9. p. 208. of the house haunted with spirits and cleared by the Preist saying Masse in it To conclude therefore this passage concerning the miracles most of them done in Affrica at the memorial of S. Stephâ—n reported by S. Austin in his foresaid booke de ciu Dei it is yet further to be obserued that the same are also acknowledged and recorded by Euodius of whom thus writeth S. Austin at (m) Lib. 22 de ciu Dei c. 8. and after the engl trans p. 888. Vzaly neare Vtica haue many miracles bâ—ne wrought by power of the said martyr Stephen where Bishop Euodius erected his memorial long before this of ours The same Euodius did accordingly publish a special treatise in 2. bookes de miraculis Protomartyris Stephani extant in S. Austins workes Tom. 10. Also Sigebert Gâ—mblacensis 500. yeares since in l. de illust (n) Cap. 15. Eccles script maketh mention of this Euodius and of his treatise of S. Stephans miracles and the Century writers say from (o) Cent. 5. c. 10. col 1137. Trithemius there is a booke of Euodius extant of the miracles done in Affricke by the reâ—iques of S. Stephen of which miracles mencion is also made by S. (p) Tom. 10. de diuers ser 51. Austin elswhere by (q) In script Eccles in Luciano c. 46. in Auito c. 47. in Orosio c. 39. Bede l. Rerract in act Apost c. 5. 8. et in l. de tempor ratione Nicep hist l. 14. c. 9. Genadius Bede and Nicephorus A truth so cleare that Hospinian confesseth that (r) De Templis p. 301. Austin telleth many true miracles done by the signe of the Crosse the deuil put to flight de ciu Dei l. 22. c. 8. Yea he further saith (s) Pag. 138. hither b long those other true miracles which other Fathers mention as also Austin de ciu Dei l. 22. c. 8. And wheras Duraeus obiecteth these foresaid miracles D. Whitaker denyeth not but confesseth saying (t) Reply to Duraeus p. 886. I do not thinke these miracles vaine and therfore not forged which are affirmed to haue bene done at the monuments of the martyrs Moreouer our aduersaries them selues haue in such like respect not forborne to translate and publish in english S. Austines foresaid booke of miracles In further confirmation of al which I might yet ad sundry other miracles mencioned by S. Austin in sundry (u) Tom. 1. l. 1. Retract c. 13. post med tom 7. de vnit Eccles c. 19. ante med Tom. 1. l. 9. confes c. 7. Tom. 9. in Ioan. tract 120. circ med other of his writinges as also by (x) Orat. in mamant Naz. orat in Cipri Chrisost l. contra Gentiles Amb. ser de S. Geruas et Protas Hier. cont Vigilan ep ad Eustochium and in vita Hilarion Sulpt in vita Martini and see Cent. 5. c. 13. from col 1478. til 1493. cent 4. c. 13. froÌ„ col 1433. til col 1456. S. Basil S. Gregory Nazianzen S. Chrisostome S. Ambrose S. Hierome Sulpitius and the Century writers against al which if any yet vnsatisfyed shal oppose his owne bare vnwarranted denyal we leaue that man as much more worthy of contempt then further reply And thus much breifly concerning such miracles collected from S. Austin as do clearly conuince what religion it was whether Catholicke or Protestant which was by him professed and by miracles thus confirmed Concerning such sayinges of S. Austin as are vsually obiected by our aduersaries against his former Catholicke doctrines confessed for such by Protestantes and confirmed by miracles CHAPTER 19. Such places are answeared as are vrged against the Canonical Scriptures against Traditions and the authority of Councels SECTION 1. AGainst the booke of Machabees M. Moulin obiecteth that S. Austin saith (a) Defence p. 152. The booke of Machabees is receiued not vnprofitably of the Church if men read it soberly M. Moulin in the same place geueth the answeare him selfe which in substance is that S. Austin said this as in respect of Razes killing himselfe whose example the Donatistes of indiscret zeale followed in reguard wherof S. Austin required this sobriety explaning further there and elswhere (b) Tom. 2. ep 61. post med which Moulin omitteth that The Scripture of the Machabees haith touching Razes death tould how it was done but not commended it as though it were to be done And in the booke of Iudges (c) Cap. 16.30 is reported the like of Sampson whom yet the Apostle (d) Hebrewes 11.32 and Aug. de ciu Dei l. 1. c. 21. commendeth Wheras M. Carthwright (e) In Hookers Eccles pol. l. 2. sec 7. p. 118. 119. obiecteth against vnwritten traditions certaine obscure sayinges of S. Austin and other Fathers M. Hooker forbeareth not in our so cleare a case by his special explication and answeare to explaine and cleare them to our handes D. Fulke (e) In Hookers Eccles pol. l. 2. sec 7. p. 118. 119. obiecteth against the authority of Councels that S. Austin teacheth that (f) Answeare to a counterf Cath. p. 89. And Aug. tom 7. de Bapt. cont Don. l. 2. c. 3. post med general Councels themselues may be often amended the former by the later when by some experience of thinges that is opened which before was shut and that knowen which before was vnknowen But his meaning here is onely concerning matters of fact or at most but concerning such pointes of faith as were by former Councels not erroneously determined but onely left vndefyned and afterwardes resolued vpon by later Councels for S. Austins wordes of Amendment argue him not to speake of faith seeing faith or heresy is not properly said to be amended but of matters of fact which are subiect to amendment A truth yet more euident in that this amendment is here said to come to passe by the experience of thinges vnto which experience not doctrine of faith but matters of fact be properly subiâ—ct M. Iewel obiecteth (g) Reply art 4. p. 272. the testimony of S. Austin concerning Constantine the great vndertaking the iudgement of Bishops and their cause vpon appeale made to him in that behalfe but M. (h) 2. Reply part 2. p. 163. Carthwright answeareth hereto in our behalfe that Austin saith that the Emperour was driuen by the Donatistes importunity who made no end of appealing vnto him to geue sentence in that matter for the which also he was to craue pardon of the Bishops To which purpose also S. Austin and Optatus haue (i) See before c. chapter 4. sec 6. formerly made their seueral answeares Such places are answeared as are obiected from S. Austin against Baptisme by women in case of necessity And against the real presence SECTION 2. MAister Carthwright obiecteth against Baptisme by women the 4. (k) Can. 100. Carthage Councel saying (l) In Whitguiftes def tract 9. c. 5. p. 523. Let not a woman presume to Baptise But his answeare is geuen him by
Waldo Wicliue Husse Luther Caluin and other damned Heretickes whose very inconstancy and ciuil dissentions amongst them selues may serue vs for a strongest argument that their singular doctrines first proceeding from the spirit of error and ignorance were after mantained by the spirit of pride and obstinacy shortly wil be ended by the spirit of discord and contradiction God saue the KING THE CONTENTES of the preface to the kinges Maiesty THat the sacred Scriptures alone are not sufficient to determine controuersies p. 5. That controuersies in Religion are to be decyded by the Church p. 9. That long education in any profession or Religion is not sufficient security for the truth therof p. 10. That Protestants haue reuoulted from their former professed doctrines And of their great inconstancy and incertanty therein p. 12. The contentes of the Preface to the learned aduersaries Certaine writinges of S. Austin charged by Protestants for counterfeate are defended and other their euasions preuented p. 25. Chapter 1. The Author beginneth his booke to his Catholicke frend p. 1. Chapter 2. CoÌ„cerning God the humanity of Christ the B. Virgin Mary and the holy Angels Section 1. S. Austin teacheth that the sonne of God is God of God and not of him selfe p. 8. Section 2. S. Austin teacheth that God doth not reprobate any to sinne or damnation or commaund any thing impossible p. 10. Section 3. S. Austin teacheth that Christ suffered not according to his diuine nature nor according to the same was Preist or offered sacrifice or was mediator and that from his natiuity he was free from ignorance and after his death descended into hel and that his body by Gods omnipotency may be without circumscription p. 16. Section 4. S. Austin teacheth that the B. Virgin Mary was freed from original sinne That her body was assumpted into heauen and that she vowed chastity He also teacheth the different degrees of Angels and Archangels p. 22. Chapter 3. Concerning the sacred Scriptures Section 1. S. Austin teacheth the sacred Scriptures to be discerned for such by the authority of the Church p. â—26 Section 2. S. Austin teacheth the bookes of Tobie Iudith Hester Machabees c. to be diuine and Canonical Scriptures p. 28. Section 3. S. Austin teacheth that one text of Scripture may haue diuerse true senses p. 33. Section 4. S. Austin teacheth that besides the sacred Scriptures the Traditions of the Church are to be receiued beleeued As also that al heretickes do insist onely vpon the Scriptures p. 35. Chapter 4. Concerning the Church of Christ Section 1. S. Austin teacheth that the Church of Christ is freed from error p. 39. Section 2. S. Austin teacheth that the Church of Christ is Catholicke or vniuersal p. 41. Section 3. S. Austin teacheth that the militant Church must euer continue and that visibly p. 46. Section 4. S. Austin teacheth that the Church was built vpon Peter And that Peter was the head of the whole Church p. 50. Section 5. S. Austin teacheth the Primacy of the Roman Church p. 53. Section 6. S. Austin denyeth Ecclesiastical Primacy to Emperours Kinges p. 57. Chapter 5. Concerning the Sacramentes Section 1. S. Austin teacheth that the Sacraments do not onely signify but truly confer grace to the worthy receiuer p. 60. Section 2. S. Austin teacheth that certaine of the Sacraments do imprint a Character or marke in the soule of the receiuer p. 62. Section 3. S. Austin teacheth that there are seauen Sacramentes p. 64. Section 4. S. Austin teacheth that the Sacraments are to be administred with the signe of the Crosse p. 66. Chapter 6. Concerning Baptisme Section 1. S. Austin teacheth that Baptisme taketh away al sinnes both original and actual p. 68. Section 2. S. Austin teacheth that concupisence remaning after Baptisme is not sinne p. 69. Section 3. S. Austin teacheth that children dying vnbaptised are not saued p. 71. Section 4. S. Austin teacheth sundry Ceremonies of Baptisme now vsed in the Roman Church p. 73. Chapter 7. Concerning the Sacrament of Confirmation p. 76. Chapter 8. Concerning the real presence or Sacrament of the Eucharist Section 1. S. Austin teacheth the real Presence of Christes body and bloud in the Sacrament of the Eucharist p. 81. Section 2. S. Austin teacheth that the very wicked do truly receiue the body of Christ p. 85. Section 3. S. Austin teacheth that great care is to be vsed lest any part of the Sacrament do fal vpon the ground and that it is to be receiued fasting Besides which he also teacheth and alloweth the vse of holy bread now vsed by Catholickes p. 87. Section 4. S. Austin teacheth that the sacrament of the Eucharist is to be adored And other Fathers teach that it is to be inuocated and that Angels are present in time of the sacrifice p. 90. Section 5. S. Austin teacheth that the Eucharist is a true and proper sacrifice and that it is propitiatory euen for the dead and that it was offered vpon Altars consecrated with oyle and the signe of the Crosse p. 104. Chapter 9. Concerning the Sacrament of penance wherin auricular confession to Preistes imposed Penance and dayes of pardon are taught by S. Austin and other Fathers p. 111. Chapter 10. Concerning the Sacrament of Extreme vnction wherein is proued the same to be a Sacrament and vsed in the Primitiue Church p. 122. Chapter 11. Concerning the Sacrament of Orders wherein S. Austin teacheth that they are properly a Sacrament geuen onely by a Bishop who haith authority to excommunicate euen the deade And that Preistes may not marry or be one that was Bigamus p. 125. Chapter 12. Concerning the Sacrament of Matrimony taught by S. Austin and that the innocent party vpon Adultery may not marry an other And of the Preistes blessing after marriage p. 134. Chapter 13. Concerning free wil iustification merit of workes workes of superogation and the difference of mortal and venial sinnes Section 1. S. Austin teacheth that man haith free wil. p. 139. Section 2. S. Austin teacheth that our iustification consisteth not onely in remission of sinnes or not imputation therof but likewise in good workes and that the same once had may be lost p. 145. Section 3. S. Austin teacheth that good workes do merit and that there are workes of supererogation p. 149. Section 4. S. Austin teacheth that mortal and venial sinnes do differ of their owne natures pag. 154. Chapter 14. Concerning praier for the deade Purgatory material fire in hel Limbus Patrum inuocation of Sainctes their worship and Images Section 1. S. Austin teacheth that it is lawful and godly to pray for the dead and that there is a place of Purgatory after this life p. 157. Section 2. S. Austin teacheth local hel and material fire therin as also Limbus Patrum or Christes descending into hel p. 163. Section 3. S. Austin teacheth that Sainctes are to be inuocated and worshiped as also their reliques to be reuerenced p. 163. Section 4. S. Austin teacheth
likewise taught that the B. Virgin vowed perpetual chastity for thus he writeth (r) Tom. 6. de sancta virginitate c. 4. prope initium How saith she shal this be done hecause I know not man which truly she would not haue said if she had not before vowed her selfe a virgin to God c. Verily she would not haue asked how a woman should hring forth a sonne promised vnto her if she had married to haue lyen with a man This is so clearly S. Austines religion that D. Fulke confessing the same chargeth S. Austin with a non sequitur saying (s) Against Rhem. Test in Luke c. 1. v. 34. sec 13. although S. Austin gather she vowed virginity yet it followeth not c. And Chemnitius to vse his owne words attributeth (t) Examen part 3. p. 39. And sec p. 56. to Austin this fained vow of Mary which directly saith he impugneth the Scriptures Yea saith Peter (u) De Eucharist et votis col 1609. Martir Austin in his booke of holy virginity beleeueth that B. Mary vowed virginity c. which saith this hereticke al easily know how absurd it is Lastly whereas (w) Instit l. 1. c. 14. parag 5. 6. Hiperius in method Theol. p. 387. 288. and the ministers of Lincolne Diocese in their abridgement p. 74. Caluin other Protestants do vtterly deny the diuers orders of Angels other Prot. them selues translate S. Austin to say (x) In their English translation of the bookes de ciuitate Dei l. 22. c. 30. p. 919. ante med No inferior shal in heauen enuy his superior euen as now the other Angels do not enuy the Archangels Yea Cheâ—â—itiâ—â— alledgeth S. Austin as affirming the diuers degrees of (y) Loc. com part 1. fol. 2. Thrones Dominations Principalities c. Saying further how they differ amongst them selues c. In the next life we shal see face to face Concerning the sacred Scriptures CHAPTER 3. S. Austin teacheth the sacred Sciptures to be discerned for such by the authority of the Church SECTION 1. VVHereas Protestants ordinarily teach that the sacred Scriptures are infallibly discerned by vs from al Apocriphal writinges either by the Scriptures them selues or the priuate spirit S. Austin agreeably with the now Roman Church referreth our certaine knowledge therof to the authority and determination of the Church of Christ saying (b) Tom. 6. contra ep fundamenti c. 5. ante med I would not beleeue the Gospel vnlesse the authority of the Catholicke Church moued me therto c. If thou houldest me to the Gospel I may hould my selfe to them by whose commaundement I beleeued the Gospel and these commaunding I wil not credit thee c. The Authority of Catholickes weakned I can not then beleeue the Gospel c. It is necessary that I beleeue the Actes of the Apostles if I beleeue the Gospel because Catholicke authority doth commend a like both Scriptures vnto me And though sundry (c) In whitakers duplicatio aduersus Stapletonum l. 2. c. 8. p. 387. Protestants labour to euade this by affirming that S. Austin spoke of the time past when he was a Manichee and not as then being Catholicke al the wordes cyted do clearly contest the contrary and accordingly are vnderstoode by the Protestant (d) Centuriae tres cent 2. q. 3. p. 267. Bachmannus in this very sense which we now vrge And Suinglius hauing recyted this former saying of S. Austin in steede of better answeare is not ashamed to geue this vndeserued censure saying (e) Tom. 1. fol. 135. here I intreat your indifferent iudgementâ— that you freely speake whether this saying of Austin may not be thaught more audacious then meete or to haue beene vttered imprudently S. Austin teacheth the bookes of Tobie Iudith Hester Machabees c. to be diuine and canonical Scriptures SECTION 2. SAinct Austin professedly dissented from the Canon of the Hebrewes saying (f) Tom. 5. de ciuit Dei l. 18. c. 36. fine not the Iewes but the Church houldeth the bookes of Machabees for Canonical which saying is so plaine that the Protest (g) In his defence englished art 5. p. 151. Pierre du Moulin affirmeth these wordes of the Church houlding theÌ„ for Canonical to be an added falsification alledging yet not any proofe or testimony thereof whereas al copies are consenting against him In so much as our (h) P. 725. aduersaries english translation of this booke not daring to deny these wordes doth of fraudulent purpose and to make them lesse apparent onely omit this other parcel quos non Iudaei sed because that this but appearing it argueth the said bookes to be Canonical in the same sense wherein they were by the Iewes reiected and therefore properly Canonical But concerning al the bookes now in question S. Austin comprehendeth them at once with the other vndoubted Scriptures vnder one and the same word Canonical saying (i) Tom. 3. de doctrina Christiana l. 2. c. 8. ante med The whole Canon of the Scriptures is contained in these bookes following and then next immediatly numbring them vp he placeth in ranke with Genesis Exodus c. the other now controuerted of Tobie Iudith Hester c. which Protestants generally reiect for Apocriphal And whereas S. Austin was present and (k) Council Carthag 3. fine subscribed to the Carthage Councel in the same it was vniuersally decreed (l) Concil Carthag 3. can 47. That besides the Canonical Scriptures nothing should be read in the Church vnder the name of diuine Scriptures now the Canonical Scriptures are Genesis Exodus c. wherwith it in order reckneth the other bookes now in question most euidently so placing and ranking them vnder the foresaid title of Canonicas Scripturas and of such as are to be read in the Church sub nomine diuinarum Scripturarum And though M. Moulins obiecteth that S. Austin saith (m) His defence p. 152. and see Aug. tom 7. contra Epist Gaudentii l. 1. c. 31. circa med The booke of Machabees is receiued not vnprofitably of the Church if men read it soberly yet M. Moulin in the same place geueth the answeare him selfe which in substance is that S. Austin said this as in respect of Razes killing himselfe whose example the Donatistes of indifferent zeale followed in reguard whereof S. Austin requireth this sobriety And he further explaineth this which M. Moulin omitteth saying (n) Ibidem tom 2. ep 61. post med The Scripture of the Machabees touching Raze his death haith tould how it was done but not commended it as though it were to be done Euen as the booke of (o) Cap. 16.30 Iudges reporteth the like of Sampson whom yet the (p) Hebr. c. 11.32 And see Aug. de ciuit Dei l. 1. c. 21. Apostle commendeth Againe to that other often answeared cauil of our aduersaries that the foresaid Councel of Carthage here mencioneth fiue bookes of Salamon whereas we haue but
three I do once more in answeare therto explaine that the Councel vnder those fiue bookes of Salamon comprehendeth also the other two bookes of Wisdome and Ecclesiasticus both which as S. Austin further explaineth (q) De doctrina Christiana l. 2. c. 8. circa med were said to be Salamons in reguard of a certaine resemblance of stile But the truth hereof is so clearly defended by the Carthage Councel and S. Austin that our aduersary Mathaeus (r) Tract tripart theol p. 46. Hoe confesseth and reproueth the Carthage Councel in these wordes The Councel of Carthage haith decreed for Canonical al the bookes of the old Testament excepting the third and fourth of Esdras the third of Machabees c. I ad that the Councel of Carthage ought not to haue Canonized more bookes because it had not authority c. To which the French Prot. Poliander addeth saying (s) In his refutation p. 44. To come now to the error of some Councels the Councels of Carthage and Florence haue enrouled for Canonical bookes and as diuinely inspired c. The bookes of Tobie Iudith Wisdome Ecclesiasticus and the Machabees c. And the Popes Innocentius and Gelasius haue reckned these bookes among the Canonical c. And to be breife S. Austin is so clearly ours in this waightiest point concerning the number of the sacred scriptures that he with the foresaid Councel is therefore sharply reprehended by (t) Hist sacram part 1. p. 160. Lub de principiis Christ dog l. 1. c. 4. p. 8. Hip. in method theol l. 1. p. 46. Bucer in his scrirpta Anglicana p. 713. Zanch. de sacra Script p 32 33. Field of the Church l. 4. c. 23. p. 246. 247. Reynoldes in his conclusions annexed to his conference conclus 2. p. 699. 700. Hospinian Lubbertus Hiperius Bucer Zanchius D. Field and D. Raynoldes S. Austin teacheth that one text of Scripture may haue diuerse true senses SECTION 3. DIrectly contrary to (a) Confut. of Purgat p. 151. Willet in his sinopsis p. 26. D. Fulke and D. Willet S Austin teacheth with vs that one text of Scripture may haue diuerse true senses saying (b) Tom. 1. l. 12. confes c. 31. initio when one saith this meant the Scripture which I do another saith yea that which I do I thinke I speake more religiously in saying why not both if both be true and if a third and fourth c. why not al which in diuerse other places he so often repeateth and confirmeth that sundry (c) The diuines of Geneua in their propositions and principles c. c. 52. p. 149. Zanchius de Scriptura p. 422. 424. 425. Aretius loc com loc 59. p 187. 177. The author of Catholicke Traditions p. 86. 112. Bilson in his suruey p. 418. Prot. authors do assent to his iudgement therein Now this truth supposed it fully preuenteth our aduersaries vsual euasion in many pointes of controuersy as for example where we alledge the Fathers expounding some texts of Scripture in behalfe of Purgatory Prot. do commonly obiect the same or some other Father vpon occation of other applicatioÌ„ vnderstaÌ„ding thereby the tribulation of this life so opposing this against the other which exposition the said Fathers neuer intended but admitted both the said senses And the like instance might be geuen of our aduersaries like euasion in other pointes of doctrine as namely in the further exposition of Tu es Petrus et super hanc Petram c. Hoc est corpus meum c. and sundry such like Now this is so certainly S. Austines doctrine that the Prot. (d) In the ministers defene for refusal of subscription part 1. p. 61. Hutton accordingly alledgeth and confesseth the forecyted saying of S. Austin to this purpose S. Austin teacheth that besides the sacred Scriptures the TraditioÌ„s of the Church are to be receiued and beleeued as also that al hereticks do insist only vpon the Scriptures SECTION 4. COncerning the question whether the Scriptures do containe al needful pointes of faith and saluation not onely by general direction to (e) Hebrewes 13.17 Obey our Prelates (f) Math. 18.17 Heare the Church hould (g) 2. Thes 2.15 the Traditions c. which we graunt and in which sense the Fathers do often commend the Scriptures perfection but also so particularly as that there should be no neede of any vnwritten Traditions which we deny Protestants affirme S. Austin disputing against Ciprians error of rebaptizing (h) Tom. 7. de Baptismo contra Don. l. 5. c. 23. ante med saith The Apostles commaunded nothing herein but the custome which was opposed against Ciprian is to be beleeued to haue proceeded from their tradition as many thinges be which the vniuersal Church houldeth and are therfore wel beleeued to haue beene commaunded by the Apostles although they be not found writen And speaking of the Baptisme of Infants he (i) Tom. 3. de Gen. lit l. 10. c. 23. prope finem auoucheth that it were Not at al to be beleeued if it were not an Apostolical Tradition Againe (k) Tom. 2. ep 118. ad Ianuar. c. 1. Those thinges which we obserue not written but deliuered which are kept al ouer the world ar to be vnderstod to be obserued as decreed either by the Apostles the selues or general Councels And so likewise (l) Tom. 3. de doctrina Cristiana l. 4. c. 21. prope initium And in concil Carthag 3. can 24. The mixture of water with wine in the Chalice he confirmeth from Tradition which his sayinges are so euident for Apostolicke Traditions that M. (m) In Whirguiftes defence p. 103. Carthwright answearing thereto saith To allow S. Austines saying is to bring in Popery againe Adding (n) Ibidem in Carthwrightes his 2. â—eply part 1. p 84. 85. 86. further that If S. Austines iudgement be a good iudgement then there be some thinges commaunded of God which are not in the Scriptures and thereupon no sufficient doctrine contained in the Scriptures Lastly whereas M. Carthwright and others do vsually (o) In Hookers Eccles pol. l. 3. sec 7. p. 118. obiect against vnwritten Traditions certaine obscure and by vs often answeared sayinges of S. Austin and other Fathers our learned aduersarie M. (p) Ibipem p. 119. Hooker forbeareth not in our so cleare a cause by his special explication and answeare to explaine and cleare them to our handes so that al further answeare I deeme ouer tedious and vnworthy I wil now conclude this point with but remembring how peculiar S. Austin maketh it vnto heretickes to insist vpon onely Scripture To which end he induceth the Arian hereticke saying then to Catholickes as Protestants Puritans Brounistes Anabaptiistes c. do now say to vs If (q) Tom. 6. contra Maximinum l. 1. prope init prope finem you bring any thing from the Scriptures c. it is necessary that we heare it but these words
praier diligence c. Al which though endeauored by vs with al possible care are yet as being actions on our part most clearly not infallible but humane and subiect to (m) Lubbeâ—tus de princip Christian dog l. 6. c. 13. p. 442. Whitaker de Eccles controuer 2. q. 4. p. 221. error And such as the same notwithstanding Luther and many other his followers haue euen according to our aduersaries censures no lesse confessedly then greeuously (n) Whitguift in defence p. penult Bridges in def of the gouernment p. 559. Hospin hist sacram part 2. fol. 14. 44. 55. 49. 57. erred and therin persisted (o) Luther de caen a Domini tom 2. Germ. fol. 174. euenconcerning such pointes of doctrine as they from their owne careful obseruation of these foresaid meanes held for most certaine vndoubted cleare And the like might be exemplifyed in the (p) In their Apol. p. 103. Broumstes (q) Hooker Eccles pol. in pref sec 8. p. 38. Anabaptistes (r) Carrh wright in his second reply part 1. p. 18. 509. Puritanes (s) Caluin Tract theol p. 533. c. Libertines and (t) Colloq Ratisbone Lutheranes whoal of them in like manner haue no lesse carefully conferred and seriously pretended the Scriptures in defence of their so many different errors which each of them seuerally apprehended for vndoubted true and yet the same notwithstanding al of theÌ„ confessedly erred Vpon due consideratioÌ„ therefore had of these premises so necessarily inferring our owne incertanty al foresaid pretence of Scripture to the contrary notwithstanding and like further obseruation that the cheife question of the Canonical Scriptures theÌ„ selues is determined to vs not by Scripture it selfe as haith (*) See here before at e. f. beene shewed nor (u) Whitaker aduersus Stap. l. 2. c. 6. p. 370. l. 2. c. 6. p. 357. by priuate testimony of the spirit but according to the learnedst (x) The author of the treatise of the Scriptures and the Church c. 16. fol. 75. Whitaker cont Staplet l. 2. c. 4. p. 298. 300. Chemnit in examen part 1. p. 69. Lubbertus de princip Christian dog l. 1. c. 4. p. 18. Protestants by iudgement of the Church which confessedly (y) Fulke his answeare to a count Cath. p. 5. Iewel in def of the apol part 2. p. 242. Witaker contra Stap. l. 1. c. 5. p. 69. had the assistance of the holy Ghost in her infallible discerning to vs which bookes of Scripture were sacred and which not wherby also is further argued or rather conuinced her no lesse needful assistance of the same spirit in her like discerning to vs the sense (z) Chemnit in ex am part 1. p. 74. Sarâ—â—ia in defen tract cont Bezam p. 8. of the said Scripture for what auaileth it vs to be made certaine of the bookes and left incertaine of the sense What reason can our aduersaries allegde wherby to acknowledge the Churches priuiledge in the one deny it where it is no lesse needful in the other It cannot therfore I hope in these times of so great doubt question seeme either vnfitting or vnsafe that for our owne more certaine instruction in the doctrine of the Primitiue Church which both parties acknowledge for the true Church we should make humble recourse vnto the receiued and renowmed writinges of S. Austin a principal member of the said church who liuing so long before these our times and being in such respect indifferent to our late since vprisen controuersies is by our learned aduersaries professedly reuerenced as the vndoubted (a) See hereafter c. 1. h. c. best witnes since the Apostles times of Apostolicke doctrine Neither can the perswasion which is oftentimes setled and growen strong in vs by education afford any infallible certanty to your greatest Maiesty or your learned diuines whereby to secure your selues from error as might be made plaine without al further needful discourse by example not onely of sundry auncient Kinges and (b) See the Protest Apol. tract 2. c. 3. sec 6. parag 2. p. 513. at s Emperours who brought vp in Arianisme did thereupon imbrace and by their lawes establish the error therof as a truth most consonant to the Scriptures but also of diuerse moderne Lutheran Princes as of Denmarke Saxony Brunswicke c. who vpon their like education in Lutheranisme do professe as not to be questioned their monster of (c) See Whitguifâ— in his defence of the answeare p. penult Bridges in his def of the gouernement l. 7. p. 559. Hospin in hist Sacram fol. 14. 44. 55. 49. 57. And part 2. fol. 245. 282. 286. 287. vbiquity and other now dissenting opinions condemning therupon the aduerse doctrines of Caluin and Suinglius for (d) Luther Tom. 2. Wittenberg fol. 503. and tom 7. fol. 382. Fulke against the defence of the censure p. 101. 155. Hospin hist saciam part 2. fol. 183. errors most execrable In like sort the reformed Churches so are they (e) By Hooker in Eccles pol. l. 4. sec 8. p. 101. 183. styled of Transiluania Poland and hungary who being Antitrinitaries and yet otherwise (f) See Gratianus Prosper in his instrumen tum doctrinarum c. onely differing from the Caluinistes in the doctrine of the Trinity the Baptisme of infants haue together with their milke sucked the poyson of Arianisme are vpon this like ground euen to this present so carried away against our receiued doctrine of the blessed Trinity that they forbeare not to compare it to the (g) See Osiander cent 16. l. 2. c. 22. p. 209. three headed Cerberus condemning the same in their sundry (h) Gratianus Prosper Socinus Gentilis Seruetus Blandrata and other new Arians published writinges stored with plentiful alledged testimonies of Scripture for the cheifest brand of al Popish and Antichristian (i) See Osiander cent 16. l. 2. c. 22. p. 209. corruption And as we can not assure our selues but that in case of our like supposed educatioÌ„ in those opinions so once in like manner established with the current and countenance of the state our iudgements no lesse then theirs in like sort might haue beene preoccupated and transported with the same errors so their example affordeth vs iust forwarning not to rest secure vpon the appearing probability of any such like setled perswasion whatsoeuer And so much the lesse if we not onely obserue ingeneral the great reuoult of late made by so many of the learnedst Caluinistes from Caluins former receiued so much applauded (k) See Willet in Rom. c. 9. p. 442. Melancth in Con. Theol. part 2. p. 111. Hemingius de vniuersali gratia Snecanus in method de script p. 124. 430. 441. Castalio in his booke hereof de praedest Fox in Apoc. p. 473. sundry others doctrines concerning Reprobation induration vniuersality of grace (l) So did Caluin Beza and the French Protestantes and our now
SCTION 4. COncerning the Churches being builded vpon the Rocke as S. Austin acknowledgeth the building thereof vpon Christ as being the primary Rocke or foundation so likewise doth he affirme as from the then common receiued doctrine our Sauiours building of his Church vpon Peter as being a secondary or ministerial Rocke or foundation houlding both these expositions for good and probable saying hereof expresly (a) Tom. 1. l. 1. retract c. 21. post init Let the reader choose whether of these two opinions be more probable To this purpose then he writeth (b) Ibidem in his booke contra epistolam Donati I haue said in a certaine place concerning Peter the Apostle that vpon him as vpon a Rocke the Church is builded which sense is also song by the mouthes of many in the verses of most blessed Ambrose c. but I know that since I haue often expounded that which is said by our Lord thou art Peter and vpon this Rocke I wil build my Church that it might be vnderstood vpon this which Peter confessed saying thou art Christ the sonne of God And then presently afterwardes as before he concludeth but of these two opinions let the reader choose which is the more probable And he alledgeth and approueth S. (c) Tom. 7. de Bapt. cont Don. l. 3. c. 1. ante med Ciprian saying for neither Peter whom our Lord chose first or cheifest and vpon whom he built his Church c. And him selfe saith elswhere (d) Tom. 8. in Psal 30. con 2. ante med O Church that is o Peter because vpon this Rocke I wil build my Church kil and eate And of Peters sea he denounceth that (m) Tom. 7. in Psal cont partem Donat. versus finem It is the Rocke which the proud gates of hel do not ouercome In so much that the Protestant Hammelmannus confesseth this of S. Austin saying (e) De Traditionibus Apostolicis part 2. l. 3. col 622. and see the like sayinges of the other Fathers alledged reiected fâ—r the same col 621. 623. 624. 625. Austin in his booke against the epistle of Donatus teacheth that the Church was founded vpon Peter as vpon the Rocke and he proueth this his opinion by the verses of Ambrose c. concerning the Cooke c. But S. Austin proceedeth yet more particularly saying (f) Tom. 4. quaestion ex Nouo Test quaest 75. post med Our Sauiour when he commaunded that there should be geuen for him and Peter then he seemeth to haue payed for al because as in our Sauiour there were al causes of preheminence so also after our Sauiour al are contained in Peter for he ordained him the head of them that he might be the Pastor of our Lords flocke c. It is manifest that al are contained in Peter for asking for Peter he is knowen to haue asked for al for euer in the superiour the people are either reproued or commended And againe (g) Tom. 8. in Psal 108. enarrat 1. prope initium certaine thinges are said in the Gospel which properly seeme to belong to Peter the Apostle yet they haue not a cleare sense but when they are referred to the Church whose person figuratiuely he is knowen to haue borne by reason of the primacy which he had ouer the Disciples c. S. Austin teacheth the primacy of the Roman Church SECTION 5. COncerning S. Peters successors the Bishops of Rome S. Austin acknowledgeth that in the Roman Church (a) Tom. 2. ep 162. multo ante med the principality of the Apostolical chaire euer florished And (b) Tom. 6. de vtil credendi c. 17. shal we doubt saith he to hide our selues in the bosome of that Church which c. from the Apostolical sea by successions of Bishops haith obtained the hight of authority To which not to geue the Primacy is truly either the greatest impiety or headlong arrogancy And writing to Pope Bonifacius him selfe he saith (c) Tom. 7. cont duas epist Pelag ad Bonifac l. 1. c. 1. circa med It is common to vs al wbo are Bishops although thou therein dost excel by reason of the greater height of thy pastoral watch-tower In like sort he writeth to Pope Innocentius saying (d) Tom. 2. epist 92. ad Innocent prope finem we thinke c. that by the authority of thy holines deriued from the authority of the holy Scriptures that they wil more easily yeald who beleeue such peruerse and pernicious thinges so attributing the Popes authority to the Scriptures them selues And as for Innocentius him selfe the Centuristes confesse (e) Cent. 5. col 1230. 662. and see Osiander cent 5. p. 59. that he laboured much for the primacy of the Roman Church which is euident by al his epistles c. wherupon they alledge from his epistles sundry of his sayinges which importing so much are therefore by them (f) Cent. 5. col 775. 779. reprehended And wheras Innocentius writ one epistle to the Fathers of the Carthage Councel wherein he affirmeth the Primacy of the Roman Church to be (g) In Aug. tom 2. ep 91. prope init and see cent 5. col 825. 780. decreed non humana sed diuina sententia not by humane but diuine sentence And an (h) In Aug. tom 2. ep 93. multo ante med and see cent 5. col 843. 780. other to the Milleuitane Concel wherein he chalengeth that matters of faith are to be referred to the Apostolical Sea Though the Centuristes do dislike and reproue these said epistles for the foresaid doctrines tauhgt therein by Innocencentius yet S. (i) Tom. 2. epist 106. post init Austin writing to Paulinus of the Pelagian heresy which was condemned in those two foresaid CouÌ„cels meÌ„cioning two seueral letters of those two Councels sent to the Apostolicke sea To which two letters Innocentius made seueral answeare in his two former recyted epistles from whence are alledged the testimonies of his clamed Primacy S. Austin I say of these very answeares or epistles writeth thus worthily (k) Ibidem Innocentius of blessed memory writ backe vnto vs concerning al thinges in that manner which was fit and conuenient for the Bishop of the Apostolicke sea and elswhere he further saith of the same epistles (l) Tom. 7. cont Iulian. Pelag. l. 1. c. 4. post med what could that holy man blessed Innocentius answeare to the Affrican Councels but that which aunciently the Apostolicke Sea and the Roman Church continually held with the rest Most euidently so hereby geuing his allowance of that very Primacy which Innocentius clamed in or by these two foresaid epistles But indeede S. Austin was alwaies so duly respectiue to the Roman Sea as that he greauosly reprehended the heretickes of his time for their then (m) Tom. 7. cont lit Petil. l. 2. c. 51. tearming the Roman Church as our aduersaries now do the chaire of pestileÌ„ce teaching with al against the Protestants often
Hom. 13. in Exod. Origen For which their doctrine and reuerence towardes this most holy Sacrament they are confessed and reproued by the Protestant writers (u) Against Symbolising part 1. p. 148. Parker (x) Aphorism de Eucharist fol. 230. Vadian (y) Lib. ep Suing et Oecol p. 690. Oecolumpadius and (z) Reioynder to Bristow and answeare to Sanders p. 687. Fulke In like sort concerning the receiuing of this Sacrament fasting it is so euidently taught by S. (a) Tom. 2. ep 118. c. 6. ante med Austin that (b) Hist sacram part 1. p. 48. Hospinian confesseth that Austin clearly signifyeth this fast to be an Apostolical tradition and therefore necessary to be obserued for he saith It pleaseth the holy Ghost that in honour of so great a Sacrament our Lords body should enter into the mouth of a Christian before other meates which practise was so general also in the greeke Church that Hammelmannus affirmeth that (c) De Apost tradit part 3. l. 3. col 814. Theophilus accused Chrisostome vnder this title that he debarred not from the Sacrament of the Eucharist those that were not fasting c. but Chrisost taking this for a greauous crime doth greatly excuse him selfe in his Epistle c. in these wordes If this be true let my name be blotted out of the booke of life And the same Hammelmannus concerning this very point saith vnto S. (d) Ibidem col 815. Austin Although thou Austin affirmest that the Church al ouer the world obserueth this c. yet I wil bring the contrary against thee The same also is acknowledged by (e) De Sacramentis p. 803. 804. Zepperus of S. Austin who further there (f) Ibidem p. 805. recyteth sundry Fathers requiring like enioyned Chastity of married persons before their communicating Lastly concerning holy bread S. Austin writeth that (g) Tom. 7. de pec mer. et remis l. 2. c. 26. prope init Though that which the Catechumens receiue be not the body of Christ yet it is more holy then the meates wherwith we are nourished And that the Catechumen might not receiue the Sacrament which S. Austin here calleth corpus Christi appeareth by S. Austin in seueral (h) Ibidem c. 2. ad tom 9. in Ioan. tract 11. 96. places A truth so cleare that D. (i) Against Heskins c. l. 3. c. 23. p. 377. Fulke answearing therto tearmeth it A superstitious bread geuen in S. Austines time to those that were Catechumens in steede of the Sacrament S. Austin teacheth that the Sacrament of the Eucharist is to be adored and other Fathers teach that it is to be inuocated and that Angels are present in time of the sacrifice SECTION 4. THough al Protestants Caluinistes or Suinglians do generally disclaime in the Sacraments adoratiō yet S. Austin writing vpon that part of the Psalme Adore ye the foote-stoole of his feete doth by this foot-stoole vnderstand earth and by earth the flesh of Christ saying (a) Tom. 8. in Psal 98. circa med Expounding what is the foote-stoole of his feete he saith the earth is the foote-stoole of his feete I become doubtful I feare to adoare the earth lest he condemne me which made the heauen and the earth Agine I feare not to adore the foote-stoole of the feete of my Lord because the Psalme saith vnto me adore ye the foote-stoole of his feete wauering I turne my selfe to Christ because here I seeke him and I finde how the earth may be adored without sinne how without sinne the foote-stoole of his feete may be adored for he tooke of earth earth because flesh is of earth and of the flesh of Mary he tooke flesh And because he walked here in that flesh and gaue vs that flesh to eate for our saluation now none eateth that flesh but first adoreth it It is found how such a foote-stoole of the feete of our Lord may be adored and not onely we may not sinne by adoring but sinne by not adoring c. Therefore when thou doest bow downe prostrate thy selfe to euery earth do not behould it as earth but as that holy one whose footestoole it is which thou adorest for for him thou doest adore Now wheras D. Bilson answeareth hereunto that (b) His true difference part 4. p. 536. It is eaten with the spirit adored with the spirit yea the very eating of it is the adoring of it S. Austin directly to the contrary distinguisheth eating from adoring maketh as we do adoring in priority to eating saying no man doth eate that flesh before that he adore it Teaching withal there yet further our adoring thereof not onely in spirit but also by external bowing downe prosternation And al this not as to his body or flesh present to vs alwaies after one and the same manner in heauen but as in reguard of the diuersity of time and place vpon often celebration ad terram quamlibet euen to euery earth or consecrated host which we behould And in further discouery of this shift S. Austin maketh further frequent mention of adoration euen in the vnworthy for speaking of the rich proud men who do vnworthily receiue acknowledgeth yet their external adoring saying therof (c) Tom. 8. in Psal 21. concione 1. prope fin Al the rich men of the earth haue eaten and adored the rich men of the earth haue eaten the body of their Lords humility yet they are not filled to imitation as the poore but yet they haue adored And againe (d) Tom. 2. ep 120. ad Honoratum They are brought to the table of Christ and receiue his body and bloud but they only adore they are not filled because they do not imitate c. They come to the table they eate and adore but they are not filled because they do not hunger thirst iustice This doctrine of Adoration is so plainly S. Austines that (e) Scripta Anglicana p. 678. Bucer confesseth that Austin writeth in many places that the body and bloud of our Lord is to be honoured and receiued in the visible signes In further explication of S. Austines beleefe in this so material a point of faith the answearable sayinges of the other Fathers are very pertinent as namely of S. Ambrose S. Chrisostome S. Nazianzen and S. Basil al of them liuing in S. Austines age and by him highly (f) Tom. 7. cont Iulian. Pelag. l. 2. c. 2. 3. 4. 10. commended S. Ambrose then as heretofore did S. Austin (g) De spiritu sancto l. 3. c. 12. saith by the footstoole is vnderstoode the earth and by earth the flesh of Christ which we also at this day do adore not mystically or in a mystery but in mysterijs c. in the mysteries of the external elements of the Sacrament Euen as S. Austin in like manner is confessed by Hospinian to say (h) Hist sacram part 1. l. 5. p. 533. see Gratian distinct 2.
our Catholicke faith but of their Protestant religion Speake now here ingeniously can you beleeue them Neither doth D. Morton his euasion any thing helpe him alledging the example of the water miraculously vanishing away from the font at such time as a dissembling Iew came hipocritically vnto a Nouatian Bishop for to be Baptised for here was no miracle wrought at the instance of the nocatian or by his agency or ministery or in any sort colourable to confirme Nouationisme but rather to the contrary for this perfideous Iew as (s) Hist lib. 7. c. 17. Socrates reporteth and the (t) Cent. 5. c. 13. col 1483. Ceturistes confesse hauing beene before baptised after the Catholicke manner by Atticus a Catholicke Bishop of Constantinople and comming now againe vnder pretence therby of begging money to be a new baptised of Paulus the nouatian Bishop God him selfe as vnwilling to haue his Catholicke baptisme formerly receiued to be so scornfully and sacrilegiously prophaned did immediatly of him selfe without al agency therin of the Nouatian miraculously hinder the said Iew from being againe baptised by the heretical Bishop A thing so far from confirming Nouationisme as it argueth rather directly the contrary And no lesse if not more disparity or rather impertinency is obserueable in D. Mortons like further obiecting of Balaam and Cayphas not working miracles but prophecying of Christ against their owne wickednes wherto but further ad concerning al these examples aswel that no one of them came to passe as did our foresaid other miracles vpon occasion or in behalfe of commending or publishing to the heathen people or others any doctrine then before there vnknowen or not receiued as also that Cayphas his obiected (u) Ioan. 11.49.50 Prophecying was but for once the Apostles then doing many (x) Math. 10.1 great miracles As likewise was (y) Numer 24.17 Balaams Prophecying for once euen in the time of Moyses whose many stupendious miracles neede no recytal And so in like manner that which is obiected to concerne the Nouatian was but for once and the fift Century when as the Church of God was most (z) Cent. 5. c. 13. from col 1478. til 1494. glorious in miracles wheras in the other foresaid examples of vndoubted miracles confessedly wrought by S. Austin in our conuersion and by our Catholicke Preistes in their late coÌ„uersions in this age of sundry heathen nations the Protestant Church was confessedly destitute of al like answearable example in that kind as is confessed by D. Fulke saying (a) Against Rhem. test in Apoc. 13. sect 3. fol. 478. It is knowen that Câ—luin and the rest whom the Papistes cal Arch-heretickes do w rke no miracles with whom agreeth D. Sutliue in these wordes (b) Examination of Kellisons suruey p. 8. neither do we practise miracles nor do we teach that the doctrine of truth is to be confirmed with miracles And of Luther inparticular his owne Prot. neighboures say (c) Diuines of the Count Palatine in their Admonitio Christiana de libro concordiae c. 6. p. 203. we haue not heard of any miracle that he did And thus much in proofe that the ages next succeeding S. Austin agreed with him in our Catholicke Roman faith But now to come to the age precedent to S. Austin that the same Catholicke faith was then also vniuersally professed and Protestancy not so much as knowen to haue beene then in being to omit much other proofe wherof this short intended treatise is not capable that learned and so excellent a man (d) Deut. vpon the reuelat p. 262. M. Napier in his treatise dedicated to the Kinges maiesty and for the supposed worth therof reprinted in London Anno. 1594. and now againe sithence reprinted in London by M. Norton Anno. 1611. cum priuilegio Regiae maiestatis Besides the further (e) In the Preface to the Christian Reader imprinting therof diuerse times in the French and Ducth tongues and yet further promised (f) Ibidem publishing the same shrotly in Latin to the publicke vtility of the whol Church this so learned and esteemed Protestant writer auocheth that betweene the yeare of Christ 300. (g) Vpon the reuelat printed Anno. 1594. p. 68. and after the later edition p. 90. 85. and 316. the Antichristian and Papistical raigne began raigning vniuersally and without any debatable contradiction 1260. yeares next ensuing the first 300. yeares after Christ And the same not as D. Morton would (h) Appeale p. 72. euade in reguard of some one or other onely point of Popery so to vse their phrase but so generally in reguard of the whole that saith M. (i) Vpon reuelat p. 161. Napier from the yeare of Christ 316. God haith withdrawen his visible Church from the outward assemblies to the hearts of particular godly men during the space of 1260. yeares (k) Ibid. p. 191. Gods true Church most certainly abyding so long latent inuisible (l) Ibid. p. 161. 156. 237. 23. 188. the Pope (m) Ib. p. 145. his Cleargie duringal tbat time posessing the outward visible Church of Christians (n) Ibid. p. 239. neuer suffering for the space of 1000. yeares after Siluester the first any to be seene vouchable or visible of the true Church c. Thus far M. Napier To whom assenteth M. Brochard affirming that (o) Vpon the reuelat fol. 110. The Pope fel from Christ in the time of Siluester and that (p) Ibidem the Church was trodden dowen and oppressed by the Papacy euen from Siluesters time to these times during (q) Ib. fo 123. the said 1260. yeares with these agreeth M. (r) In Apoc. in his Synopsis before the booke fol. a. 1. parag 11. Brightman teaching that The Church was latent from the time of Constantine for 1260. yeares and that (s) In Apoc. in c. 17. p. 462. euer since the time of Constantine the great Rome haith beene the whore of Babilon and the Roman Bishop haith beene the beast and Antichrist foretould in the Apocalips wherto M. Leigh addeth that (t) Britannies great deliuery fol. B. 2. The Popes euer since the first 300. yeares haue beene Diuels We may yet further ad hereto in behalfe of the like yet further acknowledged antiquity of our Catholicke religion that M. Napier further auoucheth (u) Vpon the reuel in c. 16. p. 191. that during euen the second and third ages next after Christ the true temple of God and light of the Gospel was obscured by the Roman Antichrist himselfe That also in the booke so (x) In ep theol ep 46 p. 232. gratful to Beza and penned by Caelius secundius Curio a Caluinist is affirmed and houlden for good (y) De amplitudine regni Dei lib. 1. p. 43. 45. 47. that The world continued in great darknes blindnes ignorance almost from the Apostles age to these very times in which aboue al expectation the Lord began to manifest
him selfe c. Lastly Sebastianus Francus concludeth for certaine that (z) Ep. de abrogandis stat Eccles Presently after the Apostles times al thinges were turned vpside downe c. And that for certaine through the worke of Antichrist the external Church together with the faith and Sacraments vanished away presently after the Apostles departure that for these 1400. years the Church haith beene no where external and visible c. So peremptorily do they charge the auncient and holy Fathers of the Primitiue Church with Antichristian Apostacy from the faith of Christ Yea they do not forbeare to publish to the world their special booke of that argument entituled (a) His Maiesty in his declaratiâ—n concerning his proceedinges with the states in case of Voâ—stius p. 15. 19. 35. De Apostasia Sanctorum and to send the same to the Arch-bishop of Canterbury and to mantaine further by letter vnto the said Archbishop that the doctrine contained in that booke de Apostasia Sanctorum was agreeable to the doctrine of the Church of England The miserable deceiued author therof and other his complices Napier Brightman Brocard Leigh and sundry other Protestant writers not discerning that by such their pretended Apostacy them selues do in very deed as precursors prepare and make way to that fearful Apostacy which is in their opinion foretould by the (b) 2. Thes 2.3 and see Caluin vpon the same place as also Piscator Apostle to happen before the end of the world for what els is this pretended Apostacy of the Primitiue Church other then a plaine preparation and earnest perswasion to make Apostacy or departure from the doctrine of the Primitiue church and so consequently from the doctrine of Christ and his Apostles So cleare it is that not onely the ages subsequent but also precedent to S. Austin vp to the Apostles are al of them disliked and condemned by Protestants as wholly papistical and Antichristian The conclusion of the whole booke HItherto gentle Reader haue I intertained thy paines and patience in making proofe to thee of S. Austines professed religion from his owne alledged sayinges reported miracles with solution also to the contrary obiections vsually pretended from S. Austin only now in conclusion of al I offer to thy consideration how vnlike it is that I should be able to alledge to thee so many plaine and pregnant sayinges of S. Austin in behalfe of so many seueral pointes of religion and al or most of them for such by the learned aduersary confessed and yet further confirmed with like confessed consenting doctrine of the other auncient Fathers that liued next before in and after his age and al this notwithstanding no such matter as some aduersaries pretend to be by S. Austin therin intended or meant Could he not in some onely one or other but in al the cheife pointes of controuersy speake so plainly with vs and against Protestancy and so likewise acknowledged by Protestants them selues and yet himselfe in those very pointes ioyne in religion with Protestants and against vs Al which being so abundantly hertofore in this treatise examined and proued euen from the sparing and wary confession of the learned aduersaries who acknowledge no more then the racke of truth enforceth them vnto may suffice to satisfy thee studious Reader that hereby is deliuered to thee but as it were the bare out side or naked apparance of thinges in comparison of that far greater proofe and euidence which is in very deede at large abouÌ„ding in the writings of S. Austin the other auncient Fathers If therefore any shal without al forehead seeke to abuse thee with denyal of so euident premises I do therein boldly appeale to the equity of thine owne indifferent iudgement And as for those other who with more plaine dealing but no lesse offence in do ingeniously confesse and acknowledge S. Austines foresaid doctrine to make with vs yet withal contemne and reiect the same for Popish if any I say supercilious forehead of that ranke who (c) Math. 13.13.14 hauing eares to heare and wil not heare eyes to see and wil not see shal oppose against vs his owne late aduerse nouel doctrine as pretended from the Scriptures in the vnderstanding wherof he doubteth not to prefer his owne priuate interpretation before S. Austin and the other Fathers I can but yet not without commiseration pronounce of such a one (d) Apoc. 22.11 Qui sordidus est sordescat adhuc And I must needes apply vnto him those wordes of our Kinges most excellent Maiesty which he worthily deliuered against Vorstius a principal pretender of this Christian liberty As for (e) In his foresaid declaration p. 63. 64. this Christian liberty saith he which Vorstius doth vrge so much certainly he doth it with no other intention but onely vnder this faire pretext c. to abuse the world c. To abuse Christian liberty in presuming to propound a new doctrine to the world in point of the highest and holiest mysteries of God is a most audacious rashnes and impudent arrogancy And againe (f) Ibid. p. 61. 62. If one particular man may take vpon him such singularity as this how shal he be subiect to general national and synodical Councels c. Wherefore he is plainly discouered to be resolued not to be subiect in any sort to the iudgement of the Church c. for he knowes to wel that the auncient Church c. is against him And this is the reason why he wil not in these pointes submit him selfe to the iudgement of any mortal man but vpon this occasion mantaines his Christian liberty Thus far his Maiesty against Vorstius and indeede against al Protestants who being pressed with the aucthority of S. Austin the other Fathers of the Primitiue Church either for the interpretation of the Scriptures or for our knowledge of the practise of those purest times in matters of faith and religion do finally betake them selues to this desperate refuge of contemning S. Austin and al Fathers vpon pretence of this Christian liberty that al controuersies are to be decyded onely by the priuate spirit interpreting the Scriptures Now lastly as to al Catholicke Readers I conclude that seeing the faith which at this day we beleeue and professe is confessedly the same with that of S. Austines and the other holy Bishops and Doctors of the Primitiue Church that therfore amongst the other greatest blessinges of God bestowed vpon vs we euer esteeme this with highest respect of our happy vocation In due requital and gratitude wherto let vs with al exultation of minde accept and embrace what pressures punishmeÌ„ts and torments so euer inflicted vpon vs for our defence therof yea if death it selfe be vrged let vs rather make choice to dye in our Lord with S. Austin S. Ambrose S. Hierome S. Gregory and the other holy Prelates Martyrs Confessors Virgins of those purest times then to dye the death of the wicked with Aerius Iouinian Vigilantius