argue thus all those Bookes which Protestants in their authorised communion booke and bookes of Honolyes allowed by their conuocation and parlament and our Kinge doe prescribe to be vsed as canonicall scriptures as well as others and are so cited and practized ought to be receaued and allowed for canonicall But those Bookes which they denie and Catholicks receaue for canonicall are suche Therefore they ought to admitt them into the Canon of Holy scriptures The Maior proposition is euident for bookes Rules lawes and directions proposed by true authoritie as those be supposed of Protestants ar to be obeyed and followed The Minor proposition is likewise l. 1. homel l. 2. homel Artic. 25. Communion B. Tabl. direct of seruice Suruey of the Booke of comm prayer pag. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. Petit of 22. Preach exc ag hom and except 4. ag comm Booke Articl of Relig. Articul 6. moste certaine for their bookes of Homelyes receaued in the 25. Article of their Religion doe ordinarily so cite them and their Communion booke so termeth and vseth them too often to be alleadged in this place Whereuppon to be breife the Protestant Author of the Suruey of the booke of Common prayer affirmeth playnelye and often vrdgeth it That the Protestants of England must approue with the Romane Churche these bookes for canonicall So likewise doe the 22. preachers of London in their petition If any man shall Answeare that the Articles of their Religion exclude them from the canon of the scripture and so they cannot be saide to receaue them I answeare him againe that this is so farre from freeinge them in this point that it both excludeth them defineing and embraceing so contradictorie doctrines in so important busines from all hope of truthe and further proueth that these men buildeing all vppon scriptures haue either no scriptures at all or els such doubtfull vncertaine and vnresolued scriptures that true Religion which must be moste assured and infallible cannot be grownded or mayntayned by them For proofe whereof I will first recite their subscribed Article in this question and then frame my Argument Their Article is sett downe in these Articl of Rel. articul 6. definitiue wordes Holy scripture conteineth all thinges necessarie to saluation so that whatsoeuer is not read therein nor may be proued thereby is not to be required of any man that it should be beleeued as an Article of the faithe or be thought requisite or necessarie to saluation In the name of holy scripture wee doe vnderstand those canonicall Bookes of the old and new testament of whose authoritie was neuer any doubt in the Churche Of the first part of this Article I am to entreate in my chapter of Traditions hereafter Of the later part I will speake in this place onely first admonisheing my Readers in what ample maner D. Feild and others of that Religion Feild l. 3. c. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. pag. 60. 62. 63. 64. c. Feild l. 3. Titul c. 1. 2. take this worde the Churche for breuiate whereof the Titles of the first and seconde chapters of his third booke be these Of the diuision of the Christian worlde into the Greeke Latine Armenian Aethiopian and Nestorian Churches c. 1. of the harshe and vnaduised Censure of the Romanists condemninge all these Churches as Scismaticall and Hereticall cap. 2. Now this supposed I argue thus No bookes whose authoritie haue at any time beene doubted of in the Churche are by this Protestant Article to be allowed for Canonicall scriptures But all bookes that either Protestants or Catholicks receaue for canonicall haue in the Iudgment of these Protestants beene doubted of in the Church Therefore by these Protestants there be no canonicall scriptures at all The Maior proposition is euidently proued by their recited article defineing those bookes canonicall of whose authoritie was neuer any doubt in the Churche The Minor proposition is directly proued by D. Willet who writeth Willet Synop quaest 1. of scripture pag. 2. 3. edit An. 1594. and after published againe directly and at large how euery booke both of the old and new testament haue not onely beene doubted of but also denyed in this their Churche I suppose the laste edition of his booke was since the commeing in of his Maiestie my prescribed time otherwise it is so directly there proued by him that no Protestant can deny it And to shew the pitifull case of this their Protestant Article and Religion their Protestant Bishop of Wincester D. Bilson suru pag. 664. Bilson within my limitation writeth thus The scriptures themselues were not fully receaued in all places no not in Eusebius time Hee saith the Epistle of Iames of Iude the second of Peter the seconde and third of Iohn ar contradicted The Epistle to the Hebrues was contradicted the Churches of Syria did not receaue the seconde epistle of Peter nor the seconde and third of Iohn nor the Epistle of Iude nor the Apocalipse the like might be saide for the Churches of Arabia Will you hence conclude that these partes of scripture were not Apostolicke or that wee neede not receaue them now because they were formely doubted of Therefore the Protestants of England haue no certayne and vndoubted scripture if they will stand to their suscribed Articles and their owne subscription Which this Protestant Bishop before seeing the absurditie thereof hath refused to doe Therefore they may not as they doe denie those other bookes which Catholicks admitt vppon so greate and highest warrants before in Protestants Iudgment because in former tymes they haue beene doubted of as those laste recited by the testimonie of their Bishop and all the rest as D. Willet hath wittnessed haue beene To these I might add more Arguments from these Protestants true Greeke Churche and the generall Councell of Florence both allowed by some of these writers and yet alloweing and warranting for canonicall all bookes receaued by Catholicks And other Arguments by them but these ar sufficient for this matter at this time And as demonstration is made that these Protestants either haue no true scriptures at all or not the true Canon of holy scriptures So it is as euident that their Religion cannot be proued true and infallible as true Religion is by euidences that in their proceedings ar doubtfull fallible or no holy canonicall scriptures but by them excluded from that number and sacred Canon CHAPTER V. OF THE INTEGRITIE AND excellencie of the Latine vulgare translation of scriptures vsed in the Romane Church and Protestants false corrupt and erroneous Translations in their owne Iudgment and Censure NOW lett vs entreate of the vulgare Latine translation of holy scriptures handled in the next Chapter for whose allowance by these Protestants I argue by them in this maner That Latine Translation of scriptures which is to be vsed in scholes and pulpits and for antiquitie to be preferred before all others was vsed in the Church thirteene hundred yeares agoe by S. Augustine preferred
and the Hebrue Greeke Apostles also as Athenians But now sixe yeares triall hath taught that it is one thinge to dreame of tongues an other to knowe them And now they are said to be at a stand And would willingly giue ouer but that the Kings authoritie requireth an end But that your most learned Maiestie may se what is to be hoped for from them least the Churches be forced to buy bables for the word of God I will in few words deleuer that it may appeace that such pore students are not to be suffered to lest with the Kinge and the flocke Hitherto this greate linguists oration his exceptions are to tedious to be recited Onely because these men haue so magnified the Hebrue text of the old testament in respect of the septuaginta and vulgare Latine now this greate searcher of Hebrue monuments can heare onely for hee neuer se either of them of two perfect Hebrue copies of the old testament in all the world and both they be in the Iewes custodye one in Hierusalem and the other at Nehardegh in Mosopotamia Veteris testamenti duo exemplaria tam accurata atque mens humana prouidere potuit seruantur à Iudaeis Hierosolymis alterum alterum Nehardeghae in Mesopotamia Then if wee haue no better comfort from these Hebritians for a true Hebrue text then that England neither hath had or can procure any and none is to be had but from our Enemyes the Iewes and yet if they could procure a true copie which they haue not done there is not any one in England by their owne Iudgments able truely to translate it and these last translators were weary of their entreprise and would haue giuen it ouer after sixe yeares experience of their disabilitie but that the Kings Maiesties pleasure was to haue one end or other wee may not easely admitt such translations for holy scriptures nor Religion deduced from them for a true Religion And â—his the rather because since the birth of this new translation it is condemned by their owne approued writeings I will omitt others and onely cite one place out of their late commended history of the world in these Histor of the world l. 1. cap. ◠§. 14. Chron 2. cap. 21. v. 16. The Protest new transl sup words The ill translation of Ethiopia for Chus is amonge other places made moste apparant in the second of Chronicles in these words So the Lord styrred vpp against Iehoram the spiritt of the Philistines and the Arabians which confine the Ethiopians The Geneua translation hath it which were besides the Ethiopians the new English readeth thus more ouer the lord stirred vpp against Iohoram the spiritt of the Philistines and of the Arabians that were neare the Ethiopians Now how farre it is betweene the Philistines and the Negros or Ethiopians euery man that looketh in a mapp may Iudge For hee Philistines and Arabians doe mixt and ioyne with the land of the Chusites and are distant from Ethiopia about two and thirtie or three and thirtie degrees and therefore not their next neighbours but all Egipt and the deserts of Sur and Pharan are betweene them And to aggrauate this matter the more these new Protestant translators takeing vppon them to translate the old testament out of the Hebrue and new out of the Greeke and onely alloweing those texts in words are so farre from performing it in deeds that in the old testament they haue forsaken the Hebrue text diuers thowsands of times as may be proued by their owne merginall obseruations of that matter my leasure was not to recompt them all but in Genesis the first booke they haue thus behaued themselues aboue two hundred tymes and after the same rate in all the rest As in the 5. 20. and 25. chapter of the booke of Iudges fourtye times Fyfteene tymes in Sam. l. 1. cap. 18. in the 2. Booke of Samuel in cap. 22. thirteene times in cap. 1. 7. 18 20. in fower chapters aboue fyfty times in the third booke of Kings And so they deale with the Greeke in the new testament and in the old testament where the scripture is written in the Chaldy and Hebrue mixed as in the time of captiuitie so they vse the Chaldy tongue as in Esra cap. 4. they forsake the Hebrue thrise and the Chaldye eleuen or twelue times in the second chapter of Daniel they leaue it thirteene times in the third chapter twelue times in the 5. chapter neyne times c. and in these and other places where they refuse the originall tonge as for example the Hebrue they doe it not many times to preferre either the vulgare Latine Septuaginâ—a or Syriacke but their owne conceipt and Imagination Yet in places where they forsake the originall to preferre any of the other it is euidently against their owne profession and Religion and in places of their former translations censured by Mr. Gregory Martyne or other English Catholicks they often times neither regard their owne or ours but giue vs new scriptures and reuelations of their owne thoughe not many times in greate matters and so in this multiplication and chaunge of scriptures they haue also multiplied and chaunged Religion deduced from them and for that one Article of their auntient creed I beleeue in the holy ghost may now say by such proceedings wee beleeue in the foure and fourtie English Protestant holy Ghosts For whosoeuer reiect all texts of scripture as their owne marginall obseruations tell vs they doe though as before often not in great things yet sometimes otherwise and deny vnwritten traditions of this kinde must needs be in such estate CHAPTER VI. PROVETH BY THESE PROtestants that the true and Iuridicall exposition of scriptures is against them and for the doctrine of the Romane Church AFTER these I am to entreate of the true lawfull and Iuridicall Exposition of holy scriptures And that it belongeth to the Church of Rome haueing both the true scriptures the true translation of them and it self haueing power and authoritie being the true Church of Christ to propose it to all Christians and not to these Protestants for no companie or congregation of men wanting and denying diuers bookes of scriptures in which diuers Articles of Religion as prayer to Angels their patronadge prayer and sacrifice for the Deade meritt of good workes c. are directly proued not so apparently taught in other scriptures besides followeing and alloweing erroneous and corrupt translations can haue the true and Iuridicall exposition of scriptures especially hauing no Iurisdiction ouer others by their owne graunt But the English Protestants are in this state Therefore they haue not this true lawfull and Iuridicall exposition of scriptures Bothe propositions are graunted before and so nothinge remaineth to be proued in this argument Further I argue thus No priuate Interpretation of scriptures by conference of places and such Rules as Protestants assigne for Interpreteinge scripture is bindeing or iuridicall But all Protestant Expositions in respect of true byndeing
England to bee no true ministery Assertion An. Dom. 1604. pag. 277. 218. doth make demonstration of it in this maner The Queenes Royall Maiestie being neuer capable of any part of spirituall power The same could not bee deryued from her parson to the Archbishopps and Bishops Nemo potest plus Iuris in alium transferre quà m ipse habet No parson can transferre more authoritie vnto an other then hee himselfe hath And thus much concerninge Couell cont Burg. pag. 60. WottoÌ„ def of Perk. pag. 442. the first proposition The second is thus proued by D. Couell and D. Whitakers cited and allowed by him in this words The Church of Christ according to her authoritie receaued from him hath warrant to approue the scriptures to acknowledge to receaue to publishe and commaunde vnto her children Mr. Wotton witnesseth the like in this maner The Iugdment of the Churche wee ar so far from discrediting that wee holde it for a speciall grounde in this matter of scriptures Therefore that Iudgment which may in no wayes bee discredited in the greatest matter must needs bee infallible For euery witnes that is fallible may iustely bee discredited in such busines especially My fourth Argument is this whatsoeuer doth support and sustayne the truthe in which and no where els the truthe is preserued which is a diligent and warye keeper of Christs true doctrine committed vnto it chaungeinge nothinge at any time diminisheinge nothinge addinge nothinge not loseing her owne nor vsurpinge things belonginge to others must needs bee of Infallible Iudgment and free from error But the true Church of Christ is suche Therefore it is infallible in Iudgment and free from error The first propositions is euidently true for truthe once committed vnto one and continually so supported sustayned and preserued without chaunge diminution addition losse or vsurpation must of necessitie and Infallibly still bee truthe for neither truthe nor any thinge els so mayntayned and kept vnuiolable can by any possibilitie bee ouerthrowne or altered The seconde proposition is thus proued by this Protestants Mr. Ormerods Ormerod pict pap pap 93. words bee thus The Church is called a piller because it is like vnto a piller For as a piller dothe supporte and vnderproppe a buildinge and maketh it more stable firme and stronge so the Church doth sustayne and supporte the truthe for the truthe is no where preserued but in the Churche D. Sutcliffe Sutcliffe against the 3 conuers pag. 79. approueth this sentence Christs true Church is a diligent and wary keeper of doctrines committed to her and chaungeth nothinge at any time diminisheth nothinge addeth nothinge superfluous looseth not her owne nor vsurpeth things belongeinge to others Therefore Christs true doctrine committed to the true Church and continued and preserued longe time in the Church of Rome Christs true Church as this Protestants graunt in the next chapter must needs still be there and that still the true Church of Christ because that euer preserueth and neuer looseth or chaungeth the truthe nor any part thereof fundamentall or not fundamentall Lastely in this Question I argue thus whatsoeuer Societie or Companie hath authoritie in controuersies of faith and out of it there is no saluation remission of synnes or hope of eternall life must needs bee infallible in Iugdment free from error and onely to be obeyed in such things aboue all other Consistories Conuenticles or priuate parsons But the true Church is such Therefore Infallible in Iudgment free from error and so to be obeyed The first proposition is euidently true otherwise men were some times bownde to bee Hereticks or beleeue errors because authoritie is to bee obeyed and not resisted and Hereticks might be saued or God our moste good and mercifull Lord and Sauiour compelleth and necessitateth man to bee damned which be euident blasphemies The second proposition is proued by these English ProtestaÌ„ts first their booke of Articles to which they all sweare or subscribe Booke of Articl articul 20. reconfirmed by his maiestie Feild pag. 69. Couell def of Hoocker pag. 76. defineth thus The Church hath authoritie in controuersies of faith D. Feild hath this sentence There is no saluation remission of sinnes or hope of eternall life out of the Churche Like is the Iudgment of D. Couell and others And thus much of the Infallible highest Authoritie Iudgment Commaunding and Bindinge power of Christs true Church in generall Which can be but one as that Article of our Creede I beleeue the holy Catholick Church not Churches teacheth vs. And these Protestants in their Articles define it Artic. 19. A congregation of faithfull men c. not congregations And thus comment vppon it â—here Rogers vpp their Articl pag. 86. 88. 89. is but one Church And proue it by these scriptures Rom. 11. 5. 1. Cor. 10. 17. 1. Cor. 12 12. 13. 27. Rom. 12. 4. 5. Gal. 3. 28. and add thus all Gods people agree with vs in this point And cyte for it the Protestant confessions of Heluetia Boheme Gall. Belgia Augâ—st Wittenb Suew And these Protestants before haue so taught vs when they define or descrebe it allwayes in the singular number onely by these their names and distinctions blessed companie of holy ones houshold of faithe spouse of Christ Church of the liueing God piller of truthe c. And in all verbes relatiues or demonstratiues of it so singularly speakeing of it as her communion her directions her Iudgment her Children her Definitions hath warrant to approue to publish to commaunde is a diligent keeper of doctrines committed to her chaungeth nothinge diminisheth nothing c. Which by no possibilitie can bee verified of the Protestants either in England or any other nation none of them in particular or all together haueing clayming or pretending either infallibilitie in Iudgment to warrant any one article in controuersie but voluntarily and generally teachinge that Thesis generalâ—â— est it is a generall Morton Apol. part 2. pag. 315. willet Antil praef engl pag. 71. 120. 150. 4â— pref to the Read in Antil Artiâ—l of Relig. art 21. Relation of the state of Religion cap. 47. c. Comm vppon the Articl of Engl. Protest by Mr Rog. in pref Maxime there is none in their Church whose Iudgment is of Infallible authoritie Neither Prince Parlament Cowncell Ministery or their Church hath any priuilegd from error but they haue and doe erre in things pertayning to God Neither challenge any Iurisdiction generall to bynde others to their Religion but absolutely confessinge The Protestant ar without any meanes to take vp their controuersies No Prince with any preeminence of Iurisdiction aboue the rest no Patriarke one or more to haue a common Superintendance or care of their Churches And their publick comment vppon their Articles to which they haue all subscribed assureth vs is to be so for relatinge vnto vs how in the begynninge of their Reuolt from the Church of Rome to persuade the world they laboured by all
them Apochypha is vtterly ouerthowne For an opinion fownded vppon old Iewish Cauills against Christians singularly held or renewed reclaymed by the Author and generally giâ—â—ing offence as these Protestants affirme this was is not probable to be true D. Couell against Burges the Puritane answeareth the obiections against these Couell ag Burges pag. 8â— 86. 87. 88. 89 90. 91. bookes as Catholickes doe And sheweth that these bookes haue without cause beene accused of faultes by Protestants onely to deny them to be canonicall as Catholicks esteeme them And further hee addeth thus They ar moste true and might haue the reconcilement Couell sup pag. 87. of other scriptures And againe in these wordes If Russinus be not deceaued they were approued as parts of the old testament by the Apostles For when S. Hierome writt so scornefully of the historie of Susanna and the songe of the three children hee chargeth him therein to haue robbed the treasure of the holy ghost and diuine Instrument which the Apostles deliuered to the Churches And S. Hierome whoe is not vsually slowe to defend himself leaueth that point vnansweared pretending that what hee had spoken was not his owne opinion but what the Iewes obiected And for his paynes in translateing the booke of Iudith which Protestants deny hee giueth this reason because wee reade that the Councell of Nyce did reckon it in the number of holy scriptures Hitherto D. Couells words and much like vnto this of Russinus hee citeth from S. Augustine S. Ciprian and others Temporibus Apostolorum proximis in the next ages to the time of the Apostles And thus wee see how weake that Protestant Religion is that by their owne testimonie is fownded vppon so singular new reuiued Iewish Cauills disclaymed and generally offensyue and disliked opinion From hence I argue further All Bookes which were approued by the Apostles for parts of the old testament were the treasure of the holy ghost and diuine Instrument which the Apostles deliuered to the Churches which ar moste true and might haue reconcilement of other scriptures ar to be allowed for such But all these things ar verified of bookes which these Protestants deny and by themselues as is cited from them before Therefore ar to be allowed for canonicall scriptures bothe propositions be graunted by these Protestants before and so in this argument nothing remayneth to be proued And againe thus I argue whatsoeuer a generall Councell in the primatiue Church the highest Rule by Protestants before to approue scriptures and bynde all men vnto the definitions of it receaued for scripture ought to be receaued for such But more bookes then Protestants allowe were so receaued as these Protestants tell vs Therefore more are to be admitted Both propositions ar here also graunted before by Protestants and so the Argument concludeth truely against them Further I argue thus Those Bookes which the Iewes before and at the comminge of Christ for their greatest or greate part dwelleing out of Iury vsed as parts of the old testament and deliuered as a canon to the Christian Churches and were Ioyned in one volume read by them of the Latine Church then the acknowledged true Churche of Christ and were receaued in the third Carthagenian Councell which was confirmed in the sixt generall Councell ar now to be receaued and allowed for canonicall scriptures But those bookes which Protestants denie and Catholicks allowe be such Therefore they ar to be now allowed for canonicall The Maior proposition is euidently true for if the Iewes before and at the commeing of Christ the primatiue Christians of that time and their practice the authoritie of the true Church of Christ the moste principall Church before by D. Feild and other Protestants a fomous prouinciall Councell and the confirmation of a generall Councell ar not to be admitted to direct and instruct vs there is no meanes left for instruction in this case these beinge by these Protestants before the greatest warrants and Rules wee can haue in such causes The second proposition is proued in this manen D. Feild haueing spoken how the Hebrue Iewes had made their Hebrue canon accordeing to their Iewish reckoninge of the number of their letters how probably I leaue to Hebritians and may not now entreate hee concludeth thus These onely did Feild l. 4. c. 23. pag. 245. the auncient Church of the Iewes receaue as diuine and canonicall Neither much meruaile all the others being the last that were written and in the time of their decayeing state and afflictions Of these hee writeth thus in the next words That other bookes were added vnto Feild sup these whose authoritie not being certayne and knowne ar called Apocryphall fell out on this sortè The Iewes in their later times before and at the Act. 6. c. gloss ordinar lyr in eandem locum comminge of Christ were of two sortes some properly and for distinction sake named Hebrâ—es commorant at Hierusalem and in the holy land others named Hellenists that is Iewes of dispersion mingled with the Gretians These had written sundry bookes in Greeke which they made vse of together with other parts of the old testament which they had of the translation of the Septuagint But the Hebrues receaued onely the two and twentie bookes before mentioned Hence it came that the Iewes deliuered a double Canon of the scripture to the Christian Churches Thus wee see that the greatest parte of the Iewes Proselytes and all our of Iurie did add these bookes with the other for scripture vsed them as part of the old testament deliuered them to the Christian Churches as part of the canon of scripture and the primatiue Church consequently so receaued them otherwise they were not thus deliuered Therefore thus farre the Minor proposition is proued for I doe not expect D. Feild to say or not say expressely that these be or be not canonicall but what in true consequence hee must say by his owne graunte before and hereafter Then hee telleth vs they in S. Augustines time were receaued Feild pag. 246. by him the fathers of third Councell of Carthage and Innocentius then Pope of Rome in the best estate of that Church when it was as before by Protestants Kings speach sup a Rule vnto all in the catalogue of canonicall scriptures Now that the Canons of this Carthagenian Councell were confirmed in the sixt generall Councell holden at Trallo to vse his words and which Protestants acknowledge Feild l. 4. cap. 23. pag. 258. for a generall Councell their highest Rule hee testifieth after in the same chapter Neither is his exception because the Laodicean Councell which nameth not all Ob. them is there also confirmed of any purpose Answ for that generall Councell by Protestants approueing and confirminge bothe that which named them for canonicall and that doth not name them all must needs confirme them for canonicall otherwise against supposition this Councell of Carthage had not beene confirmed as they teach it was Further I
before all others and both by the Iudgment of S. Isidore and these Protestants themselues is thought the best translation and to be preferred before all others is accordingely to be allowed esteemed and preferred But the vulgare Latine translation by these Protestants is such Therefore euen by them so to be allowed and preferred The Maior proposition is manifestly true for that which is so auncient in the true Latine Church and to be preferred before all others must needs be allowed and preferred The Minor proposition is proued as followeth first their Bishopp D Doue writeth in these words of this vulgare Latine translation Wee Protestants graunt it Doue persuas pag. 16. fitt that for vniformitie in quotations of places in schooles and pulpiâ—s one Latine text should be vsed and wee can be contented for the antiquitie thereof to preferre the olde vulgar translation before all other Latine bookes so much wee doe yeeld to the Councell of Trent D. Couell entreateinge of translations of scripture against Burges the Puritan Couell against Burges pag. 94. answeareth in these words Wee are readie to confesse whether you vnderstand the Italian or that which goeth vnder the name of S. Hierome that they were vsed aâ—nâ—iently in the Church a thowsand and three hundred yeares agoe one of them by S. Augustine preferred before all the rest the other highly commended by Beza and that of the vulgar though with Pagnin and Driedo wee thinke it not S. Hieromes but mixt yet wee can be content to say as Isodore doth of it Interpretatio eius this translation is to be preferred before others Hitherto this Protestant Doctor who with their Bishop Doue before haue graunted as much as the Councell of Trent a Rule to Catholicks decreed in this matter yf wee may giue creditt Feild pag. 258. to D. Feild citeing and alloweing Andradius writeing in this maner The Church doth approue translations not pronownceing that there is no thing amisse in them but that the diuine mysteries are therein truely deliuered and nothinge that concerneth faith Religion or good maners ignorantly or fraudulently suppressed The Councell of Trent defined that the vulgare Latine translation shall be holden authenticall but hee saith Andreas Vega whoe was present at the Councell reported that the Fathers of the Councell meant not to determine that it is not defectiue or faultie but that it is not erroneous and faultie in such sorte as that any hurtfull or pernitious opinion in matters of faith or manners may necessarily be deduced from it And that this was the meaneninge of the Cowncell hee saith Andreas Vega alleadged the authoritie of the Cardinall of Sainct Crosse afterwards Pope whoe deliuered so much vnto him Hitherto D. Feilds allowance which alloweth that his Protestants before haue testified as much for the vulgare Latine translation as the Councell of Trent defined and consequently as much as Catholicks doe hold in this question Further I argue thus That Translation of scripture which was vsed 1300 yeares age when the Church was in her best and florishing estate and from which no hurtfull or pernitious opinion can be deduced is to be allowed and preferred But the vulgare Latine is such Therefore to be thus allowed and preferred The Maior proposition is euidently true and before graunted and Couell def of Hook pag. 29. D. Couell saith God hath so linked his worde and his Churche that neyther can stande where bothe are not The Minor is also before proued by these Doctors their Bishop Doue D. Couell and Feild so nothing remayneth to be proued in this argument And so it is proued and allowed by these Protestants that of all translations it is to be preferred that it contayneth nothing against Faith Religion or good maners nothing that is erroneous which suffiseth for my purpose Now lett vs see how these Protestants can iustifie their Translations from such defects for they haue graunted before that this vulgare Latine vsed and allowed in the Romane Churche is to be preferred before all their Protestant Translations Latine English Welch Dutch French or whatsoeuer named translations I argue thus No translation whatsoeuer is authenticall But euery English and other Protestant translation is a translation Therefore none of them is authenticall The Maior proposition consisteth of the verie wordes of D. Couell Couell ag Burg. pag. 94. Doue persuas pag. 16. which be these No translation whatsoâ—uer is authenticall scripture D. Doue writeth thus all Traâ—slations haue many faultes The Minor is manifestly true for a translation cannot truly be saide to be no translation for so contradictories might be true which is vnpossible Further thus I argue No translation which is not well translated but requireth new translations is to be allowed But all English translations ar such Therefore not to be allowed The Maior is euidently true for things not well done ar ill done because Non datur actus indifferens in indiuiduo No act singularized is indifferent Therefore being ill is not to be allowed The Minor is proued by the Kings speach in the Conference at Confer pag. 46. Hampton where hee saith that hee could neuer yet see a Bible well translated into English but the worste of all hee thought the Geneua to be And therefore a new translation should be made for our English nation And so D. Couell also Couell ag Burg. wisheth Againe thus I argue No translation that is peruerred in many hundreds of places is inferior to the Turkes Alcaron and denyeth Christianitie is to be allowed But the English Protestant Common translation it such Therefore not to be allowed The Maior proposition is more then euidently true The Minor is thus proued by the Protestant Author of the booke called Aduertisement Aduertism in an 1604. his words be these The Bible is peruerted in eight hundred and eight and fourtie places in the olde testament The English Protestant Bible is inferior to the â—urkes Alcaron And so Christianitie is denied in England by publicke authoritie My next Argument is this No translation that hath many omissions many additions which sometimes peruerteth the sence is sencelesse and sometymes contrary is a true translation or to be allowed But the English receaued Protestant translation is suche therefore not true nor to be allowed The Maior is palpably true The Minor is proued by Mr. Burges in these wordes Burg. apol pag. 93. in D. Couells Answ of the approued English translation it is a Translation which hath many omissions many additions which sometimes obscureth sometimes peruerteth the sence beinge sometimes sencelesse sometimes contrary Thus I argue againe No translation that is corrupt hath grosse corruptions by leaueing out of wordes by putting to of wordes and which peruerteth the meaneinge of the holy Ghost is a true or sufferable translation But the vsuall English translation by Protestants is such therefore not true nor sufferable The Maior proposition is apparantly true And the Minor is thus proued by these Protestants The 22
by matching with his scisters and presenting him with rich and rare presents for Hugh Kinge of Fraunce besides other inestimable Iuells sent him the sword of Constantine the greate in the hilt whereof all couered with gold was one of the nayles that fastened Christ to the crosse and of the speare and crowne of thornes Before him they make Kinge Elfred the most worthie and after him Kinge Edward a Saint and yet make them bothe in doctrine and practise of meritt and meritorious workes to be renowned Of the first they Pag. 351. write in this maner Elfred the fourth sonne of Kinge Ethelwolfe and ladie Osburge his wife a child of fyue yeares old was sent very honorably attended to the citie of Rome where Leo then Bishop confirmed him was his godfather at confirmation and anoynted him to the expectation of a Kingedome growne in yeares hee grewe so in discretion magnanimitie and fauour of all men that in the successiue Raignes of his three elder brethren hee ruled as a viceroy or secondary Kinge vnder euery of them and Pag. 357. after them at the last succeeded in the English monarchye Hee was a moste worthie prince Gurmund or Gurthurne the danish Kinge with thirtie of his cheife nobilitie came to conditions with Kinge Elfred and are christened His buildings were many bothe to Gods seruice and other publicke vse as at Pag. 359. Edelingsey a Monastery at Winchester a new Minster and at Shastesbury a howse of Nunnes wherein hee made his daughter Ethelgeda the Abbesse His other holy workes and meritorious deeds are to many to be remembred in this place but they conclude of him in these words The Pag. 359. sup n. 25. 28. vertues of this prince are matchable to any that euer raigned before him and exceed the moste that euer raigned after him both in seruice of God c. Concerninge K Edward syrnamed the Confessor it would be to tedious to make recitall but of parte of his holy vertues and meritorious workes in this place I onely add from these men The 40000. pownds yearely of Dane guilt was remitted by him payed for 40. yeares continuance Pag. 397. 398. 399. 400. 401. 402. out of the lands of all except onely the cleargye because say our auntient lawes the Kings reposed more confidence in the prayers of holy Church then in the power of Armes His words of Q. Editha his wife openly vppon his death bedd were â—hee was his wife but in secret embraceings as his scister K. Edward and his successors after miraculously cureth the disease called struma now the Kings euill with other propheticall and heauenly guists hee was endowed Hee vowed a pilgrimadge to Hierusalem for dischardg whereof hee built the Church of Westminister c. These Protestants conclusion of him is this Kiuge Edward a prince of much vertue and integritie of life raigned with such Iustice and pietie that hee obtayned the venerable name of Saint and vnto posterities is distinguished from other Edwards by the adiunct Confessor ô how happy were it if either Catholicks or Protestants could truly write so much of Protestant princes neither frends to the doctrine or fauoures of exercise of meritts and meritorious deeds Therfore the vniuersitie of Cambridge by their owne Doctors were ouerseene to say Wee houlde charitie to be no concurringe cause of iustification with faith Yet somewhat more of this matter is conteyned in the next chapter CHAPTER V. WHEREIN IS PROVED BY these English Protestants that the commaundements of God are possible to be kept by grace may and ought so to be kept CONCERNINGE the keeping of Concil Trid sess 6. can 11. Gods commaundements The Councell of Trent hath thus defined No man ought to vse that temerarious saying and condemned by the Fathers vnder Anathema that the precepts of God are vnpossible to be kept of a man iustified for God doth not commaunde vnpossible things but commaunding doth admonish both to doe what thou canst and to aske what thou canst not doe and doth help that thou mayest be able to doe whose commaundements are not heauie whose yoke is sweete and burden light for they which are the children of God doe loue and they which loue him as himself wittnesseth keepe his sayeings Hitherto the Councell of Trent for the doctrine of the Romane Church now that the English Protestants by their owne writings are or ought to be of the same opinion in this question thus I argue Whatsoeuer all Christians Iustely vowe to keepe and performe that in all true doctrine they are able to keepe and performe But by the opinion of English Protestants all Christians vowe to keepe the commaundements Therefore they may and must keepe them The Maior is manifest by Protestants graunteing with the holy scriptures and Fathers that iust vowes be both of things possible and must be kept for if the iust promise of man to man bindeth how much more a iust promise to God which is a vowe obligatory and byndeing The Minor is proued by the publicke Protestant English communion booke reconfirmed by his Maiesties authoritie which both teacheth that wee are bownde to Communion Booke tit chatechisme and tit publicke Baptisme §. well beloued frends keepe the commaundements and all that are baptized vowe to doe it Then seeing all English Protestants doe either sweare or subscribe vnto and dayly followe and execute the doctrine and prescription of that their authenticall Rituall and Directorie as they cannot by their oath or subscription deny it without periury or denyall of their faith so by the rule it self they committ sacriledge in reiecting that doctrine Secondly I argue thus All things that are of necessitie to bee obserued or kept of men in Religion are possible But the commaundements are of necessitie to be obserued and kept Therefore they are possible The Maior is so euidently true that if it were false all Christians of necessitie must be damned and none saued not beeing able to doe that which of necessitie they must doe or els not be saued but damned The Minor is proued by the present Protestant Archbishops of Canterbury and D. Feilds allowed Greeke Church which censureth thus The commaundements of God of necessitie are Hieremias patriarch constant censur cap. 5. to be obserued Therefore if they would deny their coÌ„munion Booke it self which before hath proued the same for vowes iustly made are of necessitie to be kept yet if D. Feild and such will be members of their allowed true Church they must be of this opinion I the rather hope so because D. Feild with others say out of the Churche there is no saluation Thirdly that doctrine which is Feild sup paert 1. cap. 1. so absurde that by Protestants opinion no man teacheth it is not true But this of the vnpossibilitie to keepe the commaundements is such Therefore it is not true The Maior is manifest The Minor is made as manifest by these words of D. Sutcliff Sutcliff ag D. Kellison
in his Iudgment the Indulgence or release as the nature thereof requireth must be free and liberall and not a commutation or chaunge for guifts or money which in Protestants denying the enioyninge of penance must needs be wicked and Symoniacall Fourthly thus I argue Whosoeuer graunt and allowe Authoritie to absolute penitents in confession both a paena culpa from the punishment and guilt of synne must mayntaine the doctrine of Indulgences But these English Protestants graunt authoritie to absolue both from the guilt and punishment of synne therefore they must mayntayne the doctrine of Indulgences The Maior proposition is often proued and allowed before The Minor is thus demonstratiuely confirmed out of the communion Booke receaued in the Kings Canons where in the Com. Booke Tit. visitat of the sicke treatise of the visitation of the sicke their Rule and direction is sett downe in these wordes Here shall the sicke parson make a speciall confession if hee feele his conscience troubled with any weightie Matter After which confession the preist shall absolue him after this sorte Our Lord IESVS CHRIST whoe hath left power in this Church to absolue all sinners which truely repent and beleeue in him of his greate mercie forgiue thee thine offences and by his authoritie committed to mee I absolue thee from all thy sins in the name of the Father and of the Sonne and of the holy Ghost Amen Where wee see not onely a Iuridicall and authoritatiue absolution from all sins giuen by Protestants diuinitie by the Preists as there they call their Ministers expressed in these Iudiciall and iuridicall words the Preist shall absolue him Christ hath left power in his Church to absolue all sinners by his authoritie committed to mee I absolue thee from all thy sins c. But also as full and powerable authoritie arrogated and vsurped of them to giue plenatie pardons and Indulgences of the seueritie due for sin before by their owne confession and that in more lardge illimited and ample order then the Pope himself teacheth or practizeth For first they generally hold that notwithstanding any punishment or seueritie that such a parson had deserued for his sinnes yett after their such absolution and authoritatiue Indulgence without any penance to bee performed either in this life or in Purgatorie which they deny presently after the separation of his soule from the bodie hee is in heauen and euer dureing happines Secondly their Rubricke and Religion is to giue these plenarie pardons to all requesting them Thirdly euery priuate minister is allowed to giue these plenaries which neither Preists nor Bishops themselues with vs can ordinarily doe Fourthly they giue these there plenary Indulgences without any iust cause or any cause of pietie at all which the Pope himself neuer doth concerning Bull. Martini Extrau vnigenitus such punishments for sins as are payed in purgatorie or the like as is euident not onely by the writings of all moderne Catholicks of this time but by these lawes Clementâ—â— 6. Bonau d. 20. 1. p. q. vlt. Ric. ibidem q. 1. ma. q. 2. Gabr. lect 57. in can Missa GersoÌ„ q. de hacre Aug. de Ancon in summa q. 30. ar 4. 5. Adr. Ca. Sot Cord. Ledesm q. 20. c. Canons and former Catholicke Doctors here cited and others Lastely thus I argue whosoeuer teach the distinction of mortall and veniall sins depriuinge not depriuing of grace allowe seueritie punishmeÌ„t for sinne both coÌ„mitted and remitted denying purgatorie say all the elect presently after death are in heauen must needs teach the doctrine of Indulgences and in more ample maner then catholicks doe But the English Protestants before and commonely soe teache Therfore they must so allowe of Indulgences Bothe propositions are euidently true and confessed by Protestants and neede no probation Therefore the catholick doctrine of Indulgences may not bee denied by English ProtestaÌ„ts They theÌ„selues though in words denying yett in practice exercisinge it in an higher measure then is vsed by the Pope himself as I haue proued before And may further add from their communion booke where it is registred in these wordes In the Com. Booke tit commination § Brethren primatiue Church there was a godly discipline that at the begynninge of Lent such parsons as were notorious synners were putt to open penance and punished in this world that their soules might be saued in the day of the Lord and that other admonished by their example might be the more afraide to offend That the said discipline may be restored is a thinge much to be wished Where they graunt not onely a punishment for example of others to take heed to offend and to satisfie their congregation but to satisfy God for their syns committed against him by their words to be putt to penance and punished in this worlde that their soules might be saued in the day of the Lorde For as their frend M. Higgons publickly preached and with priuiledge printed As Theoph. Higg ser 3. Mart. An. 1610. there is a death in syn and a death to syn so there is a double resurrection the first à culpa from syn the second à paena from the punishment which followeth therevppon Therefore these men graunting such temporall punishments due for syn euen when and where the culpa syn or guilt is forgiuen and yett not exercising any such discipline or punishment for syn must needs in their owne proceedings allowe of Indulgences in a farre more large ample or rather prodigall and presumpteous maner then is or at any time was vsed in the Church of Rome CHAPTER XIII Of the publicke Seruice of the churche in Latine or greeke and not in the vulgare Tonges NOW lett vs speake of the Relators laste scruple a straunge Tonge in deâ—â—tions as hee termeth our latine church seruice which allthough it bee both in it self and his Iudgment a matter ceremoniall in Religion and soe entreated of and proued before yett I will breefely iustifie it by these Protestants themselues in particular and argue thus That which was the practice of the churche of Christ from the first conuersion of nations vnto him vntill this age of Protestants is still to bee obserued or lawfully may But the publicke church seruice to bee in the latine tonge in this part of the worlde wherein wee liue was euer soe vsed and practized Therefore still it ought or may bee soe lawfully continued The first proposition is euidently true and before often graunted by these Protestants The seconde is thus proued by D. Doue Protestant Bishop of Doue persuasion Pag. 23. 24. cap. of prayer Peterboroughe his words bee these Vntill of late sc these dayes of protestancie throughout the west part of the worlde publicke prayers were in Latine in the east part in Greeke euen amonge those nations to whome these languadges were no mother tonges And this the confesseth to haue beene the custome from the first conuersion of nations For these two
of hande is Diuinae ordinationis and de iure diuino The ordinance of God and by his diuine lawe From which doctrine graunted by them in so publicke assemblie one of their owne fellowes in Religion inferreth this conclusion in these termes If the English Protestants opinion bee maintained Certaine coÌ„s pag. 46. that Bishops Iurisdiction is de iure diuino his Maiestie and all the Nobilitie ought to bee subiect to excommunication Neither do I vrdge these Protestants Authorities The Authors inteÌ„t and meaning by prouing seuen SacrameÌ„ts by Protestants how to bee vnderstood either for this or the other Sacraments that I seeme to graunt vnto Protestants that number of seuen Sacraments to bee among them to whome as to other Hereticks of any other now want a true and lawfull succession in orders as they do I can onely allow two Sacraments Baptisme and Marriage whereof the first for the necessitie thereof may bee in such cases of extremitie as this Inundation of heresie is not onely bee administred by Hereticks but Infidells themselues retayning the true matter forme and Intention due in that holy Sacrament And the other of Matrimony not requiring as of the essence thereof the operation of the Preist Yett do I not graunt the grace of this Sacrament to any Protestant or other out of vnitie of the Catholicke Church out of which as there is no saluation so no grace to bee hoped for bringing men to eternall beatitude But seeing this number of seuen Sacraments hath beene so much Impugned by Protestants and denied by them to bee in the true Catholicke Church which before I haue proued the present Church of Rome to bee I haue now made demostration by them selues that by their owne proceedings they ought to allow this number vnto the Church of Rome And now I proceede in like maner to Matrimonie and Extreame vnction and in the first I argue thus That which hath an externall or visible Matrimonie a Sacrament by English ProtestaÌ„ts signe or Ceremonie instituted of God signifying or giuing grace and sanctification is an holy estate honorable representing the grace of vnion betweene Christ and his Church is a Sacrament But Matrimonie is such therefore a Sacrament The Maior consisteth of the Protestant definition of a Sacrament wholly conteyning it and more them Protestants require vnto it and so cannot by them bee denied The Minor is proued by their owne publike directorie where in the treatise intituled The forme of solemnization of Comm. Booke tit Matrim §. dearely c. Matrimonie it is called in these termes Holy Matrimonie an honorable estate instituted of God signifying vnto vs the mysticall vnion which is betweene Christ and his Church which holy estate Christ adorned and bewtified with his presence and first miracle And in an other place it is named holy wedlocke §. For asmuch c. To which purpose tendeth also that their prayer ouer those that bee married in these words God the father God the sonne God the Sup. §. God c. holy Ghost blesse preserue and keepe you the Lord mercifully with his fauour looke vppon you and so fill you with all spirituall benediction and grace Againe thus I argue That externall visible ceremonie or signe that is consecrated of God to such an excellent misterie as to signifie the spirituall Marriadge betwixt Christ and his Church and by the grace and bonde whereof men are bound to loue their wyues as their owne bodies to leaue Father and Mother to whome by nature wee are so much bownde and to bee but one fleesh with his wiffe c. must needs bee a Sacrament But Matrimonie is such by Protestants of England Therefore by them to bee esteemed a Sacrament The Maior is manifestly true in it self And the Minor in those §. ô God §. all yee which words and more expressely to proue it a Sacrament sett downe in that their publicke directorie in the places here cited And had not the licentious wantonnes of these men soe much for their ownc lasciuiousnes mayntayninge Marriadge and accomptinge it an holy state in those of the cleargie in whom the holy Fathers before name it incest sacriledge and matter of excommunication disliked of the inseperabilitie betweene man and wife which beeing graunted for a Sacrament it bringeth with it they would neuer haue denyed vnto it that dignitie and denomination To which soe often and many pluralities of wiues in their ministry it self and some Protestant Bishops amonge them vntill a little restraint was ordayned by his Maiestie in parlament are more then The Sacrament of Extreame vnction Iacob 5. v. 14. 15. sufficient testimonie in this case That Extreame-Vnction is a Sacrament by their Articles and S. Iames his doctryne in his epistle â—eceaued by them for canonicall is more then manifest And soe manifest that except credible Protestant Testimonies deceaue mee greater Protestant Authoritie hath soe graunted then these their Doctors may contradict In which I will bee silent and onely add in this place that their Communion Booke it self and their common doctrine conteyned in their Catechisme there set downe to bee beleeued of all sufficiently insinuate that either there be seuen Sacraments as Catholicks beleeue or at the leaste more then two accordinge to their Article doctrine before For in proceedinge dialoguewise by question and answeare their words be these Question How CommunioÌ„ Booke Tit. Catechisme many Sacraments hath Christ ordeyned in his Church Answeare two onely as generally necessary to saluation that is to say Baptisme and the supper of the Lorde Where the words generally and necessary to saluation do emply that there be others not generally to be receaued of all as Matrimony is peculiar to the marryed Orders to cleargie men c. neyther are these absolute necessary to saluation otherwise the vnmaryed and virgyns could not bee saued all women which are vncapable of preisthood should be damned and none but cleargie men saued c. And these Protestants doe not holde that those words generally necessary to saluation are essentiall to the definition of a Sacrament which they define in the next words followeinge in this maner By this word Sacrament I meane an Catechis supr outward and visible signe of an Inward and spirituall grace giuen vnto vs ordeyned by Christ himself as a meanes whereby wee receaue the same and a pledge to assure vs thereof Which aswell proueth the Catholick doctryne that Sacraments giue grace of which hereafter as also that which I haue vrged in this place CHAPTER XX. PROVING BY THESE PROtestants the Catholicke doctrine of an Indeleble Character in the Sacraments of Baptisme Confirmation and Orders CONCERNING the Catholicke doctrine of the Church of Rome teaching a spirituall Character to bee impressed in some of these Sacraments and hitherto denyed by Protestants The Councell of Trent hath thus defined In three Sacraments Baptisme Confirmation CoÌ„cil TrideÌ„t Sess 7. cap. 4. and Orders a Character is
impressed in the soule that is a certaine spirituall and indeleble signe that they may not bee iterated For proofe of which doctrine by English Protestants I argue in this Maner That doctrine which is taught by the Greeke Church neither hereticall nor Scismatical but orthodoxe by these Protestants ot by a generall Councell whose decree and sentence bindeth all is to bee allowed by them much more if both those their Rules so confirme it But the doctrine of this Indeleble character in the Sacraments of Baptisme Confirmation and Orders is taught and approued both by the Greeke Church and a generall Councell that of Florence for such allowed by them before Therefore it ought to bee embraced by them The Maior is euidently true by their graunt before And the Minor thus proued First the Greeke Church by Hieremias their Patriarke in their Censure Hierem. in censur cap. 11. vppon Protestants in the eleuenth chapter hath so censured And the generall Councel of Florence with the assert of the same Greeke Church Armenians Iacobines and all Christendome hath defined it in these words Inter haec Sacramenta tria sunt Baptismus Cōcil Flor. in vnion Arm. Confirmatio Ordo quae Characterem i. spirituale quoddam signum à caeteris distinctum imprimunt in anima indelebile c. Among these Sacraments there are three Baptisme Confirmation and Order which impresse in the soule a Character that is a certaine spirituall signe distinct from others indeleble wherevppon they are not Iterated in the same parson but the other fowre do not Impresse a Character and admitt Iteration To bee breife I argue thus once for all That doctrine which is generally maintained not onely by all professors of it but also acknowledged and defended by them that bee esteemed learned among the enemies thereof and professe the same Religion with them is true But this doctrine of a Character is such Therefore it is true The Maior is euidently apparēt for no more then frends and Aduersaries learned can consent to any truth The Minor is thus proued by these Protestant Doctors following Ioyning in Religion with them that impugne and persecute the Church of Rome First D. Feild Feild l. 1. cap. 15. acknowledgeth a Character in Baptisme and to remayne euen in the excommunicate And so indeleble D. Couell affirmeth the same of Baptisme and Orders and seemeth to insinuate it of Confirmation Hee writeth of it in these words It is not amisse both termed a kind of Marke Couell def of Hook pa. 87. 88. 91. or character And confesseth it to bee Indeleble And for Orders hee addeth thus For ministeriall power is a worke of seperation because it seuereth them that haue it from other men maketh them a speciall order consecrated vnto the seruice of the moste highe in things wherewith others may not meddle I call it indeleble because they which haue once receiued this power may not thinke to putt it of and on like a cloake as the wether serueth And againe in this maner Where there is a chaunge of estate with an Sup. pag. 91 Impossibilitie to returne there wee haue reason to account an Indeleble Character to bee imprinted This saith the Church of Rome is in Baptisme Confirmation and Order This forme figure or Character is called Indeleble because that is not to bee reiterated as Protestants confesse of Baptisme Confirmation and Orders from whence it cometh The Character of Order is an actiue power as the schoolemen speake which giueth an Abilitie publickly to administer the Sacraments vnto those whome the Church hath esteemed fitt The Character of Baptisme is a passiue power which maketh men fitt to receaue the rest And from hence not onely is proued in as playne words as any schooleman or other Catholicke can speake the Catholicke opinion of a Character but also that Orders and others besides them allowed for Sacraments are to bee so esteemed as his last wordes the rest insinuate And this sufficeth of this Question CHAPTER XXI PROVING BY THESE PROTEstants that the Sacraments of the Ghospell giue grace and as the schooles speake ex opere operato by the vvorke vvrought CONCERNING the validitie and grace of Sacraments The Councell of Trent defineth thus If any Cōcil Trid. Sess 7. man shall say that the Sacraments of the new lawe do not giue grace by the worke wrought opere operato but that onely faith of the promise of God sufficeth to obtaine grace lett him bee Anathema And to demonstrate that the present Protestants of England are or by their owne writings ought to bee of the same opinion thus I argue Whatsoeuer Catholicke doctrine of the Romane Church is confirmed both by the publicke proceedings and priuate writings of the Protestants of England ought to bee allowed and embraced by them But the doctrine of the Romane Church concerning the efficacie of Sacraments that they cause grace in the worthie and duely disposed Receauers of them and that ex opere operato as the Councell before and our schooles speake is such Therefore it ought to bee allowed and embraced by them for true The Maior is euidently true and cannot bee denied for no man may or can hold against his owne opinion or that publicke Rule and Authoritie to which hee hath subscribed and submitted himself in Religion The second proposition is thus proued and first by that cheefe Rule their booke of Articles Booke of Articl of Relig. art 25. to which they haue all subscribed where it is thus defined in their Religion Sacraments ordeyned of Christ are effectuall signes of grace and Gods good will towards vs by the which hee doth worke inuisibly in vs. And againe in their newly reformed communion booke in these words By this words Sacrament I meane an Comm. Booke refor titul Catechis outward and visible signe of an inward and spirituall grace giuen vnto vs ordeyned by Christ himself as a meanes whereby wee receaue the same Therefore beeing graunted by the greatest Rules of Religion which English Protestants haue that Sacraments bee effectuall of grace and Gods fauour giuing grace and meanes whereby wee receaue grace And all English Protestants Ministers haue subscribed to these doctrines in those bookes They must needs graunt that Sacraments bee causes of grace for among causes the efficient and effectuall is not onely a cause but of extrinsecall causes by many degrees the cheifest And beeing allowed for such Instruments and meanes by which God worketh inuisibly in vs and giueth grace and wee so receaue grace as their words bee They must needs bee true instrumental causes of grace and such worke in vs. And their same practicall Rule of their Religion the Communion booke hath the same doctrine concerning Baptisme and consequently of all others proued by them to bee Sacraments one and the same reason beeing of all for in the Treatise of Baptisme thus it prescribeth the Minister to speake vnto God By the Baptisme of Comm. Booke Titul publick
will not haue any such canon or constitution his friuolous distinction in the Nicene Councell then lately ended then they must needs be of more auntient and vncontroleable antiquitie and authoritie by his owne censure and S. Ciprians Councell and decree against this highest power of no validitie if hee could bringe forth any such decree or Councell which hee doth not but onely alledgeth these words of S. Ciprian to Pope Cornelius statutum est omnibus nobis Which hee thus translated S. Ciprian directly ordeyned in a Councell Which Ciprian ep 55. ad Cornel. Morton App. lib. 2. pag. 296. S. Ciprian neither had done nor could doe to bynde S. Cornelius and the Church of Rome with all others For by D. Mortons owne Argument if Pope and S. Cornelius Pope and Saint Stephen with others Bishops of the Mother and commaunding Churche of Rome then by his Maiestie a Rule vnto all might not be a Rule and commaunder ouer the African Church much lesse could the Church of Africke subiect Ruled and dependinge make statutes and decrees to rule and commaund this Rule and commaunder of all And Mr Morton might haue concluded the contrary of his translation for the Church of Rome if hee had considered that S. Ciprians words be not Statutum sit ab omnibus nobis it is decreed of or by vs all â—â—t statutum sit omnibus nobis a decree is made for vs all Because S. Fabian Pope of Rome and predicessor to S. Cornelius had made such a â—abian â—â—ist 3. â—â—m 1. conc decree to bynde all as S. Ciprian spake of Ibi causa agatur vbi crimen admittitur lett the cause be hard there where the fault is committed Yet in the same place Appeales to Rome ar excepted in these words Wee forbid forreyne Iudgments by a generall decree reserued allwayes the Apostolicke authoritie And againe It pleaseth alsoe that if a Bishop accused hath appealed to the See Apostolicke that shall be decreed which the high Bishop of that See giueth sentence of All which as alsoe that whole epistle of S. Ciprian to S. Cornelius then Pope of Rome neuer denyeing appeales thither but excuseinge and defendeing and purgeing himself and other Bishops of Africke accused by Appellants at Rome as they had likewise done priori anno the yeare before sufficiently Ciprian ep 55. supr confirme the vndeniable supreame authoritie of that Church Which S. Ciprian there proueth to be of Infallible Iudgment and vndeceaueable by any Appellants or others in matters of Religion and so to be appealed vnto and supreame His words in the same epistle and concerning the same Appellants ar these Nauigare audent ad Petri cathedram They dare to saile euen to the chayre of Peter and to the principall Church from whence preistly vnitie is risen and cary thither letters from Scismaticks and wicked men nor to thinke that they be Romans whose faith by the Apostle preachinge is praised to whome false beleefe cannot haue accesse Hitherto the very wordes of S. Ciprian in that place and epistle which D. Morton alleadgeth against the Romane supreamacie by which is euident that S. Ciprian neither did nor could by his doctrine deny appeales to that Church which as hee writeth could not be deceaued with Hereticks nor false beleefe could haue accesse vnto it which could be for no other cause but for the Infallible Iudgment thereof and that God did assist it in truthe as other Protestants ar wittnesses before And D. Morton haueing first written Morton app pag. 296. in this order The Title of vniuersall Bishop of the Church hath beene long vsed of the Pope of Rome is as mutch to blame to speake thus S. Ciprian saith none of vs is called the Bishop of Bishops which not S. Ciprian onely but the whole Councell of Carthadge vnder Ciprian did professe furthermore callinge it a terror tyrannicall for any one Bishop to impose vppon his fellowe Bishops a necessitie of obedience For first D. Morton cannot but knowe that this Councell of Africke defendeinge Rebaptization was iustly condemned by the then Popes of Rome and recanted by the African Bishops present at it as is proued before Secondly D. Morton will be a Presbyterian if hee maketh equalitie in the cleargie and denyeth Archbishops primates and Patriarkes as his citation without better glosse implyeth Thirdly hee doth abuse his Readers to wish them to beleeue that S. Ciprian and the African Bishops decreed any thing against the clayme of S. Stephen then Bishop of Rome his predecessors and successors to be Bishop of Bishops Mort. sup pag. 296. in a right sence as hee there citeth from Binias for so against his owne words and citation they had called their owne decree a terror tyrannicall for any one Bishop to impose vppon his fellowe Bishops a necessitie of obedience For D. Morton dareth not to deny but S. Stephen and other Popes of Rome were at the leaste fellowe Bishops with those of Africke But S. Ciprian and those Bishops decreed no such thinge for D. Morton may so in that Councell that the sentence of S. Ciprian is the laste of all and after all the other Bishops and onely to condemne Baptisme by Hereticks after recanted and condemned And the words which hee cited against Bishop of Bishops ar in S. Ciprians Carthagin concil sub Cyprian to 1. concil init exhortation not decree to the Bishops of Africke begynninge Audistis Collegae Dilectissimi you haue hard ô moste beloued fellowes nothing concerning except affirminge or confirminge that clayme and Title in Pope Stephen an holy Saint and Martyr but alltogether about rebaptization and are these Superest vt de hacre quid singuli sentiamus proferamus Yt remayneth that euery of vs speaketh of this matter what hee thinketh Iudginge no man or remoueing any man from the Right of communion if hee shall thinke otherwise for none of vs there assembled constituted himself Bishop of Bishops Which seing S. Stephen an holy Pope and Martyr with others of that sacred See then a Rule to all by Protestants and D. Morton did by them also it must be yeelded to be iust and lawfull Neither must D. Morton be so hyperpapall as to deny the Councell of Sardyce where appeales to Rome ar warranted to be generall for his Masters the makers of their greate Theater haue so allowed and receaued it before Nor slander S. Cyprian by perswadeing the worlde that hee dyed out of the vnitie of the Church of Rome for recallinge of which his greate rashnes I referre him to better Authorities of S. Augustine S. Ierome Augustin ep 48. Hieron dialog cont Luciferian and the like And this sufficeth of this question By which the vniuersitie of Cambridg may easely resolue themselues by their owne Doctors of the second proposition offered vnto them by the Preists of Wisbich There is an externall Iudge in matters of faith whoe it is and of what authoritie his definitiue sentence is in such things
CHAPTER IIII. WHEREIN BY THESE Protestants is proued that all Bookes of scripture receaued for such by the Church of Rome ar canonicall That the Protestants also haue either no scriptures at all or vncertaine and doubtfull and no true Canon of them THvs haueinge demonstratiuely proued by these our English Protestants that the true Church of Christ is of that byndeinge and commaunding authoritie power and priuiledge That There is no saluation remission of synnes or Hope of eternall life out of the Churche it is the blessed companie of holy ones household of faith spouse of Christ piller and grawnd of truthe her communion is to be embraced directions followed Iudgment rested in to ouerrule all Inferior Iudgment whatsoeuer c. And that bothe the present Churche of Rome is this so excellent and enfraunchised societie and the Pope and Bishop thereof supreame heade and spirituall gouernor ouer the whole Christian worlde all other Questions against these ProtestaÌ„ts ar all readie determined by them for the Church and Pope of Rome So that nothing is further needfull to be disputed in this busines eyther of scriptures or any other matter in controuersy yet for particular satisfaction to all in all particulars I will proceede and first for the Bookes of holy scriptures and argue these first in generall Whatsoeuer Bookes ar proposed vnto vs by the true Church of Christ and the supreame Gouernor thereof to be canonicall scripture ar for such to be embraced and reuerenced But all Bookes allowed for canonicall by the Church of Rome at this present be such Therefore so to be embraced and reuerenced The Maior proposition is euident before by the priuiledges of the true Church recited in generall and not onely so but in particular also concerninge the authoritie of the true Church in approueinge and proposeinge holy scriptures for Mr. Wotton hath thus testified for Wotton â—ef of Perk pag. 442. Protestants The Iugdment of the Church wee are so far from discreditinge that wee Holde it for a very speciall grownde in this matter of scriptures And D. Couell hath these conuinceing Couell against Burg. pag. 60. words The Church of Christ accordeing to her authoritie receaued from him hath warrant to approue the scriptures to acknowledge to receaue to publish and commaunde vnto her children And to make it euident that this priuiledge by these Protestants cannot be attributed or ascribed to any other Church then the Church of Rome they haue before confessed that neuer any other Church but that onely exceptinge the Church of Constantinople pretended Title much lesse enioyed it to this supreamacie to propownde scriptures or make decrees and lawes to the whole Church and the children thereof and the clayme thereof in that behalf was but pretended and vsurped and now is by their desolation left desolate And to make this the next argument and others more cleare I will in this place recite the words of D. Feild wherein to omitt the Holy scriptures because they in no place tell vs which be or be not canonicall scriptures But wee ar as these Protestants before haue told vs and shall more particularely testifie Hereafter in this chapter to receaue them from the Church of Christ That wee may knowe whome moste to trust and obey in this and such matters of controuersy hee writeth thus haueing spoken of the Church before Hither Feild pag. 202. l. 4. c. 5. wee may referre those different degrees of obedience which wee must yeeld to them that commaunde and teache vs in the Church of God excellently described and sett downe by Waldensis Wee Waldens doct Fidei l. 2. art 2. 3. p. 27. must saith hee reuerence and respect the authoritie of all Catholicke Doctors whose doctrynes and writeings the Church alloweth wee must more regard the authoritie of Catholicke Bishops more then these the authoritie of the Apostolicke Churches amongst them more especially the Church of Rome of a generall Councell more then all these Hitherto D. Feilds allowance that this sentence is excellent Therefore soeinge Protestants neuer had nor can haue as they haue testified before any generall Councell and deny all Councells to be generall which Catholikes alledge for this Question of the Bookes of scriptures and others also They ar bownde to be obedient to that sentence next vnto them which D. Feild here hath told vs to be the Iudgment of the Church of Rome or Pope of Rome which hath defined and allowed the catholicke doctrine for the Bookes of canonicall scripture as alsoe other questions as all Protestants acknowledge Otherwise they ar in one of highest degrees of disobedience that is in this world as his words before are wittnesse For hee alloweth it for an excellent direction for this present time and state of controuersies And yett if he would contend which hee neither doth nor can being allowed for this present time to drawe it to the dayes of Thomas Waldensis disputing against Witcliffe their Brother in Religion as they write and resisting the Popes authoritie it maketh nothing for his excuse for if Witcliffe as they say was of their Religion the case betweene Waldensis and him was the same which now is with my self and other Catholicks writinge against these Protestants Brethren and Associates in Religion vnto Wickliffe and his Adherents This supposed I make the like Argument againe in this maner Whatsoeuer bookes ar proposed for canonicall scripture by the true Church ar the highest Rule that can be had or fownde in time of controueâ—sie ar to be receaued for holy scriptures But all those Bookes which the present Romane Church alloweth ar so proposed Therefore to be receaued for holy scriptures The Maior proposition is euidently true otherwise all Christians in such times must needs be perplexed in the cheifest matter of Religion by Protestants the scriptures themselues which cannot be for so contradictories might bothe be true The highest Rule ought to be followed the highest Rule ought not to be followed Which be contradictorie It ought to be followed because it is our Rule and the best that can be assigned it ought not to be followed because it is false and deceatefull And no man can be so bownde vnder damnation to followe a false Rule And concerninge the authoritie of the Church in this case it is further confirmed by these Protestant sentences D. Couells words be Couell def of Hook pag. 31. these The Church of Rome teacheth no badd opinion to affirme that the scriptures are holy and diuine in themselues but so esteemed by vs for the authoritie of the Churche And againe That the scriptures ar true wee haue it from the Church And further thus The Church hath fowre Couell sup pag. 32. 33. singular offices towards the scripture First to be of them as it were a faithefull Register Secondly to discerne and Iudge betweene false and adulterate and that which is true and perfect The third to publish and diuulge to proclayme as a cryer the true edict