God should command vs to believe on Congregation of Christians and not believe others that pretend also to be the true Church of Christ without confirming the testimony and doctrin of that one Congregation which he bids vs believe and preferr before the rest with such cleer signes of the truth and so evident marks of Divine authority that the others compared therwith can have no probability two things must be granted 1. that the Catholiâ—â— Church of Christ cannot be composed of all or any dissenting Congregations 2. That the one only Congregation which is the true and Catholick Church can never be so eclipsed but that it must appeare much more eminent in sanctity miracles conversion of Nations and much more credible in it's testimonies then any other Wherfore we conclude that either the learned protestant clergy or the catholick must be cheats seing that notwithstanding the evident and eminent signes and marks of God's Church can not be found in both or in any two Congregations dissenting in their doctrin and rule of faith yet each of them make their illiterat flocks believe that their own is the true Church of God whervpon the signes and seales of his authority and veracity do cleerly shine No human art or industry if not born-out with more then ordinary and notorious impudencie can pretend to discredit or darken the spendor of true Miracles Sanctity Successiâ—â— become Masters of the Comerce as shall be proved I hope these considerations will invite and incite them to examin which of both the Clergies the Roman Catholick that petitions for â—r the Prelatick Protestant that opposeth liberty of conscience are the cheats And that they may find it out withouâ— much trouble I have thought sit to lett them know there is not any one controversy between them and vs which hath not bin handled in English and argued to the full on both sides now the summe of our disputes being this whether the primitive Church was Roman Catholick or rather Protestant in the controverted points as Praying to Saints Transsubstantiation Purgatory worship of Images the Canonicall letter and sense of Scripturâ— c. To decide the Controversy each side quotes the words of Scripture Councells and Fathers because the true doctrine hath bin preserved and recorded in these writings Let him therfore that doubts of the sense of the Text and of the sincerity of him that quotes it compare the Authors words with the 〈…〉 he will infallibly find out who is the Cheat. For he that doth corrupt the words or change the sense of Scripâ—â—re Councells and Fathers doth not stick to the doctrin of the primitive Church And because I have spent some time both before and after my conversion to the Catholick faith in examining the falsifications and frauds of Protestants and their objections against Papists in the same kind I may speak with more assurance then others who have not so much experience and do protest that I never thought it possible before I found it was so de facto that men pretending not only to the name of reformed Christianity but to the Reality and Sanctity of an Episcopal caracter and charge of soules could be so vnconsiderable vnworthy and vncharitable in matters of eternity as I have â—ound the Protestant writers and in particular the prelaticks of the Church of England Let any who desires to satisfie his conscience or curiosity pervse and compare either the books of Jevel and Harding or of Bishop Morton and Father Pesons the nature or essence of a body Or whether quantity be a thing distinct from that which we call a corporeal substance SVBSECT I. VVith what impudency and hipocrisy Bishop Ievell and other prelatick writers began to maintain the Protestancy of the Church of England And how they were blamed for appealing to antiquity by some of their own Brethren TO manifest the impudency and hypocrisy wherwith Prelatick Protestancy was broach't and imposed vpon the layty in the beginning of Queen Elizabeths reign I will begin with Bishop Jevell's famous challenge and his Seconds that offered to maintain the primitive antiquity of Protestancy and the novelty of Popery His words are As I sayd before I say again I am content to yeeld and subscribe if any of our learned Adversaries or if all the learned men that be alive be able to bring one sufficient sentence out of any one Catholick Doctor or Father or out of any old Generall Councell c. for the space of 600. years after Christ c Protesting also that he affirmeth thus much not as carried away with the heat of zeale but as moved with the simple truth least any of you should happily be deceived and think there is more weight on the other side then in conclusion will be found c. And then he brake into this vehement Apostrophe O mercifull God! who could think that there could be so much wilfulness in the heart of man Then exclaimes O Gregory O Austin O Hierom O Chrysostom O Leo O Dionise O Anaclâ—tus O Calixtus O Paul O Christ Jf we be 〈◊〉 acknowledged the impossibility of defending the Protestant Religion by Tradition or by any monuments oâ— examples from antiquity or by the sayings of Fathers and Councells Insomuch that Archbishop Whitgift in his defence against the reply of Cartwright pag. 472. 473. doth not stick to say that almost all the Bishops and learned Writers of
best learned men I could get at that time Martyn Hearken good people what this man saith he made a protestation on day to keep never a whit of that which he would swear the next day was this the part of a christian man But will you have the truth of the matter King Henry 8. even then meant the lamentable change which after you see came to pass and to further his pittifull proceedings from the divorcement of his most lawfull wife to the detestable departing from the vnity of Christ's Church this man made the foresaid protestation and on the other side he letted not to make two solemne oathes quite contrary and why for otherwise by the lawes and Canons of this Realm he could not aspire to the Archbishoprick of Canterbury Cranmer I protest before you all there was never man came more vnwilling to a Bishoprick then I did to that In so much that when King Henry 8. did send for me in post that J should come over I prolong'd my Iourney by seaven weeks at the least thinking that he would be forgetfull of me in the mean time Martyn You declare well by the way that the King took you to be a man of a good conscience who could not find within all his Realm any man that would set forth his strange attempts but was inforced to send for you in post to come out of Germany what may we conjecture therby but that there was a compact between you being then Queen An's Chaplyn and the King give me the Archbishoprick of Canterbury and J will give you licence to live in adultery Cranmer You say not true Martyn Let your protestation joyned with the rest of your Talks give Judgment 〈…〉 Of that your execrable perjury and his coloured and too shamfully suffered adultery 〈◊〉 heresy and all mis-chief to this Realm And now to answer 〈…〉 of your Oration wherin you bring 〈◊〉 God's 〈…〉 you have it on your side and no man ells and 〈◊〉 the Pope hath devised a new Scripture contrary to the Scriptures of God you play here in as the Pharisees did which cryed alwais Verbum Domini Verbum Domini when they mean nothing so This bettereth not your case because you say you have God's word for you for so Basilides and Photinus the Hereticks sayd that they had God's word to maintain there Heresy So Nestorius so Macedonius so Pelagius and briefly all the Hereticks that ever were yea and so the Devill being Father of Heresies alleadged God's word for him saying Scriptum est it is writen so sayd he to Christ mittâ— to deorsum cast thy self downward saith he and so taught you to cast all things downward down with the Sacrament down with Muss down with the Armes of Christ and vp with a Lion and a Dog down with Abbyes down with Chauntrers down with Hospitalls and Colledges down with fasting and prayer yea down with all that is good and Godly c. And therfore tell us not you have God's word for God had given us by his word a mark to know that your teaching proceeded not of God but of the Devill c. For Christ sayd there shal come against his Church râ—vening wolves and false Apostles And by their fruits ye shall know them What be their fruits St. Paul declareth After the flesh they walk in concupiscence and vncleaness they contemn Potentates c. Whether these be not the fruits of your Ghospel I referr me to this worshipfull Audience whether the sayd Ghospel began not with perjury proceeded with adultery was maintained with heresy and ended in Conspiracy Now Sir two points more I marked in your raging discourse that you made here the one against the holy Sacrament the other against the Pope's Iurisdiction and the Authority of the Sea Apostolick Touching the first you say you have God's word with you yea and all Doctors I would here ask but one Question of you whether God's word be contrary to it self and whether the Doctors teach doctrin contrary to them-selves or no For you Mr. Cranmer have taught in this High Sacrament of the Altar three contrary doctrins and you pretend in every one Verbum Domini the word of God Cranmer Nay I taught but two contrary doctrins in the same Martyn What doctrin taught you when you condemned Lambert the Sacramentary in the King's presence in Whitehall Cranmer I maintained then the Popish doctrin Martyn That is to say the Catholick and Universal doctrin of Christ's Church and how when King Henry dyed did you not translate Justus Jonas Book Cranmer J did so Martyn Then there you defended an other doctrin touching the Sacrament by the same token that you sent to Lynne your printer that wheras in the first print there was an affirmative that is to say Christ's body realy in the Sacrament you sent then to your printer to put in a Not wherby it came miraculously to pass that Christ's body was clean conveyed out of the Sacrament Cranmer I remember there were two prints of my said Book but where the same Not was put in I can not tell Martyn Then from a Lutheran you became a Zwinglian which is the vilest heresy of all in the high mystery of the Sacrament and for the same heresy you did help to burn Lambert the Sacramentary which you now call the Catholick faith and God's word Cranmer I grant that then J believed otherwise then J do now and so J did vntill my Lord of London Doctor Ridley did conferr with me and by sundry persuasions and authorities of Doctors â—â—â—ew me quite from my opinion Martyn Now Sir as â—ouching the last part of your Oracion you denyed that the Pope's Holiness was supreme head of the Church of Christ. Cranmer J did so Martyn Who say you 〈…〉 head Cranmer Christ. Martyn But whom hath Christ 〈◊〉 here in earth his Vicâ—â— and head of his Church Cranmer No body Martyn Ah why â—ould you not King Henry this when you made him supreme head and now no body is This is treason against his own person as you then made him Cranmer I mean not but every King in his own Realm and Dominion is supreme head and so was he supreme head of the Church of Christ in England Martyn Is this always true and was it ever so Cranmer Jt was so Martyn Then what say you by Nero he was the mightiest Prince vpon the earth after Christ was ascended Was he the head of Christ's Church Cranmer Nero was Peter's head Martyn I ask whether Nero was head of the Church or no If he were not it is falls that you said before that all Princes be and ever were heads of the Church within their Realms Cranmer Nay it is 〈◊〉 for Nero was head of the Church that is in worldly respect of the temporal bodies of men of whom the Church consisteth for so he beheaded Peter and the Apostles And the Turck too is head of the Church of Turky Martyn Then he that beheaded the heads of
in the statuts of K. Henry 8. K. Edward 6. Q. Mary and Q. Elizabeth and against resolutions taken in so legal and general a way no rebellious designs have ever prevailed in this Monarchy nor can because in a Parliament is involved the free consent and concurrence of the Prince and people and in case it should be judged conscionable and convenient that liberty of Conscience be granted to all Christians though thereby it could be feared the Roman Catholick Religion would be restored to these Kingdoms it must be at the instance of the people and by vote of Parliament for that the Royal family and the privy Councel are at present nothing inclin'd to Popery But we hope and pray that in time God may open his Majesties and his Councells eyes to see the Divin truth and the Temporal conveniences annexed to the ancient faith wherof this Monarchy hath bin so long deprived 2. The case between the Queen of Scots and her Royal issue now reigning is very different for albeit her right was as cleer according not only to Catholick principles but to Acts of our Protestant Parliaments as it is that a man can not have two Wives at once or that Q. Elizabeths mother could not be wife to K. Henry 8. during Q. Catherins life nor her self legitimat yet the Protestant principles and her Fathers Testament seemed to favor her succession and the Queen of Scots mariage to the Dolphin of France made the English even Catholicks more slow then they would have bin otherwise in declaring for her right in the due time which was a litle before and immediatly after Q. Mary dyed because they were not inclined to be subject to a French King or governed by his Viceroy None of these circumstances and considerations now concurring it is not likely that designing or discontented persons can take any advantage against the royal family that now reigns in case liberty of conscience or even the restoring of the Roman Religion should be judged conscientious and convenient by the Parliament 3. The Protestant Clergys sincerity is now much more suspected and the common people less incensed against popery then in Queen Elizabeths dayes when the Protestant Bishops and Ministers Sermons and Bibles made men believe that Images were Idols the Pope Anti-Christ Priests Traytors Agents for the King of Spaine c. which things now are discovered to be calumnies and impostures for the Bible making Images Idols is corrected by publick authority the Pope known to be a civil person like other men not the beast of the Apocalyps Nor Rome the whore of Babylon Priests have served the King faithfully at home and abroad and if any of them hath in our late troubles negotiated with the King of Spain or his Ministers it was then intended and since hath proved and bin owned by our gratious Soveraign to have had bin for his Majesties and his Royal Highness benefit and when they were in exile in order to their subsistance and restauration not any way against their interest Wherfore seing the people of these nations are naturaly inclined to piety though whilst they were abused by the Protestant Clergy and countenanced by the interest of an illegitimat Prince they did persecute Priests and popery as the greatest obstacles of peace and salvation yet now seing they are better informed and that in this particular of our desire to apply the Church revenues to the Crown for the defence of this Empire against all forreign and domestick Disturbers we can have no design but duty to our King and love to our Countrey there can be no ground to fear that the bare word or clamors of interested Adversaries will disturb the Government or incense a well meaning multitude against Papists Priests or any other persons that desire nothing but a peacable and publick Conference in order to liberty of Conscience and to ease these Nations of those heavy burthens vnder which they grone And indeed it concerns so much the soul and state the publick good and all privat persons to examin whether English men after so many changes may not and have not bin mistaken in matters of Religion and misled by education that we have reason to hope some worthy and zealous Protestants will be pleased for their own and the worlds satisfaction to move in Parliament that our objections against the novelty of their doctrin and the sincerity of their Clergy may be taken into Consideration and a publick Tryall allowed for the discovery either of their Cheat or of our Calumny If I be found a Calumniator no other joyned with me in this work I do engage in the word of a Christian to present my self to due punishment in case J escape the pestilence wherunto J have resolved to expose my self for the benefit and salvation of my brethren but if the Protestant learned Clergy be found Cheats I humbly and only beg that the revenues which they possess may be better bestowed not vpon the Catholick Clergy but vpon the Crown for the defence and ease of the Countrey If the Protestant Religion be true by a fair Tryal it can receive no damage nor the state incurr any danger if false besides the conversion of souls to the Catholick truth the Commonwealth may declare to whom it appertains the necessity there is of seising vpon the Church livings for the preservation of the people and by their approbation conscientiously enjoy the same And albeit never any Protestant contributed to the foundation of Bishopricks or Benefices but that all such pious works in these Kingdoms have bin founded by our Roman Catholick predecessors with an express obligation of prayer for the souls in Purgatory and of preaching the Roman Religion yet I question not but that they who by vertue of the last wills and Testaments of the Founders and long prescription of lawfull Predecessors ought to be in possession of the Temporalities of the Church are so good Patriots and dutifull subjects as to declare they will resign their right vnto his Majesty whensoever these three Kingdoms will think fit to grant liberty of Conscience or to return the ancient true Religion and therby the world may be satisfyed that our quarrell with the Protestant Clergy is not for lands but for souls and of this we have given heretofore sufficient evidence in the change of Religion made by Q. Mary having then resigned our Abbeys and impropriations to the Crown wheras the Protestant Clergy in these great warrs never presented the King with any Donative out of their vast fines and revenues This backwardnes of the Bishops in so pressing a Conjuncture together with the present poverty of the people and the dangers wherunto these nations are cast for want of a publick revenue which ought to be independant of taxes that can not be seasonably and securely raysed when they are most necessary do not only justify but exact a scrutiny into the right wherby the sacred patrimony of the Church is possessed by men
Sidon they had long since don pennance in sackcloth and ashes The works which I have don in my Fathers name beare witness of me And though you believe not me believe my works And again We know that thou art a Teacher come from God for no man could do these miracles thou dost except God were with him And the reason why miracles oblige vs in conscience to believe the doctrin by them confirmed is because they are a sufficient and moral evidence of Gods authority and as it were the great Seal wherwith he warrants his Ministers and the Church to preach and propose his doctrin and Commands Now if he could put this seal to any fals doctrin or therby authorize an erroneous Church men might prudently doubt whether he doth not do so now de facto and in every particular but with such a prudent doubt none is bound to obey any Church authority and by consequence there could be no obstinacy heresy or infidelity against Gods revelations and veracity how ever so authentickly and sufficiently proposed by miracles which are the signs and badges of divin authority and the most authentick marks of the true Church To that ordinary objection of Anti-Christs miracles which though fals and feigned yet will seem so true to many that most of the world will be seduced we answer 1. That there will be an apparent difference between Anti-christian and our Catholick miracles though for want of due reflexion prudence and piety men will not consider the difference nor compare his miracles with ours 2. Christs words and warning of Anti-Christs feigned miracles is a sufficient evidence of their falshood becaus we must not credit our selves or any outward appearances against the express words of Christ. This is the reason why in the Sacrament of the Altar we are not deceived by the Species or appearance of bread and wine Though there were no other argument that Anti-Christs miracles are fals but this that the miracles of the Church both in the old and new Testament are first and that we have a Caveat to beware of such miracles and miraculists as shall come afterwards to confirm contrary doctrin whosoever is moved by Anti-Christ or his fore-runners to forsake the ancient faith and signs of the Church for novelties how ever so plausibly or prodigiously confirmed deserve damnation For there are two qualities that oblige men in reason and conscience to preferr one thing before another how ever equall they both may seem to be in other respects 1. priority of time 2. present possession We see what priviledges and prerogatives are given by the law of nature and Nations to such as are antienter by birth or nobility then others and how possession is sayd to be eleven points of the law These qualities are most properly found in our Roman Catholick doctrin it is most antient and always hath had the precedency of all pretended Reformations both in time and in the possession of the hearts of the faithful The same we say of our Catholick miracles Therfore we ought to preferr them before any others that shall appear afterwards in opposition to them Besides those miracle so credibly reported that no man can deny them without being guilty of obstinacy and rashness and besides those others continualy visible as that of St. Januarius there is an other kind of true miracles seen but not observed by every Protestant vpon which if they did reflect as many of them as mean well would become Roman Catholicks The difference between true and fals miracles is that true miracles are works besides or against the order of nature and of secundary causes and therfore may be don only by the divin power as to receive the dead to cure diseases of the body and distempers of the mind without the application of any natural means or remedys And becaus the Devil hath less power over souls then over bodys the cure of a distemper of the mind wherof no natural cause appeareth is a greater and more authentick miracle then any cure of the body how ever so prodidious Fals miracles are only such as may be don by the application of natural causes and remedies as that of Vespasianus of whom Suetonius recounts that he restored sight to a blind man and the vse of his feet to a lame man But Cornelius Tacitus doth acknowledge lib. 4. Hist. that the Physitians being consulted did answer those diseases were not incurable and Tertullian in Apologetico cap. 22. saith that both the disease and the cure was a work of the Devil Anti-Christs miracles also will be such as as may be don by the cours and concurrence of natural causes That miracles don vpon mens minds are greater then any â—â—res or changes wrought vpon the body is granted by our Adversaries and St. Bernard recounts as one of the greatest miracles of St. Malacâ—ius that he converted an obstinat soul to recant his opinion against the real presence of Christs Body in the Sacrament And for the most remarkable miracle of St. Bernard himself it is recorded how with the blessed Sacrament in his hand he did so terrify William the prowd Duke of Aquitain that he fell prostrate at his feet and he whom the most powerfâ—ll Monarchs of Christendom could not rule submitted himself to the disposal of a poor Monk becaus he threatned him with that which in appearance seemed to be and Protestants hold to â—e no more in reality or in substance then a wafer cake These things supposed as vndeniable in Philosophy and Divinity it may be easily proved that every Protestant doth or at least may see true miracles in confirmation of our Roman Catholick â—aith For without question it is either a miracle of God or of the Devil that all the Roman Catholicks not only now but for so many ages past should contrary 〈◊〉 the evidence of sense and to our natural inclination of judging according to that evidence adore for our Savior JESUS Christ that which in appearance is but a wafer cake or a Cup of wine We are either abused and seduced by Sathan or inspired and enabled by the Holy Ghost to contradict our senses which contradiction being in a matter so long and so much controverted in publick schools and general Councells and a thing wherupon depends our Salvation we can not â—e presumed if we err that we err for want of examining and comparing the reasons of both sides Catholick and Protestant especialy if we consider the number learning and integrity of the Roman Catholick Examiners and the great difficulty which they as well as all other men find in believing or judging against the evidence of sense and in denying that to be bread or wine which doth smell look tast feel and feed like bread and wine Now if we prove that this marvellous and vnanimous contradiction of our senses can not be a miracle of the Devil protestants must grant it is a miracle of God and from thence may
charity towards Catholicks is but forc't and feigned Whatsoever is required that a Church be truly Catholick is visible in the Roman It may judge and censure all other dissenting congregations without note of partiality or illegality Protestants have no credible nor legal witnesses to testify that their doctrin is the same which Christ and his Apostles taught Roman Catholicks have If all sects of Christians were admitted to general Councells and therin Judges of themselves and of their faith greater illegality it would be and greater partiality then that only Roman Catholicks be Judges of their cause Since the Apostles time one part of the Christians judged the other and the part that judged the other was that which obeyed and stuck to the Bishops of Rome as St. Peters Successors proved in every age vntill this present SECT XII HOw Gods veracity is denyed by Protestancy as also by the prelatick doctrin of fundamental and not fundamental articles of faith The belief of Gods veracity consists not in acknowledging that whatsoever God sayd is true never any heretick denyed that and all hereticks deny Gods veracity but consists in believing that God will not color nor countenance falshood with supernatural and evident signes of truth Protestants give less credit and obedience to Gods Ministers and Orders declared by the Church though qualified with vndeniable signes of Gods truth then they do to a Constable Catchpol or any other the meanest officers of a Court or Commonwealth though their warrants or badges may be more easily counterfeited then the miracles or signes of the Roman Catholick Church They will not believe God speaks or commands by the Roman Catholick Church though it hath the supernatural signes of his trust and sheweth his great seal Miracles but they believe that the King speaks and commands by any Minister of state or inferiour Magistrat No Ministers of judicature or officers of war have so authentick marks of the Kings authority to command the subjects and to end Suits of law as the Roman Catholick Church hath of Gods authority to instruct mankind and determin controversies of faith As it is rebellion to contemn the Kings authority represented by the authentick badges therof in his Ministers so is it heresy to contemn Gods authority represented in the Roman Catholick Church by supernatural signes as miracles sanctity Conversion of nations c. Gods veracity might be lawfully questioned if it were lawfull to judge that he permits the Roman Catholick Church to err in any point of faith whatsoever Proved by a similitude of my Lord Chancelor delivering the Kings mind to the Parliament in his Majesties own hearing and presence Veracity is a vertue inclining to speak truth not only when the person speaks but when any other speaks by his commission for then the person that employes an other to speak is bound by virtue of his own veracity to endeavour to the vttermost of his power that his Minister or Messenger vtter nothing but truth and this is to be vnderstood not only in matters of great but also of small importance Protestants make their own conveniency not Gods veracity the motive of their faith and measure therby which articles are fundamental which not The most fundamental article or the foundation of faith is to believe that God can not permit his Church to err even in not fundamentals A Demonstration ad hominem against the Protestant doctrin of the Churches fallibility in not fundamentalls SECT XIII THe same further demonstrated as also that neither the Protestant faith nor that of the Sure footing in Christianity is christian belief Not the matter believed but the motive and manner of believing makes our belief Christian. Protestants and the Author of the Sure footing believe not any thing in matters of faith which they do not imagin to be evident in it self or evident to them that it is revealed They agree in making cleer or self evidence the rule of faith but vary in the application of that rule the Author of the Sure footing applies it to all or most of the Roman Catholick Tenets Protestants to few The doctrin of the Sure footing can not be excused by the opinion of some Schoolmen that say an act of faith is possible and consistent with evidence of the revelation Christian faith must have a mixture of obscurity Mr. Robert Boyles expression that faith and twilight agree in this property that a mixture of darknes is requisit to both for that with too refulgent light the one vanisheth into knowledge as the other into day is not only witty but agreable to the sense of the ancient Fathers and to Scripture Hebr. 11. To believe is to trust the person believed and take his word for the truth as you doe a mans word or bill for mony Gods worth and veracity being infinit we ought not to admit of any doubt in matters of faith our assurance of faith must not be grounded vpon evidence either of the object or of the revelation but vpon an impossibility that God should by evident signes oblige mankind to believe that he revealed the mysteries of Christianity and yet not reveale them or permit the Church to deceive us God were not omnipotent did he permit the Church to err in any matter of faith though not fundamental because according to the proportion of ones inclination to any thing is the application of his power to effect the same and Gods inclination to truth even in not fundamentalls being infinit he must be infinitly concerned and applied to preserve the Church from falshood in the least articles as well as in fundamentalls The different manner of believing God and men Wee could not believe God if it were evident to us he spoke what we assent vnto Wherin doth consist the guilt of heresy Declared by that of rebellion The absurdity of the privat spirit and of all other Protestant pretexts against the publick testimony and authority of the Roman Catholick Church SECT XIV PIety and policy mistaken in making prelatick Protestancy the legal Religion of the state and in continuing the Sanguinary and penal statuts against the Roman Catholick faith It was want of Christian piety in Q. Elizabeth to introduce the Protestant Religion but not want of human policy because she had no title to the Crown but by Protestancy The title of the Stevards is vnquestionable and therfore they need not the Support of Protestancy How dangerous and damnable a thing it is to make the temporal laws of the land the rule of faith the Protestant prelatick Religion hath no better The Principles and priviledges of Protestancy being inconsistent with Soveraignty and government every Protestant Commonwealth found it necessary to mold and moderat those principles and priviledges by human lawes according to the customs and constitutions of every Kingdom and therfore Episcopacy without which our Parliaments could not be legal was here in England continued with prelatick Protestancy though contrary to the Tenets of Protestancy and to
Wittensbâ—rg he is so vehement against the wifes refusal of her husband's bed that he saith if the Magistrat omit it's duty in punishing her the husband must imagin that his wife is stole away by theeves and dead and consider how to marry an other for saith he yet further we cannot stop St. Paul's mouth c. his words are plain that a brother or sister are free from the law of wed lock if the one depart or do not consent to dwel with the other neither doth he say that this may be don once only but leaveth it free that so often as the case shall require he may either proceed or stay In which case as he signifieth to Wittemb fâ—l 112 a man may have ten or more wives fled from him and yet living Nay he doubteth not in case of adultery to give liberty even to the offending advlteror to fly into an other country and marry againe Luther loc cit fol. 123. Melancton consil Theol. part 1· pag 648. [o] Mr. Whitgift the Protestant Archbishop of Canterbury in his defence pag. 472. saith The doctrin taught and professed by our Bishops at this day is much more perfect and sound then it commonly was in any age since the Apostles tims pa. 473. asuredly you are not able so recken in any age since the Apostles time any Company of Bishops that taught and held so perfect and sound doctrin in all points as the Bishops of England do at this time In the truth of doctrin our Bishops be not only comparable with the old Bishops but in many degrees to be preferred before them c [a] Hooker lib. 1. Polit. Eccles pag. 86. lib. 2. sect 5. pag. 192. It is not the word of God which doth or possibly can assure vs that we do wel to think it his word for if any book of Scripture did give testimony of all yet stil that Scripture which gives credit to the rest would require an other Scripture to give credit vnto it Neither could we come to any pause wher on to rest vnless besids Scripture there were some thing which might assure vs. c. Which he lib. 3. sect 8. pag. 146. lib. 2. sect 7. pag. 116. Acknowledged to be the authority of God's Church Whitaker against Stapleton lib. 2. cap. 6. pag. 270. saith The testimony of the spirit being privat and secred is vnfit to teach and refell others and therfor we must recurr to Ecclesiastical Tradition an argument saith he ibid. cap. 4. pag. 300. Wherby may be argued and convinced what books be Canonical and what be not M. r Fulk in his answer to a counterfeit Catholick pag. 5. saith the Church of Christ hath judgment to discern true writings from counterfeit and the word of God from the writings of men and this judgment she hath of the holy Ghost M r Jewel in his defence of the Apology pag. 201. And afther the edition of 1571. pa. 242. saith the Church of God hath the spirit of wisdom wherby to discern true Scripture from false [*] See Pomeran in Epist. ad Rom. cap. 4. Vitus Theodorus in annot Test. pag. vl The Century writers of Magdeburg cent 1. lib. 2. cap. 4. cent 2. lib. 3. cap. 4. Hafferoferus in loc Theol. lib. 3. stat 3. loc 7. pag. 222. Adamus Fancisci in Margarita Theol. pag. 448. giveth this testimony of the Protestant Church wherof him-self was a member The Apocriphal books of the new Testament are the Epistle to the Hebrews the Epistle of Iams the second and third of Iohn the second of Peter the Epistle of Iude and the Apocalyps And all the Authors heer mentioned give the like testimony in behalf of their Protestant Churches wherfor we can not but admire Doctor Cossins confidence in affirming a matter so notoriously contradicted and much more the carelesness of them who ground their faith and Canon of Scripture vpon it s not being ever questioned See Cozins in the 17 chap. per toâ— [a] Salvus Conductus datus Protestantibus sess 13. 14. Concil Trident. Vt Protestantes de iis rebus quae in ipsa Synodo tractari debent omni libertate conferre proponere tractare c. ac articulos quot illis videbitur tam scripto quam verbo afferre proponere cum Patribus c. conferre absque ullis convitiis concontumeliis disputare nec non quando illis placuerit recedere possint Placuit praeterea Sanctae Synodo vt si pro majori libertate ac securitate eorum certos tam pro commissis quam pro committendis per eos delictis Iudices eis de putari cupiant illos sibi benevolos nominent etiamsi delicta ipsa quantumcunque enormia ac hoeresim sapientia fuerint New definitions are not new articles of faith See this largly proued in 3. part of this Treatise pag. 101. seq (a) S. Hierom in lib. de 〈◊〉 illustr extremo in Praefat librorum quos latinâ—s â—ecit (b) Hierom. epist. 89. ad Aug. quaest 11. inter ep August S. Hierom. in his Preface before the new Testament dedicated to Pope Damasus Novum opus c. [c] Luther being admonished of his corruption would not correct his error but saith tom 5. Germ. fol. 141. 144. sic volo sic jubeo sit pro ratione voluntas c. Lutherus ita vult And concludeth Therfore the word alone ought to continue in my New Testament although all Papists run mad yet they shal not take it from thence It grieves me that I did not add those two other words Omnibus omnium The Church of England in Edward 6. time Translated some times This signifieth my Body other times this is my Body other times neither is nor signifieth but insteed therof a blanck as not yet resolved vpon which was true See Knot in his Protestancy condemned Edit 1654. pag. 87. Bible 1562 Bible 1562. Cor. 7. v. 1. Bible 1577. 1579. Chemnit in examin part 2. fol. 74. Saravia in defens tra diversis mini â—r gradibus pag 3. Jewel in his defence of the Apology 157. pa. 35. Tertullian in lib de praescr Qui estis vos vnde quaÌ„do venistis vbi tam diu latuistis S. Hilarius l. 6 de Trinit ante med Tarde mihi hos piissimos doctâ—res aetas nunc â—ujus â—â—culi protulit c. S. Hierom in epist ad Pamaâ—â— â—ce an 〈◊〉 pâ—st quadring 〈◊〉 now 1600 annos docere nos 〈◊〉 quâ—d anâ—â—a neseivimus Vsque in haÌ„c diem sine isra doctrina mundus christianus fuit Luther in â—p ad Irgentineneses auâ— 1525. Christiana nolaâ— primo vulga tun audemu gloriari [a] Georgius Milius in August Confes. explic art 7. de ecclesia pag. 137. [b] Dr. Feeld in his Treatise of the Church lib. 3 cap. 46 Mr. Abr Hartwell in his report of the Kingdom of Congo printed 1597. in his epistle to the reader Symon Lythus in respons altera ad alteram Gretseri Apol pag. 331
counterfeited must needs be the effect of prejudice and passion proceeding from want of christianity especialy when they see that others as learned cautious and conscientious as them-selves after weighing all objections and circumstances submit their judgments to the sufficiency of these signs for making the Roman Catholick authority authentickly Divine and that we believe what is proposed with out the least suspition or feare either of fraud or frailty in the Roman Catholick Councells which are the Proposers and Ministers of God's word Besids if Protestants did consider the nature of Veracity and God's Providence they would never doubt of the application of his power to preserve the Roman Catholick Church from error seing it hath so many signs of his truth and Ministery as the conversion of Nations succession and Sanctity of doctrin and Doctors miracles vnity of faith c. For Veracity as Aristotle and all Philosophers define it is a Virtue inclining to speak truth And he is not inclined to speak truth that countenanceth falshood in so particular a manner as God doth the doctrin and jurisdiction of the Roman Catholick Church A King that might if he would and yet doth not hinder his Ambassadors and Ministers or any other persons from abusing other Princes or his own Subjects by their speaking or commanding in his Majesties name or at least in speaking other-wise then he really intended they should and had prescribed by his commission or instructions such a King I say is not inclined to speak truth because he willingly permits his officers or others that pretend to speak in his name or really do speak by his Orders to vtter falshood and misinterpret his words and meaning notwithstanding that he may easily prevent that fraud and frailty and reapeth no benefit by either an evident argument that he is not avers to such false practises No Protestant doubts but that my Lord Chancellor speaks truly the King's mind and sense when he pursues his Majesties speech in Parliament in his Royal presence and hearing and to think other-wise would be not only to tax my Lord Chancellor with folly but the King with an inclination to falshood and a fault unbeseeming the dignity of a Prince the care and charge of the Country's Father as also the sincerity and veracity of an honest man Seing therfore God is as much inclined to speak truth as any thing can be to love it self for God is truth by essence if it be against the dignity of a Prince and against the nature of human veracity and honesty which is but a shadow of the Divine to permit falshood in Ministers of state or in servants sent but of ordinary errands when their Masters can easily prevent it how much more repugnant must it be to the nature of God and to his Divine veracity to permit the Roman Church in his own presence name and hearing tell lyes and disguise them and it self with so probable and plausible signes of his Divine truth and Commission as to seale it's doctrin with marks and miracles so vndeniably supernatural that the most learned Protestants acknowledg they are and can only bewrought by God's power light can as litle concurre to produce darkness as truth to favor falshood Even men that love truth hate to heare others tell lyes and do contradict vntruths if them-selves be present and quoted for Authors of the stories They will not entertain servants given to that vice nor permit them weare their livery much less employ them in matters of concern wherin they may abuse their Master's word and prejudice his friends or Tenants Can Protestants then imagin that God doth not only permit the Roman Catholick Church to weare his livery and his authority but that he doth promote the stories and lies of that Church in case it's doctrin be fals for the space of so many ages with so great signes and testimonies of his Divine approbation that the wisest and wairiest men of the world after much study and examination did and do still preferr it before all other Religions Do they think that God is not as much concern'd in preventing frauds faults and frailties in his Ministers and Messengers as temporal Princes are concern'd in the credit and truth of theirs Wherfore if Protestants judg it a breach of faith or want of truth and worth in a temporal Prince not to endeavor to the vtmost of his power that his Ministers and messengers deceive not his subjects and Allies by mistaking or misapplying his Commands or demands they can not but see the absurdity of believing that God doth permit Ministers and Messengers so supernaturaly qualified as those of the Roman Church are to err in proposing his revelations vnto all man kind his Veracity being as highly concern'd in the infallibility of the Proposers as his power makes him capable of preventing their human mistakes and of confounding the Devill 's malice But Protestants have found out a new device and defence of their distinction They grant it is against God's Veracity to permit the Roman Catholick Church to err in proposing the Fundamental articles of faith that is such articles as Protestants fancy absolutly necessary for saluation which are say they that Scripture is the word of God and JESUS Christ the son of God and Redeemer of the world some add the Mystery of the Trinity hitherto we could never obtain from them a more exact Cathalogue of their Protestant Fundamentals As for the other doctrines of the Roman Catholick Church 〈◊〉 and proposed as Divine Protestants think they may be denyed and questioned without any offence to God denyal or doubt of his veracity I could never heare any other reason or dispâ—rity for this their distinction but that the measure of the infallibility of the Church ought to be our salvation because it was the end proposed by God in the institution and constitution of his Church In such articles therfore say they as are absolutly necessary for salvation the Church cannot but be infallible in the proposal otherwise we could not believe them and consequently not be saved because we can not be sure that God revealed them But this their Fundamental distinction still destroys the foundation of Christian belief which is God's veracity They make their own conveniency and not God's veracity the motive of crediting the Mysteries of faith as if truth it self or God's inclination to speak truth could be greater in on matter then other or that the belief of any article could be more Fundamental or of greater importance and necessity for salvation then to believe that God is as much concerned and as necessarily inclined to speak truth as well by the mouth of his Church as if him-self spoke immediatly as well also in the least matter as in the greatest and by consequence he is as much engaged to preserve the Church from error in on as in the other So that to believe the testimony or proposal of the Church in a matter