ashamed and strive in vain to answer to this our objecting of Luther's foresaid Disputation had as before with the Devill For first [e] Brereley in his conclus to the Judges Sect. 9. initio at c. Mr. Clarke in his answer to the Censure given upon the Books of W. Clarke and Meredith Hanmer in the special tract there had of this matter and Mr. Fulke in his Treatise against the defence of the Censure pag. 234 initio answer that by Luther's foresaid discourse of his Disputation had with the Devill is meant only a spiritual fight in mind and no bodily conference What no bodily conference With what Face can they affirm this Do not the many other precedent and confessed like fearfull nightly Apparitions argue this also to be of the like kind Doth not Ltuher himself in his foresaid Treatise of this matter report how the Divell [f] Luther describing there the sound of Sathans voyce speaking then to him saith Haec illo dicente c. The Devill speaking thus to me I burst forth all on sweat and my heart began to tremble and leap voce forti gravi utitur the Devill hath a base and strong voyce c. And then I learned how it came to passe that sometimes early in the morning men were found dead in their beds which words the rather to give colour to Mr. Clarkes pretended onely Spirituall temptation and no bodily conference are shamefully falsifyed as being quite omitted by the Divines of wittemberg in their later edition of Luthers Works but nevertheless are yet still and extant in the more antient edition of Luthers Works tom 6. Jen. Germ fol. 28. and to the eternall discredit of the said Divines of Wittemberg who in many other things have likewise most shamefully falsifyed Luther are yet also acknowledged and verbatim recited by the Protestant Writer Hospinianus in Hist Sacra mentar par 2. fol. 131 a. post med and by him alleged there out of Luther tom 6. Jen. fol. 81. then spake to him in a base and great voice so fearfully as made Luther to sweat and his heart to tremble Doth he not also report as before that the Devill spake to him calling him according to the humour of his Pride Right learned Doctor Luther Doth he not there also yet further affirm how Oecolampadius Empser and others were slain with such horrible encounters saying [g] Luther tom 7. Wittsmberg fol. 230. a. post med See also these words confessed by Mr. Fulk against the defence of the Censure pag. 237. circa medium Ego planè persuasus sum Empserum Oecolampadium similes his ictibus horribilibus quassationibus subito extinctos esse This answer being therefore without all probability and though supposed for true yet wholly impertinent For in either case the perswasions and arguments whereto Luther here yieldeth came confessedly from the Devill and what differrence is there whether the Devill made them to Luther by sensible conference or by inward suggestion A [h] Brereley in his conclusion to the Judges Sect. 9. at 〈◊〉 second answer of Mr. Sutcliffe is that Luther in his foresaid discourse of this matter only declared his Dream for he in his Book de Vera Catholica Christi Ecclesia pa 258. post med saith Per somnium tantùm Diabolum se colloqui visum dicit Lutherus ut est in libro what but a dream Mr. Sutcliff Is there in Luthers whole discourse hereof so much as but mention of any dream Are not also Luthers foresaid words directly to the contrary that he was first suddainly awaked and that then after Sathan began the disputation with him Again doth not his foresaid affirming of Empser and Oecolampadius to have been slain with such horrible encounters argue more than a dream Are men I pray you slain by dreaming or rather was not your self deeply dreaming when you made an answer so plainly untrue But in what book of Luther Mr. Sutcliff is this found you should have done well to have alleged it For Luthers words are that he was then first suddainly awaked And ibidem pag. 299. paulo ante med Mr. Sutcliff further saith hereof Lutherus autem nihil aliud peccavit quam quod ut homo Germanus non ita pridem Monachus qui eas de Diabolorum apparitionibus Monasticas fabulas è mente adhuè non ejecerat somnium narrat crasso filo Monachis familiari quare si nullum aliud habeant hujusmodi calumniae fundamentum praeter somnium quod etiam ipsi malè detorquent nihil est c. But although we should suppose it for true yet this Answer is no lesse plainly impertinent for what difference is it whether the Devill seduced Luther sleeping or waking In either case it confessedly proceeded from the Devill These foresaid answers of Mr. Fulk Mr. Clark and Mr. Sutcliff being so evidently untrue [i] Brereley ibidem sect 9. Mr. D. Morton in Apolog Catholica part 1. l. 2. c. 21. pag 351. ante med betaketh himself to a new evasion And what is that He taketh no exceptions to Sathans sensible conference had with Luther nor to his perswading him against the Masse but in steed of answer objecteth [k] Where he saith Apud Surium liquet Diabolum in specie Angelica appaâ—â—isse statim Abbatem ut Missam celebratet hortabatur alleging there in his margent Delrius Jesâ— 4. de Magia cap. 1. q. 3.8.5 Delrius a Jesuite affirming that the Devill appeared to an Abbot in form of an Angel and perswaded him to say Mass Supposing this for the truth and the whole truth of Delrius his report how unapt yet is the example thereof For here is no long and laboured disputation to prove the Masse good nor did the party here assent to the Devill nor did the Masse thereupon first begin to become publick as in the other example we charge the Devill with long framed disputation and arguments against the Masse and Luther as overcome therewith to have abandoned the Masse then before generally received And that in this manner now in this last age began the new appearing doctrin of Luther and so many of his followers in impugning of Masse Neither is this all for Mr. Morton hath in his report hereof besides his misnaming the Abbot for the Monk committed as yet further negligence if not fraud in omitting both which is there next precedent and following in his Author as namely that [l] The words of Delriâ—â— in the place cited be Mr. Morton uttered upon occasion to shew how the Devill often goeth about to deceive us or by perswading us to do things of themselves good but in an evill manner whereof he there giveth many examples â—e as followeth Item si Daemon suadeat aliiqua contra Canones vel Constitutiones vel regulas vel alia praecepta Majorum hoc indicio B. Simeon Monaclus Trevirensis eum deprehendit narratur historia ab Cuerwino Abbate apud Surium 1. Junii In verticem montis Sinai
then attribute so much to his Epistles that whatsoever was contained in them was sacred lest that in thinking so we should saith he impute immoderate arrogancy to the Apostles His words are tom 2. contra Catabaptistas fol 10. b. circa med Ignorantia vestra est quod putatis cum Paulus haec scriberet Evangelistarum commentarios Apostolorum Epistolas jam in manibus Apostolorum atque authoritate fuisse quasi vero Paulus Epistolis suis jam tum tribuerit ut quicquid in iis contineretur sacrosanctum esset non quod ipse velim non esse sacrosancta quae illius sunt sed quod nolim Apostolis imputari immoderatam arrogantiam In so much that where the Evangelists say This is my Body Zuinglius to supply their supposed defect altereth the text with incredible boldness translating and saying insteed thereof This signifieth my Body Whereof Schlusselburg a learned Protestant in Theologia Calvinistarum l. 2. art 6. fol. 33. b. fine saith Nec potest hoc scelus Zuinglii ullo colore excusari res est manifestissima in graeco textu non habetur significat sed est c. And fol. 44. a. he speaketh to the Zuinglians saying Nec potestis rem inficiari aut occultare quia exemplaria Francisco Regi Galliarum à Zuinglio dedicata sunt in plurimorum hominum manibus excusa Tiguri Anno 1525. in mense Martio in octavo c. And yet more of the Dutch Bible of the Zuinglians he saith there Ego in Saxoniae oppido Mundera An. 60. apud Scholae Rectorem Humbertum vidi exemplar Germanicorum Bibliorum quae Tiguri erant impressa ubi non sine admiratione animi perturbatione verba Filii Dei ad imitationem Zuinglii somniatoris depravata esse deprehend Nam in omnibus illis quatuor locis Math. 26. Marc. 14. Luc. 22. 1. Cor. 11. ubi verba institutionis Testamenti Filii recensentur Hoc est Corpus meum hic est sanguis meus inhunc modum textus erat falsatus hoc significat Corpus meum hoc significat sanguinem meū And see further Zuinglius himself tom 2. l. de vera falsa Religione fol. 210. a. ante med where he saith Sic ergo habet Lucas accepto pane gratias egit fregit dedit eis dicens Hoc significat Corpus meum 28. Pu. Be pleased Reader to reflect here that as above we heard Zuinglius deeply taxing Luther saying to him Thou dost corrupt the word of God thou art seen to be a manifest and common corrupter of the holy Scriptures so here we see how the Lutherans cry shame on Zuinglians for the same crime of falsifying the word of God by turning This is into This signifies my Body c. teaching every one who desires not to betray his own Soul not to trust either of these two or any other Protestant in their Translations seeing there is not a Translation among them which is not condemned by other Protestants as we shall declare after I have noted some very particular corruptions of our English Protestants Zuinglius is condemned by other Protestants for changing This is into this signifies But was he alone guilty of this impiety No. The Communion Book of the Church of England together with the Articles and Book of Ordination were composed Anno 1547. by the Lord Archbishop of Canterbury the Bishops of Rochester Ely Hereford Worcester Linclon Chichester Dr. Redman Dr. Robinson Dr. Cox the Deans of Pauls of Exeter and of Lincoln who at the Kings charges partly at Windsor partly elsewhere contrived them all which were ratified and confirmed by the Parliament in the year 1548. In this Common Book to say these few things by the way there was Invocation of Saints and Prayer for the dead which are the Doctrines commonly objected by modern Protestants against Catholicks as is yet to be seen many Copies being yet extant And in the Statute of King Edward the sixt it is resolved that those that are abstemious that is cannot drink Wine may receive under one kind only Afterward the then Lord Protector at Calvins instigation as appeareth by his Epistles to the Duke of Summerset put out the Invocation of Saints and Prayer for the dead so variable is the Religion of Protestants But to come to our purpose of proving that not Zuinglius alone was guilty of that foul falsification of the Scripture by translating signifies for is In the first Edition of the said Communion Book the words cited out of Scripture were rendred thus This is my Body c. A year after it was altered thus This signifieth my Body c. A little after is and signifieth were both expunged and a blank Paper put in the place of the Verb thus this my Body c. which without the Verb signifieth nothing or rather may be applyed to any thing as it may please the Painter or changeable Protestant And lastly is was put in again Of this incertainty in Protestant Religion in a matter of greatest moment Nicholas Heath Archbishop of York and Lord Chancellour of England minded the Kingdom 1. Elizabethae in his Speach against the bringing in of the uncertain and unsetled new Religions which Speach saith a man of great learning and credit under whose hand I received it I have read and have seen divers of King Edward the sixt Service Books some with is some with signifieth and some with a blank in the place Now Reader look above and apply to English Protestants that which Lutherans justly object to Zuinglius for his translating signified for is 29. Moreover it is to be observed that the Bible in King Edward the sixt days was translated into English by the Bishops of St. Davids Hereford Ely Norwich and Rochester and therefore it is called the Bishops Bible In it the whole Book of the Canticles which they prophanely why may not I say blasphemously translate the Ballad of Ballads and many other Chapters and verses in the Bible were particularly noted as not fit to be read to the common people or by them But in the latter Bibles all things are equally permitted to all from which liberty what could be expected then that which we find by lamentable experience an endless multiplication of new Heresies without any possible means of remedy as long as men are resolved not to acknowledge an infallible Judge of Controversies but to leave every man to read Scripture which they must interpret according to their own mind or fancy not having any other infallible Rule or Guide to follow I know that a learned Catholick in a familiar discourse with Dr. Collins chief Reader of Divinity in Cambridge told him that Protestants themselves were the true cause of so many Heresies by permitting the promiscuous reading of Scripture to every Body and the Doctor answered plainly That for his part he did not approve such liberty and this is the thing which the Church dislikes but it is a meer calumny to say that she
Antiparaeus pag. 97. initio saith Tot celebres Antitrinitarii ex Calvinianorum Scholis Ecclesiis prodierunt Writers do therefore affirm them to have been the true and next occasion of these so late new uprising and many daily increasing Arians in [e] Beza in Epist Theolog Ep. 81. pag. 303. paulo post med saith hereof Hinc illud incendium quod tota jam vastata Polonia in Transilvaniam quoque pervasit And Ep. 16. pag. 122. post med be saith hereof Poloniam totam Transilvaniam in hunc miserrimum statum redactam vides Polonia Hungary and Transilvania A thing as yet more probable in that the principal Heads or beginners of these late Arians were as Neuserus confesseth all of them at first Calvinists and so to this present in most other points do these Arian Churches yet continue thinking themselves hereby more reformed than others of whom Mr. Hooker therefore saith in his Ecclesiastical Policy l. 4. pag. 183. fine The Arians in the Reformed Churches of Poland think the very belief of the Trinity to be a part of Antichristian corruption and that the Popes triple Crown is a sensible mark whereby the world might know him to be that mystical Beast spoken of in the Revelation in no respect so much as in his Doctrine of the Trinity 43. And the Protestant Writer Luc. Osiander in Epitom c. centur 16. pag. 269. fine saith of these Reformed Arians Asserunt Deum unum in Essentia trinum in Personis esse commentum Anti-Christi esse triplicem Cerberum esse Deum Baal Moloch c. Symbolum Athanasii vocant fidem doctrinam Satanasii vanissimè insuper jactitant Lutherum vix tectum Babylonicae turris detexisse se verò ex imis fundamentis eam exscindere thinking the vulgar Protestant to be over Popish and as far short of Reformation in respect of the Trinity as do the Puritans think him to be in regard of Bishops and Ceremonies In defence of which their horrible Heresie they do daily Print and publish their many [f] Gratianus Prosper a principal Arian publâ—shed in defence of Arianism a Book of this title Instrumentum doctrinarum Aristo elicum in usum Christianarum Scholarum exemplis Theologicis illustratum per Gratianum Prosperum Losci Anno 86. Wherein are reduced into form of argument all or most of the Scriptures usually alleged in proof of Christs Divinity and by him undertaken there to be answered As also he propoundeth very many other Scriptures and reasons reduced into like form of argument against the Divinity of Christ As also Socinus another Arian published lately his Book thereof against Volanus And the other published writings of Gentilis Servetus Blandrata and many other late Arians are known and many Books taking advantage to follow Calvins example in their like perverting of the Scriptures c. proudly [g] See this in Brereley tract 1. sect 10. subd 2. at i. k. And whereas the Calvinists in Polonia did dispute against the Antitrinitaries there and charged them with arguments taken out of the Fathers the Antitrinitaries answered the Calvinists from themselves saying Hi sunt vetusti panni quosâ—vos ipsi primi lacerastis in aliis fidei articulis c. lacerata jamdudum calceamenta See this in Nullus nemo H. 9. rejecting the produced testimonies of the Fathers and in [h] Symlerus de aeterno Dei Filio l. 1. c. 2. saith of the Arians Hienim nos ad Scripturas provocant quia omnem antiquitatem sibi adversari non ignorant omnes sine exceptione rejiciunt And see Brereley tract 1. sect 10. subdivis 2. at i. k. the like appeal of other Arians to only Scripture expresly pretending the same by like examples of the Calvinists appealing from them with shew of great confidence to only Scripture In their allegations whereof they are as were the old Arians [i] St. Austine apud Brereley tract 1. sect 10. atâ—g contra Maximinum Arâ—aâ—um Episc l. 1. initio induceth the Hereticks saying then to Catholicks as Protestants do now Si quid de Divinis Scripturis protuleris quod commune est cum omnibus necesse est ut audiamus Hae vero voces quae extra Scripturam sunt nullo casu à nobis susc piuntur Cum ipse Dominus moneat nos dicat Sine causa colunt me docentes mandata praecepta hominum And again ibid. versus finem libri the Heretick further saith Oro opto Discipulus esse Divinarum Scripturarum c. Si affirmaveris de Divinis Scripturis si alicubi Scripti lectionem protuleris nos Divinarum Scripturarum optamus inveniri Discipuli See the very many Scriptures alleged only by the Arian Gratianus Prosper in his Book intituled Instrumentum doctrinarum c. very frequent and plentiful as also no less prompt in making answer as Calvin doth and by imitation of his example unto sundry those very texts of greatest importance which were heretofore by the Fathers and are now by us urg'd in proof of Christs Divinity In so much as many and some of them very learned Protestants and of great reputation in their Churches quite contrary to M. D. [k] M. D. Field of the Churcâ— l. 3. c. 29. initio pag. 138. ante med saith The tenth imputation is of Arianism which Heresy we accurse to the pit of Hell with all the vile calumniations of damned slanderers that charge us with it Neither did any of our men incline to it Fields untrue and bold denyal are fully perswaded that Arianism or further infidelity is as it were the Materia prima or very last end or center whereto the poyse or Bias in this behalf of Calvinism is by the proper direction of its genius daily more and more moving and inclining In most other points the Antitrinitarians and Arians continue yet Protestants as appeareth by Gratianus Prosper the Arian in his Book intituled Instrumentum Doctrinarum c. Printed Losci Anno 86. wherein he setteth down their several opinions to be The inequality of Christ with God the Father That Children are not to be Baptized till they be of discretion to answer for themselves which Zuinglius and Oecolampadius think to be but a matter of indifferency as is declared in Brereley tract 2. cap. 3. sect 9. subd 3. at e. f. And that the Roman Church may not in any sense be called the Church of Christ 44. Pu. Mark here who be they who are most opposite to the Roman Church namely they who deny the Blessed Trinity and our Saviours Divinity in respect whereof they tearm themselves the Reformed Church condemning the other Protestants for Popish and superstitious And as to Puritans common Protestants were esteemed Popish so Puritans who believe the Trinity and the Consubstantiality of our Saviour with his Father are also tearmed Popish and now even they who deny the Trinity c. will be judged Popish by other Sects who will pretend to be more Reform'd for example
we upon this ground deny also with the Lutherans the [i] Osiander a prime Lutheran speaking of the last Canon of the Laodicen Council commonly objected by our Adversaries wherein are omitted the Books now in question and the Apocalyps saith in his Epitom c. cent 4. pag. 299. fine Non recitantur libri Machabaeorum rectè quidem In eo autem erratum est quod Epistolam Jacobi Judae posteriores duas Joannis inter Canonica Scripta numerant quae Scripta non longè post Apostolorum tempora non pro Scriptis Canonicis habita sunt c. Rectè autem omissa est Apocalypsis ea enim non est Joannis Apostoli c. And see this point more fully in Brereley tract 1. sect 10. subdivis 3. fine at a. and tract 2. c. 2. sect 10. subdivis 2. initio in the text and margent there at o. p. q. r. s t. u. And see at large in the Protestant Authors themselves the places there cited wherein they reject these Scriptures under colour and pretence that they were denyed or doubted of in the Primitive Church Epistles of James Jude the second of Peter the 2. and 3. of John the Epistle to the Hebrews and the Apocalyps no less than the other Books now in question but by that which many of the Fathers do constantly affirm And seeing the Churches assertion as being in the judgement of our very [k] Mr. Fulk in his answer to a counterfeit Catholick pag. 5. initio saith the Church of Christ hath judgement to discern true writings from counterfeit and the word of God from the writings of men and this judgement she hath of the Holy Ghost And Mr. Jewel in his defence of the Apology pag. 201. and after the other Edition of 1571. pag. 242. circa med saith The Church of God hath the spirit of Wisedom whereby to discern true Scripture from false The Protestant Author of the Scripture and the Church which Bullinger so greatly commendeth in his Preface thereof to the Reader doth cap. 15. fol. 71.72 cap. 16. fol. 74.75 affirm that The Church is indued with the Spirit of God and that the diligence and authority of the Church is to be acknowledged herein which hath partly given forth her testimony of the assured writings and hath partly by her Spiritual judgement refused the writings which are unworthy And afterwards he further saith We could not believe the Gospel were it not that the Church taught us and witnessed that this doctrin was delivered by the Apostles To this end Mr. Hooker in his first Book of Ecclesiastical Policy sect 14. pag. 86. ante med saith apud Brereley tract 1. sect 10. subd 3. Of things necessary the very chiefest is to know what Books we are bound to esteem holy which point is confessed impossible for the Scripture it self to teach whereof he giveth a very sensible demonstration ibid. l. 2. sect 4. pag. 102. fine saying It is not the word of God which doth or possibly can assure us that we do well to think it his word for if any one Book of Scripture did give testimony of all yet still that Scripture which giveth credit to the rest would require an other Scripture to give credit unto it Neither could we come to any pause wherein to rest unless besides Scripture there were some thing which might assure us c. Which he acknowledgeth to be the authority of Gods Church l. 3. sect 8. pag. 146. fine l. 2. sect 7. pag. 116. ante med And Brereley tract 2. cap. 3. sect 11. subd 1. at s allegeth further the like judgement of Mr. D. Covel in his defence of Mr. Hookers five Books art 4. c. pag. 31. ante med saying Doubtless it is a tolerable opinion of the Church of Rome if they go no further as some of them do not to affirm that the Scriptures are holy and divine in themselves but so esteemed by us for the authority of the Church And after in the same page It is not the word of God which doth or possibly can assure us that we do well to think it is the word of God the first outward motion leading men so to esteem of the Scripture is the authority of Gods Church which teacheth us to receive Marks Gospel who was not an Apostle and to refuse the Gospel of Thomas who was an Apostle and to retain Lukes Gospel who saw not Christ and to reject the Gospel of Nicodemus that saw him Adversaries an infallible and sure direction to us in this question of the Canonical Scriptures is as heretofore positively delivered and made plain to us by no less testimony than of St. Isidoâ—e Innocentius Gelasius the Fathers of the Carthage Council and to omit others of St. Austin himself who in our Adversaries confessed judgement was [l] M. D. Covel in his answer to John Burges pag. 3. fine saith Saint Austin a man far beyond all that ever were before him or shall in likelihood follow after him both for humane and divine learning those being excepted that were inspired Also M. D. Field of the Church l. 3. fol. 170. fine saith Austin the greatest of all the Fathers and worthiest Divine the Church of God ever had since the Apostles times And Gomarus in speculo verae Ecclesiae c. pag. 96. ante med saith Augustinus Patrum omnium communi sententia purissimus habetur chief and best of all the Fathers what can be more clear and convincing herein for us and against our Adversaries than that which is as heretofore though but briefly yet plainly thus delivered from the not doubtful but confessed judgement of St. Austin and those other many antient Fathers Mr. D. [m] M. D. Covel in his answer to Mr. John Burges pag. 85. fine saith of the untruths or repugnances supposed to be in these Books now in question We could without violence have afforded them the reconcilement of other Scriptures and undoubtedly have proved them to be most true And pag. 87. fine 88 89 90. â—e maketh special answer to certain such objected repugnances Covel a prime man among our Adversaries not forbearing in this case to undertake special defence and answer against such weak seeming repugnances or contradictions occuring [n] Concerning the like seeming repugnancy of other Scriptures Mr. Jewel in his defence c. pag. 361. fine affirmeth that St. Mark alleged Abiathar for Abimelech and that St. Matthew nameth Hieremias for Zacharias and in St. Matthew 27.9 are words alleged under the name of Hieremy which are not found in Hieremy but in Zachary 11.13 Also in Mark 15.25 our Saviour is said to be crucified in the third hour whereas in John 19.14 Pilate sate in judgement upon him about the sixt hour In like manner Luke 3.35 36. affirmeth Sale to be the son of Caynan and Caynan the son of Arphaxad and so Arphaxad was Grandfather to Sale whereas in Genesis 11.12 it is said that Arphaxad lived 35.
at x. And the like indifferencie hereof is affirmed by Melancthon in Centur. Epist Theologic pag. 252. initio and see the Protestant Writers affirming in plain tearms the indifferency of Communion under one or both kinds alleged and by Mr. Jewell not denyed in his Reply pag. 110. 106. 33 Sacrifice of the New Testament according to the Order of Melchisedech by Andraeas Crastovius in libro de opificio Missâ—e l. 1. pag. 28. paulo post medium 119. paulo ante med 51. post med 58. paulo post med 122. ante med 171. and see Mr. Jewell in his Reply pag. 7. initio 34 That the first motions of our Concupiscence without our consent thereto are not sin by Zegedine in loc commun printed Basileae 1588. pag. 229. post med where he saith Peccatum tribus gradibus exurgit absolvitur suggestione delectatione consensione plena c. qui non consentit sed delectationi repugnat tentationi immo delectationem respuit peccati impuritate non inficitur c. contradicted by Keckermannus in System Theologic pag. 275. post medium 35 That the Commandements are not impossible by Sebastian Castalio de perfect obed leg Dei and he therein namely contradicted by Mr. Reynolds in his second conclusion annexed to his Conference pag 697. ante medium also by Mr. Hooker in his Ecclesiasticall Policie l. 2. pag. 101. prope finem where he saith distributively at the least all great and grievous actuall offences as they offer themselves one by one both may and ought to be avoided wherein he is namely reprehended by certain English Protestants in their Christian Letter to that Reverend man Mr. R. Hooker pag. 15. circa med and by Mr. Willet in his Meditation on Psalm 122. printed 1603. pag. 91. post medium and see Mr. Hooker's said Saying yet affirmed by Mr. D. Covell in his defence of Mr. Hooker art 7. pag. 54. and see this like possibillity now in the time of the Gospell further affirmed by Mr. Perkins in his Reformed Catholick pag. 26. fine pag. 51. prope finem 52. ante med 36 That no professed Widow might be such as had before been Bigama or twice married by Marloret in 1. Tim. c. 5. verse 9. pag. 374. post med and by Calvin in omnes Pauli Epistolas in 1. Tim. 5.9 pag. 778. circa med and see Calvin's words so understood by Mr. Bancroft in his Survey c. pag. 218. circa post med who in the same place allegeth Beza and Mr. Cartwright as herein contrary to Calvin 37 Transubstantiation affirmed by Luther after his revolt from our Church teste Hospiniano in Histor Sacramentar part alter a pag. 12. circa med and see Melancthon in Concil Theolog. part 1. pag. 584. initio affirmed also by D. Barnes one of Mr. Fox's Martyrs who in his Protestation at his death said expresly that the Sacrament after the words spoken by the Priest doth change the substance of Bread and Wine into the very Body and Blood of Christ which his Protestation being then published by a professed Gospeller of that time and then also answered unto by D. Standish in his book then printed in octavo in English the said words are yet extant therein though fraudelently since omitted by Mr. Fox who acts monument pag. 610. 611 612. following the said Copy verbatim and coming by course to those very words doth purposely overpass them See also Transubstantiation believed by the Lord Cobham act mon. pag. 272. a. and by John Husse act monum pag. 209. a. fine b. initio paulo post med pag. 197. b. fine 38 That Christ is God of God and hath his substance of his Father is affirmed by [i] Brereley tract 2. c. 2. sect 10. sub 13. sect 1. in the margent at s Zegedine in loc com pag. 634. paulo post med where he saith directly Dicendum est Filium eam ipsum Deitatem quae est Patris habere non ex sese sed ex Patre Also Mr. Hooker in his Ecclesiasticall Pollicy l. 5. pag. 113. initio saith The Father alone is originally that Diety which Christ orginally is not And see him further pag. 106. fine 113. ante med which his Assertion Mr. D. Covell in his defence of Mr. Hooker pag. 16. 17. specially defendeth affirming further pag. 17. initio That Christ had received his substance by the gift of eternall Generation and pag. 18. ante med That Christ is God by being of God light by issuing out of light and more plainly yet ibidem pag. 121. which his Doctrine is reproved by the Puritans in their Christian Letter c. pag. 6 ante med and by Mr. Willet in his meditation upon Psalm 122. printed 1603. pag. 91. Also Mr. Fox in Apoc. pag. 474. initio saith Christus Deus ex Deo and Lobehius in disput 30. Theolog pag. 49. saith Filius non solum id quo Filius dicitur habet à Patre veram etiam suam essentiam Solus enim Pater vitam seu essentiam habet à seipso and Mr. D. Dove in his Confutation of Athism pag. 37. fine saith God the Father from everlasting understanding himself begat his Son coeternall with himself c. and the Confession of Belgia in the Harmonie c. pag. 34. initio saith We beleive that Christ in respect of his Divine nature is the only Son of God and Melancthon in loc commun of Anno 1561. pag. 24. fine saith Pater aeternus sese intuens gignit cogitationem sui quae est imago ipsius dicitur 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 quia cogitatione generatur ibidem pag. 25. initio he saith Secunda persona Filius dicitur quia de substantia Patris natus est [k] Brereley ibidem in the margent at n. o. p. q. This Doctrine is impugned by M. Whitaker contra Camp rat 8. pag. 121. circa med where he saith Utcunque patres illi Niceni Christum esse dixerunt Deum de Deo tamen firmissime tenendum esse confirmat Calvinus Christum ex sese habere ut Deus sit nisi Christum volumus sua Divinitate spoliare and see Calvin Institut l. 1. c. 13. sect 23. where he saith Quomodo autem Creator qui omnibus esse dat non erit ex seipso sed essentiam aliunde mutuabitur and in his Explicat perfid Valent. Gentil extant in his tract Theolog. c. pag. 774. a. circa med he saith Hoc modo videmus precariam fieri ejus Divinitatem cui datum est esse Impugned likewise by Mr. Willet Synopsis pag. 610. fine and Snecanus in his Method descript c. pag. 107. ante med he saith Filius qua Deus non habet essentiam Deitatis à Patre and Calvin in explicat perfid valent Gentil extant in tract Theolog. pag. 774. a. ante med saith Jam tibi responsum fuit non posse Deum esse Filii sui Patrem nisi personae respectu quia alioqui vel partibilis esset Dei
particular testimonies of this matter solemnly taken by oath and there pag. 267. initio mentioned to be recorded by Publick Writings both of the City of Bruxels subsigned by P. Numan Secretary as also of Lovam subsigned by R. de Prince Secretary dated respectively 29. Julâ—i and 2. Augusti 1604. and sealed with the Scals of the said Cities published to have been there done Being carried thither in a Wagon and having confessed his sins and received the blessed Sacrament he did in the end feel his contracted and bound feet to be loosed and stretched forth so as presently he stood on his feet himself and the beholders being amazed thereat Will our Adversaries deny this It is thus reported by that excellent learned man Justus Lipsius dwelling thereby as lately done in July Anno 1603. in the presence of many eye-witnesses and thereupon published both in Print and Pulpit sundry of the Gentlemen attending upon our late Embassador the Earl of Hereford having received answerable satisfaction in that behalf as well by seeing and conferring with the party as by other publick and credible testimony thereof given Will they yet take exceptions to this John Clement himself as being but a counterfeit His known foresaid more than ordinary lameness continued till then even from his own nativity and mothers death proclaimeth the contrary What therefore remaineth but that honouring our Blessed Saviour in due acknowledgement to his holy Mother they should so with all herein acknowledge [n] Exod. 8.19 Luc. 11.10 the finger of God [o] Esay 59.1 5.2 Num. 11.23 whose hand is not yet shortned Hereunto might be added the many other miracles there done in these times and mentioned by Justus Lipsius in his foresaid Treatise The many more miracles likewise by him reported in his other Book entituled [p] Printed Antuerpiae 1604. Virgo Hallensis together also with the miraculous cures confessed by the Protestant writer Joannes Manlius from Melancthons report as done at the Memorials of the blessed Virgin at [q] Manlius in his Book entituled Locorum communium collectanea mentioned before at b. and of whom it is said in the verses before the Book Haec partim scripsit magno dictante Philippo undertaking pag. 184. to set down examples of Idolatry confesseth the matter of fact saying there pag. 187. paulo post medium of infirm persons Ad Sanctam Miriam Ratisbonensem homines ultra viginti milliaria nec bibentes nec comedentes currebant quò cùm venissent jacebant prostrati quatuor horas posteaque liberabantur And the Protestant writer Osiander confesseth the same accordingly centur 16. pag. 69. circa med saying Viri Mulieres Juvenes Virgines Ratisbonam currebant ad Idolum beatae Virginis Mariae ibi enim credebantur miracula stupenda fieri quidem edita suâ—sâ—e quaedam Antichristiana miracula praestigiis Satanicis credibâ—le est Ratisbone and [r] Manlius ubi supra pag. 185. ante med saith Novimus homines cueurrisse ad Grimenthall qui amentes suerunt acuerunt ante Civitatem per a liquot horas postea redierunt ad se haec dixerunt esse miracula Sanctae Mariae So clear and confessed herein is the matter of fact that this Author is not ashamed to allege these as examples of Idolatry Greementhall the latter whereof is set down upon the Authors own knowledge Which foresaid course of these and many other miracles hath been so assuredly accomplished in this last age that Martin Luther not unlike herein to the unclean [Å¿] Marc. 1.24 Luc. 4.34 spirit who confessed Christ to be the Holy One of God was in respect of so evident truth inforced likewise to confess and say [t] Luther in purgatione quorundam articulorum Quis enim potest contradicere his c. Who can gainsay the things which God to this day worketh miraculously and visibly ad Divorum sepulchra at the Monuments of the Saints In regard of which our foresatd so plentifull alleged testimony from miracles which are as the Scriptures tearm them * God testifying by signs and miracles Hebr. 2.4 I have a greater testimony and witness than John the works that I do give testimony c. John 5.36 the testimonies of God we may not unaptly say in behalf of our Catholick Church with a holy writer [u] Rich. de S. Victore l. 1. de Trinit c. 2. Domine si error est quod credimus à te decepti sumus c. O Lord if it be errour which we believe we are deceived by thee for thou hast confirmed these things to us with signs and wonders which could not be done but by thee Or rather as said that blessed man Nicodemus of our Saviour [x] Joan. 2.23 We know that thou art a Teacher come from God for no man could do these miracles thou dost except God were with him 7. And let it not most gratious Lord seem tedious if here we do but touch those idle tergiversations wherewith our Adversaries seek to obscure so great a light As first under pretence or example of divers dispersed fabulous Legends of things meerly feigned but never done as also of sundry counterfeit miracles done indeed but by confederacy and practice of Impostors to reject all other as being likewise untrue or at least counterfeit But with how small equity is this To touch the first Must all historical faith be abolished because of some abuse or errour in historie To these it shall suffice onely to oppose the grave answer of S. [y] Aug. de Civit. Dei l. 10. c. 18. initio saith An dicit aliquis ista falsa esse miracula nec suâ—sse facta sed mendaciter scripta quisquis hoc dicit si de his rebus negat omninò ullis literis esse credendum potest etiam dicere nec c. Austin in like case of his time As concerning the other part wherein they give example of the blood of Hales the aversion or moving of the Images face by device of secret wyers and such like whereto supposing them for true we may match the late sleeping Preacher discovered by your Majestie M. [z] See at large the Book entituled A discourse of the fraudulent practices of John Dorrel in his proceedings concerning the pretended possession and dispossession of William Summers at Nottingham of Thomas Darling the Boy of Burton of Caldwall and of Katherine Wright at Mansfield and of his dealings with one Mary Cowper at Nottingham written by M. Harsnet and printed by John Wolf 1599. And see another Treatise entituled A summary answer to all the material points in any of M. Dorrel's Books more specially to that one Book of his entituled The doctrine of the possession and dispossâ—ssion of Demoniacks out of the Word of God written by John Deacon and John Walker Preachers printed 1601. Dorrel's like discovered confederacy with Will Summers and others and their other confessed [a] See this in Stow 's Annals printed
PROTESTANCY CONDEMNED BY THE EXPRESSE VERDICT AND SENTENCE OF PROTESTANTS LUKE 19.22 By thine own mouth I judge thee DOWAY Printed in the Year 1654. THE PREFACE TO THE READER I Cannot doubt but that every Protestant if he have not a mind to divest himself of common reason and proclame himself to be inexcusable will confess Protestancy to be cast and condemned by Protestants if by their own free and open Confession these ensuing points be acknowledged for true First That the first Protestants who forsooth undertook a Reformation of the Universal Catholick Church existent before Luther after their pretended Reformation led so lewd lives and held doctrines confessedly so absurd that no man of sense or wisdom can judge them fit instruments for that supposed strange sublime supernatural and divine work Secondly That in opposition of the late and vitious Fathers of Protestants those men who even by Protestants are stiled Antient and Holy Fathers believed taught and practised the very same things which we now believe teach and practise against Protestants Thirdly That not only the Antient Fathers but even the chiefest and most learned Protestants convinced by evidence of truth stand with us against their Protestant Brethren in most of the chiefest points of Religion controverted between us Fourthly That our doctrine hath been approved by the Omnipotent hand of God using for Instruments of working Miracles those who were confessedly of our Religon yea and in express confirmation of points believed by us and rejected by Protestants Fifthly That by the confession of Protestants we Catholicks may be saved though we live and dye in the belief of all those Articles wherein Protestants disagree from us Which last consideration though it were alone ought effectually to move every one who believes an Eternity of Joy or Torment speedily to joyn himself with that Church wherein by the confession of all both friends and foes Catholicks and Protestants salvation may certainly be attained if our life agree with our belief Now for proof these Truths most important to be known I present not to the Reader any new VVork or Invention of mine own but in effect only transcribe and publish what I find in that excellent Book intituled The Protestants Apology for the Roman Church the true Author whereof thought fit to conceale himself under the name of John Brereley Priest though indeed he was neither Brereley nor Priest nor Clergy-man not John but rather James He dedicated his Book to King James and writes with so great exactness fidelity temper and moderation that Protestants though they must needs feel themselves deeply wounded by the substance of his discourse yet cannot with any shadow of reason pretend to be justly offended with his manner of discoursing In so much as Thomas Morton confesseth that whatsoever strong argument in any place in Roman Authors is to be found in favour of that Religion whatsoever hath by chance fallen from the pen of any learned Protestant but in outward appearance consonant to their doctrines which may seem any way to promote the Roman cause all that we see in this volume collected to be brought and presly urged against us with so singular a choice of the things themselves with such force of arguments with such an elegant and exquisite stile Lastly with so moderate a kind of expression as their subtilty judgement wit art and moderation could do I wish the Book were in the hands of many but it being of some bulk and not easy to be had and the points which here I offer being but few and comprised in no very great compass and of themselves very intelligible and clear to every mans understanding they will come to the knowledge of more by being published thus apart than if they were to be sought in the Book it self mixed with many other matters by the Author handled in different and distant places and upon several occasions and in a method not obvious to men who have no great mind to take much pains If upon occasion I put in a word of mine own the Reader will understand it to be mine by the word Publisher abbreviated by Pu. I make use of the Edition of An. 1608. It is clear that he is most exact in his Citations citing not only the Book but the year Edition place of Print and sometimes even the page and line as appears by the Table set down in the beginning of his Book with this title A Table of certain Protestant writers and their particular writings whose folio or page for more ready and certain direction are specially alleged in the subsequent Discourse and of their several Editions or year of Print according to which they be so alleged unless it be otherwise noted in the margent But yet notwithstanding all the care exactness used by the Author it was not in his power to exempt the Print from many Errors and Omissions as also I cannot doubt but he who Prints this publication of mine will have his errors The five Heads or Truths mentioned above I will call so many Considerations Neither have I any more to say in this place than with my whole heart to beg of the Protestant Reader even for the love he ows to the Redeemer of Mankind and for the care he should have to save his own soul that he will peruse these Considerations with a hearty desire to find and an absolute resolution to embrace the truth laying aside prejudice passion sloath and all humane and wordly respects seriously meditating the words of our Blessed Saviour Matth. 16. v. 26 27. What doth it profit a man if he gain the whole world and sustain the damage of his own Soul Or what exchange shall a man give for his Soul For the Son of Man shall come in the glory of his Father with his Angels and then will he render to every man according to his works If the Reader come not with such a disposition and resolution every word he reads will rise against him in that dreadful day of Judgement upon which all Eternity must depend O ETERNITIE ETERNITIE THE FIRST CONSIDERATION Concerning the lives of the first Protestant pretended Reformers OUR Saviour forewarning us saith Brereley tract 2. cap. 3. sect 9. subdivis 1 That a good Tree yieldeth good fruit Math. 7.17 and beware of false Prophets which come to you in sheeps clothing but inwardly are ravening Woolvs by their fruits you shall know them Math. 7.15 16. omitting petty examples saith Brereley tract 2. chap. 3. sect 9. subdivis 2. we will intreat of Principals namely of Luther of Jacobus Andreas the greatest enlarger of his Doctrine and of Zuinglius Calvin and Beza and of these also for other respects but with a gentle sparing and forbearing touch as not undertaking to allege any thing of them but that which is in it self evident and for such confessed Of Luther 1 COncerning Luther's Life and Manners saith Brereley tract 2. cap. 2. sect 10. subdivis 11. for so much as he
to keep himself awork in that kind he contracted with Carolostadius and giving him [k] Hospinian in hist Sacrament part 2. at Anno 1525. fol. 32. b. ante med saith Lutheruâ—â— Carolostadium ut contra se publicè scribat aureum nummum extractum ex pera ipsi oftert inquiens En accipe quantum potes animose contra me dimica c. cumque aureum nummum marsupio suo recondidisset Carolostadius Luthero manum in sponsionem pactae susceptae contentionis porrexit pro cujus confirmatione Lutherus ipsi vicissim haustum vini propinavit adhortans eum ne sibi parceret sed quanto vehementius animosius contra se ageret tanto illum sibi chariorem futurum See also Lavather hereof in Histor Sacrament fol. 2. a. post med a piece of Gold to write against him he upon Carolostadius his acceptance thereof gave to Carolostadius his hand upon the bargain and therupon drunk to him in a cup of Wine exhorting Carolostadius not to spare him but to deal roundly and vehemently with him whereupon ensued their most contentious and invective writings This fact of Luther was so scandalous that Hospinian though [l] See this hereafter in this Consideration num 7. â—t o. ante fiâ—em favouring Luther yet signifieth from what [m] Hospinian in his Histor Sacrament par 2. fol. 32. circa med saith of Luthers foresaid bargain with Carolostadius Haec Christiane lector fuerunt infelicissimi istius certaminis quod ex pacto sponsione susceptum tot jam annis Ecclesiam gravissime exercuit infausta auspicia quae si quis diligenter apud se animo sepositis affectibus expendat ex quo spiritu fuerint profecta tanto rectius c. est judicaturus c. And Daniel Tossanus in lib. consolatorio cap. 127. saith that Luther did proceed contra Carolostadium instinctu maligui Spiritus Spirit the same proceeded 4 Concerning the Administration of the Word and Sacraments saith Brereley tract 2. cap. 2. sect 10. subdivis 7. Luther maketh it common to Laymen with the Clergy saying to this end [n] Luther tom 2. lib. de Ministris Ecclesiae instituendis fol. 368. a b. 369. a. b. vide ibid. l. de abroganda missa privata tom 2 fol. 249. a. b. in lib. de captiv Babylon c. de Ordine And see Hospinianus in Hist Sacrament part 1. pag. 22. paulo post med part 2. fol. 14. b. circa med The first Office of the Priest is to preach the Word c. but this is common to all next is to baptize and this also may all do even women c. the third is to consecrate Bread and Wine but this also is common to all no less than Priests and this I avouch by the Authority of Christ himself saying Do this in remembrance of me This Christ spake to all there present and to come afterwards whosoever should eate of that Bread and drink of that Wine c. This also is witnessed by St. Paul who 1. Cor 11. repeating this applyeth it to all the Corinthians making them all as himself was that is to say Consecrators c. If then that which is greater than all be given indifferently to all men and women I mean the Word and Baptism then that which is less I mean to consecrate the Supper is also given to them And the like Doctrin doth he affirm no less plainly in [o] Luther in assertionibus damnatis per Leonem decimum art 13. saith In Sacramento Paenitentiae ac remissione culpae non plus facit Papa vel Episcopus quam insimus Sacerdos immo ubi non est Sacerdos aequè tantum quilibet Christianus etiamsi mulier aut puer esset c. quod autem absente Sacerdote etiam puer aut mulier quilibet Christianus absolvere potest Mat. 18. Clareè patet ubi Christus omnibus Christianis dicit Quodcunque solveritis super terram solutum erit in Coeliâ— Hanc invictam authoritatem non mihi subvertenâ— And see further in loc commun clasâ— 2. pag. 136. 138. But see his words more full than all this alleged out of the Edition of Jena by Cnoglerus in his Symbola tria pag. 157. another of his Writings being as Dr. Covell affirmeth [p] Mr. Covell in his defence of Mr. Hooker 's five Books of Ecclesiastical Politie Art 15. pag. 101. post med And see Luther de Missa privata Edit An. 1534. And see Hospinian in Hist Sacramentar pag. 22. paulo post med And Hospinian in Hist Sacramentar parte altera fol. 1â— b. circa med saith of Luther in 1 b. de Missa privata An. 34. Eousque progreditur ut diceret Sacramentum verum futurum etiamsi à Diabolo conficeretur not afraid to affirm that Sacraments are effectual though administred by Sathan himself Thus did Luther in respect of want of calling in his Followers write against the Pope though elswhere to serve his own turn against the Anabaptists who upon the same ground used the same weapons against him he [q] See Brereley tract 2. cap. 2. sect 6. initio at u. tract 2. cap. 2. sect 3. sub 2. at z. presseth and chargeth them for their want of ordinary calling So Variable Inconstant and Temporizing as occasion required was he in his Doctrine wherof Zuinglius tom 2. in responsione ad Confessionem Lutheri fol. 458. circa med saith Lutherus nunc hoc nunc illud deadem Re pronunciat nec usquam sibi constat haud dubiè eain constantia levitate in Dei Ver boutendum esse existimat qua effrictae frontis scurrae inter aleam uti consueverunt Also Hospinianus a learned Calvinist in his Historia Sacramentaria parte altera in his Alphabeticall table set before the begining of that Book at the letter L. under the word Lutherus setteth forth Luther's wonderfull inconstancy in Doctrin with particular reference to his contrary sayings and Doctrines there by him in that book at large alleged in which course he chargeth Luther in the same table saying Lutherus sibi ipsi dissimili in Doctrina de persona Christi 18. And under the word Lutheri is set down Lutheri inconstantia in Doctrina 4. b. Lapsuum inconstantiae causae 5. Ejus de coena sententia Prima 5. b. Secunda 7. b. Tertia 8. Quarta 12. Quinta ibidem De ejus inconstantia in negotio Coenae Sturmius 12. a. b. inconstantia de communione sub uno vel utraque specie 12. b. 13. inconstantia de manducatione impiorum 13. b. inconstantia de concommitantia 13. b. inconstantia de elevatione Sacramenti 13. b. 14. inconstantia de adoratione Sacramenti 14. with much more there set down in this kind And in the Book exemplified at large from Luther's own inconstant and contrary writing according to the figures of direction here as before mentioned Also concerning the form of words requisit to a Sacrament Luther affirmeth Baptism
to be good with whatsoever words it be ministred so the same be not in the name of Man but God So Luther tom 2. Wittemberg in lib de captivit Babylon cap. de Baptismo fol. 75. a. initio saith Quocunque modo tradatur Baptismus modo non in nomine Hominis sed in nomine Domini tradatur verè salvum facit imô non dubitem siquis in nomine Domini suscipiat etiamsi impius Minister non det in nomine Domini verè Baptizatum esse in Nomine Domini 5 Concerning the [r] Brereley tract 2. cap. 2. sect 10. subdivis 8. sufficiency of our Redemption by our Saviours Passion in his humane nature upon the Cross Luther taught thus far to the contrary as that not only the Humane Nature of Christ sufferd for us for saith he in affirming but so much Christ is a Saviour of vile and small accompt and needeth himself also a Saviour [Å¿] Luther in confessione majori de Coena Domini Cum credo quod sola humana natura pro me passa est Christus ille vilis nec magni pretii Salvator est Imo ipse quoque Salvatore opus habet but also that the [t] Luther de Consiliis Part. 2. saith of the Zuingliand Pertinacissimè contra me pugnabant quod Divinitas Christi pati non posset Divinity of Christ did suffer which is so intollerable and grosse that it is specially contradicted by divers learned Protestants as Zuinglius Hospinianus D. Barnes Beza Czecanorius in Brereley pag. 403 404. and affirmed to be an old condemned opinion in Apollinarius and Eutiches and contrary to the Prophets Apostles and all true Believers To this we may adde Luther's wicked Doctrine concerning our Saviour's descending into Hell there also for to suffer Torments in Soul after his death Thus Luther tom 3. Wittemberg in Psalm 16. fol. 279. a. post med saith Christus sicut cum summo dolore mortuus est ita videtur dolores post mortem in inferno sustinuisse ut nobis omnia superaret c. And see this opinion confessed in Luther by Fulke in his defence of the English translation of the Bible cap. 7. pag. 204. See Brereley tract 2. cap. 2. sect 10. sub 8. at 16. pag. 205. it should be 405 6 Conterning Luther's [u] Brereley tract 2. cap. 2. sect 10. subdi 9. contempt of the antient Fathers and his own great undertaking knowledge he saith [x] Luther in libro ad Ducem Georgium And see his like saying in Colloquiis Litinis cap. de consolatione And ad cap. 1. dd Galatas tom 5. Wittemberg fol. 290 b. He saith Esto Ecclesia Augustinus alii Doctores item Petrus Apollo imo Angelus è Caelo diversum doceant tamen mea Doctrina est ejusmodi quae solius Dei gloriam illustrat c. Petrus Apostolorum summus vivebat docet extra Verbum Dei And after the English Translation fol. 33. b. paulo post med and 34. a. initio and in libro de servo arbitrio contra Erasmum in the first Edition thereof He saith if not most arrogantly judge Deponite quicquid armaturae suppeditabunt Orthodoxi veteres Theologorum Scholae authoritas Conciliorum Pontificum consensus tot saeculorum ac totius populi Christiani nihil recipimus nisi Scripturas sed fic ut penes nos solos sit certa Authoritas interpretandi Quod nos interpretamur hoc sensit Spiritus Sanctus quod afferunt alii quamvis magni quamvis multi à Spiritu Satanae â—lienata mente profectum est See this Saying alleged in Nullus Nemo G. 6. pag. 153. And in Cnoglerus his Symbola tria pag. 152. And Luther tom 2 Wittemberg fol. 486. b. fine saith Ego verò hoc libro non contuli sed asserui assero ac penes nullum volo esse judicium sed omnibus suadeo ut praestent obsequium Since the Apostles times no Doctor or Writer hath so excellently and cleerly confirmed instructed and comforted the Consciences of the Secular States as I have done by the singular grace of God This certainly I know that neither Austine nor Ambrose who yet are in this matter the best are equall to me herein And again tom 7. in serm de eversione Hierusalem fol. 271. a. The Gospel is so copiously preacht by us that truly in the Apostles time it was not so clear And apud Brereley trect 1. sect 3. subd vis 14. initio in the Margent at the figure 4. he affirms tom 2. Wittemberg Anno 1551. lib. de servo Arbitrio pag. 434. the Fathers of so many Ages to have been plainly blind and most ignorant in the Scriptures to have erred all their life time and that unless they were amended before their deaths they were neither Saints nor partaining to the Church See further Luther's Book de servio arbitrio printed in octavo 1603. pag. 72 73 276 and 337. Also in Colloquiis Mensalibus cap de Patribus Ecclesiae Luther saith of sundry Fathers in particular In the writings of Hierom there is not a word of true Faith Christ and sound Religion Tertullian is very superstitious I have holden Origen long since accursed Of Chrysostom I make no account Bazil is of no worth he is wholly a Monk I weigh him not of a hair Cyprian is a weak Divine c. affirming there yet further that the Church did degenerate in the Apostles age and that the Apologie of Phillip Melancthon doth far excell all the Doctors of the Church and exceeds even Augustin himself [y] See Brereley Tract 2. c. 2. sect 10. subdivis 9. How highly he esteemeth of such Doctrine as himself collecteth from the Scriptures and how much he preferreth himself therein before the Fathers himself signifieth saying tom 2. l. contra Regem Angliae fol. 344. b. Gods Word is above all the Divine Majestie maketh for me so as I pass not if a thousand Austins a thousand Cyprians a thousand King Harry Churches stood against me Nay he doubteth not in plain tearms to exempt his Doctrine from all judgment of Men and Angels making himself therby judge of both saying Adversus falso nominatum Ecclesiasticum statum Scire vos volo quod in posterum non amplius hoc honore dignabor ut sinam vel vos vel ipsos Angelos de Caelo de mea doctrina judicare c. nec volo meam doctrinam à quoquam judicari atque adeone ab Angelis quidem cum enim certus de ea sim per eam vester Angelorum judex esse volo And see these words though somwhat altered in the late edition of Wittemberg tom 2. fol. 306. a. fine And apud Brereley tract 3. sect 7. pag. 681. marg at e. tom 2. Wittemberg lib. contra Regem Angliae fol. 333. a. fine he saith Certus enim sum dogmata mea habere me de Caelo c. dogmata mea stabunt c. And will our English Divines allow this in
Luther afterwards held as appeareth in Brerely tract 2. cap. 2. sect 14. in the margent at [z] Luther ibidem fol. 229. b. pauâ—o post initium next after f. at Fourthly Whereto divers other like examples might be added [a] Brereley in his Conclusion to the Judges Sect. 10. Thus then the several and disagreeing answers of Protestant Writers to our objection of the Devils disputation had with Luther against the Mass being discovered for vain and idle I will now conclude this point with the further evident testimony of Hospinianus a learned Calvinist who though he acknowledge Luther [b] Hospinian in Hist Sacrament part alter in his Prolaegom prope finem saith of Zuinglius Calvin Luther Hos enim tres viros nosco à Deo ornatos fuisse multis donis virtutibus ingenio luce doctrinae Caelestis c. Zelo gloriae Dei c. Divinitusque formatos excitatos ad Ecclesiam Christi his postremis temporibus tyran nide ac tenebris Anti-Christi horribiliter oppressam in libertatem lucem Evangelii vindicandam c. for a man adorned with excellent gifts with the light of Heavenly knowledge zeal of Gods glory and as raised up to restore the Gospels light c. Yet as inforced he confesseth most plainly the thing in question in Hist Sacrament part alter fol. 131. a. where he reciteth out of Luthers works a part of the disputation written by Luther between the Devil and him and then in the end of that side of the leaf addeth saying De hac disputatione narrat Lutherus plura quorum summa est se à Diabolâ— edoctum esse quod Missa privata imprimis sit res mala rationibus Diaboli convictum abolevisse eam Luther being instructed by the Devil that the Mass was wicked and being overcome with Sathans Arguments did thereupon abandon the Mass Insomuch as Hospinian doth yet further in his first Index or Alphabetical Table set before his Book under the Letter C. and at the word Colloqium among the many other Colloquies had among Protestants by him there set down place among other this Colloquie between the Devil and Luther in these words Colloquium Lutheri cum Diabolo in quo instituitur de erroribus Missae 131. As also Joannes Regius another prime Protestant in his Book intituled Liber Apologeticus c. under the title Consideratio censurae pag. 123. circa med forbeareth not to defend and justifie Luthers foresaid confessed instruction from the Devil saying Quid hoc ad Mysterium seu doctrinam verbi Divini per Lutherum restauratum evertendum aut ad Missae etiam veritatem stabilendam Et unde constat Pu. constat by the testimony of Luther himself tom 7. Wittember An. 1558. in lib. de Missa privata unctione Sacerdotum fol. 228. a. fine tom 9. Germ. Jenen fol. 28. in lib. de Missa angulari tibi malum ipsum fuisse Spiritum qui Luthero hoc dixerit Et posito licet malus Spiritus fuisset non sequitur tamen mox eum mentitum fuisse quia vera interdum Diaboli loquuntur quando dicunt id cujus Scriptura testis est So confessedly is that true which we object against Luther 8. As concerning [c] Brereley in his Book a part of the Lives of the late pretended Reformers Cap. 2. Sect. 1. obedience to the Spiritual Pastors in behalf of the people he saith The Governours of Churches and Pastors of Christs Sheep have power indeed to teach but the Sheep ought to give judgement c. Whereof let the Pope Bishops and Councels decree what they please we will not hinder it but we who are Christs Sheep and hear his voice are to judge whether those things be true which they propound or no and they ought to give place and subscribe to our censure and judgement c. Qui volunt perhiberi rectores Ecclesiarum pastores ovium Christi habent quidem potestatem docendi sed oves debent ferre judicium utrum illi vocem Christi vel alienorum proponant ordinent Papa Episcopi Concilia c. quicquid velint non impediemus sed penes nos qui oves Christi sumus vocem ejus audimus erit judicium utrum vera consentanea voci pastoris nostri proponant vel non ac ipsi nobis cedere nostrae censurae ac sententiae subscribere obtemperare debent Luther tom 2. Wittemb fol. 375. a. initio and next before there fol. 374. b. fine he saith Christus ademit Episcopis Doctoribus Conciliis tum jus tum potestatem judicandi de doctrina ac tradit illa omnibus Christianis in genere Is this the saying of a Sheep or of a Wolf Pu. Conformable to this Doctrine is that which Bellarmine in praefat de Conciliis Ecclesia militante saith of Luther Igitur Martinus Lutherus cum fama accepisset indictum esse Concilium continuè arrepto â—alamo librum confecit atque inscripsit De Conciliis credes ut ageret Deo gratias Ecclesiae gratularetur atque omnes ad Concilium invitaret Nihil minus summa enim libri est nihil esse opus Conciliis cum etiam vetera illa sanctissima celeberrima erraverint quilibet Parochi Ludi-Magistri non minus possint in Ecclesia quà m quaevis maxima numerosissima Concilia Orditur à Concilio illo sine controversia antiquissimo sanctissimo quod Apostoli Hierosolymis celebraverunt quanquam in â—o Concilio Apostoli decreverunt abstinendum esse à sanguine suffocato ad has angustias nos redigit ut vel ab his cibis nos abstineamus vel apertè fateamur liberum esse Concilio summo ac primo non obedire Deinde graviter exponit quanta calamitas esset non vesci deinceps capreis leporibus cervis cuniculis anseribus turdis caeterisque aviculis quod miserius est abstinere lucanicis aliisque farciminibus jusculis etiam quibusdam quae non solum pipere condiuntur sed etiam sanguine ut ipse loquitur qui ista benè norat vel liquido tinguntur vel crasso coagulato infarciuntur Quia vero tam gravis jactura nullo modo subeunda Luthero esse videbatur inde effecit non esse Apostolico decreto obtemperandum Ex quo rursum ita conclusis Ergo liberum est nobis omnia concilia relinquere sic liberi sumus ab omnibus Concilliis Praeclare omnino quasi vero quia non tenemur ea Concilii lege quae solum ad tempus data fuerat jam nullis aliis Conciliorum legibus teneamur 9 As concerning the [d] 〈◊〉 in his Booke aâ—â—art of the lives of the late pretended Reformers c. cap. 2. sect 13. initio souls immortality Luther was in the end so obstinately bent against Purgatory and Prayer to Saints that to prevent them he affirmed [e] Luther tom 4. Wittem 1574. in Ecclesiasten c. 9. saith Solomon sentire
extraordinary curious and exquisit dyet such and so publickly and precisely observed saith [h] Bolseke in his Book of the life of Calvin reporteth how that Calvins wine was choice and carried abroad with him in a silver pot when he dyned abroad that also special bread was made purposely for Calvin only and the same made of fine flower wet in rosewater mingled with Sugar Synamon and Anizeseeds besides a singular kind of bisket made for Calvin alone and be affirmeth this as a matter known all Geneva over Bolseke as the Lords of Berna were thereat greatly offended In report of all which though Bolseke make solemn and great [i] In the beginning of his said book dedicated to Monsieur of Epinac Archbishop and Earl of Lyons he hath this Protestation I am here for the love of the truth to refute Theodore Beza his false and shameless lies in the praise of Calvin protesting before God and all the holy Court of Heaven before all the world and the Holy Ghost it self that neither anger nor envy nor evill will hath made me speak or write any one thing against the truth and my conscience protestation of his truth for so much yet as being scandalized with Calvins life he afterwards became Catholick and so was at the writing hereof we will therefore in regard of our former undertaken method be sparing to urge the same Only we cannot forbear the publike testimony of that learned Lutheran Conradus Schlusselburg a man of principal estimation in the Protestants Church being as appears by the title of his Book Dioceseos Raceburgensis Superintendens conjunctarum Megapolensium Ecclesiarum Generalis Inspector and no less learned and enemy to the Pope than was Calvin himself who [k] See this apud Brereley tract 2. cap. 2. sect 10. subd 11. fine at 3. in Theologia Calvinistarum l. 2. fol. 72. a. circa post med reported of Calvin saying God in the rod of his fury visiting Calvin did horribly punish him before the fearful hour of his unhappy Death For he strake this Heretick so he tearmeth him in regard of his conceived Doctrine concerning the Sacrament and Gods being the Author of sin with his mighty hand that being in despair and calling upon the Devil he gave up his wicked Soul swearing cursing and blaspheming he dyed upon the disease of lice and worms a kind of death wherewith God often striketh the wicked with which God did strike Antiochus 2 Machab. 9.5.9.10 and Herod Act. 12.23 increasing in a most louthsome ulter about his privy parts so as none could endure the stench These things are objected to Calvin by publike writing in which also horrible things are declared concerning his lasciviousness his sundry abominable vices and sodomitical lusts for which last he was by the Magistrate at Noyon under whom he lived branded on the shoulder with a hot burning iron unto which I yet see not any sound and clear refutation made c. Deus manâ— sua potenti adeò hunc haereticum percussit ut desperata salute daemonibus invocatis jurans execrans blasphemans miserrimè animam malignam exhalârit obiit autem Calvinus morbo pediculari vermibus circa pudenda in apostemate seu ulcere faetentissimo crescentibus ita ut nullus assistentium faetorem amplius ferre posset Haec publicis Scriptis Calvino objiciuntur in quibus etiam de ipsius Aselgia variis flagitiis sodomiticis libidinibus ob quas stigma ferro candenti dor so Calvini impressum fuerit à Magistratu sub quo vixit horrenda narrantur ad quae non video solidam luculentam aliquam refutationem c. scio lego Bezam aliter de vita moribus obitu Calvini scribere cùm verò Beza eadem haeresi eodem ferme peccato nobilitatus sit ut Historia de Candida ejus meritricuba testatur nemo ipsi in hac parte fidem habere potest And see further there concerning Beza l. 1. in prooemio pag. 4. b. ibid. pag. 92. a. post med b. 93. a. initio Hierom Bolseke further affirms in his said Book that the City of Noyon in Picardy in which Calvin lived and from which saith Bolseke Calvin upon his foresaid punishment of branding fled did testify this foresaid offence and punishment of Calvin unto Monsieur Bertelier Secretary of the Counsel of Geneva under the hand of a publick and sworn Notary which testimony saith Bolseke is yet extant and hath been seen to himself and many others Now whether this Author would lye so egregiously and with setting down in Print such pretended known circumstances wherein he was so notably disproveable and to be discredited even in the knowledge of the whole City of Noyon a place not remote but in the same Kingdom we will not affirm nor determine but leave to all indifferency of judgement Only we adde that whereas F. Campian in rat 3. doth object this against Calvin as a matter known and publick tearming him therefore stigmaticus perfuga a branded fugitive M. Whitaker in his answer thereto pag. 50. initio saith Si stigmaticus fuit Calvinus fuit etiam Paulus fuerunt alii And being told by Duraeus contra Whitakerum Printed 1582. fol. 73. b. that he was prophane in so comparing Calvins brands for wickedness with Pauls brands for Christ he doth in respons contra Duraeum pag. 280. answering to that very fol. 73. of Duraeus pass over all this matter in silence forbearing so thereby all further mention or defence thereof [l] Apud Brereley in his Book a part of the lives of the late pretended Reformers cap. 6. sect 1. fine To the former testimonies affirming Calvins filthy despairing death upon the disease of Lice and Worms encreasing in an Ulcer about his privy parts assenteth the Protestant Writer Johannes Herennius who being himself an earnest Calvinist Preacher and then continuing student at Geneva affirmeth in his published Book de vita Calvini himself to have been present and eye-witness thereof saying Calvinus in desperatione finiens vitam obiit turpissimo foetidissimo morbo quem Deus rebellibus maledictis comminatus est prius excruciatus consumptus quod ego verissime attestari audeo qui funestâ—m tragicum illius exitum his meis oculis praesens aspexi 38. He [m] Brereley in the Prefac to the Reader n. 11. tract 3. sect 2. paulo post med at f. n. teaches in Dan. c. 6. v. 22.25 that earthly Princes do bereave themselves of authority when they erect themselves against God yea that they are unworthy to be accounted in the number of men and we must rather spit upon their faces thn obey them c. Abdicant se potestate terreni Principes dum insurgunt contra Deum imò indigni sunt qui censeantur in hominum numero potius ergo conspuere oportet in illorum capita quà m illis parere c. And see further this saying specially mentioned and objected to the
Christi satisfaciat c. And see Melancthon's words more vehement full and at large ibidem in his Epistle to Fredericus Miconius alleged there pag. 618. 644. post med 645. And see Hospinian in historia Sacramentar part altera fol. 68 b. And yet of Melancthon's change afterwards unto Calvinisme see the same confessed by Hospinian in Hist Sacrament part altera fol. 115. a. initio circa med fol. 141. b. initio And by Osiander in Epitom c. Centur. 16. pag. 615. initio where Osiander doth expresly charge Melancthon with inconstantia Viro Theologo indigna And see no lesse there pag. 667. Hence it is that though the Protestants in Colloq Attembergensi printed in quarto Jenae ad Salam 1570. fol. 510. b. paulo post medium do there commend and tearm Melancthon to be optimum Sanctissimum Virum c. Yet in regard of such his noted and known inconstancy in Doctrine it is also there fol. 337. b. circa medium said of him illud saltem de locis Phillippi paucis et modeste addimus Primum constare Philippum toties fere eos mutasse rebus verbis ut quibus sit fides adhibenda in dubio est Lutherum istam crebram mutationem improbasse ex fide dignis accepimus And see further of Melancthon's inconstancy the Protestant Writer Schlusselburg in Theolog. Calvinist l. 2. fol. 91. a. post med b. fol. 92 a b. fol. 94 95. And see Osiander in Epitom c. Centur. 16 pag. 809. circa post medium pag. 703. paulo post medium where it is said of him Hujus viri eruditioni si constantia in vera religione respondisset plane incomparabilis vir extitisset c. Wherefore I may conclude with the words of Gasper Ulenbergius in libro cui titulus Granes juste cause cur Catholicis in communione veteris ejusque veri Christianismi permanendum sit c. Causa 15 c. 15. pag. 315. Edit Collon 1589 in octavo Where he saith Quamobrem non est usque adco a veritate alienum quod Melancthonem nobili cuidam Johanni Bartholomeo a Velberg consuluisse aiunt ut a Catholico communicandi atque orandi ritu non discederet ac inter cetera hoc ejus quoque verba ad eundem nobilem dicta referunt Nullum habeo digitum inquit in manu mea cujus jactur a non optarim me nunquam ad scribendum de rebus Theologicis accessisse sed vocasse Philosophiae meae quemadmodum feci a principio verum longius nunc progressus sum quam ut regredi passim hactenus Melancthon ex cujus verbis promptum est Estimare quomodo ipsius Conscientia propter grave hoc in Religione dissidium cui suscitando ipse quoque manum admovit constituta fuerit Scribit hoc Wolfangus Agricola Becanus Pastor Paltensis in Concione de Matrimonio Of Bucer 58 COncerning Bucer's [o] Brereley tract 2. c. 2. sect 10. subd 5. Doctrine among his many other grosse absurdities wherewith Mr. Cartwright allegeth in Mr. Whitgift's defence pag. 522. prope initium Chargeth him apud Brerely hic at l. he was so inclining to the Lybell of Divorce permitted by Moses that he doubted not to teach that as there is at this day like hardness of Hearts so the distressed Wives ought to be releived no less now than in time past For saith he the Magistrate now hath no less Authority in this matter than Moses had and at this day ought to use the same Bucer in sacra quatuor Evangel c. In Mat. 19. fol. 147. paulo post med And see the Index or table to that book under the letter R. at the word Repudium And see the other Edition of his Book Anno 1536. pag. 390 prope finem 391 ante med In Matth. c. 19. he saith apud Brereley hic at d. in the margent Sive juste sive injusté repudiata aliqua fuerit si nulla ei sit spes ad primum virum redeundi cupiat autem piè vivere maritoque opus habeat ducens eam nequaqam peccabit And in further proof of the continuance thereof to this time he yet further saith Neither is it to be beleived that Christ would forbid any thing of that which his Father commanded but he commanded to the hard of heart that if they would not intreat their wives with Nuptiall equity they should then procure liberty by a Libell of divorce to marry again Bucer ibidem paulo post apud Brereley hic at 5. And Bucer in his Scripta Anglicana de Regno Christi l. 2. c. 26 27. pag. 99 100. affirmeth further most plainly the same Doctrine ibidem c. 28. pag. 101. in which places he doubteth not to teach that Quicunque nolit c. Whosoever will not induce his mind to love his Wife and to intreat her with all conjugall Charity that man is commanded by God to put her away and marry another And that this being commanded in the old Law pertaineth also to Christians See this ibidem pag. 100 In like sort also doth he allow and defend liberty of Divorce and Marriage again in case of the ones departure from the other Bucer in script Anglican de Regno Christi l. 2. c. 26. pag. 114. c. 41. pag. 122 In case also of Homicide ibidem l. 2. c. 37. post med c. 40 initio or but repairing to the company or banquet of immâ—dest persons ibidem l. 2. c. 37. pag 115. ante med c. 40. pag. 120 post med likewise in case of incurable infirmity of the Woman by Child-birth or of the man by Lunacy or otherwise whereby either party is become unable to render marriage right Bucer ibidem c. 42. pag. 123 prope finem 124 circa med In these and many other such like cases he yet further generally concludeth the lawfullness of Divorce and Marriage again ibidem pag. 124 prope finem and see also the marginal note there where is set down Conclusio quod aliis de causis quam fornicationis concedenda sint legitima divortia novaque inire connubia And in the Text there it is said Haec adferenda putavi ad eam explicandam questionem num concedi a Christianis Principibus Rerumpub moderatoribus possit divertium facere ad alteras transire nuptias aliis quam fornicationis et stupri de causis Ex quibus siomnia rite et ex verbo Dei ponderentur satis liquebit neminem nec virum nec mulierum cui opus sit ad bene casteque vivendum conjuge ac conjuge cohabitate aut conjugii necessaria officia faciente prohibere debere quin vir talem quaer at uxorem et habeat et mulier talem virum si depreheasum evictum sit vel virum cui pia mulier nupta fuit vel mulierem quam vir pius uxorem duxit praestare necessaria conjugii officia aut abstinatè nolle aut hujusmodi
partem Missae ex Gentibus in nostram Religionem profluxisse c. Thus wandreth he upon surmise without all proof no first beginning thereof since the Apostles times can be shewed So chargeable were the Fathers no less than we now are in that great question of [s] See Bullingers Decades in English pag. 1082. a post med Sacrifice 4. Fourthly concerning prayer for the dead it is affirmed that [t] Mr. Fulk in his retentive and pag. 106. initio and see Bucer in sacra quatuor Evangelia of 1536. pag. 31â— ante med it prevailed within three hundred years after Christ that [v] Mr. Fulk in his confutation of Purgatory pag. 78. fine and 320. ante med and 326. initio Ambrose allowed prayer for the dead and that it was the common error of his time that [x] Mr. Fulk ibid. pag. 194. ante med Chrysostom and Hierom allowed prayer for the dead that [y] See Mr. Fulk ibid. pag. 349. post med Austin blindly defended it that it was likewise taught by [z] Chemnitius examen part 3. pag. 93. b. 94. a.b. Origen Ambrose Prudentius and Hierom also by [a] Chemnitius ibid. pag. 107. b. ante med Austin Epiphanius and Chrysostom that [b] Mr. George Gifford in his demonstration that our Brownists be full Donatists pag. 38. and see hereafter in this consideration num 18. it was general in the Church long before the days of St. Austin as appeareth in Cyprian and Tertullian that also Mr. Fulk acknowledgeth [c] Mr. Fulk in confutation of Purgatory pag. 362. ante med vide ibid. pag. 303. circa med 393. paulo ante med And Brereley in his Omissions of pag. 90. saith And see Calvin de vera Ecclesiae reformat rat extant in Calvin tract Theolog. pag. 394. b. ante med Tertullian Cyprian Austin Hierom and a great many more do witness that Sacrifice for the dead is the tradition of the Apostles that [d] And Bucer in his enarrat in sacra quatuor Evangelia Printed Basiliae 1537. in Matth. c. 12. pag. 311. paulo ante med saith Ex eo quidem quod ab initio prope Ecclesiae preces Eleemosynae fiunt pro desunctis sensim irrepsit ea sententia quam D. Augustinus ponit in Euchiridio cap. 110. nâ—que negandum est defunctorum animas pietate suorum viventium relevari cum pro illis Sacrificium mediatoris offertur c. Hinc itaque non dubitarim exortum hoc in defunctos officium pro illis orandi sacrificandi c. prayer and alms were made for the dead almost from the very beginning of the Church That likewise prayer for the dead is taught in the writings [e] Mr. Fulk in his confutation of Purgatory pag. 353. And Chemnitius in his examen part 3. pag. 110. a. circa med saith Apud Dionysium oratio pro defuncto fit in Templo And see further there pag. 100. b. post med and 101. a. initio vide Dionys de Eccles Hierarchi c. 7. part 3. now extant under the name of Dionysius Areopagita who is mentioned in the [f] Act. 17.14 Acts and those writings as well [g] Mr. Fulk against the Remish Testament in 2. Thess 2. sect 19. fol. 361. b. paulo ante med thinketh that Dionysius lived in the time of Origen And Hermannus Pacificus in his Theses c. pag. 139. fine maketh this Dionysius much antient to Chrysostom saying Quae mysteriorum explicatio consentit cum iis quae multo ante Chrysostomum Dionysius de hac re scripsit cum ait in lib. de Eccles Hierarchia c. And Mr. D. Bridges Lord Bishop of Oxford in his defence of the Government c. pag. 917. prope finem saith I take this Dionysius to have been before Basil acknowledged by Mr. Fulk to have been written above 1300. years since which was long before the objected [h] Whereas it is usually objected against this Book that if it had been the writing of Dionysius then Eusebius or Hierom would have mentioned it this confessed antiquity thereof before their times avoydeth that objection which is also no less plainly avoyded by Eusebius hist l. 5. c. 26. and Hâ—erom in Catal. prope initium who signify that the Books of sundry Writers were unknown to them times to the contrary of Eusebius and Hierom as also alleged specially by Mr. Sutcliff as being [i] Sutcliff de Praesbyterio c. 13. pag. 91. prope finem saith Dionysius antiquitatis optimus sane testis videtur enim esse antiquissimus c. And Mr. Oliver Ormerode in his picture of a Puritan Printed 1605. fol. G. 3. a. ante med saith I referre you to Tertullian Iustin Martyr Cyprian c. but what do I cite these Fathers Dionysius Areopagita who lived in the Apostles time maketh mention of the Cross in Baptism de Ecclesiast Hierarchia cap. de Baptismo And see further there fol. G. 2. b. fine Also the Protestant treatise entituled Consensus Orthodoxus Printed in folio Tiguri Anno 1578. fol. 198. b. initio allegeth and affirmeth Dionysius who wrote de Ecclesiastica Hierarchia to have lived Anno Christi 96. And the Lord Archbishop of Canterbury in his answer to the admonition pag. 105. sect ult allegeth Dionysius saying Dionysius Areopagita in his Book de Caelesti Hierarchia and 7. chapter speaketh thus c. And see Mr. Cooper in his Dictionarium historicum c. annexed to â—is Thesaurus c. Printed 1578. at the word Dionysius Areopagita And Humfred in Jesuitismi part 2. rat 5. pag. 513. fine 514. initio saith Hunc Areopagitam Suidas Michael Singelus Gregorius Turonensis alii Pauli Auditorem credunt fuisse illum Scriptorem Caâ—estis Ecclesiasticae Hierarchiae most antient and the best witness of antiquity In like manner concerning Lymbus Patrum whereas Bellarmine allegeth in proof thereof the plain testimonies of the Greek Fathers as namely of [k] Bellarm. tom 1. lib. 4. de Christi anima cap. 14. Justin Irenaeus Clemens Origen Eusebius Basil Nazianzen Nyssen Epiphanius Chrysostom c. And of the Latin Fathers [l] Bellarm. ibid. Tertullian Hyppolitus Cyprian Hilary Gaudentius Prudentius Ambrose Hierom Ruffinus Austin Leo Fulgentius c. our Adversary Danaeus answereth to their testimonies saying [m] Danaeus ad Roberti Bellarmini disput part 1. pag. 176. paulo post med As concerning them they were not instructed out of Gods Word neither do they confirm their opinion from it but only from their own conjectures c. In like plain manner doth Mr. Jacob make his acknowledgement saying [n] See this in Mr. Bilsons Book of the full redemption of mankind pag. 188. fine And see Mr. Iacob further in his defence of the treatise of Christs sufferings pag. 199. paulo post med and 100. ante med And see Mr. Bilsons like acknowledgement in his Book of the full redemption c. pag. 189. post med and in his survey c. pag. 656. post med All
Hieronymus alii affirmant esse traditionem Apostolicam Ambrose Maximus Taurinensis Theophilus Hierom and others do affirm the fast of Lent to be an Apostolical tradition In more undoubted proof whereof other Protestant Writers do not only affirm [l] See this in Abraham Scultetus in Medul Theologiae Patrum pag. 440. initio the superstition of Lent and fasting to have been allowed and commanded by Ignatius [m] Mr. Whitgist in his defence c. pag. 408. circa med who was Scholar to St. John but do also defend [n] See Abraham Scultetus ubi supra and the same Epistle of Ignatius being ad Philippensâ—s is in like manner cited and acknowledged by Mr. Whitgift in his defence pag. 102. ante med and by Mr. Cartwright alleged ibid. pag. 99. prope finem And Mr. Hooker in his Ecclesiastical Policy l. 5. sect 72. pag. 209. circa mod answereth our Adversaries usual objection made against it And so likewise doth Mr. Whitgift in his desence c. pag. 102. that very Epistle of Ignatius in which this Doctrin is extant to be his true Epistle and not counterfeit Adde but now hereunto that our learned adversaries do acknowledge how that in the Primitive Church [o] Whereas Epiphanius haer 75. ante med reporting the errors of Aerius affirmeth of him that he said Neither shall fasting be appointed for these things be Judaical and under the law of bondage If at all I will fast I will choose any day of my self and I will fast for liberty And see the like in St. Augustin haer 53. and confessed by Mr. Fulk and Pantaleon hereafter in this Consideration num 21. in the margent at c. This opinion of Aerius though thus condemned was yet so agreeable and the very same with the new doctrin of Protestants that Mr. Whitaker contra Duraeum l. 9. pag. 830. initio saith De jejunio nihil a fide Catholica alienum docuit Aerius And see this condemned opinion of Aerius yet further defended by Mr. Fulk in his answer to a counterfeit Catholick pag. 45. initio And by Danaeus de haeresibus cap. 53. fol. 175. b. 177. a. b. though yet others who distike our adversaries over-plain Novellism herein do specially condemn Acrius and his foresaid defended doctrin as doth namely Mr. Hooker in his Ecclesiastical Policy l. 5. sect 72. pag. 210. paulo post med And the Protestant Author of the book intituled Querimonia Ecclesiae Printed Londini 1592. pag. 31. fine 94. ante med 103. fine Hereof see hereafter in this Consideration in the place before cited Aug. haer 53. and Epiphamus haer 75. ante med And Mr. Fulk in his answer to a counterfeit Catholick pag. 44. fine and 45. initio confesseth this saying I will not dissemble that which you think the greatest matter Aerius taught that prayer for the dead was unprofitable as witness both Epiphanius and Austin which they count for an error Also he taught that fasting-days are not to be observed And Mr. Field of the Church l. 3. c. 29. pag. 138. prope finem saith The eleventh is the heresy of Aerius He condemned the custom of the Church in naming the dead at the Altar and offering the sacrifice of the Eucharist that is of thanksgiving for them He disliked set fasts and would not admit any difference between a Bishop and a Presbyter c. He was justly condemned c. And see this confessed in like manner by Pantalcon in Chronographia pag. 28. initio And Osiander in Epitom c. cent 4. pag. 434. reciteth the condemned errors of Aerius saying Item non oporrere orare vel offerre pro mortuis oblationem Jejunia ordinata non esse obiervanda c. jejunandum esse cum quis voluerit propter libertatem Aerius was specially condemned for his then impugning of our Doctrin concerning the Churches appointed Fasts and that also they themselves do in our behalf give true and full answer to our other adversaries common and misapplyed objecting of the mistaken example of [o] Whereas Mr. Fulk against the Rhemish Testament in Matth. c. 15. fol. 28. a. versus finem in Act. Apost c. 13. sect 5. fol. 208. a. fine Arerius in loc commun pag. 272. versus finem and many others do commonly object that Montanus the Heretick was the first that appointed laws of fasting Mr. Hooker in his Ecclesiastieal Policy l. 5. sect 72. pag. 209. fine 210. initio answereth with us that the Montanists were reprehended only for that they brought in sundry unaccustomed days of fasting continued their fasts a great deal longer and made them more rigorons c. Whereupon Tertullian maintaining Montanism wrote a book in defence of the new fast c. And the foresaid Protestant Author of Querimonia Ecclesiae pag. 110. initio answereth in like manner saying Eusebâ—um inquiunt Montanum primas de jejuniis tuliffe leges manifestò docet sed falluntur graviter in hac re ut in aliis c. Abrogatis Ecclesiae jejuniis novum inducit Montanus jejunandi morem c. See this answer more at large in the book it self Montanus and wrested saying of [q] Whereas Mr. Fulk against the Rhem. Test in 1 Tim. 4.3 and commonly most Protestants do object the saying of St. Paul 1 Tim. 4.3 against our Catholick Doctrin of fasting from certain meats Mr. Hâ—oker in his Ecclesiastical Policy l. 5. sect 72. pag. 209. post med saith with us hereof Against those Hereticks which have urged perpetual abstinence from certain meats as being in their very nature unclean the Church hath still bâ—nt her self as an enemy St. Paul giving charge to take heed of them c. And the foresaid Author of Querimonia Ecclesiae pag. 106. 107. giveth the same answer to the said saying of St. Paul as likewise doth St. Austin contra Faustum Manich. l. 30. cap. 4. c. 6. contra Adimant Manic c. 14. An answer so evidently true that Mr. Jacob the Puritan in his defence of the Church and Ministry of England pag. 59. initio acknowledgeth that the place of Paul 1 Tim. 4.3 is understood of Marcion and Tatianus who did absolutely condemn Marriage and certain meats and so saith he are in no comparison with the Papists if they erred in nothing else St. Paul 1 Tim. 4.3 12. Twelfly concerning unwritten traditions and Ceremonies the Canonical Scriptures Images Relicks and consecration or hallowing of Creatures And first concerning unwritten Traditions it is confessed as followeth Whereas St. Chrysostom saith [r] Chrysost in 2. Thess hom 4. The Apostles did not deliver all things by writing but many things without and these be as worthy of credit as the other Master Whitaker in answer thereof saith [s] Whitaker de sacra Scriptura pag. 678. paulo post med I answer that this is an inconsiderat speech and unworthy so great a Father And whereas Epiphanius saith [t] Epiphanius haer 61. circa med We must use Traditions
Scripturarum Sunt autem Canonicae Scripturae Genesis Eâ—odus Levitâ—cus c. Salomonis libriquinque c. Tobias Judith Hester Esdrae libri duo Machabaeorum libri duo c. And see the like accompt made by Innocent us in Epist ad Exuperium cap. 7. By Gelasius tom 1. Concil decret cum 70. Episcopis By Isidor l. 6. Etymolog cap. 1. By Rabanus l. 2. Instit Clerâ—corum and by Cassiodorus l. 2. divin lectionum sayings had thereof And howsoever certain of our learned Adversaries were not abashed in the Tower disputation publickly and seriously to evade and answer that St. Anstin in his sayings hereof used the word Canonical [l] In the Tower disputation with F. Campian Anno 1581. the first days conference improperly the very contrary thereof is so evident not only in St. Austin and the third Council of Carthage whereat St. Austin was present and [m] In Concil 3. Carthag fine it is said Augustinus Epâ—scopus plebis Hipponae subscripsi subscribed but also in sundry other Fathers that the same is plainly confessed in divers of the same Fathers by [n] Mr. Reynolds in his Conclusions annexed to his conference the second Conclusion pag. 699. post med 700. initio reproveth herein the third Council of Carthage D. Reynolds [o] Zanchius de Sacra Scriptura pag. 32. 33. acknowledgeth the foresaid like Judgement of the Carthage Council Innocentius and Gelasius Zanchius [p] Hospinianus in Hist Sacramentar part 1. pag. 160. paulo ante med rejecteth herein the Judgement of the Carthage Council And ibid. post med pag. 161. ante med he likewise rejecteth Innocentius Gelasius pag. 161. post med he reproveth St. Austin Hospinianus [q] Lubbertus dâ— principiis Christian dogm l. 1. cap. 4. pag. 8. prope finem saâ—th Concedo quosdam ex his libris à Carthaginenâ—ibus admissos sâ—d nego eos propterea esse verbum Dei. Nulla enim Cono lia habent istam authorâ—â—atem Lubbertus [r] Hiperius in Method Theolog. l. 1. pag. 46. fine saith In Concilio Carthagâ—ensi tertio adduntur ad Canonem c. Sapientia Ecclesiasticus libri duo Machabaeorum Tobias Judith c. quos libros omnes eodem ordine numerat Augustinus Innocentius Gelasius And then afterwards more at large reciteth their Judgement Hipertus [s] D. Field of the Church l. 4. c. 23. pag. 246. circa med 247. circa med acknowledgeth the like judgement herein of St. Austin Innocentius and the third Council of Carthage D. Field and [t] See D. Covel against Burges pag. 76. fine 77. most plainly confessing St. Austins like judgement had of the Book of Wisedom and ibid. pag. 87. ante med he further saith of all these Books If Ruffinus be not deceived they were approved as parts of the old Testament by the Apostles D. Covel And whereas our Adversaries do object that [u] Origen in Psalm 1. apud Eusebium Hist l. 6. c. 19. Origen and [x] Epiphanius de pond mensur and also Haer. 8. Epicureorum circa med Epiphanius do in their mentioning the Scriptures of the old Testament seclude these from the Canon and that [y] Hieron praefat in lib. Regum St. Hierom affirmeth them to be Apocryphal it is answered thereto First that the Fathers in those places do not speak of their own opinion but do only report what was the opinion of the Hebrews and what Books they thought Canonical From which now defended opinion of the Hebrews [z] Origen was so far from the Hebrews opinion hereof that he doubted not to defend for sacred against Julius Africanus who doubted thereof the History of Susanna which the Hebrews and Protestans reject hereof see Origen in Epist ad Julium Africanum and hom 1. in Leviticum He doth likewise in Epist ad Julium Africanum affirm that part of Hester to be sacred and Canonical which the Protestants refuse as not being in the Hebrews Canon Origen [a] Epiphanius haer 76. ante med numbreth Sapientia and Ecclesiasticus among the divine Scriptures and in libro de pond niensur paulo post init he referreth Sapientia unto Salomon as Author thereof Epiphanius Hierom [b] As concerning Hierom whereas he in praefat Daniel unto an unwary Reader may seem to seclude certain Chapters of Daniel rejected by Protestants as not being in the Hebrews Canon In so much that Ruffinus mistaking herein as the Protestants do Hieroms meaning doth reprehend and charge Hierom with refusal of these foresaid parts of Daniel accordingly also as doth Mr. Whitaker contra Camp rat 1. pag. 18. circa med allege the foresaid place of Hierom against those Chapters of Daniel St. Hierom. Apol. 2. adv Ruffinum circa finem answereth and explaineth himself saying Non enim quid ipse sentirem c. Truly I did not set down what my self thought but what the Hebrews are accustomed to say against us herein calling there fierther Ruffinus stultum Sycophantem a foolish Sycophant for mistaking and charging him with the Hebrews opinion See yet this point of St. Hierom thus explaining himself confessed by Mr. D. Covel in his answer to Master John Burges c. pag. 87. circa med And see the conference of Hampton Court pag. 60. Also St. Hieromâ—n prolog in Machab. most expresly placeth the Books of Machabees rejected by the Hebrews among the stories of divine Scripture And Hier. in praefat in Judith saith of that Book Apud Haebraeos liber Judith inter Agiographa legitur cujus authoritas ad roboranda illa quae in contentionem veniunt to wil with the Jews minùs idonea judicatur c. Sed quia hunc librum Synodus Nicena in numero Sanctarum Scripturarum legitur computasse acquievi c. and sundry other [c] St. Austin de Civit. Dei l. 18. c. 36. saith Among which are the Books of Machabees which not the Jews but the Church accounteth for Canonical And St. Isidore l. 6. Etymolog c. 1. saith of the Machabees Though the Hebrews do not receive them into their Canon yet the Church of Christ doth honour them among the divine Books So clearly did the antient Fathers disclaim from the Hebrews Catalogue which our adversaries profess to maintain and follow Fathers were most clearly dissenting many of them to the contrary usually alleging and citing these Books and to prevent all evasion and Cavil not under the naked and only name of Scripture in general but with such further circumstance or Epithets [d] So is the Book of Wisedom alleged by Cyprian l. 4. Ep. 1. de habitu Virginum ante med de exhort Martyrii cap. 12. initio de mortalitate prope finem By Fulgentius ad Trasimundum Regem l. 1. c. 5. l. 2. c. 9. ad Feram Diaconum resp ad quaest 1. prope initium by Cyril l. 2. in Julianum ultra med By Clemens Alexandrinus l. 4. Strom. By
Missas celebrari mandavit c. Imaginem Divae Virginis circumferri permisit c. peregrinationes ad statuas pro plebis devotione per indulgentias confirmavit Purificationis Mariae festum cereis illustratum Palmarum diem solemnem processionibus bonoravit Initium Quadragesimalis Iejunii cinerum aspergine sacravit usum carnis lactis casei butyri atque ovorum jejunantibus interdixit c. Templis lumina dedit sex Monasteria condidit mulieres Monachorum caenobia subire vetuit Monachos Monialium tecta c. Ne bigamus fiat Presbyter prohibuit c. Indulgentias certis diebus templa visitantibus primus concessit c. Dialogorum libros quatuor pro sulciendo Purgatorio fecit cinerum consecrationes c. crucis adorationes ac Missas pro mortuis admisit c. haec omnia ut Patriarcha Romanus fecit And elsewhere namely centur 1. fol. 3. he further affirmeth that Augustin was sent from Gregory to season the English Saxons with the Popish Faith and that King Ethelbert dyed one and twenty years post susceptum Baptismum after he had received Popery Also Luke Osiander in his Epitom Historiae Ecclesiasticae cent 6. pag. 289. fine 290. initio describeth it yet more particularly saying Augustinus Romanos ritus consuetudines Anglicanis Ecclesiis obtrusit nimirum Altaria Vestes Imagines Missas Calices Cruces Candelabra Thuribula Vexilla sacra Vasa Lustrales aquas Romanarum Ceremoniarum Codices c. And ibidem pag. 288. prope finem he saith of Gregory In pluribus articulis turpiter Pontificiè hallucinatus est nam libero arbitrio bonis operibus nimiùm tribuit de paenitentia non rectè docet caelibatum ministrorum Ecclesiae acriter ursit Invocationem Sanctorum eorumque eultum sed imaginum idolatricam venerationem approbavit palliavit defend it Also the Century Writers of Magdeburg in their sixth Century cap. 10. col 748. circa med make no less plain report as yet of Augustines like doctrin to us English men and collecting elsewhere in the same Book out of Gregories own writings by them cited certain his opinions which they hold for erroneous as being Popish they do in their Index or Alphabetical table of that sixe Century after the first Edition thereof at the word Gregory specially set down with figures of particular reference where every such said opinion is to be found as followeth Ejusdem error de bonâ—s operibus de confessione de conjugio de Ecclesia de Sanctorum invocatione de Inferno de Justificatione de libero arbitrio de Purgatorio de Pâ—nitentia de satisfactione Also they charge him yet further out of his own writings with Consecration of 〈◊〉 Chailces and Corporals col 369. fine with Oblation of Sacrifice for the dead col 373. post med with exorcism col 376. circa med with translation of Reliqus col 381. fine 382. with Monachism col 383. initio 384. with Pilgrimage col 384. initio with Consecration of Churches with Mass Râ—liqus and sprinckling of holy-water col 364. 365. with Consicâ—ation of the foâ—t of Baptism of Chrism and Oyl col 367. prope initium with celebration of Mass col 369. fine 370. initio 693. post med 694. and with claim and exercise of Jurisdiction and Primacy over all Churches col 425. 426. 427. 428. 429. 430. 431. 432. c. With which last point concerning Primacy he is in like manner charged and reproved by Mr. D. Fulk in his consutation of Purgatory pag. 310. ante med and by Peter Martyr in cap. 8. Judicum and by Carion in Chron. lib. 4. pag. 568. ante med and by Luke Osiander in his Epitom centur 6. pag. 242. and Mr. Powel de Antichristo in praefat pag. 1. fine 2. initio signifieth his opinion to be that the Pope hath been Antichrist semper post Greg. Magni tempora at all times since Gregory the great of Churches [h] See the Centurists cent 5. col 744. lin 24. And Dionysius de Eccles Hierarchia c. 3. mentioneth the Consecration of Altars with infusion of sacred Oyl And see Concil Agathense can 14. Altars [i] Osiander in Epitom cent 4. l. 3. c. 38. pag. 391. initio And see Concil Laodicen can 21. Concil Agathense can 66. Church-vessels of Consecration of [k] See next hereafter num 13. at x. Monks and [l] The Centurists cent 4. col 874. lin 2â— And see Ambrose l. 3. de Virginibus and Concil 4. Carthag can 11. 104. Concil Agathense can 19. Concil 2. Carth. can 3. Virgins of hallowed [m] The Centurists Centur. 3. col 143. lin 48. Chemnitius part 2. pag. 58. b. post med And Cyprian l. 1. Epist 12. circa med saith Olâ—um in Altari sanctificatur and see Concil Laodicen can 48. Concil 2. Carth. can 3. Basil de Spir. S. c. 27. Aug. l. 5. con Don. c. 19. 20. Chrysm [n] See heretofore in this Consideration num 8. at sect next before 4. And see Mr. Perkins problem pag. 136. And Mr. Fulk against the Remish Testament in 1. Ti. 4. sect 13. fol 378. a. prope initium And see Beda hist l. 5. c. 4. post med and Ambrose de myster init cap. 3. ad Basil de Spiritu Sancto cap. 27. And see Epiphanius haer 30. ante med And Theodoret. hist l. 5. c. 21. l. 3. c. 13. water [o] Holy Bread is affirmed so plainly by St. Austin de pec mer. remiss l. 2. c. 26. that Mr. Fulk against Heskins Sanders c. pag. 377. circa med doth therefore tearm it a superstitious bread given in St. Austins time to those that were Catechumens insteed of the Sacrament And Sir Philip Mornay in his Book of the Mass pag. 51. initio chargeth Basils Liturgy with holy bread distributed after service to such as had not communicated And St. Hier. in vita Hilarionis post med saith Concurrebant Episcopi Praesbyteri Clericorum Monachorum greges c. Et hinc inde ex urbibus agris vulgus ignobile sed potentes viri Judices ut benedictum ab eo panem vel oleum acciperent bread [p] Centur. 5. col 744. lin 22. see Concil 4. Tolet. can 8. and Gregory l. 9. Ep. 28. and Prudentius in Benedict Cerei Pasch Candles c. 13. Thirteenthly it is confessed yet further in general concerning Dionysius Areopagita and Hermes who are holden most antient and [q] Of Dionysius mention is made Act. 17.34 and of Hermes Rom. 16.14 Apostolick namely that Dionysius in his foresaid writings which were above a thousand years since as D. Humfrey [r] Humfred in Jesuitismi part 2. rat 5. pag. 513. fine 514. initio saith Hunc Areopagitam Suidas Michael Singelus Gregorius Turonensis alii Pauli auditorem credunt fuisse illum Scriptorem caelestis Ecclesiasticae Hierarchiae confesseth publickly extant and alleged under his name
D. Humfrey did grievously reprehend Mr. Jewel for his so bold appealing to the Fathers affirming therefore of Mr. Jewel that herein [2.] Humfredus in libel de vita Jewell Printed Londini pag. 212. And see the same also in Mr. Fulks retentive against Bristow pag. 55. circa med he gave the Papists too large a scope was injurious to himself and after a manner spoyled himself and the Church which like disclaim in the antient Fathers is no less plainly professed by Jacobus Acontius in his treatise [3.] Jacobus Acontius in Stratagematum Satanae l. 6. pag. 296. saith of the Protestants allegation of the Fathers Quidam eo redierunt ut Patrum authoritatibus omnia denuò replerent quod utinam tam secundo fecissent successu quam bona spe aggressi sunt c. Equidem perniciosissimam omninoque fugiendam hanc offe abitror consuetudinem And see the like in Peter Martyr de Votis pag. 462. circa med dedicated to her late Majesty and by sundry [4.] Lutherus tom 2. Wittemberg Anno 1551. lib. de servo arbitrio pag. 434. affirmeth the Fathers of so many ages to have been plainly blind and most ignorant in the Scriptures to have erred all their life time and that unless they were amended before their deaths they were neither Saints nor pertaining to the Church And see further Luthers Book de servo arbitrio Printed in Octavo 1603. pag. 72.73 337. Also in Colloquiis Mensalibus cap. de Patribus Ecclesiae Luther saith of sundry Fathers in particular In the writings of Hierom there is not a word of true faith in Christ and sound Religion Tertullian is very superstitious I have holden Origen long since accursed Of Chrysostom I make no accompt Basil is of no worth he is wholly a Monk I weigh him not of a hair Cyprian is a weak Divine c. affirming there yet further that the Church did degenerate in the Apostles age and that the Apology of Philip Melancthon doth far excel all the Doctors of the Church and exceed even Austin himself And Pomerane in Joannam saith Nostri Patres sive sancti sive non sancti nihil moror excaecati sunt Montanico Spiritu per traditiones humanas doctrinas Daemoniorum c. non purè docent de Justicatione c. Nec solliciti quidem sunt ut Jesum Christum per Evangelium suum verè doceant And Beza in his Preface upon the new Testament dedicated to the Prince of Condy Anno 1587. affirmeth that Even in the best times the ambition ignorance and lewdness of Bishops was such that the very blind may easely perceive how that Sathan was President in their assemblies or Councils other Protestant Writers many of them not doubting specially to reprove even those Fathers that lived next to the Apostles times Mr. Whitaker and others to such purpose [5.] Abusing for where as Euseb l. 3. c. 26. fine allegeth Egesippus saying Till those times the Church remained a pure Virgin and incorrupt for if any then were willing to deprave or corrupt the sincere rule of healthful doctrin they lay hid in the obscure corners of darkness But after the Apostles death c. then certainly the false and subtil conspiracy of wicked errors took beginning through the fraud and craft of those who laboured to disperse false doctrine c. Mr. Whitaker in resp ad rationes Campian rat 7. pag. 102. and contra Duraeum l. 7. pag. 490. 491. urgeth this to prove that presently after the Apostles times the true Church was no longer a chast Virgin but became adulterous and corrupt An inference many ways most absurd For first Egesippus only meaneth that during the Apostles times the Church remained a Virgin that is not so much as assaulted openly by Hereticks who then lay secret and lurking where as after the Apostles times they stepped forth and gave open and violent assaults invading sometimes and usurping even upon Bishops Seas and corrupting or altering with their damnable heresies many of the Churches revolted Children which yet no more made the visible true Church to be as then heretical or unchast than Luthers like late dispersion of his doctrine and infecting therewith of many who were formerly Catholicks maketh our now Church to be Lutheran Secondly if otherwise the Church so presently after the Apostles times ceased to be a Virgin and so became adulterous and corrupt who seeth not then the blasphemy thence ensuing For in what one age since the Apostles times to this present may the Church then be thought to be preserved chast Thirdly it is against manifest Scripture as where it is said of the Church I will marry thee to me for ever c. I will marry thee to me in saithfulness and thou shalt know the Lord. Osee 2.19 20. and I will make this my Covenant saith the Lord my Spirit that is upon thee and my words which I have put in thy mouth shall not depart out of thy mouth nor out of the mouth of thy seed nor out of the mouth of thy seeds seed from henceforth for evermore Isa 59.21 Very pertinenently therefore saith St. Cyprian to the contrary Adulterari non potest sponsa Christi incorrupta est pudica c. l. de unitate Ecclesiae post initium abusing the mistaken testimony of Egesippus To this end also doth M. Napper in his discourse hereof to his late Majesty not only condemn all the Fathers that lived for [6.] Brereley tract 2. c. 1. sect 4. at q. r. s t. saith Mr. John Napper in his treatise upon the Revelations pag. 43. versus finem affirmeth that the Popes Kingdom hath bad power over all Christians from the time of Pope Silvester and the Emperour Constantine for these thousand two hundred and sixty years and that ibid. pag. 145. col 3. fine from the time of Constantine until these our days even 1260. years the Pope and his Clergy hath possessed the outward visible Church of Christians That also ibid. pag. 68. versus finem between the year of Christ 300. and 316. the Antichristian and Papistical reign began reigning universally and without any debatable contradiction 1260. years Gods true Church most certainly abiding so long latent and invisible Ibid. pag. 191. initio pag. 161. col 3. circa med pag. 156. ante med 237. paulo post med 23. fine pag. 188. ante med 1260. years last before Luther but doth also proceed yet further affirming that [7.] Mr. Napper upon the Revelations pag. 191. initio and see the Century Writers cent 2. cap. ◠col 125. lin 49. During even the second and third ages next after Christ the trne temple of God and light of the Gospel was obscured by the Roman Antichrist himself In like manner doth M. Fulk averre [8.] Mr. Fulk in his answer to a counterfeit Catholick pag. 35. prope finem the true Church decayed immediatly after the Apostles times and that
for these thousand years last past but also for so many other precedent ages as being in our opinion not any new redemption but rather a continual commemoration and application of the force and benefit of that one Sacrifice which was offered once for all Hebr. 28. 18. To what hath been said already concerning Purgatory and Prayer for the dead we may in this occasion about innovations adde that which Brereley hath tract 1. sect 7. subd 6. of the same matter where he saith Mr. Whitaker giveth example to wit of innovation in Religion made by the Roman Church in Gregory the Great saying [e] Whitaker contra Duraeum l. 7. pag. 480. He that first delivered Purgatory for a certain doctrine was Gregory the Great Whereto in Gregories full discharge from all innovation in this point we answer that long before Gregory St. Austin whom our adversaries do unworthily [*] Vnworthily for whereas Mr. Fulk against the Rhemish Testament 1 Cor. 3. sect 6. fol. 267. b. circa med to prove that St. Austin doubted of Purgatory allegeth these words of St. Austin It is not incredible that some such thing is done after this life and it may be inquired of whether it be so and either be found or hid Aug. Enchâ—rid cap. 69. 68. And ad Dulcitium quaest 1. And in like pretence that St. Austin denyed Purgâ—tory Master Fulk doth there further allege these other words of St. Austin The third place we are utterly ignorant of c. Aug. Hypognost contra Pelag. l. 5. This we say is extreamly abusively to urge the Fathers doubtful obscure words against their other plainer sayings and known meanings Therefore in answer or explanation of these saying of St. Austin we say as to the first that St. Austin doubteth not there of Purgatory but only which point is at this day yet doubted of whether that to use St. Austins words in the very same place some of the faithful after this life be saved so much later or sooner by a certain Purgatory fire as they more or less loved their transitory goods So that his doubt there is not whether there be any Purgatory which by these his very words he presupposeth and in the very same Book saith thereof as is here alleged in the text at g. it may not be denyed c. but only as he yet further explaneth himself whether that to use his own further words rerum saecularium quamvis licitè concessarum tales cupiditates c. such affection to worldly things lawfully injoyed as to Wife Children c. that without grief of mind he cannot part from them be punished in Purgatory or not And of this point he saith as is before objected and as we our elves yet say it may he inquired of whether it be so and either be found or hidden Thus much of his unworthily supposed doubt Now concerning the second place of his like supposed denyal of Purgatory we say that St. Austin useth that alleged saying not in denyal of the temporal pains of Purgatory but only upon occasion and by way of disputation against the Pelagians who imagined that besides Heaven and Hell there was a third place of everlasting life prepared for infants that dyed unbaptized In respective confutation of which said imaginary third everlasting place he saith as is alleged the third place we are utterly ignorant of c. acknowledging no more places of ever histing continuance but Heaven and Hell and affirming withall further to the Pelagians that such infants shall for ever remain not in this pretended third place which they imagined and he denyed but saith he damnatione omnium levissima in a state of condemnation of all other most easy Aug. contra Julian Pelag. l. 5. c. 8. Their punishment as the Schoolmen hold being not paena sensus any sensible torment because they never committed actual sin but paena damni the punishment of loss or privation of Heaven Into which in regard of their original sin and want of actual faith they could not enter without Baptism Joan. 3.3 Furthermore the other sayings of Austin most plain for Purgatory are over-many and known to be here recited in so much as he himself foreseeth as it were and explaneth our adversaries other common and unworthy objections out of him concerning his sometimes mentioning Sacrifice offered for Martyrs and those that be in Heaven declaring and explaning that for them it is offered as a thanksgiving and for others that are not as yet in such persect estate as a propitiation Aug. Enchirid. cap. 110. vide Aug. de verbis Apost Serm. 17. in Joan. tract 84. Our adversaries therefore may do well more advisedly to consider of these and such other like obscure seeming sayings of the Fathers before they object them to us and to remember Bâ—za ' s direction in his answer to a like objected doubtful saying from Calvn where after exphcation made thereof he saith Comparanda sunt enim inter sâ— saepenumcro unius ejusdemque Scriptoris loca ut quae fuerit ejus sententia liquidò perspiciatur quum omnia omnibus locis etiam de re una quapiam dici nec possint nec debeant Hoc qui non faciunt dici non potest quam injuriam saepe bonis doctisque Scriptoribus faciant Bâ—za in Epâ—st Theolog. Ep. 82. pag. 382. ante med This admonition of Bâ—za but duly observed by our adversaries would save them much labour of often alleging so many unworthy frivolous and mistaken objections as are by them in many controversies no less tediously than commonly urged from the obscure serming sayings of the Fathers pretend to have been doubtful of Purgatory and to have denyed it to that end abusing his more obscure sayings accordingly as the antient Father [*] Vincent Lyr. advers haer ante med saith of the Hereticks of his time Captant plerun que veter is cujuspiam Viri scripta paulò involutius edita quae pro ipsa fui obscuritate dogmati suo quafi congruant ut illud nescio quid quodcunque proferunt â—â—que primi neque soli sentire videanâ—ur Vincentius Lyrinensis noteth of the like practise of the Novellists of his time delivereth the same for most certain saying amongst his many [*] Aug. de Civit. Dei l. 20. c. 25. paulo ante med saith Ex his quae dicta sunt videtur evidentiùs apparere in â—llo judicio quasdam quorundam purgatorias poenas futuras c. And l. 21. c. 13. fine he further saith Temporarias paemas alâ—i in hac vâ—ra tantum alii post mortem alii nunc tunc c. patiuntur In so much as Mr. Fulk though faâ—sly pretending St. Austins incercertainty herein is yet insorced to confess and say of this place Austin de civit Dei l. 21. c. 13. concludeth very clearly that some suffer temporal pains after this life this may not be denyed Mr. Fulk in 〈◊〉 confutation of Purgatory pag. 110. paulo ante med
places he defendeth earnestly the perfection of the Scriptures Thus much of certain plain examples given but in this one only question of Traditions which their incredible boldness towards the antient Fathers is to be less marvailed at seeing they are not abashed to intreat also no less boldly their own Protestant Authors of these very times inforcedly urging and alleging them against their confessed and known meanings As in the example of the Lutherans who are known and confessed to defend the Real being of Christs Body in the Sacrament [r] Hereof see Mr. D. Covel in his defence of Mr. Hooker c. pag. 118. prope finem before participation and present also [s] Affirmed by the fifteen Lutheran Divines as appeareth by their words in the answer made to them intituled Apolog. modest ad Acta Conventus quindecim Theologorum Torgae nuper habit pag. 35. fine 48. fine And see Luther there alleged affirming the same pag 36. paulo post med to the bodily mouth even [t] That the wicked receive truly Christs body is affirmed by Jacobus Andraeas in confut disput Joan. Jacobi Grinaei pag. 110. circa med 115. 244. initio And by Chemnitius in his Enchiridion pag. 345. And by Adamus Francisci in Margarita Theologica pag. 260. 261. and by Marpachius in Peter Martyrs Epistles annexed to his Common places in English pag. 96. a. post med And see Luther alleged by Peter Martyr in his collections annexed to his Common places in English and his Treatise there of the Lords Supper pag. 138. a. fine b. initio of the unworthy receiver In so much as they [u] That the Lutherans do adore the Sacrament during the use thereof see Chemnitius in his examen part 2. pag. 91. b. circa med and Benedict Morgenstern tract de Ecclesia pag. 147. 149. 135. Apolog. modest ad Acta Conventus quindecim Theologorum Torgae nuper habit pag. 40. circa med And Luther tom 7. Wittemberg fol. 335. a. ante med Schlusselburg in Catal. haeret l. 3. pag. 867. adore it Mr. Fulk is not abashed most boldly and untruly to affirm that [x] Mr. Fulk in his answer to a counterfeit Catholick art 17. pag. 61. fine the Lutherans and Zuinglians do both consent in this that the body of Christ is received spiritually not corporally with the heart not with the mouth And to pass over the no less incredible boldness herein of [*] M. D. Field of the Church l. 3. c. 42. pag. 170. ante med saith Yea I dare confidently pronounce that after due and full examination of each others meaning there shall be no difference found touching the matter of the Sacrament the Vbiquitary Presence or the like between the Churches reformed by Luthers Ministry in Germany and other places and those whom some mens malice called Sacramentaries M. D. Field Peter Martyr affirmeth upon report (y) Peter Martyr in his Common places part 4. pag. 188. fine of credit that Luther judged not so grosly of this matter c. and (z) Peter Martyr ibid. pag. 195. b. ante med that he in very deed put no other conjunction but Sacramental between the body of Christ and the signs As though the hot tragical (a) Of the great contentions concerning the Real presence had between the Lutherans and Zuinglians see Luc. Osiander in Epitom cent Eccles cent 16. see l. 2. c. 10. pag. 133 134 135 c. And Peter Martyr in his Epistles annexed to his Common places pag. 137. b. 139. a. And Mr. Cowper in his Chronicle fol. 284. b. 290. b. 370. b. and Mr. Whitaker de Ecclesia pag. 322. and they are yet further notified by the very many writings by them published to the world one against an other mentioned in Brereley in the last Catalogue of Protestants Books contentions had and yet to this day continued about the Sacrament between the Lutherans and Zuinglians were to the world unknown or but only a dream or an imaginary fiction And hence it is that the Lutherans do grievously complain against our adversaries [b] Gerhardus Giesekenius a Lutheran in his Book De veritate corpor is Christi in Caena contra Pezelium pag. 93. so chargeth the Calvinists because say they that you allege Luthers words against his meaning Which thing as Luther did in his life time perceive by experience and grievously thereof [c] Lutherus in praefat in Smalcaldicos articulos extant in Luc. Osiander Epitom cent Eccles cent 16. pag. 253. saith there pag. 254. citca med Quid dicam quomodo querelam instituam adhuc superstes sum scribo conciones habeo praelego publicè quotidiè tamen virulenti homines non tantum ex Adversariis sed etiam falsi fratres qui nobiscum sentire se aiunt mea scripta doctrinam meam simpliciter contra me adferre allegare audent me vivente vidente audiente eriamsi sciant me aliter docere volunt virus suum meo labore exornare c. Qâ—id ergo bone Deus post obitum meum siet complain so also did he specially foresee and a little before his death [d] Ibid. next after he saith Deberem quidem ad omnia respondere dum adhuc vivo c. And the Tigurine Divines in Confess Orthodox Eccles Tigur tract 3. fol. 108. allege Luthers Confession made a little before his death wherein Luther saith Ego quidem sepulchro vicinus c. I that walk now nigh to my grave will carry this testimony and glory to the Tribunal seat of Christ my Saviour that I have with all carefulness condemned and avoided those fanatical men and enemies of the Sacrament Zuinglius Oecolampadius Swinckfeldius and their Scholars whether they be at Zurick or in what other place soever under the Sun forewarn against the same In like manner do the Lutherans charge our Adversaries for that with like extream boldness (e) Gerhardus Giesekenius l. de veritate corporis Christi in caena pag. 76. fine saith Zuinglianam Augustanam Confessionem reddere conantur sed tam manifestis mendaciis conspicua falsitate c. And see there further pag. 118. ante med And see in Luc. Osiander in centur 16. pag. 146. post med the like or worse complaint against the Zuinglians concerning the Confession of Augusta In like manner whereas the Confession of Ausburg was exhibited by the same Divines and in the same year and to the same Emperour Charls the V. as was the Confession of Augusta as appeareth by comparing of Luc. Osiander cent 16. pag. 144. 145. with the Catalogue of Confessions initio set before the Harmony of Confessions in English and their doctrin of the Real Presence is delivered in the very same words as in the Confession of Augusta Yet Mr. Chatterton or who else soever was Author of the Observations upon the Harmony of Confessions in English is not abashed in his
altarinon fuit ab ea adorata quamvis in magna reverentia fortasse non sine superstitione habita And Ambros in orat praepar ad Missam is so plain in this point that the Centurists centur 4. col 430. line 52. do therefore reprove those prayers of Ambrose saying Continent adorationem panis in Sacramento And so likewise saith M. Perkins in his probiem c. pag. 21. initio and Crispinus in his book of the Church pag. 87. fine and yet are those prayers acknowledged and alleged for the writings of Ambrose by M. Bilson in his true difference c. part 4. pag. 622. circa med worshipping of it and special words of invocation praescribed when the Sacrament was [†] S. Basil de spiritu Sancto c. 27. alledging unwritten traditions saith Invocationis verba dum ostenditur panis Eucharistiae poculum benedictionis quis scripto reliquit See this saying acknowledged and but weakely put off by M. Fulk in his rejoynder to Bristow c. pag. 685. post med shewed with receiving it [¶] See this heretofore in this Consideration num 2. in the margent at 32. 33. fasting and â‹ See this heretofore in this Consideration num 2. in the margent at 35. 36. And see also the same further confessed in Osianders Epitom c. centur 4. pag. 180. fine chast with [18] See the sundry Fathers who lived some of them in Constantines times others next after his time others before his time confessedly in this question of Sacrifice heretofore in this Consideration num 3 next after 12. at * ¶ §. g. h. and heretofore in this Consideration num 17. in the margent at t. offering of it in sacrifice to God as being propitiatory not only [§] See this heretofore in this Consideration num 3. fine at * next after h. confessed in sundry Fathers of this age and the age before by Andraeas Crastovius a learned Calvinist Also Basil in Liturgia prayeth ut digni simus offerre tibi rationabile istud incruentum Sacrificium pro nostris peccatis populi ignorantia And Cyprian de Caena Dom prope initium saith Quotiescunque his verbis hac fide actum est panis iste substantialis calix solemni benedictione sacratus ad totius hominis vitam salutemque proficit simul medicamentum holocâ—ustum existens ad sanandas infirmitates purgandas iniquitates for the living but also [r] Hospinianus in historia Sacramentaria lib. 2. pag. 167. initio saith of Cyrill of Jerusalem who lived in the beginning of this Century Dicit Cyrillus pro sui jam temporis recepta consuetudine sacrificium altaris maximum Juvamen esse animarum So common was this doctrine in Cyrills time See Cyrills saying hereof in Catech. 5. Mystagog And see the saying of Ambrose therein rejected Centur 4. col 295. line 3. and also Cyprian and Tertullian cent 3. col 138. line 56. 139. line 6. and Osiander of Tertullian cent 3. pag. 10. Also S. Austine l 9. Confess c. 12. affirmeth that the Sacrifice of our price was offered for his Mother Monica being dead And in Enchirid c. 110. he saith Neque negandum est defunctorum animas pietate suorum viventium relevari cum pro illis sacrificium Mediatoris offertur affirming there further that the sacrifices of the Altar or of almes which be offered for the dead are thanksgiving for those that be very good or in heaven and propitiations for those that be not very evill or not in hell affirming els where de verbis Apost serm 34. that the universal Church doth observe as delivered from our forefathers that for those who are dead in the communion of Christs body and blood when in time of sacrifice they be remembred in their places prayer is made for them ac pro illis id quoque offerri commemoretur and besides this prayer for them also it is remembred that the Sacrifice be ostered In so much as S. Austine is herein rejected by Hutterus l. de Sacrificio Missatico pag. 525. fine See also this point confessed in Austine and many other Fathers heretofore in this Consideration num 4. at k. and heretofore in this Consideration num 17. in the margent under t. And see also Bullinger in his decades in English pag. 1082. a. post med for the dead with affirming it to be [Å¿] So it is affirmed to be by Cyprian l. 2. Epist 3. and by S. Austine de Civitate Dei l. 16. c. 22. lib. 17. c. 5. fine c. 20. l. 18. c. 35. circa med and in Psalm 33. con 2. and see this point accordingly confessed by Andraeas Crastovius l. 1. de opificio Missae pag. 28. pag. 58. 102. 171. And see M. Fulk against Heskins pag. 100. circa med And see heretofore in this Consideration num 17. in the text a Sacrifice according to the Order of Melchisedech with special [19] See the Century-writers Cent. 4. col 662. line 2. col 703. line 36. col 705. line 31. liberty for Deacons to distribute it but not to offer it so distinct then was distribution from the offering thereof with terming it [20] Centur. 4. col 878. line 12 13. the viaticum for such as were sick with (21) Hieron in Epist ad Theophilum Alexandâ—inum ante libros paschales mentioneth sacros calices sanctaque velamina ex consortio corporis sanguinis Domini eadem qua corpus eju sanguis majestate veneranda holy coverings or corporals holden venerable by reason of their accompanying or touching the Body and Blood of our Lord and (22) The Centurists cent 4. col 835. line 46â— and Osiander in Epitom cent 4. pag. 391. initio and see Concil Agathense Can. 66. Concil Laodicen Can. 21. Concil 1. Bracharense can 18. And Greg. Nyssâ—n in orat de Baptismo where he saith Altate hoc sanctum cui assistimus c. quoniam Dei cultui consecratum atque dedicatum est ac benedictionem accepit c. non amplius ab omnibus sed à solis sacerdotibus contrectatur And see Nazianzen in orat de seipso contra Arianos initio holy vessells which Subdeacons and lay persons might not touch with carefull committing [23] Centur. 4. col 490. line 57. of the holy Chalice to the Priests custody with [24] Centur. 4. col 835. line 45. the Laodicen Council is alleged saying can 21. Non oportet subdiaconos licentiam habere in sacrarium ingredi contingere vasa Dominica And see surther mention of this Vestry in Concil 4 Caâ—thag can 36. and in Concilio Agathensi can 66. And in Ambrose l. 1. Offic. c. 50. alleged by the Centurists centur 4. col 409. line 40. and see Osiander in Epitom cent 5. pag. 391. initio reproving this a Vestry or place wherein Holy things were laid into which Subdeacons might not enter with [25] Cent. 4. col