the supposed answering of those few chosen and picked out by him must serue through the partiality of iudgement in his followers to disgrace all the rest of the Corruptions or falsifications vrged by you Animaduersion LII THe Protestants in falsly alledging the authorityes of Authours do abuse their Readers chiefly foure seuerall wayes First which is the most vsuall by concealing some part of the alledged authority SecoÌ„dly by adding some words of his owne to make the produced Authour or Father to speake like a Protestant Thirdly by transposing the words of an authority thereby to make the sense different from the Authors true meaning Fourthly by a wilfull mistaking or confusion of tymes I will exemplify these foure sorts in the wryting of D. White a great Impostour in his Scripts in his booke called The way to the true Churcâ— Well then the said Protestant in p. 119. oâ— his said Booke produceth a place out of the Rhemists to proue that the Church of Româ— can make that Scripture which is not anâ— vnmake that to be Scripture which is Scripture To proue this he produceth the Rhâ—mists (y) Gaelat 1. thus saying The Scriptures are 〈◊〉 knowne to be true neither are Christians bonâ—â— to receiue them without the attestation of thâ— Church Now heere marke the true wordâ— of the Rhemists and therein obserue his impurity of dealing committed by concealing part of the Sentence iust crossing his intended drift of vrging that authority Their true words are these The Scriptures whicâ— are indeed of the Holy Ghosts inditing being pâ—â— into the Churches triall are found proued anâ— testifyed vnto the World to be such and not maâ—â— true altered or amended by the same Since the Holy Scriptures in themselues were alwayes true before but not so knowne to be to all Christians All these are the words of the Rhemists where you see the wilfull concealement of this Parcell The Scriptures are nâ—â— made true altered or amended by the Church as also that other the Holy Scripturs in themselues were alwaies true meaning without the attestation of the Church Now all that can truly be gathered out of this authority is that the Scriptures though most sacred and true in themselues cannot be so made knowne to vs in which words lyeth the touch of the point without the Churches attestation But how farre off is this from M. Whytes vrging of this place Touching his imposture committed in â—dding of words this one place shall serue Thus then the said D. White produceth Bellarmine in contempt of the Churches authority saying Other meanes may deceiue me but nothing is more knowne nothing more certaine then the Scriptures That it were the greatest madnes in the world not te belieue theÌ„ c. Now in this sentence these words viz. Other meanes may deceiue me are not in Bellarmine but most subtily added to the begining of Bellarmines words and caused to be printed in the same kynd of Character or letter wherein the other words of Bellarmine are printed thereby to make the Reader belieue that they are words of Bellarmine wheras they are added as I about insinuated for the more depressing of the Churches Authority Now the whole sentence of Bellarmine was directed against the Swinkseldians who absolutely denyed Scripture and against whom Bellarmine in that place disputeth Touching the fraud consisting in a cuÌ„ning transposition of words without adding any words to the authority alledged or concealing any parcell therof this example of the foresaid M. Whyte may serue In pag. 344. of his way to the true Church he produceth for the ouerthrow of the religious vse of Images the Councell of Eliberis thus saying No (z) Can. 36. Picture is to be made in the Church lest that be adored which is painted on the walls But the true words of the Canon are these Placâ—â—â— picturas in Ecclesia non habere ne quod coliâ—â— adoretur in parietibus depingatur Jt pleaseth the Councell that pictures should not be in the Church lest that which is worshipped anâ— adored be painted on the Walls The nyce difference in words resteth thus Lest that which is worshipped be painted and as Mâ— Whyte translateth Lest that which is painted be worshipped Where the words of the Councell acknowledging the worship of Images maketh the worship due to them to be the cause why they are not painted on the walls to wit because they were subiect to be defaced either by inuasion of Enemyes or rayne c. Now M. Whites translation only by a subtill transposition of the words imports that Pictures are not to be worshipped at all Lastly concerning the Calumny resting in a wilfull confusion of tymes The said Protestant in pag. 61. for proofe of Priests lawfull mariage produceth a Testimony from Sinesius Bishop of Ptolemais thus writing of himselfe to a friend The sacred hand of Theophilus hath giuen me a wyfe and hereupon Iustify to all men that J will neither forsake her nor priuily as an adulterer keep her Company but I will pray to God to send me by her many and good children This Epistle is at large set downe in (a) Eccl. hist l. 14. c. 55. Nicephorus Now heere tâ—e fraud lyeth that at the tyme when this Epistle was written Sinesius was but a Lay-man but eminent for learning Now after he made himselfe priest and was created Bishop of Ptolemais he euer liued separated from the company of his wyfe as fully appeareth out of Nicephorus in the place aboue alledged Here then the Ministers deceit lyeth in applying that to him as if he had beene then Bishop which was spoken by him being a Layman and so M. White most fraudulently confoundeth those two different tymes together as if all had hapned at one and the same tyme. Animaduersion LIII YF your Aduersary will vant that he will proue all by Scripture only as most of them giue it out they will then force him to draw both his Premisses I meane both his Propositions if so they should be reduced to a forme of Argument from the Scripture alone of which Method within two Arguments at least he is certaine to fayle For if he take either of his Propositions from humane Authority or from naturall Reason you may tell him he leaueth his vndertaken of prouing by Scripture alone and consequently you may deny his force of Argument though Logicall in forme Here I further aduertize that if your Aduersary vndertake the part of an Opponent tye him precisely euer to Oppose which Scene perhaps he being brought to a Non-plus would flyely transferre vpon you In like sort if he taketh vpon him to answere suffer him not to oppose thought he labour so to do to free himselfe from answering Thus be sure that ech of you keepe your chosen Station Animaduersion LIV. IF the Protestant should seeke to expouÌ„d by way of conference of places those words of our Sauiour This is my body this is my Bloud figuratiuely by those other words of his J
is now forbidden as a thing vngodly 11. That there are any Sacraments of the New Testament instituted by Christ for the good of mans Soule Lastly to omit some others 12. That before the ending of the world Antichrist shall come who shal be a designed Enemy of Christ and shall labour to subuert and ouerthrow all Christian Religion All these points both Protestant and Catholike do belieue and hould that the beliefe of them is necessary to Saluation And yet not any of these Articles are expressed or set downe in the Creed Whence I conclude that the Apostles Creed cannot be a sufficient boundary to containe and limit an auayleable Fayth Animaduersion LXII THe bitter Inuectiues of the Protestants one against another are of sufficient force to discouer their dissentions in doctrine as where Luther sayth We (n) Luther in Thes Cont. Louaniens Thes 21. seriously iuâ—ge the Swinglians and Sacramentaries to be Heretiks and Aliens from the Church of God And to confront this Swinglius thus retorteth vpon Luther Luther (o) Swingl tom 2. in resp ad Luther fol 458. is guilty of high blasphemy against the nature and essence of God c. To descend to the Puritans and Protestants in England we find that the booke entituled Constitutions and Canons Ecclesiasticall printed anno â—604 doth ipso facto excommunicate the Puritans for their maintaining of these positions following as they are there set downe in the Booke The worship of the Church of England is corrupt superstitions vnlawfull repugnant to the Scriptures The Articles of the Bishops Religion are Erroneous their Rites Antichristian c. Now the Protestants do thus râ—quite the Puritans saying The (p) M. Powell in hâ—s consiâ—erations Puritans are notorious and manifest Schismaticks cut of from the Church And againe The (q) M. Paâ—ks in his Ep. Deâ—ic Puritans seeke to vndermyne the foundation of fayth Now add hereto that although infinite other passages might be brought to shew the great discord in fayth among the forraine Protestants yet there is no one more short Argument to conuince this point then to recur to the foure Catalogues of ProtestaÌ„t Books set downe in the later end of the Booke called The Protestants Apology of the Roman Church In which 4. Catalogues one may find about three hundred Bookes written in great acerbity of stile by one Protestant against another The names of all which books are taken out of Coccius his Thesaurus or from Hospinian both which Authouâ—s dyed many yeares since Now if so mâ—â—y Bookes of disagreements in fayth among the Protestants were made within so sport a Tyme how many hundred more might be alledged if one did know all other Bookes written by the Protestant against the Protestant since the death of those two former men Animaduersion LXIII MAny vulgar and vnlearned Protestants and especially the Caluinists Puritans do condemne the Catholike Roman Religion because it defendeth and practizeth diuers Ceremonyes they ignorantly tearming such Ceremonyes Idolatrous and superstitious And there is no one argument more preuayling with such men to auert them from our Catholike Religion theâ— this Now to take a way this scandall oâ— stumbling block I say that if it were God good pleasure to haue his Fayth and Religion of the old Testament which for the tyme was the true Religion to consisâ— much in Ceremonyes as we see it did faâ—â— out in the seuerall Sacrifices appoynted by God In the Tabernacle with the appurtenances and of what matter number and qualityes all things should be as also with prouiâ—ion of Oyle and Lampes The Arke The propitiatory the Consecration of priests the Institution of all vestures vessels and other holy things then belonging to the seruice of God all these to be made performed and done after a strange and different manner as we reade in Exodus As also the Institution of Circumcision consisting in paring away a piece of flesh which serued for freeing Man in that tyme from Originâ— Sinne the preparing and eating of the Paschall Lambe sprinkling the dores with the bloud thereof and infinit other Ceremonies recorded in the foresaid booke of Exodus I say if this was Gods vnsearcheable Will to ordaine these things during the tyme of the Old Law wherein he would haue the Honour Seruice and worship exhibited to â—im partly to consist why then may not our Sauiour institute the Religion fayth of Christians belieuing in him to be attended on with diuers Ceremonyes and yet this without any Superstition or Idolatry Now our Aduersaryes common euasion to this our Argument is to say that God instituted Ceremonyes in the Old Law to serue as figures or Types of things which were after to fall out in the New Law which Ceremonyes were theÌ„ to end vpon the promulgation of the fayth of Christ. This answeare is most impertinent First because not all the Ceremonyes in the Old Law but only some did serue as figures or Adumbrations of things to happen in the New Testament Secondly because the Question heere is not why or to what end the Ceremonyes of the Old Law were instituted but only whether Ceremonyes tending to the worship of God be pious lawfull Therefore I conclude that seeing the Ceremonies in the Old Law were instituted by Gods direction for the worship of him as we read in Exodus c. 8 Ostendas populo Caeremonias ritus colendi let the other secondary end of them be what it will that therefore and by force of Gods proceeding in the Old Law we Christians may not thinke strange that our Sauiour being God and Man would now in the New Law institute and giue to his Church the like power some Ceremonies and pâ—blike Rites wherewith he will be worshipped and wherin part of Christian religion shall consist Now therefore let our Aduâ—â—saries if they can giue any true reasoâ— why the Ceremâ—nies of the Old Law bâ—ing incomparably more in number shall be accounted lawfull and yet the Ceremonies of the New Law or Testament as long as they are reputed but Ceremonies must be râ—puted superstitions aâ— Idolatrous Animaduersion LXIV WE Catholikes charge the Protestaâ—â—â— with ancient Heresies For example wâ— shew how the Manichees according to S Austin depriued Man (r) L. de Haeres cap. 4â— of Freewill Hoâ— â—ouinian (s) Ier. l 1. cont Iâ—â—in Aug l. Haeres cap. taught that Fasting was not mâ—ritorious and Virginity was no better theâ— wedlock or mariage How Aerius (t) Austin l. de Haeres c. 33. taugâ— it to be most vnlawfull to pray or offerâ—â— Sacrifice for the Dead How the Arians (u) L. 1. cont Marin cap. â— reiected all vnwritten Traditions who aâ—â—â— (x) Athanas in Apolog. pro fuga perpetrated Sacrilege against the Sacraments Altars Priests and Religious person How the (y) Austin l. â— Vnitate cap. 12. Donatists taught the Churcâ— of Christ to be Jnuisible How the Deniall 〈◊〉 the Reall Presence was condemned by certaine ancient Heretiks
Caluin with an accustomed sl ight in this manner When Caluin vndertaketh to answere many texts of Scripture vrged in proofe of some Catholike Article or point Caluin begins to answere two or three of such texts as may seeme in an ignorant eye to be best capabâ—e of some shew of answere and for the other passages of Scripture which are most conuincing for the point vrged in which we Catholikes chiefly insist and wherunto Caluin cannot pretend any answere he passeth them ouer commonly in these words The chiefest passages J haue â—wered as for the other texts of Scripture wrâ—â— by the Papists to the same end they are so imâ—â—tinently alledged as that it were but tyme loâ—â— answere them therfore I passe them ouer as 〈◊〉 worthy of answere Here is Serpentiue craft 〈◊〉 the Card. calls it For Caluin thought it bâ—â—ter policy not to conceale the chiefe 〈◊〉 by vs vrged for that might argue a guâ—nes in Caluin but to take particular noâ— of them and so by slâ—ighting the force all such passages to make the ignorant â—â—der bâ—lieue that they nothing conduce the Catholike point for which they pretended Dolus an virtus quis in hoste quirat Animaduersion XIII THe Protestants do set downe the 〈◊〉 preaching of the Word and the true Aâ—â—â—nistration of the Sacraments to be the Maâ—â— of the Church The reason of this thâ— proceeding is double First herby to reâ—â— the Cathoâ—ikes Notes of the Church 〈◊〉 meane Antiquity Visibility Succession Vâ— c. seeing they are not able to iustâ— these Notes in their owne Church Sâ—coÌ„dly because by erecting their owne Notâ— of preaching the Word and administring 〈◊〉 Sacraments they reduce to their owne Ceâ—sure only reiecting all other Authorities which is the true Church For they will acknowledge the word to be truly preached at the Sacraments rightly administred onâ— such places and after such manner and â—els where or otherwise as themselues 〈◊〉 to thinke and determine And yet by their proceeding they are mightily â—â—nded And here I will briefly recur to â—t D. Whitaker sayth of these Notes These (q) Whitak contia CaÌ„p rat 3. Notes being present do constitute a Church â—eing absent do subuert it Now the Proteâ—ants during many Centuries haue wanted â—hese Notes therefore during all that time 〈◊〉 Church hath beene wholy extinct and â—nihilated That the Protestant Church â—uring many ages hath beene depriued of â—hese Notes I meane of preaching the word â—nd administring the Sacraments is euicted â—ut of the confessed Inuisibility of the Proâ—estant Church for many Ages for thus acâ—ordingly Sebastianus (r) Eâ— de abrogand in vniuersum omnibus statut Ecclesiast Francus a great â—rotestant writeth For certaine through the â—â—orke of Antichrist the externall Church togeâ—her with the fayth and Sacrament vanished aâ—ay presently after the Apostles With whom â—greeth Caluin thus acknowledging Factum (s) Inst 4. c. 1. sect 11. est vt per aliquot secula c. It was brought â—o passe that the true preaching of the word of â—od did vanish away for the space of certaine â—ges Animaduersion XIV A Weake and confused Iudgment may suggest or conceaue difficulties but it is a cleare â—dgment that must resolue them The reason of the disparity herein is this To 〈◊〉 one thing for another or to erre in the pâ—â—per nature essence of things is the soâ— of doubts and questions but to be able range and marshall together things of 〈◊〉 nature and to deuide and seuer things sunder which carry a great likenes oneâ— another for such resemblance of particâ—lars euer begets mistaking as also to knâ— what essentially is agreeing to the naâ—â— of any thing and what but accidentally companieth the same is a worke of the lâ—dicious This I write that vnlearned 〈◊〉 may learne Humility in beliefe and 〈◊〉 seeke to apprehend with their weake iuâ—ments the high Misteries of Christian Râ—gion especially the Articles of the B. â—râ—â—â— the Jncarnation and of the Reall presence Christs body in the holy Eucharist Animaduersion XV. IT sometymes may fall out that the 〈◊〉 Inuentour of a false Opinion may be 〈◊〉 Heretike as mantayning it before it be câ—demned by the Church whereas the Professours of it after its condemnation bâ—come Heretikes according to that sentenâ— of Vincentius (t) L. de Haeresib Lyrinensis O admiraâ— change of things The Authours of one and 〈◊〉 same Opinion are esteemed Catholikes the followers Heretikes Thus we see that it is coâ—tumacy against the Definitions and Decree of the Church of Christ which consummate an Heresy Animaduersion XVI WE are to call to mind that the Ceremonyes in the celebration of the Masse were successiuely and at seuerall times added and first brought in by seuerall Popes And accordingly we fynd that the (u) The Relicks of Rome or the Anatomy of the Masse by â—ntony de Adaâ—o prinâ—ed 1â—56 Hospinâ—â—n Histor Saâ—â—amâ—nt â— â— c. 4. 5. 6. 7. Aduersaryes of the Church of Rome as willing to discouer our Innouations though in the smallest Matters and but in points of Indifferency haue most dilligently and painefully recorded them in their seuerall bookes written of this very subiect with all due circumstances both of the Popes introducing them and the tymes wherein they were introduced Here now I vrge if the Enemyes of the present Church of Rome weâ—e thus diligent and solicitous in noting the begining of ech Ceremony of the Masse all such Ceremonyes being meerely accidentall to the Masse and without which it may as truly and effectually be celebrated as with them If they I say could haue discouered any Innouation in the maine doctrine of the Masse as the doctrine of the Reall Presence the Sacrifice of Christs Body there offered vp c. would they haue beene silent therin Or rather would they not haue loaded their Bookes with relation of all such Innouations they consisting not in small Ceremonies but in most sublime and high points of Christian Religion Animaduersion XVII THe Protestants are so various or rathâ— contrary in their Positions writings as that a man may borrow from their â—â—uerall Confessions both the propositions 〈◊〉 premises out of which the Conclusion shâ— rise wholy making agâ—inst their Religion For example D. Humfrey thus wryteth (x) D. Humfâ— Iâ— sâ—â—s in part 2. c. 3. Oportet Ecclesiam esse Conspicuam Concluâ— est Clarissima Jt is an euident Conclusion thâ— the Church of God ought to be conspicuous 〈◊〉 visible And M. Hooker God hath and caâ— shall haue some visible Church vpon the eartâ— But of the coÌ„fessed visibility of the Churcâ— of God more fully I will shew hereafteâ— Now touching the Inuisibility of the Protestants Church we reade M. Napper thâ— to confesse (y) V. pâ—â— the Reueâ—â—t in c 11 12. God hath with drawne his vâ—sible Church from opâ—n assemblies to the hartâ—â— particular godly men And D. Fulke confessetâ— thus (z) D. Fuâ—ke in his answer to a counterfeyt Cach p. 16. The
by his owne learned Brethrens Confessions or else he must rest silent And this is the reason why the Protestants are so loath to dispute of the Church Since this Question compreheÌ„deth in it selfe diuers points of fact as of its continuall Visibility Antiquity Succession Ordination and Mission of Pastours c. All which Questions receaue their proofes from particular Instances warranted from History by shewing the particular Tymes Persons and other circumstances concerning matter of Fact Animaduersion XXI WE Catholikes charge the Protestants with a vicious Circle of dispute between the Scripture and the spirit and in requitall hereof the Protestants do reciprocally insimulate vs Catholiks within the said vicious circular argumentation betweene the Scripture and the Church Now let vs see whether of vs stand truly chargeable herewith That the Catholikes are free from this kind of arguing I thus proue The Catholikes touching the Scripture and the Church do euer make their proofes in seuerall kinds of Causes and by a partiall manner of proofe and therby do still proue one thing by another more knowne to those persons to whom it is to be proued The actuall assent and beliefe it selfe is wrought wherby we infallibly belieue the Mysteries reuealed though we belieue the verity of the Scriptures reuelation by the authority of the Church propounding the Churches proposition for the authority of the Scriptures reuealing wherby the Scripture reuealing doth giue vs testimony of the Church propounding againe the Church propounding of the Scriptures reuealing Neuerthelesse this reciprocall testimony and proofe is not any proper vicious circle First because it is in diuerso genere causae in diuers kinds of causes for the testimonies of the Scriptures reuelation to the infallibility of the Churches proposition is causa formalis the formall cause by the which we assent to the Churches proposition But the Churches proposition is only Causa conditionalis or as we vse to speake Conditio fine qua non to know the Scriptures Reuelation and so they are reciprocall in a different manner of proofe the one that is Scripture à Priori as including diuine reuelation the other that is the Church à Posteriori required only as a condition The former as a formall precedent Cause the later as a subsequent annexed condition Secondly this reciprocall proofe is not adomnino idem as Aristotle requires to a Circle that is the one is not the totall and sole cause of knowing the other for the Churches proposition is not knowne only by the Scriptures reuelation and not otherwise but also by other proofes signes and testimoâ—ies to wit Miracles Consent Sanctity c. all which conuince that the Churches authority is necessary and infallible to distinguish the true sense of the Scripture from false and to end Controuersies about Scripture But now to cast our eye vpon the Protestants Circle prouing the Scripture by the priuate Spirit and the priuat Spirit from the Scripture it is euident that they proue the Scripture by the Spirit and Spirit by the Scripture in one the same kind of Cause and by one sole whole manner of proofe For demaund of a Protestant how and by what meanes he vnderstaÌ„deth the Scripture He answeres by the Spirit and so knowes the Scripture by the Spirit And aske him by what meanes he knowes he hath the true spirit he answeres the Scripture assures himselfe therof since he is one of the Elect. And thus this his proofe is truly Circular and vicious as being deliuered in eodem genere Causae and omnino ad idem Animaduersion XXII IT is most certaine that Protestants deny all Authorities of all affirmatiue heads making their last refuge to their owne priuaâ— Spirit and Iudgement For example if we insist in the affirmatiue Notes and Marks of the Church to wit vniuersality visibility vnity c. ouâ— aduersaryes as is aboue said discard the testimonyes of all these heads by erecting for Notes the preaching of the word and administration of the Sacraments so reducing to their owne iudgment only when the word is truly preached and the Sacramâ—nts rightly administred Yf in matters of fact we recurre to History I meane concerning visibility Succession vocation c. they reiect this authority by saying Sufficit (g) Whitak contra Duraeum l. 7 p. 478. nobis c. To vs it is sufficient by comparing the Popish opinions with the Scrâ—pture to discouer the disparity of faith betweene them and vs. And as for Historiographers we giue them liberty to wryte what they will If we produce the testimonyes of particular Fathers of the Primitiue Church marke how Luther depresseth them (h) Luth. de seruo arbis 1551. pag. 434. The Fathers of so many ages haue beene plainly blind most ignorant in the Scriptures they haue erred all their life time vnlesse they were amended before their death they were neither Saincts nor pertayning to the Church If we produce Generall Councels they answere saying (i) Petâ—â— Martyr l. de votis pa. 476. As long as we insist in Generall Councels so long we shall continue in the Popish Errors If we passe to Apostolicall Traditions Cartwright in depressing Traditions maintained by S. Austin thus wryteth To (k) Sâ—â— Cartwright in whitgifts defence p. 103. allow S. Austins saying touching Traditions is to bring in popery If we alledge diuers passages of Scripture as out of Toby Ecclesiasticus the Machabees the Protestants with full voyce deny them to be Canonicall and style them only Apocriphal If we take our authorityes out of such books of Scripture as are acknoledged for Scripture on both sydes the Protestants deny the Translation of the Scripture to be true sincere which point appeareth both from the Protestants mutual condemning one anothers translation of Scripture as also from the most bitter censure giuen by our English Puritans against our English Translaiion whereof seuerall books writteÌ„ by them are yet extaÌ„t If we Catholikes proceed further in insisting in the Originall of both the Testaments the Protestants deny that the Originalis are at this present true Thus for example in Math c. 10. we read 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the first Peter Beza (l) Beza in Annotat noui Testam 1556 denyeth the Originall herein mantayning that the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 was inserted into the text by some one fauoring the Popes Primacy In like sort (m) Beza vâ—i supra Beza denyeth that the Greeke Originall in Math. 22. is at this present the same as it was penned by the Euangelist mantayning that it is corrupted in fauour of the Realâ— presence If we yet ascending further entrench our selfe in such books of Scripture whose Originals Translations are accepted on ech party as true and incorrupted and tel our Aduersaryes that the whole Church of God in her primitiue and purest tymes interpreted the passages of Scripture in that sense in which they are at this present by the Catholikes alledged the Protestants
which we Catholikes call the Sacrament of Extreme Vnction But to proceede further in this point touching the Booke of Common Prayer in those dayes I will alledge the words of M. Done an eminent Protestant who thus writeth hereof Concerning (38) M. Doue in hit persuasion to English Recusants pag. 31. the Booke of Common prayer when the Masse was first put downe K. Henry had his English Liturgy and that was iudged absolute and without exception But when King Edward came to the Crowne that was condemned and another in the place was made which Peter Martyr and Bucer did approue as very consonant to Gods word When Queene Elizabeth began to reigne the former was iudged to be full of imperfections and a new deuised and allowed by consent of the Clergy But about the middle of her reigne we grew weary of that Booke and great meanes hath beene made to abandon that and establish another Which though it was not obtayned yet do we at the least at euery change of Prince change our Booke of CoÌ„mon prayer We be so wanton that we know not what we would haue Thus this ProtestaÌ„t Now from hence I conclude First that Protestancy here in England is not so ancient as from king Edwards dayes Secondly that it was not at perfection in the middle of Queen Elizabeths reigne For if it had then beene perfect and complete there had beene no neede of a new Common prayer-Prayer-Booke For at euery change of the Common booke of prayer there was a change of points of fayth according to which points the former CoÌ„munion Booke was to be reformed corrected And therfore according to the iudgment of men of those tymes it is thus said by M. Parker The day-starre (39) M. Parker against Symbolizing part 2. cap. 5. pag. 4. was not risen so high in their dayes when yet Queene Elizabeth reformed the defects of King Edwards Communion Booke c. Yet so altered (40) Ibidem pag. 37. as that when it was proposed to be confirmed by the Parliament it was refused Animaduersion CLXXVIII THe Doctrine of Recusancy is taught both by Protestants and Catholikes Since both of them hould it a most wicked thing and not to be donne but vnder payne of damnation without finall repentance that a man should communicate only in going to the Church and to heare but a sermon contrary to that Religion which himselfe belieueth to be true For though this Act may seeme to be couered vnder pretence of obseruing the Princes commandement for feare of losing our temporall estates yet in very deed this Act of going to the Church virtually and potentially includeth a conformity in all points to the religion of that Church to the which a Man goeth and so â—t comes to be a dissimulation or rather an absolute Abnegation of that Religion which a man houlds in his soule to be the only true Religion Now that the Protestants do teach the Doctrine of Recusancy I meane not to be present at the sermons or Prayers of a different Religion I proue from (41) Caluin de vitandis superstitionibus extat in tract Theolog. pag. 584. Caluin from the Deuines (42) The Deuines of Germany alledged in this point by Sleydan in Comment Englished l. 7 fol. 87. of Germany from Melancthon (43) Melancth in Concâ— Theolog. pa. 618. from Peter (44) Peter Martyr in his discourse hereof recited in Melancth Treatise de Concil Theolog. p. 394. Martyr and to omit others from D. (45) Wâ—â—eâ— in Synops. printed 1600. pag. 612. 613. c. Willet That the Catholikes do with the like or greater feruour preach and practice thâ— same Doctrine of Recusancy is cleare by the Example in our owne Country where sinne Protestancy was first planted some scores besides of the Laity of Venerable learned priests haue chosen rather to suffâ—â— death in Queene Elizabeth her Reigne then once to goe to the Protestant Church their liues being commonly proffered them if they would conforme themselues and leaue their Recusancy But they loathed such Conditions For the more full proofe of this Verity I add the Testimonies of three most eminent most remarkable Men whose iudgments some yeares past being demanded whether the Catholikes of England might for sauing their goods liuings go to the Protestant Church to heare a Sermon did ioyntly condemne the same as most vnlawfull and impious The men were these Cardinall Bellarmine Cardinall Baronius and Mutiâ—â—Vitellescus now generall of the Order of the Society of Iesus I will heere set downe their owne words The Judgment of Cardinall Bellarmine COnsideratis rationibus pro vtraqueparte allatis existimo non licere viris Catholicis in Anglia Haereticorum adire Ecclesias multó minùs concionibus ipsorum interesse minimè autem omnium cum ipsis in precibus vel Psalmodia alijsque ipsorum Ecclesiasticis ritibus conuenire Ideo propria manu subscripsi Robertus Bellarminus Sanctae R. Ecclesiae Presbyter Cardinalis tituli Sanctae Mariae in via The iudgment of Cardinall Baronius VIsis consideratis quae superiùs diligenti peruestigatione in vtramque partem disputata reiectis omnino exufflatis quae pro parâ—e affirmatiua fuere proposita quòd scilicet liceret Catholicis adire Ecclesias Haereticorum vt superiùs sunt proposita inhaeremus saniori sententie posteriori ab Ecclesia Catholica antiquitùs recepta vsu probata quod scilicet ita facere pâ—â— non liceat quam rogo nostros Catholicos Anglâ—â— amplecti ex animo Caesar Cardinalis Baronius titul SS Nerei Achillei Presb. The iudgmeÌ„t of Mutius Vitellescus then Prouinciall now Generall of the Order of the Jesuits VJdi rationes quae in hoc Scripto pro vtraque parte afferuntur existimo non licere vâ— Catholicis in Anglia Ecclesias Haereticorâ—s adire c. Et puto hoc debere esse extra Contrâ—â—ersiam Mutius Vitellescus Prouincialis Romaâ— Prouin Societatis Iesu Thus much in generall touching the Doctrine of Recusancy mantayned by diueâ— learned Protestants and practised with losâ— of life by many Reuerend Priests here 〈◊〉 England and fortifyed with the iudgmeâ—â— of these three former most learned pious and godly Men. Animaduersion CLXXIX â—He most common abuse in England of taking a second wyfe during the lyfe of â—e first committing fornication induceth â—e to expound those words of our Sauiour â—om whence the offenders herein seeme to â—arrant their sensuall proceedings for thus â—â—r Sauiour in Mathew 19. speaketh Whosoeâ—er shall put away his wyfe except it be for forâ—â—tation and shall marry another doth commit â—dultery from which words our Aduersaâ—es seeme to infer that who doth put away â—s wyfe for fornication and marrieth anoâ—her doth not commit Adultery But this is â—hus answered To wit that this exception 〈◊〉 Fornication is only to shew that for this â—use a man may put away his wyfe for eâ—er but not that he may marry another as 〈◊〉 most playne in 5. Mark c. 10.
good prayers is so vehemâ—â—â—â—â—d vnaffected as that I earnestly beseech you euen 〈◊〉 the most precious Passion of our Lord and â—auiour suffered for the cancelling of our sinnes by â—ur owne charitable Disposition towards others for â—resume those words of the Apostle to be imprinted 〈◊〉 your soules (a) Rom. 5. Charitas Dei diffusa est in â—â—ordibus vestris Finally by what is most sacred and holy that yoâ— would vouchsafe now and then your particular remembrance of me either yet aliue or hereafter dead in that your most retired and Religious Memento vsed in the celebration of the most Blessed and Reuerend Sacrifice of the Masse for the expiating of my manyfold sinnes This I humbly beseech this in all prostration of soule I implore and begge aâ— your hands and in such your performance ech of yoâ— iustly may comfort your selues in those words of ouâ— Sauiour Beati (b) Matt. 5. misericordes quoniam ipsi misericordiam consequentur And thus in thâ— good hope thereof I cease referring you to the perusall of the Treatise it selfe Yours in our Lord Iesus N. N. P. MISCELLANIA Contayning certaine Controuersiall Animaduersions Animaduersion I. I WILL begin with the approuall or reiecting what is or hath beene accounted the Scripture or the written Word of God which point concernes the Bookes of Ecclesiasticus Toby Judith Hester Machabees c. Where we are to vnderstand that the Canonicall Scriptures are to vs at this day discerned and made knowne not by that which either the Iewes for a time or certaine Fathers do omit deny or doubt of in their Canon of Scripture but by that which many Fathers do constantly affirme Since otherwise and vpon the conâ—rary ground we might deny with the Lutherans the Epistle of Iames Iude the second of Peter the 2. and 3. of Iohn the Epistle to the Hebrews and the Apocalyps seeing all these bookes (a) Ofiand in Epic. Cent. 4. p. 299. are denied by the Lutherans Now the reason of this Thesis or Proposition is because in the Primitiue Church the Canonicall Scriptures were not generally all at once receaued but in so great a variety of pretended Scriptures great care and search was requisite wherby to determine which Scriptures were Canonicall which not wherby it came to passe that sundry bookes were for the tyme misdoubted oâ— by some Fathers or Councells omitted oâ— not receaued which yet afterwards were vpon greater search and consideration generally acknowledged And according herto D. Bilson Bishop (b) In his suruey of â—hrists suffering printed 1604. pag. 664. of Winchester thus truly sayth The Scriptures were not receaued in all places at once no not in Eusebius his â—yme Animaduersion II. D. Whitakers (c) In his answ to M. Reynolds â—efut p. 2â— 23. and other of our Aduersaries do reiect the former bookes of the Old TestameÌ„t to wit Ecclesiasticus Toby c. because they were not first written in Hebrew and in that they had not for their knowne Authours those whom God had declared to be his Prophets This Argument is weake For it is a rash assertion so to measure the Scriptures by the tongue wherein they are written as to restrayne the Spirit of God to one only language The â—anity of which said assertion is sufficiently disproued by Example of Daniel a great part whereof to wit from cap. 2. vers 4. vâ—que ad â—â—em cap. 7. though not written in Hebrew is yet by our Aduersaries acknowledged for Canonicall And touching the second point of this Argument it cannot be proued that God would direct by his holy Spirit no Authors in their Writings but such as were knowne and also further declared by certaine testimonies to be Prophets For our Aduersaries cannot yet tell who writ the seuerall bookes of Judges the third and fourth of the Kings the two of Chronicles the booke of Ruth and Iob all which bookes neuerthelesse they admit for true and Canonicall Scripture And hereupon it is that D. Whitakers though crossing his former assertion thus writeth (d) L. de sacra Script â—ag 603. Multorum librorum authores ignorantur c. The authors of many bookes of Scripture are vnknowne as of Iosue Ruth Paralipomenon Hester c. Thus he To whose iudgment D. Willet subscribeth saying We (e) In his Synops p. 4. receaue many bokes in the Old Testament the Authours whereof are not perfectly knowne Animaduersion III. AGainst the writings of the Ancient Fathers the Protestants pretend seuerall difficultyes For example D. (f) Contra Duraeum l. 5. p. 300. Kâ—mpu in his Exam. part 1. p. â—4 Whitakers and others obiect against the Epistles of Ignatius that (g) Dial. â— Theodoreâ— and (h) Dial. 3. contra Pâ—lag Ierome do alledge certaine testimonies from Ignatius his Epistle ad Smirnenses which are not found in that or any other of Ignatius his Epistles Wherto I answere First that the Auncient (i) By Austin in Psalm 95. by Tertull. lib. adu Iudaeos versus finem By Iustin in Triphon circa medium Fathers haue in like maner cited this sentence reguauit a ligno Deus as the saying of Dauid in his Psalms which yet is at this day wanting in them And in like manner some Sentences are alledged from Tully and Plato and the same are not to be found in their wrytings now extant Therfore this former Obiection only argueth that certaine parts of Ignatius his Epistles may be lost but maketh nothing against those now remaining In like sort our Aduersaryes do reiect as counterfeyte the writings of Dionysius Arcopagita as confessed to make for our Catholike Doctrine their chiefe argument is in that these his writings are neuer mentioned by Eusebius and Ierome To this may be answered that (k) Euseb hist l. 5. c. 29. Ierom. in Catal. prope init Eusebius Ierome do confesse that there are many bookes and Authors which neuer came to their knowledge A thing not vnlike if we but remember as incident to those precedent tymes the knowne want of printing and great difficulty of Manuscripts through the violent persecutions which then raigned Finally touching the Lyturgies of Chrysostome they vrge it making altogether for seuerall poynts of our Catholike and Roman fayth that as M. Jewell obiecteth (l) Iewell in his repâ—y pag. 10. Chrysostomes Masse prayeth for Pope Nicolas who was Pope seuerall huÌ„dred yeres after Chrysostome that also it prayeth for the Emperour Alexius who liued in like manner many ages after Chrysostome These are but friuolous Cauils For in all ould Lyturgies or Bookes of CoÌ„mon prayer prayer is specially appointed to be made for Princes and Bishops for the names of whom are certayne places reserued which are subiect to alteration according to the change of succeeding tymes and persons The lyke course wherof for Princes we may discerne in the English Communion Booke composed in K. Edwards tyme where according to the change of succeeding gouerment are inserted the names of Queene Elizabeth
spake (e) Luth. tom 7. Wittenberg to him in a base great voice so as he made Luther to sweate his hart to tremble againe the same apppeareth in that Luther saith as is set downe aboue that he was first awake and that then after the Disputation begunne But howsoeuer admit it were but a spirituall fight or Disputation yet in either case the persuasions arguments wherunto Luther heere yealdeth came confessedly from the Diuell what difference then is there whether the Diuell made them to Luther by sensible coÌ„ference or by inward suggestion Animaduersion LIX AS Luther was instructed by the Diuel to impugne the Masse so were Carolostadius and Swinglius two great introducers of Protestancy in those former tymes in like manner indoctrinated by the Diuel against the Masse Touching Carolostadius whom Luther calleth a Man (f) Luth. in loc com Class 5. pag. 47. giuen ouer vnto a reprobate sense This man impugned the Masse vnder pretence of Visions and pretended conferences with God of whome the Booke entituled Conspiracy for pretended reformation thus writeth Carolostadius (g) Luth tom 3. Penens fol. 68. a preacher professing the Gospell c. attributed much to Cabinet teachers and pretended conference with God And yet his pretended visions were but meere Illusions of the Deuill of whom euen Luther thus sayth Carolostadius (h) In Theol. Calu in Prâ—â—em had his expositions from the Deuill As concerning Swinglius whom Conradus Schlusseâ—burg the Protestant calleth a man of vnfortunate memory This man disputed publikly at Zurick for the abolishing of the Masse and receaued confessedly his nightly Instruction by Dâ—eame from an Admonisher (i) So writeth Swinglius of himselfe herein tom 1. l. de sub fid Eucharist fol. 249. whether Black or Whyte sayth he I remember not Which Instruction is acknowledged by Protestants themselues to be a meere Imposture of Satan For thus hath Conradus Schlusselburg left recorded Sole (k) In Theol. Caluinist in â—roaem meridiano clartus est non Deum verum sed Diabolum ipsissimum c. It is more cleare then the Sunne that not the true God but the Deuill himselfe did inspire the Sacramentary Heresy into Swinglius by Dreame Thus far of these three former mayne Impostours I meane Luther Carolostadius and Swinglius all of them receauing their instruction from the Deuill for their abolishing and impugning of the Masse Animaduersion LX. DIuers Aâ—liaphorists or Neutralls in Religion do maintayne that whosoeuer belieueth the Apostles Creed liuing a good life may be saued Now that the Creed cannot be the Boundary or limit of Christian fayth is thus proued First because though the Protestant and the Catholike do indifferently repeat the Creede yet they vnderstand euery Article thereof in a different sense thâ—one from the other For example I belieue 1. in God The Catholike belieues that his God no way cooperateth or worketh sinne in man The Protestant belieues that God doth and therefore Beza sayth that God (l) In his Display of Popish practises p. 102. exciteth the wicked will of one thiefe to kill another And in Iesus 2. Christ his only Sonne The Catholike belieues in Christ who is God of God and equall to his Father who suffered Death quoad sufficientiam for all mankind A Sauiour who died only in Boâ—y and not in Soule Finally a Sauiour who from his first Conception was endued with all knowledge wisdome and prouidence exempt from all ignorance passion and perturbation The Protestant beliâ—ueth in Christ as his Sauiour yet in all these circumstances touching Christ differently from the Catholike Descended 3. into Hell The Catholike by Hell in this place vnderstandeth Limbus Patrum from whence our Sauiour did deliuer the soules of the lust there detayned till his comming But the greatest part of Protestants do vnderstand in this article the graue by the word Hell He 4. ascended into Heauen both the Catholiks and the Protestants do teach that Christ truly in body ascended vp into Heauen whereas the Lutherans (m) Luther bib de sacra Caena Domini tom 2. fol 11â— do teach that Christs Body is in all places with the Diuinity And that therefore it did not after his passion really ascend vp into Heauen it being there both before and after his passion To iudge 5. the quick and the Dead The Catholike belieues that Christ shall so iudge man as that his good works receauing all their force from our Sauiours Passion shal be rewarded The Protestant belieueth that Christ shall reward only a baâ—e and speciall fayth The like disparity of the beliefe of the Articles of the Creed by the Catholike and the Protestant might be exemplifyed in the other following Articles of the Creed here omitted for breuity Only I conclude that seeing it is the sense and not the words only which makes the Creed which Christians ought necessarily to belieue and seeing the Catholike the Protestant bâ—lieue the words therof in different or rather contrary senses therefore it followeth that it is not sufficient for a Christian in respect of fayth only nakedly to belieue the words of the Creed but he is obliged if so he expecteth saluation to belieue the Articles thereof in that sense and in no other wherein the Apostles did dictate them Animaduersion LXI ADmitting that both Protestant and Catholike did belieue the Creed in a true sense yet followeth it not that this beliefe I meane in respect of beliefe only were a sufficient beliefe or fayth for the saluation of Man The reason hereof is this because it is most certaine that there are diuers points of Christian Religion houlden necessarily to be belieued in the iudgment both of the Protestant and Catholike and yet the same points are not contayned or expressed in the Creed And to insist in these following 1. That there are certaine Diuine writings of infallible authority penned by the Holy Ghost which wâ— commonly call the Scriptures of the Old and New Testament 2. That there are spirituall substances which we call Angells and that many thousands of them did fall after their Creation and are become those malignant spirits which we call Deuills 3. That there is any materiall place of Hell for the wicked of which we find nothing in the iudgment of the Protestants seeing they vnderstand the graue by the word Hell in the Creed 4. That the paynes of the damned shal be for all Eternity 5. That Adam presently vpon his Creation did fall from the Grace of God and thereby transferred Originall sinne vpon all mankind 6. That the world was once drowned for sinne which inundation is commonly called Noes floud 7. That our Sauiour whilest he conuersed here vpon earth did worke any miracles 8. That S. Iohn Baptist was our Sauiours precursour or forerunner 9. That our Sauiour did chuse to him certaine Men for his Apostles who first did preach and plant the Christian fayth throughout the whole world 10. That Circumcision
Damnatioâ— And D. Whitaker thus auerreth It (h) Controuers 2. q. 5. cap. 9. is false that Hereticall and Schismaticall Churches are true Churches Thus far of our Aduersaries excluding Papists Anabaptists Arians Heretikes and Schismatiks from the Protestant Church and not acknowledging them to be members thereof nor their Doctrines Protestancy Now we will obserue what change and mutability of iudgment herein our Aduersaries shew at other tymes in willingly embracing all these former sort of men and some others also as good Protestants and in state of Saluation And first of the Papists Luther sayth In (i) In Ep. contra Anabapt the Popery there is true Christianity yea the Kernell of Christianity many pious great Saincts M. Hooker (k) L. Eccles Pol. 3. c. 1â—8 we gladly acknowledg them of Rome to be of the family of Iesus Christ and M. Bunny we (l) In his Treatise of pacification sect 18. are no seuerall Church from the Papists nor they from vs. The Anabaptists are admitted for good Protestants by Oecolampadius saying (m) L. 2. Ep. p. 63. Baptisme is an externall thing which by Law of Charity may be dispensed with And D. (n) In his answere to the Protest Apol. l. 4 cap. 3. sect 10. Morton we Protestants iudge the state of the Anabaptists not to be vtterly desperate The Arians are acknowledged by M. Morton to be of the same Church of which the Protestants are and he giueth his reason in these words Because (o) In his booke of the kingdom of Isâ—ael and the Church pag. â—4 the Arians hould the foundation of the Gospell And M. Hooker seemeth to intimate the same in these words The (p) Eccles Pol. lib. 4 p. 181. Arians in the reformed Churches of Poland c. hereby insinuating that those Protestant Churches of Poland did acknowledg the Arians to be members of their Church Of Idolaters M. Hooker thus fauorably writeth Christians (q) Eccles Pol. l. 3 pag. 1â—0 by externall profession they are all whose marke of recognizance hath in it those things which we haue mentioned yea although they be impious Idolaters wicked Hâ—tikes c. Infideâ—ls are also in our Aduersaâ—â—â— iudgments mâ—mbers of a sauing Churchâ— fayth for thus writeth Swinglius Ethâ—â—â— (r) Swingl Ep Oecolam l. 1. p 39 si piam mentem domi fouerit Christianus 〈◊〉 etiamsi hristum ignoret And hereupon Sâ—â—glius concluâ—eth that (s) Swingâ— tom 2. fol. 118. 559. Hercules Socrates â—ristides are now in Heauen as is in anothâ—â— place shewed Finally the Protestants are 〈◊〉 courteous as that they are content to â—â—corporate Antichrist within their Church 〈◊〉 state of Saluation This I thus proue I◠〈◊〉 ouermuch knowne and diuulged that mâ—ny Protestants do teach with full moutâ— that the Pope is Antichrist Now then let 〈◊〉 see how at other times they write of hiâ— whom they hould to be Antichrist and 〈◊〉 Religion Antichristianity Here then we fâ—â—â— D. Whitaker thus to acknowledg I will (t) D White in his answere to the first Demonstration of D. Sanders not say that from the tyme that Papistry begâ—â— to be Antichristianity the Popes themseâ—â—â— haue beene all damned And yet D. Whitaker 〈◊〉 where confidently auerreth the Pope to be Antichrist In like sort M. Powell hath the like sentence saying I will (u) In his answere to the last Demonstration of D. Sanders in no wise say that all the Popes from the tyme that papistry was first reuealed to be Antichristianity aâ—â— damned Thus much of this point whereby we may discerne the wounderfull and vnheard mutability of our Aduersaries Iudgments touching who are Protestants and Professours of that Church wherein a man may be saued A demonstration vnansâ—erabâ—e â—â—le and irrepliable to proue that the Proâ—â—â—â—ant Church and fayth such as these forâ—â—r men do restrayne or enlarge it is 〈◊〉 capable of Saluation And how then can Christian know if he will rely vpon the â—â—gments of Protestants herein to what 〈◊〉 of Protestants or within what Church 〈◊〉 may range himself for the Saluation of 〈◊〉 Soule Animaduersion LXXXXVIII â—N that there are many Catholike Articles the which the Iewes before the comâ—ing of Christ did belieue therefore it folâ—â—weth euidently that the said Articles canâ—ot be reputed to be Innouations or lately â—â—uented Doctrines but as ancient as the â—ymes before our Sauiours Incarnation I â—ill exemplify in some The Booke Eccleâ—â—asticus admit for the tyme it be not Scripture speaketh directly of our Sauiours â—â—scending into Hell in those words where it â—s said in his person I (x Eccles 24. will pierce through â—â—e sower parts of the Earth J will looke vpon all such as be a sleepe and will lighten all them that â—â—ust in the Lord A saying so pertinent for proofe of Limbus Patrum that D. Whitaker (y) Contra Duraeum l. 8 pag. 5â—7 acknowledging the true sense thereof auoydeth it by saying the Booke is not Canonicall which at this present is impertiâ—ent since here I seeke only to proue the â—â—uth of diuers of our Catholike points as being belieued by the Ancient Iewes before our Sauiours tyme in their writings whether Canonicall or not Canonicall Touching Prayer for the Dead It is warranted by the example of Iudas (z) Machab 2. Machabaeus the true seruant of God as also is taught by Rabbi Simeon who liued before Christ and diuers other ancient Rabbyes Rabbi Simeon thus writing of such as are temporally punished after this life After (a) In lib. Zoar. in cap 13. Genesis they are purged from the filth of their sinnes then doth God cause them to ascend out of that place Touching Gods Induration or hardning of Pharaos hart the Iewish Rabins so conspire in affirming with vs the same to be by Gods permission only and not by his working that Peter (b) Peter Martyr in Epist. ad Roman c. 9. Martyr and Munster (c) Munster in Annot. in Exod. c. 7. do accordingly acknowledg this Exposition Concerning Freewill that place in Eccâ—esiasticus (d) Ecclesiast 1â— to wit Say not thou he hath câ—â—sed me to erre Yf thou wilt thou shalt obserue the Commandements He hath set water and fyre before thee stretch out thy hand to which thou wilt Before man is life and death Good Euâ—â—â— what lyketh him shal be giuen him This testimony I say is so euident for Freewill that D. Whitaker in answere thereto reiecteth the authority saying De loco (e) In resp ad ras Camp rat 1 p. 25. Ecclesiasticiparùm laboro c. J make small account of Ecclesiasticus Philo the learned Iew who liued in Christ his tyme thus writeth Man (f) Philo in lib. quod Deus fit immutabelis hath Freewill to which purpose is extant the Oracle in Deuteronomy I haue placed before thee Lyfe and Death Good and Euill chuse Lyfe Concerning Angells Saints the Booke of Tobias written before Christ is so playne (g) Tob.
any impugned part or branch of their Religion From which vndaunted resolution of theirs we certainely collect that this their constant determination of defending the least point of their Religion proceedeth partly from a generall instinct of God impressed in mans soule teaching ech man that death it selfe is rather to be suffered then we are to deny any part of fayth and Religion in generall And thus according hereto we find that the Athenians who were Heathens though they did erre touching the particular Obiect therin as worshipping false Gods were most cautelous that no one point should be infringed or violated touching the worshipping of their Gods The like religious seuerity was practised by the Iewes as Iosephus (s) Ioseph contra Apion witnesseth Now from these Premisses we deduce against our Adiaphorists or Neutralls in Religion either Catholike or Protestant that no points of true Religion are of that cold Indifferency as that they are not to be much regarded either in beliefe or in profession but that they are of that Nature worth and dignity as a man is obliged to vndergoe all torments yea death it selfe before he yeald or suffer the least relaps in denying any of the said verities or in any externall Profession contrary thereto Animaduersion CXXI FOr the further impugning of the indifferency of seuerall Religions and to shew that euery religion among Christians is not capable of Saluation I will drawe one demonstration out of Scripture The text is this In the (t) 1. Timoth cap. 4. larer tymes certaine shall depart from the fayth attending to spirits of Errour and Doctrine of Deuils forbidding to Marry to abstaine from Meates Heere the Apostle prophesyeth according to the iudgement of S. Chrysestome (u) Hom. 12. in Timoth Ambrose (x) In hunc locum Ierome (y) L. contra Iouinian c. 7. and (z) Haer. 25. 40. Austin of the Heretykes Encratites Marcionists Ebionites and such like who denyed Matrimony as a thing altogether vnlawfull and prohibited absolutely at all tymes and the eating of certaine Meates as Creatures impure Now these Heretykes belieued in the Trinity the Incarnation and other Supreme poynts of Christian Religion And yet eueÌ„ for these two former Heresyes touching Marriage and eating of Meates and not for their misbeleife in the Trinity Incarnation c. they are said by the Apostle to depart from the fayth of Christ and to attend to the Doctrine of Deuils But such as leaue the fayth of Christ and attend to the doctrine of the Diuels are not in state of Saluation Now these Errours heere mentioned by the Apostle are of as little or lesser consequence then the Controuersyes betweene the Catholiks the ProtestaÌ„ts therefore it standeth vpon ech Christian if so he expect to saue his soule to professe entirely and wholy the true Religion Animaduersion CXXII TOuching the Doctrine of Transubstantiation in the B. Sacrament of the Eucharist the auncient Fathers are most full therin euen by the acknoledgement of the ProtestaÌ„ts themselues First then Gregory the great is coÌ„fessed by D. Humfrey (a) In Iesuitism part 2. rat 5. to haue broght in Transubstantiation into England at his first planting of Christianity in this Country as is aboue shewed Chrysostome is reprehended by the Centurists to vse their owne words (b) Cent. 5. col 517. Quia parum commodè de Transubstantiatione dixit (c) Cent. 4. c. 4. col 295. S. Ambrose is affirmed by the Centurists in the booke ascribed to Ambrose to confirme the Doctrine of Transubstantiation which Father for the said Doctrine is also taxed by (d) L Ep. Oecolampad Swinglij l. 3. Oecolampadius S. Cyrill is reprehended by Peter (e) Ep. ad Bezam annexed to his Common places Martyr in these words I will not easely subscribe to Cyrill who affirmed such a Communion as thereby euen the flesh and bloud of Christ is ioyned to the Blessings for so he calleth the holy bread c. S. Cyprian is charged in the booke ascribed to Vrsinus the Protestant entituled Coâ—monefactio cuiusdam Theologi de sancta Caenâ— who there thus writeth (f) Pag. 111. â—18 In Cyprian are many things which seeme to affirme Transubstantiation Lastly Ignatius is acknoledged by Keâ—pnitius (g) Exa part 1. p. 94. to haue confirmed the Doctrine of Transubstantiation in that eminent place of his (h) Ep. ad Smirnenses Eucharistias oblationes noÌ„ admittuÌ„t quòd non confiteantur eucharistiam esse carnem saluatoris quae pro peccatis nostris passa est c. The truth of the Fathers iudgment touching the Reall presence is so fully confessed by our Aduersaryes as that Antony de Adamo a markable Protestant thus acknoledgeth hereof (i) In his Anatomy of the Masse p. 236. J haue not hitherto beene able to know when this Opinion of the Reall bodily being of Christ in the Eucharist did first beginne With whome conspireth Adamus Francisci another Pro estant saying Commentum (k) In Margarita Theol. pag. 156. Papistarum c. The Papists inuention touching Transubstantiation crept earely into the Church Thuâ— farre of the Protestants Confessions in this poynt whereunto we may add that these Fathers heere aboue charged with the rest of the Fathers of those Ages were the chiefe Pastours Doctours of the Primitiue Church which Church belieued herein according as it was taught by the said Fathers If then these Fathers should erre in the Doctrine of TraÌ„substantiation then should it follow that the primitiue Church yea and the vniuersall Church of Christ contrary â—o Christs (l) Math 1â— promisse therein should erre Animaduersion CXXIII YF we do take into due consideration 〈◊〉 seuerall chiefe heades and points when vnto the sentences and authorities of 〈◊〉 ancient Fathers touching the Eucharist 〈◊〉 be reduced we cannot otherwise be perâ—â—ded but that the Fathers taught vnaâ—â—mously the Doctrine of the Reall Presence and Transubstantiation seing those Heads 〈◊〉 the Fathers sentences are so agreeable aâ—â—fortable to Christs Reall being in the Sacrament and so incompetent and disproportionable to a bare Typicall Presence or being of him therein To begin then The First Head of the Fathers authorityes may be the Appellatâ—â— or Names which the Fathers giue to the Blessed Sacrament far differently from the Sacramentaryes which is an argument that Sacramentaryes differ from the Fathers iâ— beleife therein Thus the Fathers call the Sacrament The body bloud of our Lord Thâ— precious body tremenda Mysteria the fearefuâ—â— Misteries the pledge of our Saluation Our priâ—â— whereas the Sacramentaryes vsuall phraâ—â— is to call the Eucharist the Symboll or signâ— of the body and bloud of the Lord. The second Classe or Head is taken from the Comparison of this Sacrament with other things for they compare it with the Manna Paschall Lamb with Panis Propositionis and the lyke saying The Eucharist doth differ from all these things as the Truth differs froÌ„ â—â—gures the body
the Catholikes the Protestants afford a most conuincing Argument that both the partyes during their continuaÌ„ce of such their contrary beliefes cannot expect saluation yet this point is made more demonstrable if we insist only in such controuersyes betweene our Aduersaryes and vs the subiect of which are taught by the one syde to be vnder Christ the immediate meanes of our grace saluation and denyed by the other party to be of such force and efficacy for the soules euerlasting Good and consequently in regard of their subiect are one way necessarily to be belieued So as if it be shewed that the Catholikes and the Protestants do mainly dissent in the meanes of obtayning Grace purchasing of Heauen it must of necessity be inferred that both the Catholikes and Protestants continuing in such their different states cannot obtayne Grace and saluation Since Philosophy and naturall Reason teacheth vs that he shall neuer attaine the End he aymeth at who vseth not the same meanes which are only and necessarily instituted to the gaying of the said End Now to come to the Articles of this kynd First Concerning the Sacraments in Generall the Catholikes belieue that all of them where no iust impediment is do conferre Grace vnto the Soule of man by the helpe continuance of which Grace the soule in the end obtaineth its saluation The Protestant doth not ascribe any such supernaturall effect vnto them To come more particularly to the Sacraments Touching Baptisme the Catholikes belieue that Children being borne in Originall Sinne cannot be saued except they be baptized with Water The (25) Caluin and Beza most frequently teach so Protestants belieue that Infants dying vnbaptized may be saued Touching the Sacrament of Penance or Confession the Catholikes belieue that after a Christian hath committed any Mortall Sinne that Sinne cannot be forgiuen him but at least in Voto by confessing the said Sinne to a Priest answerably to that in S. John 20. Whose sinnes you shall forgiue they are forgiuen them c. The ProtestaÌ„ts belieue that neither the Confession of sinnes to man nor the absolution of them giuen by man is necessary for the remitting of them but that it is sufficient to confesse them only to God And thus according to the diuersity of Doctrine either the Protestant for want of this Sacrament after he hath mortally sinned cannot be saued or the Catholikes for wrongfully imposing this yoake vpon Christians do lose their Saluation Touching the most B. Sacrament of the Eucharist The Catholikes belieue that the very body and bloud of Christ do lye latently vnder the formes of bread and wyne Math. 26. and that vnlesse we eate his body and drinke his bloud in the Eucharist we shall not haue lyfe euerlasting Iohn 6. Finally that we are to adore Christ his body in the Eucharist being accompanied there with his Diuinity The Protestants belieue that Christs true body as neuer leauing Heauen cannot possibly be vnder the formes of bread and wyne and consequently they belieue that the reall eating of his body and drinking of his bloud in the Sacrament is not necessary to Saluation finally they hould our adoration of the Sacrament to be open Idolatry Fiftly touching the meanes of our Iustification the Catholikes belieue that not only fayth but works also do iustify The Protestants do ascribe their Iustification only to Fayth and not to works Touching Grace without which a man cannot be saued the Catholikes belieue that God out of the depth of his infinite mercy offereth to euery Christian sufficient Grace whereby he may be saued The Protestants teach that God giueth not sufficient Grace to euery one but to certaine men only and according hereto Beza most blasphemously thus writeth of this point (26) Beza in his Display of Popery pag. 17. 31. 76. 116. c. God decreeth some men to destruction createth to perdition and predestinateth to his hatred destruction Touching the ten Commandements the Catholikes belieue that except a Christian do keepe them he cannot be saued according to our Sauiour Yf thou wilt enter into lyfe keep the Commandments Math. 19. The Protestants do teach an absolute impossibility of keeping them and thereupon Luther thus writeth The ten (27) Luther ser de Moyse Commandements do not belong vnto vs. Finally touching the Pope or Bishop of Rome the Catholikes do belieue that he is vnder Christ the supreme Pastour vpon earth that who do not communicate in Sacraments and Doctrine with him yielding him all true obedience in subiecting their iudgments in Matter of fayth to his sententionall Definitions cannot be saued The Protestants do teach that the Pope is that Antichrist which is deciphered by the (28) 2. Thess 2. c. Apostle and that who so imbraceth his Doctrine or yieldeth their assents to his Cathedrall Decrees cannot be saued Thus far of these points omitting some others of like nature Now here I vrge as aboue Yf these former Doctrines as they are belieued by the Catholikes do immediately concerne Saluation and become necessary meanes thereof then cannot the Protestants as reiecting all such doctrines and all such necessary meanes both in beliefe and practice be saued But if by supposall the said Doctrines be not of that Nature but false in themselues and the contrary Doctrines true then cannot the Catholikes as belieuing false Doctrines immediatly touching mans Saluation and accordingly practizing them be saued From whence it ineuitably followeth that the different Professours of these contrary Doctrines the one part belieuing the other part not belieuing the said Doctrines cannot both be saued Animaduersion CLXXVII SOme Protestants will maintaine that Protestancy for its greater antiquity was at its full and perfect state here in England in King Edwards dayes But this is most vnaduisedly spoken The falsehood of which bold Assertion I proue from the Communion Booke set out in K. Edwards tyme with approbation allowance of Peter Martyr Which Booke was further warranted in King Edwards tyme by Act of Parliament Now this Booke or publike Liturgy of the fayth of England in those dayes being printed in folio by Edward Whitchurch anno 1549. prescribeth that the Eucharist shal be consecrated with the (29) Fol. 265. signe of the Crosse It commandeth consecration (30) Fol. 2â—2 of the Water of Baptisme with the signe of the Crosse In that Booke mention is made of Prayer (31) Fol. 116. for the Dead offering vp of our prayers by (32) Fol. 117. Angells It defendeth Baptisme being giuen by Lay (33) Fol. 119. Persons in tyme of Necessity and the Grace (34) Ibidem of that Sacrament It alloweth Priests absolution of the sick penitent in these words By the authority committed (35) Fol. 142. vnto me I absolue thee of all thy Sinnes It menâ—ioneth a speciall and particular (36) Fol. 143. Confession of the Sicke Penitent Briefly to omit some other points It commandeth the (37) Fol. 143. annoynting of the Sick person
diuine Scriptures yet they are recorded and written in the Monuments of the auncient Authours and in Ecclesiasticall bookes The second reason may be the continuall vse of them For diuers Traditions are in continuall obseruation practise as the Rites and Ceremonyes of administring the Sacraments Holy-dayes appoynted tymes of fasting the Celebration of the Masse and of Diuine office or prayers and such like The third cause are certaine externall Monuments which continue for a most long tyme as most ancient TeÌ„ples or Churches in which are Altars the Holy Fonts for Baptisme the Memorialls or Toumbs of Saincts Crosses Images Ecclesiasticall bookes c. The fourth Reason is Heresy it selfe For God doth wonderfully vse the Enemyes of the Church to the preseruation of the Church For because as in euery age there haue risen vp some Heretyks who haue impugned diuers dogmaticall Traditions of the Church So hath God in ech age raysed certaine learned Orthodoxall Men who that they might better resist the Heretykes haue with most great diligence and labour searched out the Doctrine of the Church and ancient Traditions and haue transmitted them in wryting to all posterity I will ad this following obseruation in fuller warrant of vnwritten Traditions against such who restrayne the proofe of all poynts to the Scripture it selfe To wit that it is one thing for an Article of fayth to be expressed in Scripture Another thing for an Article of fayth to be grounded vpon â—cripture All Christian doctrine is not expressed in Scripture yet euery Christian doctrine is so grounded on Scripture that it may in somâ— sort or other be proued from Scripture And in this sense all Traditions receaued by the vniuersall Church of Christ may be said to be grounded on Scripture since they are grouÌ„ded vpon the authority of the Church admitting them To which Church Christ himselfe hath promised an infallibility of Truth and of not erring according to that Ego vobiscum sum omnibus diebus vsque Consummationem saeculi Math. 18. And againe Portae inferi non praeualebunt aduersum eam Math. 16. to wit against the Church of Christ Animaduersion CLXXXII PRotestancy is proued to be an intentionall thing in it selfe and voyde of all Reall fayth This is proued from the Definition of Fayth giuen by the Apostle thus defining fayth fides est sperandarum substantia rerum argumentum non apparentium That is fayth is the (50) Heb. 11. substance of things to be hoped for the argument of things not appearing This definition sheweth that fayth is a supernaturall Vertue and the Obiect thereof is that which through its owne abstrusenes sublimity cannot be apprehended or conceaued by force of Mans owne wit it transcending all Naturall Reason This we see exemplyfyed in the two supreme Articles of the Trinity and the Incarnation the Mysteryes and difficulties of which transcend all humane reason or light of Nature And hence it is that the Conclusion of the Schoole Deuines is this Quae (51) S. Thomas part 1. 2. quaest 1. fidei sunt non possunt esse scita Now to apply this Yf Protestancy be a supernaturall fayth or els it is no true sauing fayth then the Obiect of this Protestanticall fayth is of that difficult Nature as that Man through the force of Naturall reason only cannot giue any assent thereto without the speciall concurrency of Gods Grace But here I demand that seeing the Obiect of Protestancy as Protestancy is meere Negatiues and denialls as deniall of Reall Presence deniall of Purgatory deniall of Freewill deniall of praying to Saincts briefly deniall of most of the affirmatiue points taught by our Catholike Church here I say I demand what supernaturality or force of Gods speciall concurrency is required that man should giue an assent to these Negations or denyalls Nay I here say that mans naturall reason euen of it selfe without any externaâ—l help is propense and inclyning to belieue these and other such like Negations except the Affirmatiues to those Negations can be conuinced as for true either by Diuine or Humane proofe and Authority Thus it followeth that Protestancy euen from the Definition of Fayth giuen by the Apostle is no supernaturall Fayth but in respect of such a Fayth is a meere Irreality and wast of fayth Animaduersion CLXXXIII THe reasons which S. Thomas Aquinas (52) S. Thom in 3. part quaest 27. Artic 4. doth insist vpon being most probable inducements for freeing the Blessed Virgin Mary from Originall Sinne are these following The first Seeing God did decree to aduance the Blessed Virgin to so supreme dignity that she should excell euen the Angells themselues therfore it was most sutable agreeable that no priuiledg should be conferred vpon any pure Creature which was not conferred vpon the B. Virgin except such a priuiledg were repugnant to the condition state Nature or Sex But to be sanctifyed in the first instant of Creation was giuen to our First Parents As also to be sanctifyed in the first instant of Creation and neuer to be polluted with any Sinne was giuen to the holy Angells But this priuiledg is in no sort repugnant to the condition state Nature or Sex of the B. Virgin Therefore it is a pious thing to belieue that the Mother of God did not want this priuiledge Secondly because that testimony of the Heauenly Spouse ought in all probability to be accomplished and fulfilled in the Blessed Virgin Tota (53) Can. 4. pulchra es amica mea macula non est in te Thirdly because the Mother of Christ hath a singular Affinity and Coniunction with Christ himselfe Fourthly in that the Sonne of God who is the wisdome of the Father did as it were inhabitate in the wombe of the Mother after a most peculiar and wonderfull manner But it is said in holy Scripture In maleuolam (54) Wisdoms c. 1. animam c. Wisdome cannot enter into a wicked hart nor dwell in the body which is subiect to sinne Lastly because as well the honour as the ignominy of the Mother redoundeth to the Sonne Now touching the proofe of the Assumption of our B. Lady both in Body Soule pretermitting the Authority of the (55) S. Ierome writeth a sermon styling it de Eesto assumptionis Mariae The Centurists alledge that S. Austin did write a Book-entituling it de Assumptione Virginis Mariae Ancient Fathers herin I will at this present content my selfe with the Argument of S. Bernard in proofe thereof who thus disputeth Seeing God hath discouered and reuealed the Bodies of many Saincts which lay hid in diuers places that they might be honored of faythful Christians It then ineuitably followeth that if the sacred Body of the Blessed Virgin had beene still on earth he would in like maÌ„ner haue made knowne no doubt in what place or Country it did lye But it not being certainly knowne where that Body or any part thereof is in any place of the world it may irrâ—pliably