Church as farre as it hath that which belongeth to the definition of a Church is a Church that it hath not giuen vp the ghost that it hath all diuine things Not yet dead and of Gods part is yet the Church Zanchius in the preface of his booke of the nature of God Satan euen in the very Roman Church could not bring all things to that passe that it should no more haue tâ—e forme of a Christian Church And soone after VVherefore the Roman Church is yet the Church of Christ Yet the Church of Christ Pâ—essy in his booke of the Church 2. chap. auoucheth that the Roman Church is the Spouse of Christ Spouse of Christ is not yet forsaken of him that as a Mother she beareth children to God which he repeateth againe in the 10. chap. that she retaineth life and that the name of the Church ought no more to be denied to her then the name of a man vnto a liuing man Bucan in his 41. place of the Church quest 5 The assemblies of Papists are Churches as a man infected with leprosy or besides his wittes doth not leaue to be a man Polanus in his first part and Thesis of the Church The Roman Church truly is a Church because Antichrist sitteth in the Church And in his Syntagme of diuinity lib. 7. c. 8 The present Roman Church is yet the Church of Christ Serauia in his defence of the degrees of ministers pag. 30 The Roman Church is a Church and mark what I say more she is our mother in whome and by whom God did regenerate vs. And pag. 31 The couenant of God remayneth this day in the Latin Church Boysseul in his confutation of Spondé pag. 6 I exclude not the Roman Church out of the vniuersall Church I acknowledge her to be yet in the couenant of God which he repeateth oftentymes And pag. 12 The Roman Church is the Church of God Pag. 19 It is a member of the vniuersall Church p. 283 It is yet the Church Spouse and temple of God Yet the Church Spouse temple of God And pag. 822 VVe deny not that the Roman Church is the Church of Iesus Christ redeemed by him Vorstius in his Anti-bellarmin p. 188 The vulgar Roman church hath not yet lost all spirituall life is not yet openly deuorced from Christ And Peter Martyr in his epistle to Bullinger writeth Yet aliue that he gaue counsaile that the Papists they should not call one the other Heretiks but account themselues for brethren As for English Protestants Engli h ProtestaÌ„ts his Maiesty in his speach to the Parlament anno 1605. 9. of Nouember and put forth in print speaketh thus VVe do iustly confesse that many Papists especially our forefathers laying their only trust vpon Christ and his merits may be and oftentymes are saued detesting in that point and thinking the cruelty of Puritans worthy of fire Papists may be saued that will admit no saluation to any Papist And in his epistle to Cardinall Peron The Roman the Greek c. Churches are members of the Catholike Church Members of the Catholike Church And D. Andrews in his Tortura Torti towards the end speaketh thus to the Papists VVe are content to call you members of the Catholike Church though not sound members Hooker in his 3. book of Ecclesiasticall policy pag. 128 VVe gladly acknowledge them to be of the family of Iesus Christ Of the family of Christ And lib. 5. pag. 188 They should acknowledge so much neuertheles still due to the same Church of Rome as to be held and reputed a part of the house of God a limme of the visible Church of Christ D. Couel in his defence of Hooker pag. 68. May be saued Note sayth VVe affirme them of the Church of Rome to be parts of the Church of Christ and that those that liue and dye in that Church may notwithstanding be saued D. Barlow in his 3. sermon ad Clerum The learneder writers do acknowledge the Church of Rome to be the Church of God M. Bunny in his treatise of Pacification sect 18 Neither of vs Papists Protestants may iustly account the other to be none of the Church of God VVe are no seuerall Church from them nor they from vs. D. Some against Penry in diuers places auouceth That Papists are not altogeather aliens from Gods couenant That in the iudgement of all learned men and all reformed Churches there is in Popery a Church a Ministery a true Christ If you think that all the Popish sect which dyed in the Popish Church are damned you think absurdly and dissent from the iudgement of the learned Protestants D. Whitaker in his fourth controuersy quest 5. cap. 3. calleth the Papists Church the temple of God more then halfe dead and almost decayed And that temple wherein the Apostle sayth that Antichrist shall sit and which he affirmeth to be the Roman Church he termeth the very Church of God the true Church of God the society of the faythfull the liuely temple composed of liuely stones such as are the faythfull the elect And he addeth There is among them Papists some Ministery and some preaching of the word which doubtlesse affordeth saluation vnto some And as the giftes of God are without repentance so the couenant which God made with Christian people is not quite broken And cont 2. quest 5. Gods couenant with Papists cap. 15. after he had confessed that Luther had sayd that in Popery are all the goods belonging to Christians the keyes the office of preaching true Christianity and the very kernell of Christianity he addeth These things are indeed among them M. Powell in his 2. booke of Antichrist cap. 2. graunteth the Roman Church to be the true Church albeit with a new kind of distinction he deny the Popish church And D. Rainolds in his 5. Thesis albeit he say that the Roman Church be more then sickly and weak yet he dares not say that she is quite dead And D. White in his way p. 352. sayth That Popery in as much as it differeth from vs is not to be imagined by vs to be another Church distinct in place and countries from the true Church of Christ but we affirme it to be a contagion raging in the midst of the Church of Christ it selfe And in his defence c. 37. pag. 355 I neuer denied the Church of Rome to be the visible Church of God wherein our auncestors professed the truth and were saued And cap. 41. pag. 408 Professing the Church of Rome it selfe in all ages to haue byn the visible Church of God Lastly D. Hall in his Rome Irreconciliable sect 1. sayth that the Roman Church is a true visible Church but not sound and that it differeth from the Protestant Church At the sick from the whole Heereto I adde that oftentymes they call the Roman Church their Mother which hath borne them to Christ as we shall rehearse hereafter
1 We say that the Church cannot erre in things simply necessary Which he often repeateth in the 2. cap. And quest 5. cap. 17 If any fundamentall doctrine be taken away the Church straight way falleth And cap. 18 The fundamentall articles are those on which our fayth relyeth as the house vpon the foundation Againe If any fundamentall and essentiall principle of fayth be ouerturned or shaken it cannot be truly called a Church And quest 6. cap. 3 That is no true Church which taketh away one only foundation The same he teacheth in his 1. booke of the scripture cap. 7. sect 8. and cap. 12. sect 3. M. Perkins in his explication of the Creed If any man or Church retaine or defend obstinatly or of willfull ignorance a fundamentall errour we must not account them anymore Christians or Churches D. Sutliue in his first booke of the Church cap. 1 Those blemishes take away the name of the true Church which are against the grounds of fayth D. Feild in his 2. booke of the Church cap. 3 Purity free from fundamentall and essentiall errour is necessarily required in the Church D. Morton in the 1. part o◠his Apology booke 2. cap 38 Purity of doctrine in fundamentall principles of fayth is required to the being and constitution of the Church And in his answere to the Protestants Apology l. 4. c. 3. Sect. 5 The deniall of fundamentall doctrines doth exclude men from saluation and disannulleth the name of the Church in the gainsayers D. White in his way to the Church pag. 110 VVe do not thinke euery company to be the true Church that holdeth only some points of the true fayth but it is requisite that the foundation be holden And in his defence of the way cap. 17 A fundamentall point is that which belongs to the substance of fayth and is so necessary that there can be no saluation without the knowledge and explicite fayth thereof And surely they all and at all tymes ought to affirme this seeing they deliuer truth of doctrine as an essentiall marke of the Church which they must needs vnderstand and so Vorstius in his Anti-bellarmin pag. 148. expresseth it of true doctrine in fundamentall points And this their doctrine touching this matter I earnestly commend to the memory of the Reader because it is necessary to find out what a Protestant is and also is one of the grounds whereby it may appeare that there was no Protestant Church before Luther because before him there was no company which held all the same fundamentall points of doctrine which Protestants do hold 6. Finally They exclude all that deny any article of fayth they sometyms shut out of their Church all those who deny any one point of fayth be it fundamentall or other For thus writeth the Apology of the Confession of Auspurge The Church of Christ is not among them who defend naughty opinions contrary to the Ghospell And Luther in his epistle to Count Albert It is not inough if in other things he confesse Christ and his Ghospell For who denieth Christ in one article or word denieth him who is denied in all because there is but one Christ Lutherās the same in all his words And vpon the 17. cap. of Deuteronomy Faith suffereth nothing and the word tolerateth nothing but the word must be perfectly pure and the doctrine alwayes sound throughout And vpon the 17. cap. of S. Matthew Fayth must be round that is belieuing all articles though small ones For who belieueth not one article rightly belieueth nothing righly as Iames sayth VVho offendeth in one is guilty of all and so who in one article doubteth or belieueth not at least obstinatly dissolueth the roundnes of the graine and so can do no good And vpon the 5. cap. to the Galathians In diuinity a small errour ouerthroweth all the doctrine Doctrine is like to a Mathematicall point it cannot be deuided that is it cannot suffer either addition or detraction And when Zuinglius and his followers desired of the Lutherans to be esteemed as their brethren Melancthon as Hospinian reporteth in his Sacramentarian history fol. 81. roughly sayd vnto them VVe meruaile with what conscience they can account vs for brethren whome they iudge to erre in doctrine And againe fol. 82. Luther grauely spake vnto them saying he greatly merueiled how they could hold him for a brother if they thought his doctrine to be vntrue And the same Melancthon togeather with Brentius writeth thus to the Lantgraue Perhaps Christians who are entangled in some errour which they do not obstinatly defend may be tolerated as brethren but they which not only bring false doctrine into the Church but also maintaine it are not to be acknowledged for brethren And againe Melancthon in his examen of those who are to take orders tom 3. There are in that company of the Church many who are not Saints but yet agreeing in doctrine The Deuines of Wittemberg in their refutation of the orthodoxall consent pag. 73 Like as he who keepeth the whole law and offendeth in one as Iames the Apostle witnesseth is guilty of all so who belieueth not one word of Christ albeit he seeme to beliue the other articles of the Creed yet belieueth nothing and is to be damned as incredulous For euery heretike did not impugne euery article of fayth but commonly each of them of purpose impugned some one or other whome neuertheles the Church iustly condemned as heretikes if they pertinaciously stood in their errours Schusselburg also in his 3. tom of the Catalogue of Heretiks pag. 85. Christian fayth is one copulatiue and who denieth one article of fayth calleth in doubt the whole body of the heauenly doctrine Which he repeateth againe in the next pag. And tome 8. pag. 361 The Lutherans do fly him who depraueth the doctrine of truth in any article whatsoeuer And in his 2. booke of Caluinisticall diuinity article 1 VVe are certaine by the testimony of Gods word that an errour in one false doctrine obstinatly defended maketh an heretike For S. Chrysostome vpon the epistle to the Galathians sayd most truly that he corrupteth the whole doctrine who ouerthroweth it in the least article And Ambrose wrote rightly to the Virgin Demetrias That he is out of the number of the faythfull and hath no part in the inheritance of Saints who disagreeth in any thing from the Catholike truth Sacramētaries Thus the Lutherans Peter Martyr in his epistle to the straungers in England tom 2. loc col 136 VVe answere all the words of God as farre forth as they proceeded from him are of equall waight and authority and therefore none may receiue this and reiect that as false Iames sayth boldly who sinneth in one becommeth guilty of all That if it haue place in keeping of the commandements is also true in points of fayth Sadeel in his index of Turriās Repetitions pag. 806 I sayd that it was no true Church which teacheth doctrine repugnant to the
sooner giue him interest in the couenant then the child that is descended of him For how can the fathers beliefe lay hold on the promises and couenant of God for his children and cannot do it for himselfe 6. These allegations demonstrate The suÌ„mâ— of Protestants ConfessioÌ„ touching Papists that by the Confession of the Protestants the starkest Papists such as are of beliefe that the masse the Popes primacy and all things else of his are good vpright and of God are soldiers vnder Christ may attaine to saluation may be Saints yea that there are among them both many and great Saints That there is in the Church of Rome what so is necessary to saluation the summe of fayth the ground-works the essentiall ground-works the principall grounds of fayth the cheife articles the fundamentall heads the necessary heads the cheife parts the Ghospell of saluation the kernell of Christianity and all Christian good Lastly that the Church of Rome Is a limme and member of the vniuersall Church of the Catholike Church a member of the true Church and is of the family of Iesus Christ that it is mother to the children of God that it is the Church of God the temple of God the body of Christ the Spouse of Christ that it abides yet in the couenant is not yet cast of or put away is not yet killed but is yet aliue Which words plainly import that the Roman or Popish Church is a true Church in the sight of God 7. But is it credible Note that such as make profession of Christian religion should mount to that height of impiety as dare to reiect diuorce themselues from that Church which they confesse remaynes yet in the couenant of God which Christ hath not yet reiected Is it credible that they feare not to impugne to make bitter inuectiues to disgorge curses and execrations against her whom they acknowledge to be their Mother which bore them to Christ to be the Church of God to be the body and Espouse of Christ What can be more lewd and impious then to rage and raile against their owne mother against the Church of God against the very body and Espouse of Christ What strang and monstrous blindnes is it not to perceiue that whiles they confesse the church of Rome to be the church of God Espouse of Christ they acknowledge their owne to be the Synagogue of Antichrist and strumpet of the Diuell For Christ cannot haue two Espouses repugnant each to other Now the Protestant church and church of Rome are parts so opposite as can neuer make one For they iarre and disagree mainely in diuers weighty points as namely touching the canon and exposition of the Scripture touching sacrifice and the Sacraments touching the worship of God his Saints touching the meanes to obtaine remission of sinnes and many the like Whereupon Beza in Confes cap. 7. pag. 56 VVe dissent sayth he from the Papist about they very summe of saluatioÌ„ And others say no lesse as shall be shewed hereafter in the 2. booke and 6. cap If ours be true Religion sayth S. Augustin to the Donatists which yet came nearer to Catholiks then Protestants do yours is superstition Lib. 2. coÌ„t Gaud. c. 11. Againe If our communion be the Church of Christ yours is not Christs Church Lib. 1. de Bapt. c. 11. for that is but one which so euer it be And in another place VVhen they approue that Church which as is manifest we communicate with all and they do not by that their testimony they acknowledge themsâ—lues conuinced Lib. ad Donat post codat and giue you plaine notice if you be wise what you ought to forgoe and what it behoues you to cleaue to and retaine And S. Cyprian epistle 76 If the Church were on Nouatus side it was not with Cornelius Num. 4. 8. The Protestants now and then perceiue as much when they acertaine vs as hath byn shewed in the first chapter that who so seuereth himselfe from any particuler congregation which is a true Church excludes himselfe wholy from the church Caluin saw it when 4. Insti c. 2. § 10. he wrote thus VVe cannot graunt them Papists that they are the church but the necessity of subiectioÌ„ obedieÌ„ce will befall vs. If they be churches the power of the keyes is in their possession If they be churches that promise of Christ VVhatsoeuer ye bind on earth shall be bouÌ„d in heauen takes effect in them M. Perkins perceiued it to when in his explicatioÌ„ of the Creed col 794. he sayd Zanchiuâ— lib. 1. de Eâ—cl c. 7. As long as any church forsakes not Christ we may not withdraw our selues from it The reason is apparant because in so doing we should depart from Christ or Christ shold be parted euen as we are rent and disioynted from the church wherein he is And in his Reformed Catholike tract 22. col 470. Whâ—re he sayth VVe ought not to deuide our selues from any nation or people which hath not before cut it selfe of from Christ D. Feild likewise saw it in his 3. booke of the Church c. 47. Where he makes this acknowledgement Surely if he can proue that we confesse it the Church of Rome to be the true Church he needeth not vse any other argument But we haue clearely prooued it by sundry plaine confessions of many famous Protestants And hitherto we haue discouered how they sometyme harbour and receiue Papists into their church now we will shew that they vse the like curtesy towards the rest CHAP. III. That Protestants acknowledge for members of their Church sometyme those that deny as well fundamentall as other articles of their fayth sometymes Heretiks Schismatiks yea their profest and sworne enemies THAT they esteeme all such to be members of their Church as swarue from the Christian fayth only in points not fundamentall themselues in the preface of the Switzers Confession declare in these words Mutuall consent and agreement in the principall points of doctrine in orthodoxe sense and brotherly charity was of religious antiquity thought abundantly sufficient And D. Whitaker cont 4. quest 1. c. 2. pag. 527 God forbid that they should be no longer of the number of the faythfull who are in some points of a contrary opinion so they assent in the cheife and principall and necessary matters And for as much as the Protestants opinion herein is well knowne for whâ—Ì„ it is obiected vnto them that their churches disagree in points of fayth this serues them for excuse I think it needlesse to alleage any more of their sayings He that will may looke the Confession of Saxony cap. de Eccles Luther tom 7. lib. de not Eccles fol. 149. Melancthon tom 4. in ca. 3. 1. Cor. Kemnitius 1. part Examinis tit de bonis operibus pag. 332. Zuinglius tom 1. in Prefat lib de Prouident Caluin 4. Institut cap. 1. § 12. and cap. 2. § 1. Beza epist 2. Zanchius in prefat lib.
man Sonis Respons ad Spondeum c. 10. pag. 365. Heretiks are within the Church Lubbert lib. 2. de Eccles cap. 3 It is manifest that heretikes are some as yet in the visible Church some also in the church of the elect Iunius lib. 3. de Eccles cap. 4 Heretiks absolutely are of the Church vnlesse they be such as ouerthrow fundamentall articles of religion Cap. 3 n. â—â— Bullinger teacheth the same Decad. 2. serm 8. and it is the common doctrine of the Protestants who as is before proued exclude none from being members of their Church that deny only such articles as are not fundameÌ„tall Howbeit some of them vpon hereticall priuiledge as Tertullian speaketh will not haue such called heretiks Lib. de carne Coâ—isti cap. â—5 being indeed more ashamed of the name then of the thing it selfe Zanchius likewise lib. 1. epist ad Dudit pag. 150. sayth that hereticall and Schismaticall sects are within the Church Tilenus in Syntag. disput 14 Heretiks euen those that subuert the foundation and Schismatiks in regard of outward Communion are in the Church till either of themselues they go to the enemies side or are cast out by the lawfull iudgement of the Church And D. Feild in his first booke of the Church cap 14 Seing God gaue the power of the keyes and the dispensation of his word and Sacraments only to his Church if Heretiks be not of the Church they do not then baptize And cap. 7 They that are partakers of the heauenly calling and sanctified by the profession of diuine truth and the vse of the meanes of saluation are of very diuers sortes as heretikes Schismatiks hypocrites and those that professe the whole sauing truth in vnity and sincerity of a good and sanctified heart All these are partakers of the heauenly calling and sanctified by the profession of truth and consequently are all in some degree and sort of that society of men whome God calleth out vnto himselfe separateth from Infidels which is rightly named the Church D. Whitaker contr 4. quest 5. c. 3. pag 679 All heretiks are within the Church Hooker in his 3. booke of Ecclesiasticall policy pag. 128 VVe must acknowledge euen heretikes themselues to be though a maymed part yet a part of a visible Church Againe If an Infidell should pursue to death an heretike professing Christianity only for Christian Prosession sake could we deny vnto him the honour of Martyrdome By which words it is plaine that they admit heretiks not only into the visible Church but into the inuisible also or company of the elect and predestinate to saluation And D. Andrews in his answere to Bellarmines Apology cap. 5. pag. 121. denyeth that the words Catholik and Heretike are opposite wherefore vnlesse he will debarre and shut out some Catholiks from the Church he must needs giue admittance to heretiks seing by his owne verdict they may be Catholiks D. White in defence of his way cap. 38. pag. 367 The second sort of the militant Church are hypocrites and vnsound members that are not called effectually but disobey the truth whereof they make profession such are heretiks schismatiks c. Touching their acceptations of Schismatiks besides what hath byn already alleaged D. Feild in his first booke of the Church cap. 13. Writeth thus They challenge Schismatiks The departure of Schismatiks is not such but that notwithstanding their schisme they are and remaine parts of the Church of God Iunius in the place before quoted layeth clayme to those Schismatikes VVho sayth he seuer not themselues from the whole Church but only from a part thereof But D. Mortoâ— in the 1. part of his Apology lib. 1. cap. 2. sayth absolutely without any acception or restraint at all Schismatiks are of the Church And lib. 2. cap. 10. pag. 288 Variances sayth he and schismes do not betoken the false Church And D. Willet in his Synopsis cont 2. quest 3. pag. 104 VVe say that Schismatiks though they hold some false points of doctrine yet if their errours be not fundamentall and if they retaine the purity of doctrine in all points necessary to saluation and the administration of the Sacraments may make a particular Church by themselues These are their acknowledgements touching Heretikes and Schismatikes in generall They acknowledge the Grecians Let vs now descend to particularities and see the courteous admission they giue to some of them by name 8. The Grecians and other Easterne Schismatiks yea heretiks to for the most part find that fauour at their hands as they vouchsafe to account them members of their Church His Maiesty epist ad Card. Peron pa. 13 hath thus The Churches of Rome Greece Antioch Aegipt Aethiopia Muscouy and others more are members of the Catholike church D. Whiâ—e in defence of his way c. 37. pag. 355 The visible churches of Greece Aethiope Armenia and Rome with the nations contayned therin haue in them the true church of God wherin men may be saued D. Morton in his answere to the Protestants Apology lib. 4. cap. 2. sect 7. sayth that the Assyrian Churches keep the true foundation of Christian fayth The same especially of the Grecians teacheth Luther tom 2. lib. de captiu Babylon fol. 65. in Assert art 37. fol. 114. Innius cont 4 lib. 4. cap. 6. Sedeel Respons ad Thes Posnan cap. 12. D. Whitaker lâ—b 7. cont Duraeum sect 3. Bucanus loco 41. quest 5 D. Feild lib. 3. de Eccles cap. 5. 28. D. Fulke de Success pag. 120. Burhill pro Tortura Torti c. 15. and others 9. And sometymes they are not lesse free-harted towards westerne heretike Melancthon in locis à Maulio editiâ—tit de Eccles pag. 491. writeth that two girles who were burnt as he sayth for Anabaptisme They challenge the Anabaptists held the foundation of sayth and died in a good Confâ—ssion And Zuinglius tom 2. lib. de Author sedit fol. 134. seq exhorting his fellowers not to reuolt from his doctrine for the debates and quarels between the Protestants and the Anabaptists calleth both parts most learned and sonnes of the same Father Neither must thou sayth he giue any man way to shake and weakeâ— thy sayth although thou see that men of the greatest learning moue disputes and fall by the cares with much â—agernesse of contention touching externall matters he meanes baptisme but let this be rather thy stedfast persuasion that by the Sonne of God we are all made sonnes of the same Father Againe Neither am I wont to speake these things for that I am so greatly moued with the baptisme of children And ibidem lib. de Baptismo fol. 96. he sayth that baptisme is a matter of ceremony which the church may omit or take quite away Oecolampadius in his 2. booke of epistles p. 363. sayth baptisme is an externall thing which by the law of charity may be dispensed withall And Musculus in locis tit de haeresi pag. 605. reckons the Anabaptists amongst those who
Messias to be that notable Antichrist foretold in Scripture For thus writeth M. Powell lib. de Antichristo cap. 33. pag. 338 I will in no wise say that all the Popes from the tyme wherein Papistry was first reuealed to be Antichristianity are damned Howbeit in the beginning of his booke he makes this protestation I solemnely take God to record that I as certainly know the Bishop of Rome to be that great Antichrist and the Popish church to be the Synagogue of Antichrist as I know God to be in the heauens or Iesus Christ to be the true Messias promised to the Fathers D. Whitaker likewise com 4. q. 5. cap. 3. pag. 694. sayth Let vs cry aloud and swore by him who liues for euer that the Bishop of Rome is Antichrist And to D. Sanders last demonstration that the Pope is not Antichrist pag. 799 VVe may take that most sacred and most true oath and sweare by him who liues for euer that the Bishoppe of Rome is the very Antichrist And neuerthelesse in his answere to the first demonstration he sayth with M. Powell I will not say that from the tyme that Papistry began to be Antichristianity the Popes themselues haue byn all damned And both he cap. cit pâ—g 679. 682. other Protestants ordinarily affirme that Antichrists Sea shal be in the true Church among the company of the saythfull and that he shall be a cittizen and inhabitant and Pastour of the Church To whom I pray will these men deny saluation or a place in their Church who graunt it vnto Antichrist the sworne enemy of Christ whome the scripture it self styleth Christs aduersary the man of sin the sonne of perdition I see not why they should henceforward vpbrayd vs with Antichrist since they themselues clayme him for a member of their Church 6. It is also certaine that they challenge Atheists For Illyricus in Catel lib. 9. col 1916. Dâ— Humfrey respons ad Rat. 3. That they challenge Atheists Camp M. Fox in his Acts printed anno 1596. pag. 646. allot that Atheist Machiauel an honorable roome among the witnesses and maintayners of the truth And Luther apud Manlium in loc tit de Eccl. pag. 483. layth of Valla that he gaue place to none but Epicure himselfe and professed openly that he held opinions repugnant to the foundation of sayth Neuerthelesse the same Luther respons ad Louan Colen tom 2. fol. 38. writeth thus of him Valla in my iudgement was either a remanent sparke or some feâ—â—eli of the primitiue Church whose like in constancy and vnfayned zeale of Christian fayth Italy or the whole Church had not for many ages One Epicure then in Luthers iudgement was the remanent sparke and Iewell of the Church That sometymes Protestants account all those their brethren who vnder the name of Christians oppose themselues any way against the Pope CHAP. V. 1. THAT Protestants sometymes acknowledge all those for members of their Church who vnder the name of Christians do any way oppose themselues against the Pope I proue First because some of them do openly so professe For as Keâ—nice reporteth in locis tit de Eccles pag. 122. Some faine the Church to be a rable of all Sects of Anabaptists Sacramentaries Swineseldians and others so they be not Papists And Capito in Caluin epist 6. Some haue brought in a liberty as if all were of the Ghospells side whosoeuer haue cast of the Popes yoke Musculus also in locis tit de caena pag. 522. sayth I imbrace all for brethren in the Lord howsoeuer they disagree from me or among themselues as long as they mayntaine not the Popish impiety Secondly because they professe that the end of their preaching was to lessen the authority of the Pope For what end Luther and â—is fellowes preached and Bishops and to be contrary to them For thus Luther writeth of himselfe epist ad Frederic Elect. tom 2. fol. 330 The Ecclesiasticall tyranny is now weakned and broaken which only I purposed in writing Or as Slcidan lib. 3. reporteth He writeth that the Ecclesiasticall tyranny is now weakned that that alone was his designe at the first And epist ad Waldenses in Hoâ—pin part 2. fol. 8. he sayth that he impugned transubstantiation only for enny of the Papists And in parâ—â— Confell apud eâ—â—â—dem fol. 13. that he impugned the Eleuation only to spite the Papists Caluin 4. Institut cap. 10. § 1. sayâ—h The end of our contention is to bridle that infinite and barbarous Dominion which those who would be accounted Pastors haue vsurped ouer soules Zuinglius lib. de Auctor Sedit â—om 2. â—ol 125. affirmeth that there is a sort of ProtestaÌ„ts which for no other cause do heare the doctrine of the Ghospell then because they extremely hate the Popedome and enuy Papists their felicity and glory Bucer lib. de regno Christi cap. 4 The greatest part of men seeme to haue sought only these things of the ghospell First that they might shake of the tyranny of the Romane Antichrist and of the false Bishops c. Luther also tom 2. German fol. 22. telleth what was the end of the Sacramentaries Anabaptists I heare sayth he that some imbrace Anabaptisme for this only end that so they may spite the Bishop of Rome euen as the Sacramentaries do only in hatred of the Romish Bishop deny that there is any thing in the sacrament beside bread and wine Of the new Arians end thus writeth Zâ—nchius lib. 1. epist pag. 154 Ouâ— Arians haue determined to ouerturne from the foundation whatsoeuer is in the Church of Rome And what end Illyricus had thus telleth D. Whitaker ad Rat. 8. Campiani Illyricus went further then he should as I think to be the further of from you whome he hated 2. Thirdly because they call the departure from the Pope and Popish doctrine the foundation a good part and the summe of the Protestant building Sâ— dâ—el Respons ad Arthu cap. 12 Protestants agree in this foundation that the Church ought to be reformed out of the word of God and that Popish errours must be remoued out of the Church Seranta epist dedicat ad Episc Angliae It is to be wondered how much almost all the Reformers please themselues in this point that they will haue nothing common with the church of Rome Grotius apud Homium in Specimine c Neither can I forebeare to shew the fountaine and ofspring of this and other calamities VVe think that we are so much the purer the further we go from points of Romish doctrine without any difference Vergerius dial 1. pag. 20 VVe hope that shortly all matters will be composed VVe could do by Gods helpe that which seemed the cheifest of all and the hardest and well nigh impossible that is pull our selues and ridde vs of the Papists tyranny VVherefore nothing is to be doubted but we shall compasse other matters of lesse moment For a good foundation is layd yea a good part
they should be vnderstood rather according to Saint Hieromes meaning then according to their owne most proper most plaine and most frequent words especially when as Luther sayth tom 1. fol. 414 Many thinges are borne withall in the Fathers who were knowne to be orthodoxe which we may not imitate 8. Wherefore out of all which hath byn rehearsed in this chapter I thus frame my second demonstration If so be that before Luther arose there were not one only Protestant in the whole world but that all euery man followed a different Religion Luther was the Author and beginner of the Protestant Church and Religion But that is true as manifestly appeareth by the manyfold and open confessions of Luther and many and most famous Protestants Therefore c. That Protestants confesse their Church and religion to haue byn altogeather inuisible before Luther appeared CHAP. IV. 1. THE fourth demonstration wherewith we will proue Luther to haue byn the Author of the Protestant church and religion we will draw out of that which they confesse of the inuisibility thereof before Luther brake out And by the way I must aduertise the Reader of two things The one is that by the name of the Church is not to be vnderstood only the men who are of the Church but their society in religioÌ„ wherby they make a church wherefore those Protestants speake not to the purpose who to excuse the absurdity of their doctrine touching the inuisibility of the Church say they meane not that the men whereof it consisted were inuisible men for it sufficeth that they confesse that they were inuisible worshippers of God according to the Protestant manner or that their society in this kind of worship of God was inuisible Note The other point is that in these kind of questions VVhether before Luther the Protestant Church were VVhether it were visible Colloq Batisban Ses 1.6 10.17 Iuel Def. Apol. par 5. c. 15. d. 1. VVhither it had Pastors and the like the Catholiks hold the negatiue part and Protestants the affirmatiue and that it belongeth to the affirmer to proue what he affirmeth wherein if he faile he is ouercome and it is not needfull for the denyer to proue his denyall but is sufficient reasonably to answere the proofes of the affirmer which if he performe he hath wonne the cause As if one like Anaxagoras would say that there were many worlds besides this or that such and such things haue byn done in tymes past he were bound to proue what he sayth he that should deny such matters were not bound to proue his denyall but only reasonably to answere his aduersaries arguments And the reason is manifest because for to affirme or belieue any thinge we must haue reason or proofe thereof bur for the not belieuing of it we need no other reason then to shew that there is no sufficient reason why it should be belieued Hereupon Luther in his booke against Henry 8. King of England tom 2. fol. 340 sayd He must be taught the principles of disputation who hauing to proue his affirmation vrgeth his aduersary to proue his denyall And Vorstins in his Antibellarm pag. 464 It is inough for the denyer probably to deny Wherefore in these kind of questions Protestants ought to be vrged to performe their part that is to proue what they affirme to wit that before Luthers tyme their Church was had Pastors and the like which if they cannot do they must needs confesse that in this debate they haue lost their cause And they ought not to presse vs to proue that before Luther their Church was not had not Pastors c. Because as I sayd herein we are only the defenders and denyers Tom. 1. fo 389. 473. and therefore it sufficeth for vs to shew that no reasons which the Protestants alledge conuince a reasonable man to belieue that there was any such Church before Luther appeared which if we do we haue wonne the cause That the ProtestaÌ„ts Church was inuisible to strangers Neuerthelesse that I may vse Luthers words in the booke before cited Albeit it belong not to vs to proue the negatiue let vs do it 2. First therefore touching the inuisibility of the Protestant Church before Luthers tyme Protestants confesse that it was inuisible to Papists to enemies to the world and to all that were not of it For thus sayth Sadcel in his Refutation of the 61. article pag. 538 VVe deny not that the Godly men lurcked vnder Popish darknesse and we giue God thanks that such persons families Inuisible to Papists and companies were for a tyme inuisible and vnknowne to the Pope and all his Catchpoles seing they were for a long tyme like sparckles couered with much ashes The same he sayth in his answere to Arthur cap. 8. and to the Sophismes of Turrian loco 10. and to the Repetition of them pag. 706. Danaeus in his booke of Antichrist cap. 38. writeth That there were very few Protestants and those dwelling in wildernesses and also vnknowne to others vnknown to others Iunius in his 4. booke of the Church cap. 5. speaketh thus of Protestants before Luther They professed their sayth amongst themselues but not before dogges wild beasts who would runne vpon them D. Whitaker Cont. 2. quaest 2. cap. 2. pag. 458. VVas it the Protestant Church manifest to all No but to those only who had eyes And pag. 468 There was no true Church on earth Knowne only to ProtestaÌ„ts which appeared to all And quest 6. cap. 2. pag 359 VVe care not for their obiecting solitude vnto vs. For we are not ashamed to haue recalled our Church out of this kind of solitude D. Fulke to the Cauillations of Stapleton The whole forme of the Church was for some ages vnknowne to the vngratefull world And in his booke of succession pag. 118 They confessed Christ but not alwayes before heretiks but before themâ—elues and the Church And in his notes vpon the 11. cap. of the Acts If by visible you vnderstand that which is seene and knowne to the whole world it is not true that the Church was alwayes visible D. Morton in the 1. part of his Apology booke 1. cap. 16. sayth They professed secretly not publikely D. White in his way to the Church pag. 95 That they professed among themselues Osiander in his Manuel pag. 59 In the visible Church of Rome there was the inuisible company of belieuers hidden to the eye of the world Caelius secundus Curio in his booke of the lardgnes of the Kingdome of God pag. 212 It came to passe that for many yeares the Church lay hid and that the Cittizen of this Kingdome could scarce or not at all be discerned from others And the Scots in their generall confession VVe say that this is the only true Christian sayth which is now reuealed to the world Thus they acknowledg that before Luthers tym Protestants were vnknown to the Pope and his officers to their
church we define to be a congregation of men amongst whome the word is truly preached and the Sacraments administred Such a church hath not alwayes byn neither can we be assured that it shall alwayes be sound vpon the earth There was a tyme when as the visible church failed vpon earth The visible church failed This inuisibility of the Protestant Church which I haue hitherto proued by their manifold Confessions I will also proue by sequels out of other their sayings First therefore D. Morton in his Apology part 1. book 1. cap. 31. disliketh not these words of Bellarmine Protestants when they say the church cannot faile or perish meane the inuisibible church And many of them in expresse words deny that the Promises of perpetuity Protestāts say the promises belong not to the visible Church which in the scripture are made vnto the church Math. 16. and other where be made to the visible church D. Whitaker Cont. 2. quest 3. cap. 3. pag. 468 It is most false that it is the visible church against which the gates of hell shall not preuaile And Daneus Cont. 4. lib. 3. cap. 13. pag. 717 There Math. 16. is not meant the visible church To whome assenteth D. Willet in his Synopsis cont 2. quest 2. M. Powell of Antichrist lib. 1. cap. 10. Beurlin in his Refutation of Sotus cap. 53. Moulins of the vocation of Ministers lib. 1. c. 4. in his Bucklet part 1. pag. 49. And D. Morton lib. cit cap. 13. addeth that those three places Math. 16. vlt. and psal 47. which promise the perpetuity of the Church Protestāts belieue not the visible church Are euery one of them vnderstood almost by euery Father of the only company of the elect which the Protestants call the inuisible Church Besides they all generally teach that by the Catholike Church which they professe to belieue in the Creed they meane not the visible Church but only the inuisible Luther in his booke of abrogating Masse tom 2. fol. 247 VVho shall shew vs the holy church seeing it is hidden in spirit and is only belieued according as I belieue the holy church Zuinglius in his explication of the 31. article The church which consisteth of those which are knowne to God alone in that which we professe in the articles of our creed Danaeus lib. cit pag. 713 The question is of the true church of God whereof it is sayd in the creed I belieue the holy church Bellarmine vvill haue it to be the visible vve deny it The like he sayth pag. 789. 717. 718. and 725. Vorstius in his Antibellarm pag. 144 VVe professe not in the creed to belieue the visible church but the inuisible D. Whitaker lib. 3. against Duraeus sect vlt You see vvhat Catholike church vve belieue not the visible multitude of Christians but the holy company of the elect The same he sayth Cont. 2. quest 2. cap. 2. Brentius in Prolegominis pag. 2. and others commonly Furthermore they say that the visible Church is not the true Church in the sight of God For Caluin in his 4. book of Institutions cap. 1. § 7. They say the visible Church is not the true Church before God and the rest graunt that both wicked and reprobate Christians may be of the visible Church but deny that they can be of the true Church in the sight of God Now surely if the visible Church be neither the true Church in the sight of God nor she to whome he hath promised perpetuity nor she which Protestants do belieue what reason can they haue to belieue that the visible Church shall alwayes remayne or which is all one that the Church shall be alwayes visible Againe their common doctrine is that preaching of true doctrine is the note of the visible Church for so teacheth the Confession of Auspurg cap. 7. the English Confession artic 19. and all the rest To which his Maiesty in his epist to Cardinall Peron D. Whitaker Contr. 2. q 5. c. 17. D. Morton part 1. Apol. l. 1. c. 6. M. Willet in his Synopsis Cont. 2. quest 3. pag. 102. Sadeel to Turtians Sophismes loc 5. Vorstius in Antibellarm pag. 145. and others do adde that it is an essentiall note of the visible Church And it is manifest that they must say so because they vse to define the visible Church to be a company vvherein the pure vvord of God is preached the Sacraments rightly administred For so it is defined of the English Confession and of Sadeel lib. cit of Whitaker quest 5. cit cap. 20. of Melācthon tom 1. in cap. 15. Matth. and of others generally But before Luther there was no preaching of Protestantisme as we shall heare them confesse cap. 7. therefore there was then no visible Protestant Church Finally sometymes they say that not only preaching of the word but that also a lawfull ministery or that not only what true preaching soeuer but also such as is made by a lawfull Minister of the word is of the essence and substance of the visible Church For thus writeth D. Whitaker Cont. 2. q. 5. cap. 19. pag. 550 Stapleton sayth that the preaching of the Ghospell by lavvfull Ministers is the proper note of the church and vve say no othervvise And pag. 551. That he confesseth true preaching by a lavvfull Ministery to be a note of the church is no other thing then that vve say and defend The like hath Sadeel in the place now cited and the Switzers Confession cap. 17. putteth lawfull preaching for the chiefest note of the church Caluin 4. Institut cap. 2. § 1. for a perpetuall note the conclusions defended at Geneua pag. 845. for an essentiall note thereof But before Luther there were no Protestant Ministers at all as we shall hereafter heare the Protestants confesse Therefore no visible Protestant Church 8. By that which hath byn rehearsed it is manifest Summe of the foresayd confessions that very many and very famous Protestants haue often and plainly confessed that when Luther came first as they speake to the Ghospell the Protestant Church and religion was not visible say hid lurked lay in the wildernes in lurking holes indarknesse in Trophonius his denne was buryed was vnknowne vnheard of appeared to none cold not be discerned Her image could not be seene no shew of besides a huge spoile did appeare no face no fashion no trace of her was extant and she was so hid that he who would iudge according to the outward shew would think her to be no where And that this is so manifest as that the experience of many ages beareth witnes thereof With what words I pray you could they say that their Church was altogeather inuisible if they haue not sayd it in these 9. Moreouer it is manifest that for to maintaine their inuisible Church they do teach that the Church may be vnknowne to the godly to those who are of it that it may be not visible not appeare not
93. 238. 488. 493. 493. tom 3. fol. 555 tom 5. fol. 290. tom 6. fol. 79. and other where often Secondly it ariseth that true Protestancie is called Lutherans doctrine the Lutheran cause the Lutheran religion ProtestaÌ„ts terme themselue LutheraÌ„s the Lutheran businesse and Lutheranisme Of Luther himselfe tom 2. fol. 37. and 497. Of Frederick the Electour tom 1 Lutheri fol. 237. Of his Counsailers tom 2. fol. 116. Of the deuines of Mansfeld in Schusselburg tom 8. pag. 270. Of Schusselburg himselfe Epist dedicat tom 4. Of Melancthon tom 2. Lutheri fol. 193. 197. Of Kemmice Epist dedicat lib. de duabus naturis Of Hutter in Analysi Confess August pag. 595. Of Brunsfelse Respons ad Spongiam Erasmi Or Lobeenâ—us in Epist dedicat Disput Oâ— George Fabritius l b. 1 8. Orig. Saxon. and of other Lutherans And in like manner of Sacramenttaries also as of Bucer in Matth. 26. lib. de Cura animorum pag. 261. Of Hospin Prefat part 2 Histor Of Scultere Con. saecular Of D. Morton 1. part Apol. lib. 1. cap. 45. and others Thirdly therof proceedeth that the true and proper Protestants are called Lutherans both of themselues and of others For thus speaketh Luther in psalm 118. tom 7. fol. 551 I graunt my selfe to be a Lutheran And in like manner speaketh he ibidem fol. 79. 242. 233. 361. 400. And tom 2. fol. 473. and in Hospin part 2. fol. 134. So also speaketh Melancthon in dominicam 8. Trinit tom 1. and in Hospin lib. cit fol. 72. and Brentius also ibid. fol. 107. So speaketh the Confession of Saxonie in the Preface and the Saxon Ministers in the Conference of Aldburg pag. 60. Vrban Regius in Iudicio de Conuentu Norimberg pag. 9. Amsdorse in Bucer in Scriptis Anglicis p. 635. Matheus Index in Edicto aeterni Dei Iames Andrewes in Colloq Montisbel pag. 179. Yea Grauer in the Preface of his Caluinisticall absurdities dedicateth his booke Vnto the proper Lutherans and pag. 61. affirmeth that their men are called Lutherans that they may be distinguished from Papists and Caluinists Scusselburg tom 17. Catal. pag. 866. sayth The Deuines of our part call themselues and the Defenders of their opinion Lutherans Which also affirmeth Reineccius tom 1. Armat cap. vlt. Hutten in Expostulat cum Erasm sayth I acknowledge the name of Lutheran And Hailbruner VVe are not ashamed of the name And Andrew Schafman in Prodromo bringeth many reasons to proue that they did well in calling themselues Lutherans And those of Berga as Hospin reporteth in Concord Discord c. 20. say that All the sincere doctours of the Church call themselues Lutherans of Luther The same also testifie the Sacramentaries For those of New stade against the booke of Concord cap 6. pag. 213. say they account none a sincere disciple of Christ vnlesse he wil be called as well a Lutheran as a Christian The author of the orthodoxe Consent in Prefat Apologet. They take to themselues factions names vpon a preposterous and too great esteme of their masters Parcus in cap 2. Galat. sect 24 They doe not only call themselues Lutherans of Luther but also will be so called of all Beza in Conspicil pag. 8 Ye all will be named and called LutheraÌ„s And pag. 56 Not content with the name of Christians they call themselues Lutherans and reioyce to be so called Danaeus Apol. cont Iac. Andrâ—ae saith that He glorieth in Luther as in another Christ of whome euery where be thundereth calleth himselfe a Lutheran a Lutheran c. And Resp ad Selnecer he saith that Selnecer Freely confesseth that the Ducth Churches terme themselues Lutherans Vrsin in Catechism pag 494. saith This is the opinion of them who call themselues Lutherans Zauchius Epist dedicat Miscellan Many are not ashamed euen in printed bookes to all themselues Lutherans And Iezler de bello Euchar. fol. 115 Some haue no shame euen in pulpit to say VVe wil be Lutherans constantly And at some times euen the sacrameÌ„taries seeme to be desirous of the surname of Lutherans For those of Newstade in Admonit de lib Concordiae pag. 106. compliane that some would seeme to be the only disciples of Luther Musculus in locis tit de haeresi pag 604. saith No man condemneth true Lutherans vnlesse he be ignorant of the truth or very naughty And the Protestant Princes of Germanie in Thuan. lib. 79. Histor pag. 595. relate that the King of Nauarre wrote to them that if the French Protestants were to be termed of any man they ouâ—ht most of all to be called Lutherans Because when this name was odious in France for almost therscore years many by fire by rack be death sealed with their bloud the testimonie of that doctrin which they receiued first of Luther Scultete also in Concionâ— saeculari coÌ„pareth Luther with the Apostolicall men Besides the Sacramentaries call Luthers true follwers LutheraÌ„s as Zuinglius tom 1. fol. 420. 436. 470. Oecolampadius ibidem fol. 479. and in Hospin part 2. fol. 84. 112. 126. Tigurini ibidem fol 88. Bucer in cap Rom. in Scriptis Angl. pag. 669. Martyr tom 2. loc Epist ad Caluin Hospin lib. cit fol. 91. Caluin in Zancius lib. 2. Epist pag. 78. Daneus ibidem pag. 401. Zanchius himselfe pag. 394. Pareus lib. 5. de Amiss grat cap. 1. 2. lib 4. cap. 17 lib. 6 cap. 1. Vorstius in Antibellarm pag. 561. D. Whitaker cont 1. quest 2. cap. 3. and quest 5. c. 8. and quest 6. cap. 9. cont 4. quest 5. cap. 3. lib. 3. de Concupisc cap. 9. lib. 3. de Scrip. cap. 2 sect 3. D. Fulke de Success pag. 321. M. Perkins in Explicat Symboly col 781. 790. Yea Iezler loc cit fol. 39. Vorstius in Collat. cum Piscatore write that properly and vulgarly they are called LutheraÌ„s Wherupon D. Humfrey ad Rat. 2. Campian pag. 128. sayth Lutherans vulgarly called 7. Hereby we see first that the Lutherans glory of the name of Luther as the Donatists which S. Augustin reporteth did of the name of Donatus Secondly that they glory of a schismaticall name for such is the name of Lutherans as Luther himselfe confesseth in D. Morton part 1. Apol. lib. 1. cap. 8. And Hospin Praefat. part 2. Histor Vorstius in Antibellarm pag. 149 Yea D. Whitaker cont 2. quest 5. cap. 2. sayth that to take the name of any man at all is Hereticall and schismaticall and that heretikes carry the names of their masters and willingly acknowledge such names Thirdly it appeareth that the English Apologie vntruly sayd that Luthers disciples are called Lutherans in disgtace or derision For Grauer lib. cit sayth they are termed so for distinction sake Lauatherus and Hospin Praefat. Histor say they call them so for doctrine sake that it may be knowne whome they meaÌ„e And Scul eie so termeth them for honours sake And surely sith both Sacramentaries the common people and themselues also terme them Lutherans and glory
of Christ for thus he writeth Popery as Iudaisme heretofore signifieth that company which at least in her tyme had the true Church with it Such were the Iewes before the comming of Christ and the Papists before the comming of Luther His meaning as I suppose is that as the Christian Church is in state another church from the Synagogue because it hath other Sacraments other Sacrifyce and more points of fayth and Christ another founder of the Church distinct from Moyses so the Protestant Church is a distinct Church from the ancient Christian Church and Luther not only another Elias as they call him but also another Messias a founder and beginner of another Church distinct from that of Christ at least as far as his church differed from the Synagogue Behold Christian Reader wherto all their winding turning and doubling about the being of their Church in Popery is come Surely as S. Augustin sayd L 20. cont Faust c. 12. against the Manichees their imaginations haue lost all wayes For they are nothing bâ—â— the visions of frantike men For their remayneth no probable way to defend that their Church was heretofore in Popery It is mere frenzy to think that it waâ— in Popery virtually and implicitly like as a plant iâ— in the seed or a man in a child at the Christiaâ— Church once was in the Synagogue or that it waâ— openly distinct in Communion and Profession froâ— Papists or that it consisteth of such which either iâ— hart or at least in Profession were Papists or finally that the Church of God such as they will haâ—â— the Protestant to be was for many ages in a differeÌ„t yea a most opposite church where neither by diuine nor humane testimony it can be proued to haue byn neither can there any way be imagined by which it may with any appearance or probability be sayd to haue byn there Thus sayth S. Augustine do they dote lib. 20. coÌ„t Faust c. vl who not abiding true doctrine turne to fables 12 And out of these wherewith we haue shewed that the Protestant Church heretofore was not in Popery is refuted also Zanchius Praefat. lib. de Natura Dei where he sayth that their brethren in tymes past liued in some obscure vallies and Mountaines and met at night And D. Fulke lib. de Succes pag. 324. saying that in Europe the Church was by Antichrist thrust into obscure places but least they should be tript in their lying they name neither those mountaines nor vallyes nor places nor their night-owle-brethren nor finally proue any thing L. 14. cont Faust c. 9. But as S. Augustin sayd of Faustus They say it away they neuer seeke to proue it Or as Christ sayd of the aduersary man they sow cockle and depart It sufficeth for these new Pythagorians to powre out lyes like oracles for they assure themselues that with retchlesse men they will find credit of themselues like weeds grow without tilling Hence also is refuted the same Fulke in cap. 10. Apocal. Where he affirmeth his brethren hertofore haue liued in the Alpes in the Appenine Mountaines and in the Hereinian Forest He might better haue sayd they liued in the Wildernes of Vtopia for he proueth nothing L. 16. cont Faust c. 26 O man that I may cry out which S. Augustine thincking only of his owne talke and not thinking of any gainesayer Againe Doest thou not know lib. 4. cont Cres c. 54. or doest thou not feele with the heart of what man soeuer that in dispute where truth is sought where proofe followeth not the talke is vaine and foolish Wherefore now let vs heare their arguments or rather Sophismes wherwith sometymes they endeauour to proue that their Church was in tymes past in Popery The Sophismes wherwith some Protestant make shew to proue that their Church was heretofore in Popery refuted CHAP. X. 1. THE first argument wherewith Protestants would seeme to proue that their Church in former tymes was in Popery is grounded vpon that saying Apocal. 18 Goe out of her Babylon my people Therefore Gods people were in Babylon that is say theâ— in Popery Thus argueth Luther in cap. 12. Genes tom 6. fol. 144. And in cap. 19. fol. 234. The Magdeburgians in Praefat. Centur. 8. Plessy lib. de Eccles cap. 10. and others commonly Yea M. Perkins in his reformed Catholike tract 22. writeth that by this commandement it may be gathered that the true Church is and was long tyme in the Roman Church Wherein he speakes more truly then he meant For the true Church is and was alwayes in the Romane but the Protestant neither is nor was there To the argument I answere that this place can be no sufficient ground of fayth among the Protestans because their Angel their Apostle and Euangelist Martyn Luther denyeth the Apocalipse to be Canonicall Scripture Againe though indeed it be canonicall Scripture yet for the most part it is so obscure as but very few places therof are fit to grouÌ„d any point of fayth as is euident both by the booke it selfe which is well nigh all Mysticall and allegoricall and by the iudgement of the Fathers and confession of Protestants Euseb l. 7. cap. 20. For thus sayth S. Denis Patriarch of Alexandria of the Apocalipse I verily think that almost in euery sentence there lyeth some mysticall and merueilous sense Likewise S. Hierome Epist ad Paulin. The Apocalipse hath as many mysteries as words And S. Augustin In the booke of the Apocalipse many obscure things are told and there are few things therein lib 20. de Ciuit. c. 17. by light whereof the rest may be sought ought with labour And with Protestants D. Andrewes in his answere to Bellarmines Apology cap. 9 Is he ignorant that concerning the Apocalipse nothing certaine or of fayth is yet prescribed by the Church that it may be lawfull to vse one only kind of interpretation and no other as if it were so cleare and euident that it were a hainous offence to leaue it or to dissent any way from it Yea as any may with greatest probability shew the prophesies there to be fulfilled so is it free for any to vse his iudgement to follow his own opinion in explicating them And D. Whitaker Cont. 4. quest 5. cap. 3 pag. 677 It is well inough knowne that Iohn in the Apocalipse speaketh not of cleare and open matters but of obscurt and hidden M. Brightman in his Preface of the Apocalipse In so great abundance of ancient and new expositions the Apocalipse yet as all agree needeth an Apocalipse And M. Sheldon in his booke of the miracles of Antichrist cap. 4. pag. 54 calleth it a darck Mysticall prophecy in which sayth he quot verba tot latent Mysteria And pag. 226 The Apocalipse is a booke wholy mysticall which doth excepting some few doctrinall rules and exhortations to vertue in types figures formes and resemblances describe and foretell the future euents of the