against the whole Church is most insolent mâ—…dnesse saith S. Austin Ep. 118. 18. You erre no lesse absurdly when you say that in the fourth Session of the Council of Trent the Roman Church is made to differ as well from her ancient and purer self as from all other Churches besides her self This is meerly begg'd and not prov'd Might not all former Hereticks have said the same of all Generall Councils that condemn'd them Did either the Council of the Apostles Act. 15. or the first four Generall ones make the Church differ from her self by reason of their Definitions or Decrees why then the Council of Trent in particular Because say you that Council defin'd many meerly humane writings and many unwritten Traditions to be of equall authority with the Scripture anathemat zing all that should not receive them The Council of Trent defined no writings to be of equall authority with the Scriptures but such as those Orthodox Fathers by the assistance of the Holy Ghost confirming ancient Tradition judged to be the Word of God nor any unwritten Traditions but such as were either immediately received by the Apostles from the mouth of Christ himself or inspired to the Apostles by the Holy Ghost and so handed down in a perpetuall succession unto them Of such Traditions the Apostle speaks 2 Thes. 2. Hold the Traditions which you have been taught whether by word or Epistle Hence it is clear saith S. Chrysostome that the Apostles delivered not all things by writing but many things also unwritten both which are worthy of equall belief Is not this the very Definition of the Council of Trent And might not all the Hereticks that ever deni'd any part of Scripture as the Cerinthians deni'd the whole New Testament but S. Matthew's Gospel the Marcionists Gnosticks Manichees all the old Testament as Luther the Epistle to the Hebrews S. Iames and the Apocalyps and all that ever denâ—…'d Apostolicall Traditions as Arius Nestorius Eutyches and other Novellers did might not I say all these have used the same plea against the Church or Councils that defined Canonicall Books or Apostolicall Traditions against them A strange objection and stranger reformation that justifies all Hereticks in the world As for the anathema hath it not ever been the Style of all Generall Councils to lay a curse upon the refusers of their Definitions And if the point of Infallibility was both believed and virtually defined by the first Generall Councils justly imposing upon mens consciences an inward assent to their Decrees of Faith upon pain of Anathema why not as well by the Council of Trent 19. But I wonder what you mean in saying that the Roman Church was made to differ from all other Churches besides her self If by the Roman Church you mean not onely the City and Diocesse of Rome but all other Churches united with that particular Church whose Bishops sate voted in the Council of Trent then you speak a Chymera there being but one true Catholick Church in the world which is the Roman that never differ'd from her self in matters of faith except you intend a Heterogenial Church patcht up of all condemn'd Sects in the world opposite one to anothre 20. Upon the premises your Reformers say you met together and concluded a Secession As if Protestants revolted not from the Pope long before the Council of Trent or the pretended new Creed as you call it But let us see the quality of those Reformers to wit your Kings your Clerâ—…y and your Layty too What Kings I pray Hen. the 8. the first broacher of the Schisme with Dalila in his â—…ap Edward the 6. a young Child and Qâ—… Elizabeth a woman fit heads to consult of Religion Yet were they all successively by Acts of Parliament either created or declar'd Supreame heads of the Church of England a Prerogative never châ—…lleng'd by any Christian Prince before The following Kings found the breach made and the Schisme completed What Clergy but Cranmer that Arch-Sycophant who according to Hâ—…story by his whispers in the Kings car was the first au thour of the Secession from the Pope and as â—…e pretended Bishop Bramhill confesses struck the nail home What Clergy but intruders when under Edward the 6. Protestantisme was establishâ—…t in England contrary to the liking of most of the true Bishops of that time And when under Qâ—…een Elizabeth all the Bishops but one were deposed and by Cambdens confession eighty Curates fifty Prebendarics fifteen Presidents of Colledges twelve Arch-Deacons and six Abbots lost their places when also the inferiour Clergy in a Convocation appointed by that very Queen protested against the Reformation What the Laiety too have they against all Antiquity power to define matters of Religion When Theodosius the younger sent his Ambassadour to the Council of Ephesus which was the third Generall one he writ to the Council that he sent him Ea Lege upon that condition that in questions of Religion he should have nothing to doe giving this reason It is not lawfull for him that is not a Bishop to meddle in businesses and consultations of the Church The same said Basil the Emperour to the Laiety in the seventh Generall Council 'T is not lawfull for you to treat in Ecclesiasticall Causes And long before that Iustinian If the businesse be Ecclesiasticall let no Civil Magistrate deale in such questions c. But in fine what Laiety was it but a Cromwell and such like flatterers It was generally conceived and truly as I think saith Weaver in his Monuments pag. 101. that those politick wayes for taking away the Pope's authority and suppressing religious Houses were principally devised by Cromwell And Bishop Gardner in Fox pag. 1344. saith The Parliament was with much cruelty constrained to abolish and put away the Primacy from the Bishop of Rome 21. Yea but these Reformers did not consult flesh and bloud O no! King Henry consulted the spirit when lusting after Anne Bolen he tore himself from the Pope for refusing him the grant of a Divorce and to satisfie his avarice he seized upon all the goods of Monasteries What spirit the Protectour and Parliament under Edward the Sixth consulted whether God or Mammon let Baker tell you There you may read how divers Bishops were committed to prison for misliking the Reformation and all of them dispossessed of their Bishopricks and that which is worse the Bishopricks themselves were dispossessed of their revenues A Parliament was held wherein divers Chantries Colledges Free Chappels Fraternities and Guilds with all their Lands and goods were given to the King which being sould at a low rate enriched many and enobled some and thereby made them firm in maintaining the change thus Baker Queen Elizabeth bred up a Catholick and by a Catholick Bishop consecrated Qâ—…een consulted Eternity when to buy a Crown she sold her Religion Or expect the Church of Rome should have been their Physician which was
wit that when there is no Pope at all the Catholick Church hath then no Head Therefore c. What! no Head at all At least it retaineth an invisible head which is as much as Protestants allow the Church It follows only good Sir that in the interval the Church as Universal hath no visible head a thing nothing strange in Politick Bodies Elective Princes as the German Emperour and the King of Polonia be they not in Civil Government Heads of their Princedomes If they de the Princedome wants a Head till another be chosen Is this a mystery God govern'd his Church three hundred yeares without a Generall Council may he not govern it a short space without a Pope especially all other Bishops and inferiour Pastors remaining still in full possâ—…ssion of their authority over their severall Flocks and knowing their duty by former definitions of Popes and Councils interpreting the word of God Yea but when there are many Popes the Church is a monster with many heads True if with many Popes acknowledged and accepted of by the Universall Church or declared by a Generall Council which is impossible Otherwise in order to the Faithfull many Popes no Pope In the interim 't is enough for them to stick to their known Doctrine believing in generall him to be Pope who is Canonically chosen without determining any in particular But what if the Pope be hereticall hath not the Catholick Church such a Head which makes her deserve to be beheaded A dainty conceit Are not the Bishops of England in your opinion the immediate Heads of their respective Diocesses what if one amongst them should turn Arian would not the crime lie upon the Diocesse and make her deserve to be beheaded no doubt if you may be believed And to come nearer your example you once made Henry the 8th supreame head of the Church of England If holding the Primacy he had faln into Heresie durst you have said that the glish Church had such a Head as made her deserve to be beheaded Doe not you see whether this poysonous Doctrine leads The tenth Demonstration Page 21. 55. Some Popes even by the confession of Papists have err'd as private Doctors onely not as Universall Pastours of the Church never defining heresie or commanding hereticall doctrine to be submitted unto as to Divine truths Therefore no Pope is Head of the Church Nay the most zealous and partiall asserters of their Supreamacy confesse that Popes have been Hereticks and Heathens too either by denying the Godhead of the Son as Liberius or lifting him above the other two Persons as Iohn the 22. or sacrificing to Idols as Marcellinus or being rejected by the Church for the crime of Heresie as Anastasius the second Therefore in the opinion of those zealous asserters of the Pope's Supreamacy the Pope is not supreame Head of the Church For to what end are those mens authorities alledged if not to knock down the Pope's Headship with our own Clubs 56. Good God what a heap of subtilties are here mass'd up with much more craft if not malice then ingenuity One onely Pope subscribed to S. Athanasius's banishment communicated outwardly with the Arians for fear of torments but never subscribed to the Heresie it self never taught maintained or defined it Insomuch that not onely Soorates Sozomen and Theodoret but also S. Athanasius himself in his two Apologies expressely say he was no Heretick Therefore Popes have denied the Divinity of Christ. One onely Pope is without any ground accused by Stella as holding the Son greater then the Father and the Holy Ghost No other Writer in the world besides Stella ever charging him with such an errour no not Calvin himself though he wanted not spleen enough to impose upon him most wrongfully the mortality of the Soule Therefore Popes have lifted up the Son above the Father and the Holy Ghost One onely Pope not for want of faith but feaâ—…ing the cruell Emperours indignation let fall a gram or two of Incense to the Idols as S. Peter denied Christ for fear of the Jâ—…wes but soon after repenting with Peter died a glorious Martyr Therefore Popes have been Heathens by sacrificing to Idols and a totall Apostacy from Faith One sole Pope was grievously slandered by the Schismaticks adhering to Laurence the Antipopâ—… as if he had communicated with Photinus an Arian Deacon and would have reinserted the namâ—… of Acacius a furious Arian amongst the holy Bishops commemorated in the sacâ—…ed Mysteries And these slanders once blown abroad by those Schismaticks were too inconsiderately saith Baronius registred in the Popes lives Therefore Popes have been rejected by the Church for heresie Did ever Stella Platâ—…ina or Onuphrius say so Do they inferre out of the supposed fall of these few Popes amongst 234. others that either the Popes were not supream Governours of the Church or that therefore the Roman Church erred in Faith Do they not expressely assert the contrary And that those Popes err'd as private persons only and not as Heads of the Church Doth not Stella in the very same place adde immediately Sed in quantâ—… est câ—…put Ecclesia nullâ—…s errare potest But as he the Pope is Head of the Church he can in no wise erre and that the Churches of Alexandria Antioch and Constantinople have often fallen from their faith â—…t the Church of Rome never 57. As for S. Hilary he was not so desperately rash as to judge the whole Church except France to be really turn'd Arian For neither Liberius nor S. Servatins with sundry other Bishops did ever subscribe to the heretical Confession of the Arians made at Arimini though many of the Orthodox Bishops did partly compelled by fear of torments partly deluded by the Arians perswading them that the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 was omitted because it was not in Scripture Hence it is that S. Basil coetanean to S. Hilary in his 293. Epistle writes thus 'T was fitting you should understand that by the grace of God there be very many that maintain the Orthodox Faith delivered by the Nicene Fathers according to the rule of piety and that you are not left alone in the East For truly the whole West conspires unanimously with you Nay your Doctor Boughen in his Answer to T. B. confesses that when Arianisme prevailed ' at Rome the Catholick Church was visible at Alexandria in Sardinia in France and other places Wherefore S. Hilary by those words à caeteris extra Gallias from the rest out of France and inter nos tantùm amongst us alone intended only to extoll the constant Faith of his Country for not communicating with the Arians who were spread over many other parts of Europe Otherwise he saying expressely in the same Treatise Episcopos Orientales stare sanos that the Bishops of the East stood sound would have expressely contradicted himself 58. For the rest of this your Instance I can only say in your words that whosoever shall read at large the many
liberties and exemptions of the Gallican Church which still acknowledges the Pope's supremacy and the publish'd confessions of Popish writers touching the Papal usurpations and right of Kings put together by Goldastus an heretick prov'd by Gretser to be a lying knave but never denying the Roman Bishops to succeed S. Peter in the spiritual government of the Church will not be able to deny that the Supremacy of the Pope hath this Lying against it that it was not so from the beginning But I must tell you with holy S. Leo that whosoever denieth the Supream Authority of the Roman Bishop cannot deminish the power thereof but puffed up with the spirit of pride plungeth himself headlong into Hell What then have these ten so well contrived Ratiocinations demonstrated nothing at all yes Sir they have demonstrated that you are still guilty of Schisme for disturbing the See Apostolicks quiet possession of Supremacy in England without a demonstration that it was usurpt For'tis evident from our solutions that you have not demonstrated such an usurpation And t is no lesse evident that an authority of so high a concern for the peace and unity of the Church so long a knowledged and obey'd in this Kingdome as of Christ's institution could not without open Schisme be cast out except it had been demonstratively proved an usurpation Against the Infallibility of the Catholick or Roman Church The eleventh Demonstration Page 22. No Church can be infallible to wit as well incapable of errour as not erroneous except it hath that infallibility which is one of Gods peculiar incommunicable Attributes For where there is not omniscience there must be ignorance in part and where ignorance is there may be errour But no Church can have that incommunicable Attribute Therefore no Church can be infallible much lesse the Roman A high and massy discourse As if there were no difference betwixt an intrinsecal infallibility proper to the nature of an infinite Being essentially identify'd with Omniscience and an infallibilility extrinsecally communicated relying upon the perpetual assistance of the Holy Ghost promised by the word of God Had Moyses and the Prophets Gods incommunicable Attribute were the Apostles Omniscient And yet were they not infallible in what they preach'd assisted by the spirit of God was not S. Paul as well incapable of teaching the Church errours as not erroneous whilest he said to the Thessalonians 1. 2. 13. Ye received the word of God which ye heard from us ye received it not as the word of man but as it is in truth the word of God And again Since you seek a proofe of Christ speaking in me 2 Cor. 13 3. Was not the humanity of Christ incapable of errour and sin as it was govern'd by his Divinity and could not teach errours and yet it was not identify'd with the increated Omniscience of God nor with the incommunicable Attribute of infallibility What mean some Protestant Doctours when they grant the Universal Church cannot erre in Fundamentalls Cannot God preserve from errour as well in not-fundamentals taken in your sense as Fundamentalls If so that Church so preserved upon Gods promise will be infallible in the sense intended by the Roman Church and then what is become of your demonstration drawn from the impossibility of the thing Surely S. Cyprian had a better opinion of the Roman Church when he said Lib. 1. Epist. 3. The Romans are they whose faith was praised by the mouth of the Apostle and to whom misbelief can have no accesse S. Ierome had the same sentiment when speaking to Ruffinus Know thou saith he that the Roman Faith commended by the voice of the Apostle admitteth no such delusions and that being fenced by S. Paul's authority it cannot be altered though an Angel should teach otherwise 60. You and yours on the other side denying the Church to be infallible argue Christ of improvidence in not furnishing his Church with undoubtable meanes to compose differences in matters of Faith and preserve unity The Church of Tyranny in obliging men upon pain of damnation to believe her definitions that may be false and the whole Body of Christians of unsettledness in belief as relying upon nothing not subject to errour whether Fathers Councils Church or Scriptures expounded by them If I should say that any one at his pleasure I may resist the Councils I should say well saith Luther expressely against St. Austin's belief in his first Book against the Donanatists chap. 7. who speaking of the rebaptization of those that had been baptized by Hereticks he sayes The obscurity of this question compell'd men of great authority to stagger a long while untill that in a full Council of the whole world it was firmly decreed what was most wholsomly to be held all doubts removed Which he could never have said had he held the Church errable in her Generall Councils Say what you please all your certainty of Faith is finally resolved into the private spirit though you cannot endure to be told so The twelfth Demonstration 61. The Tenet of Infallibility upon earth cannot be true if errours in Faith spring up in the Church But Novatianisme was hatcht at Rome Donatisme spread over the West Arianisme over the East Chilianisme infected the primitive Fathers without contradictionâ—… and the Church of God in S. Austin's and Innocent the third's opinion held the necessity of Infant-communicating which the Council of Trent declared against Therefore the Tenet of Infallibility upon earth cannot be true 62. A sturdy argument indeed if one held every single person of the Church to be infallible Mean while it proves as well that the Church even under the Apostles time was not infallible for that in their time sprung up the Heresies of Simon Magus Diâ—…rephes Cerinthians Ebion Nicolaitans c. and yet the Apostles in their Council at Ierusalem could freely say It seemed good to the Holy Ghost and to us Was not this Council by the assistance of the Holy Ghost inerrable notwithstanding those Heresies How then doe Heresies prove the Fallibility of Generall Councils lawfully called to beat them down would not such a Principle argue the Fallibility of Christ because his Doctrine was opposed by the Jewes 63. Novatianisme though hatcht at Rome yet the Egge was laid in Africa and this no Authour denies For Novatus after a Schisme raised against St. Cyprian coming to Rome joyned with Novatianus a Roman Priest against Pope Cornelius and both together sowed the heresie held first by Montanus and Tertullian that such as were faln should not be readmitted into the Church after repentance This heresie was presently resisted by Cornelius in a Council held at Rome of threescore Bishops in Africa by S. Cyprian in a Synod of forty two Bishops at Antioch in a Provincial Council And Eusebius addes that every where through all Provinces the Bishops met against that errour Finally the first Council of Nice offered peace to the Novatians if renouncing their heresie they would
stickler in that Schismaticall Council at Wormes died a while after in despaire roaring out that he was damn'd for adhering to Henry the King against Pope Gregory and that the rest of those Schismaticall Bishops upon repentance both writ to the Pope for pardon and went themselves after the King into Italy to be absolv'd from their Schisme He addes that after the Pope had absolv'd the King he said Masse and before Communion taking the sacred Hoste in his hand in presence of the King and the whole assembly protested that he received it as the judgement of the crimes objected against him by the Schismaticks that if he were innocent he might be free'd from all suspition if guilty be suddenly struck dead upon the place That then the Pope received very confidently half the holy Hoste and after the Peoples loud congratulation of his innocency he turn'd to the King inviting him to receive the other half of the Hoste as a Canonicall clearing himself from the crimes objected also against him but that the King pretending an excuse declined the triall But if all were true that you cite out of Goldastus whom Gretser charges with three hundred lyes 't would onely prove the misgovernment of one Pope and nothing at all against the Roman Church or Supreamacy of Saint Peter's Chayre 122. In the last part of your work where you should have proved the power of particular Nations to reforme the Church in matters of Faith or alter what is ordered by the universall Church for the common good and that by separating from the whole world as Luther did you name not one Nation City Family or Orthodox man that ever did it atempted it or thought of it To sooth your Auditours you rake out of the Channell of sixteen hundred yeares a few examples in matter of fact wherein Princes either intrenching upon the immunities of the Church or asserting a pretended right have sometimes clasht â—…ith the Roman Bishops or medled de facto in Church affaires but have they therefore in their severall Kingdomes made themselves absolute Heads of the Church immediately under Christ as Henry the eighth did ordering Laymen Vicar generals in spirituality As Cromwell was and sate in the Convocation House amongst the Bishops as Head over them all Did they deny or renounce the Supreamacy of Popes in the spirituall government of the Church Have they challenged as born and in-bred to their Crowns Supreame power in all causes both Spirituall and Civill Did they part from the Pope the Papacy the Roman Church and all ancient Christian Churches in the world or ever made Lawes to reverse the Decrees of Generall Councils in matters of Faith and not upon that very score been accounted Hereticks This you shall neither find in Iustinian's Code nor in Zeno's Henoticon nor in Charles the great 's Capitulars 123. The Code was compil'd a nefandissimis hominibus by most wicked men saith Spondanus And that unhappy Emperour by medling too much against his own rule in Ecclesiasticall affaires ruin'd his Empire fell into open Heresie persecuted Orthodox Bishops and died suddenly Yet Baronius and others very probably judge that his Lawes concerning the Church were drawn up by Epiphanius and Menas Patriarchs of Constantinople but publisht in the Emperour's name for the better observance For first he often professeth that in Ecclesiasticall affaires he decreed nothing but according to the holy Canons Secondly Iohn the second Pope in a Letter to him confirmes those Lawes as being informed by two Bishops Hypathius and Demetrius his Legats that they were made by the consent of Bishops in conformity to the See Apostolick and Decreâ—… of the Fathers Thirdly because the Emperouâ—… in the Code Tit. 1. lege 8. sayes he will 〈◊〉 suffer any thing to passe concerning the affaires of the Church which shall not be referr'd 〈◊〉 his Blessednesse the Pope because he is Heâ—… of all the holy Prelates Zeno was a profess'â—… Eutychian who put out a profession of Faith call'd Henoticon in which embracing the Faiâ—… of the three first Generall Councils he left out the Council of Chalcedon He was in fine buâ—…ied alive 124. Charles the Great 's respect to the See Apostolick is most renowned in the Christian world Of devotion to the Church he caused the Ecclesiastical Laws to be drawn out of the sacred Councils and Decrees of Popes into 168. Capitula or Chapters where with much modâ—…sty he excuseth himself saying that he does not prescribe Lawes to Bishops but only minds them to see the Decrees of their fore-â—…athers observed There even as they are in Goldastus his thiâ—…d Tome he sayes The Ecclesiastical and Canonical authority teacheth that Councils must not be held without leave of the Roman Bishop there that by the incitement of the See Apostolick and the Council of Bishops he forbid Church-men to bear Armes there Ordering that according to the Council of Nice suits arising between the Clergy and the Layety be decided in Provincial Councils He addes Yet without prejudice of the Roman Church to whom in all causes reverence ought to be kept Constantine the Great openly profest that he could not judge of Bishops The designes of the two late Emperours Ferdinand the first and Maximilian the second were ever pious and full of devotion to the Roman Church nor can you show that at any time that most Catholick House of Austria had the least thought of reforming the Church in points of Faith by their own authority However they might perhaps by the advice of learned men propose to the Pope what they thought fit in present circumstances for quieting the Empire Of twenty Kings of Iuda some were severely punish't for intermedling in Priestly functions Others as Kings and Prophets too might by Divine instinct reform even in matters of Religion Others not without the consent and aid of Priests destroying Idolatry restored discipline But which of them ever undertook a Reformation against the whole Iewish Clergy or by disowning the High Priests authority Of Cooks fraudulent allegations for our Kings of England see a solid Refutation in Persâ—…s against Cook 's fifth part of Reports where you shall find all Antiquity speaking the great respect of the British and English Kings to the Roman Church See also my Lord of Chalcedon in the Protestants Schisme Page 36. and the pages following 125. In a word Sir by the whole rapsody of your Marginal Transcripts you shew only what was done but quo jure with what right not a tittle If from matter of fact you conclude a power tell me your sense of this illation The long Parliament outed Ministers put down Bishops dissolv'd your Church Therefore they had right to doe it If you abjure this consequence to what end such a crowd in the margin quoting Histories of what was done but proving nothing of the right and power to do it 126. Doe the examples of some few secular Princes unduly handling Church affairs or actually opposing
of the Roman Châ—…ch in his dayes Your faith is renowned in the whole world Rom. 1. 5. By this Rule forsooth so appli'd all heresies and usurpations in both Lawes may be dispatcht For though there is hardly any of them in the Church which may not truly pretend to some great antiquity even farre beyond the Reformation Yet because they are not so old as the old man much lesse as the old Serpent therefore they are convinc'd to be heresies and usurpations Loe how under the weight of this ponderous application lie crush'd for ever all the modern ancient errours and corruptions not onely of Disciplinarians Anabaptists Socinians Solifidians Raâ—…ters Millinarians Reprobatarians but most of all the Pontificians for they like Mahometans have a grand compound of severall erronrs and corruptions pretending indeed to some great antiquity yet bundled up in a new Creed the Articles whereof though as old as the new Law yet not reaching to the dayes of the old Serpent they make up a young Symbol not passing the age of the Council of Trent 6. Page 6. You fasten this Quotation upon our Learned Countryman Ioannes Sarisburiensis The Roman Church shewes her self towards others rather a Step-Mother then a Mother There sit in her Scribes and Pharisees but how sincerely the whole Chapter will discover In which the Authour having related how in a conference with Adrian the fourth at Benevent in Italy the Pope askt him familiarly what men thought of the Roman Church I saith he using a holy freedome laid open the evils that in divers Provinces I had heard For as it was said by many the Roman Church which is the Mother of all Churches shewes herself towards others rather a Step-Mother then a Mother There sit in her Scribes and Pharisees But then as to his own particular observation he solemnly professeth in these words Yet one thing upon the testimony of my conscience I boldly professe that I saw no where more honest Clergy and who more detested avarice then in the Roman Church and in relation to the Pope's authority thus He that dissents from your Doctrine is either an Heretick or a Schismatick Is not this very unhandâ—…ome dealing in a Preacher first to omit wilfully those words As it was said by many and then to impose upon an Authour what he only rehearseth out of other mens mouthes secondly to skip over the words which is the Mother of all Churches wherein appeares the judgement of Nations as to the Primacy of the Roman Church Thirdly to conceale the Authour 's own words by which he expressely declares a quite contrary sence to what you wrongfully charge him with Good Reader Crimine ab uno Disce omnes 7. From your eight page till the sixteenth you seem like Euclid in his First Book to speak principles undemonstrable or with Pythagoras to exact your Auditors assent without reason upon 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he said it 〈◊〉 you assert but prove not that the point of Infallibility is the great Palladium of the Conclave as if the meeting and shutting up of the Cardinals to chuse a Pope the usuall notion of a Roman Conclave were the same as the whole Catholick Roman Church or the guift of infallibility in defining matters of Faith were proper to the Cardinals without a Pope A profound Erudition Secondly you assert without proofe that the learned Members of the Roman Church swallow glibly so many errours because they swallow this first that she cannot erre 8. Like men in fear you strike first knowing the blow to be unavoidable from us that Protestants chop up so many errours because they first devour this that notwithstanding all Christs promises the infallibility of the Apostles and the necessity of that gift to preserve her from errours yet the whole Church of Christ even in her greatest representatives can erre Thirdly you assert without ground that the point of Infallibility is an old Article of a new Creed Sir there is no such Creed extant in the Roman Church A profession of Faith I admit was appointed in a Bull by Pius quartus to be sworn to by Pastours of Souls and Professours of Learning only But if that be a new Creed much more will your thirty nine Articles make up a new Creed stuft with so many modern negatives and unto which not all but some amongst you were by your Statutes to subscribe But howsoever In your S. article you receive and believe 3. Creeds the Apostles Creed Nice Creed and that of S. Athanasius Now I ask these two last are they new Creeds or no if new ones then the Church has power to make new Creeds if not why should the Churches Declarations be call'd new Creeds rather now then in those former times Fourthly you assert quite gratis that in the Council of Trent the Roman Partisans were not afraid to make new Articles of Faith As if to declare explicitely to the faithful such verities as are contain'd implicitely or virtually in the written word of God or what traditionary Doctrines are truely Divine coming down from the Apostles by never interrupted succession of practice and belief were to make new Articles of Faith Did the Council of Nice make new Articles of Faith when it declared the Celebration of Easter or the validity of Baptisme ministred by Heretiques or the consubstantiality of the Sonne with the Father what the Council of Constantinople and St. Athanasius adde in their Creeds by way of declaration to the Apostles Creed doth it speak new Articles of Faith There was a time when some Canonical Books were not de fide obligante of necessary belief as the Epistle to the Hebrews and that of St. Iames c. are they now after the Churches acceptation new Articles of Faith And yet be those justly anathematized who deny any one of the aforesaid points so declared Why then might not the Council of Trent upon occasion of emergent heresies declare anew what was to be held about the Sacrifice of the Mass Purgatory Invocation of Saints Worship of Images and the like and yet no more in contempt of the Apostles denunciation Gal. 1. 8. then the definitions of former General Councils When did the Church forfeit the power of defining St. Paul's anathema strikes at you Protestants who adde your negative articles contrary to the word of God not at the Church which declares what is truly revealed in it 9. What you say here about the time when the denial of Marriage to Priests began of the date of Transubstantiation halfe-Communion publick prayer in an unknown tongue and the Popes Supremacy shall be answered in your demonstratons 10. You abuse very disingenuously the learned Cardinal Bellarmine in saying first that he boasted of the antiquity of Purgatory where as in the places you quote there is not a syllable of that humour only this modest expression We do not find the beginning of this doctrine but all the Ancients both Greek and Latine from the very
alone as his reason evinces For he Sacrificeth to God saith the Saint not to them because he is God's not their Priest And against Faustus the Manichaean he farther declares wherein this high invocation consists Which of the Priests saith he serving at the Altar in place of the holy Bodies ever said at any time We offer unto thee O Peter Paul Cyprian This therefore is the invocation which S. Austin denies to Saints 13. Your errour is inexcusable in deriving the Catholick Church's infallibility in matters of Faith either from Gnosticks or Disciples of Marcus whilest you might know that holy Scriptures Councils Fathers and reason convinces the contrary Quae conventio Christi Belial what relation hath Christs promises his spirit of truth abiding for ever teaching his Church all truths making it the house of the living God Pillar and Firmament of truth with the filthy errours and practises of those beastly Heretiques A Preacher of the word of God should abhorre all but especially such abominable untruths 14. Irenaeus in the Book and Chapter you quote having said that Marcus had a Devil at his elbow by whose whispers he prophesied and imparted that guilt to women fit for his purpose because his chief businesse was with Women 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 addes that his Disciples driving the same trade by deceipts corrupted many silly women giving themselves out for perfect men as if none upon earth neither Peter nor Paul could match them for knowledge Is not this a perfect Character of Luther and his Disciples your Reformers They had Devils at their eares by Luther's and Zwinglius's confession they lusted insatiably after women broke vowes of chastity seduced silly Virgins corrupted Nunnes and boasted of their abilities above the whole Church even the Apostles The Gospel is so copiuosly preached by us that truly in the Apostles time it was not so clear saith Martin Luther And again What arguments soever the ancient Orthodox Fathers the Schooles of Divines the authority of Councils and Popes the consent of ages and of all the Christian people can help you to lay them all aside We admit nothing but Scriptures and so that with us alone is the certain authority of interpreting what we interpret that is the sense of the Holy Ghost what others bring though they be many and great men comes from the Spirit of Satan and a distracted brain This indeed is to be Marcists and Gnosticks 15. 'T is also an affected errour to say we take our Purgâ—…tory from Origen and Tertullian doth not Bellarmin prove it out of Scripture alledging near twenty Texts so expounded by the ancient Fathers Nay doth not your own Chemnitius confesse that Dionisius the Areopagite mentions Prayer for the Dead Do's not your Doctor Fulk plainly averre that Tertullian Cyprian Austin Hierome and a great many more doe witnesse that Sacrifice for the Dead is the Tradition of the Apostles Insomuch that Zwinglius being urged with the authority of S. Chrysostome and S. Austin deriving that custome from the Apostles gives this wild answer If it be so as Austin and Chrysostome report I think the Apostles suffered some to pray for the Dead for no othor cause then to condescend to their infirmity But what if the fiâ—…st mention of Purgatory were found in Origen and Tertullian who lived in the beginning of the third age was it therefore a dreame of their own brain or an Heresie of Montanus as if he could commend nothing but errours Did not the Fathers of all ensuing ages follow that Doctrine without contradiction and the whole Church of God embrace it as comming from the Apostles Hoc enim à patribus traditum universa observat Ecclesia saith S. Austin This the universall Church observes as delivered by the Fathers 16. Thirdly you erre prodigiously in affirming that your Reformers in England discovered in the Roman Church horrible corruptions in point of practice and hideous errours in point of Doctrine and that in matter of faith too whereas hitherto no Protestant in the world hath ever been able to shew any one such errour or corruption What you can discover shall appear hereafter in your goodly demonstrations 17. You adde to that another gross errour that those blessed Reformers found by what degrees the several errours corruptions were slightly brought into the Church as well as the severall time wherein the Novelties received their birth and breeding But good Mr. Pierce how often have you Protestants been challeng'd to shew when any such Novelties against faith or manners sprung up in the Church and yet could never doe it How often have you been told that the Roman Church was once a true and pure Church Rom. 1. and that if it fell it must be either by Apostacy Heresie or Schisme Not by Apostacy because she believes in Christ If by Heresie what lawfull Council what Fathers what other Church of Christ ever censur'd or condemn'd her If by Schisme from what other true Church did she ever separate name that Church as distinct from the Roman if you can For I suppose that in a Schisme the rent or wound cannot be mortall to both parts least Christ should have no Church at all upon earth And because such a Church different from the Roman cannot possibly be found therefore some of your Learned Protestants ingenuously confesse it We cannot tell saith Doctor Powell by whom or at what time the enemy did sow the Papists Doctrine c. neither indeed doe we know who was the first Authour of your blasphemous opinions And Doctor Fulk in his Rejoynder to Bristow p. 205. answering the same question about the change of the Roman Church saith I answer my Text saith it was a mystery not revealed and therefore could not be at first openly Preached against 'T is also the confession of Doctor Whitaker in his answer to Campian that the time of the Roman change cannot easily be told And yet this pittifull shift is clearly against that renowned rule of S. Austin in his 118. Epistle and elsewhere that what is held by the Universall Church and not known when it began is to be believed as an Apostolicall Tradition By which maxime Doctor Whitgift proves against Cartwright that the names of Metropolitan Arch-Bishop c. have their originall from the Apostles ' Tâ—…s also against evident reason for if Christs Spirit of Truth abiding alwayes with the Church could permit errours in faith to creep into it unperceptibly such errours even by the principles of Christianity would be irreformable For if they were brought in so slily that their beginning could not be observed nor they perceived till they were universally received in the Church whosoever should attempt to reform them must by the principles of Christianity be held for an Heretick because he opposeth the whole Church of Christ and so were to be thrown out as a Heathen and a Publican For to dispute
all Antiquity that as S. Hierome noted the Villain Porphyrius censur'd S. Paul of sawcinesse and pride for checking S. Peter his Superiour The fourth Demonstration Page 17. 46. The next demonstration is taken also out of the Epistle to the Galatians 2. 9. where S. Paul gives an account how by Divine revelation he went up to Ierusalem to communicate his Gospel with the chief Apostles Peter Iames and Iohn because some were apt to mistrust his Doctrine as not having lived with Christ nor conferr'd with the Apostles Schollars of Christ. And that the said Apostles when they saw the grace that was given to Paul gave him and Barnabas the right hands of fellowship that is received them into their society of Preaching upon agreement that we saith S. Paul should goe unto the Gentiles and they unto the Circumcision Hence is hewed out the following demonstration 47. Whosoever receiveth into the fellowship of Preaching one sent unto him by Gods appointment to conferre his Doctrine that he may not Preach in vain is either inferiour to the party sent and received or at most his equal But S. Peter did so receive S. Paul Therefore S. Peter was either inferiour to Saint Paul or at most his equal And reason good for S. Peter was one amongst the three prime Apostles sent to the Iews as Christ himself was and S. Paul to the Gentiles who though in regard of their number they were to the Iewes but as the Ocean to a River yet in many other respects being the chosen people of God had as S. Paul said to the Romans Rom. 3. 3. much advantage every way above the Gentiles and chiefly because unto them were committed the Oracles of God and therefore S. Paul himself Act. 13. 46. profess'd to the Iewes It was necessary that the word of God should first have been spoken to you but seeing you put it from you and judge your selves unworthy of everlasting life Lo we turn to the Gentiles Otherwise S. Paul by calling Christ Minister Circumcisionis and himself Doctour of the Gentiles should according to you Mr. Pierce signifie some advantage of honour above Christ in the extent of his Diocesse 48. To reinforce this demonstration you may adde that since fellowship argues equality not onely all Fellowes of a Colledge are equall to their head that governs them who is likewise a Fellow but which is more we are all equal to Christ our Lord being called by God unto the fellowship of his Son Iesus Christ 1 Cor. 9. much more then was S. Paul equal with S. Peter was he not think ye especially if we add to this that S. Paul fourteen years before went up to Ierusalem to see and pay his respects to S. Peter because saith S. Ambrose 't was fit that Paul should desire to see Peter to whom our Saviour had committed the charge of the Churches And Theodoret upon the first to the Galathians He went to yield to S. Peter as to the Prince of the Apostles that honour which was fitting And S. Chrysostome He went to see him above others because he was the mouth and Prince of the Apostles and the Head of the whole Company And elsewhere He went to him as to one greater then himself and that not in a vulgar manner but to behold and admire him as a Personâ—…ge of great Excellency and Majesty as men goe to behold great and famous Cities The fifth Demonstration Page 17. 49. No man can have spiritual jurisdiction and a fatherly power over the Church but he must of necessity Lord it over Gods heritage and fleece the flock of Chrtst. But S. Peter was never known to Lord it over Gods heritage or fleece the flock of Christ. Therefore he had no spiritual jurisdiction or fatherly power over the Church for he rather forbids to domineer in the Clergy The Minor is granted on both sides the Major is clear of it self without proofe for if spiritual jurisdiction could stand without Lording and fleecing S. Peter might be Head of the Church though he did not Lord it over Gods heritage or fleece the flock 'T is also confirmed by instances Christ our Saviour had no jurisdiction forsooth over the Apostles because he came not to Lord it but to serve Non veni ministrari sed ministrare The Apostles had no jurisdiction over their respective Churches for the same reason Nay there is no Hierarchie in the Church as the Presbyterians contend against your Episcopal Protestants because Primates may not Lord it over Arch-Bishops nor these over Bishops nor Bishops over Curats nor Parish Priests over the People for whosoever will be great among you shall be your Minister and whosoever of you will be the chiefest shall be the Servant of all And if you confesse that for the good government of a Nationall Church a Hierarchy is necessary then take the judgement of Mr. Cartwright in Mr. Whitgift's defence If it be necessary for the keeping of unity in the Church that one Arch-Bishop should be Primat over all why not as meet that for the keeping of the whole Universall Church there should be one Arch-Bishop over all Hearken to your Doctor Covell saâ—…ing to the Puritans How can they think that equality would keep all the Pastours in the world in peace and unity c. For in all Societies authority which cannot be where all are equall must procure unity and obedience Oâ—…serve Melancthon's judgement As there are some Bishops that govern divers Churches the Bishop of Rome governs all Bishops And this Canonicall policy I think no wise man doth disallow For the Monarchy of the Bishops of Rome in my judgement is profitable to this end that unity in Doctrine be preserved Wherefore we would easily assent to this Article of the Pope's Supreamacy if we did agree in other matters The sixth Demonstration Page 18. 50. If the Apostles were pari consortio praediti honoris potestatis equall not onely in the substance of Apostleship as power of Preaching founding Churches remitting Sins administration of Sacraments and the like but also in jurisdiction and right to govern the whole Church And if Bishops be all ejusdem meriti Sacerdotii not onely of the same merit in order to Priesthood but also of the same degree of authority over others Then S. Peter was not Head of the Church nor the Bishop of Rome his Successour in that Office But S. Cyprian sayes the first and S. Hierome the second Therefore S. Peter was not Head of the Church nor the Bishop of Rome his Successour in that Office Now whether your interpretation of these ancient holy Doctors be or be not their true meaning the Reader may evidently deduce first by what S. Cyprian addes immediately to the very words above cited and you very unhandsomely not to say maliciously conceale Sed exordium ab unitate proficiscitur Primatus Petro datur ut una Christi Ecclesia
concerning corruptions intrenching upon fundamentalls whereof you spoke not a word before nor ever told us which they were 116. Why may not all hereticks in the world by this example pretend to let out Schisme and not to introduce it Why not stand to it as you here doe that the actual departure from the Church is indeed yours but the causal the Church's Why not that if a secession be made from the Church 't is in the very selfsame measure that the Church makes one from Christ As if there could be a just cause to depart from the Universal Church We are certain saith S. Austin that no man could justly separate from the Communion of the whole world Epist. 48. And again There is no just necessity of dividing unity lib. 2. cont Parmenia cap. II. And your pretended Arch-Bishop Laud joynes with S. Austin There can be no just cause to make a Schisme from the whole Church Sect. 21. pag. 139. Now Luther Calvin and all their followers separated from all the Churches in the world So Luther confesseth He had none to assist him but was left alone and alone stood in the Battell forsaken of all Praefat in 1 Tom. contra Regem Angliae And for this we have the expresse confession of Chillingworth that seeing there was no visible Church but corrupted Luther forsaking the external Communion of the corrupted Church could not but forsake the external Communion of the Catholick Church c. cap. 5. pag. 274. So Calvin it is absurd that since we have been forced to divide our selves from all the world we should now in our very beginnings disagree amongst our selves Ep 141. So Chillingworth cap. 5. pag. 237. As for external Communion of the visible Church we have without scruple formerly granted that Protestants did forsake it So Perkins giving the reason of the Separation for that during the space of 900. yeares the Popish Heresie spread it self over the whole world and for many hundred yeares an universall Apostacy overspread the face of the whole earth What else I pray For if every point of Faith in which we differ from Protestants as Masse praying to Saints use of Images c. be Heresie and Apostacy all the Churches in the world besides Protestants were both Hereticks and Apostates And what other sense can that insolent vaunt of Luther have in his Letter to the Strasburgians Christum a nobis primò vulgatum audemus gloriari We dare boast that Christ by us was first preached As if none in the whole world had a right belief of Christ before Luther This this was really the Doctrine of your first age though now in the second many of you for very shame disclaime from it and seek with Doctour Usher the first English broacher of this new Heresie in his Sermon at Wansted before King Iames An. 1624. to hook in and matriculate in your Protestant Church the Greeks Abyssines AEgyptians Iacobits though differing never so much amongst themselves and from you and holding Heresies expressely condemned in former Councils You may well affect their Communion but I am sure they will scorn yours 117. I said the first English broacher Forindeed this monster of Doctrine fell first from the Apostate Pen of Marcus Antonius de Dominis who to gratifie the Sectaries forged the distinction of fundamentals and not fundamentals and so made up a Church of all Sects in the world agreeing in fundamentals a Church not to be found either in Scriptures Councils Fathers nay nor any unorthodox Writings of former ages For what Christians upon earth ever taught before that salvation might stand with a voluntary disbelief of the least point of Faith known to be sufficiently proposed by the Church as revealed by God As if the sin of incredulity consisted rather in the greatnesse of the matter revealed then in denying Gods veracity equally engaged in points noâ—… fundamentall 118. Yet still Saint Austin's words stand uncontrollable that no man can justly separate himself from the Communion of the whole world To whom your Doctour Whitaker subscribes lib. 3. cont Dureum Sect. 3. He goeâ—… from the Gospel who sayes the whole world can conspire against Christ. 119. Yea but otherwise Saint Paul had been too blame in that he said to the Corinthians Come ye out from among them and be ye separate 2 Cor. 6. 17. Very true if it were the same to separate from known Heathens and publick Idolaters of whom Saint Paul speaks who are no Church and from the whole Church of Christ against which the Gates of Hell shall never prevaile Neither did the Church thrust you out as you say but as Saint Iohn fitly termes it ex nobis exierunt You went out from us by your wilfull errours Haeretici in semetipsos sententiam dicunt suo arbitrio ab Ecclesia recedendo saith Saint Hierome In Epist ad Tit. cap. 3. Hereticks give sentence against themselves parting from the Church of their own accord Nay but the Church by her hostilities and excommunications departed from you Yes indeed just as the four first Generall Councils departed from the Arians Macedonians Nestorians and Eutychians by their hostilities and anathemaes and not rather as Saint Cyprian sayes of other Hereticks By being excommunicated they received their due punishment not cast out by us but they of their own accord casting out themselves and wilfully thrusting themselves out of the Church Epist. 40. So that if the Devil drive you out as you confesse you were your own selfe-Devils and not the Church which excommunicated you 120. Yet I acknowledge with Saint Austin that every Christian who is excommunicated is delivered up to Satan but how to wit because the Devil is out of the Church as Christ is in the Church and by this he is as it were delivered to the Devil who is removed from the Communion of the Church whence the Apostle demonstrates those to be excommunicated whom he pronounceth to be delivered to Satan In this sense we grant that the holy Church by excommunication thrust out Protestants as the Apostle did the incestuous Corinthian after he had first by that detestable sin given the cause to be expell'd The excommunication was the punishment not the crime You were once under the spirituall government of the Roman Church believed her Doctrine avowed her practises Of your own private 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or election you renounc'd her authority disbelieved her Doctrine cast out her practises Behold Schisme at your door that is a voluntary recession from the former Authority Faith and Discipline of the Church for nine hundred yeares acknowledged in the Land The anathema following was both just as thundring the offenders and wholly necessary to preserve the innocent from your contagion 121. To what you cite in the Margin against Hildebrand or Gregory the seventh Baronius hath fully answer'd Anno Domini 1076. 1077. showing out of approved Authours of the same age that William Bishop of Mastrecht the chief
some exercise of the Popes power not the power it self prove the right of particular Nations to reform themselves in matters of Faith as you pretend to have done in England though you cloak them now under the name of corruptions 127. Hath not the Church ever laid claim to the spiritual government even with the exclusion of secular Princes and reserved to her self as her own inheritance from Christ the power of managing concerns of Religion Hath it ever been heard since the beginning of the world saith S. Athanasius that the judgements of the Church did take their force from the Emperour And the renowned Doctour S. Ambrose to Valentinian the younger When have you ever heard most Clement Emperour that Lay-men did judge of Bishops in matters of Faith 128. 'T is then an intollerable abuse to throng and wrest Authours against their meaning as if they favoured your unjustifiable Schisme in recounting the deeds of a few Christian Princes who even then sound in faith stuck fast to the Roman Church by whose Concession we do not deny but Princes may sometimes exercise Ecclesiastical jurisdiction without hurting the Popes Supremacy 129. You need not put an If to the matter If Sacriledge and Rebellion when you speak of your Reformers violent courses 'T is too too patent to the world that the pretended Reformation came in like a cruel Tyrant waded in bloud and cut her way through the very bowels of her mother the Catholick Church trampling over Crownes profaning Churches destroying Altars violating Vowes and every where tearing the peace of Christianity Read Ierusalem and Babel or the Image of both Churches and you shall see this verifi'd to the full A goodly Brat of Reformation not to be born but of such Parents 130. Nay but the Court of Rome trod upon Crownes and Scepters An hyperbole fetcht from the hornes of the Moon When where what Crownes and Scepters At least the Roman Church made decrees with a non obstante to Apostolical Constitutions not excepting even the Commandements of Christ. You would perswade your Auditours that by Apostolical Constitutions the Pope means Constitutions made by the Apostles themselves no more good Sir then by Litterae Apostolicae are understood Letters penn'd by the Apostles He meanes Constitutions made by Bishops of the Sâ—… Apostolick his predecessours to whom he being equal in power may upon occasion repeale their Decrees as one Parliament can repeale the Acts of another That of the non exception of Christs Commandements is an empty phansie never dream't of by the Pope Was Christs institution of the Eucharist under both kindes a command to the Layety for both kindes I have told you before that your grand Patriarch Luther contradicts you 131. The Imperiall Edict at Wormes to set the Church in her wonted posture you call a cruell Edict But Sir you cannot but know that of late there was a pack of men who attempted to reform you crying out down with Lawn Sleeves down with set Prayers down with Steeple-houses And in effect much of this was done By providence the wheele turn'd Acts and Edicts were publisht to re-establish what you call a Church in her former state What would you think of such that should now protest against those Acts as cruell because they crosse their work of Reformation 132. When I hear you for a farewell offer us peace upon condition of being cleansed of our defilements me thinks I hear an Arian a Pelagian a Donatist say the same to the Catholick Church of their dayes and in the mean while we laugh in our sleeves But who can endure to hear you say the Spouse of Christ is defiled Christ has no Church that is not holy and if holy undefiled The staines the spots the defilements stick upon you that left her The Church is for ever tota pulchra all faire and as her blessed Bridegroom tells her Macula non est in te there is no spot in thee 133. Now Sir by what hath hitherto been said you may peradventure have seen if passion interest or self-conceit doe not blinde you that you neither spoak like a Preacher nor demonstrated like a Schollar 'T is the office of a Preacher to teach move and delight to teach sacred verities move to holinesse of life and delight with the fair descriptions of Christian duties and rewards You taught indeed but what Falsities and Errours you sent not a word to the heart nor moved to ought but hatred of truth and persecution of innocents at least you endeavoured it If you delighted any 't was very likely your self or such as love vanity and seek lyes not your best and wisest Auditours As to your demonstrative faculty I appeale to any unpartiall judge whether a few scraps or texts of Scripture torn from their Context taken upon the credit of the bare Letter devested of circumstances wrackt and wrested to the sense of every wilde fancy can ever aspire to rigorous evidence the sole essence of demonstration Much lesse then a heap of quotations some falsifi'd others of open enemies or suspected friends none at all precisely to the matter in question Wherefore 't was great weaknesse in you if not worse then weaknesse first to boast of demonstrations against us in your Sermon and then to cover the shame of your non-performance tell your Reader in the Dedicatory that your marginal citations are the evidence and warrant of all the rest And why because forsooth we cannot witâ—… honour or safety contradict the publick Confessions of our ablest Hyperaspistae A pretty piece of Pedantry Hyperaspistae Are all your Demonstrations shrunk up to a few quotations of unclassical Authours As if Polydor Virgil and Erasmus two Grammarians Thuanus a Lawyer Cassander a prohibited Authour and such like Riffe-Raffe were the stoutest Champions of Gods Church But let us suppose they were indeed of the ablest Pens do's the Catholick Faith depend upon single mens opinions Are Catholicks obliged upon their honour to defend every particular Doctor 's abberrations Cannot we be safe in Conscience if we stand immoveably to the Scriptures expounded by the Church and the Desinitions of Generall Councils as the infallible rule of our Faith but we must of necessity allow of every private man's sayings If so then think in what a pittifull case you are by declaiming against the Novelties of the Roman Church for the antiquity of whose Doctrines a world of prime Protestant Writers apologize in the Protestants Apology And truly you that acknowledge no publick infallible authority to decide matters of Faith â—…s we doe must rely much upon your private Doctors of whom notwithstanding Mr. Chillingworth gives this censure in his ninth Motive to be a Catholick The Protestant Cause is now and ever hath been from the beginning maintained with grosse falsifications and calumnies whereof their prime Controversie-Writers are notoriously and in a high degree guilty In this judgement he still persevered even after his return to Protestants For answering his