Cyprian erroneously maketh necessarie Chemnitius (30) Exam. part 2 p. 58 also reprehendeth S. Cyprian for saying of Baptisme and Confirmation Then they may be clearly sanctifyed and become the sonnes of God if they be borne of both Sacraments 31) Against Symb p. 133. M. Parker reproueth (32) Ep. ad Iubaianum S. Cyprian for tearming The Oyle Signaculum Dominicum our Lords Seale And Chemnitius (33) Exam. part 2 p. 58. 64. 65. chargeth not only S. Cyprian but also the Laodicen Councel Melchiades Cornelius and Tertulian for the Sacrament of Confirmation For which also Danaeus (34) Resp ad Tom 2. Bell. p. 451. 452. reciteth and reiecteth sundrie of the ancient Fathers Concerning holie Orders to omit that already it is confessed here that S. Cyprian Tertulian and S. Denis did teach them to be truly a Sacrament numbring them amongst the rest the verie Minores Ordines inferiour Orders of Deacons Subdeacons Readers Exorcists Acolytes are so plainly taught in the Primitiue Church that D. Field maketh (35) Of the Church l. 5. p. 121 OsiaÌ„d cent 1. p. 131. no question but these Minour Orders were verie ancient alledging in proof therof the testimonies of Cyprian Cornelius and Ignatius And for the same the 36) Cent. 4. col 873. p. 874. Centurists alledge the Fathers of the Fourth Age. (37) Tom. 6. Wittemb fol. 53. But Luther confesseth that S. Denis S. Pauls Scholler affirmeth that there are in the Church Bishops Deacons Subdeacons Lectours Exorcistes c. Lastly as touching Extreame vnction Innocentius is reproued by (38) PageaÌ„t of Popes fol. 26. Szeged in Speculo Pontif. p 33. M. Bale Szegedine for that he affirmed Anoyling of the Sick to be a Sacrament Wel then the Poynts here confessedly taught by the Fathers of the Primitiue Church are that the Sacraments do not only signify but truly conferre Grace Iustification and Remission of sinnes That Infants dying vnbaptised can not be saued That in case of necessitie Lay-persons may baptize and that the Sacraments are seauen in number Now the Fathers produced and reproued by Protestants for these Poynts are S. Austin Innocentius Cyprian Origen Tertulian Iustin Clement Vrban the Councel of Laodicea Melchiades Cornelius Ignatius S. Denis The Protestants charging the foresayd Fathers are Luther Caluin Musculus the Mâ—gdeburgians Zuinglius Sarcerius Bucer Bullinger Scultetus Rhegius Chemnitius Danaeus Osiander Whitaker Carthwright Humfrey Parker Field Bale So euident it is that the Primitiue and our now Roman Church do most truly agree in the Doctrine number of the holie Sacraments It is Confessed by Protestants that the Fathers of the Primitiue Church beleeued and taught the Real Presence of Christs true Bodie and Bloud in the Eucharist As also our further Catholick Doctrines of Transubstantiation Adoration Reseruation and the like CHAPTER VIII IT is the (1) Conc. Trid s ss 1â— c. 1. 4. certaine and general Decree of the Catholick Church that in the Blessed Sacrament of the Eucharist after the Consecration of bread and wine our Lord IESVS CHRIST God and man is truly really and substantially contayned vnder the formes of those sensible creatures And that the whole Substance of bread is conuerted into the Substance of Christs Bodie and the whole substance of wine into the substance of his Bloud which Conuersion is fitly called Transubstantiation Protestants herein being much diuided amongst themselues The (2) Luth. l. de Captiuit Babyl c. de Euchar. Chemn l. duabus Christi naturis Lutherans teach the Real Presence no lesse plainly then Catholicks only with this difference that they think withal the bread and wine to remayne after Consecration with the Bodie and Bloud which alteration is called Consubstantiation (3) Zuingl l De vera falsa Relig. Zuinglians are of opinion that Eucharist is only a signe figure or remembrance of Christs Bodie no wayes truly contayning the same Caluinists (4) Cvlu l. de Coena Domini Beza de Caena Domini seem in shew more liberal admitting the Bodie of Christ to be truly and really in the Sacrament and that the Sacrament is not only a Signe or figure or that thereby is only giuen to vs the fruits merits of Christs Bodie but euen the Bodie itself yet with this qualification that the same is not receiued by the bodilie mouth of the CoÌ„municant but only by his Faith Neither that the bread wine cease to be or are conuerted into the Bodie and Bloud of Christ but that when the bread and wine are receaued with the bodily mouth at the same time the bodie bloud of Christ are receaued spiritually mystically and by Faith Now in one thing herein I wil accord with D. Morton that (5) Prot. Appeal l. 2. p. 105. This question of Transubstantiation being of so great consequence that if it be defensible Protestants must stand chargeable of Heresie but it may be confuted the Romanists must necessarily be condemned of Idolatrie That therfore we both think it our bounden dutie to consult more exactly with the Senat of Antiquitie which I wil now only performe from the free grants confessions of D. Morton's owne Brethren And so to begin with S. Gregorie D. Humfrey (6) Iesuit parr 2. rat 5 p. 627. speaking of him and S. Augustin demandeth what Gregorie and Augustin brought into the English Church To which himself answereth that They brought with manie other Catholick poynts by him there recited Transubstantiation To arise to S. Chrysostome the Centurists (7) Cent. 5. col 517. confesse that he seemeth to teach Transubstantiation And Musculus (8) Loc. com p 336. reciteth and reproueth a Saying of S. Chrysostom's for the Real presence The Centurists (9) Cent. 4. c 10 col 985 295. likewise affirme that Eusebius Emissenus did speak vnprofitably of Transubstantiation And 10) Antony de Adamo in his Anatomy of the Masse f. 222 And see Cent 4. c. 4. col 295. Oecolamp lib. Epist p. 756. VadiaÌ„ de Euchar. Aphor. l. 5. p. 150 151 many Protestant Writers do greatly reproue the Bookes of Sacraments truly ascribed to S. Ambrose for affirming the opinion of Christs bodilie Presence in the Sacrament Insomuch that the Centurists (11) Cent 4. c. 4. col 295 charge S. Ambrose for not writing wel of Transubstantiation and Application for the dead In this respect also Peter Martyr (12) In de fens obiect Gardin p 4. p. 124. professeth to dislike the iudgement of S. Cyril And (13) In his Epistles annexed to his Common Places ep to Beza p. 106. p. 98 further annexeth I wil not so easily subscribe to Cyril who affirmeth such a Communion as thereby euen the Substance of the Flesh and Bloud of Christ first is ioyned to the blessing for so he calleth the holie bread c. Insomuch as in his second Alphabetical Table at the word Heresie is set downe Heresie of Cyril touching our Communion
the longest Continuance and greatest Antiquitie is a Popish Argument And the Doctrine of the Pope or Church of Rome was so timely working as that it was in being euen in the Apostles dayes For our Conclusion then we haue it here confessed that euer since the time of Constantin and Pope Siluester which contayneth some 1300 yeares al Popes and the Church of Rome haue been so agreable in Doctrine and Faith with our Present Pope and Church that therefore they are al censured for Antichrists Rome for Babylon the imagined Protestant Church during the same time not hauing anie one visible member in the world And not only this but that euen our first Christian Emperours are reproued by Protestants in regard of their very Religion and their honouring and defending of the foresayd Popes And as for the Roman Churches continuance from Christs time vntil the Raygne of Constantin it is plentifully acknowledged that as she was founded by the Apostles so she continued in the doctrine of the Apostles euen vntil the verie times of S. Augustin who flourished almost 100. yeares after Constantin in so much as during al the sayd time the verie Succession of Roman Bishops is granted by Protestants to haue been a good proof of the true Faith And wheras S. Austins Rule of making al such Doctrine truly Apostolical as hath no knowne beginning since the Apostles is approued and applauded by the learnedst Protestants yet themselues likewise confesse that the allowance of this Rule is the opening of a window to bring in al Poperie so truly Apostolical is the Doctrine of Papists Adde lastly that the Antiquitie of our present Papistrie is confessedly no lesse gray-headed then the times of S. Paul and the other Apostles and the continuance therof euer since such as that perusing Councels Fathers and Stories from the Apostles we stil find the print of the Popes feet Now my kindest Aduocats in this so important a Plea are no other then Caluin Suinglius Zanchius Danaeus Beza Winckelmanus Sebastianus Francus Rhegius Brocard Brightman Leigh Napper Parkins Whitaker Powel Fulk Raynolds Ridley Iewel Bunnie Carthwright Parker Field Whitguift Fotherbie Willet Midleton and Morton al of them Protestant Writers and men much renowned by their other Brethren A FVRTHER PROOF OF THE PRESENT ROMAN Religions Continuance from the Apostles times to these dayes is taken from the Christian belief of the Indians Armenians Grecians Brittans al of them Conuerted in the dayes of the Apostles CHAPTER VI. IT is recorded by sundrie Historiographers and acknowledged for most true by the learnedst Protestants that manie Heathen Nations were conuerted by the Apostles themselues to the Faith of Christ whereof peculiar instance is giuen of India Armenia Graecia Britanie c. The Conuersion of India is confessed by (1) Cent. 1. p. 37. Osiander and (2) Comment de Regno Christi p. 45. Nicolaus Phillippi affirmeth S. Thomas to haue been their first Apostle Chemnitius (3) Exam. part 2. p. 7. teacheth that S. Bartholomew preached the Ghospel to the Armenians And as for the Conuersion of Greece it clearly appeareth by Saint Pauls Epistles to sundrie of that Nation as to the Corinthians Ephesians Thessalonians and by the Apocalypse chap. 1. vers 11. Now as concerning the first Conuersion of Britanie it was so vndoubtedly Apostolick as that (4) Britannia c. p. 40. M. Cambden auoucheth that It is certayne that the Brittans receiued the Christian Religion in the verie infancie of the Church In proof wherof he there alleageth sundrie ancient Authorities (5) Ibid. p. 157. And See M. Hal in his Apologie against the Brovvnists p. 58. Further also teaching that in Britannie flourished the Monasterie of Glassenburie which taketh its ancient beginning from Ioseph of Arimathia c. for this the ancientest Monuments of this Monasterie do testify c. Neither is there cause why we should doubt thereof In like sort sayth (6) Description of Britanie annexed vnto Holinshead c. v. 1. p. 23. M. Harison That Ioseph preached here in England in the Apostles times his Sepulchre yet in Glassenburie and Epitaph affixed thereto is proof sufficient (7) Remedie against Schisme p. 24. M. Henoch Clapham is so confident of the Britans conuersion in the Apostles times as that he auoucheth that our Schismatikes may aswel ask me what assurance I haue there was a King Henrie as demand what assurance I haue of the other (8) Against Rhem. Test in 2. Cor. 12. fol. 316. D. Fulk thefore calleth them The Catholick Brittans with whom Christian Religion had continued in succession since the Apostles times This then supposed that al the former Countries were conuerted to Christianitie by Christ his Apostles and disciples themselues The next point to be examined is whether the sayd Faith and Religion which as then they learned receaued and beleeued and which for sundrie succeding Ages they practised and professed is more agreable to the present Roman or Protestant Faith And first as concerning the Indians (9) Comment de Regno Christi l. 1. p. 45. 46. D. Philippus Nicolai relateth that India in sundrie places is inhabited by them in great number who receiued the doctrine of the Ghospel from S. Thomas the Apostle c. vpon the seauenth day according to our custome they meete in the Churches that they may be present at the Sacrifices heare Sermons they vse in their Sacrifices wine made of dryed Grapes giuing bread they not only giue the bodie of Christ but also by drinking of the consecrated Chalice they giue his bloud hauing before made confession of their sinnes c. At the entrance of the church like vnto the Papists they are sprinkled with holie water with the same rite and the same religion they burie the dead c. praying vnto Christ for their eternal Saluation c. The Priests are so shauen vpon the head that they haue vpon the crowne the Image of the Crosse Amongst them there are Societies of Monks and companies of Sacred Virgins shut vp in seueral houses Chastitie is kept by al them with a great desire of honestie abstinence and religion c. They strictly obserue the fasts of Aduent and Lent c. And In the honour of S. Thomas they keep a Festiual day Yea he further writeth (10) Ibid. p. 64. of the remote Cataians of India that they haue their chappels in which for the safetie of their Marchants trauayling in strang countries Sacrifice is offred with Popish ceremonies and Masses Now by this testimonie of so learned a Protestant it appeareth that the Indian Christians first conuerted by S. Thomas retayne yet and practise these Catholick poynts of Faith The real presence of Christs Bodie and Bloud in the Eucharist Confession of sinnes before Receiuing Sprinkling with holie water prayer for the dead Shauing Priestes Crownes The Image of the Crosse Companies of Monks and Nunnes their Chastitie and abstinence The Feasts of Aduent and Lent The
Apostles withal and the Euangelists themselues euen after their receauing of the Holie-Ghost did write teach and defend seueral errours how can anie Christian build an infaillible sauing Faith vpon the Ghospels or other Apostolical writings How then can they be acerteyned of anie one true sentence of God's Word if the writers and deliuerers therof were not infallibly guided by the Holie-Ghost into al truth and so freed from al errour ignorance misprision or falshood And if some peraduenture except that these so Atheistical and Sacrilegious reproaches imposed vpon the sacred Scriptures and the Blessed Euangelists and Apostles be not the ordinarie opinions or practise of Protestants but peraduenture only of some few either ignorant or not endowed with the spirit the falshood and vanitie of this euasion is most apparent for who of forraine Protestants were euer reputed more learned or more enlightned with the spirit then Luther Caluin Beza Chemnitius Islebius Illiricus with the other Centurie-writers Castalio Zuinglius Musculus Brentius Andreas Friccius Adamus Francisci Bullinger and sundrie such others al of them highly esteemed of by their other Protestant Brethren Or who at home more honoured then Tyndal Iewel Goad Fotherbie Fulk Whitaker c. and yet al of those being indeed the primest men that euer they had do ioyntly conspire in this greatest impietie of censuring controuling correcting or reiecting some one part or other of the forenamed Canonical Scriptures or els of condemning the Euangelists and Apostles of seueral errours infirmities and sliding in matters of faith and Religion Which foule proceeding of so manie and so learned Protestants doth euidently according to D. Fulk's Rule conuince them to be perfect Hereticks For (88) Confut. of Purgatorie p. 214. whosoeuer sayth he denieth the authoritie of the Holy Scriptures thereby bewrayeth himself to be an Heretick Laus Deo B. V. Mariae FINIS A TABLE OF THE BOOKES AND CHAPTERS THE FIRST BOOKE WHERIN IS PROVED BY THE Confession of Protestants that the Catholick Roman Church hath continued Euer most Knowne and Vniuersal euen from Christs verie Time vntil the Date hereof THE antiquitie of the true Church and the force of the Argument drawne from the Authoritie thereof As also of these great necessitie of finding-out this true Church chap. 1. fol. 1. That the present Roman Church and Religion for the last thousand yeares after Christ haue stil continued most Knowne and Vniuersal throughout the Christian world chap. 2. fol. 4. A further confirmation of the vniuersal continuance of our Roman Church Religiō for these last thousand yeares is taken from the Confessed belief and profession of such Persons as liuing within the foresayd time were most Famous and Notorious in one respect or other chap. 3. fol. 8. That the faith of S. Gregorie S. Augustin and whereto England was by them conuerted was our Roman Catholick and not Protestant chap. 4. fol. 10. That the present Roman Church and Religion continued and flourished during the whole time of the Primitiue Church contayning the first six hundred yeares after Christ chap. 5. fol. 20. A further proof of the present Roman Religions Continuance from the Apostles time to these dayes is taken from the Christian belief of the Indians Armenians Grecians and Brittans al of them Conuerted in the dayes of the Apostles chap. 6. fol. 27. THE SECOND BOOKE Wherin is proued through al the chief Articles of Religion and that by the Confessions of Protestants that the same Faith which is now taught by the Roman Church was anciently taught by the Primitiue Church of Christ THat General Councels do truly represent the Church of Christ And of the Credit and Authoritie giuen by Protestants to the sayd Councels chap. 1. fol. 1. That the argument drawne from the Authoritie of the Primitiue Church of Christ and of her Doctours and Pastours is an Argument of force And for such approued by sundrie learned Protestants chap. 2. fol. 3. That the Fathers and Doctours of the Primitiue Church beleeued and taught that S. Peter was ordayned by Christ the Head of the Apostles and of the whole Church and that the Church was founded vpon S. Peter it is Confessed by Protestants themselues chap. 3. fol. 8. It is Confessed by Protestants that the Fathers of the Primitiue Church beleeued taught the Bishop of Rome to succeed S. Peter in the Primacie of the whole Church chap. 4. fol. 11. It is confessed by Protestants that the Primitiue Church of Christ beleeued the Bookes of Tobie Iudith Ester Sapientia Ecclesiasticus and two first of Machabees to be truly Canonical Scripture chap. 5. fol. 25. It is acknowledged by Protestants that the Fathers of the Primitiue Church beleeued taught our now Catholick Doctrine concerning Traditions chap. 6. fol. 30. It is Confessed by Protestants that according to the Fathers of the Primitiue Church the Sacraments do truly conferre Grace and Remission of sinnes And that they are in number seauen chap. 7. fol. 32. It is Confessed by Protestants that the Fathers of the Primitiue Church beleeued and taught the Real Presence of Christs true Bodie and Bloud in the Eucharist As also our further Catholick Doctrines of Transubstantiation Adoration Reseruation and the like chap. 8. fol. 35. Protestants confesse that the Primitiue Church of Christ beleeued taught practised the Sacrifice of the Masse as also that it is a Sacrifice according to the order of Melchisedech and truly Propitiatory for the liuing the dead chap. 9. fol. 41. It is acknowledged by Protestants that the Fathers of the Primitiue Church taught and beleeued the Power of Priests to Remission of Sinnes The necessitie of Auricular Confession The Imposition of Pennance and satisfaction to God thereby As also our Roman Doctrine of Pardons or Indulgences chap. 10. fol. 46. It is granted by Protestants that the Catholick Doctrine of Purgatorie of Prayer and Sacrifice for the dead was beleeued taught and practised by the Fathers of the Primitiue Church chap. 11. fol. 50. It is confessed by Protestants that the. Fathers of the Primitiue Church beleeued and taught our Catholick Doctrine of Christs Descending into Hel. chap. 12. fol. 55. It is confessed by Protestants that the Fathers of the Primitiue Church beleeued and practised our Catholick Doctrine of praying to Angels and Saints chap. 13. fol. 57. It is confessed by Protestants that the Fathers of the Primitiue Church allowed the vse of Christs Image and his Saincts placing them euen in churches and Reuerencing them chap. 14. fol. 60. It is acknowledged by Protestants that the Fathers of the Primitiue Church did specially honour reuerence the holie Relicks of Martyrs and other Saints carrying them in Processions and making Pilgrimages vnto them at which also manie Miracles were wrought chap. 15. fol. 63. It is confessed by Protestants that the holie Doctours of the Primitiue Church not only vsed the signe of the Crosse but likewise worshiped the same attributing great efficacie power and vertue thervnto chap.
world could speake more fully for vs Catholicks in this behalf then doth the Protestāt (2) In his cōsideration of the Papists reasons pag. 105. M. Powel in these wordes I grāt that from the yeare of Christ 605. the Professant companie of Poperie hath been verie visible and perspicuous Or (3) In his discourse vpō the Catalo of Doc. ī the epi. to the Reader Simon de Voyon affirming that Anno 605. when Pope Boniface was stalled in the Papal Throne thē falsehood got the victorie c. Thē was the whole world ouerwhelmed with the dregs of Antichristian filthines abominable superstistions and Traditions of the Pope then was that vniuersal Apostacie from the Faith foretold by Paul And (4) In his exposition of the Creed v. 1. pag. 266. M. Parkins hauing spoken of the second signe of Christs comming which there he maketh to be the reuealing of Antichrist in Boniface Anno 607. alleageth thē next after as a third signe and as being distinct frō the other a general departing of most men from the Faith saying respectiuely thereof during the space of nine hundred yeares c. the Popish Heresie so do Hereticks stile it hath spred it self ouer the earth and so vniuersally in his opinion through-out al parts of Faith that sayth he next afterwards and the faithful seruants of God were but as a handful of wheat in a mountaine of chaffe (8) In his Reioynder to Bristow p. 34 which can scarce be discerned And againe (5) Ib. p. 310. we say for the space of manie hundred yeares an vniuersal Apostacie ouerspred the whole face of the earth and that our Protestant Church was not then visible to the world but lay hid vnder the chaffe of Poperie and the truth of this the Records of al Ages manifest M. Morton (6) Protest Apeale p. 71. would euade these testimonies of M. Parkins by answering that he speaketh this only of the Article of the Popes Primacie and not in regard of so large continuance and general belief of the other points of our now Catholick Faith which yet is most vntrue Parkins speaking in general of a general departing from the Faith and of an vniuersal Apostacie In so much as the Protestant church or Religion was not according to Parkins then visible to the world In which sense also (7) In his Ansvver to a counterf Cath◠p. 36. D. Fulk confesseth that The very Religiō of the Papists came in and preuailed Anno Dom. 607. c. And so vniuersally that saith he The reuelatiō of Antichrist with the Churches flight into the wildernes was Anno 607. So clear and cōfessed it is that our now Roman Religion hath cōtinued vniuersally for these last thousand yeares A truth so euidēt also that most Protestāts do from thence inferre and auouch that al the Popes of Rome for these last 1000. yeares haue been Antichrists (9) De Antichrist in praef p. 1. 2. M. Powel affirmeth that the Pope hath been Antichrist at al times since Gregorie the Great According to (10) Cont. Bellar. par 1. pag. 371. Danaeus The Kingdome of that Antichrist hath now manifestly cōtinued more then nine hundred yeares from the Emperour Phocas to the time af Luther D. whitaker (11) De Eccles cōt Bellar p. 144. affirmeth Boniface the Third who liued Anno 607 and al his successours to haue been Antichrists (12) In his Answ to a counterf catho pa. 27. and in his confut of Purgatory pa. 344 and ParKins v. 1. pag. 266. D. Fulk auoucheth that the Popes from Boniface the Third were blaspemous Hereticks and Antichrists (13) In his treatise of Antic p. 4. D. Downeham auerreth that The whole row or rable of Popes frō Boniface the Third downeward were Antichrists (14) In his Tryal of the Romish cler pa. 330. M. wotton tearmeth Boniface the Third the first reuealed Antichrist And (15) Hist sacr par p. 189. Hospinian censureth him and al his successours to be verissimos Antichristos most true Antichrists D. whitaker (16) De eccl cōt 8. l. cōtro 2. q. 4. p. 144. deliuering his owne and other Protestants opinion herein sayth we affirme Gregorie the Great to haue been the last true and holie Bishop of that Church c. For those that followed were true Antichrists c. And because they aske and demand of vs some certain time we assigne them this to wit of Antichrist's first comming So manifest it is that al the Roman Bishops after these last thousand yeares being thus censured by so many Protestants for Antichrists haue no lesse professed and maintayned the present Roman Religion then Gregorie the Fifteenth who now gouerneth that Sea and is charged by Protestants to be Antichrist himself And as al the Popes for these last thousand yeares are thus censured for Antichrists so is the article of the Popes Primacie or supreme authoritie ouer the whole Church in al matters Ecclesiastical plainly acknowledged by D. Morton himself to be no lesse ancient For wheras M. Brierlie produceth the testimonies of Parkins Napper and Broccard for the continuance of our Roman Religion in general for these last thousand yeares D. Morton restraineth their meaning though vndeseruedly only to the point of the Popes Primacie saying (17) Prot. Appeal p. 71 The alleaged Authours speak of the Primacie of the Pope And againe 18 Ibid p. 72 Be it granted for so it is that the Papal Primacie beginning in Boniface the Third is now nine hundred yeares old So ancient and vniuersal is this so transcendent Article of the Popes Primacie in matters Spiritual A point of such importāce that D. Reynolds affirmeth therein (19) confe p. 568. the very being and essence of a Papist to consist And D. Whitaker auoucheth that (20) contra Duroe pag. 503. It is the head of Popish Religion of which almost al the rest depend But what more forcibly can be produced for the further confirming of our Churches foresayd cōtinuāce for these last 1000. yeares then the publick exercise of our Churches Liturgie the holy Sacrifice of the Masse during the foresayd time Seing not only according to D. Sutclif (21) Answear to Exceptions pa. 11. In the Masse the verie Soule of Poperie doth consist as also according to D. Whitaker (22) contra Duroe pag. 426. Nothing is more holie and diuine in our conceipt But withal the Masse including sundrie articles of our Catholick Faith as true external Sacrifice the Real presence of Christs Bodie and Bloud in the Eucharist Priesthood Prayer to Angels and Saints Prayer and Sacrifice for the dead and sundrie such like thereby doth plainely conuince the vniuersal continuāce of our Catholick Religion D. Luther (23) In colloquiis Ger. de Missae affirmeth that Priuat Masse hath deceiued many Saints and carried them away into errour frō the time of Gregorie for 800. yeares With him agreeth M. Tindal (24) Act. Mon. p. 1338 in
keeping of holie dayes in honour of Saincts And lastly The Popish Masse and Ceremonies To come now to the Armenians (11) Cent. 15. p. 477. Osiander confesseth that In the yeare On thousand foure hundred and thirtie Pope Eugenius then called a Councel at Florence c. To which Councel the Grecians Armenians Iacobins assented M. Marbeck (12) Com. Places p. 258. acknowledgeth that at the Councel of Florence the Christians of Armenia and India consented to the Roman Church and that the Greeks agreed And where as (13) Vol. 2. Generat 39. Nauclerus recordeth that Anno. 1145. The Embassadours of the Armenian Bishops as also their Catholick that is their vniuersal Metropolitan who hath vnder him more then a thousand Bishops came to Pope Eugenius being at Viterbo and hauing ended their iourney after a yeare and a half they offred their Subiection to the Apostolical Sea the same historie is mentioned by M. Symondes (14) Vpon the Reuel p. 223. 150. 250. And See Volater Geograph l. 10. and other Writers And of the great agreement between the Armenians and the Roman Church we may read Gomarus (15) Speculum Ecclesiae p. 163 172. and (16) l. 2 c. 23. fol. 183. Villamont in his voyages printed in French But D. Philip descendeth more particularly and sayth of the Armenians They haue their blemishes For in the forme of their Liturgie mention is made of Inuocation (17) Comment de Regno Christi l. 1. p. 35. And see Cathol Tradit p. 207. and Intercession of Saincts and of oblation of the Sacrament As also (18) Ibid. p 22. Let the Christian Readers know this that not only the churches of the Graecians but also Rutans Georgians and Armenians and Indians Aethiopians who are become Christians do hold the true and Real Presence of the Bodie and Bloud of our Lord wheresoeuer the Eucharist is celebrated c. And (19) Ibid. p. 56. agayne There are not wanting who think that as yet there remayne in sundrie places of Arabia some Mozarabes Christians whom it is euident in Africk and Spayne in former Ages to haue embraced the Religion of Christians not much vnlike to the Popish Rites By al which it appeareth that the anciēt Armenians receiuing their Religion from the Apostles do agree with vs Catholicks in Inuocation of Saincts (21) Cent. 16. p. 970. The Real Presence The oblation or Sacrifice of Christs Bodie In acknowledging their obedience to the Church of Rome and in brief in their Religion in general not much vnlike to that of the Papists Now as touching the Grecians (20) Estate of the Church p. 253. Crispinus affirmeth that (23) Acta Theologorum Vvittemb Ieremiae Patriarchae Constantinop de Augustana Confes p. 55. 102. 128. Anno. 870. the Greek and Latin Churches became diuided only for the Primacie and diuersitie of Ceremonies so fully did they at that time consent in al other poynts Osiander speaking of the other Oriental Churches further remote auerreth that Anno 1585. the Christians who inhabit neer to Mount Libanus became at last conquered and subiect to the Turkish Empire Neither is that to be maruailed at for the Christians in the East haue not sincere Religion but are in most part of Articles Popish Sir Edwin Sandes (22) In his last leafe but fiue in his Relation of the State of Religion vsed in the West partes of the world auoucheth that The Greek Church doth concurre with Rome in opinion of Transubstantiation and generally in the Sacrifice and whole bodie of the Masse In praying to Saincts and Auricular confession in offring Sacrifice and prayer for the dead Purgatorie and worshiping of Pictures c. Yea the Protestant Diuines of Wittemberg do fully testify that the Greek Church yet to this day professeth and teacheth Inuocation of Saincts and Angels (24) Ib. p. 243. 368. Reliques (25) Ib. p 243. 244 247. 251. Worshipping of Images (26) Ib. p. 86. 96. 100. 240. 380. Transubstantiation (27) p. 102. 104 And see Cath. Tradit p. 129. 137. Sacrifice The signifying (28) p. 97. 99. 100. Ceremonies of the Masse (29) p. 87. 10. in Prefat Auricular Confession (30) p. 79 89. Inioyned Satisfaction (31) p. 78 238 Confirmation with Chrisme (32) p. 242. 326. Extreme Vnction (33) p. 77. 242. And Cath. Trad. p. 197. and al the seauen Sacraments Also (34) p. 93. 102. 109. Prayer for the dead (35) p. 93. 104. Sacrifice for the Dead (36) p. 93. 109. Almes for the dead (37) p. 224. 296. 367. Freewil (38) p. 132. 257. Monachisme (39) p 111. 129. 135. vowes of Chastitie (40) p 126. The fast of Lent and other set Fasting-dayes That (41) p. 129. Priests may not marry after Orders taken And lastly to omit manie others That (42) p. 131. 138. 142. the Tradition and doctrine of the Fathers is to be kept So plainly in al these chief Articles of Faith doth the Grecian Church remayne vnchanged and wholy consonant with the Roman But now at last to come to our Neighbours the Britans whom we haue proued before to haue been conuerted in the Apostles times concerning them I wil only declare two things First that the Faith which at first they receaued they kept for six hundred yeares euen vntil the comming of S. Augustin into England vnchanged and the same in al matters of weight and substance The Second that the Faith and Religion which S. Augustin taught in England and which is formerly confessed to haue been altogether Catholick or Romish was the self same Faith and Religion which the Britans beleeued and professed some Ceremonies excepted Now as touching the First M. (43) Pageant of Popes Cent. 1. c. 70. Bale confesseth that The Brittans being conuerted by Ioseph of Arimathia held that Faith at Austins comming And (44) Cent. 1. c. 90. There was alwayes amongst the Brittans preaching of Truth most sure Doctrine and such Worship as was by Gods commandment giuen of the Apostles to the Churches wherupon he calleth the then Brittan Church (45) Cent. 1. c. 73. the true Church of Christ D. Fulk (46) Answ to a Counterf Cath. p. 49. affirmeth that The Brittans before Austins comming continued in the Faith of Christ euen from the Apostles times yea he calleth the Brittans of S. Austins time (47) In 2. Cor. 12.12 Catholicks c. with whom Christian Religion had continued in Succession since the Apostles time M. Fox (48) Act. Mon. p. 463. auoucheth that The Brittans after the receiuing of the Faith neuer forsook it for anie manner of false preaching of other nor for torments and that (49) In his Protestat Religion remained in the Brittans vncorrupt and the Word of Christ truly preached til the comming of S. Austin But M. Midleton (50) Papisto-mastix p. 202. confirmeth this poynt further by succeeding testimonies of the
Iustification In like sort where Protestants teach only Baptisme and the Lords Supper to be Sacraments the Catholick Church beleeueth Seauen to wit Baptisme Confirmation Pennance Eucharist Orders Matrimonie and Extreme Vnction To examine now what is confessed herein from the Faith and Doctrine of the Fathers of the Primitiue Church and first concerning the efficacie of Sacraments S. Austin expressing the difference between the Sacraments of the Old Testament and ours affirmeth that (3) In Ps 73 And cont Faust l. 19. c. 13. In Ps 72. In Io tract 11. 41. The Sacraments of the New Testament giue Saluation whereas The Sacraments of the Old Testament did but promise the Sauiour This his saying is so direct against Protestants that Musculus blusheth not to say (4) loc com p. 299. It was spoken by Austine without consideration And the like reprehension is made by Caluin But (5) Inst l. 4 c. 15. Sect. 7 Musculus not satisfyed with reproof only of S. Augustin reprehendeth further the Fathers in General for that sayth he (6) loc com p. 299. They attribute greater efficacie to our Sac aments then to the Sacraments of the Old Testament affirming ours to be effec ual signes of Grace not oâ—ly signifying the same as the others did but also conferring and giuing Grace and Saluation This efficacie or conferring of Grace the Fathers exemplify in Baptisme insomuch that the Centurists write thus (7) Cent 3. c. 4. col 82. Cyprian dareth to affirme that the person baptizing giueth the Holie-Ghost and inwardly sanctifyeth him that is baptized And (8) Cens. 3. col 247. Cyprian thinketh al sinnes to be taken away in Baptisme And (9) Cent. 3. col 260. Origen truly taught concerning the effect of Baptisme that the filth of Sinne was taken away thereby Trac 35. in Math. and hom 15. in Iosuam In like sort of other Fathers most ancient as Iustin Clement c. it is confessed by the Centurists that they (10) Cent 2. c. 4. col 47. Thought Regeneration to be wrought by baptisme the word vnto which two ioyned togeather they attribute efficacie that is to say remission of sinnes But Zuinglius auoucheth in general that (11) Tom. 2 de bap f. 70. And see Luth. To 2. fol. 229. It was a great errour of the old Doctours in that they supposed the external water of Baptisme to be of anie value towards the purging of sinne But the Fathers were so ful herein that as D. Whitâ—k r (12) l 10. cont Dur. p. 883. Sarc loc com â—om 1. f. 232 and Sarcerius acknowledge they condemned the Manichees amongst other errours in that They did deny that sinnes were remitted and Grace conferred in Baptisme From hence the ancient Doctours taught so great necessitie of Baptisme that they firmely beleeued that ChildreÌ„ dying vnbaptised could not be saued M. Carthwright testifyeth that (13) In Whitguift Def p. â—22 S. Austin was of mind that children could not be saued without baptisme For which his opinion he further chargeth him with (14) Ibid. p 516. Absurditie And the same is acknowledged by (15) Disp Ratisb p 398. Bul. Dec. 5. Ser. 8. p. 1049. Dil. Disp breu p. 4. 5. Bucer Bullinger Dilingam who alledgeth to this end sundrie particular Sayings of S. Austin And Musculus confesseth 16) Loc. com p. 308. that Austin and some other Fathers were of the same opinion S. Cyprian also is reproued for the same Doctrine by Scultetus 17) Medulla Theol. p 370 saying These blemishes are noted in Cyprian c. that he thinketh Baptisme to be absolutely and simply necessarie Vrbanus Rhegius affirmeth that (18) In parte 1. oper in Catechismo min. f. 105. The Scripture and Authoritie of the ancient Church constraine him to beleeue that litle children dying vnbaptized are damned And by reason of this necessitie the Fathers doubted not as Caluin sayth (19) Inst l 4 c. 15. sec 20. almost from the verie beginning of the Church to vse the Baptisme of Lay-persons in danger of death Concerning the number of the Sacraments it is to be obserued that the Fathers not foreknowing our present Controuersie therof did but speake of them as also of other poynts of Faith casually as occasion was ministred and so accordingly S. Austin sometimes mentioneth but one sometimes two and sometimes more (20) In Ps 103. Con. 1. De Bap. cont Don. l. 5. c. 20. ep 119. c. 7. therfore it is sufficient if the Fathers in this sort do make mention of al our Sacraments And yet in our behalf the testimonie of Luther is verie strong who writing of this poynt obiecteth thus (21) Tom 2. Wittemb de Capt. Babyl f. 84. But thou wilt say what do you answer to Dionisius who numbreth vp six Sacraments c. I answer sayth Luther that he alone of the old Writers is to be had for seauen Sacraments although omitting Matrimonie he only reciteth six And the like is confessed by him of D. Humfrey (22) Iesuit part 2. p. 519. who affirmeth that S. Dionisius in this respect displeased Luther (23) Exam. part 2. p. 7. Chemnitius confesseth out of S. Cyprian that he numbrelh fiue Sacraments and only euadeth that the Sermon de Ablutione Pedum is not S. Cyprians but forged vnder his name In like sort where Tertulian casually mentioneth diuers of our Sacraments namely Baptisme Extreme Vnction Confirmation Orders the Eucharist saying most wittily (24) l. De Resur Carnis c. 8. The flesh is washed that the soule may be cleansed the flesh is annoyled that the soule may be consecrated the flesh is signed that the soule may be armed The flesh is couered with Imposition of hands that the soule may be enlightned with the Spirit the flesh eateth the Body and Bloud of Christ that the soule may be fatted to God This Saying is so displeasing to Protestants that M. Parker in great choller demandeth (25) Against Symb. part 1 sec 11. p. 77 p. 2. sec 10. p. 132. Who can brooke it But more in particular concerning Chrisme or Confirmation sundrie Protestants (26) Ministers of Lincolne Dioc. in their Abridgment p. 40. And see Park against Symbol p. 1. p. 133. reproue Tertulian Cyprian Ambrose with errour of vsing the Crosse in Confirming those that were baptised M. Parkins sayth (27) Vol. 2 p 653. This vnction pertayned to Baptisme in the West til aboue Three hundred yeares after Christ for then was there another Confirmatorie vnction deuised by Melchiades or as some say before him by Vrbane the first who liued about Anno 223. S. Cyprian teaching that 28 l 1. ep 12 It is necessarie that he who is Baptised receiuing Chrisme should also be annoynted the (29) Cent. 2 col 125. Centurists reproue him for the same affirming further that in these ancient times vnction and imposition of hands followed Baptisme of which Tertulian c. which custome
with Christ And in his Epistle to Caluin he further reproueth for this Doctrine Cyril and some other Fathers Caluin (14) Lib. Ep. Resp ep 208 p. 392. speaking of the Real Presence writeth thus Although I see the ancient Fathers and especially Hilarie and Cyril to haue gone further then was fitting c. They in their ignorance catched fly to a miserable refuge c. But lest these new fusores forgers should vrge their authority it shal be sufficient for me not to subscribe c. So likewise (15) In Apolog Conf. August fol. 128. Melancthon alledgeth a Saying of S. Cyril as affirming the Real and corporal presence And the like doth Bucer (16) In his scripta Angl. p 616. 617 both of S. Hilarie and S. Cyril But to arise yet to more ancient times the Protestant (17) Commonâ—factio cuiusdam Th ologi de S Caena c. p. 211. 2â—8 Vrsinus affirmeth that In Cyprian are manie Sayings which seem to affirme Transubstantiation D. Beard sayth Wheras the Papists reply (18) Rectâ—a from Romish Re igion p. 245. that they teach no more then Cyprian did Thirteen hundred yeares since who sayd that Christ did beare himself in his owne hands at the last Supper I answer sayth he that Cyprian in that place and the rest of the Fathers els-where did often vse hyperbolical speaches to extol the dignitie of the Sacrament So voyd is D. Beard of better answer to so cleer words of S. Cyprian in proof of Transubstantiation And wheras S. Cyprian himself testifyeth that That bread which our Lord gaue to his Disciples not in shew but in nature changed by the omnipotencie of the Word is made flesh the (19) Cent 3. col 247. Centurists say herof Cyprian in his sermon de Caena Domini thinketh that in the supper there is the true Bodie and Bloud of Christ And the same also do they (20) Cent. 3. col 58. 260. affirme of Tertulian and Origen Yea it is reported and acknowledged by manie Protestant writers that in those verie times of Tertulian Cyprian and Origen Christians were accused that they killed Infants and eate mens flesh which calumnie vndoubtedly thence arised sayth Osiander in that Christians beleeued and confâ—ssed that in the sacred Supper of our Lord the Bodie of Christ was eaten and his Bloud drunk Moreouer S. Ignatius who by the confession of M Whiteguift (22) In his Def against Carthwright p. 408. was S. Iohn's Scholler and liued in Christ's time sayd of Hereticks of his time accordingly as is acknowledged by sundrie Protestants (23) Hamelmanus de Tradit Apo. c. 746. Chem. ExaÌ„ part 1. p. 94 Recitationes de Concilio Scripti libri CoÌ„cor p. 177 They do not admit Eucharists and oblations because they do not confesse the Eucharist to be the flesh of our Sauiour Iesus Christ which flesh suffred for our sinnes (24) Marg. Theol. p. 256 Adamus Franciâ—ci confesseth accordingly that Transubstantiation entred early into the Church And Antonie de Adamo (25) In his Anat. of the masse p. 236 freely confesseth that He hath not yet hitherto been able to know when this opinion of the Real and Bodilie being of Christ in the Sacrament did begin Melancthon for his supposed worth in learning tearmed by Lauatherus (26) Hist Sacr. f. 47. the Phoenix of his Age writeth hereof saying (27) lib. 3. Ep Zuingl OecolaÌ„p f. 132. There is no care that hath more troubled my mind then this of the Eucharist And not only myself haue weighed what might be said on either side (21) Osiand Cent. 3. l. 1. c. 3. p. 6. The Cent. cent 2. c. 3. col 26. 30. c. 7. col 123. And Cent. 3 c 3. col 10. Vad. Aphor. aâ— Euchar. l. 6. fol. 198. but I haue also sought out the iudgement of the old writers touching the same And when I haue layd al togeather I find no good Reason that may satisfy a Conscience departing from the Propriety of Christs words THIS IS MY BODY Bucer (28) Scripta Eruditorum aliquot viroruÌ„ de Caena Domini p. 37. And see Hospinian part 1 p. 292. Bucanus loc com p. 714. speaking also of the Fathers in general confesseth that their words sayings are with vs Catholicks and so euidently that he therfore purposely to auoyd their termes as being sayth he Seruiceable to Antichrist and ouer much varying from the Scriptures But (29) Six godlie Treat trans into Engl. p 48. Let no man think it strange sayth a French Protestant that the Successours of the Apostles haue from time to time corrupted the true vse of this holie Sacrament of the Eucharist c. And (30) Ib. p. 66 How was it possible that the first Bishops of Rome should draw the Princes Senatours and Romans vnto the Ghospel during the first Three hundred or Foure hundred yeares after Christ seing they did not labour but to corrupt the vse of the holie Sacraments and to restore the Iudaical Cereâ—onies and the Idolatries of the Heathen So displeasing to Protestants was the doctrine practise of the verie immediat Successours of the Apostles concerning the Sacrament of the Eucharist Now from this beleef of the Real presence of Christs Bodie and Bloud in the Sacrament proceeded first a most special care and warines least anie particle therof should fall vpon the ground S. Cyril of Hierusalem Catech. 5. speaking hereof thus premonisheth Take heed lest anie thing of it fal from thee c. A Saying so plaine that D. Fulk (30) Ib. p. 66 in lieu of better answear tearmeth it a meer Superstitious precept And wheras S. Austin l. 50. homil hom 26. writeth thus of the reuerend respect of those times in this behalf With what solicitude doe we obserue when the Bodie is administred vnto vs that nothing therof fal vpon the earth And Tertulian l. de corona militis we take it heauily that anie of our Chalice or Bread do fal vpon the ground And Origen hom 3. in Exod you that are accustomed to be present at the diuine mysteries doe know that when you receaue the Bodie of our Lord you doe with al warines and reuerence take heed that no litle therof fal downe c. These so learned and ancient Fathers are for these Sayings reproued by M. Parker (32) Against Symb. part 1. p. 148. Vadians Aphoris de Euch f 230. and others And Oecolampadius speaking 33) Lib. Ep. Oecolampadij Zuing. p. 690. of Reseruation of the Sacrament therupon inferreth that Hence was the Religion of the ancient Fathers who took it heauily the Eucharist to fal vpon the earth Secondly from the same beleef of the Real presence proceeded a special Reuerence worship and adoration therof by the ancient Fathers Insomuch that Chemnitius (34) Exam. part 2 p. 92. And see Chytreus de Bap. Euchar p. 472. alledgeth the seueral Sayings of Austin Ambrose and Nazianzene al of them affirming in his
others do report And that The manner was to send it by the Deacons to them that by sicknes or other necessarie impediment were forced to be absent to strangers Yea for this purpose they did in such places where they communicated not euerie day reserue some part of the sanctifyed Elements to be sent to the Sick such as were in danger of death Yea as then was vsual the Pixe for the reseruing or carrying therof in so much that (59) Assert Theol. part 2 sec 47. Marbachius confesseth that S. Basile reserued the Eucharist in a golden Doue And wheras D. Harding obiecteth for the Pixe the plaine testimonies of Symmachus Gregorius Romanus Gregorius Turonensis Theodorus the same are acknowledged by M. Iewel (60) In his Reply Art 9 p. 420. Fulk against Staplet p. 150 151. D. Fulk Lastly the Roman Church doth so directly follow the Doctrine and practise of the Primitiue Church in this so waightie a matter of the Eucharist as that she obserueth the external forme or figure therof vsed in the ancient Church D. Bilson (61) In his true Differ p. 4. p. 566. acknowledgeth from S. Epiphanius in Ancorato that the Eucharist was round in figure And M. Carthwright (62) In Whytguift Def. p. 593 And see Proet de Sacram p 287. 281. confesseth that it was a round wafer-cake brought in by Pope Alexander which Pope liued as Osiander (63) Cent. 2. p 10. Whitgift in his Def. p. 594. and D. Whiteguift confesse Anno Christ 111. which is now aboue 500. yeares Hospinian (64) Hist Sacram. l. 4. p. 370. auoucheth that It can not certainly be knowne when Christians first began either at home or in the Churcheâ— to prepare of floure or bread litle round Hostes morcels like peeces of siluer c. Epiphanius maketh mention of round bread in the Supper c. The ancient Iew s also did most plainly foretel the Real presence of Christs Bodie in the Eucharist and the Sacrifice therof for wheras Duraeus vrgeth from Galatinus the Hebrewes most plaine and plentiful Sayings iâ— behalf therof D. Whitaker answering thereto neither confesseth nor yet denyeth but only shufleth them off saying (65) Cont. Dur. l. 9. p. â—18 In this matter we do not desire thy Peter Galatin neither do we need those testimonies of the Hebrewes so not denying but rather supposing the truth of the forsayd testimonies euidently foreshewing and affirming the Real presence and Sacrifice of Christs blessed Bodie in the Sacrament And thus we see the Fathers and Doctours of the Primitiue Church to haue symbolized with vs Catholicks in the doctrine of the Eucharist teaching expresly First Transubstantiation itself Secondly and prescribing a most diligent care that no part therof do fal vpon the ground Thirdly yea and adoring it with special reuerence Fourthly and in that regard vsing Eleuation therof at Masse time as we stil continue Fiftly for which case they receaue fasting Sixtly the Marryed Laytie also forbearing the Companie of their wiues for some tyme before Receiuing Seauenthly Besides they not only kept and reserued the same for the sick and other such necessities But also vsed the verie forme figure of a round wafer-Cake obserued at this day Now the Fathers produced and reproued by Protestant Writers for the forsayd poynts are S. Gregorie Chrysostom Eusebius Emissenus Cyril Ambrose Hilarie Austine Nazianzene Basile Hierom Siricius Innocentius Calixtus Vrbanus Symmachus Gregorius Turonensis Epiphanius Cyprian Origen Tertulian Ignatius the Fathers in general The Protestants citing and confessing the foresayd Fathers are the Centurists Musculus Oecolampadius Vadian Anthonie de Adamo Peter Martyr Caluin Melancthon Bucer Osiander Vrsinus Hamelmanus Adamus Francisci Hâ—spinian Bucanus Chemnitius Chytreus Crispinus Marbachius Pelargus Altkircherus Zepperus Humfrey Whitaker Fulk Parker Parkins Carthwright Willet Iewel Field and Beard And now I appeale to al indifferent Readers whether Protestants themselues haue not sufficiently confessed that by the Sentence or Doome of the Senate of Antiquitie D. Morton and his Brethren are chargeable with Heresie as also the Romanists acquitted of Idolatrie Protestants confesse that the Primitiue Church of Christ beleeued taught and practised the Sacrifice of the Masse as also that it is a Sacrifice according to the order of Melchisedech and truly Propitiary for the liuing and the dead CHAPTER IX IT is the general (1) Conâ— Trident. sess 22. c. 9. and certaine Decree of the Catholick Church that Christ our Sauiour at his last Supper instituted a true and proper Sacrifice of his owne Bodie Bloud and that he gaue power and authoritie to his Apostles and to Priests their Successours to offer the same aswel for the Liuing as the Dead Protestants (2) Luth. de Capt Babyl c. de Eucha Chemnit Exam part 2. Caluin Instit l. 4. c. 18. §. 1. 2 deny al true proper and external Sacrifice to be ordained by Christ or to be vsed in the time of the Ghospel but only the spiritual Sacrifices of Prayse thankes-giuing and the like Now because D. Morton wisheth that (3) Prot. Appeale l. 2. p. 169. These two questions whether the Eucharist be a true essential Sacrifice whether it be properly Propitiatorie auaylable in itself for remission of Sinnes or no might be decided amongst other meanes by the verdict of ancient Fathers I wil therfore ioyne with him therein and that only from the verdict giuen by his owne Brethren S. Gregorie the Great is much reproued by manie Protestant Writers for his Doctrine and practise of the Sacrifice of the Masse M. Beacon (4) The Reliques of Rome p 344 affirmeth that the Masse was fully finished by Pope Gregory the first about Anno Domini 600. Melancthon (5) l. 4 Chr. in Henri i. 4 fol. 186. 187 confesseth that He allowed by publick Authoritie the Sacrifice of Christs Bodie Bloud not only for the liuing but also for the dead D. Humfrey (6) In Iesuit part 2. rat 5 p. 5 627. acknowledgeth that S. Gregorie S. Austin brought into England the Archbishops Palle for Solemne Masses Carion (7) Chr. l 4. p 567. 568. auoucheth that Gregorie c. approued the oblation of the Bodie Bloud for the dead M. Bale (8) Cent. 1. p. 68. granteth that Gregorie ordered the verie Ceremonies of the Masse made vp the Canon therof And that He commanded (9) Act. Rom. Pontif. p. 44. 45. 46. 47. Masses to be celebrated vpon the dead Bodies of the Apostles And the (10) Cent. 6 col 369. 370 69â— 694. Centurists charge him with Celebration of Masse Szegedine writeth that Gregorie is sayd to be the first Authour of this propitiatorie Sacrifice about the yeare Six hundred for he appoynted certain dayes in which Sacrifice should be offred with Solemnitie in the Church (11) Graues aliquot Quaestiones printed with Brunlerus fol. 161. 162. promised ardon of sinnes to such as came
and euen the whole Chaos of Popish Superstition be builded vp But to cleare S. Gregorie of al Innouation in this point of Doctrine The Centurists acknowledge that (33) Cent. 5. c. 6. col 692. S. Chrysostom mentioneth dayes of Indulgence and Pardon And D. Field (34) Of the Church l. 1. c. 17. p. 33. confesseth that The Ancient Bishops were wont to cut off great partes of enioyned Pennance which remission was called an Indulgence Now to conclude Confession being made and Pennance inioyned the Priest as the Centurists confesse for the practise of the Third Age did afterwards absolue the Penitent euen with the now-like vsed ceremonie of imposing his hand So that the Primitiue and our present Roman Church do confessedly agree in the doctrine of Pennance First As that Priests haue truly Power to remit Sinnes Secondly that Auricular Confession is necessarie Thirdly that after Confession Pennance is to be imposed Fourthly (35) Cent. 3 col 127. that the same is truly Satisfactorie Fiftly after Pennance Absolution is giuen with Imposition of hands Sixtly yea Pardons and Indulgences are acknowledged to be granted and vsed in those purest times of the Church Primitiue Now the Fathers cited and reproued by Protestants for our foresayd doctrines are S. Gregorie Leo Chrysostom the Doctours in the Age of Constantin Ambrose Augustin Cyprian Tertulian the Carthage Councel the 1. Councel of Neece and the Fathers in general The Protestants accusing them are the Centurie-writers Caluin Chemnitius Melancthon Hamelmanus Osiander Hieronimus Marius Pantaleon Valera Symonides Bale Humfrey Field Morton and Whitaker It is granted by Protestants that the Catholick Doctrine of Purgatorie and of Prayer and Sacrifice for the dead was beleeued taught and practised by the Fathers of the Primitiue Church CHAPTER XI WHAT more generally disliked by Protestants then our Catholick doctrine of Purgatorie and our charitable pracise of Praying Sacrificing for the dead And yet what more generally confessed by Protestants to haue been the beleef and custome of the Primitiue Church then Purgatorie Prayer and Sacrifice for the dead Concerning S. Gregorie D. Humfrey (1) In Iesuit part 2. rat 5 p. 5. 627. acknowledgeth that he taught vs Englishmen by the preaching of S. Austin the doctrine of Purgatorie c. the oblation of the healthful Sacrifice Prayers for the dead (2) In Chro. l. 4. p. 567. 568. Carion confesseth that he approued the opinion of the oblation of Christs Bodie Bloud to be made for the dead Iohn Bale (3) In Act. Rom. Pontif. p. 44. 45. 46. 47. is of opinion that he made his foure books of Dialogues for the vpholding of Purgatorie c. and admitted euen Masses for the dead The Magdeburgians (4) In the Index of the 6. Centurie at the word Gregorie charge him out of his owne writings with the Doctrine of Purgatorie c. (5) Cent. 6. col 373. and with oblation of Sacrifice for the dead D. Fulk (6) Ag. Rhem. Test in 1 Cor. 3. sayth In the dayes of Gregorie c. the opinion of Purgatorie had gotten some ground in the Latin Church c. yet in the place by the Rhemistes quoted he granteth it but for very smal offences D. Sutcliffe auoucheth that Gregorie (7) Subuersion c. 4. vsed Litanies allowed Purgatorie c. And wheras D. Whitakers confidently auoucheth that (8) Contra Duraeum l. 7. p. 480. He that first deliuered Purgatorie for a certaine Doctrine was Gregorie the Great Yet M. Symonides (9) Vpon the Reuel p 83. only chargeth him not with beginning but with increasing two pernitious things in the Church Inuocation of the Dead and Prayer for the dead yea D. Morton confesseth that S. Gregory (10) Prot. Appeale l 1. Sec. 17. p. 19. â—0 frameth thus his conclusions Because such Soules departed appearing after desire the help of the liuing the Sacrifice of the Altar is profitahle for them Wherupon our Doctour concludeth saying This doth giue vs cause to obserue in him a deep plunge into Superstition And againe S. Augustin spake with a Peraduenture but S. Gregorie kindled the fire with a Credo c. And now of late the Romanists haue blowâ—e the flame with an Anathema So hotly do Roman Catholicks follow the Sent giuen by S Gregorie and S. Augustin But to clear S. Gregorie of al Innouation in this poynt (11) Ibid. p. 498. I wil ascend to his predecessours and Ancients And to begin with S. Augustin whom though D. Morton pretendeth to speak hereof only with a Paraduenture or doubtfully yet Bullinger hauing perused diuers places of S. Augustins writings concerning this poynt auoucheth (12) De origâ—â— Erroriâ— f. 223. That not in one but in manie places Augustin maketh mention of Sacrifice for the dead c. in Enchirid. c. 109. for it is not to be denyed sayth he but that the Soules of the dead are releeued by the pietie of their liuing friends when the Sacrifice of the Mediatour is offered for them c. And in his 32. sermon de Verbis Apostoli This sayth he deliuered from the Fathers the whole Church obserueth that prayer be made for them who dyed in the Communion of the Bodie and Bloud of Christ when in their place they are remembred in the Sacrifice and the Sacrifice also is offered for them This therfore sayth Bullinger I set downe more at large that thou mayst vnderstand this custome of Sacrificing for the dead to be ordayned not by the Apostles but by the holie Fathers D. Willet affirmeth That diuers of the ancient Fathers (13) Tetrastylon part 3. p. 97. did incline too much to maintayne and commend prayer for the dead with which errour sayth he S. Austin seemeth somewhat to be infected Augustine sayrh Caluin (14) Instâ—t l. 3. c. 5. § 10 in his books of Confessions telleth that his mother Monica earnestly desired that Memorie of her might be made at the Altar in performing the mysteries An old womans desire sayth Caluin which her Sonne squared not by the rule of Scripture but through affection of Nature would haue it approued to others D. Fulk confesseth that (15) In his Confut of Purgat p. 1â—0 Austin de Ciuitate Dei l. 21. c. 13. concludeth verie clearly that some suffer temporal paynes after this life this may not be denyed Yea he boldly auoucheth that Austin (16) Ibid. p 313. blindly defended prayer for the dead D. Morton affirmeth that Protestant Authours (17) Prot. Appeal p. 495. haue obserued S. Augustin to haue been the first who opened the window vnto the doctrine of Purgatorie by whose owne direction sayth he we haue a good warrant to dissent from him c. So admitting S. Austin for Purgatorie but most disgraciously insinuating that therin he is contrarie to himself which as most palpably vntrue I forbeare to confute and only proceed cleerly to shew that neither S. Austin was first nor the sole man that opened
is acknowledged of Dionysius by Melancthon (49) In aliquot libel c. fol. 23. D. Fulk 50) Against Purgatory p. 353. which D. Fulk in plainest words teacheth that Tertulian (51) Against Purgat p. 3â—2 see p 303. 393. Cyprian Austin Hierom and a great manie more do witnesse that Sacrifice for the dead is the Tradition of the Apostles Wherunto Bucer accordeth (52) In Enarrat in Sacra quatuor Euangel in Math. c. 12. p 311. affirming that prayer and almes were made for the dead almost from the verie beginning of the Church Lastly Zuinglius being impugned for denying Prayer for the dead and pressed with the Authoritie of Fathers especially of S. Chrysostom S. Augustin who deriue this Custome from the Apostles answereth thus (53) Tom. 1. Epicheroe de Can. Miss f. 186. And see Tom. 2. in Elench contra Anabap f. 10. If it be so as Augustin and Chrysostom report I think that the Apostles suffred certayne to pray for the dead for no other cause then to condescend to their infirmitie So insimulating the Apostles wilfully to haue permitted others to erre according to the errours of Protestants in praying for the Dead which they could not do without errour in themselues Yea the Doctrine of Purgatorie and Prayer for theÌ„ dead was beleeued and practised by the ancient true beleeuing Iewes For whereas M. Morton speaking of the Church before the coming of Christ affirmeth the doctrine then taught by the Iewes to be now knowne among other Reasons (54) Treat of Israel the Church p. 93. 94. By the open Confession of the Iewes in al Ages since the coming of Christ For sayth he it is plaine that they hold euen to this day those opinions which they receaued from their Ancestours and were commonly held of that Nation Yea say the Centurists (55) Cent. 8. col 885. The Iewes are constant in their opinions And Pet. Martyr writeth that (56) Com. plac in Engl. part 2. p. 599. The Iewes as yet continue and kept in so great aduersities in so diuers and griâ—uous Captiuities and Dispersions they hold stil their Religion Doubtles no ancient Troians Lumbards Hunnes or Vandals haue so held their owne c. and could shew their original Historie set forth in most true writing and being euerie where dispersed as they were could neuertheles keep their owne Ordinances c. Now concerning these Iewes so constant in their Faith and admitting the bookes of Machabees but only for a true Historie it is euident thereby that Iudas Machabeus a holie and iust man procured (57) 2. Machab 2.43.45 Sacrifice for the dead and that the Priests of Hierusalem then true beleeuers offred the same wherein also our later Iewes are so conformable that D. Whitaker confesseth the same in these words (58) Cont. Dur. l. 1. p. 85. I know that the Iewes haue libros memoriales books of Commemorations which they read in their Synagogues and I am not ignorant that now they are accustomed to vse certaine prayers for the Dead Insomuch that Buxdorsius also reporteth their knowne and confessed doctrine of Purgatorie (59) Synagoga Iudaica p. 24. 505. 506. 508. 275. D. Beard auoucheth that (60) Retractiue from the Romish Religion p. 77. The Romanists are like vnto the Iewes in their doctrine and practise of Prayer for the dead for they hold and teach that prayer Sacrifice is to be offered for the dead grounding their opinion partly vpon the example of Iudas Machabeus who as they affirme procured Sacrifice to be offered by the Priests for the dead c. and partly vpon the Thalmudical Traditions of diuers of their ancient Rabbins From the Premisses then we may remember that the ancient Fathers did confessedly beleeue a place of Purgatorie after this life Secondly wherin Sinnes were punished and remitted Thirdly for which Remission they vsed to Pray giue Almes and offer the most precious Sacrifice of Christs Bodie and Bloud Now the Fathers acknowledged and reprehended by Protestants for the forsayd Poynts are S. Gregorie Austin Ambrose Hierome Chrysostom Prudentius Epiphaenius Pelagius the Fourth Carthage Councel Cyprian Tertullian Origin Clemens Alexandrinus Dionysius the Areopagite the Apostles and the ancient beleeuing Iewes The Protestant Writers obseruing and disliking in the sayd Fathers the forsayd Poynts are Caluin Beza Bullinger Zuinglius the Centurie-writers Carion Chemnitius Osiander Melancthon Hospinian Winkelmannus Buxdorsius Bucer Symondes Bale Sutcliffe Humfrey Fulk Whitaker Gifford Willet Morton It is confessed by Protestants that the Fathers of the Primitiue Church beleeued and taught our Catholick Doctrine of Christs Descending into Hel. CHAPTER XII ACcording to the Article of our Creed He descended into hel Catholicks generally teach that the Soule of Christ presently after his death descended into Hel or Lymbus Patrum or Abrahams Bosome there to deliuer and redeeme the Captiue Soules of the holie Patriarks Prophets and other Iust who liued before his time But Protestants being diuided amongst themselues (1) Buâ—er in c. 27. Mat. Beza in c. 2. Act. some of them teach that by the foresayd Article is only vnderstood that Christ descended to his Graue (2) Calu. Instit l. 2. c. 16. § 8 9. 10. 11. 12 others that he suffred the paynes of the Damned Soules Now do decide this Controuersie by the beleef and Doctrine of the Fathers of the Primitiue Church and that by the confessed acknowledgement of our Aduersaries who in a case so euident liberally confesse the general streame of ancient Doctours to be most aduerse vnto them in this verie Article of our Faith wheras that most holie and euer renowmed Cardinal Bellarmine in proofe of this Article alledged (3) Tom. 1. l 4. de Chri. Anima c. 14 the plaine testimonies of the Greek Fathers as namely of Iustin Ireneus Clemens Origen Eusebius Basil Nazianzen Nyssen Epiphanius Chrysostome c. And of the Latin Fathers Tertulian Hypolitus Cyprian Hilarie Gaudentius Prudentius Ambrose Hierome Ruffinus Austin Leo Fulgentius c The Protestant (4) Ad Bellarm Disput part 1. p. 176. Danaeus in answer to so manie most famous Fathers testimonies most barely affirmeth that As concerning them they were not instructed out of Gods word neither do they confirme their opinion from it but only from their owne coniectures c. Thus supposing their Catholick opinion herein and therefore reiecting al their iudgements as confirming their Faith only by their owne coniectures in Danaeus his opinion which as no lesse absurd in itself then improbable to al Iudicious I omit as an answer purely Protestantical In like plaine manner (5) Conc. Dur. l 8. p. 567 And see p. 773. D. Whitaker in answer to the like testimonies of the Fathers vrged by our Catholick Writer Duraeus writeth thus That which thou couldest not do by Scriptures no doubt thou wilt performe by the testimonies of the Fathers of whom that I may freely and briefly answer thee what I
Relicks is so great as that (29) Exam. part 4. p. 7. Chemnitius confesseth that Hierom writeth that the Hereticks Caiani were condemned by Tertullian for that they would not honour the Relicks of Martyrs From al which it appeareth that most special Reuerence was giuen to the holie Relicks of Saincts by the Fathers of the Primitiue Church of Christ who celebrated Masses ouer them Dedicated Churches in their honour Translated them carryed them in Processions made Pilgrimages vnto them and frequently make mention of the manie and strange Miracles wrought by them The Fathers cited and reproued by Protestants for the foresayd poynts are S. Gregorie Hierom the Emperours Constantin and Arcadius Augustin Ambrose Chrysostom Theodoret and Tertullian The Protestants their Accusers are the Centurists Carion Bullinger Chemnitius Crispinus Hospinian Osiander Zepperus Marius Bale Humfrey Brightman Parker Fulk Fox Beard and Whitaker IT IS CONFESSED BY PROTESTANTS THAT THE HOLIE Doctours of the Primitiue Church not only vsed the signe of the Crosse but likewise worshiped the same attributing great efficacie power and vertue thereto CHAP. XVI ALthough the CROSSE OF CHRIST by reason of that dignitie which it obtayned by touching the Bodie and Bloud of Christ may truly be esteemed amongst â—he most precious Relicks As also in that it representeth the figure of our Lord Crucifyed it may rightly be numbred amongst the honest Images Yet because withal it is indeed the high Altar of the chiefest Sacrifice wherby the wrath and Iustice of God was satisfyed the ladder wherby Christ himself ascended into heauen the worthiest Instrument of mans Redemption and Satans foyle and as now is the fairest Marke wherat our Modern Hereticks do leuel and direct their poynsoned arrowes of foulest Contumelies Iniuries and Disgraces I wil therefore seuerally treat thereof and that from the confessed testimonies practise and beleef of the most holie learned and ancient Fathers of the Primitiue Church Luke (1) Cent. 6. p. 289. 290 Osiander discoursing of the seueral articles of the Catholick Roman Religion taught by S. Gregorie and S. Austin amongst the rest doth number the allowance and vse of holie Crosses (2) In Act. Rom. Pontif p. 44 45.4â— M. Bale acknowledgeth that he admitted worshipping or adoration of the Crosse But M. Symondes chargeth him (3) Vpon the Reuel p. 83.84 85 86. that He instituted the worship of the Crosse barefoote on Good Fryday And Peter Martyr (4) In his common places in Englih part 2. c. 5. sec 14. p. 343. yet further affirmeth that Gregorie of Rome the Patron sayth he of Superstitions sayth in his prayers Grant vnto vs Lord that they which come to the Adoring of thy Holie Crosse may be deliuered from the bonds of their sinnes For which poynt of Adoration or worship of the Crosse Conwal King of Scotland who liued within the first six hundred yeares is reproued by (5) In the later Edition p 107. Hollinshead in his Cronicle of Scotland But to arise M. Parkins (6) In his Problem p. 83. confesseth that About the foure hundreth yeare after Christ the Crosse began by litle and litle to be adored For which time he there alledgeth the direct testimonies of Prudentius Hierom and Euagrius And he also granteth else where (7) In volume 1. p. 681. that sundrie priuat men and particular Churches after Foure hundred yeares began religiously or ra her sayth he Superstitiously to adore the wood of the Crosse and the peeces therof c. Caluin relating that S. Augustin tract 50 in Ioan. affirmeth that the faithful haue Christ by the signe of the Crosse by the Sacrament of Baptisme and by the meat and drink of the Aultar he presently affirmeth that Augustin (8) Inst l. 4. c. 17. § 28. numbred that Superstitious Rite amongst the Symbols of the Presence of Christ. d. Abbots (9) In his Answer to D. Bishop p. 168. aknowledgeth and translateth those words of Eusebius in his 3. book of the lyfe of Constantin Atque interdum vultum salutari illa Passionis signauit nota in this sort He signed his face with the signe of the Crosse (10) In his coÌ„mon places part 2 c. 5. sec 20. p 349. Peter Martyr writeth that Constantin made the signe of the Crosse in gold I allow not c. And wheras (11) De vita Constant l. 1. c. 22. Eusebius relateth and that from the mouth of Constantin himselfe who confirmed the same with oath that The Signe of the Crosse appeared to him in the afternoone in great light aboue the Sunne and a writing therin with those words In hoc vinces In this signe thou shalt ouercome The same Historie is reported out of Eusebius (12) Cent. 4 l. 1. c. 30. by Osiander (13) In Apocal c. 16. p 604. M. Fox (14) In M. Trigs true CatholicK p. 295 M. Gualter and M. Trigge al Protestant Writers And agayne (15) Hist l. 1. c. 8. Zozomene and Eusebius (16) De vita Constant l. 2. c. 7. relating that In what part of the Armie the Standard of the Crosse was seen there the Enemies fled and the Conquerours pursued which the Emperour vnderstanding when he saw anie part of his Armie languishing there he commanded the Standard to be placed as a certayne helpe for the obtayning of victorie and by the help wherof the victorie was forthwith obtayned by a certayn diuine power the strength of his Souldiers being much confirmed Al this is acknowledged by (17) In Apoc. in c 12 p. 326.327 M. Brightman (18) De Templis p. 165. and Hospinianus D. Fulk (19) Agaist HesKins c. p. 657. affirmeth that by Report of Paulinus the Crosse was by the Bishop of Hierusalem brought forth at Easter yearely to be worshiped of the people Yea sayth (20) Vol. 2. p. 596. M. Parkins The Bishop himself was the chief of the worshippers c. This Paulinus liued in the fourth Age and was as Osiander confesseth (21) Cent. 5. l. 3. c. 20 p. 386. verie familiar with Hierome Ambrose and Augustin Danaeus (22) In 1 partis altera parte ad Bellarm. p. 1415. auoucheth that Cyril and sundrie other Fathers were plainly Superstitious and blinded with this inchantment of the Crosses Adoration For which poynt of Adoration M. Parker (23) Against Symbolizing part 1. p 14 part 2. c. 6. p. 61. alledgeth the Saying of Photius Sedulius Chrisostom Propertius Paulinus Hierom and Euagrius al whom he reprehendeth for the same The (24) Cent. 4. col 302. Centurists say of Ephrem that he attributeth ouer much to the signe of the Crosse And D. Fulk (25) Against HesKins c. p. 657. affirmeth that Ruffinus and Cyril had a Superstitious estimation of the signe of the Crosse And the (26) Cent. 4. col 459. Centurists charge them for that At euerie foot they signed their forhead with the signe of the Crosse which signing was so ordinarie in those times as
reporteth that Constantin when he went to the warres vsed to carry about with him a Tabernacle made in forme of a Church to the end that a Consecrated house should not be wanting either to himself liuing in the Deserts or to his Armie c. And that Priests and Deacons did daily attend vpon the Tabernacle the truth herof is so certaine that it is confessed by Crispinus 7) Of the Estate of the Church p. 89. But for further testimonie of hallowing of Churches in those ancient times see D. Fulk 8) Against Rhem. Test in 1. Thim 4. see 13. fol. 378. the Centurie-writers 9) Cent. 4. col 408. and Crispinus 10) Of the Estate of the Church p. 93. Secondly these Consecrated Churches were dedicated in memorie of Christ or some of his Saincts In which respect S. Gregorie is charged by 11) Chron. l. 4. p. 567. 568. Carion to haue Commanded Churches to be dedicated to the bones and Ashes of Saincts M. Mason affirmeth that 12) Consecration of Engl. Bishops p. 57. In Canterburie the Regal Cittie euen when Austin arriued there was a Christian Church built in the time of the Romans dedicated to the Memorie of S. Martin And wheras Eusebius de vita Constantini l. 3. c. 47. relateth that Constantin erected Churches in the honour of Martyrs And l. 4. c. 58. 59. dedicated a most sumptious Church in Memorie of our Sauiour's Apostles the 13) Cent. 4. col 408. Centurists speaking hereof say These Dedications seem to haue sprong from Iudaisme without anie Commandment of God Yea 14) Cent. 4. col 452. they further confesse that Constantin appointed a verie Solemne Feast for the Dedication of the Church And Brightman 15) Apoc. in c. 12. p. 325. acknowledgeth that at Constantins comming in c. Temples were Consecrated to Martyrs Yea sayth D. Beard 16) Retractiue from Romish Religion p. 388 389. The Annual Feastes of Dedication of Churches grew from a sinister imitation of Constantin the Great who because he kept a Solemne day at the Dedication of a certain Church which he had built therfore it was receaued as a law c. to solemnize euerie yeare a Holiday vpon the day of the Dedication of their Church Thirdly in the Churches was built a place seueral for the laying vp of holie things called the Vestrie wherof the Centurists 17) Cent. 4. col 835. alleage the Laodicen Councel saying It is not fit that Subdeacons haue libertie to goe into the Vestrie and touch our Lords vessels Yea they 18) Cent. 4. col 409. And see Osiand cent 5. p. 391. acknowledge the Vestrie to be mentioned by S. Ambrose l. 1. offic c. 50. Fourthly as concerning Chancels D. Raynolds 19) In his Conference with M. Hart p. 488. confesseth from S. Denis the Areopagite that in his time there were Chancels seuered with Sanctification from the rest of the Church And Hospinian 20) De Templis p. 85. makeh mention of Chancels vsed in Constantins time And the Centurists 21) Cent. 4. col 1165. Hospin do Templis p. 85. 86. 87. affirme that Lay-persons were prohibited to come into the Chancels Osiander 22) Cent. 4. p. 390. chargeth the Laodicen Councel as Superstitious herein Fiftly but nothing was more diligently regarded and obserued in Churches then sacred Altars S. Gregory is charged by the Centurists 23) Cent. 6. col 369. with Consecration of Altars And Osiander 24) Cent. 6. p 289. 290. affirmeth that Augustin sent by S. Gregorye thrust vpon the English Churches the Roman Rites and Customes to wit Altars c. Peter Martyr 25) In his Common places in English part 4. p. 225. writeth that Petrus Alexandrinus attributeth more to the outward Altar then to the liuelie temples of Christ He further 26) Ibid. p. 226. confesseth that Optatus l. 6. against Parmenianus sayth what is the Altar Euen the Seate of the bodie and bloud of Christ Such sayings as these sayth Peter Martyr edifyed not the people And for the selfe same Saying is Optatus reproued by the Centurie-writers 27) Cent. 4. c. 6. col 409. Hospinian 28) de Templis p. 98. And see p. 101. 459. 460 100. sayth I dare not deny but that in the time of Constantin the great Statelie Temples Statelie and beautiful Altars took their beginning and the same were fixed and of stone The Centurists 29) Cent. 4. col 409. speaking of the same Age affirme that The Histories of this time testify that there were Altars in the Churches c. but this Custome came into the Church of Christ from the Iewish custome But Praetorius 30) De Sacramentis 287. ariseth higher auouching that Anno 262. Pope Sixtus the Second abrogated the tables hitherto vsed and erected Altars which sayth he better represent Iudaisme then Christianisme M. Carthwright 31) â—n his 2. Reply part 1. p. 517. And see Iacob in his Reasons taken out of Gods word c. p. 58. thinketh that Ignatius calleth the Communion Table vnproperly an Altar Yea he 32) â—n his 2. Reply part last p. 264 reproueth the Fathers in general saying The ancient Writers abuse herein may easily appeare in that in this too great libertie of speech they vsed to cal the holie supper of the Lord a Sacrifice and the Communion table an Altar In like sort sayth Peter Martyr 33) In his Com. plac part 4. p. 225. The Fathers should not with so much libertie haue seemed here and there to haue abused the name Aultar So plaine it is that Altars consecrated were vsed in those ancientest times of the Primitiue Church Sixtly vpon these Altars were placed lights or Candles M. Bale 34) In Act. Rom. pontif p. 44. confesseth that S. Gregory gaue lights to Churches And D. Morton sayth of him 35) Prot. Appeal l. 1. p. 57. Margin He indeed requireth lights but not that therby he might burne day c. Which may seem to haue been rather the institution of his Successour Sabinianus for c. But our late Writer D. Beard proueth the same from 36) Retractiue from Rom. Relig. p. 65. the decree of our owne Popes Gregorie the First and Sabinian his Successour the one of which appointed certaine lands for the maintenance of waxe-câ—ndles and Lampes in Churches the other ordayned that burning lampes should be alwayes kept in their Churches The 37) Cent. 4. col 487. Centurists charge Constantin that He ordayned the burning of Candles in the Churches in the day-time And againe say 38) Cent. 4. col 410. they Eusebius hath reported that wax-Candles and Lamps were burned in the day-time in the places of the Assemblies by Constantin the great In like sort Crispinus 39) Of the Estate of the Chuâ—ch p. 93. thinketh that In Constantines time manie Ceremonies il-agreing with Gods Word were brought in as Candles lighted in the day-time M. Beard affirmeth that In
and disliked by 12) Cont Gandiner Ecl. 838. Peter Martyr as also by 13) Ag. Hoskins p. 83. Oecolam lib. 3. Epist p. 689. D. Fulk and Oecolampadius who answering hereunto sayd Cyril wrote this against the Anthropomorphites who taught that the bodie of Christ was corrupted if the remnants of the Sacraments were corrupted But this most strongly confirmeth both Reseruation and Real presence for how could the Anthropomorphites think Christs bodie to haue been corrupted the Sacrament being corrupted had they not thought Christs bodie to haue been in the Sacrament the same as then vsually reserued The denial of Priests power to remit sinne in the Sacrament of Pennance was condemned in the Nouatians against whom writeth S. Ambrose 14) l. 1. de Remit c. 2. c. 7. thus They say they giue the reuerence to God to whom alone they reserue the power of forgiuing sinnes but none do greater iniurie vnto him then those who wil breake his commandments for seing our Lord himself in his Ghospel hath sayd Receaue you the Holie-Ghost whose sinnes you shal remit they shal be remitted c. who doth more honour him he who obeyeth his commandments or who resisteth To omit the like censure giuen by Pacianus 15) Ep. 1. ad Sympron against Sympronianus the Nouatian Socrates relateth the Heretick Acesius to haue sayd that sinners 16) Hist Trip. l. 2. c. 13. were to be inuited to Pennance but the hope of Remission they were not to haue from Pirests but from God alone who hath power to forgiue sinnes which when he had spoken the Emperour sayd O Acesius set a ladder and if thou canst ascend alone to Heauen So strange and singular in those times was this opinion of the Nouatians and yet this Historie is so true that it is recorded and confessed by 17) Cent. 4. p. 119. CheÌ„ Exam. part 1. p. 188. part 2. p. 193. Cent. 4. col 653. Osiander Chemnitius and the Centurie-writers And M. Dilingam 18) Disp de natura Pâ—n p. 12. granteth that The Nouatians did reserue to God alone the power of forgiuing sinnes do so Protestants sayth he And may not I rather say and that most truly that Protestants do so and therin are right Nouations For what Protestants in England dare publickly now auouch that Ministers haue power not onely to declare but truly to forgiue sinne and that remission of sinnes is not reserued to God alone In like sorte concerning Pennance inioyned after Confession Theodoret reproueth the Hereticks Audiam 19) l. 4. her Fab. de Audiant for that They giue remission to such as are confessed without prescribing time for Pennance as the Lawes of the Church commande Concerning the Sacrament of Confirmation or Chrisme the Nouatians as Theodoret testifieth were farther condemned for that They 20) l. 3. her fab 2. â—aue not holie Chrisme to those who were Baptized by them And Eusebius testifieth that Nouatius himself being Baptized was not confirmed by a Bishop which he wanting sayth Eusebius how could he obtayne the holy Ghost Optatus reproueth 22) l. 2. contra Donatistas the Donatists for that they caused the reserued Eucharist to be throwne to dogs which dogs thervpon al raging rent in peeces their Maisters as guiltie of the holie Bodie They also threw out of the window a vial or litle bottle of Chrisme to the intent to breake it 21) Hist li. 6. c. 35. see M. Parker against Symbolyzing p. 77. 96. 97. the which being stayed by an Angels hand God preseruing it light safe amongst the stones For the denial of the external Sacrifice of the Masse Ignatius before censured certain Hereticks saying They do not admit Eucharists and oblations because they do not confesse the Eucharist to be the flesh of our Sauiour Iesus Christ c. And S. Augustin 23) Tom. 6. cont Aduen legis and Prophet c. 19. condemneth the Manichees for denying external sacrifice of whom he further sayth The 24) Tom. 6. cont faust Manich. l. 20. c. 18. Manichees being ignorant what is to be condemned in the Sacrifices of the Gentils and what to be vnderstood in the Sacrifices of the Hebrewes and what to be holden or obserued in the Sacrifice of Christians do Sacrifice their owne vanitye to the Diuel Yea the Armenians 25) Conc. 6. ConstaÌ„tinop can 32. were condemned for not mingling water with wine in the Chalice in time of the Sacrifice against whom was vrged the authoritie of S. Iames and S. Basil And S. Cyprian 28 affirmeth against the Hereticks Aquarij that in the chalice of our Lord water alone cannot be offred neither wine alone c. And as concerning Altars vpon which this sacrifice was offred Optatus 27) L. 6. cont Donatist sayth vnto the Donatists What is so Sacrilegious as to breake scrape and remoue the Altars of God in which sometimes yourselues haue offred For what is the Altar but the seat of the Bodie and Bloud of Christ These al your furie hath scraped or broken or remoued c. What hath Christ offended you whose Bodie and Bloud there resided at certaine times 26) l. 2. Ep. 3 What haue your selues offended that you should breake those Altars c. So clearly was our Protestants furie and malice in ruining Altars long before condemned in the Heretical Donatists And thus we see our moderne Protestants agreeing first with the Pelagians in denying the necessitie of Baptisme and grace remission of sinnes to be giuen thereby as also the Ceremonies of Exorcisme and Exsufflation to be therefore in them and the Manichees condemned for Hereticks by S. Augustin Secondly their denying of the Real Presence in the Eucharist was condemned in most ancient Hereticks by S. Ignatius Thirdly their denying of CoÌ„munion vnder one kinde was condemned in the Nestorians by the Councel of Ephesus Fourthly Their denyal the B. Sacraments Reseruation was condemned in the Anthropomorphites by S. Ciril Fiftly the denial of Priests power to remit sinne was condemned in the Nouatians by S. Ambrose Sixtly in whom also was condemned the denial of Confirmation and Chrisme by Theodoret and others Seauenthly the denial of External Sacrifice was condemned in the Manichees by S. Augustin and in others by S. Ignatius Eightly the not mingling of water with wine in the Chalice was condemned in the Armenians by the 6. Councel of Constantinople and in the Aquarij by S. Cyprian Ninthly the breaking and casting downe of Altars was condemned in the Donatists by Optatus And so I leaue it to the iudgement of anie indifferent man whether it standeth with more discretion and securitie concerning the former points of Faith and Religion to ioyne in profession and beleef with S. Ignatius S. Cyprian S. Ambrose S. Augustin S. Cyril Theodoret Optatus and the present Catholik Roman Church or with the most infamous and condemned Hereticks the Pelagians the Manichees the Donatists the Nestorians the Nouatians the Antropomorphites the Aquarij
abstinence from drie meâ—ts vpon an opinion c. that those things had an euil beginning Now if D. Fulk be comprehended in D. Mortons We then did he vndeseruedly obiect against Catholicks the errour of the Montanists So wholy impertinent is the obiection from Montanus And as to the abstinence from flesh and marriage the Manichees and Tatianists condemned flesh marriage as pertaining to the il God according to the Heresie of the Valentinian before them To this end sayth 21) Ad Quod vult-Deu haer 25. 40. 53. S. Austin of the Tatianists or Encratites They condemne marriages and esteeme of them al alike as of fornication and other pollutions neither admit they to their number anie that vse marriage They eatâ—â— flesh but account al flesh as abhominable A thing so euident that the Puritan M. Iacob 22) Def. of the Churches Ministerie of Eng. p. 59. answerably acknowledgeth in our behalf that Marcion the Heretick and Tatamus did absolutely condemne marriage and certaine meates and so are in no comparison with the Papists if they erred in nothing els In like sort sayth D. Morton our Aduersaries b) Prot. Appeal p. 600. feared the eating of certaine meates as the Heretical Tatianists and Manichees anciently had done but with a difference for the foresayd Hereticks taught that men might not eate certaine sortes of meats because they thought they were not made of the good God but of the Euil for the which cause they were condemned in Councels But abstinence from certaine meates is appointed in our Church say the Rhemists for chastising the bodie with Pennance Heerby acording vnto vs that it is not alwayes Quid but Quo that is not the same Action but the diuers principles and intentions of the Action do distinguish truth from Heresie So confessed a difference there is euen in D. Mortons Iudgement between our Catholick truth and the Heresie of the Tatianists and Manichees concerning abstinence from certaine meates To come then to the second against Prayer for the dead D. Fulk barely affirmeth that it is taken from Montanus not being able to alleage anie one testimonie of anie one Father witnessing the same or charging Montanus with errour in that respect Yea his owne conscience did tel him the contrarie when he confessed that he vttered this but of 23) Against Purgat p. 417. thought and 24) Ib. p. 263. coniecture and as a thing that may wel be so Whereas I haue proued 25 at large that Prayer for the dead was taught by S. Cyprian other Fathers liuing with and before Montanus To the third against Purgatorie fire Origens errour was that Hel-fire was not euerlasting but temporal which as S. Austin (26) Ad. quod vult haer 43. relateth should in time purge not only them that had ended their liues in most horrible sinnes but also the Diuels themselues Which opinion maketh so litle or rather truly nothing against Purgatorie that S. Austin and S. Epiphanus who confute the errours of Origen do yet (27) See before l. 2. c. 11. confessedly beleeue and defend the Catholick doctrine of Purgatorie and Prayer for the dead To the fourth against worshiping of Relicks of Saincts 28) haer 19. S. Epiphanius reporteth that the Essenes were a sect of Iewes that Marthis being the kinswoman of Elxat and Marthana his sister they were in the countrey of the Essenes adored for Gods for that they were of Elxais stock The spitle of which woman and the filthes of their bodies the Hereticks of that countrey did take to them therby to cure diseases but yet without anie effect at al. Now as this follie of the Essenes maketh nothing at al against the 29) Act. 19.12 napkins or handkerchefs which being brought from Paules bodie to the sick the diseases departed from them and the wicked spirits went out so neither doth it make anie thing against the Religious estimation of Saincts Relicks and the Miraculous cures which God hath shewed by them according to the vndoubted and confessed report and 30) See before l. 2. c. 15. testimonie of the ancient Doctours To the fift against the vulgar peoples praying in Latin or other vnknowne tongue S. Epiphanius relateth amongst the other errours of Elxai 31) haer 19. that he prescribed this prayer Abir anid moib nochile daasin ani daasin nochile moib anid abar selan which prayer being interpreted as S. Epiphanius affirmeth it was nothing but vaine words But what maketh this against godlie prayers allowed and prescribed by the Pastours of Christs Church So that D. Fulks pretended errours against the Catholick Church are nothing els being duly examined but malicious forged and idle inuentions of his owne braine Other Protestants m) Whitaker contra Duraeum l. 7. fol. 480. obiect that we take from the Manichees Communion vnder one kinde But this also is most vntrue for 32) Exam. part 2. p. 145. Zepperus de Sacrament p. 41. Chemnitius himself truly explaineth this and sayth The Manichees because they detested wine as an abhominable thing and imagined the bodie of Christ as only phantastical not to haue had true bloud they endeuoured to bring in the receiuing only of one kinde for which errours they were condemned by S. Leo and Gelasius and are stil by al Catholick Doctours And we are further cleered herein at large by (a) Prot. Appeal l. 2. p. 139 140. D. Morton in these words Knowing that the Manichees did heretically celebrate the Eucharist only in one kinde the bread but the wine they did not allow because they imagined wine to haue been created by an euil spirit and were therefore anciently condemned for Hereticks would now the Apologists hold it conscionable in Protestants to accuse the Romanists of that Heresie of the Manichees because they distribute not the Eucharist in both the elements bread and wine Nay would they not rather reiect this accusation as altogeather iniurious saying It was not the Manichees abstinence from the wine but the reason of that forbearance which was iudged heretical So kind is M. Morton here to Catholicks and so scrupulous in conscience least they should be iniured with this so vnworthie imputation But where was his conscience or ordinarie senses when directly contrarie to the premisses in the same booke of the Appeal himself produceth D. Whitaker and ioyneth with him charging vs Catholicks with the sayd imputed Heresie of the Manichees saying But b) Ib. p. 505. M. Whitaker in the same place did further more note the administration of the Eucharist but in one kind now vsed in the Romish Church to haue had the original from the Manichees c. Where now then was his want Shal it not be rather imputed to the Apologists who haue not answered vnto those points which they haue so willingly concealed then vnto our Doctours who hath obiected so many c Thus confessing D. Whitaker to haue obiected to Catholicks the foresaid Heresie of the Manichees and
to examine matters but to define nothing before his notice and withal not to communicate with Photius as a Bishop but only as a Secular man being ordayned contrarie to the Canons and hauing vniustly deposed Ignatius which when Photius perceuied he hindred the sayd Legats for conferring with anie but only their own followers and withal assembled a Synod wherein through the power of the Emperour he further confirmed the Deposition of Ignatius and his own Creation threatning also the Popes Legats that vnles they also would subscribe to the sayd Councel the Emperour would bannish them into remote Countries where for verie hunger they should be inforced to eate lice Through which terrours and also through bribes from Photius the Legats contrarie to the Popes command subscribed to the condemnation of Ignatius and establishment of Photius Which when Pope Nicolas truly vnderstood assembling a Councel in Rome he excommunicated Photius and his own Legats and deposed them al restoring Ignatius to his Sea Which Basil the Emperour succeding Michael according to the Popes determination fully executed Now what doth anie of this make against the Popes Supremacie but rather confirme the same seing that both Michael and Photius sent Embassedours to the Pope entreating that he would send Legats from himself for the redressing of abuses at Constantinople And when themselues were found cheifly faultie the Emperour was seuerely reprehended by the Pope and Photius excommunicated and deposed Adde hereunto that the Greek Writers themselues do generally testifye that both Michael and Photius were men extremely addicted to manie and most enormous vices and therefore their resisting the Pope is of no greater Authoritie then of an offender or Rebel resisting his lawful Iudge or Prince So likewise concerning the Bishop of Rauenna's resisting the Pope Anastasius cited by M. White in proof thereof reporteth (81) In Nicolao 1. that sundrie Persons going to Pope Nicolas with manie complaints of greiuous wrongs and dommages done vnto them by the sayd Bishop the Pope therevpon did by his Legats and letters admonish him to surcease the same and to make satisfaction Which the Bishop neglecting and adding stil more to his former impieties he further commanded him to repaire to Rome there in the Synod to answer in his own behalf which he likewise refusing and contemning to do he was therevpon Excommunicated by the same Councel Yea the Pope himself vpon the earnest intreatie of the people of Rauenna went to the same Cittie where presently he restored manie things taken wrongfully by the Bishop who hauing Intelligence before hand of the Popes comming was fled to Papia there to desire Ludonicus the Emperours help and backing against the Pope But as the people there in the streets did eschew his companie hearing that he was Excommunicated by Pope Nicolas so the Emperours answer was only this by his Messenger Let him go and laying pride aside let him humble himself to the Pope to whom both we and al the Church are subiect Which when the Bishop heard despayring of al other meanes he went to Rome where submitting himself to the Pope and promising reformation and performance of sundrie matters enioyned him and commanded by the same Pope he was therevpon absolued from his Excommunication and suspension from saying Masse This being the truth of the Storie concerning the Bishop of Rauenna his resisting the Pope I referre it to the Iudgement of anie impartial Reader whether this doth not strongly confirme the Primacie of the Bishop of Rome But to proceed after 900. 900. to 950. 950. and so forward D. White vrgeth sundrie abuses noted as then in the Church of Rome But those by him specifyed concerning only matter of life and manners are altogeather improper and insufficient to proue any change in Faith and Doctrine which was the only point pertinent to be proued Yea Baronius by him alleaged speaketh only of such abuses as were brought into the Church by Anti-Popes and Intruders not by true Popes And whereas further it is obiected that certaine of the English Clergie maintayned the Sacrament to be only a figure of the Bodie bloud of Christ against the Real Presence then increasing Besides that the confirmation hereof dependeth vpon the testimonie of the old Fabler Fox I haue shewed heretofore in the Examples of Scotus and Bertram that our Catholick Doctrine of Real Presence was confessedly beleeued and taught in the purest times of the Primitiue Church After 950. 950. to 1000. we haue fayth D. White Otho the Great that deposed Iohn the Pope and assumed into his hands the nominating and making of Popes hereafter c. But this only proueth what was done not with what right it was done for though through the solicitation of a false Synod Otho assented to the deposition of Iohn by reason of manie crimes obiected against him Yet the proceeding therin was in sundrie respects not Iuridical but directly contrarie to the much more ancient practise and decrees of the Church as Baronius proueth at large Anno 963. Neither is it true that Otho assumed into his hands the nominating and making of Popes hereafter for no sooner was Iohn deposed but immediatly in the hearing of the Emperour the Bishops assembled iâ— the same Synod sayd We choose Leo our Pastour that he may be the cheif and vniuersal Pope of the Roman Church to which though the Emperour afterwardes assented yet did he neither first nominate or elect him In this Semi-centurie M. White further vrgeth that Aelfricus Archbishop of Canterburie preached and published his Homilies against the Real Presence comming in But first Aelfricus the Archbishop of Canterburie was so Roman Catholick that D. Godwin testifieth (n) Catal. of Bishops p. 23. that he was brought vp in Glassenburie And M. Bale assureth vs that he was Schollar to S. Ethwald and Abbot of Abingdon and for his craftie (x) Cent. 2. c. 41. sayth he in promoting Papistrie made Archbishop of Canterburie Secondly the Protestants which (*) In the Preface before it published that Sermon confesse that the Authour thereof was no Archbishop of Canterburie And it is more likely to be true which M. Fox (y) Act. mon. p. 1148 1040. sayth that it was Aelfrick surnamed Bara an Heretick who as S. Dunstan appearing to one in a vision sayd as reporteth Osberne attempted to disinherit his Church but I haue stopped him sayth S. Dunstan and he could not preuaile Thirdly that Sermon diligently read maketh as much for Transubstantiation as against it Lastly though we should suppose for the present that Aelfricus did preach or publish such Homilies yet was that doctrine so far from comming in as then as that the best and ancientest Fathers of the Primitiue Church are formerly confessed and reproued for the same doctrine by sundrie Protestant Writers In like sort though Arnulphus a man vicious inueighed against the Pope vrging that if he be voyd of charitie puffed vp only with knowledge he is Antichrist
29. Armenians retaine stil sundrie points of Catholick Religion l. 1. c. 6. p. 29. Aultars vsed in Churches in time of the Primitiue Church l. 2. c. 22. p. 85. Aultars disliked by Hereticks l. 3. c. 2. p. 8. S. Austin the Monk commended by Protestants l. 1. c. 4. p. 16. 17. S. Austin conuerted England to the now Roman Faith l. â— c. 4. p. 16. B. BAptisme conferreth Grace and Remission of sinnes l. 2. c. 7. p. 33. Baptisme necessarie for the saluation of infants Ib. Baptisme ministred by lay persons in case of necessitie lawful l. 5. c. 2. p. 12. In Baptisme sundrie Ceremonies vsed by the Primitiue Church l. 2. c. 22. Barnabas the Apostle according to Protestants erred in Faith l. 5. c. 3. p. 23. Beades or litle stones vsed to pray with in time of the Primitiue Church l. 2. c. 22. S. Bede confessedly a Roman Catholick and a holie man l. 1. c. 3. p. 14. Berengarius his errour and Recantation l. 1. c. 3. p. 14. S. Bernard a Roman Catholick l. 1. c. 3. p. 15. and l. 3. c. 8. p. 53. Bertram no Protestant l. 3. c. 8. p. 46. Bigamus not admitted to Holie Orders in time of the Primitiue Church l. 2. c. 17. p. 73. C. CAlling necessarie for Preaching and Administration of Sacraments l. 4. c. 4. p. 13. 14. Protestant Ministers are distitute of al lawful Calling l. 4. c. 4. p. 15. 16. 17. seq c. The Calling of the English Ministerie l. 4. c. 4. p. 16. Some Protestants deriue their Calling from Catholicks Ib. p. 17. Others denye it Ib. p. 19. Calling by the Laytie allowed by Protestants Ib. p. 20. Protestants being confessedly destitute of al ordinarie Calling doe flye vnto extraordinarie Ib. p. 20. Extraordinarie Calling is euer confirmed by Miracles Ib. p. 21. Extraordinarie Calling is freed from errour Ib. p. 23. Catholick Priests haue lawful Calling l. 4. c. 4. p. 17. 18. 24. Candles lighted in Churches in the day in time of the Primitiue Church l. 2. c. 22. p. 86. Canticles reiected by Protestants as Apocryphal l. 5. c. 3. p. 20. Castalio his Apostacie l. 4. c. 2. p. 7. The name Catholick why imposed at first l. 3. c. 7. p. 30. 31. l. 4. c. 2. p. 9. Applied only to the Roman Church Ib. p. 9. Disliked by Protestants Ib. p. 9. Ceremonies approued by the Fathers of the Primitiue Church l. 2. c. 22. p. 89. Charles the Emperour a Roman Catholick l. 1. c. 3. p. 14. The Booke written vnder Charles his name against Images is counterfeit l. 3. c. 8. p. 45. Chrisme vsed and approued in the Primitiue Church l. 2. c. 22. p. 88. Christ to haue been ignorant condemned in ancient Hereticks and Protestants l. 3. c. 5. p. 15. Christ as God to haue suffred and dyed condemned in Protestants l. 3. c. 5. p. 15 Church to be knowne is most necessarie l. 1. c. 1. p. 3. Out of the true Church there is no saluation Ib. l. 4. c. 3. p. 11. Church of Christ is most ancient l. 1. c. 1. p. 3. Church of Christ cannot fayle l. 4. c. 2. p. 3 Church of Christ cannot erre l. 1. c. 1. p. 2 Church of Christ is euer visible l. 3. c. 3. p. 9. l. 4. c. 3. p. 10. 11. 12. Church of Christ conuerteth Heathen kings and Nations l. 4. c. 5. p. 24. 25. seq Church of Christ discerneth true Scriptures from Apocryphal l. 1. c. 1. p. 3 Churches were hallowed in time of the Primitiue Church lib. 2. c. 22. p. 90. Churches were dedicated to Christ and his Saints Ibid. p. 91. Churches had Vestries Ibid. Churches and Chancels Ibid. Commandments to be impossible condemned in ancient Hereticks and Protestants l. 3. c. 5. p. 14. Ten Commandments reiected by Protestants l. 5. c. 3. p. 19. Communion vnder one kind l. 3. c. 2. p. 6. 7. c. â— p. 21. Confession of the Aduersarie a strong Argument Praef. to the Reader Confession of sinnes to the Priest vsed in the Primitiue Church l. 2. c. 10. p. 47. l. 5. c. 2. p. 12. Confession being made Pennance was imposed l. 2. c. 10. p. 48. And Absolution giuen with imposition of hands Ibid. p. 49. Confirmation vsed in the Primitiue Church l. 2. c. 7. p. 33. 34. Consecration of water Bread Ashes and vsed in the Primitiue Church l. 2. c. 22. pag. 88. Cranmer his life and death l. 4 c. 4. p. 18. Creed of the Apostles doubted of by Protestants l. 5. c. â— p. 20. Crosse worshipped by the Fathers of the Primitiue Church l. 5. c. 2. p. 15. l. 2. c. 16. per totum The signe of the Crosse then vsed Ibid. Crosse vsed in Consecration of Sacraments Ibidem Miracles wrought by the Crosse and the signe therof Ibidem Crosse impugned by ancient Hereticks and Protestants l. 3. c. 3. p. 10. 11. Councels represent the Church l. 2. c. 1. pag. 1. Councels best meanes to decide Controuersies Ib. p. 2. Councels cannot erre in matters of Faith Ibidem Some Protestants pretend to submit themselues to general Councels Ibidem Councels reiected by Protestants lib. 5. c. 1. p. 9. Councel of Francford l. 3. c. 8. p. 44. D. DAntes the Poet. lib. 3. c. 8. p. 56. Dauid George his falling from Protestancie to Apostacie l. 4. c. 2. p. 8. E. ECclesiastes reiected by Protestants for Apocryphal l. 5. c. 3. p. 20. Emperours reigning during the time of the Primitiue Church reiected by Protestants for Papists l. 1. c. 5. p. 20. Eucharist to be the Sacrament of Christ's true Bodie Bloud was beleeued by the Fathers of the Primitiue Church euen by the confession of Protestants l. 2. c. 8. per totum l. 5. c. 2. p. 13. Eucharist carefully kept from falling l. 2. c. 8. p. 37. Eucharist adored in the Primitiue Church Ibidem Eucharist accustomed to be eleuated in Masse-time Ibid. p. 38. Eucharist receaued fasting Ibid. Eucharist receaued chast Ibid. Eucharist reserued Ibid. l. 3. c. 2. p. 7. Eucharist vsed in around figure in time of the Primitiue Church l. 2. c. 8. p. 39. Eucharist foretold by the ancient Iewes Ibidem Eucharist impugned by Hereticks lib. 3. c. 2. p. 6. 7. l. 3. c. 8. p. 51. Extreme-Vnction belieued and vsed by the Fathers of the Primitiue Church l. 2. c. 7. p. 34. F. FAith alone to iustifye condemned in ancient Hereticks l. 3. c. 5. p. 14. Fast of Lent confessedly approued and obserued in the Primitiue Church l. 2. c. 19. Fasts prescribed in the Primitiue Church Ibidem Aerius denying prescribed Fasts condemned by the Fathers of the Primitiue Church Ib. l. 3. c. 4. p. 13. Yet defended by Protestants against the Fathers Ibid. c. 5. p. 16. Fasts condemned in Montanus confessedly different from our Catholick Fasts Ib. p. 19. 20. Fasts not to be kept vpon the Sunday l. 2. l. 3. c. 4. p. 13. Fathers confessed by Protestants to haue been Papists l. 5. c. 1. p. 2. Fathers